This title verse explains what follows as the oracle of Yahweh's word that He sent to Israel through Malachi. The Hebrew word massa', translated "oracle,"occurs 27 times in the Prophets (e.g., Isa. 13:1 Nah. 1:1; Hab. 1:1; Zech. 9:1; 12:1; et al.). It refers to a threatening message, a burden that lay heavy on the heart of God and His prophet.
"The word of Yahweh"refers to a message that comes from Him with His full authority. "Yahweh"is the name that God used in relationship to Israel as the covenant-making and covenant-keeping God. What follows is evidence that Israel was in trouble with Yahweh because the Jews had not kept the Mosaic Covenant. Yahweh, of course, was completely faithful to His part of the covenant.
"Malachi"means "my messenger."The prophet's name was appropriate since God had commanded him to bear this "word"to the people of Israel. The prophet was not the source of the revelation that follows; he was only a messenger whose job it was to communicate a message from Yahweh (cf. 2:7; 2 Tim. 4:2; 2 Pet. 1:20-21).
The revelation that Yahweh gave Malachi for Israel consisted of six "heavy"messages. The first one reminded God's people of His love for them and of their ungratefulness.
1:2a The Lord's first word to His people was short and sweet. He had loved them. He had told His people of His love for them repeatedly throughout their history (cf. Deut. 4:32-40; 7:7-11; 10:12-22; 15:16; 23:5; 33:2-5; Isa. 43:4; Hos. 11:1, 3-4, 8-9). Yet they were now questioning His love and implying that there was no evidence of it in their present situation in life.12Yahweh had promised them a golden age of blessing, but they still struggled under Gentile oppression and generally hard times (cf. v. 8; 2:2; 3:9, 11). Their question revealed distrust of Him and hostility toward Him as well as lack of appreciation for Him. Israel should have responded to Yahweh's love by loving Him and keeping His commandments (Deut. 6:4-9).
1:2b-3 In replying to the people's charge, the Lord asked them if Esau was not Jacob's brother. The implication of the question is that these twins were both the objects of God's elective love. Yet God had loved Jacob, the younger, and hated Esau, the older. The evidence of God's hatred for Esau was that He had made the mountains of Seir, the inheritance that God gave Esau and his descendants, a desolate wilderness. Unstated is the fact that God had given Jacob a land flowing with milk and honey for his inheritance, which proved His love for that brother.
It is remarkable that God loved Jacob in view of the person Jacob was, and it is equally remarkable that God hated Esau, because in many ways he was a more admirable individual than his brother. Normally in the ancient Near East the father favored the eldest son, but God did what was abnormal in choosing to bless Jacob over Esau. God's regard for individuals does not depend ultimately on their behavior or characters. It rests of His sovereign choice to bless some more than others (cf. Rom. 9:13). This is a problem involving His justice since it seems unfair that God would bless some more than others. However, since God is sovereign, He can do whatever He chooses to do.
Another problem that these verses raise concerns God's love. Does not God love the whole world and everyone in it (John 3:16)? Yes, He does, but this statement deals with God's choices regarding Jacob and Esau, not His affection for all people. When He said here that He hated Esau, He meant that He did not choose to bestow His favor on Esau to the extent that He did on Jacob (cf. Ps. 139:21). He made this choice even before they were born (Gen. 25:21-34; Rom. 9:10-13). To contrast His dealings with the twins, God polarized His actions toward them in this love hate statement. God loved Jacob in that He sovereignly elected Him and his descendants for a covenant relationship with Himself (Gen. 29:31-35; Deut. 21:15, 17; Luke 14:26), as His special possession (cf. Deut. 4:37; 5:10; 7:6-9). Often in Scripture to love someone means to choose to bless that person. Not to love someone means not to bless them.
"Modern studies of covenant language have shown that the word love' (. . . aheb, or any of its forms) is a technical term in both the biblical and ancient Near Eastern treaty and covenant texts to speak of choice or election to covenant relationship, especially in the so-called suzerainty documents."13
The fact that God gave Mt. Seir to Esau as his inheritance shows that He did love him to that extent. But He did not choose to bless Esau as He chose to bless Jacob, namely, with a covenant relationship with Himself.14Eternal destiny is not in view here; God was speaking of His acts in history toward Jacob and Esau and their descendants.
Did not God choose to bless Jacob because Jacob valued the promises that God had given his forefathers whereas Esau did not (cf. Gen. 27)? Clearly Jacob did value these promises and Esau did not, but here God presented the outcome of their lives as the consequences of His sovereign choice rather than their choices. Their choices were important, but more important was the choice of God before and behind their choices that resulted in the outcome of their lives (cf. Eph. 1; Rom. 9).
Some of God's choices, the really important ones (His decree), determine all that takes place to bring those choices to reality. If this were not so, God would not be all powerful; man could override the power of God with his choices.15Yet God's choices do not mean that man's choices are only apparently real. Human beings have a measure of freedom, and it is genuine freedom. We know this is true because a just God holds human beings responsible for their choices. How humans can be genuinely free, to the extent that we are free, and how God can still maintain control is probably impossible for us to comprehend fully. No one yet has been able to explain this mystery to the satisfaction of most people.
The bottom line is that God chose to bless Jacob to an extent that He did not choose to bless Esau. This decision lay behind all the decisions that these twin brothers made. They were responsible for their decisions and actions, but God had predetermined their destinies.
1:4 Even though the Edomites, Esau's descendants, determined to rebuild their nation after it had suffered destruction by the Babylonians, they would not be able to do so. They could not because almighty Yahweh would not permit it. He would tear down whatever they rebuilt, so much so that other people would view them as a wicked land (cf. the holy land, Zech. 2:12) and the objects of Yahweh's perpetual indignation.16
"Israel needed to consider what her lot would have been if she, like Edom, had not been elected to a covenant relationship with Yahweh. Both Israel and Edom received judgment from God at the hands of the Babylonians in the sixth century (Jer. 27:2-8). Yet God repeatedly promised to restore Israel (because of His covenant promises, Deut. 4:29-31; 30:1-10), but He condemned Edom to complete destruction, never to be restored (Jer. 49:7-22; Ezek. 35)."17
1:5 Observing Yahweh's dealings with Edom, the Israelites would learn of His love for her and His greatness that extended beyond Israel (cf. vv. 11, 14; 3:12; 4:6). They would eventually call on other people to appreciate Him too.
The point of this message was to get the Jews of the restoration community, who were thinking that God had abandoned them and forgotten His promises to them, to think again. Even though they seemed to be experiencing the same fate as their ancient enemy, the Edomites, God would restore them because He had entered into covenant relationship with them. He would keep His promises, both to the Israelites and to the Edomites, for better and for worse respectively.
The first oracle ended with a statement of Yahweh's greatness. The second one opens with a question about why Israel's priests did not honor Him.
"The style of the third oracle differs from the others. Instead of an initial statement or charge followed by a question of feigned innocence, this oracle begins with three questions asked by the prophet. However, as at the beginning of each of the other oracles, the point is presented at the outset."26
This message deals with the same social evils that Ezra and Nehemiah faced: intermarriage with unbelievers, and divorce (cf. Ezra 9:2; Neh. 14:23-28).
2:10 Malachi said, by asking rhetorical questions, that God was the father of all the Israelites (cf. Exod. 4:22; Hos. 11:1).27That one true God had created all of them. Israel belonged to God because He had created the nation and had adopted it as His son. Therefore it was inappropriate for the Israelites to treat each other as enemies and deal treacherously with each other; they should have treated each other as brothers and supported one another (Lev. 19:18). By dealing treacherously with each other they had made the covenant that God had made with their ancestors virtually worthless; they could not enjoy the blessings of the Mosaic Covenant.
2:11 The evidence of Judah's treachery was that the Israelites were profaning (making common) Yahweh's beloved sanctuary. This sanctuary may refer to the temple or His people. They did this by practicing idolatry. They had married pagan women who worshipped other gods (cf. 2 Cor. 6:14-16). Yahweh's son (v. 10) had married foreign women that worshipped other gods and, like Solomon, had become unfaithful to Yahweh (cf. Exod. 34:11-16; Deut. 7:3-4; Josh. 23:12-13; Ezra 9:1-2, 10-12; Neh. 13:23-27).
2:12 In a curse formula, Malachi pronounced judgment on any Israelite who married such a woman. The judgment would be that he would die or that his line would die out ("cut off"). The difficult idiom "who awakes and answers"(NASB) evidently means "whoever he may be"(NIV). This curse would befall him even though he brought offerings to almighty Yahweh at the temple. Worshipping God did not insulate covenant violators from divine punishment then, and it does not now.
2:13-14 The people evidently could not figure out why God was withholding blessing from them, so Malachi gave them the reasons. Another sin involved weeping profusely over the Lord's altar because He did not answer their prayers while at the same time dealing treacherously with their wives (cf. 1 Pet. 3:7).28The marriage relationship is a covenant relationship, and those who break their vows should not expect God to bless them. God Himself acted as a witness when the couple made their covenant of marriage in their youth. This sin may have in view particularly the Israelite men who were divorcing their Jewish wives and then marrying pagan women (cf. v. 12), or divorce in general may be all that is in view.
2:15 No individual Israelite who benefited from even a small amount of the Holy Spirit's influence would break such a covenant as the marriage contract. God Himself would not break His covenant with Israel. In both cases godly offspring were a major reason for not breaking the respective covenants. The welfare of the children is still a common and legitimate reason for keeping a marriage intact. The Israelites needed to be careful, therefore, that no one of them dealt treacherously with the wife he married in his youth by breaking his marriage covenant and divorcing her.29
2:16 The Israelites were not to break their marriage covenants because Yahweh, Israel's God (sovereign Law-giver and Judge), hates (Heb. sane', detests) divorce (cf. Matt. 19:6; Mark 10:9).30He hates it because it constitutes covenant unfaithfulness, breaking a covenant entered into that God Himself witnessed (v. 14). Furthermore, He hates it because He is a covenant-keeping God; He keeps his promises. To break a covenant (a formal promise) is to do something that God Himself does not do; it is ungodly.
God also hates someone who covers himself with wrong. This is a play on a Hebrew euphemism for marriage, namely, covering oneself with a garment (cf. Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). One covers himself with wrong when he divorces his wife whom he has previously married (i.e., covered with his garment). For these Jews divorce was similar to wearing soiled garments; it was a disgrace. For emphasis, the Lord repeated His warning to take heed to one's spirit so one would not deal treacherously with his covenant partner (cf. v. 15).
The fact that Ezra commanded divorce (Ezra 10) may appear to contradict God's prohibition of divorce here. (Nehemiah neither advocated divorce nor spoke out against it; Neh. 13:23-29.) The solution seems to be that Malachi addressed the situation of Jewish men divorcing their Jewish wives, perhaps to marry pagan women. Ezra faced Jewish men who had already married pagan women. Does this mean that it is all right to divorce an unbelieving spouse but not a believer? Paul made it clear that the Christian is to divorce neither (1 Cor. 7:10-20). Evidently it was the illegitimacy of a Jew marrying a pagan that led Ezra to advocate divorce in that type of case.
Even though God hates divorce He permitted it (Deut. 24) to achieve the larger goals of maintaining Israel's distinctiveness so she could fulfill His purposes for her in the world (Exod. 19). His purposes for the church are not the same as His purposes for Israel. Furthermore the church is not subject to the Mosaic Law. Therefore it is inappropriate to appeal to the Jews' action in Ezra as a precedent that Christians who are married to unbelievers should follow (cf. 1 Cor. 7:12-13).
That another oracle is in view is clear from the question and answer format that begins this pericope, as it does the others. Verse 17 contains the question and answer, and the discussion follows in 3:1-6. The Israelites' changeability (2:17) contrasts with Yahweh's constancy (3:6).
2:17 Malachi announced to his hearers that they had wearied God with their words; He was tired of hearing them say something. Their response was again hypocritical incredulity. They believed He could hardly be tired of listening to them since He had committed Himself to them as their covenant lord (cf. Isa. 40:28).31The prophet explained that Yahweh was tired of them saying that He delighted in them even though they said that everyone who did evil was acceptable to Him. They seem to have lost their conscience for right and wrong and assumed that because God did not intervene He approved of their sin. Really their question amounted to a challenge to God's justice. If they were breaking His law and He was just, He surely must punish them. Their return to the land indicated to them that He was blessing them, and He promised to bless the godly in the Mosaic Covenant (Deut. 28:1-14).
Modern people say the same thing. "If there is a just God, why doesn't He do something about all the suffering in the world?""If God is just, why do the wicked prosper?"Scripture reveals that God blesses the wicked as well as the righteous (Matt. 5:45; Acts 14:17), and the righteous suffer as well as the wicked because of the Fall and sin (Gen. 3:16-19; Eccles. 2:17-23). Moreover, God allows Satan to afflict the righteous as well as the wicked (Job 1-2). God will eventually punish the wicked and bless the righteous, but perhaps not in this life (cf. Job 21:7-26; 24:1-17; Ps. 73:1-14; Eccles. 8:14; Jer. 12:1-4; Hab. 1). Malachi's audience had forgotten part of what God had revealed on this subject, and, of course, they had not yet received New Testament revelation about it.
3:1 The Lord's response to the cynical Israelites was to point them to the future. He predicted the coming of His messenger (cf. Isa. 40:3-5). There is no question about who this was because Jesus identified him as John the Baptist (Matt. 11:10; cf. Mark 1:2; Luke 7:27). This future messenger would clear the way in preparation for Yahweh (cf. Isa. 40:3; John 1:23). Clearly Jesus Christ is Yahweh since John the Baptist prepared the way for Jesus.
Then the Lord, whom the Israelites were seeking, would suddenly come to His temple (cf. Ezek. 43:1-5; Zech. 8:3). Though Jesus entered the temple in Jerusalem many times during His earthly ministry, this sudden coming was not fulfilled then (cf. vv. 2-5). It will occur when He returns to set up His messianic kingdom. "The messenger of the covenant"is another name for the Lord who would come following the appearance of the first messenger promised in this verse. He would be the divine Messiah. "Messenger"means "angel,"and the Angel of the Lord is in view here. The "covenant"is the New Covenant that God promised to make with the Jews in the future (cf. Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 37:26). The Jews delighted in this Messenger because His coming had been a subject of messianic prophecy and an object of eager anticipation from early in Israel's history (Gen. 3:15; pass.). Sovereign Yahweh promised His coming again here. The Jews had been expressing disbelief that God would intervene and establish justice in the world (2:17), but God promised He would.
3:2-3 When the Lord came suddenly to His temple, no one would be able to stand before Him. Elsewhere the prophets foretold that this time would be a day of judgment on the whole world marked by disaster and death (4:1; Isa. 2:12; Joel 3:11-16; Amos 5:18-21; Zech. 1:14-18). Here Malachi said no one would be able to endure His coming because He would purify the priesthood, the people who stood closest to Him. As a fire He would burn up the impurities of the priests, and as a laundryman's soap He would wash them clean (cf. Isa. 1:25; Jer. 6:29-30; Ezek. 22:17-22; Zech. 3:5). The Levitical priests would then be able to offer sacrifices to Yahweh in a righteous condition rather than as they were in Malachi's day (cf. 1:6-2:9; Isa. 56:7; 66:20-23; Jer. 33:18; Ezek. 40:38-43; 43:13-27; 45:9-25; Zech. 14:16-21). The multiple figures of cleansing and the repetition of terms for cleansing stress the thoroughness of the change that the Lord's Messenger would affect.
3:4 After this cleansing of the priests, Judah and Jerusalem (i.e., all Israel) would be able to offer sacrifices that would please the Lord, in contrast to the present ones that did not (cf. 1:13-14). They would be acceptable like the offerings the priests offered earlier in Israel's history, before the priesthood had become corrupt.
3:5 At that time the Lord assured His people that He would draw near to them, but it would be for judgment. He would quickly judge all types of sin that they practiced, whereas in Malachi's day, and now, He waits to judge (cf. 2 Pet. 3:9-10). The Levites would not be the only Jews He judged; all the Israelites living then would come under His judgment (cf. Ezek. 20:34-38). He would judge them for all types of activity forbidden for His people: sorcery, adultery, lying, oppression of employees, widows, orphans, mistreatment of aliens, even all forms of irreverence for Him. This was His answer to their claim that He was unjust (2:17).
3:6 The Lord concluded by reminding His people of one of His character qualities that should have made them fear Him and have hope. He does not change, and that is why they would not be consumed totally. He was faithful to His covenant promises in the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants; He would never destroy them completely but would chasten them and finally bless them. By calling the Jews "sons of Jacob,"the Lord was connecting their behavior with that of their notorious patriarch. Promises are only as good as the person who makes them, so the fact that Yahweh does not change strengthens the certainty of their fulfillment (cf. Deut. 4:31; Ezek. 36:22-32).32
The statement that Yahweh does not change (cf. 1 Sam. 15:29; Heb. 13:8) may seem to contradict other statements that the Lord changed His mind (e.g., Exod. 32:14). This statement that He does not change refers to the essential character of God. He is always holy, loving, just, faithful, gracious, merciful, etc. The other statements, that He changes, refer to His changing from one course of action to another. They involve His choices, not His character. If He did not change His choices, He would not be responsive; if He changed His character, He would be unreliable.33
The Lord had said that Israel's earlier history was a time when the priests and the people of Israel pleased Him (v. 4). Now He said that those early days were short-lived (cf. Exod. 32:7-9). In contrast to His faithfulness (v. 6), they had been unfaithful.
3:7 From Israel's early history the people had deviated from the straight path that Yahweh had prescribed for them to walk in the Mosaic Covenant. They had disobeyed covenant stipulations. The almighty Lord called His people to return to Him with the promise that if they did He would return to them (cf. Deut. 4:30-31; 30:1-10). The response of the people, however, was that they did not know how to return. The Mosaic Covenant specified how they were to return, by trusting and obeying Yahweh, so their question indicated a reluctance to change their ways.
"How should we return?' is not an earnest entreaty for information but a self-serving declaration of innocence. The people, in effect, are saying, What need do we have to return since we never turned away to begin with?'"34
3:8 The Lord proceeded to give some examples of repentance that the Israelites needed to apply. How absurd it is for human beings to rob God. To rob Him one would have to be stronger and smarter than He. Yet that is what the Israelites were doing because God was allowing it. They were thieves of the worst kind, robbers of God. They brazenly asked how they had robbed Him. They had withheld the tithes (Lev. 27:30, 32; Deut. 12:5-18; 14:22-29) and offerings (Num. 18:21-32) that the Law commanded them to bring to God.35Earlier the Lord criticized the priests for offering inferior quality sacrifices (1:7-14), and now He criticized the people for offering an insufficient quantity of sacrifices (cf. v. 10). Failure to adequately support the priests and Levites resulted in the breakdown of priestly service (cf. Neh. 10:32-39; 13:10).
3:9 All the people were guilty of this offense. That is, it was widespread in the nation, not that every individual Israelite was guilty necessarily. Robbing the priests and Levites of what was due them was really robbing God since they were His servants and they maintained His house, the temple. They would receive a curse from the Lord for this covenant violation (v. 11; cf. 4:6).
3:10 The people needed to bring the whole tithe, not just part of what they owed, into the storehouse, the temple. There were special rooms in the temple devoted to storing the gifts the Israelites brought (cf. 1 Kings 7:51; Neh. 10:38; 13:12). Then there would be food in the Lord's house for the priests and for Himself. The sacrifices were, in a figurative sense, food for the Lord (cf. 1:7). The Lord urged His people to put Him to a test by doing this.36He had promised to bless them for obedience, so their obedience in bringing the full amount of tithes that the Law required would test His faithfulness to His promise. He promised to reward their full obedience with rain and harvests abundant enough to satisfy their needs. His "storehouse"of blessings for them was full.
This verse has often been used to urge Christians to tithe. However, the New Covenant under which we live never specified the amount or percentage that we should give back to God of what He has given to us. Rather it teaches that we should give regularly, sacrificially, as the Lord has prospered us, and joyfully (cf. 1 Cor. 16:1-2; 2 Cor. 8-9; Phil. 4). In harmony with the principle of grace that marks this dispensation, the Lord leaves the amount we give back to Him unspecified and up to us.37
This verse has also been used to teach "storehouse giving."Those who do so view the church building, or the church congregation, as the storehouse into which Christians should bring their gifts to the Lord. Some go so far as to say that it is wrong for Christians to give to the Lord in ways that bypass the local church, for example, giving directly to a missionary.
This viewpoint fails to appreciate the difference between Israel's temple and Christian churches. Israel's temple was a depository for the gifts that the Israelites brought to sustain the servants and work of the Lord throughout their nation. The Christian church, however, is different in that we have no central sanctuary, as Israel did, nor does the church have a national homeland. Christians live and serve throughout the world in contrast to the Israelites who fulfilled theirmission by serving God within their land. God told the Israelites to stay in the land and let their light shine from there (Exod. 19:5-6), but He has told Christians to go into all the world and let our light shine there (Matt. 28:19-20). Some Christians believe that each local church is a microcosm of Israel, so we should regard our church as Israel regarded its temple. Most Christians believe the church is not limited to a collection of local churches but includes the whole universal body of Christ (Eph. 1; 4). The whole is greater than any of its parts and even all its parts.
3:11-12 Not only would God provide adequate harvests (v. 10), but He would also preserve the harvested crops from animals and diseases that might otherwise destroy them. Their grapes would also develop fully on their vines rather than dropping off prematurely. All other nations would acknowledge divine blessing on the Israelites because their land would be such a delightful place.
The Mosaic Covenant with its promises of material blessing for obedience is no longer in force (Rom. 10:4; Heb. 8:13). Obedience to God's will does not necessarily result in material prosperity now (Phil 1:29; 4:11-13). However, we do have promises that God will reward those who trust and obey Him in the next stage of our lives, after death, if not before (Acts 4:31-35; 1 Cor. 3:11-15; 2 Cor. 5:10; 9:6-12; Gal. 66; Phil. 4:14-19).
The final three verses of the book, which are also the final message in the Old Testament, are sufficiently different from what immediately precedes to indicate another message from Malachi. Essentially Malachi said, Be prepared for God's coming.
"Malachi began with an illustration from Genesis (Jacob and Esau) and spent most of the first half of the book reminding priests and people of the need to keep the Mosaic Law. Now, close to the end of his book, he gives another terse reminder of their continuing obligation to those laws."43
4:4 Moses' last words to the Israelites in Deuteronomy contain about 14 exhortations to remember the Law that God had given them. Malachi closed his book, and God closed the Old Testament, with the same exhortation. The Israelites had forgotten and disregarded God's law, and Malachi had pointed out many specific instances of that. Now he urged the people to recall and obey their Law. By calling Moses "My servant,"the Lord was reminding Malachi's audience of how faithful Moses had carried out God's will. He was to be their model of obedience.
4:5 The Lord promised to send His people Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord arrived. An angel later told John the Baptist's parents that their son would minister in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17). Yet John denied that he was Elijah (John 1:21-23). Jesus said that John would have been the Elijah who was to come if the people of his day had accepted Jesus as their Messiah (Matt. 11:14). Since they did not, John did not fulfill this prophecy about Elijah coming, though he did fulfill the prophecy about Messiah's forerunner (3:1).
This interpretation has in its favor Jesus' words following the Transfiguration (and John the Baptist's death). Jesus said that Elijah would come and restore all things (Matt. 17:11). Whether the original Elijah will appear before the day of the Lord or whether an Elijah-like figure, similar to John the Baptist, will appear remains to be seen. Since Jesus went on to say that Elijah had come and the Jews failed to recognize him, speaking of John (Matt. 17:12-13), I prefer the view that an Elijah-like person will come.
What John did for Jesus at His first coming, preparing the hearts of people to receive Him, this latter-day Elijah will do for Him at His second coming. Evidently the two witnesses in the Tribulation will carry out this ministry (Rev. 11:1-13). Who the witnesses will be is a mystery. Evidently one of them will be an Elisha-like person. These men will do miracles as Elijah and Elisha did.
4:6 Malachi revealed only one future forerunner of Messiah before the day of the Lord in view, perhaps the more prominent of the two. Elijah was a very significant person in Israel's history because he turned the Israelites back to God at the time of their worst apostasy, when Ahab and Jezebel had made Baal worship the official religion of Israel. Moses established the theocracy on earth, but Elisha restored it when it almost passed out of existence. Similarly the eschatological Elijah will unite the hearts of the Jews to turn back and worship Yahweh.
At His first coming Jesus said that because of Him families would experience division. Some fathers would believe on Him but their sons would not, and daughters would disagree with their mothers over Him (Matt. 10:35-36; Luke 12:49-53; cf. Mic. 7:6). When this Elijah comes, he will cause the Jews to believe on their Messiah as they did in the past. They will unite over belief in Him.
If the Lord would not send this Elijah, and if he did not turn the hearts of the Jews back to God, the Lord would have to come (in the person of Messiah) and strike the earth with a curse. Because the Jews will turn to Jesus Christ in faith, blessing will come to the earth, not a curse (vv. 2-3). This is another reference to millennial conditions.
The Jews of Malachi's day needed to remember their Law and practice it as preparation for the coming day of the Lord. As Jesus said, Moses wrote of Him (John 5:46). Had Malachi's audience and subsequent generations of Jews paid attention to the Law of Moses they would have recognized Jesus for who He was at His first coming. This was the last revelation that God gave His people before the forerunner of Messiah whom He promised in 3:1 appeared some 400 years later. They had plenty of time to get ready.
In Malachi's day the people needed to return to the Lord or He would smite the land with a curse. This is really what happened since they did not return to Him. The Israelites' problems occupying the land God gave them since the Babylonian captivity is evidence of their failure.
Fortunately for them, and for the whole world, God did not cast off His people Israel because they rejected His Son (Rom. 11:1). He will send another powerful prophet, like Moses, to His people in the end times. They will believe the message of that Elijah and will turn to Jesus Christ in faith when He returns to the earth (Zech. 12:10). Then Messiah will initiate a righteous worldwide rule that will last 1, 000 years (Rev. 20:1-6) rather than smiting the land with a curse.
