There is a bit of an emerging controversy over Malachi 2:16. Or perhaps the controversy has already emerged and swallowed up its competition. I don’t know for sure. At any rate if we look “diachronically” at the translations of this verse, we see the following:
Malachi 2:16 throughout the years
KJV — 1611 / 1769
For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.
RSV — 1952
For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel, and covering one’s garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless.
NEB — 1976 (Possibly “patient zero”)
If a man divorces or puts away his spouse, he overwhelms her with cruelty, says the Lord of Hosts the God of Israel.
NASB — 1977
“For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel, and covering one’s garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless.”
NIV — 1984
“For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel, and covering one’s garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless.”
ESV — 2001 (Another deviation)
For the man who hates and divorces, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.
NIV — 2011 (The floodgates open)
“The man who hates and divorces his wife,” says the LORD, the God of Israel, “does violence to the one he should protect,” says the LORD Almighty. So be on your guard, and do not be unfaithful.
ESV — 2011 (Note that the word “hate” disappears entirely)
For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.
For reference, the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) version:
For I detest divorce — said the Lord, the God of Israel — and covering oneself with lawlessness as with a garment — said the Lord of Hosts. So be careful of your life-breath and do not act treacherously.
Now you can’t just translate a passage “word for word” and expect to give an accurate rendering of the original meaning in the target language. But in this case it is helpful to do so just to see what the problem is. Here’s my attempt at literal rendering of the Hebrew. Note that the Hebrew goes from right to left, but I’ll translate from left to right, word by word.
כִּֽי־שָׂנֵ֣א שַׁלַּ֗ח אָמַ֤ר יְהוָה֙ אֱלֹהֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל
For-he-hates to-send-away-of says Yahweh God-of Israel
וְכִסָּ֤ה חָמָס֙ עַל־לְבוּשׁ֔וֹ אָמַ֖ר יְהוָ֣ה צְבָא֑וֹת
And-to-cover violence upon a-garment-of-him, says Yahweh of-armies.
The main problem with this is that the first word (actually first two words) are “For he hates” (third-person singular). It then refers to Yahweh God of Israel as if he is speaking. So one might be able to interpret it as “God says that if someone hates…” and then, “to send away” meaning “hates to the point of sending away [divorcing].” Then the “and” that begins the next clause could mean something like an equals sign: “Yawheh says that a man who hates to the point of divorce [sending away] equals a man who covers his garment with violence.”
I believe this is wrong. It opens the possibility that God might NOT hate (or detest) divorce. In other words, it takes a pretty clear passage and mangles it to make it conform to our cultural norms.
While there may be some technical issues I am ignoring in my ignorance, it seems to me that the Hebrew is simply an example of indirect speech. It’s as if someone says, “Joe said he hates hot dogs.” You could say this as “Joe said, ‘I hate hot dogs,'” but the first way is just as valid and as clear. Indirect speech in the original languages is very common since they did use punctuation the way we do.
One might ask what it means to say, “God hates divorce.” I have long thought that applying the word “hate” to God means that God rejects whatever it is. One might say that “God doesn’t believe in” divorce — not just in the sense that he doesn’t like it, but in the sense that we don’t believe in a flat earth. This is why Jesus speaks of divorce as adultery. The human institution of divorce does not overrule the divine “putting together” that occurs in marriage.
If the ESV is accurate in the translation of 2:15, this is even more striking (and more at odds with ESV’s translation of 2:16):
“Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth.”
God actually puts a “portion of the Spirit in their union.” This is what makes marriage real — God’s blessing of the union with his own Spirit. This, by the way, is why we as Christians cannot look upon marriage the same way the world does. It is not simply “falling in love” — something that the New Testament speaks of as “the passion of desire” (see 1 Thessalonians 4:5). The world speaks as though “falling in love” sanctifies marriage (and even fornication). The Bible says that marriage sanctifies sex, love, and all the things (such as children) that go along with marriage.
There are many ways that Christians in this day and age have bought into worldly values. Marriage is one of the ones that most affects almost everyone. An unclear message in this area has effects that permeate every aspect of life.