11,141
edits
Matthew 17:11: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
Only an interpretation of this kind can make possible Jesus’ identification of John the Baptist with Elijah in the verse that follows. In short, Jesus responds initially by fully agreeing with the scribes in their understanding of Malachi’s prophecy that Elijah is to come and accomplish his preparatory work. It is only in his conclusion that the passage is fulfilled with John the Baptist that Jesus parts company with the scribes. | Only an interpretation of this kind can make possible Jesus’ identification of John the Baptist with Elijah in the verse that follows. In short, Jesus responds initially by fully agreeing with the scribes in their understanding of Malachi’s prophecy that Elijah is to come and accomplish his preparatory work. It is only in his conclusion that the passage is fulfilled with John the Baptist that Jesus parts company with the scribes. | ||
<ref>Donald A. Hagner, vol. 33B, Matthew 14–28, Word Biblical Commentary, 499 (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998).</ref> | <ref>Donald A. Hagner, vol. 33B, Matthew 14–28, Word Biblical Commentary, 499 (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998).</ref> | ||
==How did the disciples understand it?== | |||
<ref> </ref> | Jesus’ disciples ask '''why the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come before the Christ'''. Malachi prophesied that God would send the prophet Elijah before the great and dreadful day of the Lord (Mal. 4:5). By claiming that the restoration of all things by Elijah had not taken place, the scribes could cast doubt on the messiahship of Jesus. Jesus answered that Elijah has already come but was mistreated in the same way that the Son of Man is “destined to undergo suffering at men’s hands.” Then they made the connection. '''He was talking to them about John the Baptist'''. John was the Elijah who came first in order to set things in order. The argument of the teachers of the law against his messiahship would not hold. <ref>Robert H. Mounce, Matthew, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series, 169 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011). </ref> | ||
The disciples’ question can be taken in two ways. | |||
:1. As a chronological problem. If you are the Messiah, what about Elijah? How can you be the Messiah if the teachers are right when they say that Elijah has to come first? How is this to be explained? Most people who read these accounts take the disciples’ question this way because of the word first, which suggests the problem with the sequence. | |||
:2. As a theological problem. This understanding of the question comes from the anticipated nature of the forerunner’s ministry. Malachi 4:6 taught that Elijah would bring about the restoration of all things (v. 11). But if Elijah was to do that, bringing the people to a right relationship with God as a precondition of the Messiah’s coming, how was it that the Messiah would need to die? Who would reject him in such a happy age? | |||
:Their confusion was not merely chronological—who must come first—rather, it referred back to their fundamental inability to make sense of the combination of glory and suffering. At this stage, their witness of the transfiguration glory of Jesus had if anything confirmed them in their misapprehension.<ref>D. A. Carson, God with Us: Themes from Matthew (Ventura, Calif.: Regal Books, 1985), 106.</ref> | |||
Whatever their question meant, both these puzzles were answered when Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands” (vv. 11–12). | |||
This means that the scribes were right to insist that Elijah must come before the Messiah, but they were wrong in failing to see that he had in fact come. They were wrong in their interpretation of the restoration too. | |||
They understood this as a promise of a perfect messianic age. But that was not a given fact, even in Malachi, since the last verse says that if the people do not repent at the forerunner’s teaching, then God will return “and strike the land with a curse” (Mal. 4:6). Since Jesus is making clear that the work of Elijah had been done by John the Baptist and that the people had not repented at his teaching, the only thing they could reasonably expect from God now was this judgment. | |||
Moreover, since the leaders had mistreated and killed John the Baptist, why should Jesus expect any different treatment? By calling their attention to this pattern, Jesus was reinforcing his teaching that it was necessary for him to be crucified. | |||
This was the second most important thing he had to teach them after he had taught who he was. Peter, James, and John had been given a glimpse of glory on the mountain, just as we have been given a glimpse of future glory in the last chapters of the Book of Revelation, but that is for later. This is now, and what is needed now is that the followers of Christ deny themselves, take up their crosses daily, and follow him. Before glory there must always be a cross.<ref>James Montgomery Boice, The Gospel of Matthew, 323-24 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2001). </ref> | |||
It is clear that the disciples did not take Jesus' explanation to mean that there would be another Elijah coming 2,000 years later. | |||
=References= | =References= | ||