11,153
edits
Matthew 17:11: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:''Watch what He said, "Elias truly must first come." Past, present--in the future tense, but then He give John as an example. John wasn't Malachi 4. John was Malachi 3...<ref>JEZEBEL.RELIGION_ MIDDLETOWN.OH V-6 N-14 SUNDAY_ 61-0319</ref> | :''Watch what He said, "Elias truly must first come." Past, present--in the future tense, but then He give John as an example. John wasn't Malachi 4. John was Malachi 3...<ref>JEZEBEL.RELIGION_ MIDDLETOWN.OH V-6 N-14 SUNDAY_ 61-0319</ref> | ||
=Scripture= | |||
'''KJV''' | '''KJV''' | ||
| Line 24: | Line 20: | ||
:''He answered, “Elijah does indeed come first and will restore all things. And I tell you that Elijah has already come. Yet they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted. In the same way, the Son of Man will suffer at their hands.” Then the disciples understood that he was speaking to them about John the Baptist.<ref>Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible, Mt 17:11–13 (Biblical Studies Press, 2006).</ref> | :''He answered, “Elijah does indeed come first and will restore all things. And I tell you that Elijah has already come. Yet they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted. In the same way, the Son of Man will suffer at their hands.” Then the disciples understood that he was speaking to them about John the Baptist.<ref>Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible, Mt 17:11–13 (Biblical Studies Press, 2006).</ref> | ||
=Is this a proper interpretation of this scripture?= | |||
While William Branham's interpretation does appear to make sense, is it correct? | |||
==Improper View of Malachi 4== | |||
William Branham’s understanding is seriously flawed because Jesus is clearly referring to Malachi 4 as it is the '''only''' reference to Elijah in the entire Book of Malachi. So his statement that Jesus is referring to John the Baptist as fulfilling Malachi 3 and not Malachi 4 is clearly an incorrect interpretation of the passage. | |||
==Jesus is quoting directly from the Septuagint== | |||
The Septuagint was the Bible of Jesus and the apostles. Most New Testament quotations from the Old Testament are taken from it directly, even when it differs from the Masoretic (Hebrew) Text. On the whole the Septuagint closely parallels the Masoretic Text and is a confirmation of the fidelity of the tenth-century Hebrew text.<ref>Norman L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library, 552 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999)</ref> | |||
The word “Septuagint,” (from the Latin ''septuaginta'' = 70; hence its common abbreviation of LXX) derives from a story that 72 (other ancient sources mention 70 or 75) elders translated the Pentateuch into Greek; the term therefore applied originally only to those five books. That story is now acknowledged to be fictitious, yet the label persists by virtue of the tradition.<ref>Melvin K. H. Peters, "Septuagint", in , vol. 5, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman, 1093 (New York: Doubleday, 1992).</ref> | |||
William Branham puts great stock in the fact the Jesus uses the future tense. However, the verb ἀποκαταστήσει, “will restore,” '''is drawn verbatim''' from the LXX of Mal 3:23, where, however, the object clause is “the heart of the father to the son and the heart of a man to his neighbor” (the Hebrew of Mal 4:6 is only slightly different). | |||
The future tense, therefore, does not suggest that Jesus expects a future return of John the Baptist. The restoration of “everything” (πάντα) must here refer not to the renewal of the present order itself (which would make Elijah the Messiah himself, rather than the forerunner of the Messiah), as, for example, apparently in Acts 1:6 (and compare especially the cognate noun ἀποκατάστασις, “restoration” or “establishing,” in Acts 3:21 in an allusion to the return of Jesus), but to a preparatory work of repentance and renewal (as in the Malachi passage; see especially Luke 1:17). | |||
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> | |||