Matthew 17:10

Mat 17:10-13. His disciples asked, &c. — Being much surprised at the sudden departure of Elias, and at their Master’s ordering them to keep his having appeared a secret, they had no sooner finished their dispute about what the rising from the dead should mean, than, addressing themselves to Jesus, they said, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come — Before the Messiah, if no man must know of his coming? As if he had said, Since Elias has gone away so soon, and since thou orderest us to keep his appearing a secret, how come the scribes to teach, on all occasions, that Elias must appear before the Messiah erects his empire? As they supposed that Elias was to have an active hand in modelling and settling the Messiah’s kingdom, they never doubted that he would abide a while on earth; and knowing that the scribes affirmed openly that Elias was to appear, they could see no reason for concealing the thing. Jesus answered, Elias truly shall first come, and restore, or regulate, all things — Jesus not only acknowledged the necessity of Elijah’s coming before the Messiah, according to Malachi’s prediction, but he assured his disciples that he was already come, and described the treatment he had met with from the nation in such a manner as to make them understand that he spake of John the Baptist. At the same time he told them, that though the Baptist’s ministry was excellently calculated to produce all the effects ascribed to it by the prophets, they need not be surprised to find that it had not all the success which might have been expected from it, and that the Baptist had met with much opposition and persecution. For, said he, both the person and the preaching of the Messiah himself shall meet with the same treatment.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

D. The Church as wholly unknown and hidden. Mat_17:10-13

(Mar_9:11-13.)

10And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias [Elijah] 11must first come? And Jesus [he]14 answered and said unto them,15 Elias [Elijah] trulyshall first16 come [cometh], and [shall] restore all things.17 12But I say unto you, That Elias [Elijah] is come already,18 and they knew him not, but have done unto him [with him, ἐν αὐτῷ] whatsoever they listed [would, ἠθέλησαν]: likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of [by, ὑπ̓] them. 13Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Mat_17:10. Why then?—Although the particle οϋ̓ν seems at first sight to connect this query with the preceding prohibition of Christ (Meyer), it rather refers to the fact that Elijah had departed, and was not accompanying them (Grotius, Michaelis, Fritzsche, Olshausen, and the author in his “Leben Jesu”).19 Euth. Zigaben., and others, erroneously interpret the clause: Why did Elijah not come before Thee (not till now)?—Equally untenable is the view of Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Neander, who understand it as implying the inquiry, whether the appearance of Elijah which had just taken place was that to which the scribes referred, or whether another was till to be expected. Still more erroneous is the glossary of Schleiermacher and others, that the disciples remarked that Elijah had not yet appeared. Light-foot observes (on the passage): It was expected that Elijah should come and settle the controversies pending between the various Jewish schools, bring back the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod, and sanctify the people by a lustration.

Mat_17:11. Elijah truly shall first come, or lit. and according to the true reading: Elijah indeed cometh.—Jesus confirmed this doctrine, which was based on Mal_3:13; Mal_4:5. He adds: καὶ ἀπο κατα στήσει πάντα, “which is derived (says de Wette correctly) and somewhat enlarged from Mal_4:6, ‘he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers’ (compare Luk_1:17); and Mat_3:1, ‘and he shall prepare the way before Me’ (Luk_3:4). Properly speaking, the αποκατάστασις πάντων (according to the Sept. Mal_4:6), comp. Act_3:21, is specially the work of the Messiah, and Elijah could only be said to prepare the way for it.” Of course the expression must be understood as merely implying such a preparation. Meyer: A restitutio in integrum of the position and circumstances of the theocracy, which was to be effected by the Messiah, and prepared and introduced by Elijah.—In the confirmatory reply of Christ, the present έ̓ρχεται is used in the tense of the future, while the future tense in the next clause indicates that the Lord enters into this dogma. Hence it is not incompatible with what follows: “Elijah is already come.”

Mat_17:12. But I say unto you.—A more distinct explanation of the disclosure which He had already made on an earlier occasion, Mat_11:14. Hence we conclude that the prophecy of Malachi concerning the advent of Elijah was fulfilled, in the proper sense, in the appearance of John the Baptist, who had accomplished the preparatory ἀποκατάστασις by his preaching of repentance, by his testimony to Jesus and by pointing his disciples to Him, as well as by his martyrdom.

They knew him not.—In his peculiar character as the forerunner of the Messiah (or in respect of the fulfilment of the prophecy concerning Elijah). The persons here alluded to were his contemporaries generally, more especially the scribes ( Mat_17:10). Comp. Matthew 11.

Done unto him, or better: with him.20—ΙΙοιεῖν έ̓ν τινι, not classical, taken from the Septuagint, Gen_40:14; Dan_11:7; [Luke 33:39].—Whatever they would, ὅσαἠθέλησαν.—In wilful apostasy from their living connection with the prophets, and in opposition to the obedience due to him. A prelude this to the similar and decisive rejection of the Messiah Himself.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On the fulfilment of the prophecy of Malachi, see the preceding notes and Matthew 11. Otto von Gerlach remarks: “It refers to the ministry of one or more messengers of God, in the spirit and power of Elijah. In this sense, Elijah had reappeared in John and in the same sense will another Elijah precede the second coming of the Lord.” But we must maintain: 1. That the prophecy of Malachi was distinctly fulfilled in John the Baptist. 2. That in the same sense no other Elijah can come, as the Old Covenant, which both represented, is abrogated by the gospel.—Still, in every age, the Lord has His forerunners of the order of Elijah, and especially before His final appearance.

2. On descending from the mountain, the fact of Christ’s future sufferings is immediately brought forward again. Gladly would the disciples have taken the glorified spirits down with them into the conflict with the unbelief of the world. The question seems to have haunted their minds, Could not Elijah prevent the impending conflict and sufferings? To this mental objection, Christ replied, according to Mark, “How it is written of the Son of Man, that He must suffer many things, and be set at nought.” In other words, they were to read the prediction concerning Elijah in the light of those concerning the Son of Man. Then follows the declaration: Elijah is indeed come; but, so far from preventing the sufferings of the Messiah, he himself has fallen in the service and ministry of God. From this the disciples might infer what His future would be. And now, more than ever before, were they to feel that they were about to witness the most solemn and awful conflict, and that a deep abyss of suffering, into which they were immediately to descend, intervened between the old and the new order of things.

3. All mere traditionalism and ritualism are here denounced as arbitrary will-worship, and a demoniacal service of the flesh and of self. The blessed spirits who represented genuine and divine tradition—the prophets, restorers and reformers of the kingdom of God—received the same treatment at the hands of these guardians of outward and legal traditionalism, as civilized men do who land on inhospitable shores, inhabited by savages and cannibals. In short, they failed to understand and see what their own symbols implied, nor did they acknowledge their living embodiments, because their will was perverted, and, while feigning the strictest adherence to the letter of the law, they in reality served the will of the flesh.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The fresh perplexities of the disciples on descending from the Mount of Transfiguration.—After the barrier which separates this life from the other has fallen, the deep abyss of the cross opens, intervening between the old and the new order of things.—How the scribes by their false literality perverted even the word of God into traditions, and transformed it into dangerous error.—The Scripture has been fulfilled in a much wider sense than that elicited by the dead learning of the letter only.—How traditionalism fails to recognize Elijah, even while studying his description as given in the word.—Self-seeking under the garb of traditionalism.—The true Church of the Lord hidden and unknown amidst the old and formal community of Israel.—The great messengers of God, known only by report in the world: 1. They were announced, but not properly expected. 2. They came, but were despised and ill-treated. 3. While actually in the world, their future coming was still expected with fanatical anticipations.—Even in this world, a distance wide as the poles intervenes between the children of God and the servants of the devil.—Traditionalism persecuting and murdering the living prophets, and at the same time adorning the graves of the old prophets whom their fathers had murdered (Mat_23:29).—The glorious day of God is hid in this mortal life from the children of darkness.—Elijah had just been among them; yet they still continued to expect and to teach that Elijah would come. All God’s dealings and works are spiritual, and pass by unknown and unnoticed on account of the carnal services which men mistake for the reality.—The spirit of true religion, and a dead ministry and services.—John the Baptist the Elijah of his age: 1. The affinity of their character; 2. of their mission; 3. of their success (Elijah prepared the way for the Messianic prophecies—John, for Christ Himself).—The age of Elijah and that of John 1. The external difference between them (in the one case, unbelief and apostasy from the law; in the other, traditionalism). 2. Their internal agreement (in the one case, worldliness, apostasy, and hatred of the prophets; in the other, obduracy against the voice and reproofs of the Spirit).—The sufferings of John a foretaste of the sufferings of Christ.—Preserve in your hearts the blessed mystery of the Mount of Transfiguration, and then boldly descend into the terrors of the valley.

Starke:—Majus: We must not take in a literal sense what is intended to be spiritually understood in Holy Writ, as this would necessarily give rise to errors.—Quesnel: There never was an age which had not its Elijah, zealous and jealous for the honor of God; but woe to him who stops his ears!—The world knows not the children and the servants of God, 1Jn_3:1.—All witnesses to the truth must suffer sorrow, ignominy, and tribulation, Act_14:22.—Jesus the best expositor of Scripture.

Heubner:—All preachers of repentance are forerunners of Christ.—Great men have commonly the same fate.—From the fate of His forerunner, the Lord Jesus might anticipate what awaited Himself.—Ἀποκαθιστάναι, i.e., to restore the ancient, divine, and original order of things. But the main point is, to determine the right date, and what the genuine original really is.—Thus we are to go back for our authority to the time of the Apostles, and not, like the Roman Catholics, to the state of things immediately before the Reformation.

Footnotes:

[14] Mat_17:10.—Ιησοῦς is omitted in Codd. B., D., L., Z., etc [also in Cod. Sinait., and in all the modern crit. editions See Tregelles and Alford.—P. S.]

[15] Mat_17:11.—Αυτοῖς, unto them, is omitted in B., C., D., etc., and by Lachmann and Tischendorf. [The literal tranaslation, therefore, according to the oldest reading, would be: And He answering said.—P. S.]

[16] Mat_17:11.—ΙΙ ρωτον, first, is wanting in B.,D., and many other witnesses [also in Cod. Sinait.], and looks like a repetitious insertion from Mat_17:10 and Mar_9:12. [So also Meyer and Alford.]

[17] Mat_17:11.—[Ηλίας μὲν έ̓ρχεται καὶ ἀποκαταστήσει πάντα; Lange: Elias kommt freilich und wird Alles wi-derherntellen;, Ewald: Elia zwar kommt und wird Alles wieterherstellin; Conant: Elijah indeed comes and shall restore all things. The present tense in the first verb is simply an assertion of the certainty at the coming of Elijah without reference to the past or future, and involves, therefore, no contradiction with ῆδη ῆ̓λθεν in Mat_17:12. The verb έ̓πχεσθαι, however, like the English to come, and the German kommen, includes in the nature of the case the significance of the future tense, comp. Joh_4:23 : έ̓ρχεται ώ̓ρα καὶ νῦν έ̓στιν; Joh_4:21; Joh_14:8; Joh_16:2, and the part. præs. ὁ ἐρχόμενος of the Messiah, Mat_3:11, and the apocalyptic formula: δ ων καὶ δ ην καὶ δ ἐρχόμενος. There is, therefore, no necessity whatever to resort in such cases, after the old fashion, to a supposed Hebraism, an arbitrary enallage temporum. which falls with the assumption that the Hebrew language uses promiscus the past for the future and vice versâ, an error which has been amply refuted by Ewald, Krit. Grammat., p. 523 sqq. Comp. also Winer’s Grammat., §40, p. 237; and Alex. Buttmann’s Grammat. des N. T. (Berlin, 1859), p. 176.—P. S.]

[18] Mat_17:12.—[Better: already come, ἢδη ή̓λθεν.]

[19][Alford refers οὖν to both, the withdrawal of Elijah from the eyes of the disciples, and the injunction of the Lord lot to tell the vision. How should this be? If this was not the coming of Elijah, was he yet to come? If it was, how was it so secret and so short[illegible]—P. S.]

[20][Lange: an ihm gethan]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

17:10-13 Elijah’s presence at the transfiguration prompted a question about the view that Elijah must return before the Messiah comes (see Mal 4:5-6). In pointing to John the Baptist, Jesus reinforced the unexpected idea that the Messiah must suffer, even as his precursor had suffered (Matt 14:3-12).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mat 17:10. Τί οὖν, κ.τ.λ., how then, etc.) To the mention of His death they oppose the restitution of all things by Elias, whom (see 17:31) they suppose to have come; and they think that this fact ought not to be concealed, but, on the contrary, published for the promotion of the faith, that the event may be recognised as already corresponding to the expectation of the Scribes.—πρῶτον, first) sc. before the Messiah’s kingdom.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_17:10. Οὖν] can have no other reference than to the foregoing prohibition (comp. Mat_19:7): Seeing that we are forbidden to tell any one about the appearing of Elias which we have just witnessed, and so on, what reason, then, have the scribes for saying that Elias must first come (before the Messiah appears, to establish His kingdom)? Does it not follow from Thy prohibition that this teaching of the scribes must be erroneous, seeing that, if it were not so, Thou wouldst not have enjoined us to keep silence regarding this manifestation of Elias? This is likewise in harmony with the answer of Jesus, which is to this effect: That teaching is quite correct; but the Elias whom it speaks of as being the Messiahs forerunner is not the prophet who has just been seen upon the mount, but John the Baptist, whom they did not recognise, and so on. This view is so entirely in accordance with the context as to exclude any others, as, for example, that of Euth. Zigabenus, Erasmus, Kuinoel, who, emphasizing πρῶτον, interpret thus: διατί οἱ γρ. λέγ., ὅτι Ἠλίαν χρὴ ἐλθεῖν πρὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ; πῶς οὖν οὐκ ἠλθεν οὗτος πρὸ σοῦ; or that which ascribes to the disciples the idea, of which there is not the remotest hint, that Christ is going to be revealed before the world in His glory, and that therefore there is really no further room for the manifestation and the services of Elias (Hofmann, Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 518); or that of Grotius, Michaelis, Fritzsche, Lange, Olshausen, Bleek, Hengstenberg, who understand the question of the disciples as referring to the circumstance that Elias had not remained, but had so quickly disappeared again (it was believed, though of this the question contains no hint whatever, that Elias would teach the Jews, settle the disputes among their instructors, restore the pot of manna and Aarons rod, and so on; Lightfoot on this passage; Winzer, de ἀποκαταστάσει πάντων, II., 1821, p. 9); or, again, that of Chrysostom, Theophylact, Neander, Krabbe, Ebrard, who suppose that the object of the question was to know whether the manifestation of Elias, which the scribes had in view, was that which had just taken place, or whether it was some other one yet to come; or, lastly, the expedient of Schleiermacher and Strauss, who think that the whole conversation originated in the disappointment felt in consequence of the prediction regarding the coming of Elias not having been fulfilled, and that it has only found its way into the present connection through an erroneous process of combination. According to Köstlin, p. 75, οὖν does not refer back to the transfiguration at all, but seems to say: Seeing that the Messiah is already come, which is the idea supposed to be contained in Mat_16:13-27. He thinks the connection has been interrupted by the evangelist interpolating the story of the transfiguration between Mat_16:27 and Mat_17:10.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 17:10 . τί οὗν , etc.: does the οὖν refer to the prohibition in Mat 17:9 (Meyer), or to the appearance of Moses and Elias, still in the minds of the three disciples, and the lateness of their coming (Euthy., Weiss), or to the shortness of their stay? (Grotius, Fritzsche, Olsh., Bleek, etc.). Difficult to decide, owing to fragmentariness of report; but it is most natural to take οὖν in connection with preceding verse, only not as referring to the prohibition of speech pro tem ., but to the apparently slighting tone in which Jesus spoke. If the recent occurrence is not of vital importance, why then do the scribes say etc.? To lay the emphasis (with Weiss) on πρῶτον , as if the disciples were surprised that Moses and Elias had not come sooner, before the Christ, is a mistake. The advent would appear to them soon enough to satisfy the requirements of the scribes just at the right time, after they had recognised in Jesus the Christ = Thou art the Christ we know, and lo! Elias is here to prepare the way for Thy public recognition and actual entry into Messianic power and glory. The sudden disappearance of the celestials would tend to deepen the disappointment created by the Master’s chilling tone, so that there is some ground for finding in οὖν a reference to that also.

Mat 17:11 . ἔρχεται : present, as in Mat 2:4 , praesens pro futuro , Raphel ( Annotationes in S.S.), who cites instances of this enallage temporis from Xenophon. Wolf ( Curae Phil. ), referring to Raphel, prefers to find in the present here no note of time, but only of the order of coming as between Elias and Christ. It is a didactic, timeless present. So Weiss. ἀποκαταστήσει πάντα . This word occurs in Sept [103] , Mal 4:5 , for which stands in Luk 1:17 : ἐπιστρέψαι ; the reference is to restitution of right moral relations between fathers and children, etc. Raphel cites instances of similar use from Polyb. The function of Elias, as conceived by the scribes, was to lead Israel to the Great Repentance. vide on this, Weber, Die Lehren des T. , pp. 337 8.

[103] Septuagint.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Verse 10. His disciples] instead of HIS disciples, some MSS., with the Coptic, Armenian, Vulgate, all the Itala except two, and Origen, read simply, οι μαθηται, THE disciples, i.e. those only who had been with him on the mount, Peter, James, and John.

Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?] As the disciples saw that Elijah returned to heaven, knowing the tradition of the elders, and the prophecy on which the tradition was founded, Mal 4:5-6, Behold I send you Elijah the prophet, before the great and terrible day of the Lord shall come; and he shall turn the hearts, &c., it was natural enough for them to inquire what the meaning of the tradition, and the intention of the prophecy, were.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(10) His disciples asked him.—The context clearly implies that the question came not from the disciples at large, but from the three who had seen the vision, and were brooding over the appearance, and yet more, perhaps, the disappearance, of Elijah, as connected with the tradition of the scribes. If Elijah was to come and prepare the way, why had he thus come from the unseen world for a moment only?

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?] The truth of the resurrection was new to the disciples, see Mar_9:10. “If thou art the Messiah,” they say, “and shalt rise from the dead, surely the scribes are wrong in teaching that Elijah must precede the Messiah.”

Jesus shews that the prophecy of Mal_4:5 was fulfilled in John the Baptist. Others contend that our Lord’s words do not necessarily mean this, but that Malachi’s prediction, though partially fulfilled in John the Baptist, should have a more literal accomplishment before Christ’s second coming.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And his disciples asked him, saying,.... That is, these three, Peter, James, and John, before they came to the rest; whilst they were going down the mountain, or from it, to the place where the others were; for the rest knew nothing of the appearance of Elias, and so cannot be thought to join in a question concerning him.

Why then say the Scribes, that Elias must first come? That is, come before the Messiah comes; for certain it is, that this was the sense of the Scribes, as it was of the ancient Jews, and is still the opinion of the modern ones. They say (h),

"that in the second year of Ahaziah, Elias was hid; nor will he appear, till the Messiah comes; then he will appear, and will be hid a second time; and then will not appear, till Gog and Magog come.''

And they expressly affirm (i), that

"before the coming of the son of David, , "Elias will come to bring the good news" of it.''

And this, they say (k), will be one day before the coming of the Messiah. And Maimonides (l) observes,

"that there are of their wise men that say, , "that before the coming of the Messiah, Elias shall come".''

So Trypho the Jew, the same with R. Tarphon, so often mentioned in Talmudic writings, disputing with Justin Martyr, tells him (m), that the Messiah,

"shall not know himself, nor have any power, "till Elias comes", and anoints him, and makes him known to all.''

And hence the Targumist (n) often speaks of Messiah and Elias as together, and of things done by them; and in their prayers, petitions are put for them, as to come together (o): this is founded upon a mistaken sense of Mal 4:5 and which is the general sense of their commentators (p). Now the Scribes made use of this popular sense, to disprove Jesus being the Messiah: they argued, that if he was the Messiah, Elias would be come; but whereas he was not come, therefore he could not be the Messiah. The disciples having just now seen Elias, are put in mind of this tenet of the Scribes, and of their use of it; and inquire of Christ, not so much about the truth of it, and the reason of their imbibing it, as why they were suffered to make use of it, to his disadvantage; and especially why they, the disciples, should be forbid publishing what they had seen; whereas, were they allowed to divulge this vision, and bear their testimony to this truth, that Elias had appeared, and they had seen him, it might be a means of stopping the mouths of these Scribes; and of convicting men of the truth of the Messiahship of Jesus, upon their own principles, and of confirming them that believed it: or else the sense is, whereas they had seen Elias, and he was gone again, without making any public appearance in the nation, their question is, how came the Scribes to say, that he should come first? and if there was any truth in this, how came it to pass, that he did not come sooner, even before Christ came in the flesh; and inasmuch as he did now appear, why he did not appear more publicly, as the person that was to come, at least, before the setting up of the kingdom and glory of the Messiah; which they might hope were at hand, and that Elias was come to usher it in: but that he did not appear publicly, and they were not allowed to speak of it, they wanted to know Christ's sense of these things; and took this opportunity as they came from the mountain, to converse with him about it.

(h) Seder Olam Rabba, p. 45, 46. (i) Gloss. in T. Bab. Erubin, fol. 43. 2. (k) R. Abraham ben David in Misn. Ediot, c. 8. sect. 7. (l) Hilch. Melacim, c. 12. sect. 2. (m) Dialog. cum Tryph. p. 226. (n) In Exod. xl. 10. Deut. xxx. 4. & Lam. iv. 22. (o) Seder Tephillot, fol. 56. 2. & 128. 2. (p) Aben Ezra, Kimchi, & Abarbinel in loc.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?

Ver. 10. Why then say the scribes, &c.] Christ had answered them this question once before; but they were unsatisfied by anything he could say, because strongly possessed with the conceit of an earthly kingdom. But the occasion of the question might be this. Our Saviour had forbidden them to tell any man the vision; hence they might thus debate it. Forasmuch as Elias must first come (so the scribes teach, and they have a text for it, Mal 4:5), and now he is come, as we have seen in the mount, why shouldest thou, Lord, forbid us to tell it abroad, since this might be an effectual argument with the Jews to move them to acknowledge thee for the true Messiah? To this our Saviour answereth.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

See also Mar 9:11-13.

Why then say the scribes ... - The disciples appear to have been satisfied now that he was the Messiah. The transfiguration had taken away all their doubts, but they recollected that it was a common doctrine among the Jews that Elijah would appear before the Messiah came, and they did not then recollect that he had appeared. To this difficulty the word then refers. “We are satisfied that thou art the Christ, but Elijah has not yet come, as was expected; what, then, is the meaning of the common opinions of our learned men, the scribes? Were they right or wrong in their expectation of Elijah?” See the notes at Mat 11:14.

Mat 17:11

Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things - He did not mean by this that Elijah was yet to come, for he tells them immediately Mat 17:12 that he had come; but he meant to affirm that it was a true doctrine which the scribes taught, that Elijah would appear before the coming of the Messiah. To “restore” means to put into the former situation. See Mat 12:13. Hence, it means to heal, to correct, to put in proper order. Here it means that Elijah would put things in a proper state; he would be the instrument of reforming the people, or of restoring them, in some measure, to proper notions about the Messiah and preparing them for his coming. Before the coming of John their views were erroneous, their expectations were worldly, and their conduct were exceedingly depraved. He corrected many of their notions about the Messiah (see Matt. 3), and he was the instrument of an extensive reformation, and thus restored them, in some degree, to correct views of their own system and of the Messiah, and to a preparation for his advent.

Mat 17:12

Elias is come already - That is, John the Baptist has come, in the spirit and power of Elias. See Luk 1:17.

They have done unto him whatsoever they listed - The word “list” is an old English word, signifying to choose, to desire, to be inclined. See Jdg 3:8. It means, here, that they had done to John as they pleased; that is, they had put him to death, Mat 14:10.

Mark adds Mar 9:12 that Jesus told them that it was “written of the Son of man that he must suffer many things, and be set at naught.” This was written of him particularly in Isa 53:1-12. To be set at naught is to be esteemed as worthless or as nothing; to be cast out and despised. No prophecy was ever more strikingly fulfilled. See Luk 23:11, Luk 23:14-21. This narrative, with some additions, is found in Mark 9:14-29, and Luk 9:37-43.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Elias must come first. The prophet Elias will come again in person before my second coming to judgment, and will re-establish all things, by the conversion of the Jews to the Christian faith, according to the common opinion. But John the Baptist who was Elias in spirit, is already come. See Matthew xi. 14. (Witham) --- This was a vulgar error spread by the Scribes among the Jewish people. It proceeded from an erroneous interpretation of Scripture. They confounded the two comings of our Saviour. The Baptist was the precursor of Christ at his first coming, and was styled by our Lord Elias, because he performed the office of Elias; and he shall go before Him in the spirit and power of Elias. (Luke i. 17.) --- But this prophet in person will be the precursor of the second coming of Christ. Whereby Malachias, predicting this coming of Christ, says: I will send to you Elias the Thesbite; thus evidently distinguishing him from the Baptist, who was also Elias in spirit and in the dignity of his office. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lviii.) --- Jesus Christ here confirms the literal sense of the prophecy; (Malachias iv. 5,) but in the next verse, he shews a prior, though less perfect accomplishment of the same in the person of John the Baptist, who was raised by God to prepare the ways of the Lord.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Before these words, Mark saith, Mar 9:10, And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean. Then he addeth, And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come. The disciples (as appeareth) were as yet very imperfectly instructed in the doctrine of man’s redemption by Christ, though Christ had before told them, that as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so he should be three days and three nights in the belly of the earth. How dull the best of men are to apprehend spiritual mysteries, which are above the reach of our reason! The Jews had a tradition, and retain it to this day, That before the coming of the Messias Elias should come; they build it upon Mal 4:4,5. That they had such an expectation appeareth by their sending to John the Baptist, Joh 1:21, to know if he were he, meaning Elijah the Tishbite (for him they expected); and this was their great error, and still blindeth them. The disciples had now seen Elijah, and possibly might wonder at our Saviour’s forbidding them to speak of the vision, as thinking that nothing could more conduce to the receiving of him as the Messiah: or possibly they might wonder at Elijah’s so soon leaving the earth, the Messiah being come, whom they expected he should come before. So as though they were fully satisfied that Christ was the true Messiah, yet they knew not how to reconcile their faith to the promise, or to their tradition built upon the promise. This causeth the question.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

10. Why then say the scribes — The word then seems to imply something previously said in their conversation, contradictory to this opinion of the scribes that Elias should first come. This transient appearance was not a coming at all commensurate with the views of the scribes. What foundation then have the scribes, and how is their view reconcilable with the facts?

The Jews still, in accordance with their interpretation of Malachi, expect the coming of Elias as the forerunner of their Messiah, and pray for his appearance in their synagogue worship. They hold that, since his translation, Elias invisibly revisits the world perpetually. They believe him present at circumcisions; and a seat is provided at the right hand of the child which he is supposed to occupy. It is therefore not so much for his coming that they pray as for his manifestation.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Why then (oun) say the scribes that Elias must first come? The illative particle "then" shows that the apostles" question arose from something immediately preceding. The connection seems to be this: Elias had just appeared and then had vanished again; how could this visitation be reconciled with the scribes" interpretation of Malachi"s prophecy? If Elias was to come before the advent of Messiah, and Jesus is the Messiah, how is it that he has only now shown himself? If he has a work to do on earth, how could he do that when his sojourn was limited to a few minutes" duration, and to the view of so few witnesses? Malachi had spoken of the Messenger who was to precede and prepare the way for Messiah; he had said, "Before the great day of the Lord, I will send you Elijah the prophet"; (Mal_3:1 Mal_4:5) and the learned among the Jews interpreted these two passages of his appearance in person to herald the approach of Messiah. Hence the perplexity of the apostles, they, like the scribes, not distinguishing the two advents of Christ, and the double allusion in the prophet"s announcement the "Messenger" in Mat_3:1 being a different personage from "Elias" in Mat_4:5, though of the same power and spirit. Christ explains the difficulty in the two next verses.

Vers. 10-13. The Elijah ministry of John the Baptist.

The disciples were perplexed at what they saw on the Mount of the Transfiguration. There Elijah appeared with Moses in conversation with Christ, and the vision recalled to mind the familiar expectation of the Jews that the prophet should precede the advent of Christ. Was this the coming of Elijah? Surely not, for it was but a momentary visit in a solitary place. Yet if Elijah had not come first, how could the Christ have come? Thus the disciples were troubled in mind till their Master explained the situation by pointing to the mission of John the Baptist.

I THE ADVENT OF CHRIST NEEDED TO BE HERALDED BY AN ELIJAH MINISTRY. The word "must" points to more than the fulfilment of prophecy. There was a necessity in the very nature of the case. Except Elijah came first Christ could not come.

1. Inferior ministries prepare for higher ministries. Elijah was great, but not so great as Christ. The prophets were all of them less than the Saviour. The Law was not equal to the gospel. Yet the lower and earlier ministries, with which all of these were associated, made the way ready for the coming of Christ.

2. Awakening must precede regeneration. Christ came to bring new life to the world. No Elijah could confer such a gift on his fellow men. But, in order to receive it, men must be awake and attentive. The earlier ministry rouses; it breaks up the fallow ground; thus it prepares for the later seed sowing.

3. Repentance must come before forgiveness. The grace of the gospel is net for the impenitent. Some influence must melt the stubborn heart if the kindly blessings of Christ are to be received into it.

II THE ELIJAH MINISTRY MAY COME AND YET BE REJECTED. It was so in the case of John the Baptist, at least on the part of a considerable portion of the Jews.

1. There is no compulsion in the Divine ministries. We may accept them, and then they will bring us blessings. But we may reject them, though to our cost. After all, man is more than the soil through which the plough is driven; for he may arrest the instrument that would prepare him for the seed sowing, or he may harden himself against it.

2. The most needed Divine ministry may not come in the form we are expecting. The people looked for Elijah, and Elijah came; yet they did not recognize him. We may read the Bible too literally. Prophecy is not fulfilled in pedantic, verbal exactitude. The spirit of the prediction is verified in the event, but not in the form in which the prediction was first recorded. We blunder in blindness if we fail to welcome the Baptist because we are looking for Elijah.

III CHRIST OPENS HIS DISCIPLES" EYES TO THE FULFILMENT OF GOD"S PURPOSES IN THE ELIJAH MINISTRY OF JOHN THE BAPTIST.

1. It is well to bring our difficulties to Christ. The disciples were not ashamed to own their perplexity, nor too proud to ask for light. Our Lord will accept confidence in regard to the doubts that trouble us .

2. Jesus Christ understands the Divine purposes. They were obscure to the disciples; but to him they were quite clear. Therefore when we cannot see all we may trust him. The captain knows the route over the seas that are all unknown to the passengers.

3. Our Lord reveals needful truths concerning the Divine purposes, He gave his disciples an explanation. His whole life and teaching are luminous with revelation. W.F.A.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Why then say the scribes, that Elijah must come first - Before the Messiah? If no man is to know of his coming? Should we not rather tell every man, that he is come, and that we have seen him, witnessing to thee as the Messiah?

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come

Cf Mat 11:14; Mar 9:11; Mar 9:12; Mar 9:13; Luk 1:17; Mal 3:1; Mal 4:5; Mal 4:6 All the passages must be construed together.

(1) Christ confirms the specific and still unfulfilled prophecy of Mal 4:5; Mal 4:6: "Elias shall truly first come and restore all things." Here, as in Malachi, the prediction fulfilled in John the Baptist, and that yet to be fulfilled in Elijah, are kept distinct.

(2) But John the Baptist had come already, and with a ministry so completely in the spirit and power of Elijah’s future ministry Luk 1:17 that in an adumbrative and typical sense it could be said: "Elias is come already." Cf; Mat 10:40; Phm 1:12; Phm 1:17 where the same thought of identification, while yet preserving personal distinction, occurs. Joh 1:27

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The question of the disciples:

v. 10. And His disciples asked Him, saying, Why, then, say the scribes that Elias must first come?

v. 11. And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias, truly, shall first come, and restore all things.

v. 12. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of Man suffer of them.

v. 13. Then the disciples understood that He spake unto them of John the Baptist.

The fact that they had seen the prophet Elijah in the vision on the mountain recalled to their minds the saying of the scribes, probably based on Mal 4:5, as to the coming of Elijah. Their understanding was that Elijah would reappear in person, settle the quarrels between the various Jewish schools, bring back the pot of manna and Aaron’s rod, and sanctify the people by an extraordinary washing. Jesus concedes the correctness of the idea: Elijah, according to the prophecy, was indeed to come for the purpose of restoring everything among the Jews to its proper state, as the Lord wanted it to be. He was to prepare the way for the Lord Himself. But the Lord finds fault with the fact that the scribes and the Jewish people in general did not recognize the second Elijah as such, but did what they pleased with him. The leaders of the people rejected him, and the dissolute, adulterous tetrarch put him to death. He shared the fate of most prophets that place the fearless confession of truth above the concern for their own safety and welfare. From the rejection of His herald to the denial of the Messiah Himself is only a small step; and even in the same manner will they cause Him to suffer. This explanation was sufficient to open the eyes of the disciples; they understood that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was to come before the great and dreadful day of the Lord.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Here we have the disciples’ question, and our Saviour’s answer. They ask our Saviour, how the observation of the Jewish doctors holds good, that Elias must come before the Messias come? We see the Messias, but we see no Elias; our Saviour answers, that Elias was come already: Not Elijah in person, but one in the spirit and powers of Elias; one of his spirit and temper; to wit, John the Baptist, who was prophesied of under the name of Elias. And great indeed was the resemblance between the Elias of the Old Testament, and of the New, namely John the Baptist; they were both born in bad times; they were both zealous for God and religion; they were both undaunted reprovers of the faults of princes; and they were both hated and implacably persecuted for the same.

Learn, that hatred and persecution, even unto death, has often been the lot and portion of such as have had the zeal and courage to reprove the faults of princes; Elias is come, and they did unto him whatsoever they would.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? They knew that the scribes, in their capacity as interpreters of prophecy, were wont to say that Elijah must come before the Messiah could appear. They said this on the strength of Mal. 3:1, and 4:5. If Peter, James and John were of those who asked this question, they were probably seeking to ascertain if the vision they had seen was the coming of Elias and why he did not remain.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

10. πρῶτον, inserted to help the sense, appears in the majority of later uncials, not in אBD.

10. οὖν. Elijah had appeared to the chosen three Apostles. It seemed to them that this was a fulfilment of Malachi’s prophecy and the necessary condition of the Messiah’s Advent as explained by the Scribes. But they are forbidden to announce this to any one. Hence the inference expressed by οὖν. The Scribes must be mistaken. For surely the Messiah would allow His disciples to make known this clear token of His presence.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10.] The occasion of this enquiry was, that they had just seen Elias withdrawn from their eyes, and were enjoined not to tell the vision. How (οὖν) should this be? If this was not the coming of Elias, was he yet to come? If it was, how was it so secret and so short?

On ver. 12, see note on ch. 11:14.

Our Lord speaks here plainly in the future, and uses the very word of the prophecy Mal 4:6. The double allusion is only the assertion that the Elias (in spirit and power) who foreran our Lord’s first coming, was a partial fulfilment of the great prophecy which announces the real Elias (the words of Malachi will hardly bear any other than a personal meaning), who is to forerun His greater and second coming.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. And the disciples asked Him, saying, Why therefore do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?] Mk. has: “And they were asking Him, saying, Why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” Two facts in the preceding narrative may have suggested this question. The disciples had seen Elijah on the mountain. In what relation did this appearance stand to the coming which was attributed to him by the official theologians? Further, it was part of this official theory, that Elijah would prepare the way for the Messiah by restoring all things. (On this see Volz, Jüd. Eschat. p. 192.) But if all things were restored, and Israel was made ready for the Messiah, what did Christ mean by foretelling His death and resurrection? Why death in view of the restorative work of the forerunner?—ἐπηρώτησαν] aor. for Mk.’s imperf, as often. τί for Mk.’s ambiguous ὅτι; cf. similar changes in 17:19 = Mar 9:28, Mat 9:11 = Mar 2:16.

(M)

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.