Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 17:13
Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
13. understood ] See note ch. Mat 16:12.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 13. Then the disciples understood] When he spoke of the sufferings of this prophetic Elijah, and also of his own, which had been the subject of the conversation on the mount, during the transfiguration, they clearly apprehended that he spoke of John the Baptist.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Then the disciples understood,…. By his saying that Elias was come, and by the account he gave of his ill usage, it was clear to them,
that he spake unto them of John the Baptist; and that he was the Elias that was to come, and was come: so that this observation, that according to prophecy Elias was to come before the Messiah, was no objection to Jesus being the Messiah; but on the contrary, since he that was intended by Elias was come, and had done his work and office, it was a confirmation of the truth of his Messiahship.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Then understood ( ). One of the three k aorists. It was plain enough even for them. John was Elijah in spirit and had prepared the way for the Messiah.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
(13) Then the disciples understood.The words are suggestive both as indicating the conclusion in which they ultimately rested, and the frankness with which they owned how slowly they had passed from the literalism of the scribes to a true apprehension of the spiritual meaning of the prophecy in question.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
13. John the Baptist Hence the spirit of prophecy had, by the lips of Malachi, simply designated John by the name of the prophet of whom he was the antitype. Just so Christ is called our passover by the appropriation to him of the name which belonged to his type. See notes on Mat 3:1; Mat 11:2.
We may, in conclusion, remark that the narrative of the transfiguration is good proof of the immortality of the soul, and of an intermediate state of the soul between death and judgment. Moses is dead, yet Moses still lives. For Moses appeared living to the apostles on the mount of transfiguration.
In the scene of the Transfiguration we may find the following purposes:
1 . It presented a visible exhibition of Christ as in his glorious kingdom just at hand, namely, at his resurrection. It presented to his apostles a purer as well as sublime view of his royalty; elevating their thoughts above the notion of a mere earthly conqueror and king. It presented him as arrayed in his royal robes, when he should be fully invested by God the Father Almighty, in consequence of his sufferings, with a name which is above every name. It was, therefore, a confirmation and pledge (though not a fulfilment) of the utterance which he had given, just one week before, that even some of their own congregation should with living eyes behold him coming in his kingdom. Mat 16:28.
2 . It presented a predictive view of Christ which should be recalled to mind after his resurrection, both to confirm to his disciples the reality of that event, and remind them not only of its verbal predictions from the Saviour’s lips, but of this visible prediction presented to their eyes. Both glories, namely, of the transfiguration and of the resurrection, were the same. And when these three disciples should see the ascending Saviour, they would well remember that they had before seen him in the same splendour on the mount.
3 . It presented a signal specimen of our own glorious resurrection in the image of the risen Christ. There is not to be the creation of a new body, as there was not in the transfiguration, by either the bringing into existence new particles of substance, or by the additional accretion of other particles already existing.
Our Lord’s body went into its resurrection or glorified state, and subsided again, without any exchange of its particles of substance. Its substance was, for the time, endowed with higher phenomenal properties. So, chemically, the charcoal becomes a diamond by simply a new arrangement, without any change of identity of the particles.
So the same body that dies, particle for particle and substance for substance, will rise again; yet changed, or transfigured, in so far as it is invested with new properties of glory and of fitness for a heavenly world.
4 . It presented Christ as the founder of the new heavenly kingdom, as harmonizing with, though superior to Moses, the founder of the old dispensation, and to Elias, the head of the prophetic order. All the illustrious of past ages stand diminished and humbled before the now glorious Son of man, this transcendent Head of the human race. Adam before the fall was his most nearly equal type; yet still inferior because he fell. Hence, when the apostles afterward went through Jerusalem, and beheld the pomp of the old ceremonial, and the pride of its priesthood, they could call to mind this lesson, and contemn the whole, as nullified by reason of the glory that excelleth.
5 . It presents to the Christian Church a symbol of the exalted nature of Jesus, as the second unfallen Adam, as the glorifying restorer of man to his primeval glory; as invested with the robe of Divinity, exalted as a Prince and a Saviour, to conform all his own to his own final glorious likeness. The Gospel of Matthew mostly presents Christ in his laborious and suffering conditions; teaching sublimely and working miraculously, indeed, yet struggling with the trials, and exhibiting the simplicity of mere humanity. But this one scene in Matthew raises Jesus above all human level, and furnishes a full basis for all the glories which the Epistles of Paul and the Revelation of St. John ascribe to his transcendent Person.
6 . The Jews, during some part of their history, conceived a theory that there were to be two Messiahs, a glorious and a suffering one. They found in Scripture prophecy such varying accounts and descriptions of the great One to come, some exhibiting him in triumph and splendour, and others showing him in humiliation and death, that they could explain the discrepancy only on the supposition of two different persons. The one they called Messiah, the Son of David, and the other Messiah, the Son of Joseph. Now Jesus, by this manifestation of his own glory, showed both to be united in himself. He was both the suffering and the glorious Messiah.
He was the Son of man and the Son of God. He descended to the humblest depths of our nature to bring us to its utmost heights.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Then the disciples understood that he spoke to them of John the Baptist.’
Then the disciples realised that He was speaking of John the Baptist. He was the Elijah who was coming. They had taken a further small step in understanding. But we may ask, can we really say that John had ‘restored all things’? Clearly a phrase like that can mean a number of things. It could not possibly be taken literally, for then he would have forestalled the Messiah. If ‘Elijah’ literally ‘restores all things’ there would be nothing left for anyone else to do. But what then was prophesied of the coming Elijah? It was that he would ‘turn the heart of the fathers to the children and the heart of the children to their fathers’ (Mal 4:6). He would restore all that was necessary in God’s purposes. He would put right the basics. And this was to be in order to forestall the judgment of God and make His people ready for blessing and not cursing. This was the ‘restoration of all things’ that was promised.
And that was certainly also promised of John the Baptist. He would turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God (Luk 1:16). And he would go before God’s face in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to walk in the wisdom of the righteous, to make ready for the Lord a prepared people (Luk 1:17). This was the restoration promised, and this John fulfilled. This was why there was such fruitful ground awaiting the coming of Jesus (Joh 4:38).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
Ver. 13. Then the disciples understood ] Different measures of light and grace are given at several times, as God pleaseth to dispense, Joh 12:16 ; Joh 2:22 ; Joh 10:41-42 . Joseph understood not his own dreams, nor the eunuch what he read, till afterwards. Wait at wisdom’s gates, wear out her threshold: then shall we “know if we follow on to know the Lord,” Hos 6:3 . Beg and dig for understanding, and thou shalt be sure of it, Pro 2:3-5 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mat 17:13 . : the parallel drawn let the three disciples see who the Elijah was, alluded to by their Master. What a disenchantment: not the glorified visitant of the night vision, but the beheaded preacher of the wilderness, the true Elijah!
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
of = concerning. Greek. peri. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
the disciples: Mat 11:14
Reciprocal: Mat 3:1 – John Mat 11:9 – A prophet Mat 21:25 – baptism Mar 9:13 – Elias
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
7:13
The disciples did the proper kind of reasoning and it gave them the correct conclusion, and was a demonstration of the thoughts offered at chapter 13:1G, 17.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 17:13. He spake unto them of John the Baptist.Our Lord referred to John, but this does not exhaust the meaning of the prophecy in Malachi. The passages bearing on the subject indicate strongly another appearance of Elijah (whether the same person or not is of course unknown to us) before the second coming of Christ, to do a similar preparatory work. In every great spiritual movement there must be one who precedes in the spirit and power of Elijah.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The disciples now understood that John the Baptist initially fulfilled the prophecy about Elijah returning. However, their continuing problems with Jesus’ death seem to indicate that they did not really understand that He had to die. This incident reveals another step of understanding that the disciples took, but it was only a small step.