11<\/strong>. first come<\/em> ] that is before the Messiah (Mal 4:5<\/span>). The Pharisees and Scribes may have urged as a capital objection against the Messiah-ship of their Master that no Elias went before Him. “It would be an infinite task,” says Lightfoot, “to produce all the passages out of the Jewish writings which one might concerning the expected coming of Elias.” He was to restore to the Jews the pot of manna and the rod of Aaron, to cry to the mountains, “Peace and blessing come into the world, peace and blessing come into the world!” “Salvation cometh, Salvation cometh, to gather all the scattered sons of Jacob, and restore all things to Israel as in ancient times.”<\/p>\n Why say the scribes … – <\/B>See the notes at Mat 17:10-13<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n Christ had been telling his disciples that he should suffer. The Jews had a prophecy, not only that the Messias should come, but that he should be cut off, but not for himself, <\/I>Dan 9:26<\/I><\/span>. Only this hindered the certainty of their persuasion that Christ was he, because Elias was not yet come, whom they did expect, Mal 4:5<\/span>; for they expected the coming of Elias in person, whereas the prophecy was to be understood of one in the spirit and power of Elias, <\/I>as the angel expounded it, Luk 1:17<\/span>. They also expected that Elias, when he came, should make a great change in their world, and bring all things again into order; but still their eye was upon a secular change, and a restoring of them to that liberty of their country which they formerly enjoyed, whereas the prophecy, Mal 4:6<\/span>, is expounded by the angel, Luk 1:16<\/span>,17<\/span>, And many of the<\/I> children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.<\/I> to<\/I> turn the hearts of the fathers unto the children, and the<\/I> disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people<\/I> prepared for the Lord.<\/I> The disciples, being Jews, were under the prejudices of these notions about Elias, so commonly received by the doctors of their church and the generality of their people. To this our Saviour answers, The thing was true, Elias (that is, one in<\/I> the spirit and power of Elias)<\/I> was, according to the prophecy of Malachi, to come before the Messias; but they had overlooked him, for indeed this Elias was come, Mat 11:14<\/span>, and by his preaching the doctrine of repentance for the remission of sins had endeavoured to restore all things, that is, to make a great change in the hearts and lives of the Jews, but they had put him to death. He further telleth them, that John had told them of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought. He did indeed tell them so, when he pointed to him passing by, and said, Behold the Lamb of God, which<\/I> taketh away<\/I> (or taketh up or beareth) the sins of the world, <\/I>Joh 1:29<\/I><\/span>. So that this was no just prejudice to their believing that he was the true Messiah. <\/P> <\/p>\n And they asked him, saying<\/strong>,…. Being put in mind of it, by seeing Elias on the mount, or else by what Christ had said concerning his resurrection, or both:<\/p>\n why say the Scribes<\/strong>, the Vulgate Latin adds, “and Pharisees”,<\/p>\n that Elias must first come<\/strong>? before the Messiah comes, or before the setting up his kingdom in greater glory; [See comments on Mt 17:10]<\/span>.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And they<\/strong> asked Him, saying,” <\/strong>(kai eperoton auton legontes) “And they inquired of Him (further) saying,” desiring further information.<\/p>\n 2) ”Why say the scribes that Elias must first come?”<\/strong> (hoti legousin hoi grammateis hoti Elian dei elthem peoton) ”Why is it that the scribes say that Elias is to come (must come) first?” prior to your resurrection? The scribes frequently misinterpreted their predictions, the prediction of the Lord and prophets, Mal 4:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n ‘And they asked him saying, “The scribes say that Elijah must first come?”<\/p>\n The question may suggest that they were disappointed by the fact that Elijah had come and yet had not remained and revealed himself to the world. It was commonly taught that his coming must precede that of the Messiah. Why then had he not stayed? Or were the scribes wrong?<\/p>\n A question of the disciples:<\/p>\n v. 11<\/strong>. And they asked Him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come?<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 12<\/strong>. And He answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of Man that He must suffer many things and be set at naught.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 13. But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.<\/p>\n <\/strong> Peter, James, and John were still busy straightening out matters in their own understanding. They had seen Elijah on the mountain, there was no doubt about that. But now the scribes, on the basis of Mal 4:5<\/span>, were teaching that Elijah was to come before the appearance of the Messiah and restore things to the proper state for the coming of the great Lord. They wanted this apparent contradiction explained. Jesus gladly furnishes them the necessary information. Their statement is right: Elijah, coming in advance, was to prepare the way. Their mistake consisted in applying the prophecy to the wrong person. It was not Elijah, the ancient prophet, in his own person, that would reappear on earth, but his antitype. And that antitype, John, had appeared and done his work. But Jesus immediately adds a few words of instruction concerning the question that had bothered them. How is it written about the Son of Man? He asks. They should remember the Scripture-passages which dealt of His person and work, and make the right application. He Himself gives the answer: That He must suffer much and be utterly despised. Those prophecies would be fulfilled in Him. As for those concerning Elijah, they had been fulfilled. John had come, and they, the Jews and especially Herod and Herodias, had worked their spite against him and put him to death. The disciples were familiar with the fate of the precursor, and they could and should expect nothing else for Him, since the Scripture must be fulfilled. It was the obligation which He had taken upon Himself; it was the work which He would carry out to the end for the redemption of the world.<\/p>\n 11 And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 11. See Trapp on “<\/em> Mat 17:10 “<\/em> <\/p>\n 11.<\/strong> ] The <\/strong> may be merely recitantis, ‘ they asked him, saying<\/em> ( that<\/em> ) the Scribes say, that Elias must first come<\/em> :’ leaving <\/strong> to find its application in the difficulty thus suggested by them. But it is better to take it in the unusual sense (undoubted there) of Mar 9:28<\/span> [see Moulton on Winer, p. 208, note 4]: see further on in this note.<\/p>\n Mar 9:11<\/span> . , etc.: this may be taken as an indirect or suggested rather than expressed question, being recitative, as in Mar 2:16<\/span> = the Pharisees and scribes say, etc., how about that? (Weiss in Meyer), or, writing not but , (neuter of ), as an instance of the use of this pronoun as an interrogative in a direct question (Meyer, Schanz, vide<\/em> also Burton, M. and T., 349). De Wette takes = after Beza and Grotius (who calls it one of Mk.’s Hebraisms).<\/p>\n Why say the scribes. ? = Tho scribes say, &c. <\/p>\n first. See Mal 4:5, Mal 4:6. <\/p>\n 11.] The may be merely recitantis, they asked him, saying (that) the Scribes say, that Elias must first come: leaving to find its application in the difficulty thus suggested by them. But it is better to take it in the unusual sense (undoubted there) of Mar 9:28 [see Moulton on Winer, p. 208, note 4]: see further on in this note.<\/p>\n Mar 9:11. , they say) An interrogation by implication.[3] [, first) before that the great and terrible day of the Lord shall come, Mal 4:5. The disciples appear to have supposed, that it was to be on that day that the resurrection, even as of all the dead of every class, so also of Christ, since even He must die, would take place; and that it is for that reason the exceedingly long silence is imposed on them.-V. g.]<\/p>\n [3] , for , is often found in LXX. See Mar 2:16.-ED. and TRANSL.<\/p>\n Mar 9:11-13<\/p>\n 7. JESUS ANSWERS THE QUESTION<\/p>\n CONCERNING ELIJAH.<\/p>\n Mar 9:11-13<\/p>\n 11 And they asked him, saying, How is it that the scribes say that Elijah must first come?–The scribes were learned men in the scriptures and in the traditions of the elders and were teachers of the Jews. They expected a literal fulfillment of Malachi’s well known prediction concerning the coming of Elijah (Mal 4:5-6), and under this influence the disciples were surprised that when he appeared in the mountain he did not remain to do the work predicted of him; hence their question.<\/p>\n 12 And he said unto them, Elijah indeed cometh first,–He did not mean by this that Elijah was yet to come for he directly tells them he had come; but he meant to tell them it was a true doctrine which the scribes taught, that Elijah would appear before the coming of the Messiah.<\/p>\n and restoreth all things:–That is, to put into the former situation. (Mat 12:13.) Here it means to heal, to correct, to put in proper order. It means that Elijah would put things in a proper state; be the agent in reforming the people, of restoring them in some measure to proper notions about the Messiah, and preparing them for his coming. It is a brief summary of the prophecy concerning Elijah.<\/p>\n and how is it written of the Son of man, that he should suffer many things and be set at nought?–Henceforth he keeps the lesson of his suffering constantly before them. His suffering and death would be in the conformation of the “restoration of all things.” It took these to complete it. After all, the disciples were not prepared for it when the hour came. This prepares the way for what is said regarding Elijah in the next verse. This was written of Jesus particularly in the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah. To be set at “nought” is to he esteemed as worthless, or as nothing; to be cast out and despised. No prophecy was ever more strikingly fulfilled. (Luk 23:11.)<\/p>\n 13 But I say unto you, that Elijah is come,–John the Baptist, who came in the spirit and power of Elijah. Jesus teaches them a second time that Malachi used the name of Elijah figuratively to represent John the Baptist.<\/p>\n and they have also done unto him whatsoever they would, even as it is written of him.–That is, they had done to John as they pleased–they had put him to death. Matthew (Mat 17:13) adds the disciples then understood that he spoke of John the Baptist. See Luk 1:17.<\/p>\n Elias <\/p>\n See, Mal 4:5; Mal 4:6 (See Scofield “Mat 17:10”) <\/p>\n Mar 9:4, Mal 3:1, Mal 4:5, Mat 11:14, Mat 17:10, Mat 17:11 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Mat 11:9 – A prophet Mar 8:28 – Elias Mar 15:35 – he Luk 1:17 – in Act 3:21 – the times Rev 20:4 – the souls<\/p>\n 1<\/p>\n The apostles did not realize that Elias was used figuratively only.<\/p>\n Mar 9:11. The question is the same as in Mat 17:10 (see notes there). Three renderings are possible: saying, The scribes say, etc., How is it that the scribes, etc., Why, etc. The last is probably the sense here. See on Mar 9:28.<\/p>\n Verse 11 <\/p>\n First come; that is, before the Messiah.<\/p>\n 9:11 And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? <\/p>\n 9:12 And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought. 9:13 But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.<\/p>\n It seems that this is still just the three apostles that had witnessed the transfiguration. Gill agrees with this assessment.<\/p>\n This passage states clearly that The Jews believed that Elias would come and Christ confirms that it was a correct belief on the part of the Jews, but also reveals that Elias had already arrived on the scene and the Jews had treated him in some manner.<\/p>\n Gill mentions that the Latin Vulgate Bible adds Pharisees to the mix by translating it scribes and Pharisees. I wouldn’t wonder if the term “scribe” wasn’t a broad term for all of the leadership since they were so closely related to one another.<\/p>\n Is Elias Elijah? Is Christ speaking of the transfiguration? It would seem that this is not the case since it looks as if Elias had arrived in the past at some point.<\/p>\n Is Elias speaking here of John the Baptist? Is Elias speaking of the Lord Himself? Let us see if we can determine this.<\/p>\n Gill lists a number of Jewish scholars that mention that Elias would come before the Messiah. Christ seems to be speaking to this belief and it would indicate that He was speaking of John the Baptist.<\/p>\n Some indicate that they feel that the transfiguration appearance was the appearing of Elias though the Jews had nothing to do with that so how could they have treated him in a poor manner as verse thirteen mentions? “and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.”<\/p>\n Indeed, this may have been in the apostles mind as they spoke to Christ, but He makes it clear that the transfiguration had nothing to do with it.<\/p>\n Here is a prime example of the need to look at all the gospel records to gain the full accounting of facts. Matthew makes it clear that Christ was speaking of John the Baptist. Mat 17:12<\/p>\n “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. 13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.”<\/p>\n This would indicate that the three apostles did in fact think that the appearance of Elias\/Elijah at the transfiguration was the appearance that the Jews were looking for. It also indicates that Peter’s offer to build tabernacles might well have been based on his belief that he two Old testament saints were not going to be leaving.This conversation brings to mind two previous discussions in Mark. One is when Herod was trying to figure our who Christ was when He heard of his fame. Mar 6:14 “And king Herod heard [of him]; (for his name was spread abroad:) and he said, That John the Baptist was risen from the dead, and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him. 15 Others said That it is Elias . And others said, That it is a prophet, or as one of the prophets. 16 But when Herod heard [thereof], he said, It is John, whom I beheaded: he is risen from the dead.”<\/p>\n The other comes when Christ asked Peter who people thought that He was. Mar 8:28 “And they answered, John the Baptist: but some [say], Elias ; and others, One of the prophets. 29 And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ.”<\/p>\n This makes one wonder, with all of this information and all this commotion about who different ones were, how the Jews could possibly have missed the implications of John the Baptist and Jesus. It seems to me that only their blindness could have allowed them to have missed all this that had been laid our so clearly before them. This blindness came from God Himself. We know that Christ spoke in parables to keep the Jews from understanding. I personally would add that the blindness may well have been brought to the Jews even more completely by the Father as He did unto Pharaoh. (Rom 9:17 “For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh , Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy] and whom he will he hardeneth.”)<\/p>\n Another passage that makes it clear that God has repercussions for those that reject him is Rom 1:20. “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenant breakers without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.”The clear implication of these passages is that if a man turns against God, at some point God will turn the man’s heart even further from God and that there will be no cure for the turning. The application of this is related to the lost when they die. They are clearly without excuse and they clearly will reap that which they have sown. Their final destiny is far from God and of their own choice.<\/p>\n When someone dies and the relatives morn the loss, if they question the eternal state of the person you can, in clear conscience tell them that God gives choices in life and each person must choose their own way to walk. If they are in heaven it is because of a clear choice for God. If they are not in heaven it is also because of a clear choice against God.<\/p>\n It is not our place to assume that we can tell if a person was a child of God or not, it is their own choice and unless they made that choice known we cannot know what it was nor their placement in eternity.<\/p>\n This, in my mind, allows us to have peace after the loss of a loved one. We need not worry whether we lived correctly before them, we need not worry whether we witnessed clearly enough to them, and we need not worry about their eternal destination. It was between the person and God. There was little we could have done or say that would have changed things – it is simply a decision the person made when confronted with the revelation of God in nature and to any revelation that they might have received in life.<\/p>\n Their decision, not God’s, not yours – THEIR DECISION.<\/p>\n 9:11 {3} And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come?<\/p>\n (3) The foolish opinion of the rabbis concerning Elias’ coming is refuted here, which was that either Elias should rise again from the dead, or that his soul would enter into some other body.<\/p>\n Rather than asking for clarification about the resurrection issue, the disciples raised questions about the larger problem of Messiah dying. If Jesus was the Messiah and He would die, what did the scribes’ teaching about Elijah being the forerunner of Messiah mean (Mal 3:1-4; Mal 4:5-6)? They taught that he would turn the hearts of the people back to God (cf. Mal 4:6), but Elijah had not appeared and most of the people had not repented.<\/p>\n And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elijah must first come? 11. first come ] that is before the Messiah (Mal 4:5). The Pharisees and Scribes may have urged as a capital objection against the Messiah-ship of their Master that no Elias went before Him. “It would be an infinite task,” says … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 9:11”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24536","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24536","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24536"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24536\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24536"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24536"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24536"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"