The Spirit and Power of Elijah

The disciples had just witnessed the transfiguration of the Lord Jesus Christ, and were awed by the glimpse of His glory shown to them, the presence of Moses and Elijah, and the voice of God the Father from heaven. Upon being comforted by Jesus, however, they ask Him to interpret the preceding event and the prophecies concerning Elijah.

[6] The bright cloud and the voice frightened the three disciples: “And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid (ephobēthēsan, the aorist passive tense of phobéō [5399], to fear).” The passive tense reflects the cause of their fear; they were made fearful or frightened by the bright cloud that appeared instantaneously and the booming sound of the Father’s voice that interrupted Peter’s speech. Fear is not an action we initiate, like taking a walk. Nor is it something we choose, as if any of us would want it. God imposes fear on both unbelievers (Ex. 23:27; Isa. 2:19; Rev. 6:16) and believers (Ps. 85:9; Jer. 32:40; Acts 5:5, 11).

[7] We dare not approach the Father without the holy righteousness of the Son. But through the Son’s merit and propitiation, God’s throne of wrath (Rev. 6:16) becomes His throne of grace that we can approach boldly (Heb. 4:16). Accordingly, it was not the Father but Jesus, the human mediator (1 Tim. 2:5) who “touched (hēpsato, the aorist middle of háptomai [680] them, and said, ‘Arise, and be not afraid’ (phobeísthe, the present passive imperative of phobéomai, to be frightened).” The present tense means “continue not to be afraid.”

Jesus did not expect them to turn their fears off permanently, as if this were something in their control apart from His gentle touch and calming words. Had He not touched them and said, “Do not be afraid,” they would have had no rational basis for knowing they were not endangered by the bright cloud and the Father’s immediate, holy presence. By contrast, the wicked, over the course of their lives, build up a “fearful (phoberá [5398]) expectation (ekdochē [1561])” of God’s wrath (Heb. 10:27). But when the Lord tells us, “Do not be afraid,” we can trust Him. The imperative presupposes the propositional truth, “There is no reason to be afraid.” His “touch” confirms His words.

[8] Jesus then rather suddenly terminated the vision: “And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw absolutely no one” (a.t.). According to Mark’s record of this event, when the disciples looked around, Moses and Elijah, the shining garments, and the bright cloud had all “suddenly” (exápina [1819], unexpectedly) vanished (Mark 9:8).

[9] As they descended, Jesus gave them a command: “And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged (eneteílato, the aorist middle of entéllomai [1781], to command) them, saying, ‘Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.’” The vision of Elijah and Moses was bound to stir up incredulity even among the nine disciples who did not see it. So Jesus told the three to keep the transfiguration event to themselves until after His resurrection, the arch confirmation of all that was given in the Law and the Prophets.

[10, 11] The transfiguration prompted the disciples to ask, “Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?” Why the “then”? Jesus had just said, “Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen.” The “then” implies that the disciples thought Jesus was inverting the sequence of Elijah’s appearance and the resurrection as given by the prophet Malachi (Mal. 4:5, 6). At this stage of revelation, they, like the Pharisees, probably assumed that any particular resurrection—in this case, the Son of man’s—would occur at the general resurrection on the Day of the Lord, the end of the age. If so, telling no one about the vision until the resurrection would make little sense, since Malachi prophesied that Elijah would appear before the Day of the Lord (the resurrection) with the purpose of changing the hearts of parents and children prior to judgment. If the transfiguration had anything to do with Malachi’s sequencing of events, it did not make sense to conceal it.

When we say “this stage of revelation,” we mean that the disciples had not yet heard the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24), let alone Paul’s advanced, prophetic schema in 1 Corinthians 15 and John’s book of Revelation. “And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elijah truly comes (érchetai, the present—not future—tense of érchomai [2064], to come) first and shall restore (apokatastēse, the future tense of apokathístēmi [600]) all things” (a.t.).

Before we undertake the adversative phrase in the next verse, we should understand that we cannot logically deduce from these words that Malachi’s prophecy is only ahead of us. Jesus quoted Malachi’s prophecy that was future to Malachi at the time he gave it. Jesus neither issued a new prophecy of the future nor confirmed the futurity of the old one; in fact, to the contrary, He was not even quoting the event but the principle of the prophecy. This was proven by the use of the present tense érchetai, that is, “Elijah comes” (a principle) not “Elijah will come” (an event).

[12] The second, third, and fourth evidences of past fulfillment are the following three words: “But…Elias came (ēlthen, the aorist tense of érchomai, to come; answering to érchetai in the prior verse) already” (a.t.). These words cannot refer to Elijah’s pre-ascension life or to his appearance at the transfiguration. The first understanding is ruled out by the fact that Malachi’s prophecy (400 b.c.?) was hundreds of years after Elijah’s ascension (868 b.c.?). The second possibility is eliminated by the subsequent phrase, “and (i.e., when he came) they knew him not, but did to him whatever they wanted” (a.t.), which has no meaning at the event of the transfiguration. Unbelieving Jews did nothing to Elijah at the transfiguration; they weren’t even there.

Still, there is little doubt that the transfiguration was a prophetic vision of the Second Coming of Christ in glory to judge the living and the dead and to set up a kingdom that has no end. The transfiguration prefigured His personal presence (parousía [3952], appearance) in this kingdom.

Until we read the next verse, there is some mystery in these words concerning Elijah: “And they knew (epégnōsan, the aorist tense of epiginōskō [1921] from epí, upon; and ginōskō [1097], to experientially know) him not, but did to him whatever they wanted. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them” (a.t.). From the last sentence, we can deduce that the Jews punished Elijah “likewise” as they punished Christ. But this finds no fulfillment in the Old Testament. The Jews knew Elijah, and Jezebel persecuted him—nor was it fulfilled in the New Testament (hardly at the transfiguration). So Jesus must have had someone else in mind when He plainly said, “Elijah came.”

[13] Now we read, “Then the disciples understood (sunēkan, the aorist tense of suníēmi [4920], to put elements together to make sense) that He spake unto them of John the Baptist.”

Matthew does not say the disciples “mistakenly concluded.” If John was not “Elijah,” the conclusion is inexplicable since Jesus mentioned only Elijah by name—not John. More broadly, nothing verbatim in the prior conversation explained why the disciples would conclude “John” when Jesus had said only “Elijah.” This, then, was a theological conclusion on their part. John fit the theological and historical criteria.

Historically, John “came already”—this much is obvious. Second, of historical note, both the Jews and the Gentiles “did to” John what “they wanted” to do. For the most part, the scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees rejected John’s prophecy of the coming Messiah. And the Gentile king Herod, at Herodias’ request, imprisoned and killed him. According to Luke, John fulfilled Malachi’s prophecy: “And he [John] shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord” (Luke 1:17).

Apparently, the “spirit and power” of Elijah rested on John as it did on Elisha (2 Kgs. 2:9–12). This was more than just the Spirit of God; the Spirit of God re-created the spirit of Elijah—the pattern of Elijah’s ministry. This template clothed John like a garment, fitting him like a glove. Consequently, he turned the hearts of fathers to their children, just as Malachi said Elijah would do (Mal. 4:6). John, then, bore the title and template—not the historic person—of “Elijah,” whose name means “My God [is] Yah(weh).” And Jesus confirmed as much to the multitudes in Matthew 11:10–14.

Because prophecy is a set of templates impressed on human history, subject to multiple fulfillments, none of this precludes a return of Elijah to earth to preach before the return of Christ (see Rev. 11:3–12). It is not unreasonable to assume that Elijah’s bodily ascension and preservation in heaven was for this purpose. Also, at least one, if not both, of the “two witnesses” in the tribulation period repeat the miracles of Elijah (Rev. 11:5, 6).

As “the spirit of Elijah” in John the Baptist announced Christ’s coming to establish His spiritual kingdom, so “the body of Elijah” will return to proclaim the inauguration of the physical kingdom at the Second Coming. Peter recounted the transfiguration in his second epistle at a time when skeptics questioned the physical reality of miracles. In 2 Peter 1:16–18, he compares “wisdom-infused (sesophisménois, the perfect passive participle of sophízō [4679], to make wise) myths” with the “majesty (megaleiótētos [3168]) of that One (ekeínou, i.e., of Jesus Christ)” of which he, James, and John were “eyewitnesses” (epóptai [2030], observer, inspector; the masculine plural noun of epopteúō [2029], to inspect). He characterizes this event as the “power (dúnamin [1411]) and presence (parousían)” of the Lord Jesus (a.t.).

The transfiguration, then, was intended as a prophetic glimpse into the future power, presence, and glory of Jesus Christ, and it was accompanied by “A voice borne (enechtheísēs, the aorist passive participle of phérō [5342], to carry, bear) to Him, such by (hupó [5259], by means of) the Majestic (megaloprepoús, the genitive singular of megaloprepēs [3169], to be suitable, fit, right for the occasion) Glory (i.e., the Father(” (2 Pet. 1:17; a.t.). The Father is called ho megaloprepēs toú stereōmatos, “the Majestic steadfast (hard or persevering) One” in the Septuagint’s translation of Deut. 33:26.

Dr. Spiros Zodhiates (1922-2009) served as president of AMG International in Chattanooga, Tennessee for over 40 years, was the founding editor of Pulpit Helps Magazine, and authored dozens of exegetical books.