The Coming of Elijah - Past or Future?

The coming of Elijah per Malachi 4 has been the subject of much debate throughout the centuries. Will Elijah himself come again before Jesus reappears, or was John the Baptist this second coming of Elijah as Christ stated in Matthew 11:14? We examine this subject in significant depth. It's important on multiple fronts, but it also relates directly to what we expect of latter-day events, for either Elijah has a specific role to play before Christ appears or he does not.

There are two video exhortations below. The first one is the main talk we gave, but there was interest shown in giving more direct attention to questions and objections surrounding it. The second exhortation was given to dedicate attention to these.

There is also a full readable/printable copy of these two exhortations below all joined into one document for those who prefer to read. I encourage this over the video exhortation as it contains more information and allows people to read/study at their own pace.

Part 1 - Elijah's Coming Past or Future?

Part 2 - Objections Answered

The Coming of Elijah – Past or Future? - Readable Version

TGP Prophecy Letter – February 23, 2025

Download/Print

Is Elijah himself going to return before Jesus reappears, or is he not? This is a subject which I have heard spoken of only in passing and found little written on. There are two thoughts on this: one is that Elijah himself will come again, and the other is that John the Baptist was the second coming of Elijah. This gets to the subject of who John the Baptist was and what he represented, but it also has a great bearing on latter-day prophecy as well, for it’s believed by some that Elijah will come again before Christ comes. Not only this, but it sheds light on the importance of John the Baptist and what his role was. Like any other subject, once you really start looking into it, you learn so many other wonderful things besides what you set out to learn. I want to share my findings and the testimony of the Word on this subject.

What we’ll do is very briefly discuss the life and work of Elijah, his removal from the scene, and the prophecies which indicate his future role. We’ll then examine these prophecies and others along with what we learn in the New Testament to see what the Scriptures teach about his second coming. Some of you might remember me giving a few talks on Elijah years ago, and I very briefly covered the aspect of his “second coming” mostly because of not having enough time to look deeply into it, but I will say that my view has changed. The evidence I used to support my previous position was borrowed evidence that hadn’t been thoroughly examined, and I no longer see it as even relevant. As always, I want to go about this so as not to tell so much as to show.

There are many moving parts to this, but I at least want to share the study which will hopefully provoke some thought and independent study.

Elijah – His Life and Purpose

Most of us are very familiar Elijah. The majority of what we learn about him is recorded in 1 Kings 17 through 2 Kings 2. His introduction is sudden and bold, for the first time we hear about him is when he announced to wicked Ahab that there would be no rain until Elijah prayed for it. It then didn’t rain for three and a half years. God used him as a vessel to show His mighty hand, and it seems Elijah was known to call down fire from heaven as this happened on no less than three occasions! He was also quite recognizable, for he wore hairy garments (likely of camel’s hair) and a leather girdle. In one instance, Elijah had sent a message to Ahaziah through a man who did not know who Elijah was. Ahaziah questioned the messenger,

2 Kings 1:7-8 – And he (Ahaziah) said unto them, What manner of man was he which came up to meet you, and told you these words? (8) And they answered him, He was an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins. And he said, It is Elijah the Tishbite.

Simply by his garments (and of course his messages from God), he was known. Elijah spent much of his time living in the wilderness fleeing Ahab’s wrath. There were many things that God had Elijah do, but his purpose can be summarized as working to turn Israel away from their corruption and back to God (1 Kings 18:37).

But Elijah would not complete this work and would be removed from the scene prematurely, and the Lord commanded him to find a man named Elisha and anoint him as a prophet who would take Elijah’s place. Elijah’s leaves the narrative as thunderously as he enters it,

2 Kings 2: 1, 11-17 – And it came to pass, when the LORD would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal… (11) And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. (12) And Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof. And he saw him no more: and he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces. (13) He took up also the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and went back, and stood by the bank of Jordan; (14) And he took the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is the LORD God of Elijah? and when he also had smitten the waters, they parted hither and thither: and Elisha went over. (15) And when the sons of the prophets which were to view at Jericho saw him, they said, The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha. And they came to meet him, and bowed themselves to the ground before him. (16) And they said unto him, Behold now, there be with thy servants fifty strong men; let them go, we pray thee, and seek thy master: lest peradventure the Spirit of the LORD hath taken him up, and cast him upon some mountain, or into some valley. And he said, Ye shall not send. (17) And when they urged him till he was ashamed, he said, Send. They sent therefore fifty men; and they sought three days, but found him not.

There is much mystery which surrounds this account, particularly with verses which we skipped over for time’s sake, but it’s clear that Elijah could not be found. Apart from one quick mention (which we’ll talk about shortly), we don’t hear much about Elijah until we come to Malachi 4 which speaks of a second coming of Elijah:

Malachi 4:5-6 – Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: (6) And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

This is how the Old Testament ends. So it’s clear that Elijah was to come again “before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD”. The question revolves around WHEN this would take place. We’ll dig into that, but it’s important to first talk about

What Happened to Elijah?

Is Elijah in heaven right now? This is certainly the prominent view of modern Christendom, and it’s the view we would get from a simple reading of the text. Yet there’s more to this than is often overlooked, and it directly relates to the nature of his second coming, because if Elijah was taken to where God resides and is still there, this would obviously indicate that God is going to send him again just like how Christ is on God’s right hand until he comes again. It clearly shows that God has a further purpose with this individual.

There are obviously numerous first principle issues with view, just a few being the mortality of man and that “it is appointed unto men once to die” (Hebrews 9:27), that man can’t exist in the presence of God and live (Exodus 33:20, 1 Timothy 6:16), and that Christ is the first begotten of the dead and none of Adam’s race could have attained immortality before him, for otherwise he is not the first begotten of the dead (Revelation 1:5, 1 Corinthians 15:20, 23). Salvation was not possible for any of Adam’s race until Christ attained it, for it’s on the basis of his death and resurrection that we have hope. Christ himself settles this question by emphatically stating in John 3:14 that “no man hath ascended up to heaven”.

But, if Elijah isn’t in heaven and died like the rest of Adam’s descendants do, this would allow for him to not literally come again and therefore indicate a different view. Now, we must be concise for time’s sake, but we have clear Scriptural evidence that Elijah was merely taken from the scene and out of Israel’s view, but not to heaven. It’s unclear where Elijah was taken, but the fact that he remained on earth is certain.

In reference to the chart above, 2 Kings 1 records the death of Ahaziah (King of Israel) and Jehoram taking his place in 896 BC. The next chapter (2 Kings 2) contains the account of Elijah being “taken up,” so he must have been taken in 896 BC or soon thereafter. In 2 Kings 3, (the chapter after Elijah’s ascension), King Jehoshaphat of Judah and King Jehoram of Israel both sent for Elisha, showing that Elijah had been taken away already.

Now, Jehoshaphat would reign in Judah for a number of years before dying and being replaced by Jehoram. So there were two King Jehoram’s around this time: one was a King of Israel and the other King of Judah, two completely different people who actually reigned at the same time. It is to this new Jehoram King of Judah that we find a letter written from Elijah:

2 Chronicles 21:9, 12 – Then Jehoram went forth with his princes… And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet…

Here is a letter from Elijah that was apparently written after he was “taken up”! As it was written to Jehoram King of Judah who didn’t claim the throne until 892 BC, this means that is what written and sent by Elijah approximately four years after he was “taken up” (896 – 892 = 4 years). But Jehoram reigned for eight years, and this is assuming that Elijah wrote the letter during the first year of his reign (possible, but unlikely). From this information, it could have been written up to 12 years after Elijah’s removal (4 years from his taking away to Jehoram taking the throne + 8 years of Jehoram’s reign).

However, 2 Chronicles 21 shows us that the news which Elijah wrote to Jehoram had to have been shared in the first five or six years of his eight-year-long reign, for God later smote him “in his bowels with an incurable disease” (2 Chronicles 21:18-20), and this took two years to kill. So we must remove the last two years of Jehoram’s reign as possible time slots when the letter was written. Elijah’s letter therefore must have been received in the first five or six years of his reign. So, all of that is to say that Elijah was alive and well for 4-10 years after his removal.

This begs the question of why Elijah would be taken away in such a manner, and we can summarize it by saying it was done to teach a lesson and give the impression of having departed to heaven. It’s similar to what we’re told of Melchizedek, that he was “Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually” (Hebrews 7:1-3). We know that he did have a mother and father (and many believe him to be Shem), but these facts are omitted from Scripture to give the impression of his eternity and therefore act as a figure of Christ. I believe that a similar thing is done with Elijah.

According to 2 Kings 2:4-11, the last time Elijah was seen was leaving Jericho and heading across the Jordan river. This would place his removal somewhere close to the Jordan River, just north of the Dead Sea (see map below). We know that he was not taken into God’s dwelling place, so when it says that it took him up into heaven, it simply means that he was carried away through the firmament - the sky.

The location of Elijah's ascension

Again, the import of this is that if Elijah is not in heaven, he died and must be resurrected – something which we know Christ will do when he returns. But this fact also relates also to the transfiguration in the New Testament, for Elijah appears there on the mount with Moses and Christ. It’s believed by some that Elijah simply came down from his abode in heaven to be present there, but there are many issues with this as well. We don’t have time to talk about the transfiguration in depth, but suffice it to say that Christ himself tells his disciples that it was “a vision”, this word “vision” being the one used to mean divine showings such as blind Saul, who was blind at the time, being given a vision of Ananias coming to him (Acts 9:11-12) and Peter seeing the knit sheet of animals descend from heaven (Acts 10:9-19, note vs. 19). So this being established, let’s now ask,

Will Elijah Himself Come Again?

If he is to have a second coming, for what purpose is he said to come back for, and what passages teach us this? Malachi 4 is the foundational passage:

Malachi 4:1-6 – For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. (2) But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. (3) And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts. (4) Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. (5) Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: (6) And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

It’s therefore unquestionable that Elijah would have a second role to play. This has been the subject of great exploitation by the Jews. Since his “taking away” from Israel, he has featured prominently and fantastically in Jewish thinking. We see this not only in the Scriptures during Christ’s time, but even today. When Christ was performing miracles, the Jews thought that he was Elijah (Matthew 16:13-14). When Christ was on the cross, they asked whether Christ was calling out to Elijah (Matthew 27:47). When observing their feasts (specifically Passover), Jews would leave an open seat for Elijah in case he made an appearance! Commentator John Gill explains lists their outlandish expectations of him. Commenting on Matthew 17:10,

“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, ‘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.’ (so there he has three comings) And they expressly affirm that ‘before the coming of the son of David, ‘Elias will come to bring the good news’ of it.’ And this, they say, will be one day before the coming of the Messiah. And Maimonides observes, ‘that there are of their wise men that say ‘that before the coming of the Messiah, Elias shall come’.’ So Trypho the Jew… tells him 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 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: this is founded upon a mistaken sense of Malachi 4:5 and which is the general sense of their commentators. 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.”

So we can see how much has been built around what the Jews expect of Elijah’s coming, and most of it is simply nonsense. But the fact remains that some sort of second coming exists.

The question really is, Is this role to be carried out by Elijah himself or by one who would play the role of Elijah? Also, when is this to occur? Has it already been fulfilled, or is it yet future?

We must exercise discipline here and stick with what we KNOW relates to Elijah’s coming, for many passages are often brought in which are assumed to refer to him but are either debatable or misused. The core passage is of course Malachi 4, and upon reading it, we see that there are other things to define here like the dreadful day of the Lord, what it means to turn the hearts of the fathers and children toward one another, and what curse God would smite the earth with if they do not do this. In order to understand whether John the Baptist fulfilled these things or Elijah must come again to do so, let’s first understand what they mean:

“Great and dreadful day of the Lord”

This phrase is understood to have two different meanings depending upon the context. The term refers to Divine wrath and judgment in either case. We tend to first think of Christ’s second coming, for that will certainly see his wrath poured out on the earth, but it’s also applied to God’s judgment upon the Jewish commonwealth during the Jewish-Roman wars from AD66-AD138 (AD70 being a climactic point). So at this point, either of these are possible interpretations. Does it relate to AD70 and that general time period or the judgments of the Lord on the entire planet at his coming?

“Turning the heart of the fathers toward the children, and the heart of the children toward their fathers, lest I smite the earth with a curse.”

We’ll consider these two parts together. The first phrase is interesting and seems to indicate creating unity and mutual respect among the people. Elijah was to be sent again to create this unity (or at least preach this), for otherwise the earth would be smitten with a curse. What is this curse? It’s not specified here. The verse seems to indicate that Elijah would be sent to create this unity so that God would not administer the curse, yet it’s difficult to see with either AD70 or Christ’s return how this would fit, for God did smite the Jews and Jerusalem in AD70, and God will smite the earth at Christ’s coming. There’s a New Testament reference to this passage though, and it shows us the meaning of it and indicates a return to God by the people. We’ll read that shortly, but first, I want to consider what I see as

Troubles with Elijah’s Second Coming as Still Future

In looking through Scripture and Christadelphian writings, I note a few things which present troubles. In searching prophecies concerning latter-day events, we can’t help but notice the lack of mention of Elijah. As Malachi 4 is the only passage which explicitly lays out Elijah’s role, other prophecies we see must align with this to be said to refer to Elijah, and very few are found.

We also find trouble with chronology. We learn that Elijah will come BEFORE the dreadful day of the Lord, and this means that he must come before Christ does. There are multiple points on this:

For those who conclude that John was merely a type of Elijah and that the true Elijah must still come, the figure has to fit the shadow. As John the Baptist came on the grand scene before Christ did, the true Elijah must appear and begin working to cause Israel to repent before Christ appears to Israel. We find no mention of this in prophecy at all, and we actually find evidence contrary to this, for it is not Elijah who cause Israel to repent, but Christ. They turn not to Elijah, but Jesus, for they look on him whom they pierced, and then they realize who their Messiah is (Zechariah 12:10, 13:6). This has been one of the biggest questions in my mind that I can’t reconcile. Where is Elijah shown to work upon Israel before Christ does? I find little support for it and much speculation.

We can also ask why there’s the question of the identity of their savior as he comes from the scene of judgment to their salvation. Isaiah 63 shows the Jews asking “Who is this that cometh from Edom?”, showing that they don’t know their redeemer yet. Israel is in blindness until they see the holes in Christ’s hands after they have been saved Zechariah, but Elijah should have turned their hearts beforehand.

There are also other chronological issues, for as Elijah is not in heaven and must have died, Christ will first have to return and resurrect and judge Elijah in order for him to do anything on the world scene, for certainly he will not doing anything with Israel as a mortal. Christ must therefore return first. There are other issues yet, but these are a few.

John the Baptist – The Coming of Elijah, or Merely a Type?

Now, finally, let’s get to the big stuff. Where do we go from here? There are two basic questions to ask:

1. Did John do what the role of Elijah was said to do without leaving anything undone. If so, we can conclude that he was the Elijah to come.

2. Are there any prophecies which would then make no sense if John was the “Elijah”? Does this have a domino effect on anything else? If it does, it shows the future role of Elijah, but if we remove the future role of Elijah and everything is still in harmony, it indicates that Elijah himself won’t play that role.

Question 1: Did John do what the prophecies say Elijah would do?

I think that the greatness of John is something we often overlook. By a simple reading of the passages in the New Testament, it might appear that John didn’t really accomplish anything - almost as if there was no purpose for him to come. I believe this is part of the reason why he is viewed merely as a type (for I’ve thought this myself!). Yet if we pay close attention to what’s written, we find a very different picture. Consider how Christ speaks of him in

Matthew 11:11 – Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist…

This is an incredible statement! Christ is saying that John the Baptist is the greatest person that has ever been born (apart from Christ himself of course). So let’s learn about John. The details surrounding his birth are some of the most important on this subject. John’s birth was similar to Isaac’s in that his parents “were now well stricken in years” (Luke 1:7), so his birth is of miraculous nature. His father Zacharias learned that they would have John through the angel Gabriel who appeared to him, and note what Gabriel says John would be born to do and fulfill:

Luke 1:11-17 – And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense. (12) And when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled, and fear fell upon him. (13) But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. (14) And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. (15) For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb. (16) And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. (17) And he 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.

This is what the role of the Elijah was to be, and this is the only place where we’re shown the direct import of Malachi’s prophecy. We also have a Scriptural definition of what Malachi says Elijah would do concerning the fathers and the children. Gabriel says that it includes a turning to God, not just a return between fathers and children. Elijah was to “make ready a people prepared for the Lord”. We also see that John was said to be sent “to Israel”, which challenges the view that only the scattered Jews are called Israel, for John did not speak to any of these.

The latter part of Luke 1 tells us more about his role:

Luke 1:76-80 – And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; (77) To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, (78) Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us, (79) To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. (80) And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel.

John’s role was to prepare the way for Christ and prepare the people for Christ, and that tells us to apply Old Testament prophecies about this to John, such as another passage in Malachi:

Malachi 3:1 – Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

We also learn that John “was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel.” This has puzzled many as to why he had to grow up in such a way out of Israel’s view, but it’s because of his role as Elijah. We see him come onto the scene in the same bold way that Elijah did before:

Luke 3:1-6 – Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar… the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness. (3) And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; (4) As it is written in the book of the words of Esaias the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. (5) Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; (6) And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

The word of God comes to him and says, “It’s time for you to appear to Israel”, and he then goes forth and preaches repentance to them. The verse continues:

Luke 3:7-9 – Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? (8) Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. (9) And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

Here is John preaching destruction, just like Elijah was to do in Malachi 4 “lest the Lord smite the earth (land) with a curse”. Yet there’s even more. Note what he wore:

Matthew 3:4 – And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.

He is even dressed as Elijah. But perhaps most importantly, he does all of these things and appears where Elijah was last seen. He first appears “preaching in the wilderness of Judaea” (Matthew 3:1), which in those days encompassed the land east of Jerusalem and north of the Dead Sea (see map below). He then preached and baptized in that same location, for “he came into all the country about Jordan” (Luke 3:3). And when he baptizes people, he’s doing so in the same river that Elijah divided with his staff right before he was taken away, for the people “were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins” (Matthew 3:6). Everything John does is where Elijah was taken up! This is a similar concept as we see with Christ, for he left from the Mount of Olives and will return to them on the same mount of Olives (Acts 1:9-12, Zechariah 14:4).

The location of John's appearance

Imagine you’re a Jew in Israel, and you’re expecting Elijah to come preaching a return to God to escape judgment and to announce the advent of the Messiah, and suddenly, here is this man who hardly anyone has ever seen before, suddenly appearing in the same location Elijah was last seen, wearing the same clothes that Elijah wore, and preaching the same message that Elijah was to preach. By all accounts, Israel would have believed him to be Elijah, and we see now why so many asked, “Art thou Elias?” (John 1:21). Christ himself answers this, saying,

Matthew 11:12-14 – And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. (13) For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. (14) And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. (13) Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

In other words, “This is the Elijah which Malachi said would come.” And likewise after the transfiguration, it’s recorded,

Matthew 17:10-13 – And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? (11) And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. (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.

Christ is acknowledging that the scribes are correct in their understanding of order – Elijah would come before Christ, but he immediately says that “Elijah is come already”, they just didn’t know him. This is the same way they looked at Christ, for they didn’t recognize him either. So Christ says that John was the Elijah, but interestingly, John himself denies this:

John 1:21 – And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

Considering Christ’s testimony of John, why does John say this? It’s possible that this shows that John was merely a type, but this doesn’t explain Christ’s testimony of him very well. It seems to me that John is denying that he is literally Elijah the individual. We have the angel Gabriel’s testimony of him that he would finish the work of Elijah, but John is here showing that Elijah was not taken to heaven reserved for his second coming, but like all of the other righteous of old “died in faith, not having received the promises” and “is both dead and buried”, though none knew where (Hebrews 11:13, Acts 2:29). Yet the role of Elijah would be played by John who would go “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17), and he came to continue the work and pick up where Elijah left off in turning Israel to God.

Christ’s qualifier “if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come” indicates that John’s coming as the second Elijah would take thought and meditation to understand. While it was obvious in many ways, it was not at all what the Jews expected (obviously, considering what we know they still expect of him). Yet this is just like how the Messiah came. They were confused and expected the Messiah to come the opposite of how Christ came, so much so that even John the Baptist who had been imprisoned sent messengers to ask Jesus, Are you the Messiah? (Luke 7:19-23) I believe that John, like the other disciples and everyone else (Acts 1:6) expected the Kingdom to be set up then. So I would say YES, John fulfilled what Malachi says Elijah would do, for the NT says that he came to do this very thing. How ironic is, then, to see how adamantly the Jews believed Elijah would come before the Messiah, yet they still missed him.

As for the curse in Malachi that “the earth” (eretz – “land”) would be smitten with a curse”, this fits if we apply it to John’s time, for while many Jews were turned to God, the nation refused to be, and they rejected their Messiah. The nation of Israel is likened to a fig tree in many places in Scripture (Jeremiah 24:1-10), and John warned the Jews of his day:

Matthew 3:10 – And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

The nation was to be destroyed, and Christ showed this same thing by smiting the fig tree which had the appearance of figs, but no figs (Matthew 21:19). We know that all of these things were fulfilled by the Romans who not only ended the Jewish commonwealth, but destroyed the land itself. It was not just a battle in AD70, the Jewish Roman wars were from 66AD-138AD, and one way the Romans inflicted pain was by salting their fields and destroying the ecosystem. The Greening Israel Project states,

“The destruction of the land started with Rome. Josephus records that the Roman armies cut down vast numbers of Israel’s trees and destroyed the forests in order to build siege works for their conquest. Legend has it that the Romans even uprooted the grapevines and took them back to plant in Italy.

“Not only were the forests cut down, but the large, grazing herds of wildlife in Israel were hunted or driven elsewhere to find forests and grasslands that could sustain them. This only served to exacerbate the desertification of the land and, with no trees or root structures in place, the ground could no longer hold water and unchecked erosion began.”

From Desolation to Restoration • Israel Throughout History – Drew, Parsons, Greening Israel

The Jewish Roman War was the cause for the desolate conditions in which the land lay until the Jews returned and recultivated the land. The Jews were a cursed race (Deuteronomy 28), and so was the land until their return. There are even other verses which prophesy the desolation of the land.

Question 2: What other passages does this effect? Questions and Objections Considered

Now, there were a lot of questions I had when looking into this, and a number of them are mentioned by Bro. Thomas in Elpis Israel. Let us then consider what he says and then break each point down:

“It would seem from the testimony of Malachi, who prophesied concerning the ten tribes, that while they are in the wilderness of the people they will be disciplined by the law of Moses as their national code, while things concerning Jesus will be propounded to them as matter of faith; for it is testified by Hosea that they shall be gathered, and ‘shall sorrow a little for the burden of the King of princes’ (Hosea 8:10). The person with whom they will have more immediately to do in their Second Exodus is Elijah. There would seem to be a fitness in this. In the days of their fathers, when they forsook the Lord and abolished the law of Moses, Elijah was the person whose ministerial life was occupied in endeavoring to “restore all things.’ Though he did much to vindicate the name and law of Jehovah, he was taken away in the midst of his labours. For what purpose? That he might at a future period resume his work and perfect it by restoring all things among the ten tribes according to the law of Moses, preparatory to their being planted in their land under a new covenant to be made with them there.

“But it may be objected that Elijah has come already, and that John the Baptist was he. True, in a certain sense he was. John was Elijah to the House of Judah in the sense of his having come ‘in the spirit and power of Elijah’. But John was not the Elijah who talked with Moses on the Mount of Transfiguration. The latter is Elijah to the house of Israel. The scribes taught that Elijah must precede Christ; which Jesus approved, saying, ‘Elijah truly shall first come, and restore all things’. He said this after John was put to death. John did not restore all things; but Elijah will, and that too before the Lord Jesus makes himself known to the ten tribes, whom he will meet in Egypt.”

Elpis Israel, 14th Edition, pgs. 451-452

The reasons for John not being the coming of Elijah are therefore

John stated that he was not Elijah.
John was Elijah to the House of Judah, not Israel. Elijah was sent to Israel, and the book of Malachi is written primarily concerning them.
John came “in the spirit and power of Elijah”, but was not Elijah himself.
Elijah appeared on the mount of transfiguration, and this was not John.
Elijah was to “restore all things”, but this was said after John had been put to death. It must apply to Elijah’s future coming as John did not restore all things.
Elijah is needed to lead a second exodus
Christ will meet the tribes in Egypt as a result of Elijah’s work

Let’s consider each objection:

1. “Doesn’t John deny that he is Elijah?”

John does in fact deny that he is Elijah. The passage in question is

John 1:19-21 – And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (20) And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. (21) And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

We have considered this briefly, but it deserves a more thorough explanation. It is worth mentioning that there are three questions from the Jews, not two. Their last question about “that prophet” is not another way of asking about Elijah, but refers instead to a different prophet which the Jews expected to appear. This expectation was based upon what Moses had told Israel long ago,

Deuteronomy 18:15 – The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

This prophecy of course refers to Christ, but the Jews did not understand this. Some Jews believed that this would be Jeremiah who would reappear, and others believed it could have been any of the Old Testament prophets (see John Gill commentary on John 1:21). This was the intent of the Jews when they asked John “Art thou that prophet?”, to which he answered, “No.”

Our focus of course relates to their question of whether John was Elijah. It must be noted that like many of the Jews in Christ’s day, Bro. Thomas believed that Elijah was taken into heaven itself and was unaware of the fact that Elijah was on the earth for 4-10 years after his taking up. We saw this proven earlier because Elijah wrote a letter to a king who did not even ascend to the throne until a minimum of four years after his Elijah’s removal.

If we believe that Elijah is in heaven, we are forced to believe in Elijah’s second literal coming, because for what other purpose would God reserve him there? It therefore also forces us to look for evidence showing the purpose of his second coming to justify it. But once the Scriptural testimony of this is seen and it’s realized that Elijah was not taken to God’s dwelling place but simply removed from Israel’s view, the difficulty disappears. Bro. Thomas clearly believed that Elijah was in heaven, and this helps explain why he believed he must return again. John’s answer to the Jews that he was not Elijah is therefore seen as proof of Elijah’s second coming.

Critical to all of this is to first understand the nature of their question. This is the core of the difficulty and the key to its solution. It’s imperative that we recall what the Jews expected of Elijah, for it’s from their corrupt understanding which the question arises. Once this is seen, the reason for John’s answer becomes apparent.

As we might recall from John Gill’s summary of Jewish thought around Elijah, the Jews expected Elijah the Tishbite to physically return and announce the Messiah’s coming. They expected him to come in boldness and authority, proclaiming himself openly. Many even expected him to choose who the Messiah would be, for the Messiah would not even know himself until Elijah revealed it to him. Their understanding was very different and grossly perverted from what the Scriptures taught, and their question therefore expressed these false expectations. We ourselves ask questions based on what we believe, not necessarily what is true (though we aim to believe only what is true). It must also be remembered that John was in the wilderness until the day of his showing to Israel when he came shouting for their repentance, so the Jews did not see where he came from. It’s likely that most we unaware that he had been born of Zecharias and Elisabeth. For all they knew, he could have descended from heaven as they Elijah to do.

They therefore approached this man in camel’s hair and a leather girdle (just like Elijah) and asked him if he was Elijah. By all appearances he seemed to be. They did not ask if he was the coming or the manifestation of Elijah which was prophesied in Malachi 4 as this concept was nowhere in their thinking. This must be understood. They were expecting Elijah himself, and so they asked if he was Elijah the man. They were to be greatly disappointed, for not only would John not fulfill their corrupted expectations, but he was truly not Elijah the Tishbite. So John answered their question truthfully and gave them the only correct answer – he was not Elijah. Had John answered yes, it would have been untruthful.

This does not mean that John was not the Elijah of Malachi 4. John, being the manifestation of Elijah to come and to finish his work, fulfilled the role of Elijah in the prophecy, and Christ therefore testified of John that “this is Elias, which was for to come” (Matthew 11:14), meaning “This is Elijah that Malachi spoke of and God said He would send”. If John was not that person, we must imagine that Christ would not have included this detail and been so clear.

The easiest way to see this logic and explanation is by applying the same concept to another prophecy about Christ. In Malachi 4, prophecy said that Elijah would come again, and we believe that John was the Elijah intended even though his name was not Elijah and he was not Elijah himself. We therefore find Jews asking about John’s identity at the time when the prophecy is being fulfilled and asking if he was the one mentioned in the prophecy. In the same way, we find prophecies like Ezekiel 37 which speak of David sitting on the throne in Jerusalem, but Christ is the intended person even though his name was not David, nor was he David himself (Ezekiel 37:23-25). The name “Elijah the prophet” refers to John in the same way that “David my servant” refers to Jesus. It’s significant that both passages at face value appear to teach that the named individual would fulfill that prophecy, for there’s no indication in the chapters which would make us think that “Elijah” or “David” are merely titles or symbolic placeholders. To understand the reason for John’s answer to the Jews, let us set up the same scenario for Ezekiel 37’s fulfillment as we see with Malachi 4’s:

Let us fast forward to the time of the prophecy’s fulfillment when “David my servant shall be king over them (Israel)” (Ezekiel 37:24) and imagine a group of Jews who are ignorant of Jesus of Nazareth but familiar with Ezekiel 37. Knowing the prophecy, the Jews expect David himself to rule over Israel, for that is what the prophecy says in black and white. They then sees this glorified man on the throne performing what Ezekiel said David would do, and they therefore asks Jesus, “Art thou David?” How would Christ respond? Even though he technically is the “David” of Ezekiel 37, he would know that the Jews expected David the individual to reign, and Christ’s answer would therefore be the same which John gave, “I am not.” We therefore see that John’s answer was the only correct answer to give.

We might wonder though, why would John not follow this answer by explaining the concept to them and own what Christ so plainly declared – that John the Baptist was indeed that “Elias, which was for to come” (Matthew 11:14). There are numerous reasons why this was not done, and we often ask the same question about Jesus and his discussions with the Jews. One reason might be because there were many men in those days who sought prominence and power and claimed to be Elijah or the Messiah. Many such examples are recorded by Josephus. Some of these imposters even made great progress in deceit before being slain or admitting falsehood. For John to publicly declare himself as the coming of Elijah would have been to throw himself into the same likeness as the others. Instead of telling Israel that he was the Elijah who was to come, he would show them through his coming and deeds.

Actions speak louder than words, and it’s a general rule of truth that what we do shows who we are more than what we say we are. It’s the exhortation and warning which Christ gives his disciples in

Matthew 7:15-16 – Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. (16) Ye shall know them by their fruits…

Adding to this is the fact that the testimony of others concerning us is more effective than what we claim ourselves to be. Christ’s testimony of John is more powerful than anything John could have said of himself, and this shows the wisdom of the Proverbs in use to “Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth” (Proverbs 27:2).

I find that this question of how John claimed his role of Elijah relates closely to how Jesus claimed his role as the Messiah. Jesus did not strut through the streets proclaiming that he was the Messiah even though he was the one to come. On the contrary, we find what appears to be a reluctance about making the news public. On a few occasions, we find him telling others to “tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ” (Matthew 16:20, 8:4). When he did acknowledge that he was the Messiah, it was not with boldness and pride as the imposters of his day boasted.

Perhaps the most noteworthy instance of this is when John the Baptist asked Jesus if he was the Messiah. Christ did not answer the messengers and say, “Tell John that ‘Yes, I am the Messiah.’” He told them to tell John what Christ was doing, thus showing his identity by his works, not his words:

Matthew 11:2-5 – Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples, (3) And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another? (4) Jesus answered and said unto them, Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: (5) The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.

Even to the man who prepared the way for Christ, Christ did not clearly answer, “Yes, I am the Messiah.” He instead pointed to the prophecies which he was fulfilling (though in shadow concerning these particular prophecies), and these were the evidence of his Messiahship.

2. “Elijah was to be sent to Israel. John was sent to Judah, not Israel.”

This argument states that Elijah was sent to the house of Israel in his first coming, and as Malachi is written primarily to Israel, his second coming must be to Israel as well, not Judah. Since Israel had been carried away into Assyria over 700 years before John the Baptist came on the scene, John could only have been sent to Judah. The duties of Elijah’s second coming could therefore not be fulfilled by him.

There are a number of points to mention on this, but for time’s sake, we’ll just mention the biggest issue with this view. It’s that the Jewish nation in John’s time was called Israel on multiple occasions, and that by reliable sources. In fact, the nation at that time was primarily referred to as Israel.

When Joseph and Mary fled from the wrath of Herod, the angel appeared to Joseph and said, “Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel… and he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel” (Matthew 2:20-21). In strict terms, we should object and say that “That is not possible. Israel didn’t exist at the time,” but it is nevertheless what the Spirit says. There are countless other examples of this (See Matthew 8:10, 9:33, 10:6, 23, 15:24, 27:42, Luke 24:21, John 3:10, Acts 1:6, 2:22, 36, 3:12, 4:8, 10, and many others).

To make it even more clear, we find clear Scriptural testimony that John the Baptist was sent to Israel, and specifically to fulfill the role of Elijah. Again, the angel Gabriel foretold John’s role:

Luke 1:15-17, 80 – For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb. (16) And many of the children of Israel shall he (John) turn to the Lord their God. (17) And he 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… (80) And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel.

Had the nation only been considered Judah in those days, the angel could not have said this and applied such prophecies to John. We also find that John himself adds to this and says that his role was to manifest Christ to Israel, and that this was his core duty:

John 1:29-31 – The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. (30) This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. (31) And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

We therefore find no issue with John being the Elijah sent to “Israel”, and it explains why Christ also testified of John likewise (Matthew 11:12-14).

3. “John came in the spirit and power of Elijah, but he was not Elijah himself”

This objection hinges upon what we have already considered under the first objection – whether Malachi 4 required Elijah himself to reappear or the name was representative of one who would fulfill his role. But there’s more on this that’s worth mentioning.

It’s without question that John appeared in the way he did to give the impression that he was Elijah, for he shared his attire, lifestyle, purpose, and even appeared in the location where Elijah was taken up. Without question, the Jews were supposed to see John and make a direct correlation with Elijah. But why did it have to be John and note Elijah himself? I would say it is because of the law of death which rules over the race and the fact that “it is appointed unto men once to die”. It was not possible for Elijah to live until Christ’s day, so God designed events to give the impression as if Elijah had come back to fulfill his role.

Also included in this is the concept of manifestation, and it will here be seen how John could be the Elijah of Malachi 4. Christ came in the spirit and power of God and did His will completely, and he therefore could be called “God manifest in the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16). It is for this reason that one of his name’s would be “Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us” (Matthew 1:23). This same concept is seen with John who is said to have come “in the spirit and power of Elijah,” for since the day of his birth, he was trained and raised up to live as Elijah did and finish work. It can therefore be said that he’s “Elijah manifested (again) in the flesh”.

4. “Elijah appeared in the transfiguration, so he must be in heaven and come again.”

We mentioned this briefly earlier and how Elijah did not come down from heaven to appear on the mount, but rather that this was a “vision”. But as Bro. Thomas believed that Elijah was literally taken into heaven, he therefore believed that Elijah himself descended from heaven to appear in the transfiguration. Let’s consider this again with more information.

I believe we can say with certainty that this was a vision for two reasons. The first is that Jesus specifically told his disciples that it was a vision: “tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead” (Matthew 17:9). “tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead” (Matthew 17:9). It is the Greek “horama”, and every use of it (with the potential exception of one case) refers to a Divine revelation. It’s the word used to describe the sheet of animals that Peter saw descend from heaven and many other such miraculous signs. Every appearance in the Bible of “horoma” is listed here for consideration: Matthew 17:9, Acts 7:31, 9:9-10, 9:12, 10:3, 10:17, 10:19, 11:5, 16:9-10, 18:9, 26:19.

The other reason it had to of been a vision is tied to why Christ commanded his disciples to tell no man what they had seen until he be risen from the dead. This gets directly down to first principles, for not only did Christ appear in a glorified state (Matthew 17:2), but so did Elijah and Moses, for Luke records that these two men “appeared in glory” (Luke 9:30-31). For those who believe in heaven going after death, this all makes perfect sense because they believe that when men die, their immortal soul goes immediately to heaven in glory. It’s therefore easy to see why they are glorified before Christ had even offered himself. Yet the Scriptures teach that all men return to dust and must await the return of Jesus to be first resurrected, then judged, and then, Lord willing, glorified. Christ himself also was not glorified until he was resurrected, for glorification is the result of the change of this dying and corruptible frame to that of immortalization and incorruption (1 Corinthians 15:48-53). Christ is the first to attain to eternal life as he is “the firstfruits of them that slept” (1 Corinthians 15:20-23). If Moses and Elijah are literally in glory here, then this is not true as Christ himself was still mortal.

The reason that the disciples had to wait to share the vision is because the immortal, glorified persons they saw could only have been a reality AFTER Christ himself was raised, for only after that had the blood of the covenant been successfully shed and the first begotten of the dead been raised. It’s on the basis of Christ’s immortalization and glorification that all others are offered it, but nobody else will be glorified until Christ returns and judges his servants, for he “shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom” (2 Timothy 4:1). Thus, the things of the transfiguration were only a vision of him coming in his kingdom to judge and immortalize his servants, and this makes even more sense once we realize that Christ told us that that is what the vision was intended to be. Each of the three accounts of the transfiguration is preceded by Christ telling his disciples that “There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom” (Matthew 16:28, Mark 9:1, Luke 9:27). To “taste death” is to experience it at all, even if for only a short time, for of Christ’s death, it is said that “he by the grace of God should taste death for every man” (Hebrews 2:9). Therefore, some of his disciples would not experience death at all before seeing this wondrous vision of Christ’s kingdom, meaning that they had to see it before they fell asleep in Christ. The transfiguration is the fulfillment of this prophecy.

5. “John did not ‘restore all things’ as Malachi says.”

The strongest point of evidence I find for the future second coming of Elijah is what we find after the transfiguration. Having seen Elijah and Moses in glory on the mount, his disciples asked him, “Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?” (Matthew 17:10). Christ then affirms what the Scribes taught, saying that “Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things” (Matthew 17:11). We mentioned last time how Christ was simply showing his approval of their understanding of chronology, for they were correct in that Elijah must come first. But Christ immediately follows this by saying “But I say unto you, That Elias is come already”, and “Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist” (verses 12-13). I believe this is the correct understanding of Christ’s words here, but let’s for a moment consider if this means Elijah himself would come before Christ’s second coming.

It's said that Elijah will “restore ALL THINGS”, and on this phrase the claim is hinged, for it’s argued that John did not restore all things. What often goes unexplained though is what “things” Elijah was supposed to restore. What does it mean to “restore all things”? The more we learn, the more realize that “all” very rarely means “all”. It usually means “all” within a specified group or category, and so it is here. We know that it can’t truly mean ALL things because that’s Christ’s role. Jesus is the one appointed to enact “the restitution of all things”, the term here clearly meaning all things relating to God’s Kingdom, the redemption of man, and the unity of God and man (Acts 3:21, Ephesians 1:10). The “restoration” applied to Elijah must therefore be more limited than this, and given what Malachi says the Elijah would do, it would seem to mean to restore Israel to a right mind/expectation. Albert Barnes and John Gill have astute explanations of what this phrase means:

Barnes - “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 (Matt. 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 Matt. 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.”

Gill - “and restore all things. The Syriac and Persic versions render it, "shall perfect, or complete all things", that are prophesied of him; and shall put a period to the law and the prophets, and close the Mosaic economy, and direct persons to Christ; in whom are the perfection of the law, and the fulfilling of the prophets. The Arabic version reads it, "he shall teach you all things"; the whole of the Gospel being to be reduced to these two heads, repentance towards God, and faith in Christ; both which were taught by the true Elias: but the truest sense of the phrase is to be learned out of Malachi 4:6 (which says) "He shall restore, השיב, he shall turn all things, the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers"; and this is explained in Luke 1:17 "he shall turn the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, and make ready a people prepared for the Lord": which is other, and better sort of work, than what the Jews assign to their Elias…

In short, “restore all things” relates to Israel and refers to the prophecy John would fulfill – “to turn (Strong’s G1994 - “to revert” or restore) 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). This includes restoring Israel to a right mind and expectation of their messiah, initiate the close of the Mosaic law, and point people toward Christ.

But Bro. Thomas makes a point regarding timing and says that while Christ approved of the concept of Elijah’s coming, it must refer to Elijah’s future coming because this conversation took place after John had already died. This is also supposedly supported by the future tense in which Christ speaks of him coming. But if we note carefully how the question is asked, we see why Christ answered in the way he did:

Matthew 17:10-12 – And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? (11) And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. (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.

Since the scribes believed that Elijah hadn’t come yet, they stated this in the future tense – they said “Elijah must (not “had to”) come first”. Christ is simply answering the question in the sense and tense it is being asked and speaking in terms of Scripture, The essence is, “The Scriptures do say that Elijah must come before the Messiah does,” but he then follows this with the critical point of clarification which shows where they went wrong: “But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not…”

We use this same kind of speech frequently with Scripture. For example, Revelation 16 talks about the drying up of the Euphratean power, after which the frog-like spirits go forth throughout the earth. Some people believe this hasn’t happened yet, but I firmly believe it has. People could ask me, “Why do some say that the Euphratean power must first be dried up before the froglike spirits go forth?” I would say, “The Euphratean power truly shall dry up first because that’s what the Scriptures say. But I say unto you that it is dried up already, some people just don’t recognize it.”

They didn’t believe that John was the Elijah to come, and as a result, they “have done unto him whatsoever they listed,” and he was beheaded and killed. In the same exact way, they also didn’t recognize Christ, and he therefore follows this by saying that they would treat him the same: “Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.” It’s interesting to see how all of these things are related, and one of the reasons they didn’t believe that Jesus was the Messiah is because the Elijah they were expecting hadn’t come yet. They therefore concluded that Jesus wasn’t the Christ.

To summarize, Christ answers their question in the affirmative as far as chronology goes by quoting their statement, but he clarifies the part where they went wrong in missing the Elijah because of incorrect understanding.

6. “Isn’t Elijah needed to lead the second Exodus?”

It’s believed by some that Elijah will be the head of a second exodus, and Bro. Thomas said that the Jews will “appoint” Elijah as their head and will come up through Egypt on their way to the land, and there Christ will meet them before they enter the land and reveal himself to them.

The subject of the lost ten tribes of Israel is central to this position and is worthy of comment. There is a good argument that there may not be such a thing as ten lost tribes of Israel, and that before Assyria carried Israel away, God spoke through His prophets and called a remnant out of Israel to come down into Judah to escape the Assyrians, and that this remnant from then on constituted Israel as a whole. Those who were carried away into Assyria were “cast off” from the Lord, and in Judah, therefore, were represented all twelve tribes. Prophecies such as Micah 2:12 have been used to support this position along with others, and archeological and historical evidence shows that Jerusalem swelled to an incredible population before Assyria came down as many Israelites sought refuge there.

To make matters more difficult though, this Judah would be carried away into Babylon less than 200 years after Israel was carried away in Assyria. A number of them eventually returned to the land by the decree of Cyrus, but many remained in Babylon. Therefore, when we come to the time of Christ and John’s day, there are Jews in the land and many Jews who remained outside of the land both in Assyria, Babylon, and beyond, and it seems that James might have written his epistle to these, for he writes “to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad” (James 1:1). The point is, even before AD70, there were people of both Israel and Judah which needed to be brought back to the land.

But all of this is almost negligible to mention, for the Romans came and scattered Judah to the four corners of the earth as well. Both Judah and Israel therefore need to be gathered, and it’s impossible for us to know after so many years whether Jews who are returning were from Israel or Judah. What remains to be gathered is a mixed multitude of both Judah and Israel as we saw in Isaiah 11:12-14 earlier. The point here is that it would seem inappropriate to refer to all dispersed Jews strictly as “Israel” as has often been suggested.

All of this considered, there are practical issues with the concept of Elijah leading all of the dispersed Jews back to the land. One is that the Jews are dispersed amongst all nations and are not centralized in one location as in Egypt. The Scriptures say that “I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west; (6) I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth” (Isaiah 43:5-6, also 11:11-12). It’s therefore unlikely and untenable for one man to lead ALL of these people back to the land, at least in the same way Moses did. We also note that this role of leading an exodus is not listed as part of Elijah’s role at his second coming. Hosea 1:11 does speak of Judah and Israel appointing themselves a head and coming out of their lands, but we believe this to be Christ considering that he is the great shepherd of Israel who would lead and feed them (Ezekiel 34:22-23).

It is certain, though, that the second regathering of the Jews will far outdo the first exodus from Egypt (Jeremiah 16:14-15), and while it’s possible that Elijah could have a role in this, it’s undoubtedly Christ that is the main force. Yet the methods of how they are gathered are quite different than the way the first exodus was carried out. The second exodus seems to be more of a “summon” by Christ than a true physical leading from their dispersed lands:

Zechariah 10:8-10 – I will hiss for them, and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased. (9) And I will sow them among the people: and they shall remember me in far countries; and they shall live with their children, and turn again. (10) I will bring them again also out of the land of Egypt, and gather them out of Assyria…

“Hiss” means a “shrill, or whistle” (Strong’s H83319). I believe that Christ, having established himself in Jerusalem, makes this “hiss/whistle” part of his announcement to the nations. He warns the nations to submit, but at the same time calls for all Jews to return regardless of whether they are of Judah or Israel (Isaiah 11:12). It seems that they come on their own and the Lord will bless their journey:

Isaiah 5:26-27 – And he will lift up an ensign to the nations from far, and will hiss unto them from the end of the earth: and, behold, they shall come with speed swiftly: (27) None shall be weary nor stumble among them; none shall slumber nor sleep; neither shall the girdle of their loins be loosed, nor the latchet of their shoes be broken: