Yet, as we view it, and without needlessly imputing malice prepense to the Pharisaic deputation, their questions seemed but natural. After his previous emphatic disclaimer at the beginning of his preaching (St. Luke iii. 15), of which they in Jerusalem could scarcely have been ignorant, the suggestion of his Messiahship - not indeed expressly made, but sufficiently implied to elicit what the language of St. John [1656] shows to have been the most energetic denial - could scarcely have been more than tentative. It was otherwise with their question whether he was Elijah?' Yet, bearing in mind what we know of the Jewish expectations of Elijah, and how his appearance was always readily recognised, [1657] this also could scarcely have been meant in its full literality - but rather as ground for the further question after the goal and warrant of his mission. Hence also John's disavowing of such claims is not satisfactorily accounted for by the common explanation, that he denied being Elijah in the sense of not being what the Jews expected of the Forerunner of the Messiah: the real, identical Elijah of the days of Ahab; or else, that he denied being such in the sense of the peculiar Jewish hopes attaching to his reappearance in the last days.' There is much deeper truth in the disclaimer of the Baptist. It was, indeed, true that, as foretold in the Angelic announcement, [1658] he was sent in the spirit and power of Elias,' that is, with the same object and the same qualifications. Similarly, it is true what, in His mournful retrospect of the result of John's mission, and in the prospect of His own end, the Saviour said of him, Elias is indeed come,' but they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed.' [1659] But on this very recognition and reception of him by the Jews depended his being to them Elijah - who should turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just,' and so restore all things.' Between the Elijah of Ahab's reign, and him of Messianic times, lay the wide cleft of quite another dispensation. The spirit and power of Elijah' could restore all things,' because it was the dispensation of the Old Testament, in which the result was outward, and by outward means. But the spirit and power' of the Elijah of the New Testament, which was to accomplish the inward restoration through penitent reception of the Kingdom of God in its reality, could only accomplish that object if they received it' - if they knew him.' And as in his own view, and looking around and forward, so also in very fact the Baptist, though Divinely such, was not really Elijah to Israel - and this is the meaning of the words of Jesus: And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.' [1660]
More natural still - indeed, almost quite truthful, seems the third question of the Pharisees, whether the Baptist was that prophet.' The reference here is undoubtedly to Deut. xviii. 15, 18. Not that the reappearance of Moses as lawgiver was expected. But as the prediction of the eighteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, especially when taken in connection with the promise [1661] of a new covenant' with a new law' written in the hearts of the people, implied a change in this respect, it was but natural that it should have been expected in Messianic days by the instrumentality of that prophet.' [1662] Even the various opinions broached in the Mishnah, [1663] as to what were to be the reformatory and legislative functions of Elijah, prove that such expectations were connected with the Forerunner of the Messiah.
But whatever views the Jewish embassy might have entertained concerning the abrogation, renewal, or renovation of the Law [1664] in Messianic times, the Baptist repelled the suggestion of his being that prophet' with the same energy as those of his being either the Christ or Elijah. And just as we notice, as the result of those forty days' communing, yet deeper humility and self-abnegation on the part of the Baptist, so we also mark increased intensity and directness in the testimony which he now bears to the Christ before the Jerusalem deputies. [1665] His eye is fixed on the Coming One.'He is as a voice not to be inquired about, but heard;' and its clear and unmistakable, but deeply reverent utterance is: The Coming One has come.' [1666]