John 1:21 (KJV) And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
John the Baptist denied being Elijah.
Yes, according to this particular gospel, John denied being Elijah. That is established, incidentally, from the first "art thou" question... the second, as has been pointed out to you elsewhere, concerns his denial of being the prophet like Moses anticipated in Deuteronomy.
Matthew 17:11 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.
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
Read again closely
Jesus never said John was Elijah.
The disciples assumed it .
You are making the mistake of reading Matthew through a Johannine lens... if you let the Matthean text speak for itself, it is equally obvious that this author thinks John
was Elijah. There is an explicit such claim placed in the mouth of Jesus elsewhere in the gospel that you have overlooked here. I will quote the section at length, since it is pertinent to discussion later on in the thread about John's role as the Isaianic messenger:
As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? What then did you go out to see? Someone dressed in soft robes? Look, those who wear soft robes are in royal palaces. What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is the one about whom it is written,
'See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.'
Truly I tell you, among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John came; and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. Let anyone with ears listen!"
Matt 11:7-15
On reaching 17:11-13, the equation of John and Elijah has already been established by the author... it can thus be reiterated in different and even ambiguous words in order to provide several of Jesus' disciples with a moment of intellectual clarity --- the verb
συνιημι (
syniemi) means "to have an intelligent grasp of something that challenges one's thinking or practice" (BDAG). To suggest that 17:13 conveys the subjects'
misunderstanding of an equation between John and Elijah is to misread the text:
And the disciples asked him, "Why, then, do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?" He replied, "Elijah is indeed coming and will restore all things; but I tell you that Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but they did to him whatever they pleased. So also the Son of Man is about to suffer at their hands." Then the disciples understood that he was speaking to them about John the Baptist.
Matt 17:10-13
The disciples (contextually Peter, James and John; cf. 17:1) are narrated to have seen a vision of Moses
and Elijah with the transfigured Jesus (17:2-3) and their disappearance (17:8) prompts them to ask about the tradition of Elijah's coming (cf. Mal 4:5-6). At this point they understand this literally and are genuinely confused about the prophet's brief appearance on the mountain that fails to meet expectations. Jesus proceeds to correct their misunderstanding by claiming that Elijah has already come, but was not recognized... he draws parallel between what he is about to suffer with what was done to this Elijah, a cryptic reference to John's beheading narrated in flashback at 14:3-11. The disciples grasp the connection, which challenges their previous literal interpretation of Elijah, now coming to understanding that John the Baptist was this Elijah.
John the Baptist never operated in the spirit of Elijah but Jesus sure did .
The phrase "in the spirit of Elijah" comes from Luke 1:17 and, unless you're proposing Luke presents the angelic visitor who appears to Zechariah as an unreliable witness, the messenger's claim concerning Zechariah's future son (ie. John) can be taken as this gospel author's endorsement of a position somewhere between Matthew's (John is Elijah) and John's (John is not Elijah)... he comes not
as Elijah, but in his spirit and power. This is an early attempt at resolving the tension between the two traditions... you are welcome to embrace that of John, but do not misread Matthew or outright ignore Luke in the process.
Kind regards,
Jonathan
