Chapter # 9 Paragraph # 2 Study # 3
February 21, 2023
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(Download Audio)
(381)
Thesis: The "Elijah" question was important because it highlighted the necessity for the suffering of The Son of The Man.
Introduction: In our last study we saw that "The Three" had no real grasp of the Gospel as we know it. Because they were initially disciples of John (though Mark does not tell us this), they were very familiar with his message of "forgiveness on the basis of repentance" as the proper meaning of
Isaiah 40. They also, as Mark makes the point in
1:2-3, knew of the linkage between
Malachi 3:1 and
Isaiah 40:3. And they had to have known that
Malachi 4:5 was a more specific revelation of the "voice"/"messenger", thesis in that it identified Elijah as some form of that "voice, messenger" prophecy.
What they did not know was the "necessity" of the sufferings, and the "setting at nought", of The Son of The Man, so that their grasp of the Gospel as we know it did not have Paul's "tension" doctrine in it as he stated it in Romans 3:23-27. This is obvious in our current text of Mark in that The Three were fixated on the "problem concept" of resurrection from the dead.
Somehow, though, The Three were able to shift away from "resurrection" to "the Elijah question". That is where we are in our study this evening.
- I. The Elijah Question.
- A. Was clearly an issue in the "post-vision-of-the-Kingdom" setting as they descended from the mountain.
- B. Its roots.
- 1. Were growing in the soil of the argument of the scribes that Jesus was operating in the power of Beelzebub, the prince of the devils (deceivers): 3:22.
- a. They made this argument on the basis of the fact that "Elijah" had not yet come.
- b. They made this argument because no one could deny Jesus' authority as healings and exorcisms were regular occurances.
- c. They made this argument because Jesus deliberately refused to "knuckle under" to their "traditional understanding of the Scriptures" especially regarding the Sabbath.
- 2. Were growing in the soil of Jesus' "obvious" identity as The Christ as the mountain experience made clear after a host of powerful miracles had been done.
- 3. Were growing in the soil of the misguided theology of the scribes regarding the purpose of the sacrifices of animals at the temple in Jerusalem.
- 4. Were growing in the soil of the gradual development of the "forerunner" thesis that began in Isaiah 40 and moved to Malachi 3:1 and then moved again to Malachi 4:5-6.
- a. Mark clearly linked John the Baptizer to Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40 at the very beginning of his Gospel.
- b. But Mark did not go so far as Malachi 4:5-6 because of the setting for that prophecy.
- C. Was a pervasive "problem" right up to the post-resurrection teaching of Jesus: Luke 24:25-27.
