And his disciples asked him, saying. No sooner is the resurrection mentioned than the disciples imagine that the reign of Christ is commenced; [1] for they explain this word to mean that the world would acknowledge him to be the Messiah. That they imagined the resurrection to be something totally different from what Christ meant, is evident from what is stated by Mark, that they disputed with each other what was the meaning of that expression which he had used, To rise from the dead Perhaps, too, they were already under the influence of that dream which is now held as an undoubted oracle among the Rabbins, that there would be a first and a second coming of the Messiah; that in the first he would be mean and despised, but that this would be shortly afterwards followed by his royal dignity. And, indeed, there is some plausibility in that error, for it springs from a true principle. The Scripture, too, speaks of a first and a second coming of the Messiah; for it promises that he will be a Redeemer, to expiate by his sacrifice the sins of the world [2] And such is the import of the following prophecies: Rejoice, daughter of Zion, behold, thy King cometh, poor, sitting on an ass, (Zechariah 9:9.) We beheld him, and he had no form or beauty, and he resembled a leper, so that we had no esteem for him, (Isaiah 53:3,4.) Again, Scripture represents him as victorious over death, and as subjecting all things to his dominion. But we see how the Rabbins corrupt the pure word of God by their inventions; and as every thing was greatly corrupted in the time of our Lord, it is probable that the people had also embraced this foolish notion. Why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first? The gross mistakes which they committed as to the person of Elijah have been pointed out on two or three occasions. [3] Perhaps, too, they cunningly and wickedly endeavored to lessen the authority of Christ by bringing forward Elijah; for as it had been promised that Elijah would come as the forerunner of Messiah, to prepare the way before him, (Malachi 3:1; 4:5,) it was easy to excite a prejudice against Christ, by saying that he came unaccompanied by Elijah By a trick closely resembling this, the devil enchants the Papists of the present day not to expect the day of judgment till Elijah and Enoch have appeared. [4] It may not usually be conjectured that this expedient was purposely resorted to by the scribes, in order to represent Christ as unworthy of confidence, because he wanted the legitimate badge of the Messiah.

Footnotes

1 - "Ils imaginent que c'est l'entree du regne de Christ, et leur semble qu'ils y sont desia;" -- "they imagine that it is the commencement of the kingdom of Christ, and think that they are already in it."

2 - "Faisant par son sacrifice satisfaction pour les pechez du monde;" -- "making satisfaction by his sacrifice for the sins of the world."

3 - Among other passages in which our Author has treated of the erroneous notions entertained by the Jews respecting Elijah, the reader may consult his Commentary on John [30]1:21, [31]25. -- Ed.

4 - "Iusques a ce qu'on voye Elie et Henoch retourner en ce monde;" -- "till Elijah and Enoch are seen returning to this world."

See also Mark 9:11-13.
Why then say the scribes - The disciples appear to have been satisfied now that he was the Messiah. The transfiguration had taken away all their doubts, but they recollected that it was a common doctrine among the Jews that Elijah would appear before the Messiah came, and they did not then recollect that he had appeared. To this difficulty the word then refers. "We are satisfied that thou art the Christ, but Elijah has not yet come, as was expected; what, then, is the meaning of the common opinions of our learned men, the scribes? Were they right or wrong in their expectation of Elijah?" See the notes at Matthew 11:14.

His disciples - instead of His disciples, some MSS., with the Coptic, Armenian, Vulgate, all the Itala except two, and Origen, read simply, οι μαθηται, The disciples, i.e. those only who had been with him on the mount, Peter, James, and John.
Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? - As the disciples saw that Elijah returned to heaven, knowing the tradition of the elders, and the prophecy on which the tradition was founded, Malachi 4:5, Malachi 4:6, Behold I send you Elijah the prophet, before the great and terrible day of the Lord shall come; and he shall turn the hearts, etc., it was natural enough for them to inquire what the meaning of the tradition, and the intention of the prophecy, were.

And his disciples asked him, saying,.... That is, these three, Peter, James, and John, before they came to the rest; whilst they were going down the mountain, or from it, to the place where the others were; for the rest knew nothing of the appearance of Elias, and so cannot be thought to join in a question concerning him.
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 (h),
"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.''
And they expressly affirm (i), that
"before the coming of the son of David, , "Elias will come to bring the good news" of it.''
And this, they say (k), will be one day before the coming of the Messiah. And Maimonides (l) observes,
"that there are of their wise men that say, , "that before the coming of the Messiah, Elias shall come".''
So Trypho the Jew, the same with R. Tarphon, so often mentioned in Talmudic writings, disputing with Justin Martyr, tells him (m), 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 (n) 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 (o): this is founded upon a mistaken sense of Malachi 4:5 and which is the general sense of their commentators (p). 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. The disciples having just now seen Elias, are put in mind of this tenet of the Scribes, and of their use of it; and inquire of Christ, not so much about the truth of it, and the reason of their imbibing it, as why they were suffered to make use of it, to his disadvantage; and especially why they, the disciples, should be forbid publishing what they had seen; whereas, were they allowed to divulge this vision, and bear their testimony to this truth, that Elias had appeared, and they had seen him, it might be a means of stopping the mouths of these Scribes; and of convicting men of the truth of the Messiahship of Jesus, upon their own principles, and of confirming them that believed it: or else the sense is, whereas they had seen Elias, and he was gone again, without making any public appearance in the nation, their question is, how came the Scribes to say, that he should come first? and if there was any truth in this, how came it to pass, that he did not come sooner, even before Christ came in the flesh; and inasmuch as he did now appear, why he did not appear more publicly, as the person that was to come, at least, before the setting up of the kingdom and glory of the Messiah; which they might hope were at hand, and that Elias was come to usher it in: but that he did not appear publicly, and they were not allowed to speak of it, they wanted to know Christ's sense of these things; and took this opportunity as they came from the mountain, to converse with him about it.
(h) Seder Olam Rabba, p. 45, 46. (i) Gloss. in T. Bab. Erubin, fol. 43. 2. (k) R. Abraham ben David in Misn. Ediot, c. 8. sect. 7. (l) Hilch. Melacim, c. 12. sect. 2. (m) Dialog. cum Tryph. p. 226. (n) In Exod. xl. 10. Deut. xxx. 4. & Lamentations. iv. 22. (o) Seder Tephillot, fol. 56. 2. & 128. 2. (p) Aben Ezra, Kimchi, & Abarbinel in loc.

Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? They knew that the scribes, in their capacity as interpreters of prophecy, were wont to say that Elijah must come before the Messiah could appear. They said this on the strength of Malachi 3:1, and Malachi 4:5. If Peter, James and John were of those who asked this question, they were probably seeking to ascertain if the vision they had seen was the coming of Elias and why he did not remain.

Why then say the scribes, that Elijah must come first - Before the Messiah? If no man is to know of his coming? Should we not rather tell every man, that he is come, and that we have seen him, witnessing to thee as the Messiah?