Thursday, May 23, 2019

E.W. Hengstenberg's Use of Elijah/Elias in Malachi 4:5 to Denote a Forerunner


In my article “Elias” as a “Forerunner” in LDS Scripture, I presented some instances of 19th century theological literature that used Elijah/Elias in a generic sense to denote a forerunner, similar to what one finds in D&C 27; 77; 110 and in some sermons delivered by the Prophet Joseph Smith.

In his massive two-volume Old Testament Christology, E.W. Hengstenberg (1802-1869) used Elijah/Elias in a very similar manner. Commenting on Mal 4:5 (3:23 in the Hebrew), Hengstenberg wrote the following:

Ver. 5 (chap. iii.23). “Behold, I send you Elias, the prophet, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.”

There can be no doubt whatever that Elias the prophet is identical with the messenger, whom the Lord will send to prepare the way before him (chap. iii.1). If, then, we have already proved in our remarks upon that verse, that the reference there is to an ideal messenger, the personified preacher of repentance, the same proofs are equally valid in connexion with the passage before us. The same idea is expressed in both cases: before God proves himself to be the covenant God by inflicting punishments and bestowing blessings, he shows that he is so, by placing within the reach of the children of the curse the means of becoming the children of the blessing. Of course we must not separate the power of the Spirit of God from the outward mission of his servants, and thus change the gift into mockery. There was no necessity to allude particularly to his, because it always accompanies the outward preaching, and in fact is in exact proportion to it; so that we may infer with certainty the amount of inward grace, from the extent to which the outward means of grace are enjoyed in any age.

The only point which we have to examine in connection with this passage, has reference to the one thing which is peculiar to it, the designation of the messenger by the name of Elias. The reason for this must be sought in the prophet’s own description of the office and work of the messenger and of Elias, namely, “to prepare the way of the Lord,” and “turn back the heart of the fathers to the children and of the children to the fathers.” Hence the messenger, as a reformer raised up by God, is called by the name of that one of the earlier messengers of God, who exceeded all the rest in spirit and power, who lived in a remarkably corrupt age, and whose rejection was followed by a particularly terrible day of the Lord, viz. first the calamities inflicted by the Syrians, and then the captivity of Israel, the ban, with which the land was smitten, because it did not realise its destination to be a holy land. The name of Elias recalled all these circumstances; when the people hard this name, they were weakened out of their dream of self-righteousness, and found themselves placed upon a level with the corrupt generation of the time of Elias. The coming of the Lord is that former age afforded a firm foundation of his future coming. Again, the reason why Elias should be especially selected, becomes still more obvious, if we trace the view which is very perceptible in the historical books, that he was the head of the prophetic order in the Israelitish kingdom, or rather in a certain sense the only prophet inasmuch as his successors merely received the spirit indirectly;--a view, to which we are also led by the striking resemblance which the acts of Elisha bore to his own. We find a perfectly analogous resemblance in the case of Isaac and Abraham, Joshua and Moses. In 2 Chr. xxi. 12 there is brought to the king a writing from “Elijah the prophet,” for Elijah as an individual had departed this life long before. In 1 Kings xix. 15, 16, the Lord says to Elijah, “thou shalt go and anoint Hazael to be king over Syria, and Jehu the son of Nimshi , shalt thou anoint to be king over Israel.” Elijah himself did not perform either of these acts; but Elisha anointed one (2 Kings viii.13), and a pupil of Elisha anointed the other (2 Kings ix. 4-6). Elisha, who modestly acknowledge that his relation to God was not originally the same as that of his leader, desired the portion of the first-born in his spiritual inheritance (בְרוּחוֹ, 2 Kings ii. 9). Hence he also loos upon the rest of the prophets as the spiritual children and heirs of Elijah, and as standing in the same relation to him, in which the seventy elders, upon whom God put of the spirit of Moses, stood to Moses himself. According to 2 Kings, ii.15, the sons of the prophets said, “the spirit of Elijah (that is, the spirit of God in the particular form which it assumed in Elijah) doth rest upon Elisha.” And as an outward sign that his ministry was merely a continuation of that of Elijah, Elisha received his mantle. But a similar relation as this may be found existing altogether apart from scriptural ground. Look for example at the connexion which existed between Luther and Jonas or Bugenhagen, or again between the reformers generally and the churches of which they were the founders. It might also be shown that since this relation is an appointment of God himself, the words which are so frequently abused, be not the servants of men,” do not apply to it at all; though sin creeps into this, as into every thing human. But this does not form part of our present subject. We merely call attention to the fact, that if, according to these proofs, we are not limited to one single historical character, even when the Elijah of former times is referred to, but everything is attributed to Elijah, which constituted a continuation of his mission till the coming of the terrible day upon Israel, there is still less ground for seeking the Elijah of the future exclusively as one individual.—We have already observed that the prophet intentionally borrows from Joel (ii. 31), the expression, “Before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.” The day foretold by Joel, the judgment on the enemies of the kingdom of God, was ardently desired. By the announcement of the coming of a preacher of repentance (μετανοια), the prophet shows how wrong it is for them to identify themselves with the kingdom of God, and expressly declares in the following verse, that, if his preaching makes no impression, the great day will inevitably be terrible to those who fancy themselves the supporters, but are in reality the enemies of the kingdom of God. (Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Old Testament Christology [trans. R. Keith; 2 vols.; 1854; repr., Mac Dill, Fla.: MacDonald Publishing Company, 1971], 2:1227-29, emphasis in original)

 On Mal 4:5 itself, see, for e.g.: