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)