Luke 1:17 does not fulfill Malachi 4

[Mr. M]

What final ultimatum did I demand? I don't recall doing that. I asked a question that you are free to answer or not. That's not an ultimatum.

Consider it unanswered.

 

[keras]

It is perfectly plain that Malachi 4:5-6 remains to be fulfilled.
We await the great and terrible Day of the Lord, His fiery wrath, as described in many prophesies.
John the Baptizer was a fore runner of the Elijah to come in the end times. He may already be here, as the Sixth Seal is very close now.

 

[Hazelelponi]

This prophecy is for all Israel, and remains unfulfilled.

Romans 9:6 - and it's fulfilled perfectly.

This portion I quoted above is what happens when you decide you know better than Scripture what it means. You have a preconceived image in your head what it means and ignore what Scripture tells you out of hand.

All who are of Israel are not Israel. But all Israel was and continue to be saved, until the second coming of our Lord.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It is perfectly plain that Malachi 4:5-6 remains to be fulfilled.
We await the great and terrible Day of the Lord, His fiery wrath, as described in many prophesies.
John the Baptizer was a fore runner of the Elijah to come in the end times. He may already be here, as the Sixth Seal is very close now.

I see that you too don't accept what Jesus said. It's not a surprise. Jesus Himself expected that.

Matthew 11:11 Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence and violent people have been raiding it. 13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.

I am willing to accept that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come because I know that Jesus knew what He was talking about.

Despite clear passages like Matthew 11:11-14, you get thrown off and end up not accepting clear passages like that because of the reference to "the great and terrible day of the Lord". That is not referring to the same day of the Lord that is referred to in passages like 1 Thess 5:1-6 and 2 Peter 3:10-13. It is referring to the day Christ died on the cross. That day was great because it brought the hope of redemption and eternal life to the world (John 3:16). It was terrible because it also brought condemnation upon those who don't believe (John 3:18).

Luke 1:17 And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

This verse indicates that John the Baptist would be the one to "turn the hearts of the parents to their children" which is a quote of Malachi 4:6 which you say is unfulfilled. Do you think John the Baptist didn't "turn the hearts of the parents to their children" even though Luke 1:17 says he would?

 

[Mr. M]

Romans 9:6 - and it's fulfilled perfectly.

4 Remember the Law of Moses, My servant, which I commanded him in Horeb
for all Israel, statutes and judgments.
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet
Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
6 And he will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,
And the hearts of the children to their fathers,
Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.

It ain't over until it is over.
You should not have stopped reading at Romans 9
Romans 11:1 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not!
26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.

This portion I quoted above is what happens when you decide you know better than Scripture what it means. You have a preconceived image in your head what it means and ignore what Scripture tells you out of hand.

And what might that be? Can you describe what image I have in my head right now?
Exactly what scripture am I ignoring? Do really think that I do not know Romans 9-11?

All who are of Israel are not Israel. But all Israel was and continue to be saved, until the second coming of our Lord.

Where is it said otherwise? What does that have to do with the ministry of John the
baptist? The Gospel has always brought division, and will until the final consummation.

 

[jeffweedaman]

It is amazing to me that you would suggest that John the Baptist failed to accomplish what he was put on the earth to do. No, he did not! There is no scripture which indicates that he failed in his mission. It does not say that he would turn the hearts of all parents to their children and all children to their parents. He wasn't sent to force anyone to do anything. He was sent to tell people about the good news of the impending arrival of the Messiah, Jesus, and to baptize them in order to prepare people for Him and he did that for many people.

What people did with that news that he shared was up to each person to decide. To think that all of them needed to respond positively in order to fulfill the prophecy is unreasonable.

If you think John the Baptist failed in his mission then do you think Jesus failed as well? This is what Peter said about Jesus and what He came to do:

Acts 3:24 “Indeed, beginning with Samuel, all the prophets who have spoken have foretold these days. 25 And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, ‘Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.’ 26 When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways.”

Did Jesus fail to turn each of them from their wicked ways? Is it saying that all of them had to turn from their wicked ways in order for Jesus to have been successful in His ministry? If that was the case then He would have failed. But, I'm not willing to say that Jesus failed, are you?

Jesus did what was necessary to turn everyone from their wicked ways, but each person must choose how to respond. If someone doesn't respond favorably, that doesn't mean Jesus failed to turn them from their wickedness. He succeeded in doing all He had to do, but each person is responsible for their own actions. This is how John the Baptist's ministry should be understood as well. He did not fail.

I agree SJ.
Jesus comes a second time like a thief and nobody knows when the thief will appear.....there is no warning....unlike his first coming when JTB prepared the way.
That sort of rules out somebody appearing just before him to herald his imminent future appearing.
Nobody knows the day or the hour, not even the Lord and not Elijah.

 

[keras]

This verse indicates that John the Baptist would be the one to "turn the hearts of the parents to their children" which is a quote of Malachi 4:6 which you say is unfulfilled. Do you think John the Baptist didn't "turn the hearts of the parents to their children" even though Luke 1:17 says he would?

There is no evidence; Biblical or historical that John 'turned the hearts' of anyone.
My point is that Elijah will come before the great and terrible Day of the Lord. His fiery wrath, as prophesied many times.
Thinking the DoL happened in 70 AD, is error, as it was the Romans who destroyed the Temple and exiled the Jews. 40 years after John was killed.

Your insistence of Elijah having been and gone already, cannot be right, as John the Baptist didn't fulfil Malachi 4:5-6.
But the interesting quote is Malachi 4:6a...lest I come and destroy the land.
This is what the Lord will actually do: Isaiah 10:23, Zephaniah 1:1-18, Hosea 4:3, Jeremiah 8:16, Joel 1:15-20,+

 

[Mr. M]

I agree SJ.
Jesus comes a second time like a thief and nobody knows when the thief will appear.....there is no warning....unlike his first coming when JTB prepared the way.
That sort of rules out somebody appearing just before him to herald his imminent future appearing.
Nobody knows the day or the hour, not even the Lord and not Elijah.

Hi Jeff,
There is no reason to think that Elijah coming to restore the people of Israel prior to the
second coming violates the principle of "knowing the day or the hour". The purpose is not
to herald his imminent future appearing. The coming of the Lord is also like the days of Noah.
Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world
and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.
Elijah preparing hearts for true worship in Israel will not warn the world of the Lord's return.
He could be there now. This work is framed in OT language, as it is directed toward natural
Israel.
Malachi 3:
3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi,
and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.
4 Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old,
and as in former years.
Because of this language, Orthodox and Messianic Jews, and many Gentiles who identify as Messianic
believe this must involve rebuilding a temple,and restoring animal sacrifice. We should go strictly by
the words of the Lord on this:
John 4:
23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father
in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him.
24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.
This is why restoring true worship will also turn the hearts of Fathers to children, etc...
Many in Israel turned their hearts to the Lord in response to John's preaching:
Matthew 3:
5 Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him
6 and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins.
Notice the critical result of he preaching “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!”.
People turned their hearts to the Lord, and the evidence is they publicly confessed their sins!
If you have studied the history of all revivals among God's people, whether in the OT, or in the
history of the church, the turning of hearts results in broken and contrite hearts. One of the natural
benefits of this occurring is restoration of relationships, both within the church, and the family. That
is why it is described as "turning of the hearts of fathers to children, mothers to daughters".
This is the working of the Holy Spirit! This is not the work of Elijah or John the baptist, or
Hezekiah, or Josiah. We cannot overlook this critical element of the passage in Luke 1:
15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink.
He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.
16 And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God.
No where in the post did I say that John failed his mission. The post is saying that the work
is not complete. John came in "the spirit and power of Elijah", and turned many hearts. But
as this OP post #1 points out, if you have read it, is that once Jesus came to be baptized by
John, the ministry of John was complete, and successful, and soon terminated. His mission
turned many hearts, but that was not his mission, that was just a favorable outcome of his
preaching. His mission was to identify and bear witness to the Messiah. Even then, John did
not know the day or the hour, but he was instructed on what to look for beforehand.
The Lamb of God
John 1:
29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, Behold! The Lamb of God
who takes away the sin of the world!
30 This is He of whom I said, After me comes a Man who is preferred before me, for He
was before me.
31 I did not know Him; but that He should be revealed to Israel, therefore I came
baptizing with water.
32 And John bore witness, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove,
and He remained upon Him.
33 I did not know Him, but He who sent me to baptize with water said to me,
Upon whom you see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, this is He
who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.
34 And I have seen and testified that this is the Son of God.

The false accusations and conclusions against this teaching is rooted in replacement theology.
They do not believe that Elijah would return for the sake of natural Israel, because of the idea
that natural Israel has been completely replaced by the church. This is a false theology, that
picks apart Paul's teaching in Romans to create a false narrative. Every believer should have a
careful and thorough knowledge of Romans 9 - 11 for a solid foundation on the difference between
a "spiritual Israel", and natural Israel, which has not been abandoned by God. Because of this,
every sober-minded student of the scriptures recognizes that while John came in the spirit and power
of Elijah, Malachi chapters 3 and 4 prophecies are not fulfilled. I have taken the time this morning
to provide you will a careful, sober-minded explanation, without all the unnecessary conflicts because
you have shown earlier a sincere desire to understand these things. I truly hope this helps and inspires
you to continue your own study, and do not be thrown by people who attack others. We are not here
to win an argument, but to go as deep as necessary into the scriptures to have sound knowledge of
doctrine. It is easy to recognize the argumentative, who think they are out to win a contest. They
keep saying the same things over and over, thinking they will wear others down with a false superiority. I heard this several times: "Jesus said that John was Elijah. I believe him. That makes
me right. How can you believe otherwise." As if I don't know every word Jesus ever spoke. I know
what He said, and I know why He said it. That is to know the truth. Not to know what was said, but
what was meant. The intent. This is logos theos. The word of God. Jesus is called the word of God,
and what did he constantly do, but clarify every word of God. Not what God said, what He meant. What
was His intent, and Will for us. That is what makes the Son=The Word. The Spirit is remaking us to
conform to the image of His Son. To what the Father originally intended. This is logos.
In Spirit and Truth, and the Love of Christ,
brother Jim

 

[Spiritual Jew]

There is no evidence; Biblical or historical that John 'turned the hearts' of anyone.

He baptized many people. You don't think he turned any of their hearts?

So, just to be clear, you're saying that you believe John the Baptist failed to do what Luke 1:17 said he was going to do?

Luke 1:13 But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John...17 And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, "to turn the hearts of the parents to their children" (direct quote from Malachi 4:6) and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The false accusations and conclusions against this teaching is rooted in replacement theology.
They do not believe that Elijah would return for the sake of natural Israel, because of the idea
that natural Israel has been completely replaced by the church. This is a false theology, that
picks apart Paul's teaching in Romans to create a false narrative. Every believer should have a
careful and thorough knowledge of Romans 9 - 11 for a solid foundation on the difference between
a "spiritual Israel", and natural Israel, which has not been abandoned by God.

This is complete nonsense. The only one making a false accusation here is you saying that people who disagree with you on this are promoting replacement theology. No one is replaced. God's people are ALWAYS those who have faith. He is not a respecter of persons and being a child of God has NEVER been based on one's nationality. As Paul makes clear in Romans 11, Gentile believers are grafted in with Israelite believers. Unbelievers are cut off. No one is replaced. And no one is saying God has abandoned Israel.

Also, as Paul makes clear in Romans 9-11, there was a remnant of believers from Israel in his day. And there has been ever since. Why would anyone say they've been abandoned when the gospel of Christ has been available to all people, including all from Israel, for almost 2,000 years now?

 

[Mr. M]

And no one is saying God has abandoned Israelites.

And yet you insist that the prophesies of restoration, that includes mention of Elijah in Malachi 3/4
have all been fulfilled by John the baptist because that was his mission. His mission was to testify
to the Messiah, whom he baptized and declared to be the Son of God. The lamb of God who takes
away the sin of the world. If you read the entire post that you are now quoting from then you know
that I explained that the expression "turning the hearts of the fathers" is in direct association to the
act of people repenting and confessing their sins before God. Multitudes did so in response to the
preaching of both John and Jesus. Many also later turned back away rather than continue to follow
Him. His mission, in direct association with John, was to declare the message of God's Love. I never
said that John failed in his mission, that was your accusation. I said that mission is not complete, and Malachi 3 and 4 are not completely fulfilled.
You may say that you reject replacement theology, and I never said that you accepted it.
I said that the doctrine that the end time prophecy found in Malachi 3/4, as well as so many others
that speak of the restoration of true worship in Israel in the latter days, are already fulfilled comes
from that influence. I hope that you can say with 100% certainty that none of your doctrinal beliefs have been influenced by replacement theology. Your belief that all of the prophetic implications of Malachi 3 and 4 have been fulfilled just because Jesus said that John was Elijah speaks otherwise.
Even when the focus of the thread was placed on Luke 1:17, which states that John came in the
"spirit and power of Elijah", and makes reference to one verse of Malachi 4, verse 6, about turning hearts, you are declaring "mission complete", all prophecy fulfilled. You say that was John's mission, and have declared it a success. Scripture does not support your conclusion that was his mission, as Keras has elaborated on. As I explained in my last post, "hearts turning back" is the expected outcome of repentance, even today. Hearts turn back to the Lord will also find healing in personal relationships, family, marriage, parent to children.
The mission is salvation and redemption, a work still in progress. Even for you and I.
1 Peter 1:8 Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, 9 receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls.
1 Timothy 6:19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
Luke 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draws nigh.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

And yet you insist that the prophesies of restoration, that includes mention of Elijah in Malachi 3/4
have all been fulfilled by John the baptist because that was his mission. His mission was to testify
to the Messiah, whom he baptized and declared to be the Son of God. The lamb of God who takes
away the sin of the world. If you read the entire post that you are now quoting from then you know
that I explained that the expression "turning the hearts of the fathers" is in direct association to the
act of people repenting and confessing their sins before God. Multitudes did so in response to the
preaching of both John and Jesus. Many also later turned back away rather than continue to follow
Him. His mission, in direct association with John, was to declare the message of God's Love. I never
said that John failed in his mission, that was your accusation. I said that mission is not complete, and Malachi 3 and 4 are not completely fulfilled.
You may say that you reject replacement theology, and I never said that you accepted it.
I said that the doctrine that the end time prophecy found in Malachi 3/4, as well as so many others
that speak of the restoration of true worship in Israel in the latter days, are already fulfilled comes
from that influence. I hope that you can say with 100% certainty that none of your doctrinal beliefs have been influenced by replacement theology. Your belief that all of the prophetic implications of Malachi 3 and 4 have been fulfilled just because Jesus said that John was Elijah speaks otherwise.
Even when the focus of the thread was placed on Luke 1:17, which states that John came in the
"spirit and power of Elijah", and makes reference to one verse of Malachi 4, verse 6, about turning hearts, you are declaring "mission complete", all prophecy fulfilled. You say that was John's mission, and have declared it a success. Scripture does not support your conclusion that was his mission, as Keras has elaborated on. As I explained in my last post, "hearts turning back" is the expected outcome of repentance, even today. Hearts turn back to the Lord will also find healing in personal relationships, family, marriage, parent to children.
The mission is salvation and redemption, a work still in progress. Even for you and I.
1 Peter 1:8 Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, 9 receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls.
1 Timothy 6:19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
Luke 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draws nigh.

John the Baptist did everything that scripture says he would do, including Luke 1:17. Are we in agreement on that, at least?

Are you willing to take back your accusation of replacement theology since no one here is saying that anyone is being replaced?

 

[Mr. M]

Are you willing to take back your accusation of replacement theology since no one here is saying that anyone is being replaced?

I already did. I never said that you are a proponent of that doctrine. I cautioned that believing that
so much of the prophets that speak of the restoration of true worship in the latter days as completed is influenced by the many influential teachers today who are under that notion. As I said, my sincere hope is that all of your doctrines are 100% free of that present influence. Only you would know for sure. Again, I never said that you were trying to teach that doctrine. The idea that John's completed mission fulfills all of what is prophesied in Malachi 3 and 4 is an error linked to that doctrine. John completed his mission when he baptized Christ. His preaching of "repentance for the remission of sin", which was also preached by Christ was only a part of their mission. The very expression, "turning of the hearts" as I have explained, is rooted in the understanding of repentance in the Hebrew. "Return to the Lord", "turn back to Him", etc...and those who do, inevitably find His Spirit heals and restores, and especially manifests in the restoration of personal relations, which is the Father's heart. It is an oversimplification to claim that to be the all of John's mission. John's work, as described in Luke 1:17,
is linked to the words found in Malachi 4:6 by the working of the Holy Spirit, which never fails.
Again, many came to Christ and John, seeking many things, including healing, deliverance from demons, or just to see signs and wonders. Repentance for many is a transient experience. Many who believed later turned away. Why is that? Because their expectations did not align with the will of God.
Jesus had to return to the wilderness on occasion because crowds wanted to take Him and make Him the king, Right then. You do understand that was unacceptable. I already pointed out, this was even on the hearts of the apostles, who asked, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” Acts 1:6.
I have pointed out that the scriptures are clear that there remains a full restoration of true worship
in Israel in the latter days. Acts 3:21.
In all sincerity, you have no authority to declare that Elijah will have no hand in that restoration, just
because Jesus said that John is Elijah, especially when our text for the thread is clear in Luke 1:17,
that this was not literal, but only "in spirit". You can try talking down to me all you want, as if your
position is superior because you claim to take Jesus at His word, when there are deficiencies in your
comprehension of that Word. It would help if you had a better understanding of expressions He used,
"if you can receive it"=in you have the comprehension, which many clearly did not. or "let them who
have ears, hear". He also said, "let these words sink down into your ears". You seem to feel as if you
have a deep revelation of truth, yet your words are old news to me, as in decades. I am 65, and I
have only been sharing on this site for 16 months. I do not mean to say anything beyond words of
sincerity and truth. You have not taught me anything, as if I am unaware of what is said in all these
scriptures, and their relation to all the prophets. John no doubt completed his greater mission
successfully, which was to testify to the Son of God. Along the way, he without question led many
to repentance, fulfilling what is expressed by the words "turning the hearts". The greater and final
fulfillment of prophecy remains before us, and it would be quite naive to assume that Elijah will not
be involved. Jesus said John was the greatest among those born of women, because of this awesome
mission we have been discussing. However, Jesus also said that the least in the kingdom of heaven
is greater than John. Elijah has been a part of that kingdom for quite some time. What John and
Elijah do have in common is that they are both but men, as I. We must fiercely abide in the Holy
Spirit of the Lord, and enter the kingdom by force. Not on our own ability, but by the Grace of God.
There are many wonders yet to behold! Did not the Lord tell His disciples,
John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believes on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Abide in the Spirit of the Lord, that you may so behold!
Grow in Grace, and the knowledge of our Lord and Savior. 2 Peter 3:18

 

[Spiritual Jew]

In all sincerity, you have no authority to declare that Elijah will have no hand in that restoration, just because Jesus said that John is Elijah, especially when our text for the thread is clear in Luke 1:17, that this was not literal, but only "in spirit".

There's no need to be so dramatic. I'm declaring my opinions and understanding of the scriptures just like you are. Of course I don't have the authority to declare what Elijah can or can't do and neither do you. I don't really understand the last point you made here, though. Just because the fulfillment of the coming of Elijah was "in spirit" through John the Baptist doesn't make the coming of Elijah any less fulfilled than if it was the literal Elijah himself.

You can try talking down to me all you want, as if your position is superior because you claim to take Jesus at His word, when there are deficiencies in your comprehension of that Word.

Again, you are being overly dramatic with thinking I'm talking down to you and saying my position is superior and all that. So, it's okay for you to disagree with me, but not okay for me to disagree with you? Please stop being so overly sensitive. You don't seem prepared for the idea that anyone could possibly disagree with you, so you take it personally. This isn't personal. This is a disagreement over the meaning of certain scriptures.

I'm not talking down to you, I'm showing that I don't like it when it seems to me that someone is just brushing aside something Jesus said which is that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come. It's not debatable that Jesus said that. Where did He say that the real Elijah would also come (though he did already come in a sense at Christ's transfiguration)? Don't you think He would have mentioned that Elijah himself was also going to come at some point, if that was going to happen, in order to avoid confusion? But, all He said was that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come. Period.

 

[Mr. M]

There's no need to be so dramatic. I'm declaring my opinions and understanding of the scriptures just like you are. Of course I don't have the authority to declare what Elijah can or can't do and neither do you. I don't really understand the last point you made here, though. Just because the fulfillment of the coming of Elijah was "in spirit" through John the Baptist doesn't make the coming of Elijah any less fulfilled than if it was the literal Elijah himself.

Again, you are being overly dramatic with thinking I'm talking down to you and saying my position is superior and all that. So, it's okay for you to disagree with me, but not okay for me to disagree with you? Please stop being so overly sensitive. You don't seem prepared for the idea that anyone could possibly disagree with you, so you take it personally. This isn't personal. This is a disagreement over the meaning of certain scriptures.

I'm not talking down to you, I'm showing that I don't like it when it seems to me that someone is just brushing aside something Jesus said which is that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come. It's not debatable that Jesus said that. Where did He say that the real Elijah would also come (though he did already come in a sense at Christ's transfiguration)? Don't you think He would have mentioned that Elijah himself was also going to come at some point, if that was going to happen, in order to avoid confusion? But, all He said was that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come. Period.

I appreciate the thorough nature of the discussion, and we both have made our positions clear.
I'd like to call it a wrap. Good will to you.
Peace.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I appreciate the thorough nature of the discussion, and we both have made our positions clear.
I'd like to call it a wrap. Good will to you.
Peace.

I'm fine with that. Thanks for the discussion. Nothing personal was intended.