TEXT [Commentary]

12. Jesus’ transfiguration (17:1-13; cf. Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36)

1 Six days later Jesus took Peter and the two brothers, James and John, and led them up a high mountain to be alone. 2 As the men watched, Jesus’ appearance was transformed so that his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as light. 3 Suddenly, Moses and Elijah appeared and began talking with Jesus.

4 Peter exclaimed, “Lord, it’s wonderful for us to be here! If you want, I’ll make three shelters as memorials[*]—one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.”

5 But even as he spoke, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy. Listen to him.” 6 The disciples were terrified and fell face down on the ground.

7 Then Jesus came over and touched them. “Get up,” he said. “Don’t be afraid.” 8 And when they looked up, Moses and Elijah were gone, and they saw only Jesus.

9 As they went back down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, “Don’t tell anyone what you have seen until the Son of Man[*] has been raised from the dead.”

10 Then his disciples asked him, “Why do the teachers of religious law insist that Elijah must return before the Messiah comes?[*]”

11 Jesus replied, “Elijah is indeed coming first to get everything ready. 12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, but he wasn’t recognized, and they chose to abuse him. And in the same way they will also make the Son of Man suffer.” 13 Then the disciples realized he was talking about John the Baptist.

NOTES

17:1 Six days later Jesus took Peter and the two brothers, James and John, and led them up a high mountain to be alone. If the interpretation of 16:28 suggested above is correct, Jesus’ prediction there that some of his disciples would see a royal “coming” before they died was fulfilled only six days afterward (Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36). Exod 24:16, which mentions that a cloud rested on Mt. Sinai for six days, is the first of many OT allusions in this passage. Only Peter, James, and John observed the miracle (cf. 26:37). These are three of the first four disciples Jesus called (4:18-22); Peter’s brother Andrew was left behind. Jesus’ being accompanied by these three may be intended to remind the reader of Moses’ being accompanied by Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, but the seventy elders were also present with Moses (Exod 24:1, 9). The event, which occurred on an unnamed, high mountain, reminds the reader of Moses’ experience at the giving of the law from Sinai (cf. 5:1; 15:29; Exod 24:12-18; 31:18).

17:2 Jesus’ appearance was transformed so that his face shone like the sun. The traditional though opaque term “transfiguration” underlines the difficulty in describing the transformation that happened to Jesus. The word used in the Gr. text eventually gave rise to the English “metamorphosis” (cf. Rom 12:2; 2 Cor 3:18). Matthew relies on two similes to describe this event, describing its glory as something that dazzles like bright sunlight. The detail that Jesus’ face shone recalls Exod 34:29-35.

17:3 Moses and Elijah appeared and began talking with Jesus. Allison (1993) argues that Moses typology occurs throughout Matthew, and it is clear that Matthew presents Jesus’ teaching as fulfilling the law of Moses. It is clear from Matt 17:5 that Deut 18:15-19 is also implied here. Elijah’s presence is undoubtedly connected to Mal 4:5-6, to which Jesus alluded concerning John the Baptist in 11:14. It is sometimes held that Moses and Elijah represent respectively the OT law and prophets (cf. 5:17; 7:12). Others point out that both had mountaintop experiences with God—Moses at Sinai and Elijah at Horeb (1 Kgs 19:8). In any event, Moses and Elijah were both key prophetic figures in the OT, so their presence with Jesus is fitting. If the presence of the two individuals is understood typologically, Jesus was the “prophet like Moses” spoken of in Deut 18:15, and John was Elijah (17:10-13). Matthew’s comment that Jesus conversed with Moses and Elijah is tantalizingly brief. Luke 9:31 indicates ominously that the conversation concerned Jesus’ upcoming departure (lit. “exodus”) from the world, which would be fulfilled in Jerusalem. For a detailed study of the transfiguration, see McGuckin (1986).

17:4-5 I’ll make three shelters as memorials. Peter’s knee-jerk response to this glorious manifestation was perhaps to suggest a reenactment of the feast of tabernacles (sukkoth [TH5521, ZH6109] “booths,” cf. Lev 23:42-43; Zech 14:16ff). Or maybe Peter was thinking in terms of the “tent of meeting” where God spoke with Moses outside the camp (Exod 33:7). His plan was to put up three tents or huts as temporary quarters or memorials for the three prominent persons there. This idea was well-intentioned, and Peter did acknowledge Jesus’ lordship and prerogatives in the way he put the question, but it nevertheless threatened to blur the uniqueness of Jesus as God’s Son.

a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said. The voice coming from the bright cloud reminds the reader of significant revelations to Israel from clouds in the days of Moses (Exod 40:34-38; cf. 2 Macc 2:8). The brightness of the cloud is a bit oxymoronic and suggests the “shekinah” or visible manifestation of God’s glory (Exod 24:16-17; cf. Ezek 1:4; 10:4). The cloud also anticipates the clouds that will accompany Jesus at his return (24:30; 26:64).

This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy. Listen to him. The heavenly voice reiterates the words spoken at Jesus’ baptism (3:17; cf. Ps 2:7) and adds “listen to him.” This command that the disciples attend exclusively to Jesus quashes Peter’s idea for three tents in language that alludes to Deut 18:15. Jesus and Jesus alone must be heard and obeyed. It is significant that this endorsement occurred not long after Jesus’ clear announcement of his upcoming suffering in Jerusalem and Peter’s negative response to it (16:21-22). The disciples were still likely perplexed at the notion of a suffering Messiah, and they needed this renewed divine endorsement of Jesus.

17:6-7 The disciples were terrified. Peter’s enthusiasm at being present for this occasion must have rapidly changed to terror when the voice rang out from the cloud (Deut 4:33).

Then Jesus came over and touched them. He and the other disciples fell on their faces in fear and did not get up until Jesus touched them and told them to do so (cf. 8:25-26; 14:26-27; cf. Dan 8:17; 10:8-10; Rev 1:17).

17:8 they saw only Jesus. When the disciples got up and looked around, Moses and Elijah had vanished and only Jesus was with them. This underlines the word from heaven that Jesus alone is to be heard and obeyed. As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem and the suffering he would endure there, the disciples must not lose their focus on him.

17:9 don’t tell anyone what you have seen until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead. This is the last time in Matthew that Jesus enjoins silence concerning miraculous events (cf. 16:20 for the most recent time). This and other commands for silence aimed to avoid “superficial political messianism” (Carson 1984:388), which would have further exacerbated the enmity of the religious leaders. After Jesus had been vindicated by his resurrection, the true nature of his messianic ministry would become clearer, and the story of his miracles could be told in a proper context.

17:10 Elijah must return before the Messiah comes. Jesus had already spoken of the complex relationship of John the Baptist to Elijah in Matt 11:10-14, but the disciples’ question shows that they still did not understand how the coming of Elijah related to the Messiah’s death and resurrection. Evidently the appearance of Elijah with Jesus reminded them of Mal 4:4-5, which predicted the coming of Elijah as a forerunner of the Messiah and the day of the Lord. Since Elijah had indeed appeared, they might have wondered what hindered the coming of the day of the Lord and the restoration spoken by Malachi, and why Jesus must suffer in Jerusalem.

17:11-13 Elijah has already come, but he wasn’t recognized. Jesus replied in effect that the disciples should focus on John the Baptist’s Elijah-like ministry (not the recent appearance of Elijah at the transfiguration). If they did so, they would understand that John’s death foreshadowed the death of Jesus.

COMMENTARY [Text]

The description of the transfiguration proper is brief—just the first three verses of Matthew 17. But the incident becomes the backdrop for two significant incidents for the disciples. In the first, Peter’s hasty response to the glory of the Lord is corrected by the same heavenly voice heard at Jesus’ baptism (17:4-8; cf. 3:17). In the second, Jesus once again forbids the disciples to make him known (cf. 16:20), which leads to their question about the future coming of Elijah (17:9-13). Jesus answers their question cryptically in terms of a past coming of “Elijah,” and when he compares his own future suffering to what has happened to this “Elijah,” the disciples finally grasp that he is speaking of John the Baptist. Thus, the passage contains the transfiguration proper (17:1-3), a lesson on the preeminence of Jesus (17:4-8), and a lesson on the continuity of John the Baptist with Elijah of old and with Jesus himself (17:9-13).

This passage presents two lessons, one relating to the disciples’ deepest spiritual needs and one relating to a perplexing intellectual question. The first lesson concerns Jesus’ preeminence in the disciples’ lives. Confronted with the amazing scene of Moses and Elijah speaking with a gloriously transformed Jesus, Peter proposed the construction of temporary shelters for all three of them. We will never know exactly what Peter had in mind for these three shelters, since his proposal was interrupted by the voice from heaven. But we can be sure that Peter was on the wrong track, since his proposal did not reflect the sole sufficiency of Jesus for his disciples. Setting up three tents for Moses, Elijah, and Jesus would have had two erroneous effects: it would have belittled Jesus with faint praise, and arrogated Moses and Elijah to a status that belongs only to Jesus. As great as Moses and Elijah were, each was only God’s servant, not his Son (3:17). Moses was the prototypical prophet, but he spoke of Jesus as the definitive eschatological prophet whose words must be heeded (Deut 18:15-19). Elijah’s ministry courageously stood for the law of Moses, but Jesus as the definitive teacher of that law brings it to its ultimate goal (5:17-19). Therefore, however well-meaning Peter’s proposal was, it suggested the unthinkable notion that Moses and Elijah were on the same level as Jesus. This would not do, for Jesus alone is the beloved Son who pleases the Father, and Jesus alone must be heard and obeyed.

The second lesson has to do with the disciples’ understanding of the mysteries of biblical prophecy. In the plan of God, the ministries of Elijah, John, and Jesus are intricately interwoven. In his own right, John was not Elijah but came to minister in the spirit of Elijah (Luke 1:17; John 1:21). John’s ministry as the forerunner of Jesus was in line with that spoken of by Isaiah concerning the one who would prepare the Lord’s way (3:3; Isa 40:3).

According to Matthew 17:13, it seems that the disciples did understand that John’s ministry was a fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecy (Mal 4:4-5) and that John’s suffering and death anticipated what was about to happen to Jesus. Matthew 17:11 remains perplexing, however, since it seems to leave the future coming of Elijah as an open question. Perhaps Revelation 11:3-6, another perplexing text, has something to do with this.

The Transfiguration and Theology. The transfiguration of Jesus is an amazing event but not totally unexpected for Matthew’s readers. After all, Jesus had a miraculous birth, and his ministry began with the ringing endorsement of the heavenly Father (3:17). He had done mighty works of compassion and had definitively taught the Torah with nothing less than heavenly authority (7:29). He had even demonstrated supernatural control of natural processes by calming storms and feeding thousands of people with a few loaves of bread. He had promised a glorious return, a judgment of all people, and a righteous Kingdom on the earth. After his resurrection, he would receive total authority in heaven and on earth, and his presence would accompany his disciples in their communication of his Kingdom message to all the nations until the end of the present age before his return (28:18-20).

Thus, from the standpoint of Matthew as a whole, Jesus’ glorious transfiguration is in keeping with his status as the Son of God, his fulfillment of Old Testament patterns and predictions, and his promise of a future Kingdom. The transfiguration is an integral part of Matthew’s high Christology and his apocalyptic eschatology. It authenticates both Jesus’ divine identity and God’s plan to invade this world and rule it forever. By the transfiguration, the disciples were given a glimpse of who Jesus is and what he will one day bring to this world (see 2 Pet 1:16-18). Moses and Elijah are worthy figures, but they are only supporting actors in the redemptive drama the disciples witness. As the scene ends, Moses and Elijah have exited, and only Jesus remains in the center of the stage. The “listen to him” of the transfiguration becomes the “teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you” of the Great Commission.

In light of other New Testament texts, the transfiguration should probably be viewed not as the illumination of the man Jesus with an extrinsic glory but as the momentary uncovering of the Son of God’s own intrinsic glory, which has been temporarily veiled and will be reassumed at the resurrection and ascension (John 17:4-5, 24; Phil 2:5-11; Col 1:16-19; Heb 1:1-4). Orthodox systematic theologians are challenged by the transfiguration to attempt an explanation of what must be ultimately inexplicable to mere humans. God alone knows how the eternal Son of God came to earth as a genuinely human child, and how the divine and human natures of Jesus were implicated in his transfiguration.