What the Transfiguration Means and Why We Don't Take Jesus Seriously Enough -- a study of Matthew 17:1-13
- mww
- 3 hours ago
- 15 min read
Jesus is God.
Bible Study Ideas and Commentary for Matthew 17:1-13
Whatever Dallas Jenkins thinks, the Transfiguration is integral to the narrative about Jesus. Just as God the Father validated Jesus and His ministry at His baptism, here He again validates Jesus to the flagging disciples who have real doubts about what Jesus is about to do and suffer. But the appearance of Moses and Elijah put Jesus' story into clear focus.
This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased. Listen to him! (17:5)
When We Studied This in 2016
This was another post I still find very useful --
Discussion ideas in that post I'm currently jealous of:
mountaintop experiences
meeting your heroes
"more than meets the eye"
Other topics you will find useful:
why it matters that Jesus is fully God,
differences in the Gospel accounts,
Jesus was fully human, too.
It's a post worth your time.
Getting Started: Things to Think About
That "mountaintop experiences" still seems ripe for the picking.
"Why Do You Trust Jesus?"
If I had to suggest a different idea than above, it would be this. The disciples were smacked in the face with irrefutable evidence that Jesus was very God. (And we haven't gotten to the resurrection and Thomas yet . . .) What about you? Why are you willing to follow Jesus as the Son of God and "take up your cross" as we read last week?
The answer to that question could be very helpful for when you share the gospel with a non-Christian.
Imagine the Transfiguration
Below, I link to a site where an art historian explains the development of this event in art. It's interesting. But let's set that aside -- you've almost certainly read this passage more than once; what do you imagine it looked like?
I'll just tell you right now that asking an AI to help you with that won't accomplish very much. Every description I gave, the AI came back with an illustration that looked suspiciously like the artwork linked in that historian's post.
In other words, I don't think the AI can think about this without including artwork humans have already created over the years. And maybe you can't either! It sounds like we need to acknowledge how art influences our "imagination" . . .
This Week's Big Idea: The Transfiguration
I never cease to be amazed by how influential art is, especially on Bible stories. We see a piece of art, and it sneaks into our heads until we convince ourselves that that's what the event must have looked like. (Else why would so many of us believe that Jesus looked like a northern European?)
If you want an interesting survey of the development of this event in art, I've got just the guy for you:
(FYI, because it confused me, Raphael combined the Transfiguration with the next event in Matthew -- the demon-possessed boy.) (And no, I don't know why He's floating.)
If you want a more robust theological study, I might suggest some other sources.
That would not include "The Chosen"! Dallas Jenkins famously (controversially) did not attempt to include the Transfiguration in his series. Part of his reasoning seems to be that he feared any attempt to put the event on film would just turn out goofy (kinda like those pieces of art, eh?). But the person who put together this video also accused Jenkins of misunderstanding or minimizing the importance of the Transfiguration to the story of Jesus:
If the video is right, then that's a black eye for Jenkins. The Transfiguration is vital to the story of Jesus.
Here are a few basic sources for you about the Transfiguration:
Transfiguration of Jesus - Bible Meaning and Definition | Bible Study Tools
The Transfiguration | Modern Reformation
"For a brief moment, the flesh of the Son of God, in which he came to tabernacle among us (John 1:14), was insufficient to stop the manifestation of the eternal glory that is his by virtue of the fact that he is God."
What the Transfiguration Teaches Us About Jesus: 3 Important Truths
Note that I'm not listing the "three important truths", but the author pointed out something I'd not noticed before. Jesus takes Peter, James, and John aside on three occasions in Matthew:
In the home of Jairus, Jesus showed himself as the conqueror of death.
On the mount of transfiguration, he was seen glorified in death.
In the garden, he surrendered to the Father’s will unto death.
Here's a paragraph from the Holman Bible Dictionary:
A mountain in the Bible is often a place of revelation. Moses and Elijah represented the law and the prophets respectively, which testify to but must give way to Jesus. Moses and Elijah themselves were heralds of the Messiah (Deut 18:15, Mal 4:5-6). The three booths suggest the Fest of Tabernacles which symbolizes a new situation, a new age. Clouds represent divine presence. The close connection of the transfiguration with the confession and passion prediction is significant. The Messiah must suffer, but glorification and enthronement, not suffering, are His ultimate fate. These involve resurrection, ascension, and return in glory. The disciples needed the reassurance of the transfiguration as they contemplated Jesus' death and their future sufferings.
What Is the Transfiguration and Why Do We Care? (Also -- Where We Are in Matthew's Gospel)
Matthew's arrangement of his Gospel helps us understand what this event represented and why he included it (didn't impress Dallas Jenkins, though).
In the section of "Rising Tensions" (chapters 14-18) --
Peter's confession of the Christ (16:13-20)
The first prediction of Jesus' death (16:21-23) (and Peter's rebuke)
The way of discipleship (16:24-28) (and "will not taste death")
The Transfiguration (17:1-13)
The demon-possessed boy (17:14-20)
The second prediction of Jesus' death (17:22-23)
Just from that arrangement, we can infer that the Transfiguration
validated Peter's confession of Jesus as the Son of God,
squashed any further impulse to disagree with Jesus,
gave comfort for the disturbing news of Jesus' impending death, and
fulfilled Jesus' prophecy of "the Son of Man coming in His kingdom".
That actually tells us a lot. Even if we're not exactly sure what happened, we can at least see why it happened.
As for the what, I like the quote from the Modern Reformation author -- that in that moment on that mountain, Jesus' flesh was unable to contain His deity; it just burst out from Him.
As for the why, it's simpler. We will cover this in more detail in the commentary below. Remember from last week's passage that Peter had just attempted to contradict Jesus, but here we hear the voice of God telling Peter, James and John to listen to Jesus. That voice, combined with the visual evidence of Jesus' glory, cemented for those disciples that Jesus was indeed somehow God. Their allegiance and faith should be secure (we'll see how that goes). And as for the upsetting prophecy of Jesus' death? What could death do to God?
I'll also discuss the possibility that Jesus Himself needed some comfort and reassurance that He was on the right path, and Moses and Elijah gave that to Him.
For the next section, remember that the disciples had been in Caesarea Philippi (16:13), and the next location stamp is Capernaum (17:24).
Where Is the "Mount of Transfiguration"?
Your clue is that we call it "the Mount of Transfiguration" because no one knows which it is. The two most common candidates are Mount Tabor and Mount Hermon --
A third candidate is Mount Miron (Meron), which is unlabeled but would be between Kadesh and Hazor on that map. This gallery is ordered Tabor, Hermon, Miron.
Pros and Cons of each:
Mount Tabor -- the traditional site. Not very high (less than 2,000ft). Out of the way for a walk from Caesarea Philippi to Capernaum. Had a Roman fortress at its summit.
Mount Hermon -- the trendy pick. The tallest mountain in the region and very close to Caesarea Philippi -- but so tall that it would have been frigid at its summit. Also, not in Jewish territory, so they would have been unlikely to encounter Jews at its base.
Mount Miron (Meron) -- the hipster pick. The tallest mountain in Israel proper and on a path from Caesarea Philippi to Capernaum. But no early source suggests it.
I still go with Mount Hermon, but truly, it doesn't matter which mountain it is.
Part 1: The Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-3)
After six days Jesus took Peter, James, and his brother John and led them up on a high mountain by themselves. 2 He was transfigured in front of them, and his face shone like the sun; his clothes became as white as the light. 3 Suddenly, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with him.
Some people suggest that "six days" is sufficient for Jesus to get to Mount Tabor. And that could be true! But I think the bigger point is that Matthew directly connects this event with the end of chapter 16:
28 Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.
Peter, James, and John are the "inner circle". I really like the observation from the "3 Important Truths" article linked above -- Jesus calls Peter, James and John apart on three occasions:
the raising of Jairus's daughter from the dead,
here at the Transfiguration,
in the Garden of Gethsemane.
Those are very unique events. That author highlighted their connection with death and pointed out Jesus' power of life over death. I think that's meaningful and can't argue with it. I might emphasize the place of the disciples in those events, though. Their presence changed nothing about the event. So, what was Jesus teaching them by allowing them to accompany Him?
Jairus's daughter: Jesus has the power to raise the dead.
Transfiguration: Jesus is God incarnate.
Gethsemane: the disciples are still weak.
In other words, these events are also about the faith the disciples should have in Jesus. Why do you think Jesus chose these three events?
The word for "transfigured" is the Greek word metamorphosis -- it suggests an actual change in nature. (I.e., He had appeared to be human, but if fact He was something more.) "Before them" is an important comment -- it suggests that the three disciples were the true beneficiaries of this experience. (Jesus already knew He was God. Although, some have suggested that this "reminder" was timed to give Him the strength to stay the course.)
It's been well-pointed out that Moses also went up a mountain to meet with God, and he also "shone":
Ex 34:29 As Moses descended from Mount Sinai—with the two tablets of the testimony in his hands as he descended the mountain—he did not realize that the skin of his face shone as a result of his speaking with the Lord
What's the difference between what happened to Moses and to Jesus? That's right -- Moses reflected God's glory; whatever happened to Jesus came from inside of Him.
White supremacists rather stupidly associate this "shining white" with skin color. Dumb as rocks. Visually speaking, here's an AI summary: "While yellow-green is most luminous to us, a 'pure white' light, which contains all wavelengths at once, is often perceived as the most 'blinding' or intense type of light." (I love the "us".) Catch that? "White" is the combination of every wavelength of visible light, and therefore its intensity can be maximized. "Turn up the brightness" enough, and you'll eventually get to "pure white". (Our sun is extremely yellow, but if you look at it during the day, you'll just see white. And then go blind.)
I mentioned Moses and his mountaintop experience on Sinai; but also appearing was Elijah. Some scholars emphasize Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel. But I think we're supposed to think of Elijah hiding in a cave on Mount Sinai (Horeb).
Yes, Moses "represents" the Law and Elijah "represents" the Prophets, but I think we're also supposed to recognize them as two men who had unique encounters with God on a mountaintop. And more to it, both men were directly connected with the Messiah -- Deut 18:18 and Mal 4:5-6.
But Luke gives us a different clue as to why they were there:
9:30 Suddenly, two men were talking with him—Moses and Elijah. 31 They appeared in glory and were speaking of his departure, which he was about to accomplish in Jerusalem.
In other words, they were there to give encouragement to Jesus. Moses could certainly speak of the trials of putting up with God's people and dying an ignominious death alone. And Elijah? Well, he put up with so much that God took him to heaven in a chariot of fire. And the reason he met God on a mountaintop is he had given into fear and tried to hide there, so he could sympathize if Jesus had any concerns.
The three disciples didn't understand any of that, though.
Part 2: Peter the Clueless (Matthew 17:4-8)
4 Then Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it’s good for us to be here. If you want, I will set up three shelters here: one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.” 5 While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased. Listen to him!” 6 When the disciples heard this, they fell facedown and were terrified. 7 Jesus came up, touched them, and said, “Get up; don’t be afraid.” 8 When they looked up they saw no one except Jesus alone.
Peter isn't directly rebuked, but he is ignored. Mark's Gospel (Peter's mouthpiece) says that Peter didn't know what to say, so he himself thought his words were rather dumb. Note: the idea of building tabernacles or staying on the mountain was not the primary problem -- the problem was that Peter did not recognize Jesus' uniqueness. To him, Jesus was on level with Moses and Elijah (and Peter might have even thought that a compliment!); Peter just did not yet understand what it meant for Jesus to be the Son of God.
"Shelters" = "tabernacles" and almost certainly was a reference to the Feast of Tabernacles. That feast was eschatological in nature -- for 7 days, the people were to dwell in basic hand-built shelters outside of Jerusalem, commemorating the tents the people lived in during their exodus and celebrating the gift of the Promised Land. Rituals included pouring water from the Pool of Siloam and lighting giant menorahs, symbolizing God's provision in the wilderness and looking ahead to the feast with God in heaven. In other words, Peter recognized the eschatological significance of Moses and Elijah appearing on a mountain, even if he didn't realize what it had to do with Jesus.
God cut Peter off before he could make a bigger buffoon of himself. "Cloud" was of course associated with the cloud by which God led the Israelites through the wilderness and descended on Mount Sinai to give the law. But I encourage you to look up every mention of a cloud in the Old Testament --
Clouds are regularly associated with God's power and glory. The comment about the cloud being "bright" (mentioned only by Matthew) reinforces this connection here.
And just as the people of Israel were terrified by the cloud and the voice of God on Mount Sinai, so were the three disciples here. The Lifeway material says that the cloud covered Jesus, Moses, and Elijah; I don't see why it didn't cover the entire mountaintop.
What God said is (obviously) significant. It should ring a bell --
3:16 The heavens suddenly opened for him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming down on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased.”
Was God the Father using this moment to "reassure" His Son? --
At His baptism, at the beginning of His ministry, God the Father announced who Jesus was and His support of what Jesus was going to do;
here at the "turning point" -- now that the disciples also have an idea of who Jesus is and what was going to happen to Him -- God reiterated that support.
That makes sense, but note that God is speaking to the disciples. Apparently, they also need to hear this. The "Listen to Him" ties it all together.
Peter has already expressed his disagreement with Jesus' take on His own mission, and that upset Jesus very much. God the Father knew the importance of the disciples to Jesus' future (let alone their role in building the future church!); He wanted that kind of squabbling to stop. What Jesus was facing was hard enough without their opposition.
I think we can say that God was affirming Jesus, and He was also affirming Jesus to the disciples.
But of course, "listen to Him" extends a lot further than His announcement of His purpose and mission. There, with Moses in view, we are reminded that the Hebrew concept of "listen" means "obey". Everything Jesus has said comes with the same authority as God's own words to Moses on that mountain long ago.
If you think you're taking Jesus seriously enough and obeying Him fully enough, you aren't. He's not just a teacher. Or a miracle worker. Or even a savior. He is God. God in the flesh.
And yet, after all of that -- all of that overwhelming terror -- Jesus speaks gently to His disciples. The truth was too much for them, just as it is too much for us, but Jesus is kind and gracious and full of love and mercy. That's the God we serve.
Part 3: The Sign of John the Baptist (Matthew 17:9-13)
9 As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, “Don’t tell anyone about the vision until the Son of Man is raised from the dead.” 10 So the disciples asked him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” 11 “Elijah is coming and will restore everything,” he replied. 12 “But I tell you: Elijah has already come, and they didn’t recognize him. On the contrary, they did whatever they pleased to him. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that he had spoken to them about John the Baptist.
This is the last time Jesus tells the disciples to be silent about something. No one would believe or understand this event until Jesus rose from the dead.
But this gave the disciples an opportunity to ask a question. They saw Elijah on the mountain (read my other post on this passage for some interesting implications of that), and they were reminded of what Elijah was supposed to mean (they thought):
Mal 3:1 See, I am going to send my messenger, and he will clear the way before me. Then the Lord you seek will suddenly come to his temple, the Messenger of the covenant you delight in—see, he is coming,” says the Lord of Armies. 2 But who can endure the day of his coming? And who will be able to stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire and like launderer’s bleach. 3 He will be like a refiner and purifier of silver; he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver. Then they will present offerings to the Lord in righteousness. 4 And the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem will please the Lord as in days of old and years gone by.
and --
4:4 Remember the instruction of Moses my servant, the statutes and ordinances I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel. 5 Look, I am going to send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes. 6 And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers. Otherwise, I will come and strike the land with a curse.
If Elijah had come, wouldn't that suggest that the Messianic age was upon them and God was about to destroy His enemies and restore His people?
Here's where things get really somber. Elijah had come. And the Jews killed him.
And if God's people were willing to do that to God's messenger, what did they think would happen to God's Son?
The disciples understood the connection (John the Baptist was the prophesied Elijah), but they didn't understand the purpose. How could anyone restore something if they were dead?
I think this leads to a good closing discussion. You know the rest of the story. You have the rest of the New Testament which explains what happened.
Why did Jesus have to die to restore God's people? How did Jesus' death accomplish His mission?
We'll obviously talk more about this when we get to the passion narrative in Matthew's Gospel, but this is the most important thing we can know and understand in the entire Bible. We can't talk about it too much.
Closing Thoughts: What Happens Next
I showed the Raphael painting in which he put the Transfiguration at the top and the demon-possessed boy at the bottom. The Gospel writers all thought these two events were at least narratively connected.
Matthew has mentioned the disciples' failures a number of times in this section of his Gospel. It's a kind of "two steps forward one step back" pattern -- they try, they fail; they try, they doubt. The juxtaposition is profound -- while Jesus is revealing His identity as the divine Son of God on the mountain, His followers are trying and failing to drive out just one little demon in His name.
Yes, the crowd, the commotion, the confusion, the failure -- all of that is supposed to make us think of Moses coming down from the mountain to find the camp in chaos and worshiping a golden calf.
The disciples'' faith just isn't there yet. Perhaps like the Ark of the Covenant, they thought that their given authority was like a magical talisman. Show up, say the magic words, and miracles happen. But no, it's also about their faith. They don't even have the faith of a tiny mustard seed.
But when they see Jesus risen in glory, all of that will finally change.