Matthew XVII
1. And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
2. And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
3. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
The Transfiguration, like the revelation of the Church, marks a distinct epoch in Christ’s life. What is the place of the Transfiguration in the Messianic development? It would seem that from the time of our Lord asking, “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” he called particular attention to his own Person. Up to that time He worked as it were simply as a public benefactor, a great philanthropist, who lived expressly for the purpose of doing good: but the time had come for showing that He was more than was generally understood by a public benefactor, and there was a difficulty in getting men to understand what more He was. With infinite wisdom He collected public opinion through His disciples; having ascertained what “men” said, He asked the disciples their own opinion; thus, by two steps, He came forward towards a full disclosure of His Personal dignity; it was not hurried upon the disciples; the revelation was graduated; and, lest the light should be too intense for their vision, the great shadow of the Cross was thrown over it, — He must “suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.” The apprehension of the Person of Christ on the part of the disciples, was associated with a sublime moral revelation on the part of Christ. The disciples were now to be taught something of sacrifice; and in order to have a true idea of sacrifice they must have a true conception of Christ’s person. If He was only a common man He could only be “killed;” if He was more than a common man He could “be raised again the third day.” The question, then, was, “Who am I?” The answer given by inspiration of the Father was, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This character separated Him from all other men. Now, when He spoke of being “killed,” the word had an application which it could not otherwise have had. How could the Son of the living God be killed? How could the very fountain of immortality be affected by death? A spark may be quenched, but the sun can only be eclipsed, — a momentary darkening, and then the great brightness! At this point may be seen the use of a Divine revelation of the Person of Christ. Everything turned upon the quality of that Person. Hence the joy, the exultancy, of Jesus Christ when He found that the Father had told what He Himself could hardly express, — told the disciples that their Master was His own Son! Here, then, so much is gained; the Person has been revealed, the Cross has been hinted at. Meanwhile the intelligence was to proceed no further, — “Tell no man that I am Jesus the Christ; let me work for some time longer, just as I have been working; the plan must be disclosed gradually: you, as my disciples, shall hear about it first; but even you must restrain your curiosity, and do your daily work in all quietness and patience.”
The Transfiguration showed another phase of the Person of Christ. Hitherto He had dwelt secretly in the flesh, and was not physically distinguished from other men. How
o 2 little did observers know the interior life of Jesus Christ! What awful force was beating in His heart! What light was shaded by His eyes! He could not tell all, or show all; the sun is lighting more worlds than ours; what if he were to turn his concentrated splendour upon the earth? Jesus Christ was the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the most He could do was to shed a few broken rays on the weak vision of the world. On the “high mountain apart” He showed more of His glory than He had before disclosed. There are exceptional hours in human history, when men utter words which attest the grandeur of the human mind, when the countenance burns with the fire of intelligent enthusiasm, and the voice reaches a tone of purer music than is born of earth; and in those exceptional hours we see somewhat of the dignity of human nature. Multiply this by infinitude, and we shall know something of what the disciples saw when Christ’s “face did shine as the sun, and His raiment was white as the light.” The Transfiguration completed the revelation of the Person of Christ, — the Father had revealed Him to the mind, now the Father reveals Him to the sight.
What was the meaning of Moses and Elias talking to Christ? Moses represented the law; Elias represented the prophets; Christ was the fulfilment of both. Many incidental points of importance might be inferred from this appearance of Moses and Elias: it shows — 1. That departed men are still living; 2. That death does not destroy the individuality of men; 3. That the greatest of departed men are interested in the work of Christ; 4. That immediate personal communication between departed spirits and men yet in the flesh is possible.
4. Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
Peter has apparently recovered himself from the effects of the error recorded in ch. xvi. 22; yet his proposition, though well intended, was unheeded. Soon, therefore, do we come upon instances of fallibility, which show that the moment a man loses his inspiration he loses his authority. It is characteristic of partially developed natures to wish to build and rest on the very first appearance of anything like comfort or peace. Peter had seen no such sight before; weary of the world, he desired a resting-place; excited by religious impulse, he wished to build three tabernacles. A very fallible Peter, truly! One day, close to God; another, rebuked as the medium of the devil! There is something beautiful, too, in Peter addressing Jesus particularly; Moses was there; Elias was there; great names to every Jew! Yet Peter overlooked all the history and tradition associated with their illustrious names, and addressed Jesus as the Lord. Was there anything in this prefigurative of the perfect homage which the Church, throughout all time, should render to the Son of the living God? The point need not be pressed; yet, as a matter of fact, Moses and Elias must decrease, while of the increase of Christ’s government there shall be no end.
5. While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
Up to this time little has been said of the Miraculous Conception of Jesus Christ; now God declares Himself, in the hearing of Moses the lawgiver, Elias the prophet, and the disciples who formed the nucleus of the Church, Jesus Christ’s Father. He had declared this to the general multitude at the baptism; now He declares it on a “high mountain apart,” and adds, “hear ye him.” The command means that Jesus Christ had something particular to say; had, in fact, a new revelation to make, the making of which would mark an epoch in His ministry. The words, “Hear ye him,” are very emphatic: i. Christ’s authority Divine; 2. Christ’s authority undivided; 3. Men are to be “heard,” only so far as they repeat Christ’s words.
6. And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.
7. And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid.
8. And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only.
There are experiences which cast men down with a view to their being lifted to a higher and firmer elevation than they have yet attained. When the disciples “fell on their face, and were sore afraid,” they little understood how God was conducting them to a fuller knowledge of the purposes which had been kept secret from the foundation of the world. Review life, and say how much we owe to having been cast down and sore afraid? We truly need to be struck with the higher light, and thrust down by the higher power, before we can be much or do much in life. The Saul who is blinded for three days may become a Paul. Looked at homiletically, this portion of the narrative suggests: — 1. The mercifulness displayed in a. graduated revelation; 2. Our dependence upon Christ through all the crises of our spiritual development (ver. 7); 3. The glorious issue of some of the most mysterious circumstances of life, — “they saw no man, save Jesus only.”
9. And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Teli the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.
i. Christ’s life not to be told in fragments; 2. The parts of Christ’s life are mutually explanatory; 3. The resurrection of Christ, the great reconciling and all-explaining fact in His ministry. His profoundest words would have had no meaning had He not known that He would rise again from the dead.
10. And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11. And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
The disciples now begin to put deeper questions than they had ever put; now they want explanations of prophecies and criticisms upon current theology; and from Christ’s method of meeting their inquiries, we may learn: — 1. That prophecies may be fulfilling while men are unaware of the fact; 2. Consequently, that men may be proceeding on miscalculations as to time; 3. That God is responsible for the facts, not for the interpretations of prophecy; 4. That all prophets may expect maltreatment at the hands of dogmatic or technical interpreters (ver. 12). All these considerations impart a profound solemnity to life!
The command — “tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen from the dead” — which is given again and again in various forms, proceeds upon a principle, with whose operation society is well acquainted; that principle is that no man can be fully understood or appreciated while he is living. Many circumstances combine to conceal his real stature. Specially are the “visions” of living men apt to be misconstrued and misapplied; their common daily history may be lived in the presence of the world, but if they are favoured with visions and dreams, with inspirations and prophetic foresights, let this higher life be kept a secret until death has supplied the chief condition of a just judgment. This hiding of the higher life will be in proportion to its compass and elevation. The young Christian talks more of his experience than the old Christian, just as a rill may make more noise than a river. An ordinary mother talks much of her child; but the mother of Christ “kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart.”
14. And when they were come to the multitude, there came to him a certain man, kneeling down to him, and saying,
15. Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.
If the “tabernacles” had been built according to Peter’s suggestion, what would have become of those who were hoping in Christ for help? Seasons of rapture should prepare for seasons of service. Compare the scene on the top of the mountain with the scene at its base; this comparison will show: — 1. The great contrasts of human life;
2. The condition of society in the absence of Christ; 3. The highest function of man — to save (physically, mentally, spiritually, men may do much to save one another); 4. The practical aspect of the sublimest realisations of life, — what a realisation Christ had, yet how practical was the after-work! It is better to heal a man than to dwell in a tabernacle on the high mountain.
16. And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him. This verse, by a natural accommodation, shows: — 1. That
the disciples are powerless without Christ. 2. That the powerlessness of the disciples is likely to bring discredit upon Christ.
3. That the powerlessness of the disciples is entirely their own fault, because they need never to be without Christ.
17. Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him hither to me.
18. And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour.
19. Then came the disciples to Jesus apart, and said, Why could not we cast him out?
20. And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.
21. Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
The last point is proved by these words, which, taken by themselves, show: — I. That the inefficiency of the Church is a source of grief to Jesus Church. 2. That what is wanting on the part of the disciples is made up by the power and grace of the Master. 3. That different diseases require different treatment, — “this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.” Illustration may be found in common life; among diseases of the soul may be set down — Pride, Lust, Covetousness, Self-confidence, &c, the cure of which may require variations of treatment. 4. However many and subtle the variations, Christ’s power is available for all.
On the expression, “This kind goeth not out,” &c, Lange remarks: “It were a mistake to regard this demoniacal possession as different from others in kind, and not merely in degree, and hence as constituting a peculiar kind, for which specific prayer and fasting were required. The Lord rather conveyed to His disciples that they had not preserved or cultivated the state of mind and heart necessary for the occasion, that they were not sufficiently prepared and collected to cast out so malignant a demon.... The demons of such complete melancholy could only be overcome by most earnest prayer and entire renunciation of the world.” Stier says: “Our Lord says two things in the But: first, that He had meant the casting out of devils by the similitude of removing mountains; and, secondly, that to control spirits, to break the evil will, the wicked power in the kingdom of sin, and of rebellion against the Almighty, who tolerates it according to the law of freedom, and even only thus removes it, is, indeed, another and greater thing than the simple working of miracles on helpless nature.” Olshausen says: “The immediate connection of the words, with the reproof administered to the apostles, leads obviously to this meaning — ’ this obstinate enemy was not to be overcome in the same way that many others are. It was needful for you, with prayer and fasting, earnestly to strive after more of the power of faith, and then might you have been victorious.’” Speaking of the same verse (21st), Adam Clarke says: “I strongly suspect it to be an interpolation; but, if it be, it is very ancient, as Origen, Chrysostom, and others of the primitive Fathers, acknowledge it.”
22. And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:
23. And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.
What had Jesus Christ done that He should be condemned to death? Could He not interpose the power with which He had worked His miracles, and so save Himself from such a betrayal as that spoken of? The understanding of the idea depends upon a proper criticism of the word irapaZihoaOcu; instead of being rendered “shall be betrayed,” the expression should be, “is about to be delivered,” the word “delivered” having a wider meaning than the word “betrayed,” — embracing the principal idea of the latter, but extending further. The word 7rapaBlBa)fj,c is variously rendered in the New Testament; for example, John was {irapeBodri) cast into prison (Matt. iv. 12); and in Mark iv. 29, it is rendered “brought forth” (wapahw); in Acts xv. 26, we have irapaBeScoKoat rendered “have hazarded;” and, in 1 Peter ii. 23, the word is translated “committed.” It is important to note the various senses in which the word is used, so as to escape the idea that Jesus Christ was simply overpowered by superior force, and so made a victim or a martyr. The betrayal of our Lord was not a merely human deed; was not Jesus Christ mightier than
Judas Iscariot? He offered, or gave, or delivered himself; no man took His life from Him; He surrendered it, not as a martyr, but as a sacrifice.
About this announcement there are two things remarkable: — 1. Christ’s care in preparing His disciples for the Cross. 2. The confidence with which Christ affirms His own resurrection, — “the third day he shall be raised again.” To have spoken of the betrayal alone, would have been to have put before His disciples a fragmentary truth; over the darkness of death, Christ sheds the light of resurrection. The disciples saw the fragment, they could not see the whole; hence they were eXvirrjO^arav a(f>68pa, “grieved exceedingly.” The revelation of Christ’s purposes can occasion grief only when it is incompletely apprehended; sorrow attaches to some of the intermediate points, but never to the issue: “the Lamb slain” is a part of the process; the Lamb slain, but seated in the midst of the throne, is the sublime consummation.
The change of subject is startling; we pass from the great sacrifice for sin to the payment of tribute money: —
24. And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute-money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
25. He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
26. Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
27. Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.
On this passage Lange says: “De Wette regards the passage as involving some difficulties, since Jesus had disowned every outward and earthly claim in His character as Messiah, and had become subject to the law. Accordingly, this critic suggests that Jesus had only intended to prove the rashness of Peter’s promise, and to suggest the thought to him (as he was still entangled with Jewish legalism) that, in point of law, the demand made upon him was not valid. On the other hand, Olshausen maintains that Jesus asserted His exaltation above the temple ritual (as in chap. xii. 8). Meyer reminds us that although, as Messiah, Jesus was above the law, in His infinite condescension He submitted to its demands. This explanation is, so far, more satisfactory. But commentators seem to forget that the breach between the ancient theocracy and the eKKkrjaia had already begun in Judaea and Galilee, and that Jesus had entered on His path of sufferings. It was inconsistent to reject, and virtually (though perhaps not formally) to excommunicate, Jesus, and yet, at the same time, to demand from Him the templetribute. And, in this sense, the apostles themselves were included among the viol (in the plural). They were to share in the suffering and in the excommunication of their Master.”
The circumstance may be paraphrased thus: We are now called upon to pay tribute, not to the Roman government, but in support of the temple. But I am the Lord of the temple, and consequently am free from its law of offerings and tributes and taxes; and my disciples, by reason of their vital union with myself, are also free. We might, therefore, resist all demands, and thus bring into stronger contrast than ever the old temple and the new church; but let us give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God; even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Go, therefore, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.
The last expression, viz., “for me and thee,” is remarkable; why Peter alone? Why were not the other disciples included? “All the disciples were young, and had a long earthly course before them. Zebedee and Salome, the parents of James and John, were still living. This must be well kept in view in study of the Gospel history.... Peter had a family, the other disciples formed that of Jesus. For this reason they that received tribute-money asked, ‘Doth not your,’ not ‘Doth not thy, Master,’ &c. It may be that the other disciples had not passed their twentieth year, and were not yet liable to the rate.” {Critical English Testament, vol i.) “Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the Lord” (Ex. xxx. 15).
Viewed homiletically, the incident suggests the following points: — 1. Christians may do some things which are expedient, though not demanded by law. 2. In doing things which are expedient, Christians should be governed by a desire not to offend. 3. In being anxious to avoid offence, Christians should not be unfaithful to God and conscience. 4. In avoiding unfaithfulness to God, Christians will not create a conscience that is not founded on reason. Unreasoning conscientiousness leads to a most unhealthy morality — a morality which expresses itself in bigotry and intolerance. A modern homilist suggests, among many others, the following general points: — 1. That it is highly politic for the Christian man to fall in, as much as possible, with the institutions of his country. 2. That it may be sometimes necessary to waive a personal privilege, in order to avoid collision with existing institutions. 3. That Christ’s disciples can afford to be generous in their concessions to public sentiment {The Genius of the Gospel,. pp. 452-4). No doubt this passage may, by a fallacious interpretation, be much abused. The desire of avoiding offence is very liable to misapplication. In referring to Christ’s case it should be remembered: — 1. That the tribute was required for the temple. 2. That the temple was a Divine institution, and 3. That the Divine institution of the temple had not then been superseded by the Christian Church. Christ’s act was the last expression of veneration for an institution which was about to pass away; that institution having been instituted by God Himself. No argument can be legitimately drawn from this circumstance in favour of extortions on behalf of Pagan or politico-religious institutions.
GENERAL NOTE ON THE TRANSFIGURATION.
In the course of this mysterious incident we often feel quite at a loss to interpret its purpose, but when we take Christ’s own standard of interpretation, viz., the Resurrection, there is less difficulty in seeing its profounder significations. Read in the light of the Resurrection, then, we have the following points: — I. The human body is capable of the most glorious transfiguration. It is promised that Christ shall change our vile or common body, &c. 2. Not until after the Resurrection was the Church entirely liberated from the ancient dispensations. As with Christ, so with men; the law has dominion over us until we are crucified; the only way into life is through death. 3. What was told to a few before the Resurrection, was to be preached to every creature after the Resurrection. We have nothing now to wait for. The disciples had to keep silence for a time; we may teach all nations. We may reverse the Saviour’s words, and say, — Tell the vision to every man, for the Son of man is risen from the dead!