Wherefore I will be careful to put you always in mind of these things, although knowing [them] and established in the present truth.
Peter writes this letter knowing his death is near. His work is not to unveil something new but to keep old truth alive in his readers' memory — "the truth that you have," which older translations call "the present truth."
The verse opens with "therefore," pointing back to what Peter has already taught. One writer sees a plain duty in it, binding on anyone who serves the Lord.
He makes no claim to originality, or to teaching new things. But saints needed reminding of these things. If he did not do it, this would be negligence — a serious thing for every servant of the Lord to take to heart. Saints may know such things, and may even be established in the present truth. Still, they constantly need reminding of things of eternal value.
They already know these things, and still Peter repeats them. The problem is not ignorance.
But in practice believers face influences that damage them. These influences distract the spirit and attract the flesh. So believers are like watches that need winding up again and again. It is not enough to know the present truth and to be established in it. That is why the apostle is always ready to put them in mind of these things.
One writer suggests a scene from the Gospels may lie behind this concern.
The apostle clearly knows how quickly we forget the great practical truths of Christianity. Three times in these four verses he speaks of putting the saints in remembrance. Possibly he is thinking of what happened on the resurrection day. The angel said to the disciples, "Remember how he told you." Then we read, "And they remembered his words." The Lord Himself had spoken of these great events, yet they had forgotten what He said.
Peter says his readers are established in this truth. One writer explains the phrase by comparing two ages of light.
Another writer traces a pattern through Scripture. In every age faith took hold of what God was saying then.
Cain and Abel were each tested by the truth of sacrifice, urgent in their day, which faith valued and unbelief despised. Enoch and Noah both accepted the older truth. But God tested each of them by what He revealed in their own day, and they stayed faithful to it... The Christian begins with redemption by the blood of the One who gives us eternal life. In every case faith shows its power by taking hold of "the present truth." It still values everything made known before, because all of it was God's doing and God's communicating.
Knowing the truth and being established in it are not the same thing.
How quickly we forget "the present truth." The devil cares little how much truth we know, so long as he can keep us from being established in "the present truth." That truth is our present standing before God. It is everything given to us that pertains to life and godliness, together with the kingdom glories to which this life leads.
Peter knew his death was near, so he put this in writing. One writer sees God providing here for readers Peter would never meet.
He would take pains, so that after his departure they could call these things to mind at any time. He was providing for them in this way in this letter, and by God's goodness providing for our needs at the same time. How wonderful is the mercy that has given us a plain word which stays within our reach at all times — not tradition, which is uncertain and open to corruption.
- Remember — Peter offers nothing new. He repeats what his readers already know, and calls it negligence to do less.
- Because we forget — even people who heard the Lord speak forgot His words. We are like watches that need winding.
- The present truth — the full light of Christianity, after the dim and fitful gleams of earlier ages. Nothing about God is now held back.
- Established, not just informed — the enemy shrugs at how much truth we know, so long as we are not settled in it.
- Written, so it lasts — Peter's provision for life after his death is a plain word, always within reach, instead of tradition that can be corrupted.
But I account it right, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting [you] in remembrance,
Peter's readers already know the truth and stand firm in it. Yet while he is still alive, he says it is right to keep reminding them — so why does settled knowledge need stirring, and why does he speak of his body as a tent?
Peter does not repeat himself because his readers are ignorant. He repeats because what we know does not stay fresh on its own.
But in practice believers meet influences that damage them, distract the spirit and attract the flesh. So they are like watches that need winding up again and again. It is not enough to know and to be established in the present truth.
For Peter, reminding is a duty. To skip it would be a fault in him.
He makes no claim to originality, or to teaching new things. But the saints needed reminding of these things. If he did not do it, that would be negligence — a serious thing for every servant of the Lord to take to heart. They may know such things. They may even be established in the present truth. Still they constantly need reminding of what has eternal value. The phrase "present truth" surely means what God has revealed in this age of His grace, in contrast to what He revealed before.
Peter's aim is to stir them up. That points to a ministry aimed at the heart and conscience, not at adding facts.
Take note of this! We may listen to talks or read articles that contain no truth new to us. Let us not despise them for that. The main work of a teacher may be to teach the truth of Christianity. That truth is old in itself, but it is mostly new to those he teaches. The main work of a pastor or shepherd is to reach the hearts and consciences of believers. He applies to them the things they have been taught. He stirs them up and keeps them alert and watchful. Do not most of us need the second ministry more than the first? Our more urgent need is probably to practise what we already know, rather than to add to what we know.
Why press truth they already hold? The answer has to do with opposition.
Every Christian is bound to believe that the great enemy sets himself most against whatever God has in hand now. Anyone who believes that can easily see how important this care for the saints is. It was always so… In every case the power of faith shows itself by taking special hold of "the present truth." It still values everything made known before, because it was all God's doing and God's communicating.
Some translations read "tabernacle" here — a tent, pitched for a journey and taken down at its end.
Nor did Peter grow weary of this work of reminding the saints of the truth. He thought it entirely fitting as long as he lived on earth. And life on earth, at its longest, is very brief for any of us. His natural body was only a tabernacle, a temporary tent, which he would shortly put off, according to the Lord's word in John 21:18-19.
Writers note that the same picture shapes how Scripture speaks of dying at all:
As we have seen, the apostle Peter calls death the "putting off of his tabernacle" (2 Peter 1:14). Paul's language is similar, and if comment is needed, it may supply it: "if the earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved" (2 Cor. 5:1). [ESV: "if the tent that is our earthly home is destroyed"]
Knowing his time was short did not make Peter passive. It made him write — so the reminding would outlast him.
So, as long as he was in the tent of the body, he would seek to do this. He had all the more reason: the Lord Himself had told him he would soon put off his tent… He would therefore be diligent, so that after his departure they could call these things to mind at any time. In this letter he was providing for them. Through God's goodness, he was providing for our needs at the same time. How wonderful is the mercy that has given us something better than tradition, with its uncertainty and its openness to corruption — a plain word that stays within our reach at all times.
That leaves a question for every reader.
We may sometimes think it is not worth going over the same things again and again. Not so Peter. And if our hearts are only put in remembrance of these things, thank God. It will be blessed fruit to our account in the days to come. Do we not need stirring up? We do. Satan does his utmost to hinder our souls.
- Tent — Peter's body is only a temporary tent. The housing is short-term, so the work inside it is urgent.
- Winding — believers are like watches that need regular winding. Knowing the truth is not enough on its own.
- Stirring — the aim is stirred hearts, not new facts. Practising what we know is the more urgent need.
- Guarding — the enemy attacks what God has in hand now. So faith grips the present truth, and still values all that came before.
- Writing — the tent comes down, so Peter wrote. His reminder outlives him and reaches us as a plain word, always within reach.
knowing that the putting off of my tabernacle is speedily [to take place], as also our Lord Jesus Christ has manifested to me;
Peter writes as a man with a date in view. He knows his time on earth is almost over, and he says so calmly, because the Lord Jesus Himself had told him.
Peter kept reminding believers of the truth, and he had a reason to keep at it. His body was only a tent — a temporary shelter he would soon put off.
Nor did Peter grow weary of this ministry of reminding the saints of the truth. He thought it entirely fitting to do so as long as he lived on earth, which at the longest is very brief for any of us. His natural body was only a tabernacle, a temporary tent, which he would shortly put off, according to the Lord's word in John 21:18-19.
Paul uses the same picture, which shows this is not a private turn of phrase but a shared way of speaking about death.
As we have seen, the apostle Peter calls death the "putting off of his tabernacle" (2 Peter 1:14). Paul's language is similar, and if comment is needed, it can supply it: "if the earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved" (2 Cor. 5:1).
(Older translations render 2 Corinthians 5:1 as above; the ESV reads, "if the tent that is our earthly home is destroyed.")
Peter's certainty rests on a promise the Lord made him. The way he would die mattered as much as the fact that he would die.
But the Lord promises Peter that when he is old he will stretch out his hands, and another will tie his belt and carry him where he does not wish to go. So Peter could no longer boast of his own strength or courage. As a helpless old man he would receive a remarkable privilege from God. He would not only die for Christ's sake, which in younger days he had tried to face and failed at shamefully. He would die the very death the Lord had suffered, with its long agony and shame. For the Lord, as we are clearly told, spoke as He did to show not death so much as the kind of death by which Peter was to glorify God. After saying this, He says to him, "Follow Me."
This is the same man who once failed shamefully when death drew near. His tone here is steady.
The calmness with which he speaks of his approaching martyrdom, a cruel one, is much to be noted. It was only the putting off of his tabernacle (2 Peter 1). This was not making light of death. If any man ever felt the power of death as wielded by the devil, the terror he can bring by it, and his own utter weakness in its presence, it was Peter. But by the time he wrote his Epistles, Christ had by death brought to nothing the one who had the power of death, and had taken away its sting.
Nobody needs God to tell him he will die. Peter did need telling, and that says something about what Christians were expecting.
Now Peter looked on to the hour of his death. The Lord Jesus had hinted at his death and the manner of it, as recorded in John 21:18-19. By this time he knew it was to take place shortly. Is it not striking that Peter should need to be told that he is going to die? What a testimony to the fact that not death, but the coming of the Lord, is really the hope of the Christian.
The timing matters too. The news came only at the very end, so it could not push back the hope of the Church.
Notice also that the Spirit of God in the word never mentions Peter's death, so that the Church could know anything about it, until he was just at the point of departure. Then Peter says the Lord had told him that he must "put off this tabernacle." Besides, Peter might have died any day. Though he was not a young man when the first epistle appeared, the Spirit of God kept him from writing about it then. So it could not affect the Church's hope.
Knowing his time was short did not make Peter passive. It made him repeat himself on purpose, because he judged his readers needed it.
But in practice believers are exposed to influences so harmful, so distracting to the spirit and so attractive to the flesh, that they are like watches needing to be wound up regularly. It is not enough to know and to be established in the present truth. Hence the apostle's readiness always to remind them of these things (verse 12). Here he repeats it as their urgent need while he lived, and in view of his speedy departure.
What he left behind was not a chain of officials but a document.
He knew that shortly the Lord's words about putting off his earthly tabernacle would be fulfilled (John 21:18-19), and so he commits "the present truth" to writing, so that after his departure we would have the truth in a form always within reach. It is noticeable that he appoints no apostolic successor to maintain the truth, nor does he throw the saints upon the church: he gives them the written word of God as the sole authority for their belief.
- Tent — Peter calls his body a tent. It is a temporary shelter he will soon put off, not a permanent house.
- Shown — He is not guessing. The Lord had told him how he would die, and that kind of death was how he would glorify God.
- Calm — Peter once failed shamefully when death came near. Now he calls a cruel death the putting off of a tent, because Christ has taken away its sting.
- Exception — Peter had to be told he would die. Death was not what Christians were waiting for; the Lord's return was. The news came at the very end, so it did not touch that hope.
- Written — A short time left made Peter work, not withdraw. He put the truth in writing and left believers Scripture rather than a successor.
but I will use diligence, that after my departure ye should have also, at any time, [in your power] to call to mind these things.
Peter knew his death was near, and he chose to leave a letter rather than a successor. Two questions follow: what was the "effort" he promised, and what are "these things" he wanted his readers to keep?
Peter does not say "when I die." He calls his death a departure; older translations read "decease" here.
The word for death in 2 Peter 1:15 is "decease," literally exodus, "departure": "After my departure."
The same term appears where Moses and Elijah speak with Jesus about His coming death — a scene Peter himself witnessed.
"Departure" (ἔξοδος): compare Acts 13:34, for Luke's use of εἰσόδος, "entry." The word "exodus" is found again in 2 Peter 1:15.
Peter had urged diligence on his readers earlier in this chapter. Here he practises it himself.
See what use Peter made of what he knew, and how he practised the diligence he has pressed on others in this chapter. He goes on to press home the reality and certainty of the coming kingdom. He never stops to say just what he planned to do. It is very evident, however, that what he planned and accomplished was the writing of the Epistle that we are now reading. He did it under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. By means of it we can now at any time call to mind these things, though Peter's voice is long since silent.
The phrase points back to verses 5 to 7, and Peter will not let it go.
"To have these things always in remembrance." "These things" appear five times. So our souls cannot over-estimate the value and the worth of verses 5, 6, 7, which the apostle points back to five times over. The Lord grant we may have them always in remembrance, yes, have them engraved on the tablets of our hearts. Peter felt there was no apostolic succession, no one to do the work he was doing, after his death. So he says, I leave you my epistle, something that may always be a blessing and a help to your souls.
Who would guide these believers once Peter was gone?
Peter writes to believers of his own nation, scattered through Pontus. He says, "I will make every effort" — that is, by writing the epistle — "so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things" (2 Peter 1:15). So he commits their future to the guidance of the written word, not to apostolic successors. Paul does the same. He speaks to the elders of the church in Ephesus and warns them of the difficulties and dangers ahead. He says, "And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace" (Acts 20:32).
Why write at all? The alternative was teaching passed on by word of mouth.
Can anything more plainly show the absurdity of trusting tradition, even of early days, when we have the sure light of God's word? Yet all of it justifies our apostle in his zeal. He left nothing for the building up of the saints to such a haphazard channel. He wrote all that was needed to help, guard, and stir them, in words taught by the Spirit. In this way they would come face to face with Him who inspired these exhortations.
The phrase "at any time" reaches past Peter's first readers to us.
Peter wrote to them so that they would be able to return to his letter and receive its help again in the future. The same principle applies to the whole of the Word of God. God has given it to us so that we can turn to it for the instruction or correction we often need. Today we can keep several translations of the Bible on our phones. So Peter's statement is true in the plainest sense: at any time we can call to mind the instruction in God's Word. Do we take advantage of this?
Peter knew what was coming for him. His thoughts turn to the people he would leave behind.
Peter knew that he must soon put off this tent of his body, as the Lord had shown him. With a true shepherd's heart and care he thinks of the Lord's blood-bought sheep. So he would all the more fully warn them, urge them, and remind them, so that after he was gone they might have those things always in remembrance. Though they knew them already, he would still put them in mind, and press on them what would sustain them, leading them on in diligence, so that they might be kept from falling while here.
- Departure — Peter calls his death an "exodus," a departure, and he knows it is near.
- Diligence — the effort he promised is the letter itself, written under the Spirit's guidance.
- Deposit — "these things" are verses 5 to 7, named five times, to be engraved on the heart.
- Not descendants — he leaves the flock to the written word, not to successors. Tradition is a haphazard channel.
- Daily — because he wrote, we can recall these things "at any time." Do we take advantage of it?
For we have not made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, following cleverly imagined fables, but having been eyewitnesses of *his* majesty.
Peter writes to believers who had seen their promised King rejected and crucified, and he rests their hope on something he saw with his own eyes. Everything in the verse turns on that: the kingdom is real, because three men saw it in advance.
A hope that seems to have failed is easily re-explained as a picture. One writer asks whether Peter's readers felt that pull.
Peter was writing to people who had cherished the hope of Messiah's kingdom from their fathers' days, and who had lived to see Him rejected and crucified. Were they tempted then to wonder about the prophecies of His glorious and actual kingdom, covering both earth and heaven? Were they only figures of speech — glowing, poetic descriptions of what was after all just a spiritual and invisible state in heaven?
Peter's answer is an event on a mountain — the transfiguration — and where the Gospels place it matters.
In each Gospel that tells of it, the transfiguration comes right after a promise. Some standing there would not taste death before they saw the kingdom of the Son of Man. And Peter, when speaking of this scene, declares that it was a display of the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He says that the sight of His majesty confirmed the word of prophecy to them, so that they knew what they were talking about... It was a sample of the glory in which He would later come, given to confirm the faith of His disciples in view of His death, which He had just announced to them.
Peter names power and coming. One writer matches those two words, and the glory, to the three Gospel accounts.
If we turn to Mark 9, we find the Lord saying in verse 1, "there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power." In Matthew 16:28 it is, "until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." Third, in Luke 9:30-31, we find Moses and Elijah, "who appeared in glory". Peter speaks of these three marks — the power, the coming and the glory of the Lord — referring to the three different characters of the transfiguration in the Gospels.
Peter's word for eyewitness is not the usual one.
Here our apostle testifies to it as one of the chosen three who actually saw the glory and heard the Father's voice about the Son. He uses a word found in the New Testament only in Peter. The word can carry a wide meaning, but it says more than "eyewitness". The Greeks used it for those admitted to the highest level of their secret religious rites.
Peter had known Christ in weakness. On the mountain he saw the same Person in power.
He had spoken of things seen as well as things heard. The apostles Peter, John and James were together eyewitnesses of the majesty of Christ, the three of them forming a complete witness to His glory. They had known Christ in weakness and humiliation; they saw Him too in His power and majesty. The scene on the mount of transfiguration was a foretaste of His coming, for His coming will be in power and majesty. That power will change our bodies of humiliation into conformity to His body of glory. It is the power by which He is able even to subject all things to Himself (Philippians 3:21).
The charge Peter denied is still made. Now it is aimed at the prophets.
Look around the Christian world and ask people! Ah, they say, there is no prophecy. They say the book of Isaiah must be cut into three or four parts to get rid of the idea of prophecy. In the second part it names a man like King Cyrus, and nobody, they claim, can speak about a person in advance. It is impossible; there is no prophecy. Cleverly devised myths! they say.
Certainty about that glory changes how this world looks.
When faith grasps the glory of Christ in the world to come, all the glitter and brightness of this world will fade into darkness. We will then value it at its true worth.
- Seen, not spun. Peter answers the doubt with an event, not an argument.
- Seen in sample. The transfiguration showed the coming glory in miniature. It steadied the disciples right after the Lord announced His death.
- Seen in three marks. Power, coming and glory match the three Gospel accounts of that one scene.
- Seen by three. Peter, James and John saw it together, and three witnesses make the testimony complete.
- Seen, therefore settled. What Peter saw makes the promise sure. A heart sure of that glory stops overvaluing this world's glitter.
For he received from God [the] Father honour and glory, such a voice being uttered to him by the excellent glory This is my beloved Son, in whom *I* have found my delight;
Peter points back to a mountain, where a voice out of the light named Jesus as the beloved Son. The verse raises three questions: who spoke, what Jesus received, and why it still matters.
Peter does not say the Lord's own glory broke out. He says the Lord received something.
It was not the glory that belongs to Him in Himself. The point was not glory shining out of Him, but glory given to Him. "He received honor and glory from God the Father."
Moses gave the law. Elijah called Israel back to it. Both were great men, and on the mountain someone tried to place them on a level with the Son.
It was the Father's voice out of the excellent glory. "He was still speaking when, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, 'This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.'" The Father then showed His jealousy for the honour of His Son. He would not allow anyone to put the law-giver or the law-restorer on that level. They were servants, to be honoured in the place He gave them. But His beloved Son! — there were His delights. Christ went down in infinite love to suffer as man, and as man to be exalted. Yet in His Father's eyes the glory of the eternal Son was precious beyond all human thought.
Peter piles up phrases: from God the Father, from the excellent glory, from heaven. Each phrase names the same source from a different side. The scene also stands against the way men treated Him.
Men heaped dishonour and shame on Christ. In contrast, He received honour and glory from God the Father. All others have come short of the glory. In contrast, here was One whom "the excellent glory" greeted as the beloved Son of the Father. The voice the Apostle heard came from heaven, and all heaven agrees with the Father's delight in Christ. The whole scene lets us into the secret of heaven's delight in Christ, and of how precious the Son is to the Father.
The Father's words announce nothing that started that day. (The ESV reads "with whom I am well pleased"; older translations render it "in whom I found my delight.")
Soon His departure in Jerusalem would prove that the city He wept over saw no beauty in Him to desire. It hid its face from Him, the way people turn away from someone, and treated Him as struck down by God and afflicted. But here the voice out of the glory declares, This is my beloved Son in whom I found My delight. So it had been in eternity before creation. So it was when the world was made by Him, in all the dealings of providence, in the secret working of grace with people, and in the public government of Israel under the law.
Peter did not tell this story only as a memory. He used it as proof about the future.
Peter, speaking of this scene in 2 Peter 1:16, says it was a display of the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He says that the sight of His majesty confirmed the word of prophecy to them… It was a sample of the glory in which He will come later. It was given to confirm the faith of His disciples, who now faced the death He had just announced to them.
The disciples did not watch the cloud from outside. They went into it, and that changes what this verse offers us.
Peter tells us that this voice came from the excellent glory… Now Peter and the others had entered into the cloud. So we get the wonderful fact that saints have the privilege of standing in the glory the voice comes from, and there, in that glory, sharing the delight of the Father in His beloved Son. We are called not only to the fellowship of God's Son, Jesus Christ, but to have fellowship with the Father. God the Father admits us to share His satisfaction in His beloved Son.
- Received. The Father gave Him honour and glory. This was not His own glory breaking out.
- Source. It came from God the Father, from the excellent glory, and from heaven — one delight stated three ways.
- Contrast. Men gave Him shame. The Father gave Him honour, and would not let even Moses or Elijah rank beside Him.
- Duration. The delight the Father declared on the mountain is not new. It reaches back before creation and runs through all His dealings since.
- Reach. The disciples entered the very cloud the voice came from. So the scene ends with an invitation: share the Father's satisfaction in His Son.
and this voice *we* heard uttered from heaven, being with him on the holy mountain.
Peter closes his case for the coming kingdom with a memory. He was with Jesus on a mountain, he heard a voice out of heaven, and he offers what he saw and heard as the proof.
Peter's case rests on the ordinary tests of a reliable witness. One writer sets out what qualifies him to speak.
To assure them of this, he reminds them of two things. He had seen it himself on the mountain where Jesus was transfigured. He had also heard the voice from the excellent glory: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." In one word, he had seen and heard, and this is what qualifies a competent witness.
The transfiguration is the day the disciples saw Jesus in glory on the mountain. Out of that whole scene, Peter singles out one part for his readers.
Every part of the scene before their eyes was a magnificent testimony to the future kingdom of the Son of Man. They saw that kingdom on a small scale. Later the Lord will come and set it up in visible grandeur, at its appointed time, before the whole universe. But the emphasis clearly falls on "this voice we heard," carried out of heaven, when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
Peter names three sources of the honour Jesus received.
Men heaped dishonour and shame on Christ. In contrast, He received honour and glory from God the Father. And the voice the Apostle heard came from heaven; all heaven agrees with the Father's delight in Christ. The whole scene lets us into the secret of heaven's delight in Christ. It shows how precious the Son is to the Father. The honour and glory He receives comes "from God the Father", "from the excellent glory", and "from heaven".
The word "heard" marks the disciples' position. Moses and Elijah entered the cloud. The disciples stayed outside it and listened.
The disciples were not in heaven. As one of them says, "we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven." They did not enter the cloud of the excellent glory with Moses and Elijah. Yet they saw it, and they have spoken of it. They have testified to us that they have been "eye-witnesses of His Majesty."
Peter calls the place holy for what happened there. One writer shows how that scene differs from other places where we see Christ.
The Apostle may well speak of such a spot as "the holy mountain". Above the earth, and apart from the world, God lets us share with the Father in His delight in Christ. It is not what Christ is to sinners: we learn that in the sorrows of the plain below and the sufferings of the cross. Nor is it what Christ is to His tried saints: we learn that in the upper room. On the holy mountain we learn what Jesus is to the Father, to glory, and to heaven.
The Gospel accounts of the same voice add "hear Him," and Peter does not repeat those words here. Commentators differ on why. One reads the omission as evidence that Peter had taken the correction to heart.
The voice comes, as Peter says, "from the excellent glory: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Notice that in the Gospels God added the words, "Hear him." Peter needed those words then. He was lowering his Master while lifting up Moses and Elijah. He learned his lesson, however, and here, quoting the Father's words, he leaves out "Hear him." By this time he had learned to listen to no voice but the voice of Jesus.
Another writer sees no lapse of memory and no self-correction, but a deliberate focus.
Our apostle leaves out the clause that the Gospel writers carefully record. It is not that he could forget it, or would forget it. He leaves it out to bring forward the Father's good pleasure in Him, His beloved Son.
- Seen — Peter had both seen and heard, and that is what makes a competent witness of the power and coming of the Lord Jesus.
- Heard — the stress falls not on the whole scene but on the voice: "this voice we heard," carried out of heaven.
- From heaven — Christ's honour came from the Father, from the excellent glory, and from heaven. All heaven shares the Father's delight in Him.
- Holy — the mountain is holy for what happens there. Above the earth and apart from the world, we learn what Jesus is to the Father.
- Outside the cloud — the disciples stood near the glory, not inside it. They passed on what they heard, and Peter learned to listen to no voice but the voice of Jesus.