And after six days Jesus takes with [him] Peter and James and John, and takes them up on a high mountain by themselves apart. And he was transfigured before them
Jesus had just spoken plainly to His disciples about His own suffering. Six days later He takes three of them up a high mountain, and there His appearance changes in front of them.
The glory came soon after those words about the cross. One writer explains what the display was for.
He showed His glory in the kingdom before the kingdom was set up. He did it to strengthen His own people to take up the cross and follow their Master. The disciples, like the Christian world too, looked for progress and triumph. They overlooked faith and love tested by suffering with Christ, which is the pattern of all holy endurance. So the Lord told them plainly of His own sufferings and the glories that would follow.
Another writer asks what such a sight does for people who follow a rejected Christ.
The Lord passes a vision of the coming glory before us. It holds up their faith, and ours, as we follow a rejected Christ along His lowly path of suffering and shame. It shows that the path of outward weakness will end in "the Kingdom of God come with power."
Luke gives a different count of the days. One writer finds meaning in both numbers.
Matthew and Mark say "after six days"; Luke says "about eight days after." Six is man's number. It speaks of his week of labour. It is good to know that after all man's toil and struggle there will be a time of rest and glory. Eight is the number of resurrection. The risen Christ will bring the blessing in, and He will make it secure by divine power.
The Lord led them away from everyone else, "by themselves." One writer draws out what that means for us.
To see this glorious vision, the Lord leads Peter, James and John up a high mountain, apart by themselves. If we as believers are to look beyond the long dark night and greet the coming day, we too will need to rise in spirit above the turmoil of this poor world. We will need to find ourselves alone with Jesus. In such moments, as with the disciples, our souls will be taken up above all else with the glory of His Person.
Mark's Gospel has its own emphasis, and it shapes how he tells the scene.
In Mark we have seen the humble and devoted service of Christ in proclaiming the kingdom, whatever the divine glory that shone through His humiliation... The isolation of Jesus and the three disciples at this moment is marked more strongly in verse 2, and the facts are told without addition.
So what actually happened to Him on the mountain?
When He went up the mountain with His disciples, He looked to all appearance only a man among men. To the natural eye there was nothing to mark Him out from Peter, James, or John... But on the mountain this wonderful change (called transfiguration) happened. What kind of change was it? Can we not say that His essential purity or holiness broke out and filled the body in which it was housed, so that He stood before His disciples as a being of light?
One writer is careful to mark what did not change.
But let us be clear that with our Lord Jesus Christ there was never any hint of a change in His essential being as God. Before He ever came to our sad world, He already existed in the very form of God. He never needed to be changed to be like God, the way we are changed to be like Him. But Scripture uses this same word of His transfiguration in Matt. 17:2 and Mark 9:2. There it describes the change that came to the body He had taken when He became a Man. I think this is because it was a sample — an early taste — of that resurrection body, which is permanent and everlasting.
The same word used of Christ on the mountain is used again of His people.
Christ on the mountain shows us what His people will be when He comes to receive them to Himself. But this mighty change begins in them, in their character, while they are still here. So in Rom. 12:2 the apostle says, "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed [transfigured] by the renewal of your mind"... Then we learn a further thing. It is by beholding the glory of the Lord that we are changed [transfigured] into the same image from one degree of glory to another.
- Six days — man's week of labour runs out first, and glory follows the toil. Luke's "eight" adds resurrection, which makes the blessing secure.
- Apart — the vision came away from the crowd. It is still seen by those who rise above the turmoil and stay alone with Jesus.
- Transfigured — not a change in who He is as God, but His hidden holiness breaking out through the body He took as man.
- A sample — what the three saw was an advance sample of the resurrection body and of the kingdom coming in power.
- Changed — the same word covers His people. We will be like Him when He comes, and looking at Him changes us now.
and his garments became shining, exceeding white [as snow], such as fuller on earth could not whiten [them].
Three disciples went up a mountain with Jesus and watched Him change in front of them. Mark records the moment in one detail: the white of His clothes.
One writer compares the Gospel accounts and traces Mark's focus back to the way he presents Jesus.
Notice that Mark says less about the personal change and more about His clothing than either Matthew or Luke. "And He was transfigured before them; and His garments became shining, exceeding white, such as no fuller on earth could whiten them." He is always the Servant-Son. He is as deep in His lowliness as He is dignified in receiving what comes from above. That dignity shows where it comes from: its splendour puts the pride of earthly glory to shame. Matthew draws no contrast with a fuller on earth. True to his own style, he adds that "His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became white as light" — an image of supreme glory, suited to the great King.
The change added nothing from outside. It let out what was always there.
In the New Testament the transfiguration gives us a striking illustration of the meaning of these white garments. Our Lord's glory, His intrinsic character, was to shine out on that holy mountain. It did not shine as He went through the land in the lowly covering of badger skins, where the eye of unbelief saw nothing attractive in Him. Instead the outer coverings of God's dwelling place came off, as it were, and the personal, moral glory of that Holy One shone out. "His face shone like the sun"; "His clothing became shining, exceeding white as snow, so that no fuller on earth could whiten them" (Mark 9:3). This shows the essential and perfect purity of His nature.
A fuller was the tradesman who washed and whitened cloth. Mark measures the Lord's clothing against the best that trade could do. (The writers quoted here use an older translation: "no fuller on earth." The ESV reads "as no one on earth could bleach them.")
The word kabas simply means "to wash," as it is often translated, and would include "bleaching." The coming of the Lord is compared to a "refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap," when the dross and dirt will be cleared away (Mal. 3:2). At the transfiguration the clothing of the Lord became so white that it exceeded the whiteness any fuller on earth could produce (Mark 9:3). It was a reflection of heavenly glory.
Peter later wrote about what he saw that day. One writer notes which word he stressed.
In later years Peter, writing of this great scene, could say, "We made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." They speak not only of His coming, but of "the power" of His coming. They saw a sample of the mighty power that at His coming will change us into His likeness in the twinkling of an eye. In a moment He was "transfigured," and His garments of humiliation were changed into shining clothing "exceeding white as snow."
One writer reads that white as a picture of the life Jesus lived, and as a design God means to reproduce.
The Lord Jesus came into the world to do the will of God. He lived a life of complete obedience to God. Near the end of that life He took three of His disciples up the holy mountain. There He was transfigured before them: "and His clothing became shining, exceeding white as snow; so that no fuller on earth could whiten them" (Mark 9:3). This was an unearthly, heavenly whiteness, a picture of the life of righteousness He had lived on earth. And God's great purpose is to reproduce that life in His saints... We are not saved by works, but we are saved for works.
One writer applies the same words to us. The hope of being like Him will not leave us content with the dirt of this world.
If this is our high and holy destiny we cannot be content to accept the defilements of this world, whether they are inside us or around us. We must purify ourselves with such a hope in view... this process will go on as long as we are here. The standard of purity is "even as He is pure." We may apply Mark 9:3, which speaks of His clothing as "exceeding white as snow; so that no fuller on earth can whiten them." No fuller on earth can whiten us to that standard. We shall only reach it when we are like Him in glory.
- Servant. Mark keeps his eye on the clothing, not the face. He shows the Servant-Son: lowliness and glory in one moment.
- Shining. The white came from inside Him, not from outside. The covering drew back, and the perfect purity of His nature shone out.
- Standard. A fuller was the best whitener on earth, and earth's best fell short. That glory came from heaven, not from a workshop.
- Sample. Peter called it "the power" of His coming. It previews the moment He changes believers into His likeness in the twinkling of an eye.
- Shaped. That white pictures the obedient life He lived. God is weaving the same pattern into His people, and it is finished only when we are like Him in glory.
And there appeared to them Elias with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.
On a high mountain, three disciples watch their Master's appearance change, and two men from Israel's distant past appear beside Him. Who are these two men, why these two, and what does their presence say about the One at the centre?
Commentators read this scene as a working model of God's kingdom. Every kind of person appears in it at once.
In this picture of God's kingdom the Lord shows the very thing popular theologians dislike so much. Earthly things mingle with heavenly things here, though the two are never confused (John 3). There are the glorified ones: Moses and Elijah. There are the men still in their unchanged natural bodies: Peter, James, and John. And there is the central figure, the Lord, the Head of all things above and below.
Each Gospel names the two men in its own order. Commentators take the difference as deliberate.
In the two other Gospels there are slight differences that must have meaning. Mark says, "Elijah with Moses." Luke stresses that men are standing in such a place: "two men, who were Moses and Elijah." Matthew names the lawgiver first, then the prophet of judgment for the broken law. That is the natural order, and it reminds us how the two relate to each other. And they are talking with Jesus: so they had been, we may say, all through the centuries. The law kept and the law broken both alike called for Him and foretold Him. His coming as the Priest-King is the full end that both of them reach.
The two men left this world by very different routes. Commentators see that difference as the key to why they appear here.
Moses must have been raised, for he had died. True, no one knew the place of his burial, for God buried His servant... Elijah went to heaven without dying. So you have the exact picture of the two groups: those who will die, and those who will not pass through death. "We shall not all sleep" means that we shall not all die; "but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet."
Their presence proves something simpler too.
Moses had died, and Elijah had gone to heaven without dying, centuries before. Yet here they were, alive. This is a perfect demonstration of the unbroken, continuous life of the spirit and soul after the death of the body.
Mark tells us they were talking with Jesus, but not what about. Two men with honours and failures of their own had one theme.
Suppose Moses and Elijah had been alone when they appeared on the Mount of Transfiguration. They might have talked of the way God had honoured them when He took them away from the place of their work. But in the presence of their Lord, they must only think and talk of His death. They had broken down. Moses had failed in simple obedience to God and in patience with His people. Elijah had become discouraged, as though God had less power than the pagan Jezebel. But the prophecy about Jesus says, "He will not grow faint or be discouraged" (Isaiah 42).
Centuries away from earth had left these two better informed than the disciples nearby.
They were recognisable and able to talk to one another. They knew more than the disciples knew. What the Lord had told the disciples about His death didn't sink into their hearts until after His resurrection. But these two men lived hundreds of years before the disciples, and they knew that He was about to give His life at the cross. If they were talking with the Lord about His death, they knew about it from their own writings.
Honoured as these two are, they do not stand on Christ's level. The proclamation on the mountain settles the order.
Moses and Elijah appeared on the mount of transfiguration as representatives of the law and the prophets. But theirs was then a subordinate place, for the proclamation was "This is my beloved Son; listen to him."
The same mistake still happens, wherever an admired servant eclipses the Master.
Are believers not in danger, at times, of falling into the snare of forgetting one thing? However outstanding the devotion and spirituality of individual servants may be, the Lord is supreme. They may change and pass away. But of the Lord alone can we say, "You remain," and "You are the same."
- With Jesus — the centre. The mountain shows the kingdom in miniature. Glorified men, natural men, and Christ the Head of all things stand together.
- With Jesus — the two witnesses. Moses gave the law; Elijah was the prophet of judgment for the broken law. Both had been speaking of Christ all through the centuries.
- With Jesus — both roads home. God buried Moses; Elijah never died at all. Together they picture the raised and the changed.
- With Jesus — one topic. They had honours of their own to discuss. In His presence they spoke only of His death, which they knew from their own writings.
- With Jesus — but under Him. Their place on the mountain was second to His. No servant, however great, shares the Son's supremacy.
And Peter answering says to Jesus, Rabbi, it is good that we should be here; and let us make three tabernacles, for thee one, and for Moses one, and for Elias one.
Peter speaks first on the mountain, while Moses and Elijah stand there with the transfigured Christ. His words are part delight and part mistake, and they raise the question the scene answers: where does Jesus stand next to the greatest servants God ever sent?
Peter was looking at three kinds of company at once.
In this picture of God's kingdom the Lord shows earthly things and heavenly things brought together, though never mixed up. The glorified are there, in Moses and Elijah. The men in their still unchanged natural bodies are there too — Peter, James, and John. At the centre is the Lord, the Head of all things above and below. So it will be one day. The power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ will no longer be a testimony in words from those who saw His majesty. It will be made good and displayed in the day of the Lord.
The three accounts of this moment do not use the same word for how Peter addressed Jesus.
In the account of the Transfiguration, Mark 9:5 has "Rabbi," Matt. 17:4 "Lord," Luke 9:33 "Master." It is easy to see that with these a simple difference of translation may arise.
So the difference between the accounts is one of translation.
Something real had gripped Peter. The glory had crowded out everything he had lived for up to that hour.
He would gladly stay there, forgetting all he had known and valued before, all on the earth. I do not say that we have Peter's own heart to thank for what his lips said on the hill of glory. It was rather the power of the place that spoke in him. But this makes it all the more significant. The heavenly glory was so commanding that when it shone out it displaced everything.
Three shelters for three figures put three persons in one class. Writers agree this is where Peter went wrong. One of them names the root of the failure.
He completely forgot the personal dignity of Jesus. "Let us make three tabernacles," one for his Master and the other two for His servants, Moses and Elijah. Would he, then, put his Master, the Lord of all, on the same level with the head of the law and the chief of the prophets? Peter thought this would be great honour for Him! He was altogether astray. The root of all wrong is making little of Jesus. The power for all that is good is faith in His glory. So Peter, in a human way, seeking to honour Jesus, in reality lowers Him.
One writer takes Peter's sentence apart clause by clause. Each piece has its own fault.
First, he emphasizes "it is good for us to be here," instead of focusing on the greatness of his Lord. Second, he speaks of mere human work: "let us make three tabernacles." Third, this would only be building for earth. Fourth, to build a tabernacle for the Lord Jesus would in effect shut Him inside human limits. Fifth, his suggestion would give some glory to others, instead of rightly giving every honour to Him.
Peter had spoken against the cross once before. The same thought returns here in a new form.
Behind it hid another thought. The same effort to keep the Lord from obeying to the point of death on the cross appeared in the temptations in the wilderness. It lay hidden in Peter's "God be favourable to You." And it is made here once more. Peter would have a Christ in glory, and the kingdom set up there, without the cross. He is even willing to work for it with his two companions, for he says, "Let us make here three tabernacles."
Peter's mistake still has an edge for readers who admire great servants of God.
From the nation He had received dishonour and shame. From ignorant but true disciples He receives little more than the honour and glory they would give to Moses and Elijah. Peter would put the Lord on the same level with these great servants… Are believers today not in danger of forgetting that the Lord is supreme, however outstanding the devotion and spirituality of individual servants may be? They may change and pass away; but of the Lord alone can it be said, "You remain," and "You are the same."
- Sight. Peter saw a preview of the coming kingdom: glorified men, ordinary men, and Christ at the centre of both.
- Delight. "It is good that we are here" was true. The glory was so commanding that it displaced everything Peter had valued before.
- Slip. Three shelters made three equals. Peter meant to honour Jesus, but he lowered Him. Making little of Christ is the root of all wrong.
- Shortcut. Behind the plan lay the old wish for a kingdom without the cross, and human hands offering to build it.
- Supremacy. Great servants may change and pass away. Of the Lord alone can it be said, "You remain" — no servant, however great, shares His place.
For he knew not what he should say, for they were filled with fear.
Peter had just seen Jesus shining in glory, with Moses and Elijah beside Him, and he offered a plan. Mark tells us the state he was in: he had no idea what to say, and fear had gripped him and those with him.
Peter's plan put Christ, Moses and Elijah side by side. The mistake began with what Peter forgot about his Master.
Indeed, he did not know. It was sheer forgetfulness of the personal dignity of Jesus. "Let us make three tents," one for his Master and the other two for His servants, Moses and Elijah. Would he, then, put his Master, the Lord of all, on the same level with the head of the law and the chief of the prophets? Peter thought this would be great honour for Him! He was completely wrong. The root of all wrong is a low thought of Jesus. The power for all that is good is faith in His glory. So Peter, in a human way, tries to honour Jesus and in reality lowers Him. God the Father would never allow this, especially not in a disciple.
One short suggestion goes wrong at five separate points.
Peter was afraid and did not know what to say, yet he seems to have thought he should say something. How much better it would have been for him to be silent. First, he stresses that "it is good that we are here," instead of focusing on the greatness of his Lord. Second, he speaks of mere human work: "let us make three tents." Third, this would only be building for earth. Fourth, to build a tent for the Lord Jesus would in effect shut Him inside human limits. Fifth, his suggestion would give some glory to others, instead of giving Him every honour as it should.
Their fear did not come from danger. Glory itself was too much for them, as it was for Jacob and for the prophets.
The mind of Peter on the hill was very much that of Jacob at Bethel. In one sense it was delight to him beyond expression... "Master, it is good that we are here," tells the unforced, necessary joy and satisfaction which the spot and the occasion inspired. But then the occasion was a little too much for him. He feared, just as Jacob at Bethel, feeling that he was at the gate of heaven, and yet saying, "How awesome is this place!"... But glory has always proved itself too much for man. Man needed to be set free before he could be at ease in its presence, as Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and others show us.
One thing would have steadied them, and they did not yet know it.
And here too we learn the secret of the disciples' fears in the presence of this excellent glory... Only one thing will strengthen us to stand assured in the presence of the glory: the knowledge of the humiliation of Christ. Peter and those with him did not know this then. His humiliation is the only ground of fellowship with even the excellent glory, and it is a sure and most blessed one. It gives us this assurance. This glory would otherwise have found things in us to judge and consume. But all of it has already been judged and put away in Him who bore all our shame. And the disciples received this assurance on that very occasion. Jesus came to them, amazed and confused as they were, and restored them with the voice and the touch of the Son of Man.
Mark's note about Peter carries a warning for anyone about to speak.
This only shows how dangerous a thing it is for a believer to speak unless he has the assured sense that he has the Lord's mind in what he says.
This raises a question that still matters: what place do honoured servants have next to Christ?
His personal glory is maintained as the One who is supreme. From the nation He had received dishonour and shame. From ignorant but true disciples He receives little more than the honour and glory they would give to Moses and Elijah. Individual servants may be outstanding in devotion and spiritual life. Yet in our day, are believers not in danger at times of forgetting that the Lord is supreme? Servants may change and pass away. Of the Lord alone can it be said, "You remain," and "You are the same."
- Fear — Glory has always proved too much for man. Peter stood at heaven's gate and was afraid, just as Jacob was at Bethel.
- Ignorance — Peter spoke without knowing what to say. His words forgot the personal dignity of Jesus and put his Master on a level with two servants.
- Silence — He felt he had to say something, so he said the wrong thing. Better to stay quiet than to speak without the Lord's mind.
- Assurance — Only the knowledge of Christ's humiliation steadies a man in the presence of glory. All that glory would judge in him is already put away in the One who bore his shame.
- Supremacy — Servants may change and pass away. Of the Lord alone can it be said, "You remain" — so never let an honoured servant share His place.
And there came a cloud overshadowing them, and there came a voice out of the cloud, *This* is my beloved Son hear him.
On a mountain, three disciples saw Jesus transfigured, with Moses and Elijah beside Him. Peter offered to build three tents — and this verse is the Father's answer.
One writer explains what the disciples would have recognised in the cloud — and what was new.
These Jewish disciples knew well what the cloud meant. It told them of the Shekinah glory that long ago filled the dwelling place of God and spoke of the presence of God. In the days of their wilderness journey the cloud was over Israel, but they never entered the cloud. Here on the mountain these disciples enter the Father's house. They enter on the ground of the death Christ was about to die, and in the company of a glorified Christ. And in the Father's house they hear the Father's voice. That voice declares the Father's heart... the Father does not say, This is the Son whom you ought to adore and admire, but He tells us His own thoughts about Him.
Peter meant to honour his Master by giving Him one tent among three.
"Let us make three tents," one for his Master and the other two for His servants, Moses and Elijah. Would he then put his Master, the Lord of all, on the same level as the head of the law and the chief of the prophets? Peter thought this would be great honour for Him! He was completely wrong. The root of all wrong is belittling Jesus. The power for all that is good is faith in His glory. So Peter, in a human way, seeking to honour Jesus, in reality lowers Him; and this God the Father would never allow.
The Father had already used this title at Jesus' baptism. The Gospel writers do not all record the same word for it.
Mark 9:7 — "Beloved Son." Compare Mark 1:11 and 2 Peter 1:17; the same word stands in Matthew 17:5. But in Luke 9:35 the reading scholars prefer is "chosen." In Semitic languages that is much the same as agapetos, "beloved." In the Greek of that day it was a synonym of monogenes — only-begotten.
At the baptism the voice named the Son but gave no command. Peter's words draw out the command here.
He did not say "listen to him" at the baptism of Jesus by John. He took it for granted, so to speak, that when He declared Him Son of God, everybody would listen to Him. But when Peter would put the Saviour on the same level as the Lawgiver and the Reformer, the Father steps in at once and sweeps Moses and Elijah off the scene. Do not forget this. Moses is gone, because the law could not save you. Elijah's day is over, because reforming your life could not meet your need.
Setting the Son above the two great figures of Israel's past is not a verdict against them.
"Listen to Him," is the Father's demand. It is no longer, Listen to Moses, or Listen to Elijah, but "Listen to HIM." Could anything be more startling to a Jew? All must give place to the Son. The dignity of the others is not denied, nor their due position slighted. To assert the glory of the sun in the heavens is in no way to despise the stars.
The command is not only a rebuke for one moment on a mountain. One writer sees the whole New Testament growing out of it.
The New Testament is the unfolding — if I may say so — of this little word, "Listen to him." It is God unfolding the glory of the Son to us... whatever the blessedness of Moses and Elijah, of the law and the prophets, they have their place, but their best place was to bear witness to Him. And now it was no longer only a witness about Him. It was Himself; He had come. So anyone with a true sense of the glory of the Son of God would not care to listen to servants talking about Him, now that he could hear Him Himself.
Mark's Gospel presents Jesus in lowly service, so testimony to who He is matters all the more.
There is a double witness from on high. At the baptism in Jordan a voice out of the heavens declared, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Mark 1:11), a testimony repeated from the "excellent glory" on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mark 9:7). There was also a double witness from beneath. Unclean spirits fell down before Him, saying, "You are the Son of God" (Mark 3:11).
- Cause. Peter's plan gave Jesus one tent among three. The Father broke in, because putting the Son on a level with servants lowers Him.
- Cloud. The cloud was the known sign of God's presence. Israel followed it but never entered it; here the disciples go inside.
- Voice. From inside, they hear not a demand to admire the Son but the Father telling them His own thoughts about Him.
- Command. The Father did not say "Listen to Him" at the baptism; He says it now, and Moses and Elijah step off the scene — their dignity intact, like stars beside the sun.
- Result. That short command opens out into the whole New Testament: God unfolding the glory of the Son to us.
And suddenly having looked around, they no longer saw any one, but Jesus alone with themselves.
Peter has just offered to build three shelters — one each for Jesus, Moses and Elijah. The two visitors vanish instead, and commentators read that as the Father's answer to Peter, and as a lesson about who alone the disciples must hear.
The Father has just spoken from the cloud. What vanishes next says as much as what stays.
This gives special emphasis to Christ's title as Son. It also stresses the Father's will that they should listen to Him — not now to Moses and Elijah, whom Peter's thoughtless haste had put on a level with Him. The sudden disappearance of those who represented the law and the prophets seals the divine word too. Only Jesus is left with the disciples.
Moses stands for the law and Elijah for the prophets. Their leaving marks the end of a whole era in God's dealings.
Moses and Elijah were taken away, and Jesus is left alone. Law was gone, prophecy gone, and Christ is alone, and He was going to be crucified... Peter would have had the three set up together, all treated alike — "Let us build three tents." But at that moment Moses and Elijah disappear, and the voice says, "This is My beloved Son; listen to Him." It is now the righteousness of God, apart from law, in Jesus... Every word of law and prophets is the truth of God, but they lasted only until John the Baptist.
Peter had put his Master on a level with two great servants. One writer turns that mistake on the reader.
However great they were in their day, they must give place to Christ. He keeps His personal glory as the One who is supreme... In our day, are believers not in danger of forgetting this? However outstanding the devotion and spirituality of individual servants may be, the Lord is supreme. They may change and pass away; but of the Lord alone it can be said, "You remain," and "You are the same."
One writer sets a limit on how far these two words may be pushed.
I believe there has been a misuse of those words "Jesus only." We must not forget the Father and the Spirit. But when it is a question of putting others on an equality with Him, honoured servants as they were, the Father soon puts it right... Here the meaning is "They saw Jesus," not in company, but "alone," since Moses and Elijah were no longer to be seen.
The verse does not only say the disciples saw Jesus. It says they saw Him with them.
They had just seen two men "with Jesus" in glory. Now they see Jesus "with themselves," on the path that leads to glory. It is good for us to realise the glory of the Person of Jesus — the One we shall be with in the glory, and the One who is with us on the way there.
Another writer looks at what the disciples were left with once the glory faded.
The time of the kingdom had not yet come... The disciples came back to the days before the kingdom, the days in which we live. Thank God, though the glory and the power, though Moses and Elijah passed from their sight, they had with them "JESUS ONLY," and He is enough. We have Him with us today.
One writer compares this moment to a blind man whom Jesus healed in two stages. At first the man saw people like walking trees. After a second touch he saw everything clearly.
Saints disappear, but Jesus remains. The words "they saw no one any more, except Jesus only" are very significant. If any of us come near to that in our spiritual experience, we shall no longer be like a man who sees people as trees walking, but like the man after the second touch, seeing everything clearly. Jesus will fill the picture as far as we are concerned, and man will be eclipsed.
- Alone by the Father's choice — Peter ranked Jesus alongside Moses and Elijah. The Father took them away and left the Son standing alone.
- Alone in authority — the law and the prophets gave their testimony and stepped aside. The Father's command is simple: listen to Him.
- Alone above servants — great servants change and pass away; only of the Lord can it be said, "You remain."
- Alone, not isolated — "Jesus only" does not shut out the Father and the Spirit. It means Jesus with no one beside Him on the mountain.
- Alone, and enough — the glory faded and ordinary days returned. The disciples still had Jesus with them, and so do we.
And as they descended from the mountain, he charged them that they should relate to no one what they had seen, unless when the Son of man should be risen from among [the] dead.
Three disciples come down the mountain where they have just seen Jesus in glory, and He tells them to say nothing. But the silence has an end date. That date held a truth they had never heard before.
The glory the three saw was a preview of the kingdom, shown to chosen witnesses. The ban on speaking about it had an end. Once it lifted, the vision would count for far more than it could that day.
The kingdom would be brought in with power when its time had come. The Transfiguration was the witness and visible picture of that to the chosen witnesses who were with Him on the Mount. As they came down He forbade them to tell what they had seen until He was risen from the dead. Then it would be an immense confirmation to their faith and testimony. (2 Peter 1:16-18)
One writer links the silence to the rejection that had already happened. The sight on the mountain was not material for a public campaign.
It was no longer a question of testifying to the kingdom of Christ. This was rejected. The vision was for the disciples, to strengthen their faith in Jesus. The Lord was occupying Himself with the souls of believers, not with the world... For now it was of no use to speak of these things any further. That had to wait until the Holy Spirit was given, until the Lord was risen from the dead, and power came from on high to make these things a fresh starting-point.
The next verse shows the three puzzling over the words. Their difficulty was not resurrection in general. Older translations read "risen from among the dead," and that one word changes everything.
This truth was new to them. Resurrection of the dead was a doctrine every orthodox Jew knew (Heb. 6:2). Resurrection from the dead was quite new to them all. This last is Christian doctrine, tied to the truth of the two resurrections, which the Lord first spoke of (John 5:28-29). Some will rise to life; others will rise to judgment, to be judged at the last and condemned for ever (Rev. 20:5, 11-15).
Another writer marks where that teaching first appears in the Bible, and where it reaches believers.
Both Testaments teach the resurrection of the dead. But resurrection from the dead is New Testament revelation alone. Mark 9:9 teaches it first, and Luke 20:35 then confirms that it applies to believers.
The Pharisees and Sadducees, two Jewish groups of that day, already argued about whether the dead rise. But God raising one man out from among the dead, while others stay in death, says something about that Man.
It was not the bare fact of resurrection. The Pharisees already believed in resurrection itself, though the Sadducees rejected it. But resurrection from among the dead was another thing altogether, and that is what the Lord was presenting here. Keep these things among yourselves, He says, until the Son of Man is risen from among the dead. God would raise Him up from among the dead as the great open token of His own delight and pleasure in that blessed Servant.
At this stage the Lord speaks only of His own rising. What it would mean for His people came later.
This is now the Christian form of resurrection, with the Lord Himself as the firstfruits and pattern. But no such application is made yet; only the Son of Man is to rise alone on the third day. It is a foundation of our faith that He has done this.
They did what He said, and they kept doing it while the meaning stayed out of reach.
The three disciples were plainly not ready for this glory. They must first see their Lord crucified. Without this, neither they nor we can properly value His glory... They clearly obeyed His instruction, but seemed bewildered about what the rising from among the dead should mean. No doubt they thought this had some spiritual explanation, for they had no idea it could be literally true.
- Silence — the ban on telling the vision had a date on it: they were to say nothing until the Son of Man had risen.
- Suffering — the kingdom had been refused, and the three had yet to see their Lord crucified. The vision now served their faith, not the world.
- Seal — rising from among the dead was God's open token of His delight in His Servant. The phrase was so new that the disciples could not work it out.
- Sample — Christ rises alone as the firstfruits and pattern; what it means for believers comes later in Scripture, not here.
- Speak — once He was risen, the sealed vision became strong testimony. That is how Peter later used it (2 Peter 1:16-18).
And they kept that saying, questioning among themselves, what rising from among [the] dead was.
Three disciples had just seen Jesus transfigured on the mountain. On the way down He told them to say nothing until the Son of Man had risen from the dead — and that phrase puzzled them.
Their difficulty sat in one small Greek word: ek, "out of." Older English translations blurred it.
The disciples were familiar with the Pharisees' idea of resurrection of the dead. But resurrection from among the dead, or first resurrection, was a riddle to them. The Lord Himself was to be its "firstfruits" (1 Corinthians 15:20). The King James Version did not bring out the force of the preposition ek here.
These men were not sceptics about life after death.
Standard Jewish belief held the resurrection of the dead (John 11:24; Hebrews 6:2). But to rise from the dead, while others stayed under its power, was completely new to them — as it still is to many now.
They did not have to wait long for their answer:
The Lord did not enlighten them at that time, but they did not have long to wait for an answer. The Lord rose, and the angel at the tomb announced that "He has risen from the dead" (Matthew 28:7). He had risen, but all the dead had not. Resurrection of the dead is a truth which concerns all who die. Resurrection from the dead is the proper and sure hope of saints who die.
If God raises some out from among the dead, the rest are still there. The disciples could not take that in.
They knew about resurrection; the whole party of the Pharisees believed in it. But here was a power that delivered people out of the condition in which man, and even the saints, lay. It implied too that others were still left in that condition when God used that power. Of this they were completely ignorant. That there was a resurrection in which God would raise up all the dead at the last day, they had no doubt. But they understood nothing of this: that the Son of Man was the resurrection and the life. Here was the last Adam in absolute triumph over death, the Son of God having life in Himself, shown by His resurrection from among the dead.
The question was never whether the dead rise. It was about His rising first, and what that says about Him.
They were not questioning the rising of the dead; every Jew understood that. Their question was about His rising from among the dead. His being taken out from among the dead was the mark of God's special favour, and the firstfruits and pattern of those who will also be taken out in this way.
His resurrection does not stand alone. Two places in Luke's Gospel point the same way:
Here, of course, it was the resurrection of Christ Himself that was in question. But He was the firstfruits of His own, so His resurrection was both the pledge and the pattern of theirs. In Luke 14:14 we find the expression "the resurrection of the just." In another chapter (20:35) the Lord speaks of those "who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead." The phrase He uses plainly means a partial resurrection: those who get this resurrection will leave others behind them in their graves.
They kept quiet without grasping what He meant. Understanding came later, through help they did not yet have.
The Lord made all this known to the disciples, as verse 9 shows, with a view to the time when His death and resurrection would be complete. Only then would they understand it all, enlightened by the Holy Spirit, and able to use it with real effect in testimony. At that moment they did not even understand what rising from among the dead really meant, as the next verse shows. The rising of the dead would not have puzzled them in any special way. It was this rising "out of," or "from among," the dead — which first took place in Christ — that raised such questions.
Their bewilderment is not treated by these writers as a failure peculiar to the twelve. Kelly notes that the same phrase still passes over many heads:
If they knew the Scriptures and God's power of resurrection, as the Sadducees did not, certainly the rising from among the dead was as new to them as it is still little understood by many disciples.
- One preposition. Their whole difficulty hangs on "out from among." Older translations left that small word flat.
- Old truth. Jews expected a resurrection of the dead at the last day, and these men never doubted it.
- New truth. Rising out from among the dead means God raises some and leaves others in their graves — a power they had never heard of.
- First one out. God raised Christ first, marking His special favour on Him and making Him the firstfruits and pattern of His own.
- Later light. They obeyed while still puzzled. The meaning came when He rose, and the Holy Spirit taught them.
And they asked him saying, Why do the scribes say that Elias must first have come?
The disciples have just come down from the mountain, where they saw Elijah standing beside Christ in glory. Now they raise the objection the religious teachers pressed against Jesus: the prophets said Elijah must come first, so how can the Messiah be here already?
The disciples had kept this problem to themselves. The glory they had just seen loosened their tongues.
The prophets had said that Elijah must first come. The scribes insisted on this. Struck with the glory that plainly confirmed the claims of Christ, the disciples speak to Him of this difficulty. Seeing the glory convinced them, and that conviction made them admit the difficulty they had kept silent about before, not daring to bring it forward. But now the proof is strong enough to embolden them to face the difficulty.
Note what they do with it: they bring it to Him. One writer contrasts this with the puzzle they had kept among themselves a moment earlier.
The disciples, however, have another difficulty about which they do speak to the Lord.
Jesus does not answer by correcting the scribes' doctrine. He grants it — and then adds the half they had left out.
Our Lord does not dispute the truth the scribes pressed. But He points out His own coming shame and suffering before He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels. In the same way He shows a similar application of Elijah's case in the person of John the Baptist, while Elijah's own coming still awaits its fulfilment in a future day. To faith the forerunner has already come, as well as the Lord Himself. Unbelief must feel both later on.
The problem was never the Elijah prophecy itself. It lay in how they read the prophets.
The difficulty arose from the fact that while they accepted the Scriptures that spoke of Christ coming in glory, they overlooked those that spoke of His coming to suffer as the Son of Man.
The teachers whose words the disciples repeated had made the same mistake.
The scribes ignored the sufferings of Christ and therefore could not understand the glory that should follow.
Scripture describes two arrivals of the Messiah. Once you see that, the scribes' teaching and Christ's presence no longer clash.
The difficulty was tied to the truth of the two comings, which the disciples did not yet understand. The Lord came in humiliation. He will come again in power and glory. A forerunner came before the first coming. A forerunner will appear before the second... The scribes were right about the coming of Elijah. He will come, and restore all things. But no one has yet seen anything like that here on earth. John the Baptist, who came in the spirit and power of Elijah, did not do that.
John the Baptist himself showed the difference. It lies in which Scriptures he claimed and which he did not.
Before Christ appeared in this way, which tested the Jews as to their responsibility, God had not failed to give them a testimony according to the spirit and power of Elijah; and they had treated him badly, just as they pleased... So John also said that he was not Elijah, and he quotes Isaiah 40, which speaks of the testimony; but he never quotes Malachi 4, which relates to Elijah in person.
There is a warning here about how doubts get planted. The scribes said nothing false.
The scribes had the Scriptures at their command, and they presented what the Scriptures contained, as ready scribes — here, perhaps, to object against the truth. What they said here was the truth. The apostles quickly bring it back to this doubt and difficulty. The glory impressed them, but it did not fill them. And this was natural, because the difficulty was already in their minds — Satan was using a truth, note this, to create a difficulty. And how easily that difficulty could be used, when people did not understand the glory and mystery of God in the suffering of His exalted Son!
- Glory loosens the tongue. The disciples had held this question back. Seeing Christ's glory gave them courage to bring it to Him.
- Glory without the suffering. The scribes' error was not what they taught but what they left out. The Son of Man must suffer first, and without that, the glory to follow made no sense to them.
- Glory twice over. Two comings answer the puzzle. Christ came in humiliation and will come in power, and each coming has its own forerunner.
- Glory announced twice. John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah. The Elijah who restores all things is still to come, and John never claimed that prophecy for himself.
- Glory divides faith from unbelief. Faith already recognises both the forerunner and the Lord. A true statement, used the wrong way, breeds doubt.
And he answering said to them, Elias indeed, having first come, restores all things; and how is it written of the Son of man that he must suffer much, and be set at nought
The disciples have just seen Jesus in glory on the mountain. One thing still troubles them. Their teachers, the scribes, said Elijah must come before the Messiah — and no Elijah had appeared. The Lord's reply does not correct them. It adds the half of Scripture they had left out: the writings about a Son of Man who suffers.
Jesus lets the expectation stand. What He adds is that Elijah's role, like His own, has two moments — one already met in the forerunner, one still ahead.
Our Lord does not dispute the truth the scribes pressed. He points out His own coming shame and suffering before He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels. In the same way He shows a similar use of Elijah's case in the person of John the Baptist, while the strict coming of Elijah still waits for its fulfilment in a day yet ahead. To faith the forerunner is already come, as well as the Lord Himself. Unbelief must feel both by and by.
Two different prophecies stand behind the question.
Elijah's appearing is connected with the great and terrible day of the Lord in Malachi 4:5. That day had not come when the Lord was on earth, and it has not come yet. But a herald was to go before Messiah (Isaiah 40). The herald had come and gone; John the Baptist had appeared. Here was the solution of the difficulty.
The men who raised the objection had the Scriptures at their fingertips.
Here what they said was the truth. The apostles keep bringing the matter back to this doubt and difficulty. The glory impressed them, but it did not satisfy them. And this was natural, because someone had planted the difficulty in their minds. Satan was using — note this — a truth to make a difficulty. And the difficulty worked so easily, because they did not understand the glory and mystery of God in the suffering of His exalted Son!
The verse holds two things, and both stand written. Their order is the point.
In fact, the word spoke of it, and Jesus accepts it as the truth; Elijah was to come and restore all things. And he will indeed come before the Son of Man appears in glory. But first of all the Son of Man must suffer and be rejected. Scripture said this too, just as it foretold the mission of Elijah.
The scribes' problem was not bad information. It was selective reading.
There are two advents of Christ — one in humiliation, the other in glory. The first had then taken place. For the second, Israel must wait. The scribes thought only of the second. They overlooked the prophecies about Messiah's humiliation and death... "It is written of the Son of Man" (Mark adds, v. 12) "that he should suffer many things and be treated with contempt." Had they laid hold of that, they would have seen it: a path of humiliation, ending in death, must come before His coming in power (Isaiah 52:13 — 53:12).
The prophecies of glory held their attention.
Dazzled by the passages that spoke of His glory, they would surely find the others unclear, mysterious, obscure. They would drop them fast, with the excuse that they were hard to explain and of no particular interest or profit.
The older wording here is "set at nought." It is stronger than dislike.
He was "set at nought" by men (Mark 9:12); by Herod's soldiers (Luke 23:11); and by the religious leaders in Acts 4:11. The verb here means "utterly worthless" — contemptible! So man, seeking his own glory, has no appreciation of One whose every motive, every word and every action had the glory of God in view.
The two halves of the verse look like they clash.
A suffering Son of Man did not look like coming after all things were restored. And yet in fact there had been a coming of Elijah — one who had come in such a spirit and power. But that light had gone out: they had done to him according to their will; and so the Son of Man would suffer also.
- Confirmed — Jesus does not cancel the scribes' teaching. Elijah does come first and restores all things. That promise waits for the day of the Lord, still ahead.
- Corrected — He adds the Scripture they ignored. The Son of Man must suffer and be counted worthless. Both are written, and the suffering comes first.
- Contempt — "Set at nought" means valued at zero. Man saw no worth in the One who lived for God's glory.
- Confused by truth — A true doctrine, held by halves, unsettled the disciples. Satan can use a truth to make a difficulty.
- Come already — John the Baptist came in Elijah's spirit, and men did to him as they pleased. What the messenger received, the Master would receive.
but I say unto you that Elias also is come, and they have done to him whatever they would, as it is written of him.
Three disciples have just seen Jesus transfigured on the mountain. Coming down, they ask about the scribes' teaching that Elijah must come before the Messiah. His answer holds two things together. Elijah has already come, and people treated him as they liked. That shows the disciples what lies ahead for the Son of Man.
The Lord is not speaking of the ancient prophet returning in person. He means His own forerunner.
John was not Elijah himself, but he was the same kind of prophet as Elijah. He stood apart from the people and pressed the claims of God's righteousness on them. Luke 1:17 shows this: "He will go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah."
Yet John himself denied being Elijah when the authorities questioned him.
Speaking of John, the Lord said, "Elijah has come" (Mark 9:13). This seems to clash with John 1:21. Another passage explains it: "If you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come" (Matthew 11:14). John had come in the spirit and power of Elijah, as Gabriel foretold. And he was Elijah to those who received him and later followed the Lord, like Andrew and another disciple in John 1:40.
Whether John counted as Elijah turned on how the nation answered him.
If the nation had received the word John preached, Elijah's mission would have been fulfilled, just as Malachi prophesied. But the nation refused Jesus as well as His forerunner. So faith alone could recognize the testimony of John the Baptist as being, in effect, the testimony of Elijah.
Saying that John filled the role does not cancel the prophecy of a literal Elijah still ahead.
Nothing was farther from His mind than to set aside a future work of Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes (compare Mark 9:12; John 1:21). That description does not suit His first coming in grace at all, even though moral judgement went with that grace.
Commentators differ on who that future figure is. One suggestion links him with one of the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3 — "another prophet of the same character" who will arise "when Israel is about to face the horror of the great tribulation" (Leslie M. Grant).
Scripture foretold more than Elijah's coming.
Scripture said the Son of Man must suffer before His glory, just as surely as it said Elijah would come. Still, as we have said, in the matter of testimony to the Jews, the man who took Elijah's place in moral character had come. They had treated him as they were about to treat the Lord. So too, John himself said he was not Elijah. He quotes Isaiah 40, which speaks of the testimony; but he never quotes Malachi 4, which is about Elijah in person.
Elijah's own life shows the same pattern: a short welcome, then hatred.
In Ahab's day Elijah was a restorer, as we see in 1 Kings 18. But this lasted only for a season. The people rejoiced in his light; then Jezebel forced him out into the wilderness again. It was the same with the Baptist. The people rejoiced in his light too. Again, it lasted only for a season. Crowds came to him for baptism, but the wicked hated him. Another Jezebel in that day had him beheaded. Neither Elijah nor the Baptist left Israel established.
Their question came from reading only half of what the prophets said.
The difficulty arose because they accepted the Scriptures that spoke of Christ coming in glory, but overlooked those that spoke of His coming to suffer as the Son of Man.
The killing of the forerunner was more than a private tragedy; it read the nation's verdict out loud.
The killing of John was in effect a public act. It showed that Israel was not ready to receive the One John spoke of (Mark 9:12-13). The killing of Stephen was the same kind of public act. It proclaimed that the nation would not accept the crucified Messiah whom God had glorified and whom Stephen was preaching.
Evil could do as it pleased with God's messenger. That is still the condition of service today.
Whatever it costs, we are to do the will of God while evil is in power. No power comes in now to stop the evil. (Mark 9:13; Rev. 3:10.)
- Come — Elijah had come, not in person but in John the Baptist, who went before the Lord "in the spirit and power of Elijah."
- Received — faith could see that the forerunner had come, and the Messiah with him. Unbelief saw neither.
- Refused — if the nation had accepted John's preaching, Elijah's mission would have been fulfilled. It rejected the messenger and the Messiah alike.
- Written — Scripture foretold the suffering of the Son of Man as surely as it foretold Elijah's coming. John's death was the public sign that Israel would not have Him.
- Reserved — a literal Elijah is still promised before the great and terrible day of the Lord. Until then we do God's will while evil still holds power.