Transfiguration

DN 7:9-10, 13-14
2 PT 1:16-19
MT 17:1-9

This vision from Daniel is considered apocalyptic literature: the purpose of which was to unveil, uncover, or reveal (1). Such stories, common in the day and region, contain and reveal hidden information. Scholars have here identified the influence of Babylonian creation myth, Canaanite mythical imagery, and myths of Ugarit (1). Despite literary blending and borrowing, ancient Judaic revelations intended to convey news of Lord God’s plan for imminent salvation from suffering experienced by His chosen people (1).

The Transfiguration of Jesus is an important revelation of Jesus as the Son of the Father. It is similar to God’s self-revelation to Moses on Mount Sinai (2); each takes place on the seventh day, occur on a mountain, each takes three companions, their faces shine with God’s glory, God is present in a ‘glory cloud,’ and God speaks through a heavenly voice.

According to biblical scholar Robert Alter, events or words which echo typically highlight new meaning through the additions or subtractions between the repeats. This telling of the Transfiguration is an example of a writer’s intentional intensification through parallelisms between the Old Testament and the New (*see note). Each event is a Lord God self-revelation; because we recognize the scene as a moment of self-revelation, we recognize that God is revealing Jesus as Himself.

The Transfiguration also harkens back to Jesus’ Baptism, however, after God the Father says, “This is my beloved Son,” He adds, “Listen to him” (3). So too, early in our faith journey, it is enough for us to recognize Jesus’ presence in our lives, but as the relationship develops, we must improve our listening habits and skills.

Israelite prophets and kings determined action based on Divine revelation through dreams, visions and their interpretations. Peter, however, claims in his letter his authority comes from the real experience of witnessing the Transfiguration (4). In other words, his self-proclaimed validation of authority is based on the revelation of an event experienced in the flesh. Neither Daniel or Peter understood the revelation at the moment of its manifestation; Daniel received help from ‘one present’ (an angel) and the events themselves after the Resurrection taught Peter their meaning.

We too have visions of the Lord. Like Daniel, sometimes we experience dreams (either in sleep or day-dreams) but don’t understand what the Lord is communicating; we need to ask for help. He is present in our physical, waking world as well, and like Peter, we may not see it in the moment. The word ‘vision’ not only refers to our physical, human eyesight, but to our ability to comprehend what is before our very eyes. Whether the sights we behold are of a spiritual nature or of a physical one, we can only perceive and interpret by the Grace of God. Both Peter and Daniel teach us that the understanding of the vision, what we behold before us with our eyes, is a Holy experience.

Journal Questions:

How has the Lord revealed Himself to me? Who helped me interpret and understand it?
How would I evaluate my success or failure in listening to Jesus at present?
Do I take comprehension of what I see for granted? When have I achieved understanding of what had unfolded before me some time after the fact? Why might have understanding taken time to develop?
In recounting a sleep or day dream, where was the Lord? What might He be telling me?

Resources:

1- New Interpreter’s Bible One Volume Commentary, Gaventa, Beverly Roberts, and David Petersen. Abingdon Press, Nashville, 2010.

2- The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, Hahn, Scott, Curtis Mitch. Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2010.

3- The New Testament: Fortress Commentary on the Bible. Editors: Aymer, Kittredge, Sanchez. Fortress Press, Minneapolis. 2014.

4- The Letters of James and Peter, the Daily Study Bible Series, Barclay, William. The Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1976.

* Note: Robert Alter is a Jewish biblical scholar; the comment here about intentional intensification between the Old and New Testaments by the writers is my own perception and not his.

Related