Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 17:2
And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
2. was transfigured before them ] St Luke mentions that this was “as He prayed.” The glorified change may be illustrated by Mar 16:12, “He appeared in another form unto two of them.” The word implies more than a change of mere outward semblance.
as the light ] A hint that the Transfiguration took place at night, which is also rendered probable by the statement of St Luke that the three apostles were “heavy with sleep,” that they “kept awake,” that they descended “the next day,” ch. Mat 9:32; Mat 9:37.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And was transfigured before them – The word transfigure means to change the appearance or form. It does not denote the change of the substance of a thing, but simply of its appearance. It puts on a new aspect. What this change was we are expressly told.
1. His face shone as the sun; that is, with a special brightness. A similar appearance is described respecting Moses when he came down from the mount, Exo 34:29-30. See also Heb 1:3, where Christ is called the brightness of the glory of God: in the original, the splendor or shining, like the brightness of the sun.
2. The second change was that of his garments. They were white as the light. Mark says, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth could white them. The word fuller means, commonly, one who dresses cloth or fulls it, so as to make it more thick and strong. Here it means one who bleaches cloth or makes it white; one who cleanses garments when by wearing they become soiled. Among the Greeks that was a distinct trade. Luke says, white and glistering, that is, resplendent, shining, or a very bright white. There is no evidence here that what is commonly said of him is true, that his body was so changed as to show what his glorified body is. His body, so far as the sacred writers inform us, underwent no change. All this splendor and glory was a change in appearance only. The Scriptures should be taken just as they are, without any attempt to affix a meaning to them which the sacred writers did not intend.
Raiment – Clothing. John may refer to this transfiguration in Joh 1:14, as Peter does in 2Pe 1:16-17.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 2. Was transfigured] That fulness of the Godhead, which dwelt bodily in Christ, now shone forth through the human nature, and manifested to his disciples not only that Divinity which Peter had before confessed, Mt 16:16, but also the glorious resurrection body, in which they should exist in the presence of God to eternity.
White as the light.] But the Cod. Bezae, some of the ancient versions, and several of the fathers, read , as snow; and this is the reading in Mr 9:3.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And was transfigured before them,…. Peter, James, and John, before whom he was metamorphosed, or changed into another form; for not the substance of his body was changed, nor even the shape of it altered, only it received a more glorious form; that whereas before he appeared in the form of a servant, and looked mean and despicable, now he appeared in the form and majesty of God; or there was a divine glory; which from his deity showed itself in a visible manner through his flesh:
and his face did shine as the sun it had still the same appearance of an human face, but had such a dazzling glory upon it, as equalled the sun shining in its full strength:
and his raiment was white as the light: he did not put off his clothes, nor were the nature and substance, and fashion of them changed; but such rays of glory darted through his flesh, and through his clothes, as made them as bright and shining, as the light of the sun at noon day. Mark says, they became “exceeding white as snow, so as no fuller on earth can white them”. The Vulgate Latin reads, “as snow”, here; and so do the Ethiopic version, and Munster’s Hebrew Gospel. Snow has a peculiar whiteness in it, and is therefore made use of, to express the glittering brightness of Christ’s raiment; and the fuller is mentioned, who by the Jews a is called , and means one that whitens wool, or raiment, and such an one is here designed: not that any fuller makes garments of another colour white; for though this may be done, it is not the work of fullers, but dyers: but fullers, whatever colour garments are of, if sullied and spotted, can restore them to their native colour; and if white, can bring them to their former whiteness: now Christ’s garments were as white, yea, whiter, than any such men could possibly make garments, that were white at first: what colour Christ’s garments were of before, is not certain; now they appeared white, to the greatest degree of whiteness. Dr. Hammond b has a conjecture, that in the phrase “on earth”, reference is had to the earth fullers make use of in cleaning, and which is called “fullers’ earth”; and that the words are to be rendered, “as no fuller, by or with earth can white them”; but if this will not bear, the sense is, that there is no fuller, nor ever was, or ever will be upon earth, that can make raiment so white as Christ’s was.
a Maimon. in Misn. Bava Kama, c. 10. sect. 10, b In Mark ix. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
He was transfigured before them ( ). The word is the same as the metamorphoses (cf. Ovid) of pagan mythology. Luke does not use it. The idea is change (–) of form (). It really presents the essence of a thing as separate from the (fashion), the outward accident. So in Ro 12:2 Paul uses both verbs, (be not fashioned) and (be ye transformed in your inner life). So in 1Co 7:31 is used for the fashion of the world while in Mr 16:12 is used of the form of Jesus after his resurrection. The false apostles are described by in 2Co 11:13-15. In Php 2:6 we have used of the Preincarnate state of Christ and of the Incarnate state (Php 2:7), while emphasizes his being found “in fashion as a man.” But it will not do in Mt 17:2 to use the English transliteration because of its pagan associations. So the Latin transfigured (Vulgate transfiguratus est) is better. “The deeper force of is seen in 2Co 3:18 (with reference to the shining on Moses’ face), Ro 12:2” (McNeile). The word occurs in a second-century papyrus of the pagan gods who are invisible. Matthew guards against the pagan idea by adding and explaining about the face of Christ “as the sun” and his garments “as the light.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
He was transfigured [] , meta, denoting change or transfer, and morfh, form. This latter word denotes the form regarded as the distinctive nature and character of the object, and is distinguished from schma, the changeable, outward fashion : in a man, for instance, his gestures, clothes, words, acts. The morfh partakes of the essence of a thing; the schma is an accident which may change, leaving the form unaffected. Compare Mr 16:12; Christ “appeared in another form” [] , and 1Co 7:31 : “the fashion [] of the word passeth away.” The distinction passes into the verbs compounded with these two nouns. Thus, Rom 12:2, “Be not conformed to this world,” is suschmatizesqe; i e., be not fashioned according to the fleeting fashion of this world. So Rev., fashioned. See, also, 2Co 11:13, 14, 15, where the changes described are changes in outward semblance. False apostles appeared in the outward fashion of apostles of Christ; Satan takes on the outward appearance of an angel. All these changes are in the accidents of the life, and do not touch its inner, essential quality. On the other hand, a change in the inner life is described as a change of morfh, never of schma. Hence, Rom 12:2, ” Be ye transformed [] ; the change taking place by the reviewing of the mind. Compare Rom 8:29; 2Co 3:18; Phi 3:21; and see, further, on Phi 2:6, 7.
Why, then, it may be asked, is a compound of morfh employed in this description of the transfigured Savior, since the change described is a change in his outward appearance ? It may be answered, because a compound of schma, expressing merely a change in the aspect of Christ ‘s person and garments, would not express the deeper truth of the case, which is, that the visible change gets its real character and meaning from that which is essential in our Lord – his divine nature. A foreshadowing or prophecy of his true form – his distinctive character – comes out in his transfiguration. He passes over into a form identified, so far as revealed, with the divine quality of his being, and prophetic of his revelation “as he is” (1Jo 3:2), in the glory which he had with the Father before the world was (Joh 17:5). In truth, there is a deep and pregnant hint in the use of this word, which easily escapes observation, and which defies accurate definition. The profound and overwhelming impression upon the three disciples was due to something besides the shining of Christ ‘s face and garments, and the presence of Moses and Elijah; and was deeper and subtler than the effect of all these combined. There was a fact and a power in that vision which mere radiance and the appearance of the patriarchs could not wholly convey : a revelation of Deity breaking out in that glorified face and form, which appealed to something deeper than sense, and confirmed the words from heaven : This is my beloved Son.
The same truth is illustrated in the use of morfh in Mr 16:12, where it is said that Jesus appeared in a different form [ ] after his resurrection. The accidents of figure, face, pierced hands and feet, were the same; but an indefinable change had passed upon him, the characteristic of which was that it prefigured his passing into the condition peculiar and appropriate to his essential spiritual and divine being.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
2. And was transfigured before them. Luke says that this happened while he was praying; and from the circumstances of time and place, we may infer that he had prayed for what he now obtained, that in the brightness of an unusual form his Godhead might become visible; not that he needed to ask by prayer from another what he did not possess, or that he doubted his Father’s willingness, but because, during the whole course of his humiliation, he always ascribed to the Father whatever he did as a divine Person, and because he intended to excite us to prayer by his example.
His transfiguration did not altogether enable his disciples to see Christ, as he now is in heaven, but gave them a taste of his boundless glory, such as they were able to comprehend. Then his face shone as the sun; but now he is far beyond the sun in brightness. In his raiment an unusual and dazzling whiteness appeared; but now without raiment a divine majesty shines in his whole body. Thus in ancient times God appeared to the holy fathers, not as He was in Himself, but so far as they could endure the rays of His infinite brightness; for John declares that not until
they are like him will they see him as he is, (1Jo 3:2.)
There is no necessity for entering here into ingenious inquiries as to the whiteness of his garments, or the brightness of his countenance; for this was not a complete exhibition of the heavenly glory of Christ, but, under symbols which were adapted to the capacity of the flesh, he enabled them to taste in part what could not be fully comprehended.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(2) And was transfigured before them.Elsewhere in the New Testament (with the exception of the parallel, Mar. 9:2) the word is used only in its spiritual sense, and is there rendered transformed. St. Luke does not use the word, but describes the change which it implies, the fashion of His countenance became other than it had been (Luk. 9:29). He adds the profoundly significant fact that this was while He was in the act of prayer. It was in that act of communion with His Father that the divine glory flowed out into visible brightness. Transcendent as the manifestation was, it has its lower analogies in the radiance which made the face of Stephen as the face of an angel (Act. 6:15); yet more in the glory which shone on the face of Moses when he came down from the mount (Exo. 34:29); in some faint measure, in what may be called the metamorphic power of prayer which invests features that have no form or comeliness with the rapture of devout ecstacy. And it is no over-bold speculation to see in the fact thus noted that which gives its meaning to the Transfiguration as a stage in the training of the disciples. Prayers like those which were offered for Peter that his faith might not fail (Luk. 22:31-32) at least suggest something as to the intercession of the Master for His disciples, and this, we must remember, was a crisis in their spiritual history. They had risen to the highest faith; they had been offended by the announcement of His rejection, His sufferings, His death. Something was needed which might sustain their faith, on which they might look back in after years as the earnest of a future glory. It was well for them that they should, at least once in His life of lowliness, gaze on the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father (Joh. 1:14), and feel that they were not following cunningly-devised fables, but had been eye-witnesses of His majesty (2Pe. 1:16). To those who believe that our Lords human nature was in very deed, sin only excepted, like unto ours, it will not seem over-bold to suggest that for Him too this might have been a time of conflict and of trial, a renewal of the Temptation in the wilderness (Mat. 16:23), an anticipation of that of the agony of Gethsemane, and that even for Him, in his humanity, there might be in the excellent glory and in the voice from heaven the help and comfort which strengthened Him for the cross and passion. Following the narrative in its details, we may trace its several stages in some such sequence as follows:After six days, spent apparently with their Lord in the mountain district near Csarea Philippi, but not in the work of preaching or working miracles, the rest of the disciples are left at the foot of the mountain, and the three follow Him, as the evening closes, to its summit. There, as afterwards in Gethsemane, He withdraws from them about a stones throw (Luk. 22:41), and they watch with Him. and gaze on Him, as He, standing or kneeling (the first was, we must remember, the more common attitude of prayer, Luk. 18:11), intercedes for them and for Israel, and, we may add, for mankind. And then, as they gaze, form and features shine with a new glory, bright as the sun, as though the Shechinah cloud had wrapt Him round. Even His garments are white as the light, white as snow (the reading in St. Mark is doubtful, but if genuine the snows of Hermon may have suggested the comparison), as St. Mark adds with his usual descriptive vividness, so as no fuller on earth can whiten them. Nothing, however, it may be added, suggests the vision of three forms floating in the air with which Raffaelles glorious picture has made us familiar.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2. Transfigured Changed in appearance. Luke tells us that our Lord was praying when the glory began. Before them As they stood lost in wonder at the phenomenon. It was no transient glimpse. It was a full steady splendour. His face did shine Compare this with this description of the resurrection glory, when “his countenance was like lightning and raiment white as snow.” Compare also his appearance to John, Rev 1:3-16. Raiment Luke says it was “white and glistening.” Mark, “shining exceeding white as snow.” That is, his person was shining and his apparel was white.
‘And He was transfigured before them, and his face shone as the sun, and his garments became white as the light.’
And there in that high mountain the disciples saw an amazing transformation take place. They saw Jesus transfigured before them. Before their eyes His face shone like the sun, and His clothing became ‘white as light’, glistening and other worldly, and glorious. And they must have been shaken to the core, for this was not what they had been expecting when they went up with Him into the mount. It was true that Peter had declared Jesus to be ‘the Christ, the Son of the living God’. But those had been words which manifested a conviction that had taken hold of his heart. This was something different. They were seeing that He was. They were being made to recognise as never before the uniqueness of Jesus.
And well they might for there is no other occasion in Scripture where this kind of appearance is seen as being true of a human being. It is seen to be true to some extent of heavenly figures (see Mat 28:3; Dan 10:5-6; Rev 1:13-15), but never of an earthly One. For here there is no thought that it is the presence of God in glory that has caused it. This is no reflected glory, as it was with Moses when his face, and only his face, shone in Exo 34:29, when he had been face to face with God in the cloud. (We should note also that that was semi-permanent and that Moses brought it down from the mountain with him. It was not a once for all revelation. It was borrowed glory intended to impress the people below. So its source was different, its aim was different, and the detail of the description is very different). The idea here is rather that the inward glory of Jesus is being revealed to His disciples. In that ‘high mountain’, having come closer, as it were, to Heaven, what He was in Himself could not remain hidden. The sun was the brightest light then known to man, and beyond man’s reach, and spoke of heavenly glory, while garments as white as light indicated total purity and unearthliness. He was thus here being revealed as of absolute glory and purity, and as basically One Who was from Heaven.
The description is, of course, making clear what was seen, not defining it. Glory shone out from Him. The parallels in the other Gospels mainly concentrate on the clothing. Mark says it was unearthly. It was ‘as no scourer on earth could whiten it’. Luke says it was ‘glistening’ (exastraptown), a word used in Dan 10:9 of the glistening feet of a rather spectacular angel. But ‘white as light’ here in Matthew goes further. It brings to mind Psa 104:2, ‘You are clothed with honour and majesty, Who cover yourself with light as with a garment’. This confirms that the aim here is to bring out Jesus’ ‘unearthliness’, and here in Matthew even His divinity.
Dan 7:9 speaks of the Ancient of Days (God) as having ‘raiment as white as snow’ (compare Mat 28:3), and this is in fact picked up by copyists who later incorporated it in the Transfiguration text of both Matthew (D and versions) and Mark (A D and versions). But even if we reject those readings on the basis of the evidence the comparison does confirm the heavenly nature of the ‘whiteness’. So Jesus is being revealed as a heavenly figure, and more.
This is backed up by the fact that the word for ‘white’ (leukos), when used elsewhere in the New Testament, either refers to the clothing of angels, or else to the clothing of glorified saints who have been cleansed by the blood of Jesus. It symbolises what is pure and is not of earth.
However Luke also confirms that ‘the appearance of His countenance was altered’, and Matthew here describes it as ‘shining like the sun’. This connects Him with the righteous who will in the future shine forth as the sun in the Kingly Rule of their Father (Mat 13:43), but here it is seen as His already, not something that He has to receive in the future. He is already the Righteous One (compare Act 3:14) shining like the sun. One day all the righteous ones, made righteous by His coming and the divine activity upon them (see on Mat 5:6), will be like Him for they will see Him as He is (1Jn 3:2). Matthew may well also have had in mind the Sun of righteousness Who would arise with healing in His wings (Mal 4:3).
This growing in righteousness and glory of His people so that they become ‘the righteous’ is in fact revealed in similar terms to the Transfiguration in 2Co 3:18. There it comes about through beholding/reflecting the glory of the Lord. But there it is we and not the Lord whose shining is likened to the shining of Moses’ skin.
Comparison can be made with the faces which were ‘as lightning’, again of the angels in Mat 28:3; Dan 10:9. But as the sun is brighter and more permanent than the lightning, so was His glory seen to be more glorious as compared with theirs. If the ideas are being borrowed and to some extent improved on in order to bring out what is unique, the outshining of the glory of Jesus (compare Heb 1:3), they are not just being duplicated. In contrast with them He is the outshining of the glory of God and the ‘stamped out image’ of His substance (Heb 1:3). As Peter puts it, ‘we were eyewitnesses of His majesty’ and ‘He received honour and glory from God the Father’ (2Pe 1:16-17).
However, the main immediate comparison that would probably have been made by the Apostles as they saw Him in His glory on the Mount, would be with the glory of the Lord as He came down on the Tabernacle (and later the Temple). There He met with the children of Israel, and there His holiness was manifested. See Exo 29:43; Exo 40:34-35; 1Ki 8:11. But here the glory is seen rather to have emanated from Jesus, revealing that Jesus Himself was, in His humanity, God’s Dwellingplace, and it is important in this regard to note that the glory is seen as being that of Jesus Himself, for the voice of the Father ‘came out of Heaven’ (2Pe 1:18), from the cloud, not from Jesus Himself.
This ‘vision’ might well also have reminded the disciples of another vivid scene in Isa 6:1-8. That too was a glorious vision of a King in His glory, for although His glory is not mentioned there, it is implied in the fact that the seraphim covered their faces before Him and in the moving of the foundations, and there can be little doubt that the disciples would have seen that appearance in Isaiah in the light of the Shekinah, the revelation of the glory of God in His Dwellingplace. And there too He was accompanied by heavenly attendants who spoke to Him. There too the cloud came down (the house was filled with a smoke cloud), and there too a voice spoke from Heaven, referring to the need to listen (which would not be heeded in the case of Isaiah’s listeners). So there are a number of similarities. Of course here on the Mount Jesus could not yet be on a throne because He had not yet been glorified, but that is how He will be depicted in Mat 25:31. Here He is being depicted rather as the beloved Son, prior to His coronation (Mat 28:18), but it is probably still in terms of that vision of Isaiah (compare also Isa 60:19). This ties in again with Matthew’s emphasis on Isaiah and his prophecies in Mat 3:2 to Mat 20:28.
Later in Rev 1:13-16 similar descriptions will be used of Jesus, in a similar manifestation of glory, there described in terms of His face shining as the sun and as walking in the midst of His ‘congregation’, (seen in terms of seven ‘congregations’ which represent the universal congregation), and having the keys of Death and of Hades. These are concepts which tie in with this whole passage from Mat 16:13 to Mat 17:8, which reveals as it does the increasing manifestation of Christ, first as the Son of the living God (Mat 16:16) revealed in power in establishing His congregation and bringing the keys which release from Hades (Mat 16:18), and then as the glorious Son making known His glory (Mat 17:2; Mat 17:5; Rev 1:17). And all this in terms of tribulation and kingship (Mat 16:24-25; Mat 16:28; Rev 1:9). It is no coincidence that the Apostle John was present at both visions. Revelation 1 was an even greater (because totally heavenly) manifestation of what happened here.
Mat 17:2. And was transfigured before them The word implies either that there was a transfiguration made on the substance of his body, according to the import of the word in the best classic writers; (See Php 3:21.) or that the outward appearance only of his body was altered, as seems most probable from the manner in which St. Luke has expressed it. In this transfiguration the face of Jesus became radiant and dazzling; for it shone like the sun in its unclouded meridian clearness, and so was incomparably more glorious than the face of Moses at the giving of the law: at the same timehis garments acquired a snowy whiteness bright as light, and sweetly refulgent, but in a degree inferior to the radiancy of his countenance. Thus for a little while, during the state of his humiliation, the Son of God permitted the glory of his divinity to break forth, as it were, and shine through the veil of his human nature with which it was covered. See Macknight and Calmet.
Mat 17:2 . .] was transfigured , in the way about to be described. That is to say, His external aspect was changed (“non substantialis, sed accidentalis fuit transformatio,” Calovius); His face gleaming like the sun, and His raiment being so white that it shone like light. He appeared in outward heavenly , which (2Pe 1:16 ) was the foreshadowing of His future glorified state (Joh 12:16 ; Joh 12:23 ; Joh 17:5 ; Joh 21:24 ; 2Co 3:18 ; Mat 13:43 ). The analogy presented by Exo 34:29 comes short in this respect, that, whereas the brightness on the face of Moses was the result of God’s having appeared before him , in the case of Christ it proceeded from His own divine nature and life , the of which radiated from within .
] The aspect of it, therefore, was luminous, radiant.
2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
Ver. 2. And was transfigured before them ] This was while he was praying, as St Luke noteth. Prayer, rightly performed, is a parleying with God, , interpellatio, 1Ti 2:1 , a standing upon interrogatories with him, , 1Pe 3:21 , a pouring out of the heart unto him, Psa 62:8 , a familiar conference with him; wherein the soul is so carried beyond itself otherwise, ut caro est pene nescia carnis, as St Jerome speaks of certain holy women in his time, that they seemed in place only remote, but in affection to join with that holy company of heaven. So Dr Preston, on his death bed, said he should change his place, but not his company. Peter praying fell into a trance. Cornelius praying saw heavenly visions. Mr Bradford, a little before he went out of the Counter, prayed with such plenty of tears and abundant spirit of prayer, that it ravished the minds of the hearers. Also when he shifted himself in a clean shirt made for his burning, he made such a prayer of the wedding garment, that the eyes of those present were as truly occupied in looking on him, as their ears gave place to hear his prayer. Giles of Brussels, martyr, was so ardent in his prayers, kneeling by himself in some secret place of the prison, that he seemed to forget himself. Being called many times to eat, he neither heard nor saw them that stood by him, till he was lift up by the arms; and then gently he would speak unto them, as one awakened out of a deep sleep. Amor Dei est ecstaticus-sui nec se sinit esse iuris.
2. ] . = Luke. In what way, is not stated; but we may conclude from what follows, by being lighted with radiance both from without and from within.
= Luke; = , Mark.
Mat 17:2 . , transfiguratus est , Vulgate; became altered in appearance. Such transformation in exalted states of mind is predicated of others, e.g. , of Iamblichus (Eunapius in I. Vit. 22, cited by Elsner), and of Adam when naming the beasts (Fabricius, Cod. Pseud. V. T. , p. 10). , so as to be visible to them, vide Mat 6:1 . Luke’s narrative seems to imply that the three disciples were asleep at the beginning of the scene, but wakened up before its close. : these words describe the aspect of the transformed person; face sun-bright, raiment pure white.
transfigured. Greek. metamorphoomai = to change the form. Occurs only here, Mar 9:2, and in Rom 12:2, 2Co 3:18. Marking the change TO a new condition, while metaschematizo = change FROM a former condition. See note on Php 1:3, Php 1:21.
was = became.
light. App-130.
2.] . = Luke. In what way, is not stated; but we may conclude from what follows, by being lighted with radiance both from without and from within.
= Luke; = , Mark.
Mat 17:2. , was transfigured) This verb implies that our Lord had always possessed the glory within Himself. The force of the verb is different, as in Php 3:21 and 2Co 11:14; cf. also the distinction between and , in Php 2:6-8.[777]- light,) inferior to that of the sun;[778] for His garments diluted the splendour of His body.
[777] Sc. – – .
[778] Whereas His face shone as the sun, His raiment was only white as the light.-ED.
, forma, according to Beng. l. c., expresses something absolute. , habitus, refers to the aspect and feeling (refertur ad aspectum et sensum). I think as habitus is from habeo, so from , ; and therefore is the whole external condition of man, as seen in his form (), gesture, and gait,-the bearing and state of a man.-ED.
was transfigured
The transfiguration scene contains, in miniature, all the elements of the future kingdom in manifestation:
(1) the Lord, not in humiliation, but in glory (Mat 17:2).
(2) Moses, glorified, representative of the redeemed who have passed through death into the kingdom. Mat 13:43; Luk 9:30; Luk 9:31.
(3) Elijah, glorified, representative of the redeemed who have entered the kingdom by translation. 1Co 15:50-53; 1Th 4:14-17.
(4) Peter, James, and John, not glorified, representatives (for the moment) of Israel in the flesh in the future kingdom Eze 37:21-27.
(5) The multitude at the foot of the mountain Mat 17:2, representative of the nations who are to be brought into the kingdom after it is established over Israel Isa 11:10-12, etc.
transfigured: Luk 9:29, Rom 12:2, Phi 2:6, Phi 2:7,*Gr.
his face: Mat 28:3, Exo 34:29-35, Joh 1:14, Joh 17:24, Act 26:13-15, Rev 1:13-17, Rev 10:1, Rev 19:12, Rev 19:13, Rev 20:11
raiment: Psa 104:2, Mar 9:3
Reciprocal: Exo 24:10 – in his clearness Psa 18:12 – At the Psa 45:2 – fairer Ecc 8:1 – a man’s Son 5:15 – his countenance Son 6:10 – clear Isa 33:17 – eyes Dan 7:9 – whose Dan 10:6 – his face Hab 3:4 – brightness Mar 9:2 – transfigured Joh 20:12 – in Act 1:10 – two Act 6:15 – saw Act 22:6 – about Phi 2:8 – in Phi 3:21 – that Rev 1:17 – I fell Rev 19:8 – white
17:2
Transfigured is from META-MORPHOO which Thayer defines, “To change into another form, to transfigure, transform,” and he comments on the word as follows: “To be resplendent with divine brightness; used of the change of moral character for the better.” It is the word for “transformed” In Rom 12:2, and for “changed” in 2Co 3:18. It is the source of our English word “metamorphosis” which Webster defines, “2. A striking alteration in appearance, character, or circumstances.” With all this authoritative information before us, we understand the meaning of our verse is that Jesus underwent a change in his appearance so that his face shone, and even his raiment was glistening white. However, his body was not replaced literally, and the change in his appearance did not prevent the apostles from recognizing him.
And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
[And was transfigured.] When Christ was baptized, being now ready to enter upon his evangelical priesthood, he is sealed by a heavenly voice for the High Priest; and is anointed with the Holy Spirit, as the high priests were wont to be with holy oil.
In this transfiguration, he is sealed for the high priest: for mark, 1. How two of the greatest prophets, Moses and Elias, resort to him. 2. How to those words, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” which also were heard from heaven at his baptism, is added that clause, “hear ye him”: which compare with the words of Moses, concerning a prophet to be raised up by God, Deu 18:19; “Whosoever shall not hearken to my words, which I shall put into his mouth,” etc. 3. How the heavenly voice went out of the cloud that overshadowed them, when at his baptism no such cloud appeared. Here that is worthy observing, which some Jews note, and reason dictates, namely, That the cloud of glory, the conductor of Israel, departed at the death of Moses; for while he lived, that cloud was the people’s guide in the wilderness; but when he was dead, the ark of the covenant led them. Therefore, as that cloud departed at the death of Moses, that great prophet, so such a cloud was now present at the sealing of the greatest Prophet. 4. Christ here shines with such a brightness, nay, with a greater than Moses and Elias now glorified; and this both for the honour of his person and for the honour of his doctrine; both which surpassed by infinite degrees the persons and the doctrines of both of them. When you recollect the face of Christ transfigured, shining with so great lustre when he talked with Moses and Elias, acknowledge the brightness of the gospel above the cloudy obscurity of the law and of the prophets.
Mat 17:2. And he was transfigured before them, as witnesses. Peter afterwards mentions it (1Pe 1:16-18) and John alludes to it (Joh 1:14). The change in His appearance took place while He was praying (Luk 9:29).
His face did shine as the snow, and his garments became white as the light. Mark: And his garments became glistening, exceeding white; such as no fuller on earth can so whiten them. Luke: The fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment became white and dazzling. No explanation is possible that denies the supernatural element. Our Lords inherent glory burst forth; added to this there was an external heavenly illumination affecting His garments and surrounding Moses and Elijah, reaching its highest manifestation in the luminous cloud spoken of in Mat 17:5.
17:2 And was {b} transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
(b) Changed into another colour.
Jesus underwent a metamorphosis. The Greek word that Matthew used is metamophoo meaning "to transform or change in form." It was not just His appearance that changed, but His essential form became different. [Note: Lenski, pp. 651-51.] Probably Jesus assumed His post-resurrection body that was similar to, but somewhat different from, His pre-resurrection body (cf. 2Pe 1:16-18; Rev 1:16).
Matthew’s statement that Jesus was transfigured before the disciples indicates that the transformation was for their benefit. Jesus’ face shone, as Moses’ face had, and His garments became as white as light because they radiated God’s glory (cf. Exo 34:29-30). Moses, however, reflected God’s glory whereas Jesus radiated His own glory.
". . . wherever leukos [white] is used here or elsewhere in the New Testament in connection with clothing it always has reference either to that of angels (beings surrounded with glory), or else to the garments of the saints who enter into a glorified state in heaven." [Note: Joseph B. Bernardin, "The Transfiguration," Journal of Biblical Theology 52 (October 1933):185.]
This vision of Jesus would have strengthened the disciples’ faith that He was the Messiah. It would also have helped them understand that the sufferings He said He would experience would not be final (Mat 16:21). They would see Him glorified "coming in His kingdom" (Mat 16:28).
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)