Bearing Witness to the Glory of God’s Beloved Son—Lectionary Reflection for Transfiguration Sunday (2 Peter 1:16-21)

2 Peter 1:16-21 New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

¹⁶ For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty. ¹⁷ For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, my Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.” ¹⁸ We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him on the holy mountain.

¹⁹ So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed. You will do well to be attentive to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. ²⁰ First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, ²¹ because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

                **********************

                Throughout time, people have made their way up to mountaintops, seeking divine encounters. Sometimes, as in the story of the Tower of Babel, they may have attempted to storm heaven (Gen. 11:1-9). Abraham took Isaac up a mountain with the intention of offering him to God as a sacrifice. Fortunately, an angel intervened, and Isaac was spared. This has been interpreted as a test of Abraham’s faithfulness (Gen. 22:1-14; Heb. 11:17-19). Later, Moses heard the call to climb Mount Sinai, where he entered a cloud and then received the Tablet of the Law from Yahweh (Exod. 24:9-18). Then there is the story of Jesus’ Transfiguration, which is found in each of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 17:1-13; Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36). It is there on the mountain top that Jesus’ glory is revealed, and a voice from heaven embraces him as God’s beloved Son. With the story of the Transfiguration, the season of Epiphany comes to a close, giving way to the season of Lent.

                Perhaps you have had mountaintop experiences. I’ve climbed a few mountains, back in my youth, but I’m not really a mountain climber. I can’t say that I had divine encounters when I climbed those mountains. Now that I live in the eastern half of the United States, what they call mountains out here, we generally called hills when I lived out west. Nevertheless, there is something spiritual about being on a mountaintop, where the world lies below you, and only the sky stands above you. You may feel closer to God, at least that was the premise in the ancient world.

                While the primary witness to the Transfiguration is found in the Synoptic Gospels, there is one other place where we find a witness to this event. That is 2 Peter 1:16-21. Although the author of this letter claims to have been an eyewitness to this event, that is unlikely. The scholarly consensus is that 2 Peter is relatively late in its appearance, perhaps as late as the early second century. Whoever wrote the letter drew on Peter’s name to give the letter greater authority. While that may seem disingenuous to the modern reader, it was a rather common occurrence in the ancient world. If there was a community that emerged from Peter’s ministry, a community that carried on his witness, then perhaps the author is part of that continuing community, such that this served as a recounting of Peter’s witness passed down to later followers.

What one finds in this letter appears to be a farewell address. The purpose of this discourse appears to be an attempt to resolve theological conflicts centered around the status of Jesus’ expected return. These conflicts appear to have arisen because false teachers have entered the community and stirred things up. So, the author asks them to trust the apostolic tradition, which is what we find revealed here in the author’s witness concerning the Transfiguration of Jesus.

                Like the Synoptic accounts, the author speaks to what took place on the Mount of Transfiguration. Now, the letter doesn’t give the entire story. Instead, the focus is on God’s declaration, which the author claims to have witnessed, that Jesus is God’s beloved Son, with whom God is well pleased. Since the author claims to have heard this voice from heaven, the readers are asked to trust his message. For modern readers, these claims seem to ring hollow. Isn’t the author pretending to be something he wasn’t? That appears to be the case, but could it be that the readers knew that the author wasn’t Peter, especially if this was a second-century document?

                Having asked these questions, we return to the top of our reading, where the author tells us that he and his compatriots did not “follow cleverly devised myths.”  What is meant by this?  Might the author want to convey to us that the message they presented was a true representation of the Gospel that had been preached by Peter and not something that had been devised by false teachers?  

                When compared with the Synoptic accounts, substantial elements are missing, including the transformation of Jesus’ appearance as well as the presence of Moses and Elijah. While the letter assumes Peter’s presence, no mention is made of James and John (or any other disciples). The focus here is on God’s witness to Jesus’ majesty.

                Having begun with the claim that he and his compatriots did not follow “cleverly devised myths,” after recounting the witness of God to Jesus’ identity, the author concludes by affirming the reliability of the prophecy of Scripture, which we’re told is not a matter of one’s own interpretation. That is because no prophecy found in Scripture came about due to human will. That is, the prophetic word found in Scripture is the product of people being moved by the Holy Spirit to speak for God. As Pheme Perkins notes, the author might have in mind as a contrasting reality what was known to occur at places like Delphi, where the interpretation of the prophecies was a matter of conjecture. She writes that “Second Peter insists that prophetic words inspired by the Holy Spirit are not that sort of prophecy; they reflect God’s purposes, not human cleverness” [Feasting on the Word, p. 451]. In other words, we can’t make Scripture say whatever we want it to say.

As for what the author has in mind when speaking of Scripture, we can assume that the author has the Old Testament in mind. However, by the early second century, we see parts of what becomes the New Testament spoken of as Scripture. The assumption is that these documents, which must be read under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, bear witness to the things of God. As Christopher Beeley notes, “Peter’s point is extremely practical: It is in the Scriptures above all that we find the light of Christ to illuminate the darkness of our lives every day.” [Feasting on the Word, p. 450]. As we ponder this word about biblical interpretation guided by the Holy Spirit, it might be easy to assume we can put away interpretive helps or listen to the community. That won’t work, but that doesn’t mean God isn’t involved in the interpretive process. Surely God expects us to use the tools if they can be helpful.  

As for Scripture, it serves as a lamp that shines in the darkness, helping us find our way as we seek to follow the ways of God. Such is the witness of Scripture itself, as we read in Psalm 119:105: “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.” So, as we leave the Mountain of Transfiguration and return to the valley below, where Epiphany gives way to Lent, may that lamp that is Christ light our path as we move toward Holy Week.