• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

A SUPERNATURAL WONDER

Joined
Jul 31, 2023
Messages
538
Reaction score
147
Points
43
A Supernatural Wonder on top
of a High Mountain

Going back two-thousand years or more, one of the most intriguing and unique wonders occurred when our Lord was transfigured on the top of a high mountain, along with Moses and Elijah [Matt. 17]. Jesus’ appearance was refashioned to depict a different form or image of Himself. His appearance was resplendent with divine brightness. What a splendid scene that must have been for Peter, James, and John, the three men who were with him.

“Metamorphosis” is another term to describe that supernatural occasion in that there was a change, a recasting, a new shape, an unusual appearance. As usual, impulsive Peter did it again—blundered! He wanted to “build” something to give special allegiance and recognition to each person in the scene. But no! The God above would have no part of that scenario. “This is my Son, you listen to Him!”

Moses was expected to be adhered to under the Old Law, and Elijah’s prophecies were to be weighed for their wisdom and divine accuracy. “But my Son is your new Teacher, Lawgiver, Prophet, Chief Shepherd, and Mediator. Hear Him and heed Him,” God said to the three men.

In real life, Elijah did not suffer physical death [2 Kings 2:11]. He was taken up to heaven without the usual “passing away” syndrome experienced by all of us—sooner or later. He appeared with Jesus in his glorified form. Moses, however, had died a physical death hundreds of years prior to this heavenly scene. Yet he appeared with his Lord in a glorified form.

It seems that Moses’ transformed or glorified form on this occasion did not consist of terrestrial flesh and blood. His flesh and bones were still in the grave, and the resurrection was yet future. He appeared as a celestial being, not of this earth—a “spiritual anatomy,” so to speak. His configuration seemed to have been likened to the Lord’s.

So the observations and questions naturally follow. Moses was there in person. The episode was not a vision, not a nightmare, not a movie scene, and not figurative. It was real—as real as real can be. Inasmuch as Moses’ earthly flesh and blood was not part of the scene, what other part of him was left? His spirit—the real Moses!

A man’s spirit is his essential character, the principal element that drives him to action, his very essence. Remove his spirit—essence—from his body and the body dies. “The body without the spirit is dead” [James 2:26].

Yes, I am very much aware the Hebrew and Greek terms for “spirit” also translate “breath” and “wind.” Breath and wind, however, are not the essential character or principle element that drives a man to action or prompts him to produce and achieve. Here’s an example. Since we have mentioned Elijah’s not having to face biological death, note that before he was taken up into heaven Elisha pleaded with him to “let there be a double portion of your spirit on me” [after you depart]. And it happened! Elijah’s inner force or power fell upon Elisha.

What portion of Elijah fell upon Elisha? His spirit. Not his breath, not the wind, not a breeze, but Elijah’s inner self, his essential character and force. Hundreds of years after this great prophet was lifted up into heaven, John the Immerser [not “Baptist”] came in the spirit of Elijah—the same essential character and force of the prophet [Matt. 17:12]. John did not come “in the breath” of Elijah. Nor was John “full of wind.” Elijah’s spirit was the real man. John’s spirit resembled Elijah’s—not his (Elijah’s) breath!

On this subject, it is fascinating that John tells us, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits...” [I John 4:1]. This testing refers to a man’s essential character, his real self. Test him, not his breath, to ascertain his validity. But if we translate “spirit” here to mean “breath,” we place ourselves in a ridiculous rut. John is not alluding to testing a man’s breath for possible halitosis!

Someday our physical bodies, although returned to dust, will be resurrected and transformed to be like our Lord’s glorious body [Phil. 3:20]. As our “spirit returns to God who gave it” [Eccl. 12:7], or returns to His control, I can envision it reuniting with our glorious, transformed body when our Lord returns for the final time.​
 
It may be worth mentioning that the accounts of the transfiguration of Jesus on the mount does not say that Moses and Elijah were transfigured. Just saying.

I like to think they were, or otherwise appeared glorified, because it would help my thesis in other threads, but it doesn't say so, to my reading.
 
It may be worth mentioning that the accounts of the transfiguration of Jesus on the mount does not say that Moses and Elijah were transfigured. Just saying.

I like to think they were, or otherwise appeared glorified, because it would help my thesis in other threads, but it doesn't say so, to my reading.
Makesends, what term would you use to explain their appearence?
 
God's 'reprimand' to Peter the Impetuous, to me, anyway, speaks of the difference between the OT and NT in another way, besides. In the same way that legalism makes people want to do things, or be a certain way, or otherwise behave in a worthy way, likewise the children of Israel needed a go-between because they could not handle God personally --they wanted a priest, king, whatever, so they could have temporary relief from their 'being undone'. Peter wanted to build altars, as though that would satisfy the need of recognition. But God showed that would not render Peter (nor anyone) having responded appropriately concerning who Jesus Christ is. It is not a one-and-done thing that we can do.

"Listen to HIM (Christ)"
 
Makesends, what term would you use to explain their appearence?
Simply what it says, that they also appeared there with him. I can't assume they were transfigured also, though I would like to.

Side note: I find it remarkable that (apparently) Peter etc somehow knew who the two were, by sight! To me, that may be a strong hint that they were in some way, not just the ordinary temporal humans anymore that people once knew, but, perhaps, glorified and finally their REAL selves. But, that is not said, either.
 
Simply what it says, that they also appeared there with him. I can't assume they were transfigured also, though I would like to.

Side note: I find it remarkable that (apparently) Peter etc somehow knew who the two were, by sight! To me, that may be a strong hint that they were in some way, not just the ordinary temporal humans anymore that people once knew, but, perhaps, glorified and finally their REAL selves. But, that is not said, either.
"And He was transfigured before them..." Matthew, chapter 17, English Standard Version. I think I'm on safe ground by using "transfigured." The KJV also uses the term. It indicates Moses and Elijah were also transfigured with Jesus.​
 
"And He was transfigured before them..." Matthew, chapter 17, English Standard Version. I think I'm on safe ground by using "transfigured." The KJV also uses the term. It indicates Moses and Elijah were also transfigured with Jesus.​
Well, no, it doesn't. That Jesus was transfigured is not in question. But, if you mean to say he was transfigured "before" they were, it doesn't say that, either. "Before", there, is not a reference to time, but position. He was transfigured in front of the Disciples, not transfigured before Moses and Elijah were transfigured. It doesn't say they were transfigured at all. It doesn't say they weren't either, and, like I said, it would help another argument I'm in, if it did. But it doesn't.
 
Back
Top