Mateus 17
David Guzik · Citado em PreceptAustin
Mateus 17
Guzik adds that there was a third mount "Mount Miron (about 3,900 feet, 1,190 meters) was the highest mountain in a Jewish area, and is on the way between Caesarea Philippi and Capernaum. Carson favors this location." Spurgeon's Commentary - Were these “six days” a week’s quiet interval, in which our Lord prepared himself for the singular transaction upon the “mountain apart”? Did the little company of three know from one Sabbath to another that such an amazing joy awaited them? The three were elect out of the elect, and favoured to see what none else in all the world might behold. Doubtless our Lord had reasons for his choice, as he has for every choice he makes; but he does not unveil them to us. The same three beheld the agony in the garden; perhaps the first sight was necessary to sustain their faith under the second. The name of the “high mountain” can never be known; for those who knew the locality have left no information. Tabor, if you please; Hermon, if you prefer it. No one can decide. It was a lone and lofty hill. Stephen Langton (ca. 1150–1228) divided the Bible into chapters while serving as a professor at the University of Paris, before becoming the Archbishop of Canterbury. His chapter divisions were later adopted in the Latin Vulgate and eventually in subsequent translations of the Bible, such as the Wycliffe Bible (14th century) and the King James Version (1611). The chapter divisions were designed to make the text easier to reference, memorize, and study, especially in academic and ecclesiastical settings. Before Langton’s work, the Bible had other forms of divisions: The Hebrew Bible: Divided into sections called parashot for liturgical readings and verses marked with punctuation. The Greek Septuagint: Used divisions similar to paragraphs. Langton’s chapter system became the standard and is the basis for the chapters we use today in most Bible translations. The division of the Bible into verses came after the chapter division, the Old Testament Verses were arranged by Jewish scribes (the Masoretes whose work resulted in the Masoretic Text, the authoritative Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible, which is the basis for most modern translations of the Old Testament.) in the 9th century CE. The New Testament Verses were introduced by Robert Estienne (also known as Stephanus), a French printer, in 1551. He added verse numbers to the Greek New Testament and later applied them to the entire Bible. McNeill -MATT. 17:1, 2. Jesus taketh Peter, James and John … up into an high mountain apart, and was transfigured before them. Come close to Him. He may take you to-day up into the mountain top, for where He took Peter with his blundering, and James and John, those sons of thunder, who again and again so utterly misunderstood their Master and His mission—there is no reason why He should not take you. You can hardly be farther back than they were. So don’t shut yourself out of it and say, “Ah, these wonderful visions and revelations of the Lord are for choice spirits, for an election within the election!” They may be for you. The Lord will come to those that are humble and of a contrite heart and who tremble at His Word. Special Three - J. O. Sanders, BORROW Enjoying Intimacy with God, Moody, p. 19 G. C.
Mateus 17
Guzik has an interesting thought on the transfiguration writing that "Essentially this was not a new miracle, but the temporary cessation of an ongoing one. The real miracle was that Jesus, most of the time, could keep from displaying this glory. Yet John said, We beheld His glory (Jn 1:14+). Peter wrote, We were eyewitnesses of His majesty." D A Carson on why Jesus commanded silence - The command must have been in some ways disappointing and its lifting a delight. Why did Jesus impose it? Probably for two principal and complementary reasons: 1. The story would only stir up superficial political messianism, already a menace. If Jesus’ closest disciples found it hard to understand a suffering and dying Messiah, how would the crowds fare until after the resurrection? 2. The strongest evidence for Jesus’ messiahship would be his resurrection, by which he “was declared with power to be the Son of God” (Ro 1:4). Premature self-disclosure in a direct fashion, without the supreme “sign of Jonah,” the resurrection (see comments at 12:40), would not only foster false expectations but also quickly disillusion those who held them. Thus, with his prospective converts in mind, Jesus knew it was better for their sakes to wait until after the resurrection before allowing Peter, James, and John to tell what they had seen. (See Matthew) Peter obeyed Jesus' command to be silent, but then recalled this event in his Second Letter writing "For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 17 For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, “This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased” (cf Mt 17:5)– 18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. 19 And so we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. (2 Peter 1:16-19+) THOUGHT - As revelatory as the transfiguration was, Peter says the inspired, written Word is even more sure and therefore deserving of our attention until the end of this age and the King returns. Are you paying attention daily to God's sure prophetic Word for it alone will guide us in this dark place that is daily becoming darker! When the day dawns we will no longer know in part, but then we shall know fully. Maranatha! Spurgeon's Commentary - What they had seen would confirm their own confidence, and remain a secret spring of delight to them; but as it would require great faith in others to believe it, they were to “tell the vision to no man.” The transfiguration would be as hard to believe as the incarnation itself; and there could be no practical use in making demands upon a faith which scarcely existed. Until the greatest confirmation of all was given in our Lord’s resurrection, the vision on the Holy Mount would be rather a tax upon faith than a support of it in the case of those who did not themselves personally see it, but only heard the apostles’ report of it. It is wise not to overload testimony. There is a time for making known the higher truths; for out of season these may burden, rather than assist, enquiring minds. What a secret these men had to keep! They did keep it; but they never forgot it, nor ceased to feel its influence. Now that the Son of man is risen again from the dead, no doctrine needs to be kept back. In bringing life and immortality to light, our Lord has rent away the veil which had long concealed the higher mysteries of the gospel. His coming out of the grave has set free all buried truth. It is idle, not to say sinful, to be silent about the deep things of God now that “the Lord is risen indeed.” Yet some preachers we could name never mention election, the covenant, or final perseverance by the year together. Vision (3705) horama from horáō = to see, behold; English - panorama) describes literally that which is seen, as opposed to a figment of one's imagination (Mt 17:9; Ac 7:31; 10:3, 17, 19; 18:9). It is something that is viewed with one’s eye. It describes a supernatural vision used to give divine communication and is distinct from a dream. In Matthew's use Jesus refers to His transfiguration commanding Peter, John and James “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead.” (Mt 17:9) Uses of Jesus appearing to Ananias in a vision and told to go to Saul who had seen Ananias in a vision (Acts 9:10, 12). Of the vision of Cornelius at God begins to open the Gentiles to the Gospel (Acts 10:3) by showing Peter a vision (Acts 10:17, 11:5). Classical writers understood horama to mean “that which is seen, visible,” “a sight.” It did not usually refer to a supernatural vision, although it could. A “dream” could also be called horama (Liddell-Scott). In the Septuagint the word is used for (1) a “vision” by which God revealed himself to Abraham (Genesis 15:1); (2) a “great sight” of a bush which burned with fire and was not consumed (Exodus 3:3); and (3) “night visions” through which God revealed to Daniel things in the future (Daniel 7:13,15). Horama is the word used by Luke to describe the Gospel going from Asia to the European continent A vision appeared to Paul in the night: a man of Macedonia was standing and appealing to him, and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” When he had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them. (Acts 16:9-10+) Son of Man in Matthew - 31x/29v- Matt. 8:20; Matt. 9:6; Matt. 10:23; Matt. 11:19; Matt. 12:8; Matt. 12:32; Matt. 12:40; Matt. 13:37; Matt. 13:41; Matt. 16:13; Matt. 16:27; Matt. 16:28; Matt. 17:9; Matt. 17:12; Matt. 17:22; Matt. 18:11; Matt. 19:28; Matt. 20:18; Matt. 20:28; Matt. 24:27; Matt. 24:30; Matt. 24:37; Matt. 24:39; Matt. 24:44; Matt. 25:31; Matt. 26:2; Matt. 26:24; Matt. 26:45; Matt. 26:64 John Broadus on Son of Man - This remarkable expression was no doubt founded on Da. 7:13, “I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man,” Rev. Ver., a passage which the Jewish writers agree in referring to the Messiah. The so-called “Book of Enoch” frequently speaks of the coming Messiah as the Son of man. We learn from John 12:34 that the Jews understood this phrase to mean the Messiah; and from Luke 22:69f. that they saw little difference between calling him the Son of man and the Son of God. Our Lord’s frequent use of the phrase (more than seventy times) constitutes an oft-repeated claim to be the Messiah (e. g., Mt 24:30; 26:64); it was also probably designed to render prominent the great fact that He was genuinely and thoroughly a man, a fact which believers in His divinity sometimes fail to appreciate. The phrase is never applied to Him by any other than Himself, except in Acts 7:56, and perhaps in Rev. 1:13; 14:14. As the Hebrew phrase originally suggested human feebleness and frailty (as in Ps 8:4; 146:3), it may have seemed on that account less appropriate to the now exalted and glorified Redeemer. The many attempts to explain the phrase ‘Son of man’ in some other sense than as denoting the Messiah, are well stated and briefly refuted in Meyer, QUESTION - What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man? | GotQuestions.org - WATCH VIDEO ANSWER - Jesus is referred to as the “Son of Man” 82 times in the New Testament (NIV and ESV). In fact, Son of Man is the primary title Jesus used when referring to Himself (e.g., Matthew 12:32; 13:37; Luke 12:8; John 1:51). The only use of Son of Man in a clear reference to Jesus, spoken by someone other than Jesus, came from the lips of Stephen as he was being martyred (Acts 7:56). Son of Man is a title of humanity. Other titles for Christ, such as Son of God, are overt in their focus on His deity. Son of Man, in contrast, focuses on the humanity of Christ. God called the prophet Ezekiel “son of man” 93 times. In this way, God was simply calling Ezekiel a human being. Son of man is simply a periphrastic term for “human.” Jesus Christ was truly a human being. He came “in the flesh” (1 John 4:2). Son of Man is a title of humility. The Second Person of the Trinity, eternal in nature, left heaven’s glory and took on human flesh, becoming the Son of Man, born in a manger and “despised and rejected by mankind” (Isaiah 53:3). The Son of Man had “no place to lay his head” (Luke 9:58). The Son of Man ate and drank with sinners (Matthew 11:19). The Son of Man suffered at the hands of men (Matthew 17:12). This intentional lowering of His status from King of Heaven to Son of Man is the epitome of humility (see Philippians 2:6–8). Son of Man is a title of deity. Ezekiel may have been a son of man, but Jesus is the Son of Man. As such, Jesus is the supreme example of all that God intended mankind to be, the embodiment of truth and grace (John 1:14). In Him “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9). For this reason, the Son of Man was able to forgive sins (Matthew 9:6). The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:28). The Son of Man came to save lives (Luke 9:56; 19:10), rise from the dead (Mark 9:9), and execute judgment (John 5:27). At His trial before the high priest, Jesus said, “I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:64). This statement immediately ended the trial, as the court accused the Lord of blasphemy and condemned Him to death (verses 65–66). Son of Man is a fulfillment of prophecy. Jesus’ claim before the high priest to be the Son of Man was a reference to the prophecy of Daniel 7:13–14, “I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed” (NKJV). Daniel saw glory, worship, and an everlasting kingdom given to the Messiah—here called the “Son of Man”—and Jesus applied this prophecy to Himself. Jesus also spoke of His coming kingdom on other occasions (Matthew 13:41; 16:28). The author of Hebrews used a reference to the “son of man” in the Psalms to teach that Jesus, the true Son of Man, will be the ruler of all things (Hebrews 2:5–9; cf. Psalm 8:4–6). The Son of Man, in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, will be the King. Jesus was fully God (John 1:1), but He was also fully human (John 1:14). As the Son of God and the Son of Man, He is deserving of both titles. ILLUSTRATIONS - Matthew 17:9 The Unfinished Painting - Imagine seeing an unfinished painting by a master artist. Without the final strokes, it is difficult to grasp the full vision of the masterpiece. The artist might say, "Wait until it’s complete before you show it to others." Jesus’ glory revealed on the mountain was a "preview," but the complete picture of His mission would only be understood after His resurrection. The Surprise Ending - A filmmaker creates a suspenseful movie and tells the cast not to reveal the twist ending. The story only makes sense once the surprise is unveiled. Jesus’ resurrection was the "twist ending" that made sense of His life, death, and divine glory. The disciples were told to wait before sharing the Transfiguration so the full story could be revealed. The Seed and the Plant - A gardener plants a seed and explains that its beauty will only be evident once it grows and blooms. Until then, it’s hard to understand its potential. The Transfiguration was like the seed—beautiful, but its full meaning was revealed in the resurrection, when Jesus’ glory and purpose "bloomed." A Confidential Plan - A CEO announces a groundbreaking project to their inner circle but says, "Keep this confidential until the launch date." Sharing too soon could lead to misunderstanding or derail the plan. Jesus’ command to keep the vision private ensured that the disciples wouldn’t share incomplete or misunderstood truths. The resurrection was the "launch" that clarified everything. The Puzzle with Missing Pieces - If you show someone a puzzle with many pieces missing, they may not understand the image. The puzzle must be completed to see the full picture. The Transfiguration was a piece of the puzzle, but the resurrection was the key to seeing the entire story of Jesus’ mission. The Teacher’s Lesson A teacher explains part of a lesson to the class but asks them not to share it with others until they’ve learned the entire concept. Sharing too soon could lead to confusion. The disciples needed time to understand the significance of the Transfiguration in light of Jesus’ resurrection before they could teach others. The Blueprint and the Building An architect shows a blueprint to a small group and says, "Wait until the building is complete before revealing this." The blueprint only makes sense when the final structure is visible. The Transfiguration was a glimpse of God’s "blueprint" for redemption, but the resurrection was the completed structure that brought the plan to life. Matthew 17:10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” Why: Mt 17:3,4 11:14 27:47-49 Mal 4:5,6 Mk 9:11 Jn 1:21,25 Related Passages: Matthew 11:14 “And if you care to accept it, he (JOHN THE BAPTIST) himself is Elijah, who was to come. THE DISCIPLES PUZZLE OVER ELIJAH And His disciples (mathetes) asked Him, “Why then do the scribes (grammateus) say that Elijah must (dei - compelling divine necessity to) come first (protos) - Next in Mt 17:10-13 we drop in on a "Bible Study" entitled "Will the Real Elijah Please Stand Up!" Elijah's presence in the Transfiguration prompted their question. While scribes (basing their teaching on Mal 4:5-6) taught Elijah must come first, the prophet Malachi had taught this same thing declaring "Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the LORD. “And he will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the land with a curse.” (Mal 4:5-6+) Malachi's prophecy led the scribes to believe that Elijah had to come first, that is before the Messiah Who would usher in the Messianic Age. Now that the disciples had no doubt Jesus was the Messiah, they were confused as to why Elijah had not come before Him. John Broadus explains that "The thought of Elijah had been suggested by his appearance on the Mount. The Scribes were accustomed to teach that Elijah in proper person would come before the Messiah, and prepare the way for Him by a new work of reformation—thus interpreting literally the prediction of Mal. 4:5 (cp. notes on Mt 16:14). Some of the Jews held that Elijah would anoint the Messiah. But here is Messiah present beyond question, and no such preparatory ministry of Elijah has occurred. They ask him therefore to explain why the Scribes say that Elijah must come before the Messiah; and this he proceeded to do" Spurgeon's Commentary - 10. And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? One by one the difficulties of the disciples are stated to their Lord, and their solution is soon given. One of these concerned Elijah; and as he had been just now before them, they were led to mention it. “Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?” This is the report of men who have studied our Scriptures, that Elias comes before the Lord’s appearing. No doubt it staggered their minds when they had it put in some such logical fashion as this,— Messiah cannot come till Elijah has appeared; Elijah has not appeared; Therefore Jesus is not the Messiah Matthew 17:11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things; and restore: Mal 4:6 Lu 1:16,17 3:3-14 Ac 3:21 Related Passage: Malachi 4:6+ Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the LORD. “And he will restore (Lxx = apokathistemi) the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the land with a curse.” Mark 9:12+ And He said to them, “Elijah does first come and restore (Lxx = apokathistemi) all things. And yet how is it written of the Son of Man that He should suffer many things and be treated with contempt? Luke 1:17 And it is he who will go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, TO TURN THE HEARTS OF THE FATHERS BACK TO THE CHILDREN, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous; so as to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” FIRST PART OF ANSWER YES ELIJAH MUST COME And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming (erchomai - present tense) and will restore (apokathistemi) all things - In answer to the disciples' question about Elijah, He first says that the prophet Elijah would come and "restore the hearts of the fathers to their children" just as Malachi had prophesied in Mal 4:6+. Some writers think that Elijah will return as one of the Two Witnesses in Revelation 11 (see pros and cons regarding this interpretation). Spurgeon's Commentary - 11, 12. “Jesus answered”: he has an answer for all questions, and we shall do well to bring our difficulties to him to hear his replies. Our Lord admits that Elias must come before the Messiah: “Elias truly shall first come”; but he asserts that the person intended by the prophecy “is come already,” and that the evil ones “have done unto him whatsoever they listed.” This cleared up the doubt at once. Then Jesus went on to say that what had been done to the true Elias would also be done to himself, the Messiah. Jesus himself must die by a cruel death: “Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.” How simple the explanation of the difficulty! How often has it happened that we have been looking for that which has already come, or have been perplexed by a doctrine which, when it has been opened to us by the Holy Spirit, has proved full of instruction and comfort. Without divine teaching we drown in the shallows; but with it we swim the fathomless deeps Restore (600) apokathistemi from apo = from + kathistemi = to set in order, appoint) means literally to restore to an earlier condition. Meanings include to restore, to give or bring back, to reinstate. To return to a former condition, place or position. Apokathistemi in secular Greek was a medical technical term for restoring to health (to cure) (Mt 12:13, Mk 3:5, 8:5, Lk 6:10) In Mt 17:11 and Mk 9:12 Jesus told His disciples that "Elijah is coming and will restore all things." APOKATHISTEMI - 8V - Matt. 12:13; Matt. 17:11; Mk. 3:5; Mk. 8:25; Mk. 9:12; Lk. 6:10; Acts 1:6; Heb. 13:19 Matthew 17:12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” and they: Mt 11:9-15 21:23-25,32 Mk 9:12,13 11:30-32 Lu 7:33 Jn 1:11 Jn 5:32-36 Ac 13:24-28 but: Mt 11:2 14:3-10 Mk 6:14-28 Lu 3:19,20 Ac 7:52 Likewise: Mt 16:21 Isa 53:3-12 Lu 9:21-25 Ac 2:23 3:14,15 4:10 Related Passage: Malachi 3:1+ “Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming,” says the LORD of hosts. SECOND PART OF ANSWER ELIJAH HAS COME But (term of contrast) - Jesus had just stated that Malachi 4:5-6 would be fulfilled in the future, but now speaks about Elijah in the present. Are you confused? I say to you that Elijah already came (erchomai aorist tense - past tense - at a point in time) - Indeed, this can be somewhat confusing. Jesus had just said the disciples were correct that Elijah must come before the Messiah. Jesus was speaking of the prophecy in Malachi that had not yet been fully fulfilled. Now He throws a curve stating that Elijah had already come (aorist tense) in the past. The solution to this puzzle is that Jesus identified the ministry of John the Baptist with the ministry of Elijah. Two passages give shed light on how to explain Elijah future and Elijah present. How can Elijah be partially fulfilled in John and fully fulfilled in a future Elijah? First, Luke 1:17+ prophesied that John the Baptist would "go as a forerunner before Him (Messiah) in the spirit and power of Elijah." In other words, he would have an "Elijah-like" ministry. This explains Jesus' statement that Elijah already came in the past when John the Baptist began his ministry. Second, in Mt 11:10, 14+ Jesus explained that John the Baptist was "the one about whom it is written, ‘BEHOLD, I SEND MY MESSENGER BEFORE YOUR FACE, WHO WILL PREPARE YOUR WAY BEFORE YOU (Mal 3:1+)....And if you care to accept it, he (JOHN THE BAPTIST) himself is Elijah, who was to come." As explained below the Jews did not accept that John the Baptist was an Elijah-like figure. And they (ou - absolutely) did not recognize (epiginosko) him, but did to him whatever they wished - They in context is the Jews, the Jewish nation as a whole and the Jewish religious leaders. They did not recognize John as Elijah. If John the Baptist had been recognized as Elijah, the prophecy of Elijah would have been fulfilled. In other words, if Israel had responded in saving faith to John the Baptist's call of repentance, everything necessary to bring in Messiah's kingdom would have accomplished. In that setting all Israel would have had to do was accept Messiah as her rightful King, which of course they did not do. By the statement did to him whatever they wished Jesus means they imprisoned and then beheaded John the Baptist. They wished speaks of their own will -- they did what they did to John because they wanted to! One question that is raised regarding Jesus' interpretation of John as Elijah is the fact that Elijah himself flatly stated he was not Elijah (Jn 1:21+).
Mateus 17
Guzik summarizes how John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah... Elijah was noted as being full of zeal for God; so was John the Baptist. Elijah boldly rebuked sin in high places; so did John the Baptist. Elijah called sinners and compromisers to a decision of repentance; so did John the Baptist. Elijah attracted multitudes in his ministry; so did John the Baptist. Elijah attracted the attention and fury of a king and his wife; so did John the Baptist. Elijah was an austere man; so was John the Baptist. Elijah fled to the wilderness; John the Baptist also lived there. Elijah lived in a corrupt time and was used to restore failing spiritual life; so was it true of John the Baptist. Matthew 17:13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist. the disciples: Mt 11:14 JESUS' EXPLANATION CLARIFIES CONFUSION Then the disciples understood (suniemi) that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist - Jesus' explanation enabled the disciples to put the pieces of the "Elijah puzzle" together and understand why Jesus had called John an Elijah-like figure. Ligon Duncan summarizes the Elijah puzzle - Now if you will look at the very first words of verse 12, you will notice that Jesus uses the same juxtaposition here that He uses in the Sermon on the Mount. You remember when Jesus says, “You have heard…but I say. You have heard, but I say.” Well, here again, the scribes teach Elijah is coming and will restore all things, but I say Elijah has already come. So what Jesus is saying is this. The scribes were right to think that Malachi predicted that Elijah would come to prepare the way for the Lord, but they were wrong in not recognizing that John the Baptist was the Elijah predicted by Malachi. They rejected his teachings, just like they rejected My teaching; they put him to death just like they are going to put Me to death. He is saying to His disciples, ‘Don’t think because you have seen Elijah in the flesh today, that this means now that I am going to reign in glory apart from the cross for now. The true Elijah predicted by Malachi, he was beheaded. I’m going to be crucified, because the way to glory is the way of the cross. Martin Luther once said “There is not a word in the Bible which is extra crucem, there is not a word in the Bible which can be understood apart from the cross,” and this is precisely what Jesus is pressing home again here. There can be no appreciation of His glory apart from the understanding of the cross. This glorious Christ is the crucified Christ. That is the Christ we proclaim, that is the Christ we trust in. May God enable us to believe in Christ as He is offered in the gospel, and that is the glorious Christ who was crucified. (The Transfiguration) Understood (4920) suniemi from sun/syn = with + hiemi = send) (Related noun sunesis) literally means to send together or bring together. The idea is to put together "pieces of the puzzle" (so to speak) and to exhibit quick comprehension. Suniemi is describes the ability to understand concepts and see relationships between them. Suniemi means to put together, grasp or exhibit quick comprehension. Suniemi is the manifestation of the ability to understand concepts and see relationships between them and thus describes the exercise of the faculty of comprehension, intelligence, acuteness, shrewdness. The noun sunesis was originally used by Homer in the Odyssey to describe the running together or a flowing together of two rivers. BDAG says that suniemi means to "to have an intelligent grasp of something that challenges one’s thinking or practice SUNIEMI - 25V - Matt. 13:13; Matt. 13:14; Matt. 13:15; Matt. 13:19; Matt. 13:23; Matt. 13:51; Matt. 15:10; Matt. 16:12; Matt. 17:13; Mk. 4:12; Mk. 6:52; Mk. 7:14; Mk. 8:17; Mk. 8:21; Lk. 2:50; Lk. 8:10; Lk. 18:34; Lk. 24:45; Acts 7:25; Acts 28:26; Acts 28:27; Rom. 3:11; Rom. 15:21; 2 Co. 10:12; Eph. 5:17 Matthew 17:14 When they came to the crowd, a man came up to Jesus, falling on his knees before Him and saying, when: Mk 9:14-29 Lu 9:37-43 falling on his knees: Mk 1:40 10:17 Ac 10:25,26 Related Passages: Mark 9:14-17+ And when they came back to the disciples, they saw a large crowd around them, and some scribes arguing with them. 15 And immediately, when the entire crowd saw Him, they were amazed, and began running up to greet Him. 16 And He asked them, “What are you discussing with them?” 17 And one of the crowd answered Him, “Teacher, I brought You my son, possessed with a spirit which makes him mute Luke 9:37-43+ And it came about on the next day, that when they had come down from the mountain, a great multitude met Him. 38 And behold (idou) a man from the crowd shouted (boao), saying, "Teacher (didaskalos), I beg (deomai) You to look at (epiblepo) my son, for he is my only boy (monogenes) DISCIPLES DESCEND FROM A MOUNTAIN HIGH TO A VALLEY LOW This next section Matthew 17:14–20 covers and deals with the cure of the demon possessed boy which shows that with God all things are possible. This section has parallels in. Mark 9:14-29+ and Luke 9:37-43a+. All the Synoptic Gospels place this event immediately after the transfiguration. Mark's account is much more detailed and twice the length of the parallel passages. When - What time? The parallel account in Luke 9:37+ says "The next day." Remember that time phrases (even words like "when") beg the question when? In context it is the day after Jesus' transfiguration on the mountain. As Wiersbe wisely reminds us "We dare not stay on the glorious mountaintop when there are battles to fight in the valley below." Luke alone mentions this descent the next day and it serves to highlight the difference between the future glorious kingdom and the fallen world to which the quartet returned. These three men had seen the King of glory. They had received a preview of coming attractions, the Messianic Kingdom on earth. They saw something no other men had ever seen. So they were coming down in elevation, but surely the were coming down in elation! But they would never forget this time of Jesus' transfiguration. They came to the crowd - Who is they? The "they" refers to Jesus, Peter, James, and John, who were descending from the mountain after the Transfiguration. Talk about descending to the "lowlands of reality." Luke says there was "a large crowd around them, and some scribes arguing with" the 9 disciples (Mk 9:14+). A man came up to Jesus, falling on his knees (gonupeteo) before Him and saying - KJV has "kneeling down." A man falling on his knees (father of a falling son - falling into fire) is a not just a picture of his physical posture but reflects his heart's posture, in this case his acknowledgement of Jesus' authority and reflecting his desperate need for deliverance for his only son (monogenes - Lk 9:38+), the same word used for God's only begotten Son (Jn 1:14, 18+). John