Mark 9:2–8 – Could the Transfiguration be a later myth or legend, given the supernatural elements and lack of external corroboration? 1. Textual Context and Overview Mark 9:2–8 reads: “After six days Jesus took with Him Peter, James, and John and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And He was transfigured before them. His clothes became radiantly white, whiter than any launderer on earth could bleach them. And Elijah and Moses appeared before them, talking with Jesus. Then Peter said to Jesus, ‘Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let us put up three shelters—one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’ (For they were all so terrified that Peter did not know what else to say.) Then a cloud appeared and enveloped them, and a voice came from the cloud: ‘This is My beloved Son. Listen to Him!’ Suddenly, when they looked around, they saw no one with them except Jesus.” The Transfiguration is recorded in Matthew (17:1–8) and Luke (9:28–36) as well, and 2 Peter 1:16–18 echoes its significance. The event portrays an extraordinary display of Jesus’ divine nature, witnessed by three key disciples. This unique moment, though overwhelmingly supernatural, has early attestation across multiple sources, suggesting it is not a much-later invention. 2. Internal Witness and Multiple Gospel Accounts The presence of the Transfiguration in three Synoptic Gospels offers a strong case for its historical foundation: • Multiple Attestations: Mark 9:2–8, Matthew 17:1–8, and Luke 9:28–36 independently describe the same core elements—Jesus’ transformed appearance, shining garments, the presence of Moses and Elijah, and the voice from the cloud. • Shared Details, Minor Variations: While the essential narrative remains consistent (a transfigured Jesus, the disciples’ fear, the appearance of Moses and Elijah, and God’s affirmation of His Son), each writer’s style presents small differences. This phenomenon, common to eyewitness or near-eyewitness accounts, supports authenticity rather than calculated mythmaking. In addition, 2 Peter 1:16–18 speaks of not following “cleverly devised fables,” but rather being “eyewitnesses of His majesty,” referencing the “Majestic Glory” that said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” This explicit allusion points back directly to the Transfiguration scene, further demonstrating how the earliest Christian writers understood and affirmed this event, rather than treating it as legend. 3. Early Manuscript Evidence and Literary Consistency Early Christian manuscripts, such as those found in papyri collections (e.g., P45) and later codices like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, show remarkable continuity in transmitting Mark’s Gospel. Although papyri fragments of Mark are more fragmentary than some Johannine manuscripts, what does exist consistently includes this Transfiguration passage. Textual critics such as Bruce Metzger and more recent scholars have emphasized the reliability of the Gospel tradition, with no evidence that Mark 9:2–8 is a late insertion. The passage’s theological consistency with the rest of Mark—particularly its focus on Jesus’ identity and authority—fits organically into the narrative rather than functioning like a legendary addition. 4. Consistency with Hebrew Prophetic Patterns The Transfiguration resonates with Old Testament theophanies and schedules of revelation: • Parallel to Moses’ Encounters: Exodus 34:29–35 describes Moses’ face shining after being in the presence of the Lord, an event pointing to divine revelation. Mark’s mention of Jesus’ radiantly white garments recalls Old Testament imagery of God’s overwhelming splendor. • Fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets: The appearance of Moses and Elijah—representing the Law and the Prophets—symbolically testifies to Jesus as the ultimate fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures (cf. Matthew 5:17). This direct integration with the Old Testament storyline argues against a later legend: it reveals deep thematic continuity recognized by very early believers. 5. Early Church Reception and Patristic Witness Church Fathers, including Irenaeus (2nd century) and Origen (2nd–3rd centuries), reference Jesus’ transfiguration in their writings. Irenaeus, in “Against Heresies,” alludes to a glorified Christ and draws connections to apostolic testimony. The unbroken tradition within early Christianity concerning this event’s authenticity weighs strongly against the claim of a gradually developed myth. Moreover, Tertullian refers to the Gospels as authoritative records rather than mythic inventions. For an event to be widely accepted among the earliest Christian communities—especially while contemporary eyewitnesses could still speak—suggests the Transfiguration was rooted in actual historical experience rather than a fabricated tale. 6. Addressing Claims of Myth or Legend Claims that the Transfiguration is myth often focus on the supernatural elements—Jesus shining, Moses and Elijah appearing, and a voice from heaven. Yet: 1. Ancient Biographical Standards: The Gospels, while theological, also align with what scholars identify as ancient Greco-Roman biography. Myths typically lack historical anchors and eyewitness specificity. Mark’s account, naming three disciples as witnesses, matches a historical style. 2. Cultural Context: Many first-century Jewish believers were cautious about attributing deity to humans. For them to proclaim a miracle as bold as the Transfiguration indicates they were convinced it truly occurred, not likely to invent a story that would provoke skepticism or persecution. 3. Motivational Factor: If this was fabricated, it would serve no clear polemical agenda—especially since the earliest believers already recognized Jesus’ authority through His teaching, miracles, and especially His resurrection. The Transfiguration stands as a consistent and complementary event in the broader narrative, not a contrived “extra.” 7. Lack of “External Corroboration”? Unlike events such as Jesus’ trial before Pilate, which secular historians like Tacitus or Josephus might mention in passing, supernatural occurrences on a secluded mountain with only disciples present would naturally have fewer external confirmations. However: • Nature of Private Revelations: This was a private event witnessed by only three disciples (Mark 9:2). Such intimate encounters are not expected to have widespread external documentation. • Subsequent Church Transmission: The early church accepted their testimony as authoritative eyewitness accounts. Early Christian documents (including Papias’ and Polycarp’s quotes preserved in later works) reveal a consistent reliance on the apostles’ preaching—Peter, James, and John were prominent among them. 8. Theological Significance and Cohesion The core theology of the Transfiguration ties directly into Jesus’ identity as both fully God and fully man. It prefigures His resurrection glory and affirms His divine appointment: • Foreshadowing of Resurrection: The radiant glory displayed is a glimpse of His resurrected state (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:42–49). This theological continuity is reinforced by the resurrection narratives, recognized by prominent scholars (e.g., Gary Habermas) as historically well-grounded events in early Christian preaching. • Confirmation of Sonship: The voice from the cloud (“This is My beloved Son. Listen to Him!”) reiterates the declarations made at Jesus’ baptism (Mark 1:11). Scripture’s unified testimony, from Mark 1 to the resurrection accounts, underscores a singular Christology, pointing to the divine Son of God. 9. Philosophical and Historical Considerations Some modern worldviews dismiss supernatural events outright, presupposing that miracles cannot happen. Yet such a stance is a philosophical assumption, not a proven fact. Numerous reports of extraordinary experiences—including documented medical healings and personal testimonies—remain consistent with the biblical worldview that God acts in history. Furthermore, miracles in Scripture are generally tied to specific purposes, not random displays of power. The Transfiguration’s purpose was to affirm Jesus’ supreme authority to a small group of trusted witnesses, who would later lead the church. The coherence of this purpose with the Gospel’s message weighs against the notion of legendary elaboration. 10. Conclusion All available evidence—from the presence of the Transfiguration in the earliest strands of the Synoptic Tradition, to textual consistency across manuscripts, to the attestations by Peter himself (2 Peter 1:16–18), to the acceptance by the earliest Church Fathers—points away from any suggestion that this event was a later myth or legend. The supernatural elements align with a consistent biblical framework of God’s self-disclosure, culminating in Christ’s resurrection. Although external corroboration for a private event of this nature would be unusual, the recorded testimonies of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and Peter collectively ground the Transfiguration in historical and theological reality. Taken within the broader context of Scripture—whose reliability is supported by a robust manuscript tradition and early Church bearing—Mark 9:2–8 stands as a genuine, historically recognized account confirming Jesus’ revealed glory rather than a fabricated myth. |
    |