17:1 {After six days} (meq' hemerfs hex). this could be on the sixth day, but as Luke (#Lu 9:28) puts it "about eight days" one naturally thinks of a week as the probable time, though it is not important. {Taketh with him} (paralambanei). Literally, {takes along}. Note historical present. These three disciples form an inner group who have shown more understanding of Jesus. So at Gethsemane. {Apart} (kat' idian) means "by themselves" ({alone}, monous, Mark has it) up (anapherei) into a high mountain, probably Mount Hermon again, though we do not really know. "The Mount of Transfiguration does not concern geography" (Holtzmann).
17:2 {He was transfigured before them} (metemorfwqe emprosqen autwn). The word is the same as the metamorfoses (cf. Ovid) of pagan mythology. Luke does not use it. The idea is change (meta-) of form (morfe). It really presents the essence of a thing as separate from the scema (fashion), the outward accident. So in #Ro 12:2 Paul uses both verbs, sunschematizesthe (be not fashioned) and metamorphousthe (be ye transformed in your inner life). So in #1Co 7:31 scema is used for the fashion of the world while in #Mr 16:12 morfe is used of the form of Jesus after his resurrection. The false apostles are described by metaschˆmatisomai in #2Co 11:13-15. In #Php 2:6 we have en morphˆi used of the Preincarnate state of Christ and morphˆn doulou of the Incarnate state (#Php 2:7), while schˆmati h"s anqrwpos emphasizes his being found "in fashion as a man." But it will not do in #Mt 17:2 to use the English transliteration metamorfwsis because of its pagan associations. So the Latin _transfigured_ (Vulgate _transfiguratus est_) is better. "The deeper force of metamorphousthai 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."
17:3 {There appeared} (wfqe). Singular aorist passive verb with Moses (to be understood also with Elijah), but the participle sunlalountes is plural agreeing with both. "Sufficient objectivity is guaranteed by the vision being enjoyed by all three" (Bruce). The Jewish apocalypses reveal popular expectations that Moses and Elijah would reappear. Both had mystery connected with their deaths. One represented law, the other prophecy, while Jesus represented the gospel (grace). They spoke of his decease (#Lu 9:31), the cross, the theme uppermost in the mind of Christ and which the disciples did not comprehend. Jesus needed comfort and he gets it from fellowship with Moses and Elijah.
17:4 {And Peter answered} (apokriqeis de ho petros). "Peter to the front again, but not greatly to his credit" (Bruce). It is not clear what Peter means by his saying: "It is good for us to be here" (kalon estin hemas h"de einai). Luke (#Lu 9:33) adds "not knowing what he said," as they "were heavy with sleep." So it is not well to take Peter too seriously on this occasion. At any rate he makes a definite proposal. {I will make} (paiˆs"). Future indicative though aorist subjunctive has same form. {Tabernacles} (skenas), booths. The Feast of Tabernacles was not far away. Peter may have meant that they should just stay up here on the mountain and not go to Jerusalem for the feast.
17:5 {Overshadowed} (epeskiasen). They were up in cloud-land that swept round and over them. See this verb used of Mary (#Lu 1:35) and of Peter's shadow (#Ac 5:15). { this is} (houtos estin). At the baptism (#Mt 3:17) these words were addressed to Jesus. Here the voice out of the bright cloud speaks to them about Jesus. {Hear ye him} (akouete autou). Even when he speaks about his death. A sharp rebuke to Peter for his comfort to Jesus about his death.
17:7 {And touched them} (kai hayamenos autwn). Tenderness in their time of fear.
17:8 {Lifting up their eyes} (eparantes tous ofqalmous autwn). After the reassuring touch of Jesus and his words of cheer. {Jesus only} (iesoun monon). Moses and Elijah were gone in the bright cloud.
17:9 {Until} (hews hou). this conjunction is common with the subjunctive for a future event as his Resurrection (egerqei) was. Again (#Mr 9:10) they were puzzled over his meaning. Jesus evidently hopes that this vision of Moses and Elijah and his own glory might stand them in good stead at his death.
17:10 {Elijah must first come} (eleian dei elqein prwton). So this piece of theology concerned them more than anything else. They had just seen Elijah, but Jesus the Messiah had come before Elijah. The scribes used #Mal 4:5. Jesus had also spoken again of his death (resurrection). So they are puzzled.
17:12 {Elijah is come already} (Eleias ede elqen). Thus Jesus identifies John the Baptist with the promise in Malachi, though not the real Elijah in person which John denied (#Joh 1:21). {They knew him not} (ouk epignwsan auton). Second aorist active indicative of epiginwskw, to recognize. Just as they do not know Jesus now (#Joh 1:26). They killed John as they will Jesus the Son of Man.
17:13 {qen understood} (tote sunekan). One of the three k aorists. It was plain enough even for them. John was Elijah in spirit and had prepared the way for the Messiah.
17:15 {Epileptic} (seleniazetai). Literally, "moonstruck," "lunatic." The symptoms of epilepsy were supposed to be aggravated by the changes of the moon (cf. #4:24). {He has it bad} (kakws ecei) as often in the Synoptic Gospels.
17:17 {Perverse} (diestrammene). Distorted, twisted in two, corrupt. Perfect passive participle of diastrefw.
17:20 {Little faith} (oligopistian). A good translation. It was less than "a grain of mustard seed" (kokkon sinape"s). See #13:31 for this phrase. They had no miracle faith. Bruce holds " this mountain" to be the Mount of Transfiguration to which Jesus pointed. Probably so. But it is a parable. Our trouble is always with " this mountain" which confronts our path. Note the form metaba (meta and bˆthi).
17:23 {And they were exceeding sorry} (kai elupeqesan sfodra). So they at last understood that he was talking about his death and resurrection.
17:24 {They that received the half-shekel} (hoi ta didracma lambanontes). this temple tax amounted to an Attic drachma or the Jewish half-shekel, about one-third of a dollar. Every Jewish man twenty years of age and over was expected to pay it for the maintenance of the temple. But it was not a compulsory tax like that collected by the publicans for the government. "The tax was like a voluntary church-rate; no one could be compelled to pay" (Plummer). The same Greek word occurs in two Egyptian papyri of the first century A.D. for the receipt for the tax for the temple of Suchus (Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_). this tax for the Jerusalem temple was due in the month Adar (our March) and it was now nearly six months overdue. But Jesus and the Twelve had been out of Galilee most of this time. Hence the question of the tax-collectors. The payment had to be made in the Jewish coin, half-shekel. Hence the money-changers did a thriving business in charging a small premium for the Jewish coin, amounting to some forty-five thousand dollars a year, it is estimated. It is significant that they approached Peter rather than Jesus, perhaps not wishing to embarrass "Your Teacher,"a roundabout hint that the tax was overdue" (Bruce). Evidently Jesus had been in the habit of paying it (Peter's).
17:25 {Jesus spake first to him} (proefqasen auton ho iesous legwn). Here only in the N.T. One example in a papyrus B.C. 161 (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The old idiomatic use of fqanw with the participle survives in this example of prophthan" in #Mt 17:25, meaning to anticipate, to get before one in doing a thing. The _Koin‚_ uses the infinitive thus with fqanw which has come to mean simply to arrive. Here the anticipation is made plain by the use of pro-. See Robertson's _Grammar_, p. 1120. The "prevent" of the Authorized Version was the original idea of _praevenire_, to go before, to anticipate. Peter felt obliged to take the matter up with Jesus. But the Master had observed what was going on and spoke to Peter first. {Toll or tribute} (telˆ ˆ kenson). Customs or wares collected by the publicans (like phoros, #Ro 13:7) and also the capitation tax on persons, indirect and direct taxation. Kˆnsos is the Latin _census_, a registration for the purpose of the appraisement of property like hˆ apographˆ in #Lu 2:2; Ac 5:37. By this parable Jesus as the Son of God claims exemption from the temple tax as the temple of his Father just as royal families do not pay taxes, but get tribute from the foreigners or aliens, subjects in reality.
17:26 {The sons} (hoi huioi). Christ, of course, and the disciples also in contrast with the Jews. Thus a reply to Peter's prompt "Yes." Logically (arage) free from the temple tax, but practically not as he proceeds to show.
17:27 {Lest we cause them to stumble} (hina me skandaliswmen autous). He does not wish to create the impression that he and the disciples despise the temple and its worship. Aorist tense (punctiliar single act) here, though some MSS. have present subjunctive (linear). "A hook" (agkistron). The only example in the N.T. of fishing with a hook. From an unused verb agkiz", to angle, and that from agkos, a curve (so also agkale the inner curve of the arm, #Lu 2:38). {First cometh up} (ton anabanta prwton ichthun). More correctly, "the first fish that cometh up." {A shekel} (statˆra). Greek stater = four drachmae, enough for two persons to pay the tax. {For me and thee} (anti emou kai sou). Common use of anti in commercial transactions, "in exchange for." Here we have a miracle of foreknowledge. Such instances have happened. Some try to get rid of the miracle by calling it a proverb or by saying that Jesus only meant for Peter to sell the fish and thus get the money, a species of nervous anxiety to relieve Christ and the Gospel of Matthew from the miraculous. "All the attempts have been in vain which were made by the older Rationalism to put a non-miraculous meaning into these words" (B. Weiss). It is not stated that Peter actually caught such a fish though that is the natural implication. Why provision is thus only made for Peter along with Jesus we do not know.
