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 were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.
2 Peter 1:16-18, ESV
Numerous popular theologians have said that the transfiguration was an example of Christ’s divinity being revealed in its own refulgence, if even for a brief moment. A few years ago, I probably would have agreed. But a growing unease with this perspective has given way to a firm, “No.” My unease began as I better came to understand Chalcedonian Christology,
[ref]Though not the focus of this particular article, it is important to note that this common conception of the Transfiguration is, in fact, typically related to an ancient heresy called Eutychianism. Eutychianism holds that the attributes of the divine nature are communicated to the other nature, resulting in a Christ who was not both fully human and fully divine, but a sort of hybrid, a tertium quid. Christ’s humanity is divinized. Chalcedon specifically denied this, saying that “the distinction of natures [is] by no means taken away by the unity, but rather the property of each nature [is] preserved, and [concurs] in one Person and Subsistence.”[/ref]
but that wasn’t the decisive factor for me. I suppose I could make some qualifications within my understanding of the hypostatic union that would have allowed me to continue to hold to that school of thought. Instead, it was my growth in two other theological loci: eschatology and pneumatology.
One of the key passages for me is 1 John 3:2, which says, “Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him because we shall see him as he is.” I believe John’s linking the beatific vision with our glorification is done with the transfiguration in view, just as Peter does in his second epistle. While there is some related debate regarding 2 Peter 1:4’s phrase “partakers of the divine nature,” I do not think we can affirm theosis as understood by the Eastern Orthodox (and some Roman Catholics). We cannot take either 1 John 3:2 or 2 Peter 1:4 to mean that we become God. Rather, it is the fullness of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. For this reason, Paul can speak to the gift of the Holy Spirit this way: “In [Christ] you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory (Ephesians 1:13-14).” The word translated by the ESV as “guarantee” could also be rendered as down payment, indicating that the fulfillment will be of the same kind as what we receive in this life, but in full measure. Christ, on earth, was the Man of the Spirit par excellence. That same indwelling of the Spirit —and, through the Spirit, Christ and the Father (John 14:23)— is our eschatological goal. Christ’s transfiguration was not a revelation of His deity, but of His glorified humanity. It also reveals what we will become. Because of the work of the Spirit, Jesus can pray that we will be glorified and still affirm that we have already received glory (John 17:22, 24). Even now, we are “seated with Him in heavenly places in Christ (Ephesians 2:6)”.