Transfiguration of Jesus: Mount Tabor, Uncreated Light, and Theosis

The Transfiguration of Jesus on Mount Tabor is attested convergently in the Synoptic Gospels (Mt 17:1-9; Mk 9:2-10), where the face and garments of Christ shine with a light that the exegetical tradition identifies with the divine glory itself, presenting Jesus «as the Tetragrammaton in the splendor of the divine glory» (Mt 17:1-9). This is why the transfiguration of Jesus stands at the center of any reading of the Transfiguration in the Bible. The Greek verb employed by the evangelist, metamorphōthē (μετεμορφώθη, “was transformed”), indicates neither an accidental change nor an illumination received from outside: already the presentation of light in creation possesses a theological value, not a merely cosmological one (Gen 1:3).

The Gospel Narrative and Its Structure

Six days after the confession at Caesarea, Jesus leads three disciples apart and is transfigured before them, while the luminous cloud envelops the scene and a voice from heaven attests his sonship (Mk 9:2-10). The convergence of the Synoptic witnesses—the Transfiguration in Matthew 17 read together with Mark—roots the episode in the most ancient apostolic memory, alongside the frequent motifs of luminous transfiguration in Second Temple literature (Mk 9:2-8).

The Glory of the Incarnate Word

Johannine Christology offers the interpretive key: the Son is the eternal Logos (Jn 1:1) and his glory is manifested already in the signs (Jn 2:11). The Taboric light is therefore not conferred ab extra upon a glorified man, but is the glory proper to the divinity of the Word, veiled in the flesh and here shown to the disciples. The rabbinic tradition too preserves an expectation of messianic light—a point of contact that situates the event within the continuity of revelation, not in its supersession.

The load-bearing elements of the account may be synthesized as follows:

• the presence of Moses and Elijah as living witnesses of Law and Prophecy, in communion with Christ
• the cloud and the voice that take up the Sinaitic theophany, attesting continuity and not abolition
• the uncreated light, manifestation of the divine glory and not a mere physical phenomenon
• the command of silence until the resurrection, which binds the glory to the cross

The presence of Moses and Elijah at the Transfiguration of Jesus is not an incidental detail: the two represent, respectively, the Law and Prophecy, the two great lines of Old Testament revelation that converge and bear witness to the glorified Christ (Mt 17:1-9). Asking why Moses and Elijah appear is therefore a question about the very structure of revelation. The scene, attested by the most ancient apostolic memory (Mk 9:2-10), frames the entire Mosaic-prophetic economy as oriented toward the manifestation of the divine glory, now unfolded on the mountain.

Law and Prophecy: Two Witnesses, One Fulfillment

Moses is the lawgiver par excellence, Elijah the archetypal prophet: together they attest that the glory of the eternal Word (Jn 1:1), already manifested in the signs (Jn 2:11), is the center toward which all Scripture tends. This is the core of the Moses–Elijah Transfiguration meaning: their presence abolishes neither the Torah nor Prophecy, but shows their fulfillment within the continuity of revelation, not in its supersession. The light of the scene is no created phenomenon: already the presentation of light in creation possesses a theological value (Gen 1:3).

The Unfinished Departures

The Old Testament tradition preserves a trait common to the two: their end remains in some way open. The burial of Moses is unknown; Elijah is carried off in a whirlwind without knowing death. The rabbinic tradition awaits the return of Elijah as the precursor of the messianic age, a motif that Christian theology reads as oriented toward Christ, not in opposition to him. This is how the relation of the law and prophets to the Transfiguration takes shape.

The theological elements of the scene may be synthesized as follows:

• Moses and Elijah are not allegorical apparitions but figures alive in God, in communion with the glorified Christ (Mk 9:2-10)
• the Law and Prophecy are not erased but led to their fulfillment
• the unfinished departure of the two prepares the recognition of Christ's lordship over the living and the dead
• the scene confirms the continuity of salvation history, against any reading that opposes the Old and New Testaments

The debate over the location of the Transfiguration of Jesus—Mount Tabor or Mount Hermon—is not a mere topographical curiosity: the choice of mountain bears on the theological reading of the event, because in Scripture the mountain is the place par excellence of theophany (Mt 17:1-9). The Synoptics do not name the mountain, designating it only as “a high mountain” (Mk 9:2-10), which is why the question of where the Transfiguration happened remains open.

The Two Hypotheses and Their Arguments

The ancient Christian tradition, attested by pilgrimages and by the construction of a sanctuary on the site, has favored Mount Tabor in Galilee; the Mount Tabor Transfiguration has thus become the dominant devotional reading. Modern criticism has proposed Mount Hermon for its proximity to Caesarea Philippi, the scene immediately preceding in the Gospel narrative. Both hypotheses converge on a theological datum: the mountain is the place where the divine glory is manifested, like the light that possesses theological and not merely cosmological value (Gen 1:3).

The Meaning of the Mountain

More than the geographical datum, what counts is the symbolic function: the mountain recalls Jacob's ladder, the place where heaven and earth touch (Gen 28:12), and the entire tradition of the mountains of revelation. The glory of the eternal Word (Jn 1:1), already manifested in the signs (Jn 2:11), unfolds on the mountain as fulfillment—not substitution—of the Old Testament theophanies. The Synoptic reticence about the name (Mk 9:2-10) underscores that the true “place” of the Transfiguration is the very person of the glorified Christ. The Mount Hermon Transfiguration hypothesis, in this light, does not alter the theological meaning.

The elements of the debate may be synthesized as follows:

• the patristic and liturgical tradition orients toward Tabor, without the text imposing it
• the modern geographical argument values Hermon for narrative coherence with Caesarea Philippi
• the anonymity of the mountain in the Synoptics is theologically intentional, not a lacuna
• the mountain remains a sign of continuity with the theophanies of Sinai and Horeb, not their abolition

The meaning of the Transfiguration of Jesus depends on the Greek verb employed by the evangelists: metamorphōthē (μετεμορφώθη), aorist passive of metamorphóō, “to be transformed.” The transfiguration meaning here is not a metamorphosis in the pagan mythological sense, but the unveiling of the glory proper to the divinity of the Word, whom the Synoptics present as “the Tetragrammaton in the splendor of the divine glory” (Mt 17:1-9).

The Verb Metamorphōthē and Its Semantic Field

The same verb of metamorphosis in the Greek Bible recurs in the Pauline letters with an interior value: the believer is called “to be transformed” by the renewing of the mind and “from glory to glory.” The lexical continuity is theologically decisive: the transformation of the Christian participates, by grace, in the same metamorphosis that in Christ is the manifestation of his divine nature. The light that accompanies the event is no created phenomenon: already the presentation of light in creation possesses theological value (Gen 1:3).

Manifestation, Not a Change of Nature

The exegetical tradition specifies that the metamorphe of Jesus does not indicate an ontological change: the divine nature of the Word is neither acquired ab extra nor altered, but is made visible to the disciples. The glory of the eternal Logos (Jn 1:1), already at work in the signs (Jn 2:11), is manifested on the mountain as an anticipation of the glorious condition. The Synoptic reticence about the detail (Mk 9:2-10) guards the mystery without reducing it to spectacle.

The essential lexical points:

• metamorphōthē is passive: the initiative belongs to the Father who unveils, not a magical self-transformation
• the same verb describes the transformation of the believer, grounding participated theosis
• the metamorphosis reveals what Christ is from all eternity, not what he becomes: no adoptionism
• the Taboric light is uncreated glory, not a physical phenomenon nor a moral allegory

The uncreated light of the Transfiguration of Jesus constitutes the heart of Eastern Orthodox theology: the light that enveloped Christ on Tabor is not a created physical phenomenon, but the very glory of God, manifested in the flesh of the Word (Mt 17:1-9). Already the presentation of light in creation possesses a theological and not merely cosmological value (Gen 1:3): all the more does the Taboric light belong to the divine order. The uncreated light in Orthodox thought is thus not a metaphor but a real divine reality.

The Hesychast Controversy and the Essence–Energies Distinction

In the fourteenth century the controversy between Gregory Palamas and Barlaam of Calabria fixed the doctrine: the light contemplated by the hesychast monks of Mount Athos is the very light of Tabor, and it is uncreated. Palamas distinguished the divine essence—imparticipable and inaccessible—from the uncreated divine energies, really participable by humankind. The Taboric light is precisely uncreated energy: God communicates himself really without his essence being comprehended or exhausted.

Hesychasm as the Way to the Light

Hesychasm and the Palamas Taboric light are inseparable: hesychasm is not a self-sufficient technique but a path of purification (nepsis) and unceasing prayer, by which the purified heart is rendered capable, by grace, of contemplating the very glory that the three disciples saw on the mountain. The light of the eternal Logos (Jn 1:1), already manifested in the signs (Jn 2:11), is the same that the holy hesychast receives as a gift, never as a natural conquest.

The essential doctrinal elements:

• the Taboric light is uncreated: it belongs to God, not to the created order
• the essence/energies distinction safeguards together the transcendence and the real communication of God
• hesychasm is synergy: uncreated grace and cooperating freedom, never automatism
• the vision of the light is an anticipation of theosis in the Orthodox sense, participation by grace in the divine life, not by the creature's own nature

Theosis—the deification of humankind by grace—is, in Eastern Orthodox theology, the ultimate goal of human life, and the Transfiguration of Jesus is its perfect icon: what Christ manifests on Tabor is the condition in which humanity is called to participate (Mt 17:1-9). The three disciples do not merely witness a prodigy: they contemplate in advance the glorious destiny of the saints. This is the deepest meaning of theosis in the Orthodox understanding.

Theosis: Participation, Not Confusion

Deification in Christianity does not mean that the human being becomes God by nature or is fused into the divine essence. The Greek patristic tradition defines it as participation by grace in the uncreated energies of God, through union with the incarnate Word (Jn 1:1), whose glory is manifested already in the signs (Jn 2:11). The Palamite essence/energies distinction is here decisive: the deified human truly participates in God without exhausting or sharing his essence.

The Transfiguration as Anticipation of the Goal

The Taboric light (Mk 9:2-10) is not only the glory of Christ, but the prototype of the deified condition: the light that possesses theological value from creation itself (Gen 1:3) becomes, in the vision on the mountain, a promise for humankind. This is the heart of the transfiguration and theosis connection. Deification is synergy: divine gift and free cooperation, never autonomous conquest.

The essential elements of theosis:

• it is the goal of human life: the human being is created to participate in the divine glory
• it is founded on the Incarnation: the Word becomes man so that man may be deified by grace
• it is participation in the uncreated energies, not in the essence: no pantheistic confusion
• the Transfiguration is its icon: what shines in Christ is the promise offered to the saints
• it remains always gift and synergy, never self-divinization nor a purely moral perfectionism