Two tools that you should have in your hermeneutical toolbox are the notions of intertextuality and intratextuality. The former looks for textual connections between books of the Bible and the latter for textual connections within a single book of the Bible. These tools are especially relevant for the study of the fourfold Gospel. These verbal and thematic links help us to discern the theology of the evangelists.
In his helpful book, Studies in Matthew, Dale Allison lays out the intratextual links between Matthew’s account of the Transfiguration and his account of the Crucifixion of Christ. Check them out (pp. 228-29):
So it seems fairly obvious that Matthew wants us to read these two stories together. The juxtaposition of Jesus’ transfigured glory with his humiliating death functions to highlight a major Christological theme for Matthew. Jesus is both the Danielic Son of Man and the Isaianic Suffering Servant. He is both the Lord of glory and the one who is crucified for the sake of his people. We can’t read either story without the other. We need both in order to understand the full theological significance of Christ’s identity and mission. If the dogma is the drama, as Dorothy Sayers concluded, then we could say something similar here: the grammar is the theology. We get at Matthew’s Christology precisely by attending to these kinds of verbal and thematic parallels.
One thought on “The Transfiguration and the Passion”
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.