of his countenance now lit up the road to Gethsemane's garden, Calvary, and the tomb. The two heavenly visiters were aware of this, and hence they conversed concerning the main design of the transaction. In addition to this, it should be specially noted, that our Lord was found in the attitude of prayer, as Mediator, when "the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering." On this occasion, it is not improbable that Jesus wept in the agony of prayer. Thus we read how, "in the days of his flesh, he offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death." (Heb. v. 7.) We have only two things recorded for which our Lord offered up personal petitions: the one relates to his sufferings, the other to his glory. "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me;" and, "Now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." Either one or other, or both, of these petitions we can well conceive as suitable at the moment he was transfigured. If he prayed for glorification, here was its pledge and proof if from a foretaste of his passion he said, "Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour;" here was support, preparation, qualification, and consecration for it. In further confirmation of the connexion between Mount Tabor and its glory, and Mount Calvary and its sufferings, we cannot forbear remarking on the first topic introduced by our Lord to his disciples on descending the Mount. He tells them again "how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought." Thus, before his transfiguration, during its greatest glory, and immediately after its cessation, the sufferings and death of Jesus exclude every other consideration, and swallow up his whole soul. Moses and Elias enter into the grand theme, while the voice of the Father from the cloud pronounces the approbatory sentence, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." For if he is pleased and pacified, it is by the pouring out of the soul of Jesus unto death. In fact, everything recorded by the Evangelists respecting the time and sayings concerning the transfiguration connect it with his sufferings, and constrain us to look for some further evidence of its design. Consider,

2. The direct evidence furnished by the Apostles, that his transfiguration was a consecration and preparation for sufferings, death, and atonement. The prohibition, not to publish it until after his resurrection, implies not merely a liberty but an obligation to make it known. And was it then to be blazed abroad, as a mere subject of wonder, without any great or important end to be answered by its promulgation? Undoubtedly not. It was reserved for "the ministration of the Spirit," to make it fully known. The office of the Holy Ghost is "to take of the things of Jesus, and show them unto us." This he does not merely by his operations and influence directly on the mind, but by the inspiration and writings of the Apostles. What then was their chief theme? Why, the nature, virtue, and results of his sacrificial offering on the cross; his resurrection, his ascension, and

his intercession at the right hand of God. Reason itself might teach us, that in a work so stupendous, awful, and important, as the atonement by the suffering and death of Jesus, that every previous act and manifestation must have been either remotely or immediately a preparation for that great event. "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me," or, according to the margin, "fitted me." If, therefore, his incarnation, spotless life, baptism, and submission to every righteous institution and ordinance of the Jewish dispensation, with the visible descent and indwelling of the Holy Ghost, were preparation for sacrifice and atonement, why should we exclude the mysterious fitting of his transfiguration, and leave it an insulated and unaccountable fact? In fact, the impression is invariably made, whether the direct design be observed or not, that he who was crucified on Mount Calvary, was transfigured on Mount Tabor; that the same body which was covered with blood was clothed with light; and the same pores from which it oozed in the garden, emitted light and glory on the Mount. His transfiguration was not to be published till after his resurrection; and hence it is agreeable to reason, to expect to have it brought up again in review; and the question is, whether we have evidence in the after notice taken of it by the Spirit of God, to justify the connexion now pointed out. Let us first, then, hear Peter, an eye-witness, and then Paul, the great Apostle of the Gentiles. In 2 Peter i. 17, we read, that "he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." This is mine anointed, the Holy One, the Prophet, Priest, and King, so long foretold, of whom it was sworn, "Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedec," in whose one sacrifice and priesthood I am pleased for evermore. Let us now compare this with Heb. ii. 9: "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." Here the same terms "glory and honour' are used by both Apostles. The words in the original are exactly the same, as well as in our translation. Paul does not mention the place of his crowning. Peter informs us it was on "the holy Mount." Peter does not tell us the express design of the transfiguration. Paul does; for he declares it was for the suffering and tasting of death. Peter says, he received glory and honour. Paul tells us he was crowned with both. Paul does not inform us who crowned him; but Peter does: "He received, from God the Father, glory and honour." crowning, then, was evidently the act of the Father, and, consequently, of the whole divine nature. Hence, when the face of Jesus shone, and his raiment became white as the light, this arose from the fulness of the Godhead bodily which dwelt in him, but is especially attributed to the personal influence of the Father. The propriety of this, in relation to atonement, will appear more evident as we pass on. Here we must observe, that no plain, simple passage in the whole compass of revelation has puzzled

critics of all classes more than the language of Paul in Heb. ii. 9. It has been tortured and transposed, in direct violation of its order in the Greek text, which is literally followed in our translation. All the comments made upon it, that I have seen, have failed in pointing out its meaning, and leave uncertainty on every mind respecting its construction. Why, then, is this the case? Because they consider the crowning by way of reward, instead of consecration and preparation, and make it subsequent to his sufferings instead of anterior. Thus, one of the plainest texts in construction, because misunderstood and misapplied, is rendered both difficult and unnatural. It plainly refers to the transfiguration. It was crowning towards an end; and that end was sacrifice and atonement. Aaron was crowned at his consecration as a Priest; and it is not a little remarkable, that in the ancient heathen world, they decked and crowned their sacrifices with garlands before they offered them, on many occasions. No transposition or criticism whatever can force the text now in question from its present position, or give it a satisfactory import contrary to that which was primarily intended by the inspired penman. In this view, it is easy, natural, and proper. The translation of the particle día, into by instead of for, affords no help to the notion, that the crowning with "glory and honour" was by way of reward, not preparation, or that it was after and not before "the suffering of death." For if we read, that Jesus was "crowned with glory and honour by the suffering of death, that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man,” we are thrown into confusion of thought at once, while we are stopped in our conclusion by the repetition of the design, "that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.' Besides, this view represents him as in the act of suffering death, and also crowned by it towards this very end, that he should taste death, which is evidently unmeaning and absurd! Again: on the principle that the crowning is because of, and subsequent to, the suffering of death, manifestly intimates that future glory was given with the design, that previously he might taste death, which is equally absurd, and places the reward before the sufferings which merit it! The suffering and tasting of death relate to one and the same act; and by the plain, simple, easy, and unforced language of the Holy Spirit in the mouth of Paul, it was evidently crowning towards this end, while, from the direct language of Peter, it took place at his transfiguration. Now, in the context of this passage, the Apostle, quoting from Psalm viii., says, "What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands." Such was the first Adam, when he was created in the image of God. He was crowned towards an end also; but he forfeited all by the fall. Whether his body was surrounded by any external glory, of which he was stripped by his one act of disobedience, we are not about to assert, although by analogy it might be inferred: of one thing we are certain, that Jesus, the second Adam, in order that he might taste death for the whole offspring of the first, restore

all things by his atoning blood, and put all things under his own feet as "the man Christ Jesus," was crowned with a greater glory and honour on Mount Tabor than that which was conferred on the first Adam. If glory and honour were associated with the image of God in the first Adam, much more so is it to be found in Him who is "the express image of his person," "the image of the invisible God." If sin banished the glory of the first Adam, it is agreeable to reason that the glory of the second Adam should contribute to the destruction of sin; and this it did by sanctifying and imbuing his blood as the great sin-offering. The view now given will be further elicited, when we consider,

3. That there was no crowning without anointing. The holy oil formerly used for this purpose was only poured on the heads of Prophets, Priests, and Kings. Thus the spirit of prophecy descended on Saul when he was anointed King. David was doubly anointed; first by Samuel, and afterwards at Hebron. Aaron being dressed in the holy garments "for glory and for beauty," was anointed by Moses, and constituted the first High Priest of his order. Here was the first authoritative separation between the regal and sacerdotal functions. It took place at the command of God himself. Moses was agent on the part of God in their separation, in the case of his brother Aaron; and now he appears on "the holy mount" to witness their re-union in the anointing of Christ, who is consecrated a Priest, not after the order of Aaron, but after that of Melchizedec. He now beholds him with his Urim and Thummim, his lights and perfections, beaming not from precious stones, but from the Divinity within. The holy and precious unction proceeds not from the hand of Moses, but from that of the indwelling Father, and imbues not only the skirts of his garments, but his whole frame. If Aaron, when anointed, shone with the holy oil running down to the skirts of his garments, how much more gloriously did Jesus shine when anointed with the divine glory! "Holiness unto the Lord" not only beamed from his forehead bright as the sun, but also from his whole frame. Here he was consecrated, "not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life." The Apostle further testifies, that "the law maketh men High Priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore." As the Priest anciently fixed his seal to the horn of the animal which he deemed fit for sacrifice, so the Father gave the seal of his approval from the cloud, when he said, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Jesus, in his last sublime prayer, said, after lifting up his eyes to heaven in the character of Mediator, "And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." As the Father and the Son are one in essence, so they are one in will and action. The sanctification here mentioned began specially at his transfiguration, and its virtue henceforth flowed into his sufferings. Jesus was anointed a Prophet at his baptism, and a King at his entrance into heaven; but it has been considered difficult to fix the period of his anointing as Priest. This difficulty passes away in the view we have now taken. It is worthy

of remark, that after his first anointing began his fasting and temptation; after his second anointing followed his sufferings and death; and after his third anointing commenced his glorious reign, the outpouring of the Spirit, the conquest of his enemies, and the spread of that kingdom which is ultimately to be extended over all the earth. Thus he now bears the glory, and is a King and Priest upon his throne. But we must now observe,

4. The peculiar influence produced on our Lord by this consecration and crowning with glory and honour. The word here rendered "transfigured," is from μera, denoting "change of condition," and pop pow, "to form;" and hence imports a change, transformation, or transfiguration, relating specially to the external appearance. The same word is used, however, in two other places of the New Testament, where it evidently implies not only a great moral change, but one that operates on the spiritual and physical powers. Thus, in 2 Cor. iii. 18: "But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed (transfigured) into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." The face of Moses shone when he descended from the mount: it was covered with a veil. "Our dispensation is brighter and better than that," saith the Apostle; "for we, without covering or veil, behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord, especially in the mirror of his transfiguration, which changes us into the image of his nature, perfections, and glory, so that the understanding, will, and affections are renewed." Does not this involve an operation on the physical powers and qualities of the mind, purifying, regulating, and framing them into the image of Him who created and redeemed us? Again, in Rom. xii. 1, 2, we read as follows: "I beseech you, therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world; but be ye transformed (or transfigured) by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God." Now, if the same Apostle exhorts us elsewhere to be renewed in the spirit of our minds, to put on the new man after the image of God in righteousness and true holiness, can we forbear observing, that in the passage now in question he tacitly holds up before us the example of our Lord, even when transfigured on the mount? Does not the use of the very same word lead us by association of thought to Mount Tabor? There, in the attitude of prayer, he presented his body a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable; there he lost all conformity to this world; there he was transformed; and there he was, in some sense or other, also renewed, both in mind and body, by the holy anointing oil poured on him by the Father, when he "received glory and honour;" and there he was qualified fully to prove what was the good, acceptable, and perfect will of God; so that in the garden afterwards he could say, "Father, thy will, not mine, be done." It is evident at once that our moral transfiguration operates on the whole constitution of man; the whole man is forgiven, adopted, and regenerated; we are sanctified throughout spirit, soul,