an exercise in markan accommodation 69

THE TRANSFIGURATION:
AN EXERCISE IN MARKAN ACCOMMODATION

CANDIDA R. MOSS
Yale University

Introduction
One of the primary aims of historical criticism has been to iden-
tify the intellectual and religious context of New Testament texts
and pericopes, and for most of the twentieth century this has been
a question of identifying either a ‘Palestinian Jewish’ or ‘Hellenis-
tic Jewish’ context. The traditional view propagated by the history
of religions school drew sharp lines between the Aramaic-speak-
ing exclusivistic Judaism of Palestine and the Greek-speaking
Hellenistic Judaism of the Diaspora. More recent scholars, most
notably Martin Hengel, have rejected these stereotypes and argued
that the dichotomy between Hellenism and Palestine/Syria is an
unfounded assumption.1 Subsequently, the line between ‘Judaism’
and ‘Hellenism’ has become increasingly blurred. As archaeologi-
cal excavations in Palestine have demonstrated, Greek thought
permeated all aspects of Jewish material culture.2 The consensus
amongst modern scholars maintains that the intellectual back-
ground to the New Testament has its own distinctive, pluralistic
original context, not to mention the later, different pluralistic
contexts in which it came to be read.
Despite the great advances made by Hengel in recognizing the
intellectual variety and conflation of the period a number of ob-
vious expansions of this idea have yet to be made. For some rea-

1
Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine
during the Early Hellenistic Period (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974).
2
V. Tsaferis, ‘Cults and Deities Worshipped at Caesarea Phillipi-Banias’, in
E. Ulrich et al. (eds.), Priests, Prophets and Scribes. Essays on the Formation and Heri-
tage of Second Temple Judaism (Festchrift J. Blenkinsopp; Sheffield: Sheffield Aca-
demic Press, 1992), pp. 190-201. This problem is complicated by the fact that
even in Palestine, the pristine bastion of ‘pure’ Judaism, it is impossible to speak
of Judaism in the singular, but rather, of the varieties of ‘Judaisms’ present dur-
ing the first century. Cf. Daniel Boyarin ‘The Gospel of the Memra: Jewish
Binitarianism and the Prologue to John’, HTR 94 (2001), pp. 243-84.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2004 Biblical Interpretation 12, 1

Also available online – www.brill.nl
70 candida r. moss

son many scholars, including Hengel himself, persist in arguing

from the assumption that New Testament authors, such as Mark,
were unaware of the diversity of their intellectual climate.
The varied texture of the Markan audience is evident to more
than just the modern scholar. It was common practice for teach-
ers in antiquity to consider the circumstances of their listeners and
couch their arguments in terms appropriate to their audience. If
sensitivity to gender, vocation, nationality, disposition, social sta-
tus and beliefs was so vital for pedagogical success, it stands to
reason that the Markan author was not only conscious of the de-
mographics of his audience but tailored his narrative accordingly.
The transfiguration is a perfect example of a story that reso-
nates within both Jewish and Greek thought, although in subtly
different ways. If Hellenistic influence upon first century Judaism
was widespread and the author of Mark was aware of members of
his audience familiar with these traditions it is likely that he uti-
lized elements of Greek religious thought to appeal to them. The
author alludes to a variety of religious traditions to make his nar-
rative accessible for the broadest audience and transforms their
established literary conventions and religious motifs into a vehicle
for his own argument.

The Integrity of the Account

The apparent disparity between the portrait of Jesus at the trans-
figuration and his presentation throughout the rest of the gospel
has prompted a wealth of scholarly studies devoted to recasting
the account in a more manageable literary mold. Explanations for
the particular character of the narrative cover a variety of bases;
scholars categorize it as an enthronement story,3 theophany, 4 epi-
phany, 5 story originating in the world of magic,6 proleptic vision

3
U.B. Müller, ‘Die Christologische Abschnitt des Markusevangeliums und die
Verklärungsgeschichte’, ZNW 64 (1973), p. 190. Müller argues that the account
was originally an enthronement tradition that was shaped in light of the suffer-
ing Son of Man being proclaimed as the Son of God. Cf. also H.Reisenfeld, Jésus
transfigure l’arrière du récit évangélique de la Transfiguration de notre-Seigneur (Copen-
hagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1947), pp. 281-88.
4
H.P. Müller, ‘Die Verklärung Jesu: Ein motivgeschichtliche Studie’, ZNW
51 (1960), pp. 61-62.
5
F.R. McCurley, Jr, ‘And After Six Days (Mark 9: 2): A Semitic Literary De-
vice’, JBL 93 (1974), pp. 67-81.
 an exercise in markan accommodation 71

of the exaltation of Jesus7 and misplaced resurrection account. 8

The framework of this paper does not permit an in-depth exami-
nation of each of these hypotheses; however, the misplaced resur-
rection hypothesis must be addressed briefly as it challenges the
integrity of the text in its present context.
A number of distinguished scholars have argued that the
Markan transfiguration was originally a resurrection or ascension
account. 9 This argument rests upon the similarities between the
narrative and portraits of resurrected or exalted individuals in
Jewish and Christian literature (Matt. 13: 43; 2 Cor. 3: 7-18; Rev.
7: 13-14).10 It is particularly significant that Moses and Elijah are
present at the scene as Jewish thought contemporary with Mark
speculated that neither died but were taken up into heaven and
immortalized. 11
The misplaced resurrection hypothesis suffers from a number
of serious flaws. As demonstrated by C.H. Dodd, the transfigura-
tion account in Mark contrasts with the form of the resurrection
accounts in ‘almost every particular’.12 For, whilst the latter com-
mence with the disciples abandoned and orphaned, at the trans-
figuration Jesus is present throughout. In the transfiguration Jesus
is uncharacteristically mute and a divine voice from heaven in-
structs the chosen three, whilst at the resurrection Jesus’ final
words play a central role and there is no voice from the heavens.
The presence of Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration contrasts

6 Morton Smith, ‘The Origin and History of the Transfiguration Story’, USQR

36 (1980), p. 42.
7
H.C. Kee, ‘The Transfiguration in Mark: Epiphany or Apocalyptic Vision?’
in J. Reumann (ed.), Understanding the Sacred Text: Essays in Honor of Morton S.
Enslin on the Hebrew Bible and Christian Beginnings (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press,
1972), pp. 135-52.
8
See, particularly, K.G. Goetz, Petrus als Grunder und Oberhaupt der Kirche und
Schauer von Gesichten nach den altchristlichen Berichten und Legenden: eine exegetisch-
geschichtliche Untersuchung (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1927), pp. 76-89.
9
For a detailed discussion of scholars subscribing to the misplaced resur-
rection hypothesis see G.H. Boobyer, St Mark and the Transfiguratio n Story
(Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1942).
10 Unless otherwise stated, biblical citations are taken from either the 26th

edn. Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece or the NRSV. Citations from classi-
cal sources are from the Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni-
versity Press).
11
For example, on the disappearance of Moses, see Josephus, Ant. 4.326.
12 C.H. Dodd, ‘The Appearances of the Risen Christ: An Essay in Form-Criti-

cism of the Gospels’, in D. Nineham (ed.), Studies in the Gospels: Essays in Memory
of R.H. Lightfoot (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1955) , pp. 9-35.
72 candida r. moss

with the solitary figure in the resurrection accounts. In addition

to this the resurrection accounts mention the visible glory of Jesus’
transfiguration. Not least of the difficulties with this hypothesis is
that it is ultimately unprovable; those supporting this view are
forced to construct elaborate explanations to account for the
present context of the pericope. 13 In short, it is a hypothesis that
creates more problems than it solves.

Jewish Motifs
The briefest glance at the Markan transfiguration scene reveals
a narrative liberally seasoned with Jewish motifs.14 The references
to the passage of ‘six days’ (cf. Exod. 24:16), the geographical set-
ting on a mountain top (cf. Exod. 24:12), the transformation of
the main character (cf. Exod. 34:29, 30, 35), the tents (cf. Exod.
25:9), the cloud and voice (cf. Exod. 24:16) and of course the
presence of Moses and Elijah themselves have led many to argue
that the transfiguration account is purely a reformulation of Exo-
dus 24 and 1 Kings 19. This approach is encapsulated in Chilton’s
statement that ‘[I]t is beyond reasonable doubt that the transfigu-
ration is fundamentally a visionary representation of the Sinai
motif of Ex[od.] 24’.15
That the transfiguration account deliberately relates the iden-
tity and person of Jesus to that of Moses and Elijah is undoubt-
edly true. It goes almost without saying that Mark describes the
event in terms and using motifs that resonate forcefully for those
familiar with stories from the Hebrew Bible. 16 And certainly, in

13
See Morton Smith ‘Origin and History’, who states that ‘besides these de-
cisive objections … there is another, less probative, but more important: the
resurrection stories have to be accounted for. If it is difficult to believe that a
man’s disciples saw him transfigured while he was alive, it is yet more difficult to
believe that they saw him so after he had been arrested, “crucified, dead and
buried”’, p. 41.
14
The use of the terms ‘Jewish motifs’ and ‘Greek motifs’ in this paper do
not presume that the Jewish traditions referred to are uninfluenced by Helle-
nism. As we have already argued, the influence of Hellenism upon Jewish tradi-
tions across the Mediterranean makes it difficult to conceive of a form of
‘unhellenistic’ Judaism. The use of the terms here is for simplicity’s sake and to
avoid the awkwardness of referring to ‘Jewish Hellenism’ and ‘non-Jewish Helle-
nism’.
15
Bruce D. Chilton, ‘The Transfiguration: Dominical Assurance and Apos-
tolic Vision’, NTS 27 (1980), p. 122.
16
It should be noted, however, that some of these motifs, namely the
 an exercise in markan accommodation 73

this respect, the narrative accords with the rest of the gospel since,
in a number of stories, Jesus’ actions mimic those of Elijah and
Moses.17 The presence of these illustrious figures at the transfigu-
ration scene together with the shining garments of the exalted
Christ provide a glimpse of the future resurrection and glorifica-
tion of Christ, a reading confirmed by Jesus’ stern instructions not
to tell anyone what they had seen until the Son of Man had risen
from the dead.
There is an indisputable link between the Markan transfigura-
tion and Jewish traditions; however, the question remains, is this
the only intellectual background with which the Markan author is
working? There seems to be a measure of ambiguity in the way
the Markan author handles these Jewish traditions. In Jewish lit-
erature contemporary with Mark human transformation implies
an irrevocable process in which the individual ceases to be hu-
man. 18 This point is succinctly put by Zeller; ‘En montant vers
Dieu, le visionnaire doit abandoner tout ce qui est humain et être
revêtu de gloire divine.’ 19 In marked contrast to this model Jesus’
illumination has no lasting effects on him and he descends from
the mountain in the same form as he ascended it.20 Moreover,
there is a significant difference in the subject of the illumination;
in Mark it is Jesus’ garments which radiate whilst in Exodus Moses’
face is affected by the glory of the divine. 21

mountaintop setting and symbolic representation of a deity using a cloud, are

not exclusively Jewish. In Greek religious thought the mountain setting is equally
important in connection with Mount Olympus and the association of clouds with
Zeus well established.
17
For example, cf. the call of the disciples with that of Elisha (1Kgs 19:19-21
cf. Mark 1:16-20) and the multiplication of loaves with the manna in the wilder-
ness (Exod. 16:1-36 cf. Mark 6:30-44).
18
See, e.g., 1 Enoch 104.2. This is not to say that there were no reversible
transformations of visionaries when they ascend to heaven, e.g., Isaiah in the
Ascension of Isaiah. See Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Chris-
tian Apocalypses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993) chapter 3 especially.
19
Dieter Zeller, ‘La Metamorphose de Jésus’, in Alain Marchadour (ed.),
L’Évangile Exploré. Mélanges offerts à Simon Légasse à l’occasion de ses soixante-dix ans.
(Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1996), p. 172: ‘Upon ascending to God, the vision-
ary must abandon everything that is human and be adorned in divine glory’, my
translation.
20
It might be argued that the astonished response of the crowd in Mark 9:15
is due to some change in his appearance (cf. the radiance of Moses’ face in the
Exodus account). However, it might equally be part of the crescendo of popular
support Jesus receives in the Gospel.
21
Often scholars gloss over this detail as if it were unimportant. H.C. Kee,
for example, writes that ‘In Moses’ case, it was his face that shone and it contin-
74 candida r. moss

These minor differences may initially seem inconsequential and

we should be cautious in our handling of them. It would be fool-
ish to suppose that Mark would seek to replicate a text from the
Hebrew Bible without making any changes. However, they do in-
dicate that the author wove a measure of ambiguity into his ac-
count in order to distance it from the Exodus narrative. For Mark,
the event focuses upon the revelation of Jesus’ identity as ‘Son’.
This is a significant deviation from the Hebrew Bible accounts
where the actions of the individual are the focus of the narrative.
Zeller accurately highlights the importance of this ambiguity, writ-
ing, `Cette dérivation et la trajectoire qu’elle opère permettent
sans doute de comprendre l’ambivalence inhérente à la transfigu-
ration de Jésus du point de vue de l’histoire religions’.22 In light
of these differences we should consider the possibility that the
Markan author incorporates motifs from outside the Hebrew Bible
and deuterocanonical literature into his account, and it is to these
literary traditions that we will now turn.

Hellenistic Motifs
For some the mere suggestion that Mark was influenced by Hel-
lenistic culture and literature might seem strangely inappropriate.
The vocabulary of the gospel is painfully simplistic and hardly sug-
gests an author widely read in Hellenistic literature. However,
whilst the vocabulary might be limited, the sentence structure is
relatively sophisticated. For those wishing to portray the Markan
evangelist as an ill-educated simpleton this poses a problem; the
evangelist certainly speaks in simple terms, but he does so with
panache. Irrespective of our view of the author there remains an
inexplicable gulf between the gospel’s vocabulary and its style. This

ued to shine after he left the mountain, while the brilliance of Jesus’ appear-
ance was only a passing phenomenon’ (‘The Transfiguration in Mark’, p. 143).
Disregarding, for a moment, that it is Jesus’ clothing not his face that is illumi-
nated, Kee’s comparison runs against the Christology of the rest of the work and
his own argument. For, assuming that ‘brighter is better’ (a natural assumption
to make given the passage), Moses’ Transfiguration would seem to be of a better
sort than Jesus’ as it lasts longer!
22
Dieter Zeller, ‘La Metamorphose de Jésus’, p. 186: ‘This derivation and the
trajectory which it makes permits, without doubt, understanding of the ambiva-
lence inherent in the Transfiguration of Jesus from the perspective of the his-
tory of religions’, my translation.
 an exercise in markan accommodation 75

can only be intentional; it would be foolish to suppose that whilst

the author paid close attention to his grammar he somehow failed
to learn his vocabulary! We can safely assume that the simplistic
vocabulary is part of the rhetoric of the text and the author’s at-
tempts to win over his audience.
The technique of ‘accommodation’ or ‘adapting speech to the
audience’ is evidenced in Hellenistic literature contemporary with
the Gospel according to Mark. For example, in his Progymnasmata,
Theon addresses the importance of selecting language appropri-
ate to both the speaker and his audience. 23 He writes that gen-
der, age, occasion, status, vocation, disposition and nationality are
important factors in determining the appropriate language for
constructed characters. 24 Theon is dealing with character por-
trayal, but his instructions demonstrate how a teacher should adapt
his vocabulary to accommodate his pupils. The principle of adapt-
ing speech to suit addressees was well-established elsewhere in
Hellenistic thought; Aristotle’s Rhetoric recognizes the differences
between characters of varying ages and emphasizes the importance
of recognizing these for oratorical purposes.25
The same practice of accommodation and adaptability can be
seen in Christian writings as early as Paul. Clarence E. Glad uses
this practice to reconcile seeming inconsistencies and instances
of hypocrisy on the part of the apostle. 26 In the early church the
technique is of particular interest to Augustine, in his De Cate-
chizendis Rudibus, where he exhibits great sensitivity to the cultural
background of his audience. He insists that the style of a discourse
should vary according to the make-up of the audience. 27
The technique of ‘accommodation’ is relevant to the gospel of
Mark for a number of reasons. First, Mark is developing charac-
ters for which simple rural and agricultural terms are highly appro-
priate. Following Theon’s model, more sophisticated ‘Hellenistic’

23
J.R. Butts, ‘The Progymnasmata of Theon: A New Text with Translation
and Commentary’ (Diss., Claremont Graduate School, 1986), 8.1-2.
24
Butts, 8.9-15, 75-76.
25
Aristotle, Rhet. 1390a.
26
Clarence E. Glad, Paul and Philodemus: Adaptability in Epicurean and Early
Christian Psychagogy (New York: Brill, 1995).
27
Augustine, Catech. 2 and 15 (PL 40: 311A and 322 C). According to Augus-
tine, the factors that should be considered include whether the audience is edu-
cated or illiterate, urban or rural, their nationality and their disposition. He goes
so far as to say that members of the audience influence each other by their mere
presence (15).
76 candida r. moss

vocabulary would be a literary faux pas. Second, it is a logical de-

velopment to go from being aware of the language appropriate
to a character to being sensitive to language appropriate to one’s
audience. This move is particularly appropriate to Mark who con-
tinually strives to help the reader understand his message.28 Sen-
sitivity to his audience’s linguistic competence(s) would play a part
in this. Composing his gospel using simple vocabulary enabled his
message to reach the largest possible audience, including many
illiterates who could listen to the gospel being read aloud, but
could not read it themselves. Furthermore, if we assume that Mark
was writing for an audience whose circumstances varied widely this
must have caused considerable difficulties and perhaps the evan-
gelist avoided using terms which were technical or associated with
polytheistic religions in order to avoid confusion and conflict.
From this starting point we can identify different levels of mean-
ing in the text: the straightforward allusion to Hebrew Bible tra-
ditions through the incorporation of Septuagintal language and
motifs and the more subtle narrative allusion to Hellenistic tradi-
tions for those familiar with Greek religious thought. In this re-
spect we might say that the author presents his ideas on two
wavelengths, one for those more familiar with Jewish traditions and
another for those more familiar with Greek religious thought. The
same kind of duality is found elsewhere in the New Testament. R.
T. France’s study of the Matthean formula quotations identifies
two levels of meaning to the quotations: a straightforward ‘sur-
face meaning’ and a ‘bonus meaning for the initiated and the
alert’.29 As France insightfully notes, such a distinction is realistic
precisely because it is so prevalent. We only have to look to con-
temporary children’s literature to see examples of texts primarily
composed for children alluding to adult themes and concepts. 30
With these models of adaptation and multi-layered meaning in
mind, we will turn to the texts themselves.
A variety of Greek myths recount how the gods often walked
amongst humans in disguise and it is certainly possible that, for
those readers of the gospel well-versed in these traditions, Greek
epiphanies formed a natural backdrop for the Markan transfigu-

28
See, e.g., Mark 5:41; 7:1-5; 13:14; 15:34.
29
R.T. France, ‘The Formula Quotations of Matthew 2 and the Problem of
Communication’, NTS 27 (1981), p. 244.
30
See, for example, J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Philosophers’ Stone (Lon-
don: Bloomsbury, 1997).
 an exercise in markan accommodation 77

ration than the story about Moses. Oft-times this earthly socializ-
ing was intended to test the morality and piety of humanity, as in
Apollodorus’ Library he recalls how,
Zeus desirous of putting their impiety to the proof, came to them in the
likeness of a poor man … [and, following their human sacrifice] in disgust
upset the table at the place which is still called Trapezus and blasted
Lycaon and his sons by thunderbolts. 31

Even Nyctimus, the youngest son of Lycaon, who was quick

enough to appease the angered Zeus, did not escape punishment,
for ‘when Nyctimus succeeded to the kingdom, there occurred the
flood in the age of Deucalion; some said that it was occasioned by
the impiety of Lycaon’s sons’.32 The popularity of the notion that
deities disguised themselves as the impoverished of society in or-
der to try the virtue of humans is further attested in The Odyssey
where Odysseus, disguised as a beggar, is struck by Antinoos. A
more prudent suitor reprimands Antinoos’ impetuosity, saying:
A poor show, that—hitting this famished tramp—
bad business, if he happened to be a god.
You know they go in foreign guise, the gods do,
Looking like strangers, turning up
In towns and settlements to keep an eye
On manners, good or bad. 33

Not all deities conceal themselves for such moral purposes. The
Odyssey records numerous occasions when Athena appears in dif-
ferent disguises to assist her favorite:
And Athena drew near him in the form of a young man, a herdsman of
sheep, one most delicate, as are the sons of princes. In a double fold about
her shoulders she wore a well-wrought cloak, and beneath her shining feet
she had sandals, and in her hand a spear. 34

On this occasion the goddess metamorphoses from man to

woman in front of a bemused Odysseus, the only similarity be-
tween her two forms being their youth and beauty:
And the goddess, flashing-eyed Athena, smiled, and stroked him with her
hand, and changed herself to the form of a woman, comely and tall and
skilled in glorious handiwork.35

31
Apollodorus, The Library, III.VIII.1, amended translation.
32
Apollodorus, The Library, III.VIII.1-2.
33
Homer, The Odyssey. XVII.485-87; trans. from Robert Fitzgerald, Homer: The
Odyssey (Anchor Books; Garden City: Doubleday, 1961; Anchor Books edn 1963,
p. 327).
34
Homer, The Odyssey, XIII.221-25.
35
Homer, The Odyssey, XIII.287-90.
78 candida r. moss

These frequent transformations make it easy to empathize with

the exasperated Odysseus’ protestations that he can never know
if he is in the presence of the divine: ‘It is hard, goddess, for a
mortal man to know you when he meets you, however wise he is,
for you take whatever shape you want’.36
A particularly striking example of deities disguising themselves
for a time and wandering amongst men in human form is that of
Demeter. Following the loss of her daughter Persephone the dis-
traught goddess transforms herself into the form of a spinster and
wanders the earth in disguise:
She avoided the gathering of the gods on high Olympus,
and went to the towns and rich fields of men, disfiguring her form a long
while.
And no one of men or deep-bosomed women knew her when they saw her,
until she came to the house of wise Celsus who then was lord of fragrant
Eleusis … And she was like an ancient woman who is cut off
from childbearing and the gifts of garland-loving Aphrodite. 37

The metamorphosis of Demeter from illustrious deity to lowly

spinster goes undetected by humans who do not recognize her
because ‘the gods [in human form] are not easily discerned by
mortals’.38 Demeter’s true identity is only revealed because she is
angered by the misplaced accusations of a mortal woman.
The goddess’s transformation is described as a dazzling enlight-
enment similar to that of Jesus in Mark. The radiant light ema-
nating from the goddess is described in vivid detail:
When she said so the goddess changed her stature and her looks, thrusting
old age away from her: beauty spread round about her and a lovely fra-
grance wafted from her sweet-smelling robes, and from the divine body of
the goddess a light shone afar, while golden tresses spread down over her
shoulders, so that the strong house was filled with brightness as with light-
ening. 39

It is noteworthy that in this account the robes of the goddess

are transformed as her whole body radiates. The same observa-
tion can be made of Aphrodite whose garments form the focal
point of the illumination:

36
Homer, The Odyssey, XIII.312-14, amended translation.
37
Homeric Hymn II (To Demeter) 92-97, 101-102.
38
Homeric Hymn II (To Demeter) 111-12, although there is more than a touch
of irony in the reassurances of the daughters to Doso that she will be welcomed
because she is ‘godlike’, 159. cf. also Homer’s statement that ‘the gods are hard
to look upon when they appear in manifest presence’ The Iliad, XX.130-31,
emended translation.
39
Homeric Hymn II (To Demeter) 275-80.
 an exercise in markan accommodation 79

Now when Anchises saw her, he marked her well

and wondered at her mien and shining garments,
for she was clad in a robe out-shining the brightness of fire,
a splendid robe of gold.40

Throughout Greek myths of divine epiphanies the most fre-

quently recurring motif is the illumination of the divine subject.
The extraordinary brilliance of the divine body is almost unbear-
able to the human eye, ‘The body of the god shines with such an
intense brilliance that no human eye can bear it. Its splendor is
blinding’.41 This is certainly analogous to the ‘dazzling white’ gar-
ments of Jesus that shine brighter than ‘any fuller on earth could
bleach them’ in Mark 9:3.
In the Markan transfiguration the identity of Jesus is revealed
to the select few; Peter, James and John. Throughout the gospel
these three enjoy a special relationship with Jesus receiving instruc-
tion and information denied to the rest of the twelve. Some ar-
gue that their presence and role are analogous to the role of
Aaron and Hur in Exodus 24. This comparison flounders when
we consider that these individuals do not actually witness the
‘transfiguration’ of Moses. Moreover, in Greek myths there is an
explicit link between the revelation of divine identity and the spe-
cial status of the recipient. In Sophocles’ Ajax the main character
laments his fall from divine favor saying that he is `no longer
worthy ( ) to look upon the race of gods’.42 In the same way,
Callimachus’ Hymn to Apollo states that the god appears only to
those of good character:
Not unto everyone doth Apollo appear (faei¿netai), but unto him that is
good.
Whoso hath seen Apollo, he is great; whoso hath not seen him, he is of low
estate.
We shall see thee, O Archer, and we shall never be lowly …
Let not the youths keep silent lyre or noiseless step, when Apollo visits his
shrine
For Apollo hath power ( ), for he sitteth on the right hand of
Zeus ( )43
This passage is particularly interesting with respect to Mark. The
deity appears to a select few described as ‘good’, the relationship

40
Homeric Hymn V (To Aphrodite) 84-87.
41
Jean-Pierre Verant, Mortals and Immortals: Collected Essays (ed. Froma I.
Zeitlin; Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), pp. 44-45.
42
Sophocles, Ajax, 397-99.
43
Callimachus Hymn II (To Apollo) 7-16.
80 candida r. moss

between the deity and the individual redefines the position of the
individual and those of good character are exalted. In particular
the mention of Apollo’s `power’ and place at `the right hand of
Zeus’ resonate with the Markan description of the Son of Man,
coming with much power and seated at the right hand of the fa-
ther (14:62).
The fearful response of the disciples to the transfiguration of
Jesus is often compared to that of Aaron and the Israelites in Exod.
34:30. However, the same instinct can be observed in Greek myths
when the revelation of divine identity terrifies the recipient to the
point of death. For example, when the disguised Demeter encoun-
ters a group of young men cutting down sacred trees in her shrine
she warns them against provoking the wrath of the gods. When
they do not desist she reveals herself to them and they flee in
panic:
And Demeter was angered beyond telling and put on her goddess shape.
Her steps touched the earth, but her head reached unto Olympus. And
they, half-dead when they beheld the lady goddess, rushed suddenly away. 44

This extreme response to divine glory is consistent with the vivid

descriptions of the bodies of the deities shining with ethereal
light.45 As Vernant articulately describes it:
The paradox of the divine body consists in the fact that in order to appear
to mortals, it must cease to be itself; it must clothe itself in a mist, disguise
itself as a mortal, take the form of a bird, a star, a rainbow. Or, if the god
chooses to be seen in all majesty, only the tiniest bit … can be allowed to
filter through and even this is enough to strike the spectator with thambos
stupefaction, to plunge him into a state of reverential fear.46

Accordingly the relationship between divine epiphany and fear

is a close one; it is doubtful that a mortal can behold a deity with-
out experiencing extreme terror.47 This offers an explanation for
the unusual use of the intensive term (terrified) in Mark
9:6 for the disciples; they react exactly as is expected with uncon-
trollable fear in the presence of the divine.

44
Callimachus Hymn VI (To Demeter) 57-60.
45
It might be argued that the youths respond in this manner because they
have committed a crime, not because of the divine epiphany. However, the fact
that prior to the epiphany the youths had brushed off the warnings of a disguised
Demeter indicated that the young men’s fear was prompted by the transforma-
tion, not their own actions.
46
Jean Pierre Vernant, Mortals and Immortals, 45.
47
Even Hercules, the mightiest of mortals is unable to look upon Zeus di-
 an exercise in markan accommodation 81

In addition to fear, another common element in mortal re-

sponse to divine epiphany is the impulse to worship. Often the
recipient of the divine visitation offers to institute an altar or place
of worship dedicated to the deity. An example of this is found in
the Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite where the mortal onlooker offers to
set up an altar to the goddess: ‘I will make you an altar upon a
high peak, in a far seen place, and will sacrifice rich offerings to
you at all seasons’.48 This tradition offers an interesting back-
ground for Peter’s surprising offer to make tabernacles for Jesus,
Moses and Elijah. From these examples it seems that far from
being unexpected, the disciples’ dual response of fear and wor-
ship fit perfectly the standard response of mortals in epiphany sto-
ries.49
Despite the ease with which the gods were able to conceal their
true identities whilst in human form there were still a number of
telltale signs by which the observant individual could apprehend
the truth about the identity of the figure in front of them. Often
these identity markers concern movement and stature. For ex-
ample when Poseidon poses as the seer Calchas his true identity
is easily discerned:
Aias seeing it is one of the gods who hold Olympus that in the likeness of
the seer biddeth the two of us fight beside the ships—not Calchas is he, the
prophet, and reader of omens, for easily did I know the tokens behind him
of feet and of legs as he went from us; and plain to be known are the
gods. 50

Even Demeter, in the form of the old woman Doso, cannot pre-
vent some of her divine glory from breaking through the barriers
of human appearance. Upon entering the household of Celsus
there is a brief moment when her true nature permeates through
the walls of its fragile human container: ‘the goddess walked to

rectly; ‘Heracles (they say) would by all means look upon Zeus and Zeus would
not be seen by him. At last being earnestly entreated by Heracles, Zeus contrived
a device whereby he showed himself displaying the head and wearing the fleece
of a ram which he had flayed and beheaded’ (Herodotus, II. 41-42).
48
Hesiod: Homeric Hymn 5 (To Aphrodite) 100-102.
49
Interestingly enough, Peter’s suggestion to build tabernacles, a symbol of
institutionalized worship, is rebuffed. This cuts against the trend of epiphany
stories in general, which are closely tied to cultic worship. However the evange-
lists’ interest in moving away from institutionalized cult at this point fits in with
his attitude to the Temple in later passages (see Mark 13, especially).
50
Homer The Iliad XIII. 68-72.
82 candida r. moss

the threshold: and her head reached the roof and she filled the
doorway with a heavenly radiance’.51 These examples certainly cast
the mind of the reader of Mark back to previous events when the
form and abilities of Jesus seemed otherworldly. Occasions, such
as Mark 6:45-52, when Jesus walked on water, may now be read as
hinting at the concealed identity of the Markan Jesus.
More commonly in Greek myths, the true identity of the deity
is apparent only to a few present. On one occasion when Athena
approaches Odysseus, she goes unnoticed by Telemachus but is
perceived by Odysseus and provokes fear in his hounds who cower
at the immortal visitation:
but she [Athena] drew near in the likeness of a woman, comely and tall,
and skilled in glorious handiwork. And she stood over against the door of
the hut, showing herself to Odysseus, but Telemachus did not see her
before him, or notice her; for in no way do the gods appear in manifest
presence to all. But Odysseus saw her, and the hounds, and they barked
not, but with whining slunk in fear to the further side of the farmstead.
Then she made a sign with her brows, and goodly Odysseus perceived it.52

What is interesting about this story is that whilst the goddess

allows herself to be seen by Odysseus she is unable to control the
perception of the dogs. It is as if the deity has the power to dis-
guise and reveal her identity to humans, but not to other beings.
A similar phenomenon is evident in Mark where Jesus’ identity is
often recognized by demons that know his name (1:21-28, 34;5:
6).53
Dennis R. Macdonald has recently suggested that the author of
the gospel of Mark used Homer’s Odyssey as a prototype for his
gospel.54 He argues that the figure of Jesus in Mark mimics that
of Odysseus in the epic and subsequently that the transfiguration
resembles Od. 16.172-303 where Telemachus mistakes Odysseus for
a god.55 Macdonald is correct to highlight the similarity between

51
Hesiod: Homeric Hymn II (To Demeter) 187-89.
52
Homer, The Odyssey, XVI.157-64.
53 It might be supposed that knowing the ‘name’ of Jesus is not comparable

with knowing the identity of a disguised goddess in Greek mythology. This as-
sumption would be incorrect. In Greek literature individual identity has two dis-
tinct aspects, name and body (Od. 8: 552-54) As Vernant puts it, ‘Like human
beings, the gods have proper names. Like them too gods have bodies’ (47). Thus
in Mark, where the demons can name Jesus they can also identify him.
54
Dennis R. Macdonald, The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark (New Ha-
ven: Yale University Press, 2000).
55
Macdonald, The Homeric Epic and the Gospel of Mark, pp. 91-96.
 an exercise in markan accommodation 83

Hellenistic epiphanies and the Markan transfiguration scene;

however, it does not appear that the evangelist followed this ac-
count specifically. In fact, with the exception of the command to
secrecy, all the elements of Mark 9:2-10 which Macdonald views
as Homeric parallels are characteristic of Hellenistic epiphanies
in general. The most notable divergence from the conventions of
epiphanies in the ancient world is Odysseus’ human nature and
his denial of his divine status. This element of the narrative is
absent in the gospel of Mark and, consequently, it is impossible
to identify the ‘transfiguration’ of Odysseus as the source for the
Markan account.
Furthermore, whilst the Odyssey was undoubtedly one of the
most influential works at the time of the gospel’s composition,
there is no reason to suppose that the connection between Mark
and epiphany stories is a literary one. It is more likely that the
author was familiar with Greek religion simply by word of mouth,
as one living in a culturally pluralistic society. In many of the ac-
counts of divine epiphanies there is an implicit link between
epiphany and cultic practice. Demeter intervenes in the cutting
down of sacred trees at her shrine, Zeus objects to human sacri-
fice at Trapezeus, and mortals offer to institute shrines to the
disclosed deity. More explicitly, Herodotus describes a number
of occasions where festivals are linked to the appearance of a
deity:
there appeared in Egypt that Apis whom the Greeks call Epaphus; at which
revelation ( ) straightway the Egyptians donned their fairest gar-
ments and kept high festival. 56

And again,
The rulers told him that a god, who had been wont to reveal himself at long
intervals of time, had now appeared ( ) to them; and that all
Egypt rejoiced and made holiday whenever he appeared. 57

Even Homer describes how the gods often enjoyed participat-

ing in the cultic activities, describing how, Poseidon often went
off to the Ethiopians and could be found there ‘taking his joy,
sitting at the feast’.58 Throughout the Hellenistic period collec-
tions of divine epiphanies promoted faith and served as religious

56
Herodotus, III.27.3.
57 Herodotus, III.27.12-13.
58
Homer, The Odyssey, I.22, 26-27.
84 candida r. moss

propaganda in the cults of such gods as Ascelpius,59 Apollo,60 and

Athena. 61
Similarly, Cicero’s discussion of epiphanies in De Natura Deorum
illustrates the close connection between epiphany, cult and popu-
lar belief in the Roman Empire. In his fictional conversation,
Balbus cites the examples of Postumius at Lake Regillus, Vatinius
on the Via Salaria and the Locrians at the Battle of Sagra as ex-
amples of gods appearing to men.62 Despite Cotta’s dismissal of
these examples as mere ‘rumoribus’, 63 Balbus protests that a
temple was dedicated to Castor and Pollux in the Forum on ac-
count of their participation in a cavalry engagement post mortem,
Vatinius was mentioned in the resolution of the Senate, and Sagra
was a ‘vulgare proverbium’ amongst the Greeks. Such examples
illustrate the extent to which epiphanic conventions assimilated
into Roman society both in connection to formal cultic institu-
tions and more commonplace beliefs. If epiphany traditions were
so commonplace in the Hellenistic world, it is highly likely that
the Markan evangelist could have come into contact with them
merely by word of mouth. 64
In his 1933 article, ‘The Transfiguration’, J.B. Bernadin made
the intriguing suggestion that for Mark the transfiguration was a
momentary breakthrough of the pre-existent glory of Christ which
was really with him throughout his earthly life, but hidden beneath
his outward human form.65 For Bernadin the transfiguration looks
backward in the text, to Jesus’ manifestations of power and au-
thoritative teaching, to what Jesus had been and still was, rather
than forward to what he would be after the resurrection. Berna-
din’s argument correctly draws attention to the fact that the trans-
figuration illuminates the meaning of events earlier, as well as
later, in the text. In its most basic form an epiphany story con-
cerns the revelation of a previously disguised identity. This ele-
ment, more than any other, resonates throughout the Markan

59
Epidaurus, ‘Iamata’ in Inscriptiones Graecae (1873) 4.12 .121-4; Aelius
Aristides, Hieroi Logoi.
60
Istrus in F. Jacoby, Fragmente der Griescischen Historiker (1923), 334 F 50-52.
61
Lindian temple chronicle in F. Jacoby, Fragmente, 532 D.
62
Cicero, De Natura Deorum, III. 10-13.
63 Cicero, De Natura Deorum, III. 13.
64
The influence of non-literary sources upon the evangelist in this instance
does not preclude the use of written sources in other parts of the gospel.
65
J.B. Bernardin, ‘The Transfiguration’, JBL 52 (1933), pp. 181-89.
 an exercise in markan accommodation 85

gospel. Like an epiphany story, Mark is concerned with disclosing

a hidden truth about identity. The transfiguration is a moment
when the true identity of Jesus ‘breaks through’ the layers of se-
crecy surrounding him and in this respect the transfiguration
narrative conforms to the conventions of an epiphany story more
than any other genre.
The mistake Bernadin makes is to suppose that the secret iden-
tity revealed at the transfiguration must be one of divine essence
or ousia. This is clearly insupportable; there is no open statement
either of pre-existence or participation in creation at the trans-
figuration or any other juncture in the text. At the transfigura-
tion Jesus’ divinity is purely relational to the father. Here, as at
the baptism, Jesus is referred to by a heavenly voice as . The
full implication of these acclamations is realized in 15:39 in the
words of the centurion who declares him to be The
provenance and meaning of this term is hotly debated, and this is
hardly the place to enter into such a debate. 66 However, whether
rooted in Hellenistic or Jewish traditions (or both) the term does
not necessarily imply pre-existence or divine nature. Even in the
Imperial cult the term is used to denote those who are deified
because of their mighty deeds after their death.

Objections to the Epiphany Hypothesis

The Epiphany Hypothesis is not without its difficulties. Argu-
ably the most methodical refutation of it is that of H.C. Kee. He
argues that the abundance of Jewish eschatological elements in
Mark 9:2-8 makes this the only conceivable context for the ac-
count. He maintains that it was impossible that the author was
susceptible to Hellenistic influences because ‘[there is a] lack of
evidence for Mark having spliced together in the transfiguration
account two wholly disparate elements—display of eschatological
glory and metaphysical transformation’.67 The weaknesses of this
argument lie in the assumptions it makes about the composition

66
For a summary of scholarship on the matter and a discussion of Jewish and
Hellenistic backgrounds to the term see Adela Yarbro Collins, ‘Mark and His
Readers: The Son of God among Jews’, HTR 92: 4 (1999), pp. 393-408 and ‘Mark
and His Readers: The Son of God among Greeks and Romans’, HTR 93: 2 (2000),
pp. 85-100.
67
H.C. Kee, ‘The Transfiguration in Mark’, 137.
86 candida r. moss

of the work. It presumes not only that the author was incapable
of working with more than one source, but also that all of these
sources were literary. There is no obvious reason to suppose that
the author of Mark did not compose his gospel using genres and
motifs originating in different intellectual backgrounds. In fact the
ambiguity in the passage seems to suggest exactly this, that the
author drew together both elements of epiphany stories and as-
pects of Jewish eschatological visions in crafting his account.
Kee goes on to argue that the Markan transfiguration deviates
from epiphanic form, saying,
If the epiphanic disclosure of Jesus to the disciples is the main point of the
story we should expect some manifestation of his powers as a divine being.
Instead, apart from the radiance of his garments and his being named as
Son all that we have in Mark is the instruction ‘Hear him’.68

This objection falters on three points; first, we should note that

there is no reason to suppose that epiphanies require dramatic
manifestations of divine power. Whilst some accounts, such as
Zeus’ actions at Trapezus, fit this stereotype, in others, for ex-
ample, Demeter’s wanderings in Eleusis, the deities reveal their
true identities and immediately depart. Second, the transforma-
tion of the garments is itself a feature of epiphany. Third, if his
demand for manifestations of power is desired, then they are
clearly evidenced outside of this individual pericope.
The most convincing part of Kee’s argument is the absence of
the term from the Markan account. However, when we
consider the careful selection of vocabulary in the gospel as a
whole this is hardly surprising. If the Markan author wrote simple
Greek in order to reach the widest possible audience we would
expect him to omit terminology that was too technical or closely
associated with polytheistic religions. As is widely documented, the
title was applied to Emperors as part of a system of cults
devised to show them .69 The author of Mark may very
well have avoided using this term in order to avoid evoking these
traditions directly and possibly offending some of his audience.

68
H.C. Kee, ‘The Transfiguration in Mark’, 139.
69
See, S.R.F. Price, ‘Gods and Emperors: The Greek Language of the Ro-
man Imperial Cult’, JHS 104 (1984), p. 93. See also the negative presentation of
Antiochus Epiphanes in Josephus, Ant. 8.221.
 an exercise in markan accommodation 87

Early Interpretations of the Transfiguration Scene in Mark

Our argument rests upon the assumption that Mark utilized a
variety of different religious traditions in order to appeal to an
intellectually diverse audience. In light of this we would expect
that the earliest interpreters of the Markan transfiguration account
read the narrative in different ways and interpreted it accordingly.
The earliest interpreters of the narrative, namely Matthew and
Luke, illustrate this perfectly (cf. Matt. 17:1-8 and Luke 9:28-36).
In Luke the account is subtly changed so it seems less like an
epiphany and accords with another Hellenistic literary genre, the
‘dream-vision’.70 In Matthew, the narrative is brought closer to the
Jewish visionary genre with the specific designation of the event
as an (v. 9). It would be a vast oversimplification to de-
scribe Matthew and Luke as ‘Jewish’ and ‘Greek’ readings of the
Markan, but they demonstrate that it was possible to read Mark 9:
2-8 in a variety of ways.
Another indication that gospel narratives were interpreted in
light of Greek myths can be seen in the writings of the philoso-
pher Celsus, who maintained that what the Christians offered as a
new revelation was an imitation of ancient myths well known
throughout the Hellenistic world:
In truth there is nothing at all unusual about what the Christians believe,
except that they believe it to the exclusion of more comprehensive truths
about God. 71

Early Church apologists, most notably Justin Martyr, felt compelled

to account for the similarities between the figure of Jesus and
Greek deities, in particular Dionysus, through the introduction of

70
It might be argued that the Lukan author used a separate source for his
Transfiguration account. This is a needlessly complex theory. That
is changed and the disciples appear on the brink of sleep indicates that the au-
thor was aware of the epiphanic convention and takes strides to avoid this inter-
pretation by bringing the account closer to that of Hellenistic dream-visions. This
understanding of the Lukan Transfiguration as a dream-vision brings the account
into line with other dream-visions in Luke-Acts (cf. Acts 8–10). For discussion of
the literary conventions of Hellenistic dream-visions employed in the Lukan
Transfiguration see John S. Hanson, ‘Dreams and Visions in the Graeco-Roman
World and Early Christianity’, in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, II,
Principat 23.2 ed. Hildegard Temporini and Wolfgang Haase (Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter, 1980), pp. 1395-427.
71
R.J. Hoffman, Celsus On True Doctrine (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1987), p. 120.
88 candida r. moss

the doctrine of ‘diabolical mimicry’ centuries before the birth of

Jesus:
The wicked spirits put forward many to be called Sons of God, under the
impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the
things that were said with regard to Christ were merely marvelous tales.72

That the parallels between Greek deities and the gospel portrait
of Christ were clear to Celsus and required such close attention
by the apologists indicates that, from the very beginning, the gos-
pel story was read as analogous to Greek myth.

Conclusion
The transfiguration in Mark is a collage of religious motifs that
draws upon both Jewish and Greek religious thought. The evan-
gelist could have become acquainted with Greek traditions in a
number of ways, either in the course of a traditional Hellenistic
education, through contact with any of the numerous cultic insti-
tutions across the Roman Empire, or merely by word of mouth,
as an individual living in a polytheistic cultural environment.
Incorporating these traditions into his account through narrative
allusion and thematic similarity enabled the evangelist to appeal
to a wider audience on their own terms.
At the transfiguration Jewish and Greek religious motifs are in-
corporated into the account to explain the identity of the Markan
protagonist. The experience was ‘not just a vision … It is an ac-
count of the metamorphosis of the person of Jesus’.73 The author
adapts these traditions to make his gospel more accessible to a
diverse audience. For those more familiar with Greek religious
practices and thought he uses the epiphany motif to explain the
significance of Jesus’ undisclosed identity. For those better ac-
quainted with Jewish motifs he utilizes contemporary thought
about Moses and Elijah to anticipate the future resurrection and
glorification of God’s Son. Naturally, not all of the gospel’s first-
century audience can be divided into these two groups. There
would have been many, such as the evangelist himself, who were
familiar with both Jewish biblical and non-biblical traditions and
Greek epiphany stories. Many more, no doubt, would have fallen

72
Justin Martyr, First Apology, 54 cited in Hoffman, Celsus, 24.
73
G.H. Boobyer, St. Mark and the Transfiguration Story (Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, 1972), p. 11.
 an exercise in markan accommodation 89

somewhere on a spectrum in between. However, by tailoring his

narrative to appeal to both those more familiar with biblical nar-
ratives and those more familiar with Hellenistic traditions, the
evangelist makes his account intelligible to the broadest possible
audience.

Abstract

The transfiguration in Mark is traditionally understood as a re-working of

Exodus 24 and 1Kings 19. There are a number of elements of the Markan trans-
figuration account, however, which resonate more strongly with the conventions
of Hellenistic epiphany stories. This paper attempts to demonstrate that the
author of the gospel of Mark appealed to a variety of religious traditions in or-
der to make his narrative accessible to a diverse audience. This practice of accom-
modation conveyed the gospel message to a variegated audience with varying
degrees of familiarity with Jewish and non-Jewish Hellenistic traditions.