ye him. And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only."

My mind is strongly impressed with the belief that this whole story can be the most satisfactorily accounted for, by a dispassionate consideration of the general notions and expectations of the Jewish people respecting their anticipated Messiah; in which the disciples of Jesus had been educated, and which they doubtless continued to indulge, to a considerable extent, until the last of their days. Dr. A. Clarke says, "It was a constant and prevalent tradition among the Jews, that both Moses and Elijah should appear in the times of the Messiah, and to this very tradition the disciples refer, verse 10;"* (i. e. Matt. xvii. 10: "And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?")

Two different expositions have been given of the evangelical narrative-one literal, and the other regarding it as merely the record of a dream. Dr. Clarke, in common with very many others, adopts the first-named intepretation, and very poetically treats of the appearance of the two ancient personages mentioned as a symbol of the deference paid by the Law and the Prophets to the new and better dispensation of Christianity. I extract the following, from his somewhat extended comments on the passage:

*Commentary-N. T.

"That fulness of the Godhead, which dwelt bodily in Christ, now shone forth through the human nature, and manifested to his disciples not only that Divinity which Peter had before confessed, chap. xvi. 16, but also the glorious resurrection body, in which they should exist in the presence of God to eternity......Elijah came from heaven in the same body which he had upon earth, for he was translated, and did not see death, 2 Kings, ii. 11. And the body of Moses was probably raised again, as a pledge of the resurrection; and as Christ is to come to judge the quick and the dead, for we shall not all die, but shall all be changed, 1 Cor. xv. 51, he probably gave the full representation of this in the person of Moses, who died, and was thus raised to life, (or appeared now as he shall appear when raised from the dead in the last day;) and in the person of Elijah, who never tasted death. Both their bodies exhibit the same appearance, to show that the bodies of glorified saints are the same, whether the person had been translated, or whether he had died......We may conceive that the law in the person of Moses, the great Jewish legislator; and the prophets in the person of Elijah, the chief of the prophets, came now to do homage to Jesus Christ, and to render up their authority into his hands; as he was the END of the law, and the grand subject of the predictions of the prophets. This appears more particularly from what St. Luke says, chap. ix. 31, that Moses and Elijah conversed with our Lord on his death, which he was about to accomplish, (to fulfil,) because in it all the rites,

ceremonies, and sacrifices of the law, as well as the predictions of the prophets, were fulfilled."

Like many other commentators, the Doctor here takes some important particulars for granted. This is especially the case with regard to the reason he offers, why the bodies of both Moses and Elijah exhibited the same appearance. His opinions concerning "the bodies of glorified saints," (whom he believed would arise bodily in the resurrection) doubtless colored the medium through which he gazed at this, as well as some other scriptural topics.

I have met with no attempted explanation of this subject which (to me) appears so rational, as that which is given by Mr. Furness, the Unitarian clergyman to whom I have previously alluded. He considers the appearances described as merely the phenomena of a dream. There is some novelty in his exegesis; and its interest in this, if in no other respect, will justify the introduction of an extract from it here. Though somewhat lengthy, it will, I think, repay a considerate attention. And whatever you may think of its correctness as an exposition of the evangelist's meaning, you will not hesitate to admit its plausibility, in many respects, and the ingenuity it displays.

"According to Luke, 'Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep' when the Transfiguration began, and 'when they were awake they saw his glory and the two men that stood with him.' 'Heavy with sleep.'

This phrase expresses merely a state of drowsiness, and therefore it does not convey the sense of the original. The words in the original signify that the disciples were sunk in a deep sleep. They were in a sound slumber, out of which they awoke to behold the glorious vision. Now every plain principle of investigation enjoins it on us to scrutinize the accounts, given by men in this situation, of what they saw, when, just waking from sleep, they could not have collected their powers, or been at all prepared for calm and accurate observation.

It is not said that the Transfiguration took place at night, but there is reason to suspect that it was at night that these things occurred.* That the disciples were asleep furnishes some ground for this inference. They that sleep sleep in the night. It is not likely that Jesus would have retired during the day for purposes of devotion and prayer. He was accustomed to spend nights in prayer. If then the transfiguration happened after nightfall, here is an additional reason why we should ex amine this account with great care. Good men and wise are liable to be mistaken under such circumstances. At all events, whether it was in the night or the day, the condition of the witnesses makes it our plain duty to weigh the narratives well."†

After relating the conversation, in reference to the Messiahship, which took place a few days previous, hetween Jesus and his disciples; and stating that their

* Mr. Barnes says, "It is not improbable that this was in the night.”Note on the passage.

+"Jesus and His Biographers," pp. 319, 320.

minds were thereby highly excited, and filled with glowing anticipations in reference to the display of external grandeur, which their Jewish education led them to suppose would soon be made, Mr. Furness continues:

"In this state of mind, Peter, James and John, the three whom Jesus had particularly distinguished, and who had every hope of occupying conspicuous offices in the celestial kingdom, accompanied their Master up the mountain whither he went for the sake of retirement and devotion. Exhausted by the excitement of their present manner of life and their dazzling prospects, they fell into a deep sleep, Jesus being withdrawn a short distance, engaged in meditation and prayer. The visions which engrossed his waking thoughts, returned naturally and vividly to the mind of Peter in his sleep, and he dreamt that he saw his master invested with all that outward glory, which he had now for some time believed that Jesus would shortly assume. He dreamt also, as it was so natural for a Jew to dream, that he beheld two of the ancient prophets, Moses and Elias, conversing with Jesus, and the topic of their conversation was that strange event which Peter had been informed by his master was to take place at Jerusalem, [the crucifixion] and which, perplexing and shocking the mind of Peter, had made so powerful an impression on him that it connected itself with his dreams. Thus far, I conceive, the transfiguration was the vision of Peter in his sleep. James and John were sleeping all-unconscious and dreamless at his side.

While Peter was thus dreaming, a cloud arose and