2Pe_1:18.
καὶ
ταύτην
…
ἐνεχθεῖσαν
; the author is anxious to show prominently that he has been an ear-witness of that divine voice, as well as an eye-witness of the
μεγαλειότης
of Christ.
ἐξ
οὐρανοῦ
ἐνεχθ
. is added by way of emphasis, in order to lay stress on the fact that Christ received that testimony directly from heaven.
ἐν
τῷ
ὄρει
τῷ
ἁγίῳ
] From the epithet
τῷ
ἁγίῳ
it must not, with Grotius, be concluded that the reference here is to the hill on which the temple stood, and that what is alluded to is not the transfiguration, but the incident recorded in Joh_12:28. Without any reason, de Wette asserts that that epithet (instead of which Mat_17:1 has:
ὑψηλόν
) betrays a view of the case more highly coloured with the belief in miracles than that of the apostles, and belonging to a later period; Calvin already gives the correct interpretation: montem sanctum appellat, qua ratione terra sancta dicitur, in qua Mosi Deus apparuit; quocunque enim accedit Dominus, ut est fons omnis sanctitatis, praesentiae suae odore omnia sanctificat; Dietlein: “the ‘in the holy’ is added, not to designate the mountain, but in order to distinguish it on account of this event;” so, too, Brückner and the modern commentators generally.