Scholars generally agree that Moses and Elijah appear at the Transfiguration because they are connected to each other in some way, and that this connection informs the significance of the story as a whole. However, there is no consensus regarding how Moses and Elijah are related, and consequently there is significant disagreement about how their presence contributes to the Transfiguration. The present study, which focuses on Mark's account (Mark 9.2–8), argues that Moses and Elijah appear together because they received similar theophanies at Mount Sinai and, as a result, the Transfiguration should be read as a mountaintop theophany in which Jesus constitutes the personal presence of Israel's God.

Geoffrey of Vinsauf's Poetria nova must be studied as a poem in its own right as thoroughly as it has been studied as a technical rhetorical treatise; although many scholars have acknowledged the brilliance of his style, few analyses thereof exist. This imbalance in criticism limits our understanding of his ideas and the appeal they held for medieval poets. This study, therefore, focuses on two images in the section on ornatus graves, or weighty ornamentation, the category of figures defined by its reliance on transumptio. In describing its moving effects, Geoffrey uses the imagery of a pilgrimage (peregrinatio) and of a “clear cloud” (nubes serena). Both help him explain how transumptive language at first displaces or hides meaning beneath something that is deceptively ordinary. When that meaning becomes clear to the reader, however, the recognition can be delightful, intoxicating, or even wondrously transporting. The images are not original to Geoffrey, nor are they drawn from the discourse of formal rhetoric. Rather, peregrinatio and the nubes serena have a rich history in liturgical drama, biblical commentary, and iconography where they signify a kind of spiritual transport remarkably similar to Geoffrey's conception of transumptio in terms of process and quality. Thus, the Poetria nova leverages the spiritual significance of the images to make a decisively literary point about the wondrous power of subtle, transumptive language. Only by recognizing the resonance of these images can we fully appreciate just how highly Geoffrey values transumptio. Approaching the Poetria nova with a poet's eye expands the range and scope of likely influences on the treatise and, more importantly, deepens our appreciation for his remarkable commitment as a poet to the affective potential of transumptive language.

The starting point of the transfiguration of Jesus is the choice of Jesus himself. He had announced a destiny of suffering and death and, then, was faced with rejection of his words by his disciples, especially Peter. Now, they must know by themselves what ‘God's views’ are. The fundamental issue is whether Jesus' announcement really corresponds to the divine will. The answer will come from heaven: the disciples will be the privileged witnesses of the transfiguration granted to Jesus. He will appear as a heavenly figure, flanked by Moses and Elijah and thus preceding them. Peter would like to honour the three figures and prolong the wonderful vision making three dwelling-places, which recall the heavenly dwellings. But he does not realize that Jesus had announced a tragic destiny that falls within God's design. So, God has to speak. After the cloud will cover the three heavenly figures, the divine voice will address the disciples making it clear to them who Jesus is (God's Son) and what they must do (listen to Jesus, namely, accept his announcement of suffering and death).

How is the association of the descent/ascent motif with the Johannine Son of Man to be explained if the gnosticism theory no longer holds? ἀναβέβηκεν (3.13) is usually taken to refer to Jesus' final ascension. But Odeberg saw that it refers to a tradition of heavenly ascent in Jesus' lifetime. Bühner argued rather for a double reference—to the ascent of a visionary seer involving a metamorphosis into a heavenly being and a final ascent at death. Yet he ignores the likelihood, sustained by Jarl Fossum and Morton Smith, that the transfiguration tradition was based on an authentic memory. In chs. 9 and 5 the evangelist recognizes that Jesus had been invested with the authority of the heavenly Son of Man. He sees the crucifixion as an exaltation (3.14), and follows a statement of Jesus' ascent, descent and exaltation by a full summary of God's loving gift to the world.