David Garland notes that the transfiguration narrative in Matthew is chiastically structured:

A. Narrative introduction, 17:1

B. Transfiguration of Jesus, 17:2-3

C. Peter’s response, 17:4

D. Divine Voice, 17:5

C’. Disciples’ response, 17:6

B’. Jesus speaks, 17:7

A’. Narrative conclusion, 17:8

Garland also notes that the transfiguration shares a number of features with the crucifixion: “Jesus is surrounded by two celebrated saints of old; on the cross he will be surrounded by two criminals . . . . On the mount of transfiguration, Jesus’ garments glisten in his glory; at Golgotha, his garments have been taken from him in his humiliation . . . . In both scenes, there is mention of Elijah . . . and of great fear at divine manifestations . . . . In the first, Jesus is confessed as the son of God by a divine voice; in the second, by his executioners, Roman soldiers . . . . Both scenes are witnessed by his followers: the first by the inner circle of disciples; the second, by women from afar. These parallels reveal that, for Matthew, Jesus’ suffering and glory can be seen properly only as two sides of the same coin.”

If we take this a step further and notice the link between the transfiguration and the coming of the Son of Man in judgment, we can see parallels between the cross and the Olivet Discourse (as Mark Horne has detailed for the gospel of Mark).