Matthew 17:22

Mat_17:22-23

The Son of Man shall be betrayed into the hands of men.

Christs second announcement of His death

1. In rapid succession the Saviour brings before His disciples the great facts in His history as the Mediator-facts which have the most direct bearing on mans redemption and spiritual recovery.

2. His complete knowledge of His future, and the calm magnanimity with which He talked about these stupendous events, demonstrate Him to be superhuman.

3. What considerate kindness toward His disciples does this evince. For it was not only necessary that their material notions of His mission should be corrected (Luk_9:43-44); but still more necessary that they should be prepared for these wonderful events, so that when they come they should regard them as the fulfilment of His prediction and an argument for faith.

I. The saviour fortelling the great facts in his history as mediator

1. He foretells His betrayal-Betrayed into the hands of men-The men to whom He was allied by nature, and from whom He might therefore expect pity and tenderness; men whom He had undertaken to save, and from whom therefore He might expect honour and gratitude; but these were His persecutors and murderers (Act_2:23).

2. He foretells His passion and death. His being killed was the mortal termination of His sufferings, and nothing less would satisfy the rage of His foes.

(1) The manner of His death is expressly mentioned (Mat_20:17-19).

(2) The Saviour declares the necessity of His sufferings and death (Mat_16:21). This necessity was independent of prophecy. To accomplish His redeeming purposes He must suffer and die. God cannot forgive sin on the ground of mercy.

(3) The voluntariness of His sufferings and death is manifest. He foreknew all. He could have escaped all. He was free. The will of the Father did not coerce the Son. Besides, there can be no merit in exacted suffering. Herein, behold the wonderful love of Jesus! (Joh_10:18; Rom_5:5-6).

3. He foretells His resurrection. This event is not only the crowning evidence of His claims, and the commencement of His state of exaltation, but the demonstration of the sufficiency of His atonement (Romans 4:24, 25; 1:3, 4: 8:34; Act_17:31). If we are true believers we have a personal interest in every part of His mediatorial work.

II. The disciples sorrowing exceedingly but improperly. There is no evidence that their sorrow was on account of the sins involved in these coming events. And though it showed their love to their Master, it also disclosed their ignorance of the real character of His mission.

1. For if it was sorrow for themselves it was improper, because the accomplishment of these facts were essential to their happiness (Joh_16:7). How often we regret the loss which serves our highest interest!

2. If it was sorrow for their fellow-men it was improper, for His sufferings, etc., were the only means of their redemption and spiritual recovery.

3. If it was sorrow for their loved Master and Lord it was improper, for His sufferings, etc., were an essential part of His great plan, and the prelude to His glory (1Pe_1:11). In His deepest agonies, He is an object for praise not pity-commendation not commiseration. (A. Tucker.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat_17:22. While they abode.—See R.V. margin. While they were sojourning in Galilee on their way back—on their return from the northern parts about Cæsarea Philippi (Morison).

Mat_17:24. Tribute money (τὰ δίδραχμα)—“The double drachma;” a sum equal to two Attic drachmas, and corresponding to the Jewish “half-shekel,” payable, towards the maintenance of the temple and its services, by every male Jew of twenty years old and upwards. For the origin of this annual tax see Exo_30:13-14; 2Ch_24:6; 2Ch_24:9. Thus, it will be observed, it was not a civil, but an ecclesiastical tax. The tax mentioned in the next verse was a civil one. The whole teaching of this very remarkable scene depends upon this distinction (Brown). The half-shekel was worth about fifteen pence. Came to Peter.—At whose house Jesus was probably lodging. Doth not your Master pay tribute?—The question seems to imply that the payment of this tax was voluntary, but expected; or what, in modern phrase, would be called a “voluntary assessment” (Brown).

Mat_17:25. Jesus prevented him.—Spake first to him (R.V.), i.e. anticipated him. Take custom.—Receive toll (R.V.). Custom on goods exported or imported (Brown). Tribute (κῆνσον).—From the Latin word census, meaning the poll-tax, payable to the Romans by everyone whose name was in the “census” (ibid). Of their own children.—Sons (R.V.), i.e. the princes. Strangers.—This cannot mean “foreigners,” from whom sovereigns certainly do not raise taxes, but “those who are not of their own family,” i.e.d. their subjects (Brown).

Mat_17:26. Then are the children free.—By “the children” our Lord cannot here mean Himself and the Twelve together, in some loose sense of their near relationship to God as their common Father. For besides that our Lord never once mixes Himself up with His disciples in speaking of their relation to God, but ever studiously keeps His relation and theirs apart (see e.g. on the last words of this chapter), this would be to teach the right of believers to exemption from the dues required for sacred services, in the teeth of all that Paul teaches, and that He Himself indicates throughout. He can refer here, then, only to Himself; using the word “children” evidently in order to express the general principle observed by sovereigns, who do not draw taxes from their own children, and thus convey the truth respecting His own exemption the more strikingly, q.d. “If the sovereign’s own family be exempt, you know the inference in My case;” or, to express it more nakedly than Jesus thought needful and fitting: “This is a tax for upholding My Father’s house; as His Son, then, that tax is not due by Me—I am free” (ibid.).

Mat_17:27. Lest we should offend them.—Cause them to stumble (R.V.). Misconstruing a claim to exemption into indifference to His honour who dwells in the temple (Brown). A piece of money (στατῆρα).—A stater—a shekel (R.V.). A coin equal to two of the fore-mentioned “didrachms”; thus the exact sum required for both. Me and thee.—Our Lord does not say “for us,” but “for Me and thee,” thus distinguishing the Exempted One and His non-exempted disciple (Brown).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Mat_17:22-27

Self-taxation.—In the beginning of these verses we find our Saviour coming back to Galilee from the neighbourhood of Cæsarea Philippi (Mat_16:13), and making His way once more to “His own city” (Mat_9:1) Capernaum. Apparently He did so now for the last time in His life, and as one marked step in His journey southward to meet His death at Jerusalem (see Mat_19:1; Mat_20:17; Mat_21:1). This may help to account for the fact, that, on this occasion, He did not wish to be known (see Mar_9:30). And this, in turn, for the peculiar form of the tax-gatherers’ question to Peter (Mat_17:24) “Doth not your Master pay the half-shekel?” as though they suspected Him, from His being out of the way, of a desire to avoid it this time. And this, once more, for the very positive and apparently displeased character of the Apostle’s reply (Mat_17:25). As though he would say, “Of course He does—as He has done always before—and as you very well know.”

There are two things to be noted in the way in which the Saviour Himself meets their demand. He treats it as wholly uncalled for, on the one hand, and yet as absolutely irresistible, on the other.

I. As wholly uncalled for.—And that first, it would seem, because of the nature of tribute in general. For tribute then was a thing universally regarded as a token of subjugation and conquest. Hence the irresistible force of the argument in Mat_22:19-21. Hence also, what we find implied in the language used in Ezr_4:13, viz., that people who are so far independent as to have a well-protected city and walls of their own, would refuse to submit, as a matter of course, to anything of the kind. Peter himself knew of this as a fundamental rule on such subjects. Hence, therefore, he would see at once the extreme unreasonableness of laying a tax on his Master. No one on earth had the shadow of a right of asking “tribute” from Christ. Still more unreasonable was such a demand, when considered in connection with the special character of the tribute in view. As both the amount asked for, and the way in which it was spoken of—“the half-shekel”—seem to point out, it was that poll tax expected from every male in Israel for the temple expenses and service, originally levied only (so it is said), when the census was taken, but afterwards made an annual demand (see Jos., Ant., XVIII. Mat_9:1; 2Ch_24:9, etc.) How monstrous, therefore, in every way, even to propose such a thing to One who was really the Lord of the temple (Mat_12:6), and the Temple itself in a sense (Joh_2:19-21), and also, as Peter himself had not long before both seen and confessed, Son of God in the highest possible sense. Asking this temple-tribute from Him, therefore, was in every way wrong, for it was treating One as a stranger and a subject who was pre-eminently both a Son and a King.

II. As absolutely irresistible.—We find this implied, on the one hand, in the reason advanced. Pay this tribute the Saviour says in effect, however unreasonable the demand for it undoubtedly is, lest “we cause them to stumble” (Mat_17:27). In other words, lest our refusal to pay it should give them “offence”—or be a “scandal” to them and others—or cause them to think about us otherwise than is correct, or desirable either. How very easily this might have been is just as easily seen. Such a refusal to pay, under the circumstances, would be almost certainly attributed either to unseemly covetousness, or else to contempt for God’s services, or to want of love for His house—to anything, in short, but those other reasons of which the Saviour had spoken. And that, of course, would be a most injurious thing, in almost every way, because a thing which, besides bringing most undeserved reproach on Christ and His followers, would greatly hinder them in their work. Sooner, therefore, than cause such results, the Saviour will put up with this wrong. Sooner than mislead others, or hinder true godliness, or be thought of Himself as profane, He will comply with this otherwise most unreasonable demand. If He cannot even allow it on other grounds, He cannot refuse it on this. The same is taught us also, in the next place, by the method adopted, inasmuch as this shows to how great lengths the Saviour was willing to go in order to carry out His resolve. From this point of view the very strangeness of the almost unique miracle of which we read next, is its best justification. It was, indeed, a kind of stately procession of marvellous signs. Peter was to go to the neighbouring sea and to cast in a hook, and at once secure a fish, and find a coin in its mouth, and find that coin also to be exactly sufficient for the twofold purpose in view (Mat_17:27). All the more fitted, therefore, was it to show the thought which the Saviour had in His mind. He will not pay that tribute money out of ordinary resources. Probably, in His case, they were already needed in other directions (see Joh_13:29). He will meet it, instead, by a supply of His own—by an unheard of supply—by an exactly fitted supply—by something which shall show how great is the importance He attaches to doing as now asked! The very fish of the sea shall help Him to avoid giving avoidable cause of offence.

Here, therefore, we may see in conclusion:—

1. A great lesson in doctrine.—It was, as it were, almost under the shadow of the cross that this transaction took place. See what is said in Mat_17:22-23, and note how we read there for the first time, of the “betrayal” of Christ. We may well judge, therefore, that we have here a kind of parable of what was about to be done on the cross. The temple tribute was due from Peter. It was not due from Christ. He paid for them both. Just so with that “obedience” of His “unto death” by which “the many” are “made righteous” (Php_2:8; Rom_5:18-19). “Thou shalt answer for me, O Lord, my God.”

2. A great lesson in conduct.—If we have really laid hold of this hope in Christ, we shall seek to resemble Him in our lives. Especially shall we do so in feeling it incumbent on us to avoid at all costs all really avoidable cause of offence. See such passages as 2Co_6:3; Rom_14:13; Rom_14:15; Rom_15:3; Mat_18:5, etc. Anything rather than let our good be evil spoken of, if we can help it.

HOMILIES ON THE VERSES

Mat_17:24-27. Christ paying tribute.—

1. Tribute is due to magistrates for their public service.

2. Christ is not unfriendly to magistrates and rulers, nor anyway a hinderer of paying anything due to them, for Peter affirmeth that Christ paid ordinarily.

3. He will not exempt His ministers or followers from the common civil duties, whereunto other subjects are liable; therefore He saith to Peter, “What thinkest thou?” etc.

4. Christ by no ordinary course of law was subject unto any power under heaven; for as king’s sons are naturally free from tribute, so is the Son of God naturally free also, for He is the Heir and Owner of all things.

5. Although Christ was the rich Heir of heaven and earth, as of His own workmanship, yet for our cause He voluntarily subjected Himself, and became poor, that He might make us rich; for He had no money to pay His tribute.

6. As in matters of civil loss, Christ did dispense with His own right civil, and subjected Himself to pay tribute, which He was not bound to do, so must His servants do; and not only must they pay tribute, which is their due by civil obligation, but rather than mar the gospel and breed scandal, they must bear burdens which civilly they are not bound to bear.

7. Christ was never so far abased at any time, but the glory of His Godhead might have been seen breaking forth in the meantime, or shortly after, lest His humiliation should at any time prejudice His glory at our hands; as here, at the time when He doth subject Himself to pay tribute, He showeth Himself Lord of all the creatures, who can make the most wild of them come to His angle, and bring money with them in their mouth.—David Dickson.

The coin in the fish’s mouth.—The uses intended by this narrative are:—

I. Doctrinal.

II. Ethical.—The doctrine taught is the place of Jesus in the kingdom of heaven. His own place of Sonship by right of nature, and that which He wins for His followers in grace. The moral enforced is that greatness in the kingdom is best proved by service and humility.—Prof. Laidlaw, D.D.

The ethical aspect of the conversation.—A comparison of the synoptic narratives makes it plain that during this homeward journey to Capernaum, probably near its close, occurred the dispute among the disciples, about priority in the kingdom, which drew from the Lord several touching and instructive utterances. There is reason to think this is one of them. The words immediately following our story in Matthew’s Gospel tell us that “at the same time” (ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ, Mat_18:1), they came to put their question to Jesus on this topic. Mark says that “being in the house, He asked them, What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?” The suggestion has much probability, that with Peter alone in the house, the Lord here forestalls the discussion, and makes this incident bear upon it. It is when viewed in this connection that the present story becomes luminous, and that the words of Jesus about the temple-tax are seen to have their moral design. To teach “the foremost disciple” a lesson of humility and self-effacement, Jesus directs his attention pointedly to His own claim, to His willingness to waive it, and to His reason for so doing, viz., lest offence should follow upon a premature or punctilious assertion of even a Divine right. This, rather than any other, is the point of ethical moment in the narrative, not so much the poverty of His lot as Son of man, His command over the resources of nature and providence as Son of God, the extraordinary manner in which upon occasion His necessities were relieved—not so much these, as the forbearance and self-restraint of the kingdom’s Head; an example to His followers of meekness and self-repression for the kingdom’s sake. The key to the moral intention of the story then, lies in the words, “But lest we cause them to stumble” (R.V.). It was a lesson of meekness and wisdom. Jesus waives the exercise of a right, founded upon the plainest and most momentous grounds, lest the exercise of it in the circumstances should prove a stumbling-block to those who were as yet unprepared to receive the grounds themselves. Thus does Jesus set forth one of the most characteristic features of Christian morality.—Ibid.

Mat_17:27. The tribute money.—The story of the tribute-money is not one of the great miracles, and yet its lessons are well worth our careful study.

I. There is what, for the want of a better word, we must call the modesty of Jesus.—Rather than offend the prejudices of the people, He would waive His claim. Are not we who call ourselves His disciples too ready to put forth our titles to men’s respect and to stand upon our dignity?

II. We learn something of the poverty of Jesus.—There is a something of greater moment than wealth, and that is character. Money may not elevate, good deeds do. In the conventional meaning of the words, Christ was not worth fifteen-pence; yet He could heal the sick and raise the dead. It will be worth our while to weigh ourselves in the true balances, and to find out Heaven’s assessment of our belongings.

III. The story gives us a peep into Christ’s resources.—Though He had not the money by Him, He knew where it was. The gold and silver are all His.

IV. We learn that God does not often act without human agency.—Christ could have done without Peter. It would have been easy to have willed it, and the fish would have swum to His feet, as He stood by the side of the lake, and have dropped the coin within His reach. But He knew that Peter could catch the fish, and so he was sent to do what He was able. It appears to be the Divine plan to do what men cannot, but not to act for us.

V. The story teaches that he who works for Jesus is sure to get his pay.—Christ wanted fifteen pence, and Peter took out of the fish’s mouth half-a crown. And thus in obeying Christ he paid his own taxes. In keeping His commandments there is a great reward.—T. Champness.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

F. The Church in its human weakness. Mat_17:22-23

(Mar_9:30-32; Luk_9:43-45.)

22And, while they [again] abode27 in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed [is about to be given up, μέλλει παραδίδοσθαι] into the hands of men;23And they shall kill him [will put him to death], and the third day he shall be raised [rise] again.28 And they were exceeding sorry.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Mat_17:22. The expression ἀναστρεφο μένων indicates that they had returned into Galilee. But as the former circumstances had not changed, the object of this visit must have been to prepare for the last journey of Jesus to Jerusalem.

The Lord was now ready, and His disciples were forewarned. Hence He returned to Galilee in order to commence the journey which was to bring Him to Golgotha. In all probability He did not pass over the sea, but went privately through Upper Galilee to His own country, as the expression παρεπορεύοντο in the Gospel of Mark seems to intimate, which has been understood by some as referring to bye-roads (Grotius). It was on this occasion that His brethren asked Him to attend the feast at Jerusalem—that He declined to go up with the company of pilgrims—that He privately went afterward, and unexpectedly made His appearance at the Feast of Tabernacles. Then followed the events connected with it, and His last visit to Capernaum, Mat_17:24.

Jesus said unto them.—Not a mere repetition of what He had formerly intimated to the disciples; for the term παραδίδοσθαι conveyed an additional element of information,—viz., that He was to be given up and surrendered,—an intimation which was afterward more fully explained. Jesus passed privately through Galilee (Mar_9:30). On this secret journey He prepared His disciples, in the wider sense of the term, for the issue before Him. An analogous expression, only more comprehensive, occurs in Mat_20:19.

Mat_17:23. And they were exceeding sorry.—For further details, see the accounts in Mark and Luke. This communication, in its effects on the disciples, is not incompatible with the fact that Jesus had so clearly intimated His resurrection. Irrespective of its bearing upon them in their individual capacity, the announcement of Christ’s crucifixion implied what would affect their views about the future of the world. The death of Jesus on the cross involved the destruction of their whole scheme—of their hopes of a Messianic temporal kingdom, and of their expectation of a state of immediate glory in this life.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The young and newly-formed band of members of Christ’s Church now began to anticipate the immeasurable consequences of His course of suffering. Thus the transition from the Jewish to the Christian view of the relation between the first and second æon was preparing. A change such as this would necessarily be accompanied by manifold doubts, struggles, and conflicts.

2. It may be regarded as an evidence of the work of Christ in the hearts of His disciples, that they endured this conflict; nor can we wonder that, notwithstanding all this preparation, they felt deeply perplexed during the solemn and awful interval between the last supper and the resurrection.

3. Thus it seems as if, like a timorous fugitive, the Lord had to pass by mountain tracks and bye-roads through His native land, in order to prepare. His friends for His impending sufferings.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The journey of Jesus through Galilee, now and formerly.—How everything wears a different aspect as the end draws nigh!—The secret journey of Jesus through His native land, a comfort to persecuted believers at all times.—How faithfully and calmly the Lord foretold His end to His disciples!—The Church of Jesus in its first human sorrow about the divine sufferings of Jesus: 1. The nature of this grief, in distinction from the peculiar sorrow about Christ’s death: it was exalted, though not yet sacred. 2. Its form and expression. Contrast between the narrative in the gospel, and the festivals to commemorate the event, introduced by the mediæval Church. 3. Its ground: acquiescence in Christ’s sufferings, implying the surrender of all worldly views, hopes, and expectations.—Difference between human and divine sorrow in connection with the cross.—Heavenly wisdom and strength of the Lord Jesus.—The Lion of the tribe of Judah did not hesitate to assume the appearance of a fugitive.—Like a chased roe upon the mountains, and yet Himself, 1. the Lamb, 2. the Lion.

Starke:—Canstein: When the time of our departure draws nigh, we should prepare our friends for it.—Osiander: How salutary is the remembrance of the cross!

Gossner:—Christ could not find attentive hearers, when preaching on the subject of His approaching death.

Heubner:—In mercy, God often grants us foretokens of heavy trials to come.

Footnotes:

[27] Mat_17:22.—Lachmann reads: συστρεφομένων [to turn about with, to gather together], with Cod. Vaticanus I. [and Cod. Sinaiticus], for ἀναστρεφομένων [to return, to move about, to sojourn]; Meyer regards it as a glass to prevent ἀναττρεφομένων from being understood of return into Galilee; hence in the interest of the tradition of Tabor as the locality of the transfiguration. [So also Alford.—P. S.]

[28] Mat_17:23.—Lachmann, following Cod. B., etc., reads: ἀναστήσεται for ἐλερθήσεται. [But even if we read with Tischendorf and Alford: ἐγερθήσεται, it should be translated: he shall rise, as in Mat_8:15; Mat_8:26; Mat_9:6; Mat_16:21; Mat_17:7; Mat_25:7, etc. In the N. T., and with later Greek writers, verba media in the reflective or intransitive sense, prefer the passive form of the aorist to the middle form. Comp. Alex. Buttmann: Grammatik des neu-testament-lichen Sprachidioms, p. 45,19, and 165; also Robinson: Lexic, sub ἐγείρω, middle intransitive, to awake, to arise.—P. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 17:22-27.

Returning To Galilee, Jesus Again Foretells His Death. He Pays The Temple Tax

Here are two matters.

I. Mat 17:22 f. He Again Foretells His Death And Resurrection

Found also in Mar 9:30-32 Luk 9:43-45. Mark tells how they left the place of healing the demoniac boy, near the Mount of Transfiguration, and passed through Galilee. And while they abode, etc.,—were gathering themselves together in Galilee (Rev. Ver., margin), is in all probability the true text?[1] It implies that they returned by different routes to a fixed point in Galilee. Upon reflection, this is seen to agree exactly with Mark’s statement that Jesus ’wished no one to know’ (compare above on Mat 16:5) of the journey through Galilee, for a natural expedient to this end would be the separation of the Twelve into several parties, taking different routes. We then understand that at the rendezvous, as they were assembling, Jesus made the statement that follows. Mark’s ’for’ (Mat 9:31) perhaps indicates (Alford) that he wished to pass on unnoticed, because he was engaged in privately teaching his disciples about his approaching death. Or it may mean that he wished to avoid the fanatical multitude, who, at his last recorded visit to Capernaum, wanted to make him a king after their own notion. (Joh 6:15) The Son of man, see on "Mat 8:20". Shall be (or is going to be,) the same construction as in Mat 16:27. Betrayed, or delivered up, into. So Com. Ver. rightly in Mark and Luke, though rendering ’betrayed’ in Matt. (compare on Mat 10:4); and we shall find similar inconsistency throughout in translating the term. The words which really mean ’betray’ and ’traitor’ occur only in Luk 6:16 Act 7:52. Into the hands of men. In Mat 20:19 it becomes more definite, ’unto the Gentiles’; Mat 26:45, ’into the hands of sinners.’ The idea of losing liberty and being rudely handled by other men, is always in itself painful. This being delivered into the hands of men is the new idea here added; the rest is repeated from Mat 16:21. (See note.) And they were exceeding sorry, or exceedingly grieved. Mark and Luke state that they did not understand the saying (compare on Mat 17:9), and feared to ask him about it—probably with that feeling which often restrains persons from seeking more precise information that would probably but increase their distress. The three who had witnessed the transfiguration must have been better able to bear this renewed and painful announcement; but they could not tell the others what they had seen and heard.

[1] It is the reading of à B, and the cursive 1; several early versions show confusion and uncertainty in their rendering. ’Abode’ represents anastrephomenon, and ’were gathering themselves together’ is sustrephomenon. The latter would strike copyists as strange, and be easily changed into what seemed more simple. The case is not certain, but highly probable.

II. Mat 17:24-27. Paying The Temple Contribution

Found in Matthew only, except the statement in Mark, (Mar 9:33) that ’they came to Capernaum.’ This seems to have been our Lord’s final visit to Capernaum, which had so long been his abode (see on "Mat 4:13"), and was probably short. (Compare on Mat 18:1) He had just come from the neighbourhood of Cesarea Philippi. (See on "Mat 17:22".) They that received the tribute money (half shekel). The Greek didrachmon, or double drachm, was a silver coin equal to two Attic drachms, and in the times of the New Testament and Josephus was nearly equal to a half shekel, or something over thirty cents. ’Tribute money,’ Cranmer and K. James, is too indefinite; ’poll money,’ Tyn., Gen., fails to suggest that it was a specific poll-tax for the temple. It is better in such cases to use the definite term of the original, and let this become matter of explanation. But as the Greek didrachm or double drachm is unfamiliar, it is convenient to use the half shekel, the Hebrew shekel being familiar to us from Old Testament Moses directed (Exo 30:11 ff.) that whenever the people were numbered, every male over twenty years old should give a half shekel, rich and poor alike, for the support of the tabernacle. Upon this Josiah based his demand for a special contribution to repair the temple. (2Ch 24:6) After the return from the captivity, Nehemiah and his followers "made ordinances"—not as being required by the law of Moses, but as a voluntary agreement—to pay every year the third part of a shekel (they were poor then), in order to provide sacrifices, etc., for the temple. (Neh 10:32 f.) In the Mishna, as here in Matt., we meet with a well known contribution of a half shekel. The Rabbis had kept Nehemiah’s plan of making it annual, but had returned to the sum which the law of Moses required for the occasional gift, and doubtless held that they were but carrying out the law. The Mishna has a separate treatise on this subject. Priests, women, children, and slaves, were exempt, but might give if they wished. The Jews in Palestine were expected (Edersheim) to give before the time of the Passover; those in foreign countries were allowed till Pentecost or even Tabernacles, and there was a special chest in the temple for contributions due the previous year. Commissioners were sent through Palestine to collect—’they that received the half shekel,’ distinct from the publicans who collected the government tax; in foreign countries the money was deposited by the leading Jews in some fortified city till it could be escorted to Jerusalem. (Josephus "Ant.," 18, 9, 1.) Cicero states that gold was, every year, in the name of the Jews, exported from Italy and all the provinces to Jerusalem, and commends Flaccus for prohibiting this exportation from Asia, i. e., the region of which Ephesus was the chief city. (Cicero, "for Flaccus," 28.) Josephus says ("Ant.," 3,8,2) that the gift in Exo 30:11 was from men between twenty and fifty years old, which statement makes it likely that the age was thus limited in his times, which were those of the New Testament. After Titus destroyed Jerusalem, Vespasian decreed that the Jews everywhere "should bring two drachms every year for the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, as before they were wont to pay for the temple at Jerusalem." (Josephus "War," 7,6,6.)—Quite distinct from this yearly half shekel, which was required by custom, if not by the law, were the voluntary contributions made at the temple, which varied indefinitely in amount. (Mar 12:41 ff.) Entirely distinct also was the tax (Mat 22:1) to the Roman government in Judea and Samaria, which two districts formed at the time of our Lord’s ministry a Roman province.

It is not at all clear with what design the collectors asked the question, but most likely in a reproachful tone, as if he was slighting a duty recognized by all devout Jews. Doth not your master—that is teacher (didaskalos, see on "Mat 8:19") pay the half-shekel, as everybody else does? The regular time for paying was in the spring, while it was now near the beginning of autumn. Jesus and his followers had been long absent from Capernaum, and the collectors now seized their opportunity, perhaps wishing to send up all that was behind to the Feast of Tabernacles.

Mat 17:25 f. Peter’s ready answer, Yes, most naturally suggests that Jesus had paid in previous years, and so there was no doubt that he would pay now. The fact that Matt. records this incident without any explanation as to the nature and design of the contribution, is one of the many proofs that he wrote especially for Jewish readers, to whom the matter would he familiar. Into the house, probably the house of Peter, which Jesus usually appears to have made his place of abode at Capernaum. (compare on Mat 4:13, Mat 8:14). Jesus prevented, that is, spake first to, him, saying. The Greek means to get before, anticipate, (compare on Mat 12:28), and would be exactly translated now by ’anticipated him, saying.’ Tyn. and Gem gave ’spake first to him.’ The Latin prevent (originally ’to come before’) was introduced by Cram and Rheims, and at that time was a good translation; but it has now lost that meaning in Eng., and acquired a different sense, which makes it very misleading, (e. g., Psa 119:147 f.; 1Th 4:15) To avoid the word ’anticipate,’ which is not used in K. James, the Rev. Ver. has returned to ’spake first to him,’ a rather inadequate rendering. Jesus knew what had occurred without needing to be told. (Compare Joh 1:48) Custom (rather toll), or tribute. The first Greek word denotes taxes or tribute in general, the second is the Latin word census, which, from meaning a registration for the purpose of taxation, might naturally in the provinces be applied to the poll-tax; its sense here and in Mat 22:17. Of their own children (sons), or of strangers? The latter term means those of other blood, of other than the royal family. Then are the children (sons) free, i. e., exempt. And so the Son of God, as Peter had recognized Jesus to be, (Mat 16:16) ought to he exempted from paying tax to the temple for the support of divine worship. He uses the plural, ’sons,’ because he is stating the inference from his previous argument in a general form; but the application is obviously designed to be to himself. The Romanists in Europe have absurdly applied this to the clergy, as showing that they ought to be exempted from taxation, at any rate when it is for religious purposes. When our Lord adds, ’lest we cause them to stumble,’ the plural refers not to any notion that Peter was exempt, but to the fact that Peter as well as himself had not paid; and he proceeds to direct how Peter may pay both for the Master and himself.

Mat 17:27. Lest we should offend them, or better, cause them to stumble, give them an occasion for objecting to my claims, and refusing to receive me. (See on Mat 5:29.) They would have said that he did not keep the law, did not perform a recognized duty of every Israelite, and so he certainly could not be the Messiah. Go thou to the sea. The preposition is that usually rendered ’into.’ In a case like this it signifies into the locality represented in a general way by the sea, which would include its shores. We are not at liberty to understand it here in a stricter sense, such as would be expressed in English by ’into the sea,’ because that would be manifestly inappropriate to the action which Peter was to perform, viz., catching a fish with a hook. (So in Joh 11:38, Joh 20:1) Wherever it would not be distinctly and decidedly unsuitable to the action in question, the natural and common sense of ’into’ must be retained. (Compare on Mat 3:16) The sea was of course the Lake of Galilee, on which Capernaum was situated. (Mat 4:13) Thou shalt find a piece of money, (a shekel, Greek stater,) an attic silver coin, equal to four drachms, or two half-shekels. For me and thee, is strictly, ’instead of me and thee,’ the notion being of a substitution, which was the original and proper meaning of this contribution. (see Exo 30:11-16) Jesus never wrought miracle for his personal benefit. If he had procured the money for this purpose in an ordinary way, it might have obscured the fact of his extraordinary position as the Messiah. Matthew probably recorded this incident to show his Jewish readers on the one hand that Jesus felt himself entitled to the respect due to the Messiah, and on the other, that he was very careful to keep the law in all respects, so that no Jew had a right to stumble at him. Our Lord’s disposition to forego a privilege to which he was justly entitled, rather than that men should have an excuse for misapprehending him, was imitated by Paul, (1 Corinthians 9) and stands before us all as a part of the example of Christ. A hook. Fish-hooks are mentioned elsewhere in the Bible only in Isa 19:8 Amo 4:2 Hab 1:15 Job 41:1, etc., and are not now used in the Lake of Galilee. Peter had previously had experience of a miracle in catching fishes. (Luk 5:4 ff.) Commentators compare here the story of the ring of Polycrates (Herod. III., 39-42).

Homiletical And Practical

Mat 17:24-27. Jesus giving for the support of the temple. (1) He takes pains to avoid being misunderstood; (a) speaking so as to prevent Peter from misunderstanding him; (b) acting so as to prevent the Jews. (2) While avowing himself the Son of God, he performs every duty of a good man, (compare Mat 3:15) including that of taking part in religious contributions. He relinquishes an avowed claim to exemption, lest his course should injure others. Compare 1Co 8:13, 1Co 9:12, 1Co 9:22.

John A. Broadus, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (American Baptist Publication Society, 1886) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CHAPTER 38

DEATH AND RESURRECTION

Mat 17:22-23; Mar 9:30-32; Luk 9:43-45. Mark: “And having gone out from thence, they continued to journey through Galilee.” As Galilee extends up to the very suburbs of Caesarea-Philippi, this passage is a clinching argument for the location of the transfiguration in that vicinity. Luke: “Place these words in your ears; for the Son of man is about to be delivered into the hands of sinners.” Matthew & Mark say: “They will kill Him; and having been killed, on the third day He will arise.” “And they did not know this word, and it was hidden from them, in order that they may not understand it; and they feared to ask Him concerning this word.” This took place in His conversation with His disciples while journeying down the Jordan, from Caesarea-Philippi, back to the sea of Galilee. You observe that this is the second time that He has positively told them about His coming arrest, execution, and resurrection. As you here see, “it was hidden from them,” so they did not understand it. Do you know that this dark veil wrapped the important item in our Lord’s biography till He had actually risen from the dead, though He had distinctly and positively spoken it out to them three times? Why was this revealed to them, and still withheld from them? It was really indispensable that it should be revealed, in order to the completion of the prophetical curriculum, destined, as in all bygone ages, to constitute the basis of faith for all future generations; hence the necessity of its revealment is clear and demonstrative. Then why was it withheld from them, so they never did receive it till after He had risen from the dead? This is equally obvious. If His disciples had understood it, they would have rallied His friends and fought for Him, thus precipitating on the country a bloody revolution, which Jesus did not want. Consequently, the blessed Holy Spirit just took it away from them, so they never caught the idea till after He had risen from the dead.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Subdivision 5. (Mat 17:22-27; Mat 18:1-35; Mat 19:1-30; Mat 20:1-28.)

Responsibility and Reward.

The responsibilities of the Kingdom follow, by an easy transition; upon the principles of it as thus declared; closing with a view of the rewards of grace in which love will satisfy itself at the end of the way. We have here, not merely the fact that there are such, but the doctrine as to them - a most important one - and giving us a precious and wonderful insight into heaven itself, which is a sweet and how fitting conclusion to all this part. After this the Lord presents Himself openly to Israel, and the final scenes draw on.

1. The governing principle is what comes first before us; and this, as we have seen; is the cross. Accordingly the Lord again speaks of it to His disciples now. He does not apply it; and nothing further is connected with it here, except the exceeding grief of His disciples. But it is not difficult to trace it as in moral connection with what follows. The Son of God as Son of man passing through the world, is not discerned by the men of it. Had they possessed this wisdom, "they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." True, it was guilty ignorance, the result of being so absolutely in contrast with Him spiritually; and the followers of their Master are, just in proportion as they resemble Him, in the same way unknown. "Therefore the world knoweth us not," says the apostle, "because it knew Him not" (1Jn 3:1). Being thus rejected, He accepts it without contention, and in this too calls upon His disciples to follow Him. At Capernaum those that collected the half-shekel which was the temple-tribute, come to Peter and ask him: "Doth not your Teacher pay the half-shekel?" He at once answers, in entire forgetfulness of the glory of Him whom He had confessed as the Son of God, that He did pay it. If it were the atonement-money, the dishonor done to Him would be most manifest, yet the Lord raises no question upon this ground; and, according to the institution of Exo 30:11-16 that was only required upon the occasion of a numbering of the children of Israel. Joash, however, refers to it (2Ch 24:6), when urging contributions for the temple-service; but evidently as a precedent only, as the restrictions of the law were not carried out in the answer to his exhortation. "After the return from the captivity," says Farrar, "this bekah, or half-shekel, became a voluntary annual tax of a third of a shekel" - showing it was hardly looked at as carrying out the original enactment of the law of Moses - "but at some subsequent period had again returned to its original amount." The Lord treats it as a simple temple-tribute, but even on this ground cannot let pass the question of its claim upon Him. He does more than as such resist it for Himself: He puts His rash and forgetful disciple along with Himself, as free.

He does not wait for Peter’s question, but shows His divine knowledge by anticipating it. "What thinkest thou, Simon?" He asks; "from whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? from their sons, or from strangers? There could be but one answer: "From strangers." "Surely then," the Lord replies, "the sons are free."

But, though He vindicate this liberty, in practice He does not insist upon it. Personal right one is always entitled to surrender, and the "giving offence" - the causing spiritual injury - to any one, by any claim of it, though misunderstood wholly, that were indeed for Him, the Lord and yet the Servant of His people’s need, impossible to be thought of. "But that we may not give them offence, go to the sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that cometh up first; and when thou hast opened its mouth, thou shalt find a shekel: that take, and give unto them for me and thee."

Thus He veils His glory, yet declaring it in the very way in which He veils it. To summon a fish of the sea to pay the tribute for Him, guards indeed well His glory, as the Lord of that higher temple which Israel’s temple figured, and which is the universe that His hands have made (Heb 9:23-24). There is not even the appearance of compromise as to what He is, and only His grace is shown in thus stooping. Not an adversary even can cavil at it; and the weakest instead of stumbling, can find in it only measureless comfort in the realization of this union of power and grace in Him.

But not only so: as "Son over" this "house of God" (Heb 3:1-6), He can make others free of it (Joh 8:36). Yea, He can set free the very slaves - and there is no slavery in God’s universe but that of sin - and make them sons of the house of which He is Master. And this is what He shows us now in Peter, the representative disciple, as we have so lately seen him. The fish brings the tribute-money for him also, a piece which is the equivalent of two half-shekels: "For Me and thee," the Lord says; not "for us": for if He had not His unique glory, we could not have our blessing. "For Me," and so, through My grace, "for thee:" and in this (or what is implied in it) we all have part.

We, through His grace, are sons of God, and free. Yet must we be content to wait for the time when we shall be recognized as this, and in the meanwhile to pay tribute, as if we were not what we are. Not expecting recognition, and not claiming rights, and earnest to avoid giving offence by any self-assertion; our privilege, as well as our responsibility, is to walk in the steps of Him with whom the path of humiliation and of service was His choice and glory.

2. (1) This lowliness of spirit is now insisted on in the strongest way, the Lord using a little child as His text throughout, and in answer to a question proposed by His disciples which evidenced their need of such instruction. There had been a dispute among them, the other synoptists tell us, as to who among them should be the greater. The Lord’s words about the keys to Peter, and His joining him with Himself in payment of the temple-tax, may have led to this; but the cause is not stated, nor is it important. The important thing was the condition of soul which the question itself revealed. Greatness was what they sought; and in that which they owned to be the Kingdom of heaven; yet which (as they are shown later) they are making but a kingdom of the Gentiles in their thoughts, a place for the gratification of ambition and self-seeking. In this a little child was capable of being their instructor. Jesus called to Him a little child, and placed him in the midst of them and said, with one of His emphatic affirmations, "Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children; ye shall in no wise ENTER into the Kingdom of heaven."

The question was here a more fundamental one than that which they had started. One must enter it, in order to be great in it and ambition could not even enter. It is plain that, while merely the ordinary term is used here, which applies both to the mystery- and the final-form of the Kingdom, yet it is of the latter both the disciples and the Lord are speaking. They have in mind the time when "greatness" will be estimated by the King, and receive its reward, and the Lord states the necessary condition for even entrance into it at that time.

The word for "be converted" is simply "turn yourselves," though surely here having reference to that spiritual change, for which a compound form of it is generally used, of somewhat stronger meaning. The little child as a symbol reminds us of the way in which God has ordained that men should enter the present life, most surely in lowliness and feebleness enough. The long drill and discipline of childhood might well seem intended to "hide pride from man," and the mercy of God it is that provides for beings so helpless, the love and care which after all, in such a world as this, so generally wait upon the birth of children. So also is it with the beginning of spiritual life, which we enter not as doers of something great, but in feebleness and poverty to receive grace, not due. And the end is as the beginning: it is in grace we grow; at the end as at the beginning, it is salvation that we receive; reward at last is not claim but mercy. In this way it is as little children that the Kingdom of heaven must be entered; and in proportion to the simplicity with which this is done will the true character of the Kingdom be attained. "A little child" may, indeed, have in its heart the seed of ambition as of all other evil, but not the man who estimates himself but as that. To him no ambitious thought is possible. While the Lord in His grace identifies Himself with the least of His own; so as to assure every one that his littleness will not make him of little account to Him. This is an assurance which prevents the consciousness of nothingness becoming a distress; nay, rather, enables us only the more to realize the sweetness of a love so great.

(2) Thus it wraps itself about the objects of it, like a mother with a babe, and grows, as one might think, passionate in denouncing those who would injure them. "But whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in Me, it were better for him that a great mill-stone were hanged about his neck, and he sunk in the depth of the sea;" - so does God care for the feeblest of His own!

But offences would come: "woe to the world because of" them; yea, "woe to the man by whom the offence cometh!" And here the Lord repeats, with more general application, what He had said in the sermon on the mount with more special reference to the seventh commandment of the law. Better to cut off hand or foot, - better to pluck out an eye, if it caused offence, than to retain these and be cast into the hell of fire. It is the Saviour of men; He who died in His love to redeem them, who ever gives the most earnest and emphatic warning of that to which sin of necessity brings those who cleave to it.

(3) But His heart turns to what is more congenial: "See that ye despise not one of these little ones: for I say unto you that their angels in heaven continually behold the face of My Father who is in heaven." Well, then, may they be held in loving regard by men. But the doctrine of the passage has its difficulty. De Wette, as quoted by Lange, says with regard to it: "In the Old Testament we only read of guardian angels of empires (Dan 10:13; Dan 10:20). But at a later period the Jews believed also in the existence of guardian angels for individuals (Targum of Jonathan on Gen 33:10, Gen 35:10, Gen 48:16). Similarly also the New Testament (Act 12:7?)" Yet he takes it as figurative, in which way it would be hard to understand it. Meyer, approved by Lange, in opposition to this says, "The belief in guardian angels is clearly admitted by Christ." Probably most agree with this; Dr. Brown remarks: Among men, those who nurse and rear the royal children; however humble in themselves, are allowed free entrance with their charge, and a degree of familiarity which even the highest state ministers dare not assume. Probably our Lord means that, in virtue of their charge over His disciples (Heb 1:14; Joh 1:51), the angels have errands to the Throne, a welcome there, and a dear familiarity in dealing with His Father which is in heaven; which on their own matters they could not assume." This, however, seems too much like the state of an earthly court, from which it is rash to draw analogies for heaven. The difficulty as to interpreting our Lord’s words as referring to guardian angels is that it seems a very indecisive passage to stand alone for the doctrine, which assuredly the verses in Hebrews and in John’s Gospel do not teach. Daniel more nearly approaches it, though the angels representing; the empires there seem all to be evil, and only Michael as "prince" of the Jewish people is really in any sense a "guardian" (see Dan 10:21).

But the Lord’s words seem to apply strictly to "little children," and not simply to believers as designated in that way. He is not telling His disciples not to despise believers, but certainly what might seem to them comparatively of little account, which believers as such would not. (Comp. Mat 19:13.) On the other hand, we have no reason that I am aware of, for introducing into what is here the additional thought that there is restriction even among the unfallen angels as to seeing the Father’s face. The fallen condition in which we are is that, rather, one would suppose, which makes such a restriction seem necessary or natural.

The passage in the Acts referred to, though commonly taken to imply also the Jewish doctrine of guardian angels, hardly seems capable of being reconciled with it: for why should a guardian angel assume Peter’s voice, so as to be mistaken for him? and in this place Brown interprets "his angel" to be "his disembodied spirit, his ghost." The two passages in this case would strengthen one another; and the children’s angels, or spirits, being permitted to behold the Father’s face in heaven would be indeed an admonition not to despise them, as well as an unspeakable comfort as to the condition of an infant after death.

The next clause is omitted in some ancient MSS. and versions, and it has been thought to be an insertion from Luk 19:10; but, as others have remarked, the omission of "to seek" - simply, "the Son of man came to save that which is lost" - is significant. They are lost ones needing a Saviour; but seeking implies a condition of active wandering from God such as in their case is hardly begun yet.

His own joy in salvation - the joy of the Shepherd over a lost sheep found - the Lord then emphatically declares. It is but a glimpse of what we have in Luke poured fully out, and here without the contrast of Pharisees with "tax-gatherers and sinners," there brought out so vividly. The ninety and nine in this case seem but brought in to emphasize how the one lost has concentrated upon him in the meantime all the solicitude, and, when found, the tenderness of the Shepherd, as if there were not another. Yet this over-abounding joy does not, in fact, disparage the interest in them which is only for the moment not in the same way realized. Let any of these become the lost, they too would arouse the same anxiety and tenderness. In Luke the parable is uttered to a different audience, and in other circumstances which combine to present these ninety and nine in a manner in some respects very different from this.

Here it is the Father’s will which He has come to carry out, and it is not the Father’s will that one of these little ones should perish. How sweet and perfect an assurance! It is only the contrary will of man that hinders his salvation: on God’s part there can be no contrary one: "As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth." Thus the little ones removed from us by death we may trust confidently to the divine love which waits on them. Our assurance as to them is rooted in the unchangeableness of the divine nature.

3. The Lord goes on to speak of holiness, which is also absolutely characteristic of God, and which must be maintained by all who are associated with His name on earth: "Let him that nameth the name of the Lord," says the apostle, "depart from iniquity." The assembly comes here, therefore, into a special place of responsibility and for the first time we find it assuming a position and exercising powers for which He has endowed it with authority as representing Him. On the other hand, in most suited connection with this, we find His people reminded of their weakness and dependence upon Him: a dependence which, when realized, brings in that assured and ready help which makes it but a means of realizing in turn the resources and nearness of the living God. The whole is crowned with the assurance of His presence in the midst, where two or three are gathered to His Name and this at once seals their commission to maintain what is due to Him under whose authority they act, and pledges Him to meet all their necessities.

But this is another text which, having been variously interpreted, calls for careful examination at our hands.

(1) The disciples having been charged to avoid what would be offence against another, and as to themselves rather to get rid of what might seem like hand or foot than go on with what was matter of offence, are now taught how to deal with sin in another.

But at once question begins: What is the sin which we have to do with here? and are we to take it as generally taken; as simply personal trespass? For some of the most ancient MSS. and some editors omit the "against thee" of the common version; and have only "if thy brother sin," which would seem to make it wider. This can however, I think, be better settled as we go on; and we may leave it for the present undecided.

But undoubtedly we are to remember that, in any case, the thing to be considered by us is what the Lord calls "sin," and we must not allow ourselves to admit practically a lighter word than that. "Sin," whether it be against oneself or not, is something which should bring up at once before us the psalmist’s deep realization, "Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned" (Psa 51:4); words which only appear the more striking as we think of the dreadful character of that which he had committed against his neighbor. Sin can only be viewed rightly as against God; and to treat it so we must be before God about it. We must know how, in Old Testament language, to eat the sin-offering in the holy place.

This is the only fully effectual corrective of the danger from any personal element, wherever (as in the present case is generally taken for granted) that may be found. In the presence of God sin is truly judged, but therefore judged in ourselves first and so it is we obtain that "spirit of meekness," in which alone we are able to "restore" those "overtaken in a fault" as considering our own proneness to temptation (Gal 6:1). That is the first thought here, and always as regarding one who has sinned - restoration: "if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother." There is not to be the thought, as presently and plainly insisted on; of "pay me that thou owest," but of gaining a brother: of winning him back to all that belongs to Christian brotherhood. For sin means collapse, estrangement from this, - a shadow over the glory of "what is really life," and dishonor to Christ and to God. How in the apprehension of this, could one even think of one’s own things, save as one may truly find them in the thought of a "brother"!

And this governs all in this first step taken: "go and show him his fault" - literally, "convict him," bring him to conviction - "between thee and him alone." Let there be no needless exposure, no pain that can be spared, nothing that would arouse resentment, and so most surely hinder recovery. He is to feel that, as Elihu with Job, you desire to justify him, - if that may not be, yet to put his case into his own hands for trial, and lift him up into the Christian place of judgeship, master of himself once more.

Grace is in anywise the only power over sin. It is not laxity, as people misconceive it, but always sin’s unsparing enemy and scourge. "Sin shall not have dominion over you, because ye are not under law, but under grace." Yet how often do those who are themselves wholly debtors to grace, use the law without hesitation in their dealings with one another. Of course, they betray in this their own slight knowledge, while the fruit is reaped in failure to maintain the holiness they seek. We cannot, by our will to do it, make that which is the "strength of sin" become its antidote.

But if this, then; be the divine principle in dealing with it, it is plain that whether it is sin against myself or against another can make no difference. This does not come into consideration; and the reading which would leave it out seems practically right. If it is grace that is moving me for a brother’s deliverance, it can make no difference against whom the sin is. Nay, if it is in my brother, it is against me necessarily, if not directly: it injures me, aggrieves me, as one of the family. It will in any case work the same misery: it is equally against God my Father, against Christ my Lord, and against the soul of him who has committed it while again grace requires not to find a legal title to proceed, as in my own matters, but in the needs to which it ministers finds its sufficient justification. In any case, the principle applies, wherever and so far as the circumstances permit the application there is supposed, as we see, a condition of things in which love finds its call and opportunity, and which cannot, perhaps, and need not, be further defined.

The next step to be taken; if the first be ineffectual, is to "take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." These witnesses are not to establish the truth of the charge: for of this the one who has sinned is already "convicted," but to bring the influence of the truth to bear upon him the more by their confirmation. They are a jury of appeal to make him realize the gravity rather than the truth of his sin; - a midway step between the private reasoning and the full publicity of the assembly. Love would yet spare the person, while it cannot spare the sin and therefore the present procedure.

The third appeal is to the assembly as a whole, which is defined in what follows as a gathering to the name of Christ. It is astonishing that any could have had the thought here of the Jewish synagogue, although it is true that the Christian assembly did not yet exist, and that the Lord is speaking anticipatively; but the same could be said in general of what is before us in all this part of Matthew. The Christian assembly has as yet only once been spoken of, and in the present case it is a local one - a gathering," for which we must wait historically for the Acts. Here we have it strikingly for the first time as entrusted with the maintenance of holiness in connection with Christ’s Name on earth. It is, as we see, the last court of appeal, and to whose acts He gives, in the most solemn way, authoritative sanction. The case is left in its hands for final decision, which is supposed to be in accordance with what has been done before; and now, "if he refuse to hear the assembly, let him be unto thee as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer."

This is the fourth step therefore: the man is now to be treated as in an outside place, as a Gentile, a "man of the nations," by itself expresses. A "tax-gatherer" adds to this the thought of having lost the place inside by his unworthiness. The outside place is manifest: of course, in the Lord’s lips it could not mean any dismissal of care and thought and labor after the one so treated. It is one of that hated class - the tax-gatherers - who records, and alone records, this injunction: himself the most signal example of the grace that sought all such. On the other hand, while business intercourse and communications might go on, even in all this would it be but the more apparent that what was Christian had come to an end, till divine grace should restore it. The Christian in the world was to be but the reflex of his Master’s mind; and as surely as He could not go on with sin; no more could those who were to act on earth for Him who had left it.

It is true that it is said here, "let him be to thee," and this is the binding of this conduct on the individual; but any proper consideration given to the matter will assure us that this could not possibly mean that this refusal of Christian fellowship was to be merely on the part of the one against whom the sin had been. Were the witnesses who had shown their sympathy up to this point with the brother who had been sinned against, now to withdraw it, and go on in fellowship with him they had condemned, because the case was not their own? Was the brother offended, and to whom at least this must apply, to act in such a way, not because of the sin; but because he himself was the person wronged? How this would destroy the whole character of discipline, as well as the spiritual character of Christian fellowship!

The assembly would be little Christian which could become partner to any thing of this sort, or look at sin as having merely a particular reference, and not being the general concern of all. The next verse also, which applies, of course, to the assembly as a whole, negatives absolutely any such conclusion. For here, in the fifth place, the numerical order certifying it as a principle of divine government in the kingdom of God at hand, - the power of God allying itself here to human weakness - the Lord adds, with one of His "verilies," the oath for confirmation, which is an end of all dispute: "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

The Church on earth acts for its absent Lord; and, as so acting, He gives it His authority with the broad seal of royalty attached to the commission. Without this it could not move in the regulation of such matters at all: all the authority that it has is delegated to it by the King; it is not a democracy, but a monarchy most absolute, - a Kingdom not of man but of God.

It is plainly also in the moral sphere that the commission applies; and this at once makes known its limitations. In nothing so plainly as in the moral sphere is every thing based upon the character of God Himself. Every thing here is fixed, therefore, and unchangeable. The Church cannot so much as define what good or evil is. Every conscience here is subject to God alone, and the only appeal to it is as the appeal of light to the eye - the appeal of self-evidence. The eye may be diseased, the conscience hardened, the appeal useless; but this is always a result of rejecting the light: the light itself is divine, not human; and brings the soul before God, not man, not the Church. The rule of conscience means in result the rule of God, just as that of the eye would mean that of the light. Though light and the eye are very different things, yet the "light of the body is the eye."

The Church is a body not legislative but executive: it does not decree what shall be, but decides upon what is. It has authority to act, but upon lines laid down for it; and authority to act does not guarantee the action. But unless the action be according to His mind, it should be plain that the Lord could not sanction it. He could not "bind" sin upon one who had not sinned, nor "loose" it where there had been no repentance. This would be to put evil for good and good for evil, and to put the Church above her Lord. Either, then; the Church’s action is secured infallibly, or there are conditions implied which we shall be able to gather from the context.

In the specified case to which this assurance is appended, it is abundantly plain that it is a case of real "sin:" "if thy brother sin." Of this he is to be convicted, and witnesses brought in, and then it is to be told to the assembly. This is the case in which the assembly is authorized to act, and only in such plain cases. As far as we read here, if the case were not plain, - if there were not, therefore, agreement about it, - it would not be such as would give title, or (to speak better) impose responsibility, to act at all. It must be in the light, not in the dark, we walk. The fact is, that it is not here that the Church has ever realized its real difficulties, although, of course, here also there may be unfaithfulness to the Lord, and what is to be done then is not yet taken up. We are here at the beginning of things, and must expect, in this, as in other matters, to have the truth gradually unfolded to us. The point is here, that the Church is guardian of the holiness to be always associated with the profession of the name of the Lord; there is no question at present of doctrine at all, and it would be premature to speak of it yet in any explicit way; though something may be inferred in what almost immediately follows: but that is another thing.

(2) The sense of responsibility should lead ever to the sense of weakness, and this is the order of thought here. Remembering the need of His people, the Lord now assures them of the way in which they may count upon Him for the supply of all their need. And, like Him, He does not limit it to this or any particular need: "Again I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree together on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father who is in heaven." Above all is this assurance needed where, as the connection would imply, and in some measure the agreement also, the acting together as representatives of Christ on earth is that as to which need is realized. Here one cannot but feel the grace of this lowest possible number for consent or united action. Supposing there were no more together in a place, or that others failed to realize the need, yet here would the Lord meet those who did so. Thus, while not necessarily implying the failure of His people, He provides for it. How tender are these all-seeing Eyes that contemplate us!

(3) And He adds this assurance, the unspeakable comfort of His people ever since: "For where two or three are gathered together unto My Name, there am I in the midst of them."

It is not "in My Name," as in the common version; but "unto:" His name being thus the central point of gathering. "In His name" would be by His authority, or as representing Himself: both things, of course, true, but neither of them defining, as this does, the Christian assembly. His Name speaks of doctrine - the truth of what He is, Himself being absent; and where He, apprehended by faith, thus draws His people together, there He promises Himself to be among them, their sufficient resource and the sanction of what they do in the manner already enjoined to maintain in love the holiness of His name.

It should be evident that more is intended here than to declare His readiness to meet the need of two or three who unite to supplicate Him in some common interest. This is simply appended to what has been before enjoined in the matter of assembly discipline, and both are sealed with this final promise of His presence where two or three are gathered to His name: words which must apply to the assembly so gathered. His presence in their midst is more directly called for by their action in the first case as representing Him than by their supplication in the second. Compare the apostle’s words to the Corinthians (1Co 5:3-5), though the Lord’s here are so much more, as He is Himself beyond all other.

No body of people gathered to aught but the truth as to what Christ is could have any claim to the promise here, as none who fulfil this condition could be excluded. If those are admitted among the orthodox who are themselves unorthodox, and this be deliberate, then it is plain his Name ceases to be that to which such a company is gathered. The orthodoxy even of the mass cannot make up for the failure as to the gathering-point. However many the Christians there, the gathering is not Christian.

A false Christ is not Christ; deliberately held to, it is the denial of Christ; and here it is important to remember that ignorance is by no means the same thing as denial, which assumes knowledge. As to the blessed Person of the Lord His own words declare our common ignorance as to much: "No man knoweth the Son but the Father." But that which Scripture declares of Him is by that fact no longer to be beyond our knowledge, but what is committed to our trust as the vital centre of all truth and blessing. Christ is the manifestation of God, the Redeemer of men; as the Word of God, by whom and for whom all things were created, He is the Sum of all knowledge that is really such. Aberration here is quick distortion of all other things. Thus "gathered to My name" is vital to the Assembly. They are in the world as His representatives the Spirit by which they are baptized into one body is in them to glorify Him. How would every thing be lost if His Church could accept a substitute for Him; or allow the darkening of one glory of the "Light of men"!

Here, then, is the Church as it is presented to us for the second time and in living activity in the Gospel of Matthew. In no other Gospel is it presented to us at all. And here it is seen, as we may say, according to the constant character of Matthew, as in the Kingdom, and in the exercise of authority suited to the Kingdom of heaven. We have nothing as yet of the Body of Christ, or of espousal to Him; nothing of it even as indwelt of the Holy Spirit, nor explicitly as the house of God - though it is what He builds, and Peter and such as he are "stones" in the building: a building instinct with glorious life, against which the gates of hides cannot prevail: a living Church, manifesting its life in love and holiness, finding its centre of attraction and controlling authority in Him who is its Creator and Lord, refusing all other. Such is the picture given to us in the Gospels.

F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 14

Last Words at Capernaum - Mat_17:22-27; Mat_18:1-35

THE TEMPLE TRIBUTE {Mat_17:22-27}

THE way southward lies through Galilee; but the time of Galilees visitation is now over, so Jesus avoids public attention as much as possible, and gives Himself up to the instruction of His disciples, especially to impressing upon their minds the new lesson of the Cross, which they find it so very hard to realise, or even to understand. A brief stay in Capernaum was to be expected; and there above all places He could not hope to escape notice; but the manner of it is sadly significant-no friendly greeting, no loving welcome, not even any personal recognition, only a more or less entangling question as to the Temple tax, addressed, not to Christ Himself, but to Peter: "Doth not your Master pay the half-shekel?" (R.V). The impulsive disciple showed his usual readiness by answering at once in the affirmative. He perhaps thought it was becoming his Masters dignity to show not a moments hesitation in such a matter; but if so, he must have seen his mistake when he heard what his Lord had to say on the subject, reminding him as it did that, as Son of God, He was Lord of the Temple, and not tributary to it.

Some have felt a difficulty in reconciling the position taken on this occasion with His previous attitude towards the law, notably on the occasion of His baptism, when in answer to Johns remonstrance, He said, "It becometh us to fulfil all righteousness"; but it must be remembered that He has entered on a new stage of His career. He has been rejected by those who acknowledged allegiance to the Temple, virtually excommunicated, so that He has been constrained to found His Church outside the commonwealth of Israel: He must therefore assert His own rights and theirs in spiritual things (for it must be remembered that the "half-shekel" was not the tribute to Caesar. but the impost for the maintenance of the Temple worship). But while asserting His right He would not insist on it: He would stand by His disciples word, and so avoid putting a stumbling-block in the way of those that were without, and who therefore could not be expected to understand the position He took. While consenting to pay the tax, He would provide it in such a way as not to lower His lofty claims in the view of His disciples, but rather to illustrate them, bringing home, as it must have done, to them all, and especially to the "pilot of the Galilean lake," that all things were under His feet, down to the very "fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas". {Psa_8:8; Psa_50:10-12} The difficulty which some feel in regard to this miracle, as differing so much in its character from those wrought in presence of the people as signs of the kingdom and credentials of the King, is greatly relieved, if not altogether removed, by remembering what was the special object in view-the instruction of Peter and the other disciples-and observing how manifestly and peculiarly appropriate it was for this particular purpose.

THE LITTLE ONES. {Mat_18:1-14}

The brief stay at Capernaum was signalised by some other lessons of the greatest importance. First, as to the great and the small in the kingdom of heaven. We learn from the other Evangelists that by the way the disciples had disputed with one another who should be the greatest. Alas for human frailty, even in the true disciple! It is most humiliating to think that, after that week, with its high and holy lessons. the first thing we hear of the disciples should be their failure in the very particulars which had been special features of the weeks instruction. Recall the two points: the first was faith in the Christ, the Son of the living God, and over against it we have from lack of faith the signal failure with the lunatic child; the second was self-denial, and over against it we have this unseemly strife as to who should be greatest in the kingdom.

It is startling and most sad; but is it not true to nature? Is it not after the most solemn impressions that we need to be most watchful? And how natural it is, out of what is taught us, to choose and appropriate what is welcome, and, without expressly rejecting, simply to leave unassimilated and unapplied what is unwelcome. The great burden of the instruction for the last eight or ten days had been the Cross. There had been reference to the rising again, and the coming in the glory of the kingdom; hut these had been kept strictly in the background, mentioned chiefly to save the disciples from undue discouragement, and even the three who had the vision of glory on the mount were forbidden to mention the subject in the meantime. Yet they let it fill the whole field of view; and though when the Master is with them He still speaks to them of the Cross, when they are by themselves they dismiss the subject, and fall to disputing as to who shall be the greatest in the kingdom!

How patiently and tenderly their Master deals with them! No doubt the same thought was in His heart again: "O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you?" But He does not even express it now. He takes an opportunity, when they are quietly together in the house, of teaching them the lesson they most need in a manner so simple and beautiful, so touching and impressive, as to commend it to all true-hearted ones to the end of time. Jesus called a little child to Him, "and set him in the midst of them." Can we doubt that they felt the force of that striking object lesson before He said a word? Then, as we learn from St. Mark, to whom we always look for minute details, after having set him in the midst of them for them to look at and think about for a while, He took him in His arms, as if to show them where to look for those who were nearest to the heart of the King of heaven.

Nothing could have been more suggestive. It perfectly suited the purpose He had in view; but the meaning and the value of that simple act were by no means limited to that purpose. It most effectually rebuked their pride and selfish ambition; but it was far more than a rebuke-it was a revelation which taught men to appreciate child-nature as they had never done before. It was a new thought the Lord Jesus so quietly introduced into the minds of men that day, a seed-thought which had in it the promise, not only of all that appreciation of child-life which is characteristic of Christendom to-day, and which has rendered possible such poems as Vaugbans "Retreat," and Wordsworths grand ode on "Immortality," but also of that appreciation of the broadly human as distinguished from the mere accidents of birth or rank or wealth which lies at the foundation of all Christian civilisation. The enthusiasm of humanity is all in that little act done so unassumingly in heedless Capernaum.

The words spoken are in the highest degree worthy of the act they illustrate. The first lesson is, "None but the lowly are in the kingdom: Except ye be converted (from the selfish pride of your hearts), and become (lowly and self-forgetful) as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." A most heart-searching lesson! What grave doubts and questions it must have suggested to the disciples! They had faith to follow Christ in an external way; but were they really following Him? Had He not said, "If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself? Were they denying self? On the other hand, however, we need not suppose that this selfish rivalry was habitual with them. It was probably one of those surprises which overtake the best of Christians; so that it was not really a proof that they did not belong to the kingdom, but only that for the time they were acting inconsistently with it; and therefore, before they could think of occupying any place, even the very lowest in the kingdom, they must repent, and become as little children."

The next lesson is, The lowliest in the kingdom are the greatest: "Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven." Again a most wonderful utterance, now so familiar to us, that we are apt to regard it as a thing of course; but what a startling paradox it must have been to the astonished disciples that day! Yet, as they looked at the bright, innocent, clear-eyed, self-unconscious little child, so simple, so trustful, there must have come a response from that which was deepest and best within them to their Masters words. And though the thought was new to them at the time, it did come home to them: it passed into their nature, and showed itself afterwards in precious fruit, at which the world still wonders. They did not indeed get over their selfishness all at once; but how grandly were they cured of it when their training was finished! If there is one thing more characteristic of the apostles in their after life than any other, it is their self-forgetfulness, their self-effacement, we may say. Where does Matthew ever say a word about the sayings or doings of Matthew? Even John, who was nearest of all to the heart of the Saviour, and with Him in all His most trying hours, can write a whole gospel without ever mentioning his own name; and when he has occasion to speak of John the Baptist does it as if there were no other John in existence. So was it with them all. We must not forget that, so far as this lesson of self-denial is concerned, they were only beginners now; {see Mat_16:21} but after they had completed their course and received the Pentecostal seal, they did not disgrace their Teacher any more: they did then really and nobly deny self; and thus did they at last attain true greatness in the kingdom of heaven.

So far we have what may be called the Saviours direct answer to the question as to the greatest; but He cannot leave the subject without also setting before them the claims of the least in the kingdom of heaven. He has shown them how to be great: He now teaches them how to treat the small. The two things lie very close together. The man who makes much of himself is sure to make light of others; and he who is ambitious for worldly greatness will have little regard for those who in his eyes are small. The lesson, then, would have been incomplete had He not vindicated the claims of the little ones.

It is manifest, from the whole strain of the passage which follows, that the reference is not exclusively to children in years, but quite as much to children in spiritual stature, or in position and influence in the Church. The little ones are those who are small in the sense corresponding to that of the word "great" in the disciples question. They are those, therefore, that are small and weak, and (as it is sometimes expressed) of no account in the Church, whether this be due to tender years or to slender abilities or to scanty means or to little faith.

What our Lord says on this subject comes evidently from the very depths of His heart. He is not content with making sure that the little ones shall receive as good a welcome as the greatest: they must have a special welcome, just because they are small. He identifies Himself with them-with each separate little one: "Whoso shall receive one such little child in My name receiveth Me." What a grand security for the rights and privileges of the small! what a word for parents and teachers, for men of influence and wealth in the Church in their relations to the weak and poor!

Then follow two solemn warnings, wrought out with great fulness and energy. The first is against putting a stumbling-block in the way of even one of these little ones-an offence which may be committed without any thought of the consequences. Perhaps this is the very reason why the Master feels it necessary to use language so terribly strong, that He may, if possible, arouse His disciples to some sense of their responsibility: "Whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." How jealously He guards the little ones! Verily he that toucheth them "toucheth the apple of His eye."

From the corresponding passage in St. Mark, it would appear that Christ had in view, not only such differences of age and ability and social position as are found in every community of disciples, but also such differences as are found between one company and another of professing Christians. {see Mar_9:38-42} This infuses a new pathos into the sad lament with which He forecasts the future: "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come: but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" The solemn warnings which follow, not given now for the first time, {see Mat_5:29-30} coming in this connection, convey the important lesson that the only effectual safeguard against causing others to stumble is to take heed to our own ways, and be ready to make any sacrifice in order to maintain our personal purity, simplicity, and uprightness (Mat_18:8-9). How often alas! in the history of the Church has the cutting off been applied in the wrong direction; when the strong, in the exercise of an authority which the Master would never have sanctioned, have passed sentence of excommunication against some defenceless little one; whereas if they had laid to heart these solemn warnings, they would have cut off, not one of Christs members, but one of their own-the harsh hand, the hasty foot, the jealous eye, which caused them to stumble!

The other warning is: "Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones." To treat them so is to do the reverse of what is done in heaven. Be their guardian angels rather, if you would have the approval of Him Who reigns above; for their angels are those who always have the place of honour there. Is there not something very touching in this home reference, "My Father which is in heaven"?-especially when He is about to refer to the mission of mercy which made Him an exile from His home. And this reference gives Him an additional plea against despising one of these little ones; for not only are the highest angels their honoured guardians, but they are those whom the Son of man has come to seek and to save. The little lamb which you despise is one for whom the heavenly Shepherd has thought it worth His while to leave all the rest of His flock that He may go after it, and seek it on the lonely mountains, whither it has strayed, and over whose recovery He has greater joy than even in the safety of all the rest. The climax is reached when He carries thoughts above the angels. above even the son of man, to the will of the Father (now it is your Father; for He desires to bring to bear upon them the full force of that tender relationship which it is now their privilege to claim): "Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish."

TRESPASSES. {Mat_18:15-35}

The transition is natural from those solemn words in which our Lord has warned His disciples against Offending "one of these little ones," to the instructions which follow as to how they should treat those of their brethren who might trespass against them. These instructions, occupying the rest of this chapter, are of perennial interest and value, so long as it must needs be that offences come.

The trespasses referred to are of course real. Much heartburning and much needless trouble often come of "offences" which exist only in imagination. A "sensitive" disposition (often only another name for one that is uncharitable and suspicious) leads to the imputing of bad motives where none exist, and the finding of sinister meanings in the most innocent acts. Such offences are not worthy of consideration at all. It is further to be observed that our Lord is not dealing with ordinary quarrels, where there are faults on both sides, in which ease the first step would be not to tell the brother his fault, but to acknowledge our own. The trespass, then, being real, and the fault all on the other side, how is the disciple of Christ to act? The paragraphs which follow make it clear.

"The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable"; accordingly we are first shown how to proceed in order to preserve the purity of the Church. Then instructions are given with a view to preserve the peace of the Church. The first paragraph shows how to exercise discipline; the second lays down the Christian rule of forgiveness.

"If thy brother shall trespass against thee,"-what? Pay no heed to it? Since it takes two to make a quarrel, is it best simply to let him alone? That might be the best way to deal with offences on the part of those that are without; but it would be a sad want of true brotherly love to take this easy way with a fellow-disciple. It is certainly better to overlook an injury than to resent it; yet our Lord shows a more excellent way. His is not the way of selfish resentment, nor of haughty indifference; but of thoughtful concern for the welfare of him who has done the injury. That this is the motive in the entire proceeding is evident from the whole tone of the paragraph, in illustration of which reference may be made to the way in which success is regarded: "If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother." If a man sets out with the object of gaining his cause or getting satisfaction, he had better let it alone; but if he wishes not to gain a barren triumph for himself, but to gain his brother, let him proceed according to the wise instructions of our Lord and Master.

There are four steps:

(1) "Go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone." Do not wait till he comes to apologise, as is the rule laid down by the rabbis, but go to him at once. Do not think of your own dignity. Think only of your Masters honour and your brothers welfare. How many troubles, how many scandals might be prevented in the Christian Church, if this simple direction were faithfully and lovingly carried out! In some cases, however, this may fail; and then the next step is:

(2) "Take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." The process here passes from private dealing; still there must be no undue publicity. If the reference to two or at most three (see R.V) fail, it becomes a duty to

(3) "tell it unto the church," in the hope that he may submit to its decision. If he decline, there is nothing left but

(4) excommunication: "Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican."

The mention of church censure naturally leads to a declaration of the power vested in the church in the matter of discipline. Our Lord had already given such a declaration to Peter alone; now it is given to the church as a whole in its collective capacity: "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." But the question comes: What is the church in its collective capacity? If it is to have this power of discipline, of the admission and rejection of members-a power which, rightly exercised on earth, is ratified in heaven-it is important to know something as to its constitution. This much, indeed, we know: that it is an assembly of believers. But how large must the assembly be? What are the marks of the true church?

These questions are answered in vv. 19 and 20 (Mat_18:19-20). It is made very plain that it is no question of numbers, but of union with one another and the Lord. Let it be remembered that the whole discourse has grown out of the strife with one another which should be the greatest. Our Lord has already shown that, instead of ambition to be the greatest, there must be readiness to be the least. He now makes it plain that instead of strife and division there must be agreement, unity in heart and desire. But if only there be this unity, this blending of hearts in prayer, there is found the true idea of the Church. Two disciples in full spiritual agreement, with hearts uplifted to the Father in heaven, and Christ present with them, -there is what may be called the primitive cell of the Church, the body of Christ complete in itself, but in its rudimentary or germinal form. It comes to this, that the presence of Christ with His people and of His spirit in them, uniting them with one another and with Him, is that which constitutes the true and living church; and it is only when thus met in the name of Christ, and acting in the spirit of Christ, that assemblies of believers, whether large or small, have any guarantee that their decrees on earth are registered in heaven, or that the promise shall be fulfilled to them, that what they ask "shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven."

These words were spoken in the day of small things, when the members of the Church were reckoned by units; therefore it is a mistake to use them as if very small gatherings for prayer were especially pleasing to the great Head of the Church. It does indeed remain true, for the encouragement of the faithful few, that wherever two or three are met in the name of Jesus He is there; but that makes it no less disappointing when the numbers might be reasonably expected to be very much larger. Because our Lord said, "Better two of you agreed than the whole twelve at strife," does it follow that two or three will have the power in their united prayers which two or three hundred would have? The stress is not on the figure, but on the agreement.

The words "There am I in the midst of them" are very striking as a manifestation of that strange consciousness of freedom from limitations of time and place, which the Lord Jesus felt and often expressed even in the days of His flesh. It is the same consciousness which appears in the answer to the cavil of the Jews as to the intimacy with Abraham He seemed to them to claim, -"Before Abraham was, I am." As a practical matter also it suggests that we do not need to ask and wait for the presence of the Master when we are truly met in His name. It is not He that needs to be entreated to draw near to us: "There am I."

So far the directions given have been with a view to the good of the offending brother and the honour of Christ and His cause. It remains to show how the offended person is to act on his part. Here the rule is very simple: "forgive him." What satisfaction, then, is the offended party to get? The satisfaction of forgiving. That is all; and it is enough.

It will be observed, indeed, that our Lord, in His discourse up to the point we have reached, has said nothing directly about forgiveness. It is fairly implied, however, in the manner of process, in the very first act of it indeed; for no one will go to an offending brother with the object of gaining him, unless he have first forgiven him in his heart. Peter appears to have been revolving this in his mind, and in doing so he cannot get over a difficulty as to the limit of forgiveness. He was familiar, of course; with the rabbinical limit of the third offence, after which the obligation to forgiveness ceased; and, impressed with the spirit of his Masters teaching, he no doubt thought he was showing great liberality in more than doubling the number of times the offence might be repeated and still be considered pardonable: "Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?" It has been thought that some of his brethren had been treating Peter badly, so that his patience was sorely tried. Be that as it may, the question was not at all unnatural. But it was founded on a fallacy, which our Lord cleared away by His answer, and thoroughly exposed by means of the striking parable which follows. The fallacy was this: that we have a right to resent an injury, that in refraining from this we are forbearing to exercise our right, and consequently that there is a limit beyond which we have no call to exercise such forbearance. Our Lord by His answer clears away the limit, and makes the obligation unconditional and universal (Mat_18:22).

The parable shows the reason why. there should be no limit-viz., that all believers, or members of the Church, by accepting from God the unlimited forgiveness He has extended to them, are thereby implicitly pledged to extend a like unlimited forgiveness to others. There is no duty on which our Lord insists more strenuously than this duty of forgiving those who trespass against us, always connecting closely together our forgiving and our being forgiven; and in this parable it is set in the strongest light.

The greatest offence of which our fellow-man can be guilty is as nothing to the sins we have committed against God. The proportion suggested is very startling. The larger sum is more than two millions sterling on the lowest computation; the smaller is not much more than four guineas. This is no exaggeration. Seven times altogether for a brothers offences seems almost unpardonable: do we never offend against God as many times in a single hour? Then think of the days, and the years! This is a startling thought on the one side; but how cheering on the other! For the immensity of the debt does not interfere in the slightest with the freeness and fulness and absoluteness of the forgiveness. Verily there is no more satisfying or reassuring presentation of the gospel than this parable, especially these very words, which rang like a knell of doom in the unmerciful servants ear: "I forgave thee all that debt." But just in proportion to the grandeur of the gospel here unfolded is the rigour of the requirement, that as we have been forgiven so must we forgive. While we gladly take the abounding comfort, let us not miss the stern lesson, evidently given with the very strongest feeling. Our Lord paints the picture of this man in the most hideous colours, so as to fill our minds and hearts with a proper loathing of the conduct of those he represents. The same intention is apparent in the very severe terms in which the punishment is denounced: "His lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors." After this how awful is the closing sentence: "So likewise shall My heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses."

Is that tender name of Father out of place? By no means; for is it not the outraged love of God that cries out against the unforgiving soul? And the words "from your hearts,"-are they not too hard on poor frail human nature? It is easy enough to grant forgiveness with the lips, -but from the heart? Yet so it stands written; and it only shows the need we have, not only of unmeasured mercy, but of unmeasured grace. Nothing but the love of Christ can constrain to such forgiveness. The warning was a solemn one, but it need have no terror for those who have truly learned the lesson of the Cross, and welcomed the Spirit of Christ to reign in their hearts. "I can do all things through Christ Who strengtheneth me."

There is an admirable fulness and harmony in Christs teaching on this subject, as on every other. The duty of unlimited forgiveness is most plainly enjoined; but not that weak forgiveness which consists simply in permitting a man to trespass as he chooses. Forgiveness and faithfulness go hand in hand. The forgiveness of the Christian is in no case to be the offspring of a weak unmanly indifference to wrong. It is to spring from gratitude and love: gratitude to God, Who has forgiven his enormous debt, and love to the enemy who has wronged him. It must be combined with that faithfulness and fortitude which constrains him to go to the offending party and frankly, though kindly, tell him his fault. Christs doctrine of forgiveness has not an atom of meanness in it, and His doctrine of faithfulness has not a spark of malice. "The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace."

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

17:22 betrayed: See Matt 20:18; 26:14-16, 45-49 for the fulfillment of this prediction.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mat 17:22. [796] Μέλλει—παραδίδοσθαι, shall be betrayed—εἰς χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων, into the hands of men) What a grievous condition! Thus was He delivered up who exhibited such great authority in Mat 17:18.

[796] Ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ, in Galilee) As yet abiding in a place separated by a long distance from the scene of His passion.—V. g.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_17:22-23. Comp. Mar_9:30 ff.; Luk_9:43 ff.

While they were still in Galilee (ἀναστρεφ., Xen. Cyr. viii. 8. 7, Mem. iv. 3. 8; Thuc. viii. 94; Jos_5:5), and before they entered Capernaum (Mat_17:24), Jesus once more (comp. Mat_16:21) intimated to His disciples His approaching sufferings, death, and resurrection. This is not a meaningless repetition of Mat_16:21 (Köstlin, Hilgenfeld); but this matter was introduced again because Jesus knew how much they required to be prepared for the impending crisis.

εἰς χεῖρας ἀνθρ.] into mens hands, uttered with a painful feeling, sensible as He was of the contrast between such a fate and what He knew to be His divine dignity. It was in keeping with the feelings now present to the mind of Jesus, not to indicate that fate with so much detail as on the former occasion (Mat_16:21).

ἐλυπήθησαν σφόδρα] therefore not impressed by the announcement of the resurrection, although it is said to have been made with so much clearness and precision. This announcement, however, is not found in Luke. See note on Mat_16:21.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 17:22-23 . Second announcement of the Passion (Mar 9:30-31 ; Luk 9:44-45 ).

Mat 17:22 . συστρεφομένων α ., while they were moving about, a reunited band. ἐν τ . Γ .: they had got back to Galilee when the second announcement was made. Mk. states that though returned to familiar scenes Jesus did not wish to be recognised, that He might carry on undisturbed the instruction of the Twelve. μέλλει , etc.: the great engrossing subject of instruction was the doctrine of the cross . παραδίδοσθαι : a new feature not in the first announcement. Grotius, in view of the words εἰς χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων , thinks the reference is to God the Father delivering up the Son. It is rather to recent revelations of disaffection within the disciple-circle. For if there were three disciples who showed some receptivity to the doctrine of the cross, there was one to whom it would be very unwelcome, and who doubtless had felt very uncomfortable since the Caesarea announcement. παραδ . contains a covert allusion to the part He is to play.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Our minds must be prepared more and more against the offence of the cross.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Christ here foretels his own sufferings; he began to do it before (Mat 16:21); and, finding that it was to his disciples a hard saying, he saw it necessary to repeat it. There are some things which God speaketh once, yea twice, and yet man perceiveth it not. Observe here,

1. What he foretold concerning himself - that he should be betrayed and killed. He perfectly knew, before, all things that should come to him, and yet undertook the work of our redemption, which greatly commends his love; nay, his clear foresight of them was a kind of ante-passion, had not his love to man made all easy to him.

(1.) He tells them that he should be betrayed into the hands of men. He shall be delivered up (so it might be read and understood of his Father's delivering him up by his determined counsel and fore-knowledge, Act 2:23; Rom 8:32); but as we render it, it refers to Judas's betraying him into the hands of the priests, and their betraying him into the hands of the Romans. He was betrayed into the hands of men; men to whom he was allied by nature, and from whom therefore he might expect pity and tenderness; men whom he had undertaken to save, and from whom therefore he might expect honour and gratitude; yet these are his persecutors and murderers.

(2.) That they should kill him; nothing less than that would satisfy their rage; it was his blood, his precious blood, that they thirsted after. This is the heir, come, let us kill him. Nothing less would satisfy God's justice, and answer his undertaking; if he be a Sacrifice of atonement, he must be killed; without blood no remission.

(3.) That he shall be raised again the third day. Still, when he spoke of his death, he gave a hint of his resurrection, the joy set before him, in the prospect of which he endured the cross, and despised the shame. This was an encouragement, not only to him, but to his disciples; for if he rise the third day, his absence from them will not be long, and his return to them will be glorious.

2. How the disciples received this; They were exceedingly sorry. Herein appeared their love to their Master's person, but with all their ignorance and mistake concerning his undertaking. Peter indeed durst not say any thing against it, as he had done before (Mat 16:22), having then been severely chidden for it; but he, and the rest of them, greatly lamented it, as it would be their own loss, their Master's grief, and the sin and ruin of them that did it.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 22. They abode in Galilee] Lower Galilee, where the city of Capernaum was.

The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men] Μελλει - παραδιδοσθαι εις χειρας - The Son of man is about to be delivered into the hands, c. I am fully of the mind of two eminent critics, Grotius and Wakefield, that παραδιδοσθαι should be here translated delivered, or delivered up, not betrayed and that the agency, in this case, should be referred to God, not to Judas. Jesus was delivered up, by the counsel of God, to be an atonement for the sin of the world. See Ac 4:27-28. Against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed to do what thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done, Herod and Pontius Pilate-were gathered together.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(22) While they abode in Galilee.—Better, as they went to and fro. The journeyings were apparently, like that to the coasts of Tyre and Sidon (Mat_15:21), unconnected with the work of His ministry. Our Lord was still, as before, taking His disciples apart by themselves, and training them by fuller disclosures of His coming passion. “He would not that any man should know” of their presence (Mar_9:30), for at that crisis, as was shown only too plainly by what followed, their minds were in a state of feverish excitement, which needed to be controlled and calmed. St. Luke adds (Luk_9:44) the solemn words with which this second announcement of His death was impressed on their thoughts, “Let these sayings sink down into your ears” (literally, place these things). The substance of what they heard was the same as before, but its repetition gave it a new force, as showing that it was not a mere foreboding of disaster, passing away with the mood of sadness in which it might have seemed to originate.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22, 23. The Second Announcement of the Passion

Mar_9:31; Luk_9:44

Both St Mark and St Luke add that the disciples “understood not this saying.” It was difficult for them to abandon cherished hopes of an earthly kingdom, and “might not Jesus be speaking in parables of a figurative death and resurrection?” See note, ch. Mat_16:21.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And while they abode in Galilee,.... Munster's Hebrew Gospel reads it "and while they were walking in Galilee", for they passed through it, when they departed from hence; see Mar 9:30 and as they were going to Capernaum, and so onward, to the coasts of Judea, in order to be at Jerusalem at the feast of the passover; where, and when, Christ was to suffer: and observing that the time of his death drew nigh, he inculcates it again to his disciples a third time, that they might be prepared for it, and not be discouraged and terrified by it;

Jesus said unto them, the son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: some copies read, "sinful men"; and so the angels report the words, in Luk 24:7 by whom may be meant the Gentiles, who, by the Jews, were reckoned very wicked men, and called sinners of the Gentiles. Now Christ intimates, that the son of man, meaning himself, should be betrayed by the Jews, into the hands of the Gentiles; than which, with the Jews, nothing was reckoned a fouler action, or a viler crime; their canons run thus (h):

"It is forbidden to betray an Israelite into the hands of the Gentiles, whether in his body or in his substance; and though he may be a wicked man, and a ringleader in sin, and though he may have oppressed and afflicted him; and everyone that betrays an Israelite into the hands of the Gentiles, whether in his body, or in his substance, has no part in the world to come.''

They forgot this rule, when they delivered Christ to Pontius Pilate. They go on to observe, that

"it is lawful to kill a betrayer in any place, even at this time, in which they do not judge capital crimes; and it is lawful to kill him before he betrays; but when he says, lo! I am about to betray such an one in his body, or in his substance, though his substance is small, he exposes himself to death; and they admonish him and say to him, do not betray: if he is obstinate, and says I will betray him, it is commanded to kill him; and he that is first to kill him, is a worthy man,''

(h) Maimon. Hilch. Chobel Umazzik, c. 8. sect. 9, 10.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:

Ver. 22. The Son of man shall be betrayed] This our Saviour often inculcates, to drive them out of their golden dream of an earthly kingdom; which pleased them so well, that they could hardly forego it. It is no easy matter to be disabused, undeceived. Error once admitted is not expelled without much ado. It sticks to our fingers like pitch: take heed how we meddle.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

See also Mar 9:30-33; Luk 9:43-45.

And while they abode in Galilee - Galilee, the northern part of Palestine. See the notes at Mat 2:22.

The Son of man shall be betrayed ... - To betray means to deliver up in a treacherous manner. This was done by Judas Iscariot, called for that act the traitor, Mat 26:14-16, Mat 26:47-50. A traitor, or betrayer, is one who makes use of confidence reposed in him for the purpose of delivering him up who puts that confidence in him to the hands of enemies.

Mat 17:23

And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again - See Mat 12:40. Mark and Luke add that they understood not that saying, and it was hid from them, and they were afraid to ask him. The reasons of this may have been,

They were strongly attached to him, and were exceedingly sorry (Matthew) at any intimation that he was soon to leave them. They learned with great slowness and reluctance, therefore, that he was to be treated in this manner. They were not willing to believe it. They knew that he was the Messiah, but they supposed that he was to be a distinguished prince, and was to restore the kingdom to Israel, Act 1:6. But to be betrayed into the hands of his enemies, and be put to death, appeared to them to be frustrating all these expectations. Though what he said was plain enough, yet they did not understand it; they could not see how he could be the Messiah, and yet be put to death in this manner; nor did they understand it fully until after the resurrection.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

They were troubled exceedingly, not being able to comprehend the mystery of Christ’s sufferings and death, which were so opposite to the nations they had of the glorious kingdom of the Messias. (Witham) --- This grief was the consequence of their attachment to their divine Master. They were ignorant, as St. Mark and St. Luke notice, of the word that was spoken. They full well understood that he would be put to death, but did not sufficiently comprehend the shortness of his rest in the grave, the nature of his triumphant resurrection, nor the inestimable benefits which his death would bring on the world. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lix.)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Mark saith, Mar 9:30-32. And they departed thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it. For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day. But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him. Luke saith, Luk 9:44,45, he said unto them, Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men. But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask him of that saying. It is said that Christ taught his disciples as they were able to hear, Mar 4:33. He tells them, Joh 16:12, he had many things to say unto them, but they could not bear them at that time. Christ a long time concealed the doctrine of his passion, and resurrection from the dead, from them, until he had confirmed them in the great point of his Divine power, and his being the true Messiah; now he begins to deliver this doctrine unto them, that what they should now soon see might not weaken their faith in him as the Messiah and the Son of God; partly in regard of that inveterate opinion which had possessed the generality of the Jews, that the Messiah should be a temporal prince, and should deliver the Jews from that servitude under which they were, and had for a long time been; partly in regard of the difficulty to conceive how he who was the Son of God could die. Once or twice before therefore he had begun to speak to them about his passion, Mat 16:21. Moses and Elias had some discourse with him about it, Luk 9:31. The text saith, they understood it not; it was hid from them; they perceived it not; they were afraid to ask him.

They were exceeding sorry: possibly they were sorry that they could not understand it, and reconcile it to the notion of the Messias they had drank in; for it seems hard to assert they were sorry for what Christ said about his suffering, because the Scripture saith, they understood it not, thinking our Saviour had not spoken plainly of a matter of fact which should be, but that he intended something else besides what his words seemed plainly to import.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. While they abode in Galilee — The miracle and conversation of the last paragraph plainly took place not far from the mount of transfiguration, which was in the vicinity of Cesarea Philippi. Thence, according to Mar_9:30, they crossed over Gennesaret to Galilee, where the present scene transpired. Into the hands of men — Though he was the Son of man, and the model of humanity, it was fatal for him to be betrayed into the hands of men. Our Lord first broached the subject of his death at the scene of the apostolic inauguration in Mat_16:21. And (as in our comment on that passage we have noted) so unexpected a turn after delivering to them the kingdom, struck them with consternation. He now, after his transfiguration, reveals the same sad assurance. Matthew says they were exceeding sorry. Luke says that our Saviour told them, Let these sayings sink down into your ears, if not into their understandings; and he adds: They understood not this saying, and it was hid from them that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask him.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 22, 23. Second official announcement of the Passion and Resurrection. (Mar_9:30-32 Luk_9:43-45)

While they abode (anastrefomenwn , went to and fro; conversantibus, Vulgate) in Galilee. After some weeks spent in the extreme north, Jesus and his disciples had returned secretly to Galilee Mar_9:30), and were approaching the neighborhood of Capernaum. The privacy was connected with the special instruction which he was now giving to his disciples. The Son of man shall be betrayed... men. There is a reference to the preparation thus mercifully afforded to the twelve in the angel"s address to the women at the sepulchre, "Remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee". (Luk_24:6) Jesus reiterates the prediction continually in order to familiarize his followers with the unwelcome, the incredible, reality. But the Messiah"s Passion, death, and resurrection were ideas that they could not at once receive; so impossible they seemed in the very nature of things, so contrary to all their hopes and expectations. Shall be betrayed (mellei paradidosyai). Is ordained, in the counsels of God, to be betrayed. Tradendus est (Vulgate). Men. He had before named the chief priests, (Mat_16:21) afterwards he mentions the Gentiles, (Mat_20:19) as the agents in his death. So St. Peter, in his great sermon, (Ac 2) says to the Jews, "Ye have taken him, and by wicked hands "by the hand of lawless men," Revised Version have crucified and slain.

Vers. 22-27. Greatness in submission

The originality of Jesus meets us at every turn. The men of this world seek greatness in self-assertion and resistance by force and cunning. Christ exhibits it in condescension and patience.

I THE GREATNESS OF JESUS IS SEEN IN HIS PASSION.

1. His submission there was voluntary.

(1) He foresaw it.

(a) It was predicted. He was perfectly conversant with the prophets.

(b) He enlarged upon their anticipations. How circumstantial are his words (see vers. 22, 23)!

(c) His clear foresight was an ante-Passion.

(2) He could, have avoided it.

(a) For he was "the Son of man." As the true Adam the innocent and perfect Man he might have claimed Eden. He was under no obligation to suffer.

(b) But he was also "the Son of God." In this quality he was acknowledged at his Transfiguration (see ver. 5). Under these titles alike equally glorious attributes of Divinity are ascribed to Jesus. He was the Arbiter of life. His own life could not be forfeited without his consent.

(3) Yet he died. The "betrayed" of the Old Version is "delivered up" in the New (ver. 22). His manhood was surrendered by his Godhead. The voluntariness of the sacrifice of Christ was superlative, infinite.

2. Behold now his greatness in the grandeur of his purposes.

(1) In the Passion of Christ we have the most wonderful revelation of God. Where else can we find an equal exhibition of the greatness of his love? It is also the most glorious vindication of his truth. (cf. Mat_26:24 Act_2:23 Act_3:18)

(2) Atonement is made for human sin. "They shall kill him." "Without shedding of blood there is no remission.

(3) The gospel has to be authenticated in the resurrection. "And the third day he shall be raised." Death was the necessary prelude to a resurrection. Note the occasion of the sorrow of the disciples. The prospect of the death of their Master swallowed up as it were that of the resurrection, of which also they had been pre-informed. So do the trials and sufferings of this life so fill our minds as to prevent our rejoicing in the blessedness of the glories that are to follow.

(4) To all these great purposes of the Passion of Christ add this, viz. that in it he is our Pattern. The believer is crucified with Christ. And that union with Christ which he finds at the cross carries him back into the life of his earlier history, and forward into the life of his resurrection. Men are at their greatest in this wonderful union with their Lord.

II THE GREATNESS OF JESUS IS SEEN IN HIS SUBMISSION TO TAXATION.

1. Look at the fact assuming the tax to have been a Roman impost.

(1) Beza and Jerome were of opinion that the tax here, as in Mat_22:7, was paid to Caesar. On that supposition the inquiry may have been, "Is your Master of the opinion of Judas of Galilee, that tribute should not be paid to Caesar?

(2) Peter took it as matter of course that his Master would pay the tax; but Jesus put the matter to him in an unexpected light. We know Christ only as he reveals himself. The revelation was given, not to the tax gatherer, but to Peter. Truth is variously seen as it is viewed in relation to the world and in relation to Christ. The Word gives a distinct testimony to the worldly and co the spiritual.

(3) But where is the point of the reference to the "kings of the earth"? Might not Jesus, as the "Son of David" and rightful Heir to the throne of Israel, have contested the matter of the tribute to Caesar? As the "Son of man," was he not Heir to the royalty of the whole earth? (cf. Gen_1:26 Psa_8:4-6 Heb_2:6-9) In this he is "higher than the kings of the earth.

(4) Had Jesus urged these things upon the tax gatherer and contested the matter with Caesar, he would have sought greatness as the men of the world seek it. But to that he would not stoop. God is in no haste. At the proper time "he will take to himself his great power.

(5) So can the sons of God afford to wait for the great day of their public honour when they shall claim the freedom of the universe.

2. Look at the fact understanding the tribute to belong to the temple.

(1) This is the sense in which it is generally taken. A half shekel was expected from every master of a Hebrew family to provide salt for the offerings and other things not otherwise provided for. (see Exo_30:11-16 Neh_10:32)

(2) According to this view, then, our Lord refers to the "kings of the earth" as in contrast to the King of heaven. The temple for whose service the tribute was expected was the house of God; but Jesus was the Son of God the Prince. (cf. Dan_9:25, Dan_9:26) So was he Lord of the temple, and free. (cf. Mal 3:1Jo Mal_2:16 Heb_3:6) Jesus might have claimed exemption upon higher ground than that on which exemption was conceded to the priests who ministered in the temple.

(3) Those who are Christ"s share in his rights as the sons of God. Hence the manner in which Jesus associates Peter with himself in this matter of the tribute. "For me and thee" (ver. 27). The disciples of Jesus, like the priests that ministered in the temple, should be free. And here is a hint that disciples of Jesus should be released from Levitical obligations in general.

(4) Instead of arguing this question with the collector, Jesus left it to be disposed of by the issue of events. How truly great is he in his calm self-possession!

3. Now look at the manner of his submission.

(1) He waives his claim in tenderness toward the prejudices of men. "Lest we should offend them." Note: Men occupied in worldly concerns are most ready to be offended with the saints in money matters. Lest these persons, being ignorant of his Divine character, should impute his refusal to impiety. Love will conciliate prejudice.

(2) Consider further the extent to which he carried that tenderness. A miracle is wrought to avoid giving offence. How original is the conduct of Christ in this! How great is he in that originality!

(3) Here, then, is our Example. The loving Spirit will do anything for peace but sacrifice justice and truth. (cf. 1Co_8:13 Rom_16:13) Note: The business of Christians is with the morals of the world rather than with the politics of nations. In improving the morals of the world they go to the very root of the evils in the politics of nations.

4. View the greatness of Jesus in his superiority to the world.

(1) He elected poverty. What poverty is this! He has not in possession fifteen pence to satisfy a collector of tribute. Note: The original disciples did not follow him for worldly gain. His high example may reconcile his disciples to privation.

(2) But what resources are associated with this poverty! The miracle of the fish showed omnipotence and omniscience in many ways. The fish must be taken; it must be taken immediately; it must bring up money; the first fish must bring it up; the coin must be a stater. Note: The disciples of Jesus in their poverty may trust his providence. He can as surely supply their needs without as by miracle.

(3) The poverty of Jesus was voluntary. The power which commanded that stater could have summoned boundless wealth. It is Christ-like to forego opportunities of wealth for the kingdom of heaven"s sake.

(4) When will men discern it practically, that there are better things than money? J.A.M.

Vers. 22-27. Return to Galilee.

I REITERATED PREDICTIONS OF THE COMING PASSION.

1. The Lord alone with the twelve. He returns to Galilee, but no longer for teaching. He revisits the old familiar spots with the shadow of death closing round him. He was not followed by multitudes as of old. He "passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it". (Mar_9:30) He confined his teaching to the little circle of his apostles. He sought to prepare them for the awful scenes which lay before them.

2. He forewarns them of his death. He repeats in Galilee the prophecy of Caesarea Philippi; he adds one important detail, "The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men." He hints at the treachery; he tells them not yet of the traitor. He predicts his approaching death; he predicts his resurrection on the third day. They were exceeding sorry; they understood not that saying, says St. Mark, and were afraid to ask him. The Lord had now told them of his death twice, and that very plainly; but they could not, they would not, take it into their hearts. It so dashed all their hopes, it was so utterly different from all their expectations. It seemed so strange, so impossible, that One who had manifested such wondrous power, whom some of them had lately seen radiant with the glory of heaven, could suffer death at the hands of men. They were exceeding sorry; they could not believe, and yet perhaps they could not wholly disbelieve. They feared to ask him. Their love for him was mingled with a profound reverence and awe which late events had greatly increased. They were filled with grief and mysterious forebodings.

II THE TEMPLE DUES.

1. The question put to Peter. All adult Jews paid a half shekel yearly for the expenses of the temple service. The payment was originally made (Exo_30:12-16) only when the people were numbered. It was called a ransom for souls. The same sum was paid by all, rich and poor alike, to show that the souls of rich and poor are of equal value in the sight of God. The collectors now came to Peter. They felt, it may be, something of the awful dignity which surrounded the Person of the Lord. "Doth not your Master pay the half shekel?" they said. Peter at once assented; he thought that his Master, so zealous for the honour of the temple, would readily and gladly pay the temple dues.

2. Peter"s conversation with the Lord. Peter came into the house, perhaps his own house, which had been usually honoured with the Saviour"s presence during his residence at Capernaum. Jesus spoke first to him. He knew what had happened, for he knew all things. He drew from Peter the acknowledgment that the kings of the earth take tribute from their subjects, but not from their own children; the children are free. The inference was obvious. Peter had not long before confessed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. Then he was under no obligation to pay the customary dues for the maintenance of the temple service, for he was the only begotten Son of the invisible King, who, though the heaven and the heaven of heavens could not contain him, deigned to regard that temple as his earthly sanctuary. Again, Christ was greater than the temple; he himself was the Temple of God in the fullest, holiest sense. All this Peter had forgotten.

3. The payment. It was not of obligation; the Lord was plainly exempt. But he will pay it for example"s sake, to avoid wounding consciences. It was right for Israelites to maintain the temple services. It is right that Christians should give freely, cheerfully, for the support of the Church. It would have caused grave offence if the people of Capernaum, who knew the Lord so well, had heard that he refused to contribute for a purpose so sacred. They would not understand the deep reasons which he gave to Peter. They would simply suppose that a great Rabbi, a famous Teacher, declined to pay the temple dues. The example would be evil; it would be seized as an excuse by the avaricious; it would cause idle and malicious talk. The Lord would pay the sum demanded, though he was not really liable. He is here, as always, an Example to us our great Example. We must avoid shocking the feelings of others, even the prejudices of the ill instructed, We must be careful not to do things which, though lawful in themselves, may lead others astray. We must not stand upon our strict rights when to do so might be misunderstood, and might wound the consciences of weak brethren. We must give willingly, not only to the poor, but also for the service of the Church. The half shekel paid annually for the service of the temple was regarded as given to God. So are our poor gifts now, if we give in faith and love. We must learn humility of our lowly Lord. He came to be baptized, though he was without sin. He paid the temple dues, the ransom for souls, though he was the Son of God. "Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.

4. The means for providing the payment. It may be that the bag which Judas kept was empty. It may be, though the sum was so small, that Peter had rashly promised more than the slender means of the little company could then furnish. It may be that the Lord wished to teach Peter that, though he submitted to this demand like an ordinary Israelite, he was indeed the Lord of creation, that even the fishes of the sea would wait upon his will. Peter was to resume his old occupation. He was to go to the sea. The first fish that came up would furnish the necessary money, a stater, enough for both the Lord and Peter. The Lord teaches us a lesson of trustfulness. He bids us fulfil the duties of our calling, in the humble discharge of those daily duties we shall find all that we need; for he will provide for those who trust in him. We are not told the result. Doubtless the stater was found. The two half shekels were paid. The Lord does not mock his people with commands which cannot be obeyed. He who gives the commandment enables them to fulfil it. He directed the fish to the hook of Peter. He makes all things work together for good to them that love him. He will help us in small difficulties as well as in great emergencies, he teaches us by this miracle, as he taught afterwards by the mouth of his apostle, "Be careful for nothing; but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.

LESSONS.

1. The apostles were reverent in their relations with Christ; so must we be.

2. They feared to ask him about his approaching death; they understood him not. We know more than they knew then; let us meditate constantly in reverent love upon the Saviour"s cross.

3. Let us give freely for all good works; let us not make excuses for ourselves, but imitate the Lord"s example.

4. Our almsgiving will not impoverish us; "the Lord will provide."

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mark ix, 30; Luke ix, 44.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Christ Foretells His Passion and Pays the Temple-Tax.

v. 22. And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of Man shall be betrayed into the hands of men;

v. 23. and they shall kill Him, and the third day He shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.

It appears that Jesus now returned to Galilee from the locality of the transfiguration. The apostles also gathered themselves together unto Him; the Teacher and all His pupils were reunited. This was done quietly, without public demonstrations. The time of God’s merciful visitation upon the people of Galilee was past. The great mass of them had not heard, had not been converted. But Jesus took all the more time for His disciples, to give them the information of which they stood in such sore need. Again He makes His announcement emphatic: It is surely coming to pass, it will happen without fail. He will be delivered up, according to the counsel of God, to be an atonement for the sins of the world. Into the hands of men He will be given, through them, as the representatives of all mankind, He will find His death. Thus it was written, and thus it must be done. It will not be an execution which will stand in the justice even of human courts, it will be deliberate murder. But He will not remain in death. He will not see corruption. He is the antitype of Jonah: on the third day He will be raised again from the grave; He will rise and show that the seal of God’s approval has been placed upon His finished work. The disciples were again too dull to grasp the significance of the instruction in Christ’s words. Above all was the comfort of the last words lost upon them. They were all greatly distressed and filled with much sorrow. They saw only death and darkness.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observable it is, how frequently our Saviour forewarned his disciples of his approaching sufferings. All was little enough to arm them against the scandal of the cross, and to reconcile them to the thought of what he was to suffer for them, and they were to suffer with him.

Learn, That we can never hear too much of the doctrine of the cross; nor can we be too often instructed in our duty to prepare for a suffering condition. As Christ went by his cross to his crown, from a state of abasement to a state of exultation, so must all his disciples and followers likewise.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [LXXI. Return to Galilee].

LXXI. RETURN TO GALILEE. THE PASSION FORETOLD. aMATT. XVII. 22, 23; bMARK IX. 30-32; cLUKE IX. 43-45.

b30 And they went forth from thence [from the region of Cæsarea Philippi], and passed through Galilee [on his way to Capernaum]; and he would not that any man should know it. [He was still seeking that retirement which began on the journey to Tyre. See Joh_7:3, Joh_7:4. See page 439.] [426] 31 For he taught his disciples [the reason for his retirement is here given: he wished to prepare his disciples for his passion], and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered up [the present tense is used for the future to express the nearness and certainty of the event] into the hands of men, a22 And cBut awhile they abode in Galilee, cwhile all were marvelling at all the things which he did, aJesus csaid unto his disciples, 44 Let these sayings sink into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered up into the hands of men. [We have here two notes of time during which Jesus spoke of his passion. It was all the while he was in Galilee, between his return from Cæsarea and his departure into Judæa, for which see page 439. The length of time suggests that the sad lesson was oft repeated, but was at a time when the marvels of his works strengthened the faith of the disciples so as to enable them to bear the instruction.] band they shall kill him; and when he is killed, after three days he shall rise again. aand the third day he shall be raised up. [For comment on similar language see page 306.] And they were exceeding sorry. [Peter's experience taught them not to attempt to correct Jesus while thus speaking, so there was nothing left for them but to grieve at his words.] c45 But they understood not this bthe saying, cand it was concealed from them, that they should not perceive it [What was told to them was not for their present but their future benefit, and therefore they were left to puzzle over the words of Jesus]; and they were afraid to ask him about this saying. [Not so much from any awe with which they regarded him, as from the delicacy of the subject itself, and their own sorrow, which shrank from knowing it more fully.] [427]

[FFG 426-427]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. While they abode in Galilee. Mark 9:30, says: Departing thence (from the vicinity of Mt. Hermon), they passed through Galilee. Compare also, Luke 9:43–45.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Here the scene shifts momentarily, and Jesus foretells his death and resurrection a second time.

they stayed

"Jesus and his disciples stayed"

The Son of Man will be delivered

This can be stated in active form. AT: "Someone will deliver the Son of Man" (See: Active or Passive)

delivered into the hands of people

The word "hands" here is a metonym for the power that people use hands to exercise. AT: "taken and put under the power of people" or "taken and given to people who will control him" (See: Metonymy)

The Son of Man ... him ... he

Jesus is referring to himself in the third person. (See: First, Second, or Third Person)

into the hands of people

Here "hands" refers to power or control. AT: "to the control of the people" or "to the people" (See: Metonymy)

third day

"Third" is the ordinal form of "three." (See: Ordinal Numbers)

he will be raised up

Here to raise up is an idiom for causing someone who has died to become alive again. This can be stated in active form. AT: "God will raise him up" or "God will cause him to become alive again" (See: Active or Passive and Idiom)

translationWords

Galilee

Jesus

disciple

Son of Man

hand

day

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

22, 23. THE SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE PASSION

Mar 9:31; Luk 9:44

Both St Mark and St Luke add that the disciples ‘understood not this saying.’ It was difficult for them to abandon cherished hopes of an earthly kingdom, and ‘might not Jesus be speaking in parables of a figurative death and resurrection?’ See note, ch. Mat 16:21.

Observe here the various phases in the prediction of the Passion. The first (ch. Mat 16:21) foretells the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah by the Jews, and his death in the indefinite passive, ἀποκτανθῆναι.

The second speaks of the betrayal into the hands of men, εἰς χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων (Matt., Mark, Luke); and ‘they shall put him to death.’

The third (ch. Mat 20:17-19) particularises the share taken by Jew and Gentile. The Sanhedrin shall condemn and deliver to the Gentiles, εἰς τὸ ἐμπαῖξαι καὶ μαστιγῶσαι καὶ σταυρῶσαι.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. And whilst they were gathering together in Galilee, Jesus said to them, The Son of Man is about to be delivered into the hands of men.] Mk. has: “And they went out thence, and were going through Galilee. And He wished that no one should know it; for He was teaching His disciples, and saying to them that the Son of Man is being delivered into the hands of men.”

It is in accordance with the editor’s practice to omit Mk.’s καὶ οὐκ ἤθελεν ἵνα τις γνοῖ. Cf. his omission of οὐδένα ἤθελεν γνῶναι fromMk 7:24, ἤθελεν παρελθεῖν αὐτούς from Mar 6:48. But it is difficult to see why he substitutes συστρεφομένων δὲ αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ for Mk.’s ἐπορεύοντο διὰ τῆς Γαλιλαίας. συστρέφεσθαι occurs only once again in the N.T., in Act 28:3, of S. Paul gathering sticks. It is used of the movement of soldiers or of men conspiring together. Here apparently it means simply to “gather together.”—μέλλει] See on 16:27.

(M)

22, 23. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following:—δέ, Mat_22, Lk 43; εἶλεπεν, Mat_22, Lk 44. Mk. has παραδίδοται.

22. συστρεφομένων] So א B 1. ἀναστρεφομένων, C D al.

(M)

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.