Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 17:22

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 17:22” utilice nuestra app.

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

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.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

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.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

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] – – 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 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.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

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.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

22. And while they abode in Galilee,Jesus said unto themMark (Mr9:30), as usual, is very precise here: “And they departedthence”that is, from the scene of the last miracle”andpassed through Galilee; and He would not that any man should knowit.” So this was not a preaching, but a private, journey throughGalilee. Indeed, His public ministry in Galilee was now all butconcluded. Though He sent out the Seventy after this to preach andheal, He Himself was little more in public there, and He was soon tobid it a final adieu. Till this hour arrived, He was chiefly occupiedwith the Twelve, preparing them for the coming events.

The Son of man shall bebetrayed into the hands of men . . . And they were exceedingsorryThough the shock would not be so great as at the firstannouncement (Mat 16:21; Mat 16:22),their “sorrow” would not be the less, but probably thegreater, the deeper the intelligence went down into their hearts, anda new wave dashing upon them by this repetition of the heavy tidings.Accordingly, Luke (Luk 9:43;Luk 9:44), connecting it with thescene of the miracle just recorded, and the teaching which arose outof itor possibly with all His recent teachingsays our Lordforewarned the Twelve that they would soon stand in need of all thatteaching: “But while they wondered every one at all things whichJesus did, He said unto His disciples, Let these sayings sink downinto your ears; for the Son of man shall be delivered,” c.: “Benot carried off your feet by the grandeur you have lately seen in Me,but remember what I have told you, and now tell you again, that thatSun in whose beams ye now rejoice is soon to set in midnight gloom.”Remarkable is the antithesis in those words of our Lord preserved inall the three narratives”The son of man shall bebetrayed into the hands of men.” Luke adds (Lu9:45) that “they understood not this saying, and it was hidfrom them, that they perceived it not”for the plaineststatements, when they encounter long-continued and obstinateprejudices, are seen through a distorting and dulling medium”andwere afraid to ask Him” deterred partly by the air of loftysadness with which doubtless these sayings were uttered, and on whichthey would be reluctant to break in, and partly by the fear of layingthemselves open to rebuke for their shallowness and timidity. Howartless is all this!

Mt17:24-27. THE TRIBUTEMONEY.

The time of this section isevidently in immediate succession to that of the preceding one. Thebrief but most pregnant incident which it records is given by Matthewalonefor whom, no doubt, it would have a peculiar interest, fromits relation to his own town and his own familiar lake.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

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 Mr 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 Lu 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.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Christ’s Sufferings Foretold.

22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: 23 And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.

Christ here foretels his own sufferings; he began to do it before (ch. xvi. 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 (ch. xvi. 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.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Mat 17:22

. And while they remained in Galilee. The nearer that the time of his death approached, the more frequently did Christ warn his disciples, lest that melancholy spectacle might give a violent shock to their faith. It was shortly after the miracle had been performed that this discourse was delivered; for Mark says that he went from that place to Galilee, in order to spend there the intervening time in privacy; for he had resolved to come to Jerusalem on the day of the annual sacrifice, because he was to be sacrificed at the approaching Passover.

The disciples had previously received several intimations on this subject, and yet they are as much alarmed as if nothing relating to it had ever reached their ears. So great is the influence of preconceived opinion, that it brings darkness over the mind in the midst of the clearest light. The apostles had imagined that the state of Christ’s kingdom would be prosperous and delightful, and that, as soon as he made himself known, he would be universally received with the highest approbation. They never thought it possible that the priests, and scribes, and other rulers of the Church, would oppose him. Under the influence of this prejudice, they admit nothing that is said on the other side; for Mark says that they understood not what our Lord meant. Whence came it that a discourse so clear and distinct was not understood, but because their minds were covered by the thick veil of a foolish imagination?

They did not venture to make any farther inquiry. This must have been owing, in part, to their reverence for their Master; but I have no doubt that their grief and astonishment at what they had heard kept them silent. Such bashfulness was not altogether commendable; for it kept them in doubt, and hesitation, and sinful grief. In the meantime, a confused principle of piety, rather than a clear knowledge of the truth, kept them attached to Christ, and prevented them from leaving his school. A certain commencement of faith and right understanding had been implanted in their hearts, which made their zeal in following Christ not very different from the implicit faith of the Papists; but as they had not yet made such progress as to become acquainted with the nature of the kingdom of God and of the renewal which had been promised in Christ, I say that they were guided by zeal for piety rather than by distinct knowledge.

In this way we come to see what there was in them that deserved praise or blame. But though their stupidity could not entirely be excused, we have no reason to wonder that a plain and distinct announcement of the cross of their Master, and of the ignominy to which he would be subjected, appeared to them a riddle; not only because they reckoned it to be inconsistent with the glory of the Son of God that he should be rejected and condemned, but because it appeared to them to be highly improbable that the grace which was promised in a peculiar manner to the Jews should be set at naught by the rulers of the nation. But as the immoderate dread of the cross, which had suddenly seized upon them, shut the door against the consolation which was immediately added, arising out of the hope of the resurrection, let us learn that, when the death of Christ is mentioned, we ought always to take into view at once the whole of the three days, that his death and burial may lead us to a blessed triumph and to a new life.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat. 17:22. While they abode.See R.V. margin. While they were sojourning in Galilee on their way backon their return from the northern parts about Csarea Philippi (Morison).

Mat. 17:24. Tribute money ( )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 ().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 sovereigns 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 Fathers house; as His Son, then, that tax is not due by MeI 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 ().A statera 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 Csarea 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 Apostles reply (Mat. 17:25). As though he would say, Of course He doesas He has done always beforeand 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 ofthe half-shekelseem 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 offenceor be a scandal to them and othersor 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 Gods services, or to want of love for His houseto 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 ownby an unheard of supplyby an exactly fitted supplyby 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 kings 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 fishs 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 Matthews Gospel tell us that at the same time ( , 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 relievednot so much these, as the forbearance and self-restraint of the kingdoms Head; an example to His followers of meekness and self-repression for the kingdoms 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 mens 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 Heavens assessment of our belongings.

III. The story gives us a peep into Christs 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 fishs 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.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Section 44
JESUS MAKES THIRD PASSION PREDICTION

(Parallels: Mar. 9:30-32; Luk. 9:43-45)

TEXT: 17:22, 23

22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be delivered up into the hands of men; 23 and they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised up. And they were exceeding sorry.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

Why were people gathering in Galilee? (See comment on the textual variation from abode in Galilee.) Is there a suggestion here of a mass rallying of the Galileans for a popular march on Jerusalem?

Why does Jesus need privacy to teach His disciples? (Cf. Mar. 9:30) Cannot He do anything He wants to, even teach His followers in the presence of great crowds? What kind of hindrance would the great audiences present to the training of the Twelve?

Is there any connection between this prediction of death and the marvelling of the disciples? (Cf. Luk. 9:43)

Why does Jesus preface this third passion prediction with the words Let these words sink into your ears? (Luk. 9:44)

Why were the disciples afraid to ask him about this saying that so deeply distressed them? (Mar. 9:32)

In what sense was it painfully true that the disciples at that moment in their experience did NOT believe the gospel? What, to you, is gospel?

Why should such an embarrassing account be included in the story of the life of Christ? After all, the Apostles are put in a bad light by this sort of thing. Would it not have been better simply to edit the narrative, omitting the spiritual obtuseness of the very men who later were to become the pillars of the Church? What could possibly be gained by this unabashed mention of their shameful fears and misconceptions?

How was this saying concealed from them? (Luk. 9:45) Did God hide it from them? Did Satan? Did they do it themselves? If so, how? If not, who did?

Why did the prediction produce a different effect in the disciples this time, as compared to the previous one?

PARAPHRASE AND HARMONY

Jesus and the Twelve traveled on from the district around the mount of Transfiguration, passing through Galilee. It was a time when people were gathering in Galilee, full of admiration and awe over everything He was doing. It was for this reason that He wished this journey to be kept secret, because He was trying to teach His disciples. He would say to them, You all get this through your head: the Messiah is destined to be betrayed into the power of evil men. They will execute Him. Nevertheless, though He be killed, three days later He will rise from the dead.
Yet they did not understand. Preconceptions concealed its meaning, making it impossible to understand and accept. Even though they were crushed with grief by it, they were afraid to ask Him about it.

SUMMARY

The realism of Jesus demands that, in the midst of great popular enthusiasm, He continue hammering on the major, however unacceptable, theme of His ministry: His death, burial and resurrection. Though He often repeated this prophecy of ultimate victory over apparent defeat, the Twelve saw in it nothing but incomprehensible pessimism. The deep dread that what He predicted might possibly be true so numbed them that they could not bring themselves even to request further information that might have alleviated their pain, for fear that they would receive only additional confirmation of their worst unspoken fears.

NOTES
III. REPETITION OF THE PASSION PREDICTION

A. THE PERCEPTIBLE PRESSURE OF POPULARITY

Mat. 17:22 While they abode in Galilee. The American Standard Version revisers decided that the better reading here is abode (anastrefomnon). However, in the calculation of probabilities of scribal correction, Metzgers evaluation (Textual Commentary, 44) is the more sound:

It is probable that the reading sustrefomnon (taken to mean were gathering together) would strike copyists as strange, and therefore would be changed into what seemed more appropriate (anastrefomnon, abode). The verb sustrfein, which occurs only twice in the New Testament, apparently means here while they were crowding (around Jesus).

The attentive reader will object (as probably did the one who made the original change in Matthews copy) that, if the original reading were they were gathering instead of abode, it would make Matthews affirmation of the presence of crowds (gathering or crowding) contradict Marks secret journey (And he would not have any one know it). To this it may be countered that even Luke (Luk. 9:43) seems to contradict Mark by implying the presence of crowds at least in the general area when Jesus made the Passion Prediction. Doubtless this is but faulty harmonization. A better solution is to see that the Lord repeated this prediction several times during this same period. Resultantly, the three Gospels were never strictly parallel because they refer to different aspects of this period. The basis for this solution is as follows:

Marks verbs in the imperfect tense (thelen, eddasken, legen) affirm that Jesus repeated His Passion Prediction many times during this period, so exact harmonization of the three Gospels is not necessary, even if the wording of the prophecy is comparatively similar each time. Thus, Matthews gathering in Galilee is not even parallel, much less contradictory, to Marks secret journey.

Lukes version is to be closely linked with the epileptic demoniac episode, hence the first of the series of Passion Predictions implied in Marks imperfect-tense verbs.

Matthews gathering in Galilee, then, occurred near the close of this journey from the mount of Transfiguration, perhaps as Jesus and His disciples neared, or arrived at, Capernaum.

Another solution is the lexical significance of sustrefomnon given by Rocci (1784) who interprets this word in Mat. 17:22 as to roam about together. Accordingly, he would see no crowds whatever, since the last personal reference in the context is only to Jesus and the disciples talking privately. (Mat. 17:19 ff) If this interpretation be adopted, Matthew and Mark would be seen as more closely parallel.

Certainly there is no ground here for accusing the Evangelists of self-contradiction and no basis for emending the text. In fact, there is even another suggestive solution which would see Matthew and Mark as parallel.

Although Rocci personally interpreted sustrefomnon in our text as to roam about together, he points out that sustrfo is also a military term meaning to regroup, to close ranks, i.e. pulling ones forces into a compact unit ready for action. What a picture, if this be thought of as Matthews intention! With a materialistic coup detat in mind, the Galileans would be closing rank around Jesus to march on Jerusalem. The Apostles and more spiritually-minded disciples would expect Him to proclaim His Messianic Kingdom there. Jesus Himself is going to battle in Jerusalem too, but in the only way this war can be wonby dying for sinful man. So, in this Galilean staging area for the long march on Jerusalem, Jesus called aside His aides for a private briefing, (Mar. 9:30) Not only would he not have any one know about their travel through Galilee toward Capernaum (Mar. 9:30; Mar. 9:33), but He must repeat His incredible message only in the hearing of His disciples. (Luk. 9:43 b, Luk. 9:44; Mar. 9:31; Mat. 17:22 b, Mat. 17:23) Although He will make several quick trips to Jerusalem before the fated Passover (cf. Joh. 7:10; Joh. 10:22 f; Joh. 11:17 f), the final assault actually begins from Galilee. (Cf. Act. 10:37-39; Luk. 9:51) But before leaving Galilee, the Apostles must understand the true purpose of this final approach to Jerusalem, So He now lays before His men for the nth time the ultimate targets to be reached, but they are not the kind of objectives that anyone else had in mind.

Although Matthew mentions nothing of great crowds, except this possible oblique reference (while they were crowding around Jesus), Luke (Luk. 9:43) connected the first of these Passion Predictions with the liberation of the demonized epileptic boy and the consequent astonishment of the people at the majesty of God, causing them to marvel at everything He did. Therefore, enthusiastic praise and popular excitement are definitely part of the background situation to which the Lord addressed this prophecy of His death. The excitement caused by the healing of the demonized boy in the area of the mount of Transfiguration (Luk. 9:43) may have had only local repercussions. Nevertheless, if the Feast of Tabernacles was not far off (cf. Joh. 7:2), it is not impossible that crowds should begin to form for the trek to the capital. Although the Lord desired privacy (Mar. 9:30), His deliberate return into Galilee and Capernaum in particular brings to an end the withdrawals He had begun when He took His disciples to Phoenicia. (Mat. 14:1; Mat. 14:13; Mat. 15:21; Mat. 16:4 f, Mat. 16:13) So, as they return to Galilee and potential popularity, with the hallelujahs of His recent victory ringing in their ears, they must be brought back down to reality.

Incidental proof of Jesus long absence from Galilee during the preceding period is furnished by John, who, although he does not recount Jesus withdrawals from Jewish population centers, nevertheless, records the challenge of Jesus unbelieving brothers, Leave here and go to Judea, that your disciples may see the works you are doing. For no man works in secret if he seeks to be known openly. If you do these things, show yourself to the world. (Joh. 7:3 ff) Ironically, this too tempts Jesus to ignore the reality of the cross and keep the popular, enthusiastic approval coming.

Accordingly, Jesus Passion Prediction, given in these circumstances, means, Gentlemen, do not let yourselves be taken in by the false hopes of the people nor fall for their mistaken opinions, by forgetting or doubting my declarations. In fact, it is into the hands of ignorant, mistaken men that I am to be delivered, men to whom I am related by blood, men from whom I should expect understanding and faith, loyalty and submission, gratitude and honor!

Ironically, the basis of the astonishment at the majesty of God evident in everything He did should have furnished the Apostles reasons to accept anything Jesus said, however unreasonable or improbable it might seem. For these are proof that He is a Teacher come from God, for no man can do these signs unless God be with Him. (Joh. 3:2) But, like Nicodemus who must argue the new birth with Jesus rather than let Him reveal it, the Apostles, too, are left distressed by His teaching. So, rather than strengthen their faith in Him, the miracles psychologically widened the breach between their belief that He is the Christ, on the one hand, and their total incomprehension of His death-predictions, on the other, because of the strident incongruency between these two ideas. The more miracles He did the more He seemed like the Messiah and Gods Son, and the less likely seemed His predicted murder!

B. THE PAINFULLY PRECISE PLAN OF HIS PASSION

The Son of man shall be delivered up into the hands of men, and they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised up. All generals ask men to die for the cause they represent, but Jesus talked about voluntarily dying for His enemies. Now, those disciples who expected a triumphant militaristic Kingdom in which men would be delivered into the hands of the Messianic King, must now learn that the Son of man is about to be delivered (mllei paraddosthai) into the hands of men. Who delivered Jesus over to His enemies? Judas Iscariot thought HE did, but it was God the Father who handed His own Son over to men. (Act. 2:23) In Gethsemane Jesus actually handed Himself over! (Study Joh. 18:4-11; Mat. 26:51-54; Joh. 10:18!) While the God-fearing disciples wept bitterly around the cross, they would deem the Passion of Jesus a betrayal by a God who had let them down at this critical moment by not intervening to rescue Him from such a fate. But the Father had not betrayed them. He handed over His only Son, yes, but not to have done so would have been a betrayal of the entire human race. This is what it means to believe that God so loved the world that He GAVE His only Son!

C. THEIR PERCEPTION PREVENTED BY PERSISTENT PREJUDICE

As we evaluate His planning from our vantage point, we appreciate the precision of His time-schedule. His divine foreknowledge, like all prophecies, is more impressive after the fulfillment. But His disciples were not unimpressed: they were appalled!

They were exceedingly sorry (elupthesan sfdra), deeply grieved. Although they found no place in their mental framework for the literal interpretation of His words, His persisting in repeating them (Mar. 9:31) hurt them deeply. Whereas they had been shocked before, and indignant that anyone should think of plotting His death (Mat. 16:21 ff), now they are crushed with disappointment. Not even the promise of His resurrection can transform this grief into hope. This sorrow proves how unsympathetic they yet were with Jesus intentions, and proves that they too were yet unbelieving. (Study Mat. 11:6 and notes.)

They did not understand this saying and it was concealed from them, that they should not perceive it. (Mar. 9:32 a; Luk. 9:45 a) Since its obvious, literal sense was totally unacceptable to them, and since they could not decipher any other meaning, they were as unable to understand it as if someone were trying to hide its meaning from them. How could the Messiah they believed Him to be, actually permit His enemies to slay Him when He possessed the supernatural power to annihilate them, assert His God-given right and so prevent such an injustice?

And they were afraid to ask him about this saying, (Mar. 9:32 b; Luk. 9:45 b) Two motives:

Fear to be reproved by Jesus for their reluctance to accept it at face value, as Peter had been rebuked. (Mat. 16:22 f)

Fear to face the horrible truth, hoping that ignoring it would make it go away. This is based on the horrifying possibility that He really intended to go through with every appalling bit of it.

So they preferred to remian ignorant. And His solitude became complete. (Cf. note on Mat. 11:27)

FACT QUESTIONS

By what route did Jesus return from the preceding incident to Capernaum? (Cf. Mar. 9:20) Where had He been? How do we know Capernaum was His immediate destination?

List several reasons why Jesus would have desired anonymity at this time.

Who was gathering in Galilee, according to the better manuscript evidence for Mat. 17:22?

Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the Son of man? What does this title mean?

On what other occasions had Jesus predicted His own untimely death and bodily resurrection?

Indicate several motives for His repeating these predictions here.

List several factors which collaborated in causing the disciples to fail to understand His remarks about His death. (Cf. Mar. 9:32; Luk. 9:45)

Explain their great distress. Explain how they were exceeding sorry.

What reason would explain why they were afraid to ask Him for further explanation? (Cf. Mar. 9:32; Luk. 9:45)

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(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.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

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.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And while they gathered in Galilee, Jesus said to them, “The Son of man will be delivered up into the hands of men,” ’
This is the first specific indication that they are back in Galilee. At the opening of this section Jesus was in His home town (probably Nazareth although Matthew does not say so) and left it because of their unbelief (Mat 13:53-58). Now He will return to His home town (Capernaum – Mat 17:24 compare Mat 4:13) where they still do not recognise Him. Matthew centres the salvation history around Galilee. He depicts Jesus’ ministry only from when it commences in Galilee (Mat 4:12-16), as continually returning to Galilee, and as finalising in Galilee in the resurrection appearance on the mountain (Mat 28:16-20), after the interlude in Jerusalem. This may be seen as confirming that he is a Galilean.
‘While they were gathered.’ Mark has ‘passing through’. This may suggest that the wider group of disciples were gathering ready for the trip to Jerusalem for Passover, so that prior to travelling to Jerusalem Jesus wants them all to be aware of what lies ahead. As the Son of Man He will be delivered by God into the hands of men. There may here be a wordplay on ‘Man’ and ‘men’. The One Who has come representing man, and as born of woman, will be delivered into men’s hands for them to do their will with Him. Men will show once and for all what they will do with a man who dares to be too much like God.
Others see the verb as meaning ‘gathered around Him, moved around together’, indicating that He was teaching them as they moved around.
As we have seen the chiasmus indicates that this must be taken together with the previous passages. Here therefore Jesus’ words are a demonstration of true faith. He is ready for His Father’s will, and is voluntarily following the path that will lead to it.
It is possible that ‘handed over’ has in mind Judas Iscariot. This might be Jesus’ first attempt to win Judas from the path he has chosen to tread.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jesus Again Warns Of His Coming Arrest, Execution, And Rising Again (17:22-23).

Then Jesus presents the final example of faith. He is not just calling on His disciples to believe. He too will evidence His faith by going forward in the hands of God Who will deliver Him (‘will be delivered’ is a divine passive) into the hands of men. The result will then be that they will kill Him. But on the third day God will then raise Him from the dead. So He is going forward with His faith fully in His Father.
Jesus had given constant indications of the suffering that He must face almost from the beginning (Mat 9:15; Mat 10:38; Mat 12:40 and compare Joh 2:19-22) but from the time of the disciples’ open recognition of Him as ‘the Messiah, the Son of the living God’ He has proclaimed with even more force the necessity for His humiliation, death and resurrection in accordance with Isa 53:7-12. See Mat 16:21; Mat 17:9; Mat 17:12. But now it is included so as to demonstrate that He has the faith that He desires of His disciples. Initially He had spoken of it in Caesarea Philippi, but now it is in Galilee. He knows that His hour is near.
Analysis.
a And while they gathered (came together) in Galilee, Jesus said to them (Mat 17:22 a).
b “The Son of man will be delivered up into the hands of men” (Mat 17:22 b).
c “And they will kill him” (Mat 17:23 a).
b “And the third day he will be raised up” (Mat 17:23 b).
a And they were very upset (Mat 17:23 c).
Note that in ‘a’ Jesus spoke seriously to them of what was coming, and in the parallel they were very upset. In ‘b’ we have a description of God’s first act in the coming drama and in the parallel God’s last act. Centrally in ‘c’ is the fact of what men will do in the face of God’s activity.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Revelation of the Divine Provisions of Those in the Kingdom of Heaven In Mat 17:22-27 Jesus reveals to His disciples for a second time His impending Passion and Resurrection (Mat 17:22-23) followed by an explanation and illustration of the divine provision for those disciples who obeyed the Son of God (Mat 17:24-27). This second testimony of His Passion and Resurrection serves as a confirmation and certainty of these events.
Here is a proposed outline:
1. Jesus Foretells of His Death & Resurrection Mat 17:22-23
2. The Payment of the Tax Money Mat 17:24-27
Mat 17:22-23 Jesus Foretells of His Death and Resurrection a Second Time ( Mar 9:30-32 , Luk 9:43 b-45 ) – In Mat 16:22-23 Jesus offers His second testimony of His Passion and Resurrection following Peter’s confession of the deity of the Lord.
Mat 17:22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:
Mat 17:23 And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.
Mat 17:24-27 The Payment of the Tax Money The story of Jesus sending Peter to catch a fish in order to pay tribute in unique to the Gospel of Matthew. We know that Matthew was a tax collector, so this event must have stood out in his mind. Matthew uses this story to emphasis his theme of offences that is woven throughout this narrative material in Mat 13:53 to Mat 17:27. For Jesus says, “Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them,” (Mat 17:27). Leon Morris says this story tells us that Jesus submitted Himself to the rules of men in order to avoid offenses even though He was truly only subject to His Heavenly Father. [490]
[490] Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew, in The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 451.
Mat 17:24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
Mat 17:24 “And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter” – Comments It is not clear why the tax collectors approached Peter instead of Jesus. Some scholars suggest that the location may have been in Peter’s house, since Jesus had moved His residence to Capernaum (Mat 4:13) (R. T. France). Other scholars proposed that the tax collectors would have been hesitant to approach a rabbi, so that approached Peter instead (Leon Morris).
Mat 4:13, “And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim:”
“and said, Doth not your master pay tribute” – Comments BDAG says the Greek word (tribute money) means, “a double drachma, two-drachma piece.” This Greek word is found twice in the New Testament, being used twice in Mat 17:24. The majority of scholars believe the in Mat 17:24 was a reference to the annual Temple tax that was first imposed by the Lord in the wilderness for the upkeep of the Tabernacle (Exo 30:11-16), and reinstituted by Nehemiah when the Jews returned from the Babylonian Captivity (Neh 10:32). [491] The ABD says the Mishna ( eqalim Mat 1:3-5) refers to the collection of this tax annually throughout the region of Palestine during the month prior to the Passover and sent to Jerusalem, and it was collected in the Temple area twenty days prior to the Passover. [492] In the book of Exodus, each adult was to pay half a shekel. One coin used during this period of time was the tetradrachma, also called the shekel of Tyre. [493] Thus, France says four drachmas were equal to one shekel, so that Jesus would have been required to pay two drachmas. [494]
[491] Josephus refers to the Jewish Temple tax saying, “There was also the city Nisibis, situate on the same current of the river. For which reason the Jews, depending on the natural strength of these places, deposited in them that half shekel which everyone, by the custom of our country, offers unto God, as well as they did other things devoted to him; for they made use of these cities as a treasury, whence at a proper time, they were transmitted to Jerusalem; and many ten thousand men undertook the carriage of those donations, out of fear of the ravages of the Parthians, to whom the Babylonians were then subject.” ( Antiquities 18:312-313)
[492] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, in New International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2007), 668.
[493] R. F. Youngblood, F. F. Bruce, R. K. Harrison, and Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, rev. ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004), “Money of the Bible.”
[494] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, in New International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2007), 668.
Exo 30:11-16, “And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them. This they shall give, every one that passeth among them that are numbered, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary: (a shekel is twenty gerahs:) an half shekel shall be the offering of the LORD. Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the LORD. The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering unto the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls. And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls.”
Neh 10:32, “Also we made ordinances for us, to charge ourselves yearly with the third part of a shekel for the service of the house of our God;”
However, a few scholars believe this verse refers to a Roman civil tax because Jesus mentions the kings of the earth taxing strangers.
Mat 17:25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:25 “He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon” – Comments BDAG says the Greek word used in Mat 17:25 means, “to speak first.” This Greek word is used once in the New Testament.
Jesus brought up the issue of a tax before Peter had a chance to discuss it with Him.
“of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers” – Comments BDAG says the Greek word used in Mat 17:25 means, “a revenue obligation , tax, toll-tax, customs duties.”
BDAG says the Greek word means, “a tax, poll-tax.” This Greek word is used four times in the New Testament (Mat 17:25; Mat 22:17; Mat 22:19, Mar 12:14), with three uses referring directly to tax money paid to the Roman government.
Comments Because kings often taxed their own citizens, Leon Morris understands the distinction between children and strangers to be the children of the royal family in contrast to all others citizens in the kingdom. [495] The application would mean that the children of the Kingdom of Heaven are free from men’s laws and traditions.
[495] Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew, in The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 453.
Illustration:
1Ki 9:21, “Their children that were left after them in the land, whom the children of Israel also were not able utterly to destroy, upon those did Solomon levy a tribute of bondservice unto this day. But of the children of Israel did Solomon make no bondmen: but they were men of war, and his servants, and his princes, and his captains, and rulers of his chariots, and his horsemen.”
Mat 17:26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
Mat 17:27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.
Mat 17:27 Word Study on “a piece of money” – The Greek word ( ) (G4715) means, “a stater or certain coin.”
Mat 17:27 Comments – Jesus could have acquired the money many other ways, but He told Peter, an experienced fisherman, to go do something completely beyond a fisherman’s natural way of reasoning. This took faith on the part of Peter. Jesus was testing Peter’s faith.
The Scriptures do not continue this story to describe how Peter went fishing and obtained the tax money. This event is left for the reader to understand that the event took place just as Jesus had described it to Peter. Peter had to respond in faith and obedience to the words of Jesus. Not only did Peter receive his tax money, but the Lord supplied him a fish to eat for his dinner through his obedience.
Note that Jesus paid in full, no more or no less.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

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.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Mat 17:22. And while they abode in Galilee It should seem that the wonder of the discipleswasaccompaniedwith proportionably high expectations of happiness in that temporal kingdom, which they were now convinced Jesus could easily erect. Our Lord, knowing this, thought fit when they came to Galilee, the country where he had the greatest train of followers, to moderate his disciples’ ambition, not only by concealing himself for awhile, forbearing to preach and work miracles as he returned through Galilee, but also by predicting a third time his own sufferings and death. Upon this they were exceeding sorry, taking no comfort from the mention that he made of his resurrection: the prediction concerning his death raised such fears in their minds, that they durst not ask him to explain it; especially as they remembered that he had often inculcated it, and reprimanded Peter for being unwilling to hear it.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 17:22-23 . Comp. Mar 9:30 ff.; Luk 9:43 ff.
While they were still in Galilee ( ., 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 (Kstlin, Hilgenfeld); but this matter was introduced again because Jesus knew how much they required to be prepared for the impending crisis.
.] into men’s 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 ).
] 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 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

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, ] 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 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 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 Jerusalemthat He declined to go up with the company of pilgrimsthat 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 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 Christs 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 schemeof 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 Christs 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 on 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 Christs 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 medival Church. 3. Its ground: acquiescence in Christs 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: [to turn about with, to gather together], with Cod. Vaticanus I. [and Cod. Sinaiticus], for [to return, to move about, to sojourn]; Meyer regards it as a glass to prevent 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: for . [But even if we read with Tischendorf and Alford: , 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 , middle intransitive, to awake, to arise.P. S.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

“And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: (23) And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry.”
I cannot allow those verses to pass without calling upon the Reader to remark, with me, how much the Lord Jesus seemed to delight in the prospect of his great accomplishment of redemption. Every feature in his character marks this. In proof, see Mat 16:22-23 ; Luk 12:50Luk 12:50 ; Joh 13:27Joh 13:27 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

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.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

22, 23. ] OUR LORD’S SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT OF HIS DEATH AND RESURRECTION. Mar 9:30-32 .Luk 9:43-45Luk 9:43-45 . This followed immediately after the miracle ( Mar 9:30 ); our Lord went privately through Galilee; . . .: the imparting of this knowledge more accurately to His disciples, which He had begun to do in the last chapter, was the reason for His privacy. For more particulars, see Luk 9:45 ; Mar 9:32 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 17:22-23 . Second announcement of the Passion (Mar 9:30-31 ; Luk 9:44-45 ).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mat 17:22 . ., while they were moving about, a reunited band. . .: 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. , etc.: the great engrossing subject of instruction was the doctrine of the cross . : a new feature not in the first announcement. Grotius, in view of the words , 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. . contains a covert allusion to the part He is to play.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 17:22-23
22And while they were gathering together in Galilee, Jesus said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men; 23and they will kill Him, and He will be raised on the third day.” And they were deeply grieved.
Mat 17:22
NASB”while they were gathering together in Galilee”
NKJV”while they were staying in Galilee”
NRSV”as they were gathering in Galilee”
TEV”when the disciples all came together in Galilee”
NJB”one day when they were together in Galilee”
There is a Greek manuscript variation at this point. The ancient manuscripts , and B and the Greek text used by Origen have “all came together,” while C, D, L & W have “abode.” The first term was misunderstood by early scribes and changed to the more familiar text. The reason the twelve were divided into four groups of three was that they took turns traveling with Jesus and returning home for brief periods to check on their families. This verse speaks of the disciples and Jesus meeting at a certain place.
Mat 17:22-23 “the Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men; and they will kill Him, and He will be raised again on the third day” Jesus showed His prophetic insight about His suffering and death (cf. Mat 16:21 ff; Mat 17:9; Mat 17:12; Joh 10:11; Joh 10:15; Joh 10:17-18). Jesus was beginning to lay the foundation for the disciples’understanding of what was going to occur during the last week of His life. From this passage we learn that Jesus would be turned over to the Gentiles (i.e., the Romans, cf. Mat 20:19).
Mat 17:23 “and they were deeply grieved” Both of the Gospel parallels in Mark (Mar 9:32) and Luke (Luk 9:45) add that they did not understand but were afraid to ask. It is amazing that the Sanhedrin understood Jesus’ prediction about His resurrection but the disciples were absolutely surprised by His appearance in the upper room (cf. Luk 24:36-38).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Galilee. App-169.
shall be = is about to be. This is the second of the four announcements. See the Structure, and note on Mat 16:21.
betrayed = delivered up. This is added in this the second announcement of His sufferings. Compare Mat 16:21.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

22, 23.] OUR LORDS SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT OF HIS DEATH AND RESURRECTION. Mar 9:30-32. Luk 9:43-45. This followed immediately after the miracle (Mar 9:30);-our Lord went privately through Galilee; …:-the imparting of this knowledge more accurately to His disciples, which He had begun to do in the last chapter, was the reason for His privacy. For more particulars, see Luk 9:45; Mar 9:32.
Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 17:22. [796] -, shall be betrayed- , into the hands of men) What a grievous condition! Thus was He delivered up who exhibited such great authority in Mat 17:18.
[796] , in Galilee) As yet abiding in a place separated by a long distance from the scene of His passion.-V. g.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Pay Tribute Where It Is Due
Mat 17:22-27
All Jews were required to pay the half-shekel for the maintenance of the Temple services. See Exo 30:13. As Gods own Son, our Lord might surely have claimed exemption from taxation for His Fathers house. But He waived His claims, that He might not put a stumbling-block in the way of others. We must often conform to requirements that seem needless, because of the effect of our example on others who have not had the advantages of our illumination.
In the miracle that followed, our Lord sweetly teaches that He is responsible for the expenses of those who have given up other means to livelihood in order to devote themselves to His service. It is as though we are encouraged to go to Him to meet the demands made on us for taxes of one kind and another. He will give us what we need, kindly classing Himself with us, not in two coins, but in one. Make Christs interest your aim; He will make your taxes His care. See 1Jn 1:3.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Chapter 46
Lest We Should Offend Them
And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry. And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.
(Mat 17:22-27)
During the last six months of his public ministry, our Lord spent less and less time with the multitudes and more and more time in private with his disciples. During these last six months, he constantly gave them intense, careful instruction, both about his betrayal, death, and resurrection for the redemption of our souls and about the principles of his kingdom, the principles of grace, faith, and love by which we are to live in this world for the glory of his name and the advancement of his kingdom. Some of these momentous final words and the events surrounding them are recorded by all four gospel writers. But some were recorded only by one. Mat 17:22-27 describes an event and a word of instruction recorded by Matthew alone.
Christs Determination
The first thing that demands our attention in this passage is Christs determination to suffer and die for his elect.
And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry (Mat 17:22-23).
Our Lords heart was focused upon his death from eternity. He came into the world to suffer and die for his people. And every step he took moved him with predetermined pace to the appointed place and appointed hour when he would lay down his life for the people he loved from everlasting and had come to save.
The Lord Jesus seemed to delight in the prospect of his death as our Substitute, because the joy set before him of our everlasting salvation would be accomplished by his great sacrifice (Mat 16:22-23; Luk 2:48-49; Luk 12:50; Joh 12:27-28; Joh 13:27). Because his heart was fixed upon us from eternity, he was determined to die upon the cursed tree and spoke often of the event. Here he tells his disciples, now for the third time, how that he must go to Jerusalem, be betrayed into the hands of men, and die (Mat 16:21; Mat 17:12).
Our Savior was not the helpless victim of circumstances beyond his control. He voluntarily laid down his life for his sheep (Joh 10:17-18), and did so by the will, purpose, and determinate counsel of God the Father (Act 2:23). But let it never be forgotten that the Lord of Glory was betrayed and slain by the hands of wicked men. The Son of man came into the world to save men, and was by a man “betrayed into the hands of men.” For men he lived, and by man he was betrayed. For men he died, and by men he died. Nothing would satisfy the rage of men against him but his blood. God hating man ever cries, Give us his blood! Yet, nothing could satisfy the wrath and justice of God but his blood. When justice found our sins upon him, justice cried, Give me his blood! (Heb 9:22). And by his precious, sin-atoning blood divine justice is fully and forever satisfied.
As our Savior kept his death in the forefront of all his teachings, so too must his servants. We preach Christ crucified because nothing is so needful, so vital, so comforting to our souls and so glorious as this: When we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodlyGod commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us (Rom 5:6-8). Then, our Lord assured the disciples that he would, according to the type and prophecy of the Old Testament, rise from the dead on the third day (Psa 16:9-11; Isa 26:19; 1Co 15:3-4).
The last line of Mat 17:23 reads, And they were exceeding sorry. Many excuses are offered by which to make less of this than the Holy Spirit does. Some say they sorrowed because they loved the Savior. No doubt that is true. Others say they sorrowed because they were confused and did not understand his doctrine. That too is certainly true. But the Holy Spirit tells us by Mark, that they sorrowed because of their ignorance (Mar 9:32). And their ignorance was rooted in a lack of faith. John Gill explains how their grief might arise from their ignorance of the Lords doctrine.
They seem to have overlooked, and to have taken no notice of his rising again from the dead; which might have administered comfort to them, and have relieved them under their melancholy apprehensions of things; but this they understood not, nor indeed truly any part of what he had said; so Mark and Luke intimate. But then it may be said, how came they to be so very sorrowful, if they did not know what was said? To which may be replied, that this might be the reason of their sorrow, because they did not understand what he said, and they were afraid to ask. They could not tell how to reconcile the betraying of him into the hands of men, and his sufferings and death, with their notions, that the Messiah should abide forever, and should set up a temporal kingdom, in great splendor and magnificence. And what he meant by rising again from the dead, they could not devise. They could not tell whether all this was to be understood in a literal, or mystical sense.
How often we grieve when there is no cause! Christs death was for the glory of God, by the will of God, and according to the purpose of God. It was the means of their ransom and ours. Our Saviors death upon the cursed tree was the revelation of Gods glory. It was our Saviors path to glory, joy, and everlasting dominion, and the accomplishment of their everlasting redemption and ours! Yet, they were exceeding sorry! Why? Because they had counted on an earthly kingdom, with earthly joys, and earthly honors.
These faithful men were so greatly influenced by the religion of the Pharisees that they never questioned the Pharisees traditions regarding the Saviors kingdom. Blinded by tradition, they remained ignorant of his plain teaching, until he was raised from the dead. Therefore, he set the truth before them again and again, in almost the same words. His purpose was to banish from their thoughts, and ours, all dreams of an earthly, Jewish millennial kingdom. His death would be a painful, heavy trial to them. Therefore, he took great care to prepare them for it.
Temple Tax
Next, we read about a dispute some raised with Peter over paying the Jewish temple tax.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? (Mat 17:24-25)
This is an issue discussed by none of the other inspired writers. Matthew, who was himself a tax-collector, is the only one who mentions it. But the tribute money here, the tax being discussed was not a tax imposed by Caesar or a political government. That is discussed later on (Mat 22:17). This tribute money was a temple tax, which the Roman government allowed the Jews to collect. It was a Jewish custom.
Originally, it was based upon Gods law. It was the ransom money that every man was to pay for the maintenance of the tabernacle and temple sanctuary (Exo 30:12-14; 2Ch 24:6-9). From the payment of this redemption money there was no exemption. But it was not a tax levied every year. It was a free gift made by every man numbered among the children of Israel. It was not tribute money but ransom money.
The Jews, by custom, had made the ordinance of God a fashionable, annual ceremony, imposed upon and expected of all professedly religious people. It was a matter of custom which they practiced, as usual, with great show. Religious people in that day, as in ours, who did not know God, made certain that everyone saw their acts of devotion. Consequently, when they asked Peter, Doth not your master pay tribute? he answered, without hesitancy, though he did not really know for sure, Yes! Of course he does.
Christs Divinity
That brings us to the third thing in our text, which is the marvellous demonstration of our Saviors divine majesty.
And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee (Mat 17:25-27).
In these verses we see a clear, instructive demonstration of his omniscience and omnipotence as God. These two divine attributes are full of very practical instruction. We cannot be reminded too often that the Lord Jesus Christ, our God and Savior, knows everything that is thought, said, and done in this world (Mat 17:25). When Peter came into the house, apparently to discuss this matter with the Savior, he prevented him. He showed Peter that he had heard every word of his conversation with the tax collectors from the temple.
All things are naked before him. Nothing is secret (Heb 4:13). A more solemn realization cannot be imagined. Hypocrisy is useless! Concealment is impossible! Christ sees everything, hears everything, and knows everything. We live in the immediate presence of God! We will be wise always to realize that fact. J. C. Ryle wrote
Let us measure every difficult question as to right and wrong by one simple test. How would I behave if Jesus was standing by my side? Such a standard is not extravagant and absurd. It is a standard that interferes with no duty or relation of life. It interferes with nothing but sin!
As he is omniscient (all-knowing), so too our Savior is omnipotent (all-powerful). This is demonstrated by his power over all creation. He told Peter to go catch a fish, assuring him that the first fish caught would have the money needed to pay the tax (Psa 8:6-8).
Here is a blessed fact we must never overlook. Our God will provide for his own. We may safely serve him and confidently trust him. God our Savior is also God our Provider. His name is Jehovah-jireh. The Lord will provide (Gen 22:14; 1Sa 2:30). He often provides our needs supernaturally. And he often does so through the instrumentality he has appointed, by our faith in and obedience to him. (Because he trusted Christ, Peter got his fishing pole and went fishing.) But the provision is Gods and Gods alone!
No Offense
In these last three verses of Matthew 17 (Mat 17:25-27), our Savior and Master demonstrated a great willingness to make concession in matters of indifference, rather than give offence. First, He showed Peter that neither he, nor Peter, was under obligation to pay the customary tribute (Mat 17:24-26).
Do kings require their own children to pay taxes? Of course not. The kings family is always exempt. But his subjects, and especially the immigrants in his kingdom, are required to pay tribute. Should the Lord Jesus pay redemption-money for himself to God? Should he, who is himself the Kings Son, come under poll-tax to his Father? Even if the tribute money had become a tax to be levied by law, still “are the children free.” Neither the Lord Jesus, nor Peter, was obliged to pay. Our Lord was free; he was not obliged to pay, because he is the Son of God. His disciples were free, because in him they were (and are) the sons of God!
Then, the Master gave a lesson that needs to be often repeated about matters of indifference. It was his right not to pay the tribute. But rather than cause needless offence, as he put it, Lest we should offend them, he said to Peter, Go get the money and pay the tribute.
We must never give up Gods rights as God. But we must always be willing and quick to give up our own. If we must have a quarrel with any, we ought to make certain that it is worthwhile; and the only thing worthwhile is Christ, his cause, his glory, and his gospel. Gods people should never engage in anything that disturbs the peace of society or the lives of other people that is of mere temporary importance. And in the house of God and our own homes we ought to be even more lenient. In all matters of indifference we should be ready and willing to yield to others, especially to our brethren.
Sometime ago, a local church with which I have intimate connection, suffered a terrible split. Both groups were faithful men and women I have known for years. There were no gospel issues at stake, nothing involving moral or spiritual compromise. The whole division began with small, personal quibbles. Being asked by both groups to help, I personally called each man in both factions and reasoned with him. I said, I do not know and do not want to know what the strife is all about; but let me give you my assessment. Please correct me if I am wrong. There is no division over doctrine, or over moral or spiritual evil, is there? Each one answered, No, not really. So I said, This whole thing is about personal quibbles? The reply, without exception, was Yes. Really, thats all. Then I asked, Would you be willing to break up your family over these things? No, of course not, was the reply. So I urged my friends to each call the other and eat crow. They did. The church has since not only survived, but thrived.
Our Master, by example and by precept, teaches us to bend over backwards to avoid offending even self-righteous, legalistic, lost religionists. How much more we should do so among those who are of the household of faith (Eph 4:1-7; Eph 5:18-21; Php 2:1-5). Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God (1Co 10:32).
Tribute Paid
Beyond those things plainly revealed in this passage there are beautiful blessed spiritual truths beneath the surface. Our Lord Jesus Christ willingly came under tribute for our sakes (Gal 4:4-6; 2Co 8:9). By his one payment, a payment which he provided, typified in the ransom money required under the law (Exo 30:12-14), by the sacrifice of himself, he cleared our debt completely.
There were not two coins in the fishs mouth, one for Peter and one for the Lord Jesus, our Substitute. There was one piece of money, which made payment for both Peter and his Savior. What a picture this is of our complete union with Christ in redemption. Our debt became his. His payment was and is ours. By his one sacrifice both the Surety and those for whom he died must go free!
In all things seek the glory of God (1Co 10:31). Let us live in the awareness of his presence. Let us live to honor his name. Let us seek to help others by our behavior, molding our lives to Christs example.
If our Savior performed a miracle then to pay tribute for Peter, we ought to be confident that he will not now fail to supply all our needs. Robert Hawker wrote, Oh! how blessedly doth every incident in the life of Christ, minister instruction, grace, and comfort?
Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

Again the King speaks of his Death
Mat 17:22-23. And while they abode in Galilee, Jems said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men: and they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again. And they were exceeding sorry
Our Lord returned often to the solemn subject of his death at the hands of men. It was on his own mind, and therefore he spake of it to his disciples. Their minds were far too receptive of other notions in reference to his kingdom, and therefore he set before them the truth again and again, almost in the same words. He would banish all dreams of a worldly monarchy from their souls. His death would be a grievous trial to them, and he would prepare them for it. He now speaks of his being betrayed: this was ever a bitter drop in his cup of gall. The Son of man comes to save men, and is, by a man, “betrayed into the hands of men.” For man he lived, by man he is betrayed, and by man he died. Full well he foresaw that ” they shall kill him.” 0 suicidal world! Will nothing content thee but the blood of God’s own Son?
Our Lord would have us preach much about his death now that it is accomplished, for he continually talked of it while yet in the future. No theme is so vital, so practical, so needful.
His penetrating mind realized death, and anticipated that third day, when the word would be fulfilled,-“He shall be raised again.” This was the light of the morning which would have banished the darkness of despair from the minds of the disciples, if they had understood and believed. An old writer says, “He sugared the bitter pill of his death with the sweetness of his assured resurrection.”
Our Lord well knew what he said, and he used plain terms; but speak as he might, his followers could only in part apprehend his meaning; and that part made them “exceeding sorry.” Christ’s words, half understood, may cause the heart great grief. Yet, it may be, this cooling cloud of fear calmed their minds, and kept them from that fanaticism which filled the air around them. He knew best what state of mind would bo safest for them at that time; and he knows the same as to us at this moment.
Fuente: Spurgeon’s The Gospel of the Kingdom

The Son: Mat 16:21, Mat 20:17, Mat 20:18, Mar 8:31, Mar 9:30, Mar 9:31, Mar 10:33, Mar 10:34, Luk 9:22, Luk 9:44, Luk 18:31-34, Luk 24:6, Luk 24:7, Luk 24:26, Luk 24:46
betrayed: Mat 24:10, Mat 26:16, Mat 26:46, Act 7:52, 1Co 11:23
Reciprocal: Mat 26:2 – betrayed Luk 17:25 – must Luk 24:44 – These Joh 18:4 – knowing
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

7:22
Before leaving Galilee Jesus predicted his betrayal.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Mat 17:22. They were abiding in Galilee. The first prophecy did not take place in Galilee (chap. Mat 16:13; Mat 16:21).
Delivered up, etc. The Son of God would be left to the power of men; a new feature in the prediction.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

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.
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

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.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

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 Csarea 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 Csarea and his departure into Juda, 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]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

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 Lords 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.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Mat 17:22 f. Further Prediction of the Passion (Mar 9:30-32*, Luk 9:43-45)Again the disciples understand; they are not so utterly obtuse as in Mk. and Lk.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

17:22 {5} And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:
(5) Our minds must be prepared more and more for the offence of the cross.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Understanding Jesus’ death and resurrection 17:22-23 (cf. Mar 9:30-32; Luk 9:43-45)
Jesus next gave His disciples His second clear announcement of His passion (cf. Mat 16:21-24). The reference to it in Mat 17:12 was only a passing one. He had alluded to it in veiled terms before He articulated it clearly (cf. Mat 9:15; Mat 10:38; Mat 12:40).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Matthew’s reference to time was general. All the disciples were again with Jesus in Galilee. Jesus introduced the subject of His passion again, which the Transfiguration and the events that had followed it had interrupted.
Jesus’ statement was direct, but it was also somewhat ambiguous. The Greek word paradidosthai means either "to hand over" or "to betray" depending on the context, which is no help here. Furthermore this verb is in the passive tense so the perpetrator of this action, whomever it would be, remained hidden. In typical fashion Jesus gave His disciples more information, but He did not give them all He could have. More information would have created questions and problems that He did not want them to face yet. This is the first time that Matthew recorded Jesus announcing that He would be betrayed. The Son of Man would be betrayed into the hands of men.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

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.”
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles