Some of my more detailed reviews - books, films, theatre trips, software etc. I will also post the text of some of my sermons here.

Sunday, October 05, 2014

Seeing Jesus Differently - Matthew 17:22-27

Introduction

As we continue our wanderings through Matthew we have come to this fascinating little passage about the temple tax. After the Transfiguration Jesus and the disciples were making there way back to base, on their way they have healed a demon possessed boy, and now they have arrived and there to great them is the tax collector.

Taxes

I expect most of you have come across tithing – we talk about it often enough, but I wonder if you have heard of the temple tax before. So, in case you don't know about the temple tax I will give you some background in a minute.
You may also be aware that Jesus appears to have views on taxation that are a little bit different to those he expresses here. That story is a few chapters further on in Chapter 22. Jesus is asked about paying taxes to the Romans in one of those entrapment questions that the religious leaders of the time were so fond of. He surprised them all, as he usually did, when he said “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” There doesn't seem to be any concerns about paying taxes to the Roman authorities, yet here paying taxes to the temple seems to be a bit of an issue. Of course you may say that they weren't asking Jesus to pay the tax, but he isn't one who has one rule for himself and another for those around Him. So we should try to understand what is going on here too.

Offense

Then there's the statement about paying the tax so as not to give offense. Jesus usually seems to 'tell it like it is'. Only a few pages back he called Peter 'Satan', and since then has gone back to using his old name of Simon – that must have given offense. He is more than willing to put the religious leaders in their place, take the start of chapter 23 as an example:
Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
How could that not cause offense?

Missing Verse?

These things make the passage interesting, but for me there is one thing that makes it absolutely fascinating, and its not even in the passage. Why is there no verse 28? After a story like this I would expect a conclusion, but it is unfinished. Does that mean that Peter didn't go fishing that day and the temple tax was never paid and so offense was given? Or is it a test of the readers faith, should we just accept, by faith, as some preachers suggest that it happened exactly as Jesus said it would. We will see – but the Bible is not usually quiet about prophesies being fulfilled. Perhaps Jesus instructions are some sort of coded message to Peter and Matthew didn't know what was meant. Perhaps its is a metaphorical suggestion that Peter should pay the taxes out of his earnings – he is a fisherman, so go fishing – that will make you the money you need. During my preparation I have read sermons that suggest all of these things, and have also read suggestions that this never happened but was inserted by the author for other purposes. I don't like to treat scripture like that – as soon as the explanations start to get complicated and require us to read something into the story I begin to look for a more straight forward explanation.
What do you think – did the tax get paid or not?
Scripture does not tell us one way or the other.

Tax

Tax is always raised for something. Even if you don't agree with the thing the money is being used for you generally still pay the tax.
Wernher von Braun said “There is just one thing I can promise you about the outer-space program – your tax-dollar will go further.”
The temple tax was there to support the temple – not the people in it, just the buildings and so on. Thankfully we don't raise a tax to support our buildings, if we did it would have to increase, but I digress.
The temple tax pre-dates the temple. It had been around for a much longer time. It is first recorded in Exodus 30:13 where the census is being described.
Each one who crosses over to those already counted is to give a half shekel, according to the sanctuary shekel, which weighs twenty gerahs. This half shekel is an offering to the LORD.”
In Exodus it was use to support the Tabernacle – the tent that the Israelites took with them that was later replaced by the temple.
So the temple tax is a poll tax, by Jesus time it was paid annually by each male of 20 years or more. During its history the tax has varied in amount, but has never been a huge. In Jesus time it was set at 2 days wages for a labourer. Taking the October 2014 minimum wage for a twenty-one year old and assuming an eight hour day that is £204.
Given the English attitude to a poll tax – most of us remember the Community Charge and the public reaction to it in 1990 – riots in the streets. You might think that this tax would be unpopular. The English are not like the Jews. In Jesus time it was collected by Jews all over the empire and there are reports of armed guards taking the collection from Rome to Jerusalem. Even when the Romans banned the removal of Gold from Rome, the Jews still paid the temple tax. It was what you did if you were a good Jew at that time.
Assuming that, it seems strange that the tax collector would ask “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?”. There is some suggestion that not all the Jews in Palestine paid the tax, some groups (or sects) did not pay. It is also worth noting that the question is not always phrased in the negative – it depends which translation you read.
As Adam Hart-Davis told us “tax doesn't have to be taxing”, so that's enough on the temple tax for now.
There are other mysteries to look at and try to understand.

Detailed look at the passage

Matthew Only

As I start to look at a passage in a little more depth, one of the first things that I do is to find similar passages in other parts of the Bible. That is no help to me here. This story is unique to Matthew.

How did Jesus know?

Following on from the tax question we have another conundrum. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. He asks Peter who pays taxes. How does Jesus know of the conversation that Peter has just been involved in. Again there are a number of possibilities:
  1. It may have been revealed to Him supernaturally. We know this is possible, but there are other possibilities
  2. He may have overheard the conversation, or snippets of it at least. First century houses in Palestine did not have windows to block out the sound, if the conversation took place immediately outside the house it is possible that Jesus heard.
  3. Jesus may just have been expecting it – the tax was collected at the same time every year.
I'm always reluctant to choose a supernatural explanation, if a reasonable alternative can be found, but for me on this occasion I think it is most likely a combination of the first and the third. The reason for my choice of explanation is that the Amplified version has “when Peter came home”, which suggests he may have been further away that just outside. Either translation is acceptable. And that's it as far as evidence goes.
So lets move on to something more important.

Jesus is exempt from the Tax

Lets look at the details of the conversation with Peter:
"What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes q —from their own sons or from others?”
Mt 17:26 “From others,” Peter answered. “Then the sons are exempt,”
Clearly it would be a nonsense for a King or Queen to tax their own children – families do not work like that, so Jesus is showing Peter that, as the Son of God, He does not have to pay the tax. After all it was Peter who first recognized Jesus as the Son of God. That is recorded back in chapter 16, so Jesus is still busy teaching the disciples and reinforcing the lessons they are learning.
We are now in the same position as Jesus, because we are adopted sons and daughters because of what Jesus has done for all of us. No tax NEEDS paying to maintain the temple because ultimately we are all the same family.

Go fishing

Then we have this final statement from Jesus:
But so that we may not offend them, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”
… and we are back at this very strange sentence. Jesus does not want to offend the collectors of the temple tax. He advises Peter to go fishing with a line rather than a net, this is the only place in the New Testament where line fishing is suggested.

What is really happening?

So what is really going on here. The best explanation I found was in Tom Wright's commentary “Matthew for Everyone”. To see what is happening we must take a step back from the detailed events we have been looking at and see the big picture.
Jesus is on a mission. He has come from Heaven to Earth and is in the process of training his successors. The first two verses we had read this morning show this
When they came together in Galilee, he said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and on the third day he will be raised to life.” And the disciples were filled with grief.
Through His death and resurrection Jesus pays the price for our sins and makes a way for us back to God. This is the plan that makes us the adopted children who do not have to pay the temple tax. He is busy on the latter stages of that training, and He is preparing himself for a visit to Jerusalem where he will visibly and actively threaten the life of the temple. Now is not the time to make a scene. Now is not the time to upset a small time tax collector and bring the attention of the temple authorities on him. Tom Wright says that “The point of the story isn't that Jesus had the power to make a coin appear in the mouth of a fish, … nor is it that Jesus is simply a good citizen finding ways of paying the necessary taxes. The point is that He was a master strategist. He was himself, as he told His disciples to be” as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
That was a eureka moment for me. At last there was an explanation of why the story was there and it meaning. It provides us with the model of how to behave when we are planning to bring the message of Jesus to the wider world.
So did Peter go fishing with a line – well scripture doesn't say, and now I know the story's true meaning it doesn't bother me that much, so you can decide for yourself, but I can assure you that the tax was paid, because Jesus was following the model he had devised for his mission, which goes something like:
Make your plans, keep your council, don't cause offense or bring attention to yourself until you are ready. Then go and transform the world.

No comments: