Biblical commentary on the New Testament - The Christian ...

572 Matthew XVII. 24.
maintain, that Matthew means to relate that Jesus commanded
Peter to take a fish, and foresaw that it would bear a stater in its
mouth. The result, however, thus yielded by our interpretation,
we cannot leave standing in opposition to the character of Christ ;
and it becomes a question, whether, notwithstanding the above ob-
jections, this miracle can be made to harmonize with his general
procedure. The main question to be settled is this, whether the
form of miraculous action here exhibited was in opposition to the
fundamental laws which controlled the Saviour's action : the other
objections will then disappear of their own accord, or will lose their
weight. It must be maintained as a leading principle, that every
miraculous act of Christ had an object connected with his whole
Messianic work. What can have been the object of the present
miracle ?
Peter's answer to the collectors, that the Lord would pay the
contribution, implied a failure to recognise his peculiar posi-
tion ; and although Jesus might appeal to his Divine Sonship,
which, at a former period, Peter had already confessed, yet the
Saviour seems to have wished still more deeply to impress on his
mind a view of his exalted dignity. [Peter had, rashly and unau-
thorized, conceded that Jesus was bound to pay the tax, comp. ver.
25, This the Saviour teaches him ; this too he intends to teach
the receivers of the tribute, and that by actual proof He shows
them that he is Lord not only of the temple, but of the whole
world, and that his submission to the tribute was purely voluntary,
not in the sligtest degree obligatory.]
Ver. 24.—As respects the relative value of the money which this
narrative refers to, the crarijp is = 4 drachmas or Roman denarii.
These formed a Jewish shekel. The Stdpaxfiov is therefore = half a
shekel, i. e., to about 10 good groschen. The stater thus amounted
to 20 good groschen.* This sum of itself,f and still more the conversation
which follows, shews that it is not a civil tax but a temple
tax that is here spoken of According to Exodus xxx. 13, seq., every
Israelite was required to pay such a contribution ; and in the time of
Josephus (Antiq., xviii., 9, 1), even the foreign Jews paid it. The
question put by the collectors of this assessment, whether Jesus
would pay it, doubtless arose from their believing that, as a theocratic
teacher, he would regard himself as free from such an impost. But
Peter, to whom the question was addressed in the absence of Jesus,
believed, that with his strictness in religious observance, he would
make it a point to pay the sacred tax, and answered affirmatively.
* The good groschen is equal to rather more than 3 cents. The Marien-groschen is of
less value.— [T.
f The double article also ol rd didpaxfia Xa/xjSuvovTeg, indicates a reference to certain
appointed persons entrusted with the collection of the temple ofTerings.