CONTAINED in these last few verses of Matthew chapter 17 we have recorded something in the life of Jesus which Matthew alone records. No doubt this was because it was concerned with Jewish law and custom which the Gentile world would not so easily relate to.

The incident is concerning what is called the temple tax which the law required of everyone when they reached the age of 20. It seemed to be a tax paid to the temple just once in a lifetime, and usually required on reaching the age of 20. The tax was relatively small – just the average wage for two days – the general wage for one days work being a drachma or in Jewish money half of a shekel. So the tax was two drachma or a shekel. The tax was exactly the same for both rich and poor. We find God ordering this tax in Exodus 30:12-14. It was an offering to God as a ransom for life. It was to atone for your life, and so it was atonement money. Its purpose was to be a memorial for the Israelites before the Lord making atonement for their lives. The meaning of this tax is obscure, at least to me, but as far as I understand it, it seems to be a tax to remind the Israelites of their need for atonement for sin, and the paying it to the temple to point them to sacrifice which was needed to atone for sin, and to provide for such atonement by maintaining the service of the temple. The tax was small and the same for everyone so that all may realize they need atonement, but too small to give any idea that the tax bought atonement for sin. By pointing people to the need of sacrifice or atonement and the animal sacrifices provided as a temporary measure in the Old Testament, people were being pointed to Christ, the true sacrifice for sin to which all the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament pointed.

Apparently Jesus and Peter had not paid this tax to the temple up to this point. So when they arrived in Capernaum the collector of this tax approached Peter to inquire whether he and Jesus were going to pay the tax as was the custom and required by God's law. Peter says that he and Jesus would pay this temple tax.

No doubt Peter was disturbed by this encounter with the temple tax collector and was going to consult Jesus concerning the paying of it, but was surprised when Jesus spoke first concerning taxes in general and this tax in particular. Peter has said that he and Jesus would pay the temple tax. Jesus now asks him whether taxes were required from the kings sons, or from others. Peter replies that a king would not tax his own sons. Jesus takes this answer as correct which implied that Jesus was not required to pay the tax being the Son of the King of kings, nor was Peter required to pay being joined to Jesus in discipleship. But Jesus then says that they would pay the tax in order not to cause offense, and miraculously provided the money for the tax.

We learn two important things from this incident. The first is another testimony to the uniqueness of Christ as the divine Son of God. He was the Son of God and so had no obligation to pay this tax. Nor did Jesus need to pay any atonement for sin on his own behalf for he was holy. Further Christ's uniqueness as the Son of God is seen in this most extraordinary miracle to provide the money to pay the tax. The miracle can in not way be diminished, even if we assume it is possible for a fish to have picked up money in his mouth. How did Peter catch just this fish unless it was by Christ's divine power. How was there a coin which was just the amount needed to meet the tax for Peter and Jesus unless Jesus by supernatural power made it so? Why did Jesus provide the needed money in this peculiar way, when so many other more obvious options come to mind? So we could go on to show that nothing but a miracle by divine power is here recorded. This is just one of many incidents which Jesus gave to demonstrate who he was, the Word made flesh, God incarnate. Let us never be deprived of the evidence given here for our faith by the skepticism and arrogance of clever people.

The other lesson we learn is the lesson of not causing unnecessary offense to others by false standing on principles. No doubt Jesus and Peter were not obligated to pay this tax, but if they did not they would have caused offense, and so people would be offended unnecessarily in Christ, and so turned away from faith in him.

How important this is in the world and in the church. There are things which are essential to the Gospel of Christ which can never be compromised. With regard to these they are part of the offense of the cross, and must be held sacred even if they cause offense. On the other hand if the issue is relatively unimportant, to stand on principle and cause offense by it is wrong and foolish. How often we stand up for our rights as we call them, and how often do we stand on principle in a self-righteous way, when the issue is unimportant. All we do when we act like this is to cause unnecessary offense, and causing offense we hinder the proclamation of the Gospel, and turn people away from Christ.

Our pride and our principle are not important when by holding on to them we cause offense over trivialities. So much harm can be done to souls by such action. So much negative vibes can be caused in people's minds towards Christ when we act in this way.