← Back to sermon library

Please turn in your Bibles to 
Matthew chapter 17. Our focus this morning is on 
a very interesting miracle of our Lord. It's only recorded 
in Matthew's Gospel. It's interesting because it concerns 
a temple tax. Matthew himself being a tax collector, 
perhaps that's one of the reasons why he remembered this and fondly 
recorded it for us in this particular section. I do want to read what 
precedes and what follows so I can hopefully show you the 
connection because in some respects, as I said, it's not in Mark or 
Luke. It almost would appear that it's 
a bit random in terms of its insertion here, but I do think 
it connects very clearly with what precedes and with what follows. I'm sure that last week I said 
I wasn't sure that it connected with verses 22 and 23, but I 
am now sure that it does in fact do so. And I hope to show that 
as we move through the passage. But beginning in chapter 17 at 
verse 22, Now while they were staying in Galilee, Jesus said 
to them, The Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the hands 
of men, and they will kill Him, and the third day He will be 
raised up. And they were exceedingly sorrowful. When they had come 
to Capernaum, those who received the temple tax came to Peter 
and said, does your teacher not pay the temple tax? He said, 
yes. And when he had come into the 
house, Jesus anticipated him saying, what do you think, Simon, 
from whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, 
from their sons or from strangers? Peter said to him, from strangers. 
Jesus said to him, then the sons are free. Nevertheless, lest 
we offend them, go to the sea, cast in a hook, and take the 
fish that comes up first. And when you have opened its 
mouth, you will find a piece of money. Take that and give 
it to them for me and you." At that time, the disciples came 
to Jesus saying, who then is the greatest in the kingdom of 
heaven? Then Jesus called a little child to him and set him in the 
midst of them and said, Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are 
converted and become as little children, you will by no means 
enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself 
as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever 
receives one little child like this in my name receives me. 
Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, 
it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around 
his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe 
to the world because of offenses, for offenses must come, but woe 
to that man by whom the offense comes. If your hand or foot causes 
you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for 
you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two 
hands or two feet to be cast into the everlasting fire. And 
if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from 
you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, 
rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire. Amen. Well, let us again ask the Lord's 
help as we look to Holy Scripture. Our Father, we come to you as 
the author of this word. We pray for the Spirit of God 
to be upon us. We pray that we would understand 
what this passage is relating to us, that we would see in it 
the glory and the majesty and the excellence of our Lord Jesus 
Christ. We ask that you would just cause 
us to see these things and cause us to be well taught by the Spirit 
of God. Again, forgive us for sin and 
anything that would darken our understanding. Help us to keep 
our minds and hearts from wandering. Help us to not slumber physically. Help us to be engaged in this 
act of worship as we gather around the word of the living God. And 
we pray these things through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. Well, as we have seen, after 
the Mount of Transfiguration, when Jesus comes down from the 
Mount, He is immediately in the midst of this demon-possessed 
boy. He casts out this demon from 
this possessed boy, He heals him, He brings great help to 
that father and to the son, and then He teaches with reference 
to faith. He then indicates in verses 22 
and 23 a second formal announcement concerning His going to the cross. While they were staying in Galilee, 
Jesus said to them, The Son of Man is about to be betrayed into 
the hands of men, and they will kill Him, and the third day He 
will be raised up. And they were exceedingly sorrowful." 
We saw how that was functioning relative to the preceding context. Perhaps Matthew is indicating 
to us the decisive victory over the devil will ultimately be 
at the death and the resurrection of our Lord. It is there at the 
cross that Jesus triumphs over those principalities. It is there 
that he delivers that skull-crushing blow to the serpent himself. And then this situation concerning 
the payment of tribute tax. It definitely does connect, I 
think, to the preceding and to the following. Jesus has just 
announced his passion. He's just announced his betrayal, 
his death, and his resurrection. We, as students of the Bible, 
know why Jesus did this. It wasn't for an example so that 
we'll know how to go out and love men. It was for atonement. It was for ransom. It was for 
reconciliation. It's very intriguing if you go 
back in the Bible to Exodus chapter 30, where this temple text is 
first introduced. It is associated with the ideas 
of ransom. It is associated with the idea 
of redemption. It is associated with the idea 
of atonement. And the fact is that we have 
Jesus paying a debt that Peter did not owe. So there is a connection 
between what precedes in terms of the atoning work of our Lord 
Jesus and the very purpose for which this temple tax existed. But then notice in verse 27, 
Jesus acknowledges his freedom. He is exempt as the Son of God 
from paying a temple tax. And yet, he says, nevertheless, 
lest we offend. Jesus is concerned not to offend 
outsiders. Jesus is concerned not to offend 
or cause a stumbling block to those outside of the church. 
If it's something that doesn't compromise the gospel, we ought 
to be willing to let it go. And then in verse 6, in chapter 
18, Jesus deals with offenses caused by the world upon his 
little ones. So there is that connection as 
well. What precedes concerning ransom 
and atonement, and what follows concerning offense. So I hope 
that we've located the passage in its particular context. Now 
let's look at the very, very blessed meaning of it. In the 
first place, we'll consider the question concerning the temple 
tax, verses 24 to 26. And then secondly, the concession 
concerning the temple tax. Jesus makes a concession. He 
pays something that He did not owe. But first, notice the question. The setting is given to us in 
verse 24, and this is important. It says, "...when they had come 
to Capernaum." Now, according to Matthew 4.13 and Matthew 9.1, 
Jesus made His home in Capernaum. It would be in Capernaum that 
this temple tax would in fact be levied upon him. As well, 
Peter made his home in Capernaum also, according to Matthew chapter 
8 and verse 14. Remember, Jesus healed Peter's 
mother-in-law. That teaches us that Peter was 
married. contra the Pope of Rome idea, 
but as well that Peter maintained a home in Capernaum. And so Jesus 
went and he healed his mother-in-law. So it is quite natural that Peter 
would be asked about this temple tax. And most likely they were 
at Peter's house. Some have taken this passage 
and said, well, why didn't Jesus pay the temple tax for the other 
11 apostles? Because they're in their hometown 
of Capernaum. Not every miracle always benefits 
every human being. There is a selectivity in terms 
of the application of miracle. The Roman Catholics actually 
teach that this puts Peter on par with Jesus. As the vicar 
of Christ on the earth, it was natural and fitting for Jesus 
to pay his temple tax. That's not what the passage is 
about at all whatsoever. But the setting is important 
because it is in Capernaum. This is where that particular 
tax would be levied. As well, Capernaum is right on 
the Sea of Galilee. If you need a fish, the Sea of 
Galilee is a good place to get a fish, right? This wasn't some 
place out in the desert where Jesus said, I want you to travel 
for five days, Peter, and I want you to throw on your hook and 
find a fish. No, he's right there on the Sea of Galilee. So those 
are the reasons why Capernaum is mentioned. Remember, they're 
on their way down to Jerusalem for what Jesus is taught in verses 
22 and 23. Betrayal, death, resurrection. Now note the question directed 
to Peter. It says, when they had come to 
Capernaum, those who received the temple tax came to Peter 
and said, does your teacher not pay the temple tax? Again, they're 
probably in Peter's home. The questioners, in their question, 
actually assume that Jesus does pay the tax. It wasn't like, 
he doesn't pay the tax, does he? Like they were trying to 
get one over on him. It was a question concerning 
something. They probably already knew that 
Jesus himself did. Now the tax that is in view is 
not a civil tax. It's not taxes paid to the Roman 
government. Later, in Matthew 22, this will 
be an area of dispute. When they ask him, or the religious 
leaders ask Jesus, is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar? That's 
when he says, bring me a coin. And he sees the face on the coin, 
and he says, pay or give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and give to 
God what is God's. That's not what's in view here. 
When Jesus speaks of the king's who collect taxes and customs 
from their subjects? Do they do it from strangers 
or from their children? Again, the emphasis there is 
not on the fact that this is a civil tax, but that's an illustration 
of the point that he wants to make. But as I said, the backdrop 
is in Exodus chapter 30, verses 12 to 16. In the census of the 
men of Israel, they were to give a half-shekel tax. Men of Israel, 
20 years and older. Now it seems to be that it was 
only when the census was conducted The Qumran community thought 
that it was a one-time tax and that it was not to be replicated 
every year. After the exile, according to 
Nehemiah, the tax was bumped up from half a shackle to a third 
of a shackle, and then it was to be done yearly. And what we 
find, as I mentioned in the book of Exodus, is that it's connected 
with ransom. It's connected with atonement. 
And I think the idea might go this way. It's difficult to try 
and piece together, but just so you see, in the Exodus passage, 
ransom and atonement are used. When were censuses conducted 
in Israel? It wasn't like it was today, 
where every year you get annoyed by some census taker asking you 
your things and whatnot. It was for war. The idea for 
taking a census ultimately was for war. And so what is going 
on perhaps in the Exodus text is that the men who paid the 
half shekel in a sense were pledging themselves to the holy war and 
in a sense God was giving them or God was giving them their 
lives so that they could in fact go and do what they had pledged 
with reference to that tax. But whatever the particular significance 
is, it was a temple tax paid by a half shekel, and at the 
end of the Exodus passage it says that the money that was 
collected went into the tent of meeting. Not went into it 
and was kept there, but went into the furnishings, it went 
into the sacrifices. So this was a common practice 
after the exile, and this is precisely what these men are 
asking. in this place. It was the half shekel for religious 
service. Chamberlain says this was an 
annual tax for maintaining the services and sacrifices of the 
Jerusalem Temple, and it was levied on all Jewish males 20 
years and older in both Palestine and the Diaspora, with the probable 
exception of priests in Jerusalem. Now, it's very important that 
you follow what I'm about to say here. The temple tax was 
offered to the Lord. The temple tax was given to the 
Lord. Who owned the temple according 
to Israel's theology? The Lord. You need to keep that 
in mind because when Jesus uses this illustration about the kings 
of the earth taxing and rendering custom to their subjects, do 
they do it with foreigners or do they do it with sons? You 
see there's a high Christology going on in here. Jesus has already 
said in Matthew chapter 12 that he's greater than the temple. The temple will be forefront 
with reference to dispute in Matthew 21. The temple ultimately 
is condemned by our Lord in Matthew 23 and in Matthew 24. Now what 
happens in his trial in 26 and 27 is that the person said that 
he was making threats basically to destroy or remove the temple. 
So temple becomes a prominent feature of what happens from 
this point on. But at this particular time, 
God owns the temple. And God does not levy taxes upon 
his sons. And as a result, the son is free. That's the emphasis. But even 
in spite of being free, Jesus says, nevertheless. How many 
times do you and I demand our rights? How many times do you 
and I actually say, nevertheless, lest we offend them? Temple tax 
collectors in Capernaum. Jesus doesn't want to offend. 
What we learn from this passage is a principle of deference. The Christian man is both free 
and slave all at the same time. It's very intriguing. The commentators 
say they wonder if Paul had this in his mind when he's writing 
1 Corinthians 8-9. Of course he had this in his 
mind. Of course he would think concerning 
the Lord's words. Nevertheless, lest we offend 
them. So when he starts dealing with the church, eating meat 
that was offered up to idols, Paul says, we know there's no 
such thing as an idol, but I don't want you to offend a brother 
for whom Jesus died, so you can eat a steak. When it comes to 
the area of drinking alcohol, you ought not to cause a brother 
to stumble for whom Jesus died. You ought to have a nevertheless 
attitude that we do not offend for the cause of Christ. This 
is what Jesus is doing here in a very pointed manner. But notice, 
we go back to the particular situation. The money that was 
requested, interestingly enough, was a coin worth about two denarii 
and it equaled the Jewish half shekel. Isn't it amazing when 
Peter goes and he finds that fish and the fish opens its fish 
mouth. There's precisely what is needed 
for Peter and Jesus. Some have stumbled because the 
text does not record that Peter actually went and did this. Well, 
it doesn't say that Peter went to the sea. It doesn't say that 
Peter cast in a hook. It doesn't say that Peter pulled 
out a trout or whatever it might have been and pried its little 
fish mouth open and boom, shining in the daylight sun was the exact 
amount of money for Jesus and Peter. Does it need to say it? What have we witnessed up to 
this point in Matthew's presentation of our Lord Jesus? He is the 
one who speaks to the wind and the waves and they stop. He is 
the one that multiplies a few loaves and a few fishes to feed 
5,000 on one occasion. He is the one that walks on water. He is the one that feeds 4,000 
on another occasion. These are just His miracles over 
nature. We haven't even discussed the 
healing and the casting out of demons and the raising of the 
dead. By the time we get to this instruction wherein Jesus says, 
I want you to go to the sea, cast in your hook, pull up a 
fish, and there you'll find the exact amount of money that we 
need, we as Matthew's readers realize that we're dealing with 
the God of heaven and earth. We are dealing with the Lord 
Christ Almighty. We are dealing with One who's 
able to raise the dead. Certainly He's able to put a 
skater in the mouth of a fish, right? If He can do the greatest, 
He can certainly do the least. So this text has been unfortunately 
misinterpreted on a whole host of ways. But notice the discussion 
between Jesus and Peter. It says, Peter answers affirmatively 
for him. I don't know why Spurgeon thinks 
that Peter was rash and presumptuous to do that. I don't. At all. And I love Spurgeon. Don't go 
home and say, Butler hates Spurgeon. Tweet, Butler said bad things 
about Spurgeon. I just don't know why he would 
think that Peter did a bad thing here. He said, yes, of course 
he pays the temple tax. He's a faithful, pious man. If 
he needs to pay the temple tax, he'll pay the temple tax. That's 
what's expected from faithful, pious men. Now notice, Peter 
comes into the house and Jesus asks the question. It says that 
Jesus anticipated him saying. Now again, the text does not 
demand omniscience, but Matthew's readers up to this point know 
that omniscience is true of our Lord Jesus. Could be that he 
just overheard them, or it could be, as we all have come to realize, 
Jesus is both God and man in one blessed, unique person. That's 
what happens. And so he asks him this particular 
question. Again, it's by way of analogy. The reference to kings, the reference 
to those who impose taxes on earth illustrates the point. 
It's not teaching that this is a civil tax. You might say, why 
are you making a big deal out of that? Because the commentators 
make a big deal out of it and miss, I think, the connection 
between the temple tax in Exodus 30 and what has preceded here 
in Matthew 17, 22, and 23. We come out of 22 and 23 thinking 
atonement, thinking ransom, thinking redemption, thinking reconciliation. We get emphasis with this with 
reference to the temple tax that is given to us in Exodus 30, 
which highlights ransom and redemption and reconciliation. and atonement. Matthew is bringing us to consider 
this theme. He wants us to be conscious of 
this reality. He doesn't want to let us forget 
the shadow of the cross that looms large for the remainder 
of this particular book. It is about the presentation 
of Jesus as the Messiah of Israel who came to save his people from 
their sins. And everything Matthew writes, 
everything that he does in this particular book, orchestrates 
to that particular end. He is setting before us the Lord 
Christ Almighty. So he asks the question, what 
do you think, Simon, from whom do the kings of the earth take 
customs or taxes? From their sons or from strangers? Well, even Peter would get this 
one, right? Right? Well, from strangers. The point 
is this. If you were a king and you had 
a palace, you most likely wouldn't tax your sons. Now, I say most 
likely because there's always an exception to a rule out there. 
Oh, I'm going to tax you. No, that's just not the way royalty 
lives. You say, what about my 18-year-old son that likes to 
play Nintendo? Can I charge him room and board 
so he can learn something about the poor choices that he's made? 
Yeah, charge him room and board. Just don't tax him. It's a pretty 
straightforward simple illustration or analogy, right? If you're 
a king, you have a palace, you don't hit your wife and your 
kids with a tax. That's one of the prerogatives 
of being in the royal family. We don't have to pay taxes. We 
don't have to pony up that dough. We are out with reference to 
that particular situation. We can say with debt, it's good 
to be the king. It's a pretty straightforward 
illustration of a bigger Christological point that we've just met with 
on the Mount of Transfiguration. What do we read in 17.5? Jesus 
goes up on the Mount with Peter, James, and John and avoids thunders 
from the heavens And the father says, behold, this is my beloved 
son in whom I am well pleased. When it comes to the temple tax, 
the father himself owns the temple. The fact is that the son is exempt. The fact is the son shouldn't 
have to pay. The fact is the son shouldn't 
have to pony up, though, in order to make this presentation. But 
notice what he says. The sons are free. The Lord is the son of the father 
who owns the temple and therefore he is free from the tax. Carson 
says the point is that just as royal sons are exempt from the 
taxes imposed by their fathers, so also Jesus is exempt from 
the tax imposed by his father. In other words, Jesus acknowledges 
the temple tax to be an obligation to God. But since he is uniquely 
God's son, therefore he is exempt. That's the point. He doesn't 
have to pay the temple tax. This is not something that is 
stipulated to him in terms of his mission of righteousness. 
Behold, I have come to do your will. Well, the temple tax never 
affected the unique Son of God. He is speaking here in very lofty 
terms. Whether we pass by it and miss 
it or not, he is asserting that I'm free. I'm exempt. Peter, remember the mount. Remember 
the voice of the Father that came from the cloud. Remember 
your own confession in 16, when Peter says, Thou art the Christ, 
the Son of the living God. This is another indirect ascription 
to what Matthew's greater purpose is. This is the Christ, the Son 
of the living God. And Jesus invokes this, and Jesus 
uses this illustration, and Jesus gives this analogy to instruct 
Peter. It's almost as if to say to Peter, 
you know what you said in Matthew 16? You know what you heard on 
in Matthew 17? This underscores the entirety 
of this whole temple tax question. On the one hand, no, I am exempt. I am free. I don't have to pay 
this particular tax. So that's the question concerning 
the temple tax. Now notice the concession. So 
I said he's a free man, but he willingly submits himself to 
others. Bruner makes this observation 
as he's applying this whole principle to us. He says, so there are 
two senses of self in the Christian. The sense of being a free child 
of God and the sense of being a willing servant of others. 
Now, brethren, I will argue in the course of the remainder of 
this sermon that if Jesus does this with godless temple tax 
collectors in Capernaum, and Paul uses that sort of a foundation 
to argue for Christian ethics within the context of the church, 
if Jesus will make concession to this degree to men who aren't 
ultimately in his life, the temple tax collectors in Capernaum, 
How will we not make concessions to those whom we love, to those 
whom we worship with, to those whom we may be married to, to 
those who may be our parents, to those who may be our children? 
You know, as an American, one of the things that I know my 
country was founded upon was revolution and independence. 
I'm not here to discuss all the ins and outs and the particulars. 
Is there a just sense where men can revolt? I certainly am happy 
to discuss that particular subject. There is an independent spirit 
There is a me-ism that infiltrates the heart of man. And I suspect 
it's not just true of Americans, it's probably true of Canadians 
as well. We know our rights, we say. We shake our fists. This is my 
liberty, Jesus said. I can do this particular thing. 
But if you are causing a brother for whom Jesus died to stumble, 
give it up! Stop! There are actually bigger 
concerns than your happiness. I know that may blow you away, 
but God's glory, the purity of the gospel, the glory of Christ, 
and the feelings and the sensitivities and the experiences of your brethren, 
Jesus makes this very pointed statement. He says the sons are 
free, Jesus being the son. Nevertheless, lest we offend 
them. J.C. Ryle says he might justly 
have claimed exemption from the payment of this tribute money. 
He who was son of God might fairly have been excused from paying 
for the maintenance of his father's house. He who was greater than 
the temple might have shown good cause for declining to contribute 
to the support of the temple. But our Lord does not do so. 
He claims no exemption. He desires Peter to pay the money 
demanded. You see, brethren, the passage 
connects us to atonement. The passage connects us to the 
offenses that inevitably come to the Christian Church. But 
the passage as well presents to us Jesus as the unique Son 
of God and one in whose train we ought to follow. Now, as I 
said, Paul is free with his interpretation of this various component in 
the book of 1 Corinthians. You may turn there. 1 Corinthians 
chapter 8 and verse 9. 1 Corinthians chapter 8 and verse 
9. Now, I personally believe that 
weaker brethren should get stronger. Weaker brethren should grow to 
maturity. Weaker brethren ought to attain 
strongness so they do not stumble over matters of Christian liberty. 
So do not say, well, I'm a weaker brother and you just always have 
to be patient with me. Yes, that is true. However, as 
a weaker brother, you need to read more and you need to free 
your conscience from some of the bondage that you live in. 
Because God the Lord is good. And God the Lord commands us, 
and God the Lord has said, these certain things are free as long 
as you don't abuse them, as long as you don't misuse them, as 
long as you engage in them in a godly, responsible manner. 
So weak brethren, get strong. Read Romans 14, read 1 Corinthians 
8, read 1 Timothy. Get your mind around the reality 
that God is not an austic. God does not enjoin upon us what 
the heretics in Ephesus did in 1 Timothy chapter 4. They forbid 
marriage and they forbid eating meats, which God created, to 
be enjoyed. God didn't give that steak simply 
for us to go, wow, it's wrong to eat steak. No, He gave it 
to the Christian brother and sister so they could enjoy a 
nice cut of beef. Praise God from whom all blessings 
flow. The earth is the Lord's and the 
fullness of it. And unless He calls something 
sin, it is wrong for us to call it sin. You see, the same Bible 
that tells us we're not to take away from the Word of God, tells 
us we're not supposed to add to it. You say, well, I have 
to protect and I have to throw up and I have to make all these 
hedges. No, you're not more pious than 
God. You're not more righteous than 
God. You are not more holy than God. This was the Pharisaic abuse 
of the Sabbath day. What ended up happening? They 
twisted the fourth commandment to teach that man was made in 
order to observe the Sabbath. Jesus says that was never the 
intention. The Sabbath was made for the 
man. The Sabbath is a gift given by 
God. When we reject Sabbatarianism, 
it's probably the sort of Sabbatarianism that is contra to God's original 
intention. When Mark 2, or Jesus in Mark 
2, tells us the Sabbath was made for the man, He's probably talking 
about Adam. When God rested on the seventh 
day, He exemplified and He demonstrated what Sabbath looked like to Adam. 
And then when Cain and Abel come to offer their sacrifices, do 
you know when they do that? They do it at the end of the 
days. Not at the end of the age, not 
at the second coming, probably at the end of the week when men 
Sabbath and rest and find their blessing in God Most High. You see, we don't help God by 
putting up a bunch of strictures that He never imposed. So, weak 
brothers and sisters, I say this, I say it lovingly, but I say 
it encouragingly as well. Read, study, learn. God is not 
agnostic. There's nothing intrinsically 
evil about stuff. What is intrinsically evil is 
the heart. Remember that instance in Matthew 
15? They came and they complained to Jesus and they say, Why? Why 
do your disciples eat with unwashed hands? Jesus says their problem 
is not what goes down their gullet. Their problem is not what slithers 
down their esophagus. Their problem is not the means 
by which they secure bodily nourishment. Their problem is that cesspool 
of a heart. Their problem is that place from 
whence all evil flows. God does not have a problem. 
He is not at war with nature. He's at war with sin and evil 
and vileness. So brethren, may I encourage 
you to get your mind wrapped securely around these particular 
issues. And if you still choose to reject 
or to resist those particulars, you have freedom to do that. 
Christian liberty doesn't demand a particular aspect of conduct. But it demands that we allow 
brothers and sisters are bound ultimately by God the Lord. So 
that was a bit of an aside, I apologize. But notice in 1 Corinthians 8, 
9. But food does not commend us 
to God. For neither if we eat are we 
the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse. And then 
notice in verse 13, therefore, if food, so he's just established 
the principle. It's not food that commends us 
to God. Paul in a sense is saying, I have freedom with reference 
to food. I am exempt from these laws that would bind me with 
reference to food. But notice what he says in verse 
13, therefore if food makes my brother stumble, if it causes 
an offense, if it brings a scandal to him, I will never again eat 
meat, lest I make my brother stumble. Did Paul know this payment 
of the tribute tax? Absolutely! He's pulling out 
the principles. If Jesus is not going to fend 
temple tax gatherers in Capernaum, certainly brothers and sisters 
that worship in the same church ought to endeavor to keep the 
unity of the Spirit and the bond of peace. ought not to parade 
their liberties or display their liberties or shove their liberties 
around. This is very concerning to me. 
With the reformed resurgence that we've seen, there is this 
idea that, well, we get to drink beer, we do this. You know what, 
brethren? I am not saying you can't drink 
beer, but I'm suggesting that it's probably not the best thing 
in the world to blog about it and to push your liberties around. I bought black shoes today. That's 
my liberty. Why don't people do that? It's 
somehow cool and hip to drink a beer in the name of Jesus. Brethren, when we've come to 
that point and we're pushing those sorts of things, we've 
missed verse 27. Jesus teaches us with a simple 
fish. Nevertheless, lest we offend 
them, the them are tax gatherers in Capernaum. Guys that nobody 
probably ever would remember, except their dear families. Nobody 
thinks today, boy, I wonder who those men were in Capernaum. 
We don't care. Jesus cared enough not to offend 
them. Notice Paul says essentially 
the same thing. Notice chapter 9, verse 12. Chapter 9, verse 12, he says, 
if others are partakers of this right over you, I'm sorry, if 
others are partakers of this right over you, are we not even 
more? The text and context is simple. 
Paul is an ox laboring and nobody's paying him. Well, Paul, you're 
supposed to live on love and fresh air. Paul, don't you preach 
for souls? Aren't you in this for spiritual 
things? Aren't your motives so elevated and so high you can't 
think about food? No. Paul's not a disembodied 
spirit. He's not floating around the 
first century. He has to eat. He has to drink. He says, do 
we not have a right to bring along a believing wife like Peter 
and the rest of the disciples? Paul's essentially saying to 
a church he founded, why are you treating me like this? But 
he's not doing it like that. He's appealing to their minds 
with the scripture. Pay the ox. Does God actually 
care that an ox eats grain? Yeah, because God's nice and 
he's good. But the larger principle is if you have an ox ministering 
among you, pay him. Don't tell him, aren't you in 
this for souls? Yes, but I can't feed my family on souls, as much 
as we try. And if we were, your soul would 
be too small to feed my particular big brood. You see, this is his point. Do 
we not have the right? Do we not have an exemption? Do we not possess freedom? Do we not possess liberty? Look at what he says. Nevertheless, 
we have not used this right, but endure all things, lest we 
hinder the gospel of Christ. You see, Paul's marching orders 
are according to his master, who taught Peter a very simple 
lesson with a very simple fish. Notice in verse 22, he says, 
"...to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak. I 
have become all things to all men, that I might by all means 
save some. Now this I do for the gospel's 
sake, that I may be partaker of it with you. And then in Galatians 
5.13, the same sort of an enjoiner, or the same sort of an idea. 
5.13, for you, brethren, have been called to liberty. Only 
do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love 
serve one another. You see that? Those two senses? 
You're a free man, and you're a servant. Jesus is exempt from 
the temple tax, and yet he's a servant. Jesus is exempt from 
the various things imposed upon him by men. And nevertheless, 
he says, lest we offend them. We don't want to send them home 
saying, man, that guy wouldn't even cough up a half shekel. 
He wouldn't even throw four denarii in the hat for he and his buddy. 
He just wouldn't do that. What's up with him? He's demanding 
his rights. He's asserting himself. You know what? I'll sacrifice 
those rights. I'll sacrifice that exemption. I will sacrifice 
my liberty because I want to win men for the gospel. That's 
the attitude. That's the mindset. That's what 
this fish teaches us. So we have freedom. We have concession. Notice we have the means employed. Isn't this a beautiful thing? 
Matthew 17. Nevertheless, lest we offend 
them, go to the sea, cast on a hook, and take the fish that 
comes up first. And when you have opened its 
mouth, you will find a piece of money. Take that and give 
it to them for me and you. I told my little grandson today, 
pay attention, the story's about a fish. He may have been thinking, 
Jonah, I know he likes that particular, that narrative. I don't like 
saying story, it almost sounds like it's false. We think of 
story as false or fake shit. So I prefer narrative. That means 
it's true. Stories certainly can be true. 
If you're on the way home today and you get hit by a car and 
you're relating your story, I hope no one says, I doubt the veracity 
of this, while they see your bleeding wounds in front of them. 
So story doesn't necessarily imply falsity. But isn't it beautiful? Go throw a hook. The only time 
in the Gospel narratives where a hook is used to fish. It's 
always nets. Who's he talking to? Son of Peter. Peter's a fisherman. Peter knows 
the Sea of Galilee. Peter knows the ins and outs. 
Peter knows. This isn't his first rodeo. For 
Jesus to give him this instruction And for the end result, it truly 
is a beautiful illustration of the entirety. Calvin made this 
comment concerning this instruction. He says, though I acknowledge 
that Christ had not always full coffers, that means that Christ 
as a man was oftentimes poor. So next time you run out of dough, 
at least you're in the company of the beloved Lord Jesus, right? 
He says, yet I think that he was not compelled by poverty 
to give this order to Peter, but that he did so in order to 
prove by a miracle that he had a more extensive dominion than 
all earthly kings, since he even had fishes for his tributaries. Which of the kings of the earth, 
who levy taxes upon their subjects, had the ability to have a fish 
bring the money? It's an exercise and a demonstration 
and a manifestation of Christ's lordship and sovereignty over 
nature. So Peter is told very vividly 
what he is supposed to do. As I mentioned earlier, it doesn't 
say he doesn't. There's not a verse 28 that says, 
and Peter went, and he cast in the hook, and he pulled out the 
fish, he opened the mouth, and there was the stater. There was 
the exact and precise amount of money that would satisfy for 
Jesus and Peter. You know what one rationalistic 
interpreter suggests? that when Jesus gave this instruction 
to Peter, I got a hair on my head and my wife's not home, 
that's weird. Usually I get her hair on my head and she's not 
here, so it must have been a pillow remnant. You know what this rationalist 
says? Peter, go down to the sea and catch a fish. Go sell the 
fish in the market and take the proceeds and pay the temple tax. 
Or from the same man, Peter, you are a fisher of men. Go out 
and make a rich convert, and that rich convert will dig deep 
enough to produce the stater that is necessary for our temple 
tax. Again, the Christ who has spoken to the wind to stop blowing. The Christ who has spoken to 
the waves to stop crashing. The Christ who has multiplied 
fish and loaves on two occasions. One to feed over 5,000, on the 
other to feed over 4,000. And the Christ who actually walks 
on water. Not to mention the Christ who 
tells Talitha to get up from her grave and live. Not to mention 
the Christ that has the ability to cast demons out with a word. 
Not to mention the Christ that has all power and authority. Does it really need to have a 
verse 28? Do we really need to become rationalists? Do we really need to think that 
Peter was going to sell a fish that day and use that money to 
pay a temple tax? Or are we driven by Matthew to 
consider again our blessed Lord Jesus? the sovereignty he wields, 
the power he manifests, the ownership that he displays in terms of 
this particular universe. It is a wondrous, wondrous account 
of the miraculous work of our Lord Jesus. Spurgeon summarizes 
it this way, he says, thus the great son pays the tax levied 
for his father's house, but he exercises his royal prerogative 
in the act and takes the shekel out of the royal treasury. Isn't 
that beautiful? Do you ever consider that fish 
the royal treasury? He says, as man he pays. But first, as God, he causes 
the fish to bring him the shekel in his mouth. I think Spurgeon 
is much more preferable than the idea that he sold the fish 
and paid the temple tax, or he made a rich convert who pulled 
out the money to pay for Jesus and Peter. Well, brethren, what 
do we learn in this beautiful account with tax money, with 
fish, and with our beloved Lord Jesus? First, the Christology. 
We cannot miss that. We cannot ignore that. This is 
what Peter, or Matthew, wants. Who do men say that I, the Son 
of Man, am? And then he says, but who do 
you say that I am? And Simon Peter confesses, thou 
art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Brethren, that is 
a mouthful! That is amazing! That is pulling 
together so many strands of biblical data from the Old Testament. 
The Psalm 2 strand, the Davidic strand, or the Davidic Kingdom 
strand from 2 Samuel 7. The royal psalms throughout, 
the prophets and the wisdom literature, all these things converge, all 
these things, the bulls and the goats and the things that we 
talked about when we looked at Hebrews, all of those were prefigurements, 
all those were typical. In other words, they were like 
signposts. You know, when you're 15 or you're 16 and you get your 
learners, you've become an L. One of the things that you're 
probably more conscious of when you're an L than when you've 
been driving for many years are signs. You need to pay attention, 
because you know that if I run this stop sign, I am not going 
to get a license. I mean, that's a pretty mercenary 
way to put it, but nevertheless, that's probably the way we address 
it. Should be, I should stop so I don't kill people, but whatever 
floats your boat. As long as you stop. We pay attention 
to signs. Before the days of GPS, we had 
to read maps. It was terrible. We had these 
great big books, or we had these glove boxes shoved with things. 
Fishing things. Now talk about dangerous. I mean, 
we're reaching over, pulling maps out, flipping the pages 
while we're driving. Those were signposts. They prefigured. They looked forward to something. It's what the Old Covenant is. 
It's anticipation. It is an expectation. It's all about hope. So when 
Peter says, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God, he's 
pulling all these passages of hope, and he's saying, it's you, 
it's Jesus, it's the Son of God, it's the Messiah that we're following, 
it's the one that we're with. Others may say Elijah, others 
may say Jeremiah, others may say one of the prophets, but 
we have come to know that in truth, you are Messiah. They 
go up to the mount. Transfiguration. The father says, 
this is my beloved son. And then Jesus uses this casually 
to teach Peter something concerning tribute tax. The sons are free. Commentators spend a lot of time 
there. It's plural sons. Who's he talking about? Is it 
Jesus and the disciples? Is it Jesus and Israel? We know 
for sure it's Jesus. We know of a truth that He is 
the unique Son of God. This story about tax money and 
fish is another means by which Matthew says, Behold your God. Behold your God. See Him through 
the fish. See Him through the taxes. See 
Him in His deference. See Him in His servanthood. See Him as the ransom, as the 
atonement that that temple tax prefigured back in Exodus chapter 
30, and again in Nehemiah's day, and in the history of Israel. 
They probably threw these half shekels down, not giving it one 
concern whatsoever. Matthew doesn't want us to make 
that mistake. When you consider that half shekel, 
when you consider atonement and ransom and sacrifice, you need 
to think in terms of verses 22 and 23. Because all that stuff 
in the Old Testament pointed forward to verses 22 and 23, 
when Jesus said, I will be betrayed, and I will die, and I will be 
raised the third day. Brethren, the Christology in 
Matthew 17, 24 to 27 is amazing. He is the Son of God. The Lord 
Christ is greater than the temple. He's already said this in Matthew 
chapter 12. The Lord Christ is sovereign 
over nature and working miracles. Don't you, as a believer, like 
to know that your God has everything in control? I do. And I like 
the way our God tells us it's not just the big stuff. If I've 
heard it once, I've heard it dozens of times, people say, 
well, my problem's pretty insignificant. What, you mean like on the level 
of a half shekel payment of a temple tax that's found in a fish? Yeah, 
like that. Christ is sovereign over that. Do you understand that? He's 
got the big things. But he's got the little things, 
too. So I think as believers sometimes, we're convinced, yeah, 
I know Jesus is coming again in glory to judge the living 
and the dead. I know it's all gonna pan out in the end. That's 
why I'm a pan-millennialist, because it's gonna pan out in 
the end. You see? Jesus has today, too. When Jesus needs an illustration 
to demonstrate the comprehensive sovereignty of God, He says, 
look at the sparrow. Look at the bird in the air. 
It doesn't fall out of the sky apart from your Father's will. 
You see, brethren, these things are meant as encouragements to 
us, that in the details of our lives, in the difficulties that 
we face, in the trials that we go through, when we might conclude, 
nobody cares about me, God Almighty does. God Almighty does. And it's manifested in a half 
shekel tax, fetched out of the mouth of a fish. That little 
fish is telling us Matthew's message. Behold your God. The Lord Christ is that perfect 
man of Psalm 8. We read it at the outset of worship. 
What the original intention for Adam was. You see, Psalm 8 is 
a description of the image bearer of God. Man in his upright state. But because Adam sinned, God 
sent a second Adam. God sent a last Adam. Christ 
is the perfect man. And this is what is described 
concerning him in Psalm 8. You have made him to have dominion 
over the works of your hands. You have put all things under 
his feet, all sheep and oxen, even the beasts of the field, 
the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea that pass through 
the paths of the seas. Think about what he did! Think 
about Peter, when he did meander down to the Sea of Galilee, and 
he did throw in his hook, and it was the very first fish, just 
like the Master said. He was probably like a kid with 
a present. He was probably like a kid with 
a racing heart. You hand the kid the present 
and their heart starts thumping and thudding and going and moving 
and shaking because they've got an anticipation. I can't wait 
to get the paper off because I want to see what the present 
is. Well, Peter's got the fish just like the master said, but 
again, not his first rodeo, not his first fish. So now he grabs 
that little fish and he opens up his mouth and there's the 
coin. There it is, just like the Master 
said. We hope Peter thought, Psalm 
8, that this perfect man has dominion over the fish, even 
over their paths in the seas. Things that men never give cause 
or thought to, men never consider. I was quite encouraged the other 
day. I went over and visited the dittos. I got a big fish 
tank. Their kids know fish, man. Their kids know their fish. They 
know their names. They're telling me this and the 
history. As I said to Joe, they've restored 
my confidence in fish ownership. But most of us couldn't care 
about fish. Some of us don't even like fish. 
We eat it because we have to. This fish tells us, behold your 
God. Isn't the Lord good? Isn't God kind? Isn't He glorious to bring this 
little fish to Peter, so that Peter can in fact see that this 
man is a free man, but he has made himself a servant to others. As well, brethren, we need to 
learn the concession made in this passage. Ryle again says, 
there is deep wisdom in those five words, lest we should offend 
them. They teach us plainly that there 
are matters in which Christ's people ought to sink to their 
own, or ought to sink, rather, their own opinions and submit 
to requirements which they may not thoroughly approve, rather 
than give offense and hinder the gospel of Christ. God's rights 
undoubtedly we ought never to give up, but we may sometimes 
safely give up our own. Ryle's right. Brethren, be very 
careful of causing offense to somebody for the sake of your 
liberty. Ryle teases that out a little 
bit. If y'all don't have Ryle's expository thoughts on Matthew, 
Mark, Luke, and John, get it. Or at least find the website. 
His stuff on the Gospels is so hearty, so rich, and so helpful. It is for family reading as well. I've got books in my study that 
if I read them out loud you wouldn't get it. Not because you're dumb, 
but because it's written in more technical language. Then you've 
got hearty, feeling driven, not feeling in a bad way, but more 
of a hearty appeal from authors and Ryle's expository thoughts. 
I remember reading that with our little children. We went 
through Matthew way back in the day. Did they get it all? Probably not. It's a good way 
to cover the gospel narratives. He teases out the implications. 
Nevertheless, lest we offend in society lest we offend in 
society." Now again, we don't compromise God's rights. We must 
obey God rather than men. Brethren, there is a sense where 
the Christian man, though he is free, becomes a servant to 
all. We could certainly tease out 
the applications in the family Remember reading Walter Chantry's 
little book called The Shadow of the Cross, Studies in Self-Denial, 
another excellent book that I can highly recommend. But the last 
chapter is self-denial in marriage. What would our marriages look 
like if we actually followed the Bible when it came to self-denial? What if your marriage wasn't 
all about you? What if your marriage was actually 
a picture of Christ and his love for the church? What if we as 
men, instead of being these macho alpha male, get me this sort 
of thing honey, actually did what Christ did with his bride 
and gave his life for her? You know brethren, deference 
or this nevertheless attitude is not wrong to possess in the 
Christian life. But as well in the church, Praise 
God for the meeting last night. If you were not here, may I encourage 
you that it was excellent. It was a blessing. There weren't 
fireworks. We didn't have this long of a 
list of people that got converted. Celebrate with us for 5,000 people 
who made a decision for Jesus. It was pretty garden variety. 
I think it represents, hopefully, faithful plotting. You know, 
that stuff does not come without, first, God, and second, a bit 
of Ephesians 4. What does Paul say with reference 
to the church? You go in and you make everybody 
do what you say. You go in and you change everything 
so that it fits your needs. You go in and impose your preferences 
and make sure that everybody sees that you're the smartest 
and the wisest and your way is the best. No, he says we are 
to endeavor to keep the unity of the spirit and the bond of 
peace. I realize, my brothers and sisters, that there are certain 
shortcomings in this church. I know that. I know you may have 
a preference for something we do not do. You may have a preference 
that we didn't do something we presently do. But you know what? What we have here is worth pursuing. It is worth fighting for. And by fighting for, I don't 
mean fighting each other, but fighting our own remaining flesh 
and bringing it into a subdued state so that we don't try to 
impose ourselves upon others. Nevertheless, lest we offend 
them. May that be the anthem of the 
Christian man. May that be something that typifies 
and indicates and characterizes and describes us with our reformed 
doctrine of Christian liberty. Nevertheless, lest we offend 
them. And then finally, the gospel 
and the passage. Spurgeon beautifully captures 
this lesson. He says, the obvious moral lesson 
is pay rather than cause offense. Right? It's hard to miss verse 
27 when you're looking at the obvious moral lesson. I'm free, 
yet, nevertheless, we don't want to cause offense, so go pay. 
He says, but far greater and deeper truths lie slumbering 
down below. They are such as these, the glorious 
freedom of the son, this is Jesus, his coming under tribute for 
our sakes and the clearance of himself and us by the one payment 
which he himself provided. Now Spurgeon, I think is right. This does not haphazardly find 
its place in the interpretative stream. It is connected to a 
passage where Jesus indicates that he's going to be betrayed, 
he's going to die, and he is going to be raised the third 
day. And then he pays with his own a debt that Peter had. Brethren, atonement is not lacking 
in this passage. Redemption and ransom and the 
things that the temple tax typified are here fulfilled by our Lord. They are fulfilled tangibly in 
this little event concerning the fish, but they are fulfilled 
in Matthew 27 when our Savior goes to the cross. Our Savior 
knows the wrath and the bruising of God the Father. Our Savior 
is delivered up. Our Savior, in the language he 
employs in Matthew 28, the Son of Man did not come to be served, 
another passage, but to serve and to give his life a ransom 
for many. That little half shekel represented 
in Exodus 30. What about Galatians 3.13? Christ has become a curse for 
us. This little fish preaches, behold 
your God, but it preaches the cross. It preaches substitutionary 
atonement. It preaches ransom and redemption. It preaches the reality that 
Christ pays the debt that He does not owe. For a debt that 
we could not pay. Praise God Almighty for our Lord. praise God Almighty for this 
temple tax and this fish that tease out these very practical 
and helpful lessons in terms of a nevertheless but let us 
behold our God and let us behold our beloved Savior dying on the 
cross for sinners being raised the third day so that we might 
have everlasting life and if you do not have a saving interest 
in that please look to Christ believe Quit playing games. You come every Sunday. We go 
through this every Sunday, and I aim to until I die. Every Sunday 
I hope to set before you Christ and his gospel. Every Sunday 
I hope to call you to believe in Christ and his gospel. Every 
single Sunday you will be haunted by these words until, by God's 
grace, you come. It's time to wave the white flag 
and surrender. Surrender to Him who has mastery 
over fish. Surrender to Him who has mastery 
over Peter. Surrender to Him who has mastery 
over the universe. Surrender to Him who gave His 
life a ransom for sinners. Believe and you will be saved. 
Well, let us pray. Our Father, we thank you for 
your word and we thank you for your graciousness and your mercy 
to us. We thank you that this fish and 
this temple tax and these events teach us such glorious truth 
concerning our God. We thank you for the Lord Jesus 
and his unique sonship and we thank you for his life. and His 
death and His resurrection, and the fact that He paid what we 
owed, the fact that He gave His life for us. God, I pray that 
sinners here, right now, by Your grace, would believe these truths 
and would pass from death into life. They would pass, or they 
would be moved from that place of darkness into that blessed 
light in the kingdom of the Son of Your love. Go with us now, 
we pray, when we ask these things through Christ Jesus, our Lord. 
Amen.