For the Lutheran Readings for today and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for June 1, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

Episcopal and Presbyterian Readings:

Numbers 11:1-23

Complaining in the Desert

11:1 Now when the people complained in the hearing of the LORD about their misfortunes, the LORD heard it and his anger was kindled. Then the fire of the LORD burned against them, and consumed some outlying parts of the camp. 2 But the people cried out to Moses; and Moses prayed to the LORD, and the fire abated. 3 So that place was called Taberah, because the fire of the LORD burned against them.

4 The rabble among them had a strong craving; and the Israelites also wept again, and said, "If only we had meat to eat! 5 We remember the fish we used to eat in Egypt for nothing, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic; 6 but now our strength is dried up, and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at."

7 Now the manna was like coriander seed, and its color was like the color of gum resin. 8 The people went around and gathered it, ground it in mills or beat it in mortars, then boiled it in pots and made cakes of it; and the taste of it was like the taste of cakes baked with oil. 9 When the dew fell on the camp in the night, the manna would fall with it.

10 Moses heard the people weeping throughout their families, all at the entrances of their tents. Then the LORD became very angry, and Moses was displeased. 11 So Moses said to the LORD, “why have you treated your servant so badly? Why have I not found favor in your sight, that you lay the burden of all this people on me? 12 Did I conceive all this people? Did I give birth to them, that you should say to me, 'Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries a sucking child,' to the land that you promised on oath to their ancestors? 13 Where am I to get meat to give to all this people? For they come weeping to me and say, 'Give us meat to eat!' 14 I am not able to carry all this people alone, for they are too heavy for me. 15 If this is the way you are going to treat me, put me to death at once-if I have found favor in your sight-and do not let me see my misery.”

The Seventy Elders

16 So the LORD said to Moses, "Gather for me seventy of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the elders of the people and officers over them; bring them to the tent of meeting, and have them take their place there with you. 17 I will come down and talk with you there; and I will take some of the spirit that is on you and put it on them; and they shall bear the burden of the people along with you so that you will not bear it all by yourself. 18 And say to the people: Consecrate yourselves for tomorrow, and you shall eat meat; for you have wailed in the hearing of the LORD, saying, 'If only we had meat to eat! Surely it was better for us in Egypt.' Therefore the LORD will give you meat, and you shall eat. 19 You shall eat not only one day, or two days, or five days, or ten days, or twenty days, 20 but for a whole month–until it comes out of your nostrils and becomes loathsome to you-because you have rejected the LORD who is among you, and have wailed before him, saying, 'Why did we ever leave Egypt?' " 21 But Moses said, "The people I am with number six hundred thousand on foot; and you say, 'I will give them meat, that they may eat for a whole month'! 22 Are there enough flocks and herds to slaughter for them? Are there enough fish in the sea to catch for them?" 23 The LORD said to Moses, "Is the LORD's power limited? Now you shall see whether my word will come true for you or not." (Numbers 11:1-23, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from June 17, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from June 20, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two), when comments were repeated from June 20, 2004 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two) in an email sent June 14, 2004, for June 14-20.

Portions of Numbers, chapter 11, were discussed in the recent reading for May 15, 2010 (Saturday in the week of the Sixth Sunday of Easter, Year Two). As noted there, the full chapter is included here in the readings for today and tomorrow, June 15 and 16, 2010 (Tuesday and Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two).

Did you ever feel overwhelmed by responsibilities and unappreciated by those you were trying to help? Consider the situation of Moses in Numbers, chapter eleven, which combines the themes of the LORD’s provision of food for the Israelites, the murmuring of the people and the consequent burden upon Moses. “When the people complained in the hearing of the LORD,” “the fire of the LORD burned against them, and consumed some outlying parts of the camp” (Num. 11:1). But when they cried out, “Moses prayed to the LORD, and the fire abated” (v. 2). So the place was given the name “Taberah” (tav‘ērāh, v. 3), which means “Burning” (NRSV text note b, cf. bā‘ar, “burn,” William L. Holladay, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon, 1971, 10^th corrected printing, 1988, s.v. bā‘ar).

“The rabble among them [i.e., among the Israelites] had a strong craving,” we are told; “and the Israelites also wept again, and said, ‘If only we had meat to eat! We remember the fish we used to eat in Egypt for nothing, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic” (vv. 4-5). “Now” they complain, “our strength is dried up, and there is nothing at all but this manna to look at” (v. 6). “Not satisfied with the manna,” says Bernard W. Anderson, “the people craved seasoned meat dishes such as they had enjoyed in Egypt (Ex. 16:3)” (NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on vv. 4-15). Nili S. Fox comments: “If only we had meat. . . . we remember the fish: Meat may actually refer to fish, a cheap and ample food from the Nile. Why the Israelites do not slaughter animals from their herds (Exod. 12:38; Num. 32:1) is not explained in the text” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, p. 306, on Num.11:4-5).

The narrator describes the manna: “Now the manna (w^ehammān) was like the coriander seed (kizra‘-gad), and its color was like the color of gum resin (habb^edōlach)” (v. 7 NRSV). b^edōlach is defined as “ ‘bdellium,’ the fragrant, transparent, yellowish gum-resin of a South Arabian tree” (Holladay, Lexicon, s.v. b^edōlach). The NJPS translation says, “in color it was like bdellium” (Num. 11:7 NJPS). The narrator says, “The people went around and gathered it, ground it in mills or beat it in mortars, then boiled it in pots and made cakes of it; and the taste of it was like the taste of cakes baked with oil. When the dew fell on the camp in the night, the manna would fall with it.” (vv. 8-9). According to David P. Wright, in Exod. 16, the manna “is . . . described in slightly different terms (Ex. 16:31; Num. 11:8). These differences gave rise to the postbiblical tradition that the taste of manna differed, suiting the palate of each individual” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., revised, 2007, on Num. 11:6-9). Fox elaborates on this understanding. “Manna is described here,” says Fox,

as a rich and tasty food suitable for various modes of preparation. This positive depiction of manna underscores the unjustified complaints of the people. Some scholars identify the manna with the edible sap of the tamarisk tree that forms flaky sweet pellets in conjunction with the activity of plant lice. Its description here differs from Exod. 16:31; this is reconciled in classical Jewish thought by suggesting that the manna could take on various flavors (see, e.g., m. Yoma 75a). (op. cit., pp. 306-307, on vv. 7-9)

Moses and the LORD both become displeased by the people’s complaint about food. “Moses heard the people weeping throughout their families, all at the entrances of their tents. Then the LORD became very angry, and Moses was displeased” (Num. 11:10). But Moses’ anger is directed at the LORD: “So Moses said to the LORD, “why have you treated your servant so badly? Why have I not found favor in your sight, that you lay the burden of all this people on me?” (v. 11). And Moses continues: “Did I conceive all this people? Did I give birth to them, that you should say to me, ‘Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries a sucking child,’ to the land that you promised on oath to their ancestors? Where am I to get meat to give to all this people?” (vv. 12-13a). After a little more along this line, he concludes by saying, “If this is the way you are going to treat me, put me to death at once–if I have found favor in your sight–and do not let me see my misery” (v. 15). Jo Ann Hackett comments on verse 12, “The use of an extra Hebrew pronoun I [’ānōkî] twice lends emphasis to Moses’ implication here that it was indeed the Lord who conceived and gave birth to Israel. . . . The female imagery used here of the Lord and of Moses (he has been designated Israel’s wet nurse) is unusual, but not unique (see Deut 32:18; also Isa 42:24; 66:13)” (HarperCollins Study Bible, 1^st ed., 1993, on Num. 11:12; repeated in the 2^nd ed., 2006). “Utterly frustrated,” says Fox, “Moses questions his heavy burden of leadership and his ability to succeed at it. He is ready to die if no relief comes. The point of this episode, including Moses’ desire to satisfy the people, is to elicit divine solutions for the problems” (op. cit., p. 307, on vv. 10-35).

The LORD’s answer is instruction to get help. “Gather for me seventy of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the elders of the people and officers over them; bring them to the tent of meeting, and have them take their place there with you” (v. 16). “I will come down and talk with you there,” says the LORD; “and I will take some of the spirit that is on you and put it on them; and they shall bear the burden of the people along with you so that you will not bear it all by yourself” (v. 17). “Most important,” says Fox, “is the appointment of seventy elders to assist Moses. The judicial roles of Israel’s elders are legitimated for all time because of their endowment with Moses’ spirit. Simultaneously, this scene affirms Moses’ human traits and limitations” (ibid.).

At this point, the LORD addresses the people’s request for meat. “And say to the people,” says the LORD to Moses: “Consecrate yourselves for tomorrow, and you shall eat meat; for you have wailed in the hearing of the LORD, saying, ‘If only we had meat to eat! Surely it was better for us in Egypt.’ Therefore the LORD will give you meat, and you shall eat” (v. 18). But the LORD’s anger shows through for, as he says, they will have enough meat to make them sick! “You shall eat not only one day, or two days, or five days, or ten days, or twenty days, but for a whole month–until it comes out of your nostrils and becomes loathsome to you–because you have rejected the LORD who is among you, and have wailed before him, saying, ‘Why did we ever leave Egypt?’ ” (vv. 19-20). Moses talks back to God, questioning his response about the meat. “But Moses said, ‘The people I am with number six hundred thousand on foot; and you say, “I will give them meat, that they may eat for a whole month”! Are there enough flocks and herds to slaughter for them? Are there enough fish in the sea to catch for them?’ ” (vv. 21-22). In response, the LORD as much as says, “Your forgetting! This is God talking!” “The LORD said to Moses, ‘Is the LORD’s power limited? Now you shall see whether my word will come true for you or not’ ” (v. 23).

This story is continued in tomorrow’s reading. But we may anticipate a bit of it by quoting Fox again. “God’s solution to the meat crisis differs from an earlier rendition of the story. In Exod. ch 16, quail and manna are God’s gift to Israel; here in Numbers the wording of their grievance bespeaks their desire to return to Egypt, clearly a rejection of God that warrants punishment. Therefore, when the quail finally arrive, many people become fatally ill from gorging themselves with meat. Appropriately, the place name for this event becomes Kibroth-hattaavah, ‘burials of the craving.’ (ibid.)

Romans 1:16-25

The Power of the Gospel

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel; it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, “The one who is righteous will live by faith.”

The Guilt of Humankind

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made. So they are without excuse; 21 for though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools; 23 and they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling a mortal human being or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the degrading of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. (Romans 1:16-25, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from March 10, 2009 (Tuesday in the week of the Second Sunday of Lent, Year One), when comments were repeated from June 17, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two), when comments were repeated from March 6, 2007 (Tuesday in the week of the Second Sunday of Lent, Year One), when comments were repeated with editing from June 20, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two) when they were combined and revised from June 20, 2004 (Tuesday of the week of the Second Sunday after Pentecost, Year Two) in an email sent June 14, 2004, for June 14-20, and from February 22 (Tuesday of the week of the Second Sunday of Lent, Year One).

On Romans 1:16-17

Many have considered Romans 1:16-17 the thesis statement of the Epistle to the Romans. Following the salutation and the thanksgiving (discussed yesterday), this brief description of “the gospel,” with reference to key themes–“faith” (pistis) and “righteousness” (dikaiosyne)–in the context of “the power of God for salvation,” introduces the subject matter of much of the Letter and leads into the body (main section) of the discussion. Karl Barth translates verse 17 as follows: “For therein is revealed the righteousness of God from faithfulness unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous shall live from my faithfulness [be’emûnātô YHWH; LXX: ek pisteôs mou]” (Epistle to the Romans, trans. from 6^th ed., 1965, p. 35). The Hebrew term translated “faith” in Habakkuk 2:4, ’ emûnah, has meanings such as “steadiness,” “reliability,” “honesty,” “in faithfulness” (William L. Holladay, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon, 1971, 10^th corrected ed., 1988, s.v. ’ emûnah). The related Hebrew verb (’-m-n) has related meanings, e.g. “prove oneself reliable,” “have stability, remain, continue” in the nifal conjugation, but the hifil conjugation can mean “believe = think,” “put trust in a person,” “rely upon (God), believe in” (Holladay, s.v. ’-m-n). Barth notes that pistis, usually translated “faith” in the New Testament, can mean “faithfulness” (e.g. Rom. 3:3, cf. Barth, 78). Barth comments at length on Romans 1:16-17:

From faithfulness the righteousness of God reveals itself, that is to say, from His faithfulness to us. The very God has not forgotten men; the Creator has not abandoned the creation. . . . Unto faith is revealed that which God reveals from His faithfulness. . . . Those who labour and are heavy laden shall be refreshed. . . . Those who stand in awe in the presence of God and keep themselves from revolt live with God.

In them is fulfilled the prophecy–The righteous shall live from faithfulness! (Hab. ii. 4). . . . There is no other righteousness save that of the man who sets himself under judgement . . . He shall live. He has the expectation of true life . . . He shall live by the faithfulness of God. Whether we say of the faithfulness of God or ‘of the faith of men’, both are the same. . . . It is the faithfulness of God which we encounter so unescapably in the prophet’s ‘No’: God the Holy One, the altogether Other. It is the faith of men which we meet in the awe of those who affirm the ‘No’ and are ready to accept the void and to move and tarry in negation. Where the faithfulness of God encounters the fidelity of men, there is manifested His righteousness. There shall the righteous man live.

This is the theme of the Epistle to the Romans. (Barth, 41-42)

An alternative suggestion as to the theme or thesis of Romans merits consideration. Paul J. Achtemeier, Joel B. Green, and Marianne Meye Thompson say that understanding of Romans 1:16-17 as the theme of the letter, of which “the remainder of the letter is then the attempt to work out the implications of that theme for Christian faith (chs. 1-8) and practice (chs. 12-15)” has difficulty in “accounting for the location and content of chs. 9-11” (Introducing the New Testament; Its Literature and Theology, 2001, p. 307). According to these authors:

A more appropriate locus for the statement of a theme would be at the beginning of the letter, and in fact that seems to be the case here as well. Surely the content of Paul’s ministry, as he himself says at the outset, is the ‘gospel of God’ (1:1), a gospel then defined in 1:2-4. These verses summarize how God has carried out his redemptive plan in the history of the Jews (the prophets, David vv. 2-3) and in the decisive act of Christ’s resurrection (v. 4). This summary leads seamlessly into Paul’s declaration of his own call to evangelize the Gentiles (v. 5) as a direct outgrowth of these salvific acts of God. The universality of the gospel’s significance, implied by the references to elements of Jewish history and to Paul’s call to preach to Gentiles (vv. 2-5), is then in fact made thematic beginning with vv. 14-16, where the universal significance is expressed in terms of two inclusive contrasts: Greek and barbarian (v. 14), Jew and Greek (v. 16). These two passages, 1:2-5 and 1:14-16, indicate together that the universal availability of divine salvation, understood in terms of its history in God’s activity with the Jews, is the theme of the letter. (ibid., pp. 307-308)

These authors find an echo of this theme in 11:32, where “at the end of the development of his argument in chs. 1:11, Paul again refers to the same theme, declaring explicitly the universality of purpose contained in the divine plan of salvation: God has enclosed all people in disobedience, in order to have mercy on all” (ibid., p. 308). The phrase “justification by faith,” as in 1:17, which they prefer to render as “righteousness through trust” (ibid.), becomes the means, rather than the comprehensive theme. “Obviously, getting right with God through trust is an important point for Paul, but it is important as the means by which the universal scope of the gospel is carried out, rather than as the theme of the letter” (ibid., p. 309).

On Romans 1:18-25

Moving on from the theme of “the righteousness of God . . . revealed through faith” (v. 17), Paul says, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth” (v. 18). Of this verse, Barth says, “In the name of God! We know not what we should say to this” (op. cit., p. 42). He calls this section “The Night,” an apt description. Paul notes that these people who “suppress the truth (v. 18) could have known about God. “For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them” (v. 19). If they have had no contact with the Hebrew people or the Hebrew scriptures, nevertheless, “Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made” (v. 20a). They should have recognized the hand of God in his created world. And so, “they are without excuse” (v. 20b), because “though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him” (v. 21a). On the contrary, says Paul, “they became futile in their thinking, and their senseless minds were darkened” (v. 21b). They “turned to the dark side,” so to speak, the “night.” In idolatry “they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling a mortal human being or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles” (v. 23). “They exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (v. 25), so “God gave them up” (v. 24), in a refrain that is repeated to emphasize humankind’s choices (vv. 26, 28). They “exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (v. 25). They are indeed “without excuse” (v. 20). Neil Elliott says, “Like other Jews, Paul attributes the wickedness characteristic of the pagan world to idolatry” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., 2001, on Rom. 1:23). “Idolatry,” says Elliott, “is an attempt to deny awareness of God, thus evading accountability for one’s actions. Its opposite is the ‘spiritual worship’ offered by renewed minds (12:1-2)” (ibid., on 1:19-23).

Matthew 17:22-27

Jesus Again Foretells His Death and Resurrection (Mk 9.30-32; Lk 9.43b-45)

22 As they were gathering in Galilee, Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into human hands, 23 and they will kill him, and on the third day he will be raised." And they were greatly distressed.

Jesus and the Temple Tax

24 When they reached Capernaum, the collectors of the temple tax came to Peter and said, "Does your teacher not pay the temple tax?" 25 He said, "Yes, he does." And when he came home, Jesus spoke of it first, asking, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tribute? From their children or from others?" 26 When Peter said, "From others," Jesus said to him, "Then the children are free. 27 However, so that we do not give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook; take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a coin; take that and give it to them for you and me." (Matthew 17:22-27, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from November 18, 2009 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 16, Year One), when comments were based on those of June 17, 2008 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two), when comments that were repeated from November 21, 2007 (Wednesday in the week of the Sunday closest to November 16, Year One), were repeated with editing and supplement from June 20, 2006 (Tuesday in the week of the Sunday closest to June 15, Year Two), when comments were combined and revised from June 20, 2004 (Tuesday of the week of the Second Sunday after Pentecost, Year Two) in an email sent June 14, 2004, for June 14-20, and from November 16, 2005 (Wednesday of the week of the Twenty-Sixth Sunday after Pentecost, Year One). For recent comments on parallel passages from the perspective of Mark’s version, which includes a paragraph on the larger context within the three Synoptic Gospels, see the Archive for March 22, 2010 (Monday in the week of the Fifth Sunday of Lent, Year Two); for recent comments on Luke’s version, see the Archive for May 23, 2009 (Saturday in the week of the Sixth Sunday of Easter, Year One).

Matthew’s version of the second Passion Prediction is brief (Mt. 17:22-23).

Matthew briefly describes the setting, “As they were gathering in Galilee” (Mt. 17:22a; cf. Mk. 9:30a). Both Gospels have recently placed Peter’s confession (Mt. 16:13-20; Mk. 8:27-30; Lk. 9:18-21) in “the district of Caesarea Philippi (Mt. 16:13; cf. Mk. 8:27). In the three Synoptic Gospels this second prediction of Jesus’ Passion follows the Transfiguration (Mt. 17:1-9; Mk. 9:2-10; Lk. 9:28-36) and the Healing of a Boy Possessed by a Spirit (Mt. 17:14-21; Mk. 9:14-29; Lk. 9:37-43a). Mark emphasizes secrecy and calls Jesus’ prediction “teaching”: “He [i.e., Jesus] did not want anyone to know it, for he was teaching his disciples” (Mk. 9:30b, 31a). According to C. Clifton Black, revised by Adela Yarbro Collins, when Jesus does not permit the demons to speak (Mk. 1:34), it “is the first injunction to silence about Jesus’ identity; v. [1:] 25 prepares for it. See also 3:11-12; 8:30; 9:30. These commands are related to the reinterpretation of messiahship in Mark” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Mk 1:34). Luke’s version gives the impression that this second Passion prediction follows immediately upon the healing of the boy at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration. “While everyone was amazed at what he was doing,” says Luke, “he said to his disciples, ‘Let these words sink into your ears’ ” (Lk. 9:43, 44a).

In Matthew, the prediction itself closely follows Mark’s version. “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into human hands, and they will kill him, and on the third day he will be raised” (Mt. 17:22b, 23a; cf. Mk. 9:31b). For Mark’s “is to be betrayed” (paradidotai, present passive indicative, “is betrayed,” Mk. 9;31), Matthew has “is going to be betrayed” (mellei . . . paradidosthai, present passive infinitive, Mt. 17:22; cf. Lk. 9:44). The reference to resurrection is similar in Matthew and Mark (absent in Luke): “and they will kill him, and on the third day he will be raised” (Mt. 17:23a), compare “and they will kill him, and three days after being killed, he will rise again” (Mk. 9:31b). Rather than mentioning the disciples misunderstanding (Mk. 9:32; Lk. 9:45), Matthew says briefly, “And they were greatly distressed” (Mt. 17:23b).

In Matthew this prediction is followed by Jesus’ discussion with Peter about the Temple Tax. “When they reached Capernaum,” says Matthew, “the collectors of the temple tax came to Peter and said, ‘Does your teacher not pay the temple tax [didrachma, cf. NRSV text note f ‘Gk. didrachma]?’ ” (Mt. 17:24). The word didrachma, the plural of didrachmon), was “a double drachma, two-drachma piece (two d. = 1 stater) monetary unit of the Aegean, Corinthian, Persian, and Ital.-Sic. coinage system; a coin worth two Attic drachmas, but no longer in circulation in NT times; it was about equal to a half shekel (two day’s wage) among the Jews, and was the sum required of each person annually as the temple tax; even though this tax was paid with other coins, the amount was termed a d[idrachma]” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3^rd ed., 2000, s.v. didrachmon). According to J. Andrew Overman, for the “temple tax, each Jewish male was to pay a half-shekel annually in March (Ex. 30:13) for support of the Temple. After the revolt against Rome, Jews were forced to pay this tax to support the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus in Rome (Josephus, War 7.218)” (NOAB, 3^rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mt. 17:24). According to E. E. Tilden and Bruce M. Metzger, “The half-shekel tax was paid by Jewish males annually in March for the upkeep of the temple. . . . The coin (Greek stater [v. 27]) was exactly enough (two didrachmas) to pay for both [Jesus and Peter]” (E.E. Tilden, B.M. Metzger, NOAB, 2^nd ed., 1994, on Mt. 17:24). The “stater [was] a silver coin = four drachmas (c. four days’ wages)” (BDAG, s.v. Statēr).

Peter answers the tax collectors. “He said, ‘Yes, he does [i.e., does pay the temple tax].’ And when he came home, Jesus spoke of it first, asking, ‘What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tribute? From their children or from others?” (v. 25). Jesus may well have heard the tax collectors’ question “when they reached Capernaum” (v. 24). Or he may have known Peter’s thoughts (cf. Jn. 2:24-25). “When Peter said, ‘From others,’ Jesus said to him, ‘Then the children are free’ ” (v. 26). Jesus thus implies that they do not owe the tax, but adds, “However, so that we do not give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook; take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a coin (statēr); take that and give it to them for you and me” (v. 27). Overman says, “the children are free,”suggests Jesus believes payment of the tax is not required in Israel” (op. cit., on v. 26). One wonders if Overman is thinking of the tax for the Jerusalem temple in Jesus’ day, or the tax for the Roman temple of Jupiter in Matthew’s time. In any case, he adds that by the words, “so that we do not give offense, Matthew encourages Jewish Christians to maintain solidarity with the larger Jewish community” (ibid., on v. 27).

It would be one thing for Jesus and/or Jewish Christians in Matthew’s tradition and church to support the Temple in Jerusalem, and quite another to support a Roman temple. In our lifetime–mine, anyway–Christians like Corrie Ten Boom (and many others) have felt they must resist the godless government that oppressed them. Jesus' dialogue with Peter about this suggests that he paid the tax not due to obligation, but rather "so that we do not give offense to them" (v. 26). According to Krister Stendahl, the story makes the points that “Jesus does certain things which, strictly speaking, he did not have to do as the Son of God,” and that “Jesus' action could not be made a basis for making Christians continue to pay the Temple tax” (K. Stendahl, Peake's Commentary on the Bible, 1962, reprint 1072, on Mt. 17:25). On the other hand, it may remind us of Paul's claim: “I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some” (1 Cor. 9:22).

As noted above, for the Lutheran Readings for today and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for June 1, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net