Matthew 17:24-27 - "And when they had come to Capernaum, those who collected the two-drachma tax came to Peter..."

Matthew 17:24-27

I honestly forgot this story was even in the Gospels, it's talked about so little. Maybe the weird way Jesus obtained money to pay the temple tax makes modern day people feel uncomfortable. Asking Peter to fetch a coin from a fish's mouth is a bit too hocus pocus for us. We're fine if Jesus has his disciples get their breakfast in miraculous ways--dropping their net to one side of the boat and pulling up a haul of 153 fish (John 21:5-14). But when it comes to obtaining cold hard cash we're uncomfortable unless it's being earned by a day's work.

I'll come back to why I think Jesus chose to pay the tax in this unusual way. As for the rest of the passage, you might have noticed the footnotes in Bible Gateway tell us that the two-drachma tax is the temple tax. That's pretty important. Because from the exchange Jesus had with Peter, it's clear that he regarded himself and his disciples as sons--not strangers--who should have been exempt from this tax, but he consented to pay it anyhow so as not to give offense. The reason Jesus said they were sons was that the temple was his Father's house and the disciples were also a part of God's household. So actually Jesus, as the Son of God, should have been the one receiving the tax money, not paying it out.

Jesus' sufferings on earth were both great and small. One of his lesser sufferings was knowing he was a son but being treated like a stranger. The little indignities that he absorbed every day largely go unmentioned in the Gospel accounts, but you can imagine it was probably a daily occurrence. Even as a boy his parents scolded him for simply doing what a son ought to: hanging around his Father's house. I imagine twelve-year-old Jesus was mystified at Joseph's and Mary's distress. He probably thought, "Isn't that the whole reason you brought me to Jerusalem? Why else am I here?"

Humility is bending to these indignities and aiming instead not to give offense. "Give [the tax money] to them for you and for Me." Jesus paid taxes to his own Father's house. And perhaps the reason the stater was provided through the fish's mouth was to show that the Father was the one providing it for Jesus. Do you invite guests into your home then pay them rent to allow you to sleep in your own bedroom? Well, God the Father chose to pay taxes to his own house.

This shouldn't be a surprise. The humility of God is such that he also paid a ransom to buy back the very people he created. He had to purchase back what belonged to him from the start. And the price he paid for them was prohibitively high, even though the debt they incurred was owed to him. The one who should have been paid was the one who paid out the price.

Matthew 17:14-23 - "When they came to the crowd, a man came up to Jesus..."

Matthew 17:14-23

Jesus' rebuke to this man with the demon-possessed son, and to the townspeople in general, sounds harsh until you consider that there were some unbelieving towns where Jesus refused to do any miracles at all. At least this crowd got off with a scolding, and the father received the cure he wanted for his son. For further insight into why Jesus had such a prickly attitude toward them, check the parallel passage in Mark 9:14-29 where it says Jesus reprimanded this father for saying "if you can do anything." The father was treating Jesus like a shot in the dark, a crapshoot, instead of the Son of God sent from heaven. Then after Jesus healed the boy and he lay still, the townspeople immediately jumped to the conclusion that he was dead. It was like they were waiting for Jesus to fail.

What distressed Jesus most about people's unbelief was that he was right there, in the flesh, doing miracle after miracle in the sight of all. If they didn't believe now, when would they? What would it take? So he says,"How long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you?"

The disciples came to Jesus privately, recognizing their own part in the failed exorcism, but notice how Jesus was more gentle and fatherly with them. He told them the problem was the littleness of their faith, but he didn't treat them as if they lacked faith altogether. Now why did Jesus say the littleness of their faith was the problem, then go on to exhort them to have mustard-seed-sized faith? A mustard seed is one of the smallest seeds around. Was Jesus saying small faith was the problem, or was it the solution?

I'm not sure what the answer is. To me it sounds as if he's saying not only did they have little faith, but they lacked faith in their little faith. They failed to see that even small faith can do the impossible if you understood that it was not the quantity but quality of your faith that mattered. As the saying goes, it's not about the greatness of your faith, but the greatness of the God in whom you put your faith that counts.

But you don't want to make the mistake of thinking faith is all about sending concentrated brain waves toward getting what you want, like the power of positive thinking, or Luke Skywalker dislodging his lightsaber from the snow. Jesus could heal sickness and exorcise demons because the sin that brought those conditions upon people would be paid for in his blood. He asked people to believe in him because his power to do miracles was rooted in his curse-reversing death. So this story concludes with Jesus telling his disciples that he must be handed over, killed, and raised on the third day. They grieved. They didn't understand that these miracles they rejoiced in were inseparable from the cup Jesus had to drink.

Matthew 17:9-13 - "As they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them..."

Matthew 17:9-13

Many times we have seen Jesus swear people to secrecy, whether it's about his various healing miracles or Peter's confession that he was the Christ. Matthew has already explained in 12:15-21 that Jesus' ministry was not an advertising campaign. While it's true he didn't take every measure to hide his miracles, nevertheless the theme of his ministry was to fulfill the prophecy in Isaiah 42:2: "He will not quarrel, nor cry out; nor will anyone hear His voice in the streets." The Suffering Servant would not try to control the airwaves. He let others draw their own conclusions, whether they thought he should be worshipped or murdered.

I do wonder though if Jesus' command to "tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead" was more than just about being low key. Peter, James and John didn't seem to have a clue what the vision was all about, and perhaps Jesus knew they wouldn't until he rose from the dead. What could they possibly say about it in the meantime? "Hey everybody! You'll never guess what we just saw!" It would be all about them and how special they were to witness something spectacular, making the other disciples jealous. The apostle Paul was famously humbled by a thorn in the flesh to keep him from boasting of visions he saw (2 Cor. 12:1-10). Jesus may have imposed silence on his disciples to restrain their pride as well as their ignorance.

The disciples responded to Jesus' command by asking him about Elijah. At first that seems pretty strange. You have to consult Mark 9:10 to see that they got there because Jesus' admonishment led them to debate about the resurrection. I imagine it went something like this: "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead." "Did he just say 'rise from the dead'?" "I think so. What does that mean?" "I think it means this, I think it means that, blah blah." "Hey, wasn't Elijah supposed to rise from the dead?" "That's what the scribes say. He was supposed to come before the Christ." "So where is he?" "He never came! Maybe the scribes are wrong." "Say, Rabbi, why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?"

Jesus answered by first affirming that the scribes were correct. "Elijah is coming and will restore all things." He spoke of Elijah in the present and future tense as a way of confirming the truth of this statement. But then he immediately switched to the past tense to reveal that the prophecy about Elijah already happened. "But I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands." Jesus used their inquiry as an opportunity to reiterate what he knew was so hard for the disciples to swallow: that he also would suffer and die. John the Baptist was the great, much-anticipated Elijah--look at how they treated him. Was it so hard now to imagine the same happening to the Christ?

John was truly Jesus' forerunner in every way, even in suffering a cruel fate. Every other disciple of Jesus followed him in losing their life. Only John the Baptist had the unique honor of preceding him. No wonder Jesus praised John as the greatest in the kingdom of heaven (11:11).

Matthew 17:1-8 - "And six days later Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John his brother..."

Matthew 17:1-8

The two other times this story of Jesus' transfiguration is told in the Gospels (Mark 9:2-8 and Luke 9:28-36), it always follows right after Jesus said something to the effect of "some of those standing here will not taste death until they see the coming kingdom of God." That's important to note because otherwise you're thinking, "Well, that never happened. Here we are two thousand years later, the disciples are dead, and Jesus still hasn't returned in glory."

The transfiguration that Peter, James, and John got to witness apparently was the revelation of the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. Normally we think of Jesus' second coming as a time and space event. It will happen in the future. He will come with the angelic host. The final judgment on mankind will take place. But evidently all that is just so much window dressing because the essence of the coming kingdom is centered on Jesus himself and the revelation of his glory.

Jesus pulled back the veil of his humble fleshly garb, and his entire body from his face to his clothes poured forth blazing light. This is what is means for the kingdom of God to come. The king is revealed in his true glory. Apparently what also got torn back was the veil that separated this world from the world to come, because suddenly Moses and Elijah were hanging out with him chatting, a preview of post-resurrection life.

A lot of people think that life in heaven will just be a return to the Garden of Eden, with a lot of trees and eating fruit and petting animals. But this vision tells us that Jesus' glorified existence, and the existence of everyone who shares in it, will not be about continuing to live in a regular fleshly body that doesn't die. It's about receiving a resurrected body that is full of light, power, and immortality (1 Corinthians 15:42-45, 52-54). Your glorified body is suited for a higher existence in the heavenly kingdom, right alongside the angels. When Jesus preaches the promise of eternal life, this is a picture of what it is.

Remember when the apostle Paul had a similar encounter with Jesus on the way to Damascus (Acts 9:3-6)? It changed his life. In a flash he understood that all his law-keeping was a massive dung heap because he saw Jesus in resurrection glory. Immediately he comprehended that Jesus, not the law, was the way to eternal life.

That's probably what should have happened to Peter, James, and John, but these three were a bit slower than Paul. Instead it ended up being an awkward moment of Peter blathering on about making three tabernacles, because, well, we've all been there. That moment when you feel like you're supposed to say something even though you don't know what, and you end up blurting out something stupid. To make things worse, God the Father rebuked Peter's three tabernacles idea, sending them all diving to the ground in fear. It's another instance of the raw honesty of the Gospel writers. I mean, what a disappointment that the moment of The Big Reveal ended up crumbling into a scene of awkwardness and embarrassment. When it was all over, I could just picture the three of them frazzled, bewildered, and probably wishing they had made a better showing in front of Bible celebrities like Moses and Elijah.

But in the end they did get it. John would later say, "We beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). Peter would say, "But to the degree you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing, so that also at the revelation of His glory, you may rejoice with exultation" (1 Peter 4:13). They saw Jesus' glory and wanted to pass it along to the rest of the saints. If only you had been there, you would have seen Hope itself. If you had seen what we saw, you would find courage in your sufferings. And yet you can see him. With eyes of faith you can see what we saw. "And though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible, and full of glory" (1 Peter 1:8).