This message was due for my next video, but I am not going to be home …
“And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. ”
“Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.”
Matthew 17:24-27
“They that received tribute” This was not a tax to be paid to the Roman government; but a tax for the support of the temple. Of course today its overkill …
In that time, the law (Exodus 30:13) obliged every male among the Jews to pay half a shekel yearly; for the support of the temple.
This was in addition to the tithes paid by the whole nation, and seems to have been considered as a voluntary offering. It was devoted to the purchase of animals for the daily sacrifice, wood, flour, salt, incense, etc., for the use of the temple.
Jesus prevented him – That is, Jesus spoke before Peter had told him what he had said. This implies that, though not present with Peter when he gave the answer, Jesus already knew what Peter said.
Of whom do the kings of the earth … The earthly kings. Their own children, their sons; the members of their own family.
Or of strangers? “Strangers” does not mean foreigners, but those that were not their own sons or members of their family.
Peter replied that tribute was collected of those not of their own family. Jesus answered, Then are the children, or sons of the kings, free; that is, taxes are not required of them.
The meaning of this may be thus expressed: “Kings do not tax their own sons. This tribute-money is taken up for the temple service; that is, the service of My Father. I, therefore, being the Son of God, for whom this is taken up, cannot be lawfully required to pay this tribute.”
This argument is based on the supposition that this was a religious, and not a civil tax. If it had been the latter, the illustration would not have been pertinent.
“Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them” That is, so they don’t think that we despise the temple and its service, and thus provoke needless opposition; and even though we are not under obligation to pay it, it is best to pay it to them.
Jesus sent them to the beach. This was at Capernaum, on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias.
“Thou shalt find a piece of money” In whatever way this is regarded, it is proof that Jesus had divine attributes. If He knew that the first fish that came up would have such a coin in it’s mouth, it was proof of omniscience.
If He created the coin for the occasion and placed it there, then it was proof of divine power.
God can and does provide for us to get thru such circumstances. Being financially blessed overall is also not meant for us just to live comfortably. We are expected to help those in need when we see the opportunity to do so. This is not what America’s churches are doing.
Today’s churches do the bare minimum according to tyrannical government regulations and Freemason ideals. Serving big meals and providing handouts only to allow the needy to remain needy or become dependant, even stay homeless is not doing God’s work. That’s doing the devil’s bidding …
Jesus said “give into Caesar that which is Caesar’s” We however give unto Caesar that which God’s and keeping the spoils for ourselves. We’re doing it wrong …
agentofgodseekeroftruth 