Lives of the apostles of Jesus ChristBacon, David Francis
Religion
Lives of the apostles of Jesus Christ
Bacon, David Francis
Apostles
_A piece of money._――The term thus vaguely rendered, is in
Greek στατηρ, (_stater_,) which was a coin of definite value,
being worth among the Jews about four attic drachms, and exactly
equivalent to their shekel, a little more than half a dollar of
federal money. The tax here paid was the half-shekel tax, due
from every Jew for the service of the temple, so that the “piece
of money,” being one shekel, was just sufficient to pay for
both Jesus and Peter. The word translated “the tribute money”
(in verse 24) is equally definite in the Greek,――διδραχμον,
(_didrachmon_,) equivalent to the Jewish _half_-shekel, and
being itself worth half a _stater_. The stater, however, as a
name for Attic and Byzantine _gold_ coins, was equivalent to
twenty or thirty times the value of the shekel. (See Stephens’s
Thesaurus, Donnegan’s, Jones’s and Pickering’s Lexicons.) On
this passage see Hammond’s Annotations, which are here quite
full on values. See too, Lightfoot’s Horae Hebraica on Matthew
xvii. 25. Macknight’s Paraphrase, Poole and Kuinoel, for a very
full account of the matter. Also my note on page 32.
There have been two different accounts of this little
circumstance among commentators, some considering the tribute
money to have been a Roman tax, and others taking the ground
which I do, that it was the Jewish tax for the expenses of the
temple-worship. The reasons may be found at great length, in
some of the authorities just quoted; and it may be remarked
that the point of the allusion in Jesus’s question to Peter,
is all lost on the supposition of a Roman tax; for how could
Jesus claim exemption as a son of the Roman emperor, as he
justly could from the Jewish tax for the service of the heavenly
king, his Father? The correspondence of values too, with the
half-shekel tax, is another reason for adopting that view; nor
is there any objection to it, except the circumstance, that the
time at which this tax is supposed to have been demanded, does
not agree with that to which the collection of the temple-tax
was limited. (Exodus xxx. 13, and Lightfoot on Matthew xvii. 24.)
THE QUESTION OF SUPERIORITY.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account