All who had observed what Jesus did in the area of Caesarea Philippi were filled with amazement. (Luke 9:43) None of the accounts, however, provide any specifics about any miracles other than the one involving the epileptic boy. Moreover, no direct mention is made of Jesus’ departure with his disciples.
After having returned to Galilee, he again told his disciples what lay ahead for him. He would be arrested (literally, “delivered into the hands of men”) and killed but would rise on the third day. Although there was nothing ambiguous about Jesus’ words, the disciples could not bring themselves to accept their plain meaning. They found it impossible to believe that he would suffer and die, for this did not agree with their messianic expectations. (Matthew 17:22, 23; Mark 9:30-32; Luke 9:44) As Luke 9:45 indicates, the meaning of Jesus’ words was hidden from the disciples, preventing them from perceiving their full significance.
Still, they were apprehensive about asking him about his comments, perhaps feeling that they should have understood what he meant. (Mark 9:32) At the same time, the disturbing nature of his remarks did grieve them greatly. (Matthew 17:23)
Jesus wanted them to understand. According to Luke 9:44, he requested that his disciples “put” his words into their ears or listen attentively.
After Jesus returned to Capernaum with his disciples, Peter was approached about the payment of the temple tax. Possibly while they had been in Caesarea Philippi, this annual tax of two drachmas (one didrachma; approximately two days’ wages) began to be collected. (Matthew 17:24)
Asked if his “teacher” (Jesus) paid the tax, Peter replied, “Yes.” Upon entering “the house,” likely his own home, he did not have an opportunity to mention the incident. Aware of what had taken place, Jesus brought up the subject, asking Peter whether earthly kings receive tax or tribute from their own sons or from strangers. “From strangers,” Peter replied, and Jesus added that the sons, therefore, are free of this obligation. Thereby Jesus implied that he, as the Son of God, was not required to pay the temple tax, for the temple was his Father’s house. To avoid giving offense respecting this matter by asserting his right not to pay the tax, Jesus arranged for his and Peter’s share to be obtained in a manner that harmonized with his being God’s unique Son. He instructed Peter to go to the Sea of Galilee and cast a fishhook into the lake. In the mouth of the first fish he would catch, he would find a stater coin (valued at four drachmas), with which he would then pay the tax. (Matthew 17:24-27) Likely the fish would have been Chromis simonis. This mouth-breeding variety of fish has a mouth large enough to accommodate a coin. The male of Chromis simonis takes some 200 eggs into its mouth, and the hatched fish continue to be sheltered there for a number of weeks.
While on the way to “the house” in Capernaum (likely the home of Peter and Andrew), the disciples argued about who among them was the greatest. After Jesus and the disciples entered the house, he brought up the subject of greatness. Although he was fully aware of their discussion among themselves, he asked them what they had argued about on the road. They appear to have been embarrassed about the incident and did not respond. (Mark 9:33, 34; Luke 9:46; see the Notes section regarding Matthew 18:1.)
Jesus then used the opportunity to teach them about the meaning of greatness in the “kingdom of the heavens,” the realm where his Father is Sovereign. He seated himself and invited the twelve apostles to come to him. In the “kingdom of the heavens,” greatness differed markedly from the kingdoms of the world, where those in positions of prominence and power issued commands and had inferiors serve them. On account of the environment in which they had grown up, the apostles shared this view of greatness. According to Luke 9:47, Jesus knew the “reasoning of their heart,” suggesting that their understanding of greatness reflected their inmost thoughts. Therefore, it must have been very startling for them to hear Jesus’ explanation of greatness. Anyone who wanted to be first or occupy the foremost position would have to conduct himself as being “last of all” or the most insignificant and make himself the “servant of all.” (Mark 9:35)
To provide the apostles with an object lesson about true greatness, Jesus asked a child in the home to come to him. This may have been Peter’s son and, therefore, a youngster whom the apostles knew. The boy would have been an example of the essential attributes Jesus wanted his disciples to associate with greatness in God’s kingdom. In expression of his affection for the boy, Jesus had him stand beside him and put his arms around him. (Matthew 18:2; Mark 9:36; Luke 9:47)
After focusing attention on the youngster, Jesus solemnly declared with an introductory “amen” (truly) that, if the disciples did not “turn” or change and become like children, they would not enter the kingdom of the heavens. They needed to rid themselves of all feelings of superiority and reflect the lowly spirit of a child that recognizes and is responsive to parental and other adult authority. (Matthew 18:3) The person who would humble himself, proving himself to be like a responsive, unassuming child would be truly great in the kingdom of God. Moreover, whoever, in Christ’s “name,” received or welcomed such a child or a person manifesting the disposition of an unassuming youngster would be regarded as having welcomed God’s Son and, therefore, also his Father who had sent him. This welcoming in Christ’s name would denote doing so because of recognizing the individual as one who belonged to the Son of God. Jesus’ teaching revealed that the one who made himself the most serviceable or the least one through unassuming laboring for others would prove himself to be great. (Matthew 18:4, 5; Mark 9:37; Luke 9:48; see the Notes section regarding Matthew 18:6.)
Notes:
According to Matthew 18:1, the disciples approached Jesus with the question about who would be the greatest in the “kingdom of the heavens.” In Luke 9:47, this question is represented as a “reasoning of their heart,” and Mark 9:34 indicates that they remained silent about their argument regarding greatness. Thus both Luke 9:47 and Mark 9:34 suggest that the disciples would have wanted to ask Jesus about greatness but were apprehensive about doing so. Therefore, in view of Jesus’ awareness of their unspoken question, Matthew 18:1 could appropriately refer to the disciples as having raised it.
Based on Matthew 18:6 alone, one could conclude that Jesus’ point about stumbling others or giving occasion for offense was part of the discussion relating to greatness. This is, however, not the case. While preserving the content of Jesus’ teaching, Matthew’s condensed account does not include John’s remark, which, according to Mark 9:38 and Luke 9:49, preceded the comments about stumbling.
John told Jesus about a man whom he and other disciples had observed using Jesus’ name to expel demons. Not being in their immediate company, they tried to prevent him from doing so. Possibly John thought that this effort to stop the man was commendable and, in view of the corrective admonition about greatness, may have felt the need for a reassuring favorable response from Jesus. In reply, the Son of God said that the man should not be prevented from doing good work in his name, for no one who did a work of power in his name would quickly change and begin to speak evil of him. “Whoever is not against us,” Jesus continued, “is for us.” (Mark 9:38-40; Luke 9:49, 50)
As a fellow Israelite, the man was one of God’s people and recognized the divine authority inherent in Jesus’ name. Therefore, when expelling demons on the basis of the authority the name represented, the man revealed himself to be for Christ and working in concert with other believers.
Any action that proved to be supportive of Christ and his disciples would not go unnoticed and would be recompensed. Even a small gesture of hospitality, such as offering a cup of water to Jesus’ disciples, based on a recognition of their belonging to him, would be rewarded. This would be because the Son of God would regard a kind act as being done to him. With a solemn introductory “amen” (truly), he declared, “I say to you, he positively will not lose his reward.” (Mark 9:41)
Jesus considered all of his disciples, including the most insignificant from the human standpoint, as very precious. Therefore, to stumble one of the little or insignificant ones who believed in Jesus, injuring them in a manner that could cause them to stumble into sin or to erode their faith in him would be very serious. (Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42) When the disciples tried to stop a fellow Israelite from doing good in Jesus’ name, they could have harmed him spiritually. This appears to have been a factor in Jesus’ use of strong words when speaking to the disciples.
The Son of God indicated that it would be better for one who made himself responsible for causing stumbling to have a heavy millstone (one requiring a donkey to turn) tied around his neck and to be cast into the sea than to have to face the resultant severe judgment. (Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42) Certain death by drowning would be preferable to the dreadful punishment awaiting those who lead others into sin or wreck their faith.
Jesus mentioned that there would be “woe,” distress, or grief for the world of mankind on account of those who would cause stumbling or give offense. It would be inevitable that such persons would exist and exercise their baneful influence. “Woe,” as Jesus continued, would come upon any man who proved himself to be the cause for stumbling or offense. (Matthew 18:7)
In his teaching about avoiding personal stumbling or the committing of serious sin, Jesus emphasized the need for one to get control over one’s body members. It would be better to cut off one’s hand, deadening it respecting wrong use, than to have two hands and end up being tossed into the flames of Gehenna. Likewise, if one’s foot were to be the cause of stumbling, being turned to follow a sinful course, it would be better to cut it off, deadening it with reference to wrong desire, than to retain two feet and be found deserving of the fiery Gehenna. Whenever the eye focuses on impure desires, leading to stumbling into sin, it would be better to pluck it out, ridding oneself of the sinful inclination, than to keep two eyes and then to be thrown into the fire of Gehenna, “where their worm does not die and the fire is not extinguished.” (Matthew 18:8, 9; Mark 9:43-48; see the Notes section regarding Mark 9:44, 46.)
The desirable course is to gain the mastery over the members of the body. This requires diligent effort and sacrifice, comparable to cutting off a body member, to avoid having a seriously misused hand, foot, or eye. How much better it would be for the person to have been willing to sacrifice the wrong desires and, as one without an offending body member and so appearing as crippled and lame or with one eye, to enjoy the real life, entering into God’s kingdom or the realm where the Most High rules by means of his Son! (Matthew 18:8, 9; Mark 9:43-48)
Jesus’ words about Gehenna parallel those of Isaiah 66:24. There the reference is to the dreadful judgment to befall those who defiantly transgressed God’s commands. That judgment is comparable to being thrown into a refuse dump, where fire burns continually and maggots consume whatever the flames do not reach. Like the fire that burned continually, maggots would always have been visible on the carcasses that were not in direct contact with the fire, and this may be the reason behind the expression that “their worm does not die.” A person’s being committed to the fiery Gehenna appears to be the same judgment as the one the book of Revelation refers to as being cast into the “lake of fire.” This is the final judgment that takes place after the resurrection. (Revelation 20:11-15)
After the sobering comments about stumbling, Mark 9:49 quotes Jesus as saying, “For everyone will be salted with fire.” If these words relate to the fire of Gehenna, all who lead others into sin or who themselves live a life of sin would be subject to that fire, as if applied to them like salt. (See the Notes section for additional comments about Mark 9:49.)
There is a possibility, however, that the expression “salted with fire” has another significance. Salt can be used as a purifying agent, a preservative, and a seasoning, and fire often relates to condemnation or refining. In the Scriptures, trials and hardships are mentioned as serving to test or refine. (Compare James 1:2-4; 1 Peter 1:6, 7; 4:12, 13.) If the expression about being “salted with fire” is to be linked to purifying and refining, this could denote that everyone will be submitted to difficulties in life. These distressing circumstances can have a wholesome effect (as when salt is used as a purifying agent, a preservative, or a seasoning) and, like fire, serve to refine individuals, leading to their becoming more compassionate and caring persons who rely on God for strength to endure. In other cases, the salting with fire would have the opposite effect, hardening and embittering the individuals and revealing them to be valueless dross and devoid of all faith in God.
Salt is a good substance because of the beneficial purposes for which it can be used. The impure salt known to Jesus’ disciples could lose its saltiness in a humid environment. Once the sodium chloride had been leached out, it could not be restored and the remaining substance would be useless. (Mark 9:50)
For the disciples to have salt in themselves would have meant for them to serve as a force or influence for good. Their praiseworthy disposition, words, and deeds would counteract the tendency toward moral decay in others and contribute to making life more pleasant for those with whom they had personal dealings. In this way, their life, like salt, would serve as a valuable preservative and a desirable seasoning. (Mark 9:50)
The disciples’ argument about who among them was the greatest would not have served to preserve peace. It would have been divisive and given rise to resentment. Therefore, they needed to have within themselves the beneficial properties of salt and maintain peace or good relationships among themselves. (Mark 9:50)
Notes:
Modern translations commonly omit verses 44 and 46. These words are missing in the most ancient manuscripts and repeat verse 48 (“where their worm does not die and the fire is not extinguished”).
In Mark 9:49, fifth-century Codex Alexandrinus and many later manuscripts add, “and every sacrifice will be salted with salt.”
Jesus commanded his disciples not to disdain the “little ones.” Emphasizing the preciousness of those whom others may regard as insignificant, he revealed that “their angels in heaven” always beheld his Father’s face. This indicates that angels in the presence of the Most High are personally concerned about the welfare of believers and take note of any injury that may be inflicted upon them and are willing to aid them in their time of need. The closeness of these angels to the heavenly Father also shows that any kind of mistreatment would be known to him and would merit condemnatory judgment. (Matthew 18:10)
With a parable, Jesus then illustrated his Father’s loving concern and care for believers. A man owning 100 sheep would leave the 99 to pasture on the heights and search for the one that had wandered off. “Amen” (truly), said Jesus, on finding the one lost sheep, he would rejoice more over it than over the 99 that had not strayed. Applying the point of the parable, the Son of God said that it was not his Father’s will that one of the insignificant ones be lost. (Matthew 18:12-14; see the Notes section regarding Matthew 18:11.)
In harmony with God’s will, every effort should be made to restore a “brother” or a believer who may have stumbled into sin. When sinned against, the injured believer should go to the offender and, to him alone, expose the wrong, reproving him. If the transgressor listens and acknowledges his sin, he would be “gained” as a brother or helped to remain a brother or beloved fellow believer. If, however, he refuses to listen, the injured believer should take one or two fellow believers along to speak to the transgressor. This action would be in keeping with the legal principle that every matter be established “by the mouth of two or three witnesses.” If the offender still refuses to acknowledge his guilt and to seek forgiveness, the wrong should come before the community of believers. If even then the erring one cannot be persuaded to acknowledge his sin and be motivated to change, he would be regarded like a tax collector or a man of the nations. This would signify that the community of believers would not choose to have close fellowship with him, as he did not want to be forgiven of his sin and, therefore, had no desire to be, or remain, a “brother.” (Matthew 18:15-17)
The “binding” and “loosing” about which Jesus next spoke is one in which believers share as a community. (Matthew 18:18) If the transgressor persisted in his sinful course despite all efforts to help him to come to repentance, the “binding” would indicate that his conduct could not be tolerated and he would be shut out from close fellowship with the community of believers. The “loosing,” on the other hand, would indicate that he had been forgiven and remained a part of that community. (For comments on Matthew 16:19, see the section “Peter’s Confession and Christ’s Response” and the accompanying “Notes”; for additional information on Matthew 18:18, see the Notes section.)
According to numerous manuscripts, Jesus’ next words include the solemn “amen” (truly) before “I say to you.” The subject is prayer. If two believers “agree on earth” to unite in a specific petition respecting any matter, the heavenly Father would respond. (Matthew 18:19) As believers, their request would be in harmony with God’s will, and this assured that they would be granted a favorable hearing. In view of the context, prayer concerning an erring brother would have been an appropriate matter. (Compare 1 John 5:14-16.)
Even when two or three believers are assembled in his “name,” the Son of God promised to be in their midst. (Matthew 18:20) Their being gathered in his name would indicate that their fellowship with one another is based on a recognition of Christ as their mutual Lord. Therefore, in spirit, he would be with them, assuring that their prayers would be heard.
This also points to the fact that any “binding” and “loosing” would be in harmony with God’s will, as Jesus would be with the community of believers in all actions guided by holy spirit. Decisions that are merely the product of the exercise of human authority would not be confirmed in heaven, as any gathering where such decisions are reached could not be considered as having taken place in Jesus’ name. In such a case, his authority would not have been recognized and his guidance would not have been followed. (Compare 1 Corinthians 5:1-5.)
Notes:
The words of Matthew 18:11 (“the Son of Man came to save the lost”) are missing in the oldest extant manuscripts but are found in many later manuscripts.
As in Matthew 16:19 (also here at Matthew 18:18), the Greek passive participles for “bound” and “loosed” are in the perfect tense. For this reason, some regard the binding and loosing as already having taken place in heaven. Kenneth S. Wuest, in his expanded translation expressed this meaning with his rendering, “Whatever you forbid [bind] on earth, shall have already been forbidden [bound] in heaven. And whatever you permit [loose] on earth, shall have already been permitted [loosed] in heaven.”
Probably Jesus’ words about gaining an erring brother prompted Peter to wonder concerning how often forgiveness should be extended. He asked whether up to seven times might be the limit. Jesus answered, “Not up to seven times, I say to you, but up to seventy times seven [or, seventy-seven] times.” (Matthew 18:21, 22) This reply indicated that harboring grudges or resorting to any kind of reckoning in relation to forgiveness would be wrong.
To stress the importance of maintaining a forgiving spirit, Jesus related a parable. He likened a feature of the “kingdom of the heavens” to a “man,” a “king,” who determined to settle accounts with his slaves. (Matthew 18:23)
One slave owed him the astronomical sum of 10,000 talents. With a Tyrian talent being 6,000 denarii (the wages a laborer would earn in 6,000 days), this huge sum could not be earned in the course of many lifetimes. To pay off what would have been only a small portion of the debt, the king decreed that the slave, his wife and children, and everything he possessed be sold. At that, the slave prostrated himself before his master, pleading to be shown patience in order to have time to repay his debt. Compassionately, the king canceled the entire debt, one that would have been impossible for the slave to repay. (Matthew 18:24-27)
After having been the recipient of extraordinary mercy, this slave found a fellow slave who owed him 100 denarii (a minuscule fraction of the debt the king had canceled), grabbed him, and started to choke him, demanding that he pay back all that he owed. This slave then prostrated himself, pleading to be shown patience until such time as he could pay off the debt. The creditor slave, however, refused to respond compassionately to his fellow slave but had him imprisoned until such time as the debt would be paid off. (Matthew 18:28-30) As a prisoner, the slave would have been unable to earn any money. Only relatives or friends could have freed him from prison by paying off the debt.
Having observed this merciless treatment, other fellow slaves were greatly distressed. This prompted them to report to the king what had happened. (Matthew 18:31)
He called for the harsh slave to appear before him, condemned him as wicked, and asked whether he should not have had compassion for a fellow slave in view of the compassion that had been shown him. Greatly angered, the master handed him over to the “tormentors” (the jailers who often inflicted torment on prisoners), until such time as he would pay back his debt. (Matthew 18:32-34) Repayment would, of course, have been an impossibility, as no friends or relatives would have had such great wealth at their disposal.
Revealing the serious consequences for being unforgiving, Jesus said that his heavenly Father would deal like the king of the parable with his disciples if they did not forgive a brother’s transgressions from their hearts or in all sincerity from their deep inner selves. (Matthew 18:35) The tremendous debt of sin that God is willing to forgive everyone who repents and asks for mercy makes any sin a brother or fellow believer might commit against one appear minuscule (a debt of just 100 denarii alongside a forgiven debt of 60,000,000 denarii). Accordingly, all who would have a share in the “kingdom of the heavens” or in the realm where the heavenly Father rules by means of his Son must be forgiving as he is.