24

CHAPTER 24.

FROM SUNSHINE TO SHADOW.


Our Lord's descent from the holy heights[795] of the Mount of
Transfiguration was more than a physical return from greater to lesser
altitudes; it was a passing from sunshine into shadow, from the
effulgent glory of heaven to the mists of worldly passions and human
unbelief; it was the beginning of His rapid descent into the valley of
humiliation. From lofty converse with divinely-appointed ministers, from
supreme communion with His Father and God, Jesus came down to a scene of
disheartening confusion and a spectacle of demonized dominion before
which even His apostles stood in impotent despair. To His sensitive and
sinless soul the contrast must have brought superhuman anguish; even to
us who read the brief account thereof it is appalling.


HEALING OF YOUTHFUL DEMONIAC.

Jesus and the three apostles returned from the mount on the morrow
following the Transfiguration;[796] this fact suggests the assumption
that the glorious manifestation had occurred during the night. At or
near the base of the mountain the party found the other apostles, and
with them a multitude of people, including some scribes or rabbis.[797]
There was evidence of disputation and disturbance amongst the crowd; and
plainly the apostles were on the defensive. At the unexpected approach
of Jesus many of the people ran to meet Him with respectful salutations.
Of the contentious scribes He asked: "What question ye with them?" thus
assuming the burden of the dispute, whatever it might be, and so
relieving the distressed disciples from further active participation.
The scribes remained silent; their courage had vanished when the Master
appeared. A man, "one of the multitude," gave, though indirectly, the
answer. "Master," said he, kneeling at the feet of Christ, "I have
brought unto thee my son, which hath a dumb spirit; and wheresoever he
taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth,
and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him
out; and they could not."

The disciples' failure to heal the stricken youth had evidently brought
upon them hostile criticism, taunts and ridicule from the unbelieving
scribes; and their discomfiture must have been intensified by the
thought that through them doubt had been cast upon the authority and
power of their Lord. Pained in spirit at this--another instance of
dearth of faith and consequent lack of power among His chosen and
ordained servants--Jesus uttered an exclamation of intense sorrow: "O
faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I
suffer you?" These words, in which there is evident reproof, however
mild and pitying it may be, were addressed primarily to the apostles;
whether exclusively so or to them and others is of minor importance. As
Jesus directed, the afflicted lad was brought nearer; and the tormenting
demon, finding himself in the Master's presence, threw his youthful
victim into a terrible paroxysm, so that the boy fell to the ground and
wallowed in convulsions, the while frothing and foaming at the mouth.
With calm deliberation, which contrasted strongly with the eager
impatience of the distracted parent, Jesus inquired as to when the
malady had first befallen the lad. "Of a child," answered the father,
adding, "And ofttimes it hath cast him into the fire, and into the
waters, to destroy him." With pathetic eagerness he implored, "If thou
canst do anything, have compassion on us and help us." The man spoke of
his son's affliction as though shared by himself. "Help us," was his
prayer.

To this qualifying expression "If thou canst do anything," which implied
a measure of uncertainty as to the ability of the Master to grant what
he asked, and this perhaps as in part a result of the failure of the
apostles, Jesus replied: "If thou canst believe"; and added, "all things
are possible to him that believeth." The man's understanding was
enlightened; up to that moment he had thought that all depended upon
Jesus; he now saw that the issue rested largely with himself. It is
noteworthy that the Lord specified belief rather than faith as the
condition essential to the case. The man was evidently trustful, and
assuredly fervent in his hope that Jesus could help; but it is doubtful
that he knew what faith really meant. He was receptive and eagerly
teachable, however, and the Lord strengthened his feeble and uncertain
belief. The encouraging explanation of the real need stimulated him to a
more abounding trust. Weeping in an agony of hope he cried out: "Lord, I
believe;" and then, realizing the darkness of error from which he was
just beginning to emerge, he added penitently "help thou mine unbelief
"[798]

Looking compassionately upon the writhing sufferer at His feet, Jesus
rebuked the demon, thus: "Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come
out of him, and enter no more into him. And the spirit cried, and rent
him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead; insomuch that
many said, He is dead. But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him
up; and he arose;" and as Luke adds, "and delivered him again to his
father." The permanency of the cure was assured by the express command
that the evil spirit enter no more into the lad;[799] it was no relief
from that present attack alone; the healing was permanent.

The people were amazed at the power of God manifested in the miracle;
and the apostles who had tried and failed to subdue the evil spirit were
disturbed. While on their mission, though away from their Master's
helpful presence, they had successfully rebuked and cast out evil
spirits as they had received special power and commission to do,[800]
but now, during His absence of a day they had found themselves unable.
When they had retired to the house, they asked of Jesus, "Why could not
we cast him out?" The reply was: "Because of your unbelief;" and in
further explanation the Lord said, "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but
by prayer and fasting."[801]

Hereby we learn that the achievements possible to faith are limited or
conditioned by the genuineness, the purity, the unmixed quality of that
faith. "O ye of little faith;" "Where is your faith?" and "Wherefore
didst thou doubt?"[802] are forms of admonitory reproof that had been
repeatedly addressed to the apostles by the Lord. The possibilities of
faith were now thus further affirmed: "Verily I say unto you, If ye have
faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain,
Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be
impossible unto you."[803] The comparison between effective faith and a
grain of mustard seed is one of quality rather than of quantity; it
connotes living, virile faith, like unto the seed, however small, from
which a great plant may spring,[804] in contrast with a lifeless,
artificial imitation, however prominent or demonstrative.


THE LORD'S DEATH AND RESURRECTION AGAIN PREDICTED.[805]

From the locality whereat the last miracle was wrought, Jesus departed
with the Twelve, and passed through Galilee toward Capernaum. It is
probable that they traveled by the less frequented roads, as He desired
that His return should not be publicly known. He had gone into
comparative retirement for a season, primarily it seems in quest of
opportunity to more thoroughly instruct the apostles in their
preparation for the work, which within a few months they would be left
to carry on without His bodily companionship. They had solemnly
testified that they knew Him to be the Christ; to them therefore He
could impart much that the people in general were wholly unprepared to
receive. The particular theme of His special and advanced instruction to
the Twelve was that of His approaching death and resurrection; and this
was dwelt upon again and again, for they were slow or unwilling to
comprehend.

"Let these sayings sink down into your ears" was His forceful prelude on
this occasion, in Galilee. Then followed the reiterated prediction,
spoken in part in the present tense as though already begun in
fulfilment: "The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they
shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third
day." We read with some surprize that the apostles still failed to
understand. Luke's comment is: "But they understood not this saying, and
it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask
him of that saying." The thought of what the Lord's words might mean,
even in its faintest outline, was terrifying to those devoted men; and
their failure to comprehend was in part due to the fact that the human
mind is loath to search deeply into anything it desires not to believe.


THE TRIBUTE MONEY--SUPPLIED BY A MIRACLE.[806]

Jesus and His followers were again in Capernaum. There Peter was
approached by a collector of the temple tax, who asked: "Doth not your
Master pay tribute?"[807] Peter answered "Yes." It is interesting to
find that the inquiry was made of Peter and not directly of Jesus; this
circumstance may be indicative of the respect in which the Lord was held
by the people at large, and may suggest the possibility of doubt in the
collector's mind as to whether Jesus was amenable to the tax, since
priests and rabbis generally claimed exemption.

The annual capitation tax here referred to amounted to half a shekel or
a didrachm, corresponding to about thirty-three cents in our money; and
this had been required of every male adult in Israel since the days of
the exodus; though, during the period of captivity the requirement had
been modified.[808] This tribute, as prescribed through Moses, was
originally known as "atonement money," and its payment was in the nature
of a sacrifice to accompany supplication for ransom from the effects of
individual sin. At the time of Christ the annual contribution was
usually collected between early March and the Passover. If Jesus was
subject to this tax, He was at this time several weeks in arrears.

The conversation between Peter and the tax-collector had occurred
outside the house. When Peter entered, and was about to inform the
Master concerning the interview, Jesus forestalled 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."

Peter must have seen the inconsistency of expecting Jesus, the
acknowledged Messiah, to pay atonement money, or a tax for temple
maintenance, inasmuch as the temple was the House of God, and Jesus was
the Son of God, and particularly since even earthly princes were
exempted from capitation dues. Peter's embarrassment over his
inconsiderate boldness, in pledging payment for his Master without first
consulting Him, was relieved however by Jesus, who said:
"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."

The money was to be paid, not because it could be rightfully demanded of
Jesus, but lest non-payment give offense and furnish to His opponents
further excuse for complaint. The "piece of money," which Jesus said
Peter would find in the mouth of the first fish that took his bait, is
more correctly designated by the literal translation "stater,"[809]
indicating a silver coin equivalent to a shekel, or two didrachms, and
therefore the exact amount of the tax for two persons. "That take, and
give unto them for me and thee" said Jesus. It is notable that He did
not say "for us." In His associations with men, even with the Twelve,
who of all were nearest and dearest to Him, our Lord always maintained
His separate and unique status, in every instance making the fact
apparent that He was essentially different from other men. This is
illustrated by His expressions "My Father and your Father," "My God and
your God,"[810] instead of our Father and our God. He reverently
acknowledged that He was the Son of God in a literal sense that did not
apply to any other being.

While the circumstances of the finding of the stater in the fish are not
detailed, and the actual accomplishment of the miracle is not positively
recorded, we cannot doubt that what Jesus had promised was realized, as
otherwise there would appear no reason for introducing the incident into
the Gospel narrative. The miracle is without a parallel or even a
remotely analogous instance. We need not assume that the stater was
other than an ordinary coin that had fallen into the water, nor that it
had been taken by the fish in any unusual way. Nevertheless, the
knowledge that there was in the lake a fish having a coin in its gullet,
that the coin was of the denomination specified, and that that
particular fish would rise, and be the first to rise to Peter's hook, is
as incomprehensible to man's finite understanding as are the means by
which any of Christ's miracles were wrought. The Lord Jesus held and
holds dominion over the earth, the sea, and all that in them is, for by
His word and power were they made.

The Lord's purpose in so miraculously supplying the money should be
studiously considered. The assumption that superhuman power had to be
invoked because of a supposed condition of extreme poverty on the part
of Jesus and Peter is unwarranted. Even if Jesus and His companions had
been actually penniless, Peter and his fellow fishermen could easily
have cast their net, and, with ordinary success have obtained fish
enough to sell for the needed amount. Moreover, we find no instance of a
miracle wrought by the Lord for personal gain or relief of His own need,
however pressing. It appears probable, that by the means employed for
obtaining the money, Jesus intentionally emphasized His exceptional
reasons for redeeming Peter's pledge that the tax would be paid. The
Jews, who did not know Jesus as the Messiah, but only as a Teacher of
superior ability and a Man of unusual power, might have taken offense
had He refused to pay the tribute required of every Jew. On the other
hand, to the apostles and particularly to Peter who had been the
mouth-piece of all in the great confession, the payment of the tax in
ordinary course and without explanation by Jesus might have appeared as
an admission that He was subject to the temple, and therefore less than
He had claimed and less than they had confessed Him to be. His
catechization of Peter had clearly demonstrated that He maintained His
right as the King's Son, and yet would condescend to voluntarily give
what could not be righteously demanded. Then, in conclusive
demonstration of His exalted status, He provided the money by the
utilization of knowledge such as no other man possessed.


AS A LITTLE CHILD.[811]

On the way to Capernaum the apostles had questioned among themselves, as
they supposed beyond the Master's hearing; questioning had led to
argument, and argument to disputation. The matter about which they were
so greatly concerned was as to who among them should be the greatest in
the kingdom of heaven. The testimony they had received convinced them
beyond all doubt, that Jesus was the long-awaited Christ, and this had
been supplemented and confirmed by His unqualified acknowledgment of His
Messianic dignity. With minds still tinctured by the traditional
expectation of the Messiah as both spiritual Lord and temporal King, and
remembering some of the Master's frequent references to His kingdom and
the blessed state of those who belonged thereto, and furthermore
realizing that His recent utterances indicated a near crisis or climax
in His ministry, they surrendered themselves to the selfish
contemplation of their prospective stations in the new kingdom, and the
particular offices of trust, honor, and emolument each most desired. Who
of them was to be prime minister; who would be chancellor, who the
commander of the troops? Personal ambition had already engendered
jealousy in their hearts.

When they were together with Jesus in the house at Capernaum, the
subject was brought up again. Mark tells us that Jesus asked: "What was
it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?" and that they answered
not, because, as may be inferred, they were ashamed. From Matthew's
record it may be understood that the apostles submitted the question for
the Master's decision. The apparent difference of circumstance is
unimportant; both accounts are correct; Christ's question to them may
have eventually brought out their questions to Him. Jesus, comprehending
their thoughts and knowing their unenlightened state of mind on the
matter that troubled them, gave them an illustrated lesson. Calling a
little child, whom He lovingly took into His arm, He said: "Verily I say
unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye
shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall
humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom
of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name
receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which
believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about
his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." With this
lesson we may profitably associate a later teaching, that little
children are typical of the kingdom of heaven.[812]

Even the apostles were in need of conversion;[813] respecting the matter
at issue their hearts were turned, partly at least, from God and His
kingdom. They had to learn that genuine humility is an attribute
essential to citizenship in the community of the blessed; and that the
degree of humility conditions whatsoever there is akin to rank in the
kingdom; for therein the humblest shall be greatest.

Christ would not have had His chosen representatives become childish;
far from it, they had to be men of courage, fortitude, and force; but He
would have them become childlike. The distinction is important. Those
who belong to Christ must become like children in obedience,
truthfulness, trustfulness, purity, humility and faith. The child is an
artless, natural, trusting believer; the childish one is careless,
foolish, and neglectful. In contrasting these characteristics, note the
counsel of Paul: "Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in
malice be ye children, but in understanding be men."[814] Children as
such, and children as types of adults who are true believers, are
closely associated in this lesson. Whosoever shall offend, that is cause
to stumble or go astray, one such child of Christ, incurs guilt so great
that it would have been better for him had he met death even by violence
before he had so sinned.

Dwelling upon offenses, or causes of stumbling, the Lord continued: "Woe
unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences
come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" Then, repeating
some of the precious truths embodied in His memorable Sermon on the
Mount,[815] He urged the overcoming of evil propensities whatever the
sacrifice. As it is better that a man undergo surgical treatment though
he lose thereby a hand, a foot, or an eye, than that his whole body be
involved and his life forfeited, so is it commended that he cut off,
tear away, or root out from his soul the passions of evil, which, if
suffered to remain shall surely bring him under condemnation. In that
state his conscience shall gnaw as an undying worm, and his remorse
shall be as a fire that cannot be quenched. Every human soul shall be
tested as by fire; and as the flesh of the altar sacrifices had to be
seasoned with salt, as a type of preservation from corruption,[816] so
also the soul must receive the saving salt of the gospel; and that salt
must be pure and potent, not a dirty mixture of inherited prejudice and
unauthorized tradition that has lost whatever saltness it may once have
had. "Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another," was the
Lord's admonition to the disputing Twelve.[817]

As applicable to children of tender years, and to child-like believers
young and old, the Savior gave to the apostles this solemn warning and
profound statement of fact: "Take heed that ye despise not one of these
little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always
behold the face of my Father which is in heaven." The mission of the
Christ was presented as that of saving those who are temporarily lost,
and who, but for His aid would be lost forever. In elucidation of His
meaning, the Teacher presented a parable which has found place among the
literary treasures of the world.


THE PARABLE OF THE LOST SHEEP.[818]

"How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone
astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the
mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he
find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of
the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it is not the will of
your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should
perish."

In this effective analogy the saving purpose of Christ's mission is made
prominent. He is verily the Savior. The shepherd is portrayed as leaving
the ninety and nine, pastured or folded in safety we cannot doubt, while
he goes alone into the mountains to seek the one that has strayed. In
finding and bringing back the wayward sheep, he has more joy than that
of knowing the others are yet safe. In a later version of this splendid
parable, as addressed to the murmuring Pharisees and scribes at
Jerusalem, the Master said of the shepherd on his finding the lost
sheep:

"And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing.
And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours,
saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was
lost. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one
sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons,
which need no repentance."[819]

Many have marveled that there should be greater rejoicing over the
recovery of one stray sheep, or the saving of a soul that had been as
one lost, than over the many who have not been in such jeopardy. In the
safe-folded ninety and nine the shepherd had continued joy; but to him
came a new accession of happiness, brighter and stronger because of his
recent grief, when the lost was brought back to the fold. To this
parable in connection with others of analogous import we shall recur in
a later chapter.


"IN MY NAME."[820]

In continuation of the lesson illustrated by the little child, Jesus
said: "Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me: and
whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me: for he that is
least among you all, the same shall be great." It may have been Christ's
reference to deeds done in His name that prompted John to interject a
remark at this point: "Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy
name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth
not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall
do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that
is not against us is on our part." The young apostle had allowed his
zeal for the Master's name to lead to intolerance. That the man who had
attempted to do good in the name of Jesus was evidently sincere, and
that his efforts were acceptable to the Lord we cannot doubt; his act
was essentially different from the unrighteous assumptions for which
some others were afterward rebuked;[821] he was certainly a believer in
Christ, and may have been one of the class from which the Lord was soon
to select and commission special ministers and the Seventy.[822] In the
state of divided opinion then existing among the people concerning
Jesus, it was fair to say that all who were not opposed to Him were at
least tentatively on His side. On other occasions He asserted that those
who were not with Him were against Him.[823]


MY BROTHER AND I.[824]

The proper method of adjusting differences between brethren and the
fundamental principles of Church discipline were made subjects of
instruction to the Twelve. The first step is thus prescribed: "Moreover
if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault
between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy
brother." The rule of the rabbis was that the offender must make the
first advance; but Jesus taught that the injured one should not wait for
his brother to come to him, but go himself, and seek to adjust the
difficulty; by so doing he might be the means of saving his brother's
soul. If the offender proved to be obdurate, the brother who had
suffered the trespass was to take two or three others with him, and
again try to bring the transgressor to repentant acknowledgment of his
offense; such a course provided for witnesses, by whose presence later
misrepresentation would be guarded against.

Extreme measures were to be adopted only after all gentler means had
failed. Should the man persist in his obstinacy, the case was to be
brought before the Church, and in the event of his neglect or refusal to
heed the decision of the Church, he was to be deprived of fellowship,
thereby becoming in his relationship to his former associates "as an
heathen man and a publican." In such state of non-membership he would be
a fit subject for missionary effort; but, until he became repentant and
manifested willingness to make amends, he could claim no rights or
privileges of communion in the Church. Continued association with the
unrepentant sinner may involve the spread of his disaffection, and the
contamination of others through his sin. Justice is not to be dethroned
by Mercy. The revealed order of discipline in the restored Church is
similar to that given to the apostles of old.[825]

The authority of the Twelve to administer the affairs of Church
government was attested by the Lord's confirming to them as a body the
promise before addressed to Peter: "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye
shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."[826] Through unity of purpose
and unreserved sincerity they would have power with God, as witness the
Master's further assurance: "Again I say unto you, That if two of you
shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall
be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three
are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."
Peter here broke in with a question: "Lord, how oft shall my brother sin
against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?" He would fain have
some definite limit set, and he probably considered the tentative
suggestion of seven times as a very liberal measure, inasmuch as the
rabbis prescribed a triple forgiveness only.[827] He may have chosen
seven as the next number above three having a special Pharisaical
significance. The Savior's answer was enlightening: "Jesus saith unto
him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times
seven." This reply must have meant to Peter as it means to us, that to
forgiveness man may set no bounds; the forgiveness, however, must be
merited by the recipient.[828] The instruction was made memorable by the
following story.


PARABLE OF THE UNMERCIFUL SERVANT.

"Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which
would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one
was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch
as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife,
and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant
therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience
with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was
moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. But the
same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed
him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the
throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down
at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will
pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till
he should pay the debt. So when his fellowservants saw what was done,
they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was
done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou
wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me:
Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even
as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the
tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise
shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts
forgive not every one his brother their trespasses."[829]

Ten thousand talents are specified as expressive of a sum so great as to
put the debtor beyond all reasonable possibility of paying. We may
regard the man as a trusted official, one of the king's ministers, who
had been charged with the custody of the royal revenues, or one of the
chief treasurers of taxes; that he is called a servant introduces no
inconsistency, as in an absolute monarchy all but the sovereign are
subjects and servants. The selling of the debtor's wife and children and
all that he had would not have been in violation of the law in the
supposed case, which implies the legal recognition of slavery.[830] The
man was in arrears for debt. He did not come before his lord voluntarily
but had to be brought. So in the affairs of our individual lives
periodical reckonings are inevitable; and while some debtors report of
their own accord, others have to be cited to appear. The messengers who
serve the summons may be adversity, illness, the approach of death; but,
whatever, whoever they are, they enforce a rendering of our accounts.

The contrast between ten thousand talents and a hundred pence is
enormous.[831] In his fellowservant's plea for time in which to pay the
hundred pence, the greater debtor should have been reminded of the dire
straits from which he had just been relieved; the words, "Have patience
with me, and I will pay thee all," were identical with those of his own
prayer to the king. The base ingratitude of the unmerciful servant
justified the king in revoking the pardon once granted. The man came
under condemnation, not primarily for defalcation and debt, but for lack
of mercy after having received of mercy so abundantly. He, as an unjust
plaintiff, had invoked the law; as a convicted transgressor he was to be
dealt with according to the law. Mercy is for the merciful. As a
heavenly jewel it is to be received with thankfulness and used with
sanctity, not to be cast into the mire of undeservedness. Justice may
demand retribution and punishment: "With what measure ye mete, it shall
be measured to you again."[832] The conditions under which we may
confidently implore pardon are set forth in the form of prayer
prescribed by the Lord: "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our
debtors."[833]


NOTES TO CHAPTER 24.

1. Faith in Behalf of Others.--The supplication of the agonized father
for the benefit of his sorely afflicted son--"Have compassion on us, and
help us" (Mark 9:22)--shows that he made the boy's case his own. In this
we are reminded of the Canaanite woman who implored Jesus to have mercy
on her, though her daughter was the afflicted one (Matt. 15:22; page 354
herein). In these cases, faith was exercized in behalf of the sufferers
by others; and the same is true of the centurion who pleaded for his
servant and whose faith was specially commended by Jesus (Matt 8:5-10;
page 249 herein); of Jairus whose daughter lay dead (Luke 8:41, 42, 49,
50; page 313 herein), and of many who brought their helpless kindred or
friends to Christ and pleaded for them. As heretofore shown, faith to be
healed is as truly a gift of God as is faith to heal (page 318); and, as
the instances cited prove, faith may be exercized with effect in behalf
of others. In connection with the ordinance of administering to the
afflicted, by anointing with oil and the laying on of hands, as
authoritatively established in the restored Church of Jesus Christ, the
elders officiating should encourage the faith of all believers present,
that such be exerted in behalf of the sufferer. In the case of infants
and of persons who are unconscious, it is plainly useless to look for
active manifestation of faith on their part, and the supporting faith of
kindred and friends is all the more requisite.

2. Power Developed by Prayer and Fasting.--The Savior's statement
concerning the evil spirit that the apostles were unable to
subdue--"Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and
fasting"--indicates gradation in the malignity and evil power of demons,
and gradation also in the results of varying degrees of faith. The
apostles who failed on the occasion referred to had been able to cast
out demons at other times. Fasting, when practised in prudence, and
genuine prayer are conducive to the development of faith with its
accompanying power for good. Individual application of this principle
may be made with profit. Have you some besetting weakness, some sinful
indulgence that you have vainly tried to overcome? Like the malignant
demon that Christ rebuked in the boy, your sin may be of a kind that
goeth out only through prayer and fasting.

3. Nothing Impossible to Faith.--Many people have questioned the literal
truth of the Lord's declaration that by faith mountains may be removed
from their place. Plainly there would have to be a purpose in harmony
with the divine mind and plan, in order that faith could be exerted at
all in such an undertaking. Neither such a miracle nor any other is
possible as a gratification of the yearning for curiosity, nor for
display, nor for personal gain or selfish satisfaction. Christ wrought
no miracle with any such motive; He persistently refused to show signs
to mere sign-seekers. But to deny the possibility of a mountain being
removed through faith, under conditions that would render such removal
acceptable to God, is to deny the word of God, both as to this specific
possibility, and as to the general assurance that "nothing shall be
impossible" to him who hath faith adequate to the end desired. It is
worthy of note, however, that the Jews in the days of Christ and since
often spoke of removing mountains as a figurative expression for the
overcoming of difficulties. According to Lightfoot and other authorities
a man able to solve intricate problems, or of particular power in
argument or acumen in judgment, was referred to as a "rooter up of
mountains."

4. The Temple Tribute.--That the tribute money referred to in the text
was a Jewish contribution to the temple and not a tax levied by the
Roman government, is apparent from the specification of the "didrachma,"
which in the authorized version is translated "tribute." This coin was
equivalent to the half shekel, reckoned "after the shekel of the
sanctuary," which was the fixed amount to be paid annually by every male
"from twenty years old and above," with the provision that "the rich
shall not give more and the poor shall not give less" (Exo. 30:13-15). A
tax levied by the political powers would not be designated as the
didrachma. Moreover, had the collector who approached Peter been one of
the official publicans, he probably would have demanded the tax instead
of inquiring as to whether or not the Master was to be counted among the
contributors.

Among the many humiliations to which the Jews were subjected in later
years, after the destruction of the temple, was the compulsory payment
of what had been their temple tribute, to the Romans, who decreed it as
a revenue to the pagan temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. Of the emperor
Vespasian, Josephus (Wars of the Jews, vii, 6:6) says: That he also laid
a tribute wheresoever they were, and enjoined every one of them to bring
two drachmae every year into the capitol, as they used to pay the same to
the temple at Jerusalem.

5. Talents and Pence.--It is evident that by specifying ten thousand
talents as the debt due the king, and a hundred pence as that owed by
the fellow-servant, the Lord intended to present a case of great
disparity and striking contrast. The actual amounts involved are of
minor significance in the story. We are not told which variety of talent
was meant; there were Attic talents, and both silver and gold talents of
Hebrew reckoning; and each differed from the others in value. The Oxford
marginal explanation is: "A talent is 750 ounces of silver, which after
five shillings the ounce is 187 pounds, ten shillings." This would be in
American money over nine and a quarter millions of dollars as the sum of
the ten thousand talents. The same authority gives as the value of the
penny (Roman) sevenpence half-penny, or fifteen cents, making the second
debt equivalent to about fifteen dollars. Comparison with talents
mentioned elsewhere may be allowable. Trench says: "How vast a sum it
was we can most vividly realize to ourselves by comparing it with other
sums mentioned in Scripture. In the construction of the tabernacle,
twenty-nine talents of gold were used (Exo. 38:24); David prepared for
the temple three thousand talents of gold, and the princes five thousand
(1 Chron. 29:4-7); the queen of Sheba presented to Solomon one hundred
and twenty talents (1 Kings 10:10); the king of Assyria laid upon
Hezekiah thirty talents of gold (2 Kings 18:14); and in the extreme
impoverishment to which the land was brought at the last, one talent of
gold was laid upon it, after the death of Josiah, by the king of Egypt
(2 Chron. 36:3)." Farrar estimates the debt owed to the king as
1,250,000 times that owed by the lesser to the greater debtor.

6. An Assumed Approval of Slavery.--Some readers have assumed that they
find in the Parable of the Unmerciful Servant an implied approval of the
institution of slavery. The greater debtor, who figures in the story,
was to be sold, together with his wife and children and all that he had.
A rational consideration of the story as a whole is likely to find at
most, in the particular incident of the king's command that the debtor
and his family be sold, that the system of buying and selling
bondservants, serfs, or slaves, was legally recognized at the time. The
purpose of the parable was not even remotely to endorse or condemn
slavery or any other social institution. The Mosaic law is explicit in
matters relating to bondservants. The "angel of the Lord" who brought to
Hagar a message of encouragement and blessing respected the authority of
her mistress (Gen. 16:8, 9). In the apostolic epoch, instruction was
directed toward right living under the secular law, not rebellion
against the system (Eph. 6:5; Col. 3:22; 1 Tim. 6:1-3; 1 Peter 2:18).
Recognition of established customs, institutions, and laws, and proper
obedience thereto, do not necessarily imply individual approval. The
gospel of Jesus Christ, which shall yet regenerate the world, is to
prevail--not by revolutionary assaults upon existing governments, nor
through anarchy and violence--but by the teaching of individual duty and
by the spread of the spirit of love. When the love of God shall be given
a place in the hearts of mankind, when men shall unselfishly love their
neighbors, then social systems and governments shall be formed and
operated to the securing of the greatest good to the greatest number.
Until men open their hearts to the reception of the gospel of Jesus
Christ, injustice and oppression, servitude and slavery, in some form or
other, are sure to exist. Attempts to extirpate social conditions that
spring from individual selfishness cannot be otherwise than futile so
long as selfishness is left to thrive and propagate.