Luke 20:19 - 26
19 The scribes and the chief priests sought to lay hands on him at that very hour, for they perceived that he had told this parable against them, but they feared the people. 20 So they watched him and sent spies, who pretended to be sincere, that they might catch him in something he said, so as to deliver him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor. 21 So they asked him, “Teacher, we know that you speak and teach rightly, and show no partiality,[d] but truly teach the way of God. 22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” 23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said to them, 24 “Show me a denarius.[e] Whose likeness and inscription does it have?” They said, “Caesar's.” 25 He said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” 26 And they were not able in the presence of the people to catch him in what he said, but marveling at his answer they became silent.
Questions:
ReplyDelete1. Were the spies at all sincere in their flattery?
2. What things belong to Caesar and what things belong to God?
https://hartmangroupdevotionsmark.blogspot.com/2018/11/mark-1213-17-13-later-they-sent-some-of.html says:
ReplyDeleteThey anticipated that Jesus would oppose the tax, as their purpose was "to hand him over to the power and authority of the governor".
it is usually thought that the coin was a Roman denarius with the head of Tiberius. The coin is also called the "tribute penny." However, it has been suggested that denarii were not in common circulation in Judaea during Jesus' lifetime and that the coin may have instead been an Antiochan tetradrachm bearing the head of Tiberius, with Augustus on the reverse.
The tax denoted in the text was a specific tax… It was a poll tax, a tax instituted in A.D. 6. A census taken at that time (cf. Lk. 2:2) to determine the resources of the Jews provoked the wrath of the country. Judas of Galilee led a revolt (Acts 5:37), which was suppressed only with some difficulty. Many scholars date the origin of the Zealot party and movement to this incident.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:
In the first place, there is no mention there of obedience; in the second place, if Christ recognized the obligatoriness of paying tribute, and so of obedience, He would have said directly, "Yes, it should be paid;" but He says, "Give to Cæsar what is his, that is, the money, and give your life to God," and with these latter words He not only does not encourage any obedience to power, but, on the contrary, points out that in everything which belongs to God it is not right to obey Cæsar.
Mennonite Dale Glass-Hess wrote:
It is inconceivable to me that Jesus would teach that some spheres of human activity lie outside the authority of God. My perception of this incident is that Jesus does not answer the question about the morality of paying taxes to Caesar, but that he throws it back on the people to decide. When the Jews produce a denarius at Jesus' request, they demonstrate that they are already doing business with Caesar on Caesar's terms. I read Jesus' statement, "Give to Caesar…" as meaning "Have you incurred a debt in regard to Caesar! Then you better pay it off." The Jews had already compromised themselves. Likewise for us: we may refuse to serve Caesar as soldiers and even try to resist paying for Caesar's army. But the fact is that by our lifestyles we've run up a debt with Caesar, who has felt constrained to defend the interests that support our lifestyles. Now he wants paid back, and it's a little late to say that we don't owe anything. We've already compromised ourselves. If we're going to play Caesar's games, then we should expect to have to pay for the pleasure of their enjoyment. But if we are determined to avoid those games, then we should be able to avoid paying for them.
Christian anarchists do not interpret Matthew 22:21 as advocating support for taxes but as further advice to free oneself from material attachment. Jacques Ellul believes the passage shows that Caesar may have rights over the fiat money he produces, but not things that are made by God.
https://hartmangroupdevotionsmark.blogspot.com/2018/11/mark-1213-17-13-later-they-sent-some-of.html continued:
ReplyDeleteWhen you know that all is God’s, then anything you render to Caesar you will render for God’s sake. Any authority you ascribe to Caesar you will ascribe to him for the sake of God’s greater authority. Any obedience you render to Caesar you will render for the sake of the obedience you owe first to God. Any claim Caesar makes on you, you test by the infinitely higher claim God has on you.
Rendering to Caesar is limited and defined by rendering to God. What is Caesar’s is determined by the fact that everything is God’s first, and only becomes Caesar’s by God’s permission and design. Only God decides what is a rightful, limited rendering to Caesar. The only reason God ordains the rights of a Caesar is for the sake of God.
We are God’s servants, not the servants of any government. We are free from all governments and human institutions, because we belong to the owner of the universe and share in that inheritance (“fellow heirs with Christ”). We are aliens in the U.S.; we serve the owner of the world.
God has made us and bought us for himself (1 Corinthians 6:20). We are slaves of no man and no government (1 Corinthians 7:22-23). Our citizenship is in heaven (Philippians 3:20). We are aliens and exiles on the earth (1 Peter 2:11). We are not “at home” here, but await the Lord from heaven (2 Corinthians 5:8).
---
The Pharisees and the Herodians thought they had Jesus in a trap. They thought they were asking a financial and political question. They were wrong. No longer is the question to whom you will pay taxes, but to whom you will render worship. The Jews knew it. They knew that what He had said was true. The coin was idolatrous.
Almost EVERYBODY seems to use this to teach the separation of church and state. Are they wrong? Well, not entirely. But if it means that we belong to God, the common distinction between “things that are Caesar’s” and “things that are God’s” is flawed. The focus of this passage is not on civil government at all, but on whom you will worship.
---
The Herodians were a political group that was supportive of Herod and Rome. Some may have been Jewish, but many were of the same nationality as Herod – Idumean, descendants of the ancient enemies of the Jews, the Edomites. The Pharisees despised them for they considered them to be irreligious traitors. But now they needed their help. The Herodians were glad to help in this plot for they too hated Jesus simply because Herod Antipas wanted Him dead.
It was this tax that was the cause of an insurrection in A.D. 6 by Judas of Galilee that resulted in the deposing of Herod Archelaus and the appointment of a Roman governor for the area. Judas’ rally cry was that God was their only God and Lord, the census tax would not be paid. Later, in A.D. 66, this tax was one of the factors that led to the national revolt that eventually resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by Roman General Titus.
https://hartmangroupdevotionsmark.blogspot.com/2018/11/mark-1213-17-13-later-they-sent-some-of.html continued:
ReplyDeleteMy 2 cents : Questions and findings:
1. Was there any sincerity to the Pharisee's flattery? Did they really believe that Jesus taught the way of God?
It is almost certain that the Pharisees were buttering up Jesus for the trap. But, it's possible that these particular Pharisees meant what they said. There were some Pharisees that were secret disciples of Jesus. It's also possible that the main leaders found people who were sympathetic to Jesus and sent them as dupes to trap Jesus (unknowingly to them).
2. To what level should we obey government officials?
The Herodians and Pharisees were political enemies - to the point that they were actual enemies. The Herodians welcomed the rule of Rome and wanted to profit off it. The Pharisees hated the rule of Rome and quietly advocated and looked to a time where Israel would throw off Rome's rule.
Jesus was sticking it to both the Herodians and the Pharisees. When Jesus had them show Him the poll tax coin, He was specifically pointing out the main issue with it. On the coin was an image of Caesar claiming to be a god. This was blasphemy to the Israelites.
Jesus was saying to the Herodians, "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's". He is basically accusing them of being complicit with the idolatry.
Jesus was saying the same thing to the Pharisees - "You owe Caesar a debt, but render unto God what specifically belongs to God". Jesus is saying that the Pharisees are right to not be complicit in the idolatry, and that they need to worship God alone. But, He is also telling them that they are under Rome and they owe something to Rome.
It's the same for us. We are citizens of God's kingdom, period. Any other obligation must be under the umbrella of God. Everything belongs to God. God has set up earthly rule for His own purposes. We are obligated to support those earthly rulers, even though they are going to go off the rails.
Whenever earthly rule fits under the umbrella of God, we are obligated to obey it. If it should come into conflict with God's Rule, we are obligated to disobey it in just those specific areas. But, even as we disobey those things that go against God's rule, we still fulfill our obligations to support the institution of our government.
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/20-21.htm says:
ReplyDeleteAnd they asked him, saying, master,.... Rabbi, or doctor; hoping, by this flattering title, and the flattering words used by them, to work him up to an openness and freedom of conversation with them.
---
This "tribute" was a capitation tax - a denarius a head assessed on the whole population, the publicans who farmed it being answerable for it to the Roman treasury. As a direct personal tax it was most unpopular, and was looked on by scrupulous legalists and the more zealous Jews as involving a greater humiliation than the ordinary import or export customs dues. It occasioned at times popular tumults, as in the case of Judas of Galilee (Acts 5:37). If Jesus answered the question in the affirmative "Yes, it is lawful for the Jews to give this tribute to Caesar," then the Pharisees would use this decision of his as a means of undermining his credit with the zealous populace. "See, after all," they would say, "this pretended Messiah of yours is but a poor-hearted traitor. Think of King Messiah paying tribute to a Gentile." If, on the other hand, the Master had said such payment of tribute was unlawful, then the Herodians, who were watching him, hoping for some such expression of opinion, would at once have denounced him to their Roman friends as One who taught the people - only too ready to listen to such teaching - lessons of sedition. In the latter case Pilate and the officials of Rome would have taken good care that the Galilaean Master had troubled the Sanhedrin no more.
https://www.preceptaustin.org/luke-20-commentary says:
ReplyDeleteIs it lawful - Is it allowed? The English word “lawful” at once suggests government, a system of civil or criminal law. The Greek word does not necessarily refer to that. The word means “it is permissible, it is allowed, permitted.” The context indicates whether the restrictions are religious or civil. Here the Jews were not discussing the legality of paying poll tax to Caesar, but whether a Jew should do so in view of his theocratic relationship to God. They hoped, in view of His Jewish background and teaching, that He would say no. That would involve Him at once with the Roman authorities. Such a reply, considering the present mood of the crowd, might put Him at the head of a rebellion (Acts 5:37) or at least would have made Him liable to a charge of treason (Luke 23:2). Had He given an affirmative answer, He would have incurred the displeasure of the Jewish crowds.
"The baseness of the plot is evident. Their hearts are hostile to Caesar, but they are ready to become "informers" against him for the sake of getting rid of him."
---
Wuest comments on the poll tax - This payment was objectionable to them for two reasons, first, because it was a sign of subjection to a foreign power, and second, because the coin with which it was to be paid, the denarius, bore the Emperor’s effigy stamped upon it. And this Emperor, it was Roman law to worship as a god. The compulsory use of the denarius could not but increase the scruples of patriotic and religious Jews.
---
Jesus' command to "Show Me a denarius": Jesus knew that at least one Jew in the throng was carrying an "idol" in his pocket. Imagine the hush that came over this group and the trepidation that began to enter the wicked hearts of the religious leaders who must have thought "He's up to something again!" I am intrigued that none of the Gospel accounts state that Jesus actually touched the denarius or took it in His hand.
https://www.preceptaustin.org/luke-20-commentary continued:
ReplyDeleteWhen Jesus said, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s,” He was drawing a sharp distinction between two kingdoms. There is a kingdom of this world, and Caesar holds power over it. But there is another kingdom, not of this world, and Jesus is King of that (John 18:36). Christians are part of both kingdoms, at least temporarily. Under Caesar, we have certain obligations that involve material things. Under Christ, we have other obligations that involve things eternal. If Caesar demands money, give it to him—it’s only mammon. But make sure you also give God what He demands.
---
The Jews had been subject to Gentile overlords for long periods in their history, but no prophet or religious teacher had ever taught in earlier days that there was anything wrong in paying tribute to those overlords. On the contrary, the prophets taught them that if they fell under Gentile domination, this was by God’s permission, and they should acknowledge the divine will by paying tribute to their foreign rulers. But around the time of the census in A.D. 6 a new teaching was spread abroad, to the effect that God alone was Israel’s king, and therefore it was high treason against him for his people to recognize any Gentile ruler by paying him tribute. The principal teacher of this new doctrine was Judas the Galilean, who led a revolt against the Romans (see Acts 5:37). The revolt was crushed, but its ideals lived on, and the propriety of paying taxes to Caesar continued to be a subject for theological debate. It would be generally agreed that Jews in the lands of the Dispersion, living on Gentile territory, should pay taxes in accordance with the laws of the areas where they lived. But the land of Israel was God’s land; this was recognized by its inhabitants when they handed over one-tenth of its produce to the maintenance of his temple in Jerusalem. But the taxes that the Roman emperor demanded were also derived from the produce of God’s land. Was it right for God’s people, living on God’s land, to give a proportion of its produce to a pagan ruler? When the question was framed in those terms, the obvious answer for many was no.
Questions and findings:
ReplyDelete1. Were the spies at all sincere in their flattery?
Since Luke calls them spies, they probably weren't sincere at all.
2. What things belong to Caesar and what things belong to God?
Nothing belongs to Caesar and everything belongs to God. God wants us to live peaceably in society and live cooperatively with the government to the point it doesn't interfere with the desires of God.
A note on what Jesus was trying to teach in this parable: Almost every commentator I've read is saying that Jesus was teaching us our obligation to a worldly government. While the Bible does teach us to cooperate with a worldly government, I disagree that Jesus was teaching that here. I think Jesus was reminding them that their current situation was because of their apostasy and they needed to repent very badly. God was in the process of throwing them out of the vineyard already and would finish up very soon. The fact that they were forced to collaborate with Caesar and his idolatry proved that.
This stuck a fork into both the Priests (who actively collaborated with Rome) and the Pharisees (who didn't want to collaborate with Rome but had to because they were being judged by God).
Governments are a reflection of the people. God will use them either to bless the people or judge the people. In the former, the government will recognize God as the supreme authority and attempt to rule as God would. In this case God's blessing will make it through. Much more often, governors will become corrupt and greedy (reflecting the people who put them in place). In this case, they become tools of judgement, bringing the country lower every year.
Sadly, we see that in the US today. As I watch State and Federal elections, I often think, "Is this really the best America has to offer?" Yes, we have voted judgement on ourselves, either with unwise, short sighted leaders, or leaders who advocate for policies and programs so contrary to life and truth.
ReplyDelete