Introduction
This is the most famous of the debates because of the brilliance of the answer. Indeed, it is an answer that forms the foundation of understanding the Church’s & the Christian’s role in the world, politics, and government.
Text
13 Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words.
As we saw last week, the religious leaders were beaten rather soundly by Jesus in their attempt to shame him. Slipping away, they set about finding another way to publicly embarrass him and create either trouble for him with the Jewish crowd or with the Roman authorities. In their common hatred of Jesus, two groups who normally would be opposed to each other unite for the next attack.
Early in Jesus’ ministry the Pharisees and Herodians had met to plot strategy, not merely to shame Jesus, but to kill him (3:6). I mentioned they would normally be opposed to each other. Perhaps the better understanding is that they had different interests. The Pharisees were obsessed with law keeping as a means of righteousness. The Herodians, most likely, were merely focused on the political agenda of supporting the rule of the Herod dynasty. Each had a love-hate relationship with Rome. They resented Roman occupation, but on the other hand, Rome kept peace and made Herod’s power possible.
So a representative group of the Pharisees and Herodians come to Jesus. Most likely, they are select men chosen for their shrewdness and debating ability.
14 They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth.
Oh, these shrewd men! They project themselves as respectful of Jesus, while at the same time try to set him up for a fall. Their words are not so much an attempt to puff up Jesus, as they are meant to arouse the expectations of the crowd. They want Jesus to feel the pressure of the crowd when they ask their question. It would have worked with me. My heart would be beating rapidly as I suspiciously wait for the shot I know is coming.
Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn’t we?”
What a tough question! I can’t think of a more difficult position to make Jesus take publicly. Let’s consider why this question is so dangerous to answer.
The issue of paying taxes is always a controversial one regardless the time and circumstance. If I were to state a position on taxes from the pulpit, I would undoubtedly offend some of you, even so much that you may not return. The Jews did not like taxes anymore than Americans, but for even stronger reasons. We may complain about the rate of taxes and the zeal of the IRS in collecting. They also complained about both, but also had to contend with a system that by its very nature invited corruption and oppression. People bid to be collectors because it was a lucrative business. They made their money by overcharging the citizens. How would you like a system in which an IRS collector received a commission based on the amount of money he could collect from you?
The Jews also hated paying taxes that went to an empire that had conquered them. Theirs was an occupied country. They bitterly resented the presence of Roman soldiers and officials, and it was especially galling to pay taxes to support these very people.
But there was one more element involved that superceded all these other concerns. That element involved religion. Israel was a theocracy. Though it was no longer an independent country, it nevertheless was a country that regarded itself as God’s kingdom. The people belonged to God; they were under his authority. To the Zealots, a nationalistic movement with its own terrorist wing, paying taxes to Rome was akin to treason. God’s honor was at stake.
It doesn’t matter how much taxes are being paid; it matters to whom they go. It matters because they are a statement of whose authority the payer is under. The question really is this: To whom do we owe allegiance: Caesar or God?
Needless to say, Jesus is put in a very difficult spot. We can easily imagine the uproar of the crowd if he even fudged on the matter. That’s a big factor in the whole question. Jesus does not have the luxury to discuss the “complexities” of the issue. He will be judged immediately by the first statement he makes. He can’t say, “That’s a complicated issue to deal with.” He certainly can’t say, “Some people may not be completely satisfied with my answer.” Every public debater knows, as well as every political candidate, that the audience has to be positively engaged immediately or will lose interest or become hostile.
The Pharisees certainly are ready to pounce on any comment that would seem to compromise the authority of God. The Herodians are ready to pounce on any comment that seems to threaten the political authorities. By the way, in my previous descriptions of the temple complex, I have not mentioned a structure that is connected to the temple mount. It is called the Antonia Fortress. It is connected to the northeast temple wall and houses the Roman military force.
The Apostle Paul had an experience with the fortress. He had come to the temple to worship, when some other worshippers called out, “Men of Israel, help us! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against our people and our law and this place. And besides, he has brought Greeks into the temple area and defiled this holy place” (Acts 21:28). Paul had done no such thing, but it doesn’t matter. The accusers spoke with conviction and so the crowd believed. They turned into a mob and tried to beat Paul to death. The Roman commander heard what was happening and took soldiers “down to the crowd” where he proceeded to chain Paul and take him back to the Roman barracks, which is the Antonia Fortress. He intended, by the way, to have Paul flogged in order to find out why the crowd was so angry.
This is what the religious leaders were hoping to instigate. Jesus fudges on the matter of taxes. The Pharisees call out, “Men of Israel, help us! This man teaches that Caesar is our God!” Or perhaps Jesus is straightforward about not paying taxes. Then they can lead the crowd in loud cheers. “No more taxes! No more taxes!” Either way, the soldiers come. They got him now!
But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. “Why are you trying to trap me?” he asked. “Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.”
“Hhmm…nice little stalling tactic. Okay, he’s buying some time, but he knows we’ve got in a corner. What’s he doing with that coin though?”
16 They brought the coin, and he asked them, “Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?”
“Caesar’s,” they replied.
17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”
And they were amazed at him.
Even his enemies must be amazed. They are speechless anyhow. They must be standing there with their mouths open trying to think of a comeback, but nothing is forthcoming.
We can appreciate the cleverness of Jesus’ answer, but it has a special punch to it in Jesus’ day because of the attitude towards coinage. The coin bears the image of the present emperor, who is Caesar Tiberius. It is commonly accepted that the emperor owns the coins which bore his image. And the fact that people use the coinage for commerce indicates that they in truth do accept the authority of Rome, whether or not they like it.
Interpretation
So Jesus wins round two. But we are still left with the task of understanding the full implications of that clever remark: Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. Though Jesus may have stopped the mouths of his enemies at that moment with that saying, it has served as fuel for many debates over the centuries.
To get a handle on Jesus’ comment, let’s review his life and ministry in Roman occupied Israel. The first curious observation to make in Mark’s gospel is the lack of reference to the Roman government. Indeed, until we come to this text, there is no direct reference to Israel being under Roman government. If all we possessed was the first eleven chapters of Mark, and we knew no history of the time, we would conclude that Israel was ruled by King Herod.
Luke sets Jesus’ birth in the setting of Roman occupation. Matthew and Luke refer to the centurion of great faith, but only twice in all the gospels is the term “Roman” used. Though it is history’s mightiest empire, it gets almost no mention in the account of Jesus’ life and ministry.
When we review Jesus’ teachings there is a curious absence of direct reference to the Roman government. The closest reference to the soldiers is in Matthew 5:41 where Jesus teaches, If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. This is most likely a reference to Roman soldiers who could require Jewish civilians to carry their packs a specific distance.
Throughout Jesus’ ministry was an undercurrent of sentiment that he ought to be the Messiah or at least made king. Being the Messiah, meant in the Jewish mind, being an earthly king. John tells us in 6:15 that the crowd intended make him king by force. The charge that the Jewish leaders will present to Pilate against Jesus is that he makes himself out to be king and that he opposes paying taxes to Caesar. But Jesus never pronounced himself as an earthly king, and when Pilate confronts him with the charge he responds with these words: My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place (John 18:36).
There is one other incident worth noting. Matthew mentions an occasion in which the collectors of the temple tax came to collect from Jesus. Talking this over with Peter, who had already committed Jesus to paying, Jesus makes the case that he and his disciples are exempt from paying. Nevertheless, he adds, But so that we may not offend them…and then pays the tax (cf. Matthew 17:24-27).
What are we to make of these observations? Think about it. If Jesus’ enemies had not tried to trap him with the question about paying taxes to the Roman government, we would have no direct teaching from Jesus about our attitude towards secular government. All we would have are the handful of references in the epistles and the narrative in Acts that records the church’s progress through the Gentile world. In all those instances the teaching is basically “be obedient and respectful to authorities.”
This is hardly revolutionary teaching, and it disappoints people of all political persuasions. Nowhere does the New Testament teach that Christians should try to change the laws of the land or aspire to get into government roles. Nowhere does it hint at trying to develop a Christian political society. If anything, Jesus’ comment indicates that we are to recognize that secular government has a legitimate authority.
Now, having said all that, church history reveals a compelling story of the power of the gospel to transform societies and government structures. For example, though the New Testament does not specifically teach against slavery, nevertheless, it can be shown how the power of the gospel message was the main moving force in eradicating it. Indeed, consider the Roman Empire. Within three centuries, this little movement called Christianity, which did not preach revolution, became the religion of Rome.
From all this, I find the most helpful teaching about how the church ought to regard political and social issues is Matthew 6:33: But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. In that context of that verse Jesus teaches Christians not to worry about the necessities of life. He, of course, does not mean forsake the necessities or have nothing to do with earning a living; he means make our primary focus the kingdom of God – our place in it and our role in serving in it. Do that, and God will provide for our earthly needs as well.
Put politics in that equation – taxes, social issues, political office, etc. – and see how it fits in with Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. What Jesus is saying is, “Don’t worry about what government requires of you. What matters is that you give to God what is God’s. Give to God’s kingdom your service, and the issues of the political kingdom will work out accordingly.”
And the church has done that. Christianity has grown under monarchy, socialism, and capitalism. It has carried on under repressive and tolerant governments. Ought Christians to engage in causes for justice and morality? Yes, of course. But we must always keep in mind is that our calling is to extend the kingdom of God into the hearts of people, and we do that not through legislation or political maneuvers, but through our own proclamation of the gospel.
We must also keep in mind that God’s concern is not how well we are able to avoid bad circumstances, but how well we live to his glory in whatever the circumstances may be. The real issue in the Christian life is not the tax rate; it is whether we continue to carry out our obligations to God despite the tax rate or the political policies of our government. The demands of Caesar can never be an excuse to disobey the commands of our Lord, how ever difficult a tension is created.
Seek first the kingdom of God means to have the right perspective of what matters. What matters is our obedience to God and our witness to our neighbor for the kingdom of God as we live in the kingdom of the world. Therefore, whether we agree or disagree with the policies of our officials, we show them due respect and do not engage in the crude jokes and remarks that our neighbors use who have the same political views as we do. We obey the laws of the land that do not force us to transgress the laws of God. Thus, we pay our taxes and adhere to the local ordinances that regulate our homes and work. We may, as citizens, raise our objections, vote for our candidates, even engage in protests and boycotts, but we still regulate our conduct under the command to love our neighbors as ourselves including those whose political and social policies we oppose.
I think that it is intentional that Jesus avoided commenting on the Roman government, not because he did not have strong views or that he was afraid of what would happen to him. I think he did so because he was focused on the cause of God’s kingdom – a kingdom that encompassed both Jews and Romans and which encompasses both Republicans and Democrats. The church is about the business of redemption. Because we belong to Christ, we are a people of mercy and of righteousness, and we promote these things, but even then we do so in the cause of redemption. Let us never lose our focus.
