Matthew 22: 15- 22
The tax man commeth
15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how they might entangle Him in His talk. 16 And they sent to Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men. 17 Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? 19 Show Me the tax money.” So, they brought Him a denarius. 20 And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” 21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.” And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” 22 When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left Him and went their way.
Have you completed this year’s tax forms? If not, then you are probably in for a big shock. God to the bank now and put in for a loan application.
I find it most interesting that as I begin to put together a teaching lesson for this chapter which deals with taxes that it is presently tax season.
For most of American citizens we submit the 1040 form along with a schedule ‘A’ Itemized deduction form. Many tax advocates have been desiring a flat line deduction for all people. This is a good idea however in our sinful world, as you know there are different social levels who are favored. The playing field is not level.
Itemized deductions use to cover some key expenses that we experience. When you add up all your expenses under this form in most cases with the restrictions you are better off taking the ‘standard government deduction which is $24,000 for a married couple instead of the itemized deduction.
For one thing we all have medical costs. The only way for one to utilize this deduction today possibly is if you or a family love one experienced significant medical issues and had to pay enormous bills. With the government doing the same thing as the insurance companies you have what is called a ‘floor’. To arrive at this floor, you must calculate your adjusted gross income and then take a percentage. Then of that amount you calculate. anything over that new amount can then be put on the medical deduction line. Good luck with getting anything over the set percentage.
Now how about SALT taxes (state and local taxes). Right now, we pay Federal, State, City, and local taxes which are in addition to real estate taxes, personal, school, and sales taxes.
So, with all these taxes largely being slapped on us by the state and local governments, the Federal government has now put a limit on the amount you can claim on your tax section which maximizes out at $10, 000.
In the past to encourage home ownership you could deduct the interest you paid on the house. This year the home interest deduction didn’t disappear, but it got modified with a slick adjustment called acquisition indebtedness. If you improved your house with modifications after purchase and took out a loan say on the home improvement you cannot deduct the interest you added to your housing cost in the home equity interest.
Last year we have 4 nasty Nor’easters’ hit us causing home damage. I was looking forward to at least using this deduction to offset the repair expenses. But guess what? They still have casualty loss, but it can only be used if the President declares a national disaster.
Next is contributions and un-reimbursed business expense. You can list your contribution but if you used your personal vehicle for business or any other out of pocket expense you had while conducting activities related to your job you are out of luck. They did away with this deduction. It only applies to Reservists and government workers.
So, if you add then what you are now allowed to deduct I will venture to guess that you cannot add up your itemized expenses to exceed the standard deduction. Am I right?
The statement that there are two things you cannot avoid – death and taxes. Do I hear an ‘Amen’ on this?
So, let us jump back a couple a thousand years ago and hear other conversations regarding taxes.
In the light of His establishment of His new congregation on earth, and His new Kingly Rule, the question is now raised as to what men’s attitudes are to be towards human authorities and towards God. Matthew answers this question in terms which relate to further belligerence revealed by the Pharisees. Gathered in Jerusalem for Passover the Pharisees have come together to discuss how they can ensnare Jesus, and in the course of this, because Jesus as a Galilean was subject to Herod’s jurisdiction, they have entered into discussions with the Herodians who had connections with Herod’s court and supported Herod (unlike the majority of the people of Galilee and Peraea who simmered under his rule). They now think that they have at last discovered how they can trap Him.
The Pharisees disliked the Herodians intensely, and the feeling was no doubt mutual, for they were religiously and politically at opposite extremes, the former seeing their duty as owed to God, and the latter as owed to Herod. But the Herodians would be necessary for the trap that they aimed to set for Jesus just in case His answer was to suggest the refusal of tribute, which they probably suspected that it would be. If He did so the Pharisees could hardly accuse Him before the civil authorities themselves, for to do such a thing would have degraded them before the people, but that was something that Herodians could be expected to do. On the other hand, if He agreed that tribute should be paid to Caesar then the Pharisees would be in a position to discredit Him totally before the people as a prophet who supported Rome. Thus, they were a formidable combination.
The Jews as a nation saw themselves as the people of God, and therefore found their subjection to the Romans extremely trying. It went against all that they believed. And they found particularly aggravating the taxes that they had to pay to Rome, especially the poll tax. These were on top of the taxes which they much more willingly paid to their own national leadership and to the Temple. They thus paid the Roman taxes very grudgingly, and considered that they were the equivalent of extortion, and therefore immoral. They saw it as questionable whether in God’s eyes they were even ‘lawful’. They themselves believed that they only owed such ‘duties’ towards God. So this taxation by Rome was something that caused much bitterness in their hearts, and especially the tribute per head that was payable directly to Caesar. That almost became a question of an offering to a foreign god. Thus, for anyone to have suggested that it was right for them to have to pay such tribute would have been looked on as the equivalent of blasphemy. As far as they were concerned such taxes suggested that the Romans were usurping the place of God. Any such person, therefore, would have found himself immediately ostracized as the equivalent of a ‘public servant’ and a traitor. And for a prophet to do so would have filled them with horror, and would have rendered him a false prophet, and therefore totally unacceptable to almost all the people.
On the other hand, the Roman authorities demanded these taxes, and they would have looked on anyone who said that they should not be paid as a rebel and an insurgent. If anyone openly and authoritatively declared that the tribute should not be paid they would immediately have been arrested, and even executed. Thus, the whole subject was one that no one spoke about, with all grudgingly paying their tribute (apart from the few obstinate rebels) but with all muttering under their breaths that it was not right that they should have to do so.
And herein the Pharisees realized that they had the unanswerable question, for whichever reply Jesus gave to it He would be finished. He would either be despised by the people or executed by the Romans. There was no way out. At last they knew that they had got Him.
15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how they might entangle Him in His talk.
The words ‘Took counsel’ signifies that the Scribes of the Pharisees and the other leading Pharisees came together to discuss the matter, and even included the Herodians and others in the discussions. Their purpose, Matthew tells us, was to ensnare The Lord Jesus by making Him say what could only condemn Him.
16 And they sent to Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men.
Their preparations were carefully laid. In order that Jesus might suspect nothing the Pharisees did not approach Him themselves, but sent along ‘their disciples’, that is the young men who were under their instruction but were still not yet fully initiated Pharisees. Such men might well be seen by Jesus as ‘seekers after truth’ and their youthfulness would surely lull His suspicions. Along with them went the Herodians. They would be expected to be interested in a subject like this, and their hope might well have been that their presence would arouse Jesus to be intemperate. And Jesus would be caught between the two, the ‘innocent minded’ young fledgling Pharisees and the worldly Herodians. In this situation Jesus would surely feel that He had to make His position clear. And then on top of this they had prepared their introductory words carefully to encourage Him to speak boldly.
“Teacher, we know that you are true. That is that He teaches what is genuinely true and speaks it out honestly and without equivocation.
Their opening words, given here, were subtle in the extreme. They flattered Him by calling Him ‘Teacher’. And then they laid out how they expected Him to approach the question.
‘And teach the way of God in truth.’ That is that His message will be firmly and truly a proclamation of God’s way, and God’s way only, the ‘way of holiness’ of Isaiah 35.8, the ‘way of righteousness’ of John (21.32).
‘And care not for any one, for you do not regard the person of men.’ This proviso was added to encourage Him to be bold, and not to compromise. They wanted to make sure that He was indiscreet. ‘Care not for anyone’. That is, does not let what others think interfere with His speaking the truth. ‘Do not regard the person of men.’ That is, does not measure His words in terms of who are present or who will hear of them. This is, of course, a fair description of a true prophet, but they spelled it out with the intention of making sure that He spoke clearly and without inhibition. The whole purpose behind it was to compromise Jesus.
17 Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?”
Then they introduced the crunch question. ‘Was it right (or ‘lawful’) to give tribute to Caesar or not?’ The word they use is ‘exestin’. It can refer either to being ‘right in itself’, or alternatively to being ‘in accordance with the Law’. But the former was probably the main meaning in this context, as is indicated by the addition of ‘or not?’ They wanted a practical ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer that would result in His committing Himself to forbidding the payment of tribute, not just a legal decision which could be dismissed as being merely intended to be a theoretical interpretation of the Law.
18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites?
Jesus was not for one moment deceived by their seeming innocence, nor moved by their flattery. He saw straight through them to the wickedness that lay at the heart of their question. And He made this quite plain in His reply. “Why do you put me to the test, you hypocrites?’ or in other words, ‘why are you trying to put Me on the spot in this hypocritical way? Have you no conscience? Do you not realize how wicked you are being?’
19 Show Me the tax money.” So, they brought Him a denarius.
Then He bade them to show Him the tribute money, that is the coin in which they would pay the tribute. And as He anticipated they brought Him a denarius. Most religiously minded Jews sought to avoid carrying a denarius, firstly because it bore the graven image of the emperor, something forbidden by the ten commandments, and secondly because it had written on it certain superscriptions. On one side was engraved, ‘Tiberius Caesar, son of the divine Augustus’ and on the other side ‘Pontifex Maximus’ (high priest - of Roma and the Roman gods). Both would be blasphemous. Thus, they would grudgingly use it to pay their taxes, but would seek to avoid it on other occasions whenever they could.
‘They brought Him --.’ This may suggest that the questioners did not have one themselves but had to obtain one, probably from one of the Herodians, or from someone in the listening crowd. By this time the crowd would have recognized the importance of the question and would be paying great attention. They probably did not recognise that it was a trap and would therefore expect the prophet to violently denounce the paying of tribute.
20 And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” 21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.” And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
Jesus then turned to His questioners and, indicating the denarius, asked them, “Whose is this image and superscription?” There was only one reply to such a question, ‘Caesar’s’. The emperors were now known as Caesar, a title associated with the emperors because of Julius Caesar’s previous importance. It had been his family name.
Jesus’ reply was masterly, for it clearly answered the question, and yet did it in such a way that all, even the most fervent, had to acknowledge that He was right. “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” In other words, He was saying, ‘this coin clearly belongs to Caesar, for it contains his image and superscription, so give it back to him, for you should not possess it anyway unless you acknowledge his over lordship. On the other hand, you are made in the image of God (Genesis 1.27), and God has designated His people as ‘holiness to the Lord’ in the superscription on the golden plate on the High Priest’s headpiece (Exodus 28.36; compare also Exodus 19.5-6; Isaiah 44.5). The consequence is that you should therefore live your lives wholly for God.’
The remarkable nature of the reply comes out in that the Zealots would have agreed with it wholeheartedly, considering that to own denarii was unpatriotic. If they could have done so, they would gladly have bundled up all the denarii and handed them back to Caesar. And the Romans would have found nothing amiss in it, for that is what they asked, the return of their denarii in taxes. All who came in between would also have had to agree, for they felt uneasy about holding denarii, and recognized that such were not of God, and yet they did so. Thus, by holding them and using them they were thereby compromising with Rome and as a result putting themselves under an obligation to Rome, and at the same time, even if only theoretically, they fervently admitted that all that they had belonged to God. Each could therefore interpret Jesus’ words to speak to his own position and as in the end seeking to turn them back fully to God.
Nor was it an evasion. It was a recognized principle of the time that to use a ruler’s coins was to acknowledge his over lordship, that was one reason why they were issued. The use of them therefore indicated a recognition that the users accepted civil responsibilities. Thus, Jesus was saying that those who did so also had to fulfil those civil responsibilities. And yet He was also emphasizing that God must have the prior claim in all things, for all things belong to God. Thus, when it comes to a choice between God and the state, God must be pre-eminent. These are the principles of the new Kingdom of Heaven.
The idea that men could owe allegiance to an earthly sovereign, even a foreign sovereign, was not new. The principle is enunciated in Jeremiah 27.5-22; 38.17-20. It is because God Is sovereign over men’s affairs, and that when He brings judgment on His people they must recognize their civil responsibilities even about foreign overlords. The principle is confirmed by Paul in Romans 13.1-7.
Had the Chief Priests, Scribes and Elders been living to God they would not have neglected God’s vineyard or have rejected His Cornerstone (21.33-42). Had they been living to God they would have responded to the King of Heaven (21.31-32). And thus, for those under the Rule of Adoni Yahweh, The God of Heaven all must be submitted to Him, while at the same time recognizing civil responsibility in its rightful place.
22 When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left Him and went their way.
On hearing His reply His opponents marveled at the wisdom of His answer. Instead of having caught Him out and shown Him up, it was they who had been shown up for hypocrisy, the hypocrisy of pretending to live only for God, and yet at the same time kowtowing to Caesar by using his coinage and taking advantage of the opportunities that his rule presented for building up wealth, taking advantage of the atmosphere of worldwide peace and communication.
