Matthew 22:15 Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16 They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?" 18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, 20 and he asked them, "Whose image is this? And whose inscription?" 21 "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." 22 When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.
As Matthew continues to unfold his story, this Sunday's passage follows directly upon the three parables of Jesus in the Temple courts: The Parable of the Two Sons; The Parable of the Wicked Tenants; & The Parable of the Wedding Banquet. What follows, then, can rightly be called THEIR RESPONSE.
This brings up an interesting theological perspective--one mentioned at least once by Luther--that being, that AT TIMES when we are *confronted by God, we do not repent; we do not seek forgiveness; and we are not sorry for our sins. At times, our reaction is just the opposite. We become more angry; more bitter, and more stubborn. That certainly seems to be the case with the religious leaders who are listening to Jesus, and specifically, the Pharisees in this week's text. THEIR RESPONSE is they laid plans to trap him in his words.
vs16-17: This is a "strange bedfellows" arrangement. As 'groups' go, neither the Pharisees nor the Herodians would care much for each other. The Herodians could be considered a catch-all term for a group of totally secular/Hellenized (meaning, totally "into" Greco-Roman culture...Jewish in name, but not in much else) "in-crowd" with the ruling client king. This would amount to close family and friends, trusted advisors, etc. The Herodians were opportunists. They had done well under Roman occupation and would continue to do well so long as status quo was maintained.
Of course, such a group would be despised by the Pharisees. The Pharisees were all about infusing ALL of normal life with the utmost of purity and holiness. They would have had utter disdain for the Herodians, and in the case of an armed conflagration ...would've fought on opposing sides. Yet, the old proverb about 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' comes into play here. They set a craft trap for Jesus by having him weigh in on just about the most contentious matter possible.
v17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?
We as 21st century Americans have a very difficult time understanding & applying what's going on here in v.17. Extremely religious people on both sides of the political divide can be heard shouting in the public square: "WE DON'T WANT OUR TAX DOLLARS GOING TOWARD ....." and you can fill in the blank (usually an unpopular war or abortion).
But the question and issue of v17 makes little sense once its removed from its 1st century context, and zero sense once it's removed from the context of Jewish Torah observance. The question "is it right..." (TNIV) is rendered "is it lawful" in the NASB. The Greek word is "exesti"...which on the surface may mean simply "permissible," but one must remember that in 1st century Jewish Pharisaical life ALL QUESTIONS of permissibility come down to the Law, the TORAH. In other words, they are not asking a philosophical question about whether or not a ruling government has the right to impose taxes. David taxed; Solomon taxed; Hezekiah taxed; the Hasmoneans taxed; Taxation was as normal in ancient life as it is in modern life. No, what they're asking is whether or not a GOOD TORAH OBSERVANT JEW COULD/SHOULD PAY **THIS PARTICULAR TAX...
Most scholars think that what's being discussed was the "census tax" that was instituted in 6AD after the death of Herod the Great, when Judea (after a brief stint under Herod's son) became directly ruled as a Roman province. The tax was one denarius per person per year. Given the size of families, and given that a denarius was the minimum daily wage a person could make and still eat, destitute families would of necessity go without food several days a year just to pay this tax. But that wasn't the worst part. The worst part was the COIN ITSELF. The denarius was a Roman coin, stamped with Caesar's image on it & with the inscription: "Tiberius Caesar, august son of the divine Augustus, high priest (pontificux maximus)." The coin literally DRIPPED with paganism and offense against the 'graven images' prohibition of the Torah. For highly observant Jews, merely touching the coin would've constituted taking part in or affirming the cultic lies expressed by the coin. Caesar was *not divine; he was *not a god; the coin was blasphemous. Yet as a conquered/subservient people they were obliged to use this coin in deference to Caesar's wishes.
So, as every commentator under the sun has noted, it's the classic trick question & the classic no-win situation for Jesus. If he says, yeah, sure go ahead & pay the tax there's no problem with it... then Jesus immediately alienates himself with the very people who have been most-attracted to him.... the poor and marginalized. If, on the other hand, he says it's evil don't pay it... then such words uttered within earshot of the Herodians will lead to his quick arrest on the grounds of subversion.
Of course we can all marvel at how Jesus extricates himself from this pickle while, in the process, showing up the Pharisees as hypocrites (for the sake of trapping Jesus, they're ok with handling the dreaded coin ...and even within a stones throw of the Holy of Holies in the Temple). But that's not the primary point of Jesus' response. The primary point is about priorities; specifically, that rendering unto God the things of God part. Jesus has just spent 3 parables illustrating that the religious leaders were doing everything BUT rendering unto God the things of God.
Ironically, of course, the religious elite THOUGHT they were engaged in just that. They THOUGHT that through Temple sacrifice, through the religious system & observances, through observing their holy tradition they THOUGHT they were rendering unto God the things of God. The proof that they were not, however, is in the fact that through all of that stuff...or in the midst of all of that stuff....they missed seeing their own Messiah. They missed the Christ event. They missed the most DEFINING MOMENT of their own religion. Of course the application here is not to 'pick on' 1st century Jewish leaders, but rather to CONSTANTLY challenge ourselves *not to fall into the same hole. ALL we do; ALL we say; ALL we are.... in rendering unto God... must be
--Because of what Christ has done for us
--Out of our love for Christ
--In support of the continued mission of Christ
No comments:
Post a Comment