Render to Caesar—Mark 12:13-17
While we honor earthly authorities, we give our unconditional obedience to God alone. If this means a king issuing a decree for all subjects to pray to him alone, then like Daniel we continue to pray to the one, true God. For the early church, the example of Daniel was not relegated to the fanciful halls of what-if. Instead, Caesar not only demanded their taxes; he also demanded their worship. Roman subjects were required to confess the lordship of Caesar, and Christians refused to do so, for they submitted to the lordship of Christ.
And they sent to him some of the Pharisees and some of the Herodians, to trap him in his talk. And they came and said to him, “Teacher, we know that you are true and do not care about anyone’s opinion. For you are not swayed by appearances, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Should we pay them, or should we not?” But, knowing their hypocrisy, he said to them, “Why put me to the test? Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” And they brought one. And he said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said to him, “Caesar’s.” Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.
Mark 12:13-17 ESV
Daniel and his three friends were powerful real-life examples of Jeremiah’s letter to the exiled Jews. For the prophet told the Jews:
Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat their produce. Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.
Jeremiah 29:5-7
While these young men may very well have been made eunuchs upon entering King Nebuchadnezzar’s service, which would have physically prevented them from having wives and children, they certainly did seek the welfare of the city and specifically of the very king who had taken them into exile. Throughout the narrative chapters of Daniel, they show themselves to be diligent servants for the welfare of Babylon.
However, living in a pagan city and serving a pagan king did occasionally put their loyalties to the test. When told worship Nebuchadnezzar’s golden image, Daniel’s three friends chose to be cast into a furnace instead. When commanded to pray to the king alone, Daniel continued to pray to the LORD toward Jerusalem three times a day as he had always done and was lowered into a den of lions as a result. Indeed, they continue to be precious examples for us still 1 Peter 2:17’s command to “Fear God. Honor the emperor.”
In our present text, Jesus is posed a question that strikes at the same perennial matter regarding our loyalties and service to earthly governments and rulers and to God as the King of kings. And to make matters even more heated, the question made is specifically about the ever-cheerful topic of taxes, which is rightfully lumped in with death as one of life’s great certainties.
Setting a Trap—Verses 13–14
In our opening verse, we read of three groups of people performing two actions. First, we find a group called they sending to Jesus the two other groups (Pharisees and Herodians) that they might snare Jesus in His speech. We should rightly begin by asking: who are they? Context indicates that these are the chief priests, scribes, and elders that questioned Jesus’ authority and were the target of Jesus’ parable in our previous passage. Indeed, verse 12 speaks of these religious leaders, saying, “And they were seeking to arrest him but feared the people, for they perceived that he had told the parable against them. So they left him and went away.” Since verse 13 picks up immediately where that verse left off, we should assume that the chief priests, scribes, and elders are still being referred to here.
Thus, after having their direct challenge of Jesus meet a poor end, they have now crawled behind the scenes to send others to do their bidding. The first of their proxy assault on Jesus would come by way of the Pharisees and the Herodians, which 3:6 told us were already conspiring together as to how to destroy Jesus. Such a partnership was certainly a case of the enemy of my enemy is my friend, for the Pharisees and the Herodians did not like one another. The Pharisees, of course, were theologically orthodox but legalistically dead in a false sense of holiness, while the Herodians were worldly politicians that trumpeted Herod’s puppet government at the expense of their fellow Jews. Even so, I think Ryle is right to point out that:
Worldly men and formalists have little real sympathy for one another. They dislike one another’s principle, and despise one another’s ways. But there is one thing which they both dislike even more, and that is the pure gospel of Jesus Christ. And hence, whenever there is a chance of opposing the gospel, we shall always see the worldly man and the formalist combine and act together. We must expect no mercy from them: they will show none. We must never reckon on their divisions: they will always patch up an alliance to resist Christ.[1]
Thus, these two competing groups united to trap him in his talk. Sproul notes that the word trap can sound too pleasant for what is being attempted here. He suggests that we should think of hunters digging a pit, filling it with spikes, covering the hole, and lying in wait for an animal to fall to its death. They are essentially attempting the same plan with Jesus. They want to snare Him with His words so they can hand Him over to the governor to be killed as a rebel against Rome.
Thus, they together devised a question about whether or not it was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar. To answer yes would have enraged many of the Jews, and to answer no would have been fomenting rebellion against Rome. This appeared, therefore, to be a fool-proof plan for trapping Jesus, for His answer would either diminish His favor in the sight of the people or cement Him as a threat to Rome. Furthermore, this would have been an issue that the Pharisees and the Herodians disagreed on anyway, making it the perfect pretense for presenting the question as if Jesus were being asked to settle their long-held dispute.
Speaking of pretense, they certainly prefaced their question with just that. Since both the Pharisees and the Herodians shared a common hunger for prominence and the esteem of others, they clearly assumed that Jesus might be swayed by that same longing, even as they flattered Jesus as not caring about anyone’s opinions. They very much understood the value of integrity, even as they lacked it themselves and desperately hoped that Jesus did as well.
Yet their words proved far truer than their wicked hearts could have imagined. Here they imitated their father who also threw words of truth at Christ in the wilderness in order to tempt Him into disobedience. They used flattery in an attempt to fan any spark of pride that Jesus may have had into a flame. Thankfully, no such spark could be found in our humble King, but the same cannot be said of us. As the shepherds warned Christian and Hopeful of the Flatterer, so should we be wary of flattery, for it stirs up pride which then leads to destruction.
Matthew Henry gives a fitting warning against such hypocritical statements:
If they spoke what they thought concerning Christ, when they said, ‘We know that thou art right,’ their persecuting him, and putting him to death, as a deceiver, was sin against knowledge; they knew him, and yet crucified him. However, a man’s testimony shall be taken most strongly against himself, and out of their own mouths are they judged; they knew that he taught the way of God in truth, and yet rejected the counsel of God against themselves. The professions and pretenses of hypocrites will be produced in evidence against them, and they will be self-condemned. But if they did not know or believe it, they lied unto God with their mouth, and flattered him with their tongue.[2]
In other words, they spoke themselves into an eternal trap quite similar to the one that they were attempting to set for Christ. If they really knew that Jesus taught the truth, then they would be judged by God for going against what they plainly knew to be true, and if they did not believe Him, then they were lying here and would be judged for that sin. Proverbs 1:18 certainly applies to them by saying, “but these men lie in wait for their own blood; they set an ambush for their own lives.”
-
John’s Conversations
Thankfully, we can all become better acquainted with the Lord Jesus without ever knowing John used two different strategies to report responses in conversation (as fascinating and potentially useful as that might be). John’s Gospel, and the Word of God as a whole, reveal the Son of God, who deserves our worship.
Conversation has been compared to a game of catch. Just as people take turns throwing a ball back and forth, people also take turns speaking. Many people converse in the Gospel of John: Jesus, John the Baptist, Andrew, Philip, Nathanael, Mary, Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, and a royal official—those are just the ones in the first four chapters. In each conversation John recorded, one speaker responds to another. But the fascinating thing is, sometimes John does something with the Greek language you can’t see in most English Bible versions.
Did you know there were different ways in Greek to describe how one person responded to someone else? Stephen Levinsohn tells us the default way simply got the job done by using the Greek verb meaning “to answer.” For example, Jesus told Nathanael that He saw him under a fig tree before Philip came and brought Nathanael to Jesus. And John reports how Nathanael answered by writing:
Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” (John 1:49)
Here, John used his default strategy (called a “quotative frame”, which he did around 45 times throughout his Gospel.
Read More -
Origin of Paul’s Faith and Teachings—1 Corinthians 11:23
Paul’s teaching was not of human origin at all. Paul delivered to the gentiles the testimony of an apostle. He was a living witness of the resurrection. He bore witness to Christ’s triumph over the grave. Paul received grace from the Lord Jesus having been found guilty of persecuting Christ’s church.
Over the last few months, I’ve been stewing on a verse. It’s come to mind regularly at various times. It’s a verse that I’ve spoken or referenced numerous times as I’ve had the privilege of administering the Lord’s Table. Yet for all the times that I’ve served the Lord’s table, and all the times I’ve received communion, this verse hasn’t laid hold on me. It wasn’t until the Lord saw fit to move me out of my most recent pulpit, that this verse grabbed me. “For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you” 1 Corinthians 11:23a.
For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you…Ἐγὼ γὰρ παρέλαβον ἀπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου, ὃ καὶ παρέδωκα ὑμῖν…1 Corinthians 11:23
We typically think of this verse as an introductory note in the larger, more important section about the Lord’s table (v17-34). It is situated in the middle of both a rebuke and a corrective instruction for the Corinthian church regarding the practice of communion. While this sentence may seem like a simple linking idea, there is much to be learned from in considering these inspired Words from the Holy Spirit through Paul.
Rather than being a throwaway sentence or simple linking phrase, this verse is a statement from Paul regarding the origin of his own faith and what he teaches. This is a genesis, a backstory to all that he’s shared with the Corinthians. This is his source of authority, this is his source of faith, this is his source of practice, this is his source of instruction for other believers. His source is not his own mind (although he was perhaps the greatest thinker of his time), his source was not his own research (although perhaps he was the greatest interpreter of his time), his source was not his own spirituality (although no one could doubt that he must have possessed tremendous faith to suffer the horrific pains he endured). To put it succinctly and bluntly – Paul wasn’t the source for Paul’s religion.
For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you…1 Corinthians 11:23a
This phrase reveals a pattern of ministry and consistent testimony regarding Paul’s faith, preaching, and teaching. In other words, this isn’t an isolated verse or a solitary statement. This is the repeated testimony of Paul. The substance of what Paul believed, taught, preached, and lived as an example came as something he received. His faith, its substance and essence, came as a gift from another. The source of the gift was none other than the risen Lord Jesus Christ.
The New Testament Concept of Paul’s Faith
When Paul writes to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Philippians, and to Timothy, he writes to them regarding what he himself has received and what he delivered to them (1 Thessalonians 4:1, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 1 Corinthians 15:3, Philippians 4:9, 1 Timothy 1:16,). The most substantive testimony of what Paul taught, preached, and delivered to the churches is found in Galatians 1:11-12:
For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. Galatians 1:11–12 ESV
When Paul speaks words of encouragement or challenge for the Corinthians and Thessalonians to continue in the faith, he speaks using terms of tradition (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15). This isn’t a philosophy (of Paul’s own making). Nor is this a new interpretation of something old (such as a Rabbinic comment which was very common in 1st century Judaism). What Paul delivered to the churches planted was precisely what he had received.
Paul’s preaching was put to the test after 14 years (as Paul counts in Galatians 2:1-2). His testimony to the gathered apostles was found to be Christ-honoring and in harmony with the testimony of the Apostles, even as he corrected another apostle (Galatians 2:11-14). How could this be if Christ did not disciple (teach and make him follow) this Paul? Thinking purely logistically, there were no assembled or distributed written gospels at the time of Saul/Paul’s conversion (recounted in Acts 9). All Paul could have heard from others would have been word of mouth. Even if there were documents for Paul to read and study, how could he have so accurately presented the resurrection message before the men who were there without himself being a witness? Yet Saul (so he was still called when Jesus was crucified and raised) was not there on what we call good Friday, or Easter. Yet he throws away all that he knew, his title, position, influence, social connections, all for the sake of the resurrected Jesus who confronted him (Acts 9:3-16). Paul’s preaching, absent the “seminary” training in Jerusalem from the disciples, came from none other than the Lord Jesus. Acts 9:16 is particularly helpful in understanding WHO it was that taught Paul. It was none other than the Lord Jesus:
But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.Acts 9:15-16 ESV, emphasis added
Paul leaves his audiences with no doubt, whether they are gentile rulers (like Felix in Acts 24, or Agrippa and Bernice in Acts 25), or gentile commoners (Like those in Athens in Acts 17), whether they are Jewish leaders (like the Synagogue of Thessalonica in Acts 17), or Jewish disciples of Jesus (like the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15), it was no one else than the resurrected Jesus himself who confronted Saul/Paul and then instructed him in the faith.
For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you…1 Corinthians 11:23a
How could this be? Jesus was already resurrected and ascended? Surely Paul didn’t walk on the road to Damascus (Luke 24), nor was he with the gathered disciples prior to Pentecost (Acts 1). How did Paul receive teaching from Jesus? Galatians is the book to turn to at this point. Notice what is absent, and what is present in Paul’s testimony.
Read More
Related Posts: -
My Father and My Son
My father abandoned me before I was born, being a bad father is something I’m deeply afraid of. Before my son was born, I was anxious that since my father didn’t love me, perhaps I also wouldn’t love my son. But to my joy, I adore my son, by the grace of God. I would never abandon him or harm him in any way.
I recently published a vague post on X (or Twitter) this week. The tweet said:
I had to discipline my son tonight. It’s not the first time, but I’m heartbroken. It’s necessary, but I hate it so much. It’s especially difficult since he’s such a good boy. He’s such an easy boy to parent. But he’s still a sinner, and since I love him, I must discipline him.
Thousands of atheists and progressive “Christians” on social media are accusing me of hurting and abusing my nearly 5-month-old son. Some believers have also resorted to all kinds of assumptions and accusations.
I’m deeply disappointed with these people. I should have known I was too vague. I should have known better. I’ve explained my foolish tweet to a few sincere people who’ve reached out to me in love, but I think it’s good for me to write this article to explain what my tweet was about.
When I said I had to discipline my son, I meant I had to do sleep training. It’s really as simple as that. I wish I had used the word “sleep training” instead of “discipline,” but I couldn’t remember the word. Even when I was trying to explain what I really meant in my tweet to some people, I said “sleeping habits” and “disciplining him in terms of bedtimes.”
Read More
Related Posts:
