Talk:Caesar
Re: [HHC TransTasman] Who's Who
Hi Mark, it has been a while.
I guess there are a few things to be said.
With regard to rendering to Caesar I think you have not understood the passage.
That passage starts with the Pharisee's and Herodian's coming to trap Jesus. These two groups were enemies who came together to attempt to destroy what they perceived as a mutual threat to their power - Jesus. Herod was King but his rule was only at the behest of the Roman occupiers. I like to think of the Herodian's as being the Vichy government of their day. (The Vichy government was the French government during WW2 that collaborated with the German army of occupation. They were seen as traitors by most frenchmen).
To be effective their trap needed two jaws, the Pharisee's were one and the Herodian's were the other.
Clearly then if Jesus said DO NOT pay tribute (and note here the correct translation is tribute and not tax, and further that tribute has connotations of rendering honour and servitude) to Caesar the Herodian's would run like dogs to report this to their Roman masters and Jesus would be arrested.
So one arm of the trap is explained.
It must be equally clear that if Jesus said DO pay tribute to Caesar that this would somehow land him in trouble with the Jews. How? Simply that every Jew listening to Jesus ministry would walk away if He instructed them to pay tribute to Caesar because they all knew the law. What law? You shall honour no other God but Me. (Remember Caesar proclaimed himself a god). The Pharisee's and all the Jews knew they should not be paying tribute to Caesar. If this was not so then the second jaw of the trap is of no effect and there is no trap. You see if Jews believed it was acceptable in God's sight to pay tribute to Caesar then where is their point of contention?
So Jesus answered in a riddle. He called for a denarii - a coin made of silver. Then asked whose superscript was on the coin. The answer - Caesar's. So render to God what is God's and render to Caesar what is Caesar's.
Before explaining the riddle lets jump to the end of the passage.
Scripture says the Pharisee's and the Herodian's were AMAZED at His answer. Further both groups realised they had no complaint to bring against Him.
So did Jesus really say "pay them both"? Is that AMAZING? I personally find it less than amazing. In fact its underwhelming and a little perfunctory. It's probably the lame answer I would have given in that situation.
The truth is everyone expected Jesus to say DO NOT pay Caesar. And indeed that is exactly what He did say. But He said it in code.
So what is the riddle? Jesus told you what belongs to Caesar, an inscription. A nothing. An image. A scratch. Therefore render him nothing.
But as to the substance of the coin, that was silver, and that belongs to God. "All the gold and all the silver are Mine declares the Lord". Its not a perfect quote from scripture but the sentiment is correct. Look it up.
And THAT is why they were AMAZED. Jesus told them to give Caesar the nothing he deserved but he did it in such a way that when His words were reported they would not be able to be construed such as to allow the Romans to bring a charge against Him.
Think it through. What trap is there if the correct answer is "pay them both"? What amazement is there in such an answer? A careful and thoughtful reading of this scripture reveals the truth, just as it reveals the superficial study given this passage by all those who have stood at a pulpit and preached this passage is instructing you to "pay both".
Second I would like to stay on the list. :)
Regards, Tony