MATTHEW 22:15-22
IN THE REPUBLIC, Plato tells a philosophical parable about a group of humans who have lived in “an underground, cavelike dwelling.” They have been there “since childhood, fixed in the same place, with their necks and legs fettered, able to see only in front of them, because their bonds prevent them from turning their heads around.” Behind them is an elevated area with a blazing fire. In front of that fire there are men talking and walking back and forth “carrying all kinds of artifacts... statues of people and other animals, made out of stone, wood, and every material.” The glow from the fire casts shadows of the mobile people and objects on the wall in front of the immobile prisoners. And so, quite naturally, the prisoners hear the echoes and see the various movements and assume (wrongly) that it is the shadows themselves that both move and speak.
As the story continues, Plato (using the voice of his mentor Socrates) then asks what would happen if one of the prisoners was released and allowed to walk upright toward the fire. Socrates proposes that such a person, having been cramped for so many years, would find both the walking toward and the viewing of the fire to be so painful to his limbs and his eyes that he would prefer to return to his customary position and confine his view to the familiar shadows.
That is the beginning of Plato’s famous Allegory of the Cave, which is his illustration of the unenlightened man, his vivid picture of man trapped in the depths of ignorance and unaware of his own limited perspective. In this chapter, as we continue our study in Matthew’s Gospel, we don’t find an allegory or a parable but rather a historical narrative (a true story) about a group of men so enslaved to their man-made traditions—so used to hearing echoes and seeing shadows—that when they see and hear the reality of Jesus Christ, they find “the true light” that has come into the world to be unbearable (cp. John 1:9). It is so unbearable that they seek not only to return to their customary position in the dark but first to douse the cause of their discomfort, to extinguish the fire altogether.
Throughout Matthew’s Gospel, Matthew has provided reasons for their desire to snuff out the Savior and the light and heat that radiates from him. Jesus has been anything but dim and cool in his claims. In 5:20 he claimed that “unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” In Matthew 9—19 he claimed that the Pharisees’ views on fasting, Sabbath-keeping, and divorce were wrong. In Matthew 21,22 he told parables about and against them.
And here in our text from Jesus’ perspective the pot is about to boil. The seven woes of chapter 23 are soon to pour out from his mouth. From the Pharisees’ perspective, however, that pot has already boiled over. In 21:46 we learn that they were ready to arrest him. Here in 22:15 they have come to gather evidence to further justify that arrest. They are plotting, as our text says, to entangle him in his talk. And the bait they will use is a tricky question.
We’ll look next at that deceptive question and also at Jesus’ ingenious answer.
The Question
As the Parable of the Wedding Feast divided nicely into two sections (vv. 1-7; 8-14), so the first of three questions put to Jesus (22:17, 28, 36) divides nicely as well. There is their question (vv. 15-17) and Jesus’ answer (vv. 18-21). Then there is the answer to his answer (v. 22), a holding of their hats in their hands, which I’ll include under Jesus’ answer.
We start with the question:
Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone’s opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances.
Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” (vv. 15-17)
To get the fuller meaning of their question, let’s bring in a few basic interrogatives of our own. Let’s question their question with who, why, where, and what.
First, who is asking the question? You’ll notice that two groups are mentioned—the Pharisees (v. 15) and the Herodians (v. 16). This is an unlikely union, as the Pharisees were “ardent nationalists, opposed to Roman rule, while the Herodians, as their name indicates, supported the Roman rule” of Herod the Great and his dynasty. Yet, as unlikely as this union might be, it’s not implausible, for it is common enough for enemies to become allies when they have a common enemy. Such is the case here. Jesus is that common enemy.
Also mentioned are the Pharisees’ disciples—“And they sent their disciples to him” (v. 16). So the picture here is that of the older Pharisees asking their younger pupils, along with the Herodians, to ask Jesus their premeditated question. Why they ask their disciples to do their dirty work, we don’t know. Perhaps it was to give some distance. Or perhaps it was because they had been in the ring with Jesus recently and hadn’t fared so well.
Our second question to their question is why. Why are they asking what they ask? Matthew reveals their motives. After hearing Jesus talk in parables about them, the Pharisees “plotted how to entangle him in his words” (v. 15). Jesus also reveals their evil intentions. He was, as verse 18 says, “aware of their malice” or literally “evil.” He knows it’s an evil temptation (cp. 4:1) or trap or test: "Why put me to the test, you hypocrites?” (v. 18). I think of it this way. They ask their question like some sly reporters today ask politicians questions, hoping the candidate puts his foot in his mouth, or here, more specifically, hoping our Savior, with some sacrilegious sound bite, will sign his own death sentence.
Our third question to their question is, where? Where are they when they ask Jesus this question? They are in the temple. In 21:23 we read, “And when he entered the temple,” and then in 24:1 we read, “Jesus left the temple.” So between those two verses we find temple talk, or talk in the temple. They are in the temple! Tuck that temple context in the back of your minds. We'll untuck it in a minute.
Our final question to their question is, what? What did they ask? They asked, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” (v. 17).
If Jesus answers no to their question—“No, don’t pay taxes to the Roman Emperor,” he then admits not only that his lordship is lame (he has been talking about a kingdom and acting like a king), but his rule is seditious. His no to them could be construed to mean yes to the charge of insurrection. And we know what Rome does with insurrections. Rebels against Rome don’t fare well. Let’s remember the official crime for which Jesus died. It was written above his head: “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews” (27:37). That was the sarcastic but serious charge. The Pharisees would love for him to freely admit that he, as the king of the Jews, will not pay taxes to a Gentile Lord.
That’s if he says no. But if Jesus answers yes to their question (“Yes, pay taxes to Caesar”), then the rumor proves true—he is a friend not only of Gentile sinners but also of Roman tax-collectors. You see, this is a short question, but not a simple one.
Some scholars think the Pharisees would have answered the question no (it is not lawful) but the Herodians yes (it is lawful). Whether the Pharisees represent one horn of the dilemma and the Herodians the other, we don’t know for certain. What we do know is that those are the two horns of the dilemma—revolution against Rome or collaboration with it. If Jesus moves too far this way or that way, he is nicked or cut or killed.
The Answer
What does Jesus do? Does he stand quietly balanced between the two horns? No. He doesn’t stand quietly or safely between them. Rather, he takes the horns by the horns and breaks them. He destroys their false dichotomy. Let me show you what I mean. Look next at Jesus’ brilliant answer. I’ll take you through it verse by verse.
First, we have verse 18: “But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, ‘Why put me to the test, you hypocrites?”’Yes, our loving Lord calls them “hypocrites,” a word he will use thirteen times in this Gospel. It’s a favorite of his. Now, what’s a hypocrite? The Greek word translated “hypocrite” refers to actors in the theater, those who would play a part often by putting on a mask. And that’s precisely the sense here. Jesus calls them out for their playacting. They have smiles on their faces but have come with evil intentions—to trap him in their trap. Psalm 55:21 can be applied to them:
His speech was smooth as butter, yet war was in his heart; his words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords.
Behind their soft and smooth words are warring intentions and sharp swords. That’s what Jesus detects here. So the word “hypocrites” is Jesus’ way of exposing them. He removes the mask from their flattering introduction to the question. Here’s that introduction again. Listen. Look. Feel the butter. It’s soft and smooth.
Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone’s opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances. Tell us, then, what you think [about Roman taxes],... (vv. 16b, 17a)
In other words, “Jesus, you are a straight shooter. And we really admire that about you. So shoot straight with us now. Should we pay the poll tax to Rome? Is that the right thing to do? Yes or no?”
What is so interesting here is that their buttering him up is both irrational and ironic. It’s irrational because if they really believed that Jesus couldn’t be moved by the opinions of others (i.e., by being buttered up), why then butter him up? Their sweet talk makes no sense. It’s irrational.
It’s also ironic. What’s ironic is that his questioners “will soon learn to their discomfort that their praise is all too true.” Jesus will shoot straight with them. And the gun won’t backfire. The bullet will go straight through their forked tongues. He will silence them with one shot.
What is also ironic is that their flattery is true. They’re right about Jesus. He is a “teacher,” in fact the greatest teacher of all time. He is also a truthful teacher and a teacher of the truth. And he himself, as they say, is “true.” One might even call him “the truth”—“the way, and the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). You see, the irony is that their hypocrisy unmasks both their true identity and Jesus’.
In verses 19-21 as Jesus continues his expose of hypocrisy. Next he says:
“Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said, “Caesar’s.”
What’s the hypocrisy here? To answer that question let’s go back to our where question. Where are they when they ask this question? The temple. What had Jesus just done in the temple? He “overturned the tables of the moneychangers” (21:12). Perhaps people are still picking up Roman coins all over the Court of the Gentiles. But notice that Jesus apparently has no money on him. Or at least the pagan coin in question was not in his possession. So in the temple, to the super-spiritual, he says, “How about you? Any Roman coinage on you?” And they unwittingly say, "Oh, sure. Here you go.” Ah ha! The first part of his trap has sprung. Here comes the second. Jesus then questions his questioners. “Okay, boys, tell me, whose image and inscription is on it?” “That’s easy,” they say. “Caesar’s.” “Yes. The image [or to use Bible language, the graven image, Exodus 20:4] that you hold in your hands is that of Caesar.” We know from archeology that the portrait on the denarius was likely the head of Tiberius, with a crown of bay leaves. We also have a good idea of what the inscription was. On one side was written:
TI CAESAR DIVI AUG F AUGUSTUS (that is, “Ti[berius] Caesar Divi Aug[gusti] F[ilius] Augustus).
Translated, we might render it, “Tiberius Caesar Augustus son of the divine Augustus.” On the other side was a picture of a seated woman (symbolizing peace, the Pax Romano), perhaps the Emperor’s wife, Livia. There the inscription reads either PONTIF MAXIM (that is, Pontif[ex] Maxim[us])," which means “High Priest,” or Divus et Pontifex Maximus, “God and High Priest.” Needless to say this coin’s images and inscriptions didn’t fare well with the first and second commandments.
The coin itself is quite a visual aid to their hypocrisy. In this silver coin Jesus wants them to see their hypocritical reflection. “Most pious of pious Jews, what are you, most separate of the separatists, doing with pagan money in God’s holy temple? How is it that you hold in your holy hands idolatrous images with blasphemous inscriptions?”
Jesus is sharp here, very sharp indeed. Psalm 9:16 reads, “the wicked are snared in the work of their own hands.” Here in 22:19-21a, the wicked indeed find the snare in their own hands! Jesus caught them red-handed.
In verse 21b we come (finally) to Jesus’ answer. His setup to it has been so great. Can his actual answer surpass it? Oh, yes, it can and will. “Then he said to them, ‘Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.’”
In the first part of his answer (“Therefore render [or literally “give back”] to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”) he adds nothing to their own reply (“Caesar’s”) except an obvious application. If it’s Caesar’s coin (he, in a sense, made it and gave it to them to use), then simply give it back to Caesar when he asks for it. In verse 17 they ask, “Is it lawful to pay [or literally “give,” [dote] ... to Caesar?” in the sense of giving a gift to him. Jesus replies, “No need to give him a gift. It’s not a gift. He's not a god. But you are to give back [apodote] to him what was first his.” In other words, pay the tax.
But why? Why does he answer this way? Why would a pious Jew pay a pagan tax? Here’s why. Let me spell out some of the practical theology (and exile theology) at work here.
Living under Roman rule—like living under Babylonian or Egyptian rule—had its ups and its downs. The big downer of the downs was Roman colonization and occupation.
Being the son of an Irishman and thus legally being an Irish citizen myself (I have an Irish passport), I know that much of Irish identity is English oppression. The slogan “700 years of English oppression” finds its way into Irish songs and slurs and jokes. I’m sure some of the Jews of Jesus’ day joked about their situation, but all of them knew it was no laughing matter. None of them liked being under Rome’s thumb.
In Judea in ad 6 or 7 the Roman poll tax (the tax in question here) was introduced and enforced. Not surprisingly, it was met with opposition, some of which was violent. A man by the name of Judas of Galilee (a popular name back then and a perfect name for a political zealot—named after Judas Maccabeus) led a revolt against Rome. He wanted his people to have their land back. He acknowledged only Yahweh as God and king. Thus he refused to pay the tax. And how did he and his insurrection friends fare? They were mercilessly massacred. As a warning to all the Jews, Rome crucified these men. They lined the countryside with crosses. The sign was clear: “Pay this small tax or you will pay a big price.”
That could be the downside of living under Roman rule.
But there was an upside, the same sort of upside to British colonization, with which we are far more familiar. When the British pulled out or were cast out of many African counties, for example, it was a victory for political freedom, but it also led to great political, social, and economic instability. Many of those countries today are the most dangerous countries to live in or travel through. Sadly, the despots of the world have filled the English void.
Being under Roman rule, as it was with British rule, had its advantages. My daughter, Evelyn, when she was in second grade, studied the history of Western civilization. Her teacher gave the class an interesting assignment just a week before I preached on this text—to write a thank you note to the Romans for all their contributions. Seriously. Here is her letter:
Dear Romans,
Thank you for...
• Starting a democracy
• Creating Roman numerals
• Making beautiful architecture
• Inventing concrete
• Making bathhouses
• Teaching us how to build roads
• Building aqueducts
Sincerely,
Thankful Evelyn
As even Evelyn now knows, being under Roman rule had its advantages. The Roman Empire provided water, sanitation, roads, law and order, and police protection. They brought much to the world in the areas of agriculture, education, and architecture. And for all this, all they asked for was one coin a year, a denarius, which was the average day’s wages (cp. 20:2). For the very poor, this could be a burden, but for most the tax in question was not a large amount but was fair for all the benefits received. Rome was not demanding an excessive tax. Rome was demanding far less than my hometown (and likely yours) does, to put it in context and make us cringe.
So with all that in mind, now back to our text.
There are two parts to Jesus’ answer. The first part—give Caesar’s coins back to Caesar—teaches them and us that during our exile (be it under Rome, England, or whatever) “respect for government is an import form of respect for God.”
In the New Testament epistles—written at a time when the Roman government wasn’t chummy with the Ecclesia—there are no Ecclesial writings on revolution. There aren’t even political gripes. Instead we find calls for prayer, subjection, and respect. Below are the exhortations.
First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions. (1 Timothy 2:1,2a)
Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people. (Titus 3:1, 2)
Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good… Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor. (1 Peter 2:13, 14, 17)
Where did such an attitude come from? National Public Radio? No. Fox News? No. Jesus? Yes. I think it came from Jesus’ words in 22:21.
Let me be clear: “If Caesar coins a new Gospel, he is not to be obeyed.” That is, if the government outlaws Christadelphian faith and practice, we must revolt against such rules and pay the price of such revolution. Read the book of Revelation (especially chapters 13 and 18). Read the lives of the early Ecclesial martyrs. Jesus, not Caesar, is Lord! We better believe that and live that out— and die for it if necessary.
I am very concerned today about Ecclesial political animosity. We live in a republic, and living in a republic gives us greater freedoms to express our views through petitions, voting, letters, and so on. But I wonder how many Ecclesias today pray for our government leaders, including (and especially) our President.
Some of us wrongly think that to freely serve God we must be free of the yoke of any godless government. Why? Christ was not completely opposed to Caesar. Even Rome would play its part in the Ecclesial drama—in the spread of the gospel to Asia Minor and Southern Europe through Roman roads and through the spread of salvation to the world through that old rugged Roman cross. God is not opposed to government, even ungodly ones, for even ungodly governments can be used as God’s servant for the Ecclesia’s good (Romans 13:4).
So while I agree with Douglas Hare that “we must be careful... not to draw from the passage more than it contains,” I think it is fair and reasonable to draw at least two conclusions, or “lessons” we might better call them. The first lesson is the legitimacy of government. Whatever government God has given us to rule over us, we are to have respect for it and (as much as we can) submit to it. In this era of exile (1 Peter I: I), as we long for the city of God (cp. Hebrews 11:10), Brethren pay taxes to the glory of God and for the welfare of the city (Jeremiah 29:7).
Give Back to God
That’s the first lesson. Give back to government might be the simplest way to say it. The second lesson is give back to God. Look again at verse 21b: “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
Note three things here. First, Jesus gives, as he is prone to do, a common Hebrew parallelism:
Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s,
And [render] to God the things that are God’s.
Second, the second half of the parallel is unnecessary. That is, it is an additional answer to their question. They just ask about the tax. Jesus answers their tax question, but he also adds to it. Thus, third, this addition must be important.
I’ll put it this way. “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” is the lesser lesson. (Perhaps I have spent too much time on it.) “[Render] to God the things that are God’s” is the major lesson. It is not that the God-point trumps the government-point, but the God-point does put the government-point in its place. If you like pictures, then picture the heel of Yahweh with Caesar Tiberius under it. The whole emphasis is not on God, but most of it is. So the idea (and application) is: if you should freely give a few denarii to Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the so-called "divine” Augustus, shouldn’t you then give everything to the Most High God?
Our application to Jesus’ clever, profound, impressive, unforgettable answer is not merely admiration. “Wow, what an amazing teacher Jesus was! Maybe we should obey what this guy teaches until the end of the ages.” Our application is to be adoration and allegiance to God and to his Christ, King Jesus.
You see, as Jesus was likely challenging the Pharisees’ loyalty to God as they held Caesar’s coins in hand (and too much in heart), so he challenges us today. Do you serve money or God? You can only serve one (see 6:24). Do you seek first your own rule and ways of living or the kingdom of God and his righteousness (6:33)? Do you fervently pray, “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:9, 10)? O Lord, let your rule reign... in this world... now. Free us from Egypt. Free us from Rome. Free us from sin! Free us from all sinful rulers forever.
When the Pharisees and the Herodians heard Jesus’ reply, “they marveled,” but then “they left him and went away” (v. 22). That is the opposite of what we are to do. We are not to merely marvel (“wow, nice answer, Jesus!”) but to worship (“wow, what a Savior, High Priest, and Lord!”). And we are not to leave and go away from our Lord, but to cling to him and follow him. We are to give back to God. To God, who has given us life and breath, salvation and sanctification, his Son and his Word, we are to give back our adoration and allegiance, our treasures and talents, our hearts and heads and bodies and souls.
(R. Kent Hughes. and Douglas Sean O'Donnell., 2013; edited Carl Hinton., 2020)