Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 20:20

And they watched [him,] and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.

20-26. Question about the Tribute Money.

20. And they watched him. ] For the word used see Luk 6:7; Luk 14:1, Luk 17:20. The incident now related took place on the Tuesday in Passion-week the Day of Temptations, or insidious questions the last and greatest day of the public ministry of Jesus. On the previous evening He had again retired to the Mount of Olives, and in the morning the disciples remarked that the Fig-tree had withered. He had scarcely arrived in the Temple when the plot of the Jewish rulers on the previous evening began to be carried out.

spies ] Literally, “tiers in wait ” ( enkathetous, Jos 8:14; Job 31:9). just men ] Rather, righteous; ingenuous and scrupulous ‘disciples of the wise,’ honestly seeking for instruction. They pretend to be strict legalists who revive the scruples of Judas the Gaulonite.

they ] i.e. the priests.

take hold of his words ] Comp. Sir 8:11 , “Rise not up in anger at the presence of an injurious person, lest he lie in wait to entrap thee in thy words. ” The words might be rendered ‘ take hold of Him by His speech. ’

unto the power and authority of the governor ] Rather, to the (Roman) magistracy and to the jurisdiction of the procurator. Comp. Luk 12:11. They had not the power or the courage to put Christ to death themselves. We see from Mat 22:15; Mar 12:16 that this plot sprang from an unholy alliance of Pharisees with Herodians i.e. of scrupulosity with indifferentism of devotees with sycophants; not the first or last instance of the ill-omened conjunction of Priests and Statesmen

“Statesmen bloodstained and Priests idolatrous

With dark lies maddening the blind multitude ”

who mutually hate each other, but unite in common hatred “to crush a reformer whose zeal might be inimical to both.” (Neander.)

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

See this explained in the Mat. 22:15-33 notes, and Mar 12:13-27 notes.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Luk 20:20-26

They watched Him

Christ was watched, and so are we

The chief priests and rulers of the Jews watched Jesus, but not to learn the way of salvation.

They watched Him with the evil eyes of malice and hatred, desiring to take hold of His words, to entangle Him in His talk, that they might accuse Him, and deliver Him up to die. He loved all men, yet He was hated and rejected of men; He went about doing good, yet they tried to do Him harm. The enemies of Christ are ever watching for our fall, eager to hear or to tell any evil thing about us, ready to cast the stone of slander against us. You know that the whitest robe first shows the stain, let us remember whose purity we wear if we have put on Christ. Let us strive to walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil. If we are tempted to say or do something which is equivocal, though the way of the world, let us pause and ask ourselves whether it will bring discredit on our faith, whether it will dishonour our Master. But there are others who watch us, and in a different manner. The Church in Paradise watches the Church on earth and prays for it. Our path of life is compassed by a great cloud of witnesses; the saints who have fought the battle and won the crown, they watch us. St. Paul, resting after his good fight, and his many perils, is watching to see how we are fighting against sin, the world, and the devil. St. Peter, restored to the side of Jesus, watches to see if any of us deny their Lord. St. Thomas, no longer doubtful, watches to see if our faith be strong. Holy Stephen watches us when the stones of insult and persecution assail us; the forty martyrs, who died for Jesus on the frozen pool at Sebaste, watch us when the world looks coldly on us, and many another who passed through fire and water watches us in our battle and the race that is set before us. Thus with the enemies of God watching for our fall, and the saints of God watching for our victory, let us watch ourselves, and let our cry be, Hold Thou me up that my footsteps slip not. (H. J.Wilmot-Buxton, M. A.)

Cowards are like cats

Cowards are like cats. Cats always take their prey by springing suddenly upon it from some concealed station, and, if they miss their aim in the first attack, rarely follow it up. They are all, accordingly, cowardly, sneaking animals, and never willingly face their enemy, unless brought to bay, or wounded, trusting always to their power of surprising their victims by the aid of their stealthy and noiseless movements. (Dallas, Natural History of the Animal Kingdom.)

Whose image and superscription hath it?—

The Divine image in the soul

1. The Divine image ought to be our highest glory.

2. Let the Divine image which we bear be a constant exhortation to serve God.

3. Never defile the Divine image by sin.

4. Endeavour to increase every day the beauty of the Divine image.

5. Respect the Divine image in your neighbour. (Bishop Ehrler.)

Man is Gods property

More than all visible things, we ourselves, with the faculties of body and soul, are Gods. Man is Gods image, Gods coin, and therefore belongs to God entirely.

I. ON WHAT IS THIS DIVINE OWNERSHIP FOUNDED?

1. On creation. Man is Gods property.

(1) As Gods creature. All that is created belongs to God, by whose omnipotence it was made.

(2) As Gods creature he bears the Divine image.

2. On redemption.

(1) The soul of the first man was a supernatural image of God, created in original justice and sanctity.

(2) In consequence of the first sin, the soul was deprived of sanctifying Rom 5:12).

(3) God had compassion on man, and found means (through the Incarnation) to restore His image in the human soul.

II. CONSEQUENCES RESULTING FROM THIS DIVINE OWNERSHIP.

1. We should render to God our soul.

(1) Our understanding.

(2) Our will.

(3) Our heart.

2. Our body and all its members. (Grimm.)

The medal made useful

One day, when Martin Luther was completely penniless, he was asked for money to aid an important Christian enterprise. He reflected a little, and recollected that he had a beautiful medal of Joachim, Elector of Brandenburg, which he very much prized. He went immediately to a drawer, opened it, and said: What art thou doing there, Joachim? Dost thou not see how idle thou art? Come out and make thyself useful. Then he took out the medal and contributed it to the object solicited for.

Render unto Caesar the things which he Caesars

Caesars due and Gods due

I. THAT KINGS AND PRINCES HAVE A CERTAIN RIGHT AND DUE PERTAINING TO THEM BY GODS APPOINTMENT, WHICH IT IS NOT LAWFUL FOR ANY MAN TO KEEP FROM THEM. This is plain here as if Christ had said: It is of God, and not without the disposing and ordering of His Providence, that the Roman Emperor hath put in his foot among you, and is now your liege and sovereign: you yourselves have submitted to his government, and have in a manner subscribed unto that which God hath brought upon you; now, certainly, there is a right pertaining to him respectively to his place. This he must have, and it cannot be lawful for you, under any pretext, to take it from him. So that this speech is a plain ground for this. But what is Caesars due?

1. Prayer for him (1Ti 2:1).

(1) That he may be endowed with all needful graces for his place.

(a) Wisdom.

(b) Justice.

(c) Temperance, i.e., sobriety and moderation in diet, in apparel, in delight, etc.

(d) Zeal and courage in Gods matters. This it is which will make kings prosper (1Ki 2:2-3).

(2) That he may be delivered from all dangers to which he is subject in his place. Kings are in danger of two sorts of enemies.

(a) Enemies to their bodies and outward state. Traitors.

Conspirators.

(b) Enemies to their souls. Flatterers.

2. Submission to him. By this I mean an awful framing and composing of the whole man respectively to his authority.

And now here, because I mention the whole man, and man consisteth of two parts; therefore I will declare, first, what is the submission of the inner man due to a king by the Word of God; and then, what is the submission of the outward man.

1. Touching the submission of the inner man, I account the substance of it to be this–A reverent and dutiful estimation of him in regard of his place. Fear the Lord and the king, said Solomon. As the fearing of God argueth an inward respectiveness to His Divine majesty, so the fearing of the king intends the like, the heart carrieth a kind of reverent awe unto him. And this is that honouring the king which St. Peter giveth charge 1Pe 2:17). Honour is properly an inward act, and we honour a superior when our respect is to him according to his dignity. That this reverent estimation of a king, which I term the substance of inward submission, may be the better understood, we must consider touching it two things.

(1) The ground of it is a right understanding of the state and condition of a kings place.

(a) Its eminence.

(b) Its usefulness.

(2) Now the companion of this reverent esteem of Caesar is a ready and willing disposition to perform to him and for him any service he may require.

2. I come now to speak of the outward submission, which is that which is for the testification and manifestation of the inward. An outward submissiveness without an inward awfulness were but hypocrisy; to pretend an inward respect without giving outward evidence thereof, were but mockery. This outward submission is either in word or in action. It includes–

(1) Conformity to the laws.

(2) Yielding of the person in time of war.

(3) Furnishing supplies.

II. THAT IT IS NOT LAWFUL FOR ANY MAN TO DEPRIVE ALMIGHTY GOD OF THAT WHICH IS HIS DUE. You are careful, saith our Saviour, as it seemeth, to inquire touching Caesars right, as if you were so tender conscienced that you would not keep ought from him that were his. It becometh you to be, at the least, as careful for God; there is a right also due to Him, look you to it, that you give it Him. Thus is the doctrine raised, God must have His due as well as the king his. Nay, He is to have it much more; He is the King of kings, and Lord of lords. By Him it is that earthly kings do reign. He beareth rule over the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whosoever He will. Let me begin by explaining what is here meant by the Lords due. The conscionable performance of any good duty is in some sense the Lords due, because the same is required by Him; and so even that which was spoken of before, by the name of Caesars due, is Gods due, because the law of God binds us to it. When we speak, therefore, of Gods due, we intend thereby that which is more properly and more immediately be, longing to Him. For examples sake–in a house, whereof every room and corner is the masters, yet that where he lieth himself is more particularly called his; so whereas all good services, even those which appertain to men, are the Lords, He being the commander of them, yet those are more precisely and specially termed His which belong to Him more directly. And of the dues of this sort we are now to treat; and these may justly be referred to two general heads. The first I may call His prerogative, the other His worship. Under Gods prerogative I comprehend two things.

1. That the things which concern Him must have the pre-eminence.

2. That He must have absolute obedience in all things. And now I come to the next part of His due, His worship. By His worship is understood that more direct and proper service which we do to God for the declaration of our duty to Him, of our dependence on Him, and of our acknowledgment both to expect and to receive all good and comfort from Him.

Here the particulars to be considered of, under this head of worship, are–

1. That He must be worshipped.

2. That He must be so worshipped as Himself thinks good. (S. Hieron.)

Duty discriminated

Go with me to the concert this afternoon? once asked a fashionable city salesman of a new assistant in the warehouse. I cannot. Why? My time is not my own; it belongs to another. To whom? To the firm, by whom I have been instructed not to leave without permission. The next Sabbath afternoon the same salesman said to this clerk, Will you go to ride with us this evening? I cannot. Why? My time is not my own; it belongs to another. To whom? To Him who has said, Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy. Some years passed, and that clerk lay upon his bed of death. His honesty and fidelity had raised him to a creditable position in business and in society, and, ere his sickness, life lay fair before him. Are you reconciled to your situation? asked an attendant. Yes, reconciled; I have endeavoured to do the work that God has allotted me, in His fear. He has directed me thus far; I am in His hands, and my time is not my own. (W. Baxendale.)

Religion and politics

It is a common saying that religion has nothing to do with polities, and particularly there is a strong feeling current against all interference with politics by the ministers of religion. This notion rests on a basis which is partly wrong, partly right. To say that religion has nothing to do with politics is to assert that which is simply false. It were as wise to say that the atmosphere has nothing to do with the principles of architecture. Directly nothing, indirectly much. Some kinds of stone are so friable, that though they will last for centuries in a dry climate, they will crumble away in a few years in a damp one. There are some temperatures in which a form of a building is indispensable, which in another would be unbearable. The shape of doors, windows, apartments, all depend upon the air that is to be admitted or excluded. Nay, it is for the very sake of procuring a habitable atmosphere within certain limits that architecture exists at all. The atmospheric laws are distinct from the laws of architecture; but there is not an architectural question into which atmospheric considerations do not enter as conditions of the question. That which the air is to architecture, religion is to politics. It is the vital air of every question. Directly, it determines nothing–indirectly, it conditions every problem that can arise. The kingdoms of this world must become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ. How–if His Spirit is not to mingle with political and social truths? (F. W. Robertson.)

No division of allegiance

Our Lord here recognizes no division of allegiance. He does not regard man as under two masters–as owing duty to Caesar and duty to God. Is there a trace in all His other teaching that He contemplated such a division? Did ever a word fall from Him to indicate that He looked upon some obligations as secular and others as sacred? No; God is set forth by Him always and everywhere as the sole Lord of mans being and powers. Nothing man has can be Caesars in contradiction to that which is Gods. Christ claims all for the Sovereign Master. Body, soul, and spirit, riches, knowledge, influence, love–all belong to Him; there is but one empire, one service, one king; and life, with all its complexity of interest, is simple–simple as the Infinite God who has given it. Rightly understood, therefore, the great precepts of the text are in perfect accord with the doctrine of Gods sole and supreme lordship over every thought, and faculty, and possession of man. Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars. Why? Who enacts it? Who has the right to require it? The answer is God. It is a part of your religious obedience to be a loyal citizen. Within the sphere that belongs to him Caesar claims your service as the ordained representative and minister of God. Civil obedience is an ordinance of the Church; civil society is the creation of God Himself. It is He who, through the earthly ruler, demands your tribute. The result, the order, and the progress of society are His work; and thus the principle of all duty is ultimately one. The inclusion of the lower obedience in the higher has been well illustrated from the world of nature. The moon, we know, has its own relation to the earth; but both have a common relation to the sun. The moons orbit is included in the earths orbit, but the sun sways and balances both of them; and there is not a movement of the moon in obeying the inferior earthly attraction, which is not also an act of obedience to the superior spheres. And just so, God has bound up together our relation to the powers that be in this world, with our relation to Himself. He has set us under rulers and in societies as a kind of interior province of His mighty kingdom, but our loyalty as subjects and our duty as citizens are but a part of the one supreme duty which we owe to Him. (Canon Duckworth.)

Secular and religious duties not in conflict

I. Our secular and spiritual relations are coexistent and co-relative in fact.

II. The obligations which arise from each are to be recognized equitably, and the respective duties performed faithfully.

III. They ought not to be in conflict, but mutually helpful. Both are of God, and with Him are no discords.

IV. Application of the principle to–

1. Secular business, society, politics, etc.

2. Soul culture, worship, Christian work. (Anon.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 20. They watched him] , Insidiously watching. See Clarke on Lu 14:1.

Spies] , from , in, and , I let down, to set in ambush. One who crouches in some secret place to spy, listen, catch, or hurt. Hesychius explains the word by , those who lie in wait, or in ambush, to surprise and slay. Josephus uses the word to signify a person bribed for a particular purpose. See War, b. ii. c. ii. s. 5, and b. vi. c. v. s. 2. No doubt the persons mentioned in the text were men of the basest principles, and were hired by the malicious Pharisees to do what they attempted in vain to perform.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

20-26. sent forthafterconsulting (Mt 22:15) on thebest plan.

spies“of thePharisees and Herodians” (Mr12:13). See Mr 3:6.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And they watched him,…. What he said, and what he did, and where he went, that they might take an advantage against him, or know where he was, to send to him, as they should think fit, and take the best opportunity of so doing. The Syriac and Persic versions leave out this clause:

and sent forth spies which should feign themselves just men: of virtue and religion, conscientious men, that would do nothing but what was just and right, and were desirous of being exactly informed of the truth of things, that they might act right in every punctilio:

that might take hold of his words; improve them, and form a charge upon them, of sedition and treason:

that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor; the Roman governor, and by him be put to death. These men were some of them the disciples of the Pharisees, and others were Herodians; see Mt 22:16.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Christ’s Enemies Nonplussed.

      20 And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.   21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly:   22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Csar, or no?   23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?   24 Show me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Csar’s.   25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Csar the things which be Csar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s.   26 And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace.

      We have here Christ’s evading a snare which his enemies laid for him, by proposing a question to him about tribute. We had this passage before, both in Matthew and Mark. Here is,

      I. The mischief designed him, and that is more fully related here than before. The plot was to deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor, v. 20. They could not themselves put him to death by course of law, nor otherwise than by a popular tumult, which they could not depend upon; and, since they could not be his judges, they would willingly condescend to be his prosecutors and accusers, and would themselves inform against him. They hoped to gain their point, if they could but incense the governor against him. Note, It has been the common artifice of persecuting church-rulers to make the secular powers the tools of their malice, and oblige the kings of the earth to do their drudgery, who, if they had not been instigated, would have let their neighbours live quietly by them, as Pilate did Christ till the chief priests and the scribes presented Christ to him. But thus Christ’s word must be fulfilled by their cursed politics, that he should be delivered into the hands of the Gentiles.

      II. The persons they employed. Matthew and Mark told us that they were disciples of the Pharisees, with some Herodians. Here it is added, They were spies, who should feign themselves just men. Note, It is no new thing for bad men to feign themselves just men, and to cover the most wicked projects with the most specious and plausible pretences. The devil can transform himself into an angel of light, and a Pharisee appear in the garb, and speak the language, of a disciple of Christ. A spy must go in disguise. These spies must take on them to have a value for Christ’s judgment, and to depend upon it as an oracle, and therefore must desire his advice in a case of conscience. Note, Ministers are concerned to stand upon their guard against some that feign themselves to be just men, and to be wise as serpents when they are in the midst of a generation of vipers and scorpions.

      III. The question they proposed, with which they hoped to ensnare him. 1. Their preface is very courtly: Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, v. 21. Thus they thought to flatter him into an incautious freedom and openness with them, and so to gain their point. They that are proud, and love to be commended, will be brought to do any thing for those that will but flatter them, and speak kindly to them; but they were much mistaken who thought thus to impose upon the humble Jesus. He was not pleased with the testimony of such hypocrites, nor thought himself honoured by it. It is true that he accepts not the person of any, but it is as true that he knows the hearts of all, and knew theirs, and the seven abominations that were there, though they spoke fair. It was certain that he taught the way of God truly; but he knew that they were unworthy to be taught by him, who came to take hold of his words, not to be taken hold of by them. 2. Their case is very nice: “Is it lawful for us” (this is added here in Luke) “to give tribute to Csar–for us Jews, us the free-born seed of Abraham, us that pay the Lord’s tribute, may give tribute to Csar?” Their pride and covetousness made them loth to pay taxes, and then they would have it a question whether it was lawful or no. Now if Christ should say that it was lawful the people would take it ill, for they expected that he who set up to be the Messiah should in the first place free them from the Roman yoke, and stand by them in denying tribute to Csar. But if he should say that it was not lawful, as they expected he would (for if he had not been of that mind they thought he could not have been so much the darling of the people as he was), then they should have something to accuse him of to the governor, which was what they wanted.

      IV. His evading the snare which they laid for him: He perceived their craftiness, v. 23. Note, Those that are most crafty in their designs against Christ and his gospel cannot with all their art conceal them from his cognizance. He can see through the most politic disguises, and so break through the most dangerous snare; for surely in vain is the net spread in the sight of any bird. He did not give them a direct answer, but reproved them for offering to impose upon him–Why tempt ye me? and called for a piece of money, current money with the merchants–Show me a penny; and asked them whose money it was, whose stamp it bore, who coined it. They owned, “It is Csar’s money.” “Why them,” saith Christ, “you should first have asked whether it was lawful to pay and receive Csar’s money among yourselves, and to admit that to be the instrument of your commerce. But, having granted this by a common consent, you are concluded by your own act, and, no doubt, you ought to give tribute to him who furnished you with this convenience for your trade, protects you in it, and lends you the sanction of his authority for the value of your money. You must therefore render to Csar the things that are Csar’s. In civil things you ought to submit to the civil powers, and so, if Csar protects you in your civil rights by laws and the administration of justice, you ought to pay him tribute; but in sacred things God only is your King. You are not bound to be of Csar’s religion; you must render to God the things that are God’s, must worship and adore him only, and not any golden image that Csar sets up;” and we must worship and adore him in such way as he had appointed, and not according to the inventions of Csar. It is God only that has authority to say My son, give me thy heart.

      V. The confusion they were hereby put into, v. 26. 1. The snare is broken; They could not take hold of his words before the people. They could not fasten upon any thing wherewith to incense either the governor or the people against him. 2. Christ is honoured; even the wrath of man is made to praise him. They marvelled at his answer, it was so discreet and unexceptionable, and such an evidence of that wisdom and sincerity which make the face to shine. 3. Their mouths are stopped; they held their peace. They had nothing to object, and durst ask him nothing else, lest he should shame and expose them.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

They watched him (). First aorist active participle of , a common Greek verb to watch on the side or insidiously or with evil intent as in Lu 6:7 () of the scribes and Pharisees. See on Mr 3:2. There is no “him” in the Greek. They were watching their chance.

Spies (). An old verbal adjective from , to send down in or secretly. It means liers in wait who are suborned to spy out, one who is hired to trap one by crafty words. Only here in the N.T.

Feigned themselves ( ). Hypocritically professing to be “righteous” (). “They posed as scrupulous persons with a difficulty of conscience” (Plummer).

That they might take hold of his speech ( ). Second aorist middle of , an old verb for seizing hold with the hands and uses as here the genitive case. These spies are for the purpose of () catching hold of the talk of Jesus if they can get a grip anywhere. This is their direct purpose and the ultimate purpose or result is also stated, “so as to deliver him up” ( ). Second aorist active infinitive of , to hand over, to give from one’s side to another. The trap is all set now and ready to be sprung by these “spies.”

Of the governor ( ). The Sanhedrin knew that Pilate would have to condemn Jesus if he were put to death. So then all their plans focus on this point as the goal. Luke alone mentions this item here.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Watched. See on Mr 3:2.

Spies [] . Only here in New Testament. From ejgkaqihmi, to send in, as a garrison into a city. Hence of persons sent in for the purpose of espionage.

Which should feign [] . Lit., feigning. Rev., which feigned. Only here in New Testament. See on hypocrites, Mt 23:13. The power and authority [ ] . The former, the Roman power in general; the latter, the specific authority of the official.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “And they watched him,” (kai parateresantes) “And as they watched (him) carefully,” cautiously, like a lion or leopard stalking his prey, like a hawk watching a chicken, like a wolf watching a sheep, for the moment of the kill, even as Satan stays on the prowl, 1Pe 5:8.

2) “And sent forth spies which should feign themselves just men,” (apesteilan egkathetous hupkrinomenous heatuous dikaious einai) “They dispatched spies who pretended themselves to be righteous;” The spies, plain-clothes men, were hired “hit men,” put on His trail, Psa 55:22; Pro 27:6. They had the nature of the old deceiver himself. They worked like termites to “worm their way” into the presence of Jesus, pretending to be good men, of good intentions, 2Co 11:13-15; 2Pe 2:1-3; 2Pe 2:18-19; Jud 1:4; Jud 1:10-16. These were Herodian spies trained in arts of deceit, Mat 22:15-16; Mar 12:13.

3) “That they might take hold of his words,” (hina eiplabontai autou logou) “In order that they might just seize a word of his,” just any word possible, that they might twist, turn, or pervert it, as a basis of bringing some kind of criminal charge against him.

4) “That so they might deliver him,” (hoste paradounai auton) “So that they might be able to deliver him for arrest,” with indictable charges and witnesses to the charges they were to bring against Him. These are the collusive plans of the chief priests and the scribes to terminate the life of Jesus, Luk 20:19.

5) “Unto the power and authority of the governor.” (te arche kai te eksousia tou hegemonos) “To the rule and the administrative authority of the governor,” the civil Roman rulers, who had the authority to administer the death penalty, under Pilate. Therefore their question that follows is one of political nature.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

Butlers Comments

SECTION 3

Religion and Government (Luk. 20:20-26)

20So they watched him, and sent spies, who pretended to be sincere, that they might take hold of what he said, so as to deliver him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor. 21They asked him, Teacher, we know that you speak and teach rightly, and show no partiality, but truly teach the way of God. 22Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 23But he perceived their craftiness, and said to them, 24Show me a coin. Whose likeness and inscription has it? They said, Caesars. 25He said to them, Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are Gods. 26And they were not able in the presence of the people to catch him by what he said; but marveling at his answer they were silent.

Luk. 20:20-22 Subtlety: Jesus told the parable of the marriage feast (Mat. 22:1-14) before the Jewish rulers could regain their composure enough to start questioning Him. Soon after He finished this parable, they were ready with their question. The Pharisees had gone to discuss among themselves (Mat. 22:15) and join with the Herodians (Mat. 22:16; Mar. 12:13) to devise a plan of attack upon Jesus. The Herodians were influential men who were politically aligned with the Herod family in its campaign to retain the Jewish throne and to Romanize the Jewish culture. The Pharisees, of course, were philosophically in direct opposition to the Herodians. But they were true pragmatists when it came to any threat to their own popularity. Jesus posed a crucial threat to Pharisaic influence, so the Pharisees would compromise their vows and convictions and join with the hated Herodians to destroy Jesus. All three gospel writers positively state the motives of the questioners in this first question as entrapment, in order to get Jesus indicted by the Roman governor (Procurator). Matthew uses the Greek word pagideusosin which means literally, that which grips, binds or snares, (Mat. 22:15). Luke says they sent spies (Gr. egkathetous, those who hide in the bushes awaiting their prey). They were probably some Pharisees they thought would not be recognized by Jesus. This group pretended (Gr. hupokrinomenous, play a part, act, pretend or hypocrite) to be sincere (Gr. dikaious, just or righteous). What they said flatteringly about Jesus honesty and candidness was true. No doubt they said it grudgingly, but they also said it with malice aforethought. They intended to seduce Him with flattery. Flattery is a dangerous thing both for the flatterer and the recipient. Flattery . . . works ruin (Pro. 26:28); it does not help the flatterer (Pro. 28:23); it is exploitative (Dan. 11:21-34; Pro. 29:5; Jud. 1:16). Flattery should never be a part of Christian methods! (1Th. 2:5). Jesus did not succumb to it.

This group was sure they had the perfect trap for Jesus. They asked Him one of the most loaded questions they could have asked at that time. It had both political and theological ramifications, They asked, Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not? Luke uses the Greek word, phoron, which means literally, something brought to Caesar, or a monetary tribute. Matthew and Mark use the word kensos from which we get the English word census and meant in Jesus day, poll tax. There were many taxes the Jews had to pay. Taxation, and especially by a foreign oppressor, was a very sensitive subject. The Jews paid the following taxes in Jesus time:

1.

Tributum Soil Roman land tax

2.

Tributum Capitis Roman poll tax

3.

Annona Grain and cattle for Roman military

4.

Publicum Customs, sales and salt tax for Roman government

5.

Temple Tax Jewish tax for support of Temple

6.

Synagogue Tax Jewish religious-education tax

7.

Herods Tax Taxation for Herods public works

At first Rome permitted the Jews to coin all their own money without the image of Caesar on it. But Herod Antipas forced the Jews to strike a coin with Caesars image upon it as an act of political flattery to the Emperor. Patriotic Jews resented this bitterly as forced humiliation and as a sign of the erosion of their national sovereignty. It was also a theological question as to whether any faithful Jew should pay taxes to a government attempting to paganize Jewish culture. The issue was highly volatile! The silver denarius was the tribute required of every Israelite by Rome. The inscription on this coin read: Tiberius Caesar, Emperor, Son of Divine Augustus, The Illustrious High Priest. When the Law of Moses was given there was no such circumstance for the Jews and so the Law said nothing about this. The Jews did pay tribute to foreign governments many times (cf. 2Ki. 17:3; 2Ki. 18:13-16; 2Ki. 23:33; 2Ch. 28:21) before their captivities. They certainly paid taxes to the foreign governments in whose lands they dwelt during their captivities. And the Biblical record also documents that they paid tribute to foreign governments after their captivities and their return to Palestine (cf. Ezr. 4:13). They certainly did not like itthey detested it. But tribute to Caesar was nothing new!

Luk. 20:23-26 Skill: Jesus does not fall into the trap of flattery. He demonstrates the very wisdom and courage they tried to use as flattery. He does not allow Himself to be impaled on the horns of their supposed dilemma. They think if He says, Yes, pay tribute to Caesar they will be able to justly indict Him for being a traitor to His own nation. They think if He says, No, pay no tribute to Caesar, they will be able to get Him indicted as a seditionist against Rome. They apparently hoped He would say No, because at His trial they accused Him (by lying) of forbidding to pay tribute to Caesar (Luk. 23:2). Jesus knew their malicious intentions and very skillfully corrects their question. They said, give (Greek, dounai); Jesus said, pay (Greek, apodote). Taxes to government are paid for the value of services received. Taxes are dues (Rom. 13:7) for services of enforcement of law and order and protection of inalienable human rights. There are two fundamental, inalienable (non-revocable) human rights granted by the Creator to all human beings: the sanctity of human life and the right to own property. These are sanctioned by the Bible itself from the very beginning. God had ordained the structures of human governments to protect those two basic rights by enforcement of restraint or capital punishment or restitution on evil doers and the approval of right-doers (cf. Rom. 13:1-7). No real conflict existed at the time of Jesus between the obligations of the Jews to God and Caesar since the Roman government permitted the Jews complete freedom to worship God as God had revealed and the Roman government maintained proper sanctions (laws) against murder and theft and enforced them. Thus Rome was carrying out, relatively, what God had ordained human governments to domaintain law and order. The Romans had even allowed the Jews liberal measures of self-government. Jesus answer, Pay the things of Caesar to Caesar, and the things of God to God, is perfectbroad enough to meet the need of any circumstance in which the believer may find himself.

Old Testament political theory and practice is more liberal than the traditions of the scribes. It may be summarized as follows:

a.

The Jews were obligated by the Law of Moses to support their theocratic government by offerings and taxes (see Leviticus and Deuteronomy).

b.

God decreed the Jews would have to support their demanded monarchy with taxes and military and civil service (1Sa. 8:9-18).

c.

The Old Testament prophets make it clear that God held all human governments (even pagan ones) responsible for maintenance of law and order, certain standards of morality, integrity to international treaties and sanctions (Isa. 10:5-19; Isa. 13:1-22; Isa. 14:1-32; Isa. 15:1-9; Isa. 16:1-14; Isa. 17:1-14; Isa. 18:1-7; Isa. 19:1-25; Isa. 20:1-6; Isa. 21:1-17; Isa. 22:1-25; Isa. 23:1-18; Isa. 36:1-22; Isa. 37:1-38; Isa. 38:1-22; Isa. 39:1-8; Jer. 27:1-11; Dan. 4:27; Dan. 5:17-23; Amo. 1:3-15, esp. Amo. 1:9; Oba. 1:11-14, Esther, etc.).

d.

The Jews were told by the Lord to be subservient and not rebellious when they dwelt in the land of foreign people (Jer. 29:1-7). In fact, they were told to seek the welfare of those pagan lands in which they dwelt, and to pray for emperors and rulers (Ezr. 6:10).

e.

Many Jews became important and influential officials in human governments (even in pagan ones), collecting taxes for pagan kings; Daniel and his three Hebrew companions; Nehemiah; Esther; Mordecai.

f.

Jews were commanded by the Law of Moses to enforce all kinds of sanctions, from capital punishment to personal restitutions for destruction of property. They had standing armies; fought wars against aggressors; assisted other nations in maintaining international law; and had a social welfare system built right into their religious and political structure.

The New Testament political theory and practice may be summarized as follows:

a.

In the New Testament Rom. 13:1-7; 1Pe. 2:13-17; 1Ti. 1:8-9; 1Ti. 2:1-4; Tit. 3:1-2 are the outstanding passages on the Christian and human government. In Rom. 12:1-21, Paul discusses the rendering unto God that which belongs to Him. And in Rom. 13:1-7, Paul discusses rendering unto Caesar that which belongs to him. The New Testament commands (not merely suggests) that Christians obey governments which fulfill the functions outlined in the references cited above. The two main functions of human government are the protection of human rights by the maintenance of law and order; public works for the common good of society.

b.

Rationality itself insists there must be structured governments for the very existence of human social order.

(1)

Axioms:

(a)

Law and its enforcement is necessary to the maintenance of social structure (cf. 1Ti. 1:8-9). If you doubt this just universalize anti-social behavior such as murder, robbery, rape, etc. What if there were no laws against these acts of social anarchy at all?

(b)

Where there are no sanctions (penalties) and where penalties are not executed (speedily), there really are no laws. Laws without penalties being executed are merely writings on paper (cf. Ecc. 8:11). This same principle applies to international laws!

(c)

Punishment must fit the crime. To sustain the majesty of the law against murder, there must be capital punishment (cf. Exo. 21:12).

c.

Revelation from God in the Bible commands that there shall be human governments:

(1)

Government in general:

(a)

Is ordained by God (Rom. 13:1-7; 1Pe. 2:13-17; Tit. 2:15 to Tit. 3:2; Ezr. 7:26; Exo. 22:28; Pro. 24:21-22; Jer. 27:5-7).

(b)

Is originated for God to execute His wrath on evil doers (Rom. 13:3-4); to restrain the lawless (1Ti. 1:8-9); to provide peace and tranquility so the world may come to know Gods truth (1Ti. 2:2-4). The very first commandment God gave Noah by which to start the human race all over again after the flood was the order for capital punishment as the penalty against murder (Gen. 9:6).

(2)

Government on international level:

(a)

Nations which stand for peace, justice and tranquility, must arm themselves and ally one with the other against aggressive invasions of powerless peopleseven by declaring and fighting war if necessary.

(b)

There are no specific New Testament scriptures to this effect, except the example of Paul appealing to the government of Rome for protection against the Jewish countrymen who wanted to kill him unjustly. But there are many Old Testament scripturesand God does not change His principles (cf. Gen. 14:21-24; Jos. 8:1-29; 1Sa. 30:1-31; Ecc. 3:8; Jer. 48:10; Dan. 5:17-28; Oba. 1:10-14; Amo. 1:9).

(c)

There were a number of individuals serving in human governments even as law-enforcers who were Christians in the New Testament: Cornelius, Sergius Paulus, Caesars own household, Erastus, the Philippian jailor. John the Baptist told certain soldiers not to extort, but he did not tell them to resign from the army to please God.

Any discussion of Jesus reply to the question of tribute usually brings up the problem of civil disobedience. Our clearest Biblical examples of civil disobedience are found in Act. 4:19-20; Act. 5:20; Dan. 1:1-21; Dan. 6:1-28; and Exo. 1:1-22; Exo. 2:1-25 (Jochebed). It is clear that Paul and Jesus did not acquiesce in the face of illegal treatment (Act. 23:1-10; Joh. 18:19-23). Pauls attitude toward governmental authority is indicated in his appealing to his Roman citizenship for protection, (Act. 16:37-40; Act. 22:25-29; Act. 26:32). Paul was so conscientious to maintain the proper structure to social order through human government he even advocated capital punishment for himself if it could be sustained that he was guilty of a capital crime (Act. 25:10-12). Civil disobedience must not be taken lightly! It is a desperate act to be taken only when all other means fail. The Christian is bound to say that the law of God takes precedence over the law of man, if the two are in clear, unequivocal conflict. But the Christian must be very certain that there is an irreconcilable conflict before he takes the drastic step of disobeying civil lawwhether he lives under a pagan ruler like Nero or one who espouses Christianity. The devil would like nothing better than to create civil anarchy in the name of Christian civil disobedience! Jehovah is a God of order, peace, discipline and obedience. He does not condone anarchy and social disorder (1Co. 14:33) and especially so in His own kingdom, the church! Of course, God does not condone compromise of His commandments, either. God has instituted the authority of the home, the church and the state. Mans individual feelings do not supersede any of these. They are not to be violated on the authority of man, but can only be superseded by the higher law of God. What about turning the other cheek (Mat. 5:38-45)? That is forbidding individual retaliation. No man, especially a Christian, has the right to hand out individual vengeance. God has ordained human governments to meet out vengeance on His behalf (cf. Rom. 12:18 through Luk. 13:7). Why did Jesus tell the disciples to get swords (Luk. 22:35-38)? Two swords were enough to allow the disciples to defend themselves against the imminent mob-violence, but not enough to start a war of vengeance on Jesus enemies. What about Peters use of the sword in the garden of Gethsemane (Joh. 18:10-12; Mat. 26:51-54)? Jesus answered three ways: (a) I must drink the cup appointed Me; (b) If this were the time for power against My enemies I could call legions of angels; (c) Those who take the sword shall perish by the sword. Jesus meant to teach Peter not to take the law into his own hands and to predict that the murderous Jews would soon perish by Roman swords. God does a better job of avenging through His use of human governments than the individual could ever do.

A great amount of human speculation has been done on the question of religion and government. Jesus answered the Pharisees and the Herodians skillfully and succinctly. His very concise answer infers He expected His Jewish listeners to know there was a precise Biblical answer. He knew that God had revealed Himself thoroughly on the subject in the Old Testament scriptures. They should know exactly what belonged to Caesar and what belonged to God without any further details from Him! We also believe that the Bible is clear enough and thorough enough that any believer may know what his responsibility is to both Caesar and God. There can be no equivocation on this great issue of life by the Christian, The Christian can have only one conscience about church and statethat is the one which the Bible delineates! For more discussion on this subject see the special study, The Christian and War, Isaiah, Vol. 2, by Paul T. Butler, pgs. 7282, College Press.

In Christs brief answer, He laid the foundation for the principle of the separation of Church and State. Neither should replace or control the other. They may and do have mutual obligations. The State should maintain a peaceful and tranquil society in which the Church is free to do its work. The Church should produce the kind of character which will mean good citizenship. One sharp dividing line exists: neither should control the other or meddle in its affairs. When that prevails, society is blessed.
Not only could the Pharisees not trap Him into some faux pas and turn the multitudes against Him, they were so astounded and amazed at the truthfulness and skill of His answer they were dumbfoundedthey were silenced! They dared not pursue the subject further. What Jesus had said was complete.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(20-26) And they watched him.See Notes on Mat. 22:15-22 and Mar. 12:13-17.

And sent forth spies.The noun is, again, one of St. Lukes characteristic words not used by any other New Testament writer. It expresses rather the act of those who lie in ambush, than that of spies in the strict sense of the words. St. Luke is, on the one hand, less definite as to the parties to the conspiracy than the other Gospels, and on the other hand more explicit as to its aim. They wanted materials for an accusation before Pilate, as well as for one before the Sanhedrin. On the omission of the name of the Herodians, see Note on Luk. 6:11.

Power and authority.We have again the characteristic combination of the two substantives. (See Note on Luk. 12:11.)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

‘And they watched him, and sent out spies (or ‘ambushers’), who put on a pretence that they themselves were righteous, in order that they might take hold of his speech, so as to deliver him up to the rule and to the authority of the governor.’

This verse beautifully sums up the true situation. These men who approached Jesus, who were sent by the Sanhedrin who waited out in the darkness, and pretended to a great deal of righteousness and godly concern, were actually tricksters whose one aim was to catch Him out and report Him to the governor for subversion. They wanted to entrap Him into saying something seditious, i.e. that ‘it was not lawful to pay tribute to Caesar’.

Mark tell us that they were an unholy alliance of Pharisees and Herodians (Galilean court officials), but Luke does not want to complicate things for his readers, who would know nothing of the Herodians (see Mar 12:13 and compare Mar 3:6).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Second Test: Is It Lawful To Give Tribute To Caesar? (20:20-26).

In the chiasmus of the Section this challenge parallels the challenge concerning His authority (Luk 20:1-8). Sneakily they seek to take advantage of His claim to speak with authority by trapping Him into subversive remarks that can then be passed on to the Roman Governor as examples of His treasonable behaviour.

In most countries the question would have been fairly easy to answer, but in Israel it was a minefield, for while most reluctantly paid their denarius poll tax they did so because of what would have happened to them and their children if they did not, but they did it with reluctance and with hatred in their hearts.

However, for any prophet to suggest that they should pay it even reluctantly would have been the death knell for any hopes that the prophet had to be listened to. He would be instantly discredited. Prophets were supposed to stand out for what was right, not to give in to expediency (that was for common folk like them).

Analysis.

a They watched Him, and sent out spies, who put on a pretence that they themselves were righteous, in order that they might take hold of His speech, so as to deliver Him up to the rule and to the authority of the governor (Luk 20:20).

b They asked Him, saying, “Teacher, we know that you say and teach rightly, and do not accept the person of any, but of a truth teach the way of God. Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” (Luk 20:21-22)

c But He perceived their craftiness, and said to them, “Show me a denarius. Whose image and superscription has it?” And they said, “Caesar’s” (Luk 20:23-24).

b And He said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Luk 20:25).

a And they were not able to take hold of the saying before the people, and they marvelled at His answer, and held their peace (Luk 20:26).

Note that in ‘a’ their aim was to ‘take hold of Him in His speech, and in the parallel we learn that they were unable to take hold of His saying before the people. In ‘b’ the question was as to whether it was lawful to give tribute to Caesar, and in the parallel He gave His answer. And centrally in ‘c’ He calls on them to produce the coin that He will cite in evidence against them.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Prophecy of His Exaltation Luk 20:20 to Luk 21:4 gives a prophecy of Jesus’ exaltation as Jesus cites from Psa 110:1.

Psa 110:1, “A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Jesus Is Questioned on Taxes Luk 20:20-26

2. Jesus Is Questioned on the Resurrection Luk 20:27-40

3. Jesus Asks the Sadducees About David’s Son Luk 20:41-44

4. Jesus Denounces the Jewish Leaders to the People Luk 20:45 to Luk 21:4

Luk 20:20-26 Jesus Is Questioned on Taxes ( Mat 22:15-22 , Mar 12:13-17 ) In Luk 20:20-26 Jesus responds to a question that is asked by the Jewish leaders about paying taxes to Caesar.

Luk 20:24 Comments The penny is a British coin. However, the Greek text reads (G1220), which refers to the Roman denarius, which had the image of the Roman emperor impressed upon it. In contrast, Jesus refers to the mina in Luk 19:13, “And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.”

Luk 20:27-40 Jesus Is Questioned on the Resurrection ( Mat 22:23-33 , Mar 12:18-27 ) In Luk 20:27-40 Jesus responds to a question asked by the Sadducees on the resurrection.

Luk 20:27 Comments The Sadducees did not believe in a resurrection or life after death. [271]

[271] R. F. Youngblood, F. F. Bruce, R. K. Harrison, and Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, rev. ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004), “Sadducees.”

Luk 20:28 Comments This law is found in Deu 25:5-10.

Deu 25:5, “If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her.”

Luk 20:35 “neither marry, nor are given in marriage” – Comments Is this a reference to marriage here on earth, now?

Luk 20:34-38 Comments Two Points of Doctrine – Jesus explains two points of doctrine in this passage:

1. God’s view of marriage and the kingdom of God (verses 34-36).

2. The resurrection (verses 31-38).

Luk 20:41-44 Jesus Asks the Sadducees About David’s Son ( Mat 22:41-46 , Mar 12:35-37 ) In Luk 20:41-44 Jesus asks the Sadducees a question about the resurrection by referring to Christ as the Son of David in the book of Psalms.

Luk 20:45 to Luk 21:4 Jesus Denounces the Jewish Leaders to the People ( Mat 23:1-36 , Mar 12:38-40 ) After answering the questions from the Jewish leaders Jesus turns to the people and denounces the hypocrisy of these leaders (Luk 20:45-47). He uses the illustration of a widow who was giving into the treasury to illustrate true service to God.

The Widow’s Mites ( Mar 12:41-44 ) In Luk 21:1-4 Jesus takes the opportunity to teach the people by using the example of a widow woman whom He and the others saw casting in two mites into the Temple treasury. He contrasts her sincere giving to the hypocritical offers of the Jewish leaders.

A Lesson on Giving – This story teaches us how to give. This poor widow gave sacrificially. The rich men did not make a sacrifice. She also gave willingly. Paul, the apostle, teaches about these same attitudes of giving in 2 Corinthians.

2Co 8:1-2, “Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia; How that in a great trial of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality.”

They also gave joyfully and out of poverty. Note that God accepts the gift we are able to give, no matter how small, and He does not expect us to give that which we do not have:

2Co 8:12, “For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.”

The Poor Verses the Rich – Those who were rich probably had many friends in the Temple court to greet and chat with that day (Pro 19:6). Jesus probably observed the rich as they noisily dropped their many coins into the Temple treasury. The poor widow probably had not many friends to chat with (Pro 19:7). She probably felt uneasy around so many richly dressed people. Probably, like many widows today, she had been done wrong by evil merchants to the point that now she did not trust many people (Also Pro 14:20)

Pro 19:6, “Many will intreat the favour of the prince: and every man is a friend to him that giveth gifts.”

Pro 19:7, “All the brethren of the poor do hate him: how much more do his friends go far from him? he pursueth them with words, yet they are wanting to him.”

Pro 14:20, “The poor is hated even of his own neighbour: but the rich hath many friends.”

Luk 20:47 “Which devour widows’ houses” – Comments The religious leaders lived a luxurious life from the offerings of the Temple, which was partly made up of the offerings of widows. The next passage of Scripture illustrates the widow’s offering in Luk 21:1-4 when the widow gives two mites into the Temple treasury.

Luk 21:2 Comments Alfred Edersheim says that it was not lawful to contribute a lesser amount than two mites. [272]

[272] Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, vol. 2 (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co, 1899), 388.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Luk 20:20. Which should feign themselves just men, See the note on Mat 22:16.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Luk 20:20-26 . See on Mat 22:15-22 ; Mar 12:13-17 .

.] having watched , so that they had thus further lain in wait for Him after that hour, Luk 20:19 , in order to be able to entrap Him.

] people instigated , secretly commissioned, Plat. Axioch . p. 368 E; Dem. 1483. 1; Polyb. xiii. 5. 1; Joseph. Antt . vi. 5. 2.

] who feigned that they themselves were strict observers of the law , who, therefore, by the pressure of their own consciences (not instigated by other people), came with the following question. These therefore are such “qui tum, quum maxime fallunt , id agunt, ut viri boni videantur ,” Cicero, Off . i. 13.

.] The subject is the members of the Sanhedrim.

] in order to take hold of Him on a word . does not depend on (Kypke, Kuinoel, Bleek), but on ., and is the secondary object. See Job 30:18 . Xen. Anab . iv. 7. 12 : . The Vulgate rightly has: “eum in sermone.”

(see the critical remarks), as Luk 4:29 ; Mat 24:24 .

. . . .] to the supremacy and (and especially) the power of the procurator . To combine the two (“ the supremacy and power of the magistrate,” Beza, de Wette, Bleek) is not indeed forbidden by the repetition of the article, but it is opposed by it, because this repetition would have no motive.

Luk 20:21 . . .] art not a partisan . See on Gal 2:6 .

Luk 20:22 . ] capitation and land-tribute , to be distinguished from , the indirect tribute (the tax on merchandise), see Kypke, II. p. 183 f., and already Thomas Magister, p. 900, ed. Bern. Comp. Rom 13:7 . Luke uses the Greek instead of the Roman word , found in Matthew and Mark.

Luk 20:26 . Observe the careful depicting of the triumph of Jesus. Comp. Luk 20:39 f.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

2. Controversy with the Pharisees and Herodians respecting the Tribute (Luk 20:20-26)

(Parallels: Mat 22:15-22; Mar 12:13-17)

20And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men,9 that they might take hold of his words [of some word of his10], that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority11 of the governor. 21And they asked him, saying, Master [Teacher], we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any [or, showest no partiality], but teachest the way of God 22,truly: Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Cesar, or no [not]? 23But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me? 12 24Shew me a penny [a denarius]. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Cesars. 25And he said unto them, Render therefore [Then render] unto Cesar the things which be [are] Cesars, and unto God the things which be [are] Gods. 26And they could not take hold of his words [saying] before the people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Luk 20:20. And they watched Him.After the defeat just suffered, nothing is more natural than that the Pharisees should look around partly for other confederates and partly for other weapons. While they before sought in vain to make their authority weigh, they now take refuge in craft, and after old combatants for the law have been put to shame and obliged to leave the field vanquished, now new and, in great part, vigorous picked troops are despatched. While, after what has just taken place, the Pharisees remain standing on the watch (), they send the Herodians to Jesus (see Lange on Mat 22:15), together with some of their disciples (Mat 22:16). Even earlier we have met with a similar temporary coalition of heterogeneous forces (Mar 2:18; Luk 23:5-17); later on, we shall find the same in yet greater measure. Moreover, it is easily comprehensible that two enemies should give up their mutual hatred for a while, when the concern is to strive against a dangerous third. Equally explicable is the change in the choice of the weapons. After the open defeat they pass over to a more concealed manner of waging war. A new disappointment will then be less ignominious, the ardently desired triumph not less advantageous. They choose, therefore, ambassadors who, as people strict in the law, must put on the guise of being concerned with a personal question of conscience, as if they were by no means set on by others to come to Him, and who must seek to accomplish their object through flattering speeches.

To the power and authority of the governor.A statement of the purpose peculiar to Luke, which, however, is probable on internal grounds also. They wish to bring matters to this pass, that the civil power shall lend them its hand to remove this man out of the way, against whom the spiritual authority has in vain armed itself. Upon this support they reckon definitely in case He gives to the question proposed, as is expected, a negative answer, in order to please the people, with whom He now appears to be making common cause against their own rulers, Luk 20:9. If He, on the other hand, espouses the party of the foreign oppressors, He would thereby lose all His credit with this same people. After such a mature deliberation they came forward, like Satan, as angels of light, 2Co 11:14.

Luk 20:21. Teacher, we know.There is something nave and at the same time a proof of the incorrigible self-conceit of the Pharisaical party in this, that they even now, after the elders of the people had just before, Luk 20:7, seen themselves constrained to a public confession of their ignorance, begin with a presumptuous We know. The purpose of this eulogy is, as to the rest, intelligible enough. In thee, do they mean, we believe we meet with exactly that independent man, from whose position our question can be answered with entire impartiality. That they could scarcely have uttered sharper satire on themselves than by this eulogy on the Saviour does not even remotely occur to them. As to the rest, the question how far they themselves really believed anything of the favorable testimony which they here publicly depose in reference to our Lord, can only be answered conjecturally.Showest no partiality.Literally, Acceptest not the person (the countenance), , comp. Gal 2:6, yet stronger than the in the parallel, and a definite designation of judicial impartiality.

Luk 20:22. Is it lawful for us.For the emphatical and most categorical form of the question, see Mark. Luke uses the Greek word , while the others make use of the Latin : Poll and ground taxes, to be distinguished from , the indirect taxes (on goods). Meyer. The question has its peculiar difficulty. It appeared to be forbidden, Deu 17:15, for a stranger to rule over Israel, as was now the case. The malcontents, with Judas Galilus at their head, who would have no other taxes paid than the temple-taxes, stood, therefore, apparently upon the ground of the Scripture. But if Jesus declared their principle valid, He would oppose Himself to the order of things that had now been induced under higher guidance, and would come into personal conflict with the civil power, with that of the Procurator.

Luk 20:23. Perceived their craftiness, .Still more strongly does Matthew say , and Mark , by which the immediateness of His knowledge is made prominent, which was by no means the result of a long deliberate reflection. Not to gain time, does He desire that a denarius should be shown Him. With the inquiry, Whose image and superscription hath it? the question is in effect already decided. A number of Rabbinical declarations, for more particular explanation of the immutable principle, He whose coin is current is lord of the land, we find in Lightfoot and Wetstein, ad loc.

Luk 20:25. Then render.The wisdom in the answer becomes first fairly visible if we give heed to the tacit presupposition from which the question had proceeded. The silly question, as the Wandsbecker Bote names it not unjustly, could not have arisen in their heart if they had not proceeded from the principle that such a civil transaction was in conflict with a higher religious duty. Our Lord resolves this antagonism in a higher unity, and already distinguishes the political from the religious sphere, while they confound the two jurisdictions. By the receiving of the coin of the Emperornot the name of Tiberius, but the official title Csar, is given, because it is here not a person but a principle that is in questionthey had shown that they regarded themselves as his subjects, and they now, therefore, would be inconsistent with themselves if they refused to fulfil the first civil duty towards him. Without expressing the least preference for the Roman dominion, our Lord was yet too well acquainted with the condition and the views of the Jewish nation not to have at once regarded every external essay for the restoration of civil freedom, which as such could not at that time have proceeded from a purely Theocratical, but only from an earthly temper, as mischievous and superfluous. He combated at the same time the opinion that such an obedience was in conflict with religious duties. The denarii were not even received as temple-taxes; the shekel of the sanctuary could therefore, as ever, be paid in addition. Here, therefore, the suum cuique holds good in the higher sense of the word, and they had only to see to it that they fulfilled each part of their double obligation with equal conscientiousness. The admirableness of the answer of our Lord consists, therefore, in this, that He: 1. Shows how the whole alternative in the present condition of things was entirely untenable; that He, 2. puts to shame before the judgment-seat of their conscience those who had come forward with the pretence of knowledge, since this must have given them plainly enough to know that they had fulfilled befittingly neither the one nor the other half of His double requirement; while He, 3. utters a principle for all following centuries, by which, on the one hand, the independence, on the other hand, the practically social direction, of the religious life is sufficiently secured. See below.

Luk 20:26. And they could not take hold.All the Synoptics are careful to speak of the astonishment of the questioners, which, therefore, must have revealed itself in a very visible manner. Luke denotes particularly the completeness of their defeat by this, that they themselves . The critical character that this moment would have had for the reputation of our Lord with the people, if He had not succeeded in rending the snare laid, is brought by this intimation to light..Not only these speakers, but also in and with them the Pharisees, who now venture no further attack. Before their departure they stand there for a moment holding their peace.A well-known painting of the whole event by Dietrici.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1.See on the parallel passages in Matthew and Mark, as also above.

2. The principle uttered by our Lord on this occasion, is not in conflict with the way in which He previously expresses Himself to Peter respecting the payment of the temple-tax, Mat 17:24-27. Here it is a civil, there it is a religious tax that is spoken of; here the rule is established according to which subjects have to conduct themselves with reference to earthly authority; there, on the other hand, the freedom vindicated which the Son may assert for Himself in reference to the house of His Royal Father.

3. The answer of the text has been on one hand judged with considerable disfavor (Gfrrer); on the other hand greeted with warm praise, e. g., by the Wandsbecker Bote: What a sense there is in all that comes out of His mouth! It seems to me therewith as it does with those boxes where there is one inside of another and another inside of that, &c. That this praise is not pitched too high, appears plain if we consider how our Lord has here said no word too much, nor yet a word too little, and how His utterance is peculiarly adapted not only to remove for Himself every perplexity and difficulty, but also to hurl back the arrow which they had directed upon Him into their own conscience. Had they at all times given to God the things that were Gods, they would now have had no tribute to pay to a foreign ruler. Therefore, even assuming that there prevailed here a conflict of duties, this had arisen from their own folly. If they give truly to the emperor his own . denotes first the coin, but then also, latiori sensu, the civil faithfulness and submission which, as it were, concentrated themselves in the tributethey would then not so eagerly long to withdraw themselves from the imperial yoke, nor yet to make common cause with its enemies. Thus does our Lord cordinate and subordinate the different duties which in their opinion stood in irreconcilable opposition.

4. To Csar the things which are Csars. By the answer of our Lord the fulfilment of the civil duty actually imposed is partly allowed, partly commanded, partly restrained within sacred limits. It shows plainly that it was not His business to encroach arbitrarily upon social life, comp. Luk 12:14; that even from reverence to God we are to honor the authority appointed by Him; that the duty to the earthly lawgiver may be refused only in the one case when it comes into irreconcilable conflict with the requirements of the heavenly one. The principle here expressed is developed fully in the spirit of our Lord, Act 4:20; Act 5:29; Rom 13:1-7; 1Pe 2:13, and elsewhere; comp. also the writings of the elder apologists, and Calvins Preface to his Institutes, &c. The Divine right to govern is, therefore, taken by our Lord and His first witnesses under their protection as definitely as the freedom of conscience, and political absolutism is as far from finding a support in His word as radicalism or the diseased craving for revolution. The independence of the church and of the state within the sphere appointed to each, is assured by the principle here uttered, and every essay towards the untimely absorption of the one in the other condemned, as in conflict with the spirit of the gospel.

5. To God the things which are Gods.The general rule, of which the preceding is only the application to a particular sphere. To Csar what is his, so far as it is required, but to God thyself, since thou art created after His image. Only if we assume that this thought hovered before the soul of our Lord, do we learn to understand the depth and beauty of His answer. The soul of man is to Him the coin which originally bore Gods image and superscription (the new birth cannot come here into view), and for this reason belongs wholly to the Heavenly Owner. Not only repentance, therefore (Ebrard), but faith, obedience unconditionally rendered, and faithfulness to God, is here demanded by our Lord. Comp. Pro 23:26. Whoever understands this, will even for God and conscience sake render to Csar also his own, and be thoroughly free, to what earthly lord soever he may owe service and obedience. The may be called a short summary of all the commandments of the first table, and affords at the same time a new proof how the Son even to the end at every opportunity sought not His own but the Fathers glory.

6. Quesnel:The image of princes that is stamped upon coins, signifies that temporal things belong to their province. The image of God that is stamped in our soul, teaches that our heart belongs to Him.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The controversy of the lie against the truth; the triumph of the truth over the lie.The unnatural coalitions of ecclesiastical and political parties which are in principle opposed.Craft over against our Lord is as powerless as force.The end sanctifies the means, a rule that was not first discovered by Ignatius de Loyola.Even His enemies are constrained to proclaim the praise of our Lord.The ideal of a perfect teacher, as the Pharisees portrayed it, is to be taken to heart by every servant of the Lord: 1. He teaches the way of God truly; 2. he takes account of no mans authority; 3. he is in himself true, without depending on any one.The masters in Israel not the only ones who have remained far below their own ideal.What in each sphere is permitted and what not, must be made out by Jesus.The crafty heart lies naked and open in its depths before the Omniscient, Jer 17:10-11.Render to Csar, &c., the fundamental law of the kingdom of God, whereby: 1. On the one hand the relation of the Christian to the earth; 2. on the other hand his vocation for heaven, is defined.Our obligation towards God the natural consequence of our relation to God.Render to God what is Gods: 1. A simple but very comprehensive requirement; 2. a natural but necessary requirement; 3. a difficult but blessed requirement.How many are put to shame and condemned by this word of our Lord: 1. There are those who give neither to Csar nor to God; 2. to Csar indeed, but not to God; 3. to God indeed, but not to Csar; 4. as well to God as to Csar what is His own, but still too weakly, too slothfully, and too little.How the impotency of sin is every time revealed anew.The best tribute have His foes stubbornly refused the Messiah, and therefore with the fullest right paid forced tribute to Csar.

Starke:When an ungodly man makes himself devout, he is worse than bad.Bibl. Wirt.:The ungodly continually torment themselves.Brentius:To be able to settle their position and unsettle it is a troublesome evil, but the righteous marks it and abominates it.Nova Bibl. Tub.:Even the ungodly can tell the truth, and God may use them as instruments for His glory.The children of the devil have great likeness to their father.Take time in everything, and answer considerately.It is a singular wisdom to convict the enemies of the truth by their own words.Luther:Fear of God and honor due the king are two fundamental particulars of the Christian religion, which are inseparably united.Hedinger:To every one his own, to God obedience, to our neighbor love, to the government its dues, to the devil sin (? rejection).The spiritual and the secular realm must neither abrogate nor hinder one another.Brentius:The Divine truth imposes at the last on all witlings an eternal silence.Heubner:The true Christian is to be lifted above political parties.The true saint inspires a reverence even in his enemies.The saints are not fools.The best Christian the best subject.Of the three systems, the hierarchical, the territorial, and the collegial system, the latter appears to admit best of agreement with this passage.Fuchs:Render to God what is Gods: 1. A penitent; 2. believing; 3. patient; 4. obedient heart.Couard:The confession of His enemies that Christ teaches the way of God aright obliges us: 1. To receive His doctrine believingly; 2. to follow His doctrine willingly; 3. to work for His doctrine with joyful courage.Westermeyer:The right hand of the Lord getteth the victory.

On the Pericope.Ahlfeld:The worlds craft shattered against the simplicity of the humble Christian.Gabler:What assures us best against the falsehood of the world?Stier:Why and how are we as Christians subject to every earthly authority? Seubert:The true Christian is also the freest citizen.Steinmeyer:In all uncertainties say only: Show me the coin! Look upon it carefully, whose its image and superscription is, and then render to every one his own. If you are wavering on the Lords day, whether you should use it for earthly activity or for participation in the sweet services of the Lords house, only look upon the coin; the image and superscription of this day is Gods: He hath hallowed it; therefore must we give Him what is His own, &c.Arndt:The repulse of the Pharisees: 1. The rich intelligence; 2. the widely comprehensive application of the pregnant answer of our Lord.By this requirement to give every one not what we please, but what belongs to him, the might of selfishness is broken, from which the whole attack and coalition of the Pharisees and Herodians had proceeded.The Lord addresses Himself with this His principle to the natural feeling of right, which even in fallen man is yet extant.

Footnotes:

[9][Luk 20:20.Van Oosterzee translates , gesetzesstrenge Leute, strict observers of the law, which is doubtless its meaning in this place. They professed an anxious desire to know just how they could reconcile their duty to the law with their actual subjection to the Romans.C. C. S.]

[10][Luk 20:20.According to the most approved reading: . It appears better, with Bleek, to make the first genitive depend on the second, than to regard both as depending directly on the verb, although, it is true, De Wette, Meyer, Van Oosterzee, and Alford adopt the latter construction.C. C. S.]

[11][Luk 20:20.. . Van Oosterzee translates: to the authorities, and especially to the power of the procurator, taking the two nouns as indicating respectively the Jewish and the Roman power. In this Meyer agrees with him, but it seems to be straining a point. It is enough to regard it as a formula for Pilates jurisdiction, rendered pleonastically full by the solemnity of the events which it introduces.C. C. S.]

[12]Luk 20:23.In B., L., [Cod. Sin.,] and some Cursives, these words [Why tempt ye Me?] do not appear. Perhaps they have crept in here from the parallel passage in Mat 22:18.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor. And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly: Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no? But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me? Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar’s. And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s. And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace.

I beg the Reader to observe the eagerness with which those awful characters followed up their pursuit in hunting after the life of JESUS. The Evangelist saith, that it was the same hour. Like the malice of the men, which in after days sought to destroy Paul, who vowed neither to eat or drink, till they had killed him. Act 23:12 . But let not the Reader overlook in every minute circumstance which attended the death of the LORD JESUS, the hand of JEHOVAH in all. This is a grand part in the whole transaction. Isa 53:10 ; Joh 19:10-11 ; Act 4:27-28Act 4:27-28 . The attempt of those men in the instance here mentioned, was with a view to bring an accusation against him to the Roman government. The nation of the Jews at that time, was under bondage to this power. And the whole body of the people were looking forward to the coming of the Messiah, to deliver them from it. Nothing therefore could exceed the art of those men. They therefore now send spies, which should address JESUS very courteously. Rabbi! (say they,) we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of GOD in truth. Thus in flattering words, they covered over their evil design. Either way, by CHRIST’S answer, they made sure to entangle him. For if he confessed the authority of the Roman government, they concluded he would lose his popularity among those who considered him as the Messiah. And if he denied the Roman power of tribute, they would have hurried him away to Pontius Pilate the governor. Precious JESUS! how truly wert thou all along manifested to be the hind of the morning, when, according to thine own language, many bulls compassed thee, and strong bulls of Basham beset thee round! Psa 22 title, and Psa 22:12 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

20 And they watched him , and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.

Ver. 20. They sent forth spies ] Gr. , fishers, that with net and bait catch the silly fish and feed on them; such were these emissaries, these catchpoles. a

Which should feign themselves just men ] Hypocrites only act religion, play devotion; as stage players they act a sultan, when they are but so many shoemakers; as ferrymen, they look one way and row another; they have holiness written upon their outsides, as Vorstius’ book had De Deo in the front and blasphemy in the text. They cry out Templum Domini, the temple of the Lord, but care not for the Lord of the temple. But religion, as it is the best armour, so it is the worst cloak; and will serve hypocrites as the disguise Ahab put on and perished, or as Absalom’s mule served her master, &c.

a A petty officer of justice; a sheriff’s officer or sergeant, esp. a warrant officer who arrests for debt, a bum-bailiff. D

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

20 26. ] REPLY CONCERNING THE LAWFULNESS OF TRIBUTE TO CSAR. Mat 22:15-22 .Mar 12:13-17Mar 12:13-17 , where see notes as before.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

20. ] ., having watched an opportunity.

., see reff., men suborned, instructed and arranged for that purpose .

., not the spies, but the chief priests.

is not the genitive after , as in E. V., but after ., as in , Xen. Anab. iv. 7. 12: that they might lay hold of him by some saying; = , Mark.

, to the Roman power (genus) . . ., to the authority of the governor (species). The second article renders the separation of the two necessary.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Luk 20:20-26 . The tribute question (Mat 22:15-22 , Mar 12:13-17 ).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Luk 20:20 . : used absolutely = watching, not Him, but their opportunity; so Grotius and Field ( Ot. Nor. ); watching with close cunning observation ( accurate et insidiose observare , Kypke). : some derive from and = sitters down, lying in wait ( subsessores , Grotius), others from . The most probable derivation is from , to place in ambush (so Kypke, Schanz, etc.). Pricaeus cites Sir 8:11 : , as probably in the mind of Lk. Here only in N.T. = “spies” (A.V [165] , R.V [166] ), “Aufpasser” (Weizscker). ., passing themselves off as; that was the trick they had been put up to. , honest men, sincerely anxious to know and do their duty. They might pose as such with the better chance of success if they were as Mt. states “disciples”; scholars of the scribes = ingenuous young men. : that they might lay hold either of a word of His , or of Him by a word ( eum in sermone , Vulgate), or of Him , i.e. , of a word spoken by Him ; all three alternatives find support. ( T.R.), indicating aim and tendency. . . : the repetition of the article raises a doubt whether both nouns refer to . So construed the clause will mean “to the rule and especially to the authority of the governor,” rule being general, and authority a more special definition of it. Some take as referring to the Sanhedrim. The probability is that both refer to Pilate. On the aim thus said to be in view Grotius remarks: “When disputes about religion do not suffice to oppress the innocent, matters relating to the state are wont to be taken up”.

[165] Authorised Version.

[166] Revised Version.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

watched. See on Luk 17:20. Compare Luk 6:7; Luk 14:1; Mar 3:2.

spies = secret agents. Greek enkathetos = Hers in wait. Jos 8:14. Job 31:9. Occurs only here in N.T.

feign. Greek. hupokrinomai. App-122. Occurs only here in N.T.

just = righteous: i.e., here, honest.

words = discourse. Greek. Plural of logos. See note on Mar 9:32.

that so = to (Greek. eis. App-101.) the end that.

power = rule. The Roman power. Greek. arche. App-172.

the governor. Pilate. He alone had the rule as to life and death. So that it was the Lord’s life they had in view.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

20-26.] REPLY CONCERNING THE LAWFULNESS OF TRIBUTE TO CSAR. Mat 22:15-22. Mar 12:13-17, where see notes as before.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Luk 20:20. [ , to be just men) As if they were asking the question under distress of mind on a point of conscience. He who has a concern for conscience on the point, in actual fact carries away with him a clear reply.-V. g.]-) The same case follows the verb in Luk 20:26, .[215]- ) to the power of the Jewish rulers, and afterwards to Pilate.

[215] governs the Genit. always, expressing the part of the thing laid hold of. So , and other such verbs expressing touch or hold.-E. and T.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Luk 20:20-26

Commentary On Luk 20:20-26

Galen Doughty

Luk 20:20-26 – Once again the religious leaders, that is the leaders of the Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests and leading rabbis, return to their strategy of trying to trap Jesus in order to bring some charge against him or have an excuse to arrest him and destroy him. Every time they have tried it they have failed but like the addict they keep doing it over and over and expecting different results each time. Now they do something that is devious and evil in nature and shows how far they have fallen. They would say that lying is wrong and against God’s Law yet now they are willing to lie and deceive if it means catching Jesus and handing him over to Pilate. They can’t get rid of him themselves so maybe they can catch him in a way that allows them to have Pilate arrest him and kill him. They have fallen into the trap of the end justifying the means.

Their spies come to him with flattering words about Jesus teaching what is right and that he doesn’t show partiality. He teaches God’s way and the way of truth. Then they sweetly ask him if it is therefore right to pay taxes to Caesar or not. They are hoping by his answer he will either anger the crowds who follow him by saying pay your taxes or anger Pilate and the Romans by saying don’t pay your taxes and then be arrested for sedition.

They forget with whom they are dealing however. Jesus sees through their duplicity and lies. He asks them to show him denarius, the standard Roman coin of the time. He asks, whose image, NIV portrait, and inscription is on it? They reply Caesar’s. Did they know they had been had when they said Caesar? I don’t think so. I think Jesus’ answer shocks, confuses and astounds them. I think some of them give Jesus grudging respect because of his answer. Yet because of it they hate him all the more! Jesus says give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.

What does Jesus mean? The word for portrait or image is the same word used in the Septuagint for the image of God in human beings in Gen 1:27. It means likeness, image and reflection. Paul uses the same word in Col 1:15 to describe Jesus as the image of the Father. I think Jesus is using a play on words here with the religious leaders. They knew their Old Testament and the important words in it. The image of God is a core Hebrew teaching about humanity. We are all made in God’s image. Jesus is saying pay your taxes; give to Caesar that which has the image of Caesar on it, namely the coin. But give to God yourself because you are made in the image of God. Your life and first loyalty belong to God and not to Caesar. God is Lord not Caesar. They knew this but were so hungry to trap Jesus and be rid of him they forgot it. It shows how much they had compromised their faith in order to hold onto their power. They were corrupt. Jesus however recognizes the governing authorities, something Paul and Peter will later reinforce, but he also knows our primary allegiance is not to the state or any human ruler. If we are citizens of the Kingdom of God we owe our allegiance to God alone! Caesar may own the coin but God owns the person! Jesus establishes the principle that Christians are to obey the government and laws of the land, including paying taxes, unless and until it conflicts with obeying God first.

The Pharisees and their allies had thought they had caught Jesus on the horns of a dilemma he would not be able to escape. Jesus, seeing through their plans, answers with a Kingdom principle they cannot deny and that silences all their objections. Their strategy proves a failure again!

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

they watched: Psa 37:32, Psa 37:33, Psa 38:12, Isa 29:20, Isa 29:21, Jer 11:19, Jer 18:18, Jer 20:10, Mat 22:15, Mat 22:18, Mar 12:13, Mar 12:15

feign: 2Sa 14:2, 1Ki 14:2-6, Psa 66:3, Psa 81:15, *marg. 2Pe 2:3

they might deliver: Mat 27:2, Joh 18:28-32

Reciprocal: Gen 42:9 – Ye are spies 1Ki 14:6 – why feignest Psa 27:11 – mine enemies Psa 41:6 – speaketh Psa 55:21 – The words Psa 56:6 – mark Psa 62:4 – bless Psa 83:3 – They Psa 140:5 – The proud Psa 141:9 – from the snares Pro 10:18 – that hideth Pro 26:28 – a flattering Pro 29:5 – spreadeth Dan 6:4 – sought Mat 2:8 – that Mar 3:2 – General Mar 3:6 – Pharisees Luk 6:7 – that Luk 7:40 – Master Luk 11:53 – to speak Luk 14:1 – they Luk 16:15 – Ye Luk 19:48 – could Luk 20:23 – Why Luk 20:26 – they could Luk 23:2 – forbidding Joh 8:6 – tempting Joh 18:19 – asked Col 4:6 – how

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

0

The priests thought they could mislead Jesus into saying something that would get him into trouble with the secular government. Spies which should feign means men who were hired to act the hypocrite in pretending to be just men. That means they were supposed to be concerned about the dignity of the government.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

LET us mark, for one thing, in this passage, the cloak of goodness under which some of our Lord’s enemies approached Him. We read that they “sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men.” We read further that they attempted to impose on Him by flattering words: “We know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly..” These words sounded well. An ignorant bystander would have said, “These are sincere inquirers after truth!” But all was hollow and unreal. It was the wolf putting on the sheep’s clothing, under the vain idea of deceiving the shepherd. “Their words were smoother than butter,” yet there was “war in their hearts.” (Psa 55:21.)

The true servant of Christ must expect to meet persons of this description, as long as the world stands. There never will be wanting those, who from interested or sinister motives will profess with their lips to love Christ, while in heart they deny Him. There will always be some, who “by good words and fair speeches,” will attempt to deceive the heart of the simple. The union of “burning lips and a wicked heart,” is far from uncommon. There are probably few congregations which do not contain some of those whom Solomon likens to “potsherds, covered with silver dross.” (Rom 16:18. Pro 26:23.)

He that would not be often deceived in this wicked world, must carefully remember these things. We must exercise a wise caution as we travel through life, and not play the part of the “simple who believeth every word.” (Pro 14:15.) We must not lightly put confidence in every new religious volunteer, nor hastily take it for granted that all people are good who talk like good men. Such caution at first sight may appear narrow-minded and uncharitable. But the longer we live the more shall we find that it is needful. We shall discover by experience that all is not gold that glitters, and all are not true Christians who make a loud profession of Christianity. The language of Christianity is precisely that part of religion which a false Christian finds it most easy to attain. The walk of a man’s daily life, and not the talk of his lips, is the only safe test of his character.

Let us mark, for another thing, in these verses, the consummate wisdom of our Lord’s answer to His enemies. We read that a most difficult and subtle question was proposed to Him for solution. “Is it lawful to give tribute to Csar or no?” It was a question eminently calculated to entangle any one who attempted to answer it. If our Lord had replied that it was not lawful to pay tribute to Csar, He would have been accused to Pilate as a rebel against the Roman power. If our Lord had replied that it was lawful to pay tribute to Csar, He would have been denounced to the people as regardless of the rights and privileges of the Jewish nation. An answer which would not involve our Lord in difficulties, seemed at first sight impossible to be found. But He who is truly called “the wisdom of God,” found an answer which silenced His adversaries. He bade them show Him a penny. He asked them whose image and superscription was on that penny. “They answered and said, Csar’s.” At once our Lord made that penny the groundwork of a reply, at which even His enemies were obliged to marvel. “Render,” He said, “unto Csar the things which be Csar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s.”

They were to “render to Csar the things which were Csar’s.” Their own lips had just confessed that Csar had a certain temporal authority over them. They used the money which Csar had coined. It was a lawful tender between man and man. They probably had no objection to receive gifts and payments in Roman coin. They must not therefore pretend to say that all payments to Csar were unlawful. By their own admission he exercised some dominion over them. Let them obey that dominion in all temporal things. If they did not refuse to use Csar’s coin, let them not refuse to pay Csar’s temporal dues.

They were to “render to God the things which were God’s.” There were many dues which God required at their hands which they might easily pay, if they were inclined. Honor, love, obedience, faith, fear, prayer, spiritual worship, were payments to God which they might daily make, and payments with which the Roman government did not interfere. They could not say that Csar made such payments impossible. Let them see to it that they gave to God His dues in spiritual things, as well as to Csar his dues in temporal things. There was no necessity for collision between the demands of their temporal and their heavenly sovereign. In temporal things, let them obey the powers, under whose authority they allowed themselves to be. In spiritual things let them do as their forefathers had done, and obey God.

The principles laid down by our Lord in this well-known sentence are deeply instructive. Well would it have been for the peace of the world, if they had been more carefully weighed and more wisely applied!

The attempts of the civil power in some countries to control men’s consciences by intolerant interference, and the attempts of the church in other countries to interfere with the action of the civil power, have repeatedly led to strifes, wars, rebellions, and social disorder. The injuries which the cause of true religion has received from morbid scrupulosity on one side; and servile obsequiousness to state demands on the other, have been neither few nor small. Happy is he who has attained to a sound mind on the whole subject! To distinguish rightly between the things of Csar, and the things of God,-and to pay to each their real dues regularly, habitually, and cheerfully, is a great help towards a quiet and peaceable life.

Let us often pray that we may have wisdom from above, in order to answer rightly, when perplexing questions are put to us. The servant of Christ must expect a portion like his Master. He must count it no strange thing, if the wicked and worldly-minded endeavor to “entangle him in his talk,” and to provoke him to speak unadvisedly with his lips. In order to be prepared for such occasions let him often ask the Lord Jesus for the gift of sound wisdom and a discreet tongue. In the presence of those who watch for our halting, it is a great thing to know what to say and how to say it, when to be silent, and when to speak. Blessed be God, He who silenced the chief priests and scribes by His wise answers, still lives to help His people and has all power to help them. But He loves to be entreated.

==================

Notes-

v20.-[Spies.] The Greek word so rendered is only found here. Parkhurst defines it as meaning “Liers in wait.”

v22.-[Lawful to give tribute to Csar, &c.] Let it be remembered, that a large party among the Jews bore the yoke of the Roman government most uneasily, and were disposed to regard with the greatest enmity any Jew who conceded that the Jewish nation was altogether in a tributary position under the Roman emperor, or “Csar.” The question of our Lord’s enemies was so artfully framed, that it seemed to place Him in a dilemma. Whatever answer He gave, it seemed that He must offend one of two parties.-He must either give offence to the friends of the Romish supremacy or to the zealots among the Jews.

v23.-[Craftiness.] The Greek word so translated is only found five times in the New Testament. It is the same word that is used in describing Satan’s “subtlety” in tempting Eve. (2Co 11:3.)

v24.-[Whose image and superscription.] Lightfoot tells us that the Jews have a tradition among them, that to admit the title of any prince on their current coin was an acknowledgment of subjection to him.

v25.-[Things which be Csar’s… things which be God’s.] Few principles contain more deep wisdom than the famous one in this verse. Few however have been found to admit of such difference as to practical application.

The grand difficulty in applying the principle arises from this, that men do not agree what are the “things of Csar,” and what are the “things of God,”-where the claims of Csar end, and where the claims of God begin. A meeting place there must be. A boundary to the respective claims of each party must be laid down. The definition of this boundary has been in every age a fertile cause of strifes, divisions, and controversies.

On the one hand the English government under the Stuarts used to push the claims of “Csar” to a fearful extreme. Men were persecuted, and punished, and fined, and imprisoned, like felons, because they would not worship God in a particular way. In this case “Csar,” beyond all doubt, was stepping out of his province.

On the other hand, the Roman Catholic Church, in modern times, is continually interfering with the civil power of every nation where Roman Catholics live, and claiming for her members immunities and privileges which threaten to interfere with the existence of civil government altogether. In this case we have an extravagant and unreasonable assertion of the claim on behalf of “the things that are God’s.”

There are few subjects on which Christians have such need to pray for a sound mind and a clear judgment, and to ask for deliverance from a morbidly scrupulous conscience, and especially on the question of the dues of “Csar.”

A conscience which is very tender and sensitive about a money payment which the state demands, but very careless in all matters of faith, and hope, and charity, and humility, and private holiness, is a conscience which, to say the least, is very suspicious.

So long as we have liberty to worship God in Christ, according to our conscience, and to serve Him in the way of His commandments, we may safely submit to many requirements of the state, which in our own private opinion we do not thoroughly approve.

It is evident to every reflecting person, that all government must be the result of compromise, and that every member of the commonwealth must be willing to give up something of his private opinions for the sake of the general good. If every subject is to be excused paying the tax to which he feels an objection, common sense tells us that all government must soon come to a stand-still. One will object to one tax, and another to another, until the whole state is thrown into confusion.

Gualter has a very useful note on this passage, in which he maintains the principle just laid down by the example of the Jews under the rule of their Babylonian conquerors, and also bears his protest against the excesses committed by Anabaptists in Germany, in the days of the Reformation, under the color of conscientious scruples.

Our Lord had probably in view two parties among His hearers. One party was that of the Jewish zealots. To them He said “render to Csar the things that are Csar’s.” The other was that of the worldly Herodians. To them He said, “Render to God the things that are God’s.”

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

Luk 20:20. And they watched him. Hanging about until the opportunity came.

They sent forth spies, men instructed for the purpose.

Feigning themselves to be righteous. They should come to Him, as though their consciences, not the craft of His enemies, had prompted the following question. On the character of these agents, and the coalition with the Herodians, see Mat 22:16.

That they (the foiled Sanhedrists) might take hold of his speech. Both the person and the thing taken hold of are expressed in the original.

Unto the magistrate, or, ruler, the civil power, etc. The Roman power in general is first spoken of, then the specific authority to which they wished to deliver Him, that of the governor.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Both St. Matthew and St. Mark tell us, that these spies, sent forth to ensnare our Saviour about paying tribute to Caesar, were the Pharisees and Herodians: the former were against paying tribute, looking upon the Roman emperor as an usurper; the latter were for it. These two opposite parties concluded, that, let our Saviour answer how he would, they should entrap him; if, to please the Pharisees, he denied paying tribute, then he is accused of sedition; if, to gratify the Herodians, he voted for paying tribute, then he is pronounced an enemy to the liberty of his country, and exposed to a popular odium.

But observe with what wisdom and caution our Lord answers them: he calls for the Roman penny, and asks them, whose superscription it bare? They answer, Caesar’s. Then says he, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. As if he had said, “Your admitting the Roman coin amongst you, is an evidence that you are under subjection to the Roman emperor; because the coining and imposing of money is an act of sovereign authority; therefore you having owned Caesar’s authority over you, by accepting of his coin amongst you, give unto him his just dues, and render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.”

Learn hence,

1. That our Saviour was no enemy to magistracy and civil government; there was no truer pay-master of the king’s dues, than he that was King of kings; he preached it and he practised it, Mat 17:27

2. Where a kingdom is in subjection to a temporal prince, whether by descent, election, or conquest, he derives the title, the sujects ought from a principle of conscience to pay tribute to him.

3. That as Christ is no enemy to the civil rights of princes, and his religion exempts none from paying their civil dues, so princes should be as careful not to rob him of his divine honor, as he is not to wrong them of their civil rights. As Christ requires all his followers to render to Ceasar the things that are Caesar’s, so princes should oblige all their subjects to render unto God the things that are God’s.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Luk 20:20-26. And they watched him For an elucidation of this paragraph, see on Mat 22:16-22, and Mar 12:13-17; and sent spies, which should feign themselves just men Men scrupulously conscientious in every point: that they might take hold of his words If he answered as they hoped he would. Master, we know then sayest, &c. Speakest in private, and teachest in public; the way of God truly The true path of duty. They could not take hold of his words before the people As they did afterward before the sanhedrim, in the absence of the people, chap. Luk 22:67, &c.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

4. The Question of the Pharisees: Luk 20:20-26.

The official question of the Sanhedrim served only to prepare a triumph for Jesus. From this time forth the different parties make attempts on Him separately, and that by means of captious questions adroitly prepared.

Vers. 20-26. The introduction to this narrative presents in our three Syn. (Mat 22:15; Mar 12:13) some marked shades of meaning. The simplest form is that of Luke. The priests and scribes (Luk 20:19) suborn certain parties, who, affecting a scruple of conscience (feigning themselves just men), interrogate Jesus as to whether it is lawful to pay tribute to Gentile authorities. The snare was this: Did Jesus answer in the affirmative? It was a means of destroying His influence with the people by stigmatizing His Messianic pretensions. Did He reply in the negative? He fell as a rebel into the hands of the Roman governor, who would make short work with Him. This is brought out in Luk 20:20 by the emphatic accumulation of the terms , , military power and judicial authority. Once given over to that power, Jesus would be in good hands, and the Sanhedrim would have no more concern about the favour with which the people surrounded Him. and ought both to be taken, notwithstanding Bleek’s scruples, as immediately dependent on : to take Him by surprise, and to catch a word from Him by surprise. According to Mark and Matthew, the Pharisees in this case united with the Herodians. Bleeks thinks that the bond of union between the one party, fanatical zealots for national independence, and the other, devoted partisans of Herod’s throne, was common antipathy to foreign domination. The presence of the Herodians was intended to encourage Jesus to answer in the negative, and so to put Himself in conflict with Pilate. But the attitude of the Herodians toward the Roman power was totally different from Bleek’s view of it. The Herods had rather planted themselves in Israel as the vassals of Caesar. The Herodians, says M. Reuss, were the Jews who had taken the side of the family of Herod against the patriots, that is to say, against the Pharisees. We have therefore here, what so often occurs in history, a coalition of two hostile parties, with the view of crushing a third, dangerous to both. In Galilee we have already seen a similar combination (Mar 3:6; Luk 13:31-32). There was a perfectly good reason for it in this case. If the answer of Jesus required to be denounced to the people, this task would fall to the Pharisees, who stood well with the multitude. If, on the contrary, it was necessary to go to Pilate, the Herodians would take this part, so disagreeable to the Pharisees.

According to Matthew (Mat 22:16), the heads of the pharisaic party took care to keep aloof. They attacked Him first through some of their disciples. In reality, their alliance with the Herodians compromised those well-known defenders of national independence.

The address of the emissaries is variously rendered in our three Gospels. : without deviating from the straight line. and , to say and to teach, differ as pronouncing on a question and stating the grounds of the decision. The Hebraistic phrase , which must have been a frightful barbarism to Greek ears (to take the countenance, for: to accept men’s persons), is found only in Luke. It would therefore be himself, if he was copying Matthew or Mark, who had added it at his own handhe who was writing for Greek readers! , the way of God, denotes the straight theocratic line traced out by the law, without regard to accomplished facts or political necessities. They think by their praises to render it impossible for Him to recoil. There was, in reality,and this is what formed the apparently insurmountable difficulty of the question, a contradiction between the pure theocratic standard and the actual state of things. The normal condition was the autonomy of God’s people,normal because founded on the divine law, and as such, sacred in the eyes of Jesus. The actual state of things was the subjection of the Jews to the Romans,a providential situation, and as such, not less evidently willed by God. How was this contradiction to be got over? Judas the Galilean, rejecting the fact, had declared himself for the right; he had perished. This was the fate to which the rulers wished to drive Jesus. And if He recoiled, if He accepted the fact, was this not to deny the right, the legal standard, Moses, God Himself?

Is it lawful for us (Luk 20:22)? They have a scruple of conscience! Jesus at once discerns the malicious plot which is at the bottom of the question; He feels that never was a more dangerous snare laid for Him. But there is in the simplicity of the dove a skill which enables it to escape from the best laid string of the fowler. What made the difficulty of the question was the almost entire fusion of the two domains, the religious and political, in the Old Covenant. Jesus, therefore, has now to distinguish those two spheres, which the course of Israelitish history has in fact separated and even contrasted, so that He may not be drawn into applying to the one the absolute standard which belongs only to the other. Israel should depend only on God, assuredly, but that in the religious domain. In the political sphere, God may be pleased to put it for a time in a state of dependence on a human power, as had formerly happened in their times of captivity, as is the case at present in relation to Caesar. Did not even the theocratic constitution itself distinguish between the tribute to be paid to the king and the dues to be paid to the priests and the temple? This legal distinction became only more precise and emphatic when the sceptre fell into Gentile hands. What remained to be said was not God or Caesar, but rather, God and Caesar, each in his own sphere. The Gentile money which passed current in Israel attested the providential fact of the establishment of the Roman dominion, and of the acceptance of that state of things by the theocratic people. Ubicunque numisma regis alicujus obtinet, illic incolae regem istum pro domino agnoscunt, says the famous Jewish doctor Maimonides (quoted by Bleek). The piece of Roman money which Jesus calls His adversaries to show, establishes by the image and inscription which it bears the existence of this foreign power in the political and lower sphere of the theocratic life; it is to this sphere that the payment of tribute belongs; the debt should therefore be discharged. But above this sphere there is that of the religious life which has God for its object. This sphere is fully reserved by the answer of Jesus; and He declares that all its obligations can be fulfilled, without in the least doing violence to the duties of the other. He accepts with submission the actual condition, while reserving fidelity to Him who can re-establish the normal condition as soon as it shall seem good to Him. Jesus Himself had never felt the least contradiction between those two orders of duties; and it is simply from His own pure consciousness that He derives this admirable solution. The word , render, implies the notion of moral duty toward Caesar, quite as much as toward God. De Wette is therefore certainly mistaken here in limiting the notion of obligation to the things which are God’s, and applying merely the notion of utility to the things which are Caesar’s. St. Paul understood the thought of Jesus better, when he wrote to the Romans (Luk 13:1 et seq.): Be subject to the powers…, not only from fear of punishment, but also for conscience’ sake. Comp. 1Ti 2:1 et seq.; 1Pe 2:13 et seq. Dependence on God does not exclude, but involves, not only many personal duties, but the various external and providential relations of dependence in which the Christian may find himself placed, even that of slavery (1Co 7:22). As to theocratic independence, Jesus knew well that the way to regain it was not to violate the duty of submission to Caesar by a revolutionary shaking off of his yoke, but to return to the faithful fulfilment of all duties toward God. To render to God what is God’s, was the way for the people of God to obtain anew David instead of Caesar as their Lord.

Who could find a word to condemn in this solution? To the Pharisees, the Render unto Caesar; to the Herodians, the Render unto God. Each carries away his own lesson; Jesus alone issues triumphantly from the ordeal which was to have destroyed Him.

5. The Question of the Sadducees: Luk 20:27-40.

We know positively from Josephus that the Sadducees denied at once the resurrection of the body, the immortality of the soul, and all retribution after death (Antiq. 18.1. 4; Bell. Jud. 2.8. 14). It was not that they rejected either the O. T. in general, or any of its parts. How, in that case, could they have sat in the Sanhedrim, and filled the priesthood? Probably they did not find personal immortality taught clearly enough in the books of Moses; and as to the prophetic books, they ascribed to them only secondary authority.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

CIX.

JEWISH RULERS SEEK TO ENSNARE JESUS.

(Court of the Temple. Tuesday, April 4, A. D. 30.)

Subdivision A.

PHARISEES AND HERODIANS ASK ABOUT TRIBUTE.

aMATT. XXII. 15-22; bMARK XII. 13-17; cLUKE XX. 20-26.

a15 Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might ensnare him in his talk. c20 And they watched him, and sent forth {bsend unto him} atheir disciples, bcertain of the Pharisees and of {awith} bthe Herodians, that they might catch him in talk. [Perceiving that Jesus, when on his guard, was too wise for them, the Pharisees thought it best to speak their cunning through the mouths of their young disciples, whose youth and apparent desire to know the truth would, according to their calculation, take Jesus off his guard. Having no ancient statement giving us the tenets or principles of the Herodians, we are left to judge them solely by their name, which shows that they were partisans of Herod Antipas. Whether they were out-and-out supporters of the Roman government, or whether they clung to Herod as one whose intervening sovereignty saved them from the worse fate of being directly under a Roman procurator (as Juda and Samaria then were), would not, as some suppose, affect their views as to the payment of tribute. If they accepted Herod merely for policy’s sake, policy would also compel them to favor the tribute, for Antipas, being appointed [597] by Rome, would have to favor the tribute, and could count none as his adherents who opposed it.] cspies, who feigned themselves to righteous [sincere seekers after truth], that they might take hold of his speech, so as to deliver him up to the rule and to the authority of the governor. [Pontius Pilate was the governor. We are not surprised at the destruction of Jerusalem when we see the religious teachers of the nation employing their young disciples in such a work as this. To play detective and entrap a rogue in his speech and thus become a man-hunter is debasing enough; but to seek thus to entrap a righteous man is simply diabolical.] b14 And when they were come, they say unto him, {csaying,} Teacher, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, bwe know that thou art true, and carest not for any one; for thou regardest not the person of men, cand acceptest not the person of any, but of a truth teachest the way of God: ain truth [The meaning of their preface is this: “We see that neither fear nor respect for the Pharisees or the rulers prevents you from speaking the plain, disagreeable truth; and we are persuaded that your courage and love of truth will lead you to speak the same way in political matters, and that you will not be deterred therefrom by any fear or reverence for Csar.” Fearless loyalty to truth is indeed one of the noblest attributes of man. But instead of honoring this most admirable quality in Jesus, these hardened reprobates were endeavoring to employ it as an instrument for his destruction], 17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? c22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Csar, or not? b15 Shall we give, or shall we not give? [The Jews were required to pay annually a large sum of money to the Roman government as an acknowledgment of their subjection. About twenty years before this Judas of Galilee had stirred up the people to resist this tribute, and the mass of the Jews was bitterly opposed to it. To decide in favor of this tribute was therefore to alienate the affection and confidence of the throng in the temple who stood listening to him–an end most desirable to the Pharisees. If, [598] on the other hand, Jesus said that the tribute should not be paid, the Herodians were present to hear it, and would be witnesses sanctioned by Herod, and therefore such as Pilate would be compelled to respect. What but divine wisdom could escape from so cunningly devised a dilemma!] a18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, ccraftiness, bknowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, {aand said} Why make ye trial of me, ye hypocrites? [Thus, before answering, Jesus exposes the meanness and hypocrisy in their question, thereby emphasizing the important fact that he did not dodge, but answered it.] 19 Show me the tribute money. c24 Show me a denarius. bbring me a denarius, that I may see it. [Religious dues and tributes had been paid in shekels or old Jewish coin, but the tribute to Rome was paid in Roman coin of which the denarius was a sample.] aAnd they brought unto him a denarius. [See Rom 13:1, Rom 13:7.] c26 And they were not able to take hold of the saying before the people: a22 And when they heard it, they marvelled, bgreatly at him. cat his answer, and held their peace. aand left him, and went away. [They were amazed to find how far his wisdom transcended that of the teachers in whom they had such supreme confidence.]

[FFG 597-600]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

TRIBUTE TO CAESAR

Mat 22:15-22, Mar 12:13-17; Luk 20:20-26. And lying in wait for Him, they sent sharpers, hypocritically claiming to be righteous, that they may catch His word, in order to deliver Him up to the tribunal and authority of the governor. And they asked Him, saying, Teacher, we know that Thou dost speak and teach correctly, and that Thou dost not receive the face, but teachest the Word of God in truth: is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar or not? And He, knowing their rascality, said to them, Why do you tempt Me? Show Me the denarion. Whose image and superscription hath it? And they responding, said, That of Caesar. And He said to them, Therefore render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars, and unto God the things which are Gods. And they were not able to capture His word before the people. And being astonished at His answer, they kept silent. We have given you Lukes narrative, who simply states that sharpers i.e., critical tricksters waited on Him in this adroit interview, hoping to perplex Him, and get some clew at Him, deduced from His phraseology of and Mark state that these critics were Pharisees and Herodiana the former the most loyal and enthusiastic Jewish party, and the latter consisting of a political faction favorable to Roman rule. Though diametrically opposed either to other, in this instance, as ever and anon hitherto, they united their forces against Jesus. How common its for the belligerent sects to make peace among themselves and unite their forces against holiness! They felt sure of success in this united hypocritical assault on Jesus, as the Pharisees represented the Jewish interest and the Herodians the Roman. In case that He had decided in favor of paying tribute to Caesar, the Pharisees aimed to prefer treasonable charges against Him, and arraign Hint before the Sanhedrin for disloyalty to the Theoeratic Government. On the contrary, if He answered the question in the negative, the Herodians were ready to have Him arrested and brought before Pilate to answer charges of treason against the Roman Empire. Now, you see how easily and conveniently He foils them both by simply asking them to show Him the denarion, a Roman coin, worth fifteen cents, and used to pay regular poll-tax, as well as the revenue to the Roman Government. Now, asking Whose image and superscription is on this coin? they respond, Caesars. Then He simply says, Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars, and unto God the things which are Gods. As the Jews claimed to be under the Divine government, while they were also subject to Roman rule, this answer covered all the ground in both cases, at the same time showing up absolute equity in behalf of each, so that no exception could be taken. Consequently the sharpers were all dumfounded.

Mat 22:22. And hearing, they were astonished, and leaving Him they went away. We see most indubitable manifestations of His Divinity thus cropping out on all occasions. Here, He is besieged by the most intellectual and cultured men of Church and State, criticizing every utterance, and doing their best to lasso Him, and all are signally foiled, defeated, and dumfounded. No other man ever trod the globe whose ordinary utterances, day by day, were utterly invulnerable.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Luk 20:20-26. The Question of Tribute (Mar 12:13-17*, Mat 22:15-22*).The authorities send spies who pretend to be honest inquirers, pious observers of the Law, with a really conscientious scruple.

Luk 20:21. thou sayest and teachest rightly, i.e. straightforwardly.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 20

Just men; men honestly desirous of instruction.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

20:20 {3} And they {a} watched [him], and sent forth {b} spies, which should feign themselves just men, {c} that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and {d} authority of the governor.

(3) The last refuge the false prophets have to destroy the true prophets is to charge them with rebellion and treason against the state.

(a) An appropriate time to take him in.

(b) Whom they had hired deceitfully.

(c) That they might latch on to something he said, and by this forge some false accusation against him.

(d) Put him to death.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

3. The question of tribute to Caesar 20:20-26 (cf. 22:15-22; Mark 12:13-17)

Luke showed how the religious leaders’ antagonism was intensifying against Jesus. This was another attempt to discredit Him (cf. Luk 20:1-8). Luke may have included it also because it shows that Jesus did not teach hostility toward the state. The early Christians likewise suffered because of false accusations that they opposed their government, but this was generally untrue.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Luke revealed the motives of Israel’s leaders on this occasion more clearly than the other evangelists did. They watched for and made opportunities to trap Jesus. The Greek word egkathetos, translated "spy," means one hired to lie in wait. A private detective or secret agent might be closer to the ancient equivalent than a military spy. These spies feigned righteous behavior though their real purpose was to get Jesus to say something for which they might accuse Him before Pilate, the Roman governor. Later they resorted to telling Pilate that Jesus taught the people not to pay their taxes (Luk 23:2), but that was a lie.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)