Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 12:13

And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in [his] words.

13 17. The Question of the Tribute Money

13. And they send ] Having failed themselves, the Jewish authorities resolved to send some of the Pharisees in company with the Herodians, to try to force Him to commit Himself by the answers He might give to their treacherous questions. A series of distinct attacks was now made upon our Lord, ( a) The Pharisees took the lead with theirs, which was, indeed, the most cunningly devised; ( b) the Sadducees followed; and then ( c) came the Scribes of the Pharisees’ party.

the Herodians ] See note on ch. Mar 3:6. As before, so now, the Jewish royalists united themselves with the ultra-orthodox Pharisaic party. The Herodians came in person. The Pharisees sent some of their younger scholars (Mat 22:16) to approach Him with the pretended simplicity of a guileless spirit, and a desire to solve a perplexing question (Luk 20:20).

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

See the notes at Mat 22:15-22.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Mar 12:13-14

Catch Him in His words.

Eastern spies

The course pursued by the enemies of our Lord does not seem strange to anyone who knows anything of the surveillance which a Hindoo uris establishes over anyone whose sayings or doings it may be of importance for him to know. For instance, Major T-, the agent for the Viceroy at the court of the Nawab Moorshedabad, complains that his house is as full of spies as it is of servants, nearly all of whom, he suspects, are in the pay of the Nawab. One servant, who pretended not to know a word of English, was discovered at length to know it well, and great was the majors disgust at the discovery; for this man was in attendance at the table, where of course he would have ample opportunities of hearing his masters opinions expressed in all the confidence of social intercourse. One of the punkah bearers, too, was found to be a quite well-to-do man. His position was a most menial one, yet its duties took him within sight and hearing of his master many times in the day. It was suspected that the Nawab was making it worth his while to submit to the drudgery of so mean a post. (A Missionarys Notes.)

We know that Thou art true.–

Concerned only to do right

What I must do, says Emerson, is all that concerns me, and not what people think. This rule, equally arduous in actual and in intellectual life, may serve for the whole distinction between greatness and meanness. It is the harder because you will always find those who think they know what us your duty better than you know it. It is easy in the world to live after the worlds opinion; it is easy in solitude to look after your own; but the great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude.

Moral fearlessness

In Scotland, Knox arose, of whom the Regent Morton said, Here lies one who never feared the face of man; who said himself that he had locked in the faces of many angry men. When he was working in chains on the galleys in France, they brought him an image of the Virgin, and bade him worship the mother of God. Mother of God, he exclaimed, it is a pented bredd (or hoard), and he flung it into the river to sink or swim. Who are you? said Mary Queen of Scots to him, that presume to school the nobles and sovereign of this realm? Madam, he answers, a subject born within the same. Have you hope? they ask him on his death bed, when he can no longer speak; and lifting his hand he pointed upwards with his finger, and so, pointing to heaven, he died.

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 13. And they send unto him] See this, and to Mr 12:17, largely explained on Mt 22:15-22.

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

See Poole on “Mat 22:15“, and following verses to Mat 22:22. The Sadducees most probably derived their name from one Sadoc, scholar to Antigonus Sochaeus. It is said that the occasion of their heresy was their masters teaching them, that they must not serve God as servants for rewards. Upon which they builded their notion, that there is no resurrection, no rewards nor punishments in another life. They denied the immortality of the soul, and the resurrection of the body, and angels, and spirits, Act 23:8; attributed all to free will, denying fate and destiny; they rejected traditions, and owned no Scriptures but the five books of Moses. They seemed to be a kind of rational divines, that would own and believe nothing but what they could fathom by their reason, or was obvious to their sense; and their doctrine was excellently suited to mens lusts, who desire not to be troubled with any thoughts of a world to come. Nothing more shows the degeneracy and debauchery of human nature than this, that to gratify their sensual appetites more freely in the things of this life, they will be content to think of annihilation, (which nature not debauched abhors), and of quitting all hopes of eternal life and happiness, that they may have a principle to warrant their living like beasts. They come to our Saviour, thinking to flout him and his hearers out of the doctrine of the resurrection, as having insuperable difficulties to clog it. But he that takes the wise in their own craftiness, shows these wise men, that all their wisdom was but folly, and their argument wholly proceeded ex ignoratione elenchi, from their not understanding the thing they would philosophize about.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

13. And they send unto him certainof the Pharisees“their disciples,” says Matthew (Mt22:16); probably young and zealous scholars in that hardeningschool.

and of the Herodians(Seeon Mt 12:14). In Lu20:20 these willing tools are called “spies, which shouldfeign themselves just [righteous] men, that they might take hold ofHis words, that so they might deliver Him unto the power andauthority of the governor.” Their plan, then, was to entrap Himinto some expression which might be construed into disaffection tothe Roman government; the Pharisees themselves being notoriouslydiscontented with the Roman yoke.

Tribute to Csar (Mr12:14-17).

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

And they send unto him,…. That is, the chief priests, Scribes, and elders, who had been with Jesus in the temple, and were silenced by his reasonings, and provoked by his parables; and therefore left him, and went together to consult what methods they should take to get him into their hands, and be revenged on him; the result of which was, they send to him

certain of the Pharisees. The Syriac and Persic versions read “Scribes”, who were the more skillful and learned part of that body of men, and scrupled paying tribute to Caesar, he being an Heathen prince, and they the Lord’s free people:

and of the Herodians; who were, as the Syriac and Persic versions read, “of the household of Herod”; his servants and courtiers, and consequently in the interest of Caesar, under whom Herod held his government, and must be for paying tribute to him: these two parties of such different sentiments, they sent to him,

to catch him in his words; or “in word”, or discourse; either with their word, the question they should put to him, or with his word, the answer he should return: and so the Ethiopic version supplies it, reading it, “with his own word”; they thought they should unavoidably catch him, one way or other; just as a prey is hunted, and taken in a net or snare, as the word used signifies: for if he declared against giving tribute to Caesar, the Herodians would have whereof to accuse him, and the Pharisees would be witnesses against him; and if he should be for it, the latter would expose him among the people, as an enemy to their civil liberties, and one that was for subjecting them to the Roman yoke, and consequently could not be the Messiah and deliverer they expected; [See comments on Mt 22:16].

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The Question Respecting Tribute.

      13 And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words.   14 And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Csar, or not?   15 Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it.   16 And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Csar’s.   17 And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Csar the things that are Csar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him.

      When the enemies of Christ, who thirsted for his blood, could not find occasion against him from what he said against them, they tried to ensnare him by putting questions to him. Here we have him tempted, or attempted rather, with a question about the lawfulness of paying tribute to Csar. We had this narrative, Matt. xxii. 15.

      I. The persons they employed were the Pharisees and the Herodians, men that in this matter were contrary to one another, and yet concurred against Christ, v. 13. The Pharisees were great sticklers for the liberty of the Jews, and, if he should say, It is lawful to give tribute to Csar, they would incense the common people against him, and the Herodians would, underhand, assist them in it. The Herodians were great sticklers for the Roman power, and, if he should discountenance the paying of tribute to Csar, they would incense the governor against hum, yea, and the Pharisees, against their own principles, would join with them in it. It is no new thing for those that are at variance in other things, to join in a confederacy against Christ.

      II. The pretence they made was, that they desired him to resolve them a case of conscience, which was of great importance in the present juncture; and they take on them to have a high opinion of his ability to resolve it, v. 14. They complimented him at a high rate, called him Master, owned him for a Teacher of the way of God, a Teacher of it in truth, one who taught what was good, and upon principles of truth, who would not be brought by smiles or frowns to depart a step from the rules of equity and goodness; “Thou carest for no man, nor regardest the person of men, thou art not afraid of offending either the jealous prince on one hand, or the jealous people on the other; thou art right, and always in the right, and dost in a right manner declare good and evil, truth and falsehood.” If they spoke as they thought concerning Christ, when they said, We know that thou art right, their persecuting him, and putting him to death, as a deceiver, was sin against knowledge; they knew him, and yet crucified him. However, a man’s testimony shall be taken most strongly against himself, and out of their own mouths are they judged; they knew that he taught the way of God in truth, and yet rejected the counsel of God against themselves. The professions and pretences of hypocrites will be produced in evidence against them, and they will be self-condemned. But if they did not know or believe it, they lied unto God with their mouth, and flattered him with their tongue.

      III. The question they put was, Is it lawful to give tribute to Csar, or not? They would be thought desirous to know their duty. As a nation that did righteousness, they ask of God the ordinances of justice, when really they desired nothing but to know what he would say, in hopes that, which side soever he took of the question, they might take occasion from it to accuse him. Nothing is more likely to ensnare ministers, than bringing them to meddle with controversies about civil rights, and to settle land-marks between the prince and the subject, which it is fit should be done, while it is not at all fit that they should have the doing of it. They seemed to refer the determining of this matter to Christ; and he indeed was fit to determine it, for by him kings reign, and princes decree justice; they put the question fairly, Shall we give, or shall we not give? They seemed resolved to stand to his award; “If thou sayest that we must pay tribute, we will do it, thou we be made beggars by it. If thou sayest that we must not, we will not, though we be made traitors for it.” Many seemed desirous to do it; as those proud men, Jer. xlii. 20.

      IV. Christ determined the question, and evaded the snare, by referring them to their national concessions already made, by which they were precluded from disputing this matter, v. 15-17. He knew their hypocrisy, the malice that was in their hearts against him, while with their mouth they showed all this love. Hypocrisy, though ever so artfully managed, cannot be concealed from the Lord Jesus. He sees the potsherd that is covered with the silver dross. He knew they intended to ensnare him, and therefore contrived the matter so as to ensnare them, and to oblige them by their own words to do what they were unwilling to do, which was, to pay their taxes honestly and quietly, and yet at the same time to screen himself against their exceptions. He made them acknowledge that the current money of their nation was Roman money, had the emperor’s image on one side, and his superscription on the reverse; and if so, 1. Csar might command their money for the public benefit, because he had the custody and conduct of the state, wherein he ought to have his charges borne; Render to Csar the things that are Csar’s. The circulation of the money is from him as the fountain, and therefore it must return to him. As far as it is his, so far it must be rendered to him; and how far it is his, and may be commanded by him, is to be judged by the constitution of the government, according as it is, and hath settled the prerogative of the prince and the property of the subject. 2. Csar might not command their consciences, nor did he pretend to it; he offered not to make any alteration in their religion. “Pay your tribute, therefore, without murmuring or disputing, but be sure to render to God the things that are God’s.” Perhaps he referred to the parable he had just now put forth, in which he had condemned them for not rendering the fruits to the Lord of the vineyard, v. 2. Many that seem careful to give to men their due, are in no care to give God the glory due to his name; whereas our hearts and best affections are as much due to him as ever rent was to a landlord, or tribute to a prince. All that heard Christ, marvelled at the discretion of his answer, and how ingenuously he avoided the snare; but I doubt none were brought by it, as they ought to be, to render to God themselves and their devotions. Many will commend the wit of a sermon, that will not be commanded by the divine laws of a sermon.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

That they might catch him in talk ( ). Ingressive aorist subjunctive. The verb is late from (a hunt or catching). It appears in the LXX and papyri. Here alone in the N.T. Lu 20:20 has the same idea, “that they may take hold of his speech” ( ) while Mt 22:15 uses (to snare or trap). See discussion in Matthew. We have seen the scribes and Pharisees trying to do this very thing before (Lu 11:33f.). Mark and Matthew note here the combination of Pharisees and Herodians as Mark did in 3:6. Matthew speaks of “disciples” or pupils of the Pharisees while Luke calls them “spies” ().

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Catch [] . From agra, hunting, the chase. Hence the picture in the word is that of hunting, while that in Matthew’s word, pagideuswsin, is that of catching in a trap. See on Mt 22:15.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

THE QUESTION OF PAYING TRIBUTE vs. 13-17

1) “And they send unto Him,” (kai apostellousin pros auton) “And next they send to Him,” for devious purposes. The “they” referred to were the chief priests, scribes, and elders, of the Sanhedrin, Mar 11:27, a motley religious gang.

2) “Certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians,” (tinas ton Pharisaion kai ton Herodianon) “Certain ones (or select ones) of the Pharisees, young scholars, and of the Herodians, Mat 22:15-16.

3) “To catch Him in H is words.” (hina auton agreusosin logo) “In order that they might entrap Him in (some) word,” in some conversational expression, or entangle Him into some contradiction, or snare Him like a wild animal, Luk 20:20.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES

Mar. 12:13. To catch Him in His words.The chief priests and scribes and elders having signally failed in their last attempt (chap. Mar. 11:27-33), now send a band of Pharisees and Herodians, in the hope that they may be able to entangle and ensnare Him in an argument.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Mar. 12:13-17

(PARALLELS: Mat. 22:15-22; Luk. 20:19-26.)

Question as to tribute money.One part of the business of a teacher of Divine truth is to be ready to resolve doubtful cases submitted to him relating to duty and conscience. Especially a teacher professing to come with a message straight from God to men would be regarded as a kind of living oracle, at whose mouth any one who had a question to propose might seek a solution of it. There are, however, two conditions which such a teacher might reasonably demand from those who came to consult him: first, that he should not be appealed to in mere private matters and personal differences, which might be settled by the proper tribunals (Luk. 12:13-14); and, secondly, that there should be, on the part of the questioner, a sincere desire to know what is right that he may choose it, and to learn the will of God that he may do it. It was in this latter qualification that the inquirers we are at present concerned with were deficient.

I. A foul plot.The chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders (Mar. 11:27), being afraid, after their signal defeat, to enter the lists with Jesus any more, now send unto Him certain of the Pharisees and Herodians, to catch Him in His words.

1. They doubtless thought this a very clever move, and congratulated one another upon the secrecy with which their arrangements had been made. But somebody had gained admittance into their counsel who was not of it. Let the plotters of mischief and those who take counsel together against the innocent know this assuredly: that there is nothing hidden from the Lord; that when every precaution has been taken, and every possibility of human treachery guarded against, a bird of the air shall carry the voice, etc. (Ecc. 10:20).

2. Christs enemies were constantly holding secret meetings to devise His ruin. It required many a midnight conclave, many a sitting with closed doors, to hatch the foul plot which ended in His death. But now all those things which were spoken in the ear in closets are proclaimed upon the housetops.

3. The object of the present plot was to catch Him in His words. They could not have employed a more likely device. Nothing is easier than to entrap a person of a frank, unsuspicious, straightforward character into saying something which may artfully be turned to his prejudice. Gods saints in all ages have been persecuted in this way (Psa. 65:5; Psalms 6; Isa. 29:21).

II. An insidious compliment.

1. A man that flattereth his neighbour, etc. (Pro. 29:5). So these hypocrites, designing to entrap Christ, try to put Him off His guard by a compliment to His character.

2. With many persons this ruse would have succeeded. There is a class of men who pride themselves on speaking the truth, regardless of consequences; whence it often happens that to the fear of being thought capable of fear they sacrifice that very truth which they profess to prize so highly.
3. To attempt to entangle Christ by so poor an artifice only shewed how far they were from knowing Him. He was certainly all that they said: He did teach the way of God in truth; He did care for no man; He did regard not the person of men. But no more did He regard the opinions of men, or care for establishing such a character of Himself amongst men. And as for those who offered Him this incense, He knew that they did but flatter Him with their lips, and dissemble in their double heart.

III. A captious question.

1. To understand the entangling nature of this question, we must remember the ambiguous condition of the Jews, as a nation, at this time. It was not independence, because they were under the military authority of a Roman governor; nor was it a state of absolute bondage, since they were allowed to retain their own laws and customs, and to exercise a certain judicial power through their high priest and Sanhedrin. It was, in fact, a condition of real subjection, with just such concessions as might soothe the wounded vanity of a fierce and high-spirited race. Observe how sensitive they were to any allusion to their lost liberties (Joh. 8:33). Now the most galling thing of all, and that which reminded them most painfully of their real condition, was the tribute. Csar could afford to leave them a shew of liberty, but not to forego his taxes. The Jews, on their part, looked upon the payment of custom or tribute to a foreign power as an act of treason against Jehovah. They did pay it, but under protestbecause they could not help themselves.

2. The question now proposed to Christ by His enemies was one which, they judged, must receive from Him either an affirmative or a negative answer. If He should decide in the affirmative, He would be placing Himself in opposition to the almost universal feeling of the Jewish nation. It would be considered not only an unpatriotic but even a blasphemous decision, and as such would be fatal to His influence with the people. If, on the contrary, He should pronounce against the lawfulness of paying tribute, He could be handed over to the magistrate on a charge of sedition.

IV. An ignominious defeat.

1. He, knowing their hypocrisypretending to entertain conscientious scruples which they did not feel, and, while professing to seek advice, having no other object but to turn Christs answer against Himself, whatever it might beinstead of giving a direct reply, desires to see the tribute money. And they bring him a denariusa silver coin bearing on its face the head of Tiberius Csar, the reigning emperor, with his name and title.
2. This proceeding of Christs was well calculated to excite curiosity, and to keep His hearers in suspense. We can fancy we see the little circle of spectators drawing closer together, looking now upon the questioners, now upon the piece of money, now upon the lips of Him who was expected to break the silence. And He does so in the memorable words, Render to Csar, etc.
3. Christ does not give a direct answer to the question asked. The question was, Is it lawful? not, Is it necessary? or, Is it expedient? but, Is it lawful to give tribute to Csar, or not? This question could only be answered by shewing that there is nothing in such a payment inconsistent with the law of God, or with that allegiance which, as the people of God, they owed to a greater King than Csar. Christ neither shews this nor even asserts it. And why? Because that would have been to do the very thing they wanted, and to fall into the trap they had laid for Him. To a captious question He returns an evasive answer. They sought a handle against Him, and He gives them something they cannot lay hold of. His reply is so framed as neither to injure Him with the people nor to compromise Him with the magistrate.

4. Still the question remains Is it lawful, etc. To which a sufficient, though not a direct, answer may be gathered from Christs action and words. For it is a general maxim that the money current in any country determines the power to which allegiance is due. When the Jews deluded themselves with the idea that they still preserved their independence as a nation, this Roman coin bore witness against them. When they boasted of being the people of God, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation, they ought to have remembered that by God, the same God whom they acknowledged for their King, did other kings reign, and princes decree justice. He changeth the times, etc. (Dan. 2:21). At one time He had brought foreign princes against this very people to oppress them in their own land; at another He had caused them to be carried away captive to a land that was not theirs. And He had forewarned them of a time when the sceptre should finally depart from Judah, etc. (Gen. 49:10). That time was now come. This very image and superscription, to those who read it aright, plainly declared so. While they were arguing and disputing whether it was lawful to pay or not, Csars collectors were gathering in his taxes. This was a state of things which could not be mistaken. None but the wilfully blind could fail to see that to resist the power was, in this case, to resist the ordinance of God.

5. But, lest this rule of rendering to Csar the things that are Csars, should appear to countenance the smallest violation of the sacred rights of conscience, we must remember that it is not the whole of Christs answer. He goes on to give a second rule which guards and limits the first; or rather, the two together must be considered as a single rule, and so applied to every case of conduct. God has His rights, as well as Csar. There need not be any opposition or interference between the two; and there was none here. Should it be otherwise, should the things of Csar in any case be contrary to the things of God, no man can doubt which of these must give way.
6. Note, in conclusion, the comparative urgency with which these respective claims are enforced upon us. Csar is pressing and peremptory: God is gentle and persuasive. Csar listens to no appeal: God is pitiful and easy to be entreated. It is Csars policy to put down resistance and disobedience at once, by the immediate punishment of the offender: it is Gods principle to forbear and suffer long, not willing that any should perish, etc. Such being the respective dispositions of these two powers, it needs little knowledge of human nature to tell which of them is more likely to obtain his due. As we look around, we observe that human laws, strictly enforced, are generally obeyed; while the most flagrant violations of the law of God, the most wanton denials of His claims, go unpunished, if not unregarded. Such being the case, it is surely incumbent on all who would see the things of Csar rendered to Csar, and unto God the things that are Gods, to throw all their weight into the lighter scale. Csar needs no advocate; he will take care to get his own: but God depends, for the enforcement of His claims, upon the zeal and earnestness of those who advocate them.

OUTLINES AND COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

Mar. 12:14. Testimony of adversaries to Christ.That a man may speak freely the truth, he must have knowledge, zeal, boldnessall which Christs adversaries ascribe to Him here.

1. Knowledge of the truth, in that He was a master and taught the way of God.
2. Zeal and love to the truth, in that He was true, teaching truly.
3. Boldness, in that He respected not the person of any.Dean Boys.

The commendable parts of a good pastor.

1. He must be for his learning a masterable to teach, apt to teach, a guide to the blind, a light to them that are in darkness.
2. He must be true; which some apply to pureness of life, but others think the words and teachest truly the way of life expound the clause Thou art true.

3. He must not utter his own dream, or the vision of his own heart, but teach the way of God (1Pe. 4:11).

4. He must have certainty of doctrine, teaching the truth aright (Jer. 23:28; Rom. 12:6).

5. He must be stout in delivering Gods ambassage (Eze. 2:6).Ibid. Suspicious blandishments.The old word is, Full of courtesy, full of craft. When ye see too glittering pretences in unapproved persons, suspect the inside (Psa. 28:3; Amo. 7:12-13; 2Co. 1:12).Bishop Hall.

Mar. 12:15. Hypocrisy exposed.Christ, as God, seeing their hypocritical humour, and understanding their treacherous intent, accommodates His answer to the foul malice of their mind, not to the fair words of their mouth, objecting against them four faults especially.

1. Folly. Why? For if I am (as you say) true, then I am God, because every man is a liar, and only God true, yea truth itself; and if I be the Son of God, I can easily make your wisdom foolishness.

2. Treachery. Why tempt ye?

3. Ingratitude. Why tempt ye Me, who teach unto you the way of God truly, desiring often to gather your children together? etc.

4. Dissimulation. Ye hypocrites. Having thus in a trice confounded them, He proceeds in the next clause to confute them, even by their own words and deeds, as the soldiers of Timotheus were wounded with the points of their own swords (2Ma. 12:22).Dean Boys.

Mar. 12:16-17. Coinage a token of authority.It has been ingeniously and not irrationally suggested that our Lords sanction of the payment of tribute money to Csar may afford a hint to Christians of the point at which they may conscientiously yield obedience to a fresh civil authority. If that authority is so recognised that its coin is admitted as the medium of exchange, its tenure may fairly be considered as a fait accompli.

The Kings image on the heart.The heart of the believer should be a golden coin, so graven with loyalty and love to the Heavenly King that there ought to be no hesitation in answering the question, Whose image and superscription is it?

Church and State.Consider the respective rights of Church and State in property, and the duty of men who may at the same time be members of the Church and subjects of the State to regard the rights and vested interests of both. In discriminating between those mutual well-defined rights and vested interests in property, the question of our Lord comes in, helping us in the knowledge and performance of our twofold duty, in our twofold capacity as members of the Church and subjects of the State.

1. Whose is this image and superscription, we ask on the one hand, of all temporal things which belong unto Csar? The answer is Csars image and superscription. Then our duty is to render such things unto Csar.
2. Whose is this image and superscription, we inquire on the other hand, borne upon the Churchs possessions? The answer is Gods. His sacred superscription is upon them. To God they were consecrated. Their use was given to His Church and her ministers and members, not for general purposes, but for Gods honour, glory, worship, and for the spiritual and ecclesiastical uses of all subjects of the kingdom, who will use them on the lines laid down in her terms of communion exclusively for and consistently with these purposes.

Religion no enemy to government.Among all the stratagems of the devil, tending to the undermining of religion and the subversion of the souls of men, though there cannot be any more unreasonable, yet there was never any more unhappily successful, than the creating and fomenting an opinion in the world that religion is an enemy to government, and the bringing sincerity and zeal in religion into jealousy and disgrace with the civil powers (Luk. 23:2; Act. 17:6; Act. 23:4-5).Bishop Seth Ward.

Loyalty of early Christians to the emperor.We pray for the safety of the emperors to the eternal God, the true, the living God, whom emperors themselves would desire to be propitious to them, above all others, who are called gods. We, looking up to heaven with outstretched hands, because they are harmless, with naked heads, because we are not ashamed (1Co. 6:7), without a prompter, because we pray from the heart, constantly pray for all emperors, that they may have a long life, a secure empire, a safe palace, strong armies, a faithful senate, a well-moralised people, a quiet state of the worldwhatever Csar would wish for himself in his public and private capacity (Jer. 29:7; Dan. 6:21; 1Ti. 2:2; 1Pe. 2:13-17).Tertullian.

Mar. 12:17. They marvelled.His remark concerning the superscription and image on the coin, as connecting the tribute with civil authority, and the opposition which He makes between such demands and the things belonging to God, intimate a new character in the Messiahs theocracy, in which the ecclesiastical should no more interfere with the civil rule, or the obedience of the subject to the human magistrate be inconsistent with the obedience of the believer to God. Csars dominion was to be one, Christs another. Jesus was a king, but not of this world.S. Hinds.

Innocence the best protection against craft.Craft is ever one of the arts of the wayward; they who believe in it find it needful to employ it. At first sight it seems as if the children of truth and simplicity must be at the mercy of the unscrupulous. What happens here should reassure us. If we are true-hearted and transparent, no craft will avail against us.R. Glover.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 12

Mar. 12:16. Gods image stamped on man.We can often tell what a thing is for by noticing its make. The instructed eye of an anatomist will, from a bone, divine the sphere in which the creature to whom it belonged was intended to live. Just as plainly as gills or lungs, fins or wings, or legs and arms declare the element in which the creature that possesses them is intended to move, so plainly stamped upon all our natures is this, that God is our Lord, since we are made in a true sense in His image, and that only in Him can we find rest. If you take a coin, and compare it with the die from which it has been struck, you will find that wherever in the die there is a relief, in the coin there is a sunken place, and conversely. So there are not only resemblances in man to the Divine nature which bear upon them the manifest marks of his destiny, but there are correspondences, wants, on our side, being met by gifts upon His; hollow emptiness in us being filled, when we are brought into contact with Him, by the abundance of His outstanding supplies and gifts.A. Maclaren, D.D.

The defacement of Gods image in man.You sometimes get into your hands money on which there has been stamped, by mischief, or for some selfish purpose, the name of some one else than the kings or queens which surrounds the head upon it. And in like manner our nature has gone through the stamping-press again, and another likeness has been deeply imprinted upon it. The image of God, which every man has, is in some senses and aspects ineffaceable by any course of conduct of theirs. But in another aspect it is not like the permanent similitude stamped upon the solid metal of the penny, but like the reflexion, rather, that falls upon some polished plate, or that is cast upon the white sheet from a lantern. If the polished plate be rusty and stained, the image is faint and indistinct; if it be turned away from the light, the image passes. And that is what some of you are doing. By living to yourselves, by living day in and day out without ever remembering God, by yielding to passions, lusts, ambitions, low desires, and the like, you are doing your very best to scratch out the likeness which still lingers in your nature.Ibid.

Mar. 12:17. Religion and business.Have you, a Christian, two sources of happinessGod and the world? Then you are wrong, for to you God ought to be in all the world that you appropriate, and all the world Gods. Do you use the adjectives spiritual and secular in describing your enjoyments? Is prayer spiritual, that is the Great Spirits gift, while an evening in a picture-gallery is secular, that is mans gift? Why, God gives the latter as truly as the former. If you are living on the high plane of your privilege, you see God in all things that you are permitted to build into your life. Have you spiritual needs, as for instance help in resisting temptation, and secular needs, such as help in sickness? There is only One Helper everywhere. You watch against temptationand pray; you call the physician in sicknessand ought also to pray. Are you able to manage the mortgage alone, but unable, as you think, to save your soul? In fact you, without God, are as powerless in the one case as the other; you cannot cross your office threshold without Him, nor sign a draft. There are not two worlds here below to the Christian, one Gods realm and the other mans. He is all in all. Colloquially it is harmless, but in the secret heart it is wicked to distinguish to oneself between spiritual and temporal possessions. Your faith and love are Gods, and so your house, your gold. Men say business is business and religion is religion. No. Business is religion and religion is business.E. J. Haynes.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

4. THE QUESTION OF PAYING TAXES 12:13-17

TEXT 12:13-17

And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, that they might catch him in talk. And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest not for any one: for thou regardest not the person of men, but of a truth teachest the way of God: Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesars. And Jesus said unto them, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars and unto God the things that are Gods. And they marvelled greatly at him.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 12:13-17

653.

Who sent the Pharisees and Herodians?

654.

Who were the Herodians? Were they friends of the Pharisees? Discuss.

655.

Why desire to catch Jesus in His speech?

656.

What is meant by the use of the word true as in Mar. 12:14?

657.

In what sense didnt Jesus care for anyone?

658.

Did these enemies of Jesus believe what they said to Him about Him?

659.

Whose law was involved in paying tribute to Caesar? Discuss.

660.

In what sense were these inquirers hypocrites?

661.

Why ask about the inscription on the coin?

662.

Did Jesus recommend paying taxes?

663.

What things belong to Godare they the same things that belong to Caesar? Discuss.

COMMENT

TIME.Tuesday, April 4, A.D. 30, two days after entry into Jerusalem.
PLACE.In the temple, probably in the court of the Gentiles.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTS.Mat. 22:15-22 ; Luk. 20:20-26.

OUTLINE.1. The trap setters, Mar. 12:13. 2. The trap set, Mar. 12:14-15 a, 3. Caught in their own trap, Mar. 12:15 b Mar. 12:17.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE TRAPPERS, Mar. 12:13.

1.

They were officiali.e. sent by others.

2.

Made up of two opposing forces, who now joined together to oppose Jesus.

II.

THE TRAP, Mar. 12:14-15 a.

1.

Flattery used as a camouflage.

2.

The trap is a question; shall we pay taxes to usurpers?

III.

THE TRAPPED, Mar. 12:15 b Mar. 12:17.

1.

He knew their purpose.

2.

He sprang the trap on them.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE TRAPPERS.

Mar. 12:13. Although thus foiled in their direct attempt to silence him, they lose no time in aiming at the same end by a more insidious method, all the parties hostile to him coalescing for a moment in a joint and several effort to destroy his popularity and influence, by setting him at variance either with the Roman government or Jewish people. The means employed for this end was a series of entangling questions upon difficult and controverted points, both doctrinal and practical, to which it seemed impossible for him to return any answer that would not commit him in the eyes of some important party. This design is apparent from the coalition of two adverse sects or parties in the first attack, the Pharisees, or bigoted opponents of all heathenish and foreign domination, and the Herodians, or followers of Herod, who sustained him as the instrument and vassal of the Romans. This unnatural alliance between parties diametrically opposite in principle was caused by their common hostility to Christ, whose growing influence was far more dangerous to both than either could be to the other. By combining, too, they seemed to render his escape impossible, as any answer which would satisfy the one side must of course afford a ground of opposition to the other. Of this crafty and unprincipled contrivance, on the part of men whose only bond of union was their hatred of our Lord and their desire to destroy him, it might well be said that their design was to catch him, as a bird is caught in fowling, by a word, i.e. by a perplexing question, or, as some explain it, by an unguarded answer.

II.

THE TRAP.

And they coming say to him, their first words being not a peremptory challenge, as in the preceding case (Mar. 11:27), but a flattering address intended to allay suspicion and conceal their real purpose, so as to throw him off his guard and make it easier to entrap him. Master, i.e. Teacher, we know, not necessarily a false profession, since the character here ascribed to Christ was not only true but universally acknowledged. True, i.e. honest, candid, truthful, one who spoke the truth without regard to consequences. Carest for no man, in the Greek a double negative, as usual enforcing the negation. It does not concern thee about no man. The impersonal verb is that employed in Mar. 4:38, and there explained. What they here ascribe to him is not indifference or unconcern as to the welfare of others, but independence of their influence and authority, as motives for suppressing an unwelcome truth. The flattery here lies, not in the falsehood or extravagance of the description, but in the honesty with which they seem to comprehend themselves among those for whom he did not care in the sense above explained. As if they had said, we come to you not only as a wise and famous teacher, but because we know that you will tell us to our faces what you think, without considering how it will affect us. Regardest not the person, literally dost not look into the face (or at the outward appearance) of men, i.e. art not influenced by any difference of rank, position, wealth, or power, a regard to which in the administration of justice was forbidden in the law of Moses as respect of persons or judicial partiality. (See Lev. 19:15, Deu. 1:17; Deu. 16:19, and compare Pro. 24:23; Pro. 28:21.) The same thing is here denied of Christ, not as a judge, but as a teacher. In truth or of a truth, i.e. truly, really, sincerely, without any such reserves or personal regards as those just mentioned. Such adulation has blinded the eyes and warped the judgment of its thousands and its tens of thousands among human sages, and especially of those who glory in their insusceptibility of flattery. It is not surprising, therefore, that these crafty casuists and politicians, who regarded Jesus as a mere man, though an eminently wise and good one, should have hoped to find him as susceptible of flattery as others. Having thus prepared the way for their ensuing question, they at length propound it, in a very categorical and simple form. Is it lawful, is it right, not in itself or in the abstract, but for us as members of the chosen people, subjects of a theocracy, to give tribute, literally census, one of the Latin words embedded in the Greek of Mark, strictly meaning an enrollment of the people and assessment of their property with a view to taxation (compare Luk. 2:1-5), but also used in the secondary sense of the tax itself, here distinguished as a Roman not a Jewish impost by the Latin word applied to it and by the express mention of the taxing power, Cesar, a surname of the Julian family at Rome, inherited from Julius Caesar by his grand nephew and adopted son, Octavius or Augustus, the first emperor of Rome, was afterwards transmitted through the line of his successors, not only those who were connected with his family, but those exalted by a popular or military nomination, It is here applied abstractly to the office, or rather to the actual incumbent, Tiberius, the stepson and successor of Augustus, who reigned from the 14th to the 37th year of the Christian era. It is not however in his personal capacity, but as the representative of Roman power, that he is here mentioned. Or not? an artful presentation of the question as requiring a direct and categorical solution, without qualifications or distinctions, but as we say in English, Yea or nay?

Mar. 12:15 a. May we give, or may we not give? the form of the Greek verb being not future but subjunctive and indefinite. It is therefore really another form of the preceding question, not a second one consequent upon it, as the English version seems to intimate. 1. Is it lawful? 2. Shall we do it? for a thing may be lawful and yet not expedient or binding. (Compare 1Co. 6:12; 1Co. 10:23). But in Greek no such distinction is expressed or suggested, but a simple repetition of the same inquiry in a different and more laconic form, thus rendering it still more categorical and peremptory, as admitting of no answer but a simple affirmation or negation. While the preamble to the question, therefore, was adapted to conciliate and prepossess an ordinary wise man, the question itself was so framed as almost to extort a categorical and therefore compromising answer. But he with whom they had to deal saw not only through their question but themselves, and shaped his course accordingly, so as at one stroke to solve the difficulty and defeat their malice.

III.

THE TRAPPED.

Mar. 12:15 b. Knowing (or according to some copies, seeing) their hypocrisy, the part which they were acting, but here from the connection necessarily suggesting the idea of dissimulation, false pretenses, which we commonly attach to the derivative in English. Why tempt ye me? not why entice me into sin, which is the ordinary sense of tempting (see Mar. 1:13), but why do you try me, prove me, put me to the test, which is its primary and proper import. (See Mar. 8:11; Mar. 10:2.) Then, instead of answering in thesi, as they evidently wished and expected, he gives a striking popularity and vividness to what he is about to say, by addressing it not only to the ears but to the eyes of those about him. Bring me a penny, a denarius, another of Marks Latin words, denoting a silver coin in common circulation since the Roman conquest, worth from fifteen to seventeen cents of our money, but here mentioned not with any reference whatever to its value, but as the tribute money (coin of the census or taxation) as it is expressed in Matthew (Mat. 22:19.) That I may see (it), is almost sarcastic, for though he did desire and intend to see it, yet the words, if seriously understood, seem to imply that he had never done so, and expected to derive some information from an inspection of the coin itself. But this was no doubt understood by all about him as a sort of grave rebuking irony, intended to disclose his knowledge of their secret motives, and his scorn of their hypocrisy, in raising such an abstract question on a point decided by their every-day transactions in the way of business. As if he had said; What! Are you required to pay taxes to the Romans? And in what coin? Let me see onethus attracting the attention of all present to the question, and preparing them to understand his memorable answer.

Mar. 12:16. And they (either those who put the question or some others present) brought (it). We may now conceive of him as holding the denarius in his hand, or displaying it to those around, as if it had been something new, thus still more exciting curiosity and gradually opening the way for the solution of the difficulty which had been suggested. Whose is this image and inscription? referring to the well-known head and title of the emperor by which the money was authenticated as a legal tender. As if he had continued in the same tone as before. See this money has a mans head and a mans name stamped upon it; what does this mean? who is this, here represented both in words and figures? The inevitable answer, Cesars, may to some have suggested, at least vaguely and obscurely, the solution just about to be expressed in words, while others, perhaps most, still continued in suspense, until the words were uttered.

Mar. 12:17. The first words of this verse are not to be slurred over as mere expletives or words of course, but read with great deliberation and strong emphasis. And Jesus (having thus directed attention to the captious and unreasonable nature of the question, not evading it, but) answering (at last) said unto them, i.e. directly to his tempters, as a solution of their abstract question, but at the same time through them and as it were over their heads to the surrounding masses, as a practical direction or a rule of duty. Render (return, pay back) the (things) of Cesar to Cesar, and the (things) of God to God, a collocation more emphatic (though identical in meaning) than the one in the translation, as it places last in either clause, not the thing to be paid but the person to receive it. Some attach to the Greek verb the diluted sense of simply giving out or paying, but the strong sense of paying back, restoring, correctly though not clearly enough given in our version, is not only permitted by the etymology and favoured by the usage of the word (compare Mat. 5:26; Mat. 5:33; Mat. 6:4; Mat. 6:18; Mat. 6:25; Mat. 20:8, Luk. 4:20; Luk. 4:9; Luk. 4:42; Luk. 19:8, Rom. 12:17; Rom. 13:7, 1Th. 5:15, 1Pe. 3:9), but required by the whole connection and essential to the full force of our Saviours answer. Of the numerous specific senses put upon that answer there are probably but two exegetically possible and yet essentially unlike. The first of these supposes Christ to represent the two things as entirely distinct and independent of each other, belonging to excentric incommensurable spheres, and therefore not to be reduced to any common principle or rule. As if he had said, Pay your taxes and perform your religious duties, but do not mix the two together or attempt to bring them either into conflict or agreement; for they really belong to different worlds or systems, and have nothing common or alike by which they can even be compared. This paradoxical interpretation would deserve no notice had it not been gravely urged by one of the most celebrated modern German writers. The other exegetical hypothesis supposes Christ to say precisely the opposite of this, to wit, that the two duties are in perfect harmony and rest on one and the same principle. Within this general hypothesis, however, there are several gradations or distinct forms of opinion as to the principle here laid down. Without enumerating all these, it will be sufficient to state two, the lowest and the highest, which can be reduced to this class. The former understands our Lord as rather distinguishing the two obligations, but affirming their consistency and equal obligation, when they are not in collision. The latter understands him as identifying both as parts of one and the same system, as if he had said, your civil duties are but parts of your religious duties. By rendering to Cesar what is his you render unto God what is his. But the question still remains, what doctrine did he teach as to the Roman domination and the duty of the Jews while under it? The most approved and prevalent opinion is that in accordance with the maxim of Maimonides and other rabbis, he regards the circulation of the coin of any sovereign as a practical proof that his sovereignty not only exists but is submitted to. So long as the Jews submitted to the Romans and enjoyed their protection they were not only authorized but bound to pay for the advantage. Others make the prominent idea that of penal visitation, or subjection to the Romans as a punishment of sin. The other precept, render unto God, etc., is understood according to these different hypotheses as meaning either, give your souls or yourselves (which bear his image) back to him by faithful service or by true repentance, as you give back to the emperor in tribute the coin which he circulates among you. All these constructions seem to me too artificial, and the only satisfactory one that which understands our Lord as first suggesting by the very aspect of the coin that they were under obligations to the civil power, and then reminding them that till these came in conflict with religious obligations they were no less binding. As if he had said, Yes, if you are actually under Roman domination, yet allowed to serve God in the way of his appointment, and indeed protected in that service, you are bound to pay back what you thus receive, but no such obligations can destroy those which you owe to God himself, or suspend them when they come in competition. In a word, repay to Cesar what he gives you, and to God the infinitely greater gifts which you receive from him. (J. A. Alexander)

FACT QUESTIONS 12:13-17

744.

What was meant by the expression It does not concern thee about no man?

745.

In what sense did our Lord look into the face of man?

746.

What immediate advantage was hoped for in the use of flattery?

747.

Just what was meant by the word tribute? How is the word Caesar used?

748.

Are there two questionsone in Mar. 12:14 and another in Mar. 12:15? Explain.

749.

What kind of an answer did these men want? Why?

750.

Just what was the point of hypocrisy, i.e. in what were they being hypocritical?

751.

Why ask to see the coin? Why ask about the superscription?

752.

To whom did Jesus address His answer? Why?

753.

Where is the emphasis? On the thing to be paid, or the person to receive it?

754.

State the two possible interpretations of this expression i.e. general ones.

755.

Which of the gradations of the above two views is to be preferred? Why?

756.

What did Jesus teach about the duty of the Jews to Roman domination?; to God?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(13) They send unto him.In Matthew the Pharisees are said to have taken counsel, or held a council, and then to have sent their disciples. Here the act appears more definitely as the result of a coalition of the two parties named. On the narrative as a whole, see Notes on Mat. 20:15-22.

To catch.Better, to entrap.

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

THE HERODIANS ATTACK JESUS, Mar 12:13-17.

(See notes on Mat 22:15-22.)

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And they send to him certain of the Pharisees and courtiers of Herod that they might catch him in his talk.’

The courtiers of Herod would be in Jerusalem for the feast and would be disturbed that a Galilean was causing trouble in Jerusalem. We know that they and the Pharisees had previously banded together to try to destroy Him (Mar 3:6). Now they had banded together again for the same purpose. But they recognised that they had first to discredit Him before the people prior to acting against Him, for His influence was huge and the crowds in Jerusalem were in a fervent state. It may well have been felt that the presence of Herodians in connection with such a question would cause Jesus to either over-react or be careless, for their careless attitude towards coins with Caesar’s head on them would be well known.

‘They send to Him.’ ‘They’ may be indefinite, or it may refer to the previously mentioned members of the Sanhedrin.

The courtiers of Herod would not be too worried about coinage with images on them, while the Pharisees would have been more wary. The Pharisees did not like them but they had to tolerate them, at least for paying the tribute, and teach the people to do the same. So they paid their poll tax to Caesar without open demur, otherwise they would have been discredited in the eyes of Rome, but they did not like it and resented it. Thus their approach in this way was hypocritical.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Pharisees and Herodians Are Sent to Entrap Him (12:13-17).

In order to fully understand this incident we need to have some background to it. Many years before, Herod the Great had ruled Palestine as its tributary king, paying homage to the Emperor of Rome. But when he died (between about 5 and 0 BC) Palestine was split up. Archelaus received Samaria, Judea, and Idumaea, Herod Antipas received Galilee and Peraea and Herod Philip received the wild country in the North East around Ituraea, Trachonitis, Gaulanitis, Batanaea and Auranitis (including Caesaria Philippi).

But Archelaus was a failure, and as a result Rome took over direct rule. His lands became an annexe of the province of Syria. Most of such provinces were ruled by proconsuls responsible to the Senate, but troublesome parts, which required the permanent presence of cohorts of the legions, were ruled by a prefect or procurator, who was directly responsible for their peace to the Emperor. Judaea was one of these troublesome areas, and was ruled henceforth by a prefect/procurator of equestrian rank, a military man who cared little for Jewish sensibilities. Tribute was therefore gathered by him and paid directly to the Emperor.

All rulers were, of course, expected to gather tribute for the Emperor, but the exaction of the poll tax on Judaea when it became a Roman province resulted in a rebellion by Judas the Galilean (c. 6 AD) whose dictate was ‘external taxation is no better than an introduction to slavery’, and whose watchword was ‘no tribute to Caesar’. He was, of course, defeated and killed but his watchword became a permanent rallying cry. Thus paying tribute, especially the ‘poll tax’ (tax per head), was seen by the Jews as something to be done grudgingly, and by some extremists even as treason. The majority, however, paid it but hated it.

Meanwhile Roman silver coins were issued for the area with Caesar’s head on them. Coinage was seen as demonstrating who ruled an area. Any new king would issue his own coinage, often with his head on it, for it was evidence of his rule. And in a sense the coinage was looked on as his. But within the Roman Empire such kings could only issue bronze coinage which in Palestine at this time had no image on it. All silver coinage, however, was issued by Rome, bearing Caesar’s image and titles. It was because such coins had Caesar’s image on them that they could not be used to pay the Temple tax which had to be paid with a coin bearing no image. As a result of all this coins with Caesar’s head on them circulated widely in Judaea. Such was the denarius. Smaller coins could be issued by the procurators and bore in mind Jewish sensibilities (e.g. the widow’s mite), but the poll tax had to be paid with a Roman denarius. It was not only a means of revenue, but a declaration of loyalty to the Emperor.

Analysis.

And they send to Him certain of the Pharisees and courtiers of Herod that they might catch Him in his talk (Mar 12:13).

And when they were come they say to Him, “Teacher. We know that you are true and show deference to no one. For you do not regard the person of men, but of a truth teach the way of God (Mar 12:14 a).

Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give?” (Mar 12:14 b).

But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, “Why do you put Me to the test? Bring Me a denarius that I may see it” (Mar 12:15).

And they brought it. And He says to them, “Whose is this image and superscription?”. And they said to Him, “Caesar’s”.

‘b7 And Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and render to God what is God’s” (Mar 12:16-17 a)

And they marvelled greatly at Him (Mar 12:17 b).

Note that in ‘a’ they sought to catch Him in His talk, and in the parallel they marvelled greatly at Him because they had not succeeded. In ‘b’ they flattered Him by suggesting that He only taught the way of God, and in the parallel He tells them to make sure that they therefore give to God what is God’s. In ‘c’ they ask whether they should give tribute to Caesar, and in the parallel He asks whose the image is that is on the coin and is informed that it is Caesar’s, demonstrating that it is his. Centrally we learn that He knows that they are putting Him to the test.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jesus Deals With The Final Challenges With Which The Jews Seek To Entrap Him (12:13-44).

In this last part of Section 4 Jesus is faced with attempts to entrap and discredit Him. They come from various sources, the Pharisees and Herodians, the Sadducees, and a Scribe. In each case He emerges having confounded His adversaries. The picture is of Jesus against the establishment, because the establishment have all gone astray.

Analysis.

a The question of payment of tribute, and the need to give to God what is His due (Mar 12:13-17).

b Jesus is challenged on a matter concerning the resurrection. He points out that in the resurrection world there is no marriage, and cites Exodus in order to demonstrate that GOD is Abraham’s God (Mar 12:18-27).

c Jesus describes those who are totally pleasing to God because they love God and their neighbour. People who see and respond to this enter the Kingly Rule of God (Mar 12:28-34).

b Jesus challenges the Scribes on the question of the Messiah and cites a Psalm of David in order to demonstrate that the Messiah is David’s Lord (Mar 12:35-37).

a People are to beware of those who make much of themselves and put on a pretence of piety, while the widow who gives her all, even though it be a pittance, gives more than all who give bountifully from their riches. She gives more than her due (Mar 12:38-44).

Note that in ‘a’ Jesus calls for the people to give God what is due to Him, and in the parallel points out the woman who gives more than her due. In ‘b’ Jesus declares that God is Abraham’s God, and in the parallel that the Messiah is David’s Lord, and brings out the distinctiveness of both. Central in ‘c’ are the two great commandments which sum up all the commandments and are at the heart of Jesus’ teaching concerning the Kingly Rule of God.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Pharisees and Herodians Tempt Jesus with a Question ( Mat 22:15-22 , Luk 20:20-26 ) In Mar 12:13 we have the account of the Pharisees and Herodians tempting Jesus with a question about paying taxes.

Mar 12:14 Comments The Jews were hoping Jesus would give a simple answer of yes or no. If He agreed with paying taxes to Caesar, He would lose His popularity with the people, who were opposed to Roman taxation. If He spoke against taxation, the Jewish leaders could report Him to local authorities for inciting rebellion against Rome and imprison Him.

Mar 12:15 Comments The hypocrisy of the Pharisees and the Herodians can be seen in the fact that their question to Jesus Christ was sugar-coated with flattery, as they first complimented Jesus before asking Him a question that was intended on getting Him in trouble.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Various Questions Proposed to Jesus.

The question of tribute:

v. 13. And they send unto Him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians to catch Him in His words.

v. 14. And when they were come, they say unto Him, Master, we know that Thou art true and carest for no man; for Thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?

v. 15. Shall we give, or shall we not give? But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye Me? Bring Me a penny that I may see it.

v. 16. And they brought it. And He saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto Him, Caesar’s.

v. 17. And Jesus, answering, said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marveled at Him.

Having been worsted in the first encounter, the Jewish chiefs lost no time in planning a second attack. They sent to Him, without delay, some keen-minded Pharisees, whose training in sophistical reasoning made them especially valuable at this time, and a few members of the clique of Herodians, whose hopes for the house of Herod made them strong enemies of the Messianic mission of Christ. See Mat 22:16. Here ecclesiastical and political ambition was represented, joined in opposition to Christ. They had been instructed and drilled in the part they were to play with great care. With smug hypocrisy and obsequious flattery they come to Jesus. They literally wanted to catch Him with their question, or with His reply. They present their trap with honeyed bait: We know that Thou art truthful, not afraid to say the truth at any time, also that no man’s person would deter Thee from saying what Thou believest to be right. But now the wolf shows his fangs: Is it right, is it the lawful thing, should it be done at all times, that census-tribute be paid to the Emperor: or, more urgently: Shall we pay it or not? But their snare was too visible, to the omniscient Christ, above all. They hoped His answer would, in either event, prove His undoing. Should He answer in the negative, the government officials could be informed to that effect; should He answer in the positive, the people, that hated the Roman yoke, could easily be turned against Him. But the Lord read the hypocrisy on their faces, in their words, in their hearts, and told them plainly that He knew their intention. Still He does not deny them an answer. Fetch Me a denarius, He tells them, that I may see. In order to make them feel the disgrace of their action, He acts as though He must make a special study of this grave matter. “The most common Roman silver coin was the denarius, rendered in the Authorized Version ‘penny’ and in the Revised Version ‘shilling. ‘ Its weight varied at different times. In the time of Christ it weighed about 61, 3 grains Troy, and was worth 16 ⅔ cents of American money.. As the ministry of Christ occurred in the reign of Tiberius, the tribute money shown to Christ was probably a denarius of Tiberius. ” When they had brought the coin and had given the information that the image and the inscription was that of Caesar, His conclusion and answer were brief: The things of Caesar render to Caesar, and those of God to God. This rule applies at all times and is invaluable in maintaining the proper distinction between Church and State. God’s people, the believers of all times, will, above all, give due honor, render due obedience, to God. In things which concern God, the service of God, faith, and conscience, we are obedient to God alone and permit no man to interfere. But in worldly, civil matters, where money, possessions, body, life are concerned. the Christians will cheerfully obey the government. With these words the Lord has incidentally laid down the distinction which is to be observed between the kingdom of God and the authority of the State, He has here forbidden the State to interfere in Church matters, and the Church to meddle with the business of the government.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Mar 12:13. To catch him ‘ is a metaphorical word, borrowed from the chase, and signifies to run down, or to take a prey in hunting. Some render it, to make a prey of; and Dr. Heylin, to ensnare. See Mat 22:16.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mar 12:13-17 . See on Mat 22:15-22 . Comp. Luk 20:20-26 . Mark is more concise and vivid than Matthew.

] the chief priests, scribes, and elders (Mar 11:27 ), whereas Matthew inaccurately refers this new and grave temptation to the Pharisees as its authors.

. . ] in order that they (these messengers) might ensnare Him by means of an utterance, i.e. by means of a question, which they were to address to Him. See Mar 12:14 . Comp. Mar 11:29 . The hunting term is frequently even in the classical writers transferred to men , who are got into the hunter’s power as a prey. See Valckenaer, ad Herod , vii. 162; Jacobs, ad Anthol. VII. p. 193. In a good sense also, as in Xen. Mem. iii. 11. 7 : .

Mar 12:14 . ] equivalent to , Luk 4:25 ; Luk 20:21 ; Luk 22:59 ; Luk 4:27 ; Luk 10:34 . See Wetstein in loc. ; Schaefer, Melet. p. 83; Fritzsche, Quaest. Luc. p. 137 f.

, .] The previous question was theoretical and general, this is practical and definite.

Mar 12:15 . ] as knowing hearts (Joh 2:25 ). Comp. Mat 12:25 ; Luk 6:8 ; Luk 11:17 .

. ] “Discere cupientium praeferebant speciem, cum animus calumniam strueret,” Grotius.

Mar 12:17 . Observe the more striking order of the words in Mark: what is Caesar’s, pay to Caesar , etc.

] see the critical remarks. The aorist would merely narrate historically; the imperfect depicts , and is therefore not inappropriate (in opposition to Fritzsche); see Khner, II. p. 73, and ad Xen. Anab. vii. 1. 13. Comp. Mar 5:20 , Mar 6:6 . The compound . strengthens the notion; Sir 27:23 ; Sir 43:18 ; 4Ma 17:17 , also in the later Greek writers, but not further used in the N. T.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

3. The Cunning Attach of the Pharisees and Herodians, and their Defeat Mar 12:13-17.

(Parallels: Mat 22:15-22; Luk 20:20-24.)

13And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words. 14And when they were come, 5 they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Cesar, or not? 15Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. 16And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Cesars. 17And Jesus answering, said unto them, Render to Cesar the things that are Cesars, 6 and to God the things that are Gods. And they marvelled at him.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Comp. the parallels in Matthew and Luke.The turning-point here is the ironical acknowledgment of Jesus Messianic dignity on the part of the Jewish rulers, after that they, in their attempt to overcome Jesus by the assertion of their authority in the presence of the people, had been covered with shame. It forms, consequently, the second section of our Lords strife in the temple on the Tuesday of the Passion Week. In this history of the temptation, the object of which was to entangle the Lord, two chief attacks are specialized by Mark: the attack made by the Pharisees in connection with the Herodians, or the history of the tribute-penny; and the attack of the Sadducees. In the latter, however, the question of the scribes leaves no longer an impression of malicious temptation, but draws the transactions to a close with an example of the triumph of Christ over many minds among the scribes and Pharisees. It is, nevertheless, the same history, written more from the bright side, while Matthew pictures it from the darker side. This individual was better than his party who had despatched him to tempt Christ: he made no concealment of the effect which the wisdom of Christ made upon him. This history is allowed by Luke to pass unnoticed. The cunning shown in the temptation now under consideration, is distinctly emphasized by each of the three Evangelists, Matthew and Mark giving the additional fact of the union between the Pharisees and Herodians to effect their ends. Matthew states that those who were sent were disciples of the Pharisees, and consequently young persons; from Luke it appears they were worldlings, who could only feign scruples of conscience. At the outset, the lively addition characterizes Mark, Shall we give, or shall we not give? The rest of the narrative is quickly sketched, and remarkably graphic. In the conclusion he is shorter than Matthew and Luke.

Mar 12:13. And they send unto Him.Those mentioned in the preceding section, the Sanhedrim, are intended. But Matthew represents with propriety the Pharisees as the most active in the transaction.To catch Him. refers primarily to the chase.

Mar 12:15. Shall we give?Important application of the question to their conduct. They appear, moreover, anxious to place the negation in His mouth.

Mar 12:17. The things that are Csars.The order of the words in Mark is peculiar; the construction is more cautious, and yet more lively.And they marvelled at Him.The young aristocratic portion of the population of the capital had not, in its pride, expected such a blow from the Galilan Rabbi. Matthew informs us that they felt themselves overcome: in Mark this is implied.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. See Matthew.

2. The feigned alliance of hostile parties against Christ, a measure of the greatness of their hatred to Christ. Mark has already (Mar 3:6) recorded the decision of the alliance. Compare the friendship of Pilate and Herod, as recorded in Luke.

3. Students and young nobles are often caught in the dangerous currents of their day. They are often, through their warm, generous feelings, misled and deceived.
4. Christ remains unmoved by the excitement; and what was confused, becomes, by a reference to manifest right, disentangled.
5. The word of Christ undermined further, the alliance between the two allied hostile parties. The Pharisees were not willing to give to the Emperor what belonged to him; the Herodians gave not to God what was Gods, not even in appearance.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

See the notes on Matthew.Perfect rest and calmness is the perfect action and quickness of the spirit.The spiritual presence of Christ fills the present with the might of eternity.How a stream of light from Christ can become a piercing lightning-flash.Hypocrisy, the original sin of an impure patriotism and feeling of false freedom.The majesty with which Christ investigates the rights of Csar: 1. The free examination; 2. the just recognition; 3. the holy reservation.Christ and the young nobility of Jerusalem: 1. How little they knew; 2. how royally He revealed Himself to them.Students and earnest youths often the unconscious and deceived tools of impure endeavors.Divine simplicity and integrity always triumphant over human and devilish cunning.Speak the truth without seeking to please or to injure any one.Amazement may form, particularly with youthful and deceived minds, the beginning of wisdom.

Starke:Nova Bibl. Tub.:The meanest kind of persecutors betake themselves to the secular authority.Truth must frequently find that hypocritical professors unite with worldlings against her.Hedinger:Every station has its rights. Fear God. Honor the king: 1Pe 2:17.Canstein:The Pharisees flattered the Lord to destroy Him: He, however, put them to shame to bring them to salvation.Braune:Those who, from their knowledge, should have been the friends of truth, are the first in enmity against the King of truth. (Pharisees and Herodians.) No one should allow himself to be employed to vex others: this is especially the duty of young persons towards noble, venerable men.They thought He had within Him the spark of vanity, and that He would destroy Himself in His zeal for Gods honor and His own personal dignity, which they presented in combination. So do men strive to entangle one another by praise.See Braunes extract from Claudius Asmus, p. 316.

Schleiermacher:It were a different case if ye had never received the money, if ye had perilled blood and life for independence; but if ye have suffered the halter to be bound round your neck, and have not made any opposition, then bear the yoke.Ye are giving your approval to the external regulations under which ye are living, as is sufficiently evident from your use of the money.(God, what is Gods.) He would remind them that they had other wealth, and were in undisturbed possession of the same.They should distinguish between the tributary condition and the spiritualGossner:Out of hypocrisy they state the truth, in order to overthrow the truth.

Footnotes:

[5]Mar 12:14.Lachmann, Tischendorf, after B., C., L., ., read instead of .

[6]Mar 12:17.Lachmann, after A., D., reads ; Tischendorf and Meyer, after B., C., L., Syriac, read .

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

(13) If And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees, and of the Herodians to catch him in his words. (14) And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the per son of men: but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Cesar, or not? (15) Shall we give, or shall we not give? but he knowing, their hypocrisy said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. (16) And they brought it; and he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? and they said unto him, Cesar’s. (17) And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Cesar the things that are Cesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him.

It was said of the LORD JESUS, under the spirit of prophecy, that with the hypocritical mockers were those that gnashed upon him with their teeth. Psa 35:16 . And here we behold them in deep design. If to the question of the lawfulness to give tribute to Caesar, JESUS had said, no; the Herodians would have apprehended him as an enemy to government. And if the LORD had justified Caesar’s claim, the whole nation of the Jews would have been against him, as they were all longing for deliverance from the yoke, and the very gatherers of the taxes were called publicans, and classed only as sinners. I beg the Reader not only to remark how much wisdom JESUS displayed in avoiding the trap which they had laid for him, but how blessedly he took occasion to remind them of what they owed to GOD. Who can indeed render to the LORD his due?

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

7 But those husbandmen said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours.

8 And they took him, and killed him , and cast him out of the vineyard.

9 What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others.

10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:

11 This was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

12 And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way.

13 And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words.

Ver. 13. To catch him in his words ] As hunters catch the beast in a toil, , as fowlers catch the bird in a snare, as St Matthew’s word here signifies ( ).

” Fistula dulce canit, voluerem dum decipit auceps. “

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

13 17. ] REPLY CONCERNING THE LAWFULNESS OF TRIBUTE TO CSAR. Mat 22:15-22 .Luk 20:20-26Luk 20:20-26 . The parable of the wedding-garment, Mat 22:1-14 , is omitted. The only matters requiring additional remark in these verses are, 13. ] is the instrument where-with they would : the verb being one taken from the chase. They wished to lay hold on him by some saying of His.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mar 12:13-17 . Tribute to Caesar (Mat 12:15-22 , Luk 20:20-26 ).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mar 12:13 . : according to Mt. the representatives of the Pharisees were disciples , not masters; a cunning device in itself. Vide on Mat 22:16 . (here only in N.T.), that they might hunt or catch Him, like a wild animal. Mt.’s expression, , equally graphic. Lk. avoids both. : either, their question, or His reply; the one involves the other.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mar 12:13-17

13Then they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Him in order to trap Him in a statement. 14They came and said to Him, “Teacher, we know that You are truthful and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any, but teach the way of God in truth. Is it lawful to pay a poll-tax to Caesar, or not? 15Shall we pay or shall we not pay?” But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, “Why are you testing Me? Bring Me a denarius to look at.” 16They brought one. And He said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” And they said to Him, “Caesar’s.” 17And Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they were amazed at Him.

Mar 12:13 “they sent” This refers to the Sanhedrin, which was the Jewish religious authority (cf. Mar 11:27).

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE SANHEDRIN

“Pharisees” This was the religious group that developed during the Maccabean period. They were very committed to the Oral Traditions (i.e., Talmud). See SPECIAL TOPIC: PHARISEES at Mar 2:16.

“Herodians” This was a political group that supported the reign of the Idumean Herods. They were also in favor of the Roman status quo. Normally Pharisees and Herodians were enemies. The fact that they were cooperating shows how serious they perceived Jesus’ teachings to be. See SPECIAL TOPIC: HERODIANS at Mar 1:14.

“in order to trap Him” This is literally “to catch.” It was used of capturing wild animals. It had become a metaphor for acquiring information so as to show a fault or error (cf. Luk 11:54). They thought that by asking Him this question they had Him trapped between two opposing groups: the Roman authorities and the people.

Mar 12:14 “‘Teacher, we know that You are truthful and defer to no one; for you are not partial, but teach the way of God in truth'” These leaders were flattering Jesus in order to find fault, but in reality, they were speaking correctly about Him. Jesus handled truth exactly like YHWH handles truth. This is supreme irony! Their tricky statements were in reality the greatest compliment.

“‘You are not partial'” The literal Hebrew idiom is “for You do not look at the face of men.” This historically referred to the Judges of Israel. When they tried a case, the defendants kept their heads bowed so that their identity could not be seen. If a judge put his hand under the chin and lifted the face so as to see the person’s identity, the chances for bias increased. Therefore, justice was to be blind!

“‘Is it lawful to pay'” This is a legal question related to the Mosaic legislation, but also relating to Israel’s current domination by Rome. This is the type of question that scribes dealt with daily. There were two ways to answer the question, one based on the Mosaic texts and one related to the reality of Roman law and occupation. These leaders wanted legal grounds to bring the Roman government into their religious dilemma (cf. Luk 20:20). By answering “yes” He would offend the zealots; by answering “no” He would be arrested by the Roman government.

“poll-tax” This was a transliteration of the Latin term “census.” It was a head tax which Rome placed on all conquered peoples. This empire-wide tax (i.e., A.D. 6-20) on males fourteen years through sixty-five years and on women twelve to sixty-five, who lived in imperial provinces went directly to the Emperor. It was the reason why Joseph had to leave Nazareth and go to Bethlehem with the pregnant Mary (cf. Luk 2:1-6).

Mar 12:15 “He, knowing their hypocrisy. . .why are you testing Me” The term hypocrisy (hupokrisis) originally referred to actors playing a part behind a mask. They pretended to be someone they were not (cf. Mat 23:28; Luk 12:1; Luk 20:20; 1Ti 4:2; 1Pe 2:1). It came to be used of manipulative people who tried to trick others into thinking that which was untrue. Everything these leaders said (ironically) to Jesus in Mar 12:14 was contradicted in their actions of Mar 12:15. The term testing (peiraz) had the added connotation of testing with a view towards destruction or failure. See Special Topic: Terms for Testing at Mar 1:13.

“a denarius” This silver coin was the only way this tax could be paid. It was a day’s wage for a common laborer or soldier. It was a symbol of Rome’s control. See Special Topic at Mar 12:42.

Mar 12:16 “‘Whose likeness and inscription is this'” Tiberius (A.D. 14-37) was the current Emperor. On this coin was a claim of the deity of the Emperor. On the front of the coin it said “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the Divine Augustus.” On the back of the coin was a picture of Tiberius seated on a throne and the inscription “Highest Priest.”

Mar 12:17 “‘Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s'” Believers are to obey civil authority because God has ordained it (cf. Rom 13:1-7; Tit 3:1; 1Pe 2:13-14). The Greek term “render” may imply “give back to someone that which belongs to him.”

“‘and to God the things that are God’s'” Although the state has divine sanction, it does not have divine status. If the state claims ultimate authority, this is to be rejected by the followers of the one true God. Many have tried to promote and support the modern political doctrine of the separation of church and state from this verse. In a very limited sense this verse does address the issue, but it is surely not a Scriptural support for this modern political theory. This theory is a truth seen from history, not primarily from Scripture.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Pharisees. App-120.

to catch = that they might catch.

catch. Greek. agreuo = to take in hunting: hence, to ensnare. In Mat 22:15 it is pagideuo = to ensnare (“entangle “). Both are Divine supplementary render ings of the same Aramaic word: Matt. giving the result of the hunting. Neither of the two words occurs elsewhere.

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

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

13-17.] REPLY CONCERNING THE LAWFULNESS OF TRIBUTE TO CSAR. Mat 22:15-22. Luk 20:20-26. The parable of the wedding-garment, Mat 22:1-14, is omitted. The only matters requiring additional remark in these verses are,-13.] is the instrument where-with they would : the verb being one taken from the chase. They wished to lay hold on him by some saying of His.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mar 12:13-17

7. TRIBUTE TO CAESAR

Mar 12:13-17

(Mat 22:15-22; Luk 20:20-26)

13 And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians,–The Pharisees counseled together how they might entangle him in his talk. Matthew (Mat 22:15-16) says “They send to him their disciples, with the Herodians.” The rulers did not go themselves, but sent with the Herodians some of their disciples. Luke (Luk 20:20) says: “Sent forth spies.” The work of a detective whose purpose is to entangle a bad man in his speech for the sake of exposing him is not an enviable one; but to lay snares for a good man is diabolical. Yet this is exactly what the Pharisees deliberately took counsel to do. Here enemies meet in their common hatred of Jesus.

that they might catch him in talk.–This was the work the spies were sent to do. The object was to ensnare or entrap him in his answer to their question in the next verse which they hoped he would answer yes or no. They thought that in his answer he must fatally involve himself in his relations either to the government or the people. They are trying him now in a way which they had never before attempted. Namely, by complimenting him until they induced him to utter sentences which they would almost suggest.

14 And when they were come, they say unto him, Teacher, we know that thou art true,–They express the truth in a hypocritical compliment, not believed by them, but artfully said, as compliments often are, to conceal their true design.

and carest not for any one;–That is, thou art an independent teacher, speaking your sentiments without regard to the fear or favor of man. This was true, and probably they believed this.

for thou regardest not the person of men,–That is, you are not influenced by rank or position, not even by Caesar himself, in your decisions, but are perfectly impartial.

but of a truth teachest the way of God:–The way of God was taught and mapped out for men to walk in without fear or favor–neither adding to nor taking from.

Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar,–The family name of Julius Caesar, the first Roman emperor, and applied to his successors. The name “Caesar,” after the time of Julius Caesar, became common to all the emperors, as Pharaoh was the common name of all the kings of Egypt. Now it is applied to the authorities of any civil government, national, state or city.

or not?–They worded the question, as they thought, so he would be forced to reply “yes” or “no.” They were anxious for him to answer in the negative for then they would “deliver him up to the rule and to the authority of the governor” as a seditious person. (Luk 20:20.)

15 Shall we give, or shall we not give?–This completes the question. They thought they had brought him to a point where he would be forced to answer as a rebel against Caesar, or a traitor to God, whose Son he claimed to be. But in this, as in all other attempts to ensnare him, Jesus in few words put them to flight.

But he, knowing their hypocrisy,–Being divine, Jesus had power to see and read their wicked thoughts, and therefore could not be deceived. This proves he was omniscient. No mere man has the power of discerning the motives of others. said unto them, Why make ye trial of me?–That is, why try to lead me into a snare by an insidious question? As deeply as they had laid their wicked plot, and cunningly as they had framed and put their question, they could not keep from knowing, from Jesus’ first word of his reply, that he saw through it all–that he detected their evil design and their hypocrisy.

bring me a denarius,–A penny, a Roman silver coin in circulation at that time worth about fifteen cents. Matthew (22 :19) says: “Show me the tribute money.” The money in which the tribute was paid. The tribute for the temple service was paid in the Jewish shekel; that for the Roman government in foreign coin.

that I may see it.–He now teaches an object lesson. He wishes them to see it with their natural eye as well as to hear it in words.

16 And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?–It is his time now to ask questions and expect replies. He is now putting them in the trap they set for him, and he does it with one simple question.

And they said unto him, Caesar’s.–They give the correct answer. Both the coin and the answer show they were submitting to Caesar’s government, and enjoying his protection.

17 And Jesus said unto them, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s,–Give to Caesar (the civil government under which you live) all that is due him–what rightfully belongs to him. If you are living under his domain and receiving his protection, pay the taxes he demands–pay him fully for protecting you, so long as you do not violate any divine obligation. Caesar’s image and name on the piece of money proved that it was his. It was therefore proper and right to give it back to him, when he demanded it. The answer is general, and teaches that taxes are to be paid by the subject receiving protection.

and unto God the things that are God’s.–While paying tribute to Caesar do not forget that you are obligated to God also–that you must give to God what he claims. He must come first. Paul says: “Ye were bought with a price; glorify God therefore in your body.” (1Co 6:20.) He does not leave us to guess what belongs to God. The coin containing the image and superscription of Caesar belonged to Caesar; man is the coinage, and bears the image of God (Gen 1:27; Gen 9:6; Act 17:29; Jas 3:9), especially the Christian man. Therefore the body and soul of the Christian belong to God and ought to be rendered unto him.

During the World War when young Christian men asked me if it was right for them to go to war and take guns and slaughter their fellow men, I cited them to what the Lord said: “Thou shalt not kill,” “do good for evil,” and do to others as you would have them do to you. I said in this case, it is your duty to obey the Lord and leave the result with him. You ought to obey the powers that be, until they conflict with God’s law. When they do, then “obey God rather than men.” (Act 5:29.)

The Christian’s relation to human government is plain. Wherefore ye must needs be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’s sake. (Rom 13:5.) Christians are to “pay tribute” to human government and “render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.” (Rom 13:6-7.) The relationship of Christians to human governments is that of respectful submission, not of aggression. They must submit to “the powers that be.” In no case are Christians justifiable in disobeying these powers, except only when civil governments require them to do that which God forbids, and forbid Christians doing that which God requires them to do. In such cases where human government or authority conflicts with God’s authority, then, as Peter and John declare, we must obey God rather than men, or human authority, and take the consequences. (Act 4:19-20; Act 5:29.) It matters not to the Christian whether a ruler is a good man or a bad man, the Christian is to respect and obey all who are in authority, with the exception or limitation which has been mentioned. Christians are to obey “for the Lord’s sake.” This is the best motive that can be had by any one. Loyalty to Christ calls upon us to respect human authority, which God has ordained. It matters not whether the government be a monarchy, kingdom, republic, or democracy; it is all the same to a Christian who is to submit to “the powers that be.” Neither does it matter to the Christian whether the ruler is a tyrant, a wicked man, or a good man; respectful obedience is to he given to the ruler by all Christians “for the Lord’s sake.” We are not to obey rulers because they are good men, nor refuse to obey them because they are bad men; neither are we to obey a law because it meets with our approval or disobey it because it does not meet with our approval. Our attitude is to be that of respectful submission “for the Lord’s sake.”

And they marvelled greatly at him.–They had been defeated in their attempt. His reply confounded both parties, and wholly prevented the use which they intended to make of it.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

CHAPTER 52

Knowing Their Hypocrisy

And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words. And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesars. And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are Gods. And they marvelled at him.

(Mar 12:13-17)

Our Savior declared, in Psa 35:16, With hypocritical mockers in feasts, they gnashed upon me with their teeth. Here we see those prophetic words fulfilled. The Scriptures declare that we who follow Christ are and must be crucified unto the world. That man or woman who believes on the Son of God is and must be dead to the world.

How is the believer dead to the world when he lives in the world, works a regular job, raises a family, and owns property in the world? A young student asked his Bible teacher. The teacher sent him out to the gravesite of a friend with instructions to criticize the dead friend, harass him, and find fault, and then praise him with glowing terms and brag on him to excess. Upon his return, the teacher asked, What did your friend say when you criticized him? Nothing. How did he react when you praised him? It made no difference to him; he is dead! That is what it means to be dead to this world, said the teacher. Its applause means nothing and its hatred means nothing. We neither admire the people of this world nor do we fear them. The riches of this world are but the fancy of fools, and the honors of this world mean little or nothing; for to be a child of God is the highest calling. The religious traditions and ceremonies of the world have no attraction nor meaning when Christ is all! That which was once important to us we now consider loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ, our Lord. This spiritual life in Christ cannot be explained; it must be experienced.

(Henry Mahan)

No one so thoroughly and constantly exemplified this deadness to as he who came to do the will of God and always did the Fathers will perfectly. Our Lord Jesus Christ was dead to both the flatteries and the abuses of the world; and if we would follow him and do his will we must be as well. We see a clear example of the Saviors deadness to the world in his dealings with the Pharisees and the Herodians in this passage.

Truth from Lying Lips

The very first thing that strikes me, as I read this passage is the fact the God often causes the truth to be spoken from lying lips. In his great sovereignty, our God often causes the enemies of the gospel to proclaim the truth, though they despise it. These hypocritical religious leaders came to our Redeemer for the purpose of laying a snare before him, to catch him in his words. When they did, they declared as clearly as any prophet or apostle three great truths about his character, both as God and as the God-man, our Mediator. In Mar 12:14 they said

1.Thou art true.

2.Thou carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men.

3.Thou teachest the way of God in truth.

In John 11, God the Holy Spirit forced a false prophet, Caiaphas the high priest, to declare the gospel of our Redeemers substitutionary death in the room of his elect as clearly as the Apostle Paul declared it in 2Co 5:17-21. Speaking by the Spirit of God, Caiaphas said, It is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, that the whole nation perish not (Joh 11:50-51).

In fact, in the case of the dying thief (Luk 23:39-43), it appears that the Lord God used the truth spoken by unbelieving men as the means by which he gave faith to the chosen object of his grace. My reason for stating this is to show that the means of grace is not always obvious. We know that faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God (Rom 10:17). We know that sinners are born-again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you (1Pe 1:23-25). But many point to the dying thief and say, That man was saved without hearing the gospel. Was he? No. Let me remind you of the things he heard, as he hung upon the cross. I do not know what he heard, or did not hear beforehand. But as he hung by his dying Savior, he heard and saw the gospel as clearly as anyone ever could. He heard the crucified Christ hailed as the King of Israel (Mat 27:42). He heard that the man hanging beside him had claimed to be the Son of God. He said, I am the Son of God (Mat 27:43). He heard the chief priests and scribes say, He saved others; himself he cannot save (Mar 15:31). He read Pilates testimony, THIS IS JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS (Luk 23:38; Joh 19:19). And he saw the Lamb of God dying as a Substitute in the place of a guilty man (Barabbas), who was released from death because he died in his place.

Mutual Enemies Unite

The next thing we see in these verses is the fact that lost men and women who are mutual enemies, people who utterly despise one another, will unite in opposition to Christ and his gospel. The Pharisees were religious fundamentalists, superstitious ceremonialists and self-righteous moralists. Religion was their life. They lived to go to church and do religious stuff. The Herodians were mere worldlings. They had absolutely no use for religion. They cared no more for the honor of God (his name, his will, his glory) than for the life of a maggot.

Yet, when the Lord Jesus Christ came preaching the gospel, the Pharisees and the Herodians were united like blood kin in the common cause of opposing him. Both the religious crowd and the worldly crowd despised the gospel of Gods free and sovereign grace in Christ, as Christ himself preached it and personified it.

That is the way it has always been. That is the way it is now. And that is the way it will always be, as long as the world stands, until Christ makes all things new. The cross of Christ is an offense to unregenerate men, both religious and irreligious (Gal 5:11; 1Co 1:17-24).

All lost men hate God and the gospel of Christ. All despise those things revealed in the gospel. There are no exceptions. Gods sovereignty offends mans pride and sense of self-determination. Fallen man desperately wants some credit for the salvation of his soul. Man is repulsed by the Bible doctrine of election because he thinks it is unfair for God to be gracious to whom he will be gracious. The teaching of Holy Scripture that man is totally depraved offends mans sense of self-worth and his love of his own imaginary righteousness. The Bibles teaching about Christs limited, the effectual redemption of Gods elect by the death of Christ, enrages men who think God owes sinners salvation, that he owes men a chance to be saved. The fact that salvation comes by the revelation of God the Holy Spirit in irresistible grace offends mans love of wisdom. When faced with the plain declaration of the gospel, men who despise one another, always unite in opposition to it.

Bold Hypocrisy

These Pharisees and Herodians stand before us as glaring examples of the brazen boldness of hypocrisy. No one is more confident, bold, or arrogant than the hypocrite. He never openly shows his true colors. In order to cover his hypocrisy he has a bold, brazen, outward pretense of sincerity. Do you see that in Mar 12:13-14?

And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words. And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?

When they could not find anything in his own doctrine or conduct for which to kill him, these proud hypocrites thought they could out smart the Son of God and trick him into saying something with which to accuse him. They began by flattering him as a man who was true, sincere, faithful and honest, unmoved, unimpressed and uninfluenced by men, and beyond the reach of bribery and intimidation. None are more subtle and deceiving than religious people who hate God.

But the Lord Jesus was much more than a mere man. He was and is the omniscient God, before whom all things are naked and open. He knew their hypocrisy and caught them in their own trap.

And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple. And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves (Mar 12:15-17).

Political Controversies

There is no greater, more effective snare, by which both Gods people and his servants are apt to be ensnared than overmuch concern about the cares and controversies of civil government. As I write this, the United States is in the middle of a presidential election. How sad it is to see so many who are citizens of another world embroiled in heated political controversy.

Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity. For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb. Trust in the LORD, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed. Delight thyself also in the LORD; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. Commit thy way unto the LORD; trust also in him; and he shall bring it to pass. (Psa 37:1-5)

Our Lord would not allow himself to be drawn into the trap of political wrangling and worldly strife. We cannot be too careful about these things. We must not allow ourselves to be overly concerned about the things of this world. I do not say that we are to have no concern about civil matters, or that we should not vote in political elections. Not at all. Believers should be the best of citizens; and good citizens act responsibly for the welfare of their nation. But the politics of this world, its pleasures, its treasures and its opinions should be of little concern to those who are crucified to the world.

Yet, faith in Christ and obedience to him is never a justification for any of us neglecting our God given responsibilities in this world. Our Lord Jesus commands us to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars and unto God the things that are Gods. That simply means that it is the responsibility of all men to both worship God and to be responsible, productive citizens in this world. The fact is, those who truly do worship God are the very best, most responsible, dependable, productive citizens in every generation.

Marveling not Believing

Learn this too, marveling at Christs doctrine is not believing on the Son of God. Many marvel at Christ and his doctrine who never believe. The last sentence of Mar 12:17 reads, And they marveled at him. The same thing often happens today. Frequently, men and women are impressed with a system of doctrine, the abilities of a preacher, a church, or a group of people. They attach themselves to preachers, churches, doctrines and causes, but not to Christ. They marvel for a while, but never come to trust the Son of God.

Salvation is something more than being impressed with and marveling at Christ. Salvation is knowing him and trusting him. I am not interested in impressing you. I want you to know Christ. Without him, you are without life, without forgiveness, without righteousness, without God, without hope. Why will you perish? Why will you die? Come to Christ and live forever. God help you now to come to him. The Lord Jesus Christ himself bids you come and promises to receive you, save you, and keep you, if you come to him.

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

they send: Psa 38:12, Psa 56:5, Psa 56:6, Psa 140:5, Isa 29:21, Jer 18:18, Mat 22:15, Mat 22:16, Luk 11:54, Luk 20:20-26

Herodians: Mar 3:6, Mar 8:15, Mat 16:6

Reciprocal: Jer 42:3 – General Mat 3:7 – the Pharisees Mat 19:3 – tempting

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Chapter 12.

The Tribute Money

“And they send unto Him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch Him in His words. And when they were come, they Bay unto Him, Master, we know that Thou art true, and carest for no man: for Thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Csar, or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give? But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye Me? bring Me a penny, that I may see it. And they brought it. And He saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto Him, Csar’s. And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Csar the things that are Csar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at Him.”-Mar 12:13-17.

The Enquirers.

-Why chosen.

“And they,” i.e. the chief priests and elders, “send unto Him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians” (Mar 12:15). The young men who actually submitted the question about tribute to Jesus were not the originators and instigators of this plot. They were only the instruments and tools. Behind the actual questioners, in the back-ground I see the sinister figures of Caiaphas and Annas, the high priests. Their own humiliating defeat in their debate with Christ about authority had only intensified their malice and rage, and hardened their resolve to catch Christ, if possible, in His talk. So this chapter tells us of a series of difficult questions which were submitted to Christ, and the plotters who concocted them all were the chief priests and the elders. To ask this question about tribute they choose certain young disciples of the Pharisees, and along with them certain young men of the Herodian party. Their choice of young men was cunningly made. Their very youth, they argued, would give to the deputation an air of guileless-ness and sincerity, and so would help to throw Jesus off His guard, and induce Him to speak with dangerous freedom. And the combination too of Pharisees and Herodians was a clever move. For as a rule Pharisees and Herodians were at daggers drawn. They stood for different ideals. The Pharisees were the patriotic party, who held that the Jews were God’s chosen people, meant not simply for independence, but for supremacy; who accordingly felt the Roman yoke to be a constant and almost unbearable irritation. The Herodians, on the other hand, were the courtly party, attached primarily to the Herodian dynasty, but through them to the Roman empire, to whose favour the Herods owed their thrones. The Pharisees were the irreconciliable opponents of Rome. The Herodians, as Dr Salmond says, accepted Roman rule, and profited by it. They sent these young Pharisees and these Herodians to Jesus. They thought it would look as if these eager young rabbis had been debating the question with the Herodians, and that in their failure to agree they had decided to submit the matter to Christ, and to appeal to Him as arbitrator.

The Manner of their Enquiry.

That is exactly the attitude the deputation assume in their approach. There is all the difference in the world between the manner of this deputation and the manner of the chief priests and elders when they came to Christ with their question about authorities. The chief priests and elders talked down to Christ; they put Him in the dock, so to speak; ordered Him to defend Himself, and undertook themselves to adjudicate on His claims. These young Pharisees and Herodians talk up to Christ, they treat Him as the Master, and salute Him as the Authority Whose word on the subject of debate will settle the quarrel.

Allied Powers of Evil.

“Master,” they say, “we know that Thou art true, and carest not for anyone; for Thou regardest not the person of men, but of a truth teachest the way of God. Is it lawful to give tribute unto Csar, or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give?” (Mar 12:14-15). First of all, let us notice what an unholy alliance there is here. As I have already said, as a rule Pharisees and Herodians were at daggers drawn. They stood for different national ideals. They were as far apart, shall I say? as the Clerical and the Free-thinker in France. But they hated Jesus more than they hated each other. And in their deeper hate of Him they forgot for the moment their mutual animosities, and became allies and friends. All the varied interests of hypocrisy and sin combine and unite to persecute Jesus. That is a suggestive little sentence in the Gospels-“And Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day” (Luk 22:12). What day was that? The day when between them they allowed Jesus to be done to death. And many a Pilate and a Herod, at enmity amongst themselves, become friends when it is a case of opposing and persecuting Jesus. Mr Malice, and Mr No Good, and Mr Love Lust and Mr Heady, these brave citizens of Vanity Fair, had no doubt their own private quarrels; but they acted as one man when it came to dealing with Christian and Faithful, who had dared to despise and denounce their fair. A common hate unites all evil principalities and powers against the Lord.

-And their Defeat.

Yet these evil alliances are all in vain. As easily as our Lord overthrew these Pharisees and Herodians, with their cunningly concocted question, so easily does He overthrow and break down all evil combinations against Him, to this day. “The Kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against His Anointed…. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision” (Psa 2:2, Psa 2:4). All unholy alliances against Christ, however formidable they may appear, are doomed to defeat. “He that falleth upon this stone shall be broken to pieces; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust” (Mat 22:44).

-Their Testimony to Jesus.

But what a magnificent testimony these Pharisees and Herodians bear to Jesus! Look at it, “Master,” they say, “we know that Thou art true”-true, that is, as Dr Morison says, ingenuous, honest, transparent; or, as the Twentieth Century New Testament translates it, “we know that Thou art an honest man”; “and carest not for anyone,” that is, absolutely frank and fearless; Jesus was one who would not trim or whittle away the truth out of fear of the great and mighty; “for Thou regardest not the person of man,” or, as the Greek might literally be translated, “Thou lookest not into the face of man”; in which phrase, says Dr Morison again, there is a hint of the law-courts. Justice is always represented as blindfold. Who the parties to a suit are, makes no difference to Justice. She never looks upon the faces of the suitors at her bar. But the venal judges of the East were often in the habit of looking into the faces of their suitors; partiality often took the place of justice, and the stronger suitor was favoured at the expense of the weaker. But Jesus never, in this sense, looked into any man’s face, He was inexorably and perfectly just, completely and entirely impartial. “Thou payest no regard to a man’s position, but teachest the Way of God in truth.” It was the “way of God,” and not any mere human philosophy that Jesus taught. His word carried upon it the impress of its own Divineness.

-Not Flattery but Truth.

Now look at all that these Pharisees and Herodians attribute to Christ: honesty, fearlessness, perfect impartiality, a unique knowledge of the way of God. Of course it may be held that all this was said by way of flattery. Granted readily. But even flattery, if it is not to defeat itself, must proceed on a basis of truth. Flattery consists in the exaggeration of good qualities already existing. If a man attributes to another qualities he does not possess, the man is not flattered, he is insulted. He feels that the other is making a fool of him. Granted, then, that these men were intent on flattering Jesus, and that their reverence was feigned, it nevertheless remains true that they were only able to attribute these various qualities to Jesus because He verily possessed them. The eulogium was well founded, though the motive that prompted them to make it was as false as could be. This then is the involuntary tribute His bitter foes were constrained to pay to Christ. God makes the very wrath of men to praise Him, the Old Book says (Psa 76:10), and from the lips of His adversaries and foes some of the noblest testimonies to Christ have come.

The Many Hostile Witnesses.

It seems to me that if I had nothing but the witness of Christ’s enemies to go upon, I should be constrained to believe He was more than man. “Never man spake like this man” (Joh 7:46), said the officers who had been sent to seize Him. “I find no fault in Him” (Joh 19:6), said Pilate. “He saved others, Himself He cannot save” (Mat 27:42), said mocking priests at the foot of the cross. “Certainly this was the Son of God” (Luk 23:47), said the centurion who had charge of the execution. Unwilling testimony to His unique and unshared greatness is wrung from the lips of men who would gladly have discovered some fleck or flaw in Him. And it is so still, the very men who criticise Christ are constrained to glorify Him. Sceptical men like John Stuart Mill can think of no better rule for life than so to live that Christ would approve the life. Strauss says, “It will never be possible to rise above Him, or to imagine anyone who should even be equal to Him.” Kenan declares that between Him and God there is no distinction. Now who was this man, about whom His very critics and foes bear testimony that He was unlike every other man the world has ever seen; that He was greater, wiser, holier than any man the world has ever seen? People talk sometimes about the difficulty of believing that Jesus was the Son of God. My difficulty is in believing anything else. “I say, the acknowledgment of God in Christ,” wrote Browning, “accepted by the reason, solves for thee all questions in the earth, and out of it.”

The Attempted Dilemma.

Now let me continue the story. It was not because of any genuine difficulty about the matter that these Pharisees and Herodians brought this question about tribute-money to Jesus. Their question was designed as a trick, a plot, a snare. They thought that it would put the Lord on the horns of a dilemma, and that, whichever way He replied, He was bound to deliver Himself into their hands. For if He answered in the Herodian sense, and said, “Yes, it is lawful to pay tribute,” the Pharisees would have at once denounced Him as a traitor to His race, and His popularity would have been destroyed on the instant. On the other hand, if He had taken the side of the Pharisees, and said, “No, it is not lawful to pay tribute,” the Herodians would have at once denounced Him to Pilate as being guilty of the crime of high treason. Whichever way the Lord answered the question, He seemed bound to come into collision either with the people or with Pilate.

The Dilemma Met.

But it is an ill business trying to lay plots for the Lord. He was not deceived by the plausibility of their question, nor by the flattery of their address. He saw into the wicked and murderous intent behind it all. He read the hearts of these men like an open book. “Why tempt ye me!” He said. And then He cried, “Bring me a denarius, that I may see it.” Tribute was paid, not in the Jewish money used for Temple purposes, but in the Roman silver coinage. When a denarius had been handed to Jesus He asked, “Whose is this image and superscription?” He held up to their view the coin, bearing on one of its sides a medallion of the emperor, and on the other the name of the emperor and his title of Pontifex Maximus. They said unto Him, “Csar’s.” And by their answer they had replied to their own question. For it was an accepted principle that when any king’s coinage was current, that king’s sovereignty was recognised. Their own Rabbis had laid down that law for them. “Render unto Csar,” said Jesus, “the things that are Csar’s.”

The Snare Avoided.

But that scarcely brings out the exact force of the Greek. The question the Pharisees and Herodians had asked was, “Shall we give?” Jesus’s reply is, “Give back, pay unto Csar the things that are Csar’s.” By accepting the advantages of Csar’s rule, they had also consented to its obligations. They had traded as Roman subjects; they must pay the Roman tribute. The payment of tribute had become a matter of obligation and debt. “Pay back,” He said, and perhaps there was a touch of scorn in His voice as He said it, “to Csar the things that are Csar’s,” and He added, “and to God the things that are God’s.” He had answered their question; and yet He had avoided their snare. Yes, and He had done more. He had laid down a profound and permanent principle. “And they marvelled greatly at Him,” says Mark (Mar 12:17). The word is an exceptionally strong one-“they were utterly amazed at Him”-not simply at the ease with which He foiled their plot, but with the wisdom of His answer. And who knows but that some of these men may have been constrained to ask in wonder, “Who is this?” and, though they went to ensnare and catch Him, may have stayed to worship and adore Him?

Duties to the State.

Now, as I said just a moment ago, this answer of our Lord’s is far more than a happy way of escape out of what looked like an inextricable difficulty, it is a satisfying answer; it lays down great principles which avail for guidance in every similar difficulty. Primarily, the topic in debate was the duty men owe to civil government. The Pharisees thought that they were by their loyalty to God forbidden to pay tribute to Csar. In other words, they felt that religion interfered with their civil obedience. The principle Christ lays down here is that those who accept the privileges of the State must discharge the just demands of the State. Christ was no Anarchist. He recognised the necessity and utility of rulers and governments. There was a certain sphere of human life within which they had a right to the exercise of authority. The Apostle was only interpreting Christ’s mind when He said, “The powers that be are ordained of God” (Rom 13:1).

Our Obedience to the State.

Everyone who accepts the advantages of the rule of the State is bound to discharge his just obligations to the State; that is the principle here laid down. Take our own case. Our English citizenship confers upon us great privileges. The State, for instance, cares for our safety. By means of its armies and its fleet it has warded off from us the dangers of foreign attack. By means of its system of law it safeguards our persons and property. And, in order to be able to do all this, the State makes certain demands upon us in the way of taxes. Now what our Lord here says is that no man has a right to receive the advantages of membership in this English State unless he is willing to discharge his duties to the English State. It is the same when you come to the narrower sphere of municipal life. Every well-ordered municipality does a multitude of things for our comfort and well-being. It makes and keeps our roads; it lights our streets; it looks after the health of our town; it maintains a staff of police for our protection. Now if we accept the benefit of all this, we must pay for it. If we enjoy the benefits of the municipality, we must discharge our duties to the municipality. In other words, the demand-notes of the Income Tax commissioner and of the rate-collector have a certain Divine authority behind them. People are all too apt to think that if they can cheat the State or the municipality, there is not much harm in it. As a matter of fact, what Jesus teaches here is, that the payment of our rates and taxes is a religious duty. “Render unto Csar the things that are Csar’s.”

-With its Limitation.

And yet the obedience which Jesus here commands us to render is not unlimited. The State has its own province, and within that province it has a right to obedience. But there is a province in which the king’s writ and the corporation’s demand note do not run. “Render unto Csar the things that are Csar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” The Pharisees were right in thinking that when the State made demands which clashed with their sense of what was due to God, it might be their duty to disobey the State. But that point had not been reached by this demand for tribute. There the State was well within its rights. But there was this limitation upon State right and the obedience of subject; it was all subject to consideration for the rights of God. “We must obey God rather than men,” said Peter to the Sanhedrin (Act 5:29). In seeking to interfere with their convictions and stifle their witness, the authorities had travelled beyond their province. Scores and hundreds of Christians refused to sacrifice incense to the emperor in the early days; they disobeyed the command of the State, preferring to be loyal to God, even though it cost them their lives. Scores of people here in England refused to turn back to Rome at the bidding of Queen Mary; they disobeyed the command of the State, preferring to be loyal to God, even though it meant dying in the flames of Smithfield. The duty of obedience to the State is not unlimited. It is subject always to our obedience to God. “My authority ends,” said Napoleon in a wise and weighty sentence, “where the authority of conscience begins.” That is why, when the State travels beyond its province, it may be resisted and disobeyed.

Our Debt to God.

But after all the emphasis of our Lord’s saying is not on the negative limitation, but upon the positive duty. These Pharisees, in their excitement about this tribute money, were forgetting the weightier matter of the Law. They would no doubt have defended their objection to Rome, on the ground of their allegiance to God. “And to God the things that are God’s,” said Jesus to them. All this fret and fume about the Roman tax was not what God really wanted. Their debt to God was far other than they conceived. “What did God want?” “Son,” that is the Divine answer, “give Me thine heart.” All this fuss about the independence of Israel did not compensate God for the refusal of the heart. “Give back-pay to God the things that are God’s.” For this also is but the discharge of a debt. God has put His image and superscription upon the heart of man, and we are defrauding God of His due if we do not give Him a consecrated and devoted heart.

A Question for Ourselves.

Have we given God His due? Have we given to God the things that are God’s? Have we given our hearts to Him? We shall give every one else his due, if first of all we give God His. But the mischief of it is, so many of us fail just here. We give God’s things to Csar. We give our hearts to money and pleasure and social position, and so God never gets His own from us. “Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness,” then everything else will be added unto us; everything else will fall into its proper place; everything else will receive its legitimate due. We shall know exactly what to give Csar when we have honestly given to God the things that are God’s. Life will be balanced, proportionate, orderly and fair, when we are ready to say to God

“Take my heart, my Lord, I pour

At Thy feet its treasure store.

Take myself, and I will be,

Ever, only, all for Thee.”

Fuente: The Gospel According to St. Mark: A Devotional Commentary

3

Herodians were a family party among the Jews who favored the Romans. This is described more extensively in the comments on Mat-Mat 22:16.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

LET us observe in the beginning of this passage, how men of different religious opinions can unite in opposing Christ. We read of “Pharisees and Herodians” coming together to “catch our Lord in His words,” and perplex Him with a hard question. The Pharisee was a superstitious formalist, who cared for nothing but the outward ceremonies of religion. The Herodian was a mere man of the world, who despised all religion, and cared more for pleasing men than God. Yet when there came among them a mighty teacher who assailed the ruling passions of both alike, and spared neither formalist nor worldling, we see them making common cause, and uniting in a common effort to stop His mouth.

It has always been so from the beginning of the world. We may see the same thing going on at the present day. Worldly men and formalists have little real sympathy with one another. They dislike one another’s principles, and despise one another’s ways. But there is one thing which they both dislike even more, and that is the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ. And hence, whenever there is a chance of opposing the Gospel, we shall always see the worldly man and the formalist combine and act together. We must expect no mercy from them: they will show none. We must never reckon on their divisions: they will always patch up an alliance to resist Christ.

Let us observe, for another thing in this passage, the exceeding subtlety of the question propounded to our Lord. His enemies asked him, “Is it lawful to give tribute to Csar, the Roman emperor, or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give?” Here was a question, which it seemed at first sight impossible to answer without peril. If our Lord had replied “Give,” the Pharisees would have accused him before the priests, as one who regarded the Jewish nation as under subjection to Rome.-If our Lord had replied, “Do not give,” the Herodians would have accused him before Pilate, as a seditious person who taught rebellion against the Roman government. The trap was indeed well planned. Surely we may see in it the cunning hand of one greater than man. That old serpent the devil was there.

We shall do well to remember, that of all questions which have perplexed Christians, none have ever proved so intricate and puzzling, as the class of questions which the Pharisees and Herodians here propounded. [Footnote: “Nothing is more likely to ensnare ministers, than bringing them to meddle with controversies about civil rights, and to settle landmarks between the prince and the subjects, which it is fit should be done, while it is not at all fit that they should have the doing of it.”-Matthew Henry.] What are the dues of Csar, and what are the dues of God-where the rights of the church end, and where the rights of the state begin-what are lawful civil claims and what are lawful spiritual claims-all these are hard knots and deep problems which Christians have often found it difficult to untie, and almost impossible to solve. Let us pray to be delivered from them. Never does the cause of Christ suffer so much as when the devil succeeds in bringing churches into collisions and law-suits with the civil power. In such collisions precious time is wasted-energies are misapplied-ministers are drawn off from their proper work-the souls of people suffer, and a church’s victory often proves only one degree better than a defeat. “Give peace in our time, O Lord,” is a prayer of wide meaning, and one that should often be on a Christian’s lips.

Let us observe, in the last place, the marvelous wisdom which our Lord showed in His answer to His enemies.

Their flattering words did not deceive Him. He “knew their hypocrisy.” His all-seeing eye detected the “potsherds covered with silver dross” which stood before Him. (Pro 26:23.) He was not imposed upon, as too many of His people are, by glowing language and fine speeches.

He made the daily practice of His own enemies supply Him with an answer to their cunning questions. He tells them to “bring Him a penny,” a common coin which they themselves were in the habit of using. He asks them “whose image and superscription” are stamped upon that penny? They are obliged to reply, “Csar’s.” They were themselves using a Roman coin, issued and circulated by the Roman government. By their own confession they were in some way under the power of the Romans, or this Roman money would not have been current among them. At once our Lord silences them by the memorable words, “Render unto Csar the things that are Csar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” He bids them pay tribute to the Roman government in temporal things, for by using its money they allowed themselves bound to do so. Yet He bids them give obedience to God in spiritual things, and not to suppose that duty to an earthly sovereign and a heavenly sovereign are incapable of being reconciled one with the other. In short, He bids the proud Pharisee not to refuse his dues to Csar, and the worldly Herodian not to refuse his dues to God.

Let us learn from this masterly decision the great principle, that true Christianity was never meant to interfere with a man’s obedience to the civil power. So far from this being the case it ought to make him a quiet, loyal, and faithful subject. He ought to regard the powers that be as “ordained of God,” and to submit to their rules and regulations so long as the law is enforced, though he may not thoroughly approve of them. If the law of the land and the law of God come in collision, no doubt his course is clear-he must obey God rather than man. Like the three children, though he serves a heathen king, he must not bow down to an idol. Like Daniel, though he submits to a tyrannical government, he must not give over praying in order to please the ruling powers. [Footnote: Sibelius quotes a passage from Augustine on the Psalms, which is worth reading, as an illustration of the subject now before us. “Julian was an unbelieving emperor. He was an apostate, a wicked man, and an idolater. And yet Christian men served as soldiers under this unbelieving emperor. When the cause of Christ was concerned, they acknowledged no commander but Him that was in heaven. When the emperor wished them to worship idols or burn incense to them, they preferred honoring God before him. But when he said, ‘draw out in order of battle, march against that nation,’ they obeyed him. They drew a distinction between their eternal master, and their temporal master; and yet were submissive to their temporal master for their eternal master’s sake.”]

Let us often pray for a larger measure of that spirit of wisdom which dwelt so abundantly in our blessed Lord. Many are the evils which have arisen in the Church of Christ, from a morbid and distorted view of the relative positions of the civil government and of God. Many are the rents and divisions which have been occasioned by lack of sound judgment as to their comparative claims. Happy is he who remembers our Lord’s decision in this passage, understands it rightly, and makes a practical application of it to his own times.

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

Mar 12:13-17. FIRST ASSAULT.The question concerning tribute to Cesar. See on Mat 22:15-22; comp. Luk 20:20-26. The parable of the wedding garment precedes in Matthews account. The narrative of Mark is graphic, but presents no new details.

To catch him by speech (Mar 12:13), lit., by word; to lay hold of Him by means of their word as a snare. Some word of His, in answer to their questions, would be laid hold of, but the figure requires a reference to their discourse.

They marvelled greatly at him (Mar 12:17). The original is stronger than in the parallel passages. It also intimates that they continued to do so. The other accounts are fuller as to the effect of His answer. These young Pharisees (Matthew) and Herodians with feigned scruples of conscience, the flower of the youth of Jerusalem, scarcely expected such a blow from a Galilean,and their astonishment was more than momentary. No wonder: the answer of Christ is the wisest ever given to an entangling question, and contains in principle the solution of the great problem of church and state, or the relation of the spiritual and secular power.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Observe here, A grand design to entangle our blessed Saviour in his discourse.

Where note, 1. The persons employed to put the ensnaring question to Christ, namely, the Pharisees and Herodians. The Pharisees were against paying tribute to Caesar, looking upon themselves as a free people, and the emperor as an usurper; but the Herodians were for it. Herod being made by the Roman emperor king over the Jews, he was very zealous for having the Jews pay tribute to Caesar; and such of the Jews as sided with him, particularly his courtiers and favourites, were called Herodians.

Note, 2. The policy and wicked craft here used, in employing these two contrary parties to put this question to our Saviour concerning tribute, thereby laying him under a necessity, as they hoped, to offend one side, let him answer how he would; if, to please the Pharisees, he denied paying tribute to Caesar, then he is accused of sedition; if, to gratify the Herodians, he voted for paying tribute to Caesar, then he is looked upon as an enemy to the liberty of his country, and exposed to popular odium. Thus has it all along been the practice of Satan and his instruments, to draw the ministers of God into dislike, either with the magistrates or with the people, that they may fall under the censure of the one, or the displeasure of the other.

Observe, 3. With what wisdom and caution our Lord answers them; he calls for the Roman penny, answering to sevenpence halfpenny of our money, two of which they paid by way of tribute, as poll money for every head to the emperor. Christ asks them, Whose image or superscription this their coin bore? They answer, Caesar’s. Render then, says he, to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. As if our Lord had said, “Your admitting of the Roman coin among you, is an evidence that you are under subjection to the emperor, because the coining and imposing of money is an act of sovereign authority; therefore you have owned Caesar’s authority over you, by accepting of his coin amongst you; give unto him his just dues, and render unto 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 paymaster 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 his right be by descent, election, or by conquest, the subjects 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 honour, as he is not to rob them of their civil rights; as Christ requires all his followers to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, so should princes oblige all their subjects to render unto God the things that are God’s.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mar 12:13-17. They send unto him certain of the Pharisees, &c. See notes on Mat 22:15-22. They marvelled at him At the wisdom of his answer.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

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

Mar 12:13-17. The Question of Tribute.The Pharisees and the Herodians perhaps represent the two horns of the dilemma by which they try to catch Jesus. The Pharisees leant to the popular view which chafed at tribute, and which found its extreme expression in the Zealots (cf. Josephus, Ant. XVH 1. 16). The Herodians probably desired the status quo which ensured Herods throne. If Jesus says it is lawful to pay tribute, the Pharisees will denounce Him to the people; if He says it is not lawful, the Herodians will denounce Him to the authorities. The flattering address, which shows that truth may be spoken in flattery, does not conceal the fact that the question is a trap, not a serious inquiry. Mk. notes a dramatic pause, while the questioners fetch a denarius to show to Jesus. Of the final answer of Jesus, Lord Acton says, Those words . . . gave to the civil power, under the protection of conscience, a sacredness it had never enjoyed and bounds it had never acknowledged: and they were the repudiation of absolutism and the inauguration of freedom. That this was the intent of the utterance may be doubted (see views of Loisy and Wellhausen, in Montefiore, i. 281). That the words as usually interpreted have exerted some such influence is undeniable.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 13

Herod Antipas, son of the old king, was at this time reigning over Galilee.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

13 And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words. 14 And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth:

Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 15 Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. 16 And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar’s. 17 And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him.

What a bunch. They are trying to trip Him up yet they use the truth to do it in front of the people. They declare Him to be Truth and that He teaches the ways of God.

When they say “and carest for no man” they are not slamming His compassion for others, but saying that He cares not what others think about Him. He concerns Himself with no man but teaches Godly principles.

At least they get just who He is in action even though they have not gotten the “Who He is” principle. They May have been lying through their teeth when they declared this also – they thought He was a false prophet – teaching new stuff so most likely this was a lie to His face in front of the people.

Mark tells us that Christ knew of their hypocrisy. The term hypocrisy is the Greek word that we gain hypocrisy from. Christ knew them for what they were but played their silly game anyway. He asked to see a penny. Not that He did not know what it looked like; he had most likely seen them many times. He just wanted to emblazon it upon their minds as well as the minds of thepeople who were witnessing the event.

Mat 22:18 mentions “But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why make ye trial of me, ye hypocrites?” Christ was rather plain and blunt. Matthew, the writer that wrote to the Jewish community wanted the reader to know exactly how the Lord felt about their leadership – He spoke His mind.

They marveled at Him! They went to catch Him, He outwitted them and they were surprised. Matthew and Luke record that they left Him. I would think so after such a complete shutdown.

It is of note that the Pharisees and Herodians came together for they were at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. The Pharisees wanted freedom from the Roman Empire and were looking for a political Messiah to free them while the Herodians seemed to want to keep the status quo by supporting the leader that Rome had appointed over the Jews – Herod.

When you want to get someone, it does not matter who you hook up with – the end justifies the means as they always say – situational ethics in other words. Your ethics are determined by the situation that you find yourself in.

One of the first lessons one of my professors brought to us in Bible College was ethics and the first part of that was related to situational ethics. I have no idea where my mind was indoctrinated but I had to wonder why he was teaching us things like this – in my mind no one could use that polluted of a system to live their life.

Today I fear we should have been teaching more about it over the years in our churches and our colleges. Christians often change their belief system to match the surroundings and situations. Their God is as moldable as their lifestyle. Sunday they are the righteous living folks that go to church and then on the weekday they turn into one of the world, someone that a person could not tell from another lost person.

Folks our lifestyle should always match our Sunday best no matter what. If we are believers, we are to be Christ-like 24/7, not Christ-like on Sunday and then world-like Monday through Saturday.

Our associations should also match our belief system. We should not change our living to match a different set of friends during the week. Our viewing of movies and television should also match. We should not say amen to the pastors decrying of the latest episode of some TV show on Sunday and then watch it during the week. We should not cry out for the moral high ground in viewing – for others – and watch trash in our own home.

It is appalling what some believers are watching these days. They often tell the lost of their dual standard by demeaning television and then tell them that they are watching PG and worse rating shows.

One cannot miss the truth that the Jewish leaders certainly missed. He requested the coin andasked whose image it was. They said Caesar’s and He told them to render unto Caesar that which was His and to God that which was His – OUCH! They are in God’s image and they certainly had not given themselves unto God in fact they were trying to kill God.

Reader, do not miss that one yourself. You are in God’s image and the Lord told them to render that which is God’s to God. Do not wait, that is the concept of the Lord for all of us. We are His He bought and paid for us, it is only up to us to commit ourselves to Him for our lives as bondservants.

If you pay your taxes, and you should, then you also should give yourself to God for His use else you are not following the Lord’s admonishment to the Jewish leaders.

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson

12:13 {2} And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in [his] words.

(2) The gospel links the authority of the magistrate with the service of God.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

2. The controversy over Jesus’ teaching 12:13-37

Controversy over Jesus’ authority led to controversy over His teaching. The Jewish religious leaders attacked Him three times trying to destroy His credibility and popularity. They plied Him with questions about the poll tax (Mar 12:13-17), the resurrection (Mar 12:18-27), and the greatest commandment (Mar 12:28-34). Then Jesus took the initiative and questioned them about Messiah’s sonship (Mar 12:35-37). This ended their attacks. The whole encounter happened on Wednesday following the events just recorded. It recalls the similar earlier sequence of conflicts with Jesus in Galilee (cf. Mar 2:1 to Mar 3:6)

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

Jesus’ teaching about the poll tax 12:13-17 (cf. Matthew 22:15-22; Luke 20:20-26)

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

Sanhedrin members took the initiative in sending the Pharisees and Herodians. They united against Jesus, whom they perceived as a common threat, even though they disagreed politically. They asked Jesus about a political issue that divided them.

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

CHAPTER 12:13-17 (Mar 12:13-17)

THE TRIBUTE MONEY

“And they send unto Him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, that they might catch Him in talk. And when they were come, they say unto Him, Master, we know that Thou art true, and carest not for any one: for Thou regardest not the person of men, but of a truth teachest the way of God: Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? Shall we give, or shall we not give? But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye Me? bring Me a penny, that I may see it. And they brought it. And He saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto Him, Caesar’s. And Jesus said unto them, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s. And they marveled greatly at Him.” Mar 12:13-17 (R.V.)

THE contrast is very striking between this incident and the last. Instead of a challenge, Jesus is respectfully consulted; and instead of a formal concourse of the authorities of His religion, He is Himself the authority to Whom a few perplexed people profess to submit their difficulty. Nevertheless, it is a new and subtle effort of the enmity of His defeated foes. They have sent to Him certain Pharisees who will excite the popular indignation if He yields anything to the foreigner, and Herodians who will, if He refused, bring upon Him the colder and deadlier vengeance of Rome. They flatter, in order to stimulate, that fearless utterance which must often have seemed to them so rash: “We know that Thou art true, and carest not for any one, for Thou regardest not the person of men, but of a truth teachest the way of God.” And they appeal to a higher motive by representing the case to be one of practical and personal urgency. “Shall we give, or shall we not give?”

Never was it more necessary to join the wisdom of the serpent to the innocence of the dove, for it would seem that He must needs answer directly, and that no direct answer can fail to have the gravest consequences. But in their eagerness to secure this menacing position, they have left one weak point in the attack. They have made the question altogether a practical one. The abstract doctrine of the right to drive out a foreign power, of the limits of authority and freedom, they have not raised. It is simply a question of the hour, Shall we give or shall we not give?

And Jesus baffled them by treating it as such. There was no longer a national coinage, except only of the half shekel for the temple tax. When He asked them for a smaller coin, they produced a Roman penny stamped with the effigy of Caesar. Thus they confessed the use of the Roman currency. Now since they accepted the advantages of subjugation, they ought also to endure its burdens: since they traded as Roman subjects, they ought to pay the Roman tribute. Not He had preached submission, but they had avowed it; and any consequent unpopularity would fall not upon Him but them. They had answered their own question. And Jesus laid down the broad and simple rule, “Render (pay back) unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s. And they marveled greatly at Him.” No wonder they marveled, for it would be hard to find in all the records of philosophy so ready and practical a device to baffle such cunning intriguers, such keenness in One Whose life was so far removed from the schools of worldly wisdom, joined with so firm a grasp on principle, in an utterance so brief, yet going down so far to the roots of action.

Now the words of Jesus are words for all time; even when He deals with a question of the hour, He treats it from the point of view of eternal fitness and duty; and this command to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s has become the charter of the state against all usurpations of tyrannous ecclesiastics. A sphere is recognized in which obedience to the law is a duty to God. But it is absurd to pretend that Christ taught blind and servile obedience to all tyrants in all circumstances, for this would often make it impossible to obey the second injunction, and to render unto God the things which are God’s, — a clause which asserts in turn the right of conscience and the Church against all secular encroachments. The point to observe is, that the decision of Jesus is simply an inference, a deduction. St. Matthew has inserted the word “therefore,” and it is certainly implied: render unto Caesar the things which you confess to be his own, which bear his image upon their face.

Can we suppose that no such inference gives point to the second clause? It would then become, like too many of our pious sayings, a mere supplement, inappropriate, however excellent, a make weight, and a platitude. No example of such irrelevance can be found in the story of our Lord. When, finding the likeness of Caesar on the coin, He said, Render, therefore, unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s, He at least suggested that the reason for both precepts ran parallel, and the image of the higher and heavenlier Monarch could be found on what He claims of us. And it is so. He claims all we have and all we are. “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof:” and “I have made thee, thou art Mine.” And for us and ours alike the argument holds good. All the visible universe bears deeply stamped into its substance His image and superscription. The grandeur of mountains and stars, the fairness of violet and harebell, are alike revelations of the Creator. The heavens declare His glory: the firmament showeth His handiwork: the earth is full of His riches: all the discoveries which expand our mastery over nature and disease, over time and space, are proofs of His wisdom and goodness, Who laid the amazing plan which we grow wise by tracing out. Find a corner on which contrivance and benevolence have not stamped the royal image, and we may doubt whether that bleak spot owes Him tribute. But no desert is so blighted, no solitude so forlorn.

And we should render unto God the things which are God’s, seeing His likeness in His world. “For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things which are made, even His everlasting power and divinity.”

And if most of all He demands the love, the heart of man, here also He can ask, “Whose image and superscription is this?” For in the image of God made He man. It is sometimes urged that this image was quite effaced when Adam fell. But it was not to protect the unfallen that the edict was spoken “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made He man.” He was not an unfallen man of whom St. Paul said that he “ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God;” neither were they unfallen, of whom St. James said, “We curse men which are made after the likeness of God” (Gen 9:6; 1Co 11:7; Jam 3:9). Common men, for whom the assassin lurks, who need instruction how to behave in church, and whom others scorn and curse, these bear upon them an awful likeness; and even when they refuse tribute to their king, He can ask them, Whose is this image?

We see it in the intellect, ever demanding new worlds to conquer, overwhelming us with its victories over time and space. “In apprehension how like a God.” Alas for us! if we forget that the Spirit of knowledge and wisdom is no other than the Spirit of the Lord God.

We see this likeness far more in our moral nature. It is true that sin has spoiled and wasted this, yet there survives in man’s heart, as nowhere else in our world, a strange sympathy with the holiness and love of God. No other of His attributes has the same power to thrill us. Tell me that He lit the stars and can quench them with a word, and I reverence, perhaps I fear Him; yet such power is outside and beyond my sphere; it fails to touch me, it is high, I cannot attain unto it. Even the rarer human gifts, the power of a Czar, the wisdom of Bacon, are thus beyond me, I am unkindled, they do not find me out. But speak of holiness, even the stainless holiness of God, undefiled through all eternity, and you shake the foundations of my being. And why does the reflection that God is pure humble me more than the knowledge that God is omnipotent? Because it is my spiritual nature which is most conscious of the Divine image, blurred and defaced indeed, but not obliterated yet. Because while I listen I am dimly conscious of my birthright, my destiny, that I was born to resemble this, and all is lost if I come short of it. Because every child and every sinner feels that it is more possible for him to be like his God than like Newton, or Shakespeare, or Napoleon. Because the work of grace is to call in the worn and degraded coinage of humanity, and, as the mint restamps and reissues the pieces which have grown thin and worn, so to renew us after the image of Him that created us.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary