From Matthew 22:15-22 / In The Cross-hairs

Most of us tend to like things simple. We like black and white understanding and answers to questions. And while there is nothing inherently wrong with that desire, it can be a real hindrance to truth if we make it iron clad. We must make room for nuance and subtlety when and where required.

Wisdom dictates that we understand that some things in Scripture present us with clear antitheses – So we have Isa. 5:20 “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” Some things are truly evil and they cannot be construed as good under any circumstances. And, some things are good and cannot be construed as evil under any circumstances. It is never right to deny Christ, and it is never wrong to acknowledge Him for who and what He is. Black cannot white nor vice versa. Clear either/ors exist. One is either born again or not. There is no middle road.

At the same time, there are also both/ands in Scripture. So if we ask “is God one or is He three?” we cannot choose one or the other but have to answer – Yes! Was Jesus God or man? Yes. Was the Bible inspired by God or written by men? Yes. In these cases and others like them, the perfect antitheses we so long for, if answered in pure black and white, will rob us of the whole truth. It is true the Bible was breathed out by the Holy Spirit. But that is not the entire truth. Jesus was indeed God, but that is not the entire truth either.

You get the picture.

All of this leads us to the confrontation contained in our text.

The Pharisees and the Herodians, typically not friendly to one another, shared one common view – they disliked Roman rule. However else apart they were theologically and even practically – on this point they were agreed.

They were also agreed that Jesus, in gaining popularity among the masses, might prove to be less than helpful in their quest to martial the people in opposing the Romans. Both parties wanted a free Jewish state. They would iron out how theocratic that state would be after the Roman yoke was dissolved.

So it was, the two groups came together to to try and entangle Jesus in His words, so as to get the Jesus fly out of their joint ointment. If He answered a definitive “yes” it is right to pay taxes to Caesar – without qualification – then they could use that to sway the people against Him as a Roman sympathizer. And if He answered a definitive “no”, that it was unlawful to pay taxes to Caesar, they could offer Him up to the Romans as anti-Caesar. Either way, He would be out of their way.

Jesus won’t satisfy their imposed either/or construct. He knows full well that according to the Scriptures, Israel would only be under foreign rule as a chastisement for spiritual infidelity. A straightforward fact no one seemed to be addressing. They needed national repentance, not an anti-Roman movement or program. Rome wasn’t the problem, only the symptom. Sin was the problem. And only Jesus was the answer to that. Living fully under God’s rule would mitigate the need for foreign rule. But that wasn’t the answer they were looking for.

Given that they were nationally unrepentant, especially in the religious leadership – then their responsibility was to yield as fully to the foreign yoke as they could, until God would deliver them in grace. Just as they were called to do when under Babylonian rule. Because of sin, they were in this place where human rule was imposed upon them in judgment. The very same way human government has been established by God all along, due to the fact that men will not live voluntarily under the just rulership of God as individuals. So He ordains human government so as to prevent total anarchy until men’s hearts and minds are ruled by Christ. Until then, we will have to “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

Is this the ideal and permanent arrangement? No. One day, Christ will rule the nations. But it is what we live under until then.

Now how is that to be lived out by Christians? And the answer, as given here by Jesus, was lived out in principle by Daniel and others during the Babylonian captivity. And the guiding principle appears to be: If the State requires of me anything Scripture expressly forbids, I must refuse; and if the State forbids me to do anything the Scripture expressly requires, I must disobey. Beyond that, I flex as far as I possibly can – recognizing the fact that we are still in some form of exile until Christ returns.

Some will argue, “but what if the State is not acting justly?” This does not mitigate their authority as it is an imposed authority by God. Rome, was a far from just state. But we read of no Christian resistance to the State in general at any time. That is not our domain. Ought we to call out sin and injustice when we see it? Of course. But someone else’s wrong does not dissolve the order automatically. And thankfully, in our present society, we have many forms of redress available to us, those in Jesus’ day and circumstance did not.

The joy is, we do not need to live in constant chaffing. We recognize the temporary place we are in. This is not the end of the story. Christ is coming. All other kingdoms will eventually fall under Him. He will crush them all to dust.

Human government as we know it both a blessing and a chastisement. We must live under it as such. Praying for and hastening unto the Kingdom to come. In due time, all will be made right. Until then, we will often be found living in the cross-hairs as Jesus did. May His Spirit of Wisdom rest on us in the intervening years.