Bearing the Image of a Living God

Introduction

Our text today belongs to a longer section that includes next week’s text and ends at the end of chapter 22. It has four sections, two of which we will cover today and two next time. First, the Pharisees approach Jesus with a question in order to stump him, and he answers with great wisdom. Second, the Sadducees do the same thing and Jesus is also able to debunk them. Third, a lawyer form among the Pharisees asks a questions which Jesus is able to answer with wisdom, showing Jesus knowledge and agreement with the OT Scriptures. Finally, Jesus asks the Pharisees a difficult question which they are unable to answer and this brings an end to the attempts to trip Jesus up with difficult questions.

Pay Attention to the Image

Matthew 22:15–22

After a direct confrontation of Jesus’ authority did not work and only embarrassed this group of priests, city elders, and Pharisees, they try a softer, more sinister approach. They now come to Jesus calling him teacher and, no doubt to please the crowd, they flatter Jesus as one who teaches the truth from God without care of the opinions of man. This is praise rooted in the Law of Moses, where justice was to be determined without “looking at the face”, which is an expression that we may find relatable. Just as you might look at someones face to see whether they agree with you or not, the Law called for justice and righteousness to be pursued regardless of what others might think. This is high praise indeed from those who would have Jesus killed within a week, but we must not understand these comments to be genuine.

Under this cover of flattery, they put a question to Jesus. Just as their question about his authority was not asked with a desire for the truth, verse 15 tells us that they asked him this to “trap” or “entangle” him in his words.

So, under this pretense, they ask him a question that we might call a catch 22, that is, no matter how he answers he will get in trouble.

The question is this: is it lawful to pay taxes to the Roman Emperor Caesar or not?

“Caesar” was originally the surname of the first Roman Emperor Julius Caesar, but had since become the royal title. In this time period, the emperor was Tiberius Caesar the son of Caesar Augustus.

When we look at the OT attitude towards this question, it is clear the answer is “yes”. But the reason for this answer is because in the OT, anytime Israel was under the authority of a pagan nation it was always because of God’s sovereign will in response to Israel’s rebellion against him. This being the case, to pay taxes to Caesar was essentially to admit that they were still under the just judgement of God. It would mean that they were not victims of Rome’s oppressive rule, but rather were receiving the wage that God had promised in response to repeated disobedience without repentance. Ever since the Babylonian captivity, the Jews had never really been free. While at first this was recognized as being God’s response to their faithlessness, over time a different attitude had emerged: one encouraged by the successful Jewish revolts in the days of the famous Maccabees. Since then, a common attitude had emerged that saw Israel as a victim of unjust suffering by the hands of pagan nations. So it was common for many Jews to be against the paying of taxes to a pagan regime. If Jesus were to answer that taxes should be paid to Caesar, this would be taken as very offensive and unpopular among the nationalistic Jews in Jerusalem, and so his popularity would take a hit. Once Jesus is out of favour with the crowds, they would be able to safely arrest him.

On the other hand, if Jesus were to go with the crowds and openly teach that taxes should not be paid to Caesar, then it would be easy to report him to the Roman authorities as a dangerous political rebel. The Roman’s dealt violently with rebels and zealots, and so the Pharisees feel like they got him. By putting themselves in the conversation as simply some eager listeners ready to learn, they remove themselves from any controversy that may result.

Jesus is aware of their sinister motives and calls them out on it. He identifies their hypocrisy, since they are pretending to approach him with a humble attitude when they are merely trying to trap him. But he does answer them, and not only is his answer masterful in slipping out of their trap, but it is also an important moment for teaches us how Christian should approach the same question.

Jesus calls for a denarius. While the temple tax was paid with the a currency which used the temple drachma, taxes to Caesar were paid with the Roman currency. The Roman denarius of the time had a picture of Tiberius Caesar on the front which declared him to be the son of the divine Caesar Augustus and high priest. This currency was offensive to the Jews for obvious reasons, as to use money you would have to use money that literally had an icon of an emperor who called himself a demi-god and a high priest. Jesus asks whose image is on the coin, to which they reply that it is Caesar’s. Jesus than answers: give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.

What does this statement mean? By pointing out the image on the coin Jesus is implying that the tax should be paid. However, his argumentation for doing so is different from what was the case in the OT. Jesus is pointing out the offensive image and essentially asks, “why do you want this? Why would you hold this back from him? It has his picture on it, so why keep it?” To any disciple’s listening in, this teaching boils down to the Christian’s rejection of worldly riches as a principle. Although God may bless a Christian with wealth, it is not to be pursued or eagerly held on to. God’s blessings no longer take the form of material wealth, but rather the promise of a heavenly Kingdom. Why hold onto what is worldly when God has promised us much greater things.

Besides this, Jesus introduces the Christian attitude towards civil government which is further explained by the Apostle Paul in Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2: 13-17. It is God’s will that, while we live in the exile of this current age and world, we submit to the governing authorities. Romans 13:7

Romans 13:7 ESV

Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

However, this does have a limit. Jesus also says to give to God the things that belong to God. What belongs to God? Well, everything does, specifically us, his image bearers. God is to have our unconditional submission and obedience just as worldly governments are to have our taxes. Now since all things belong to God, it then stands to reason that obedience to God comes before obedience to the state. Christians are to obey the government unless it compromises their obedience to God. Not unless it compromises your view of what the government should demand, obedience to the government is not conditional on how free you think you should be. It is conditional only on obedience to God. In this way, Jesus has not only defended paying taxes, he has also given us a new reason to obey worldly governments as part of our submission to God and shows us the principle that limits how far we will go to obey them. First we give God his due, and then we take care to give worldly authorities their due, recognizing that no authority exists but that which was given by God himself.

This masterful answer brings only more adoration from the crowds, not necessarily in agreement, but in wonder of his answer which cannot be contradicted. The Pharisees leave him for now, defeated.

Hope in the God of the Living

Matthew 22:23–33

At this point, another group steps in; the rivals to the Pharisees, the Sadducees. If you do not remember, we looked at these guys some time ago. Although little is known of them, we know they took a very naturalistic approach to their religion and mainly accepted only the Pentateuch as inspired Scripture. They denied the resurrection from the dead as well as the existence of angels or spirits. They come to Jesus with a trick question of their own.

They bring to mind the practice of leverite marriage in Law. Basically, if a man’s brother died without having any children with his wife, you were obliged to marry his widow. The first son born to her would be considered the son and heir of the dead brother, and any other children would be considered your heirs. This was so that the dead brother would have a son to inherit him and so his lineage would not die out. While this may not seem like a great concern for us, this was a big deal for them. To have your family line die out was to be forgotten from history and have your inheritance given to someone else. It was a erasing of identity for the one who died from among the heritage of God’s people, and so this practice insured that an Israelite’s family line continued.

The Sadducees bring up a story that they probably got from the Apocryphal book of Tobit. In that story, a woman is haunted by a demon that kills her husbands on their wedding night before they have a chance to have a child through her. After 6 husbands, all trying to fulfill the leverite duty die, Tobit is directed by an angel named Raphael on how to expel the demon and so marry her. That story has little to do with what the Sadducees are bringing up except for a dilemma they see in how it would effect one’s view of the resurrection. If all these men are married to the woman, but none of them were able to produce an heir, whose wife would she be in the resurrection?

Now, this is only a predicament if you make certain assumptions about the nature of the resurrection. It is only a problem if the resurrected world is just like our world, but this is not the case. The day of judgement when the dead are raised is a day in which the order of the world will be quite different from the age we live in now. Paul says 1 Cor 15:44

1 Corinthians 15:44 NIV 2011

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

While a spiritual body is an actual, physical body just as Christ’s body was, it is also quite different. We see that in Jesus resurrected state he was able to travel by some kind of unknown means, appearing to the disciples in a locked room. However, he still has a physical body that was able to be touched, that ate and drank, and even bore the scares of his crucifixion (although these were probably kept as a proof to the disciples, not because all spiritual bodies will bear the marks of previous injury).

One difference between a physical and spiritual body is the sexual nature of our current bodies that is necessary for reproduction and to carry out the gospel picture of marriage and family. Jesus shows just how foolish a challenge they are making as their thinking is so bound to the current state of the world. Although marriage is good, it is a temporary thing that is meant to point us forward to an age of perfection, when all that marriage teaches us is realized and perfected in a heavenly city dwelling with our God and our true family.

Interestingly, Jesus likens our resurrected nature to angels, whom the Sadducees also didn’t believe in.

But Jesus doesn’t stop with defending the resurrection. He directs them to the story of Moses and the burning bush in Exodus 3. This was a part of the OT that the Sadducees accepted as Scripture, and so while Jesus could have defaulted to many other parts of the OT to prove the resurrection, he answers them from what they accepted.

Jesus points out the way in which God introduces himself to Moses. He is YHWH, the I AM the I AM, who is the God of Moses’ ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God does not speak of them as people without life, who are currently gone from existence without either spirit or life. God made promises to those men to always be their God, which must imply life beyond death. Otherwise, he would no longer be their God. While marriage vows end with the death of one spouse, the promises of our God reach beyond the grave.

Even the idea of leverite marriage point to this. Why does it matter if a man’s line among the people of God is forgotten or disappears? What concept can there by of doing right for the dead if the dead no longer exist? Who is the leverite marriage for? If its for the woman, why is the firstborn son an heir of the dead man? It only makes sense to raise up his offspring to keep his line among the people of God if he continues to be one of God’s people even beyond death.

While this point alone does not prove a future day of resurrection, it does prove the Sadducees wrong in their denial of life beyond death. If God is truly the God of our forefathers, than he must still be keeping his promises to them, including the promise to forever be their God. Heb 11:13-16 describes those men whom God made promises to:

Hebrews 11:13–16 ESV

These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.

This is our ultimate hope; life from the God of the living.

Conclusion

Putting these two parts of this section together, we see ourselves as Christians identified as bearers of the image of the living God. This carries with it both a duty and a promise in hope. Unbelief will always obscure both of these realities, but true faith in God’s promises to us in Christ makes them clear and real and ready for us to live in. Duty becomes a delight when motivated by a sure hope and promise which will one day be made visible with eyes made new for a life of glory and immortality in the God who loved us.