Mark 12:13-17
(A Bible Study Led by Dr. Larry Reynolds)
January 10, 2013
In
our previous study we began looking at that part of Mark’s Gospel where the
conflict between Jesus and the religious establishment in Jerusalem begins to
intensify. It is important that
everything from Mark 11 to the end of Mark’s Gospel focuses on a single week in
the life of Jesus.
·
Sunday
Jesus entered Jerusalem to the praise of the multitudes on what we now call
Palm Sunday
·
Monday
He drove the sellers of sacrificial animals and money-changers out of the court
of Gentiles in the Temple area
·
Tuesday
He had a series of confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders.
·
Wednesday
He spent the day in private instruction of His disciples
·
Thursday
was the day of the Passover celebration.
That evening He celebrated the Passover with the disciples in an upper
room on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem and then went to the Garden of Gethsemane where
He was arrested.
·
Friday
was the day of the crucifixion.
·
Saturday
was a day of silence.
·
Sunday
was the day of the resurrection.
We
are currently in that part of Mark that focuses on the events of Tuesday of
that week. On that day the religious
leaders asked Jesus a series of questions, attempting to discredit him in the
eyes of His growing number of followers.
Warren Wiersbe in his commentary on Mark classifies this series of
questions this way:
·
A
question of authority (11:27-12:12) – They wanted to know why Jesus thought He
had the authority to do the things He was doing and say the things He was
saying.
·
A
question of responsibility (12:13-17) – This question had to do with the issue
of Jews paying taxes to the Romans.
·
A
question of eternity (12:18-27) – This question had to do with the resurrection
from the dead.
·
A
question of priority (12:28-34) – This question had to do with which was the
greatest commandment.
Then, toward the end of chapter
12, Jesus turn the tables on the religious leaders asked a question about them
(12:35-37).
Mark 12:13-17
Verse 13
“And they sent…” – Having failed to discredit Jesus
with the question regarding authority, the larger delegation from the Sanhedrin
(see 11:27) designated a smaller group to try to discredit Jesus.
“…some of the Pharisees and Herodians…” – This is an amazing
statement. It would be like John Boehner
and Harry Reid teaming up!
In first century Judaism could
not have been two groups further apart in their thinking than the Pharisees and
Herodians...in first century Israel was occupied by Rome... the Herodians
welcomed the occupation...these were the people, primarily from the upper
classes, who were profiting financially from their relationship with Rome...did
all they could to accommodate the Romans...their name, Herodians, came as a
result of their support of Herod, the appointed Roman ruler of the area...
The Pharisees view of Rome was just the
opposite...saw Rome as idolatrous and wicked and their occupation of Israel as
an affront to God the only rightful ruler of Israel...a sect of the Pharisees,
known as the Zealots, were actively engaged in a revolt against Rome...
In light of that, not
surprising the Pharisees and Herodians would have completely different views on
paying taxes to Rome...the Herodians viewed doing so as a good investment...
the Pharisees viewed doing so as heresy...
“…in order
to trap Him…” - Neither the Pharisees nor the Herodians were about to
change their views on paying the poll tax based on the answer of Jesus to their
question...but they did not come for information or instruction, came only for
purpose of trying to trap into making a statement that would discredit Him in the
eyes of the multitudes or the Romans and perhaps even among His most faithful
followers…
For in his group of 12
disciples He had people with strong opinions on this very issue...Simon the
Zealot would have agreed with the Pharisees...Matthew the tax-collector would
have agreed with the Herodians...and no doubt the other 10 and the multitudes
around him and certainly the Roman authorities who were always looking had
their opinions about these matters...and so they came trying to trap Jesus...
The word translated “trap”
in an interesting word that is used only in this verse. It’s a word that was used to describe the
catching of a wild animal in a cleverly constructed trap.
Verse 14 - Notice
how they approached Him...in their attempt to appear as people sincerely
seeking instruction, their lips dripped with insincere flattery..."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.”...can't you just hear the
insincerity, the false flattery in that statement?...ironically, what they said
about Jesus was correct...He was truthful...His teaching was not influenced by
popular opinion...He did teach the way of God...but the point is, they didn't
really mean any of those things...
There's a lesson to be learned
from their negative example... watch out for those people whose lips are always
dripping with flattering statements...beware of those who constantly pat you on
the back...as someone has said, "Chances are when a [person] slaps
you on the back he wants you to cough up something." [And the Angels Were Silent, Lucado, p.90]
It is possible for kind words
to mask a cold, manipulative, uncaring heart...and when the words are too kind,
when the flattery is too thick be very cautious...for the flattering words
directed toward Jesus that Tuesday of Holy Week, came from the same lips which
shouted "Crucify Him" just three days later...one
person said it well..."Treat [flattery] as cautiously as you would a
jewel-embedded scabbard for within both are found a sword." [And the Angels Were Silent, Lucado, p.90]
The
following story is from Max Lucado's book And the Angels Were Silent...about
a woman named Lucy Lambert Hale...Lucy lived in Washington, D.C. in the
1860's...Lucy was youngest daughter of John P. Hale who was a senator from New
Hampshire...she was one of the most sought after young women in the nation's
capital and there was a long list of impressive, aspiring young men trying to
win her heart...one was Will Chandler who later became Secretary of the Navy
and a United States Senator...another was Oliver Wendell Holmes who became one
of our nation's most prominent jurists...but it was another man, a man named
John, who eventually won her heart, at least for awhile...
John
also left his mark on the history of our nation...his legacy was one of smooth,
flattering words and cruel, deadly actions ...his penchant for flattery was
evident in first letter he ever sent to Lucy Hale...was sent on Valentine's Day
in 1862... listen to what he wrote: My Dear Miss Hale,
Were it not for the license which a
time-honored observance of this day allows, I [would not be writing] you this
poor note.
You resemble in a most remarkable degree a
lady, very dear to me, now dead, and your close resemblance to her surprised me
the first time I saw you. This must be
my apology for any apparent rudeness noticeable --to see you had indeed
afforded me a melancholy pleasure, if you can conceive of such and should we
never meet nor I see you again -- believe me, I shall always associate you in
my memory, with her, who was very beautiful, and whose face, like your own I
trust, was a faithful index of gentleness and amiability.
With a thousand wishes for your future
happiness I am, to you--- a
Stranger
But
with words like honey and a fierce determination John made sure he did not
remain a stranger to her...eventually they became engaged...
But
from the very beginning their relationship was flawed... while John was kind
with his words, his actions were harsh... he was possessive and jealous...his
promised one thing but delivered just the opposite...eventually Lucy became
tired of his abusive behavior, broke off the engagement, and moved to Spain
where her father had been appointed as an ambassador..
.
And
John?...his full name was John Wilkes Booth and a few months after their
engagement was broken, he assassinated President Lincoln...John Wilkes Booth is
a perfect reminder that sometimes words of honey are used to mask a heart of
steel...
“Is it
lawful to pay a poll-tax to Caesar, or not?" – The word translated poll tax is
kenson from which our word census comes. It was a
head tax which Rome placed on all conquered peoples. This empire-wide tax 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. Luke 2:1–6).[1] This tax was unpopular because it typified
the Jews’ subjugation to Rome (cf. Acts 5:37).[2]
Verse
15
“…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.[3]
Verse 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.”[4]
Verse 17 - Someone has the statement "Render to Caesar
the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's"
is the "...single most influential political statement ever made in
the history of the world! It was
decisive and determinative in shaping Western civilization." [Hughes, p.103] In a single
sentence Jesus spelled out the appropriate relationship between civil
government and religious institutions.
There are obviously two parts to this statement—one directed toward the
Pharisees and one directed toward the Herodians.
“Render to
Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” was directed toward the Pharisees. Their view was that religion should control
civil government. If they had their way, the Temple
would have been the center of government and the priests would have been the
decision makers... they believed that government apart from religious control
was not legitimate... they are not unlike those people in the Islamic community
who believe civil government must be subjected to religious authorities (such
as in Iran) and some radical Christians who prefer a theocracy over a republic
or a democracy…
And
in saying “...render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s...” Jesus was
saying to Pharisees, “You are wrong when
you think that government exists as merely an extension of your religious
views. It has a different purpose than that.” I Peter 2:14 says that government exists for “...the
punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.”...not
talking about punishing people for holding wrong religious beliefs/convictions
and praising for holding right beliefs/conviction...talking about conduct in
relation to others...it’s the primary role of gov’t to keep people from acting
in ways that infringe on the rights and freedoms of others...
Government does not exist to
propagate any particular religious point of view, even the one I hold...it
exists to provide a peaceful, orderly society where differing religious views
can compete with each other in an atmosphere of fairness...So “...render
to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s...” is a rebuke of the Pharisees
who wanted civil government to be controlled by religion...but that’s just half
of what Jesus said...
“...render ... to God the things
that are God’s...” was directed toward the
Herodians. The Herodians’ view of
government was just the opposite of the Pharisees...they had essentially sold
out to Rome...they had no problem compromising their religious convictions for
the sake of loyalty to government…for the Herodians, allegiance to Rome became
more important than their allegiance to God...we must never forget that while
government has a legitimate function, it must never have our highest
allegiance...our highest allegiance must be to God and to God alone...and to
drape the cross of Jesus Christ with the flag of any nation, even this nation
which I love and of which I am extremely proud to be a citizen, is to border on
heresy...“...render ... unto God the things that are God’s...” is a
rebuke of those who wanted religion controlled by civil government…
Conclusion
Basically
there are only three ways for government and religion to relate to each
other...every nation which has ever existed as followed one of these three
models...
- Government
over religion
- This is the model which permeated the world when the church was
born...it resulted in the persecution and death of many Christians who
refused to pledge allegiance to Rome over allegiance to Christ...in our
day this model followed in most communist countries like China where
churches need permits to operate and where persecution of Christians and
other religious groups frequently occurs...this was the way of the
Herodians…
- Government
under religion
– This is the model which permeated the world during the days of the Holy
Roman Empire...this model also resulted in persecution...the only
difference was instead of being the persecuted, Christians became the
persecutors, torturing and killing hundreds of thousands of people who
refused to submit to the orthodoxy of the day...this model is evident in
our world today where Islamic extremists control governments such as in
Iran and Pakistan…this was the way of the Pharisees…
- Government
and religion separate from each other – This is the model wisely
selected by the founders of our nation...not the state over the
church...not the church over the state...but the state and the church
existing side by side, separate from each other, and neither having
control over the other...and this model is rooted in the teachings of
Jesus...
[1]
Utley, R. J. D. (2000). Vol. Volume 2:
The Gospel According to Peter: Mark and I
& II Peter. Study Guide Commentary Series (142). Marshall, Texas: Bible
Lessons International.
[2]
Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1985). The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An
Exposition of the Scriptures (Mk 12:14). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
[3] Utley,
R. J. D. (2000). Vol. Volume 2: The Gospel According to Peter: Mark and I
& II Peter. Study Guide Commentary Series (143). Marshall, Texas: Bible
Lessons International.
[4]
Utley, R. J. D. (2000). Vol. Volume 2:
The Gospel According to Peter: Mark and I
& II Peter. Study Guide Commentary Series (143). Marshall, Texas: Bible
Lessons International.
