Everybody loves a debate between friends and enemies they know. Presidential debates in the United States are some of the most watched of televised controversies. The Kennedy-Nixon debates preceding the 1960 Presidential Election are probably the most famous in modern times, and may even be responsible for our present interest in seeing the presidential candidates go toe-to-toe in taking on the important issues that face the leaders of our world today. The problem is that most politicians, while making a great show of answering these questions, in reality evade taking a stand on any of the issues, because they fear what effect their words will have on the electorate. In other words, they fear the people. Such was true in Jesus’ day, as well, except for one thing. Jesus went toe-to-toe with his accusers and didn’t evade anything. It cost him his life, but the Gospel narratives show that Jesus did, indeed, stand for something, unlike what we see today in American politics or in 1st century AD Judaism.
The emissaries of the Sanhedrin understood that Jesus’ Parable of the Vineyard (Luke 20:9-18) reflected poorly upon them, and they sought to lay hands upon Jesus and arrest him (Luke 20:16, 19). However, since the people viewed Jesus as a prophet, they feared seizing him would lead to a violent uprising, so they stalled for more time.
In Luke 20:20 we find that part of this group of emissaries were Pharisees, specifically the scribes (i.e. rabbis) of the group (cf. Matthew 22:15-16; Mark 12:13). They watched Jesus. The Greek word is paratereo (G3906) and is used in the New Testament with evil intent. For example, the word is used of the scribes watching Jesus to see if he would heal on the Sabbath day, hoping to accuse him of wrongdoing (Luke 6:7). It is used again when a chief Pharisee, who invited Jesus to a dinner in Luke14:1, hoping thereby to accuse him of breaking the Sabbath law (cf. Luke 14:2-4). It is also used of Jews watching the gates of Damascus, hoping to capture Paul, so they could kill him (Acts 9:24). So, these men were observing Jesus with malicious intent.
These same rabbis conspired with a political group called the Herodians and sent some of their disciples with them as spies. These men went to Jesus and were supposed to pretend to be sincere men, who were influenced by his teaching, putting forth a leading question that would condemn him no matter how he replied to it.
Now the word of God speaks against both lying (Exodus 20:16) and setting traps for one’s brother (Leviticus 19:14; Deuteronomy 27:18). Yet, the judges of the supreme court of the land, the Sanhedrin, sent men to Jesus to lie, pretending they were something they were not, and, through their lie, they sought to lay a trap for Jesus that would trip him up in his words. The question they asked is this: “Is it lawful for us to pay the tribute tax to Caesar or not?” (Luke 20:21-22)
This tax was no ordinary tax. It was a head tax one paid, simply because he was alive, and it had to be paid in Roman coin. The Jews revolted against Rome cir. 6 AD, when Rome first implemented this tax in Judea and Galilee, because the very intent of it insulted their faith. It was a hated tax. So, if Jesus said, ‘Yes, it is lawful to do so,’ he would not only lose much of his support, especially among the zealots of Galilee, but he would be made to play the fool. Imagine, the Messiah submitting to a gentile king—Caesar! What an oxymoron! Such an idea had no place in a Jewish worldview.
On the other hand, if Jesus said, ‘No, it is unlawful to do so,’ the Jewish authorities could turn him over to the governor, Pilate, for making seditious statements, and telling folks not to pay tribute to Caesar. The question seemed to be self-condemning, no matter which answer Jesus chose. Jesus’ reply will be the subject of my next study.
Smoodock's Blog 