0209 WISDOM BEATS LOGIC

WISDOM OVER LOGIC, 1-0

In this chapter, Jesus faces questions from various groups of Jewish leaders, each time outmaneuvering their theological traps. First, Jesus speaks a story aimed at the leaders as a whole. Then they send some of the Pharisees and of the Herodians together to ask an impossible question of Jesus.

For the moment, let’s not focus on the exact question, but on the preamble to it, based on who is asking the question. They say in verse 14,

“Teacher, we know that you are true and do not care about anyone’s opinion. For you are not swayed by appearances, but truly teach the way of God.”

That’s a laughable introduction, given the hypocrisy of it all. The significance of the question is based on the significance of the questioners. They are representatives of groups that are on opposite ends of a theological and political divide on this very topic. His answer will therefore be impossible. At least, it’s impossible if there are only two choices, A or non-A. So, which is it, Jesus? You must choose either A or non-A. There is nothing else.

But what if it’s a false choice? What if this is purely hypothetical, and doesn’t even need to be answered? It is only designed to be a trap. And the prologue to the question underscores the irony of it all. They butter up the Master, of all things, and use two points of logic to trap him into losing his followers, no matter what he answers. So they think.

They open and close with these two similar sayings: “You are true,” they say, and “[you] truly teach the way of God.” These bookends trap Jesus into saying one side or the other, as “true” and “from God.” That will drive away half of his followers, since Jesus could not speak sarcastically or be swayed by context, later saying that literally he didn’t mean what he said. 

In between those two phrases are the other side of the same coin: “[you] do not care about anyone’s opinion,” they sneer, and “you are not swayed by appearances.” Under those conditions, he has no room to give a politically-measured response. He must say “A” and offend half of the people (those who agree with the Pharisees) or say “non-A” and offend the other half (those who agree with the Herodians).

Then they ask the question carefully, with only two options: “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Should we pay them, or should we not?” Yes or no. That’s the only way to answer the questions, right? Those are the only options they gave.

The greatest irony of the moment is that the two parties who are joining forces are pretty much on opposite ends of the theological/political spectrum. Pharisees and Herodians cannot agree on anything, ever. Except for this one thing: both groups want to do away with Jesus, or at least discredit him. As they say, politics makes strange bedfellows. 

The irony is that they themselves are “A” versus “non-A,” and yet the two groups have found a third way by inventing this question. So you might say that logically they are providing a context of thinking outside of the binary box, even as they present a strictly binary conundrum for the Master. Their hypocrisy is overwhelming, but they are willing to overlook it for the sake of an effective trap that will service both parties.

Delicious, isn’t it? And Jesus does not disappoint. He introduces a third element to the debate before he even begins: Bring me a coin and let me look at it. They bring him one, and he opens with a question (as we have noticed him do so many times): “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” Take note that Jesus has now forced THEM to be the ones who are saying the self-incriminating answer: “Caesar’s.”

So Jesus says to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s,” (implying, though not stating, that it is reasonable to pay taxes, since the coin belongs to the Roman government), “and [render] to God the things that are God’s.” In effect, Jesus distances himself from the twofold dilemma and answers, Not A OR non-A, but some sort of A AND non-A.

And Mark writes their response. “And they marveled at him.” I can imagine their debriefing meeting after the Q&A was done. “What, exactly, happened there?” “How did He do that?” “I didn’t see that coming, even when he called for the coin to be brought.”

And, as the devil did back after the 40 days’ of temptation, they left him “for a more opportune time.” 

Final score: Wisdom over Logic, 1 to 0.