There is very much here in this section, and we may not be able to give equal time to all three questions that lay before us. So let us quickly delve into the first question about coinage. Calvin observes on verse fifteen: "'That they might entrap him in his words. The Pharisees,' perceiving that all their other attempts against Christ had been fruitless, at length concluded that the best and most expeditious method of destroying him was, to deliver him to the governor, as a seditious person and a disturber of the peace."

Now we must realize in this politicization of their opposition, there is much in the previous history of the geographic area that we must take note of. William Barclay, whose real skill and calling is in the area of social history, outlines the bitter past in the Palestine of Jesus's day. "When Herod the Great died in 4 BC, he had ruled all of Palestine, as a Roman tributary king. ... When he died he divided his kingdom into three."

In order to shorten the record, that portion of Palestine where Jerusalem was located became so mismanaged, that the Empire had to take direct control and levy the taxes directly. "The actual taxes which were imposed were three.

A ground tax, which consisted of 1/10 of all the grain and 1/5 of the wine and fruit.
An income tax which amounted to one per cent of a man's income.
A poll tax, which was levied on all men from 14 - 65 and all women from 12 - 65.

This poll tax was one denarius ... which everyone had to pay simply for the privilege of existing."

Now there appear to be several names for the poll tax levied here. Calvin uses the term tribute money and the Geneva Bible calls it the Ransom money in Exodus 30:13 where the census tax is established and described. Since Exodus clearly tells us that this particular ransom is to be paid to the Lord for the service of His sanctuary, we can appreciate Calvin's description:

"There was at that time, as we have seen under another passage, a great disputing among the Jews about the tribute-money; for, since the Romans had claimed for themselves the tribute-money, which God commanded to be paid to Himself under the Law of Moses, (Exodus 30:13,) the Jews everywhere complained that it was a shameful and intolerable crime for profane men to lay claim, in this manner, to a divine prerogative; besides that, as this payment of tribute, which was enjoined on them by the Law, was a testimony of their adoption, they looked upon themselves as deprived of an honor to which they had a just claim."

Further the immediate context of a violent revolution over this issue only two decades earlier still smoldered and simmered in the hearts of minds of Jewish patriots. "No tribute to the Romans", was still a rallying cry for the politically unstable which Barclay records. In American history - some of our own heroic extremists have and still do proclaim "No King but King Jesus".. Opposition to tyranny and taxation is always a popular rallying cry, one which the new administration better understands than the last! I would honestly hope that there will be less fear of government abuse and confiscatory taxation now that the vandals are gone from the seat of government. We can easily pay the $200,000 damages to the White House and feel good in doing so - because they no longer sit at the desks and computers they so eagerly damaged. At least, now, the administration of law is out of their grasp, and at their vandalism, even the liberal media are righfully indignant.

But I digress only to make a point - just as we in this country are so sorely divided between right and left, so too were the Jerusalem religious leaders also divided. Herodians, Priests, Sadducees, they all had different agendas which Jesus threatened. And so their combined delegation would question Him with difficult questions even as He had dealt with them earlier!

Calvin continues with his political insights from the text: "This trick of taking Christ by surprise is therefore continued by the Pharisees, that, in whatever way he reply as to the tribute money, they may lay snares for him. If he affirm that they ought not to pay, he will be convicted of sedition. If, on the contrary, he acknowledge it to be justly due, he will be held to be an enemy of his nation, and a betrayer of the liberty of his country. Their principal object is, to lead the people to dislike him. This is the entrapping to which the Evangelists refer; for they suppose that Christ is surrounded on all sides by nets, so that he can no longer escape."

I know that is a lot of background, but it is necessary before we get to the point! The question please! "Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? Shall we pay, or shall we not pay?" Sedition or treason is the hopeful trap they have set before Him. But, they have not anticipated the holy and righteous wisdom of the Christ. When He asks for a coin, He asks for a specific coin, the Denarius. This is the tribute coin of Calvin's vocabulary, and unlike many of the other area and local coins without any image, this particular coin which must be produced when asked for, does indeed have the image of Caesar minted upon it.

When I was young, and the paper money still had "Silver Certificate" printed at the top. You could go into any bank and demand real solid silver for your paper. And since the law of the land enforced the legality of the demand - you could not be refused.

Holding the tribute coin up before the crowd. Jesus simply asked, "Whose image and inscription is this?" By their own admission, the money as well as the authority to govern belonged to Caesar. Oh, how that word "Caesar's" must have scratched their throats in having to admit their subjection to Him. Do we barely get a hint of the crowds enjoyment in the last phrase of verse seventeen? The answer is beautiful in its simplicity and damning in its common sense. "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Calvin tells us that there is a whole world of sermons which may be derived from this report. "Christ's reply does not leave the matter open, but contains full instruction on the question which had been proposed. It lays down a clear distinction between spiritual and civil government, in order to inform us that outward subjection does not prevent us from having within us a conscience free in the sight of God. For Christ intended to refute the error of those who did not think that they would be the people of God, unless they were free from every yoke of human authority. In like manner, Paul earnestly insists on this point, that they ought not the less to look upon themselves as serving God alone, if they obey human laws, if they pay tribute, and bend the neck to bear other burdens (Romans 13:7.), In short, Christ declares that it is no violation of the authority of God, or any injury done to his service, if, in respect of outward government, the Jews obey the Romans."

Of this commentary, several sermons could well be developed. But time is short and we must move on to question two. This question two is also deeper than it first appears. The Sadducees take their question from the Jewish book of "Tobit", where as Dr Keener reminds us, "seven husbands of pious Sarah die one after the other."

Now the question is related to the ancient practice of levirate marriage which was meant to provide for the widows. I can well remember from my Father's study of our family genealogy that the final solution to an unsolvable family tracing hinged on a similar practice whereby an widower elder in the same church as one of my ancestors who died early, did marry the mother of his same named son, Robert. The family history was almost lost in that marital transaction because the young lad almost always referred to his adopted father as his real father. Only when the session records came to light did dad realize that James Lieper was not the father of Robert Forsyth, because the family records did not account for the last name of Lieper but left unwitting descendants to assume there was a James Forsythe in the lineage who never existed as such in our immediate family!

So I hope you appreciate that in the Jewish appreciation and special accounting of genealogy, the question was of some importance. However, the questioner was sloppy in his assumptions and for that reason Jesus definitely tells him that he is mistaken! Heaven is a different experience than life on earth, Jesus would definitely tell us. Marital relationships are not experiential in the spiritual realm He would have us know.

Jesus also goes further in dealing with the questioner, who in spite of his disbelief in eternal life, gives a supposition of the very concept he deplores. My commentators tell me that the answer that Jesus gives is more pregnant in meaning to the Oriental mind than too our Western assumptions. The very words "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob", definitely imply in the linguistic construction that the three continue to exist, otherwise, God could not be God to them still. Dr Cole addresses this concept in these words: "If God can still so describe Himself to Moses centuries after their death, this experience must still be valid. If so, these three patriarchs must still be in existence; and the guarantee of their 'eternal life' is not the nature of their experience of God, but the nature of the God whom they experienced. He is the God of the living because He is the living God Himself."

If any one would doubt the teaching of life after death, they mist ignore the clear witness of the Son of God Himself. Yet far too many do in fact do so because they will not have Jesus as Lord of their life and King of the universe. Sadly, the assumption that the dead cease to exist, is becoming more popular simply for the very reason that if there is no after life, it doesn't matter how one lives in this life. I always cringe when teenagers die tragic deaths and counselors pounce on their friends to help them deal with the tragedy. I was once asked to serve on such a team, if I would be willing to attend the required indoctrination so that every member could speak with one voice on the subject. Even as Jesus demonstrates here, we cannot abide false lies and assumptions, but must speak the truth in love whenever we are allowed by circumstance to hold up the Gospel of Grace.

Our third question of the morning leads to a wonderfully beautiful answer which demonstrates the true simplicity of the doctrines of law and grace. "Which is the first commandment of all?" In the simplicity of the Lord's answer we see outlined the two tablets of the Mosaic code. The first tablet which outlines our relationship to the Lord God of the Universe, and the second tablet which tells us how we are to relate to our fellow man. Dr Keener describes the technique of Jesus here: "Following Jewish interpretive techniques, Jesus links the two commandments (Deuteronomy 6:5, Leviticus 19: 18) by a common key word, 'love'. ... That many of Jesus hearers would recognize the truth of his reply makes it all the more difficult to dispute with him on the matter." Dr Cole observes that "the first questioner seems to have been a Herodian, the second a Sadducee. Mark simply tells us that this third questioner was a scribe".

Given the legalistic mind of the scribal community, the third questioner compliments our Lord on at least His answer to the last question. And given the complexity of the groups united against the Lord of all the earth, we may even suppose that the scribe has chuckled at how easily the other questions were turned away for doing the Lord any damage. His question at least has an honest ring to it and how the questioner took the Lord's final remark is not known to us. Look carefully at the invitation, the premise and the promise in the Lord's observation. "You are not far from the kingdom of God."

We do know from history that even from amongst the ruling class, there were those leaders who came over to the Church of Jesus Christ. And while it took some time for the Church to become one body in the years after the Lord's ascension, we may well understand the consternation of the Jewish authorities who wondered if the whole world would go after the Lord. Two million of the Jews possibly did do so in time. We may hope that this questioner was one of them.

One final lesson we may take from our text today. There are many questioners of our faith today if we would but listen and hear them. Certainly, some worldly questions are rude and crude meant to trip us up and give the questioners entertainment. And while we may become jaded and jared at the apathy and obstinacy all around us, let us remember to take every question seriously in the hopes that one of our questioners too may be "not far from the kingdom of God." May the Lord give us wisdom to listen, hear and give answer for the hope that is in us, and may we pray continually that our words and witness might ring true to those who are close to the kingdom and that the Spirit of our Lord may bring them in, for His glory. Amen.