<aside> 👉
Click below for a PDF version
</aside>
See note on Mark 3:6 for information on the Pharisees and the Herodians.
The religious leadership sent a select group of Pharisees and Herodians “to catch him in his words.” This has to be the interpretive grid for understanding both the question and the answer. It would be good to be reminded that a trick question is likely not going to provide an answer that should become doctrine for all time.
The introduction to the question is like setting bait for a trap. Just as a fisherman uses bait to attract fish, humanity uses "bait" to lure their prey. In this case, they assumed Jesus would be softened by the "kind" words. We will see His response in the next verse.
After their empty words of praise, they get to the point: “Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” This is a politically charged question in any age, aimed at building an "insurrection" case. Political enemies can always twist statements and actions of opposition into "insurrection," and this is their plan. If Jesus says it is lawful to pay tribute, it could anger those who opposed Roman rule, while saying it is unlawful could be seen as rebellion against Roman authorities.
Jesus recognized their hypocrisy and asked for a coin. He inquired whose likeness and inscription were on it. When they responded that it was Caesar's, Jesus told them to give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God's. This response astonished them and left them with no grounds to accuse him.
This was a middle-of-the-road non-answer, not a doctrine for all time. It is an answer that does nothing but elicit questions: What is Caesar's and what is God's? The answer is not much more measurable than His answer to the elders in Mark 11:33.
For the first time, we are introduced to the Sadducees. Biblically, what we know about them is summarized in Acts 23:8: "For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both." Outside of this, we know that they were strict Torah observers, adhering only to what was written in the Torah (the first five books of Moses). They did not recognize the Writings and the Prophets as biblical texts. Because of this limited scriptural canon, they rejected certain theological concepts that were developed later, such as the resurrection. Additionally, they rejected Pharisaic Judaism, which included an extensive oral tradition that provided interpretations and applications for every biblical instruction.
Both here and Acts 23:8 we are told that they do not believe in the resurrection. This information is necessary for understanding the setting.
The Sadducees start their trap by referencing scripture, much like the Pharisees and Herodians did with kindness in verses 15-17. They mention a scenario from Deuteronomy 25:5-6 about the death of a brother. This passage forms the basis for the kinsman-redeemer doctrine. Note that this biblical reference is a setup to their fictitious question, which begins in verse 20.
The hypothetical (and mostly silly) question posed by the Sadducees is designed to mock the resurrection. They use the tool of exaggeration to prove something false, a rhetorical method known as “reductio ad absurdum”. This technique takes an argument to its logical extreme to demonstrate its absurdity.