"Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's [etc]"-What's your interpretation of that story?

[kaylasdad99]

@BrainGlutton

N.B.: Caesar is better than Christ and Judas is better than Caesar.

I thought only Tina Fey was better than Jesus.

[BrainGlutton]

@kaylasdad99

I thought only Tina Fey was better than Jesus.

And the Beatles, of course. But my point was (and I’m basing this on Leon Rosselson’s take, which is very different from Aslan’s) that Caesar was a ruler and Judas was a rebel and that makes both of them more useful and valuable than an otherworldly mystic trying to save your afterlife-soul.

[Not_Carlson]

I’m surprised no one’s brought up the other famous response to the issue of paying taxes. In this case it’s in regard to the paying of the temple tax, so the issue is a little different, but there are parallels.

Matthew 17:
24 And when they were come to Caper’na-um, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, **Then are the children free. **
27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.

Again, we have people challenging Jesus (or, in this case, one of his followers) on whether he recognizes the obligation to pay tax. Possibly, as with the story in Matthew 22, this was intended as a trap, ie., if Peter had claimed his master was exempt from the temple tax then this could have been used to accuse Jesus of being in defiance of the law, but by claiming that his master did pay the temple tax, Peter was giving Jesus’ enemies opportunity to refute his divinity.

Jesus’ response is basically “as the son of God, I shouldn’t really need to pay a temple tribute, but let’s not rock the boat.” The miracle (take it or leave it) was probably intended to make the point that, while agreeing to pay the tribute, he was still god’s son.

Parallels to the other story:

• Responding to a trick question by first getting someone else to provide the basis for his answer.
• Acknowledging that it’s best to pay your taxes to avoid trouble.
• Turning people’s attention to god.

[BrainGlutton]

@Not_Carlson

Parallels to the other story:

• Responding to a trick question by first getting someone else to provide the basis for his answer.

The stereotype about Jews answering a question with a question is that old?!

[Sampiro]

@BrainGlutton

The stereotype about Jews answering a question with a question is that old?!

You thought it started last Thursday, maybe?

[Not_Carlson]

@BrainGlutton

The stereotype about Jews answering a question with a question is that old?!

Really?
I didn’t actually know that was a Jewish stereotype.
(Or maybe I have heard it somewhere . . . Can’t remember.)

Is it one that’s used to denigrate Jews, or is it one that Jewish people own?

[BrainGlutton]

@Not_Carlson

Really?
I didn’t actually know that was a Jewish stereotype.
(Or maybe I have heard it somewhere . . . Can’t remember.)

Is it one that’s used to denigrate Jews, or is it one that Jewish people own?

Both, to the extreme.

[Not_Carlson]

Thanks.
That’s interesting.

[David_H_Singanas]

Please God, no! In my ELCA congregation we are quite content with our 15-20 min sermons, thank you very much (I have been in Pentecostal services with the 45 min sermons - that wasn’t all that much fun).
[/QUOTE]

My Son…
I don’t think a 15-20 minute address is called a sermon. You must be thinking
of a “homily.”

[Nava]

@Not_Carlson

Really?
I didn’t actually know that was a Jewish stereotype.
(Or maybe I have heard it somewhere . . . Can’t remember.)

Is it one that’s used to denigrate Jews, or is it one that Jewish people own?

Me either, I’m used to hearing it about Jesuits and Gallegos (who are also known to answer “yes/no” questions with “it depends”; I mean Gallegos as in “the people from NW Spain”, not “Spaniards”).

… maybe it’s Gallegos who are the Lost Tribe?

[Measure_for_Measure]

@BrainGlutton

I read in the Amazon reviews of Aslan’s book that while he calls Jesus a “zealot,” he emphasizes that Jesus was not of the Zealot Party, which did not emerge until 30 years after his death.

If that’s true, then, what’s the deal with Simon Zelotes?

And I’ve read a theory that Judas Iscariot got his name from being one of the Sicarii (carriers of a kind of dagger called a sicarius), who were a hyperextreme faction of the Zealots, actually practicing terrorism and assassination. (Another theory is that it just means he came from the town of Kerioth.)

And according to Wiki, the contemporary historian Flavius Josephus dated the Zealots from 6 AD.

FWIW, Reza Aslan will be appearing at (members only) TPM Prime on Thursday. If I can remember, I’ll try to put my version of your first question into the queue this evening.

[TokyoBayer]

@Not_Carlson

Again, we have people challenging Jesus (or, in this case, one of his followers) on whether he recognizes the obligation to pay tax. Possibly, as with the story in Matthew 22, this was intended as a trap, ie., if Peter had claimed his master was exempt from the temple tax then this could have been used to accuse Jesus of being in defiance of the law, but by claiming that his master did pay the temple tax, Peter was giving Jesus’ enemies opportunity to refute his divinity.

Jesus’ response is basically “as the son of God, I shouldn’t really need to pay a temple tribute, but let’s not rock the boat.” The miracle (take it or leave it) was probably intended to make the point that, while agreeing to pay the tribute, he was still god’s son.

Looking at this strictly from a historical point of view, unlike the “Render unto Caesar” account which is shared with earlier written Mark, the coin in the fish miracle unique to Matthew, it sounds like this story could have been added by Matthew with the intent of demonstrating the divinity of Jesus whereas the question posed in the OP is much more likely to be an actual teaching.

It doesn’t seem the points of the story are similar enough so it’s hard to project the meaning from the coin in the fish story to the “render to Caesar” account.

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@TokyoBayer

the coin in the fish miracle unique to Matthew, it sounds like this story could have been added by Matthew with the intent of demonstrating the divinity of Jesus whereas the question posed in the OP is much more likely to be an actual teaching.

It doesn’t seem the points of the story are similar enough so it’s hard to project the meaning from the coin in the fish story to the “render to Caesar” account.

So you’re saying it was a red herring?

[MilTan]

@Measure_for_Measure

FWIW, Reza Aslan will be appearing at (members only) TPM Prime on Thursday. If I can remember, I’ll try to put my version of your first question into the queue this evening.

Here’s what Aslan has to say specifically about Simon the Zealot’s epithet (sorry for no page numbers; I only have the Kindle edition):

[QUOTE=Zealot, Kindle location 1639]
… another Simon, known as “the Zealot,” a designation meant to signal his commitment to the biblical doctrine of zeal, not his association with the Zealot Party, which would not exist for another thirty years…
[/quote]

And, for what it’s worth, here’s his definition of “zeal”:

[QUOTE=ibid, Kindle location 828]
Zeal implied a strict adherence to the Torah and the Law, a refusal to serve any foreign master—to serve any human master at all—and an uncompromising devotion to the sovereignty of God. To be zealous for the Lord was to walk in the blazing footsteps of the prophets and heroes of old, men and women who tolerated no partner to God, who would bow to no king save the King of the World, and who dealt ruthlessly with idolatry and with those who transgressed God’s law. The very land of Israel was claimed through zeal, for it was the zealous warriors of God who cleansed it of all foreigners and idolaters, just as God demanded. […]

These zealots should not be confused with the Zealot Party that would arise sixty years later, after the Jewish Revolt in 66 C.E. During Jesus’s lifetime, zealotry did not signify a firm sectarian designation or political party. It was an idea, an aspiration, a model of piety inextricably linked to the widespread sense of apocalyptic expectation that had seized the Jews in the wake of the Roman occupation. […] God’s reign could only be ushered in by those with the zeal to fight for it.
[/quote]

[TokyoBayer]

@The_Other_Waldo_Pepper

So you’re saying it was a red herring?

Well, who am I to minnowize a Bible account?

[ISiddiqui]

@MilTan

Here’s what Aslan has to say specifically about Simon the Zealot’s epithet (sorry for no page numbers; I only have the Kindle edition):

And, for what it’s worth, here’s his definition of “zeal”:

And for support that the Zealot Party was likely in existence during the life of Jesus:

ZEALOTS - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Following Josephus (“B. J.” ii. 8, § 1; “Ant.” xviii. 1, §§ 1, 6), most writers consider that the Zealots were a so-called fourth party founded by Judas the Galilean (see Grätz, “Gesch.” iii. 252, 259; Schürer, “Gesch.” 1st ed., i. 3, 486). This view is contradicted, however, by the fact that Hezekiah, the father of Judas the Galilean, had an organized band of so-called “robbers” which made war against the Idumean Herod (“B. J.” i. 10, § 5; “Ant.” xiv. 9, § 2), and also by the fact that the system of organized assassination practised by the Zealots was in existence during the reign of Herod, if not long before

The spirit of this Zealot movement, however, was not crushed.** No sooner had Herod died (4 C.E.)than the people cried out for revenge** (“Ant.” xvii. 9, § 1) and gave Archelaus no peace. Judea was full of robber bands, says Josephus (l.c. 10, § 8), the leaders of which each desired to be a king. It was then that Judas, the son of Hezekiah, the above-mentioned robber-captain, organized his forces for revolt, first, it seems, against the Herodian dynasty, and then, when Quirinus introduced the census, against submission to the rule of Rome and its taxation.

[ISiddiqui]

@David_H_Singanas

Please God, no! In my ELCA congregation we are quite content with our 15-20 min sermons, thank you very much (I have been in Pentecostal services with the 45 min sermons - that wasn’t all that much fun).

My Son…
I don’t think a 15-20 minute address is called a sermon. You must be thinking
of a “homily.”

Tell that to the bulletins ;).

Though these days they are, in effect, the same thing.

[Measure_for_Measure]

Thanks for the feedback concerning the Zealots. I guess I won’t be asking that question.

[BrainGlutton]

@BrainGlutton

In his view, did Jesus believe he was the Messiah? And, if so, did he also believe he was the Only Son of God in a literal, non-honorific sense?

And another thing – in Aslan’s view, did Jesus really believe the world was about to end (as many of his recorded statements say or imply)?

[BrainGlutton]

@David_H_Singanas

My Son…
I don’t think a 15-20 minute address is called a sermon. You must be thinking
of a “homily.”

Is a sermon longer or shorter than a homily?