T
teeboy
Guest
“Give unto Ceasar what is Ceasars, Give unto God what is God’s”
What is your opinion of the meaning of the above verse?
What is your opinion of the meaning of the above verse?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
Pfaffenhoffen
Guest
I would like to know yours first.“Give unto Ceasar what is Ceasars, Give unto God what is God’s”
What is your opinion of the meaning of the above verse?
R
rdscheirer
Guest
Jesus asked for the coin- it had Caesars image on it- he was talking to the Pharisees who were so imersed in following all the laws- he meant give to Caesar what is his, but give yourself to God. The Pharisees touted themselves as being at one with the Laws but yet could not stand someone like Jesus who could turn their argument back on them.
T
thistle
Guest
D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:“Give unto Ceasar what is Ceasars, Give unto God what is God’s”
What is your opinion of the meaning of the above verse?
Ver. 17. Although Christ clearly establishes here the strict obligation of paying to Cæsar what belongs to Cæsar, to the confusion of his very enemies, we shall still find them bringing forward against him the charge of disloyalty, as if he forbade tribute to be paid to Cæsar. (Luke xxiii. 2.) After the example of her divine Model, the Catholic Church has uniformly taught with St. Paul, the necessity of obeying the powers in being; and this not for fear of their wrath, but for conscience sake. Render to Cæsar the money on which his image is stamped, but render yourselves cheerfully to God; for the light of thy countenance, O Lord, is stamped upon us, (Psalm iv.) and not the image of Cæsar. (St. Jerome) — With reason were they astonished at the wisdom of this answer, which eluded all their artifices, and taught them at the same time what they owed to their prince, and what they owed to God: and whoever hopes for the favour of heaven, must conscientiously observe this double duty to God and to the magistrate.
T
teeboy
Guest
My thoughts are that this has multiple meanings. Some of which have already been stated.I would like to know yours first.
My most sincere thought is that this was a sign of the end of the Old Covenant. The Jews were using Roman money as oppossed to Jewish Money. When a nation finds itself using a foreign currency as tender for domestic goods and services, it finds itself to not be a soverign nation. Sovereignty as a nation was important to the Jews because of the Old Covenant.
B
Bballer32
Guest
IMO, i think Jesus is telling them that you must obey. We live under the Gov’t of the United States and we must obey the Laws or suffer the consequences, but when we owe God something or if there is a law that affects our Faith, we must give our best to God to help stop this Law.
I don’t know, that’s part of what i think.
I don’t know, that’s part of what i think.
T
teeboy
Guest
I would add…My thoughts are that this has multiple meanings. Some of which have already been stated.
My most sincere thought is that this was a sign of the end of the Old Covenant. The Jews were using Roman money as oppossed to Jewish Money. When a nation finds itself using a foreign currency as tender for domestic goods and services, it finds itself to not be a soverign nation. Sovereignty as a nation was important to the Jews because of the Old Covenant.
I maybe shouldn’t have used the phrase “end of the Old Covenant”. The Jews, at the time, weren’t following the Commandments; it was a sinful generation. Since the Nation was living in sin, God didn’t keep the covenant which was evident in the Roman occupation.
I still believe the Old Covenant to exist. The Jews still have their Liturgical year just as we do. I’m just glad I don’t have to grow my hair long at the temples.
T
Timothysis
Guest
Does this include Mary, her cousin Elizabeth, and St. Joseph? What about Sts. Anna and Joachim?The Jews, at the time, weren’t following the Commandments; it was a sinful generation. Since the Nation was living in sin, God didn’t keep the covenant which was evident in the Roman occupation.
I think gross generalizations like the above are meaningless.
T
teeboy
Guest
Why?Does this include Mary, her cousin Elizabeth, and St. Joseph? What about Sts. Anna and Joachim?
I think gross generalizations like the above are meaningless.
The Holy Family was in the Grace of God.
The Old Covenant was a covenant with the Jewish People and it was about their nation. The nation was in decline at the time, so if you believe the Covenant, this would tell you that the Jews weren’t holding up their end of the Covenant. The Northern Kingdom had long fallen to the Assyrians and the Southern portion of the nation was under the control of the Romans.
T
Timothysis
Guest
Ultimately, the kingdom of God doesn’t have anything to do with political entities.Why?
The Holy Family was in the Grace of God.
The Old Covenant was a covenant with the Jewish People and it was about their nation. The nation was in decline at the time, so if you believe the Covenant, this would tell you that the Jews weren’t holding up their end of the Covenant. The Northern Kingdom had long fallen to the Assyrians and the Southern portion of the nation was under the control of the Romans.
The Holy Family were Jewish and part of the Covenant, too. Since they ushered in the coming of Jesus, I think we could say that they held up their end of the covenant very well.
T
teeboy
Guest
I believe the Holy Family to have been devout Jews.Ultimately, the kingdom of God doesn’t have anything to do with political entities.
The Holy Family were Jewish and part of the Covenant, too. Since they ushered in the coming of Jesus, I think we could say that they held up their end of the covenant very well.
Do you agree that Jesus is the soverign ruler of all nations?
H
hannajomar
Guest
I’ve always read this as Jesus’ version of separation of Church and state.
I often think of this verse when someone tells me that if I’m really Christian, I should be in favor of every government program designed to help the poor. Jesus didn’t demand that the government help the poor. He demanded that WE each help the poor. I see so many of these government interventions as the government infringing on the turf of churches. One reason they have been able to infringe is that churches have failed to take care of the poor as we should.
I often think of this verse when someone tells me that if I’m really Christian, I should be in favor of every government program designed to help the poor. Jesus didn’t demand that the government help the poor. He demanded that WE each help the poor. I see so many of these government interventions as the government infringing on the turf of churches. One reason they have been able to infringe is that churches have failed to take care of the poor as we should.
T
teeboy
Guest
That’s b/c they have us busy filling out and deciphering tax laws.I’ve always read this as Jesus’ version of separation of Church and state.
I often think of this verse when someone tells me that if I’m really Christian, I should be in favor of every government program designed to help the poor. Jesus didn’t demand that the government help the poor. He demanded that WE each help the poor. I see so many of these government interventions as the government infringing on the turf of churches. One reason they have been able to infringe is that churches have failed to take care of the poor as we should.
Jesus didn’t tell J.P. Morgan to start a banking outfit and to give some of his excess profits to an endowment for the arts.
T
TimothyH
Guest
The statement about rendering to Ceasar was Jesus’ response to a trap which the Pharisees had set for him so that he might be put to death.
The statement about rendering unto Cesear is in Matthew 22, Mark 12 and Luke 20. In all three Gospels, the Pharisees by this time had decided to kill Jesus. One of the traps they set for him was to pose a question where the answer would cause Jesus to either break the law of Moses or to break the law of Rome.
Then the Pharisees went off and plotted how they might entrap him in speech. They sent their disciples to him, with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are a truthful man and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. And you are not concerned with anyone’s opinion, for you do not regard a person’s status. Tell us, then, what is your opinion: Is it lawful to pay the census tax to Caesar or not?” (Matthew 22:15-17)
Notice that the Pharisees send not only their own desciples but also the “Herodians”. The Herodians were the representatives of Herod who was the Roman occupation ruler. The questioun they ask Jesus is one which thy believe has only two answers - yes and no. If Jesus answers no, that it is unlawful to pay the census tax then he is guilty commits treason against Cesear. If Jesus answers yes, that it is lawful to pay the census tax, then he recognizes the Cesear as a legitimate authority and breaks the law of Moses.
The question posed of Jesus could have been asked, “Who’s side are you on? Are you on the side of Moses or on the side of Cesear?”
**Knowing their malice, Jesus said, “Why are you testing me, you hypocrites? Show me the coin that pays the census tax.” Then they handed him the Roman coin. He said to them, “Whose image is this and whose inscription?” They replied, “Caesar’s.” At that he said to them, “Then repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.” *(Matthew 22:18-21)
Jesus’ answer is sublime. Jesus answers, “I am on neither side. I am on the side of God.” The Pharisees are put to shame and they walk away.
Jesus is ordering things rightly. He is stating that there are some things for which man made institutions are the legitimate authority and some things for which God is the legitimate authority. Remember that the Church carries the authority of God on earth. It is a satatement about legitimate authority. The chief priests, Levites were the legitimate authority for God in Israel at the time. These “Sat on the Chair of Moses” and judged Israelites according to the law of God as given to them through Moses.
One day as he was teaching the people in the temple area and proclaiming the good news, the chief priests and scribes, together with the elders, approached him 2and said to him, “Tell us, by what authority are you doing these things? Or who is the one who gave you this authority?” (Luke 20:1-2)
In Luke’s Gospel, the census tax episode occurs right after the Pharisees question Jesus’ authority. Jesus’ authority is questioned all through the Gospels.
Since Jesus is God, he has ultimate authority, but in saying that we should render to Cesear what is Cesear’s and to God what is God’s, he is teaching us to respect legitimate authority. A legitimate authority will always recognize the ultimate authority of God and decisions made by man made authorities will should always make decisions based on God’s supreme law. Abortion is the classic example of where this is not done - man has overstepped his legitimate authority and made decisions for which God is the legitimate authority through his Church.
Jesus tells the Phariesses and Herodians both that they possess legitimate authority but that they do not use that authority rightly, as God would want it. The Pharisees used what had been the legitimate authority given to them by God through Moses to enrich themselves and to become powerful politicians. This was a perversion of the Law of Moses. The Romans on the other hand, used legitimate civil authority to exhalt themselves as Gods. Both were perverting the legitimate authority which they possessed, and in so doing had really given up the right to use that authority any longer.
-Tim-
The statement about rendering unto Cesear is in Matthew 22, Mark 12 and Luke 20. In all three Gospels, the Pharisees by this time had decided to kill Jesus. One of the traps they set for him was to pose a question where the answer would cause Jesus to either break the law of Moses or to break the law of Rome.
Then the Pharisees went off and plotted how they might entrap him in speech. They sent their disciples to him, with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are a truthful man and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. And you are not concerned with anyone’s opinion, for you do not regard a person’s status. Tell us, then, what is your opinion: Is it lawful to pay the census tax to Caesar or not?” (Matthew 22:15-17)
Notice that the Pharisees send not only their own desciples but also the “Herodians”. The Herodians were the representatives of Herod who was the Roman occupation ruler. The questioun they ask Jesus is one which thy believe has only two answers - yes and no. If Jesus answers no, that it is unlawful to pay the census tax then he is guilty commits treason against Cesear. If Jesus answers yes, that it is lawful to pay the census tax, then he recognizes the Cesear as a legitimate authority and breaks the law of Moses.
The question posed of Jesus could have been asked, “Who’s side are you on? Are you on the side of Moses or on the side of Cesear?”
**Knowing their malice, Jesus said, “Why are you testing me, you hypocrites? Show me the coin that pays the census tax.” Then they handed him the Roman coin. He said to them, “Whose image is this and whose inscription?” They replied, “Caesar’s.” At that he said to them, “Then repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.” *(Matthew 22:18-21)
Jesus’ answer is sublime. Jesus answers, “I am on neither side. I am on the side of God.” The Pharisees are put to shame and they walk away.
Jesus is ordering things rightly. He is stating that there are some things for which man made institutions are the legitimate authority and some things for which God is the legitimate authority. Remember that the Church carries the authority of God on earth. It is a satatement about legitimate authority. The chief priests, Levites were the legitimate authority for God in Israel at the time. These “Sat on the Chair of Moses” and judged Israelites according to the law of God as given to them through Moses.
One day as he was teaching the people in the temple area and proclaiming the good news, the chief priests and scribes, together with the elders, approached him 2and said to him, “Tell us, by what authority are you doing these things? Or who is the one who gave you this authority?” (Luke 20:1-2)
In Luke’s Gospel, the census tax episode occurs right after the Pharisees question Jesus’ authority. Jesus’ authority is questioned all through the Gospels.
Since Jesus is God, he has ultimate authority, but in saying that we should render to Cesear what is Cesear’s and to God what is God’s, he is teaching us to respect legitimate authority. A legitimate authority will always recognize the ultimate authority of God and decisions made by man made authorities will should always make decisions based on God’s supreme law. Abortion is the classic example of where this is not done - man has overstepped his legitimate authority and made decisions for which God is the legitimate authority through his Church.
Jesus tells the Phariesses and Herodians both that they possess legitimate authority but that they do not use that authority rightly, as God would want it. The Pharisees used what had been the legitimate authority given to them by God through Moses to enrich themselves and to become powerful politicians. This was a perversion of the Law of Moses. The Romans on the other hand, used legitimate civil authority to exhalt themselves as Gods. Both were perverting the legitimate authority which they possessed, and in so doing had really given up the right to use that authority any longer.
-Tim-
T
Timothysis
Guest
Jesus’ rule over all nations far exceeds political considerations. So I would say no, I do not agree that Jesus is the “sovereign” ruler of all nations, simply because earthly politics and nationalism have nothing to do with the kingdom of God.I believe the Holy Family to have been devout Jews.
Do you agree that Jesus is the soverign ruler of all nations?
T
teeboy
Guest
Are we not a means or vehicle for carrying out the will of God on Earth? Think of The Lord’s Prayer.Jesus’ rule over all nations far exceeds political considerations. So I would say no, I do not agree that Jesus is the “sovereign” ruler of all nations, simply because earthly politics and nationalism have nothing to do with the kingdom of God.
Was the body of Christ not used in the same manner?
T
teeboy
Guest
are you referring to Church vs. nation? And Church taking precedence over nation in carrying out The Kingdom of God?
T
Timothysis
Guest
Are you advocating that all nations become autocratic theocracies? I hope not because the past has shown us just how bad things can get when Church and State are one and the same.Are we not a means or vehicle for carrying out the will of God on Earth? Think of The Lord’s Prayer.
Was the body of Christ not used in the same manner?
1
1AugustSon7
Guest
Actually, the only place where this really occured was in the Papal States, which was hardly notorious amongst the nations. Even then, technically speaking, there was a difference between the Church and what we today would call the Vatican proper. They were seperate entities with a shared, single head.Are you advocating that all nations become autocratic theocracies? I hope not because the past has shown us just how bad things can get when Church and State are one and the same.
Also, the opposite case is just as, if not more, scandalous: i.e., when we examine what happens to nations that cast off the Church. The Soviet Union, for example. Abortion would never have been legalised in a Catholic kingdom or polity.
T
teeboy
Guest
I am referring to the one true governance called the Kingdom of God.Are you advocating that all nations become autocratic theocracies? I hope not because the past has shown us just how bad things can get when Church and State are one and the same.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.