Sermon and Worship Resources

Mark 12:13-17 · Paying Taxes to Caesar

13 Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14 They came to him and said, "Teacher, we know you are a man of integrity. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not? 15 Should we pay or shouldn't we?" 16 But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. "Why are you trying to trap me?" he asked. "Bring me a denarius and let me look at it." They brought the coin, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied.

17 Then Jesus said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.

What is the Connection Between Church and State?

Mark 12: 14-17

Sermon
by J. Howard Olds

Well, here we are on the 4th of July. What a great time to be alive. What a privilege to be an American. What a joy to worship God in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Among other things, we hold this right to be sacred: “That Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” We believe in the separation of Church and State. The thought is inherent in the statement of Jesus who said, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to the God the things that are God’s.” The First Amendment guarantees freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion in America. That’s what I would like to talk about today.

I. IT’S TIME TO MOVE FROM CIVIL RELIGION TO AUTHENTIC FAITH.

For my entire life, there has been a concentrated effort in the name of pluralism to remove religion from public life. The urge to purge God, however, has proven to be more difficult than most crusaders anticipated.

True, we no longer have prayer in public schools, yet the same Congress which banned the practice in public schools begins each session with a prayer from a tax paid chaplain. Maybe Congress needs prayer more than school children do.

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore was relieved of his office two years ago for refusing to remove a 2.6 ton granite monument containing the Ten Commandments from a state building. Meanwhile, the east entrance to the Supreme Court building showcases a massive sculpture of Moses bearing two tablets on which the Ten Commandments are inscribed.

Isn’t that just like God? Kick Him out the front door and He sneaks in the back. The Supreme Court itself begins each of its sessions with the phrase, “God save the United States and this honorable court.” How dare God to be that mischievous! George Washington as an afterthought said, “So help me God” after taking the oath of office for President and presidents have been saying it ever since. There are Biblical passages etched in stone everywhere. To purge Washington of God’s name would take more tax dollars than we can afford. It would even alter our currency itself, which continues to proclaim “IN GOD WE TRUST.” Getting God out of public life is proving to be more difficult than we ever imagined.

So a more recent tactic and, in my opinion, a more offensive one is to render public religious statements meaningless. Justice David Souter wrote this concerning the current conflict over the Pledge of Allegiance: “The usage of “under God” in the pledge is kind of a “civic exercise.” It is something that is so tepid, so diluted, so far from a compulsory prayer that it should be beneath the constitutional radar.” Reciting it is a rote civic exercise with little or no religious meaning. “Under God” is a patriotic statement, not a religious one. That sounds like a very different interpretation than that of Dwight Eisenhower who said upon the insertion of “under God” in the pledge in 1954 that “school children would now daily proclaim the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty.”

Perhaps the real answer to religion in America comes not from words written by our forefathers in documents and stone, but words written on the hearts of our people and practiced in our relationships with one another. Not civil religion, but authentic faith is our hope of salvation.

We continue to be an incurably religious people. Ninety percent of us believe in God. Eight-five percent of us are Christian. Sixty-five percent of us consider religion to be important in daily life. Forty percent of us attend a religious service weekly. Can we transform that emotion into daily devotion and authentic faithful living?

II. IT’S TIME TO MOVE FROM INSTITUTIONAL SURVIVAL TO PROPHETIC SERVICE.

Twenty-five years ago, Marlene Wilson wrote an article entitled “Religion, the Sleeping Giant.” In it she defined the enormous potential of churches and other religious organizations to materialize thousands of volunteers, acting on their faith and moral principles to tackle social needs.

In 1996, the Welfare Reform Act signed by President Clinton enabled some houses of worship to receive tax dollars for the delivery of social services. President Bush, in presenting his Faith Based Initiative, effectively threw down the gauntlet to churches and religious organizations saying, “It’s time to unleash the armies of compassion in every city of America to provide hope for people where hope doesn’t exist.”

Oh I know, any partnership between government and churches is laced with poison and packed with dynamite. It raises all kinds of questions about the separation of Church and State and rightfully so. But the challenge is clear whether or not the government pays for it. The Church can no longer be the Church and continue to ignore the homeless, the hungry, the poor, the imprisoned, the addicted, the welfare to work families and those infected with HIV or AIDS. Furthermore, we are discovering that faith-based initiatives with a clear hope of transformation and challenge to disciplined living are very successful in tackling these social problems.

Let me explain what I mean by telling you three stories, one about my son and two about my sons in ministry. Two years ago our son, Wes, was assigned to a hopeless parish in a poor section of Lexington, KY. The handful of people remaining in that church was hostile and offensive. One woman met Wes at the door his first Sunday and informed him that he would not be there long for they intended to run him off like they had the previous two pastors. Wes asked for prayers. When a homeless man died on the church steps, Wes organized a Room in the Inn ministry like the one here in Nashville. When the neighborhood association complained of decline, he invited them to the church to strategize community improvement ministries. He organized a recovery program for alcohol and drug addicts. Meanwhile, he preached the gospel in what has emerged as one of the most diverse, eclectic, multi-ethnic congregations I have seen. Last year he baptized more people than this church did. He led the conference in professions of faith. People are coming to know the Lord and finding help in the time of need.

For the last 15 years, a couple from one of my former churches have invested themselves in ministry with the poverty stricken Portland area of western Louisville. I held their hands the Sunday they decided to move their family to that neighborhood because God was calling them to live there. A large state-of-the-art community center was built with the help of area churches. Habitat houses are replacing shacks in the neighborhood. And last year, the first young person from their youth group enrolled in Lindsay Wilson College, the first of her family to pursue a higher education. Changing lives, one person at a time.

Shortly before I left Louisville, I asked my district superintendent for the use of an abandoned church in downtown Louisville. He was in the process of closing it and I had a youth minister who was interested in inner city ministries. It has gone through several evolutions over the past three years, but about six months ago Brian and his wife, out of their own resources, started inviting the people in the surrounding housing projects to Sunday morning breakfast and worship. The sanctuary was transformed into a breakfast table. Today, they feed about 200 people breakfast every Sunday morning and then lead them in worship and Bible study.

III. IT’S TIME TO MOVE FROM POLITICAL POSTURING TO INTERCESSORY PRAYER.

Every time our General Conference meets, they pass resolutions on every subject under the sun. Most of them come to the floor late at night when delegates are too tired to debate or fast asleep. After conference, these resolutions are published in a book which people seldom read.

I have often wondered if a better use of time would be spent in prayer instead of protest. When the early Church wanted to change the culture of the world, they prayed. When the early Church had a disagreement, they prayed. When their leaders were put in jail, they prayed. When the circle of believers needed to be expanded to the Gentiles, it was revealed to Peter through prayer.

It all reminds me of one of my favorite stories. A local congregation became greatly disturbed that a nightclub was opening in the neighborhood. The concerned pastor called the members together for a prayer meeting where the people asked the Lord to intervene. That night, lightning struck the nightclub and burned it down. The owner of the club proceeded to sue the church for damages. The church denied any responsibility. When the case finally reached the judge, he made this observation: “Whether or not the church is responsible for the fire, only God knows. But it does appear that the nightclub owners believe in prayer while the church members do not.”

So when we sing “God Bless America” this 4th of July, do we mean it as a prayer or a protest? If God were to truly bless America, would we be ready for the kind of blessing he would likely bring?

As we come to Holy Communion, let us make it a season of prayer: prayer for our country, prayer for our sons and daughters in the military, prayer for our church, prayer for one another. Today let this be a house of prayer.

ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Faith Breaks, by J. Howard Olds

Overview and Insights · Debate about Paying Taxes to Caesar (12:13–17)

The Jewish leaders try to trap Jesus by asking him if it’s right to pay taxes to Cae…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Mark 12:13-17 · Paying Taxes to Caesar

17 Then Jesus said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.

Commentary · Paying Taxes to Caesar

All the stories in 11:27–12:44 portray the opposition of the Sanhedrin to Jesus. The chief priests challenged Jesus in 11:27–33, and beginning in 12:13 the remaining constituents of the Sanhedrin—the Pharisees (12:13–17), Sadducees (12:18–27), and scribes (12:28–40)—challenge Jesus as well. The Pharisees are sent “to catch [Jesus] in his words” (12:13), and they begin by flattery (12:14). The Herodians appear to have been partisans of Herod the Great and his pervasive dynasty. Their coalition with the Pharisees, with whom they shared little in common, was surely based more on a common enemy in Jesus than on common values (see Mark 3:6). “Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?” (12:14), they ask. The imperial poll tax here referred to the required payment of a denarius (the average daily wage), stamped with the impression of Tiberius Caesar (Roman emperor AD 14–37). The question of the Pharisees and Herodians is designed to ensnare Jesus however he answers: support for taxation will discredit him in the eyes of the people, who detest Roman occupation; refusal to pay will invite Roman retaliation for insurrection. In a brilliant repartee, Jesus grants that the image and inscription are Caesar’s; therefore, the coin belongs to Caesar. This answer acknowledges the legitimacy of human government. Jesus then adds, “And [give] to God what is God’s” (12:17). This answer—which has not been asked of Jesus—indicates that the political question of the Pharisees and Herodians cannot be answered without answering the more fundamental theological question—namely, that government may not assert total claim over its citizens. Political and civil duties cannot be properly rendered until the ultimate claim of God is acknowledged. Humanity, which bears God’s image (Gen. 1:26), belongs to God.

The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Big Idea: Two critical issues for all believers come out of the attempt of the leaders to entrap Jesus: (1) submission to government; and (2) the doctrine of resurrection, grounding our faith and hope in the reality of Christ’s resurrection and the certain afterlife that God’s people will enjoy.

Understanding the Text

David Daube has shown that the next four passages (12:13–37 = Matt. 22:15–46) correspond to the four major types of rabbinic questions: (1) of wisdom, on a point of Torah regarding taxes (12:13–17); (2) of mockery (scoffing at a belief), on the issue of resurrection (12:18–27); (3) of moral conduct, on the relationship between God and humanity (12:28–34); (4) of biblical exegesis, on a seeming contradiction between passages (12:35–37).1In this, Jesus is shown to have true knowledge and authority over issues of Torah. He, not the leaders, is the true interpreter of Torah.

Interpretive Insights

12:13 to catch him in his words. The leaders again prove their guilt by “trying to entrap” (agreu?, often used in reference to trapping animals) Jesus in what he is saying. The presence of the Herodians with the Pharisees is a little strange (they were not allies and disagreed over the issue of taxation), but, as in 3:6, they agree on one thing: the desire to arrest and kill Jesus. It is unusual for followers of Herod to be in Jerusalem, since Antipas ruled in Galilee and Perea, but this was Passover and Antipas himself was present (Luke 23:7–12). The main point is their hostile purpose: not to test Jesus but rather to trap him and denounce him before the people.

12:14 We know that you are a man of integrity. The fawning flattery seen in this verse was common in the first century, but this seems over the top (though compare Acts 24:2–3). The four insincere compliments stress, in order, Jesus’s integrity, fairness, impartiality, and truthfulness. There is irony in this, because although they do not believe a word of what they are saying about Jesus, they are speaking the truth. It is intended to get him to speak overconfidently and candidly, to catch him at a weak moment and expose what they believe is his false teaching. Yet Jesus’s response will prove that what they say is in fact right about him.

Is it right to pay the imperial tax . . . ? This was the poll tax (see the sidebar “Taxes, the Zealots, and Government”), consisting of one denarius paid annually by all adults (women as well as men). Jesus, being a Galilean, was not directly involved (only Judea was a province under direct Roman rule), but this was an issue debated and opposed by virtually all Jews, and that is the purpose of the leaders here. So Jesus is in a dilemma. If he answers no, the crowds will be happy and the Romans angry, thinking him to be another insurgent. If he answers yes, the crowds will be upset at him. Either way, the leaders win.

12:15 Bring me a denarius. Jesus is completely aware of (“knew,” Gk. oida) their “hypocrisy” (see on 7:6): their purpose is to trick him on a politically sensitive issue with no desire to ascertain truth. A Roman denarius coin was required to pay the poll tax, and the emperor Tiberius’s image was on it, containing the inscription “Son of the divine Augustus.” The image on the coin was idolatrous and the inscription blasphemous. It would be difficult to be more offensive to Jewish sensitivities, yet the Pharisees had one (they could have carried local copper coins instead). They, not Jesus, had the coin.

12:17 Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. This statement is deliberately ambiguous and provocative. There are two implications of Jesus’s brilliant riposte. On the political side, Jesus is commenting on the Zealot philosophy in Judaism (see the sidebar “Taxes, the Zealots, and Government”). Jesus is taking an anti-Zealot stance, stating in effect that submission to government, even Roman, is valid because it has been established by God (Rom. 13:1; 1 Pet. 2:13–15). Obedience to God should not be set in antithesis to submission to government. There is no conflict, for relationship to government is part of relationship to God. On the theological side, Jesus provides a brilliant response to the leaders and the dilemma of government versus God. When Jesus asked, “Whose image is this?” (v. 16), he likely alluded to Genesis 1:27 and the fact that every human being, including the emperor, was made in the image of God. God is creator and has dominion over all, so the emperor’s authority is under God and comes from God. Caesar is to be “given” what is due him, including taxes, and all subjects are obligated. Yet the secular sphere itself is subject to the sacred sphere, and God is sovereign over Caesar, whose realm is part of God’s realm. People submit to government as part of their submission to God (see also Matt. 17:24–27).

12:18 Sadducees. Matthew 22:23 tells us the Sadducees (see the sidebar “Who Were the Sadducees?”) came on the same day (Tuesday of passion week) and have the same purpose: to prove Jesus unworthy to be a rabbi and turn the people against him.

12:19 the man must marry the widow. Their story is based on the law dealing with levirate marriage in Deuteronomy 25:5–10 and also Genesis 38:8. The purpose of this practice was to “raise up seed” in the name of the deceased and to enable the “family name and line” to continue,2to make certain that he had legal heirs so the ancestral lands would pass down through the generations. Also, the childless widow was kept from destitution.

12:20–22 there were seven brothers. This unlikely narrative probably was a stock story used against the Pharisaic belief in an afterlife. The choice of seven brothers is for the sake of completion; it thus became a “perfect” example (seven being the number of completeness), perhaps drawn from the seven deceased husbands in Tobit 3 or the seven martyred brothers in 2 Maccabees 7. The dilemma, of course, is that the poor woman marries seven brothers in succession, with none of them able to produce children.

12:23 whose wife will she be . . . ? Behind this is the assumption that polygamy is wrong, based on the view that the Torah portrays husband and wife (singular) as “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24). To the Sadducees, this ridicules any view of an afterlife, since of necessity it will deny the Torah. The purpose is to forge a no-win situation: Jesus either denies a doctrine of resurrection or denies the Torah.

12:24 in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? These charges are hard-hitting. The Sadducees prided themselves on drawing their beliefs from Scripture (the Pentateuch), so Jesus is challenging their basic claims about themselves. Jesus’s teaching demonstrated a whole new level of authority (1:21–22), and he challenged the scribes in this same area in 12:10. As the most powerful political group in the Sanhedrin, they were struck at their very essence by Jesus.

12:25 neither marry nor be given in marriage. Jesus develops his two challenges in reverse order, explaining first why the Sadducees fail to understand God’s power to raise the dead. Their mistake is in thinking that there will be marriage in the afterlife. Thus their analogy of the woman widowed seven times is irrelevant, as there will be neither marriage nor reproduction (the purpose of marriage [Gen. 1:28]) in heaven. Marriage is an earthly relationship, and God’s power is such that the afterlife will lift God’s people above earthly things, even marriage and family.

like the angels in heaven. The risen dead will be “like the angels” in the sense that they will be eternal beings who will not need to marry or bear children to continue the race. In another sense, we will not need to marry because we will know our current spouses (and everyone else) infinitely better than we know them now. It is often said that Jesus was also correcting the Sadducean denial of angels, based on Acts 23:8 (“The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits”). But angels appear frequently in the Pentateuch, and it is better to see the Acts reference as saying that human beings will not have a place in the afterlife with the angels.3There is no evidence in Jewish writings that the Sadducees denied the existence of angels.

12:26–27 Book of Moses . . . He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Now Jesus expands upon his first charge, that they do not know the Scriptures. They accepted only the Pentateuch, so Jesus proves his point by quoting God’s statement in Exodus 3:6. In verse 19 they claimed, “Moses wrote,” so Jesus trumps this by asserting, “God said.” He uses a rabbinic argument based on grammar, completely acceptable in a first-century setting. God is speaking at his revelation to Moses at the burning bush, and it is critical to realize that the patriarchs at that time had been long dead (cf. Gen. 25:8; 35:29; 49:33). Jesus’s point is that the present-tense “I am” demands that in Moses’s time the patriarchs are still alive. Therefore, his point is that God had to have raised them from the dead. Then, that he is the God “of the living” adds the point that the resurrection power is still at work today.

Teaching the Text

1. Submission to government is part of submission to God. In Christian ethics our relationship to others is part of our relationship to God. Paul instructs wives to submit to husbands “as you do to the Lord” (Eph. 5:22), which means more than “in the same way” and connotes that submission to their husbands is part of their submission to God. The same is true of government. Romans 13:2 says that to “rebel” against governmental authority is to rebel against God and will bring “judgment” from God. This does not mean that the people of God cannot denounce evil in government. The prophets and Jesus often castigated the Jewish authorities. The key is to admonish evil in government from a position of respect and love—that is, out of love for country and respect for the fact that even an evil ruler is in office as God’s regent (Rom. 13:1a).

2. Every aspect of earthly life is submitted to the sovereign God. The earthly ruler has control over the nation, but God controls both the ruler and every aspect of his creation. Whenever a human authority demands obedience against divine mandates, we must follow the apostles and “obey God rather than human beings” (Acts 5:29; cf. 4:19). This is the one kind of “civil disobedience” that God will allow. Submission to human authority is part of our surrender to the God who superintends every earthly aspect. God must be master over all our secular resources, and in light of eternity every possession and everything in this world has no value except as kingdom resources. We must emulate Peter in Mark 10:28: “We have left everything to follow you.” This means that we hold all our possessions to be part of our stewardship to God and make him Lord over everything that we have and are.

3. The resurrection body is a new perfection. Jesus speaks here of the “power of God” guaranteeing that in the afterlife we will be “like the angels.” Paul calls this a “spiritual body” (1 Cor. 15:44), which is “imperishable” and has a new “glory” and “power” (15:42–43) and bears the “image of the heavenly man” (15:49). We know little about what this will be like apart from the fact of a physical resurrection and a perfect body. It is similar to descriptions of heaven (Rev. 21:1–22:5), a symbolic description that can do no more than approximate a far greater future than can be expressed. There is no way to describe the infinite, perfect reality that God has waiting for us. There will be a glory, a joy, a peace beyond all human understanding.

Illustrating the Text

When and how to oppose government

Quotes: Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Bonhoeffer stood boldly against Adolf Hitler and the teachings of the Nazis until he was put to death as a spy by hanging in a Nazi concentration camp in April of 1945. Bonhoeffer is often quoted as saying, “We are not to simply bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, we are to drive a spoke into the wheel itself.” There are times when Christians must stand against government when it is promoting injustice or demanding disobedience to God. How do we stand against government? Bonhoeffer wrote, in his classic book Ethics, “Political action means taking on responsibility.”4 In a democracy this means that Christians should vote their conscience. American Christians, who are protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, must learn to boldly speak the truth in love. All Christians, wherever they live, must be willing to engage in the political process.

Heaven: a different reality

Humor: In one of his Far Side cartoons, Gary Larson depicts a stereotypical view of heaven. A man with angel wings and a halo is sitting on a cloud all by himself, looking completely bored. He is thinking, “Wish I’d brought a magazine.” In the movie All Dogs Go to Heaven, Charlie the German shepherd does not want to be in heaven because there are no surprises and it is boring. Mark 12 shows us that heaven is a very different reality from what we have experienced on earth. We need to let our picture of heaven come from God’s word and not from our own imagination.

Teaching the Text by Grant R. Osborne, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Caesar

The family name of the Roman emperors following Julius Caesar (100 44 BC). Emperors after Nero retained the title “Caesar,” although they no longer belonged to the family line. The NT alludes to four Caesars: Augustus, also called “Octavian” (r. 31 BC–AD 14), called for the census (Luke 2:1) that brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem prior to Jesus’ birth. Tiberius (r. AD 14–37) is named in Luke 3:1 and was the Caesar ruling when Jesus was questioned about paying taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:17–21; Luke 20:22–25). The famine predicted by Agabus occurred during the tenure of Claudius (r. AD 41–54) (Acts 11:28), the emperor who prompted Aquila and Priscilla’s relocation to Corinth (Acts 18:2) when he expelled the Jewish population from Rome (AD 49). Nero (r. AD 54–68) was the Caesar to whom Paul appealed (Acts 25:10) and from whose household Paul sent greetings to the Philippians (Phil. 4:22).

Denarius

A Roman silver coin that was the pay for a day’s labor as well as the annual temple tax (see Matt. 22:15 22; Mark 12:13–17; Luke 20:20–26).

Herodians

Five of the important parties in ancient Judaism were the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, the Zealots, and the Herodians. The first three seem to have first emerged in reaction to the rise of the Hasmonean priest-kings in the mid-second and first centuries BC, and the other two in response to the occupation of Palestine by the Romans and their establishment of the Herods as the rulers of Israel.

Pharisees. In the Synoptic Gospels, the Pharisees were one of the groups that opposed Jesus. It seems that the Pharisees most strongly opposed Jesus on issues related to their received tradition, which they considered to be as binding as the OT law. Two such legal issues were ceremonial washings before meals and working on the Sabbath. All three Synoptic Gospels narrate the Pharisees questioning Jesus concerning his and his disciples’ failure to follow the tradition of the elders by eating with “unclean”—that is, “unwashed”—hands (Matt. 15:1 2; Mark 7:1–5; Luke 11:39–41). Concerning breaking the Sabbath, the Pharisees confronted Jesus on various occasions, such as when Jesus healed on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:9–14; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–11) and when his disciples picked grain while walking through a field (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28; Luke 6:1–5).

In response to accusations concerning breaking the traditions of the elders, Jesus affirmed the priority of mercy in the face of human need that supersedes laws concerning the Sabbath by saying that the Sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27), or that the Son of Man (Jesus) was Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5). He also said that God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Matt. 12:7).

Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees concentrated on their neglecting mercy toward fellow humans for the sake of their tradition. This is especially clear in Matthew, where Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees includes indictments against them for concentrating on the fine points of the law but neglecting justice and mercy (12:7; 23:23).

In the Gospel of John, the Pharisees are again usually depicted as adversaries of Jesus and also in league with other Jewish authorities in plotting to arrest and kill Jesus (7:32; 11:47–57). One passage suggests that they were divided concerning Jesus (9:16). One Pharisee, Nicodemus, came to Jesus by night (John 3), defended Jesus before his peers (7:50), and brought spices to prepare Jesus’ body for burial after his death (19:39).

The Pharisees were not always antagonistic toward Jesus. From time to time, they were on the same side of an issue, such as Jesus’ confrontation with the Sadducees over the resurrection (Luke 20:27–40). Nicodemus, mentioned above, was quite sympathetic toward Jesus. The apostle Paul identifies himself as a Pharisee in regard to keeping the law in Phil. 3:5; Acts 26:5, and in a confrontation with Jerusalem authorities in Acts 23:6. Also, some early Christians were said to be Pharisees (Acts 15:5).

Sadducees. The Sadducees were an elite group of Jews connected with the priesthood. “Sadducee” probably means “Son of Zadok,” a descendant of the high priest Zadok from the time of David. Some members of the Qumran community used the term “Son of Zadok” as a self-designation as well, suggesting some common ancestry, if not direct identification, of the Sadducees and some members of the Qumran community.

The Sadducees are mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, but not in John, although the “chief priests” who plotted against Jesus with the Pharisees (e.g., John 11:46) probably were Sadducees. All three Synoptic Gospels relate the narrative in which the Sadducees posed the hypothetical question concerning whose wife a woman would be in the resurrection if she outlived seven husbands. Jesus answered that they understood neither the Scriptures nor the power of God, and that God was the God of the living and not the dead (Matt. 22:23–33; Mark 12:18–27; Luke 20:27–40).

The book of Acts confirms that the Sadducees were closely connected to the priesthood 4:1; 5:17), and that they disputed with the Pharisees over the resurrection (23:6–8).

Essenes. Josephus delineates the beliefs of the Essenes as follows: (1) They ascribed every happening to God. (2) They believed in the immortality of the soul.

Zealots. Scholars tend to use “Zealots” as a general term to refer to three different groups mentioned by Josephus: brigands, Sicarii (Assassins), and Zealots. The three groups have different political ideologies and emerged at different times in the first century. They can all be described as revolutionaries.

Herodians. The Herodians are mentioned three times in the Gospels. They are reported to have plotted, along with the Pharisees, to kill Jesus after he healed a man with a withered hand (Mark 3:6). They are also described, along with the Pharisees, as trying to trap Jesus concerning the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:13).

The Herodians were aristocrats who supported the Herodian dynasty and the Romans, whose support made that dynasty possible. There seems to be some overlap between the Herodians and the Sadducees; Mark 8:15 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod (some ancient witnesses read “Herodians”), whereas the parallel in Matt. 16:6, 11 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Their religious beliefs may have been similar to those of the Sadducees. Too little information about them exists to permit drawing strong conclusions. One can safely say, however, that the Herodians were pro-Roman aristocrats who joined forces with the anti-Roman Pharisees in opposing Jesus.

Likeness

The word “likeness” is used in various contexts. The foundational concept of likeness, however, is found in Gen. 1:26: “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness.” This announces the high status of humans as the pinnacle of God’s creation (also Gen. 5:1 2). Genesis 5:3 says that Adam fathered Seth “in his own likeness, in his own image,” employing both words found in 1:26. The precise meaning of this has been much debated. Three things are to be noted. First, the expression “let us,” versus “let there be,” implies a personal aspect. It refers to the human capacity to relate to God in worship and obedience of his word (2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 4:24). Second, the word “likeness” describes human beings as not simply representative of God but representational. Humankind is the visible, corporeal representative of the invisible, bodiless God. Third, being in God’s likeness/image sets human beings apart from everything else that God has made. Humankind’s supremacy and uniqueness are emphasized.

Superscription

A heading applied to the beginning of some psalms. These superscriptions may refer to people, historical circumstances, musical aspects, or classifications. The precise meaning of many of the terms in the superscriptions is unclear.

Tribute

In the ancient biblical world, tribute was a payment made by one state to another, which was a mark of subjugation. The state required to pay the tribute (the vassal) often was a conquered people. The payment could consist of precious metals, currency, commodities, animals, and even human beings. Tribute allowed the sovereign state (the suzerain) to increase residual capital and gain large amounts of valuable materials, at the same time impoverishing and severely weakening the subjugated state (making future rebellions unlikely). Its administration was straightforward: every year the vassal was required to bring tribute to the suzerain. If such a payment was not made, it was a tacit sign of rebellion, and the suzerain sent a military force to punish the rebels.

At times, Israelite kings had occasions to impose tribute on other nations (e.g., 2 Sam. 8:2, 6; 1 Kings 4:21; 2 Chron. 17:11; cf. Ezra 4:20). However, in most instances described in the Bible, Israel appears to be on the other side of the tributary arrangement and makes monetary payments to foreign nations. Some of these instances are clear examples of Israel paying regular tribute payments to their overlord (e.g., Judg. 3:15; 2 Kings 23:33; Ezra 4:13), while others refer to bribes paid to foreign nations in order to secure military assistance against another enemy (1 Kings 15:18; 2 Kings 16:8) or settlement payments made to an attacker in exchange for its withdrawal (2 Kings 12:18; 18:15 16). On other occasions, the wealth of Israel is taken by foreign monarchs as spoils of war rather than as regular tribute (e.g., 1 Kings 14:26; 2 Kings 24:13–14). However, in nearly all these circumstances such payments resulted in Israel being required to give regular tributary payments thereafter to the foreign monarch.

Direct Matches

Denarius

A Roman silver coin that was the pay for a day’s labor as well as the annual temple tax. It was what Jesus’ opponents brought to him when he told them, “Give back Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (see Matt. 22:15–22; Mark 12:13–17; Luke 20:20–26).

Herodians

Since the term “Herodians” appears only three times in the NT (Matt. 22:16; Mark 3:6; 12:13), it is unclear whether it refers to a political party or more generally to supporters of the Herodian dynasty. Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, ruled as tetrarch of Galilee during the period of Jesus’ ministry, and this is likely where the Herodians were based. In all three NT appearances they are conspiring with the Pharisees against Jesus. This is unusual in one sense because the Herodians were favorably disposed toward the Roman authorities (who kept Herod in power), while the Pharisees generally opposed Roman rule. Nonetheless, both groups had reason to fear Jesus and his influence among the people, the Pharisees for religious reasons and the Herodians for political ones. Herod and his supporters would have been leery of any popular messianic movement that might provoke a peasant revolt among Herod’s disgruntled subjects. See also Jewish Parties.

Hypocrisy

The practice of claiming standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform. Hypocrisy is attributed to those whose actions and words differ from the intention of their heart (Matt. 22:18; 23:28). It is a form of lying (1 Tim. 4:2; 1 Pet. 2:1) and can become a form of self-delusion (Matt. 7:5; 23:16–26; Luke 12:56; 13:15).

The OT expresses the sense with phrases like “double heart” and “flattering lips” (Ps. 12:2 KJV). Jeremiah describes those who have God “always on their lips but far from their hearts” (Jer. 12:2).

The NT word hypokrinomai has its origin in the theater, referring to a play actor (Luke 20:20). All parts, including female characters, were played by a few men, who signaled character transitions by switching masks. Jesus calls his opponents “hypocrites” (Matt. 6:2, 5, 16; 15:7; 23:13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29; Mark 7:6; Luke 12:56; 13:15; cf. Ps. 26:4). Archaeologists have found a theater in Sepphoris, a large and partly Hellenized city within five miles of Jesus’ hometown, Nazareth, but the theater may have been built after his ministry. Even if Jesus did not personally attend the local theater, the imagery would have long been a part of his social world.

Jesus criticizes the scribes and Pharisees because “they do not practice what they preach” (Matt. 23:3; cf. Mark 7:6). What they practice is for display (Matt. 6:2, 5, 16). Jesus describes the attempt of his opponents to catch him with crafty questions as hypocrisy (Matt. 22:18; Mark 12:15). Jesus is not necessarily calling all Pharisees hypocrites, and certainly not all Jews, but only those who are impeding his ministry. Paul, who was raised a Pharisee (Acts 23:6; Phil. 3:5), viewed himself not as a hypocrite but as ignorant (1 Tim. 1:13). Jesus criticizes Nicodemus not for hypocrisy but for ignorance about the deeper meaning of Scripture (John 3:1–15). The rabbis, who are descendants of the Pharisees, relate a tradition of concern about hypocrisy within the ranks of the group (e.g., b. Sotah 22b).

Paul accuses Peter of hypocrisy because he was willing to eat with non-Jewish Christians in Antioch but then pulled away when a more culturally conservative group arrived from James in Jerusalem (Gal. 2:13). Peter knew the truth but, from Paul’s view, did not act consistently. In this case, the inconsistency would have created a precedent that Paul could not tolerate. The opposite of hypocrisy is love from a transparently pure heart and a willingness to admit fault (Rom. 12:9; 2 Cor. 6:6; 1 Pet. 1:22).

Integrity

A quality of completeness or uprightness; often it is expressed in terms of someone being “blameless.” However it does not, as the English word implies, suggest sinlessness. In biblical thought, integrity is grounded not in a list of character traits but rather in one’s relationship to God. Single-minded devotion to God is the environment in which integrity flourishes (1 Kings 9:4–5).

Scripture describes certain individuals as displaying integrity. Noah is “a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God” (Gen. 6:9). The narrator describes Job as “blameless and upright,” someone who “feared God and shunned evil” (Job 1:1, 8). Jesus is identified as a “man of integrity” (NIV) or “truthful” (NASB) by some Pharisaic questioners (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:14).

Paul repeatedly defends his own integrity to his churches when he is under attack by his opponents (2 Cor. 1:12; 1 Thess. 2:1–12) and encourages Titus to teach with integrity (Titus 2:7). He instructs both Timothy and Titus that church leaders must be “above reproach,” “sincere,” and “blameless”—that is, people of integrity (1 Tim. 3:2–10; Titus 1:6–8).

Poll Tax

A “head” tax levied by a government, often following a census (see 2 Sam. 24:1–17; 1 Chron. 21:1–17). Taxes were levied against conquered peoples (2 Kings 15:19–20; 23:35). The Romans demanded tribute from every head (tributum capitis) annually (see Mark 12:13–17 pars.). The procurator (e.g., Pontius Pilate) or regional head (e.g., Herod Antipas) was responsible for collecting these taxes. Around the time of Jesus’ birth, many Jews rebelled against the census and tax (Acts 5:37). According to Luke 2:1, Joseph and Mary came to Bethlehem near the time of Jesus’ birth because of a census for tax purposes decreed by Caesar Augustus.

Taxes

Taxes in Scripture encompass both religious obligation to God to meet the funding requirements of the temple and payments to secular authorities, foreign and domestic. Several words and phrases express the concept in the Bible. In the OT these include the following: (1) Ransom was the temple tax commanded by God, based on a census of Israel (Exod. 30:11–16). It resulted in atonement for the taxpayer and avoidance of a plague on Israel. (2) Tribute was a divinely commanded offering in support of the cultic priesthood. The example in Num. 31:28–30 specifically addresses spoils of war. (3) Levy was a monetary assessment of silver and gold imposed by a superior authority (e.g., Pharaoh Necho) to a subjugated one (e.g., Israel) (see 2 Kings 23:33–35). (4) Tax was a compulsory payment to an authority. The example in 2 Chron. 24:6, 9 refers to the aforementioned ransom. A second usage of the underlying Hebrew, appearing in Amos 5:11, refers to taxes on the poor by corrupt leaders in the northern kingdom.

Additionally, four different words in Aramaic, the original language of Ezra, indicate governmental revenues (Ezra 4:13, 20; 6:8; 7:24). These words are variously translated as “taxes,” “tribute,” “duty,” “revenue.” The shades of difference in meaning among them are unclear.

The NT discusses taxes in several passages. The most comprehensive is Matt. 17:24–27, Jesus’ discussion of the temple tax with Peter, ending with the account of the four-drachma coin in the mouth of the caught fish. Here, three of the four NT Greek words for taxes are employed. (1) Didrachmon in v. 24 is the “temple tax” (NIV, NRSV), the OT “ransom to the Lord” defined above. By the first century AD, the amount was fixed at two drachmas, equivalent to wages for two long days of common labor. (2) Telos comes first in the word pair translated “duty and taxes” in v. 25 and is the generic word in the NT for taxes. It also occurs in Rom. 13:7, where it is translated “revenue.” (3) Kēnsos occurs second in the same word pair in v. 25 and refers to the direct poll tax on male adults. It also appears in Mark 12:14; Matt. 22:17–19, both addressing the question of paying taxes to Caesar. (4) The remaining Greek word, phoros, is found in Luke 20:22; 23:2; Rom. 13:6–7. This term refers specifically to a tribute tax paid by a subjugated nation to a superior authority—for example, the tax owed by Israelites to Caesar.

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Mark 12:13-17 is mentioned in the definition.

Jewish Parties

During the time of Jesus and in the couple of centuries prior, Judaism was not a monolithic entity but was comprised of different groups with varying religious concerns and political interests. This multifaceted nature of Judaism has caused scholars to question whether it would be better to speak of Judaisms rather than Judaism. Was Judaism cut from a whole cloth, or was it a box of fabric scraps? Perhaps it is best to speak of Judaism as a single entity, but one comprised of various factions with diverse beliefs and interests. This conclusion is justified because the diverse sentiments and interests were responses to the same religious and political issues, such as Torah, the temple, and foreign occupiers.

Pharisees

According to Josephus. The best source of information on the Pharisees, apart from the Gospels themselves, is the Jewish historian Josephus, who discusses the beliefs of various Jewish factions. In consideration of his Roman audience, he depicts these groups as Jewish philosophical schools. In his Antiquities, Josephus indicates a rough outline of the beliefs of the Pharisees and their political position in relation to the Sadducees and the general populace.

Josephus gives the following points in summation of the Pharisees’ beliefs. (1) The Pharisees believed some things are the result of fate, whereas other things are the result of human choice. (2) The Pharisees believed that the soul survives death in a place of either reward or punishment, and in the resurrection of the body. (3) Besides believing in the authority of Scripture, the Pharisees also had an authoritative body of oral tradition.

The Pharisees and the Sadducees had a difficult relationship, due not only to different religious beliefs but also to conflicting political aspirations. Josephus suggests that Jewish leaders gave patronage to one group or the other, or suppressed one group or the other, sometimes violently. In regard to the general populace, the Pharisees had a much better relationship with them than did the Sadducees, to the point that when Sadducees were magistrates, they had to rule according to the beliefs of the Pharisees or else the people would not listen to them.

In the New Testament. In the Synoptic Gospels, the Pharisees were one of the groups that opposed Jesus. It seems that the Pharisees most strongly opposed Jesus on issues related to their received tradition, which they considered to be as binding as the OT law. Two such legal issues were ceremonial washings before meals and working on the Sabbath. All three Synoptic Gospels narrate the Pharisees questioning Jesus concerning his and his disciples’ failure to follow the tradition of the elders by eating with “unclean,” that is, “unwashed,” hands (Matt. 15:1–2; Mark 7:1–5; Luke 11:39–41). Concerning breaking the Sabbath, the Pharisees confronted Jesus on various occasions, such as when Jesus healed on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:9–14; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–11) and when his disciples picked grain while walking through a field (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28; Luke 6:1–5).

Relationship with rabbinic Judaism. An issue concerning the Pharisees is their relationship with later rabbinic Judaism. There are basically two viewpoints on this matter, and both involve the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70. One position maintains that when the dust settled from the destruction of the temple, only the Pharisees remained standing, and rabbinic Judaism is their heir. Another view holds that after AD 70 sectarian Judaism disappeared, and rabbinic Judaism emerged from a coalescence of various Jewish groups. Although one cannot be certain, it seems that the former view may be closer to the truth, since in the Mishnah, Sadducean legal opinion is contrasted with Pharisaic, and the Pharisaic is invariably considered correct.

Sadducees

The Sadducees were an elite group of Jews connected with the priesthood. “Sadducee” probably means “Son of Zadok,” a descendant of the high priest Zadok from the time of David. Some members of the Qumran community used the term “Son of Zadok” as a self-designation as well, suggesting some common ancestry, if not direct identification, of the Sadducees and some members of the Qumran community.

Along with the Pharisees, the Sadducees were a religious-political group that sought the support of the ruling powers. It is in the context of the patron-retainer relationship that we first hear of the Sadducees. Josephus relates how the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus switched from being the patron of the Pharisees to that of the Sadducees. When the Pharisee Eliezer suggested that Hyrcanus step down from the high priesthood due to his uncertain lineage, Hyrcanus became very angry and wanted Eliezer to be executed. The rest of the Pharisees suggested that he merely be bound and whipped, since they had a tradition of passing light sentences. A Sadducee suggested that they passed such a light sentence because they agreed with Eliezer that Hyrcanus was unsuitable to be high priest. Hyrcanus then cast his support behind the Sadducees and abolished the laws that the Pharisees had given to the populace.

Josephus gives the following general description of the Sadducees’ beliefs and relationship with the general populace. (1) The Sadducees rejected fate; things are the result of human action alone. Along with this, God stands aloof from humans concerning good and evil actions. Good and evil are the result of human action. (2) The Sadducees believed that the soul dies along with the body. (3) They accepted only the written law and had no oral tradition. Some take this last point to mean that they accepted only the Pentateuch as Scripture, but this goes beyond what Josephus says about them.

Josephus goes on to write that Sadducees were as contentious in their disputes with fellow Sadducees as with people outside the group, and they did not hold their elders in esteem. They had influence over the elite, but no say with the populace at large.

The book of Acts confirms that the Sadducees were closely connected to the priesthood (Acts 4:1; 5:17), and that they disputed with the Pharisees over the resurrection (Acts 23:6–8).

Essenes

The Essenes are the third “philosophical school” mentioned by Josephus. Most scholars consider the Qumran sectarians who produced the DSS to be Essenes. This has created a number of circular arguments, since the DSS are then used to confirm the nature of Essene beliefs. That being said, there is good evidence that the Qumran sectarians were at least in part Essene. The Essenes are not mentioned in the NT or in rabbinic literature, but they do appear in the writings of Josephus, Philo of Alexandria, and Pliny the Elder.

Josephus delineates the beliefs of the Essenes as follows. (1) They ascribed every happening to God. (2) They believed in the immortality of the soul.

Josephus writes at great length concerning the Essenes’ way of life. They lived an ascetic lifestyle, avoided pleasure, and devoted themselves to prayer. They shared all things in common and lived in harmony with one another. Some Essenes avoided marriage, whereas others regarded marriage and procreation as too central to human life to avoid. Certain Essenes could predict the future and interpret dreams. Concerning sacrifices, Josephus mentions that although they sent offerings to the temple, they had their own, superior sacrifices.

Philo writes that the Essenes were much admired due to their holy lives, living peaceably with one another and holding to the truth. Contrary to Josephus, Philo says that the Essenes did not sacrifice, but through study they kept their minds pure and holy.

The Essenes, as Josephus and Philo describe them, seem similar to the Qumran sectarians. The Qumran sectarians believed that God determines the fate of people (1QS 3:13–4:26). Although the sectarians believed in the immortality of the soul as well as divine reward and punishment, this does not seem to be emphasized in their writings.

Zealots

Scholars tend to use “Zealots” as a general term to refer to three different groups mentioned by Josephus: brigands, Sicarii, and Zealots. The three groups have different political ideologies and emerged at different times in the first century. They can all be described as revolutionaries.

The brigands were motivated not by religious or political ideology but by survival. Displaced from the traditional economic structure of Palestine—the agricultural village—by the Romans, the brigands stole from Jew and Roman alike. They hated the Romans because the Romans had driven them into poverty through taxation and transformation of the economy from subsistence-based agriculture to cash crops that could be sold more readily. (Money could be shipped to Rome more easily than crops.)

The other two groups, the Sicarii and the Zealots, fought the Romans and Jewish collaborators for political and religious reasons. They emerged at different times during the first century, and they should not be lumped together, for their methodologies and goals were somewhat different.

Josephus writes about what he calls the “fourth philosophy,” which he considers an alien element introduced into the religion and politics of Israel, begun in AD 6 by Judas the Galilean and Zadok the Pharisee. Their slogan was “No king but God,” and they engaged in a short-lived rebellion. It seems unclear whether the fourth philosophy should be a category that includes the brigands, the Sicarii, and the Zealots, or whether it is a group unto itself. Whatever the case, Josephus makes clear that this fourth philosophy is an anomaly in the history of Israel.

The Sicarii were a group of assassins who emerged in the AD 40s–50s. They specialized in mixing into Jerusalem crowds and murdering Jews who were friendly with the Romans, mainly the wealthy. The high priest Jonathan was one of their victims. At the start of the first Roman war, they commanded Jewish troops but were driven out by fellow Jews. They spent the rest of the war at Masada, conducting inconsequential exploits. They killed themselves in AD 73–74 rather than be captured by the Romans. Josephus writes that the leader of the Sicarii at the beginning of the first Roman war was Menahem, the son or grandson of Judas of Galilee. It has been speculated that Judas Iscariot’s surname may be derived from Sicarii, but the etymology is uncertain.

The Zealots emerged at the start of the first Roman war (AD 66–70). Josephus mentions them mainly in connection with the Roman war and seldom in other sections of his writings. They consisted mainly of people displaced by Roman activity in Galilee. They targeted the aristocracy that collaborated with Rome, the Romans themselves, and other revolutionary groups. One of Jesus’ disciples was called “Simon the Zealot” (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), but this is likely a reference to his zealous faith.

The first Roman war erupted when the Roman procurator Florus looted the temple. When nothing was done concerning this, the lower priests, the captain of the temple guard, Eleazar, and other revolutionary leaders decided to terminate the temple sacrifice made on the emperor’s behalf. This essentially started the Roman war and gave rise to the Zealots.

Herodians

The Herodians are mentioned three times in the Gospels. They are reported to have plotted, along with the Pharisees, to kill Jesus after he healed a man with a withered hand (Mark 3:6). They are also described, along with the Pharisees, as trying to trap Jesus concerning the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:13).

Ownership

Both Testaments proclaim, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it” (Ps. 24:1; 1 Cor. 10:26). Only the Lord and Creator of the universe can rightfully claim ownership over anything, be it physical, spiritual, or moral (Job 41:11). Thus, “every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights” (James 1:17). He even owns human beings themselves. In a biblical worldview, God alone exercises ownership. People, however, exercise stewardship over what he has given.

Scripture guides and regulates human relationships with respect to owning property. While people are ultimately only stewards, they must never wrongly take or desire what God has entrusted to others. Therefore God commands, “You shall not steal” (Exod. 20:15) and “You shall not covet” (20:17). The book of Proverbs explains how to wisely dispose of one’s goods (Prov. 3:9, 10; 11:25; 22:9), as does Jesus’ parable of the talents (Matt. 25:14–30). Numerous passages teach that human “ownership” should be earned through work, if possible (Jer. 29:5–7; 2 Thess. 3:10). People should acknowledge their possessions as gifts from God by giving to the poor (Eph. 4:28) and to God’s appointed leaders, both secular and Christian: “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s” (Mark 12:17 [cf. Rom. 13:6; 1 Tim. 5:18]).

In fact, the whole Bible can be read as the drama of the divine owner relating to his human stewards. At creation, God charges Adam and Eve “to work . . . and take care of” the garden (Gen. 2:15), thereby entrusting all creation to human care. In disobedience they abuse their stewardship, as will their offspring. In the fall, humankind forfeits God’s benefits in paradise (Gen. 3); he disowns his unfaithful stewards. The rest of Scripture relates how God redeems a people for himself, adopting the disinherited back into his household. He begins by promising Abraham that his offspring, Israel, will possess a land, Canaan (Gen. 17:8), which will be a kind of new paradise (Exod. 3:8). The Israelites conquer the territory, but over time they prove to be unfaithful stewards. After breaking God’s covenant, they lose the land in exile.

Jesus’ parable of the landowner in Matt. 21:33–44 is basically a capsule version of this grand biblical story. Both come to a climax when God sends his Son, Jesus Christ. He comes to “buy back” his people from their sins as the one faithful servant (Mark 10:45), even unto death on a cross (Phil. 2:8). Jesus pays for his elect’s adoption with his blood, so now believers partake in God’s ownership over all things. “All things are yours, whether . . . the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God” (1 Cor. 3:21–23).

Tiberius Caesar

The Roman emperor during the time of Jesus’ ministry, he reigned in the years AD 14–37. Tiberius was adopted by his predecessor, Augustus, in an act that paved the way for Tiberius to ascend to the headship of the empire. All references to “Caesar” in the Gospels are to Tiberius (except Luke 2:1). The first mention of Tiberius states that the ministry of John the Baptist was taking place “in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar” (Luke 3:1). It is noteworthy that each of the remaining Gospel references to Tiberius concerns the issue of paying taxes. All three Synoptic Gospels give an account of a debate between Jesus and certain religious leaders about paying taxes to Caesar, with Jesus indicating that they indeed should be paid (Matt. 22:15–22; Mark 12:13–17; Luke 20:20–26). In contrast, when Jesus is later on trial before Pilate, the assembled crowd alleges that Jesus opposed the payment of taxes to Tiberius Caesar (Luke 23:2).

Showing 1 to 50 of115 results

1. The Bigger Issue: What We Owe to God

Illustration

Timothy Weber

What amazed the Pharisees and the Herodians about Jesus' response was how he refocused the issue to something much bigger than they had intended. In essence Jesus said, give Caesar what he has coming, a silver coin with his image on it. It's already his anyway, so let him have it back. But give back to God all that God deserves, which is everything, including yourselves.

If we are right about Jesus' intentions, then we must not try and develop a full-blown political theology from his words or use them to answer all the practical questions we may bring to the text. From this passage we cannot learn how or when to turn Christian convictions into public policy or how to vote in the next election. The fact of the matter is that Jesus did not say much about such things; and the rest of the New Testament provides different responses believers should have in response to human government. In Romans 13 Paul paints a positive picture of the role of government and commands Christians to obey it; but in Revelation 13 the author describes a government gone demonic and warns believers to resist it unto death. According to the book of Acts, it did not take Jesus' followers long to discover that "we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29).

What we owe to God is infinitely more than we owe to Caesar. The Words of 1 Peter 2:17 help put the issue into perspective: Fear God, honor the king." There is a world of difference between those two obligations, no matter where we draw the line between God and the government. In the last resort, then, Caesar is Caesar, and God is God."

2. What Is Caesar’s and What Is God's? - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

A young lady was soaking up the sun's rays on a Florida beach when a little boy in his swimming trunks, carrying a towel, came up to her and asked her, "Do you believe in God?" She was surprised by the question but she replied, "Why, yes, I do." Then he asked her: "Do you go to church every Sunday?" Again, her answer was "Yes!" He then asked: "Do you read your Bible and pray everyday?" Again she said, "Yes!" By now her curiosity was very much aroused. The little lad sighed with relief and said, "Will you hold my quarter while I go in swimming?"

The little boy was straightforward and honest in his questions because he wanted to entrust to the lady something valuable. The Pharisees are not being honest. They have no intent in entrusting Jesus with anything. They are not looking for the answer to a question. They don't want someone to hold their quarter. They are looking for a way to get rid of this trouble making Nazarene named Jesus.

The Pharisees were so angry it blinded them. Think for a moment about the ironies here: We know, because we live on this side of the resurrection, that Jesus was God. They thought he was demonic, an agent of Satan. We know that Jesus is the King of kings. They thought he wanted to be the King of Israel. We know that he was the Son of God. They thought he was simply Joseph and Mary's son. We know that Jesus has influenced the world for 2000 years. They thought his influence would end at the cross.

It's a fascinating story. We look at the Pharisees and we shake our heads. How could they have been so wrong when the truth was standing right in front of them? I believe they were upset because Jesus held them accountable and exposed their hypocrisy. "Teacher, we know that you are sincere," they say to him, "and teach the way of God." Not for a moment did they believe in Jesus' sincerity. It was a set up. It was a way of putting him at ease before they stabbed him in the back. Tell us then, they continue, what do you think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor?

I suppose we ought to be grateful to the Pharisees. In their question, which Jesus says was motivated by malice, they prompt one of the greatest of Jesus' teachings. It may not seem like much on the face of it, but the implications of this teaching have echoed through the centuries and they have shaped western societies. Jesus said, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's." Let us ask three questions this morning and find out why this little teaching has had such a great influence.

1. What Is Caesar's?
2. What Is God's?
3. Which Will You Choose?

3. April 15, Not a Good Day

Illustration

King Duncan

Besides being income tax day, April 15 is also the day the Titanic sunk and the day that Lincoln was shot. Someone else has said, "You may not agree with every department of the government, but you really have to hand it to the IRS."

Another cynic has said, "Death and taxes may always be with us, but at least death doesn't get any worse."

Arthur Godfrey once said, "I feel honored to pay taxes in America. The thing is, I could probably feel just as honored for about half the price."

One last observer noted that the Eiffel tower is the Empire State building after taxes.

God and the IRS. "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's."

4. The Journey Beyond

Illustration

When John Todd, a nineteenth-century clergyman, was six years old, both his parents died. A kind-hearted aunt raised him until he left home to study for the ministry. Later, this aunt became seriously ill, and in distress she wrote Todd a letter. Would death mean the end of everything, or could she hope for something beyond? Here, condensed from The Autobiography of John Todd, is the letter he sent in reply:

"It is now thirty-five years since I, as a boy of six, was left quite alone in the world. You sent me word you would give me a home and be a kind mother to me. I have never forgotten the day I made the long journey to your house. I can still recall my disappointment when, instead of coming for me yourself, you sent your servant, Caesar, to fetch me.

"I remember my tears and anxiety as, perched high on your horse and clinging tight to Caesar, I rode off to my new home. Night fell before we finished the journey, and I became lonely and afraid. 'Do you think she'll go to bed before we get there?' I asked Caesar. 'Oh no!' he said reassuringly, 'She'll stay up for you. When we get out o' these here woods, you'll see her candle shinin' in the window.'

"Presently we did ride out into the clearing, and there, sure enough, was your candle. I remember you were waiting at the door, that you put your arms close about me a tired and bewildered little boy. You had a fire burning on the hearth, a hot supper waiting on the stove. After supper you took me to my new room, heard me say my prayers, and then sat beside me till I fell asleep.

"Someday soon God will send for you, to take you to a new home. Don't fear the summons, the strange journey, or the messenger of death. God can be trusted to do as much for you as you were kind enough to do for me so many years ago. At the end of the road you will find love and a welcome awaiting, and you will be safe in God's care."

5. A Revolutionary Text

Illustration

Staff

The passage in Matthew 22 in which Jesus tells the Pharisees to "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's is "a revolutionary text, and its public implications have been working themselves out for almost two millennia," according to George Weigel, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center of Washington, D.C. In an essay entitled "The Christian Citizen and Democracy," Mr. Weigel noted that the Scriptures say to submit to the governing authorities and to pray for them (1 Peter 2:13-14, Romans 13:1), but that Caesar is not God, contrary to a common belief in the times of Jesus.

Mr. Weigel questioned whether atheists can really be good citizens, arguing that democracy requires a standard of truth and morality outside the scope of fallen human beings. Richard John Neuhaus, editor-in-chief of First Things, was quoted as saying to an atheist who asked, "Is this the opening salvo of a campaign to deny atheists their rights?", "Relax. Your rights are secured by my understanding of the truth, even if mine are not by yours."

6. Zacchaeus - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

We owe Luke a great debt. For in his Gospel alone is told a dramatic story that capsulizes for us what the mission of Jesus was all about, and in turn what the mission of the church is all about. The event happened while Jesus was passing through Jericho, the city of palms. Writes Luke: "And there was a man named Zacchaeus. He was a chief tax collector, and he was rich." In one sentence we are told the story of a human life.

Here's the background. Nothing in first century Judea was quite so hated and despised as was the Roman tax. It not only reminded the Jews that they were a subjugated people, it also represented a theological affront. To the Jew there was only one King, and that was God, not Caesar. Paying tribute to an earthly non-Jewish monarch was something that the Hebrews had opposed throughout their long history.

But there was more. The dirty work of collecting the tax was done not by the Romans, but by collaborating Jews. Much of the money that they collected off the backs of their fellow countrymen stuck to their own fingers. We are told that Zacchaeus was a chief tax collector. That is the only time in the New Testament that that term is used. It meant that he was over an entire district. Zacchaeus may have been short in stature, but he had wealth and wealth means power, so, in a manner of speaking, people looked up to him. Zacchaeus was the little man with the big reputation. He was not just very well to do. According to Luke, he was a rich man.

Of course, one might take issue with Luke in that descriptive term rich. For in many ways Zacchaeus was as poor as any man in Jericho. For all of his money he was a lonely man, he was an empty man. In the world of the flesh he had everything; in the world of the spirit he had nothing. The people, of course, looked upon him with complete contempt. He was a dog. He was cut off from communion with the community of God. There is symbolism in his title chief tax collector. That is another way of saying that he was not only a sinner, but a chief among sinners. Therefore, he was prevented from seeing Jesus that day, not only by the press of the crowd, but also due to social and religious ostracism.

This is not only a story of Zacchaeus, but it is also the story of what it means to be a lost person. What do we means when we say that a person is lost? Well, we can perhaps oversimplify and say that their soul is lost, but it can be much more tragically real than that?

1. Jesus reaches out to the outcast and sinner

2. The most difficult aspect of our Christian faith

7. It's Not All That Bad

Illustration

Bill Bouknight

Most nice respectable American churches don't talk about sin, judgment, or hell. Why? Because they are post-modern. Most Americans read the Bible selectively, omitting those parts they don't like. The first thing many American churchgoers throw out is the concept of hell, because (in their view) a nice, well-behaved God wouldn't let anybody go to hell. After you lose hell, you lose a sense of sin. Nobody is guilty of anything. Everybody is just a victim.

The call to repent has no meaning. Dr. Calvin Miller of the Beeson Divinity School claims that instead of repenting we play a nice little game entitled, "It's not all that bad." It sounds like this---"Yes, I did have a brief affair, but my wife was not meeting my needs. I didn't divorce her, so don't call it adultery; it's not all that bad." "Yes, my daughter and her fiancée share the same bedroom when they visit us, but most engaged couples do. After all, this is the 21st Century; it's not all that bad." "Sure, I sometimes drink too much, but never in front of the kids. I don't do any harm and it never causes me to miss a day of work. It's not all that bad." Many American churchgoers live in a state of denial.

When Charlie Brown did something wrong, he felt humility. But when Bart Simpson does something wrong, he feels entitlement. What a huge moral slippage this reveals in our culture. (1) Jesus message of good news always began with the word "repent." "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." (Matthew 4:17) Jesus bragged on a notorious sinner, a tax collector, because he uttered this simple prayer, "God, have mercy on me, a sinner." A prayer of repentance always rings bells in heaven. (Luke 18:10-14) The greatness of this tax collector was that he knew how to repent, how to say, "I'm sorry." All of us can be forgiven, if we are humble enough to say, "I'm sorry."

8. Rephrasing the Question

Illustration

Tom Long

Homiletics professor and Matthew commentator Tom Long rephrases the Caesar and Tax question to Jesus like this. "In effect," he writes, the opponents of Jesus ask, "Are you a foolish, uncompromising revolutionary whose allegiance to the kingdom of heaven is actually a political revolution in disguise, or are you a smooth-talking street preacher who stirs up people with glib talk of God's majesty but who underneath advocates a get-along-go-along policy with the Roman, Gentile pigs?"

9. Integrity Deficit Disorder

Illustration

Otis Young

What are some of the symptoms of integrity deficit disorder?

A person who is afflicted with this disorder knows what's right but doesn't follow through and do what's right. He or she makes a promise or commitment, then fails to keep it. Thus when you meet a person with integrity deficit disorder you're never quite sure if you can trust that person or not.

A second symptom is also one of the causes: people who have integrity deficit disorder live from the outside in rather than from the inside out. They let their feelings and emotional responses of the moment govern their behavior more than doing what's right regardless of their feelings of the moment.

To put it another way, people with integrity deficit disorder are reactive rather than proactive. Reactive individuals base their decisions and actions on the outward circumstances of the moment, what's going on around them. If someone is rude to them, they are rude in return. They are affected by their social environment. Reactive people build their emotional lives around the behavior of others, empowering the weaknesses of other people to control them. They let other people decide how they are going to act.

In addition, reactive people are often affected by the physical environment. If the weather is good, they feel good. If it isn't, they let it affect their attitude and their performance. Worse still, reactive people blame whatever happens to them on someone or something outside of them. They rarely take any responsibility for what's happened to them. It's always the fault of someone or something else.

Proactive people, on the other hand, carry their own weather with them. Whether it rains or shines makes no difference to them. They are value driven and if their value is to produce good quality work it isn't a function of whether the weather is conducive to it or not. Proactive people also do not let the social environment control their actions or decisions.

That's where integrity comes in. Having integrity is about behaving in the way you promised to behave even though the mood in which you made the promises has changed or the environment outside you has changed. If you have integrity it protects you from your changing moods, desires and feelings. It even protects you from the changing moods of other people. It protects you from saying you are going to something and then not following through.

One day Jesus told a story designed for people who have integrity deficit disorder. His target audience were people who claimed to be the most religious.

10. Three Taxes

Illustration

Jerry L. Schmalemberger

There were three taxes the Romans extracted from the Jewish people:

A ground tax - a man must pay to the government one-tenth of his grain and one-fifth of the oil and wine which he produced.
An income tax - one percent of a person's income.
A poll tax - every male person from age fourteen to 65 and every female from age twelve to 75 must pay one denarius or one day's wages per year.

The tax mentioned in Matthew 25 is the poll tax – one denarius, one day's wages a year. The Jews resented the tax, not just because we all hate taxes, but because to a few, God was the only king. To pay taxes to an earthly king was to admit the validity of his kingship and thus insult God.

11. Give To God The Things That Are God's

Illustration

Phyllis Faaborg Wolk

"Tell us what you think, Teacher. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?" When the Pharisees asked Jesus that question, he responded with a request, "Show me the coin used for the tax," and someone handed Jesus a coin embossed with the head of the current Roman emperor, Tiberius. Engraved around his head was the inscription, "Tiberius Caesar, majestic son of the majestic God, and High Priest." "Whose image is on this coin?" Jesus asked. "The emperor's," they responded. "Well then," Jesus said, "give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor." The image of the emperor was embossed on the coin, therefore the coin belonged to him.

But in answering the Pharisees' question, Jesus didn't stop with the issue of taxation. He continued, "and give to God what belongs to God." As Jesus spoke the words, "give to God what belongs to God," standing right before him were those on whom the image of God had been embossed. The Pharisees, teachers of the law of Israel, children of Abraham whom God had claimed as his own, had been created from the very beginning in the image of God. In the image of himself, God had created them. They belonged to God. Those in whose eyes Jesus looked as he spoke were the coins of God. "Give to God what belongs to God," Jesus said. But when he spoke those words, the Pharisees left him and went away.

Should we pay taxes to the government? Yes, Jesus would say. But again, Jesus wouldn't stop there. Today he looks you in the eye and says, "Give to God what belongs to God." And as he looks at you, Jesus sees the image of God. In the beginning God created you and embossed his image upon you. In the waters of baptism, God marked you with the cross of Christ forever. God has given himself to you and has promised to love you and be with you forever.

Mrs. Detweiler was created in the image of God. She worked at Murray Elementary as the special education teacher. It didn't take her students long to recognize the image of God within her which made them feel special and loved. Even though she was a special education teacher, the students of Murray Elementary considered it a privilege to be invited to Mrs. Detweiler's room. The walls of her small classroom were covered with stars made out of bright yellow construction paper. Neatly written in black permanent marker on the star at the top of each row was the name of one of her students. As soon as a student finished reading a book, the title of that book was placed on another star that soon appeared directly beneath the star bearing the student's name. The more books a person read, the more stars accumulated under the name. Whenever her students finished a book, Mrs. Detweiler made them feel like stars, themselves. Her ability to make her students feel special and important was a mark of the image of God shining through her.

Mrs. Detweiler bore the image of God. She loved her students -- that was the image of God. She gave of herself by teaching them to read -- that was the image of God. She believed in her students -- that was the image of God. But even as one created in the image of God, Mrs. Detweiler would be the first to say that she had her faults. There were times when she let her students down; times when she lost her patience; times when her mood affected her ability to respond to her students enthusiastically. Mrs. Detweiler wasn't perfect, but she had been created in the image of God, claimed as God's child through her baptism and renewed each day with the gift of forgiveness. As she gave God what belonged to God by giving of herself to her students, Jesus worked through her. Through Mrs. Detweiler, God's love, acceptance and encouragement was shown to many students as they grew and matured into the people God had created them to be. As she gave God what belonged to God, God continued to give himself to her, revealing his love again and again through the sparkle in her students' eyes.

You are God's. His image has been placed within you. When I look at you, I see the image of God. I see the image of God in your faces as you greet one another before worship. I see the image of God each time you pray for each other and share one another's concerns. I see the image of God when I go to the nursing home and watch you hug and hold and gently speak with those who reside there. I see the image of God when I watch the Sunday school staff relate with the children -- so often God's love is given and received in the simple interactions they share. I see the image of God in the church kitchen, as members of this congregation work side by side to prepare a meal after a funeral or before a fellowship event. I see the image of God every time one of you gives to the Lord's work in a generous and cheerful way, sharing with others the blessings God has given you. God's image shines when you invite and welcome your neighbors to church -- not only those who are like you, but those who bring different perspectives and talents and needs to this body of Christ. I see God's image as this congregation reaches beyond itself to support missionaries and relieve world hunger. Whenever you give of yourself to others, the image of God within you is being revealed.

You are the bearers of God's image. Jesus said, "Give to God the things that are God's." You are God's. Jesus says, "Give yourself to God." But before you can even respond to Jesus' call to give yourself to God, God gives himself to you. Even before you have a chance to respond to Jesus' command, Jesus goes to the cross. Jesus goes to the cross to give to God what belongs to God. Jesus goes to the cross to give you to his Father in Heaven, who then blesses you with salvation and eternal life. Jesus goes to the cross for you and gives you life.

Give to God the things that are God's. When you give yourself to God, God will nurture his image within you. Jesus who now lives in you will give himself to others whenever you give of yourself to those in need. Jesus will use you to reveal God's love and forgiveness, to show all God's children how special they are to God, and to proclaim salvation to all who have been created in the image of God. Give to God things that are God's, remembering that Jesus has already given himself for you. Amen.

12. Tax Collectors of the Roman World

Illustration

Brett Blair

In the days of Jesus tax collectors deserved the scorn of the people because often they abused their position. Here is how William Barclay describes the business of the tax collector in the Roman world:

'The problem of the Roman government was to devise a system whereby the taxes could be collected as efficiently and as cheaply as possible. They had done so by auctioning the right to collect taxes in a certain area. A man bought the right to collect the taxes within a certain district; he was responsible to the Roman government for an agreed sum; anything he could raise over and above that he was allowed to keep as commission. Obviously this system lent itself to grave abuses. People did not really know how much they ought to pay in the days before newspapers and wireless announcements and the widespread diffusion of news; nor had they any right of appeal against the tax-collector. The consequence was that many a tax-collector became a wealthy man through his illegal extortion...

These tax-gatherers were universally hated. They had entered the service of their country's conquerors, and they amassed their fortunes at the expense of their country's misfortunes...They were notoriously dishonest. Not only did they fleece their own countrymen, but they also did their best to swindle the government, and they made a flourishing income by taking bribes from rich people who wished to avoid taxes which they should have paid. Every country hates its tax-gatherers, but the hatred of the Jews for them was doubly violent. The Jews were fanatical nationalists. But what roused the Jews more than anything else was their religious conviction that God alone was king, and that to pay any taxes to any mortal ruler was an infringement of God's rights and an insult to His majesty. By Jewish law a tax-gatherer was debarred from the synagogue; he was included with things and beasts unclean, and Leviticus 20:5 was applied to him; he was forbidden to be a witness in any case; "robbers, murderers and tax-gatherers" were classed together. When Jesus called Matthew, He called a man whom all men hated.'

13. Never as Stereotypes

Illustration

John A. Stroman

Jesus always met men and women on the level of their need, regardless of who they were or what they had done. He met everyone as human beings, never as stereotypes. Stereotypes were as powerful then as they are now. Once a label is placed on a person the human being vanishes. Many labels were given to people in the New Testament such labels as tax collector, Samaritan, Roman soldier, prostitute, rich young man, Pharisee, sinner, publican, leper. They all appear in the gospel narrative, and every time Jesus completely ignores the label and deals with the person. This is certainly true of his encounters with Matthew, Zacchaeus, the traveler on the Jericho road, the centurion, Mary Magdalene, and Nicodemus. David H.C. Read points out that "Jesus knew the ugly side of society: the brutality of the occupation, the corruption of the tax system, the racial prejudices, the economic injustice, the religious hypocrisy, and the sexual degradation. But never once did these factors blind him to the reality of the human being, the unique son or daughter of God he saw before him."

14. JUDGE

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Numbers 25:5 - "And Moses said to the judges of Israel, ‘Every one of you slay his men who have yoked themselves to Baal of Peor.’ "

1 Chronicles 17:10 - "from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel; and I will subdue all your enemies."

If you will check any good anthropology text, you will find that even in very primitive societies, certain persons serve as judges. In the earliest times, the head of the house was considered judge over his household, even with life and death. With the enlargement of the human family, this power quite naturally passed to the heads of tribes and clans.

Moses, we find, followed Jethro’s advice and appointed judges for every "small matter" while Moses decided the important things. Upon Moses’ death, judges handled all the disputes. During the period known as the time of the Judges (1225-1020 B.C.), military leaders seem to have served as judges. When the monarchy was established, the king and his officers became the highest legal authorities. David appointed 6,000 Levites as judges and officers. Ezra was ordered by the king of Persia to appoint judges.

All Israelites (except women, who were forbidden by the Palestinian Talmud) were deemed qualified to serve as judges in civil matters, but only priests, Levites, and Israelites of spotless character and ancestery could judge a criminal case. Qualifications for a judge were knowledge of the Law and integrity.

Although there were no age limits for judges, as the Sanhedrin became the judicial body for the Jews, it became obvious that a very young man could not qualify. To become a member of this supreme court of the Jews, a man must possess wisdom, a knowledge of foreign languages and of science, to be of good height, and possess an appearance which commanded respect. Among those who were disqualified were eunuchs, childless men, professional gamblers, shepherds, farmers, tax collectors, robbers, extortioners, and all those suspected of dishonesty.

Judges were thought of as performing a sacred duty; deliberating over a decision was described as "inquiring of God." During the period of the Judges, these leaders were charismatic, and did not hold the position indefinitely. In these times, to be a judge was to hold an honorary, voluntary position, for which one was not paid. Later, judges were paid for their services, just as our judges are today.

It was preferred that a case be decided by at least three judges, and we find this custom existing in an expanded form today in our supreme courts.

15. Greeks Seek Wisdom Not A Savior

Illustration

Brett Blair

There seems to be little connection between the Greek's request and Jesus' response until you begin to speculate about why this leap in logic. Something appears to be missing. Why does Jesus seemingly ignore the Greeks request for an audience with him?

Two possible reasons are put forth here. 1. Jesus knows that the Greeks "Seek Wisdom" and are only interested in debate and dialogue on theological philosophical issues of the day. Even if they are God Fearers they are perhaps noncommittal. Jesus draws a line in the sand now that this is Passion Week and, in effect says, the time for debating is over! Those who would be my disciples must lose their life and hate their life in this world in order to save it. Whoever serves me must follow me wherever I may go (verses 25- 26). Dialogue and casual consideration is not enough at this juncture in the drama. 2. Jesus knows that these are political operatives. He has just entered Jerusalem on the donkey and been given a coronation reception which was typically reserved for Kings. These Greeks want to know exactly who this person is and what his political aspirations are so they can report back to King Herod or even Caesar himself. Jesus knows their intent and so ignores their request.

Either way the attempt here, on the part of the Greeks, is to discern who this man is. What are his aspirations and desires? Who does he see himself as and what are we going to do with him? These questions are still being asked today and the major religions of the world all have their various answers.

16. More than Numbers to God

Illustration

Lee Griess

Numbers. Our lives are filled with numbers. Each year we file our income taxes. Now that's an exercise in numbers to end all numbers games. Pages upon pages of numbers. And when it is finally prepared, we send it off to the Internal Revenue Service with our Social Security number on it. And the IRS takes all those numbers and puts them into a computer, along with the numbers of thousands and thousands of other people. And to them, we become a number.

The government knows us by our tax number. The state knows us by our driver's license number. The bank knows us by our account number. And when we retire, we'll be known by our Social Security number. And it goes on and on. In fact, sometimes I wonder if anybody knows us at all without a number!

And that's why this morning's Gospel reading is so significant, because it tells us that God knows us. He knows us intimately, in fact, better than we know ourselves. And that's important to remember. In spite of the fact that the image of sheep and shepherd is foreign to our experience, the words of the Gospel this morning hearken for us a truth that our human hearts long to hear. The Old Testament writer put it even more clearly when he wrote, "The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want." Jesus says it this morning, "My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me, and I give them eternal life."

17. Everything He Says Is True

Illustration

Ray Pritchard & Brett Blair

When you read the story about the Pharisee, a number of specific statements are made about his piety. Please note this. Everything the man says about himself is true. For instance, when he says, "I thank you that I am not like other men," indeed he wasn't like other men. He had a standard of morality that was far above the standard of that day.

When he said, "I fast twice a week;" it happens to be literally true. The Pharisees fasted on Monday and Thursday of every week.
When he says, "I give tithes of all I possess," he means he tithes on the gross and not on the net. He went beyond the Law of Moses. That's no big deal; all the Pharisees did that.
When he says, "I am not a crook," he really isn't a crook.
When he says, "I am not like this filthy tax collector," he's really not like that guy.
When he says, "I do not commit adultery," he really doesn't commit adultery. He is faithful to his wife.
When he says, "I am honest, I am faithful, I am zealous for my religion," he means it and every word of it is true. He truly is a genuinely good man.

What we are to understand is this. When he prayed he was telling the truth. When he said, "Lord, you're lucky to have a guy like me, because I'm one of the best guys I know," it was really true. He really was a wonderful guy.

While he prayed, people would be standing around watching. And they would say, "Yep, he's a fine man." While he prayed, they probably applauded. He was the kind of guy you'd want living next door to you. A good citizen. A law-abiding man. A good, religious kind of person. If he were to come to this church today we'd love him because he would be faithful, loyal, and give us a lot of money. We'd probably make him an elder or a deacon. He's just that kind of guy. He looks really good on the outside. Everything he says about himself is absolutely true.

So what's wrong? Well, for all his goodness he isn't perfect, no one is, and the Law requires perfection. I like to call this narcissistic righteousness. What good is all the law if you don't have love? If you are not reaching out to those around you. If the center of your righteousness is You, you've missed the center. The center is love God and love your neighbor.

18. In Spite Of

Illustration

Michael A. Guido of Metter, Georgia, columnist of several newspapers writes:

"An artist in Mexico lost his right hand while working on a statue. But he did not give up his work. He learned to carve with his left hand. His beautifully finished masterpiece was called 'In Spite Of.'

"A sound body, a brilliant mind, a cultural background, a huge amount of money, a wonderful education none of these guarantee success. Booker T. Washington was born in slavery. Thomas Edison was deaf. Abraham Lincoln was born of illiterate parents. Lord Byron had a club foot. Robert Louis Stevenson had tuberculosis. Alexander Pope was a hunchback. Admiral Nelson had only one eye. Julius Caesar was an epileptic. But these men made history in spite of their handicaps. And there was Louis Pasteur, so near-sighted that he had a difficult time finding his way in his laboratory without glasses. There was Helen Keller, who could not hear or see, but who graduated with honors from a famous college.

"Got a handicap? Call on the Lord. No problem is too big for Him, or too small. He will make everything 'work together for good' if you trust Him."

Surely, Guido understands the nature of the human spirit to overcome all obstacles, and that by the power of God!

19. A Church Without Works

Illustration

Ruth M. Walsh

I was naked, and you questioned my lack of modesty in my appearance.
I was imprisoned, and you debated the legal aspects of interference.

I was penniless, and you discussed tax-deductible donations from your wealth.
I was sick, and you thanked the Lord for the blessings of your health.

I was hungry, and you formed a club to study malnutrition.
I was homeless, and you said God's love was shelter under any condition.

I was lonely, and you left me by myself while you and your friends prayed.
You seem so holy and close to God. Yet I'm still sick and alone and afraid!

20. Who Do You Say I Am? - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Jesus and his disciples ventured into the District of Caesarea Philippi, an area about 25 miles northeast of the Sea of Galilee. The region had tremendous religious implications. The place was littered with the temples of the Syrian gods. Here also was the elaborate marble temple that had been erected by Herod the Great, father of the then ruling Herod Antipas. Here also was the influence of the Greek gods. Here also the worship of Caesar as a God himself. You might say that the world religions were on display in this town. It was with this scene in the background that Jesus chose to ask the most crucial questions of his ministry.

He looked at his disciples and in a moment of reflection said: "Who do men say that I am?" The disciples begin sharing with Jesus what they have heard from the people who have been following Jesus: Some say that you are Elijah; others say John the Baptist, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets. It's always been this way, Jesus as seen by the masses is seen in so many different ways.

You can speak of Jesus as prophet, holy man, teacher, or spiritual leader, and few will object. But speak of Him as Son of God, divine, of the same nature as the Father, and people will line up to express their disapproval.

A billion Muslims will say: "Prophet, yes. God, no!" Jews scattered around the world will say: "Teacher, yes. Messiah, no!" Liberal Protestants and religionists of various stripes will say: "Exemplary man, yes. Divine, no!" Who do people say he is? Who do you say he is? And what are we called to do? Let's take a look at the answers to these three question:

1. Who do men say that I am?
2. Who do you say that I am?
3. What is the church called to do?

21. Father's Day: A Tribute

Illustration

Max Lucado

Today is Father's Day. A day of cologne. A day of hugs, new neckties, long-distance phone calls, and Hallmark cards.

Today is my first Father's Day without a father. For thirty-one years I had one. I had one of the best. But now he's gone. He's buried under an oak tree in a west Texas cemetery. Even though he's gone, his presence is very near--especially today.

It seems strange that he isn't here. I guess that's because he was never gone. He was always close by. Always available. Always present. His words were nothing novel. His achievements, though admirable, were nothing extraordinary.

But his presence was.

Like a warm fireplace in a large house, he was a source of comfort. Like a sturdy porch swing or a big-branched elm in the backyard, he could always be found...and leaned upon.

During the turbulent years of my adolescence, Dad was one part of my life that was predictable. Girl friends came and girl friends went, but Dad was there. Football season turned into baseball season and turned into football season again and Dad was always there. Summer vacation, Homecoming dates, algebra, first car, driveway basketball--they all had one thing in common: his presence.

And because he was there life went smoothly. The car always ran, the bills got paid, and the lawn stayed mowed. Because he was there, the laughter was fresh and the future was secure. Because he was there my growing up was what God intended growing up to be; a storybook scamper through the magic and mystery of the world.

Because he was there we kids never worried about things like income tax, savings accounts, monthly bills, or mortgages. Those were the things on Daddy's desk.

We have lots of family pictures without him. Not because he wasn't there, but because he was always behind the camera.

He made the decisions, broke up the fights, chuckled at Archie Bunker, read the paper every evening, and fixed breakfast on Sundays. He didn't do anything unusual. He only did what dads are supposed to do--be there.

He taught me how to shave and how to pray. He helped me memorize verses for Sunday school and taught me that wrong should be punished and that rightness has its own reward. He modeled the importance of getting up early and staying out of debt. His life expressed the elusive balance between ambition and self-acceptance.

He comes to mind often. When I smell "Old Spice" aftershave, I think of him. When I see a bass boat I see his face. And occasionally, not too often, but occasionally when I hear a good joke, (the kind Red Skelton would tell), I hear him chuckle. He had a copyright chuckle that always came with a wide grin and arched eyebrows.

Daddy never said a word to me about sex or told me his life story. But I knew that if I ever wanted to know, he would tell me. All I had to do was ask. And I knew if I ever needed him, he'd be there.

Like a warm fireplace.

Maybe that's why this Father's Day is a bit chilly. The fire has gone out. The winds of age swallowed the late splendid flame, leaving only golden embers. But there is a strange thing about those embers...stir them a bit and a flame will dance. It will dance only briefly, but it will dance. And it will knock just enough chill out of the air to remind me that he is still...in a special way...very present.

22. Evangelism

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

Most people expect every minister in the world to witness and do the "E" word thing. You're sort of like secret agents. Most folks don't expect you to talk about your faith or be involved in this whole Evangelism deal. But you know what, you are exactly who Jesus would have chosen. Jesus called fishermen, tax collectors, and the every day ordinary kinds of people. He didn't have a single Pharisee, Sadduccee, Priest or Levite on his staff. It was all run by the laity. And after Pentecost their ministry exploded.

William Willimon said: "In baptism we are initiated, crowned, chosen, embraced, washed, adopted, gifted, reborn, killed, and thereby sent forth and redeemed. We are identified as one of God's own, then assigned our place and our job within the kingdom of God."

23. Lift Up Your Eyes

Illustration

Stephen M. Crotts

During World War II a delightful Christian English lady kept a personal diary. It tells of her husband's death in the war effort. It tells of food rationing and the horrible bombing of London . It tells of her children's evacuation to the countryside. One night during the bombings the woman confessed that she woke up and could not get back to sleep. She kept thinking of Hitler, invasion, and the S.S. troops. She trembled until she suddenly thought, "Where is Alexander the Great who gobbled up the world? Where is Caesar's dogmatic rule upheld on the tips of spears? Where is Napoleon? They are all in their graves and come to naught," she wrote. "And that is where Hitler will be, too. The same God reigns!" And she rolled over, laughed, and went back to sleep! The Mid-East, terrorism, crime, abortion is this what your eyes are upon? Are you gazing at the world, and only glancing at Christ? Rise above it! Lift up your eyes and see! The same God still reigns. Be assured!

24. The Law and the Gospel

Illustration

David Ernst

The primary purpose of the Law is, like a mirror, to teach man the true knowledge of his sin. We see this in the example of the publican. The publicans were tax-collectors for the Roman imperialists. They were Jews, but were not respected by their people. They were considered traitors and thieves, with some justification.

So the publican did not approach God with pride, demanding what was owed him. On the contrary, he approached the Lord with maximum humility and true repentance. Repentance is essential to receive the forgiveness of sins in Christ. That is why the Law should be preached to unrepentant sinners, but the Gospel to those who are troubled by their sins and terrified of damnation.

The Law demands, threatens and condemns; the Gospel promises, gives and confirms our forgiveness and salvation. God offers forgiveness of sins only in the Good News that we are saved because Christ fulfilled the Law, suffered, died and rose from the dead for us. So let us draw near to God in humility and repentance, of course, but also in the hope and faith that we are justified through faith, not by works, and that in Christ we are children of God.

25. A God Smothered in Tradition

Illustration

Brett Blair

We try to make God like us and thus limit him. We smother him in tradition. We think: God can be present only in the mass. The Word of God can be found only in the King James version of the Bible. Church music can be played only on an organ. When traditions become dogma they lose their power and their meaning. A young girl watching her mother getting ready to bake a ham, noticed that she cut off both ends. "Why do you cut off both ends of the ham," she asked. "Well, I don't know. My mother always did it. Let's ask her." But the grandmother said she didn't know either. She did it because her mother always did it. So they found the great grandmother, and asked her why she cut off both ends of the ham. "Because the pan was too small," she said. Most traditions made sense at one time, but times change, and situations change. Making a place for God in our lives (along with a place for Caesar), means allowing God to be God, not to bind him with our traditional ideas, not to trap him in our mugs.

26. Success Is Sometimes Measured in Inches

Illustration

King Duncan

Success is sometimes measured in inches.

After winning the Pontiac 400 in Richmond, Virginia, several years ago, stock car driver Mark Martin discovered that the spacer between the carburetor and the intake manifold was one-half-inch too long according to NASCAR rules. He was fined $40,000 and penalized 46 points in the season standings. Something that small seemed very significant for Mark.

In his book The Range of Human Capacities, Dr. David Wechsler says that if Cleopatra's nose had been just a fraction of an inch longer, the face of Europe might have been changed because Caesar might have shown less interest in the lady. This is another example of how the size of the difference can be small, but the size of the consequences can be huge.

A tragic illustration of the crucial importance of little things was furnished many years ago when a jet crashed shortly after takeoff. All 95 people on board were killed. An exhaustive study of the wreckage determined that it could have been caused by the rudder-control system's losing a bolt that was less than one inch long. For want of a bolt, so many lives were lost.

Success can sometimes be measured in inches. Take for example, the distance between the lips and the heart. Jesus was chastising the religious leaders of his day and he quotes the words of Isaiah: "These people worship me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me."

God on the lips, but not in the heart. A fatal distance of less than 12 inches.

27. False Dichotomies

Illustration

Tim Pauls

Let me ask you a few questions that I am sure you can answer:

Did you put on shoes this morning, or did you come to church in a car?

Do you eat cereal for breakfast, or don't you like football?

Are you Lutheran, or do you live in America?

Will you obey God, or will you pay taxes to Caesar?

Welcome to the world of false dichotomies--things that are wrongly set against each other, "either/or"s that really aren't. Can you wear shoes and come to church in a car? Can you eat cereal and enjoy football? Can you be Lutheran and live in America? Of course; in fact, you can be an American Lutheran who wears shoes and eats cereal while enjoying football after you've traveled to and from church in a car. None of these things are mutually exclusive. Beware of the one who asks such questions, because there may well be an agenda behind them. At the same time, rejoice! Such scheming is no match for the crucified and risen

28. Three Strikes?

Illustration

Johnny Dean

What do you do when the Word of God you encounter at church on Sunday morning is not comforting but confusing and even down right confrontational?

The lectionary text from the Gospel of Matthew certainly fits in that category, doesn't it? Well, at first glance it may not be all that confusing. Forgiveness is good, but there are limits. If someone sins against you, confront that person face to face, one on one, and try to clear the air. If reconciliation doesn't result from the one on one encounter, confront the person again in the presence of witnesses. If the situation still remains unresolved, tell it to the church - sic the elders on them! That'll teach them a lesson! But if THAT doesn't work then let the one who sinned against you "be to you as a Gentile or a tax collector." That seems pretty straightforward, doesn't it? Sounds a lot like "three strikes and you're out," as a matter of fact. Most of us would agree with that approach. If somebody does you wrong, they either ought to make it right or pay the price. Or, as one philosopher put it, "We should always forgive our enemies, but only after they have been publicly executed."

But, you see, there IS one problem with this "three strikes and you're out" approach. And it's a major problem. The problem is that this method of dealing with someone who has wronged you is totally, completely, 100% AGAINST everything else Jesus teaches about forgiveness. In fact, if you read the entire 18th chapter of Matthew's gospel instead of reading just these few selected verses, it would appear that "three strikes and you're out" flies in the face of the teachings of Jesus recorded elsewhere in that chapter.

29. Be Careful Who You Judge

Illustration

Roger G. Talbott

A young minister graduated from seminary just before World War I and he was appointed to a church in a very small town. He had been there only a couple of weeks when he received the call every new minister dreads – the call to do his first funeral. The person who had died was not a member of his church. She was, in fact, a woman with a very bad reputation. Her husband was a railroad engineer who was away from home much of the time. She had rented rooms in their house to men who worked on the railroad and rumor had it that she rented more than just rooms when her husband was away. The young preacher, faced with his first funeral, found no one who had a good word to say about this woman, until he entered the small old-fashioned grocery store on the day before the funeral. He began to talk to the store owner about his sadness that the first person he would bury would be someone about which nothing good could be said. The store owner didn't reply at first and then, in his silence, he appeared to make a decision. He took out his store ledger and laid it on the counter between him and the preacher. He opened the ledger at random and, covering the names in the left-hand column, he pointed to grocery bills written in red – groceries that people had bought on credit and then the column that showed the bill had been paid.

He said, "Every month, that woman would come in and ask me who was behind in their grocery bills. It was usually some family who had sickness or death or some poor woman trying to feed her kids when her husband drank up the money. She would pay their bill and she made me swear never to tell. But, I figure now that she is dead, people ought to know especially those who benefited from her charity who have been most critical of her."

"Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you."

30. Be at Peace with One Another - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

One person armed with the Gospel of peace can change the world. Telemachus did. He was a monk who lived in the 5th century. He felt God saying to him, "Go to Rome." He was in a cloistered monastery but he put his possessions in a sack and set out for Rome. When he arrived in the city, people were thronging in the streets. He asked why all the excitement and was told that this was the day that the gladiators would be fighting in the coliseum, the day of the games, the circus. He thought to himself, "Four centuries after Christ and they are still killing each other, for enjoyment?" He ran to the coliseum and heard the gladiators saying, "Hail to Caesar, we die for Caesar" and he thought, "this isn't right." He jumped over the railing and went out into the middle of the field, got between two gladiators, and tried to stop them. The crowd became enraged and stoned the peacemaker to death.

When the Emperor of Rome, Honorius, heard about the monk he declared him a Christian martyr and put an end to the games. Legend has it that the very last Gladiatorial game was the one in which Telemachus died.

Jesus said, "Have salt in yourselves - be at peace with each other." Sometimes it seems we have gladiatorial games going on inside the church, inside our homes, at work? The games have been going on for as long as we can remember! Who will be a Telemachus? Who will be the monk who jumps into the arena, sacrifices himself, and brings peace? Peace can be made but it sometimes comes at a heavy price.

My question this morning is why are we so often at odds with one another? Why don't we have peace in our lives?

1. We fight to protect our turf.
2. We destroy the weak among us.
3. We will not let go of that which destroys us.

31. God is Laughing at Us

Illustration

Jon L. Joyce

"LO YOUR KING COMES TO YOU. TRIUMPHANT AND VICTORIOUS IS HE, HUMBLE AND RIDING ON AN ASS, ON A COLT, THE FOAL OF AN ASS."

Surely one sign of the lack of perceptiveness of us humans is sometimes we don’t know when we are being ridiculed, laughed at, satirized, made fun of. I remember when we arrived in Japan for the occupation years ago, the missionary’s son who was our regimental interpreter, told me to watch how the Japanese people greeted me. If they would bow and say "Koneechiwa Gozaimas" they were indicating that I was a very honorable person. If they bowed twice, they were indicating that I was a very, very honorable person, but if they bowed three times, they were making fun of me. They were indicating that I thought that I was more honorable than I really was. This is one of the great thrusts of Holy Scripture that we fail to recognize. We don’t see when Almighty God is making fun of us. We can’t seem to understand when God is laughing at us. The Word warns us: "He who sits in the Heavens shall laugh. He shall hold you in derision." But when it happens, we don’t catch it at all. We don’t get it. We don’t understand the satire.

Why do you think God allowed his only-begotten Son to be born in a livery stable? Why was he born in a one-horse town that was the least of Judah? Oh, yes, He was born the Son of a son of David, but that son was only a carpenter, and he certainly wasn’t on any social register. Why do you think that his disciples were all peasants? Why did Jesus pal around with the cheating tax gatherers and with the other outcasts of the society? Why did he walk through hated Samaria and associate with people from that half-breed, heretical race? And now why, again, this Palm Sunday procession?

Oh, don’t you see? God is laughing at us. He is satirizing our own behavior. "Triumphal entry" you call it? Nothing could be further from the truth. Could anything be more stupid and clumsy looking than an unbroken ass’ colt? The sophisticated people of Jerusalem looked down their aristocratic noses from the cool shadows of their balconies to see what all the shouting was about, and all they saw was a motley mob of hicks from the sticks waving palm branches and the very clothes off their own backs. Quite a show! Just about as exciting as a couple of dozen hippies engaged in a march on Washington, and I’m sure that it caused just about the same amount of stir in the City of Jerusalem.

Never did a story build up to a bigger letdown. The palm wavers obviously thought that Christ was riding in to take over the government of the Jews. The Kingdom had come at last! And here they were right in the front pew! They watched him as he stopped the procession and went into the Temple, and when he was inside, they waited breathlessly for some cataclysmic sign from Heaven. And what happened? Nothing! Absolutely nothing! In fact, even the Gospel writers couldn’t quite get the flat taste of it out of their mouths. Mark ends his account by saying: "He went into the Temple, and when He'd looked around at everything, the hour already being late, He went out again." Period! That’s it!

Don’t you see, beloved, God is making fun of us? He’s satirizing all of our triumphal entries. He’s paradying all of our parades. He’s laughing at all of our strutting, preening, prideful pomp and circumstance. He’s saying: "This is the kind of thing you enjoy, my children." And what does it all come to? Nothing! You have forgotten one important word in your ancient prophecy of Zechariah that you now see being fulfilled. You have forgotten the one important word, "Behold, your King comes to you humble," - HUMBLE - "and sitting on an ass’s colt."

32. The Worship Wars

Illustration

Stephen M. Crotts

We pastors call it The Worship Wars. One can see the frowning battlements in the faces seated in pews, hear the rumble of its artillery in negative comments, and feel the white heat of its lethal shrapnel in board meetings.

"It's boring!"

"Why, those songs are so old, every time I sing them I get a backache!"

"Worship is becoming a nightclub act! What will we do next?"

"Choruses are 7-11 worship. Seven words repeated eleven times!"

Any pastor, any active church member alive today is in the trenches of this warfare. Thankfully, the scriptures can be our guide through the mine-fields of this battleground. And today's text, a parable of Jesus, is a good place to begin. [read Luke 18:9-14]

Well, ladies and gentlemen, there you have it. Two men. The same church service. Two totally different approaches to worship.

Mr. Pharisee about whom Jesus said "... trusted in himself that he was righteous and regarded others with contempt," so cleverly told us he came to church with one eye on himself, one eye on his neighbor, and no eye on God. And I might point out that Jesus said even though this man went to church, he was not a part of the community for he was "standing by himself." And Jesus said pointedly that he was never forgiven by God, for "all who exalt themselves will be humbled." I guess you might say he was so self-conscious he lost his God-consciousness.

The second gentleman, however, the tax collector, "went down to his home justified." It seems that even though he was not satisfied with himself, God was.

So, from the text, which of these two men do you relate to in worship? You went to church today. What happened?

33. The Last Word

Illustration

Paul Hovey

The simplest meaning of Easter is that we are living in a world in which God has the last word. On Friday night it appeared as if evil were the master of life. The holiest and most lovable One who had ever lived was dead and in His tomb, crucified by the order of a tyrant without either scruples or regrets. He who had raised the highest hopes among men had died by the most shameful means. A cross, two nails, a jeering mob of debauched souls, and a quick thrust of a spear had ended it all. Those hours when His voice was stilled, and His hands were quiet were the blackest through which the race has ever lived. If Caesar could put an end to Jesus, then no man could ever dare aspire or hope again. Hope, in such a world, could be nothing better than a mockery. Then came Easter morning and the glorious word: "He is risen!" And evil's triumph was at an end. Since that hour when Mary in the garden first discovered the staggering fact of victory, no man whose heart was pure and whose labors were honest has ever had reason to fear or despair if he believed in the Resurrection.

34. Specializing in Misdemeanors

Illustration

King Duncan

While working as a court-appointed attorney, Emory Potter was assigned a client who had been accused of criminal trespass. Mr. Potter probed his client with some general questions of background. He asked if he had any previous arrests or convictions. The man ashamedly said, "Yes, sir. I've got quite a few." The thorough attorney then asked, "Any felonies?" The man indignantly replied, "No sir! I specialize in misdemeanors!" That sounds like many of us. We know in our minds that we are sinners, but we specialize in misdemeanors not in felonies "in small sins not in large ones. In our minds, ours are excusable sins. We are like the Pharisee who thanked God he wasn't like the tax collector. His sins fell within a range of acceptability.

35. The Importance of Voting

Illustration

Brett Blair

You are wrong if you do not vote. You are to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's. Our Caesar [in the United States] is a government of the people by the people for the people. One vote may make the difference.

ONE VOTE made Oliver Cromwell Lord Protector of the Commonwealth and gave him control of England. (1645)

ONE VOTE caused Charles I to be executed. (1649)

ONE VOTE kept Aaron Burr – later charged with treason – from becoming President. (1800)

ONE VOTE elected Marcus Morton governor of Massachusetts. (1839)

ONE VOTE made Texas part of the United States. (1845)

ONE VOTE saved President Andrew Johnson from impeachment. (1868)

ONE VOTE changed Francefrom a monarchy to a republic. (1875)

ONE VOTE admitted California, Oregon, Washington, and Idahointo the Union. (1850, 1850, 1889, 1890)

ONE VOTE elected Rutherford B. Hayes to the Presidency, and the man in the Electoral College who cast that vote was an Indiana Representative also electedby ONE VOTE. (1876)

ONE VOTE made Adolf Hitler head of the Nazi Party. (1923)

ONE VOTE maintained the Selective Service System only 12 weeks before Pearl Harbor. (1941)

ONE VOTE per precinct would have elected Richard Nixon, rather than John Kennedy, President. (1960)

I'm only one but I am one. I can't do everything but I can do something and what I can do I ought to do and that by the grace of God I will do.

NOTE: This illustration is factually inaccurate in almost everyone of it's claims. We leave this illustration up to warn about it's use and to help us and you to be wary of using non-credible material in the pulpit. While there is no problem in using legends and urban myths, so long as they are prefaced as such, factual information like this can discredit ministers in the eyes of many of our parishioners.

36. TAX COLLECTOR

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Modern taxes are a recent development, but the practice of taxation is an ancient one. The comment, "There is nothing more sure than death and taxes" has won sympathetic agreement down through the ages.

Now, certainly, any thinking person will agree that taxes are a necessity of governmental life, but we seldom approve of the methods for collecting such taxes. We are always sure that there just has to be a better way! And this has been the attitude throughout recorded history. Away back at the time of the division of the kingdom, Adoniram, a tax collector for King Rehoboam, was stoned to death for his activities!

We have mention throughout all of the Bible of the taxes imposed on the people, either by God or by conquering nations, but the title of "tax collector" seems to be a strictly New Testament term. The problem goes back to the Ptolemaic rule over Palestine, after the death of Alexander the Great. Under Ptolemy, the taxation of each city was leased to the highest bidder and that sum was then to be paid to the royal Treasury. If his collection fell below the required sum, the tax collector had to make up the difference. Any amount that he collected above this required sum he was allowed to keep. Although the tax collectors generally had a better than average education, since they had to know how to read, write, and figure sums, they also had to be men who were not above using cunning or violence to collect the taxes.

Many persons tried to cheat them, and used many ingenious ways of doing so, so the tax collector had to be just a little bit smarter, to keep ahead of them. And, if cunning didn’t work, a show of violence could be counted on to do the trick. One tax collector beheaded twenty persons when they refused to pay their taxes, and then confiscated their possessions!

In New Testament times, Roman officials were directly responsible for the collection of regular taxes, such as poll and land taxes. There were many other taxes, however, which were farmed out to private contractors for a period of five years. Usually, these contractors were Romans, but, occasionally, they were Jews.

Tax collectors as a class have never enjoyed a great popularity, but those who operated in early New Testament times were particularly despised. You see, even though the Jews had a long history of domination by others, and, at some periods, had even accepted this domination and had risen to eminence within a captive state, this was never the feeling that they had toward the Romans. It’s true that many Jews recognized the many benefits that they derived from the Roman system, but still their captors were harsh, cruel people, and were held in hatred and fear. So, any Jew who had sold out to the Romans was doubly hated, as an apostate and a traitor, taking away from his own people to give to the hated Romans! The rabbis regarded tax collectors as the same as robbers and refused to allow them to be judges or even to give witness.

We know, of course, that Matthew was a tax collector, and that Jesus often dined at the homes of these men, a fact which the Pharisees played up to full advantage. Zacchaeus was a tax collector who saw the error of his ways and offered to restore by fourfold his deceitful gains and to donate half of his capital to charity!

Although we often grumble about the taxes we have to pay, especially in April of every year, I’m sure we are all aware of the necessity of the taxation procedure to keep the wheels of our governments running smoothly. Today’s tax men, who work for the Internal Revenue Service, are educated, trained men, who are not to be anathematized, even when we might be disgruntled. Rather, they are an important part of our economic picture, and as such we owe them thanks for keeping our country in a state of relative solvency.

37. God the Diver

Illustration

Raymond Cannata

C.S. Lewis has this really helpful illustration. He says that in the incarnation, Jesus was like a diver. He is God in heaven looking down into this dark, slimy, murky water. That's our sinful, polluted world. God dives in, He gets himself wet. And then God came up again, dripping, but holding the precious thing he went down to recover. That precious thing was Zacchaeus, and you and me. All those sinners who have trusted in Christ. That's how we get out of the slime of tax collecting, or cheating, or lusting, or hating, or whatever other self-destructive sin we are buried in. God in Christ descended down into the slime and rescued us. Resolutions and vows to be better won't help by themselves. We don't have the power to keep them. We are stuck on the sea bottom. We have no power of our own to get up or out. All we can do is cry out for God's grace to lift us up, to rescue us.

38. Take Heed and Watch

Illustration

Eric Ritz

I've none some stubborn men in my life but here's two guys who take it to new heights. The the London Times ran a front-page story about an Englishman named Arthur Arch. He had just celebrated his 95th birthday, which was an accomplishment in and of itself. But the truly newsworthy thing about Mr. Arch was that for 42 years he had been precisely and consistently 20 minutes late for every meeting and appointment he had. According to his own time, he was always prompt. But according to everyone else's time, he was always late!

You see, in 1922 in England they changed all of the clocks by 20 minutes. I don't know why, but I do know that Mr. Arch never accepted the change. In fact, he said: "Nobody is going to take 20 minutes off my life. So, I'll keep my watch at the old standard time. And some day I plan to die 20 minutes late just to prove that I was right!"

Now, Mr. Arch had an American counterpart, who was also a very stubborn man, a Kansas farmer, and an independent thinker if there ever was one. I don't know his name, but I do know that in the early 1940s, this Kansas farmer alleged that the worst thing that ever happened to the United States of America was the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt as President. And, he said, the worst thing Roosevelt ever did was to approve the order of Daylight Saving Time. As you know, the order went through, but the old farmer never changed his clocks, so he was always one hour off the time observed by everyone else. That farmer, like Arthur Arch, lived and died by the old time. And his defense, he felt, was theological. He said, "I will not exchange God's time for Roosevelt's time!"

Our scripture lesson today resounds with the same thought, that we are not to exchange God's time for Caesar's time. We are to "take heed, watch, pray; for you do not know when the time is."

39. A Mother Is Waiting

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

John Todd was born in Rutledge, Vermont, into a family of several children. They later moved to the village of Killingsworth back in the early 1800s. And there, at a very young age, both John's parents died. The relatives wondered what they would do with so many children, how they could parcel them out to other friends and relatives. One dear and loving aunt said she would take little John. The aunt sent a horse and a slave to get John, who was only six at the time. The slave, Caesar, came and put the little boy on the back of the horse. On the way back an endearing conversation took place:

John: Will she be there?

Caesar: Oh, yes, she'll be there waiting up for you.

John: Will I like living with her?

Caesar: My son, you fall into good hands.

John: Will she love me?

Caesar: Ah, she has a big heart.

John: Will I have my own room? Will she let me have a puppy?

Caesar: She's got everything all set, son. I think she has some surprises, too.

John: Do you think she'll go to bed before we get there?

Caesar: Oh, no! She'll be sure to wait up for you. You'll see when we get out of these woods. You'll see her candle shining in the window.

When they got to the clearing, sure enough, there was a candle in the window and she was standing in the doorway. She reached down, kissed him, and said "Welcome home!" She fed him supper, took him to his room, and waited until he fell asleep. John Todd grew up to be a great minister of the gospel. But it was there at his aunt's, his new mother, that he grew up. It was always a place of enchantment because of his aunt. It awed him that she had given him a second home. She had become a second mother to him.

Years later, long after he had moved away, his aunt wrote to tell him of her impending death. Her health was failing and she wondered what was to become of her. This is what John Todd wrote her:

"My Dear Aunt,

Years ago I left a house of death not knowing where I was to go, whether anyone cared, whether it was the end of me. The ride was long but the slave encouraged me. Finally, he pointed out your candle to me, and there we were in the yard and you embraced me and rook me by the hand into my own room that you had made up. After all these years I still can't believe it—how you did all that for me! I was expected; I felt safe in that room—so welcomed. It was my room.

Now it's your turn to go, and as one who has tried it out, I'm writing to let you know that Someone is waiting up. Your room is all ready, the light is on, the door is open, and as you ride into the yard-don't worry, Auntie. You're expected! I know. I once saw God standing in your doorway—long ago!"

40. Historic: The Declaration of Independence

Illustration

Staff

The unanimous Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies in Congress, July 4, 1776

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained, and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighboring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren.

We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here.
We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare.

That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

The signers of the Declaration represented the new states as follows:

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Background

On July 4, 1776, the Second Continental Congress, meeting in Philadelphia in the Pennsylvania State House (now Independence Hall), approved the Declaration of Independence. Its purpose was to set forth the principles upon which the Congress had acted two days earlier when it voted in favor of Richard Henry Lee's motion to declare the freedom and independence of the 13 American colonies from England. The Declaration was designed to influence public opinion and gain support both among the new states and abroad especially in France, from which the new "United States" sought military assistance.

Although Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Roger Sherman and Robert R. Livingston comprised the committee charged with drafting the Declaration, the task fell to Jefferson, regarded as the strongest and most eloquent writer. The document is mainly his work, although the committee and Congress as a whole made a total of 86 changes to Jefferson's draft.

As a scholar well-versed in the ideas and ideals of the French and English Enlightenments, Jefferson found his greatest inspiration in the language and arguments of English philosopher John Locke, who had justified England's "Glorious Revolution" of 1688 on the basis of man's "natural rights." Locke's theory held that government was a contract between the governed and those governing, who derived their power solely from the consent of the governed and whose purpose it was to protect every man's inherent right to property, life and liberty. Jefferson's theory of "natural law" differed in that it substituted the inalienable right of "the pursuit of happiness" for "property," emphasizing that happiness is the product of civic virtue and public duty. The concept of the "pursuit of happiness" originated in the Common Sense School of Scottish philosophy, of which Lord Kames was the best-known proponent.

Jefferson emphasized the contractual justification for independence, arguing that when the tyrannical government of King George III of England repeatedly violated "natural law, " the colonists had not only the right but the duty to revolt.

The assembled Continental Congress deleted a few passages of the draft, and amended others, but outright rejected only two sections: 1) a derogatory reference to the English people; 2) a passionate denunciation of the slave trade. The latter section was left out, as Jefferson reported, to accede to the wishes of South Carolina and Georgia, who wanted to continue the importation of slaves. The rest of the draft was accepted on July 4, and 56 members of Congress began their formal signing of the document on August 2, 1776.

41. Dead Works

Illustration

Stephen Craig Jennings

Simply changing outward behavior is not repentance. We at times change our behavior for self-centered reasons. Sometimes we change in an attempt to atone for my sins. Such change will only make my sinfulness more sinful.

This is the basis for the reference in Hebrews of repenting from ‘dead works'. A dead work is a work that is not done with the leading and empowerment of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Hence any good work a non-Christian would attempt is a dead work. And many types of good works that Christians do could be devoid of the Spirit's leading and empowerment.

A dead work is giving to charity because it is a good tax break.
It is going to church because it is good for my business reputation or my resume or my politics.
It is tithing because I am afraid God will ‘get me' if I don't.
It is sending my kids to a Christian school, not because I want them to learn the truths of the Christian faith and surrender their lives to the Lordship of Christ, but because there they will run in the right crowd.
It is the giving up of a sinful habit, not because I want to be controlled by the Spirit of God instead of the habit, but because the habit inhibits my performance at work and is harming my professional reputation.

In all these ways, I have actually changed, but the change has not accomplished what Jeremiah said was impossible:

Can the Ethiopian change his skin
or the leopard his spots?
Then also you can do good
who are accustomed to do evil.

42. A Life of Despair

Illustration

Brett Blair

Two of his daughters and a son-in-law committed suicide. Three of his children died of malnutrition. Marx felt no obligation to earn a living, but instead lived by begging from Engels. He fathered an illegitimate child by his maidservant. He drank heavily. He was a paid informer of the Austrian police, spying on revolutionaries. Though Marx and his wife were poor, he kept investing in the stock market where he constantly lost. His wife left him twice, but returned. When she died, he didn't attend her funeral. His correspondence with Engels was full of obscenities. His favorite daughter, Eleanor, with her father's approval, married Edward Eveling, a man who advocated blasphemy and worshiped Satan. Daughter Eleanor committed suicide, poisoning herself with cyanide. Karl Marx died in despair.

Laura Marx, Karl's other daughter committed suicide together with her husband on 25 November 1911. The couple decided they had nothing left to give to the movement to which they had devoted their lives. Laura was 66 and her husband Paul Lafargue was 69. In their suicide letter, which Paul wrote, they explained why they committed suicide. It reads:

"Healthy in body and mind, I end my life before pitiless old age which has taken from me my pleasures and joys one after another; and which has been stripping me of my physical and mental powers, can paralyse my energy and break my will, making me a burden to myself and to others. For some years I had promised myself not to live beyond 70; and I fixed the exact year for my departure from life. I prepared the method for the execution of our resolution, it was a hypodermic of cyanide acid. I die with the supreme joy of knowing that at some future time, the cause to which I have been devoted for forty-five years will triumph. Long live Communism! Long Live the international socialism!"

Vladimir Lenin was one of the speakers at the funeral. He would later write the following to his wife: "If one cannot work for the Party any longer, one must be able to look truth in the face and die like the Lafargues."

Is it any wonder things ended this way for the Marx family? When you look at the tenets of Marxism, where else would you end up but in despair? Listen to these 10 basic principles:

Abolition of private property
A heavy progressive income tax.
Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
State control of banks.
State control of communication and the press.
State owned businesses.
Equal liability of all to work, establishing industrial armies
Equal distribution of the populace over the country.
Combination of education with industrial production.

What is there left to live for? This world would lead to the despair that caused the Marx family to take their lives. They stand in contrast to the Greatest Commandment to love God and love your neighbor and to the admonition of the Beatitudes. Christianity frees and affirms; Marxism controls and demands. It's life or death isn't it? It's God's offer to the Israelites: I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live

43. The Temptation of Jesus

Illustration

Brett Blair

While filming a documentary in Israel, Malcolm Muggeridge began reflecting upon the Temptation of Jesus. Listen to his thoughts:

Curiously enough, just at the right moment to begin filming, when the shadows were long enough and the light not too weak, I happened to notice near by a whole expanse of stones, all identical, and looking uncommonly like loaves well baked and brown. How easy for Jesus to have turned these stoned loaves into edible ones, as, later, he would turn water into wine at a wedding feast! And, after all, why not? The Roman authorities distributed free bread to promote Caesar's kingdom, and Jesus could do the same to promote his. . .

Jesus has but to give a nod of agreement and he could have constructed Christendom, not on four shaky Gospels and a defeated man nailed on a Cross, but on a basis of sound socio-economic planning and principles… Every utopia could have been brought to pass, every hope have been realized and every dream been made to come true. What a benefactor, then, Jesus would have been. Acclaimed, equally, in the London School of Economics and the Harvard Business School; a statue in Parliament Square, and an even bigger one on Capitol Hill and in the Red Square. . . . Instead, he turned the offer down on the ground that only God should be worshipped.

44. Turning Up the Religious Machinery

Illustration

William G. Carter

Eugene Peterson claims in one of his books: "For a long time I have been convinced that I could take a person with a high school education, give him or her a six-month trade school training, and provide a pastor who would be satisfactory to any discriminating American congregation. The curriculum would consist of four courses. Course 1: Creative Plagiarism. I would put you in touch with a wide range of excellent and inspirational talks, show you how to alter them just enough to obscure their origins, and get you a reputation for wit and wisdom. Course 2: Voice Control for Prayer and Counseling. We would develop your own distinct style of Holy Joe intonation, acquiring the skill in resonance and modulation that conveys an unmistakable aura of sanctity. Course 3: Efficient Office Management. There is nothing that parishioners admire more in their pastors than the capacity to run a tight ship administratively ...Course 4: Image Projection. Here we would master the half-dozen well-known and easily implemented devices that create the impression that we are terrifically busy and widely sought after for counsel by influential people in the community."

As one preacher speaking to others, Peterson is poking fun, of course, but he is also speaking a hard truth. The clergy always run the risk of merely putting on a good show. Ministers like me can grow so accustomed to the absence of God that we lose our vocabulary for naming God's presence. And we fill the vacuum by heaping up empty prayers and tuning up the religious machinery.

The one thing we need is a Word from God. The one gift we cannot purchase out of a catalog is the Word that names us, claims us, judges us, and redeems us. We do not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, God didn't speak to the politicians. During the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, God didn't speak to the religious functionaries. No, "the word of God came to John, son of Zechariah, in the wilderness."

45. Tearing the Roof Off

Illustration

Larry Powell

It seems the scribes were always around. In our scripture we learn that Jesus was at his home in Capernaum. When word spread throughout the community, a great crowd gathered inside and out the house, prevailing upon Jesus to teach them. We are told that some of the scribes "were sitting there questioning in their hearts." Why were they there anyway? Out of curiosity? To heckle? To find fault? Were they acquaintances of Jesus that they could come into his home and find a place to sit while so many others were standing? I don’t know ... but it seems the Scriptures always bear the same foreboding comment, "the scribes were sitting there," or "nearby." At any rate, on this particular occasion, they got their eyes full.

First, there was a commotion. Four men were literally dismantling the roof of the house. When a large enough opening had been torn away, down came a pallet with a man on it. Although the Scriptures do not mention the scribe’s reaction to the paralytic’s rather crude entrance, we can imagine the sudden changing of their sophisticated expressions as they tugged nervously at their robes and mumbled beneath their breath. However, they may not have been surprised at all ... they had joked among themselves that the Nazarene’s clientele included harlots, tax collectors, the sick, unstable, ne’er-do-wells, and common sinners. Perhaps such an abrupt intrusion through the roof did not impress them at all, but was rather consistent with the kind of people attracted by the unorthodox carpenter. But again, that was but the beginning.

Jesus made bold to forgive the paralytic’s sins! The scribes could sit still no longer: "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" Jesus replied, "Why do you question me like this? Let me ask you a question; which is easier to say to a paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or ‘Rise, take up your pallet and walk?’ " In a word, it is a small matter to mouth the words, "Your sins are forgiven." It is true that anyone can repeat these words whether they have the authority or not but in order that the scribes might know that Jesus possessed the authority, he did something more. Turning to the paralytic, he said, "Rise, take up your pallet and go home." To their astonishment, the paralytic did just that. He had received a double portion inasmuch as his sins had been forgiven and he had been physically healed. Additionally, the scribes had something to think about.

I want to say a word about the persistent souls who tore the roof off the house. Their determination is to be admired. Have you ever entertained the thought of visiting a sick friend or shut-in but decided against it because the weather was threatening, or the temperature was uncomfortable, or you were tired? Even the best of intentions are sometimes easily discouraged. Here were four men who could have turned away from the house when they saw such a crowd, thinking "we’ll come again later." But no, they pushed their way through the crowd with the paralytic, climbed to the roof and made up their minds to get inside. They loved their friend enough to go to some extra effort, and they had absolute faith that the man inside could heal him. I hope I have a few friends like that. The paralytic owed a great deal of his recovery to his friends. What a combination: loving friends, persistent faith, and the touch of Christ!

46. Let My Little Light Shine - Sermon Starter

Illustration

King Duncan

There are all kinds of theories about how to motivate people.

Los Angeles Dodgers pitcher Don Sutton hadn't won a game in eight weeks. A critical press was suggesting that he be dropped from the starting lineup. The future looked bleak, and Sutton felt terrible. Then, before a game, Dodgers manager Walter Alston tapped him on the shoulder. "I'd like to speak with you, Don," he said. Sutton prepared himself for the worst.

"Don," said Alston, "I know how the past couple of months have been for you. Everyone's wondering whether we can make it to the play-offs . . . You know there's a lot of pressure . . . I've had to make a decision." Sutton had visions of being taken off the mound. Then Alston continued. "If the Dodgers are going to win this year," he said, looking Sutton in the eye, "they're going to win with Don Sutton pitching. Come what may, you're staying in the starting job. That's all I wanted to say."

Sutton's losing streak lasted two more weeks, but because of his manager's encouragement he felt different about it. Something in him was turning around. He found himself pitching the best ball of his career. In the National League pennant drive, he won 13 games out of 14.

There are all kinds of theories about how to motivate people. We can do it through guilt, through fear, through shame. But these were not Jesus' methods. Jesus motivated through positive messages of hope and encouragement.

Consider our lesson for today. Jesus says to his followers, "You are the light of the world. . . ." Can you imagine that? Here was a motley crew of farmers and fishermen and tax collectors and housewives in a tiny and remote village in an obscure part of the world and Jesus was saying to them, "You are the light of the world." Talk about a statement of faith! Let's go farther than that. Talk about a crazy idea! Light of the world? That bunch? It must have sounded absurd at the time even to them. Only Jesus could have seen that through this motley crew God would indeed change the world forever. At the time, however, it probably sounded like so much idle chatter. "You are the light of the world," he said and so they were. Now do you want to hear something really absurd? So are we.

Jesus says to us this morning that WE are the light of the world. Think about that for a moment. Sink your teeth into it savor it. You and I are the light of the world. What does it mean? Well, let me suggest some possibilities.

We Have a Responsibility for the World.
We Have Something the World Desperately Needs.
We Are Not the Source of Our Light, but We Reflect a Much Greater Light.

47. Humble Beginnings

Illustration

Samuel Massey

In Minnesota you can step across the headwaters of the Mississippi River. It is no more than a tiny stream. It is amazing that a river so mighty can begin in such an inconspicuous way.

Perhaps we have a similar experience as we read the first chapter to the Gospel of Mark. The message of Christ has raised up nations and brought them low, launched and defeated armies, started large social movements and destroyed others. Think of all that has been done in the name of Jesus Christ and how inconspicuously the Gospel begins according to Mark. Here we find none of the thunderous poetry used by John to describe the pre-existent Christ. We dream no dreams and no angels visit with us. Caesar Augustus and Herod seem pretty far away. No excuse here for Christmas trees or mob-ridden malls or long hours putting together services of lessons and carols thank God! All Mark offers to us is John the Baptist, Martha Stewart's worst nightmare, smelling like a camel and calling people to change their ways.

48. The Mighty Have Fallen

Illustration

G. S. Bowes

Alexander the Great was not satisfied, even when he had completely subdued the nations. He wept because there were no more worlds to conquer, and he died at an early age in a state of debauchery. Hannibal, who filled three bushels with the gold rings taken from the knights he had slaughtered, committed suicide by swallowing poison. Few noted his passing, and he left this earth completely unmourned. Julius Caesar, staining his garments in the blood of one million of his foes, conquered 800 cities, only to be stabbed by his best friends at the scene of his greatest triumph. Napoleon, the feared conqueror, after being the scourge of Europe, spent his last years in banishment. Hitler shot himself and his wife drank poison as the European allies swept into Germany.

Vivid reminders that the grass withers, and the flower fades: but the word of our God abides for ever.

49. Worth a Thousand Points

Illustration

John P. Jewell

Perhaps you have heard the story of the man who came to the gates of heaven to be greeted by St. Peter. Peter asks the man if he can give a brief history of his life with an emphasis on the good deeds he had done in order to gain entrance into the kingdom of heaven. "You will need 1000 points to be admitted," Peter tells the man.

"This will be a cinch," the man thinks to himself, "I've been involved in church from the days of my youth." Then he begins to list his activities for Peter. He was an officer in his youth group, served in every possible position he could as a youngster. Was on the Church Council and every committee the church had to offer. His list was extensive.

"Very impressive," Peter smiles at the man. An angel standing with them also smiled and nodded as he tallied the points and then whispered in Peter's ear. Peter tells the man,

"This is quite striking we seldom see men of your very good works. You will be pleased to know that you have 327 points! Is there anything else you can think of?"

The poor soul breaks into a cold sweat and begins to reach deep for every single act of kindness he could think of. He listed them as the angel scratched furiously on his angelic clip board and nodded his head in admiration. Peter looks at the clip board and says, "This is quite exceptional! You now have a total of 402 points. Can you think of anything else?"

The distressed guy strives to recall good deeds like the time he helped a little old lady across the street. He finally arrives at a grand total of 431 points and cries out... "I am sunk! There is no hope for me! What more could I have done? O Lord, all I can do is beg for your mercy!"

"THAT," exclaims Peter, "Is a thousand points!"

So also, the tax collector in Jesus' parable finds his hope in the grace and mercy of God.

50. God Conquered

Illustration

Staff

John III Sobieski, king of Poland in the late 17th century, is best remembered as the man who saved central Europe from invading armies of Turks in 1683. With the Turks at the walls of Vienna, Sobieski led a charge that broke the siege. His rescue of Vienna is considered one of the decisive battles in European history. In announcing his great victory the king paraphrased the famous words of Caesar by saying simply, "I came; I saw; God conquered."

Showing 1 to 50 of 115 results