The Christian and Civil Government, Matthew 22:15-22
I want to go on and take what we learned from Matthew 22:15-22 and expand that in terms of a framework for understanding the role of the Christian in relation to civil government. We need to think through what the Bible says about the believer's role is in relation to government.
I have an article that was given to me which was published on October 13 1975. It is a review of a document that was discovered in May of 1919 at Dusseldorf, Germany. The Allied forces obtained a copy of the communist rules of revolution. If we listen to them we will see how these rules have been implemented by certain political parties—not every one; I'm not painting everything with a broad stroke. These rules have come through especially in those who hold to the progressive view that is dominating so much of both of our political parties.
1. Corrupt the young and get them away from religion, get them interested in sex, make them superficial, destroy their ruggedness.
2. Get control of all means of publicity, and thereby get the people's minds off their government, focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and plays, and other trivialities.
3. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance.
4. Destroy the people's faith in their natural leaders by holding the latter up to contempt, ridicule and obloquy.
5. Always preach true democracy but seize power as fast as and as ruthlessly as possible.
6. By encouraging government extravagance, destroy its credit, produce fear of inflation with rising prices and general discontent.
7. Foment unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders, and foster lenient and soft attitude on the part of government toward such disorders.
8. By specious argument cause to bring down the old moral virtues—honesty, sobriety, confidence, faith in the pledged word, and ruggedness.
9. Cause the registration of all firearms on some pretext with a view towards confiscating them and leaving the population helpless.
I think that is a pretty good summary of a lot of values that we need to definitely eschew and work against, because that is what destroys any civilization or culture from the inside out.
We are focusing in this section of Matthew 22 which is part of a threefold series of questions that the religious leaders bring to Jesus to attempt to either discredit Him among the masses or to anger the Roman government. Somehow if He falls into the trap one or the other will go against Him. This attempt failed.
We have seen that Jesus in His answer to the tax question said: “Show me the tax money”. They brought Him a denarius. It was a Roman coin on which was a picture of the emperor—Tiberius at this time. There was an inscription on the coin which makes a claim of deity for Tiberius, and it is a claim of deity for the state.
The idea of the state claiming to be divine is nothing new. The Egyptians did it rather well. Mesopotamian empires and kings did it as well. This is not something that is foreign to a Jewish culture: as when they were in captivity in Egypt when the Pharaoh claimed to be the incarnation of a god; as when Nebuchadnezzar had an idol of himself to be worshipped by all the people. The idea of living under a government that claimed the authority of God for itself and to be sovereign over all things was not anything new for a Jewish community.
In His answer Jesus said: “Surrender to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's”. What He is saying is that there are spheres of authority, that God establishes government, that God Himself instituted human government despite the fact that human government would be corrupt and under the control of many who would abuse its authority. Nevertheless God delegated authority to the human race. So there is a hierarchy of authority in relation to God and government and other subordinate authorities.
However there is also an argument out there that I have run across a few times, that this is not what is going on here at all; this is actually Jesus pitting God against Caesar: Jesus isn't in some way saying the government has a certain sphere of authority and so you should pay your taxes, but nevertheless the government can't take over the role of God and so you need to render to God that which is God's. He is in fact saying that the state of Rome is claiming exclusive authority by divine right, that they are divine, and this is in one hundred per cent collision with God's claim to rule over everything, and that what Jesus was saying in a very subtle way was that you don't need to pay your taxes because this is based on a false claim of deity, therefore don't pay your taxes. There is a certain political view that wants to lean in that direction.
But that is not what is going on here at all. The problem is that this is taking the passage out of a broader context of Scripture. We have to understand this and look at what the Bible teaches about the authority that God has delegated to human civil government and how the believer is to relate to that authority. It is one thing to say that we should submit to an authority that is doing what we think they should do, but if they go beyond a certain point then we need to rebel against them. So where does the line lie, if we can even draw a line?
In Genesis there are five divine institutions laid out. God established these. In this organization, these five divine institutions, we see that each builds upon the previous one, and that these were instituted by God for the stability, preservation and the perpetuation of the human race.
What we see in divine institution #1, and though it has been explained with slightly different terminology by different pastors, is an emphasis on personal or individual responsibility. Every individual is ultimately responsible to God for the decisions that they make. This is seen in the first prohibition that God established in the Garden of Eden where He said to Adam: “Of all the trees in the garden you may eat, except for one. The day that you eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you will surely die”. Notice that at that point Eve had not been created. He has given this to Adam, and this is going to become Adam's responsibility so that when God creates Eve it is his responsibility as the head of the race and as the spiritual head to inform and instruct Eve in these realities—which is what took place.
The second divine institution is marriage. Marriage is designed for the perpetuation of the human race, it provides stability and the proper and only framework for sexual relations; and even though the only purpose for sexual relations is not the propagation of the species it is to be enjoyed only within that framework of marriage.
In marriage there is an authority structure. The husband is the authority. Authority runs through every one of these divine institutions, and that is so important to understand because there are times, because of sin, that we all want to subvert the authority that is over us. That is part of sinfulness because the orientation of the sin nature is to self—self-absorption and self-indulgence—and we want it to be all about us. Narcissism is the domain of the sin nature.
The marriage produces children. Even though Adam and Eve didn't have children in the Garden the fact that they were commanded to be fruitful and multiply envisions the reality of children, and all three of these divine institutions are given before there is any sin. Even in perfect environment God recognized that authority needed to function (so authority is not a bad thing) for there to be order and organization, and to be able to accomplish the goals and purposes that God had established for the human race.
Adam's sin plunged the human race into corruption and it reverberated through all of creation so that all creation became corrupted by the presence of sin and evil.
There were no established governing authorities in the period from Adam to Noah. The only authority was that which was inherent within the family. There is a massive breakdown in society. There is the murder in the first family between two brothers: Cain murders Abel. Then there are subsequent murders, there is the development of polygamy; all of this goes on so that by the time we come to Noah God, we are told anthropopathically, is disgusted with the human race, regrets that He created the human race, because the thoughts of man's heart is continuously evil. He is in rebellion against God and the only ones who find grace in the eyes of the Lord are Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives. God brings a judgment on the earth and wipes out all living things, except for those families and those that are preserved upon the ark.
Coming off the ark the human race gets a second chance. God establishes a covenant with Noah. There was going to be the accomplishment of new rules. There are similar things, things that are different with the original creation covenant, but for our purposes what we are going to focus on is two verses. These two verses establish a new system of authority. On the basis of these verses God delegates to mankind the responsibility of self-government. Man is for the first time mandated to govern himself.
God is omniscient. We have some people, Christians and non-Christians, who think we should not have capital punishment: capital punishment is often abused, often someone who is not truly guilty is sentenced to death, there have been those who have been wrongly executed because of capital punishment, so we ought not have capital punishment.
Guess what folks! God in His omniscience knew that that would happen. Now if that is a justification for not doing it then why did God go ahead and authorize it and mandate it. So the fact that man fails is not an excuse for not having capital punishment.
We have people who fail at marriage, people who are unfaithful or who have a divorce. That does not mean that we should just scrap marriage. Just because parents are failures at being parents and the family does not function correctly and is sometimes extremely dysfunctional and destructive, does not mean that we should do away with families. Just because an institution is being implemented by sinful, fallen, corrupt human beings doesn't mean that we do away with it; because the institution is established to preserve the human race, and the fourth and fifth divine institutions—human government and nationalism—are given to help restrain the sinfulness of mankind.
What we see in Genesis chapter nine is the foundation for human government. The original government was divine, and that was the government of God; so in principle, government is not flawed. The reason for making that point is that I have heard people, solid believers who have spent a lot of time under good teaching make the point that government is always evil. No, the people who are in government are evil; government as a principle begins with God and government as a principle is in and of itself not evil.
So we have the delegation of certain government responsibilities here for the first time. One question we should ask is, how long does this covenant last? The covenant lasts until God destroys the present havens and the present earth, and that will not be until the end of the millennium. The Noahic covenant is a perpetual covenant, so it is still in effect. That means that to eat meat is still in effect. That means that provisions to take a life under certain conditions is also in effect, and it means that God's promise that He will not destroy the earth by water again is also in effect. The rainbow is the sign of this covenant.
What we see in vv. 5, 6 is the foundation for why Christians and for why the Judeo-Christian heritage emphasizes the sanctity of human life, and that the role of government ultimately, according to the Noahic covenant, is to preserve and protect human life. Thus when a life is taken unjustly there is to be a judicial framework for evaluating what happened and determining guilt as well as punishment.
Genesis 9:5 NASB “Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from {every} man, from every man’s brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.”
So the most extreme and most serious form of punishment is for taking the life of a human being, and that is what is being authorized here. Some people say capital punishment doesn't prevent anything; others say that it does. Well, prevention isn't part of the covenant. Verse 6 tells us why there should be capital punishment: “For in the image of God He made man.” That is important.
The image of God belongs to every single human being (Genesis 1:26, 27). So as image bearers men and women from Adam and Eve down, even though the image is flawed, are here to represent God. So when you take the life of another person what you are doing is in effect making a theological statement that you are attacking God indirectly through His image, through His representative.
So on the subject of murder we are not talking about killing as a form of capital punishment because obviously God authorized it. Some quote Exodus 20:13, “You shall not murder [not “kill” as in KJV]”. There are about seven different words in the Hebrew to describe killing. This is the word ratsach, which means to murder. In Exodus 21 there is another clear statement about capital punishment and stipulations, that under certain conditions the life of someone who commits murder is to be taken. There are numerous places in the Old Testament that authorize capital punishment. Capital punishment isn't ratsach. What is prohibited here is ratsach. Taking life in combat, self-defence is not ratsach. Taking a life in self-defence is authorized; taking a life combat as part of war is also authorized. So we have to be careful to understand what the text actually says.
As we move from the covenant with Noah and look at the covenant with Moses we see that there is a structure at the beginning of the Mosaic Law, which we usually refer to as the Ten Commandments. They are divided into basically two subject categories. The first is about how we relate to God and the second about how we relate to mankind. Jesus summarized commandments: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength”. That is the first part of the Ten Commandments. The second part: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
People who have a false sense of compassion often abuse that. For example, I was informed yesterday by a man who was in conversation with someone when the Ten Commandments came up. He ask this person what were the greatest commandments and the person said: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself, and this is why we need to let as many refugees and people come across the border as possible; not letting them come is not loving our neighbor”.
That is typical progressivism that focuses on the wrong person as the neighbor. What about your actual neighbor who is killed by someone who is here illegally? What about your co-worker whose children become addicted to drugs because of the drug activity that comes across the border due to the illegal immigrant activity? Those are your neighbors also. Typical of progressivism when you see someone who has committed murder, all of the liberals com e out and will be against capital punishment because they are focusing on the criminal, You have to love your neighbor, i.e. the criminal, and they forget about the victim of the crime who is also their neighbor. It is a selective and wrong application of the principle.
But the second part of the Decalogue focuses on how man relates to man under the principle of loving your neighbor as yourself: “You shall not murder,” and this emphasizes the sanctity of life; again it is the role of government to protect and provide security for people.
The second commandment is protection of the second and third divine institutions: “You shall not commit adultery”. That is to preserve marriage and sexual relations within the framework of marriage, and to protect marriage so that it becomes the focal point of providing education and stability within a nation. When this divine institution begins to fall apart, and it has in this nation, and you begin to allow people of the same sex to marry, then you are destroying the concept of marriage and you will destroy the nation.
Once you start making the definition of the divine institutions the prerogative of government, then you will destroy the nation and its days are numbered.
“You will not steal”. This protects private property. It is a recognition that people have the right to own things without them being taken from them by others; so it emphasizes the sanctity of private property. It is interesting in this command that there is no object. It doesn't say you will not steal property, it doesn't say you will not steal cars, or money; it says you will not steal, period. So the unstated object implies that theft of any kind is also wrong.
“You shall not bear false witness against you neighbor”. This protects the privacy, the reputation of the neighbor. You can't steal his reputation, his integrity. This is to protect the neighbor's good name and reputation and also you can't falsely imprison him or punish him.
The Lord Jesus Christ went to the cross because of the Jewish leaders, the governing powers over the Jews, who bore false witness against Him.
The last commandment: “You shall not covet your neighbor's wife ...” This is recognition of a mental attitude sin. You can avoid certain overt sins but the mental attitude sins of lust are just as sinful. This last commandment emphasizes that mental attitude sins of lust are also self-destructive and it destroys one's own personal integrity.
So we see an authorization of government power to oversee these things and to emphasize them in a government. The Mosaic Law was designed for the Jewish people and was not intended to be transferred en toto to another country; but it provides a pattern.
The Old Testament establishes and legitimizes human government as delegated by God, even though there would be kings and emperors who would be corrupt and would significantly abuse that authority and also set themselves to be worshipped as God. Nevertheless, in the examples of Daniel 2, 4 & 5 there were believers who were living in a corrupt pagan government who recognized the need to still function under the authority of that government.
And when they were challenged, for example in Daniel chapter one, God gave them wisdom and in that case they were successful. In Daniel chapter three there was the command to worship the idol of Nebuchadnezzar they were unable to negotiate a compromise. They were willing to die in order to stay true to their faith, but they were not going to rebel against the king. In Daniel chapter five Daniel goes to the lions' den. Though there is an unjust law he just quietly does what he knows to be the correct thing to do, even though he knows he will be sent to the lions' den, and he just trusts God to take care of what needs to be taken care of.
As we get into the New Testament Jesus also gives some instruction about human government and also provides an example of dealing with human government. Some of this is explicit in the form of direct statements and other is implicit in His attitude in relation to governing authorities. He taught and demonstrated submission to government. Even when He was brought up on unjust charges based on false witnesses, and before a tyrannical government represented by Pontius Pilate, He submits to their decision. In fact the irony is that if Jesus had not submitted to an unjust, tyrannical authority we would not have salvation.
That is something to ponder, because there are many of us who say: “I am not going to obey a tyrannical government”. Think about it!
In John 19:11 Jesus recognizes the authority of Rome and says to Pilate: “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above ...” He is recognizing that the authority of human government is delegated under the authority of God. Jesus is showing that there is a hierarchy here: that even corrupt governments rule under the authority of God, and God delegates that power.
In another example we see people going to Jesus to adjudicate civil cases and He refuses to do it. In one case in Luke chapter twelve someone in the crowd says: “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me”. So here we have a dispute among siblings over the distribution of the inheritance, and Jesus said: “Man, who made me a judge or arbitrator over you?” Jesus doesn't step over the line and step on civil authority. He says to Him, though: “Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not {even} when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions.” He addresses the core spiritual issue, that whatever else is going on here make sure that you are not being ruled by sin, by the tenth commandment.
In Matthew chapter seventeen Jesus also authorized the payment for taxes. Matthew 17:24, 25 NASB “When they came to Capernaum, those who collected the two-drachma {tax} came to Peter and said, 'Does your teacher not pay the two-drachma {tax?}' He said, 'Yes.' And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, 'What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth collect customs or poll-tax, from their sons or from strangers?'”
Notice how He frames the question. He doesn't say, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do the priests take customs or taxes?” He is asking is it narrowed to the temple tax? He talks about kings of the earth. He is relating this to all taxes. In the paying of the temple tax, remember the temple is under the authority of the Sanhedrin and it is being ruled by a very corrupt religious system. It was a criminal operation. And Jesus could say, which some people would want Him to say to day, not to pay the taxes because you are paying into a corrupt system. But that is not what He says.
Matthew 17:26, 27 NASB When Peter said, “From strangers,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are exempt. However, so that we do not offend them, go to the sea and throw in a hook, and take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for you and Me.”
Jesus doesn't challenge the right of paying taxes.
But Jesus wasn't uncritical of governing authorities. He teaches that we are to obey authority but He is also critical of the way authorities exercise it.
In Luke 22:25 He recognizes that the kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship in an arrogant, tyrannical manner. “And He said to them, 'The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who have authority over them are called ‘Benefactors.’” This is totally false; it is double-speak.
He challenges the Pharisees in Mark 8:15 NASB And He was giving orders to them, saying, “Watch out! Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.” He realizes that they are illegitimately practicing their authority. Nevertheless, still pay the temple tax.
Matthew 23:3, 4 NASB “therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say {things} and do not do {them.} They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with {so much as} a finger.” He is indicting them for the egregious and horrible abuse of their authority. But He says to still do what they say.
Romans 13:6 NASB “For because of this you also pay taxes, for {rulers} are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.” If Paul says pay taxes and Jesus really meant don't pay taxes to an illegitimate authority then you would have a problem. But the Bible is consistent. [7] “Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax {is due;} custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.”
Romans 13:1, 2 NASB “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.”
In other words, what he is saying is that even if human beings are abusing that authority the delegation of it is still from God, and therefore we are to observe and obey the government as unto the Lord. That is what Peter's argument is in 1 Peter 2:13, 14 NASB “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.”
The motivation is that we are serving the Lord. It is the same thing as wives are to submit to their husbands as unto the Lord. Every time we submit to authority we do it as unto the Lord. As we see in Samuel, when Samuel indicts Saul for his disobedience he says to him that rebellion is like the sin of divination and insubordination is like the sin of idolatry. It is wrong; it is sin, because this reflects the first sin of the universe, Satan's rebellion against God.
1 Peter 2:15 NASB “For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.”
But the same Peter who wrote this was the Peter who recognized that there were times when you did not obey government. When the Sanhedrin ordered Peter and John to not preach the gospel they said: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than God, you judge. But we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard”. There are times when any authority over us tells us to do something in direct opposition to what the Word of God says and we are authorized to disobey—not just some principle but when there is a direct statement of Scripture that says don't do this and the government says to do it, then we are authorized to disobey.
We are exhorted to pray for leaders in 1 Timothy 2:1, 2 NASB “First of all, then, I urge that entreaties {and} prayers, petitions {and} thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.”
I think one criterion in determining who we elect for mayor, for governor, who we elect for any office, is: Are they going to have an administration that is inclined to increasing our freedom as Christians to function freely in the market place of ideas? Or are they going to be hostile? Are they going to pass laws and ordinances that make it a distraction and a challenge?
But ultimately, we recognize that there is an authority in the universe. That authority is God, and He has directed us in His Word. And He has delegated authority through the state in order to provide security and stability in the nation. But when these principles are violated it doesn't justify us in going out in some kind of rebellion, but it will lead to the destruction of a state. The only hope for this country is Jesus Christ.
There can be moral shifts, there can be some political party shifts, but unless there is an internal heart attitude, a shift in the thinking of people that moves the culture back to submission to God and to His Word there will be no restoration at all, and we will just continue on the path to destruction. But as believers living in that environment we can have great joy and stability because of our relation to the Lord and the doctrine in our souls.