Then went the Pharisees and held a council how they might ensnare him in speaking.
This plot comes right after the Lord had told a parable of clear grace. What follows is not an argument but a plan: why would religious leaders answer grace with a trap?
Grace did not soften these men. It hardened them.
The Lord had spoken a parable of clear grace at the beginning of this chapter. Even so, the opposition of the Pharisees only smolders more strongly against Him. They plot together to entangle Him in His speaking, but succeed only in entangling themselves.
They had wanted to seize Him outright and could not. So the attack shifted ground — from religion to politics.
The Pharisees now took solemn counsel, and laid their plans for ensnaring the Lord. They had just found that the crowd left them no hope of getting Him into their power simply as a Jew. So they look for a charge against Him as a subject of Caesar, to hand Him over to the power and authority of the Romans.
The men sent to Him came from rival parties. Their hatred of Christ was stronger than their hatred of each other.
The three great factions — Pharisees, Herodians and Sadducees — combine in this. Ritualists, worldly men and rationalists make common cause to defeat the Lord. Though so different in nature, they unite in this one thing: the rejection of the Lord. It is no better in our day. Three times the Devil tempted the Lord, and three times the leaders of the people tempt Him. No doubt the Pharisees, Herodians and Sadducees were only the instruments of that evil being.
Another writer finds the trap in that pairing. The two groups would close on Him "as between the opposite blades of shears" (F. W. Grant).
"Entangle" is the language of trapping. They had prepared a question about paying tax to Caesar. Either answer would destroy Him.
First the Pharisees and the Herodians — those who favoured the authority of the Romans, and those who were opposed to it — seek to entangle Jesus in His talk. So it seemed that Christ must either become an object of suspicion to the authorities, or give up His claim to be the Messiah and so the Deliverer. Who had caused this dilemma? It was the fruit of their own sins. The Lord shows them that they had themselves accepted the yoke. The money bore the mark of it: let them give it then to those to whom it belonged, and let them also — which they were not doing — give to God the things that are God's.
Another writer draws out what they had missed: "They should have known why they had to pay tax to Caesar: as a nation, they had not given to God what was due to Him" (An Outline of Sound Words).
The trap did not look like a trap. One writer turns that method on the reader.
Deceit lurked behind the innocent-looking question of the religious Pharisees when they asked, "Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?" We know this, because we read that they were seeking to entangle Him in His talk. With the flesh in us it is all too possible to try to entangle one another with smooth speech and innocent-looking questions. We can even attack one another in secret through the very words we address to God in public prayer.
Every trap failed. The failure says something about the One they tested.
When He was here, men sat in scorn and sought to entangle Him in His talk. All the contradiction of sinners against Himself, all their objections, never drew one careless word from His lips. They attacked Him on every hand — Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians. On the contrary, He met them all, and His wisdom shone out in silencing them with one simple question: "What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?"
- Counsel. The plot was their answer to a parable of grace: grace refused, then opposition organised.
- Coalition. Parties that despised each other joined hands. Hatred of Christ united men nothing else could unite.
- Craft. They came with smooth speech and an innocent-looking question. That is the ordinary shape of a snare, then and now.
- Cause. Their own sin created the dilemma they set. Roman coins in their pockets showed they had not given God His due.
- Collapse. They meant to entangle Him and entangled themselves; not one careless word ever left His lips.
And they send out to him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Teacher, we know that thou art true and teachest the way of God in truth, and carest not for any one, for thou regardest not men's person;
A run of parables has just exposed the Pharisees, and their answer is a plot with a compliment on its lips and a trap behind it. Every word they say about Jesus is true — so how can people speak so well of Him and still want to destroy Him?
The two groups who came to Jesus had almost nothing in common except their target. The Herodians took their name from Herod:
The name comes from Herod. It refers to those who joined him and his successors in bringing Greek and Roman manners and immorality in among the Jews. In their doubts they sided with the Sadducees, but they strongly opposed the Pharisees. That makes it all the more striking that they joined the Pharisees in trying to trap the Lord in what He said.
Their usual hostility is what makes this teamwork revealing:
An ominous alliance! Usually the Pharisees and Herodians were bitterly hostile to each other. The Pharisees were the great defenders of religious forms. The Herodians belonged more to the ruler's court. They used every means to advance their interests in the world, just as the others did to secure a religious reputation. But when it comes to Christ, the most opposed can unite against Him or His truth.
The Pharisees do not come in person. They send their pupils, and the arrangement itself gives them away:
The Pharisees, who are the leaders all through, lead the attack now. But the cleverness of the attack confesses their fear. They send their disciples instead of showing themselves in the open. With them they send their opponents the Herodians, whom no one would expect to be in league with them. Between the two of them they would catch Him as between the opposite blades of a pair of shears. They do not even bring an argument, only a matter for Him to decide. On that they can count on His complete and fearless truthfulness. He teaches the way of God in truth, and He is not swayed by appearances.
Everything in their opening speech is correct. That is what makes it remarkable:
With such cunning and flattery they approached Him. For once they spoke the truth when they declared, "You are true and teach the way of God in truth." But He knew them; He read their thoughts and their sinister purpose.
Their own words leave them without excuse, and one writer presses the obvious question back on them:
Yet they bear witness that He is true, that He was not swayed by anyone's standing, and that He taught the way of God in truth. (Why did they not then submit to His teaching?) Of course their subtle wickedness meant these words only as flattery. They hoped this would sway His answer to their question, "Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not?"
A true statement can come from a speaker who does not mean a word of it:
They think they can use on the Lord the tactics that often work so well with other people. So by flattery and falsehood they try to trap Him. They say, "You are true and do not care about anyone's opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances, but teach the way of God truthfully." This was true in fact, but it was not the true expression of their evil hearts.
The compliment set Him up for a question with only two answers, and both would cost Him. But they had built that dilemma themselves:
On their part it was pure wickedness, showing a total lack of conscience. Their own sin had brought them under the Roman yoke. That position was indeed contrary to what should have belonged to the people of God on earth. So on the face of it Christ had only two options. He must either become an object of suspicion to the authorities, or give up His claim to be the Messiah and therefore the Deliverer. Who had created this dilemma? It was the fruit of their own sins.
- Alliance. Herodians and Pharisees were natural opponents. Hatred of Christ made them partners. Opposition to Him can unite people who agree on nothing else.
- Cowardice. The Pharisees sent their disciples instead of coming themselves. The design of the plot confesses their fear.
- Accuracy. Every word of their compliment was correct: He is true, He teaches the way of God in truth, He is not swayed by anyone's standing.
- Hypocrisy. True in fact, false as an expression of their hearts. Flattery is not belief; saying the right thing about Jesus is not the same as submitting to Him.
- Self-indictment. Their own testimony condemns them. If they knew He taught the way of God truly, why not obey Him? And the trap they set rested on Roman rule their own sins had brought on them.