[20:3–4]
Like a good rabbi, Jesus responds with a question, as he often does (6:3; 10:26; 12:14; 18:19). He asks about John’s baptism because the people—for example, tax collectors (3:12; 7:29)—who recognize that its origin was heavenly, not human, also tend to recognize Jesus, to whom John witnessed (3:16). In contrast, those who rejected John will likely also reject Jesus (7:30, 33–34). Moreover, it was at John’s baptism of Jesus that a heavenly voice was heard (3:22)—the voice of God the Father—proclaiming Jesus as his “beloved Son” (see 20:13). Readers thus know what authority Jesus has and who gave it to him!
[20:5–7]
Neither of the two choices—heavenly or human—suits the leaders, so they claim not to know. They did not believe the Baptist, so now they cannot say his baptism was from heaven. Neither do they dare answer that it was merely human; otherwise the people (see v. 19; 19:48; 22:2), who regard John as a prophet, will stone them to death (see Acts 5:26).
[20:8]
Since they have not answered his question, neither will Jesus answer theirs. Their insincerity has been exposed. They are asking about his authority not because they are interested in the truth but so as “to trap him in speech, in order to hand him over to the authority . . . of the governor” (Luke 20:20). Hence, Jesus does not directly tell them anything that could be used against him.
[20:9–13]
Instead, he takes an indirect path. In their hearing, he returns to teaching the people (v. 1) and uses a parable. Like the one about the fig tree (13:6), it involves a vineyard, an Old Testament image for Israel: “The vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel” (Isa 5:7).12 Jesus’ parable is allegorical, with the details representing specific realities. The man who is the owner (kyrios—literally, “lord”) of the vineyard stands for God. His going away for a long time signifies God’s forbearance and patience (see Rom 2:4). In view of the context, the tenant farmers to whom the vineyard is leased (a common arrangement of the time) represent the religious leaders in Israel—for example, “the scribes and chief priests” (Luke 20:19). God sent to Israel one servant after another—namely, the prophets, as Jeremiah explains in his temple sermon:13 “From the day that your ancestors left the land of Egypt even to this day, I kept on sending all my servants the prophets to you” (Jer 7:25).14 These were supposed to receive the owner’s share of the vineyard’s produce or “fruit” (RSV), which may refer to “repentance” (Luke 3:8), “judgment,” and “justice” (Isa 5:7). Instead, the servants got nothing but abuse (Luke 6:22–23; 11:47–51; 13:34). And so, God deliberates—What shall I do?15—and decides, I shall send my beloved son. This refers to Jesus himself, and indeed the same expression was used at his baptism (3:22). Like the baptism scene, it may also recall the sacrifice of Isaac, repeatedly called the “beloved son” (Gen 22:2, 12, 16 LXX), thus shedding light on how Jesus’ upcoming death is to be understood.
[20:14–16]
After tracing the history of God’s plan of salvation up to Jesus, the parable now looks forward to the two events that Jesus has frequently predicted: his upcoming passion when he will be killed (Luke 9:22; 18:33) and the subsequent destruction of Jerusalem (13:35; 19:43–44; 21:20). With regard to the first, before killing the son, they threw him out (see 4:29). This detail may point to Jesus’ crucifixion “outside the gate” of Jerusalem (Heb 13:12). Though the son was the heir, they wanted the inheritance to be theirs, not his. Paul, however, will explain that it is precisely by recognizing the Son that people become “joint heirs” with him (Rom 8:17; see Gal 3:29; 4:7). As for the second event, the time for patience will give way to the time for judgment, when the owner will finally come. Indeed, the Romans will come—as agents of God’s judgment, like the Babylonians before them (2 Chron 36:15–20)—and put those tenant farmers to death. As a result, the vineyard will be given to others, a reference especially to the apostles, who will replace the temple authorities in looking after God’s vineyard (see Luke 22:29–30).
By using the parable, Jesus has given an indirect answer to the question about authority. His authority is that of the beloved Son, given to him by the one who sent him, God the Father. He has also sounded a warning against the religious leaders who are questioning him. Understanding the gist of what Jesus is saying about the vineyard, the people (20:9) plead that it not be so.16
[20:17]
Jesus then looked at them intently (22:61) to explain the parable. He cites a scripture verse (Ps 118:22) taken from the same psalm that he earlier quoted (Luke 13:35) and that was also used to acclaim him as he approached Jerusalem (19:38; Ps 118:26). He, the beloved Son, is also the stone17 that is rejected (Luke 9:22; 17:25) by the builders—in other words, the Jewish leaders. However, whereas the temple’s stones will be thrown down (19:44; 21:6), this stone “will rise” (18:33) and become the cornerstone.18 Indeed, Peter in Acts refers to Jesus’ resurrection and quotes this same psalm verse (Acts 4:10–11; see 1 Pet 2:7), before concluding that “there is no salvation through anyone else” (Acts 4:12).
[20:18]
Jesus makes a further statement using stone imagery: everyone who falls on it will be dashed to pieces. In other words, those who reject the stone will suffer punishment. Underlying this saying is a verse from Isaiah about “a stone for injury, / A rock for stumbling” (Isa 8:14).19 The final phrase, about the stone’s effect when it falls on anyone, is illuminated by a passage from Daniel: after the rise of a series of earthly kingdoms, the “God of heaven will set up a kingdom”—depicted as a stone—and “it shall crush all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever” (Dan 2:44 NRSV). Hence, the same stone will bring judgment to some (Luke 20:18) and salvation to others (v. 17). As Simeon had foretold, Jesus is “destined for the fall and rise of many” (2:34).
[20:19]
The scribes and chief priests understand enough of what Jesus was saying to know that he had addressed this parable to them as the tenant farmers. They may also perceive that he claims to be the beloved son, as they will later ask him if he is “the Son of God” (22:70). Though they wish to arrest him, they are again restrained because they feared the people (19:48; 20:6).
The Question about Tribute to Caesar (20:20–26)
20They watched him closely and sent agents pretending to be righteous who were to trap him in speech, in order to hand him over to the authority and power of the governor. 21They posed this question to him, “Teacher, we know that what you say and teach is correct, and you show no partiality, but teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. 22Is it lawful for us to pay tribute to Caesar or not?” 23Recognizing their craftiness he said to them, 24“Show me a denarius; whose image and name does it bear?” They replied, “Caesar’s.” 25So he said to them, “Then repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.” 26They were unable to trap him by something he might say before the people, and so amazed were they at his reply that they fell silent.
OT: Gen 1:26–27
NT: Luke 6:7; 11:54; 14:1; Rom 13:1–7. // Matt 22:15–22; Mark 12:13–17
Catechism: paying taxes, 2240; civil disobedience, 2242
[20:20–21]
Looking for another opportunity, they watched him closely, like the Pharisees did earlier (6:6–7). They send agents to Jesus to trap him in speech (11:54). Their goal is to hand him over to Pilate, the Roman governor (3:1; 23:1), which would fulfill one aspect of Jesus’ passion predictions (9:44; 18:32). Since these “spies” (RSV) are pretending to be righteous, they introduce their question with effusive praise of Jesus’ correct teaching and lack of partiality, perhaps thinking that he will let down his guard.
[20:22]
They ask whether it is permitted for them to pay tribute to Caesar. When Rome took direct control of Judea (AD 6), its inhabitants had to begin paying tribute (a poll or head tax as well as a land tax) as an acknowledgment of their dependence on the emperor. At that time, a census was taken for such tax purposes, which led to an unsuccessful revolt led by Jud
as the Galilean (Acts 5:37). He viewed paying tribute to Rome as a sign of slavery for a people who should serve God alone.20 So, if Jesus the “Galilean” (Luke 23:6) now tells them not to pay, he can similarly be accused of opposing the payment of taxes and inciting the people to revolt (23:2, 14). In contrast, if he complies, he will lose credibility with the people, who expect a king (19:38) to liberate them.
[20:23–24]
Staying one step ahead of their craftiness, Jesus tells them to show him a silver denarius, the amount of the annual head tax, equivalent to a day’s wage (7:41; 10:35). Apparently, he does not have such a coin, but they do! Their hypocrisy thus begins to be exposed: if they were really “righteous” (20:20), they would not be carrying such a coin in the temple area (20:1). Unlike the coins of Herod Antipas in Galilee, which only had plant images (see comment on 7:24–25), thus following the Jewish practice of not portraying people, the denarius bore a human image (Deut 4:16 RSV) of the emperor,21 together with his abbreviated name—in other words, an “inscription” (RSV) that also promoted Roman emperor worship: TI CAESAR DIVI AUG F AUGUSTUS (“Tiberius Caesar, son of the divine Augustus, Augustus”).22 Jesus draws attention to these uncomfortable details by asking whose features the coin has. They are forced to admit: “Caesar’s.”
[20:25]
Jesus then issues a pronouncement that begins: Then repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. The question (Luke 20:22) had asked whether one should “pay” (literally, “give” [RSV]). Jesus’ response is slightly different: one should “repay” (see 10:35)—literally, “give back” (NIV)—what is Caesar’s. If they use Caesar’s coin, they should have no problem giving it back to him in payment of the tax. Jesus’ words eventually were understood to sum up the Christian principle of giving civil authorities their due (see Rom 13:7; Catechism 2239–40). Thus, Jesus is no Zealot.
Figure 18. Denarius of Tiberius Caesar.
However, neither is he like the unpopular Sadducees23 who collaborated with the Romans. The second half of Jesus’ pronouncement makes this clear, as it puts the first half in proper perspective: repay to God what belongs to God. This unexpected addition creates a parallel, inviting them to recall what bears not Caesar’s image but God’s—namely, human beings, who are created “in his image” (Gen 1:27). Hence, the things of God that they are to give back to God include their very selves.24 The two do not necessarily conflict with each other, but ultimately the obligation to give our whole selves to God takes precedence over the demands of civil authorities.
[20:26]
The spies have failed in their effort to trap him in speech (Luke 20:20). Instead, they are amazed with his answer (see 4:22) and fall silent as a result. However, out of malice the leaders will later distort Jesus’ answer so as to accuse him falsely before Pilate: “He opposes the payment of taxes to Caesar” (23:2).
Reflection and Application (20:20–26)
Give back to God what is God’s. Many Christians throughout history and still today in some parts of the world have accepted martyrdom rather than render to the civil authorities what belongs to God. Most Christians do not have to face such extreme trials, but nonetheless they may face situations—for example, regarding basic human rights and Gospel teachings—where they may be forced to practice civil disobedience (Catechism 2242), in a peaceful manner, thus accepting the sufferings that may result while also seeking recourse so as to remedy the situation.
The Sadducees’ Question about the Resurrection (20:27–40)
27Some Sadducees, those who deny that there is a resurrection, came forward and put this question to him, 28saying, “Teacher, Moses wrote for us, ‘If someone’s brother dies leaving a wife but no child, his brother must take the wife and raise up descendants for his brother.’ 29Now there were seven brothers; the first married a woman but died childless. 30Then the second 31and the third married her, and likewise all the seven died childless. 32Finally the woman also died. 33Now at the resurrection whose wife will that woman be? For all seven had been married to her.” 34Jesus said to them, “The children of this age marry and are given in marriage; 35but those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and to the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. 36They can no longer die, for they are like angels; and they are the children of God because they are the ones who will rise. 37That the dead will rise even Moses made known in the passage about the bush, when he called ‘Lord’ the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; 38and he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.” 39Some of the scribes said in reply, “Teacher, you have answered well.” 40And they no longer dared to ask him anything.
OT: Exod 3:1–6, 15–16; Deut 25:5–6
NT: Luke 14:14; 17:27; 18:30; Acts 4:1–2; 5:17; 23:6–8. // Matt 22:23–33, 46; Mark 12:18–27, 34
Catechism: resurrection of the dead, 575, 993; virginity a sign of the coming age, 1619; angels, 330
Lectionary: Luke 20:27–38: Thirty-Second Sunday Ordinary Time (Year C)
[20:27]
Some Sadducees (see the sidebar, “Jewish Groups and Leaders,” p. 82) now enter into controversy with Jesus. It is not surprising to encounter them in the temple area (20:1), since the group included leading priests and often the high priest himself (Acts 4:1–2; 5:17). In contrast to Jesus (Luke 14:14) and the Pharisees, they deny that there is a resurrection (Acts 23:6–8).25 Both Sadducees and Pharisees originated in the second century BC. At that time, belief in the resurrection was becoming more widespread among Jews after the experience of the Maccabean martyrs (2 Macc 7:9, 11, 14, 23, 29). However, the Sadducees were opposed to this trend. In matters of belief, they accepted only those teachings clearly written down in the Torah, the law of Moses,26 regardless of other passages in the Old Testament that lent support to such a belief.27
[20:28–33]
In their view, Moses actually teaches against the resurrection. The law of levirate marriage (Deut 25:5–6) states that the brother of a man who dies leaving a wife but no child should marry the widow and thus raise up descendants for the deceased (see Gen 38:6–11). So the Sadducees present a test case, taking inspiration from Tobit (Tob 3:8–9, 15) and 2 Maccabees (2 Macc 7): seven brothers successively married a woman, but all the seven died childless; then the woman also died. Their question about the hereafter—whose wife is she?—makes the resurrection look absurd and therefore false.
[20:34–36]
Jesus gives a two-part answer. First, he rebuts their argument by pointing out that life in the coming age is not the same as life now, as they are assuming. It does not involve marriage. The purpose of the levirate law, besides providing for the widow, was that “the name of the deceased” would continue through a descendant (Deut 25:6). However, in the resurrection of the dead, people are like angels in that they can no longer die, so there is no need for marriage to perpetuate one’s name. So, whereas the children of this age marry (Luke 17:27), those in “eternal life” (18:30) are characterized above all by their relationship with God: they are children of God. The further description that they are the ones who will rise is more literally translated “they are children of the resurrection” (NIV). Jesus’ words also imply that not all attain to this blessing, so people, including the Sadducees questioning him, should focus on doing what is necessary to be deemed worthy by God to receive it.
[20:37–38]
Second, Jesus shows that the resurrection of the dead is indeed taught by the law of Moses, thus arguing on the basis of the authority the Sadducees accepted. At the burning bush, the Lord revealed himself to Moses as the God of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exod 3:6, 15–16). Though they died centuries before Moses, to God they are living. He is not God of the dead, which means that belief in the resurrection is actually necessary for having a proper understanding of God.28
But how are they alive? The resurrection of the body has not yet taken place, as the Sadducees could point out by referring to the cave of Machpelah in Hebron, where
the patriarchs were buried (Gen 49:31; 50:13),29 for which Herod the Great had constructed a massive enclosure that still stands. Hence, if Abraham is alive, as the parable about Lazarus also assumes (Luke 16:19–31), there must be some “intermediate state,”30 as Christian teaching has affirmed with respect to the immortal soul (Catechism 1023).
[20:39–40]
Some of the scribes (see Acts 23:9) acknowledge that Jesus has answered the Sadducees well. However, the Sadducees will later take up the issue again with Jesus’ disciples, who are proclaiming the resurrection of the dead in Jesus (Acts 4:1–2), who is “the first to rise from the dead” (Acts 26:23).
As a result of Jesus’ skill in fending off three questions (Luke 20:2, 21–22, 28–33), his opponents no longer dared to ask him anything. From now on they will simply seek how “to put him to death” (22:2).
Jesus’ Question about David’s Son (20:41–44)
41Then he said to them, “How do they claim that the Messiah is the Son of David? 42For David himself in the Book of Psalms says:
‘The Lord said to my lord,
“Sit at my right hand
43till I make your enemies your footstool.”’
The Gospel of Luke Page 46