Church and State Relations

How many times have we heard, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."? Many people use this sentence to justify a sharp Church and State separation. We see this interplay of Church and State in two extremes in the example of Emperor Theodosius I. Theodosius was raised to be a Christian and was an emperor in post-Constantine Rome.
One particular story illustrates how the Church's influence over the most powerful is used in a positive way. On one occasion Theodosius was angered at an uprising in Thessalonica. The Governor of the city was killed in a riot and the Emperor ordered the killing of 7000 people that were supposedly implicated in the murder. The Bishop of Milan, Ambrose, heard of this action and was outraged that a Christian Emperor would order such a thing. He blocked Theodosius from Communion and ordered him to do penance. Ambrose had such a strong influence over Theodosius that the logistics of how he could carry out the death penalty was altered and a 30 day wait period was instituted before the Emperor could carry out an execution. Ambrose was famously quoted as saying, "The Emperor is in the Church and not above the Church."

On the flip side we observe the opposite of Church and State relations with Theodosius making the Nicene Creed and dogma the official religion of the Roman Empire in 380 AD. No longer would paganism be the official religion of the Empire but now Christianity becomes the only religion recognized by the Empire. This would lead to many unsavory things that Theodosius probably never expected.

We look at the example of Theodosius and see the two visions of Church and State relations. This is a very complex subject that I definitely do not have the ability to answer. It is something that I have thought a good bit about because of the recent elections and many social issues that have come to the fore. Issues such as sanctity of life, justice for those less fortunate, and the struggle over all people being treated as if they are made in the image of God.

Going back to the original comment about Rendering unto Caesar and the popular perception of modern day people's thinking on how Jesus thought about the Church and State may be useful.

Jesus had just cleansed the Temple and wheels were being put in place that would take Him to the cross. The Temple cleansing act would have been a very Messianic act to the Jews and highly controversial. The two groups that come to Jesus only have one thing in common and that is their common goal to trap Jesus. The Herodians were in the back pocket of the Romans and had compromised with the pagans. The Pharisees were the Puritanical bunch that one day would side with the rebellion in AD 66 that would see the utter destruction of Israel. Two completely different agendas are trying to trap Jesus. If Jesus answers soft on the question then He basically sides with the pagan sympathizers and will be discredited with all of the people. If he answers as a revolutionary and says, “hey stick the thumb in the eye of the Romans”, they would have immediately gone to the Roman authorities and shared the info with them. His answer is radically different and they are just floored by it.

1^st of all – having the coin itself is against the Jewish Law. Even Herod Antipas would not have his own image put on a coin because of the prohibition against the elevation of oneself by the image. But this coin is even more over the top. The Roman Denarius would have an image of Tiberius Caesar and would say the ‘son of Augustus.’ Augustus was a divine title given to the Caesar by the Senate in 31 BC. to Octavian.

We have a false impression by Jesus comment, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's.”

From a Jewish mindset they would know that Jesus was quoting and augmenting a statement by Mattathias Maccabeus some years before.

We find in the 1^st book of Maccabees a statement by Mattathias right before his death.

“Pay the Gentiles what is their due, and obey the commands of the Law”

By this statement Mattathias meant to rebel and expel the Greeks from Palestine and Judas his son took up the banner and did just that. The people went through a rigorous time of returning to the Torah and taking up the sword.

Jesus is cryptic on purpose. This statement could not be used by either groups for their advantage. At face value the Romans would not see this statement as a threat.

Is Jesus saying rebel against the pagan power? Yes. But not like the Jews wanted to do.

Jesus' Kingdom is more real than any other and the ones of this earth are mere shadows and caricatures. Jesus is calling out both mindsets. Jesus would see both the Herodian stance as compromise and also the eventual violent revolution as compromise. By taking part in a violent revolution they would play right into the hands of the way Rome does things. Compromise on both fronts.

I don't know if this blog brings up any points for discussion but I would like to know what others think about this debate. I am still working through all of this and I find Christ constantly calling me into account and I am reminded of His Kingdom and the fact that we are to pray, "Thy will be done in Heaven as on Earth."

If God were in charge how would He run this show?

Return From Exile

One cannot read the beautiful passages of Isaiah chapters 40-55 without being moved by the wonders of God's plans for Israel and the return from Exile. Isaiah paints a picture of God renewing Creation and sending forth a Servant that would accomplish His purposes. Isaiah 55 also gives us a picture as to how powerful God's word really is. Isaiah tells us that God's word will go forth and accomplish His purpose.
We know from history that Israel returned from Babylonian Exile after the Persians took over, but at the time of Christ many Jews were wondering if they had truly returned from Exile. Many read the passages of Isaiah and saw that they were still under bondage in their own homeland. Just a look at the Roman garrisons in Jerusalem would quickly remind them of this. Many of these 'Return from Exile' passage had not been fulfilled yet and many saw themselves as still in a state of Exile.
With this in thought we see the coming of Christ. In this post I would like to propose that John chapter 1 is a passage chocked full of connections to Isaiah's vision of the Return. John presents to us that Christ is the true Return from Exile that all of the Jews had anticipated.

First, we pick up in John chapter 1:1-3 and verse 14

“ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

4 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."

We see here a parallel with Isaiah 55:10 -11

"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, And do not return there without watering the earth And making it bear and sprout, And furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater; 11 So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding {in the matter} for which I sent it.

In John chapter 1 we see the very personification of the Word. We see God incarnate come into our world to accomplish the purposes of the Father in ways that the Jews could have never imagined. God's Word would truly accomplish His purpose by completing His rescue operation by returning man from the Exile of Sin.

Secondly, we pick up on the idea of God's Presence in the Temple. Many pre-exilic prophets envisioned a time when God's Glory would leave the Temple because of Israel's sin. God would leave the Holy of Holies and leave the Jews to the Babylonians. We see in John 1:14 that God's presence has returned in a new and more full sense. John tells us that the Word became flesh and Tabernacled (skene- or Templed) among us. God's presence had truly returned to His people and it was found in Jesus of Nazareth.

Thirdly, we see John the Baptist as the fulfillment of the prophecy of the forerunner. In Isaiah 40:3-4 we see that passage about the one that would prepare a way through the desert for the return. The Jews in Isaiah's day saw this as a literal highway that would be plowed through the desert that separated Babylon from Israel. The path the Jews would normally take to Babylon would have them travel north and then South East. This new path would go directly to Zion. John the Baptist in John 1: 23 tells us that he is the fulfillment of this passage and he is the voice that calls in the wilderness. He is the one that makes the paths straight. It would not be a literal path through the desert but it would be a spiritual path of repentance that would lead people to the true return from Exile through the Christ.

Lastly, Isaiah presents to us a mysterious figure of the Servant that would become like a Lamb to fulfill God's purpose of Return From Exile. This Servant would suffer for the people and be vindicated. He would be punished for Israel's sin. Many people in Jesus' day saw the Servant as the nation of Israel but Jesus would take on the role of the Servant and would represent the entire nation. We see in John 1:29 that John the Baptist identifies Jesus as this Servant by calling Him the Lamb of God. Jesus would be the one that would suffer for the people but be vindicated.

In this post I tried to lay out a case that John 1 is giving us a message of a true Return from Exile in Jesus Christ. This return is God's ultimate purpose to lead us from the Exile of Sin and into a New Creation.