Thread, bc I feel like doing theology right now.

What Jesus says is “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s.” He’s saying it in response to some Pharisees who tried to trick him into speaking out against the Romans & incriminating himself. https://twitter.com/moderateDG/status/1150117685700825091

At the time, the poor in Judea were being taxed mercilessly to pay for the Roman empire’s expansion; religious leaders wanted to trick Jesus into taking a political side.

“But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, ‘You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me?’” (Matt. 22)

So he asks whose image is on the coins, and they say, “Caesar,” so he says to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.

But Jesus himself broke the law throughout the NT, so is he being a hypocrite? No.

There was a caveat built into what Jesus said, because he was slyly avoiding their trap. “What is God’s” often comes into conflict with “what is Caesar’s,” and as Acts says, “We ought to obey God rather than men.”

Another one tyrants will use to argue that the Bible demands strict law-following is Romans 13: “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.”

That passage, though, is written by Paul—an apostle known for constantly winding up in prison because he was constantly breaking the laws which forbade him to preach Christianity. So, again, was he being a hypocrite? No.

Paul’s letter to the Romans was written for two specific audiences: The Romans, to tamp down concerns about Christians whom they persecuted, and the church there. It was coded. Roman rulers would read the letter as affirming their own authority. But...

The church read it differently: “There is no authority (except that which God has established)...the authorities (that exist) have been established by God.”

Any authority that would order them to violate their duty to God is not one that truly “exists.”

When you read the New Testament (and the Old), you have to consider the context of the time in which these events would’ve happened and when it was written.

Jesus was a lawbreaker who had to avoid falling into the Pharisees’ efforts to prematurely put him in Roman crosshairs.

Paul & the Gospels writers were lawbreakers & persecuted people who wrote the letters and the Gospels in such a way that fellow persecuted believers would take away one meaning, while opposing rulers might also have concerns about a Christian threat to their authority allayed.

If you take the tyrant’s interpretation of Jesus on “rendering to Caesar” or Romans 13, then Harriet Tubman was a sinner who should’ve obeyed the law of slavery; the people who hid Anne Frank’s family were sinners who should’ve obeyed Nazis. Paul sinned by preaching the Gospel.

If you follow the authortiarian’s interpretation of those passages, then this man is a sinner for giving food and water to immigrants and deserves those 20 years in prison they want to get him for.

But that’s contradict Jesus’ words in Matthew 25:31-46.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/scott-warren-trial-us-mexico-border-migrants-border-patrol-a8955096.html%3famp

This would’ve made a good addition to the #ThingsJesusNeverSaid.