Server Outage Notice: TheSeed.info is transfering to a new Server on Tuesday April 13th
| > Sermon Archive > Sermons by Author > Rev. Mark Chen > The Chief Prophet, Priest, and King Owning the Conspirators | Previous Next Print |
| Order Of Worship (Liturgy) Psalter 283 - Motives to Gratitude Psalter 343 - The False Tongue TH 560 - Lord, Speak to Me That I May Speak |
The Chief Prophet, Priest, and King Owning the Conspirators
Matthew 22:15-46
Political assassinations are not uncommon in history. Julius Caesar was assassinated after he was appointed dictator perpetuo - dictator for life. Why the assassination? There were different motives. Some were worried it was the end of the Republic and a return to tyranny. They didn’t want a monarchy. Others saw themselves as heroes acting in the name of liberty. Only elected officials sharing power. Others held deep personal grudges against him. His policies threatened the traditional power, status, and nepotism enjoyed by the old aristocratic elite. So at a gathering, these coalition of senators approached him under the guise of presenting a petition. But when they surrounded him, they stabbed him 23 times.
Similarly, there was a coalition of conspirators trying to get rid of Jesus. He was turning their whole world order around. When he entered Jerusalem as King, he cleansed the temple like a priest, declaring - “my house shall be called a house of prayer, but you’ve made it into a den of robbers.” And here he taught like a prophet the true way of salvation. That’s why all the chief priests, Pharisees, and Herodians were furious. Their authority, their income came from temple commerce, and their political arrangement with Rome was under assault. So they formed an unholy alliance. Normally these groups despised each other, but they united around a single goal - to destroy Jesus by shaming Him publicly so the crowds would abandon Him, or by getting Him to say something for Rome to execute Him. So in our passage, he faced three waves of attacks, each from a different group. And in each response, he manifested his three fold office. The Chief Prophet, Priest, and King owned every conspirator. Who were they and why did they want him dead? We will explore the three conspirators. Firstly, the loyalists’ attempt to trap Jesus; secondly, the liberals’ attempt to shame Jesus; and thirdly, the legalists’ attempt to confound Jesus.
Firstly, the loyalists’ attempt to trap Jesus. Against the Herodians - the political loyalists, the Lord acted as prophet, to expose their hypocrisy and declare God’s twofold claim. But we see their devious trick. Verse 15 says that the Pharisees went and plotted how they might trap Jesus in his words. And they colluded with the Herodians. This was a coalition of Pharisees and Herodians. And they said to him, verses 16-17 - “Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men. Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?” Now, who were the Herodians, and why this question? The Herodians were a political party loyal to Herod and the Romans. When the Romans conquered Judea in 63 BC, they ousted the Jewish monarchy comprised of the Sadducees. They put Herod, their own puppet king, to rule Judea. So long as Rome was in power, the Herodians will be in power. But Jesus was disturbing the status quo. Normally they wouldn’t collaborate with the Pharisees, who were the archconservatives. But they joined forces, the loyalists with the the opposition party, against Christ.
This was a masterstroke of political entrapment. We see flattery - master, you’re true, you don’t care about other people’s opinion, you’re not swayed. They wanted him to speak boldly, without caution. And the question they wanted him to answer was - should we pay taxes to Caesar? Now, the Pharisees knew that if he said to pay taxes, then they’d brand him as a Roman loyalist and he’d lose the support of the common Jewish crowd. His popularity would collapse. On the other hand, if Jesus said not to pay taxes, then the Herodians would immediately accuse him before Pilate with charges of sedition. His popular support would collapse if he’s arrested as a rebel. Either way, they’d have him. The Herodians were keen to have him put to death, because never before had there been someone like him, able to stir much of the people. They saw their power slipping away. Either way, they thought they had him.
But they were confronted with his dexterous teaching. Verse 18 says that he was aware of their malice. He called them hypocrites and asked them for a penny, a denarius. And he asked - whose image or superscription are on it? Whose face? Whose name? Both the loyalists and archconservatives answer - Caesar’s. He then told them to give to Caesar what belonged to Caesar, and to God the things that are God’s. Notice that Jesus didn’t answer their hypothetical and hypocritical question with a simple yes or no. He asked for a coin. Because the denarius bore the image of Caesar, for a zealous Jew, even holding such a coin was offensive. But they managed to produce one readily. So these people - both Pharisees and Herodians - were already participating in Caesar’s economy. Now to be clear, his answer was not a division of life into sacred and secular. But he reordered their allegiance. If Caesar’s image is on the coin, then give Caesar this stamped piece of metal. But whose image is on man? God’s - he created man and woman after his image. Therefore, we must all give ourselves to God. And this even applied to Caesar. While this coin belonged to Caesar, you belong to God. You see, the loyalists were owned. They wanted a political answer. But Jesus gave them a theological answer that transcended politics. In the end, Christ wasn’t a revolutionary against Rome and he certainly wasn’t a collaborator. He was a prophet who pointed people to God’s ownership of them. And that’s why the loyalists marveled and left. Their trap was shattered. And the same for the Pharisees - they hoped to get rid of him in this way. So against them, Jesus acted as King, declaring the rightful dominion of God over Caesar.
Secondly, we see the liberal’s attempt to shame Jesus. But against these Sadducees, who were theological liberals, Jesus was priest, showing that eternal life resides with God. Verse 23 says “The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection.” What did they say to him? They gave him an impossible scenario. But before that, who were they? The Sadducees were made up of the priests and elders. They were the religious establishment. Initially conservative, they repelled the Greek rulers 200 years before to restore Jewish rule. And so the priests became the rulers - rich and powerful. Their children went to the best Greek schools where they were educated, met their Greek friends, and formed alliances. Eventually they adopted Greek philosophy. They especially denied the doctrine of bodily resurrection. So while they continued to be priests of the most high God, they were liberal in theology. Rome ousted them in 63 BC and let them retain some power. So they collaborated with Rome to keep peace and their power. And because Jesus came and created such a stir, they were afraid of losing their place.
So they came with a riddle designed to make resurrection faith look absurd. They cited the levirate marriage law from Deuteronomy 25:5 - a law given to preserve the family line and inheritance in Israel. Their hypothetical: a woman marries seven brothers, each dying childless. Finally, she dies. In the resurrection, whose wife would she be? This was their attempt to shame Jesus. The ancient Greek concept of life after death was very similar to the Chinese. They provided food offerings of dried fruits and small cakes, and buried them with personal items like jewelry, figurines to act as servants, and oil lamps. They would be buried with coins on their eyes, so they could pay Charon, the boatsman to bring them to Hades. So the Sadducees, who believed in the afterlife, assumed that a resurrected life would be a continuation of present earthly arrangements of marriage, procreation, and property disputes. They couldn’t conceive of a radically new creation. So as the liberals they were, they took eternal truths and reduced them to finite and carnal categories.
But note the political context as well. The Sadducees weren’t just debating theology. They’re defending their power. If there’s no resurrection, then there’s no final judgment. If there is no final judgment, then the high priest’s authority is absolute in this life. Denying the resurrection would keep their control intact. Liberalism always serves the powerful.
So here, Jesus didn’t argue philosophy. He corrected their foundational ignorance and gave a factual solution. He told them in verse 29 - you’re wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures or the power of God. So he spoke about God’s power. In the resurrection, there’ll be no marriage. Mankind will be like angels in heaven. Marriage is for now; it’s for companionship, procreation, and to serve as a picture of Christ and the church. But in the new creation, this picture gives way to the reality. God has the power to make heaven different from earth! After this, the Lord spoke from the Scriptures. He quoted from Exodus 3:6 where God said - “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” He used the present tense when, by that time, all three of these people had died on earth. But the fact that he was still the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, showed that they were in fact alive. Here, the Lord showed himself to be priest - showing God’s power to save. And in verse 33, the crowd marveled at this. You see, he owned the liberals not by philosophy, but by showing them God’s power to save. And he also showed how their denial of resurrection wasn’t intellectual superiority, but actually denial of the gospel. And because the crowd marveled, it was clear the Sadducees couldn’t answer this carpenter from Galilee.
And here, he was confronted by the third group of collaborators. Thirdly, we see the legalists’ attempt to confound Jesus. But against the Pharisees, these religious legalists, the Lord acted as king, pointing to the end of the law - which is total and complete submission and obedience to God out of love. In verse 34, when the Pharisees heard Jesus silenced the Sadducees, they decided to try again. This time they asked a question about the law. The Pharisees were the ultraconservatives, who added more requirements to God’s laws. They despised the Sadducees for their liberalism and the Herodians for their compromise. These other parties rejected God’s law. But the Pharisees saw themselves as faithful, obeying God. But in actual fact, the Pharisees by their many laws had not obeyed God. For example, the fifth commandment requires us to care for our parents. But the Pharisees used the first commandment to circumvent this. They would dedicate their money to the temple, thereby reserving it, calling it a gift for the Corban, which was the temple treasury; and by such reservation, they could then decline to support their parents. They were using the first commandment against the fifth. By so doing, they were justifying disobedience in the name of obedience. So these legalists now, step forward again. They had earlier partnered with the Herodians to ask about taxes. That failed. They saw Jesus silence the Sadducees (their theological enemies), but instead of repenting, they regroup. And so in verses 34 onwards, one of them, a legalist, asked - “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” This was their perennial conundrum - which was the most important commandment. And here, the Lord solved it. Now, this was a common rabbinic debate. Some said the most important was sacrifice, others said Sabbath, some said circumcision, etc. And they wanted the Lord to pick one, and they’d accuse him of breaking the others. But the Lord Jesus, as king, doesn’t break any law. And so he didn’t play their game. As king, he enforced the law. He quoted Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18 that the greatest commandments were to love God with heart, soul, mind, and strength; and to love one’s neighbor as themselves. On these two commandments depend all the law and prophets. If we see God as king, and we obey him in love - we would also love our neighbors. If you love God, you’d support your parents. But these legalists wanted a list to measure. But their conundrum is solved by seeing the kingship of Christ.
But our Lord Jesus wasn’t about to let all of these traps go unaddressed. As king, he would himself confound them. He’d own them. Whereas he could answer all their confounding questions, his pointed conundrum to them was unsolved. The tables are now turned. The Lord went on the offensive. In verses 41-42, he asked them who is Christ? Whose son is he? They answer easily: “The son of David.” Orthodox, biblical, correct - as far as it goes. This is the standard messianic expectation: a human king from David’s line who would liberate Israel from Rome. Then Christ quoted Psalm 110:1 - “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet.’” If he’s the son of David, then why did David call him my Lord? And so the Pharisees were stumped. Last verse says - “And no man was able to answer him a word.” You see, they knew the Christ would be human form David’s line. But they missed that he’d also be divine - David’s Lord, not merely his descendent. Because in the end, if you have a human messiah, you have no Savior. The Christ must be both son of David (true man) and Lord of David (true God). The Pharisees wanted a political liberator, not a divine Redeemer. They wanted a messiah who would kill Romans, not a Messiah who would die for sinners. Here Jesus acts as King revealing His own identity. And he’s not just a prophet or a priest. He is Lord - the one David himself worshiped. And verse 46 says, from that day no one dared ask him any more questions. The Chief Prophet, Priest, and King owned them all.
What do we learn brothers and sisters? Sure, we can say that we shouldn’t be like the Herodians, Sadducess, and Pharisees. But like the Herodians, we do enjoy and love what our nation gives to us and are afraid to lose it by standing against the grain as a believer. While we may not be liberal in theology, but in practice, we may hold to the gospel, but we show our unbelief by living as if there’s no judgment after death, no resurrection after death. And like the Pharisees, we defend ourselves with our religiosity and knowledge, when confronted with the need to be godlier. And all this shows that we’re not always comfortable with Christ as prophet, priest, and king. Why? Because he comes and upsets our comfort and complacency.
On that Tuesday in Jerusalem, these enemies of Christ thought they would shame him; instead they became ashamed. And if you remember, the day before, another was ashamed - Judas. And this mutual shaming became the ideal situation for another collaboration. This time a successful one, that would end in Christ’s death. But make no mistake. Why do you think Christ did this? He was in charge of his destiny. No man taketh his life, but he himself lays it down. He’s king. He’d already prophesied of his death - many times. He’s prophet. And because of their shame and anger, they killed him, where he offered himself up as sacrifice. He’s our priest. Why? So that we would never be ashamed. So that his laws might be written on our hearts. And so that at his name, we would bow the knee.
1. The Loyalists’ Attempt to Trap Jesus (15-22)
A. Their devious trick (15-17)
B. His dexterous teaching (18-22)
2. The Liberals’ Attempt to Shame Jesus (23-33)
A. Their impossible scenario (23-28)
B. His factual solution (29-33)
3. The Legalists’ Attempt to Confound Jesus (34-46)
A. Their perennial conundrum solved (34-40)
B. His pointed conundrum unsolved (41-46)
* As a matter of courtesy please advise Rev. Mark Chen, if you plan to use this sermon in a worship service. Thank-you.
(c) Copyright 2026, Rev. Mark Chen
Please direct any comments to the Webmaster
