Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§15.4 Who Did They Think Jesus Was?
peror to levy tribute from his subject peoples. 167 Here again, the fact that the
charge features so little in the trials of Jesus (Luke 23.2 apart) suggests that no
case of any weight could be built on it. 168 That the saying contributes anything
towards an answer to our question, therefore, is at best uncertain. But it certainly
bears witness to Jesus' own political astuteness.
g. The Question about David's Son
As well as being of disputed historicity, the passage's riddling quality puts the
onus on the hearer to draw out its significance. Does it reveal anything of Jesus'
own self-understanding? 169 Was he playing 'cat and mouse' with his interlocutors,
or simply engaging in a stimulating intellectual exchange?
h. The Trial of Jesus
The trial of Jesus, however, provides more answers. The interest again centres on
Jesus' response to the questions put to him by both Caiaphas and Pilate. What is
of particular interest is the ambivalence of the reply in all but one version.
Matt. 26.63-64
63 And the High Priest said to
him, 'I adjure you by the living
God that you tell us if you are
the Christ, the son of God.
64 Jesus says to him, 'You
say'.
Mark 14.61-62
61 Again the High Priest asked
him and says to him,
'Are you
the Christ, the son of the
Blessed?' 62 But Jesus said, 'I
am'.
Luke 22.67-68
67 ... saying, 'If you are
the Christ.
tell us'. But he said to them, 'If
I tell you, you will not believe;
68 and if I ask, you will not
answer'.
167. This was presumably how the saying was taken by Paul, if it is indeed the case that
Rom. 13.7 contains an echo of it (Rowland, Christian Origins 144-45). See also Cullmann,
Revolutionaries 45-47; F. F. Bruce, 'Render to Caesar', in Bammel and Moule, Jesus and Politics
249-63, who points out, inter alia, that if the issue became more sharply confrontational
subsequently for the Zealots, leading to the first revolt in 66, it is also true that Christians also
subsequently concluded that it was necessary to say No to Caesar; Witherington, Christology
101-104, 117; Crossan and Reed observe that in asking for a coin, Jesus shows that he did not
even carry Caesar's coin (Excavating Jesus 181).
168. This tells against the argument, e.g., of Horsley, Jesus 306-17, that it would have
been almost impossible to hear the saying as somehow legitimating 'the things of Caesar'. That
some chose to hear it as a challenge to Caesar's authority is certainly implied by Luke 23.2; but
the saying itself would hardly give sufficient substance to the charge itself. Wright's treatment
(Jesus 502-507) also raises the question whether all the 'layers of meaning' which might be detected
in Jesus' answer were thereby intended by Jesus.
169. 'This text, when coupled with others, strongly suggests that Jesus did see himself in
more than ordinary human categories' (Witherington, Christology 191).
651