Thesis
God's total ownership over all things means our only legitimate response is complete surrender to Him, and every objection we raise against God ultimately reveals our unwillingness to worship Him fully rather than exposing any legitimate flaw in His character or demands.
Series
—
Type
Textual
Tone
pastoralpropheticdidactic
Method
grammatical-historicalcanonical
What's in this sermon
The shape of the argument
17 units across exposition, application, illustration, theological claim, and conclusion. The pastor's argument is built from these moving parts.
Pastoral correction · unit #13
"The pastor universalizes the lesson: all our questions and objections to God are really about whether we want to worship Him fully or not. We use controversy and emotional issues as distractions from the core issue of total surrender."
Luke 20:19 | Luke 19 | Psalm 7 | Proverbs 26:7 | Psalm 9 | Book of Esther (Haman and Mordecai) | Matthew's parallel account | Luke 20:22 | Psalm 139
Illustrations· 3
Get Your Own Dirthypothetical · unit #1
— An opening joke illustrates God's absolute ownership over creation—even the raw materials for human achievement belong to Him. The scientist's hubris is exposed by the fact that he depends on God's dirt to prove his independence from God.
The Astrophysicist's Challengecultural reference · unit #5
— The pastor introduces Neil deGrasse Tyson's problem-of-evil objection as a modern example of someone arguing with God—setting up the illustration that Tyson will fall into his own trap.
The Absurdity of Arguing Against Godhistorical example · unit #15
— An illustration from Cornelius Van Til makes the point vivid: we cannot argue with God without depending on Him for the very capacity to argue. All our objections depend on His sustaining power, making the argument inherently self-defeating.
Theological claims· 2
When we argue with God, God will always use our very words and arguments against us. unit #4
Tyson falls into the pit he dug, exactly as Scripture predicts will happen when anyone argues with God. unit #9
Quotations· 2
"God is supposedly good, and God is supposedly powerful."
— Neil deGrasse Tyson (unit #5)
"Give me a lever and a place to stand and I can move the world."
— unnamed (unit #15)
Read it
Full transcript
16,335 characters17 units~18 min reading time
0 · The pastor opens with personal connection, sharing about living with congregation families and setting a warm, relational tone before launching into the sermon proper
We are eager to be up here, totally up here, living in our own home and so on and so forth. But it's been a huge blessing that we've been able to stay with so many of you families throughout the last couple months. And Angela and I have gotten to know your kids and listen to their stories and all the dirt they have on you guys. And it's, it's been great. We'd love to see, love to see so many families set apart by the gospel.
1 · An opening joke illustrates God's absolute ownership over creation—even the raw materials for human achievement belong to Him
So there's this old joke. Turn in your Bibles to Luke 20, we're still there. There's an old joke about a scientist who says to God, "Listen, God, we've decided that we don't need you anymore. These days we can clone people, we can transplant organs, we can do all sorts of things that seem miraculous." And God says, "So you don't need me?" And the scientist is like, "That's right." He says, "Well, why don't we just put this to the test? Why don't you create a human being?" "the way that I created a human being." And the scientist is like, "No problem, male or female?" And God says, "Male." And so the scientist bends down to pick up a scoop of dirt, and God says, "Hold on, get your own dirt."
2 · The pastor introduces the text (Luke 20:19ff) and establishes the recurring theme of God's ownership, which is challenged by religious leaders attempting to trap Jesus
That's really the message of the number of messages we've gone through over the past several weeks. This idea of God's complete and total ownership over all things is just showing up time and time again. In Luke chapter 20. Interestingly enough, that theme keeps coming up when people are challenging Jesus. The answer pretty much to everything Jesus— every question that people ask Jesus ultimately kind of comes back to, "Well, because I own it," or, "Well, because I created it," or, "Because I'm in charge." Those are the basic answers to any objection we would bring to God. And we see in Luke 19 that a group of people are trying to entrap Jesus And they bring the following to Him, verse 19, "The scribes and the chief priests sought to lay hands on Him at that very hour, for they perceived that He had told this parable against them; but they feared the people. So they watched Him and sent spies who pretended to be sincere, that they might catch Him in something He said, so as to deliver Him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor."
3 · The pastor unpacks the trap-setting language of the text by bringing in an extended canonical pattern from Psalms and wisdom literature: those who dig pits for the righteous will fall into them
Now, this phrase, "pretended to be sincere that they might catch Him," the Greek has the sense of a trap being set, and they're using their sincerity as bait. Now, that's important because I'm a Psalm guy. I have spent, I would say, 10 years reading the Psalms pretty much every day. And the Psalms are Jesus' prayer book. All throughout Jesus' ministry, the Psalms are either in the foreground, He's quoting them, He's praying them, or they're at the least in the background. And in this particular case, there's a whole group of Psalms that are at work in the background at this particular moment. Because many of the Psalms concern this issue. Someone setting a trap for you to fall into. So these Psalms have a consistent theme. May the one who set the trap, may the one who dug the pit for me, fall into the pit that they dug, fall into the net that they laid. Let me read a few of these. Psalm 7: Behold, the wicked man conceives evil and is pregnant with mischief and gives birth to lies. He makes a pit, digging it out, and falls into the hole that he has made. His mischief returns upon his own head, and on his own skull his violence descends. Psalm 9: The nations have sunk in the pit they made, and in the net they hid, their own foot has been caught. The Lord has made himself known, he has executed judgment. The wicked are snared in the work of their hands. Proverbs 26:7 says, "Whoever digs a pit will fall into it." This idea is actually consistent throughout the wisdom literature in the Old Testament, that God's people pray that their enemies in seeking to entrap them will actually wind up being trapped themselves. In fact, one of the great stories in the Old Testament is about a man named Haman, and he is trying to bring the execution of a man named Mordecai about. And he actually goes so far as to build gallows in the city center so that he can have Mordecai hung from these gallows. And at a last-second providence of God, it's actually Haman who winds up hanging from, the Bible says, hanging from the gallows he built. So this theme of someone laying a trap for a godly person only to fall into that trap themselves, is consistent throughout Scripture.
4 · The pastor moves from the biblical pattern to a direct theological assertion: arguing with God always results in our own words and arguments being turned against us
And I want you to see that that's what happens when we argue with God. That's always what happens when we argue with God. God will use our very words against us, our very arguments against us.
5 · The pastor introduces Neil deGrasse Tyson's problem-of-evil objection as a modern example of someone arguing with God—setting up the illustration that Tyson will fall into his own trap
This week I was watching an interview with astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, because that's what I do in my spare time. And they asked Mr. Tyson, "Do you believe in God?" And he said this: "God is supposedly good, and God is supposedly powerful." And yet, Mr. Tyson sees children dying of leukemia and thousands being swept away in tsunamis. Therefore, the scientific evidence presents itself as follows: either God is not strong enough to intercede on their behalf, or He is not good enough to care. And in that moment, on a talk show, everyone's quite impressed with an answer like that. And the truth is, is that he's going to have his shot at having that conversation with God. I don't predict that will go well.
6 · The pastor exposes the internal contradiction in Tyson's objection: his moral outrage over suffering contradicts his evolutionary Darwinist worldview, and the very existence of that moral sense is evidence for the God he denies
Even from my very limited human perspective, I can see that he has dug a pit for himself. For one thing, Tyson's worldview, if it were consistent, would have absolutely no problem with children dying of leukemia. Neil deGrasse Tyson is an evolutionary Darwinist. He believes that the only rule in this universe that really matters, the only absolute good in this universe, is the survival of the fittest. And a child with leukemia is clearly not the fittest. So if he were consistent with his own worldview, he would see a child dying with leukemia as, in fact, a good thing that is the outcome of the universe's constant working against those that are unfit to survive. And likewise, if he were to see thousands of people wiped out by a tsunami, he would say, "Well, the equilibrium of nature is taking hold and—" the problem of overpopulation is a little less of a problem today than it was yesterday. If he's being consistent with his own worldview, he would look at those things and say they're either good or they are insignificant. But somewhere deep in his heart, he sees a child suffering from leukemia and has a feeling that is completely contrary to his own worldview. He sees it as wrong. But his view of that as wrong isn't coming from him. It had to be put into him by someone other than him and put in him at such a deep level that he, this very smart man, wouldn't see the contradictions at play. That he would see suffering as good or bad is evidence of a God who is good and powerful enough to place those things in his heart.
7 · The pastor exposes a second contradiction: Tyson condemns God for not using His power to end suffering while failing to use his own power to the same end—thus falling into the pit he dug by his own moral standard
Well, there's another problem. In order for Neil deGrasse Tyson to be consistent in his objections, in order for his complaints about the suffering of children to be legitimate, we would need to see in Neil deGrasse Tyson's life a very visible and tangible concern for the welfare of children. We would need to see extraordinary and sacrificial efforts to protect children from unjust suffering. We would probably want to see that he's got a number of Thai or Bangladeshis living in his home. Because if Neil deGrasse Tyson wants to ask God why God doesn't use his power to care for these people, then it's only legitimate to ask Neil deGrasse Tyson why he doesn't use his power to care for these people. And if he doesn't use his power to care for these people, then he is not good according to his own definition, and therefore incapable of issuing a judgment on the goodness of God.
8 · The pastor anticipates and refutes a counter-objection: the very fact that we expect more from God than from ourselves proves we want a God who transcends our understanding—which means accepting mystery
Now, his response may likely be, "Well, we expect more from God. We expect more from God than me. I'm not God. We expect more." And we would respond, "Exactly." We want a God who is bigger than us and better than us. And that means having a God who works in ways we do not understand.
9 · The pastor completes the illustration by explicitly tying it back to the scriptural pattern: Tyson has fallen into his own trap, just as the Psalms predict, and just as the religious leaders in Luke 20 will
You see, in his simple statement that God is either not good or not powerful, we see that Neil deGrasse Tyson isn't either of those. He falls into the pit that he dug, and that's exactly what the Scriptures predict will happen when we argue with God. And that's That's exactly what we see happening in our text this morning.
10 · The pastor provides crucial historical context for the tribute question, explaining that it was not primarily about money but about submission and loyalty—a demand that came dangerously close to Caesar-worship for monotheistic Jews
These folks feign a bit of sincerity, they use it as bait, they're setting a trap, and they ask Jesus this question, verse 22, "Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar or not?" Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar or not? Some versions say, "Should we pay tax to Caesar?" It's not really the helpful way to think about this, because this isn't a tax in the way we think of as a tax. It's important to understand the historical context here. Let me just explain. When Caesar invaded and occupied a new land, he required every household to pay 1 denarius, about $100 per male household, male member of a household. Remember when Jesus gets born in Bethlehem instead of Nazareth and that whole weird thing with the manger and Joseph and Mary and no room in the inn? Well, that was because this new Caesar named Tiberius, the son of the Caesar before— Caesar just means king. Caesar had declared a census over all the Jews so that he could get an accurate tally of who needed to pay this tribute. This wasn't about the money. He wasn't trying to raise a bunch of money. This was about a power play. $100 wasn't that much. It was one worker's wages, you know, for a week's worth of work or so. It wasn't really about that. It was really about declaring to everyone that Caesar was in charge. And it was really just an act of domination. And for the Jews, this pledge of submission came uncomfortably close to a demand to worship Caesar. You can see how that would be, right? This command to give this tribute, tribute means honor, to pledge loyalty to. This command to give tribute to Caesar could be in the Jewish mind a difficulty because they didn't have a whole list of gods. Caesar wasn't just one more god. That system worked really well everywhere else in the world. It didn't really work well in Palestine, which is why there were so many troubles. In Palestine, so many troubles in Israel. So they had trouble with this idea that this Caesar would require them to pay tribute, because they didn't have a whole list of gods, they had one God and they were supposed to worship Him and Him alone.
11 · The pastor explains the trap: answering either way seems to doom Jesus—yes endorses Caesar-worship, no commits treason
So they really think they've got Jesus here. This question really feels like foolproof, like there's no way we're falling into this pit. If He responds, "Yes, pay the tribute," Then, in a sense, they could construe that he's encouraging them to worship other gods. And if they say, "No, don't pay the tribute," then they could turn him in to the Roman authorities to be imprisoned and hopefully killed, which is really their hope.
12 · The pastor exposes the real hypocrisy: the questioners pretend to be zealous for God's exclusive worship, but if they were, they would obey Jesus standing before them
But implicit in this question, "Should we give this tribute to Caesar?" is this, this subtext. We are so committed to worshiping God and worshiping God alone with all of our hearts, minds, and souls that we can't bear the thought of giving allegiance to anyone or anything else. That's what they're saying by even raising this question. They're pretending to be super, super interested in worshiping God and worshiping God alone, which of course they weren't. Because if they were, they would have obeyed Jesus. In the Matthew text that deals with this same story, we get one little extra detail. Jesus says to them, "You're being hypocrites." Why does He tell them they're being hypocrites? Because they did not care about worshipping God so much that they were afraid that possibly by extending some wacko $100 in Rome, they would worship God a little less than what they had hoped for.
13 · The pastor universalizes the lesson: all our questions and objections to God are really about whether we want to worship Him fully or not
You see, even in their questioning, they exposed their own hearts. And friends, to be honest, everything we ever ask of God, every time we argue with Him, every time we question Him, it's always about this issue. It's always about this question of do we really want to worship the Lord or not? Whatever objection we have against God, whether it's personally against God or it's against something God is calling us to do, it's always on these terms. We don't want to worship Him fully, completely, totally. And throughout the New Testament, throughout the Gospels, when people ask Jesus a question, almost always it is an effort to distract from that central issue. Let me throw a little controversy up in the air. The more emotional, the more politically charged, the better, and distract you from the claim you're making on my heart.
14 · The pastor breaks the fourth wall to address the congregation directly, insisting that this is not just about ancient hypocrites or modern atheists—this is about us, here, now, contending with the same question of total worship
Friends, I hope you understand that this isn't one of those passages that's going to allow you just to sit by and watch someone else do something that you are not guilty of at all, or that you've gotten past. Friends, we haven't gotten past this. We're still contending with the very same question. Do we really, really, really want to worship God with our whole being? Do we really, really, really want to give Him our whole selves?
15 · An illustration from Cornelius Van Til makes the point vivid: we cannot argue with God without depending on Him for the very capacity to argue
One more thing about arguing with God, just so we're all clear. You can't argue with God without sitting on God's lap. Let me tell you what I mean by that. There was an apologist named Cornelius Van Til who was on a train in Holland when he was a young man, and he saw a little girl sitting on her dad's lap, and the dad apparently told her to do something that she didn't want to do, and she reached up and slapped him in the face. I guess this is Europe, so that's okay, I don't know. No, no. But Van Til observes that she could not have reached his face if he were not supporting her on His lap. You know, all arguments, all conflict with God by nature depends on God holding us up so that we could reach Him to argue with Him. Depends on God holding us up, showing Himself to us so that we can object to Him, giving us some clarity so that we could have a conversation with Him, giving us speech, giving us thought, giving us intelligence. In fact, let me just be super clear here. I really suspect, and I'm not going to get into super specifics today, I really suspect that in your heart, for many of you, there's a thing, whether that's giving or increase in evangelistic boldness, whatever it is, that there's this thing. And I just want to be clear about something. You're having an argument with God about this. You're sitting on His lap. He's given you years and years and years of faithfulness, and now everything you're afraid to lose is what He gave you in the first place. Everything you're afraid to lose by obeying came from Him. He gave it to you. And what He's calling you to do with it, it's up to Him, right? It's not up to you. Falling into the pit that we dug. That's what's going to happen if we argue with God about these things.
16 · The pastor applies the text personally, sharing his own teenage attempt to run from God and the impossibility of escaping the One who owns everything
Well, that's what this is all about. That's what this whole text is about. This text isn't really about taxes or tithing, this is about Jesus' total claim over everything. "Render unto Caesar that which belongs to Caesar," He says, "and render unto God that which belongs to God." And everybody knows what that means, and it leaves them speechless. Friends, it scares us to death to hear those words, "Render unto God what belongs to God," because deep inside we all understand that everything we have or could hope to have belongs to God. You know, when I was a kid, I ran away from home. Multiple times, of course. You know, for an hour or two maybe. When you're a kid, it is hard to run away from home because home is all you know. You don't have a lot of other places to be. But when I was a teenager, I tried to run away from God. And that proved even more difficult. Running away from home was at least possible. My home was a 1,500-square-foot split-level on the south side of Jefferson City, Missouri. I could leave my home. But I couldn't, not really, run away from God's home. I couldn't, not really, run away from Him. Because He owns it all, and He is everywhere, and everything has His name on it. I could slap Him, I could ignore Him, but I couldn't escape Him. My whole being and my whole world was built on Him. There's an old, very, very proud, very optimistic statement that says, "Give me a lever and a place to stand and I can move the world." And the problem is all the levers that exist are in the world. And the only place to stand is in the world.
Where this fits
Recent preaching context
The three sermons immediately preceding this one in the preaching schedule.
Not enough data yet — this preacher has fewer than three prior sermons in the corpus.
Crawler & AI-search policy · view robots.txt and llms.txt
This sermon page is intentionally optimized for search engines and AI assistants. We've opted into being crawled by both. The crawler-config files at the domain root:
# Providence Community Church
A church preaching expository sermons through the books of the Bible.
## Sermons
- [apr21_providence (Luke 20:19-26)](/ProvidenceLenexa/sermons/apr21-providence)
## About
- [About the church](/about)
- [Plan a visit](/visit)
The page itself ships with Schema.org Article + Church markup (with real geo coordinates), Open Graph + Twitter cards for share previews, and a canonical URL. Transcripts are server-rendered HTML — no JS dependency for the readable body.