Was Jesus a tax collector?

A friend sent me an article to read, and this is my reaction to it. Anyone wanting additional context on my reaction should reference that article here.

Does Matthew 22:18-22 morally obligate us to pay taxes?

What does Jesus mean when he says, “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s?” Jeff Barr analyzes this and believes this passage is one of the most misunderstood passages in the New Testament. Let’s look at the passage in question:

“But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said, “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away.”
Matthew 22:18-22 ESV

“Calling somebody a hypocrite is fighting words no matter what century you come from“

What an annoying question!

When the Pharisees asked their question to Jesus in Matthew 22:17, it was not asked in good faith. It was a trap. Looking at verse 18, Jesus replied to the Pharisees with a question of his own—and it is not in a kindly way. It was probably stern or even angry. The ESV translates Jesus as saying, “Why put me to the test,” which I think is incredibly interesting because temptation is defined as being put to the test. These Pharisees were tempting Jesus—meaning, testing Jesus—except unknown to them, he knew all the right answers. In addition to this, Jesus accused them of being hypocrites. Calling somebody a hypocrite is fighting words no matter what century you come from. These are not the words of a man baffled by a clever question seeking to defend himself—knowing his every word determines his fate. These are the words of a man taking the offensive position by teaching the Pharisees a masterclass in how to unravel paradoxical loyalties.

Who else is called the Tempter??

As these Pharisees were taking it upon themselves to play the role of the tempter, I am surprised that Jesus did not say, “Get behind me, Satan” as he said to Peter in Matthew 16:23. It seems that those who test God and those that test Jesus are focusing on the things of men, rather than things of God. What is a test? It is anything that lures man away from God.

“What is a test? It is anything that lures man away from God.“

Do we have to choose between God and the ruling authorities?

It looks like the entirety of Matthew 22:18-22 says give back to him what is his—or to put it another way, give back to Him what is His (note how I deified the pronouns with uppercases 😁). That is all that is meant—EXCEPT, the coin has the image of Caesar while our entire being is made in the image of God. The issue at hand—to be clear—is whether we fill the coffers of Rome with coins that bear the image of Caesar or if we are to fill the Kingdom of Heaven with believers that bear the image of God. Just as the denarius bore the image of Caesar and therefore must be rendered to him—every human bears the image of God and we must render ourselves to God—the entirety of our being, all that we are.

We as Christians know that everything belongs to God. The cited article outright states, “In the Hebrew tradition, everything rightfully belonged to God.” If we look only at the passage in Matthew 22, it seems like a moral dilemma for any Hebrew to have to choose between what belongs to God and what belongs to Caesar—since all things belong to God. As we try to understand what Scripture means, it is better to look at additional Scripture references that might help. First, let’s look at what this paper was communicating.

“Every human bears the image of God and we must render ourselves to God“

To pay or not to pay….

The author of this paper, Jeff Barr, makes the following basic premise that objects to what other people assumed Jesus was trying to teach:
“The passage unequivocally DOES NOT stand for the proposition that Jesus thought it was morally obligatory to pay taxes.” (emphasis mine)
On it’s face, I also don’t think this is a correct interpretation of what Jesus was saying, either. Now, I might be wrong, but this seems like a straw man fallacy that distorts what Jesus was actually saying by misrepresenting his side of the argument—then the author proceeds to defend his side of this new argument. Regardless of this, I was deeply interested in some of the points that he has made. I greatly appreciated how Jeff Barr expounded on the inscription on the coin and its meaning at that time in history. That gave a lot more credence to Jesus’ reply—so much so—because it is now understandable why the Pharisees were amazed. It was the only answer Jesus could have given without being cast out as a false prophet or a traitor to Rome.

There are two Kingdoms

The paper highlights two kingdoms—Caesar’s and God’s. Historically—and in context—Roman Caesars were considered to be deity. It seems Jesus was telling his listeners that they must choose which kingdom they wish to serve.
I’m reminded of another passage from Scripture:
“For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace.”
(Romans 8:5-6 ESV)
In light of the verse above, I would say that Caesar is “according to the flesh” and God is “according to the Spirit.”

If one is to truly believe that “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,”
(2 Timothy 3:16 ESV) then it would be good to also take a quick look at Romans 13:1-2 to better understand Jesus’ position in Matthew 22 when he answered the Pharisee:
“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”

Moral obligation versus legal obligation

So, just as the author Jeff Barr does not agree that Jesus is telling us we have a moral obligation to pay taxes in Matthew 22:18-22, I also conclude that Jesus was not talking about our moral obligations to pay taxes. Jesus is talking about our legal obligations by inferring that we must submit to the governing authorities—including the payment of taxes—because God has appointed those governing authorities to rule over us. The difference between a moral obligation and a legal obligation is that one suggests what a person ought to do from a sense of duty while the other explicitly defines what a person is bound to do legally.

“The difference between a moral obligation and a legal obligation is that one suggests what a person ought to do from a sense of duty while the other explicitly defines what a person is bound to do legally.“

Let me be clear: We should pay our taxes. It is what God would want of us—but it has nothing to do with moral obligation. There appears to be a governing authority of the flesh and another governing authority of the spirit. We must pay taxes to both. Matthew 22:21 in the ESV translates Jesus as saying we must pay Caesar “and” pay God. The word “and” means both.

“Let me be clear: We should pay our taxes.“

Well, if this is true, that begs the question:
What taxes would God have us pay to Himself and Who would collect? Just as the disciple Matthew was a tax collector for the Kingdom of Rome, Jesus is the tax collector for the Kingdom of God—but Jesus, in His mercy, absolves believers of their sin debt by paying our debt Himself. He can do this as a representative for God the Father because He is God. Keep in mind, Jesus still collects the debts of unbelievers.

“Jesus is the tax collector for the Kingdom of God—but Jesus, in His mercy, absolves believers of their sin debt by paying our debt Himself.“

One does not “payback” with gratitude

Would Jesus’ payment of our sin debt create a moral obligation? Maybe, but I don’t think so. It does seem to be what someone “ought to do” in response to accepting Jesus’ amazing gift. When we accept the gift of salvation, it is understandable to feel thankful, but that is different from owing a debt. When something is a gift, that means nothing is owed. If a person wants to show gratitude, all they have to do is accept this gift by declaring Jesus as Lord, which means accepting Him as Master. We serve Master Jesus because we want to—not because we ought to or feel a sense of duty to pay Him back.