What does the Bible say about paying taxes?

Subjection of the ungodly to authority is purchased only by fear of punishment. But fear of consequences is certainly not the only principle that should restrain the Christian from disobedience — “not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake.” To maintain a good conscience toward God subjection to authority is a plain necessity. We may ourselves judge, that a certain act is not intrinsically evil, but if it controverts authority, it is indirect, but nonetheless definite disobedience to God.

The payment of taxes is directly connected with this. It is by this means that government is supported, and it is the plain responsibility of the believer to pay all that is required of him, in simple honesty. We partake of many advantages of government: why should we not be thankful to pay for them? If authorities are guilty of abusing their power, by wrong use of money, etc. for this they will have to answer to God; but it gives us no liberty to withhold what is due from us. If we would so excuse ourselves, this is but the subtle working of selfishness taking advantage of wrong to justify wrong. Whether then tribute, custom, fear, or honor — what is due we must render without regard to our thoughts of the person or persons who are in authority. It is the authority — not the person — to which we owe subjection.

Some have refused to pay taxes on the ground that the money is being used by the government to carry out morally bad programs. This does not excuse our refusal to pay taxes. We are responsible to God to submit to the government's demand for taxes, as Romans 13:6 insists. The government must answer to God for its use of the money. The Lord Jesus told Peter to pay the temple tax for himself and for the Lord, even though He was not really required to pay it, but because others thought He should (Mt. 17:24 - 27). This surely tells us that money is not as important a matter as submission to the authority ordained by God.

The Domain of the Civil Power. — Is, then, blind obedience in everything to the ruling power here inculcated? Has it authority to exercise unlimited sway over the conscience? Within its proper sphere of civil rule it is to be obeyed, and to that the apostle clearly points, as he adds, "Rulers are not a terror to the good work (so we should read) but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he bears not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that does evil" (3, 4). The good and the evil here must clearly be understood of that which is good or evil in God's sight. That will guide as to the domain of civil rule, and the Divine purpose for which such authority has been instituted upon earth.

Were the civil power (how often has it done it?) to dispute God's authority over the conscience, and to command that which He has forbidden, any resisting it would not have praise from it; and if they did obey it in such a case, they would not be doing that which is good. Hence, subjection to it in its own lawful domain is what is here enjoined. If it oversteps the bounds, the answer of Peter to the rulers at Jerusalem will guide the Christian: "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken to you more than to God, judge ye" (Acts 4:19). Where man's claims conflict with God's claims, the path, however trying, is clear, "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). And this important question receives further elucidation. For the same apostle, who so boldly addresses the rulers in the council, wrote by the Spirit to saints scattered abroad, "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; or to governors, as to them that are sent by him" (for civil power can be delegated) "for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: as free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God" (1 Peter 2:13-16). Subjection, then, to the civil power is to be rendered not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake. It is God's ordinance, and rulers are His ministers, and Christians are His servants. How this clears up matters, and would remove any scruples that might present themselves, arising out of the question of the ruler's religious belief. A heathen, an idolatrous monarch or ruler, was to be obeyed in that domain in which, according to God, he had lawful sway. And the Christian doing good would have praise of the same, and be manifesting that he was a servant of God.

Tribute and Custom. — Another question, and one apparently not yet settled for some in our day, presents itself, and is finally dealt with by the apostle. Tribute, custom, fear, honour, each should be cheerfully rendered, where and when due. Taxes, and custom dues are to be paid, and those in authority feared, or reverenced, and honoured. What is due is the guiding principle, and the righteous rule. Is not this at times forgotten? How it simplifies matters! What is lawfully due, pay. There the Christian's responsibility ends. Thus the Word could smooth his path, whilst maintaining the authority of God, stimulating him too to subjection in all things lawful to the civil power for conscience' sake. For in paying what was due he was obeying God. This puts conscience really in the right place, and sheds a true light on the duty of a servant of the Most High. A rightly ordered conscience will not refuse the payment of that which is due.

At once, therefore, we may call out as to the sad travesty of authority so frequently seen. But we must remember that, when these words were penned, Nero had just about ascended the imperial throne in Rome, and the man who wrote the words was soon to suffer grievous things at the hands of the religious authorities in Jerusalem. Read Acts 23:5, and 26:25, noting in these instances how effectively Paul practised what here he teaches us. Only one thing exempts us from the subjection here demanded, and that is when subjection to authorities would involve us in disobedience to God. Then we must be obedient to the highest Authority. As Peter said, "We ought to obey God rather than man" (Acts 5:29).

If we merely think of government as it exists in the world today we must certainly be confused. In all directions there are overturnings, with power passing into the hands of strange people. Under the slogan of "Liberty" worse tyrannies and atrocities take place than those enacted under the despots of older times. But if we look away to God and His Word, all becomes simple. We are not set in the world to make governments or to alter governments, but to seek the interests of our Lord, while yielding all proper honour and subjection to governments, whatever they may be. The instructions apply to such matters as tribute and custom, as verse 7 shows. We are to pay all that is due in the way of rates, and custom, as well as income tax. What the authorities may do with our money, when they get it, is their matter, not ours. In the mercy of God we are relieved of that heavy responsibility.

To whom did the current coinage belong? Whose image did it bear? Caesar's, they answered with readiness. "Render therefore to Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and to God the things which be God's" (ver. 25). What wisdom was here displayed! The civil power has rights, and they should be respected. In this case the Caesar on the throne was anything but a pattern of goodness; yet, being God's minister (Rom. 13:4), tribute to him was to be paid. But God has His rights over men. They should be respected likewise, and submitted to. "We ought to obey God rather than men," said Peter on a memorable occasion, who was then upholding the duty of rendering to God the things that were God's. "Tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom," so wrote Paul, upholding in turn the principle of rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar's. The Lord thus settled the question for that time, and for all subsequent ages as well. God has claims on His people, and the duly constituted civil power has likewise. Both are to be respected, and practically acknowledged. Here the attempt to get something against Him for His condemnation ended. "They could not take hold of His words before the people. They marvelled at His answer, and held their peace." Neither before the Sanhedrin, nor before the Roman tribunal, could they justly arraign the Lord.

1893 315 Tax-collectors are nowhere, I believe, very welcome visitors, and when, as in Matthew's time and country, they collected the taxes for a foreign, conquering power, and in addition to this, "farmed" the taxes, extorting from the oppressed people, as was believed, much more than was just or politic, they were as a class doubly disliked. The ancient Jew hated them and classed them generally with sinners — "publicans and sinners" as the common phrase went. So the modern Americans tarred and feathered them when they came claiming tribute for this country, what time they threw the chests of tea into Boston Harbour.

These popular condemnations, however, are usually merely the outcome of ignorant bigotry. The tax-collecting class are probably no worse than their neighbours. Certainly there is no money we pay that is better laid out than that which we contribute to enable the governing power to protect us from anarchy or invasion. The Christian too has received a direct command that dignifies his payment of taxes in an especial way: "Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's;" "Tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom." It is well for the Christian to avoid countenancing the vulgar class-hatreds and contempts that are so frequent in every part of the world. The Jew hated the Samaritan, the Greek called the Roman "barbarian," to the Hindu all other people are contemptibly "Yavanna," to the Chinese, "Tatse." Every people have a part of the country which they make it their pleasure to abuse and sneer at: the Italians, Lombardy; the French, Gascony; the Germans, Saxony; the Austrians, the Magyar country; the English, — but I must not come too near home; let us keep at a distance. The Greeks scorned Boeotia, yet it produced Hesiod, Pindar, and Plutarch; the Syrians loathed Nazareth, but out of it came Christ.

(Vv. 6, 7). Those in authority being God's officers to exercise government we are to pay tribute when tribute is due, and custom to whom custom is due, and yield fear and honour to whom due. It is not for the believer to raise questions as to how the tribute is spent. The use of the tribute and custom is no part of our responsibility. Other Scriptures will show that if the government requires the believer to act in plain conflict with the word of God, he is to obey God rather than man, but even so it will be in suffering rather than resisting.

But these wonders are not yet acknowledged by the world. Neither Christ nor Christians are yet recognised in their true position of exaltation as sons to the Father. Consequently the tax must be paid without demur. Neither clamour, nor resistance passive or otherwise could proceed from the meek and lowly One. Had the half shekel been required at census time as atonement-money (Ex. 30:11-16) the case would have presented grave difficulties; but the collection was of a different nature, a mere change for the maintenance of the temple (2 Chron. 24:6). Mark the tender consideration of our Lord; "Notwithstanding, lest we should stumble them —" He would rather pay any figure, however unjust or objectionable, than endanger the testimony of God by provoking invidious comments from the unregenerate. How little has His example been heeded by Christians when smarting under a sense of wrong!

As regards Christian responsibility, it is of no essential importance what may be the form of government. It may be despotic or constitutional: it may be aristocratic or republican. Nay, more, in its profession, it may be Pagan or Mahometan, Popish or Protestant. The principle or rule, as regards mankind and the earth, remains untouched. Thus, the Christian is bound to pay allegiance and honour wherever he may be — in England to the Queen, and in France to the Emperor; in Russia to the Czar, and in Turkey to the Sultan; and the same thing is true of all subordinate authorities. The only limit is that the Christian owes absolute subjection to God; and therefore when obeying an earthly government entails — happily a rare thing — disobedience to God, it need scarcely be said that he must obey God rather than man. To resist the powers is to resist God's ordinance. The alternative for the Christian, when he may not obey a human command that involves a breach of God's will, is suffering, not resistance. But in general it remains true that to him who does good, the magistrate, under any government you please, is God's minister for good. So said St. Paul in view of an arbitrary and an idolatrous power. "But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid: FOR HE BEARETH NOT THE SWORD IN VAIN." That is to say, we have the Apostle, long after Christ had been extensively preached among the Gentiles, urging the saints at Rome to submit themselves to the existing authorities, to render to Caesar the things of Caesar. Of course, if Caesar had sought to corrupt the faith or destroy the worship of God's church; if Nero had ordered them to give up the Lord, positively like Nebuchadnezzar, or negatively like Darius, their duty had been plain — not to protest merely, and sin all the while, but to suffer for righteousness' sake: they were not to render the things of God, but of Caesar, to Caesar. But if the State demanded any service, however hard, Christianity taught them to yield it, if not positively sinful. If it insulted and persecuted them, still they were taught to pray for kings and for all in authority, "that we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty."

“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.” This is certainly the normal state. There is a point surely beyond which we must render no obedience either to rulers or anyone else except God. If they were to demand of us what is due only to God — worship, for instance, as in the case of Daniel with Darius, or his three friends with Nebuchadnezzar — we must firmly refuse. If they require us to definitely sin against God, it is for us to boldly use the language of Peter — “We ought to obey God rather than men.” But this is far different even than unjust statutes or practices that are hard and oppressive. So long as a good conscience toward God is not compromised, it is better that we suffer in subjection, and commit the keeping of our souls to God, as unto a faithful Creator. We must remember that “the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: He turneth it whithersoever He will.”