“Render unto Caesar.” You’re probably aware of this phrase, and its consistent appearance in arguments concerning Christians and the state. In most cases it’s thrown into a debate much like Romans 13 as a sort of proverbial trump card.
It’s generally assumed that dropping this three-word phrase destroys any anarchist or libertarian Christian’s push back to issues concerning obeying the government and more specifically, taxation.
It usually goes something like this,
Person 1: Taxation is theft.
Person 2: Render unto Caesar.
Boom. That’s it. Debate over. Go home. Never complain about taxation ever again.
All kidding aside, this is actually a legitimate discussion to be had. As we try to understand what “render unto Caesar” means, we walk into a very good opportunity to build our faith and our biblical knowledge. Serious problems arise when we use a portion of a bible verse shut down conversations… and that goes for people on all sides of biblical debates, myself included.
There is a ton of context behind “Render unto Caesar”, and just dropping them as if they easily explain your position, is really doing a disservice to the whole discussion.
When we look at the context, we may very well see what we’ve been missing regardless of what side of this debate we’re on, even those in the middle who just have no idea what to think. Maybe you’re a Christian and you already know that coercively extracting people’s money at the threat of force is theft, (or more specifically extortion), and you honestly desire to understand and obey Christ, BUT you are only encountering this verse as that bomb drop, or mic drop, that shuts down the discussion. Well, This blog’s for you.
There are primarily three different takes on “Render Unto Caesar”. We have already identified the first position which we will refer to as the Statist Position. The other two both stand in opposition to the Statist Position. We will call these the “Everything belongs to God” position, and the “He’s making a different point all together” position.
The Statist View
In the statist view, the predominant idea suggests since Jesus said the words “Render unto Caesar,” that means we can’t withhold our tax money or really even complain about it. Just shut your mouth, be a good Christian, and pay up. Usually this is associated with philosophical concepts of the social contract, and how taxation is a use for the social good or welfare, therefore it must be a good thing. In this publication, we will just stick with the biblical text surrounding the phrase “Render unto Caesar” and not the morality of taxation in general. We can square the more political concepts of taxation at a later date.
Before we dive into the remaining positions– “Everything belongs to God” position and “He’s making a different point all together,” we are going to pause and let the biblical context speak for itself.
Anytime we encounter a controversial verse, we need to get a good idea of the context and the best way is to just read the Bible. It may seem too simple, but this really is the best place to start. Then we can get into the opinions and interpretations, to compare them to what we read.
The Exchange
“Render unto Caesar” can be found in three different Gospel accounts. By virtue of being the first Gospel in the Bible we will start with Matthew, and then add in any additional details we might find from Mark and Luke’s accounts.
Matthew [22:15]-22.
“Then the Pharisees…”
Uh-oh, “then”? When “then” starts a sentence, it means there may be more leading up to this exchange that we are about to read. We need to back track until we know what happened leading up to this moment.
In the chapters leading up to our reference verse, we see more conversations between Jesus and the Pharisees. Everything starts with the momentous event of Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, which means this conversation is taking place during what we call the Passion Week. This is the final week of Jesus’ life, as he will be crucified in just a few days. When he first rides into Jerusalem, there are many people celebrating and acknowledging Jesus as the Messiah that they have read about for their whole lives. The stories of Jesus’ teachings and miracles over the last few years reached all over Israel and here He was, in Jerusalem. And Jerusalem was very significant, as it was the city of David and home of the THE Temple. We need to side step a little because this is a really big deal, and it’s the beginning of the upcoming discussions between Jesus and the pharisees. 
THE Temple we are going to read about in these accounts, is actually the second temple that was built there, and it wasn’t just a church or religious building. This temple is where God dwelt among his people. There was a large veil dividing the place where the priests could enter and the Holy of holies where only the high priest could enter. This temple is where the sin offerings and ceremonies were made by the priests for God’s people. All of this stuff is incredibly interesting, as we see Jesus, the fulfillment of all these foreshadowing objects and ceremonies showing up on this week that would finish a lot of these fulfillments. Jesus, who is referred to with prophetic significance as the son of David and the Cornerstone. This Jesus enters the City of David, Jerusalem, which literally means foundation or place to lay a cornerstone, on a donkey, then enters the temple. He quickly drives out everyone buying and selling in the temple, then leaves to spend the night in the neighboring town of Bethany. Obviously, this isn’t going to go over very well with the Pharisees, who are the religious leaders, overseeing the temple and all obedience’s to God’s laws. The next day when Jesus returns to the Temple, they begin questioning Him and His actions. Of course, the Priests and Pharisees think He is a false teacher and get really upset when Jesus starts answering their questions with Parables that are not so subtle insults to them, and also show Jesus confirming that He is the fulfillment of Isaiah and the Psalms stating that He is the Messianic Cornerstone that will be rejected. They wanted him arrested, but he had a pretty big following by this point. Not wanting to stir anything up, they decide to trap Jesus in his own words.
Now we can go back to where we started, chapter 22, verse 15.
15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words.
16 And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone’s opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances.
17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?”
18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites?
19 Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius.
20 And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?”
21 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.”
22 When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away.
There it is, the full exchange. There really isn’t anything notably different from Mark’s account, which is found in Mark Chapter 12, verses 13-17.
Luke, has a couple extra details that are worth pointing out. His account is in Luke chapter 20: 20-26. In verse 20, he points out that their intention in the trap was “to hand Him over to the jurisdiction and authority of the governor.”
This is an important detail as we start looking a little more into the implications of different answers Jesus could have given compared to the one He ended up giving.
And what would a bible study with AnarchoChristian be if we didn’t take 100 side steps and visit multiple back stories?
See, at this time the Roman Empire was occupying Israel. This actually doesn’t look much different from military occupations from other times in history. The Roman governor had full authority and control over the natives, and he allowed a certain amount of self-governance among these religious people. Herod was installed as the King, and the Priests and Pharisees were allowed to conduct their religious work.
A big part of these occupations was taxing the locals, and rebellion. The Jewish people were no different. This is where this trap comes in. Pretty much the one thing you couldn’t do was defy Caesar, and everything else is pretty much allowed to operate as normal. It’s definitely an easier way to control the populace. Most people will give into various forms of oppression if they have a semblance of freedom and autonomy.
But there were of course plenty of rebellious types that the Roman military would need to put down and lock up. We will meet Barabus during Jesus’ trials, and he is one of these rebels.
So how was this a trap? Not only is it a trap, it’s a pretty good one because it is two-fold. Half of the trap would be to possibly show Jesus as a rebel by Him publicly denouncing taxation. He’d most assuredly be arrested and therefore out of the hair of the religious leaders.
The other half of the trap would be Jesus advocating for taxes, therefore losing the support of the people that had just been shouting Hosanna as he entered the city the day before. What kind of Messiah and King of the Jews would endorse Caesar’s reign over God’s people like the turncoat and puppet client king Herod?
That’s the full exchange. It definitely seems to have more going on than just the three-word response, “Render unto Caesar.” Not only should we be wary of church and public policy being based off one verse, but we should be especially concerned if its only half of the sentence!
“Everything belongs to God”
Where do we go from here? We still have our remaining two positions—the “Everything belongs to God” position, and the “He’s making a different point all together” position. Both are held by Christian anarchists, but have some different implications in the way we interpret this exchange.
Let’s start with the “everything belongs to God” position. It’s pretty straight forward and focuses on the last half of that sentence, which is essentially “Render unto God what is God’s.” This is a really good response because falls with a similar weight as the statist use of “render unto Caesar,” and has some pretty awesome verses for its support.
It usually goes something like this,
Person 1: Taxation is theft
Person 2: Render unto Caesar.
Person 1: and render unto God what is God’s… what is God’s and what isn’t God’s? *drops mic*
The verses that are undisputed here are from all over the Bible, and most Christians can recall a couple offhand. Here are a few:
Psalm 24:1
The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein,
Deuteronomy [10:14]
Behold, to the Lord your God belong heaven and the heaven of heavens, the earth with all that is in it.
Exodus 19:5
Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine;
Psalm [50:10] – 12
For every beast of the forest is mine,
the cattle on a thousand hills.
I know all the birds of the hills,
and all that moves in the field is mine.
“If I were hungry, I would not tell you,
for the world and its fullness are mine.
Job [41:11]
Who has first given to me, that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is mine.
As you can tell, these few verses thoroughly show that literally everything belongs to God. The implication from this argument is easily deduced, and it looks like a compelling argument to not have to pay taxes.
A different point?
The final position is what we can call the “He’s making a different point all together” position. It doesn’t have as much of a mic drop appeal as the others, but it is very interesting if you haven’t examined this line of thinking before.
This argument hinges on the very overlooked question from Jesus. Prior to the instruction “render unto Caesar,” He asks to see the coin for the tax. Then Jesus asks a very interesting question. “Whose likeness and inscription is this?”
As we’ve said, Israel at the time was under Roman occupation, and the Roman Denarius became a common currency, as well as the method used to pay the tax to Caesar.
Very similar to modern coins, the denarius had a picture of Caesar and an inscription bearing the name of Caesar. During Jesus’ time in Israel, Tiberius was the Caesar (reigning from AD 14 to 37). It’s interesting to examine what Jesus was referring to on the coin. The Tiberius coin, had a picture of Tiberius on one side, with the inscription “Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus.” On the other side was a picture of either the Roman Goddess Pax, or Tiberius’ wife Livia and the inscription, “High Priest.” While it’s possible that the coin was from an older minting with Tiberius’ father Augustus Caesar, they would have followed the same design. The reverse side of the coin may have differed slightly, but they likely all carried the face of the current Caesar and his name.
So, what was Jesus getting at?
He looks at the coin that is part of this tax in question, asks whose name and image it bears, then says give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and God what is God’s. The idea behind this is that Jesus is not only identifying who owns the coin by way of the name and image it bears, but saying that something belongs to God, by this same measure. To Jews of that day and Christians today, the implications are clear. Genesis chapter 1 is the first place where we run into this concept that people are made in the image of God.
Genesis [1:26]
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…”
Genesis [1:27]
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
There are more references to this throughout the Bible, but it is abundantly clear what likeness Jesus is referring to. (For more on the Image of God, Check out episode 45 of the AnarchoChristian Podcast).
The inscription He is referring to has the same recognizable biblical reference as God’s people taking on, or bearing, or being known by God’s name and it is all over the Bible.
Isaiah 43:7:
everyone who is called by my name,
whom I created for my glory,
whom I formed and made.”
In Numbers chapter [6:22]- 27, God instructs Moses in teaching Aaron and his sons to bless Israel. After He concludes the blessing, in verse 27, He says, “so shall they put my name upon the people of Israel, and I will bless them.”
In Acts 9, God tells Ananias to go to Saul who would later come to be known as Paul, and assist him. Ananias is obviously nervous as Saul has been openly persecuting the church, but God assures him in verse 15,
“Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel.
And some even use this concept to bring a deeper meaning to Exodus 20: 7.
“You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.
It’s commonly known as the 2nd or 3rd commandment depending on your denomination, but the idea of taking God’s name in vain, could also be the bearing of, or taking on, or inscribing on yourself God’s name, in vain, rather than just using it vainly or frivolously in your speech. In fact, along with some of the early church fathers, Martin Luther identified it this way in the Ten Commandments section of his Large Catechism. Sections 54 and 55 read:
But, the greatest abuse occurs in spiritual matters, which pertain to the conscience, when false preachers rise up and offer their lying vanities as God’s Word.
Behold, all this is decking one’s self out with God’s name, or making a pretty show, or claiming to be right, whether it occur in gross, worldly business or in sublime, subtle matters of faith and doctrine.
This is just scratching the surface of the biblical accounts of bearing, or taking on, or wearing God’s name, but I think you get the point of this position.
Putting it all together, Jesus is saying we identify what is Caesar’s when something bears his image and name, like the Denarius. And we know what is God’s… we know that we are God’s people, because we bear his image and name.
Through this lens, the point of the “Render unto Caesar” comment isn’t about the tax at all, and Jesus was using that opportunity to remind God’s people what was actually important, and what we should be concerned with. We shouldn’t be concerned with identifying what or how much we are giving to Caesar. We should be concerned with identifying what is God’s and with giving to God what belongs to Him– namely ourselves.
You are generally going to find most anarchist or libertarian positions stated in a similar manner. There are a few others that might use this to rail against money completely, but I think that is pretty limited and easily shown to be beyond the point. If anything, we could make a critique against state based and fiat currency, but it’s not really about all currency. One point I like to make concerning that discussion is that money is simply a means of exchange. And although plenty of people try to make an anti-money argument with scripture, I find this one to be a poor example.
What does everyone else say?
But as we enter the end of our review, let’s visit a few quotes from some authors whose names come up regularly in our liberty and anti-state circles to see their positions concerning “Render unto Caesar”:
Tertullian says, “
“The image of Caesar which is on the coin is to be given to Caesar, and the image of God which is in man is to be given to God. Therefore thou must indeed give thy money to Caesar, but thyself to God, for what will remain to God if all be given to Caesar?”
David Lipscomb says in his book On Civil Government, that there is no better explanation that Tertullian’s, and that, “It teaches what the Savior taught: pay your tax, but you are not children or servants of the earthly governments. Give your personal service and your bodily powers to God.
Jacques Ellul explains something of a mix between the two positions in his book Anarchy and Christianity, that “the mark is the only way in which ownership could be recognized.” Then he writes that paying the tax is without importance of significance, for all money belongs to Caesar, and if he wanted, he could simply confiscate it.” but, he says, “on the other hand, whatever does not bear Caesar’s mark does not belong to him. It all belongs to God.”
In The Myth of a Christian Nation, Boyd tells us that Jews were opposed to the image of Caesar because of its implied egoism and the violation of the commandment against graven images. He says further on, that Jesus is being sarcastic as he points out that God’s people shouldn’t be fighting with each other over how much should be given back to Caesar, but “the thing people should rather be concerned with… is whether or not they are giving to God what bears his image and what therefore belongs wholly to him – namely, their lives.”
In the Cost of Discipleship, Dietrich Bonhoeffer uses Matthew 22 and Romans 13 to help explain each other. He says, “It is immaterial whether the power be good or bad, what matters is that the Christian should overcome evil by good. The question of the payment of taxes to the Emperor was point of temptation with the Jews. They pinned their hopes on the destruction of the Roman Empire, which would enable them to set up an independent dominion of their own. But for Jesus and His followers there was no need to be agitated over this question. ‘Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s,’ says Jesus.”
In A Christian Manifesto, Francis Schaeffer uses a long list of reformers disobeying the state to back up his position that the state is subject to God. He says that when Jesus mentions giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s that it is not God and Caesar on the same k]level but that God is above Caesar, and “when any office commands that which is contrary to the Words of God, those who hold that office abrogate their authority and they are not to be obeyed.”
In the essay Render Unto Caesar by Lawrence Reed, he tells us to “notice that everything depends on just what truly did belong to Caesar and what didn’t, which is actually a rather powerful endorsement of property rights. Jesus said nothing like “It belongs to Caesar if Caesar simply says it does, no matter how much he wants, how he gets it, or how he chooses to spend it.”
In Epilogue to Drózhzhin’s Life and Death by Leo Tolstoy, he says “in reply to the cunning question as to whether the tribute is to be paid to Caesar, He says, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s,” that is, give to Caesar what belongs to him and is made by him – the coin – and to God give what is made by God and is implanted in you – your soul, your conscience. Give this to no one but God, and so do not do for Caesar what is forbidden by God.”
In The God of War, written in 1920, Baptist Rev. J. J. Taylor defines what is God’s as, “Every Christian is bought with the price, and he belongs to God through Jesus Christ.” Later he reflects on World War 1, and the churches involvement across America, France, Russia, and Germany. He observes, “Generally in Europe the Church was bound up with the state, and when the state went to war the Church was necessarily in it; but in America the case was different. The Church boasted of its freedom from state control. It was bound by the word of Jesus to render unto Caesar the things that were Caesar’s, but Caesar made no demand of it. Its participation in the bloody work of war was entirely voluntary. It left Jesus out of its war councils, and deliberately rendered unto Caesar the things it had dedicated unto God.”
In Conclusion
“Render under Caesar” like many other misused verses allows us to dig even further into God’s word and ultimately strengthen our faith. After exploring the context, it is easy to dispel the Statist position.
This was a transcript of Episode 58 of the AnarchoChristian Podcast. Check here to listen.
Find it on 
