Yes, we should pay our taxes.

We should also realize what sort of a broken world we live in. We fight for justice for all people realizing that it will never happen until the Lord ushers in His New Kingdom.

Hmmm, my first thought is that bit about the "withholding."
Sorry, incorrect vocabulary regarding taxations...when we fail to pay our taxes it's calle "evasion," and when government finds we didn't pay enough, it's called "withholding."
And considering the construct of our tax code, your $10.40 evasion protest will be covered by the $10.40 withholding the government will do on your tax rebate check.

Nice thought though, empty gesture considering the process, but still, a nice thought.

Ah, the little-known "Give Caesar what is Caesar's... unless you're protesting the illegal conquest of Gaul"

Maybe every special-interest group can get in on it. The pro-lifers can withhold $10.40 to protest third-world abortion funding. The environmentalists can withhold $10.40 to protest the strategic oil reserve. The flat-earthers can withhold $10.40 to protest the GPS system. The hippies can withold $10.40 to protest the war on drugs. etc etc etc

Jesus whole point (as well as Paul's in Romans 13) is that the lesser act of paying taxes to Caesar (i.e. surrendering to the authority) mirrors the greater act of surrendering yourself to God. You can't say, "Okay God, I'll surrender to you, provided that you don't make me do such-and-such." He's the authority! You don't get to put qualifications on your sacrifice!

AStev,

By your logic it was wrong for Peter to defy the authority of the Pharisees. And it was wrong for Moses to defy the authority of Pharaoh. And it was wrong for Daniel to defy the law of Babylon.

I think Shane is right that Jesus' response to the question of Caesar and taxes is a bit more complicated then simply, "Obey and pay." But I'm not saying we should all skip paying either.

Shane's reference to a miracle performed by Jesus as a 'stunt' confirms my initial reaction to this whole article as another of Shane's stunts to keep his name out there.

This is a difficult topic to be sure. However, there is a side of this that is not covered by this article. There is such a thing has peace through superior force. We won the cold war and never fired a shot. Yes, we spent a lot of money. But no one died either.

Unfortunately everyone in the world doesn't agree that we should all spend less on our defense systems. Until they do, I'm happy to pay for our government remain strong so that we can be a force for good.

While I love some good ole passive resistance as much as the next guy, there's really no connection to Mr. Claiborne's suggestion we resist paying a small token amount and anything from the Bible, especially the two stories he uses.

Also interesting is how the early church, under the oppressive Roman system, before the Romanization of Christianity, interpreted those passages. They paid all their taxes, even though Shane is right, Rome was an extremely violent and militaristic state.

I have no problem organizing a protest against random militaristic endeavors and wasteful spending. Unfortunately you can't find New Testament support for it.

Peace.

As a tax attorney, there is plenty that could be said about this post. Shane may be aware of this, but I think it needs to be made clear that to intentionally underpay your tax due could be construed as tax evasion which is subject to both civil and criminal penalties. I would also like to point out that the Supreme Court has held that individual taxpayers do not have standing to challenge indivdual budget line items. Taxpayers must pay what they owe even if they are opposed to budget line items on moral or religious grounds.

However, my purpose for this post is not to address legal issues, but to discuss Shane's handling of the Biblical text. As one poster has already mentioned, Shane failed to address Paul's words in Romans 13 where he instructs the readers to pay the taxes they owe. I don't know how much more clear Paul can be: "If you owe taxes, pay taxes." (Romans 13:7). If you intend to discuss the Bible's instructions, it is irresponsible to ignore a positive instruction from an inspired writer.

I am even more concerned about Shane's misrepresentation of Matthew 17. Jesus doesn't tell the tax collectors to go catch a fish; he tells Peter to catch the fish. He then tells Peter to use the coin to pay the tax that Peter and Jesus owe! Either Shane was not careful in his reading or his misrepresentation was intentional. Either way, the potential is really strong to end up with some bad theology.

Lately, it seems that if we really want to protest military spending, we should find creative alternatives to the overarching battle for limited resources. I think in efforts like the Simple Way, Shane Claiborne and others try to do something like us. Others do other things toward sustainability and the promotion of life-giving models. I don't think that the 1040 for Peace idea gets us anywhere. I've enjoyed the insightful comments thus far are this post.

It's more than just taxes - it's become clear it's also about submission to 'authorities' and pacifism - life and death.
Bill A. wrote "We won the cold war and never fired a shot. Yes, we spent a lot of money. But no one died either."
But there were many thousands killed during the 'cold' war. In Korea, Viet-Nam, Bay of Pigs, El Salvador, Afghanistan - many places. Bill, God bless him, wants us to be a 'force for good". Who decides what is good? A muddled and confused populace deliberately mislead by propaganda and manipulated 'news'? A government servile to business interests and run by opportunists?
Ever since I was a kid in the 'duck and cover' '50's I have been exposed to the warmongers arguments - from Gary Cooper's 'Sergeant York' to Nixon's lies and Obama's current hypocrisy.
Let's drag out Hitler for an example. Would it be right to pay taxes to the Nazi government? Or would you then be complicit in war crimes?
Each Christian, in fear and trembling, and with God's help, must decide.

We can render unto "Caesar" what is Caesar's and then 2 years from now, vote out the rest of the "bums" who want big budgets, big deficits, and big government! This past election shows that "yes, it can be done." Now let's just hope that those who talked a big game can live up to it. Then our money can be freed up to give more and more to other nations, other families, and other people!

Angering... First, while there are similarities to Rome in terms of 'empire', America and it's governmental form is not Rome. First, we live in a globalized world where one can get a visa and move out of the US. So if the government holds you down, move to Canada. No one here is holding a dagger to your head to make you stay. Second, our governmental form allows free elections. While yes, it is dominated by elites, vote for someone you agree with. Finally, what kind of a message are Christians sending to non-Christians with the perception we all lie and cheat on our taxes.

"First, we live in a globalized world where one can get a visa and move out of the US. So if the government holds you down, move to Canada."

Canada takes a dim view about Americans wanting to immigrate there...I think that you have to prove you won't be a burden to their welfare system before they'll allow you to move there, i.e. you already have a job, or are opening a business.

"We can render unto "Caesar" what is Caesar's and then 2 years from now, vote out the rest of the "bums" who want big budgets, big deficits, and big government!"

I think it is safe to say, with thirty-two years of voting experience, that this statement is a wee bit naive.
No matter who, or what party is in office, the machine that is D.C. will continue to grind on regardless of our desire for representative government...unless you have the money, then you can get all the representation you want.

We live in a plutocracy, we just have to come to accept that this is our reality.

I must be really slow. What's the point of "A simple, small, symbolic, but concrete gesture of protest"?

To make you feel morally superior? To irritate the IRS? To show God you're not totally compliant? Otherwise you paid, say, your $3,084 tax bill to the evil empire, but not $10.40.

Sorry. To me that makes no sense on any level.

"Shane failed to address Paul's words in Romans 13 where he instructs the readers to pay the taxes they owe. I don't know how much more clear Paul can be: "If you owe taxes, pay taxes." (Romans 13:7).

Just a theological update to all who may not be up on things--the emergent types like Shane think Jesus is cool, Paul is a misogynistic homophobe and his writings are not worth the paper its been translated on, and the church (the ones they don't belong to) must constantly apologize for being so uncool (because we still take Paul seriously).

Really? Are you suggesting that we don't pay all of our taxes because we disagree with things the Government does? Seriously, there are a lot of things that our taxes pay for that are far more immoral than the military, but I still wouldn't ever seriously consider this.

We're told repeatedly in the New Testament that we are to respect the civil authority. Read the book. Romans, 1 Peter, and others. It's pretty clear. We're supposed to be good citizens and obey the laws of the land. Again, it's just another case of deciding that WE know better. Seems like following what the Bible says would be a better, less dangerous (on many levels) course of action. Do you want to be self-righteous, or obedient?

liberty in a Biblical conviction for peace, but it reminds me of the Hollywood liberals who criticize social and political view points that make it possible for them to make millions making films.

I have no issue whatsoever with Shane doing this himself, it's not surprising from looking at The Simple Way website that they take advantage of our governments 501C3 Tax Exempt status..
You would think that God didn't know beforehand how badly we would make a mess of things as a global population over time

This is silly on a practical level--it will actually make the government more money, since they'll collect not only the overdue $10.40 in next year's withholdings, but also the penalties and interest.

And symbolically, it's really a power play, essentially holding that the entire budget must conform (whatever the degree) to our particular view or else we're taking our financial ball and going home. A trust in the ultimate authority of God should allow us to share power in a civil society, even with those who spend money immorally.

Let us not forget that the purpose of our government spelled out in the founding documents is to provide for our national security. This includes waging wars even if we don't approve of the war or how it is being waged. On the other hand, there is no constitutional warrant for many of the social programs that are now consuming much of our resources.

The New Testament teaches that we are to individually take care of our fellow human beings in the name of Jesus. If the government does it, is Jesus glorified?

Paul's writings in Romans 13 should be our guide along with Jesus' admonition to "render unto Caesar..."

I am a Quaker, but I pay taxes and I will again this year. This is not the way to voice your opinion on the military budget.

I grew up in the "liberal" church and they were always self-congratulatory about their small efforts to stick it to the man in a way they deemed "prophetic." This reminds me of that. At the same time, there is a larger discussion to be had in the church about the role of government in our lives.

You say, "On one he (Jesus) borrows a coin. (The fact that he did not have one is significant)."

Yes, and a close reading of the Gospel tells why Jesus didn't have a coin. He and his disciples had enough coins to assign one of the disciples (Judas) to be the treasurer and hold the bag.

(Here's a question for the editor. Is it now an accepted style for Christianity Today to not capitalize the personal pronoun in referring to Jesus? As in "There are two occasions when he is interrogated by the authorities regarding taxes." Does God the Father get these treatment as well, or just Jesus?)

I am a Quaker and would suggest that the only legal act within your power is to live a simple life and not buy into the "consumer" mentality that runs this country's economy. I can't guarantee it will stop our war machine but it might have an indirect effect. Apparently voting for the "man of peace" didn't do any good.

I am a retired U.S. Army Chaplain and a proud defender of our nation, not a "militarist" who doesn't want peace. After reading only the first 2 or 3 paragraphs I had read enough to see that this person is totally misguided. If you truly want peace, you need a strong military. Her actions, if enough people were thoughtless enough to do it, would only hurt our country and the proud men and women who are making a daily sacrifice and putting their lives on the line so people like this author can write articles like this, even those that totally miss the mark.

I appreciate the "spirit" of this post, but its premise is partially built on at least one faulty fact (and a significant one, at that): The federal budget's largest line-item isn't military spending, and not by a long shot.

It's Social Security (in fiscal 2009, it represented 19.4% of federal spending; defense spending was 18.8%. Source: Kiplinger Letter, February 18, 2011). Similar proportions are proposed for the fiscal 2012 budget.

When you factor in Medicare (12.2% in fiscal 2009) and Medicaid (7.1% in fiscal 2009), then the amount spent on domestic entitlement programs (which I presume Shane would view as "life-giving") account for nearly 40% of all federal spending-- more than double what the U.S. spends on defense.

Knowing this, would Shane still advocate each taxpayer withholding $10.40? It seems that such an act of "protest" would actually undermine his position.

One correction: I see now that Shane isn't advocating the $10.40 withholding per se. But his logic is still built on a faulty fact, even if only to advocating finding "a way to wink at Caesar."

Shane,
You give a link to a series of graphs about budget spending that you obviously did not examine carefully. The large graph that shows the enormous amount spent on military funding (past and present) does not include the two larger sections shown on the smaller graph, namely Social Programs and Entitlement spending. Either of these expenditures are equal to or greater than the funding for defense.

The impact of this should be clear in the recent revelations that fully 34% of the nation's GDP is made up of transfer payments, that is, money taken from taxpayers and paid out in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and welfare.

You might think this is a good thing -- that taxpayer money is going to support the needy -- but this is a usurpation by the government of the role of families and churches. On the other hand, defense spending is within the role of government.

I wish you would publish Todd Wagner, M.A. who provides for the church a powerful theology, long neglected, of War, Deadly Force, and the Bible. Our nation has shamefully abandoned our wounded warriors because we have such a pitiful theology about the restraint of evil. We do not deserve the protection they provide us.
See Stress & Trauma Care with military application. www.lightuniversity.com

Just to make the point, the idea that our government spends more on defense than anything else in this country is a bit misleading. Yes the defense budget is a larger portion of the federal budget, but as everyone knows we also pay taxes to state and local governments as well.

When state and local budgets are factored in, defense spending is actually a small fraction of our total government spending (because states and cities don't have their own military) and is dwarfed by things like education, infrastructure and aid for the poor.

Just saying...

I am not sure what Bible Shane reads but from what I've read in God's Word Jesus seemed to steer clear of politics. In trying to think of passages where Jesus was providing a critique of the Roman government I am drawing a blank.
However, Jesus WAS focused on the mission at hand. A mission of saving a lost world, of spreading the Good News of salvation and of warning of the eternal consequences of rejecting the Son of God.
Perhaps that is too unpalatable for the emergent church folks but it is the thrust of the Holy Bible and it is the way to real peace in the Father.

To Jim the former chaplain, THANK YOU for your statements and also for your service. It doesn't take a PHD in history or a theology major and scholar of the Word, to see that we will always have war. This all goes back to "what is man's basic nature" - evil, self - centeredness! Historically we see that one of the best ways to have peace (and we will never have peace in this world) is through a strong deterrent.

Christianity Today's editors could have screened this article more carefully. This article is misleading and inaccurate.

To Rich:

I am not sure what CT's editorial guidelines are, but my impression is that not capitalizing personal pronouns in reference to God has been considered proper style for some time.

For example, looking at recent Bible translations:
NIV 1984: No
NIV 2011: No
ESV: No
NLT: No
HCSB: Yes
NKJV: Yes
NASB: Yes

I certainly wouldn't take the non-capitalization as a sign of disrespect.

Now, let's examine Jesus directive to take the first fruits to the church ... we tend to think of this as 10%, as in tithing. If each of you followed this directive, how much would it reduce your tax liability to "Caesar". I'm an guessing substantially more than $10.40 and you would be providing the church the ability to perform its primary mission, to spread the Gospel to all people, all nations, to all corners of the earth.
This would be the biggest statement you can make, to take social programs away from the Federal government and put it back in the church where it belongs.

I think that unless we believe that Jesus makes the case for peace as the trademark of the Kingdom of God, we will not get this bit about the tax right. If we believe, as the Niebuhr brothers, that Jesus merely spoke of the sparrows and strictly "spiritual" matters; that what he brought was not a viable peace and social ethic, but advice on how to be a better person in every day living, we cannot fully engage in Jesus' view of what it means to talk of what is God's, and what is Caesaer's. Peace, true peace, is never attained through violent means. When you force someone to acquiesce it becomes only a matter of time until your peace dissolves with a tyrant who is more powerful than you. How is this peace? To understand peace, you HAVE to go back to what Jesus taught. There is NO other authority we go with and no other means by which we seek justice and peace.
Just some thoughts from a Mennonite in Canada

Peace
Andy

I haven't read all the comments, so maybe this has been addressed. What if, rather than withholding $10.40, you send $10.40 to a charity that is doing right in the part of the world you are concerned about? And as much as we love Americans, we don't need no tax-evading criminals draining our health care system here in the Great White North! Love your March Madness though...

Shane, you write that on BOTH occasions that the Lord Jesus was asked "Do you pay taxes?", but that is not true. When the Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus concerning paying taxes to Caesar they said "Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?” (Matthew 22:17) They were asking if it was right to pay taxes to Caesar not if Jesus Christ did or did not pay taxes.

Shane, you write:

"And they, like Jesus were accused of insurrection (Luke 23:2)."

Jesus was accused of insurrection, but He was falsely accused, He never actually caused insurrection, supported or condoned insurrection. You on the other hand are condoning and supporting insurrection by telling people they should not pay all of their taxes due.

Shane, you write:

"On the other occasion, he instructs the tax collectors to go catch a fish, and tells them the fish will have a four-drachma coin in its mouth for them (Matthew 17:27)."

You are mistaken because Jesus told Peter to go catch a fish, He did not tell the tax collectors to go catch a fish.

Shane, you write:

"I am particularly fond of the fish stunt. It is as though Jesus is winking at Caesar, saying, “Oh, Caesar can have his coins… I made the fish.” Caesar can have his silly metals, after all he can keep making more of them even if they aren’t worth a dime – but coins have no life in them. Life is branded with the image of God – and Caesar does not own that"

You are mistaken because when Jesus told Peter to go catch the fish that would have money in its' mouth it was to pay the temple tax, this was a tax required by all Jewish males to support temple upkeep (Exodus 30:11-16).

Shane,

(1) You can protest all you want, but at the end of the day we still live in a fallen world.

(2) The heart is the central issue here. You can protest, but you cannot change the hearts of people. You may change the law, but not the hearts of people.

I am greatly disturbed by the anti military message this article is sending. It looks like a anti tax message, but look closely and see the writer only speaks about military spending. There are many areas of out of control government spending that is never mentioned. I see the writer using the "tax revolt" as a way of saying, that he is against the military. I am a Christian who comes from a long line of men 15 of them to be exact, who have proudly served their country. My husband has served 3 tours in the Middle East as a civil engineer. He has done many humanitarian missions over seas as well. Not all military missions are killing sprees!
Instead of blaming the proud men and women who keep our country safe and are trying to bring freedom to others, maybe you should write a blog about how Christians need to get out of the pews and into politics! That way we can make changes to government spending. But LEAVE THE MILITARY ALONE!!!!!

There aren't methods to allocate taxes paid or not paid to a budget item not even in the military. So the call for a tax protest of any amount will affect every aspect of the budget to include salaries, financial support to widows, children, and the disabled, roads and highways, education at all levels to name a few. Is that worth it?
Have we forgotten how much we spend on law enforcement, prisons, courts, and lawyers? It is easy to look at the small picture. However, we cannot escape what Americans do to other Americans. Should we go as far as disband the military, we will find that killing goes on right here around us every day. In Romans 13:4 God's word says that the government is a minister, a helper to those who do what is good. But to those that would do evil, they should be afraid; because the government does not bear the sword for nothing.
Romans 13:1-7
New American Standard Version
vs1 "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
vs2 Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
vs3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; vs4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil.
vs5 Wherefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake." vs6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. vs7 Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

“There is a way that seems right to a man, but the end thereof is Death.”
Proverbs 14:12, Proverbs 16:25

Kurt, with respect I disagree. As a former Mennonite myself I grew up around people who talked about tax resistance as a way to protest the war, and they always had their wages garnished to take what they had underpaid, all the while no "witness" was being transmitted because the only ones who knew of their resistance were the echo chamber of like-minded Mennos and the poor IRS dudes who had to collect the money (who also have no influence on the budget).

I share the opposition to Christians serving in the military...you know this. But somewhere people have gotten off-track on the notion of civil disobedience. Legitimate civil disobedience, in my view, is justified only when the law being broken is itself an immoral law. So, for example, refusing to take up arms in the face of a draft, is moral. Refusing to pay taxes, which support a variety of causes both moral and immoral, is not. Rosa Parks refusing to relinquish her seat was moral (as the law which forbade her to sit was immoral); defacing or destroying the property/offices of an institution (whether military or commercial) in order to protest that institution's immoral behavior, is not.

As believers we need to make a clear distinction between being prophetic and being destructive or just plain dumb. I don't think many of my dear Mennonite friends, or Shane, or many others inclined toward "civil disobedience" have carefully parsed the difference.

Some thoughts as I read Shane's plea and the comments in reply: Let's not fool ourselves about the USA. She is neither exceptional nor an evil empire. She is a kingdom of this world, and as such, subject to all of the warnings and injunctions of Scripture to turn and repent. And yet, like Jeremiah, we are called to seek her peace and blessing. The carefully tuned balance of Scripture requires our submission, intercession and prophetic voice. Far too many Christians commit idolatry with the flag, their trust in the military and their alliegance to the temporal. Uncomfortable (and naive?) voices like Shane's remind us of these errors. However, the actions advocated by Shane are symbolic and rather hollow compared to what is required of us to truly follow Christ in life. The one suggestion above to "outgive" our tax liability is a wonderful challenge. Indeed ten percent would be thought of as paltry by Christians outside the USA who routinely give a greater percentage. As a former serviceman and tax resister - neither is noble in and of itself, and I would not repeat either one - I can say there are far better ways to distinguish ourselves as disciples of Jesus and followers of the Way.

Budgets reflect priorities. As a nation we can't continue to spend what we do on military & security, and build strong schools, and have quality and even affordable healthcare available to most of the population. Other countries spend a lot less than us on military and more on health and education. They are countries with a future.

What if Christians OVERPAID their federal income taxes by $10.40 and specifically asked that the money be used to support programs for the poor?