What Would Jesus Tax?

Provocative title of an article by Bruce Chilton at HuffPo out this week that touches on the issue of government authority and faith.

We addressed this issue last week keying off of a nice post by Lord Keynes over at Social Democracy here and here.

Let's look at the points that Chilton here tries to make:

Money and justice do not mix. That was Jesus' perspective when he said "you cannot serve God and mammon" (Matthew 6:24). The Aramaic word he used for money basically means "bribe."

This is naive and shows a lack of knowledge of "modern" monetary systems. Modern monetary systems are nothing more than an accounting system we use to "keep score".

In fact, how can we know if we are operating our economy in a fashion that is just and righteous without a monetary system? How can we measure and calibrate our economy without a monetary system? How can we today, in a diverse and integrated economy, measure or facilitate the just distribution of the great real surplus that we are provided without a monetary system?

Indeed, how can we implement economic justice without "money" or properly a 'monetary system'?

We CAN'T.

Maybe this Professor, at Bard College of all places (!), is thinking of metals as "money" instead of our current arrangements of operating a non-convertible state currency, the same type of system that the Romans operated when the Lord was with us in blood and flesh, which He termed nomisma (and btw in Greek NOT Aramaic Mel Gibson).

This professor at Bard is stuck in 'gold standard thinking', as most today still are, even though we have not been under gold or silver for decades.

Here's a good one:

From a biblical point of view, it is in any case strange to think of government as admirable.

What is this guy talking about? Where in scripture does it say that civil government is NOT admirable. Lord Keynes addressed this nuanced issue pretty well I'd say here last week.

When Jesus said, "Caesar's repay to Caesar, and God's to God" (Mark 12:17), he certainly did not assume that Caesar was just.

How do you know Chilton?

Before his famous saying, Jesus demands, "Bring me a denarius so I can see," and then asks, "Whose is this image and inscription?" Opponents had asked him whether or not to pay tax to Caesar at all. They wanted to maneuver Jesus into a position of refusing to pay the tax, since he was known not to favor the Romans. 

Where is it written in scripture that He did not favor the Romans?

Such a position would amount to insurrection, and Rome executed anyone who promoted tax revolt. In one case of rebellion, just after the death of Herod the Great, the military commander ordered up to 2,000 crucifixions to display the imperial might.

I must have missed that part in the scriptures... sounds like somebody is watching gladiator movies.

Jesus counter-question about the image and inscription forced his opponents to acknowledge the coin as Caesar's property. It wasn't good, but it was Rome's.

Where does it say that the nomisma was "not good"?

Understanding that Caesar's power is limited to what Caesar can do -- mint coins in this case -- sets the boundary of political authority in comparison with humanity's fundamental connection to God.

Minting coins has NOTHING to do with authority.  Spending the coins in order to provide government provision for public purpose DOES though.  Caesar was set under tremendous authority in this regard.

As long as people can keep their inherent identity intact, Caesar can have what is owed him, and only that.

This is incomprehensible.

Jesus' position explains why, for him, the right question about taxing is not who should pay, but: What should be taxed? And the answer is: mammon. What comes from Caesar can go back to him, involving God and his people as little as possible.

More fantasy, Jesus asked them to exhibit to Him the poll tax nomisma and they exhibited to Him a denarius with Caesar's image on it and the Lord instructed Israel to simply pay the poll tax, what was the problem?.  "Mammon" NEVER enters into it because nomisma is NOT MAMMON; again more "gold standard thinking" from Chilton here.

Then here we go:

 These days, of course, the interest is in deficit reduction, and an estimated revenue increase $352 billion over 10 years would obviously help.

Oh yes obviously...

People do not need to pay for the money they use; money can now pay for itself.

???????

 Keeping mammon in its place sets limits on government, even as it keeps Caesar at arm's length by according him his due.

So here we go where this guy in summary conflates "mammon" with "money" via his 'gold standard thinking' and then, as our institution of civil government is set under the authority to operate our modern monetary system, we are treated to this Libertarian-style warning about "limits on government" and a projection of a gladiator-movie-style image of  a "bad Caesar" onto our modern institution of democratic representative government.

Chilton here misses the monetary economics and then can only miss the truth in the scriptures as well.

To understand the scriptures one needs to understand the difference between nomisma and mammon, just as one needs to understand the difference between a sheep and a goat, or wheat and darnel.

Perhaps he could go over to the Levy Institute at Bard and get up to speed on our modern monetary system or as the Lord termed it, our nomisma system that we have been operating now for decades and get himself straightened out on this.