Did Jesus tell us to pay taxes?

This is a departure from a "scientific" view, and yet it may help us to get away from misconceptions about Jesus and taxes that will free us to explore options that will lead to a greater understanding of ourselves.

Most, if not all christian religions, if asked whether we should pay taxes, will quote Jesus' statement, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's".

Was Jesus actually telling us to divide ourselves between body and soul, to give our body to Caesar and our soul to God? Or was Jesus telling us something else entirely?

If we look at the Gospel accounts, it becomes apparent that the Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus, and he realized this. They asked, "Is it lawfult to pay taxes to Caesar?"

This was a trick question, because if Jesus answered "Yes" to avoid the punishment of Roman authorities, he would be in trouble with the Sanhedrin, who recognized no true government over Israel but God's government. If he answered "no", obviously Roman soldiers would punish him.

By asking this question, the Pharisees believed they had left Jesus with no way out.

Instead of answering, he asked for a coin(I find it interesting that Jesus never seemed to carry coins). He then asked the Pharisees, "Whose image and superscription is on this coin?"

The Pharisees may have suspected something from this question, but by asking the question, they themselves were now involved ion defining a true answer to their own question. They answered "Caesar's image".

Then Jesus gave the famous answer "Render unto Caesar....."

But notice what actually occurred. When Jesus asked whose image was on the coin, he connected four important subjects: law(since the Pharisees asked if it was lawful to pay taxes),
taxes, money, and images.

By running a quick "Google" search in their own minds, the Pharisees knew exactly what law Jesus referred to when he asked about images. Their minds immediately went to the second commandment:
"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
"Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: ....."

The Pharisees knew instantly what Jesus was saying. To Roman soldiers listening nearby, it would seem that Jesus was telling the Pharisees to pay taxes, to Sanhedrin spies, there would be no reason to punish Jesus, since he had referred the Pharisees to the second commandment simply by asking about images. Jesus had escaped their trap, and they offered no contradiction to his answer. It is said that they "marvelled" at his answer. Why? Because he had turned the tables on them. If they argued either way, they would have been in trouble with either the Roman law or the Sanhedrin. They could say nothing.

Was Jesus telling them to pay taxes? No way! We see in Matthew 5:17 that Jesus claimed his purpose was to fulfill the law, that not one jot or tittle of the law would pass away unless heaven and earth passed away. The law said plainly that Israel was not to make graven images nor bow down and serve them. What is a coin but an engraved image?

Jesus never told Israel nor us to pay taxes. He couldn't have done so without violating his own statement in Matthew 5:17.

But you might argue that he was telling us to pay taxes. After all, Romans 13 tells us to be subject to "higher powers". We should pay taxes, right?

What are the "higher powers" as listed in the United States government?

The first hint of any hierarchy of power is listed in the Declaration of Independence. Certain truths are listed as "self evident": 1. That all men are created equal(thus tying equality to a creator, leaving only a "higher power" of that creator).
2. That all men are endowed with inalienable rights.

There is no mention of "Caesar" or any human hierarchy between man and God. There is a "creator", and there are all men, who are created equal. If we look to the law of that creator regarding taxes, therefore, we are told directly by law NOT to bow down to any image created by man. From a christian perspective, there is no religious authority telling us to pay taxes, nor can there be, since the First Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees that no law can be made regarding the establishment of a religion nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

So, what do the "higher powers" tell us? That we are free to worship God in any manner as long as we harm no others by our beliefs. Not only is this true of our US Constitution, but every state Constitution recognizes the higher power of an almighty creator.

Any christian reliion that tells you it is necessary to pay taxes in order to obey Jesus is enslaving you to an unnecessary "Caesar", a power that was done away over two hundred years ago by the Revolutionary War.

Israel, Viruses, and Evolution

Probably no nation on earth has suffered more than Israel historically. Here is a tiny nation that carried the title of "God's Chosen", and have been scattered to the winds as they cling to God's law as guidance toward the Kingdom of God.

What is remarkable is that they have survived through it all. Persecuted, scattered, with repeated attempts to destroy them, with Hitler destroying millions of Jews, this group not only survived but formed anew nation of Israel which is still hated by those around it today.

Is there a purpose in all this? perhaps, but it requires us to look at history in a modern light.

We know from biblical accounts that Abraham was given a promise by Yahweh, that Abraham's descendants would become as the sands of the sea and "posess the gates of his enemies".

Yet Abraham was also told that these descendants of his son Isaac would spend four hundred years as slaves. Why punish them in advance?

One issue here is simply human nature. Creating a race of people wouldn;t have worked very well if Yahweh had simply trusted them to reproduce and tell their descendants about Yahweh.
Slavery in Egypt, though it may seem a bit callous on Yahweh's part, served a rwo fold purpose:

1.Four hundred years gave them time to grow to "nation size"
2.It also kept them culturally isolated, and eventually caused them to focus primarily on freedom and a world in which they could direct their own development.

The patterns of Israel's development are very interesting. Even after Moses came to deliver them, they did not enter the "promised land", but wandered forty years in the desert, completely isolated from other cultures and forced to live in complete dependence on Yahweh as he taught them His laws.

This is a reversal of evolutionary patterns. Other cultures developed from their environment, adjusted to it, and then expanded into other environments. But Israel came into existence on nothing but a promise, lived as slaves, and after deliverance, still had no ongoing environment or culture of their own. Instead, laws were taught and "hard wired" into their culture with no dependence on their surrounding environment.

The laws by which they lived were more important than the environment in which they found themselves. During their time in the desert, the older generation died out, and the young, who knew only God's laws, were permitted into the Promised Land.

Yet they were given a law which Paul tells us the physical mind simply cannot keep. Due to repeated disobedience, they lost their lands, their kingdom, and were continually scattered.
This seems to make no sense. Why hold them responsible for a law they simply could not keep?

Suppose, in a more modern light, we consider civilizations as an organism and the tiny nation of Israel as information.

The problem historically is not that humans cannot organize, but they organize all too well. The tower of Babel account shows this to be so. The people, all speaking one language, began to organize and build a tower. Whether this account is true or not, it reveals some interesting points. Yahweh wasn't worried about them discovering His business. His concern came from another angle.

"....now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do."

A very telling statement. Yahweh's concern was not unlike that faced by nanotechnologists today. How do they create "nanobots" capable of self reproduction without them reproducing themselves to the exclusion of all else and destroying everything? The problem in either case is the development of intelligence and adaptability.

Yahweh employed a method not unlike what nanotechnologists might employ. He created new languages that forced them to separate and become more dependent on their environment once again.

The problem with humans has always been power, grouping into systems that oppressed the masses while favoring the few. Look at Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome, not to mention the early Catholics under Constantine. As Lord Acton said, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Here, in the midst of growing empires, was the tiny nation of Israel, entrusted with a law which, when applied, would cause continual splintering and speciation. Do you begin to see a pattern?

Biblically we see that Egypt declined after the nation of Israel left. When Babylon captured Israel and carried them away, not only did Israel not disappear, but men of israel rose to high positions of influence, people such as Daniel. And Babylon disappeared.

The same with Persia, Greece, and Rome. Yet Israel not only survived, but became a kind of founder of both Christianity and Islam, via ths descendants of Abraham.

Religion, while proclaiming peace and freedom, has resulted in wars, destruction, and the inability to organize under a common banner. Pwerhaps this is exactly what Yahweh intended!

Recently, an article in "Discover" magazine said that viruses may be the driving force of evolution. In making this proclamation, they declared further proof that there could be no creator, no intelligent design, and yet....

A virus drives evolutionary change and speciation by a simple mechanism. It enters the host, capture the reproductive machinery of a cell, and uses that machinery to reproduce itself. After a critical mass is created, the cell explodes and releases new viruses into the organism. The organism adapts by a purging process, cleansing itself internally to rid the virus. The value of the virus works at two basic levels:

1.It forces the organism to spring into defensive action and use T-cells to "recognize" the invader, thus enhancing the "intelligence" of the organism by forcing it to create a greater adaptive response to the external environment.
2. The virus becomes part of the reproductive machinery of the organism, allowing for a process of cellular adaptation to changes within the environment.

The process can be defined simply. The organism recognizes the virus, attacks it, but in the destruction process, the "message" of the virus is maintained and the organism organizes around new patterns of reproduction.

Look at the tiny nation of israel and compare its own effects to that of a virus on an orgamism.
When I compare Israel to a virus, I mean no insult. I merely point out that israel has "informed" cultures in the same general fashion, causing a constant speciation and complexity toward higher forms of organization and individual freedom.

In short, the process that Israel and the Jews have followed demonstrate a parallel pattern to what is described of the virus, driving organisms toward adaptation and complexity of form.

The purpose of Yahweh and evolution seems to merge together to suggest Intelligent design.

Predestination

We've heard all the arguments. But those arguments are posted from traditional views about religion. If you're Calvinist, you accept the TULIP doctrine. If you're not, you accept the idea of freewill choice.

Why not a new approach? Why not the idea of predestination and just ignore Calvin?

Two scriptural points come to mind: Romans 8:7, which tells us that the natural fleshy mind is enmity against God and cannot be subject to God's laws, and 1 Corinthians 1:26-28, which says God selects by a process that would seem random to human minds.

So, how do we know Calvin was right in his interpretation? If Romans 8:7 is true, we can't know. The natural mind is enmity against God. We have to take his word for it and assume that he did his homework. But if 1 Cor 1:26-28 is right, no fleshy mind would be able to "glory" in this selection process.

That the natgural mind is enmity against God should be self evident. We can't even prove there is a God, so all ideas come from interpretation. But if Godel's, and Chaitin's theorems are correct, each choice we make about God or each formal system we use to try and define God leads us into an infinity of undecided propositions(see my first article on religions).

So, based on Chaitin's and Godel's theorem, we do have "free will", and that free will is apparently infinite. But with all that freedom, none of it points toward any useful knowledge to demonstrate the existence of God.

We're back at Romans 8:7. If God exists, and if there is a selection process occurring, it's going to be undetectable to us. The more we try to "prove" God's existence, the more religions splinter into different forms.

On the other hand, it seems obvious that if God is "out there" predestining whoever He plans to call, we don't seem to be privy to the process, which seems unfair from a Calvinistic point of view.

Erich Fromm and other writers say that the "Protestant work ethic" came from Calvin's views. If one is successful financially, that is a "sign" that God is blessing us and selecting us for His predestined kingdom. Yet Jesus himself said it is harder for a camel to go through the eye of a needle that for a rich man to enter God's kingdom. Paul writes that the love of money is the root of all evil, and Jesus said we cannot serve God and "mammon".

If we combine Godel's theorem, chaitin's theorem, and the contradictory statements of the bible, it seems we can make any choice in the world except the right choice.

But can we simply "choose Christ" and ignore all this other garbage? That would be nice, but not correct. If we look at it from a biblical point of view, we see Jesus warning his disciples in the end time to be careful of deception. Yet, what do we really have to to select from? There's over 30,000 christian denominations and sects, and the number grows. If we make a choice, we simply open up to a greater infinity of options and probably more confusion and complexity.

While we ha ve free will, therefore, it seems our free will does little good to make a proper selection as to our standing with God. But if there's predestination in the Calvinist sense, we seem to have little influence in guaranteeing that we get on the right track.

If we combine Romans 8:7 with Godel's theorem and Chaitin's theorem, we should be able to conclude that it is impossible to choose a sure and certain path to God from the position in which we exist now.

But why? Why deliberately go through this process in a search for truth, only to discover, even mathematically, that truth will always surpass our greatest theorems? Maybe there simply is no God.

There may be a reason for the existing confusion. Let us assume for a second that humans can physically have a knowledge of God. Let us assume that by a process of choice humans could "access God" and proceed heavenward.

Ray Kurzweil, the entrepreneur and computer expert, writes that anything we can write or code can be programmed into a computer. Think about the significance of this. If the natural mind is subject to God's laws, if salvation or knowledge of God were possible from within a human choice procedure, would we still be free?

History has shown that those who believe they have God's power behind them have developed skills with the whip, and the rest of humanity bore the stripes to prove it. History tells us that more people have been killed in the name of Christ than any other religion.

Once a hierarchy was established in God's name, enforcing God's laws on everyone, the rest of humanity would have no freedom of exploration, no intellectual freedom to discover new ideas, and no freedom of equality. Historically, those who claimed to speak for God have destroyed such freedoms. Look at the history of Calvin's exploits as "God's man". Tyranny ruled in the little kingdom that Calvin claimed on earth.

But back to codes and Artificial Intelligence. To say that the natural mind or brain is subject to laws of God is to say that an algorithm exists, a "bootstrapping" process by which we can form a decision procedure to reach God. This means that the same process can be programmed into computers, and we could legitimately make mechanical "sons of God"!

Even more, since they could follow the laws perfectly, they would be better than us!

So, if there is a God, then "free will" must be the ability to explore our universe with no interference from any greater intelligence. And if there is to be freedom, there can be no limitations on that freedom, which Godel's theorem and Chaitin's theorem demonstrate.

So we must assume that if there is a God, then "His" purpose is to create a state of complete freedom, greater complexity, and more individual freedom. That was Jesus' statement in Matthew 10:34-38. In fact, that is what Jesus said he came to do.

From Paul's statement, from Godel's and Chatin's theorem, any formal attempt to establish truth, any attempt to capture truth in one religion or one neural net, is simply doomed to failure.

Those who claim to posses an "absolute truth" either in religion, science, or mathematics, are demonstrably wrong.

Freedom, by all accounts, seems to be the natural state of the human mind.

But what of predestination from the biblical perspective? The evidence already shows that the natural mind is against God, and we see above that if we did have a decision procedure or algorithm by which we could choose God, freedom would be eliminated.

The apostle Paul seems to have included this in his teachings. Romans 11:32 says that God has "concluded them all in unbelief(The RSV says disobedience) so that he could have mercy on them all"

If we are "predestined", it would seem that we are predestined to "disobey" whatever it is that God expects. Further, that same process leads not to utter destruction in hell, but mercy on all.

We are faced with an entirely new concept of determinism and freedom, along with predestination and salvation.

In a later article, I will explore these concepts and their relationships to entropy.

Christian religions all in error?

Are all christian religions in error? That's a big question, but it may have an interesting answer.

Two mathematical theorems interest me regarding this subject. Godel's Theorem and Chaitin's theorem, which may apply to the state of religion in the world today.

Godel's theorem: Any system of complexity equal to number theory contains conclusions that can neither be proven nor disproven. The second part states, basically, that the consistency of such a complex system cannot be proven from within the system.

Chaitin states basically that for every axiomatic system, there exists an infinity of undecideable propositions.

Clearly any idea of "God" would be as complex as number system, and any attempt to develop formal truths regarding God would result in both propositions that cannot be proven, and an infinity of undecideable propositions.

The result of seeking God, as evidence clearly shows, is an estimated 30,000 or more various denominations of christianity alone. If one of them is true, which one?

There is perhaps a biblical corollary to the above theorems, Romans 8:7: "The carnal(fleshy, physical) mind is enmity against God. It is not subject to the laws of God and neither indeed can be."

If this statement is true, it would have two basic results:

1.No human can claim authority under God's law because no one is subject to it.
2.Any such attempt would result in a continual splintering and speciation of religions.

These results would correspond to Chaitin's theorem, above, illustrating a parallel between the theorem and Romans 8:7.

If this is true, all results to organize churches in God's name would undergo constant splintering and disagreement on truth.

I suggest this is due to Godel's theorem. In all systems capable of self reference, there exists two opposing statements: "I can be proven within this system", and "I cannot be proven within this system."

This means, as Godel stated, that systems might be complete if they eliminated inconsistencies, but the elimination of such inconsistencies would create other inconsistencies at a higher level.
No matter how deeply we pursue consistency within a formal system, there emerges inconsistencies. It is within these inconsistencies, and their recognition by human minds, that speciation of religious denominations occur.

If it is argued that Jesus came to "fulfill the law" in Matthew 5:17, the result of greater emphasis on the law would be even more splintering and speciation to an individual level. Surely Jesus would have realized this.

In fact, it would appear he did, if you read Matthew 10:34-38. He states his purpose as creating a situation in which "a man's enemies will be those of his own household".

As christian religion denounces evolution, therefore, it follows evolutionary development.

Lao Tzu, the ancient sage, is quoted as saying, "The way that can be followed is not the true way".

As now is being shown in mathematics, truth is greater than proof, or truth is greater than theoremhood. With an infinity of undecideable propositions existing in any axiomatic system, truth is simply beyond the "closed" brain structure of any human mind. We are forced to remain as an "open system" by the very nature of reality itself, yet we seek to reduce our options, often by joining a religion or cult to minimize those options.

Yet even within those options, we find ourselves "speciating" into ever more complex and refined systems of thought, "straining at gnats and swallowing camels".

The result of joining religions is merely collectivized ignorance, since, if every axiomatic system contains an infinity of undecideable propositions, a union of infinite religions merely create an infinity of infinite propositions, which results in accelerated entropy.

Jesus himself warned against this "deception" in the "end time". In Matthew 24, he warned, "Take heed that no man deceive you". He warned of those coming "in my name".
In verse 24 of that same chapter, he warned that there would arise false Christs and false prophets. Certainly what Jesus warned of is the predictive result of the conditions named above.

But how to escape such deception? The answer lies in verse 23 of Matthew 24: "If any man says to you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, believe it not".

This would certainly correspond to Lao Tzu's statement above.