Over the past centuries, many have looked to the Bible in an attempt to provide justification for the so-called divine right of kings. As far back as Constantine, theologians have tried earnestly to mount a biblical defense for the existence of human empires and rulers. Unfortunately for them these efforts have often been in vain. It turns out that the Bible has very few good things to say about empires, and its authors spend considerable time condemning the actions of kings. One of the most potent indictments of human kingship is recorded in 1 Samuel 8:

Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah and said to him, “Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations.”… And the Lord said to Samuel, “Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them….Now then, obey their voice; only you shall solemnly warn them and show them the ways of the king who shall reign over them.” So Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking for a king from him. He said, “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots…He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants….He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

1 Samuel 8:1

Christians who advocate for human rulers today tend to assume that God is only opposed to unjust rulers. But notably, the possibility of injustice is not the reason God gives for rejecting the Israelite’s request. Rather, God warns them about actions that are common to all kings, such as taxation. Most strikingly, God says they will become the king’s slaves. God is not saying that they might become his slaves if he is unjust. God is saying that slavery is inherent whenever there is a king. To be ruled and taxed is to be a slave.

This idea seems shocking to us in our modern context, but it is generally taken for granted by the biblical authors. To understand this, we need to keep in mind that kings in those days used taxes primarily to enrich themselves and the nobility, rather than as a means of redistributing wealth. Over the centuries, rulers began to distribute some of their riches to the peasantry as a way of legitimizing the practice, until eventually, we arrived at the systems we have today. Yet while it’s true that God instructed his people to take care of the poor, he never intended to use socialized services and governments to that end. It was man’s initiative in 1 Samuel 8 to set up a ruling class, “to be like the other nations”, even though they were called to be set apart. Like every other empire throughout history, the Israelites established a system of coercion used to fund wars and exalt humans. Thus, despite its modern structure, our system now is not so different from theirs. While we may have good intentions for helping the poor, the fact is that a significant amount of our taxes are used in opposition to God’s will. The words of Samuel apply to all empires and rulers no matter their policies.

Some examples from the Bible will help to illustrate this paradigm regarding slavery and government.

To begin, foreign nations would often become slaves when they were conquered, and this was demonstrated by the fact that they would send tribute to the conquering king (2 Samuel 8.2, 2 Samuel 8.6, 2 Kings 17.3). Being forced to send tribute was an act of enslavement because they were no longer working for themselves.

Even within the nation of Israel, it was understood that taxpayers were under a form of slavery. In the story of David and Goliath, the men of Israel speak of the rewards that will be given to the one who slays Goliath.

And the king will enrich the man who kills him with great riches and will give him his daughter and make his father’s house free in Israel.

1 Samuel 17.25

The “father’s house” is a cultural reference to their extended family unit. What is intriguing about this verse is the Hebrew word translated as “free”, which is “chophshiy”. In most of its other occurrences, this word is used to denote being freed from slavery (Exodus 21.2, Jeremiah 34.9). In this verse, however, many translators rightly render it as “exempt from taxes”. Thus, the usage of this word in this context shows us that there is an understood equivalence between being set free from slavery and being exempt from taxes. And if we were paying attention in 1 Samuel 8, this understanding should not come as a surprise. The king will take your possessions by force, and thus you will be his slaves.

This paradigm is further revealed in 1 Kings 12, where we read about the tax revolt that divided the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. After the death of King Solomon, Rehoboam his son was made king, and he was immediately presented with a request from the people.

Your father made our yoke heavy. Now therefore lighten the hard service of your father and his heavy yoke on us, and we will serve you.

1 Kings 12.4

The image of a yoke is a common biblical picture for slavery (Lev.26.13, Ez.34.27), but it is also used to refer to tribute exacted by kings (1 Kings 12.4, Jer.30.8). In this case, it was completely natural for the people to talk about high taxes as a heavy yoke, because the idea of taxes being a burden was common knowledge. In light of this observation, we should carefully consider the implications of these words from Isaiah.

Is not this the fast that I choose. To loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the straps of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke?

Isaiah 58.6

It’s easy for us to assume that this exhortation is only related to slavery. But is it possible that “every yoke” includes the yoke related to taxes? And what do we mean by “slavery” anyways?

Here a brief discussion of the text Hebrew is necessary. In English, we have the words “servant” and “slave”, and these have vastly different connotations. In Hebrew, however, there is only one word for this concept, which is the word “avad”. The best English translation I can think of is “subservience”. As a result of this difficulty in translation, it is easy to accidentally equivocate on the terms. The important thing to understand is that in the Hebrew mind there is no distinction between a servant and a slave. In that culture there were not two categories of subservience, one being voluntary employment and the other being involuntary servitude. The word “avad” is used to discuss slavery in Egypt (Ex.1.14), vassal empires paying tribute to conquer other empires (1 Kings 4.21), and voluntary arrangements (Gen.29.18). Notably, this same word is used in 1 Kings 12, when the people say to the king “we will serve you”. This is analogous to the verse in 1 Samuel 8, “you will be his slaves”.

Thus, although it is impossible to conclude with certainty whether the word “avad” by itself denotes voluntary or involuntary subservience, the context often provides a reasonable basis for establishing the correct interpretation. Suffice it to say, there are many clear biblical examples of involuntary subservience to governments by means of taxation or forced labor (which is referred to as a yoke) such as the slavery in Egypt (Lev.26.13) and exile to Babylon (Jer.27.12). Thus, to the extent that taxation is involuntary (space does not allow a full discussion of social contract theory), there is a strong biblical precedent for calling it an act of enslavement.

The New Testament also discusses the issue of taxation in the context of slavery. For example, consider the words of Jesus in Matthew 17.

When they came to Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma tax went up to Peter and said, “Does your teacher not pay the tax?” He said, “Yes.” And when he came into the house, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take toll or tax? From their sons or from others?” And when he said, “From others,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free.”

Matthew 17.24

The Greek word translated as “free” is “eleutheros”. This word is almost exclusively used in contrast with being enslaved (John 8.33, Galatians 3.28). In fact, the most straightforward definition of this word is literally “not a slave”. However, unlike all the other contexts where this word is used to mean freedom from slavery, here Jesus uses it to mean being free from taxation. The implication is unmistakable. According to Jesus, those who don’t pay taxes are not slaves, and those who do pay taxes are not free.

Nehemiah also commented on the oppressive taxation of Israel under the rule of foreign kings.

And there were those who said, “We have borrowed money for the king’s tax on our fields and our vineyards. Now our flesh is as the flesh of our brothers, our children are as their children. Yet we are forcing our sons and our daughters to be slaves, and some of our daughters have already been enslaved, but it is not in our power to help it, for other men have our fields and our vineyards.”

Nehemiah 5.4

The former governors who were before me laid heavy burdens on the people and took from them for their daily ration forty shekels of silver. Even their servants lorded it over the people. But I did not do so, because of the fear of God.

Nehemiah 5.15

Yet for all this I did not demand the food allowance of the governor, because the service was too heavy on this people.

Nehemiah 5.18

The people of Israel had been stripped of their independence and forced to pay heavy taxes, so much so that Nehemiah refused to receive his benefits as a governor. In his mind, it was not right to receive a share of what was taken from his people. A few chapters later, the connection between taxation and slavery is made explicitly.

Behold, we are slaves this day; in the land that you gave to our fathers to enjoy its fruit and its good gifts, behold, we are slaves. And its rich yield goes to the kings whom you have set over us because of our sins. They rule over our bodies and over our livestock as they please, and we are in great distress

Nehemiah 9.36

Presumably, one could make the argument that this was only slavery because they were being ruled by foreign kings and that it would not be slavery if they could rule themselves. However, this argument has a few difficulties. First, the line between neighbors and foreigners is quite arbitrary. Many empires are so large that almost all of their subjects are ruled by people living far away. More importantly, as Christians, we are supposed to view ourselves as being foreigners and exiles of all worldly nations (1 Peter 2.11). We are “citizens” (Phil.3.20) of the kingdom of heaven and “ambassadors” (2 Cor.5.20) for Christ because we have a foreign allegiance (Rom 10.9, Acts 17.7). Thus, we understand that we always live under alien powers that are opposed to the kingdom of God (Luke 4.6, Psalm 2.2, 1 Corinthians 15.24). When they tax us we have every reason to identify with the Israelites in Nehemiah.

After reminding us of the reality that we are living in exile, Peter goes on to talk about what that should look like. Let’s look at this passage in more depth.

Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.

1 Peter 2.13

Peter begins by admonishing us to be subject to human institutions. Immediately, he is pointing out that these institutions were established by man and not by God. The examples he gives are government and slavery, which are purposefully mentioned sequentially to highlight how we have the same response of submission for both.

Some may be eager to point out that the governors are “sent by God”. But that does not mean God approves of their actions. Remember, the emperors at the time this was written were actively persecuting Christians, as referenced in other parts of the same letter (1 Peter 4.16). So it would be improper to read this as an endorsement of government action. Rather, God is using fallible humans to carry out his purposes and enforce justice. This is drawing on a significant theme from the prophets where God often uses wicked empires to punish those who do evil (Romans 13.4, Isaiah 10.5, Jeremiah 25.9, Isaiah 45.1)

In the context of submitting to human governments, Peter now encourages us to “live as people who are free”. That word “free” is the same Greek word that Jesus used in Matthew 17, which means “not a slave”. But here, like Jesus, Peter uses the word in the context of obedience to governments and rulers. He understands that kings seek to make slaves of their subjects. But as Christians, we know that we are actually “slaves” (similar to the Hebrew “avad”, the Greek word here can mean slaves or servants) of God, who is our only rightful ruler. Thus, we submit to human rulers, we pay taxes, out of obedience to God, because that is what he commands.

Peter continues,

Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps.

1 Peter 2.18:

Peter now addresses slaves with the same command he issued regarding government: be subject to the human institution. He even uses the example of Christ to show how slaves should suffer under unjust masters. But was Christ a slave? No, and yes. Though he had no direct master, Christ was subject to the governing authorities, and Peter saw this as being a close enough equivalent to slavery that he could use Christ’s submission as an example for slaves to emulate.

The point is, our response to human institutions is always to submit to unjust authority, whether that is by serving a master, walking an extra mile, turning the other cheek, or paying taxes. None of these commands is an endorsement of the authority’s actions. Rather, they are a profound acknowledgment that all man-made authorities belong in the same category, whether they are masters, rulers, or governments. All such institutions are illegitimate in God’s eyes (Judges 8.23, 1 Samuel 8.7).

The rulers of this age use taxes to fund wars, imprison the innocent and oppress the poor. They make slaves of their people. But Christ has come to set us free (Isaiah 58.6, Isaiah 61.1). Free from slavery, free from oppression, free from government. He did not come to be served, but to serve (Matthew 20.25). He did not come to coercively exact tribute, but to give.

So if Christ is our model and our king, why do we continue to make slaves of our neighbors? Why do we advocate for a foreign ruler to take a fraction of their income? Why do we continue to support a human institution that God consistently condemns? Maybe it’s time to rethink our unquestioned approval of the “divine right” of politicians.

About the Author

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

You can follow him on Twitter @PatrickC1995 or on his Facebook page The Prudent Navigator.