Should a follower of Jesus pay taxes to an oppressive government?

``Giving to God and Caesar— the Complicated End of Dualism'' is the title of Chapter 4 of  Money Matters: Faith, Life, and Wealth by R. Paul Stevens and Clive Lim. It begins with the following quotation.

“Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s.”

In my opinion, the entire problem of life in contemporary culture can be defined as the challenge to understand that saying of Jesus. 

Jacob Needleman

The relevant passage is from Matthew 22

17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the poll-tax to Caesar or not?’ 18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, ‘You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax.’ They brought him a denarius, 20 and he asked them, ‘Whose image is this? And whose inscription?’ 21 ‘Caesar’s,’ they replied. Then he said to them, ‘So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.’

Stevens and Lim claim (page 45) 

In this extraordinary incident Jesus asserted that money can have a holy purpose. He fulfilled the desire to meet a divine purpose and this-worldly obligations at the same time. And teasingly, he left open the question of what “giving to God” means.

I fail to see this. In The Gospel of Matthew: A socio-rhetorical commentary, Craig Keener suggests that this passage may be descriptive not prescriptive. It is mostly showing how great Jesus is. He can easily put the Pharisees in their place.

I also wonder if this story should be read and interpreted in conjunction with the following passage from Matthew 17. 

 24 After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?” 25 “Yes, he does,” he replied. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?” 26 “From others,” Peter answered. “Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. 27 “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

Keener (p. 445) states that the main points of this passage are the following.

Jesus cares about his disciples' social obligations.

The disciples need to be ready to surrender their privileges and rights for the sake of the gospel.

Jesus supplies needs like these as well as other needs

Putting both these interactions about money and taxes together, I would say they highlight how money is tied up with power and questions of allegiance, honour, and authority. People play these silly games with money.  Let people play their silly games. Play along. Instead, followers of Jesus should focus on his kingdom.

Much of the chapter is arguing against the dualism of the sacred-secular divide. The authors' state (p.47-8) that

by the fifteenth century only the monk, nun, and priest were regarded as having a calling. Karl Barth’s summary is apt: “According to the view prevalent at the height of the Middle Ages [secular work] only existed to free for the work of their profession those who were totally and exclusively occupied in rendering true obedience for the salvation of each and all.” 

[“Vocation,” in Church Dogmatics, III/4 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1961), 601]

This is not far from the contemporary idea that business people in the church are “walking checkbooks” needed to support the pastor. But what they do to make this money is not sacred. So what happened?

The Reformation promoted some of the problems of duality, particularly because it led to a dis-enchantment of much of life.

 With the disenchantment of work and exchange, money makes rational calculation and accounting possible but it does this by re-reducing everything to “mere quantities.” This is something that the German social philosopher Georg Simmel elaborated in his massive volume. So, as is said of some merchants, they know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

 In summary, the dualism that persists globally among Christian people has multiple sources: the persistence of Old Testament patterns, the Greek philosophical influence, the decline of the holiness of everyday life following the Protestant Reformation, and the influence of other faiths and philosophies.

 So how then do we reconcile both sides of the coin, God and Caesar? How can we give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s? This can happen only with a thoroughgoing integration of faith and life. R. T. France, commenting on Matthew 22:15–22, suggests that “this is not the rigid division of life into the ‘sacred’ and the ‘secular’, but rather a recognition that the ‘secular’ finds its proper place within the overriding claim of the ‘sacred’.”