So, what percentage of the income of an Old Testament believer was taken from his pocket in by way of direct taxes and how much by indirect taxes? Most Christians would answer 10%, since that is what has been preached from pulpits for several generations. But, is that actually the case? Well, this may surprise you, but various scholars from a variety of theological backgrounds have tried, at different times, to calculate what the actual expected rate of giving was. Before I tell you what the conclusions were, let me give you some data to think about. In passing, by tax I do not meant that there is a word in ancient Hebrew for taxes. Rather, I mean required payments rather than voluntary payments. Thus, I am not speaking of freely given charitable contributions.
10% was the Temple tax, though a very few conservatives try to argue that the money was saved up to be spent celebrating during the Great Feasts. In other words, those very few almost write as though the 10% was a heavenly-inspired savings account to allow the Israelite to go on “vacation” to Jerusalem during each of the Great Feasts. However, the vast majority of scholars say that after the initial period of Judges, that money was to go to the Temple.
Additional fees were charged for the firstborn, for special offerings, etc.
The religious requirement that the corners of your field not be harvested but rather left for the poor was itself a type of tax.
The first-fruits of the year was in addition to the 10%. The law enjoined that no fruit was to be gathered from newly-planted fruit-trees for the first three years, and that the first-fruits of the fourth year were to be consecrated to the Lord (Lev. 19:23-25). The first animal to break out of the womb of each of your animals was also to be offered to the Lord, so you “lost” that income. According to Jewish law, the corners of fields, wild areas, left-overs after harvesting (gleanings), and unowned crops were not subjected to (and could not be used as) the tithe of First Fruits. The first-fruits offering had to come from your regular crop.
I am sure that I have missed some “charges,” but the faithful Old Testament believer was taxed well beyond 10%.
Then the King would add his tax, which sometimes included both forced labor in times of peace and a form of the draft in times of war. According to the Book of Samuel, the King’s tax was an additional 10%, and those were not the only taxes levied. These taxes were in the form of both direct and indirect taxes. Here is a quote on that type of tax:
Indirect Taxes: These indirect taxes were of various types, such as custom duties or sales taxes. An excise tax on articles consumed was called “belo” in Hebrew, and a road toll or customs tax was termed “halakh.” In Ezra 4:20, these indirect taxes are termed “tribute” and “duty” respectively in the modern English version. Other words used in various places in the Old Testament were “mas” (forced labor) [I Kings 5:13; v. 27, Hebrew text], “massa” (burden) [II Chronicles 17:11], “mekhes” (measure) [Numbers 31:25-31], and “middah” (tribute) [Ezra 4:20]. These numerous terms were perhaps necessary because the Hebrew language had no general word corresponding to the English word “tax” [Orr, 1956, p. 2918].
In both the Old Testament (Joshua, Nehemiah, etc.) a per head poll tax on males is mentioned, as well as in the New Testament. Do you remember when Jesus, Peter, and the other disciples came to the city entrance and were asked whether they paid the Temple tax on people? That was a poll tax and Jesus sent Peter out to catch a fish, in whose mouth the coin required to pay that tax was found. This is a direct tax. Caesar is also recorded in Scripture as levying his own head tax on people which was different from the Temple poll tax..
Scripture expected additional free-will offerings on top of what I have enumerated thus far. However, I am not counting these since these were to be freely given.
So, how high were Israelite taxes? Well, the estimates of various people is that Israeli taxes ranged from a minimum of 25% to maybe as much as 40%, and might have gone higher during times of national emergency.
When were the total Temple and secular taxes the highest? Apparently at the time of King Solomon.
So, next time someone tells you about how ancient Israel made the country run on only 10%, do not believe him/her.
Seems impossible to measure up.
I’ve been more likely to hear OT passages brought up to say you should tithe off your gross income and not your net. I’ve never heard people attempt to connect OT giving to taxes before.
Well, I had actually heard about this way back in the late 1970’s when I was first out of seminary. And, as you can tell from the post, one of my quotes is from the late 1950’s. However, these type of studies tended to be between scholars so they were never quite publicized.
Having said that, they were never that hard to find either. But, it has grown to be a particular Evangelical tradition that 10% (and only 10%) is God’s requirement. So, any evidence that contradicts that tends to not be read.
This goes very well with my post noting there was no private property (as we imagine the term): if one compares these to modern “taxes” they give that illusion. God was redistributing the wealth, pure and simple. And, if it wasn’t God, it was the Hebrew gov’t as inspired by him. The property was not seen as belonging to the individual, but rather to God.
Without getting into the historicity of it all (for some scholars doubt that) at least in the *text* of the Bible, Post-Egyptian Slavery, Israel was envisioned as communal and socialist as possible in the ancient world all in the name of Justice and Mercy.
Only Western, mostly-white eyes (and those schooled by them) read the Bible and find anything like modern Capitalism.
In the modern sense of private property, there was no private property, as God claimed to be the owner of Israel. And, God was certainly into wealth redistribution as one can see by various laws, such as the Sabbath Year, the Jubilee Year, etc.
But, I would also hesitate to use what would be an anachronism by saying socialism. There is little doubt that they were much more of a “group” culture, a term I prefer because it is anthropological rather than political. Nothing like modern socialism existed back then, but certainly nothing like modern American capitalism did either.
And, neither did anything like modern democracy exist. At first Israel was a tribal culture, and one can see that in its internal functioning as reflected in the Books of Joshua and Judges and very early Samuel. Then it was a monarchy, although both David and Solomon had to deal with tribal elders. But, by later in the monarchy, the tribal authorities had ceased to have viable power. Even the Greeks were more “democratic” than Israel.
Good thing it is by grace, right?
Good thing it is by grace, right?
Excellent post. Last fall I did a series on the political implications of Jesus’ teaching in the 1st – the idea that the basic unit of the society was the kin-group (rather than an individual, which was a concept that didn’t really exist yet) played a large role in how the series unfolded.
This year, I’m looking at the giving that supported the Temple, and this post is very helpful!
The same conservative Christians who support the legal enforcement of the Ten Commandments and who push for a constitutional amendment forbidding gay marriage are opposed to spending tax dollars on programs to help the poor. Should these conservative Christians have their way, America will become a very lopsided and unique theocracy, with laws restricting the content of our media, laws that govern our political discourse and personal associations, and laws that govern our sexual morality, while charitable acts are left entirely at the discretion of the individual. As an atheist, I would never willingly live under a theocracy, but if I had to choose between a Jewish theocracy and a Christian one, I would certainy choose the Jewish theocracy.
This is precisely why I posted this series. I would only make one comment. Make sure in your mind to distinguish between theologically conservative and politically conservative Christians. The two are not synonymous. There are many theologically conservative Christians who are not political reactionaries. Remember that the press loves the extremes and rarely publishes the middle.
Fr. Ernesto – thanks for pointing out that distinction. Though, I’m find that political and theological conservatism are becoming more and more and more intertwined. I can’t tell you the number of times where I’ve had a politically conservative Christian gape in awe when I boldly proclaim the full humanity and divinity of Jesus, or when I whole-heartedly affirm the bodily resurrection of the dead.
I’ve just started using “orthodox,” and left the word “conservative” behind entirely. Though now even that’s getting gobbled up by folks who insist that inerrancy is a inherent doctrine of orthodoxy. Sigh.
GRIN, then make it a capital “O”rthodox and join us. Heh, heh.
On a different note, this is why it is important to read conservatives outside this country. You will find that there are many conservative evangelicals in England who are involved in Oxfam and other relief efforts. The same would be true in almost all other “Anglo-Saxon” countries, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. In those countries, there are many conservatives who are anti-abortion and socially progressive. It is in this country, in particular, that one finds a “necessary” linkage between political and theological conservatism.
The Tithe is explained in Deuteronomy 14. It is not the first fruits, as you point out. That was, for instance if we speak of grain, a handful that was given to a Levite, who waved it before the Lord, then took a handful and burned that on the Brazen Alter. The rest went into the hopper for the Priests and the Levites to eat. The tithe, according to Moses, is split into two separate times. The first, second, fourth and fifth years of every seven year period, the Israelites were to either carry the tenth of their increase to the Tabernacle/Temple, wherever HaMakon was, or convert their tithe into money to take it to HaMakom and “buy whatever their souls lusted after” to eat with joy before the Lord. The third and sixth years, all of the tithe was to be stored up in the cities nearest to where each family lived “for the Levite, the poor, the widow, the fatherless and the stranger.” Food banks in each city. The tithe DID NOT go to providing for the Tabernacle or the Temple. There was the Temple tax of 1/2 shekel each year for every Israelite man, whether poor or rich. And there was all of the food generated by the daily, sin, trespass, peace, and thanksgiving (and other) offerings to feed the priests at the Tabernacle/Temple quite well.
BTW, how things were done after the Book of Judges, if they were different than what God commanded through Moses, is irrelevant. Man is ALWAYS looking for a way to introduce religion to God’s right ways. For instance, Malachi only spoke of the tithe once in his ministry. It was concurrent with Nehemiah returning to Jerusalem from the Persian capital and perceiving that no stores had been put in Jerusalem’s storehouse while he was away, a breach of third-year tithing law. (Nehemiah 13) Also, that no writer in the New Testament speaks of the preaching of the tithe, neither to Jewish nor Gentile believers, after Jesus rose from the dead except in Hebrews 7, where Paul tells us why it’s so important to understand who Melchizedek was and why Jesus is honored to be “a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.”
Just as the rest of Moses’ Law, Malachi’s words about the tithe were covered in Jesus’ blood, lest we fear robbing God and bring the Curse of the Law upon us that Jesus died on a Cross to redeem us from . (Galatians 3:13-14)