History

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

K.C. Farmer — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 17:36:09 GMT

They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, "The Roman emperor's people demand taxes from us."

He said to them, "Give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine."

Gospel of Thomas, verse 100

I cite the Nag Hammadi Gospel of Thomas because the quote is incomplete from the other versions. Is he really talking about taxes and money, or is there a subtle message about something else?

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

FleetCenturion — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 17:21:57 GMT

Well, you made no case and your sources were entirely unsupported; the very thing you accused me of doing. The sources I Googled were for a brief explanation and nothing more. If you wish to think I believe every piece of conspiracist drivel I find on the internet, I don't suppose I can disuade you. Now, I'd love to chat on forums all night, but I have a job.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

Smiling Dave — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 17:01:58 GMT

I made my case and will end the discusson here. If the Masons come after you for exposing them, I'll admit you were right. Lock your doors.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

FleetCenturion — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 16:50:27 GMT

Excuse me, but did I not already state the biased opinions of the sources quoted? The point was to explain what the "money changers" were and what they were doing, which seemed to be your arguement.

You also seem to have quite a chip on your shoulder and a penchant for stalking my posts. Judging by the sheer number of your own posts in so short a time, you must have little else in your life.

There was such a Temple coin, as the Shekalim more than hints at, and common coinage in Judea at the time (aside from denarii) was also called a shekel. Just as it is today, strangely enough...

I could also go into how practices and customs in modern times differ from those in ancient times. I will assume you already know this, however, unless you have sacrificed a goat lately.

You also state many points which sound very scholarly, yet the Shekalim fails to cover-- especially in your third and fourth points (I will not bother picking apart ancient exchange rates). I know this, because I have read it.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

Smiling Dave — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 11:26:09 GMT

1. Wikipedia: "...who changed the standard Greek and Roman money for Jewish and Tyrian money, which were the only coinage that could be used in Temple ceremonies."

A gross error right there. No coins were used in Temple ceremonies. What does the guy think, that they juggled the coins or something?

Also, Wikipedi criticises the article as being poorly [to put it mildly sourced]. To quote: "This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed."

So when asked for a source, you quote an article that is criticized on the very page for being unsourced. Way to go.

2. http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Bankers.htm indeed states word for word all the you wrote that I dispute. I apologize for thinking it is a product of your introspection. However, it seems you have been duped, my son.

Let's look at a few quotes from this distinguished author's other writings [BTW the link is prominently displayed on the top of the article you brought to my attention:

A. The Rothschilds have been in control of the world for a very long time...

B. The Rothschilds claim that they are Jewish, when in fact they are Khazars...You will find that approximately 90% of people in the world today who call themselves Jews are actually Khazars. The author goes on to explain that the Book of Revelations refers to these 90% as "the synagogue of Satan".

C. Moses Amschel Bauer places a red sign above the entrance door to his counting house. This sign is a red hexagram (which geometrically and numerically translates into the number 666)

D. 1770: Mayer Amschel Rothschild draws up plans for the creation of the Illuminati and entrusts Ashkenazi Jew, Adam Weishaupt, a Crypto-Jew who was outwardly Roman Catholic, with its organization and development. The Illuminati is to be based upon the teachings of the Talmud, which is in turn, the teachings of Rabbinical Jews. It was to be called the Illuminati as this is a Luciferian term which means, keepers of the light...

The purpose of the Illuminati is to divide the goyim (all non-Jews) through political, economic, social, and religious means. The opposing sides were to be armed and incidents were to be provided in order for them to: fight amongst themselves; destroy national governments; destroy religious institutions; and eventually destroy each other.

So the Talmud says to do all this, according to the distinguished author. This is very revealing. It shows he knows nothing about the Talmud. Which explains how he could ake the absurd statement you quoted in your earlier posts, all flatly contradicted by ancient Jewish sources. I mean, they should know how they ran their own Temple, no?

E. Weishaupt soon infiltrates the Continental Order of Freemasons with this Illuminati doctrine and establishes lodges of the Grand Orient to be their secret headquarters. This was all under the orders and finance of Mayer Amschel Rothschild and the concept has spread and is followed within Masonic Lodges worldwide to the present day.

So every Masonic lodge, as we speak, is plotting to destroy religious institutions and national govts. OK.

I didn't bother looking for other gems in this very long article.

If you agree with him about any of the above, good luck to you. If you disagree and find it amusing in a ghastly kind of way, it should lead you to questioning him as a source of info about anything.

3. A "money as debt" video doesn't strike me as a scholarly reference. I mean, that so called source needs a source. I notice that the video uses the very words of the Rothchild conspiracy guy, the ones you used in your OP.

4. I agree with you that the role of the money changers was obvious to writers of that time. It is all spelled out in the Mishnah, a work predating Jesus in part. Read it, particularly the part called Shekalim, and you will find the many inaccuracies in your earlier posts.

Firstly, coins were not used in the Temple at all. They were used to buy what was needed for running the Temple, such as buying wine and bread and animals for sacrifice, making repairs, fixing leaks, and the like. All the priests in the Temple recieved no salaries, and but for the High Priest, were there only two weeks a year. They had families to support.

Second, a yearly donation was required of all Jews [with no agency to enforce this, all purely voluntary] to fund the Temple. If we accept the evaluation of your source, this was about $13 a year. A dollar a month. 3 cents a day. I think you pay more for your internet connection, or for a meal for two at McDonalds. I'm not sure how much a Christian Church member is expected to donate nowadays, so I did not use that as a basis for comparison.

This contribution had to be a coin that was worth half of the standard coin [say a half dollar as opposed to a dollar]. The Temple money changers charged a fee of 2%, or about 25 cents, for giving someone two halfs for his whole, if he didn't have a half coin to donate. This fee also was given to the Temple and spent on its day to day running. No private individual profited from it.

Third, this annual contribution could be of any coin in the world. It did not have to be some fictitous official Temple coin [and I do mean fictitous, there was no such coin], or even a coin in common use in Israel at the time. Coins with pictures of the Emperor on it are perfectly acceptable for all transactions, including the annual donation to the Temple, as is clear from the ancient sources.

Fourth, the money changers Jesus railed on about were not the official Temple money changers, who as explained, made no profits and were not thieves. He was instead whipping people who had set themselves up as bankers of a sort, to provide local coins for those who had foreign ones. Israel was at the center of the economic universe at the time, with coins and ships and people from all over the ancient world passing through. A convenient place to set up shop was near, not in, the Temple, as Wikipedia points out. Apparently some of them were taking advantage of the tourists.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

MrSchnapps — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 06:39:57 GMT

I don't think there's a need for 'sighing'. It's not that we *doubt* everything you put up, but if you do put up something that is at least more contentious than cogito ergo sum or that the earth revolves around the sun, then I think you're obligated to provide some sources or references.

That's how scholarship works.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

FleetCenturion — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 06:25:58 GMT

... that should read, "Testament." Sorry for my haste and lack of a SpellCheck.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

FleetCenturion — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 06:17:03 GMT

*Sigh*

If you doubt my scholarship, check out some of the following links, which I found using Google, in less than a minute:

http://www.iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_Bankers.htm

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936#docid=6076118677860424204

(The opinion is noteably slanted here, but the history is factual.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple

This, therefore, is the what is meant by the term, "money changer". The language is a bit vague in the New teestament only because their function was so obvious to writers of that time.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

Smiling Dave — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 04:03:45 GMT

I am assuming you know all this from introspection into a previous lifetime, because it has no historical basis.

I have asked you before for sources, links, anything, but you remain evasive.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

FleetCenturion — Mon, 08 Nov 2010 03:56:24 GMT

It could have definitely indicated some foresight on his part. Though Augustus was not debasing the coinage at the time, the danger was, of course, always present. It also shows the hypocrisy of later emperors, who would demand taxes paid in gold and silver, instead of the money they themselves issued.

Refusal to pay taxes to Rome was, for those residents of Judea who had taxable wealth, a purely symbolic gesture. Taxes in the time of the early Caesars were not considered excessive. It was the idea of paying taxes to a foreign power that people had a problem with.

Money which was God's was being traded for Caesar's money at a grossly unfair exchange rate, making the money changers and the Temple rich at the expense of the faithful. People were, in effect, still using Caesar's money to pay God, and being overcharged to do so. Most people were not paid in silver, Temple-issued coins. I honestly think that it was the disruption of this enterprise that led to Jesus' crucifiction more than any other event. Related to that could be that he advocated "paying" God using prayer and good deeds instead of hard cash. Though he had a good reputation as a holy man and a wise judge, the fact is that most people in Judea, before or after his death, had never heard of him. He was not the only 'messiah' in town.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

Bill — Sun, 07 Nov 2010 17:35:55 GMT

When Jews came to pay their Temple tax (a blasphemous idea in itself), they could only do so with a silver coin known as the "half-shekel of the Sanctuary". This was the only coin that was a certified ½ ounce of pure silver, without the Emperor's image upon it.

When Jesus said give Caesar what is Caesar's. He first asked for a coin. That denarii had Caesar's image on it. Could it be that he was advocating paying Caesar only with the coins that he was currently debasing?

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

Smiling Dave — Sun, 07 Nov 2010 16:14:25 GMT

David Sherin:

Interesting. Do you have any more info about Jesus and the temple money changers? I've always been really curious about that.

Dave, forgive Fleet Centurion, for he knows not of what he speaks. You can get better info about Jesus and the temple money changers from watching Star Trek. [No info beats wrong info]

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

David Sherin — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 18:46:19 GMT

Interesting. Do you have any more info about Jesus and the temple money changers? I've always been really curious about that.

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

Smiling Dave — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:53:09 GMT

What fallacy is this?

Re: Giving Caesar his Due: Money in Ancient Rome

FleetCenturion — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 14:14:03 GMT

Source? Evidence? Something?

Are you looking for footnotes? Pick up a book. I'm sorry if the History Channel didn't cover that part.