Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ned Netterville
That Jesus was crucified for opposing the payment of Caesar's tax is a minor premise in my book, JESUS OF NAZARETH, ILLEGAL-TAX PROTESTER, which is available without charge from the website, http://www.jesus-on-taxes.com. (The two major premises are 1)Jesus did not endorse taxation or the State, as most orthodox exegetes contend; and, 2) The principles Jesus espoused are diametrically opposed to taxation and the State.)
If you believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God, you will not agree with my minor premise. If you are like some fundamentalists I have heard from, my audacity in questioning the canonical Gospel version of the trial of Jesus will probably induce you to condemn me to Hell's fires for all eternity. But if like a juror you can approach the issue without prejudice, you might find the evidence persuasive beyond reasonable doubt that Pilate was guilty of killing Jesus because of their conflicting views on taxation.
Briefly here is the prosecution's case against Pilate. In addition to being governor, Pilate was procurator of Judea and thereby responsible for the collection of Roman taxes within his jurisdiction. He was accountable to Rome for tax revenues. Jesus was accused of sedition for "opposing the payment of taxes to Caesar." (LK 23:1). Only a few days earlier and in the presence of witness friendly to Rome, Jesus had denounced Caesar's tax as unjust. (See my essay to understand that when he said "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's," Jesus meant just what he said. In other words, if you have something that belongs to Caesar, give it to him, otherwise, you owe him nothing! And since none of his listeners possessed anything belonging to Caesas, his words, in answer to the question, Should we pay the tax? clearly was, "No do not pay it!"
Now whether Caesar believed that Jesus had been preaching tax resistance as his accusers charged, he would have convicted Jesus for two reasons: 1) He simply couldn't risk the possibility that he was, and there was no risk to Pilate in killing Jesus. 2) If he asked Jesus whether or not Jesus had said what his accusers charged, Jesus would not have denied the truth.
Pilate had Jesus flogged and crucified. At that time, these combined forms of punishment were generally reserved for individuals who posed a threat to the empire. They were designed to make others think twice before repeating the perpetrators' crimes.
So, there in a nutshell you have it. I would be grateful to hear what others among you think? |
Hammurabis Code (online)
§ 116. If the distress has died in the house of his distrainer, of blows or of want, the owner of the distress shall put his merchant to account, and if he be the son of a freeman (that has died), his son one shall kill; if the slave of a free-man, he shall pay one-third of a mina of silver, and he shall lose all that he gave whatever it be.
Let me work this statute with the proper names for description.
§ 116. If the distress(Seti II) has died in the house of his distrainer (in Gods possession), of blows or of want(God to Moses-if you see my face you will die), the owner of the distress(Abraham) shall put his merchant(God of Israel) to account, and if he be the son of a freeman (that has died)(Seti II), his(God) son(Jesus) one shall kill; if the slave of a free-man, he shall pay one-third of a mina of silver, and he shall lose all that he gave whatever it be.
Understand yet? When God and Abraham are making their covenant they are in Babylon. The lex locus contractus stipulates the terms and conditions of agreements. Before this agreement Abraham had allodium in his offspring (his nation). After the agreement with God
Abrahm had the legal title to the nation, God had the equitable title to the nation. The nation becomes chattels (slaves)(property) capable of having title transferred. Enter Moses. Pharaogh having been sitting on his throne became isolated from reality and began to become psychotic. This happens to people when they go into isolation. He theorises his enemies will come against him and the Israelites will join against him. So he orders the Israelite male babies killed. Israel is the debtor nation and Egypt is the creditor nation and this leads the property of Abraham into Egyptian slavery. (Theft of Abrahams property who holds legal title to Israel.) Abrahams merchant (God) has the legal duty to restore full value of the property (Israel) so he enters the House of Pharaogh to distrain the property of the debtor,(the first borns die). Pharaogh is the debtor to Abraham for taking the male babies which would have worked to pay off the debt due from Israel to Pharaogh. God, the merchant of Abraham building a mighty nation for Abraham now owes the debt of retribution due to Abraham under Hammurabi Code section 116. Some thousands of years later enter Gods payment to Abraham, Jesus the first born of God. Understand now? Jesus was killed by God, to fulfill sec 116. Someones hand had to do the acting to make the death (Judas goat). Rome and the Pharisees fulfill this part. So who killed Jesus? God, Rome and Pharisees.