|
Caesar
Ice I think you missed a very important point. Peter did not contract Jesus into it. If so, how exactly. Did Rome function on presumption as the US Inc does?
Rome was on a mission to conquer and subjugate the whole world. It made more sense to expand the tax base of Rome by imposing it's will on smaller countries and exacting tribute in exchange for not destroying everyone and everything.
Jerusalam was under occupation and the tax was a tribute. Not an excise, tarriff, or duty. Peter did not conquer Jerusalem in the name of Rome. Even if he did, contracts are void without mutual consent.
Sorry if I'm splitting hairs here. This is an interesting passage in the NT though.
KT
|