Freethought & Rationalism Archive

storytime · 07-13-2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Ok, let me think outside the Roman box. If Rome was so great for Israel, how come the Jews rebelled against it?

Their Jewish religion provided many reasons. One being taxation. According to OT, the Jews were commanded not to charge interest among themselves. It was ok to charge interest on non Jews. This situation somehow played into the policy of Jews concerning Roman taxation. The Jews saw a double tax[interest] by which their doctrine via their Gods order, prohibited. Judaism was in and of itself a self governing politic. No interference from outside Gentiles was allowed. So they fought against Rome in this one area of not paying Roman taxes. Another area of protest was, as Joseph said, the idea of honoring another god or gods. At this time the Jesus story was only a wink in the Roman eye. The Jews in their days before Jesus objected to the gods of Rome. The Roman officials seemed to have tolerated Jewish objections and protests for a while. Nero seems to be the one emperor who decided he'd had enough of Jewish ignoring of Roman gods and himself in particular. Nero as a god, wanted recognition as a god. The Jews would have protested this god-man just as they did in later years of Jesus the god-man. Both these were set up as idols that were different than the Jewish idol - the Hebrew god Yahweh.

I really cannot see any tax issues here. The war had been building up for decades - which had nothing to do with taxes, considering the long period. There was no possibility any nation could not pay the tax even for a short time. The tax was paid and sacrifices to Rome was also made - the latter being more a cause than the tax.

While it is also true the Romans had a desire to win over the 2000 year treasury of the temple - the war itself was solely a result of the requirement to place a statue of worship in the temple, as was the requirement in all of Rome's conquered nations. That the Jews could have been excused this law among all the rest of the nations spelled a disaster waiting to happen.

This accounts for Josephus' negotiations to stop the war, Rome even offering acceptance if the statue was placed outside the actual temple itself - and the jews refusing this. The war was officially initiated when Eleazar's warriors slew 600 Romans guarding the temple, along with many Jews from the Peace Party [a Leftist group], and declared all sacrifices ceased - this was in effect a declaration of war.

The topic of Eusibius is a hot one, but there is a factor here which inclines with it. In the 30's CE - there was a great upheaval arising subsequent to the pagan and immoral activities of Rome and Greece. At this time, the only voices which should be heard from jews is that of the dislodgement of Rome - yet we find no such factors in the Gospels. The notion of focusng on hapless, rowdy money changers doing what they always did for 2000 years, and being in total compliance of the law, as opposed issue # 1 - Rome - comes across like a fake implanting by Rome itself, and a dead give away.

This is further compounded with the castigating and villifying of the Jews for rejecting a divine human as Messiah - this is a Roman/European, not a Jewish tradition. The whole point is, when talking about Jews in Judea, one must either see it from the jewish persective - or else consider their history and laws which were their first priority. Here, when in Rome do as the Romans do - does not apply.

Here's an interesting note.

"But Judas, a Gaulonite, from the city called Garnala, taking with him Sadduchus, a Pharisee, urged the people to revolt, both of them saying that the taxation meant nothing else than downright slavery, and exhorting the nation to defend their liberty".

"And in the second book of his history of the Jewish war, he writes as follows concerning the same man: "At this time a certain Galilean, whose name was Judas, persuaded his countrymen to revolt, declaring that they were cowards if they submitted to pay tribute[tax, interest] to the Romans, and if they endured, besides God, masters who were mortal. These things are recorded by Josephus." (my brackets)

Now, if the Jews thought it would be the same as slavery to pay tribute to Caesar, and their old scripts commanding them that they should not be slaves to any men, but that they should be the slave holders themselves, this presents a more reasonable clue to why the Jews objected to Roman taxation than all the gods[idols] of Rome that the Jews were not forced to worship.

ref: newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm

storytime · 07-13-2009, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Ok, let me think outside the Roman box. If Rome was so great for Israel, how come the Jews rebelled against it?

Their Jewish religion provided many reasons. One being taxation. According to OT, the Jews were commanded not to charge interest among themselves. It was ok to charge interest on non Jews. This situation somehow played into the policy of Jews concerning Roman taxation. The Jews saw a double tax[interest] by which their doctrine via their Gods order, prohibited. Judaism was in and of itself a self governing politic. No interference from outside Gentiles was allowed. So they fought against Rome in this one area of not paying Roman taxes. Another area of protest was, as Joseph said, the idea of honoring another god or gods. At this time the Jesus story was only a wink in the Roman eye. The Jews in their days before Jesus objected to the gods of Rome. The Roman officials seemed to have tolerated Jewish objections and protests for a while. Nero seems to be the one emperor who decided he'd had enough of Jewish ignoring of Roman gods and himself in particular. Nero as a god, wanted recognition as a god. The Jews would have protested this god-man just as they did in later years of Jesus the god-man. Both these were set up as idols that were different than the Jewish idol - the Hebrew god Yahweh.

I really cannot see any tax issues here. The war had been building up for decades - which had nothing to do with taxes, considering the long period. There was no possibility any nation could not pay the tax even for a short time. The tax was paid and sacrifices to Rome was also made - the latter being more a cause than the tax.

While it is also true the Romans had a desire to win over the 2000 year treasury of the temple - the war itself was solely a result of the requirement to place a statue of worship in the temple, as was the requirement in all of Rome's conquered nations. That the Jews could have been excused this law among all the rest of the nations spelled a disaster waiting to happen.

This accounts for Josephus' negotiations to stop the war, Rome even offering acceptance if the statue was placed outside the actual temple itself - and the jews refusing this. The war was officially initiated when Eleazar's warriors slew 600 Romans guarding the temple, along with many Jews from the Peace Party [a Leftist group], and declared all sacrifices ceased - this was in effect a declaration of war.

The topic of Eusibius is a hot one, but there is a factor here which inclines with it. In the 30's CE - there was a great upheaval arising subsequent to the pagan and immoral activities of Rome and Greece. At this time, the only voices which should be heard from jews is that of the dislodgement of Rome - yet we find no such factors in the Gospels. The notion of focusng on hapless, rowdy money changers doing what they always did for 2000 years, and being in total compliance of the law, as opposed issue # 1 - Rome - comes across like a fake implanting by Rome itself, and a dead give away.

This is further compounded with the castigating and villifying of the Jews for rejecting a divine human as Messiah - this is a Roman/European, not a Jewish tradition. The whole point is, when talking about Jews in Judea, one must either see it from the jewish persective - or else consider their history and laws which were their first priority. Here, when in Rome do as the Romans do - does not apply.

What did Jesus have to do with the destruction of Jerusalem? The Jesus story didn't amount to anything until after the days of Paul. However, the Jews were always pumping for war with other nations because of their self-rightous beliefs and their uncivil attitude. They wanted something from Rome, but what? Recognition? Special treatment? What? Maybe you can help us figure that out Joseph?

What 2000 year old treasury of the Temple? I've never heard about that part of the story.

Villifying the Jews? ha! I think it was the other way around and the Jews were always villifying and putting those demonic cursings on others, especially those Europeans you keep slapping around.

I can just see those ancient Jewish shamons mixing their demon bowls with bat wings, teeth-of-the-dog, dung of Ms Piggy. Then praising their god for that full moon whereby they crept into a Gentile tent and left it there with full aroma. :lol: You had some really weird ancestory Joseph. (I'm assuming you've read the bible,KJV with King James imprint on the cover and copyrighted by Nelson)

spamandham · 07-13-2009, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

While it is also true the Romans had a desire to win over the 2000 year treasury of the temple - the war itself was solely a result of the requirement to place a statue of worship in the temple, as was the requirement in all of Rome's conquered nations.

I'd be interested in your source for this information. Considering that Jewish unrest started when Pompey captured Jerusalem - ending the Hasmonian dynasty, nearly a century prior to Caligula's decree, and considering that *the decree was never carried out*.... this would be a remarkable causal relationship.

arnoldo · 07-14-2009, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

While it is also true the Romans had a desire to win over the 2000 year treasury of the temple - the war itself was solely a result of the requirement to place a statue of worship in the temple, as was the requirement in all of Rome's conquered nations.

This accounts for Josephus' negotiations to stop the war, Rome even offering acceptance if the statue was placed outside the actual temple itself - and the jews refusing this. The war was officially initiated when Eleazar's warriors slew 600 Romans guarding the temple, along with many Jews from the Peace Party [a Leftist group], and declared all sacrifices ceased - this was in effect a declaration of war.

I'd be interested in your source for this information. Considering that Jewish unrest started when Pompey captured Jerusalem - ending the Hasmonian dynasty, nearly a century prior to Caligula's decree, and considering that *the decree was never carried out*.... this would be a remarkable causal relationship.

Who knows if the terms of surrender offered by the Romans via Josephus included placing an idol outside the temple. In any event Hadrian finally succeeded in placing an idol on the temple mount which triggered the final jewish revolt on 136 A.D.

Quote:

3896/ c. 136 CE

Hadrian Undertakes rebuilding of Jerusalem as "Aelia Capitolina" provoking unsuccessful Bar Kochba revolt in 135 by devout Jews.

Hadrian erects Temple of Jupiter on Temple Mount and statue of himself facing east in front. Jewish attempt to build Third Temple fails.

Source:Highlights in the History of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount

IamJoseph · 07-15-2009, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Who knows if the terms of surrender offered by the Romans via Josephus included placing an idol outside the temple. In any event Hadrian finally succeeded in placing an idol on the temple mount which triggered the final jewish revolt on 136 A.D.

Doesn't your own proof prove your own question? The Roman heresy deecree was contnued by the church - and we know what that led to.

IamJoseph · 07-15-2009, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

I really cannot see any tax issues here. The war had been building up for decades - which had nothing to do with taxes, considering the long period. There was no possibility any nation could not pay the tax even for a short time. The tax was paid and sacrifices to Rome was also made - the latter being more a cause than the tax.

While it is also true the Romans had a desire to win over the 2000 year treasury of the temple - the war itself was solely a result of the requirement to place a statue of worship in the temple, as was the requirement in all of Rome's conquered nations. That the Jews could have been excused this law among all the rest of the nations spelled a disaster waiting to happen.

This accounts for Josephus' negotiations to stop the war, Rome even offering acceptance if the statue was placed outside the actual temple itself - and the jews refusing this. The war was officially initiated when Eleazar's warriors slew 600 Romans guarding the temple, along with many Jews from the Peace Party [a Leftist group], and declared all sacrifices ceased - this was in effect a declaration of war.

The topic of Eusibius is a hot one, but there is a factor here which inclines with it. In the 30's CE - there was a great upheaval arising subsequent to the pagan and immoral activities of Rome and Greece. At this time, the only voices which should be heard from jews is that of the dislodgement of Rome - yet we find no such factors in the Gospels. The notion of focusng on hapless, rowdy money changers doing what they always did for 2000 years, and being in total compliance of the law, as opposed issue # 1 - Rome - comes across like a fake implanting by Rome itself, and a dead give away.

This is further compounded with the castigating and villifying of the Jews for rejecting a divine human as Messiah - this is a Roman/European, not a Jewish tradition. The whole point is, when talking about Jews in Judea, one must either see it from the jewish persective - or else consider their history and laws which were their first priority. Here, when in Rome do as the Romans do - does not apply.

What did Jesus have to do with the destruction of Jerusalem? The Jesus story didn't amount to anything until after the days of Paul. However, the Jews were always pumping for war with other nations because of their self-rightous beliefs and their uncivil attitude. They wanted something from Rome, but what? Recognition? Special treatment? What? Maybe you can help us figure that out Joseph?

What 2000 year old treasury of the Temple? I've never heard about that part of the story.

Villifying the Jews? ha! I think it was the other way around and the Jews were always villifying and putting those demonic cursings on others, especially those Europeans you keep slapping around.

I can just see those ancient Jewish shamons mixing their demon bowls with bat wings, teeth-of-the-dog, dung of Ms Piggy. Then praising their god for that full moon whereby they crept into a Gentile tent and left it there with full aroma. :lol: You had some really weird ancestory Joseph. (I'm assuming you've read the bible,KJV with King James imprint on the cover and copyrighted by Nelson)

Apologies. I was talking about HISTORY - heard of it? Trust a European to call monotheists for 2000 years and rejecting depraved kings worship as a demand of something from Europe. My history lessons says humanity owes a debt to the Jews for standing up to the most depraved characters and ushering the right to freedom of belief. The fact is, the Jews prevailed while 99.9% of all Europeans' ancesters became christian by enforcement.

IamJoseph · 07-15-2009, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

I really cannot see any tax issues here. The war had been building up for decades - which had nothing to do with taxes, considering the long period. There was no possibility any nation could not pay the tax even for a short time. The tax was paid and sacrifices to Rome was also made - the latter being more a cause than the tax.

While it is also true the Romans had a desire to win over the 2000 year treasury of the temple - the war itself was solely a result of the requirement to place a statue of worship in the temple, as was the requirement in all of Rome's conquered nations. That the Jews could have been excused this law among all the rest of the nations spelled a disaster waiting to happen.

This accounts for Josephus' negotiations to stop the war, Rome even offering acceptance if the statue was placed outside the actual temple itself - and the jews refusing this. The war was officially initiated when Eleazar's warriors slew 600 Romans guarding the temple, along with many Jews from the Peace Party [a Leftist group], and declared all sacrifices ceased - this was in effect a declaration of war.

The topic of Eusibius is a hot one, but there is a factor here which inclines with it. In the 30's CE - there was a great upheaval arising subsequent to the pagan and immoral activities of Rome and Greece. At this time, the only voices which should be heard from jews is that of the dislodgement of Rome - yet we find no such factors in the Gospels. The notion of focusng on hapless, rowdy money changers doing what they always did for 2000 years, and being in total compliance of the law, as opposed issue # 1 - Rome - comes across like a fake implanting by Rome itself, and a dead give away.

This is further compounded with the castigating and villifying of the Jews for rejecting a divine human as Messiah - this is a Roman/European, not a Jewish tradition. The whole point is, when talking about Jews in Judea, one must either see it from the jewish persective - or else consider their history and laws which were their first priority. Here, when in Rome do as the Romans do - does not apply.

Here's an interesting note.

"But Judas, a Gaulonite, from the city called Garnala, taking with him Sadduchus, a Pharisee, urged the people to revolt, both of them saying that the taxation meant nothing else than downright slavery, and exhorting the nation to defend their liberty".

"And in the second book of his history of the Jewish war, he writes as follows concerning the same man: "At this time a certain Galilean, whose name was Judas, persuaded his countrymen to revolt, declaring that they were cowards if they submitted to pay tribute[tax, interest] to the Romans, and if they endured, besides God, masters who were mortal. These things are recorded by Josephus." (my brackets)

Now, if the Jews thought it would be the same as slavery to pay tribute to Caesar, and their old scripts commanding them that they should not be slaves to any men, but that they should be the slave holders themselves, this presents a more reasonable clue to why the Jews objected to Roman taxation than all the gods[idols] of Rome that the Jews were not forced to worship.

ref: newadvent.org/fathers/2501.htm

In fact, Josephus himself says the initiation of the war was the refusal to allow sacrifices to Rome. This was a declaration of the war, and the premise of taxes only says the Jews paid their taxes, even when they were higher than fr most other nations, and were later instigated by one group this does not apply anymore.

If Europe was monotheist they would have stood with the Jews - they did the reverse. The Jews were the only peoples who saw Rome's decrees as blasphemous - and they stuck to their premise till the end. Can't ask for more than that. Rome is dead - freedom of belief was won through one peoples who faught alone till the end.

spamandham · 07-15-2009, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

If Europe was monotheist they would have stood with the Jews - they did the reverse. The Jews were the only peoples who saw Rome's decrees as blasphemous - and they stuck to their premise till the end. Can't ask for more than that. Rome is dead - freedom of belief was won through one peoples who faught alone till the end.

Freedom of belief came through the Jews? This is more nonsensical than most of what you say. Have your read the book you worship? It's filled to the brim with propaganda against anything non-Jewish. This is hardly "freedom of belief". If the Jews had the power, they would have happily wiped out everyone who disagreed with their beliefs. They practically had civil wars over religious trivialities even within their own ranks.

IamJoseph · 07-15-2009, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

If Europe was monotheist they would have stood with the Jews - they did the reverse. The Jews were the only peoples who saw Rome's decrees as blasphemous - and they stuck to their premise till the end. Can't ask for more than that. Rome is dead - freedom of belief was won through one peoples who faught alone till the end.

Freedom of belief came through the Jews? This is more nonsensical than most of what you say. Have your read the book you worship? It's filled to the brim with propaganda against anything non-Jewish. This is hardly "freedom of belief". If the Jews had the power, they would have happily wiped out everyone who disagreed with their beliefs. They practically had civil wars over religious trivialities even within their own ranks.

The world and humanity changed after the laws in the Hebrew bible.

At one time all humanity engaged in slavery, and deeming a non-white human was inferior. The first declaration all humans are equally blessed [via Adam and Eve], equal justice for all - king or commoner, stranger or inhabitant - and only the soul that sinneth it shall pay - turned the world. It made many dictatorial nations upset - starting in ancient Egypt, and was an affront to all dictatorial regimes - including that of christianity and islam, which professed the reverse of those laws and went on to bash the messenger. The Hebrew won - even as you pretend to be aghast at the thought. This is a fact which cmes with hard copy proof.

spamandham · 07-15-2009, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Freedom of belief came through the Jews? This is more nonsensical than most of what you say. Have your read the book you worship? It's filled to the brim with propaganda against anything non-Jewish. This is hardly "freedom of belief". If the Jews had the power, they would have happily wiped out everyone who disagreed with their beliefs. They practically had civil wars over religious trivialities even within their own ranks.

The world and humanity changed after the laws in the Hebrew bible.

At one time all humanity engaged in slavery, and deeming a non-white human was inferior.

Well, that answers my question. You have *not* even read the book you worship. If you ever decide to do so, I recommend starting at Exodus 21. It should be quite an eye opener for you. :wave:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.