Render to Ceasar

[hobelim]

The interesting thing is that the word Render or rendere in the Vulgar Latin literally means return in profit so I find it interesting that those words were attributed to the Jesus character simply because since The meanings in Latin never change for him to say give profit to Caesar who literally rent kingdom after kingdom to pieces for Roman profit doesn't make any sense if he was supposedly a Jew. That is why I find that saying suspicious and it looks to me like it is pure propaganda by the Roman authorities to entice guliable populaces to send money their way...Course with the backing of Jesus no one can question it and that way the mob of Rome gets their piece of the action.... Campeche....

I don't doubt that verses like this were used to make it seem like submission to Rome was the will of God.


One question..

What the hell is campeche ?

 

[shimon]

The interesting thing is that the word Render or rendere in the Vulgar Latin literally means return in profit so I find it interesting that those words were attributed to the Jesus character simply because since The meanings in Latin never change for him to say give profit to Caesar who literally rent kingdom after kingdom to pieces for Roman profit doesn't make any sense if he was supposedly a Jew. That is why I find that saying suspicious and it looks to me like it is pure propaganda by the Roman authorities to entice guliable populaces to send money their way...Course with the backing of Jesus no one can question it and that way the mob of Rome gets their piece of the action.... Campeche....

I don't doubt that verses like this were used to make it seem like submission to Rome was the will of God.


One question..

What the hell is campeche ?

Sorry ...Its Capeche...

 

[irosie91]

The interesting thing is that the word Render or rendere in the Vulgar Latin literally means return in profit so I find it interesting that those words were attributed to the Jesus character simply because since The meanings in Latin never change for him to say give profit to Caesar who literally rent kingdom after kingdom to pieces for Roman profit doesn't make any sense if he was supposedly a Jew. That is why I find that saying suspicious and it looks to me like it is pure propaganda by the Roman authorities to entice guliable populaces to send money their way...Course with the backing of Jesus no one can question it and that way the mob of Rome gets their piece of the action.... Campeche....

I don't doubt that verses like this were used to make it seem like submission to Rome was the will of God.


One question..

What the hell is campeche ?

I think he meant to write CAPICE? or capiche? -------I don't know what that means either-------regarding the "render unto Caesar..."
thing--------it is important to take MATTHEW with a grain of salt as a "quoter"------IMHO---he was an inventor ---very much a shill for
the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE AGENDA---------something like history's most disgusting KAPO

 

[shimon]

George was not considered a gd although fables were given about him telling no lies etc.....Ceasar was considered a god.... But one must start thinking out of the box like I have said.... Julius Ceasar was the Original J C...If the life and times of the Jesus character were based on a passion play about Julius Ceasar then RENDERING money unto Ceasar would be appropriate and using the VULGAR latin JOKE would be even more funny to the Romans who are laughing behind the peoples backs as they pull off their scam....

 

[Picaro]

It's an acknowledgement that his ministry is for all nations, and this is further confirmed by Paul in Romans, as an examination of the chiaistic structure of Romans shows, as well its links with the chiastic structures in the Synoptic Gospels; it was no 'random insertion' added later to Pauls letter, it's exactly where it's supposed to be.

Christianity is essentially apolitical re earthly kingdoms, they consider Christianity as 'light for all nations', not just Israel. In fact, the Roman Empire provided a great means for facilitating traveling from the ME all the way to the British isles and across the Mediterranean, as well as a common language, two actually, and the location of Jerusalem at the 'end' of the empire also put it within reach of 'The East'. With so many different local govts., there was no need for any political ideology, so yes, paying local taxes and respecting local govts. would be no particular concern for those who saw themselves as worshipping 'the true Kingdom'.

 

[alang1216]

-------regarding the "render unto Caesar..."
thing--------it is important to take MATTHEW with a grain of salt as a "quoter"------IMHO---he was an inventor ---very much a shill for
the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE AGENDA---------something like history's most disgusting KAPO

I think you're wrong on two points. Matthew (and Luke) had access to the now-lost Q, a book of quotes of Jesus so he is one of the best sources of such quotes. His Gospel was written well before the Roman church and the Roman empire were merged under Constantine.

 

[alang1216]

George was not considered a gd although fables were given about him telling no lies etc.....Ceasar was considered a god.... But one must start thinking out of the box like I have said.... Julius Ceasar was the Original J C...If the life and times of the Jesus character were based on a passion play about Julius Ceasar then RENDERING money unto Ceasar would be appropriate and using the VULGAR latin JOKE would be even more funny to the Romans who are laughing behind the peoples backs as they pull off their scam....

Sorry but I think you're connecting random dots to create a picture you want to see.

 

[alang1216]

It's an acknowledgement that his ministry is for all nations, and this is further confirmed by Paul in Romans, as an examination of the chiaistic structure of Romans shows, as well its links with the chiastic structures in the Synoptic Gospels; it was no 'random insertion' added later to Pauls letter, it's exactly where it's supposed to be.

Christianity is essentially apolitical re earthly kingdoms, they consider Christianity as 'light for all nations', not just Israel. In fact, the Roman Empire provided a great means for facilitating traveling from the ME all the way to the British isles and across the Mediterranean, as well as a common language, two actually, and the location of Jerusalem at the 'end' of the empire also put it within reach of 'The East'. With so many different local govts., there was no need for any political ideology, so yes, paying local taxes and respecting local govts. would be no particular concern for those who saw themselves as worshipping 'the true Kingdom'.

I don't think Christianity ever was apolitical, nothing in this world is.

I find it ironic that Rome inadvertently defined our version of Christianity. The followers of Jesus in Jerusalem, led by his brother James, believe Jesus was a Jewish messiah. It was Paul and his faction that saw Jesus as a universal savior. When the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and massacred Jesus' followers there, they set up Paul to be the undisputed leader of the cult.

 

[hobelim]

-------regarding the "render unto Caesar..."
thing--------it is important to take MATTHEW with a grain of salt as a "quoter"------IMHO---he was an inventor ---very much a shill for
the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE AGENDA---------something like history's most disgusting KAPO

I think you're wrong on two points. Matthew (and Luke) had access to the now-lost Q, a book of quotes of Jesus so he is one of the best sources of such quotes. His Gospel was written well before the Roman church and the Roman empire were merged under Constantine.

Exactly. The influence of Rome was in its perverted and superstitious interpretations of the figurative expressions that Jesus used, based on the language of the prophets, that went sailing right over their heads.

 

[irosie91]

It's an acknowledgement that his ministry is for all nations, and this is further confirmed by Paul in Romans, as an examination of the chiaistic structure of Romans shows, as well its links with the chiastic structures in the Synoptic Gospels; it was no 'random insertion' added later to Pauls letter, it's exactly where it's supposed to be.

Christianity is essentially apolitical re earthly kingdoms, they consider Christianity as 'light for all nations', not just Israel. In fact, the Roman Empire provided a great means for facilitating traveling from the ME all the way to the British isles and across the Mediterranean, as well as a common language, two actually, and the location of Jerusalem at the 'end' of the empire also put it within reach of 'The East'. With so many different local govts., there was no need for any political ideology, so yes, paying local taxes and respecting local govts. would be no particular concern for those who saw themselves as worshipping 'the true Kingdom'.

the "true kingdom" being ROME. some 500 years later the "true kingdom" became MECCA for awhile-----then it became Baghdad----
ask UMAR and ABU BAKR------and their descendant ABU-BAKR AL BAGHDADDY----------and somehow------all roads still lead to
Jerusalem

 

[irosie91]

-------regarding the "render unto Caesar..."
thing--------it is important to take MATTHEW with a grain of salt as a "quoter"------IMHO---he was an inventor ---very much a shill for
the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE AGENDA---------something like history's most disgusting KAPO

I think you're wrong on two points. Matthew (and Luke) had access to the now-lost Q, a book of quotes of Jesus so he is one of the best sources of such quotes. His Gospel was written well before the Roman church and the Roman empire were merged under Constantine.

Exactly. The influence of Rome was in its perverted and superstitious interpretations of the figurative expressions that Jesus used, based on the language of the prophets, that went sailing right over their heads.

Q ------as far as I know is a conjecture------a kind of logical but far from concrete ---extrapolation

 

[Picaro]

Ah, we get 'the Little Rascals Discuss Theology' again. Very appropriate ... for morons who have no real study skills.

 

[hobelim]

It's an acknowledgement that his ministry is for all nations, and this is further confirmed by Paul in Romans, as an examination of the chiaistic structure of Romans shows, as well its links with the chiastic structures in the Synoptic Gospels; it was no 'random insertion' added later to Pauls letter, it's exactly where it's supposed to be.

Christianity is essentially apolitical re earthly kingdoms, they consider Christianity as 'light for all nations', not just Israel. In fact, the Roman Empire provided a great means for facilitating traveling from the ME all the way to the British isles and across the Mediterranean, as well as a common language, two actually, and the location of Jerusalem at the 'end' of the empire also put it within reach of 'The East'. With so many different local govts., there was no need for any political ideology, so yes, paying local taxes and respecting local govts. would be no particular concern for those who saw themselves as worshipping 'the true Kingdom'.

Paul wrote many of his letters in a roman jail during the reign of Nero at a time when Christianity was a despised and persecuted group of seditious rabble rousers.


Do you think that his jailers would have delivered his letters without them first being redacted?


"Slaves, obey your masters", "Submit to the emperor" , (Nero), is supposed to be a light for all nations?

Thats your story? Really?

 

[irosie91]

It's an acknowledgement that his ministry is for all nations, and this is further confirmed by Paul in Romans, as an examination of the chiaistic structure of Romans shows, as well its links with the chiastic structures in the Synoptic Gospels; it was no 'random insertion' added later to Pauls letter, it's exactly where it's supposed to be.

Christianity is essentially apolitical re earthly kingdoms, they consider Christianity as 'light for all nations', not just Israel. In fact, the Roman Empire provided a great means for facilitating traveling from the ME all the way to the British isles and across the Mediterranean, as well as a common language, two actually, and the location of Jerusalem at the 'end' of the empire also put it within reach of 'The East'. With so many different local govts., there was no need for any political ideology, so yes, paying local taxes and respecting local govts. would be no particular concern for those who saw themselves as worshipping 'the true Kingdom'.

Paul wrote many of his letters in a roman jail during the reign of Nero at a time when Christianity was a despised and persecuted group of rabble rousers.


Do you think that they would have delivered his letters without them first being redacted?


"Slaves, obey your masters", "Submit to the emperor" , (Nero), is supposed to be a light for all nations?

really?

I always liked Paul------Just lilke Josephus he wrote with an EYE ON HIS OWN FUTURE-----and chance to correct
his earlier writings. He conducted himself like a gladiator ------playing it up for the vestal "virgins" so that they would
vote for his survival

 

[alang1216]

Q ------as far as I know is a conjecture------a kind of logical but far from concrete ---extrapolation

There appears to be no other explanation for similarities in Matthew and Luke except that they shared a source. What that was is unknown, it could have been a book or even a person.

 

[Picaro]

While you tards ramble on and on about stuff you know zero about, just juvenile Xian bashing rubbish you found somewhere in the fever swamps, the reference to the destruction of the temple referred to by Luke goes back to Jeremiah 7, whereupon it then assumes a role as a piece with yet another chiasmus with a different focus.

 

[Picaro]

It's an acknowledgement that his ministry is for all nations, and this is further confirmed by Paul in Romans, as an examination of the chiaistic structure of Romans shows, as well its links with the chiastic structures in the Synoptic Gospels; it was no 'random insertion' added later to Pauls letter, it's exactly where it's supposed to be.

Christianity is essentially apolitical re earthly kingdoms, they consider Christianity as 'light for all nations', not just Israel. In fact, the Roman Empire provided a great means for facilitating traveling from the ME all the way to the British isles and across the Mediterranean, as well as a common language, two actually, and the location of Jerusalem at the 'end' of the empire also put it within reach of 'The East'. With so many different local govts., there was no need for any political ideology, so yes, paying local taxes and respecting local govts. would be no particular concern for those who saw themselves as worshipping 'the true Kingdom'.

Paul wrote many of his letters in a roman jail during the reign of Nero at a time when Christianity was a despised and persecuted group of seditious rabble rousers.


Do you think that his jailers would have delivered his letters without them first being redacted?


"Slaves, obey your masters", "Submit to the emperor" , (Nero), is supposed to be a light for all nations?

Thats your story? Really?

If cared about what loons and assorted deviants think about anything, I will cite them, but even then that would for purely entertaining comedy purposes, not an acknowledgement that I think they're sane or serious.

 

[irosie91]

Q ------as far as I know is a conjecture------a kind of logical but far from concrete ---extrapolation

There appears to be no other explanation for similarities in Matthew and Luke except that they shared a source. What that was is unknown, it could have been a book or even a person.

yeah-----like they talked to each other----maybe. Luke did not STAY in Greece--------as far as I recall------sorta----they
mingled in the same social group------I am not sure of the TIMELINE------but then----USA communists never met Karl Marx

 

[Picaro]

And, for the edification of those in the Peanut Gallery who are really interested in this stuff fro learning purposes, all three synoptic Gospels has different chiastic structures, and the same verse plays a different literary role in each of them, basically different applications of the same principle, as indicated by its different position in each of them and starting in different parts of their respective Gospels which in turn link back to Old Testament chaisms and even more takes on the general idea.

You can find a lot of this type of literary structure and reference in the Old And New Testaments, it's a key part of biblical study, as opposed to the 'methodologies' based on bias confirmations and random quoting of verses cited with no context with the books they're in that is wildly popular with dumbasses and deviants derived form fever swamp sites. It's not just a collection of random sayings and proverbs thrown out in no particular order.

 

[irosie91]

And, for the edification of those in the Peanut Gallery who are really interested in this stuff fro learning purposes, all three synoptic Gospels has different chiastic structures, and the same verse plays a different literary role in each of them, basically different applications of the same principle, as indicated by its different position in each of them and starting in different parts of their respective Gospels which in turn link back to Old Testament chaisms and even more takes on the general idea.

You can find a lot of this type of literary structure and reference in the Old And New Testaments, it's a key part of biblical study, as opposed to the 'methodologies' based on bias confirmations and random quoting of verses cited with no context with the books they're in that is wildly popular with dumbasses and deviants derived form fever swamp sites. It's not just a collection of random sayings and proverbs thrown out in no particular order.

not it isn't ------it is carefully crafted