Matthew 22:20,21: He said to them: “Whose image and inscription is this?” They said: “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them: “Pay back, therefore, Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.”
Didn’t stop fundamentalists from retroactivity trying to create links of “prophecy” all throughout the OT for shit that wasn’t even remotely related or intended as such.
They’d just have claimed he wasn’t killed for tax evasion, no problems there for the fundies.
Reasonable were this a formal debate, bit sadly it’s not and I really don’t care enough to check. Disbelieve me, believe me, or check for your yourself as you see fit
except that’s not what taxes are - taxes are citizens money going in to a pot to pay for things citizens need.
Also doesn’t sound like something Jesus would say (in the context being portrayed) considering how much he hated the rich and their greed (to be clear, I’m not even christian, but this is well known).
Either way, some rich fuck trying to claim them for themsleves (or whoever added it later to serve the ruler of the time) doesn’t change what taxes are.
I love people so deliberately missing the point… Fuck Jesus and what he did or didn’t say, taxes aren’t for and don’t belong to the ruler of a country/community/whatever, no matter what that ruler tells you, it really isn’t that fucking complicated.
Either you discount things added later, so you discount everything and there is nothing left.
Or you don’t discount things just because they were added later, in which case this quote still stands.
Didn’t Jesus say something along the lines of “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s”? Sounds to me like he was pro taxes.
Matthew 22:20,21: He said to them: “Whose image and inscription is this?” They said: “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them: “Pay back, therefore, Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.”
He probably didn’t want to get crucified for encouraging tax evasion.
You are really crossing a line here with your comment!
At least they arent crossing a man.
Duh, because in the Bible he was crucified for blasphemy so if he ended up crucified for tax evasion the whole story would have fallen apart.
Didn’t stop fundamentalists from retroactivity trying to create links of “prophecy” all throughout the OT for shit that wasn’t even remotely related or intended as such.
They’d just have claimed he wasn’t killed for tax evasion, no problems there for the fundies.
No he didn’t. That line was added at the Council of Nicea a couple of hundred years later
Every line in the Bible about Jesus was added later.
Source?
My A-Level in biblical criticism thirty years ago. Sorry, I don’t have the notes any more. Maybe google can help?
I couldn’t find anything that supports your claim
It’s the obligation of whoever makes a claim to support the claim, not of those who doubt it.
Reasonable were this a formal debate, bit sadly it’s not and I really don’t care enough to check. Disbelieve me, believe me, or check for your yourself as you see fit
except that’s not what taxes are - taxes are citizens money going in to a pot to pay for things citizens need.
Also doesn’t sound like something Jesus would say (in the context being portrayed) considering how much he hated the rich and their greed (to be clear, I’m not even christian, but this is well known).
Either way, some rich fuck trying to claim them for themsleves (or whoever added it later to serve the ruler of the time) doesn’t change what taxes are.
I love people so deliberately missing the point… Fuck Jesus and what he did or didn’t say, taxes aren’t for and don’t belong to the ruler of a country/community/whatever, no matter what that ruler tells you, it really isn’t that fucking complicated.
It is literally something he said, after specifically being asked about paying taxes.
Someone else said this line was a later addition.
And as someone ELSE else pointed out, EVERY Jesus line was a later addition.
If we’re taking that route, we ought to end the discussion right now.
Okeydoke. Have a nice nice day
Just saying, if it’s all made up, there’s no room for discussion, because there’s no truth to discuss
I agree: as far as truth goes, the bible has none to discuss 🤷
What other route even is there?
Either you discount things added later, so you discount everything and there is nothing left. Or you don’t discount things just because they were added later, in which case this quote still stands.
You can go now.
I think you may have gotten the wrong impression. I wasn’t telling you to shut up.
Then maybe choose your words better.