Sorry but again you are historically incorrect as the follower of Joshua of Nazareth (Jesus Christ) revolted against those Jews who for the sole purpose of enriching themselves abandoned the Jewish laws of the Bible, adopted many Hellenistic / Roman Empire faiths and engaged in what is now defined as swindle, bank fraud, embezzlement, extortion counterfeiting of currency or usury and appointed corrupted Judges and High Priests to serve their own interests.
(could you warrant that this is not happenign also today? during a period of election in the US? and there are no subtle or outright similarities to the process practiced then?)
The occupying Romans or Greeks before them, where mostly interested in the collection of taxes and not in the Jewish internal affairs, like observation of the biblical laws or nomination of high priests and judges. It is only naturally to presume that the occupying power Romans or Greeks did care to certain extent to who is nominated and for what appointment, and his background similar to today nomination let’s say to the US High Supreme Court but cared less as long as the nominees did not oppose paying the requested taxes to the occupying Empire or induced any concepts of "national independence" or revolt.
After celebrating the first day of Passover and the festive supper with his disciples, Joshua of Nazareth (Jesus Christ) send his trusted disciple Yehuda (and not Mary Magdalene who was too close to him) to the temple to bribe the guards there, and to come and take him to the High Priest on this day of high religeous observance at a time that the priesthood of the temple collected most of their funding (pf course via the bankers of the time), and enable him to complain about the lack of observance of the Jewish laws by the then notoriety and rich business people including the high priests and the famous money changers or bankers of the time.
When asked who he was that he had the “hutzpah” to criticizes the Jewish elite and the fulfillment of their duties of the high priest and judges of the time, Joshua of Nazareth in a show of force answered “I am the son of GOD” and this sealed his fate.
The Jewish Sanhedrin or high court of the time realized they are dealing with an unwavering person who on his insistence of following the Jewish law will only bring harm to the then notoriety and rich business people including the famous money changers or bankers of the time decided that the problem is to complex and a “hot potato” that may bring reprisals from the Romans and delivered him to the Roman authorities as an outcast disconnecting themselves from his true interpretation of the laws written in the Jewish bible which run counter to the practices and laws of the Roman Empire, most importantly to the issue of ALL people are born equal, a slave is a human and not an assets and NOT a slave for life, charging usury is not permitted and punishable and it is against the law to totally destroy one’s life because he owns you money.
The Romans as they usually did, on each Jewish Holiday, to instill fear and prove who the MASTER is and to suppress any thinking of revolt, where crucifying at random "unwanted people" or so called "trouble makers". It so happen that in this specific case the followers did not budge and continued to spread the teaching and interpretation of the biblical laws and at the end succeded, as many other similar movements sprung within the Jewish population at the time. (Jewish Prophets preachings are well known).
Please read the verses mentioned below and realize that WS today as the bankers of that time are totally ignoring the basic 10 Biblical Commandments and the other Jewish laws within the Bible, such as Exodus 22:25–27, or Leviticus 25:36–37 or Deuteronomy 23:20–21 or Ezekiel 18:13, 18:17 or the Mishnah writings forbidding moral usury.
Ezekiel 18:13, 18:17 is the most powerful and correct expression and it is a pitty that no laws similar to those expressed in those verses are enforeceble today.
What seems to be misunderstood is the fact that today financial institutions and/or WS Banks act, in an eerie and very similar way to the money changers that set bench (bank) in the front of the Holy Jewish Temple and between others gave rise to the revolts.
Well freedom is a very relative state of mind, as I wonder what will be the fate today of "Joe Doe" if he will hamper the functioning of the world capital markets, critiques the way the US Supreme Court is run and publicly blemish the administration and other government institutions for not observing the laws and of being utterly corrupt and working to the disadvantage of the electorate for the sole benefit of the Upper Class or the "ONE PERCENT".
Please no need to answer! |
