Could the law abiding Jesus or his disciples have used a coin depicting Caesar?

by EdenOne 14 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  EdenOne

  So, I was just viewing an interview with Professor Yonathan Adler regarding the origins of judaism as an everyday practice of the masses. He makes a very convincing argument that the jews only became Torah observants in a generalized way around the beginning of the Hasmonean dynasty, between the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC. You can watch the interview here:

  https://youtu.be/5U1TN-i0x7g

  One thing that he said that stood out for me was this: Around Jesus' days, the authorities, out of respect for the jews' sensibilities, didn't mint coins in Judea depicting humans or animals or gods. Archaeology confirms this.

  Now, in Mark, Matthew and Luke, Jesus answers a trap question from his adversaries regarding tax payment to the roman authority by asking one of his disciples for a coin, which is referred to as a "denarius" and points to the face on that coin, asking who is it of? "Caesar", everyone replies.

  The accounts of the Roman tax episode in the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke differ in regard to the identity of the people who were questioning Jesus. In Matthew’s gospel it is the Pharisees who sent their disciples with the Herodians. In Mark’s gospel it is the chief priests, the scribes and the elders who sent the Pharisees and Herodians. In Luke’s gospel it is the scribes and the chief priests who sent spies.

  In any case, such coins wouldn't be commonly circulating in Judea because any jew would become ritually impure just by touching that object! How, then, could:

  a) Jesus' disciples, being Torah observants, have such a coin?

  b) How could the Torah observant Jesus hold and show an idolatrous coin just to make a point this becoming ritually impure by it?

  What are your thoughts?
• 

  peacefulpete

  I think Prof. Adler is stating what has been known for some time. Whenever weighing the historical usefulness of ancient writings, it's necessary to recall that winners wrote it. What we can be pretty sure of is the primary history of the Jewish faith was a 're-creation' of the deep past using ancient diverse traditions mixed with religious idealism of the 6th century BCE then further revised and reinterpreted during the Hasmonean period. Later Rabbis developed the concept of a mythic Great Assembly, (led by the last of the prophets), that defined and even rewrote the OT (Tanakh) during those years to, IMO, give authority to these revisions recognized by careful readers.

  The 'winners' that eventually defined Judaism after 70/135 spawned from the Pharisee sect, and with them came the Tanakh and Torah. Most of the other Jews becoming absorbed into them or other sects such as the diverse forms of Christianity that disavowed the Torah. Those were largely the choices.

  His comments about the coins must be regarded as another evidence the Gospel narrative dates to post 70.
  
• 

  KalebOutWest

  Because many of us grew up as Jehovah’s Witnesses or have been so influenced by the Watchtower religion, we have taken for granted what we learned from them about Judaism.

  Of Jewish stock, raised for 10 years as a Witness, but not a Reconstructionist, I got a Jewish and secular education after leaving the group. In reality, the Jewish monotheistic religion as we Jews recognize it today didn’t begin until after the exile in Babylon. It was that event that shook my ancestors into believing that their national deity had abandoned them because they refused to give up polytheism. Because patriotism was religion and vice versa in those days, the Jewish exiles decided to become more "patriotic" by pledging themselves to the God of their Ancestors while away from their homeland in the hopes that they would be restored to where they once were.

  While in the midst of Babylon, the priesthood of Judah began devising what is called a liturgical system based on the Levant seasonal festivals of the Fertile Crescent region and applied the events of the Deuteronomy Code to (apparently Deuteronomy was all there was to the Torah at that time). The synagogue system was devised within Babylon, and the writing of the Talmud and the Scriptures began pretty much simultaneously with neither one being considered greater than the other (there was no such thing as a “canon,” as that would be a Catholic invention of the 2nd century CE).

  Actual Torah religion started once the Second Temple era began, with Nehemia and Ezra and the writing/redaction of the rest of the Torah as we know it today in Babylon and beyond. Prior to the Hellenistic invasion into Jerusalem that began the events leading to the Maccabean revolt, we finally see Judaism more or less developed as we see today. But it was never settled. It would always remain fluid and pluralistic.

  The Use of a Denarius

  There are no Jewish laws that prohibit the handling of coins with images of any kind on them. While the Jews themselves did not like the Romans, and even recorded how much they hated handing over their money to them, they paid and did not have any prohibitions over handling money of any type. (m. Sanhedrin 3.3; b. Sanhedrin 25b) The Gospels even show that there were “money changers” or Jews who inside the Temple regularly exchanged Roman coins for Jewish coins.--Matthew 21.12-13.

  The famous interchange with Jesus at Matthew 22.15-22 was thus very possible because there was nothing uncommon for Jews of the time to handle money of this type, unless it was on a Sabbath.
• 

  peacefulpete

  The issue regarding coins was the presence of the image of Ceasar. This had to have been Vespasian or later. Prior to then, according to Adler, the Roman Idumean coinage was without the image of Ceasar in deference to the Jews. Interestingly the Vespasian coinage commemorating the Roman assault of 70 (now with Ceasar's image) was minted by the Jews themselves by the last of the Herodian kings Agrippa II.
• 

  KalebOutWest

  I understand that this is a popular belief in its own right.

  But these claims are from Christians or people who come from Christian backgrounds. Here is an example of website of someone who is using a similar argument:

  https://the-ans.com/library/2012PeterLewis.html

  These views don't come from Jewish law, however, nor is there any evidence of this in Jewish history or claims in mainstream academia. As I mentioned, in the Talmud it mentions clearly what actually happened during those oppressive years. That is why I gave you the historical references above. (m. Sanhedrin 3.3; b. Sanhedrin 25b) The famous Jewish Annotated New Testament (edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler) not only uses similar references but doesn’t mention your coin view--which it would have since it offers a Jewish critical view on the New Testament.

  There would be something in halakhah (Jewish Oral Law) in the Talmud mentioning this that would be quite easy to locate, especially today since it has been digitized and Jews have it at their fingertips. (As a Reconstructionist, I don’t believe in the observance of the Oral Law as the Orthodox, nor do most other Jews outside of Orthodoxy.)

  But in the end, this is basically an argument I gather for Christians or ex-Christians. I was only offering a view from someone who knows and has studied Jewish history and Jewish law.

  Whatever your conclusions, I only thought you might find it helpful to hear from someone who would know what laws, from the Torah and Oral Law there were.

  Carry on. I was just trying to aid, not argue against. Just forget I said anything at this point.
• 

  peacefulpete

  We seem to be talking past each other. The only point I was making was the presence of a Ceasar on the coin in the Jesus story dates the story after 70. Or by someone unfamiliar with the Idumean coinage. Especially the way it is written with the assumption of the image on the coin.

  I was not commenting on the question of whether Jews would have handled such a coin. My last post shows that at least post 70, when Idumean coins had Ceasar on them, they were in use, even minted by them. Maybe this reflects a compromise of necessity?
  
• 

  EdenOne

  Kaleboutwest your insight on judaism is most welcome.

  peacefulpete: "Especially the way it is written with the assumption of the image on the coin."

  This is where I was getting at. The story is told by Mark, and then mirrored by Matthew and Luke, but "Mark" has no idea that it would be very unlikely that around 30 CE there were coins in daily circulation in Judea with the effigy of Caesar. "Mark" seems to be ignorant that the carrier of such coin would become ceremonially impure. Jesus may well have taught "give Caesar what belongs to Caesar" [pay your taxes to the Roman authority ] but "Mark" is just making up the use of a denarius to illustrate that point, probably because "Mark" (whoever was the author of that gospel) probably never set foot in Judea.
  "Mark" probably wrote at least 4 decades after the fact, with third or fourth hand knowledge, to a roman audience, in Rome.
• 

  neat blue dog

  So many of "The Experts" have made fools of themselves trying to disprove the historicity of Biblical details, and going for this minutiae is really reaching. Not original, and not impressed.
• 

  enoughisenough

  let God be found true though every man a liar....I choose to believe the Bible and therefore didn't read through or watch anything to the contrary.--it would be a waste of my time as once again I choose to believe the Bible.
• 

  neat blue dog

  Agree with enoughisenough except for the part about not reading anything to the contrary. Facts hold up if they're facts regardless of the source.