You repeat back facts just told to you, yet still get parts wrong, and then you ask questions that seem to be contending with points that I have already explained.
The Australian numismatic society explains the Post Tyre Tyrian shekel, it's features and consistency of weight and silver purity somewhat better than you.
I think you just look this stuff up and repeat parrot it in posts.
Really? Can you find a single source that I ‘parroted from’ concerning the argument that the Tyrian shekel and half-shekel were in common use because it was expected that these coins would be readily available to anyone living in the area and that if it was
not commonly used currency, it would do the Temple no good to collect it because what would they then use it for? This is a conclusion based on knowledge present in multiple sources. The coins used for the Temple T and for payments made at the Temple were therefore commonly used coins in the region as I said originally. If you have a problem with that, present specific detailed arguments against it. Referring to the Australian numismatic society does not seem to be relevant than anything. What was the point of that except perhaps some kind of diversion from the topic?
The Romans insisted upon their own struck tyrian shekel because it was consistent and they could calculate returns from it. They even took kidney counts of sacrifices for single feasts in order to calculate returns. No doubt there were Roman % returns from the money-changing fees, sacrificial fees, annual fees and other services. The Baptist and Jesus were clearly against the whole money-go-round, the ignored poor-laws, the corruption, greed and hypocrisy of the priesthood and system. Baptism could redeem sinners without the need for any Temple service and the Temple takings must have fallen away quite sharply.
On the contrary, there were many kinds of
official Roman currency but the Tyrian shekel was not one of them. The shekel was minted in Tyre beginning about 300 BC and was popular in the region because of its purity. The Romans shut down the mint so that their ‘official’ currency could be continually debased. See
this about the denarius and
this about debasement in general. According to that second link “Although the denarius remained the backbone of the Roman economy from its introduction in 211 BC until it ceased to be normally minted in the middle of the third century, the purity and weight of the coin slowly, but inexorably, decreased.”
Jesus was obviously not opposed to the payments to the Temple for sacrificial animals since he willingly participated in the Passover rituals, which included buying a sacrificed lamb.
John the Baptist was not in competition with the Temple. Karbanot is sacrifice, which was performed at the Temple.
“The atoning aspect of Karbanot is carefully circumscribed. For the most part,
Karbanot only expiate unintentional sins, that is, sins committed because a person forgot that this thing was a sin. No atonement is needed for violations committed under duress or through lack of knowledge, and for the most part,
Karbanot cannot atone for a malicious, deliberate sin. In addition, Karbanot have no expiating effect unless the person making the offering sincerely repents his or her actions before making the offering, and makes restitution to any person who was harmed by the violation.”
Sacrifices and Offerings (Karbanot)
Atonement for deliberate sin did NOT involve sacrifice at the Temple. Or do you think that every time someone sinned they made a pilgrimage to the Temple in Jerusalem to offer a sacrifice?
So how do you think that the Jewish people felt about Baal all over their Temple then? The priesthood clearly didn't give a hoot.
The coin was already in widespread use. And because of its reputation for purity, it was ideal for Temple use. The pagan references were mandated by the Romans. All in all, it was preferable to the frequently debased Roman currency.
“After the Roman Empire closed down the mint in Tyre, the Roman authorities allowed the Jewish rabbanim to continue minting Tyrian shekels in Israel, but with the requirement that the coins should continue to bear the same image and text to avoid objections that the Jews were given autonomy.”
Tyrian shekel - Wikipedia
We occasionally find staters in England which are pure gold.
Interesting.
“Celtic tribes brought the concept [
staters] to Western and Central Europe after obtaining it while serving as mercenaries in north Greece. Gold staters were minted in Gaul by Gallic chiefs modeled after those of Philip II of Macedonia, which were brought back after serving in his armies, or those of Alexander and his successors. Some of these staters in the form of the Gallo-Belgic series were imported to Britain on a large scale.”
Stater - Wikipedia
Matthew wrote around 80 AD or so. At that time, the Temple Tax was still being collected from Jews by the Romans but it was not going to the no longer existing Temple. Instead it was war reparations. The tribute was not required to be paid only in Tyrian coins, as the Romans were not interested in tradition but value. Anyway, the Tyrian shekel and half-shekel were no longer being minted anywhere and the Temple treasury was raided by the Romans in 66 AD, a significant factor in starting the War.
My interest and studies finish at the disappearance of Jesus, the end of his mission.
The material I presented, including the above quote from me, showed that Matthew wrote well after Jesus went away and addressed concerns of Matthew’s own times.
