Did Jesus have to pay both the "hill tax" as the vintner and the consumption tax as well?
2006-12-26 10:28:06 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The first Bootlegger.
2006-12-26 10:30:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The wine that Jesus made replaced into obviously alcoholic for numerous causes. John 2: 8Then he instructed them, "Now draw some out and take it to the carry close of the ceremonial dinner." They did so, 9and the carry close of the ceremonial dinner tasted the water that were grew to change into into wine. He did not comprehend the position it had come from, although the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside 10and reported, "anybody brings out the alternative wine first and then the more cost-effective wine after the travelers have had too a lot to drink; yet you've kept the superb until eventually now." also, Jesus drank alcoholic wine at different circumstances besides. Luke 7:34 For John the Baptist got here neither eating bread nor ingesting wine, and also you're saying, 'He has a demon.' 34The Son of guy got here eating and ingesting, and also you're saying, 'right that is a glutton and a drunkard, a chum of tax creditors and "sinners." '
2016-12-01 04:57:41 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well..."render unto Caesar what is Caesar's", right? But if, as has been claimed, he only turned water into wine, he would be the vintner and exempt from the "hill tax". The consumption tax, I would imagine that he'd pay, since none of those allegedly present actually asked for the wine.
2006-12-26 10:31:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Noooo, the tax collector taxed you for your total belongings and estate. There were no individual taxes at the time, no Hill Tax, no Consumption Tax, no Value Added Tax, no tax you might care to mention.
There is splitting hairs, and there is being analy retentive.
2006-12-26 10:50:24 · answer #4 · answered by d_f_cornish 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually since all the wine was drunk by the time the collector came around, there was no proof that such wine existed, and therefore no tax was collected. Beyond that, the tax collector assumed the party was drunk on the crappy wine anyway.
2006-12-26 10:30:18 · answer #5 · answered by Khnopff71 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As there were no "wine taxes" in Israel at the time, the question is pointless.
2006-12-26 10:32:15 · answer #6 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they only taxed wine that was shipped, not wine that was consumed domestically.
2006-12-26 10:39:28 · answer #7 · answered by judy_r8 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
HAIR SPLITTER! just be ok with it !
2006-12-26 10:30:12 · answer #8 · answered by Mad Dog Johnson 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋