Thats the point, isn’t it? Except the templars did not abuse the people. They we

Thats the point, isn’t it? Except the templars did not abuse the people. They were destroyed by the monarchy over debts, not the people over abuses. (slaving being principal among them.) The jews were prohibited property precisely to prevent them from using their 300% interest to entrap farmers who were subject to climatological randomness. They sold alcohol and prostitution on credit. and of course engaged in usury (hazarding) not credit (shared risk).
Whats unique is their separatism and nepotism in organizing against host populations as their group strategy. But amplified by the training in writing accounting and credit they received from the egyptians precisely because they were regional outcasts: so that they would have greater fealty to egypt than loyalty to other regional tribes.
Macdonald and I came to similar conclusions by different means. He from modernity backward using academic record, and me from antiquity forward by linguistic analysis and the record in the law.
The difference IMO is in my study of their abrahamic institutionalizing of the female means of lying. An unpleasantry that is the first substantive explanatory science of lying.