The Christ Myth Theory

[Swammerdami]

Since I posted a day ago, @dbz has linked to FIVE YouTubes, with essentially ZERO commentary by @dbz . These YouTubes have a total duration of TEN Hours and 31 minutes. That's right; No, I did not watch any of this latest batch but I clicked on each just to see the duration.

TEN Hours and 31 minutes. No exaggeration. That's 10 hours with a T,E,N, H,O,U,R and an S.

I doubt that dbz has watched all ten hours. Yesterday i actually watched an entire dbz-posted YouTube!! [Swammi stands up and takes a bow]. dbz apparently thought that video would support his claims that

• Jesus Christ ("the Anointed") and Jesus Chrest ("the Good"?) were two different people. This is a key tenet of Carrierism I guess, one of several ridiculous assumptions without which the whole anti-History house of cards comes tumbling down.
• Marcion's bible was written BEFORE Luke and perhaps even before Paul, becoming the basis for those writings.
• Jesus Christ was not an historic person.

But in fact John Romer points out that

• Although there were distinct Christian cults, they all worshiped the same Jesus. (This showed up at the very timestamp that dbz thought surpported Carrierist dogma! Romer never once mentions the alternate spelling.
• Marcion copied existing texts of Luke and Paul, texts already a century-old or so in Marcion's time.
• [at 19:40] "Jesus was a real historic figure."

Has the anti-history cult devolved into self-parody?

 

[ideologyhunter]

Since I posted a day ago, @dbz has linked to FIVE YouTubes, with essentially ZERO commentary by @dbz . These YouTubes have a total duration of TEN Hours and 31 minutes. That's right; No, I did not watch any of this latest batch but I clicked on each just to see the duration.

TEN Hours and 31 minutes. No exaggeration. That's 10 hours with a T,E,N, H,O,U,R and an S.

Ha Ha!! Good for you. This thread has become a major Thread to Be Avoided for me. Every time I think there might be an interesting twist, the post turns out to be, "Here is my library! This is where I learned what I know! Read it, read it all, and you too will..." etc, etc. It could be my undergrad journalism classes, or my admiration for Maltin's Movie Guide, but I have zero patience for those who cannot summarize with concision. (Even worse: the believers who state that they will not discuss NT issues with anyone who hasn't mastered Greek.)

 

[dbz]

"Harvard Philologist Says "No Historical Jesus"". YouTube. Aug 3, 2022.

Gnostic Informant

Touchdown for the Mythicists !

Well I'll be. A well credential classicist/philologist professor has said he is a Mythicist, with a fresh approach.
His argument is simple: Christianity is a Hellenistic religion, not a Jewish one. It has borrowed from Judaism for exotic ethnicity.

Posted by u/AractusP, 4 August 2022: Classicist Carl AP Ruck: “I'm a Mythicist” r/AcademicBiblical

And another Touchdown for the Mythicists !

Christ’s descent through the cosmos will be concealed from the mostly benevolent angelic powers of the higher heavens, evidently because otherwise his identity could not be kept a secret from the evil powers below them. But once Christ reaches the lowest or sublunary region – called the “Firmament” – his disguise will change again, and this time he will assume the outward appearance of a human. [...] In any event, the interpolation looks like a later attempt to historicize what had once been a cosmic version of the crucifxion, one in which the archontic powers of the lower world crucifed Christ “in the Firmament,” not “in Jerusalem.”

---

--Arthur Droge (2023). "Whodunnit? Paul's Peculiar Passion and Its Implications". In Zeichmann, Christopher B.; Egger, John A. (eds.). Recovering an Undomesticated Apostle: Essays on the Legacy of Paul. McGill-Queen's Press pp. 305–333.

 

[Jarhyn]

It is possible Jesus was invented from whole cloth

It is possible, but it is entirely *plausible* that Jesus was a real autistic human child of an affair out of wedlock (an event that was traditionally punished by executing the mother) who was fairly intelligent but used language in ways more consistent with my usage or Spinoza's usage of terms than the average person's.

It's entirely possible, I grant, for it to be fiction entirely... but it seems rather pointless in the face of real people who have lived such experiences and think such thoughts for reasons beyond mere belief.

I don't claim to believe in the sort of resurrection that Christians do.

I do believe in resurrection through any number of strange processes to include incorporating and repeating someone's life story such that you come to think as they do about things, but also direct digital reproduction as well. I don't think Jesus would have had the basis to theorize digital resurrection, but archetype-memetic resurrection is totally a thing that someone could start to grok even 2000 years ago, and relates heavily to a concept that could easily be misunderstood into "the Trinity", or even Buddhist concepts of reincarnation (and not just by the listener, but by the 'teacher').

I find the idea of archetype-memetic resurrection far more interesting than whether or not the subject of a recorded at understanding archetype-memetic resurrection/reincarnation/reproduction ever actually existed.

Really, the part that most atheists understand least about Christianity is the biggest piece of evidence for "Jesus" actually existing, right along with the emphasis of the "God claim" at his trial, because it established a new philosophical thought, and if it was a pre-existing model, you would expect it to have relations to some other philosophy of the times. It doesn't. It's just this free-floating belief in the region about something so confusing and weird most people either misunderstood it or threw it away.

If there were some longer or deeper pedigree to the doctrine of the Trinity, linked to an older or more "sensible" interpretation "corrupted" or "adopted and improved" by the Christian religion?

 

[dbz]

I do believe in resurrection through any number of strange processes to include incorporating and repeating someone's life story such that you come to think as they do about things, but also direct digital reproduction as well.
[...]
I find the idea of archetype-memetic resurrection far more interesting than whether or not the subject of a recorded at understanding archetype-memetic resurrection/reincarnation/reproduction ever actually existed.

• "Awe, a presence that surrounds us from beginning to end"

I am more awed by an infinite number of universes/digital-VRs spawning randomly, one of which became our universe than Dying & Ἀνάστασις

---

"The Philosophy of The Fountain – Escaping Our Mental Prisons". YouTube. @LikeStoriesofOld. 28 November 2018.

 

[Jarhyn]

I do believe in resurrection through any number of strange processes to include incorporating and repeating someone's life story such that you come to think as they do about things, but also direct digital reproduction as well.
[...]
I find the idea of archetype-memetic resurrection far more interesting than whether or not the subject of a recorded at understanding archetype-memetic resurrection/reincarnation/reproduction ever actually existed.

• "Awe, a presence that surrounds us from beginning to end"

I am more awed by an infinite number of universes/digital-VRs spawning randomly, one of which became our universe than Dying & Ἀνάστασις

View attachment 49484

---

"The Philosophy of The Fountain – Escaping Our Mental Prisons". YouTube. @LikeStoriesofOld. 28 November 2018.

Eh, you miss my point that *someone* had to have spawned that thought, likely someone autistic. It was apparently never understood or explained well since then, because it was interpreted or formed as a hypothetical model of how "God" precipitates into the world (which is rather mangled, TBH).

My point is very much that this philosophy of archetype-memetic rebirth is a "new" thing, and if correct, informative of deeper beliefs about what being "born again" really meant and what was being "born" in the event.

 

[dbz]

...how "God" precipitates into the world...

• In the Middle-Platonism of Paul—"God" precipitates via "The Great Chain of Being".

---

 

[No Robots]

If there were some longer or deeper pedigree to the doctrine of the Trinity, linked to an older or more "sensible" interpretation "corrupted" or "adopted and improved" by the Christian religion?

As you wish:

What is the Trinity? This is a profound idea perceived by Moses, the Prophets and the great Jewish thinkers. But because the Christians distorted this idea, the Jews rejected it. The Jews rejected this idea, not realizing that they rejected an idea which is of infinite significance. The Trinity is the idea that man and God are one; for God created man in His own essence and nature, and man is destined to become one with God. The Zohar tells us: The Holy One, blessed is He, the Torah and Israel is One. And this idea is expressed by the famous statement in the Torah: Hear Israel, Jehovah our God Jehovah is One. The second Jehovah is the man whose soul attained to the intellect. Moses said to the Jews: You are the sons of Jehovah your God (Deuteronomy: 14, 1). And Isaiah said: Every one that is called by My name, and whom I have created for My glory, I have formed him, yea, I have perfected him. (Isaiah: 43, 7). Moses said that the Jews are the sons of Jehovah; but Isaiah went further, he said that every one, Jew or Gentile, who has attained to the intellect and identifies himself with Jehovah, he is a son of Jehovah. Jehovah comprehends Elohim; Jehovah is both Father and Mother; and the man who attained to the intellect is the son. This is the trinity, and mankind are destined to attain to this trinity, to become identified with Jehovah who comprehends Elohim. Thus Father, Mother and Son become one.--Harry Waton, A True Monistic Philosophy, p. 423

 

[WAB]

Since I posted a day ago, @dbz has linked to FIVE YouTubes, with essentially ZERO commentary by @dbz . These YouTubes have a total duration of TEN Hours and 31 minutes. That's right; No, I did not watch any of this latest batch but I clicked on each just to see the duration.

TEN Hours and 31 minutes. No exaggeration. That's 10 hours with a T,E,N, H,O,U,R and an S.

I doubt that dbz has watched all ten hours. Yesterday i actually watched an entire dbz-posted YouTube!! [Swammi stands up and takes a bow]. dbz apparently thought that video would support his claims that

• Jesus Christ ("the Anointed") and Jesus Chrest ("the Good"?) were two different people. This is a key tenet of Carrierism I guess, one of several ridiculous assumptions without which the whole anti-History house of cards comes tumbling down.
• Marcion's bible was written BEFORE Luke and perhaps even before Paul, becoming the basis for those writings.
• Jesus Christ was not an historic person.

But in fact John Romer points out that

• Although there were distinct Christian cults, they all worshiped the same Jesus. (This showed up at the very timestamp that dbz thought surpported Carrierist dogma! Romer never once mentions the alternate spelling.
• Marcion copied existing texts of Luke and Paul, texts already a century-old or so in Marcion's time.
• [at 19:40] "Jesus was a real historic figure."

Has the anti-history cult devolved into self-parody?

Yeah, I actually can't believe this thread. There is no effort to engage in argument from the main poster??

 

[dbz]

If there were some longer or deeper pedigree to the doctrine of the Trinity...

As you wish:

What is the Trinity? [...].--Harry Waton, A True Monistic Philosophy, p. 423

[57:05] Going into what some of the councils were doing. The earliest councils at Nicaea and First Council of Constantinople.

Something that was just a little seed in the dissertation—but really came to fruition—is (I don't actually think they're wrong at or imposing something foreign) with this idea called the

• Economic Trinity—that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are coordinated in their workings in all things

Because when I read what John does with prophecy. That the Father speaks the word and the word is utterly incomprehensible apart from the Spirit.

John's model of Prophecy gets you the First Council of Constantinople. It gets you that christology or that theology—that Trinitarianism

I think John would say, Yeah you got it that's what I was going for. Some folks will call that anachronistic and in a sense it is in that later interpreters were asking questions the gospel writers weren't always asking but actually think

John is making an attempt to sort out how the Father, the Son and the Spirit are interrelated and at least when it comes to how prophecy functions for the early church.

• What they did 300 years later at Constantinople.

I think John if he could look forward in time would say you got it A+

---

--"Ep 181: How the Gospel Writers Copied Each Other with James Barker". YouTube. @ProLibertyPod. 10 February 2025.

 

[steve_bank]

I'd nave to check, I believe the Trinity was part of the Nicaea conference that resolved conflicting theologies into one Christian dogma.

In RCC schools I was taught the Trinity is a mystery.

'God' is three things. gGd the father, god the son Jesus, and the holy spirit. Making the sign of the cross one says 'In the name of the father, the son, and the holy ghost'.

A priest sayss it when making a blessing.

Christianity as Christians take to be 'the gospel truth' is mostly or all a fabrication.

 

[dbz]

If there were some longer or deeper pedigree to the doctrine of the Trinity, linked to an older or more "sensible" interpretation "corrupted" or "adopted and improved" by the Christian religion?

As you wish:

What is the Trinity?

The Trinity is a profound idea perceived by Moses, the Prophets and the great Jewish thinkers. But because the Christians distorted this idea, the Jews rejected it. The Jews rejected this idea, not realizing that they rejected an idea which is of infinite significance. The Trinity is the idea that man and God are one; for God created man in His own essence and nature, and man is destined to become one with God. The Zohar tells us: The Holy One, blessed is He, the Torah and Israel is One. And this idea is expressed by the famous statement in the Torah: Hear Israel, Jehovah our God Jehovah is One. The second Jehovah is the man whose soul attained to the intellect. Moses said to the Jews: You are the sons of Jehovah your God (Deuteronomy: 14, 1). And Isaiah said: Every one that is called by My name, and whom I have created for My glory, I have formed him, yea, I have perfected him. (Isaiah: 43, 7). Moses said that the Jews are the sons of Jehovah; but Isaiah went further, he said that every one, Jew or Gentile, who has attained to the intellect and identifies himself with Jehovah, he is a son of Jehovah. Jehovah comprehends Elohim; Jehovah is both Father and Mother; and the man who attained to the intellect is the son. This is the trinity, and mankind are destined to attain to this trinity, to become identified with Jehovah who comprehends Elohim. Thus Father, Mother and Son become one.

--Harry Waton, A True Monistic Philosophy, p. 423

The Jewish Trinity Interpretation of Harry Waton Created with Gemini February 21, 2025

---

This interpretation of the Trinity, drawing from Jewish mystical texts and biblical passages, presents a unique perspective that diverges significantly from traditional Christian Trinitarian doctrine. Here's a breakdown of the key points and considerations:

Key Points of the Interpretation:

• The Trinity as Unity of God and Man: The core idea is that the Trinity represents the potential for human beings to achieve oneness with God, rather than three distinct persons within the Godhead.
• Jewish Mystical Influence: The interpretation relies heavily on Kabbalistic concepts, particularly from the Zohar, emphasizing the unity of God, Torah, and Israel.
• "Jehovah Our God, Jehovah is One": The Shema is interpreted as referring to two aspects of Jehovah: God and the human being who has attained spiritual perfection.
• Humanity as Sons of God: Passages from Deuteronomy and Isaiah are used to support the idea that humans, through spiritual attainment, can become "sons of Jehovah."
• Jehovah as Father and Mother (Elohim): The concept of Jehovah encompassing Elohim suggests a divine androgyny, adding a feminine aspect to the divine.
• The Son as the Attained Human: The "son" in this Trinity is the human being who has achieved union with God through intellectual and spiritual development.
• Universal Potential: Isaiah's inclusion of "every one" suggests this potential for oneness with God is not limited to Jews but is universal.

Points of Divergence from Traditional Christian Doctrine:

• Personhood of the Trinity: Traditional Christianity posits the Trinity as three distinct persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) who are co-equal and co-eternal. This interpretation emphasizes a unity of essence between God and humanity, rather than distinct persons.
• Jesus's Role: In traditional Christianity, Jesus Christ is the unique Son of God, the second person of the Trinity. This interpretation does not explicitly address Jesus's role or uniqueness, instead focusing on the potential for all humans to achieve a similar state.
• Holy Spirit: The Holy Spirit is not mentioned in this explanation.
• Nature of God: While this interpretation acknowledges the mystery of God, it presents a more fluid and encompassing view of God's nature, incorporating both masculine and feminine aspects.

Considerations and Criticisms:

• Interpretation of Biblical Texts: The interpretation of biblical passages, particularly the Shema, is highly specific and may not align with mainstream Jewish or Christian interpretations.
• Kabbalistic Interpretation: The reliance on Kabbalistic texts may be seen as esoteric and not representative of mainstream Jewish thought.
• Potential for Pantheism: The idea of human oneness with God could be interpreted as pantheistic, blurring the distinction between Creator and creation.
• Christian Rejection: While the text claims that jews rejected the trinity because of Christian distortion, there are many theological reasons that Judaism and Christianity have different views of God.

In Conclusion:
This interpretation of the Trinity offers a fascinating and unique perspective, drawing from Jewish mystical traditions and biblical texts. It highlights the potential for human spiritual development and union with God. However, it's crucial to recognize that this interpretation diverges significantly from traditional Christian Trinitarian doctrine and may be subject to various theological criticisms.

 

[Jarhyn]

If there were some longer or deeper pedigree to the doctrine of the Trinity, linked to an older or more "sensible" interpretation "corrupted" or "adopted and improved" by the Christian religion?

As you wish:

What is the Trinity?

The Trinity is a profound idea perceived by Moses, the Prophets and the great Jewish thinkers. But because the Christians distorted this idea, the Jews rejected it. The Jews rejected this idea, not realizing that they rejected an idea which is of infinite significance. The Trinity is the idea that man and God are one; for God created man in His own essence and nature, and man is destined to become one with God. The Zohar tells us: The Holy One, blessed is He, the Torah and Israel is One. And this idea is expressed by the famous statement in the Torah: Hear Israel, Jehovah our God Jehovah is One. The second Jehovah is the man whose soul attained to the intellect. Moses said to the Jews: You are the sons of Jehovah your God (Deuteronomy: 14, 1). And Isaiah said: Every one that is called by My name, and whom I have created for My glory, I have formed him, yea, I have perfected him. (Isaiah: 43, 7). Moses said that the Jews are the sons of Jehovah; but Isaiah went further, he said that every one, Jew or Gentile, who has attained to the intellect and identifies himself with Jehovah, he is a son of Jehovah. Jehovah comprehends Elohim; Jehovah is both Father and Mother; and the man who attained to the intellect is the son. This is the trinity, and mankind are destined to attain to this trinity, to become identified with Jehovah who comprehends Elohim. Thus Father, Mother and Son become one.

--Harry Waton, A True Monistic Philosophy, p. 423

The Jewish Trinity Interpretation of Harry Waton Created with Gemini February 21, 2025

---

This interpretation of the Trinity, drawing from Jewish mystical texts and biblical passages, presents a unique perspective that diverges significantly from traditional Christian Trinitarian doctrine. Here's a breakdown of the key points and considerations:

Key Points of the Interpretation:

• The Trinity as Unity of God and Man: The core idea is that the Trinity represents the potential for human beings to achieve oneness with God, rather than three distinct persons within the Godhead.
• Jewish Mystical Influence: The interpretation relies heavily on Kabbalistic concepts, particularly from the Zohar, emphasizing the unity of God, Torah, and Israel.
• "Jehovah Our God, Jehovah is One": The Shema is interpreted as referring to two aspects of Jehovah: God and the human being who has attained spiritual perfection.
• Humanity as Sons of God: Passages from Deuteronomy and Isaiah are used to support the idea that humans, through spiritual attainment, can become "sons of Jehovah."
• Jehovah as Father and Mother (Elohim): The concept of Jehovah encompassing Elohim suggests a divine androgyny, adding a feminine aspect to the divine.
• The Son as the Attained Human: The "son" in this Trinity is the human being who has achieved union with God through intellectual and spiritual development.
• Universal Potential: Isaiah's inclusion of "every one" suggests this potential for oneness with God is not limited to Jews but is universal.

Points of Divergence from Traditional Christian Doctrine:

• Personhood of the Trinity: Traditional Christianity posits the Trinity as three distinct persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) who are co-equal and co-eternal. This interpretation emphasizes a unity of essence between God and humanity, rather than distinct persons.
• Jesus's Role: In traditional Christianity, Jesus Christ is the unique Son of God, the second person of the Trinity. This interpretation does not explicitly address Jesus's role or uniqueness, instead focusing on the potential for all humans to achieve a similar state.
• Holy Spirit: The Holy Spirit is not mentioned in this explanation.
• Nature of God: While this interpretation acknowledges the mystery of God, it presents a more fluid and encompassing view of God's nature, incorporating both masculine and feminine aspects.

Considerations and Criticisms:

• Interpretation of Biblical Texts: The interpretation of biblical passages, particularly the Shema, is highly specific and may not align with mainstream Jewish or Christian interpretations.
• Kabbalistic Interpretation: The reliance on Kabbalistic texts may be seen as esoteric and not representative of mainstream Jewish thought.
• Potential for Pantheism: The idea of human oneness with God could be interpreted as pantheistic, blurring the distinction between Creator and creation.
• Christian Rejection: While the text claims that jews rejected the trinity because of Christian distortion, there are many theological reasons that Judaism and Christianity have different views of God.

In Conclusion:
This interpretation of the Trinity offers a fascinating and unique perspective, drawing from Jewish mystical traditions and biblical texts. It highlights the potential for human spiritual development and union with God. However, it's crucial to recognize that this interpretation diverges significantly from traditional Christian Trinitarian doctrine and may be subject to various theological criticisms.

What is even the point of putting someone on ignore if other people ping you onto their crazy shit anyway?

In short, it's a clear point mutation.

The important aspect is the momentary point mutation of something that is only vaguely "proto-trinity" into a more clear concept of memetic emergence, and this happened right around the period Jesus would have been walking the earth.

I wonder though whether the one surviving JtB cult has a similar doctrine? If so, it would indicate more an amalgamation or plagiarism.

 

[dbz]

What is even the point of putting someone on ignore if other people ping you onto their crazy shit anyway?

• 

In short, it's a clear point mutation.

The important aspect is the momentary point mutation of something that is only vaguely "proto-trinity" into a more clear concept of memetic emergence...

• Jewish dead body + Gnostic mystery cult "proto-trinity" = memetic emergence.

 

[No Robots]

What is even the point of putting someone on ignore if other people ping you onto their crazy shit anyway?

I guess the local wizard has changed his opinion since begging me to participate in his Trump thread.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I'd nave to check, I believe the Trinity was part of the Nicaea conference that resolved conflicting theologies into one Christian dogma.

In RCC schools I was taught the Trinity is a mystery.

'God' is three things. gGd the father, god the son Jesus, and the holy spirit. Making the sign of the cross one says 'In the name of the father, the son, and the holy ghost'.

A priest sayss it when making a blessing.

Christianity as Christians take to be 'the gospel truth' is mostly or all a fabrication.

Given the declining numbers of Christians in the West, isn't it time for a reboot, to renew interest in the brand? I say, let the churches that claim to have ongoing revelation discover a fourth part to the Godhead (or Holy Quadripartite.) It's pretty clear who the Catholics would install, but the pizzazz factor of a 2000-year-old virgin...nah. Just maybe they could be persuaded to elevate one of their popes to take the fourth part. Pope Linus could be the Holy Youngster, with a security blanket and deep philosophic statements. Or...cats. There were five popes named Felix. I can see a Divine Feline, on the order of the Cheshire Cat, vanishing and reappearing at will, imprinting the sky with its mysterious smile.
LDS and JWs also have continuing revelation, and might come up with something spicier. If three = one makes sense, why not four = one?

 

[TomC]

What is even the point of putting someone on ignore if other people ping you onto their crazy shit anyway?

What's the point to logging in to a discussion forum if discussion upsets you?
Tom

 

[Jarhyn]

What is even the point of putting someone on ignore if other people ping you onto their crazy shit anyway?

What's the point to logging in to a discussion forum if discussion upsets you?
Tom

Let's imagine I find myself at the intersection of 5th and Nicolette, walking with someone.

As we walk down the street discussing memetics, one of the street preachers talking about gnosticism wanders over and starts loudly talking about Kabbalah.

The point, I suppose, is to talk about it with my friend without engaging in the distraction of the loud street preaching directed at us.

I want to discuss it with DBZ, and not No Robots, because DBZ has at least used fairly academic sources for their claims, and is more concerned with history (even though excessively skeptical) than an ideological viewpoint.

 

[TomC]

Let's imagine I find myself at the intersection of 5th and Nicolette, walking with someone.

Lemme know when you grow up enough to log in to a global discussion forum without complaining about people saying things that you prefer not to know about.

I won't hold my breath.

Honestly, you strike me as the problem with modern Western society. You can't take hearing opinions that you don't like, so you want to make the Internet into an ideological bubble. You are not very different from the Maga people. You have your information bubble and they have theirs.
Tom

 

[dbz]

~~~

You can't take hearing opinions that you don't like, so you want to make the Internet into an ideological bubble. You are not very different from the Maga people. You have your information bubble and they have theirs.

• TalkingHead opines that "Elon Musk took over Twitter and that actually turned it into a free speech platform."

---