Christianity Appropriating Jewish Religion

[mymistake]

So it's Easter.  The first Sunday following the first full moon following the spring equinox.  Really weird how Easter floats around based on the Sun, the Moon and Earth's orbit unless you account for the way Christians wanted to take over Jewish legitimacy.  Christianity was a brand new religion.  Judaism was several centuries old (it had formed in that incarnation during the Babylonian captivity) so it was perceived as true and legitimate.   That was something a new religion desperately needed.

 

A careful reading of the four accepted Christian gospels will note that, of the four, Mark is the most simple and crude.  Luke and Matthew clearly build on Mark but John is far more sophisticated and developed.  John introduced all kinds of theology that were lacking in the other 3 books.  In John we find that Jesus is suddenly the atonement sacrifice pulled from the Jewish religion.  John ties the death of Jesus to the Jewish Passover celebration.  Because the Jewish celebration was based on the first full moon after the spring equinox the Christians took this for their own calculations for Easter.  John even calls Jesus the "Lamb of God" as an appropriation of the Jewish Passover lamb. 

 

John gives the death of Jesus all new meaning.  Mark left Jesus' death as a tragedy since Jesus didn't even rise in the oldest manuscripts.  Luke and Mathew add the resurrection that silly Mark "forgot".   So by the time Christians were revising Mark's gospel the resurrection had been added to turn the story into a victory but the theology had not developed enough to go anywhere with the concept.  In John the death becomes part of God's master plan to save the entire world from sin.  Along the way Christians were taking over the Passover holiday from the (now officially a cult) Jewish religion.  Instead of celebrating on Wednesday we are celebrating on Sunday and instead of calling it Passover it's now called "Easter" just like the pagan idol Easter (but that topic deserves it's own thread).

 

"See, we didn't just invent our God out of thin air!  Our God is the same one that has been around as long as people can remember but now His plan is complete.  Sorry if God didn't tell you about Jesus before but it was part of the Super Secret Plan which isn't a secret anymore.  Don't question it.  Just take it on faith.  Nothing to see here, move along."

[Blood]

John just makes explicit what's implicit in the other three. Jesus is sacrificed by "the Jews" during the Passover festival in all four gospels. The bizarre gospel theologians created the fantasy that having "the Jews" sacrifice the son of Theos instead of the paschal lamb would somehow remove "sin" from the Gentiles but ruin the Jews forever. I'm not sure how they arrived at this fantasy, or what exactly their intentions were, but no one's ever accomplished a greater mind-fuck to humanity than these sick misfits. 

 

The crucifixion during Passover, incidentally, is the strongest evidence that Jesus is a myth, in my opinion. This event simply did not happen and could not happen. "The Jews" (and only a non-Jew would refer to them as such) did not execute people during high holy days; such an act would have itself been a capital offense. So the whole myth was built around taking the paschal lamb sacrifice, personifying it, and reversing its effects so that the Jews are collectively guilty. Once that myth had been established and believed in, all you needed to do was invent the "prequel" of how the human lamb got to that position. 

 

The goal all along was to appropriate the Septuagint, de-Judaize it, and claim that Gentiles, not Jews, owned the title deeds to the Yahweh-Jesus religion. A variation on this theme was accomplished six centuries later in Arabia. 

 

Hyam Maccoby's book "The Sacred Executioner" is a strong analysis of this myth. 

[Joshpantera]

On 4/1/2018 at 9:04 PM, Blood said:

So the whole myth was built around taking the paschal lamb sacrifice, personifying it, and reversing its effects so that the Jews are collectively guilty. Once that myth had been established and believed in, all you needed to do was invent the "prequel" of how the human lamb got to that position. 

 

In the aftermath of the Jewish war and destruction of the temple. 

 

"The Jews," those unworthy bastards. The temple was destroyed, they fucked up, they are un-chosen. Now we'll acquire their largely racist world view and apply it to ourselves going forward. We're the only truth in the world now, we're superior to everyone else, the baton has passed.....

[Blood]

Yes, I believe that what we moderns call "racism" was a factor in the creation and promulgation of Christianity. Any ethnicity could join the Yahweh religion, but only Jews had elite privileges. This made the "Gentiles" that had joined the religion (proselytes) envious. Eventually, they revolted, and began to evolve a theology in which they, the Gentiles, were the Chosen "race" or generation. This orientation is basically Gnostic in its conception (i.e., a Biblical concept was inverted), though never recognized as such. 

 

The key question is when this revolt happened. I think it could have happened long before the Temple was destroyed, but there can be no doubt that this event accelerated the process. The fall of the Temple was used as "proof" that God was on the side of the Gentiles (Josephus even says so in The Jewish War). I think it's very possible that all the mythology of Jesus's "life and teaching" began to be invented at this point. Prior to this time, "Christ" was worshipped as an angel. 

[SeniorCitizen007]

I keep asking people this question ... and seldom get a positive response:

 

Is the fact that IESOUS CHRISTOS anagrams to OSIRIS SET CHOUS ('Chous', "a measure of capacity equal to 12 cups") a mere coincidence? Or is it the key to the origins of Christianity?

 

... and what of the fact that SIMWN PETROS anagrams to MORTWS PENIS (cf Latin, 'Mortuus penis', "dead penis".

 

A variation on the myth of Osiris appeared in Egypt after the Romans took over in which Isis was unable to find Osiris' penis when she tried to reassemble him after his wicked brother Set chopped him up and distributed the pieces allover Egypt. His penis, so the new variation on the myth claimed, was eaten by a sacred fish.

 

Some of the Greeks and Romans of the time were into anagrams ... they considered them sacred.

 

The reason why there was no resurrection in Mark's original gospel is because it wasn't Jesus on the cross ... Simon of Cyrene = Simon bar Kokba ... the leader of the Jewish revolt against the Romans in 131 ad was heralded as both the 'King of the Jews' and the Jewish Messiah (the Jewish Messiah was supposed to be a war-lord who would free the Jews). Simon of Cyrene had a son called Rufus ... so did Simon bar Kokba.

 

In the original story Pilate accepted Jesus as the true King of the Jews ... and had Simon of Cyrene crucified in his place.

 

Why Cyrene? In 116 ad there was a major revolt of the Jews against the Romans that started at Cyrene ... the 131 ad revolt in Israel was a continuation of it.

 

The earliest authenticated reference to Christians is found in a Jewish text dated around 138 ad.

 

 

[Blood]

11 hours ago, SeniorCitizen007 said:

I

The reason why there was no resurrection in Mark's original gospel is because it wasn't Jesus on the cross ... Simon of Cyrene = Simon bar Kokba ... the leader of the Jewish revolt against the Romans in 131 ad was heralded as both the 'King of the Jews' and the Jewish Messiah (the Jewish Messiah was supposed to be a war-lord who would free the Jews). Simon of Cyrene had a son called Rufus ... so did Simon bar Kokba.

 

In the original story Pilate accepted Jesus as the true King of the Jews ... and had Simon of Cyrene crucified in his place.

 

Why Cyrene? In 116 ad there was a major revolt of the Jews against the Romans that started at Cyrene ... the 131 ad revolt in Israel was a continuation of it.

 

 

I found this part of your message very interesting. I've never found a good explanation of why the author puts somebody from 500 miles/kilometers away in Jerusalem during the crucifixion. 

 

A post-AD 116 date for the Gospel of Mark is completely plausible; far more so than the usual apologetic date of AD 70. If David Trobisch's theory is correct that the "first edition" of the New Testament was compiled and distributed around AD 150, it would follow that all the gospels were written between AD 116 and 150. I still don't understand why there are four. The best explanation is that they were written by four different sects, but that doesn't explain why or how a fifth sect (the Katholicoi) was able to obtain all four and then successfully demonize the four sects they stole them from out of existence. 

 

[Joshpantera]

13 hours ago, SeniorCitizen007 said:

I keep asking people this question ... and seldom get a positive response:

 

Is the fact that IESOUS CHRISTOS anagrams to OSIRIS SET CHOUS ('Chous', "a measure of capacity equal to 12 cups") a mere coincidence? Or is it the key to the origins of Christianity?

 

... and what of the fact that SIMWN PETROS anagrams to MORTWS PENIS (cf Latin, 'Mortuus penis', "dead penis".

 

A variation on the myth of Osiris appeared in Egypt after the Romans took over in which Isis was unable to find Osiris' penis when she tried to reassemble him after his wicked brother Set chopped him up and distributed the pieces allover Egypt. His penis, so the new variation on the myth claimed, was eaten by a sacred fish.

 

Some of the Greeks and Romans of the time were into anagrams ... they considered them sacred.

 

The reason why there was no resurrection in Mark's original gospel is because it wasn't Jesus on the cross ... Simon of Cyrene = Simon bar Kokba ... the leader of the Jewish revolt against the Romans in 131 ad was heralded as both the 'King of the Jews' and the Jewish Messiah (the Jewish Messiah was supposed to be a war-lord who would free the Jews). Simon of Cyrene had a son called Rufus ... so did Simon bar Kokba.

 

In the original story Pilate accepted Jesus as the true King of the Jews ... and had Simon of Cyrene crucified in his place.

 

Why Cyrene? In 116 ad there was a major revolt of the Jews against the Romans that started at Cyrene ... the 131 ad revolt in Israel was a continuation of it.

 

The earliest authenticated reference to Christians is found in a Jewish text dated around 138 ad.

 

 

 

We generally like to have citations included with claims that most people are unfamiliar with, so they can be researched and analyzed by everyone. This isn't commonly known information. But I've always been open to 2nd century dating for the gospels, so I'd like to read through the citations that bring you to these claims.