New material below on the Jefferson/Tolstoy project to distinguish between the two most prominent and influential archetypes in Western narratives, consciousness, and civilization. Historical Jesus versus Paul’s Christ myth.
This from “The Rubin Report”
“My Red Pill Moment, Blaming Boomers and the New Addictions: Dr. Drew Pinsky”, Dave Rubin, Aug. 23, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLWYgdL4ZUc
(My rough paraphrase of Pinsky’s comments to Rubin): Some interesting comment in this by Pinsky on how the growing emphasis on the individual in modern history (over past few centuries) produced a related pathology of excessive narcissism. He refers to a survey in the 90s where children were asked what they wanted to become. The survey found that, even before the widespread use of the internet phenomenon, most children did not want some traditional occupation but rather they wanted to “become famous”. This took top spot in the survey.
Pinsky points to how this modern narcissism became such a dominant phenomenon and with it there arose a tendency to hysterically exaggerate the faults of others, to project one’s own faults onto others, and to signal that “I am more caring than you”. That is virtue signalling for status as more caring than others who disagree with one. He sees this tendency to hysterically exaggerate the faults of others (differing others as a threat to all life) in the “Trump Derangement Syndrome”, where disagreeing others are demonized and exaggerated as death-dealing evil. “You are killing people” is a common charge now levelled at differing others, and this charge of killing others is projected with hysterical exaggeration.
Pinsky emphasizes that this exaggeration and hysteria is coming from the Left today- i.e. that if you disagree with me then everybody is going to die because you are such a threat with your policies that differ from mine. “You are going to kill people”. This has been a constant by the Left- that “You are going to kill people… People are going to die”. It is gross exaggeration and hysteria that is projected onto differing others.
He gives the example with Covid hysteria- “If you disagree with masks, vaccines, then you are killing people”. There was apocalyptic-scale hysteria over such disagreements. We also see the same exaggerated hysteria in disagreements over climate alarmism. If you express skepticism to the alarmist narrative then the world will end, all will die.
Pinsky adds that the organizing principle on the Left is now- “I care more than you do” and that is “a specific narcissistic principle” of virtue signalling more compassion (virtue signalling for moral status above others, as Jordan Peterson also points out). This signalling then feeds into “suicidal or toxic empathy” that is polluted with narcissism. This pathology enacts destructive policies such as banning police and prisons (e.g. Zohran Mamdani in New York) with the result of letting violent people go free to further harm others. But no matter the personal history of crime, the dangerously violent criminals get priority empathy over the citizens that they then further harm because the criminals are viewed as permanent victims of past injustices. They get priority empathy.
Narcissists have two big signalling needs, says Pinsky- “I exist, and I am better than you. I care more than you and you, with your different policies, are going to kill people.” Narcissists nurse the felt need to demonize and dehumanize differing others as threatening enemies that are so bad that the narcissists reason that they can use violence to get rid of them. They are justified in using coercion because their cause is righteous and is saving the world.
If you disagree with me then you are just not caring like me, but you are horrible and a threat, a danger to life and you need to be banned from society. This is the hysteria element that takes things to apocalyptic-scale, just as we are told daily by “news” media that every normal warm event in summer now signals the apocalyptic end of the world.
Pinsky repeatedly notes the projection element in all this- Look at the policies that came out of the suicidal empathy that forced vaccines on entire populations and pushed lockdowns that destroyed children’s lives. There were increased suicides that came out of lockdowns with people losing jobs and businesses, mass panic that actually hurt people, yet the people pushing such policies projected any caused harm onto those who differed from them and challenged their hysteria.
And more…
Taking up the Jefferson project: Pulling the “diamond” out of the “dung” and cleaning it off, Wendell Krossa
I am touching base with some of the “big guns” who constructed liberal democracy in the US- i.e. the approach to organizing human society that we value more than life today. Millions having died to defend the rights and freedoms of all individuals that are protected by Classic Liberalism principles, systems of common law, and representative institutions. Thomas Jefferson was among those who helped construct the basic features of liberal democracy for our contemporary Western civilization. I am intrigued by what influenced the thinking of men like Jefferson. It appears the teaching of Historical Jesus was significant to Jefferson, but only as contrasted with the lesser “dung” material of Paul and his New Testament Christology.
I don’t know if Jefferson had read the early German theologians who started the “Search for Historical Jesus” in the early 1700s. That search arose out of the Enlightenment as people, with growing evidence on the early formation of Christianity, began to more critically reflect on that inherited religious tradition. Scholars/historians/theologians began to challenge the biblical accounts of Jesus, recognizing that while the person existed and had presented a unique message and theology, other material in the gospels, that was also attributed to him contradicted his central themes.
Jefferson was among the early notables who saw this.
“Extract from a letter- ‘Thomas Jefferson to John Adams’”
https://tjrs.monticello.org/letter/297
“We must reduce our volume to the simple evangelists, select, even from them, the very words only of Jesus … there will be found remaining the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man. I have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging, the matter which is evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill.”
And this by Marilyn Mellowes:
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/jesus/jefferson.html
“The White House, Washington, D.C. 1804.
“Thomas Jefferson was frustrated. It was not the burdens of office that bothered him. It was his Bible.
“Jefferson was convinced that the authentic words of Jesus written in the New Testament had been contaminated. Early Christians, overly eager to make their religion appealing to the pagans, had obscured the words of Jesus with the philosophy of the ancient Greeks and the teachings of Plato. These “Platonists” had thoroughly muddled Jesus’ original message.
“Jefferson assured his friend and rival, John Adams, that the authentic words of Jesus were still there. The task, as he put it, was one of abstracting what is really his from the rubbish in which it is buried, easily distinguished by its lustre from the dross of his biographers, and as separate from that as the diamond from the dung hill…
“Jefferson discovered a Jesus who was a great Teacher of Common Sense. His message was the morality of absolute love and service. Its authenticity was not dependent upon the dogma of the Trinity or even the claim that Jesus was uniquely inspired by God. Jefferson saw Jesus as a man, of illegitimate birth, of a benevolent heart, (and an) enthusiastic mind, who set out without pretensions of divinity, ended in believing them, and was punished capitally for sedition by being gibbeted according to the Roman law.”
Then…
“AI Overview
“Thomas Jefferson referred to the Apostle Paul as the “first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus” and a “dupe and impostor” in a letter to William Short in 1820. Jefferson believed that Paul’s writings introduced corruptions and interpolations into Jesus’ original teachings.”
AI Overview adds this:
• “Corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus”:
Jefferson believed that Paul was the primary source of the deviations from Jesus’ original teachings.
• “Dupe and impostor”:
He saw Paul as being misled and, in turn, misleading others about the true nature of Jesus’ message.
• “Interpolations”:
Jefferson specifically identified Paul’s works as containing “palpable interpolations and falsifications” of Jesus’ message.
Jefferson did not elaborate fully on the main themes of the “dung” context (i.e. the New Testament) that was dominated by the Christology or Christ myth of Paul. We now have almost three centuries of research from “The Search for Historical Jesus”, decades of the “Jesus Seminar” (since 1985) and “Q Wisdom Sayings” research that give us enough detailed information to conclude what actually was the message of Jesus, as contrasted with Paul’s Christ myth. As New Testament scholars/historians state, Q is the closest that we get to the actual message of Historical Jesus (see posting below on the Luke 6:27-36 and Matthew 5:38-48 versions of his main message).
We know from Q that Jesus presented “the stunning new theology of a nonretaliatory and unconditional God” (my paraphrase of a comment by James Robinson, adding the unconditional features). And there is “thematic coherence” to much of what Jesus taught (precepts and parables), affirmed by his personal treatment of others.
Jefferson responded to the teaching of Jesus somewhat intuitively, based on his sense of humanity or humaneness. He refused to kowtow to the claimed “divine inspiration” of religious holy books like the Bible, or bow to threat and coercion by religious authority.
I would offer that Jefferson’s commentary on the actual teaching/message of Jesus, as different from Paul’s Christ myth, is just as important as any of his work in helping to create the framework of ideas and principles for the great liberal democracy that is the US. His arguments regarding the teaching of Jesus, deal with the fundamental ideas/themes that shape authentic democracy and a truly humane society.
In the Jesus message we find the notable themes of (1) the nontribal inclusion of all, equally (i.e. sun and rain given generously to all, to both good and bad people). There is no tribal divide between true believers who are favored, versus unbelievers who are excluded. It takes no great leap of assumption to see how this non-discriminatory inclusivity would influence Jefferson to promote equal rights for all. And yes, the great English liberty authors would also feed his thought on these issues.
Inserts:
Grok noted this (Did the English liberty authors influence Thomas Jefferson?):
“Yes, English liberty authors significantly influenced Thomas Jefferson. Thinkers like John Locke, Algernon Sidney, and the radical Whigs shaped his views on natural rights, government by consent, and the right to resist tyranny. Locke’s Second Treatise of Government was particularly pivotal, with its ideas of life, liberty, and property echoing in Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. Sidney’s Discourses Concerning Government reinforced notions of republicanism and resistance to arbitrary power, which resonated in Jefferson’s advocacy for revolution. The radical Whigs, through works like Cato’s Letters, emphasized limited government and individual freedoms, aligning with Jefferson’s vision of a democratic republic. These influences are evident in his writings, especially the Declaration’s assertion that governments derive “just powers from the consent of the governed.”
Grok adds this in response to- Did the teaching of Historical Jesus influence Thomas Jefferson?:
“The teachings of the Historical Jesus influenced Thomas Jefferson, but in a specific and nuanced way, shaped by Jefferson’s rationalist and deist worldview. Jefferson admired the moral teachings of Jesus as found in the Gospels, viewing them as a profound ethical framework emphasizing compassion, forgiveness, and universal love. However, he rejected the supernatural elements, miracles, and divinity claims associated with Jesus, which he saw as later corruptions by the Church.
“Jefferson created the Jefferson Bible (formally titled The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth), a personal project where he extracted Jesus’ moral teachings from the New Testament, removing miracles, resurrection narratives, and anything he deemed inconsistent with reason. He described Jesus’ teachings as “the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man.” This reflects the influence of Jesus’ ethical principles, like the Golden Rule and love for one’s neighbor, on Jefferson’s philosophy.
“While Jefferson’s political writings, like the Declaration of Independence, don’t directly cite Jesus, his emphasis on universal human rights and equality aligns with the moral egalitarianism he drew from Jesus’ teachings, filtered through his Enlightenment perspective. Unlike the English liberty authors (e.g., Locke, Sidney), who directly shaped his political theory, the Historical Jesus influenced Jefferson’s personal moral framework, which indirectly informed his vision of a just society.” (End of Grok comments)
Continuing with the Jesus themes that Jefferson took inspiration from in his own pushback against the elite/commoner divide that has cursed humanity from the beginning:
Jesus presented one of history’s earliest and clearest arguments against domination by elites when he stated,
“You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve”, (Matthew 20: 25-28).
This statement of Jesus would help affirm across subsequent history that government institutions, government leaders and bureaucrats should function as the “servants of the people” (government of, by, and for the people), thereby overturning the history-long curse of elites dominating or controlling commoners. Hence, if religious believers like to repeat the phrase “God is great”, then Jesus filled out the meaning of that greatness as serving, not lording over others.
Yet Paul, perversely, then turned the common man and wisdom sage Jesus into “Lord Jesus”, the ultimate totalitarian who would rule with “a rod of iron” now and eternally as per the vision of John in Revelation.
As the quotes re Jefferson above said, “Jefferson saw Paul’s works as containing ‘palpable interpolations and falsifications’ of Jesus’ message… Paul was the primary source of the deviations from Jesus’ original teachings… Paul’s writings introduced corruptions and interpolations into Jesus’ original teachings…”, and so on.
Further, take Jesus’ central ethical principle of nonretaliatory, nonpunitive, non-vengeful justice, expressed in the statement- “Let there be no more ‘eye for eye’ retaliation but instead, love your enemies because God does, as seen in God generously giving the two basic elements for survival in agrarian society- i.e. sun and rain for crops- to everyone, both good and bad.”
There is nothing in this precept of advocacy for justice as “vengeful, righteous war to destroy enemies”. Such precepts challenge the common practise of punitive justice and orient us to restorative justice where possible.
Jefferson embraced Historical Jesus, as someone who contrasted entirely with Paul’s Christ myth, at a time when Western civilization had long been dominated by Paul and the Christ myth.
Here again is James Tabor’s points on the dominant influence of Paul over our Western narratives and societies across the past two millennia (from “Paul and Jesus”):
“There was a version of ‘Christianity before Paul’, affirmed by both Jesus and his original followers, with tenets and affirmations quite opposite to these of Paul… the message of Paul, which created Christianity as we know it, and the message of historical Jesus and his earliest followers, were not the same. In fact, they were sharply opposed to one another with little in common beyond the name Jesus itself” (p.xv1).
“Paul is the most influential person in human history and realize it or not, he has shaped practically all we think about everything… the West in particular… the foundations of Western civilization- from our assumptions about reality to our societal and personal ethics- rest in a singular way upon the heavenly visions and apparitions of the apostle Paul. We are all cultural heirs of Paul, with the well-established doctrines and traditions of mainstream Christianity deeply entrenched in our culture. In contrast, Jesus as a historical figure… has been largely lost to our culture” (p. xv11).
“Paul operated with a strongly apocalyptic perspective that influenced all he said or did” (p.15).
“The entire New Testament canon is largely a post-Paul and pro-Paul production…” (p.19).
“The ‘Jesus’ who most influenced history was the ‘Jesus-Christ’ of Paul, not the historical figure of Jesus… Paul transformed Jesus himself (and) his message of a… kingdom of justice and peace on earth, to the symbol of a religion of otherworldly salvation in a heavenly world”, (21).
“The form of Christianity… (that thrived in the late Roman Empire)… was heavily based upon the ecstatic and visionary experiences of Paul. Christianity as we came to know it, is Paul and Paul is Christianity. The bulk of the New Testament is dominated by his theological vision”, p.24).
“Paul’s view of Christ as the divine pre-existent Son of God who took on human form, died on the cross for the sins of the world, and was resurrected to heavenly glory at God’s right hand becomes the Christian message”, (39).
“The Q source is the earliest collection of the teachings and sayings of Jesus… the most striking characteristic of the Q source in terms of reconstructing Christian origins is that it has nothing of Paul’s theology, particularly his Christology or view of Christ”, (41).
For Jefferson to challenge and reject the Christology of Paul as deforming the message of Jesus took great courage and a mental perceptiveness that saw clearly the contradictions between Historical Jesus and the Christ myth.
Outcomes, consequences… Bad ideas influence bad behavior.
We have an abundance of good evidence now from historians on the outcomes of Paul’s main Christ themes, notably in fueling last century’s mass-death crusades. Consider the evidence on how potently Paul’s “apocalyptic millennial Christ myth” has shaped all that we think and do. The darker pathologies in Paul’s Christ- i.e. the elements of apocalyptic, millennialism, messianism, as outlined by David Redles further below- fueled the madness and totalitarianism of Marxism and Nazism, and now drive environmental alarmism.
These ideas in Paul’s Christology have contributed to the endless perversion of the hero’s quest as engaging a great righteous battle against evil enemies/monsters that must be vanquished, dominated, and destroyed/exterminated as too evil to be permitted to continue living. They are framed as such a threat to life, with their irredeemable impurity and evil, that they will incite God to intervene with the apocalyptic destruction of all life as necessary to purge such evil from the world and thereby save the world (i.e. much like the same theme expressed in relation to the Genesis Flood myth). In such mythology, salvation must come through violent revolutionary destruction of a threatening enemy- “The Evil Other”. That evil must be purged from life in order to save life, to “save the world”.
Insert on viewing the hero’s quest as an obligation to engage a great battle against evil enemies/monsters. This has often been framed in terms of Zoroaster’s cosmic dualism of Good fighting Evil, and the divine demand to heroically join the “good religion” (i.e. become true believers) and fight the evil that is differing others/enemies.
I often reference Solzhenitsyn (paraphrasing his points) who urged that heroic engagement of a battle against evil should be more focused on the inner battle as the real battle of life, a battle against the real enemy in life- i.e. the inherited animal that is in all of us.
“AI Overview
“Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s famous statement, found in The Gulag Archipelago, asserts that the fundamental battle between good and evil does not exist between states, classes, or parties, but rather runs “right through every human heart— and through all human hearts”. This means that each individual contains both good and evil, making moral choice and internal struggle the true domain of this conflict, rather than an external, easily identifiable enemy.”
I would add to Solzhenitsyn’s more general statement on good and evil, and the inner personal battle as the real battle of life, that the real “evil” that we must fight consists of our inherited animal impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others- i.e. the “evil triad” of animal impulses. That is the real enemy/monster that we all must face and conquer.
Add here to emphasize the inner personal battle against evil, the comments of Historical Jesus, such as- “Why judge the speck in other’s eyes when you have a beam in yours?” Get yourself sorted out first.
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye”, Matthew 7.
Continuing with the evidence on how Paul’s Christ themes have influenced modern mass-death crusades….
As repeated often here, take a look at what historians/scholars have uncovered on how devastating Christian themes when used to incite, guide, and validate the mass-death in Marxism, Nazism, and now are used to fuel similar destruction through environmental alarmism.
Sources: Arthur Herman’s “The Idea of Decline in Western History”, Richard Landes’ “Heaven On Earth: Varieties of the Millennial Experience”, Arthur Mendel’s “Vision and Violence”, David Redles’ “Hitler’s Millennial Reich: Apocalyptic belief and the search for Salvation”, among others.
I affirm with “big gun” Jefferson that Paul’s “dung” themes distort and bury the diamond message of Jesus. I go particularly hard on Paul over his advocacy of ultimate divine domination, eternal lording over others. There is no “God is great” in his pathology of “Lord Jesus”. It is eternal slavery of the unimaginably worst kind, absolutely totalitarian in mind, emotion, spirit, all life in whatever future realms exist. The New Testament advocates such enslavement in the varied other statements attributed to Paul that urge women to submit to their husbands, slaves to submit to their masters, and all to submit to government authorities as divinely appointed. Paul (and his Lord Christ) was no Jeffersonian advocacy for true liberal democracy.
Remember here also in the mix, the primitive myth that “humans were created to serve the gods”, to feed the gods and do their work. In religious narratives the human submission to gods as “Lords, Kings, Rulers” was to be mediated through human subjection to priesthoods and religious authorities, and their endless religious conditions to control all of life.
Insert: Many NDE accounts are not clear on such issues as individual human freedom from domination by others. One that does offer some comment on this issue of freedom and equality in other realms is Natalie Sudman’s “The Application of Impossible Things”, her account of being blown up by an IED in Iraq and subsequent NDE. She talks of her experience of no coercion in where she went. No “lording over others” Jesus.
Continuing…
And then add to the above, the overall summarizing theme (“thematic coherence” again) in Paul’s Christ myth that salvation comes through murder and destruction. Pardon that blunt summary. Kind of like Jefferson’s “dung” term. In Paul’s atonement theory there is the murder of the “right people” in human sacrifice as the basic condition for salvation, as the way to make things right or better. And then the mass murder and purging of all evil people from the world in the apocalyptic destruction of all enemies, as portrayed in Revelation. Again, note how these themes fueled the Marxist and Nazi crusades of last century. Destroy some enemy- i.e. Jewish Bolshevik, capitalist- in order to clear the way for salvation into an imagined utopian millennium. The historians noted above state how Hitler eventually portrayed himself as the violent Christ of Revelation who had to enact the great final battle of extermination (the true Armageddon) to purge the world of the great evil of Jewish Bolshevism. Such themes resonated with German minds long shaped by such Christian myths.
More on the Jefferson project…
Another critical element in the Jefferson project to distinguish between the messages of Paul and Jesus, is the basic theology or image of God. Jesus presented his stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory, unconditionally loving God. Never before heard of in history. The nature of God goes right to the core or foundation of salvation/atonement mythology. Paul’s theology promotes the belief in an angry God demanding blood sacrifice for appeasement (see the repeated phrase “wrath of God” in Paul’s letter to the Romans). The angry God of Paul demands full payment, full punishment of sins through violent human sacrifice.
Jesus declares there is no such God. Never had been. His new theology of non-retaliatory, unconditional God was a seditious threat to the priesthood that maintained its authority over the bloody sacrifice industry based on the myth of a wrathful God who demanded violent sacrifice as substitutionary punishment of all wrongs.
Centuries before Jesus there had been varied Old Testament prophetic intimations of a different theology, that of a God who did not want the condition of sacrifice but instead desired mercy, compassion, and love (e.g. Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah, etc.). However, that prophetic initiation of theological innovation was short-circuited and buried by the priesthood that became dominant over Jewish religion.
Later, early Jewish Christians stated that the OT priesthood and sacrifice industry was a heresy that had corrupted Jewish religion.
This example of prophetic anti-sacrifice theology in Jeremiah 7:
“Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: ‘I did not speak to your fathers or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices’.”
Or Hosea 6:
“I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice.”
However, these statements are lodged in contexts that include contradicting themes of judgment, punishment, and exclusion of unbelievers. The prophets had not yet thought their way to a clear theology of a non-retaliatory and unconditional deity.
In Jesus’ new theology and message there was no confusion about the unconditional nature of God. His main teaching and parables presented “thematic coherence” on the issue of unconditional, as does his inclusive and forgiving behavior toward outsiders, offenders, enemies.
I repeat my summary paraphrase of the central theme of his teaching- “Let there be no more ‘eye for eye’ retaliation but instead, love your enemies because God does, as evident in God generously giving the two basic elements for survival in agrarian society- i.e. sun and rain for crops- to everyone, both good and bad.” Add the same message in Luke 6:27-36 and you get the essential nature of the God of Jesus as non-retaliatory mercy and unconditional love toward all.
Barely two decades after his murder by the Romans, (a murder incited by the priests), we find Paul in his earliest letters to the Thessalonians re-establishing the theology of an angry God who threatens punishment/destruction of unbelievers. There is nothing of non-retaliatory, unconditional love in Paul’s theology, just the promise of ultimate “eye for eye” in the vengeful and destructive retaliation of apocalypse and eternal hell.
“Lord Jesus will return in blazing fire (“trampling out the fury of the wrath of God”) to destroy those who did not believe the Christ myth… They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (see his Thessalonian letters).
And in a more formal statement in Romans 12: 17-20, Paul quotes an Old Testament verse to affirm his theology of a vengeful God, “’Vengeance is mine, I will retaliate’, says the Lord”.
These entirely contrary statements of theology highlight the distinct contrast between Jesus and Paul’s Christ on the most fundamental element in their belief systems- deity. The above statements of Paul illustrate how his “dung” distorts and buries the “diamonds” of Jesus. You cannot merge and combine these entirely opposite theologies, messages.
Paul then, throughout his Romans letter, re-affirms the highly conditional nature of his God with the details of demanded sacrifice to appease the wrath of his God.
In the construction of his atonement theology Paul did something profoundly egregious. He outright rejected the new theology of Jesus and reaffirmed traditional threat theology themes of angry deity demanding punitive vengeance against all human sin by means of blood sacrifice. He reaffirmed the darkest themes from the long history of religious belief- i.e. human sacrifice, child sacrifice. He re-established the foundational myth behind the demand for salvation through blood sacrifice, the myth of angry God demanding such barbarity.
Harold Ellens expresses well the true nature of Paul’s atonement theory (quoted in Zenon Lotufo’s “Cruel God, Kind God”):
“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God (see Romans, Revelation). Crystallized in Anselm’s juridical atonement theory, this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.
“Ellens goes on by stating that the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.”
And Paul took the theme of blood sacrifice to new heights of cosmic reality, creating the ultimate archetypal myth. He reshaped the anti-sacrifice Jesus into the ultimate sacrifice, the cosmic sacrifice of a godman, a divinely instituted and universal sacrifice for all humanity and for all history.
And to the contrary, according to the revolutionary message of Historical Jesus, there had never been any such God demanding blood sacrifice. God had always been a stunningly non-retaliatory, unconditionally loving God. There never was an angry God who demanded sacrifice, payment, or retaliatory punishment. That stunning new theology would have liberated human minds, spirits, and lives as nothing ever before. But that “diamond” message (Jefferson, Tolstoy) has been buried by the Christ myth for two millennia.
Marinate a bit on the egregious nature of how Paul’s reshaped Jesus and his message.
The historical person, the wisdom sage, in an outburst of frustrated anger, openly protested the sacrifice industry in Jerusalem, overturning the tables of those selling sacrificial sheep, oxen, and other animals that visiting Jews were obligated to buy at the entrance to the temple during Passover (a Jewish remembrance of blood sacrifice to avert divine wrath and punishment).
“AI Overview:
“In the Bible, Passover (Pesach in Hebrew) is a major Jewish festival commemorating the Israelites’ liberation from slavery in Egypt, as recounted in the Book of Exodus. It is a time to remember God’s protection of the Israelites during the tenth plague, where the firstborn of the Egyptians were killed, but the Israelites were “passed over” due to the blood of a lamb on their doorposts.”
The leading priests in Jerusalem knew very well what he was protesting. They had no doubt heard of his new theology of a non-retaliatory, unconditional God that overturned entirely their mythology of wrathful deity demanding sacrifice. They understood the threat Jesus posed to their narrative, to their occupation/livelihood, to their authority and power over the population, and to their very existence.
So, they had him put to death for those reasons. Fundamentally for protesting their sacrifice industry.
Paul then, in one of history’s most audacious projects of distortion, turned that death of Jesus as a protest against sacrifice into the ultimate Sacrifice. Paul reframed the profoundly “anti-sacrifice” message of the man Jesus into his profoundly “pro-sacrifice” myth about the man. There is no more profound contradiction in religious history than that between these entire opposites.
My beef with Paul and his vengeful, destroying Christ includes that fact that the outcome of his perverse distortion of Jesus is that he short-circuited and buried the potential greatest liberation movement in history- i.e. the liberation of human narratives and consciousness from threat theology that had darkened and enslaved billions to unnecessary fear (angry Creator threatening destruction and death), anxiety, shame/guilt (i.e. humanity as evil and deserving punishment, destruction via natural world elements and future apocalyptic ending), despair, depression, nihilism, and violence.
Further, the new Jesus theology would have overturned the main archetypes of the subconscious that have long validated our worst impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others. Archetypes as in the Old Narrative themes of deity that is tribal, dominating lord/King, and punitive destruction as “justice”, etc.
“Old story themes, New story alternatives:
http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=9533
I would like to give a nod to Paul on some good points he appeared to make here and there in his letters, like an intimation of equality between sexes, ethnicities, and social statuses, in Galatians (3:28). But then he overwhelms such things with the Christ myth that establishes overwhelming inequality at universal and eternal cosmic scale- i.e. true believers saved into bliss and unbelievers damned to eternal torture in fire (the Thessalonian, Roman letters, etc.). Sheesh, Paul. You fucked up on what matters most. Those core ideas/beliefs/themes.
It is critical to recognize the stunning difference in themes and messages between these two and the outcomes of their entirely opposite themes across history. It is highly irresponsible to continue the oxymoronic merger that exists in “Jesus Christ”, a merger that undermines, distorts, and buries the priceless Jesus themes. The diamonds.
I have made my own summaries of the main differences between Jesus and Paul’s Christ myth.
Main contradictions between Jesus and Christ (updated 2025), Wendell Krossa
Some of the main contradictions that highlight the oxymoronically opposite themes between the messages of Historical Jesus and Paul’s Christ mythology. The point I draw from this? The themes of Paul have shaped Western consciousness, narratives, and overall societies for the past two millennia (conclusion of historians/scholars like James Tabor). The Jesus themes have influenced us to a lesser extent, mainly moderating the harsher features and destructive influence of Paul’s Christ:
(1) Unconditional love (i.e. no sacrifice demanded in Jesus’ original message- i.e. the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel). Versus the highly conditional atonement religion of Paul (i.e. the supreme condition of the sacrifice of a cosmic godman- the Christ).
(2) Nonretaliation in Jesus (no more ‘eye for eye’ justice but ‘love the enemy’ because God does not retaliate but loves enemies- “Be merciful just as God is merciful”). Versus supreme divine retaliation in apocalypse and hell myths. Note Paul’s theology affirming a supremely retaliatory deity- “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay’, says the Lord” (Romans 12), and his “Lord Jesus returning in fire to destroy all who don’t believe Paul’s Christ myth” (Thessalonians).
(3) Restorative justice (again- no eye for eye, but love the offender) versus punitive, destroying justice (“They will be punished with everlasting destruction”, Thessalonians) .
(4) Nonviolent resolution of problems (again, no violent retaliation against enemies) versus the violent destruction of apocalypse and fiery hell, and the violent appeasement of deity by blood sacrifice for atonement.
(5) Nontribal inclusion of all humanity (“sun and rain given freely to both bad and good people”) versus the highly tribal favoritism toward true believers and the discriminatory exclusion of unbelievers for not believing Paul’s Christ. Note the ultimate tribal divide illustrated in Revelation in the eternal division of humanity- i.e. people assigned either to heaven or to hell, as per the cosmic dualism of Zoroaster.
(6) Nondomination in relationships (“If you want to be great then serve others”) versus ultimate eternal domination by Lord Christ under his “rod of iron” totalitarianism (“every knee shall bow… He will rule them with an iron scepter”).
(7) Non-dualism (God as the Oneness of Ultimate Reality that is love) versus eternal dualism (i.e. again, the cosmic dualism of “God and Satan”, “heaven and hell”). Further, ultimate Oneness leads to the conclusion there is no separation of humanity from deity, what some describe as all humanity being indwelt by God, as a reality that is inseparable from the common human spirit. God as the Life-giving spirit inside each of us, and God’s nature as unconditional love defining our true self/person.
And so on…
You cannot mix and merge such extreme opposites in the one and same person- i.e. in the merger of “Jesus Christ”- as that supremely oxymoronic combination creates such profound cognitive dissonance that you are left with a mental state akin to insanity or madness. And the egregious thing in such mixture is that the good elements (i.e. the Jesus insights) are distorted and buried by the primitive and darkening elements in the Christology of Paul.
Applying Christology to Jesus (i.e. the divinizing of a common man over the first few centuries of Christianity) has effectively buried the potency of his liberating insights, notably his stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory, non-apocalyptic God. That truth expressed in his entirely new view of deity, though still present there in summaries of his statements (see Matthew 5, Luke 6), that “stunning new theology” is not presented clearly in its liberating potency because the larger New Testament context emphasizes Paul’s retaliatory, apocalyptic Christ and that overwhelms the central themes of Jesus.
Paul was intent on overturning and replacing Jesus’ wisdom sayings with his “secret wisdom of the Christ”, correcting the “foolish worldly wisdom” of Jesus and his followers, like Apollos (see 1 Corinthians for Paul’s vilifying rant against the wisdom tradition of Jesus).
Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy both nailed the contradiction between Jesus and Paul in the bluntest of terms and few have been as clear and direct since, perhaps because their comments are highly offensive to true believer’s sensibilities.
Few since have embraced their clarification of the stark contrast between Jesus and Paul, preferring instead the religious reformism that tinkers around the edges and gets nothing done, that avoids the central issue of theology- how Paul’s Christology deformed Jesus and his message.