The totalitarian’s formula, “Fear=control”. And Plato’s elite “specialness” taken to ultimate archetype in Paul’s Christ myth.

Finally, posted below at bottom of this opening section:

More new material posted below on this site’s project to counter “Fear and control”– How to counter the apocalyptic insanity that still dominates our age. The barbaric myth of apocalypse has erupted and re-erupted endlessly across history, beginning with the Sumerian Flood myth as the earliest written version of apocalyptic fear mongering (i.e. waterworks deity Enlil, planning to punish and destroy bad people). Terrorizing populations with apocalyptic hysteria renders people susceptible to irrational salvation schemes that destroy societies to “save the world”, (i.e. the apocalyptic millennial theme of “salvation through destruction” that has dominated Marxist collectivism, Nazism, and now dominates environmental alarmism crusades), Wendell Krossa

Also new below- “A huge Duh” (the Classic Liberal priority responsibility of all government to protect citizens from assaults/violence), and then a “same old” rehash of apocalyptic lunacy (AI as new Terminator), also a Malice episode on how we are propagandized by mainstream media. Further, a repost (revised) of the true nature of good and evil as epitomized in the contrasts between the theology/message of Historical Jesus and Paul’s Christ myth.

And this (below) well-stated ‘Free Press’ piece on obligatory land acknowledgements today that misrepresent history and actual land ownership, “No, You Are Not on Indigenous Land: Pieces of territory belong to institutions, not to racial groups”. I view the “de-colonization” project as a newish strain in the larger crusade of neo-collectivism to overthrow and replace liberal democracy with the same old horrors of all past collectivist experiments.

“In the panic age, nothing offends like optimism”, Matt Taibbi (Racket News).

When considering the general issue of child abuse: Wendell Krossa

Terrorizing/traumatizing people with apocalyptic-scale fears is the height of irresponsible human pathologies and this obsession with panic-mongering has exploded into repeated “madness of crowds” eruptions over just the past few decades- i.e. the climate alarmism lunacy, Trump Derangement Syndrome (“existential threat to democracy”), Covid hysteria and worldwide lockdowns, and the recent stirring of AI fears (i.e. “Terminator” has now emerged).

Inciting panic among populations is dangerous in any era because inciting unwarranted fear unleashes natural human suspicion of threats, it incites the human survival impulse, and too often generating fear renders people susceptible to embracing irrational defensive actions, whether wasteful salvation schemes (wasting time and resources such as on Net Zero decarbonization insanity), or worse, pushing people toward “exterminate or be exterminated” violence against one another. Richard Landes, among other historians, has detailed this in the examples of Marxist violent revolutions, Nazi madness, and now in environmental alarmism crusades.

And most egregious in the mix of terrorizing populations with exaggerated fears is the traumatizing of children with climate apocalypse till many children today suffer under debilitating “eco-anxiety”.

I am not affirming the argument in this Lancet study that places significant contributing responsibility for climate anxiety in children on “children’s lack of power to deal with the crisis” and their worry over the lack of government response in dealing with fossil fuel emissions. Nonsense.

The sole major contributing factor behind this highly irresponsible traumatizing of children is the hysterically irrational panic-mongering by adults over mainly natural climate change. The alarm and worry over government inaction is just another buttressing element to this grand lie of “imminent apocalyptic climate crisis”.

This survey of 10,000 children across Australia, Brazil, Finland, France, India, Nigeria, Philippines, Portugal, UK, and USA found that 59% of children were “extremely worried” about climate change and 84% were “moderately worried”.

The report:

“Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: a global survey”

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00278-3/fulltext

When reading this report, I was reminded of what Historical Jesus said, that, “If anyone causes one of these little ones… to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.”

“Stumble” synonyms: “Fall, slip, trip, tumble, topple, etc.”

Why would any normally sane, rational, compassionate adult do this to children? Traumatizing children over a hysterically exaggerated narrative of looming catastrophe, the falsely imagined “end of days”.

Well, this is what history’s “most violent and destructive myth” does to normally sane minds. It creates mental deformity that can push normally sane people to embrace potentially dangerous policies that ruin their own societies (i.e. “Xhosa cattle slaughter”, Net Zero) and possibly lead to conflict with “enemy” others. Panic-mongering with exaggerated apocalyptic-scale scenarios incites and validates the worst of our inherited animal impulses to tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction of differing others. Always has, always will.

Apocalyptic is the worst of “salvation through destruction” mythologies, mythologies that argue for apocalyptic as necessary to purge some evil from life (i.e. generally differing others/enemies, or “industrial capitalism” as the great bogeyman of Marxist mythologies). Salvation through destruction- a central theme of our great world religions that emphasizes destruction as necessary to achieve some form of salvation- has long been promoted as necessary to clear the way to restore a lost paradise or install a utopia. Doubt this? Read the New Testament book of Revelation, as well as Paul’s letters that emphasize the related theme of “murder the right people to achieve a better outcome, a better future”. That is the theme of human sacrifice to appease angry deity.

What ultimately fuels apocalyptic insanity and the consequent irresponsibility that has persisted as a dominant theme in Western liberal democracies over past decades?

This site argues that Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth has been most responsible for embedding the myth of apocalypse at the heart of Western narratives, consciousness, and life. And we have ever-accumulating evidence from over two millennia of the destructive outcomes from this “bad religious idea”, damaging “child eco-anxiety” being a notable outcome over past decades.

To repeat my “egregious” point, promoting apocalyptic-scale fear takes “shouting fire in a crowded theatre” to the highest reach of human irresponsibility, especially egregious when for the last 2 thousand years we have had the powerful alternative to the apocalyptic Christ- i.e. the anti-apocalyptic theology of Historical Jesus. Meaning- His stunning new diamond theology of a non-retaliatory, non-vengeful God- i.e. “There must be no more eye for eye justice, but instead love your enemies because God does” (Luke 6). A non-retaliatory God will not commit the ultimate act of retaliation in the apocalyptic destruction of life/the world.

“AI Overview” of “egregious”

“Egregious behavior means conduct that is shockingly or flagrantly bad, outrageous, and extremely noticeable. It is not just any bad or wrong behavior, but actions that are so far beyond a reasonable standard of conduct that they are often considered to be outstandingly or conspicuously wrong. Examples include violence, serious fraud, sexual harassment, or the deliberate destruction of property.

“Key characteristics of egregious behavior:

• Shockingly bad: The behavior is extremely bad, serious, and often appalling or atrocious.

• Flagrantly wrong: It is obviously and unacceptably wrong, beyond a reasonable degree.

• Conspicuous: The behavior stands out and is highly noticeable, but for all the wrong reasons.

• Serious in nature: It is a more severe form of misconduct, not just a minor mistake. For example, while a minor policy violation may not be egregious, causing serious injury due to intoxication in the workplace could be.

(End of AI overview)

More to come, I am just getting started with more on my site project to alleviate fear (“Its going to be alright for everyone, ultimately”) and to encourage alternative narratives that promote the flourishing of our common “highest human ideal” of love. This involves the best of evidence on the true state of life, and the best of insights to inform our primal impulse for ultimate meaning and purpose. The “spiritual, but nonreligious” element, if you will.

Before I add more on my anti-domination/control project, here is a nice surprise from Bob Brinsmead:

A few preface notes (recommends) to a friend who sent me Bob’s essay that is below.

Just a suggestion– Somewhere in this essay it might help to put in a one-sentence or one-phrase explanation re Helmut Koester’s research on how that entire Roman world had been Hellenized, as along with others (Arthur Herman) the Greeks had no real mythology of their own and were besotted with, and adopted as their own, Greek philosophy and mythology. Or maybe you stated this clearly enough.

Another possible point here would be a bit on Plato’s “philosopher kings” theory where special people (i.e. having done some special deed, accomplished something special perhaps in war, specially talented in art, philosophy, etc.) such people are considered divine or divinely endowed, etc. That may have influenced Paul’s transformation of the “son of man” into “Lord/King Jesus” endowed to rule above all rulers as the ultimate philosopher King, with his “rod of iron” totalitarianism.

Paul projected elite specialness onto a man who rejected the very idea of elite specialness and said, “Why do you call me good, only God is good”. He also repeatedly referred to himself as just an ordinary human, the “son of man” or of “son of humans”. And he refused the very idea of lordship, stating, “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 I came not to be served but to serve.”

That Paul then transformed him into the very things he rejected adds to the egregious nature of the fraudulent Christ that Paul created, someone quite entirely opposite to the actual person and his message. Paul further elevated his Christ beyond anything ever presented in mythical deities before. His Christ was constructed to be the universal King of all kings, Lord of all lords, the ultimate Cosmic Ruler with a totalitarian rod of iron for eternity. To infinity and beyond, profoundly distorting the message and person of the wisdom sage Jesus.

Paul’s Hellenistic Christ would be elevated by Paul as the ultimate archetype of elite domination and control.

See all Bob’s essays/commentary at robertdbrinsmead@substack.com

Why the Christology of Christianity Was Not a Friend of Human Freedom or Liberal Democracy, ROBERT D BRINSMEAD, NOV 25

In my previous paper, The Doctrine of Christ and the Triumph of Hellenism, I traced how the post-Easter Jesus movement broke into two factions, identified in Acts 6:1 as the Aramaic-speaking Jews called Hebrews and the Greek-speaking Jews called Hellenists. In later history they were badly labelled as Jewish Christians (because they never called themselves Christians) and Gentile Christians.

This first group (the Hebrews) founded the apostolic church in Jerusalem which remained within the network of Jewish synagogues. Led by James, the brother of Jesus for 32 years, their mission was to preserve and present the wisdom teachings they had heard from the lips of the historical Jesus.

He taught them nothing about a Christ and nothing about his dying in a violent act of atonement for human sin. The last two hundred years of scholarly research into the historical Jesus and the apostolic church, enables us to say this about the Hebrew church at Jerusalem with a great measure of certainty.

The second group (the Hellenists) had become obsessed and excited with the idea that the post-Easter Jesus had become the Christ. To escape persecution or hindrance from Saul of Tarsus and the Jewish Sanhedrin, they moved away from Judea to establish a church in the foreign Gentile city of Antioch in Syria where they attracted the nickname of Christians (Acts 11). It was Antioch rather than Jerusalem which became “the cradle of the Christian religion.”

Turning the post-Easter Jesus into the Christ was only the first step for the Hellenists along a long 400-year road which took them; From Jewish Prophet to Gentile God (Maurice Casey). Yet that first step of elevating the post-Easter Jesus with the title of Christ dramatically changed the nature of the gospel. As Marcus Borg says about the historical Jesus, “…with almost complete certainty we can say that the importance of his message was not about himself or the importance of believing in him.” (The Search for Jesus, p. 87).

The Hellenist Jews, however, changed all that when they changed the teaching of the historical Jesus into a teaching about him becoming the heavenly Christ. This meant that they had turned the messenger into the message and the self-effacing ambassador, someone who became the centre of attention. This created the cult of a person.

The high point of elevating the Christ was reached in drawing up the Nicene Creed in 325 CE. It was here, under the chairmanship of the Emperor Constantine, that the bishops of the Church elevated the status of Christ as being equal and co-eternal with God the Father.

By this time the Christian Church had long become the great Church of the Gentiles. There was not one Jewish descendant from the original apostolic church at Jerusalem found among the great assembly of Gentile bishops who created the Nicene Creed. These bishops gathered in the Council at Nicaea were all Greek-speaking Hellenists whose central church was now in Rome rather than in Antioch.

Given that their background language and culture was Greek, it was highly significant that the landmark Nicene Creed was drawn up by relying heavily on Greek words and Greek philosophy to define the status of Christ as being God in the Highest sense.

In the eyes of the Roman Emperor, the Nicene Creed qualified the Christian religion to become the official religion of the Roman Empire. At this Council of Nicaea Constantine drew up an edict declaring that anyone teaching contrary to the Nicene Creed would be put to death. Christianity had become the dominant religion of the Empire and ready to shed blood to assert the authority of its Christ.

Henceforth Western civilization would become red with the blood of Arian Christians (who held to the view that the Son had proceeded from the Father), Jews, Cathars (a sect in the north of France whose teachings had more in common with the so-called Jewish Christians), heretics, the victims of the Inquisition, the Crusades and lots more.

It is not entirely true to say that Christianity conquered the Roman Empire. Rather, when it became more thoroughly Hellenized than any rival religion, the Christian religion was chosen to become the official religion of the Roman Empire.

The Church’s Christology did not triumph over Greek mythology which had saturated the Roman world. It was through Greek mythology, consistent with Platonic thought, that the Christ of Christianity had become the heavenly Form of which all the old gods of Hellenism were mere types and shadows.

Just as the Hellenist Jews at Antioch were able to reduce the entire history of the Old Testament to being shadows, types and figures of the heavenly Christ, so the great Church of the Gentiles could now apply the same Platonic dualism that presents Christ as the Heavenly Reality (or Platonic Form) to whom all the gods and heroes of Greek mythology pointed. Christ was now imagined to be the ultimate Ruler of the Universe fore-shadowed by godmen rulers such as Alexander or Augustus . He was presented as the embodiment of the Greek wisdom of Plato.

He was now seen as the divine Healer who was foreshadowed by Asclepius who was just one of the numerous virgin-born heroes of Greek mythology. Christ became the ultimate dying and rising divinity of whom a host of pagan godmen such as Dionysus, Attis, Tammuz, Osiris, Appollo, Atta and Heracles were mere types and shadows.

This is how Christ was presented to the pagan world when the Christian Church and the Roman State were united in making Christ “God of very God.” Constantine the Great could see that this cosmic Christ of the Nicene Creed could fulfill all the religious traditions and aspirations of the Hellenized Roman world by uniting the Empire under the one grand myth of the heavenly Christ.

The Greek and Hebrew Languages and Worldviews

It was the Greek language and its worldview that enabled the Hellenist Christians to negotiate each step along that road which led to the Nicene Creed and their union with the Roman Empire.

It was equally the Hebrew language and its worldview that made it impossible for the Hebrews at Jerusalem to travel down the road taken by the Hellenists.

The tensions which arose between Jerusalem and Antioch, James and Paul, or so-called Jewish Christianity and Gentile Christianity, along with the historical outcomes, can never be understood unless we look at some stark differences between the Greek and Hebrew languages and their corollary worldviews.

Greek Dualism

To start with, we need to be aware of some basic things about what is called Greek or Platonic dualism. It has had such a broad influence on Western civilization that Alfred Whitehead quipped that Western thought added little more than “footnotes to Plato.”

Plato taught that everything that happens in this present material world is unreal, temporary, and inferior to the heavenly realities which are spiritual, non-material and eternal. He called these eternal, heavenly realities Forms, while the temporary earthly things were said to be mere shadows, types or allegories of the heavenly Realities.

In the first place, it was this Greek or Platonic dualism which provided the Jewish Hellenists with the dialectical skills to use the Greek version of the Hebrew writings as if none of it had any real meaning except being shadows, types and allegories of the heavenly Christ. The only thing that was new about this interpretive methodology was that it identified the heavenly Forms as Christ.

At this very time in history, there was a Hellenist Jewish philosopher at Alexandria called Philo. He was far and away the best-known Jewish writer and Biblical commentator at the very time when the Hellenists were forming a church at Antioch. Philo was a dedicated follower of Plato whose aim was to harmonize the Jewish Law of Moses with the teachings of Plato by turning the Law into being shadows, types or allegories of timeless truths of heavenly Forms as Plato would call them.

It ought to become very apparent that the Hellenists at Antioch used Philo’s interpretive dialectic when they argued that the entire Hebrew scripture consisted of shadowy types and allegories which pointed forward to being fulfilled in the heavenly reality called Christ.

I refer here to two instances where Paul gives a piece of Hebrew history and an item of Hebrew law an allegorical meaning. The instances may not appear to be very important except their far-fetched interpretations appeared as if they were drawn straight out of Philo.

The first instance is where Paul refers to the Hebrew story about the two sons of Abraham and their two different mothers as being an allegory (see Galatians 4:23-26). There is nothing in the context of this old Hebrew story to suggest it is an allegory or pantomime of something else, but it is Paul who suggests that he has adopted Philo’s method of interpreting scripture.

The next example of Paul using the Jewish Law as an allegory is a passage where he appeals to his Corinthian converts to financially support the gospel preachers (1 Corinthians 9:9). Citing the Law of Moses, which forbids the cruelty of muzzling oxen when they tread out the corn, Paul suggests that this Law was not written because God cares for oxen, but because God cares about those who preach the gospel.

To which we can only respond by saying that Paul is so influenced by Philo’s allegorical method of interpreting the Law, that he has forgotten that the God of the Hebrews does care for oxen just as “the righteous man cares for the life his beast.”

The serious issue here is not a trivial bit of history about the two sons of Abraham or some minor Jewish law about the proper treatment of oxen. It is a matter of whether the history and laws in Hebrew scripture should be taken seriously as a real history and real laws.

Does Jewish history as recorded in the OT have any real meaning in its own context without reducing it to being a mere shadow or pantomime of the coming Christ even as the entire New Testament book of Hebrews would have us believe?

Once the Hellenists came to the belief that Jesus was the heavenly Christ, it was not difficult for them, courtesy of Plato and Philo, to reduce the entire Jewish scripture to being shadowy patterns, types and allegories of Christ.

This kind of dualism has features that create a very different worldview than the one which is created by the Hebrew language and worldview.

Greek dualism tended to devalue the material creation along with the life we experience in a material body which it depicts as a prison for the immortal soul until it is release at the moment of death.

This worldview led the devotees of Greek dualism to despise this life on earth and to focus on the one which awaits them in heaven. Called Gnosticism, it generally led to a life of asceticism which denies bodily comforts or pleasures, or its opposite in a life of hedonism which is an unrestrained pursuit of pleasure.

The Hebrew view of the material world is very different to Greek dualism. According to Hebrew scripture, at every stage of the creation process, “God saw all that he had made, and it was very good” (Genesis 1: 31). In the Hebrew view of things, God must have liked a material universe because he made so much of it.

Louis Armstrong’s famous song, What a Wonderful World, sits well with Hebrew psalms and poetry which lauds the goodness of creation as the work of a gracious God. The Hebrews certainly do not view the created order as the work of an inferior Demiurge as the Gnostics do.

There is an old rabbinic saying that at end of our life, the good Lord will ask, “Did you enjoy all the good things I gave you to enjoy?” This might include planting a vineyard and drinking the wine, building a house and raising a family, or celebrating a long life “with the wife of your youth”.

It is remarkable that human erotic love is so highly valued in Hebrew culture that the Hebrew Bible devotes an entire book – The Song of Solomon – to its celebration. In Hebrew culture marriage was so highly regarded (“It is not good that man shall dwell alone.”), that celibacy was rarely practiced. This was not how it was in the Greek culture called Hellenism, nor in the history of early Christianity when monasticism and celibacy become an enormous attraction for both men and women.

A full life of work and productivity is greatly commended in the Wisdom writings of the Hebrews. It does not sound like a Greek journey of the immortal soul trapped in a mortal body.

The Hebrew language and worldview is firmly focused on this earth. It has no focus or information of the afterlife in a place called Heaven.

The patriarchs of the Hebrew faith lived upon the land. Their posterity was given a land to care for and to develop. The focus of the Hebrew prophets was always on this earth. Even when they talked of Israel’s future, it was always Israel’s future on this earth, “buildings houses to inhabit and planting vineyards to eat of their fruits.” Life is never depicted as a journey to a spiritual Promised Land, otherwise known as Heaven, as it is depicted in Bunyan’s famous Christian classic, Pilgrims Progress.

This earthy focus of the Hebrew prophets was largely lost due to the influence of Hellenism in the Christian religion. We need to keep in mind that most, if not the entire New Testament, was written in Greek by authors who were either Jewish Hellenists or Gentile Hellenists.

Except for the genuine parables and sayings of the historical Jesus – a genuine Hebrew man whose native tongue was Aramaic – most of the NT documents are apocalyptic and devalue this world as an old garment that is about to be cast away (Romans 819-23). It is a “present evil world”(Galatians 1:3), and “the whole frame of this age is passing away.” (I Corinthians 7:25-31) Christians are exhorted to set their affections on a new way of life which is already in heaven where Christ sits at the right hand of God.

In other words, the focus of the NT drifts away from the Hebrew focus on this earth to one of getting into heaven. All the Hebrew talk, however, is about an exodus to the Promised Land or a return to it. In the Christian faith, however, the Promised Land is Platonically spiritualized or turned into an allegory of getting into Heaven.

We cannot, however, put any of the loss of this earthly focus down to Jesus. He was the epitome of a true Hebrew rather than a Hellenist man. His parables and aphorisms expressed an extraordinary positive view of creation – the blessings of sun and rain upon all people alike, hopeful sowing and joyous reaping, weddings and other reasons to celebrate the goodness of life in eating and drinking, birds cared for by the providence of God, lilies of the field that far exceed the splendour of any palatial robes, and children playing with complete freedom from any care.

His teaching is not focused on getting to Heaven or an afterlife there. He sees the kingdom of God that is already present if only we have eyes of faith to see it (Luke 17:20-21; 6:20; 10:9,11). In the teachings of Jesus, the Eternal Father is not in some place more than he is present in this place, nor will God’s kingdom be more present in some future time more than it is present at this time.

Since the entire New Testament was written almost entirely if not wholly by Greek-speaking Hellenists, we should not be so surprised to find that the Promised Land of the Hebrews is spiritualized to become our future life in Heaven. “Set your affections on things in heaven and not on things of the earth”, for “ the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.” “Our life is in heaven where Christ sits on the right hand of God.” The drift of the Hebrew focus and Jesus’ focus on this earth away to a focus on a heavenly home is plain to see in Hellenized Christian teaching.

(End of Brinsmead essay)

A huge “Duh”. Some comment on the primary responsibility of government to protect citizens from assaults by offenders both foreign and domestic (as in old Classic Liberal language).

A study reported in this Gutfeld episode below reveals that locking up repeat offenders significantly reduces crimes, massively so. “City Journal” reviewed crime stats that show the following:

Examples:

In 2022 in New York, shoplifting arrests involved just 327 people re-arrested some 6000-plus times as they were responsible for over one-third of such crimes. In Oakland just 0.1% of the population committed most of the city’s homicides.

In 2014, stats showed that three quarters of state prisoners had at least 5 prior arrests. Despite such evidence, many cities have implemented cashless bail, so such repeat offenders are let free repeatedly to reoffend again and again.

Kat Timpf offers that prosecutors and cities who release repeat offenders, especially violent ones, are “totally delusional”. Others on the panel say that such prosecutors and mayors have completely inverted the ideas of guilt and innocence in that shoplifters can walk out with large amounts of goods unhindered (e.g. California) while regular customers have to wait long times for store employees to come and unlock the most mundane of normal goods.

We have the same problem here in Canada where, for example, in Kelowna three offenders are responsible for a majority of crimes (i.e. hundreds) but under “catch and release” policies they continue to re-offend and are becoming more violent.

“Gutfeld! The Greg Gutfeld Show 11/26/25 FULL END SHOW | ᖴO᙭ ᗷᖇEᗩKIᑎG ᑎEᗯS November 26, 2025”, Nov. 26, 2025

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pi8rqcdzqxg

“Your welcome with Michael malice # 390 Ashley Rindsberg”

Interesting discussion on how we are propagandized by news media.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktmEIiu5odA

“Joe Rogan Experience # 2345 Roman Yampolskiy”

Joe’s guest promotes the latest apocalypse narrative- i.e. Yampolskiy’s claim that AI is the new great threat of the end of days, about to soon become the “Terminator” of humanity. Nonsense. He pushes just another rehash of age-old apocalyptic lunacy. He offers no evidence of such threat, just speculations that are clearly apocalyptically exaggerated.

Every new technology will be subject to abuse by some, but will benefit many more. That’s just life and people. A few bad apples that abuse most anything, but a majority of good folks who know better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2i9D24KQ5k

What is the real nature of good and bad?

Short answer- the Jesus theology and message of nontribal, non-dominating, and unconditional love of enemy, features that point to the nature of ultimate Good.

The opposite theology and message of Paul’s Christ (stripped to its bare bones without the merger and cloaking with the Jesus features), i.e. the Christ features of tribalism (favor true believers, damn unbelievers), dominating (ultimate totalitarian Lord demanding eternal submission and obedience, or else…), conditional (demand for sacrifice/payment, embrace of myriad religious conditions), and retaliatory destruction (apocalypse, hell)… all pointing to the essential nature of bad/evil.

My sample list again, to highlight some critical differences between good and evil:

Notable contradictions between Jesus and Paul’s 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 significantly shaped Western consciousness, narratives, and overall societies for the past two millennia (the 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:

The main contradictions: (Sources: “Search for Historical Jesus”, “Jesus Seminar” books, and notably, “Q Wisdom Sayings” research, etc.)

(1) Jesus taught an unconditional love (i.e. there is no sacrifice/payment demanded in Jesus’ original message- i.e. the “Q Wisdom Sayings” gospel). In his teaching on love there were no required conditions from his God to be met for forgiveness, inclusion, and salvation.

Versus the highly conditional atonement religion of Paul, i.e. the supreme condition of the sacrifice of a cosmic godman- the Christ. Additionally, the condition of belief/faith in his myth (see his letter to the Romans), along with myriad other related religious conditions.

(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 acts of retaliation as in apocalypse and hell myths. Note Paul’s statement of his theology affirming a retaliatory deity in his quote of an Old Testament verse- “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay’, says the Lord” (Romans 12), along with his “Lord Jesus returning in fire to destroy all who don’t believe my Christ myth” (Thessalonians, etc.).

(3) Restorative justice (again- no eye for eye, but love the offender/enemy).

Versus punitive, destroying justice (“Unbelievers will be punished with everlasting destruction”, again Thessalonians, etc.).

(4) Nonviolent resolution of problems (again, no violent retaliation against enemies).

Versus the violent destruction of apocalypse and fiery hell, and the violence in the demanded appeasement of deity by blood sacrifice for atonement- i.e. the dangerously inciting theme in the belief that if you murder the right people- i.e. sacrifice them- then you can make the future better (cloaking evil as good- people thinking that they are heroically doing good through violence and murder).

(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”).

There is no love in threat, coercion, and domination of others.

(7) Non-dualism (God as the Oneness of Ultimate Reality that is love).

Versus eternal dualism (i.e. again, the cosmic tribal dualism of “God and Satan”, “heaven and hell”).

Further, ultimate Oneness leads to the logical conclusion that there is no separation of humanity from deity, what some describe as all humanity being indwelt/incarnated by God, the divine 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 then defining our true self/person.

(8) Another- Jesus referred to himself as a “son of man”- i.e. as just another ordinary imperfect human in common with all other humans. Not as a divine person or God sent from heaven.

Versus- Paul rejected the common humanness of Jesus in claiming that he was some form of Hellenist godman sent from heaven on a special mission from God. Paul reconstructed the human Jesus after the pattern of the godmen myths of the Pharaohs and Caesars- i.e. men born of virgins so as to avoid the “inherited sinfulness” stain.

Eventually, succeeding generations of Hellenist Christianity would further the Christology of Paul in claiming their “Jesus Christ” was sinlessly perfect, something the Historical Jesus had denied, for example, when he corrected someone with- “Why do you call me ‘good’. There is none good but God.”

The heretical Hellenist Christianity of Paul eventually reconstructed the fully and truly human Jesus into a full-fledged God and member of the Trinity.

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, unconditionally loving God. This truth was expressed in his entirely new view of deity, and fortunately was included in the New Testament gospels in summaries of his statements (see Matthew 5, Luke 6).

The liberating potency of Jesus’ “stunning new theology” is blurred and “buried” (Thomas Jefferson, Leo Tolstory) because the larger New Testament context emphasizes Paul’s retaliatory, apocalyptic Christ and that dominating New Testament narrative overwhelms the central themes and message of Jesus.

Paul overturned and replaced Jesus’ wisdom sayings with his “secret wisdom of the Christ”. Paul corrected what he termed the “foolish worldly wisdom” of Jesus and his Jewish 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 corrects nothing essential. Religious reformism avoids the central issue of theology- how Paul’s Christology utterly deformed the actual historical Jesus and his message.

A lot more coming on “Panic-mongering by elites, in the service of domination and control”…

“Decolonization” is another newish strain/theme in the general push today for neo-collectivism that has already indoctrinated a majority of youth in Western liberal democracies, youth coming out of leftist universities to be the new societal leaders of our democracies. The growing crusade to replace liberal democracy with collectivism is why I cringed as a lady preacher at my daughter’s recent wedding opened with a land acknowledgement. I challenged other’s opinions, who also attended that wedding, that what the lady did was innocuous, harmless. I view such land acknowledgments as part of a more general propagandizing, indoctrination of us that goes on all across our societies now.

The obligatory mantras of land acknowledgments are elements of decolonization ideology that is, further, part of a more general neo-collectivism crusade. This is all the same old disastrous, destructive collectivism of Maoist Marxism, Stalinist Marxism, Cambodian Marxism, Venezuelan/Chavismo Marxism, etc., the same old collectivism that has destroyed societies with over 100 million people murdered across just the last century. It’s not cutesy harmless stuff. It is hellish. And thanks to work like this below, we are becoming more truly “woke” about what is actually going on.

(Insert: Collectivism views humanity as divided tribally into two groups- i.e. victimizers/victims, oppressors/oppressed, and more recently assigns people to either category based on race, as in “Woke Racism” as the new discrimination. This “neo-collectivism” still holds the old Marxist categorization criteria of property owners/capitalists as oppressors, versus those who have less of such, the propertyless, or those without capital, as the oppressed.)

Decolonization, as the author notes below, demands mass-violence on scales unheard of before. Careful what you embrace and tolerate as “harmless”.

Interesting, as in the illustration of the Squamish nation in Vancouver (just across the Lion’s Gate bridge in North Van), native groups are far more free market than city and provincial bureaucratic regulators. This illustrates again the blinding cognitive dissonance of contemporary “liberal” woke progressivism.

This from Free Press today…

From present-day pilgrims to those who arrived hundreds of years ago. . .

It’s become fashionable to argue that Thanksgiving should really be a time for mourning—and maybe to issue a land acknowledgment or two before you carve the turkey. Don’t do it! urges Noah Smith. Land acknowledgments sound righteous, but they rely on an insidious idea, he argues: that territory belongs to races, not institutions. “Decolonization” pushed to its logical end means ethnic cleansing. Read Noah on why you are not on stolen land.

“No, You Are Not on Indigenous Land: Pieces of territory belong to institutions, not to racial groups”, Noah Smith, Nov. 26, 2025

https://www.thefp.com/p/no-you-are-not-on-indigenous-land?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Smith opens with this:

“The United States, like all nations, was created through territorial conquest. Most of its current territory was occupied or frequented by human beings before the U.S. came into existence; the U.S. used force to displace, subjugate, or kill all of those people. To the extent that land ‘ownership’ existed under the previous inhabitants, the land of the U.S. is stolen land.

“This was also true before the U.S. was born. The forcible theft of the land upon which the U.S. now exists was not the first such theft; the people who lived there before conquered, displaced, or killed someone else in order to take the land. The land has been stolen and re-stolen again and again. If you somehow destroyed the United States, expelled its current inhabitants, and gave ownership of the land to the last recorded tribe that had occupied it before, you would not be returning it to its ‘original’ occupants; you would simply be handing it to the next-most-recent conquerors.”

He then asks this series of questions: That if we go back far enough then there were never original occupants of any land. There has always been some first people to enter some area and claim “This land is mine”. But, asks Smith, by what rights do they get to claim ownership of that land?

“Why does being the first person to see a natural object make you the rightful owner of that object? And why does being the first human to set foot on a piece of land give your blood descendants the right to dispose of that land as they see fit in perpetuity, and to exclude any and all others from that land? What about all the peoples of the world who were never lucky enough to be the first to lay eyes on any plot of dirt? Are they simply to be dispossessed forever?”

He continues,

“I have never seen a satisfactory answer to these questions. Nor have I seen a satisfactory explanation of why ownership of land should be allocated ‘collectively’, in terms of racial or ethnic groups.”

He explains that assigning land ownership by race is to create ethnostates, in what is known as “ethnonationalism” and most nations since the Second World War have moved away from this and now “almost all nations define citizenship and belonging through ‘institutions’ rather than race.”

He notes how this land acknowledgment thing has now become a form of ubiquitous propagandizing, mass indoctrination if you will, in our societies, especially in progressive spaces and institutions.

He rightly notes that land acknowledgments are legally incorrect. They are moral claims based on ethnonationalism, the idea that areas of land are the property of ethnic groups. And yes, as he says, they are protests against a violent history of conquest and colonization and make people feel they are fighting for marginalized and dispossessed groups.

But then he warns that the logical conclusion of this crusade will be decolonization moving to ethnic cleansing (dispossessing) that will surpass anything similar in the past. Regarding, for example, the US,

“An attempt to dispossess over 300 million people would inevitably involve violence on a colossal scale…. Once the logic of land acknowledgments and ‘decolonization’ is followed, it leads very quickly to some very dark futures…. it would be a global nightmare made real, surpassing even the horrors of previous centuries.”

Smith concludes with an example of how past injustices over land are being resolved in places like Vancouver where tribal organizations function not as ethnonationalism but as institutions incorporating into surrounding modern society with very creative projects like high-density housing under native free market practices that outperform the clogging Nimbyism of the surrounding city bureaucracy.

He ends with this as the alternative to the dark world of ethnic cleansing in the name of “decolonization”:

“American reindustrialization is being held back by a thicket of procedural requirements and local land-use regulations; if tribes were able to use their special legal status to circumvent those barriers, it could end up benefiting everyone. The tribes would get both jobs and the ability to tax local industry; America would get to execute an end run around the NIMBYs that are holding it back.”

More on this site’s project to counter “Fear and control”– How to counter the apocalyptic insanity that still dominates our age. The barbaric myth of apocalypse has erupted endlessly across history, beginning with the Sumerian Flood myth as the earliest written version of apocalyptic fear mongering (i.e. waterworks deity Enlil, planning to punish and destroy bad people). Wendell Krossa

Preface notes: The comments below are about better understanding the root contributing factors/ideas that have long validated primal fears and consequent domination/submission forms of relating, ideas that undermine freedom in liberal democracies, with crusades to re-establish domination and control coming from both sides of our societies- i.e. through the push for theocracy from the right, and the push for collectivist totalitarianism coming from the left.

Properly understanding “root contributing factors” to any form of bad, requires going to the deeply embedded “archetypes” of the human subconscious to confront inhuman/subhuman elements there and offer better alternatives to reshape our narratives. The dominant archetypes of the human subconscious were originally framed by primitive religious minds and have hardly been challenged since, being protected “under the canopy of the sacred” as unquestionable immutable divine realities. Hence, bad has long been cloaked as good.

Anyway, moving right to the point… And yes, what is advocated here, in terms of the Jesus versus Paul contradictions, is a call to embrace the death/rebirth process, the disintegration of the old and re-integration around the entirely new. A potentially traumatizing experience for many people. To let go of an old, inherited worldview or narrative, and be open to embracing an entirely new view of reality. Louis Zurcher’s call (i.e. “The Mutable Self”) to become a self in open and developing process.

Today’s point…

Julian Simon did a great job countering fear by marshalling evidence on the true state of life as being on a trajectory of ongoing improvement, countering the dominant theme today (i.e. Arthur Herman on “Declinism”) that life is declining toward something worse, toward collapse and apocalyptic ending.

But Historical Jesus did something more profound to alleviate human fear even more effectively by going directly to the core of human narratives, going to the deeply embedded archetypes of human subconscious, that influence how people shape their narratives, to transform the singularly most dominant idea of all- i.e. Ultimate Reality or deity. He dealt history’s most potent blow to the bad religious ideas of his, and all previous eras, by rejecting the psychopathology of “threat theology”. Threat theologies have long promoted the primitive mythical construct of angry, retaliatory God who manifests his enraged vengeance on humanity through the nasty elements of nature and who further terrorizes people with threats of afterlife harm in hell, giving death its real sting.

(Insert: Primitive mythologists, focusing on the nastier elements of nature and believing there were spirits behind all the diverse elements of the natural world, had “logically” concluded that those spirits/deities must be angry and were punishing people for their sins through natural disasters, disease, accidents, and predatory cruelty.)

Contradicting that primitive theology, Jesus presented his stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory, unconditional God in stating,

“There must be no more retaliatory ‘eye for eye’ justice but instead love your enemies because God does not retaliate but loves God’s enemies. How so? God gives the two most basic things for survival in agrarian society- i.e. sun and rain- generously, universally, and freely to all alike, to both good and bad people. So be unconditionally merciful, just as God is unconditionally merciful to everyone without exclusion”, (My paraphrase of the core of Jesus’ message on unconditional reality and ethics).

Jesus presented his new theology in terms of the traditional coupling of “behavior based on similar belief”. And his belief element in this coupling was the most basic of all- theology.

He recognized that the elites of his day (i.e. priesthoods) used fear of wrathful, vengeful deity to enforce human enslavement to the sacrifice industry and to enforce subjugation to related onerous religious conditions. He therefore rejected outright the theology of angry, retaliatory deity operating behind and through nature to punish people for their sins. To the contrary, he stated that the better elements of nature- i.e. sun and rain- revealed God as unconditional love for all, generously and equally.

Additionally, his new theology countered the most potent fear of all- i.e. the primal fear of the divine threat of eternal punishment in hell.

After first slaying the monster at the heart of traditional threat theology narratives, after dealing a death blow to the image of wrathful deity that had long affirmed all other fears, Jesus then also rejected the domination and control that were the outcome of such fear mongering. He stated that truly great persons do not lord over others but instead they serve others, just as he did. In stating that, he affirmed the true greatness of the God who did not dominate anyone but served all.

With such statements, Jesus confronted very directly the dominant Platonic/Hellenistic belief of his era that there were special people divinely endowed to rule all others. Hellenism had long before spread throughout the Roman empire, affirming the common belief of that era that societal rulers- i.e. emperors, pharaohs- were divine persons, validated by deity to rule commoners.

Again, Jesus stated to the contrary, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve.”

He arguments and teaching set people free to be independent, to value themselves as equal to all others, and to live as creatively self-determining persons.

Paul undid everything of value in the message of Jesus, notably by directly confronting the new theology of Jesus (i.e. the unconditional core of his message) and replacing it with his own re-affirmation of threat theology and dominating elite rule. He overturned Jesus’ breakthrough insight on non-retaliatory, unconditional theology by stating in Romans 12: 17-20, “’Vengeance is mine, I will retaliate’, says the Lord”. His God was a wrathful monster committed to ultimate retaliation through apocalypse and hell. And that threat theology further affirmed Paul’s presentation of the Christ as fulfilling the demand of angry punitive deity for ultimate sacrifice.

In re-affirming divine threat, Paul re-established the bluntest form of totalitarian promotion of “Fear=control”. After establishing his theology, Paul then constructed his Christ as the ultimate icon of domination and control- i.e. “Lord Jesus”, the supreme embodiment of lording over others, and not serving others.

Again, the contrast between Jesus and Paul on the central Ideal in human narratives of Ultimate Reality or theology:

(1) Jesus- There must be no more eye for eye retaliation but instead love your enemies because God does not do eye for eye justice but loves enemies. And the evidence of God’s inclusive, unconditional love is in the fact God gives the two most critical elements of nature for survival in agrarian society- i.e. sun and rain- to all alike, to both good and bad people. God is clearly non-retaliatory, non-vengeful, unconditionally loving. There is not threat of punishment from such a God.

(2) Paul, to the contrary, stated that God is the ultimate guarantor of retaliatory eye for eye justice. God is vengeful and will punish and destroy his enemies, the unbelievers. Directly contradicting the unconditional God of Jesus, Paul re-established God as supremely conditional, notably in the divine demand for the condition of sacrifice of a godman to pay for all human sins.

Paul stated that God also demanded that varied other religious conditions must be fulfilled if one desired to be included in his tribally limited love- i.e. conditions of belief in Paul’s Christ myth: “Through faith in Paul’s Christ we are saved from the destroying wrath of God” (Romans 3-5). That faith is to be located on Paul’s Christ myth that epitomizes the ultimate condition ever conceived in the sacrifice of a cosmic godman to appease angry deity.

Paul followed and undid all the central breakthrough insights of Jesus. He re-established fear of wrathful deity (i.e. threat theology). His apocalyptic Christ, who would return in “blazing fire” to destroy the world and thereby punish unbelievers (Thessalonians), was constructed by Paul to ensure that people would experience “Knowing the terror of the Lord” and thereby bow the knee to his new King and dominating religious system.

Paul, with his threatening apocalyptic Lord Christ, re-established human subservience and enslavement to religious authorities and religious conditions. His Christ demanded that every knee must bow to the absolute “iron rod” lordship of the totalitarian Christ. Human enslavement to elite authority (epitomized in “Lord Jesus”) was to be exhibited in the new hierarchy of husbands submitting to Christ (i.e. via submission to the mediating representatives of the Christ- i.e. submission to priests, elders, religious authorities). Then moving down Paul’s hierarchical framework, wives were told to submit to their husbands and slaves were told to submit to their masters. And all were to be subservient to governing authorities as the threatening representatives of God (Romans 13).

To any free and independently spirited dissenters, Paul’s God/Christ threatened apocalyptic destruction and eternal burning in hellfire (see Revelation for graphic detail of what Paul believed was soon coming). Paul’s new supreme archetype- i.e. “Lord Christ”- re-affirmed the previous archetypes of special elites divinely endowed to rule others, as manifested in Plato’s philosopher kings, ruling Caesars, Egyptian god-kings, “divine right of kings”, etc.

Paul’s Lord Christ took previous mythologies of elite rule to new heights of supremacy with Paul claiming that his new Lord was the ultimate King of kings, Lord of lords, over all humanity and for eternity (again, see Revelation).

See also Ephesians 1: 21, I Corinthians 15: 28, etc.

Historical Jesus, previous to Paul’s reconstruction and deformation of him as the ultimate Lord in his myth of “Lord Jesus”, had stated clearly that any lording over others was wrong. He had stated that true greatness was to serve others just as he served others, and not to lord over anyone.

Hence, James Tabor’s good summary points that are critical to understanding who Jesus actually was and what he actually taught- i.e. his actual “Q Wisdom Sayings” message. Paul contradicted the man on all the critical points that he had presented.

Tabor in “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).

Hence, the argument on this site that the “Jesus Christ” merger of Paul is an oxymoron that results in horrific cognitive dissonance. You cannot mix and merge two entirely opposite realities/persons. One represents ultimate good, the other ultimate bad.

And consider, as Tabor and others have stated, this Christ of Paul has been the most dominant and influential myth on Western consciousness, narratives, and society. Bringing the personality-deforming influence of cruel God mythology into the West to continue wreaking damage on individuals and entire societies with threats of apocalyptic destruction that terrorize populations to submissively kowtow and embrace society-ruining “salvation” schemes.

Another on- “Apocalyptic-scale panic-mongering by elites, in the service of domination and control”, Wendell Krossa (The totalitarian’s formula, “Fear=control”)

The greatest threat to liberal democracy today is coming from within our Western societies where many among today’s state elites/bureaucrats are eroding and undermining the freedoms and rights of citizens through propagandizing exaggerated narratives of fear. Whether they possess the self-awareness to recognize it, or not, the apocalyptic-scale narratives and crusades of these panic-mongering elites function to enable them to manipulate and control citizens. And the potential outcomes are not looking good, with today’s intensified tribalism, and the positioning of both sides to defeat and eliminate opponents, even with violence. Such is the result of exaggerated demonization and dehumanization of differing others. Did we learn nothing from last centuries mass-death crusades?

The governing state elites/bureaucrats appear to be sincere, though sincerely self-delusional, in their belief that they are righteous warriors, heroically fighting some great imagined/purported evil that must be defeated, vanquished, even exterminated, in order to save the elite’s imagined threatened world, a world that they exaggeratedly claim to be under “existential threat”.

The element of self-delusion in elite narratives is remarkable. Many governing elites in varied Western liberal democracies sincerely believe that true democracy can only be the society that is controlled by them and any dissent to this bubble narrative is evil “disinformation” that threatens all good and hence must be censored, banned, even criminalized. To “save the world”.

The unrecognized, unadmitted “evil” of what these elites are doing (i.e. the righteous manipulation, control, domination of others) is then cloaked as good. Believing the lie that they have embraced, they validate all they do as “just, honorable, good”, even to the desperate measure of violence against opponents as necessary to maintain/attain their vision of greater good (again, “good” meaning them in power, in control), with destruction of opposing others and their policies as necessary to achieve salvation, to achieve a millennial utopian outcome, or to restore a lost paradise.

Such deformity of the hero’s quest results from lack of self-awareness that the real evil in life, the real enemy and monster, is inside all of us- i.e. the evil triad of tribalism, domination, and punitive destruction that many justify/validate with religious themes, notably validating with a God of similar evil triad traits. We all tend to protect our narratives and outcomes with ultimate validation that is beyond question or challenge. And my consistent point here- The Lord Christ myth of Paul has played the dominant role in Western civilization in validating the unleashing of the elite impulse to domination.

There is further “cloaking of evil with good” in elites framing their controlling policies in terms of “compassion for oppressed, empathy for victims, or for the greater or common good”, etc.

But note the outcomes of what we defend and promote- especially evidence of mass-harm from our policies. Undeniable evidence of outcomes should snap most minimally rational people back to reality. “The test of facts/outcomes” should signal to most of us that our empathy may be “suicidal”, as in things like:

(1) Uncontrolled migration, open borders and failed multiculturalism that allows in those committed to destroy liberal democracy with Marxist/socialist collectivism or Islamist theocracy.

(2) Criminal justice that lets repeat violent offenders free, soft on crime (“suicidal empathy”) polices that ignore the priority responsibility of government to protect innocents.

(3) Policies that expand state intervention and control (the real textbook “fascism”) through increased taxation (i.e. elites believing that they know better how to spend commoner’s income- Plato’s philosopher king pathology) and expanded regulation that intervenes and controls more and more of citizen’s lives, undermining freedom for self-determination, hindering individual free choice.

Such policies undermine the basic principles of liberal democracy where states should serve the people, govern by consent of the governed, and constantly redistribute power and control back to the people (i.e. the only redistribution that really matters to protect and maintain true liberal democracy). Power is redistributed back to the people through policies of decreased taxation and regulations. Giving citizens more control over their incomes and lives. That is how you defend against fascism (i.e. where state elites dictate/coerce private commercial activity), and counter elite domination and control.

Panic-mongering by elites, in the service of domination and control, Wendell Krossa (On the totalitarian’s formula- “Fear=control”)

“In the panic age, nothing offends like optimism”, Matt Taibbi (Racket News).

Other points on “Terrorizing/traumatizing people with fear”.

Bad ideas incite and validate the wrong types of fear. There are valid forms of fear all throughout life. But bad ideas validate bad people using unnecessary forms of fear to dominate and control others, resulting in the manipulation of populations to embrace destructive “salvation” schemes.

Psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo in “Cruel God, Kind God”: “Images of God as cruel and vengeful have serious consequences in the psychological realm- i.e. ‘fear, guilt, shame, and impoverished personalities’.”

A major project/goal of this site is to present evidence/insights that clearly affirm the re-assurance argument that “It’s going to be alright, ultimately for everyone”. And related- To counter the elite use of fear to intervene in other’s lives, to indoctrinate, manipulate, and control others. The goal is to protect the freedom and rights of all individuals, equally.

Project:

Re-assuring people with love and hope is what the “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory, unconditional God” intended, as presented in the message of Historical Jesus. That single most profound insight/discovery transforms and shifts the narratives of life away from their millennia-long history of promoting threat theology that traumatizes human minds and emotions and thereby deforms human motivations and behaviors.

Jesus’ “greatest contribution to the history of human ideas” (James Robinson) re-orients human narratives toward comforting hope by overturning the threat theology mythology that has darkened the very core of all human meta-narratives from the beginning. When you counter false fears you protect the freedom of people from manipulation and control by power-seeking elites.

There are enough things to be cautious about in life. We don’t need the extra enslaving burden of unnecessarily exaggerated fears, especially when used by bullies- i.e. religious, secular, or other- to manipulate and control us, to undermine our freedom and rational self-determination, subjecting us to endless harmful “salvation through destruction” schemes.

A prominent objective on this site, arising from a fundamental motivating intention of mine as a father, is to alleviate fear, to counter unnecessary fear, notably the exaggerated fear that is constantly incited by media over the great fraud of looming, imminent apocalypse of some kind- i.e. whether in the media-generated hysteria over natural climate change, or outrage over differing others, disagreeing others who are portrayed as evil enemies who threaten democracy or threaten our very existence (i.e. the evil “deniers” to the climate apocalypse narrative).

The panic-mongering hysteria plays on people’s deeply embedded fear of the loss of ordered, peaceful existence and “return to chaos” (e.g. Mircea Eliade in “The Eternal Return”). Panic-mongering over looming apocalypse incites the survival impulse as nothing else does. And that robs people of their freedom by overwhelming their rational capacities with fear, rendering them susceptible to “madness of crowd” eruptions of hysteria where apocalyptic prophets coerce people, through co-opting state powers, to embrace “salvation through destruction” crusades. The elites in those collectivist programs demand subservient enslavement with severe threats and punishments for any dissenters/”deniers” who dare to voice any heresy to their dogma.

The single most potent idea that centers and fuels the varied public narratives of apocalypse is the fallacy of a retaliatory, punitive, destroying deity who punishes people through the natural world (i.e. natural disasters, disease, etc.), and worse, threatens after-life harm in hell, adding unnecessary sting to normal death concerns. There are both religious and secular versions of this threat theology (i.e. angry God, then vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, payback karma).

Personal example of how threat theology incites deforming fear: Muhammad Ali spent the latter part of his life, according to his wife, doing good works to balance the bad behavior of his earlier years, as his response to his terror of the Islamic judgment and hell. He even, apparently, carried a match in his pocket to light and burn his finger when he faced temptation, to remind himself that hell was a far worse fire than that.

The promotion of unnecessary fear

Based on the research of historians/mythologists, we know that status-seeking elites have long used fear to control others, to subjugate others to irrational salvation schemes, to embrace unworkable and destructive utopian visions. Consequently, elites have repeatedly undermined human freedom and progress and destroyed societies in the process of enforcing their fear-based domination over others. They have pushed forward their crusades of domination, guided and inspired by the core mythology of “salvation through destruction”, a mythical theme that validates the murder of opponents/innocents (removing some “evil” threat to life) as necessary to attain some imagined salvation.

This site has repeatedly posted the research of historians Arthur Herman, Richard Landes, Arthur Mendel, David Redles, and others, on modern “secular” versions of apocalyptic millennial crusades.

We have seen this “salvation through destruction” at mass-death scale in past religious apocalyptic millennial crusades, and most insanely in last century’s secular equivalents that framed their crusades with the same complex of bad religious ideas- i.e. the crusades of Marxism, Nazism, and environmental alarmism.

The repeated outcomes of apocalyptic millennial crusades have been immeasurably destructive. How many repeats of Venezuela do we need until we get the point? Venezuela should have been among the richest, most successful societies on earth today. And watch Germany now sinking under Net Zero madness (links below), with Britain following. The US just dodged a huge bullet when it almost repeating the destructiveness of the Obama/Biden climate madness with the potential election of Kamala Harris.

Prehistorians (e.g. John Pfeiffer in “Explosion: An inquiry into the origins of art and religion”) have shown us how the “fear=control” formula was used in the earliest attempts at formulating religion, where primitive shaman initiated the first moves toward elitism in elevating themselves over their fellow tribe members. They did that by claiming to know the secrets of the invisible realm of spirits. They re-enforced their claims to elite status by taking their fellow tribals into the darkest interiors of caves to scare them with “anamorphic” art (i.e. painted animal/human figures on walls that appeared to move in flickering candlelight).

Insert: See Wikipedia on “Anamorphosis”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anamorphosis

Out of that earliest unleashing of the impulse to domination by using “metaphysically-oriented fear”, there emerged expanding belief systems, religious laws and rituals, the sacrifice industry (to appease supposed angry gods), and widespread control of resources as the priesthoods in later states established their temples at the center of settlements on raised ziggurats, to symbolically and literally manifest their domination of early human communities.

The shaman/priests did not function separately from political rule, much like the later godmen Pharaohs, Ceasars as divine, etc., all modelled similarly to Plato’s later myth of special people who were divinely endowed or blessed and therefore divinely authorized to rule commoners. So also, the later “divine right of kings” was validated by the earlier archetypes.

The divinely validated domination of commoners by elite godmen was epitomized by Paul in his “Lord Jesus” myth of the ultimate archetypal divine ruler, who would rule with absolutist totalitarian “rod of iron” tyranny. Paul and the New Testament claim that history will end with the ultimate totalitarianism of Lord Christ ruling with “rod of iron” tyranny in a Kingdom of God utopia, as portrayed in Revelation.

Paul was obsessed with ultimate power and domination, no doubt due to his admiration of Plato’s philosopher kings and wanting to outdo that with his new theology, where he constructed an even more powerful King to outpower and overpower all other kings. He gave new meaning to “the fear of the Lord” as his Christ threatened punishment and destruction for any refusing to bow the knee, punishment and destruction at scales and degrees never before imagined- i.e. eternal and infinite punishment for any persons from across all history who refuse to submit.

Again, echoing James Tabor’s point- This Christ myth of Paul has been the most influential and dominant archetype influencing Western consciousness, narratives, and society.

The Palestinian commoner Jesus had stood against such power-mongering tyranny with his blunt message that:

“You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those in high positions act as tyrants over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be greatest must be the slave of all. For even (me), just another common human being (i.e. the “son of man”), did not come to be served, but to serve.”

Jesus’ rejection of tyranny by deity, and by the self-proclaimed representatives of deity, was prefaced with his new theology of an unconditional God who did not threaten anyone, who included and loved all equally. True greatness in God and people (“God is great”), according to Jesus, was in serving and not lording over anyone. That should have been a death-blow to Paul’s later myths of “Lord Jesus”.

Again, when Paul took a human wisdom sage, a common man no different from the rest of us (i.e. a “son of man”, a common human), a poor Palestinian wisdom story-teller, and made that Jewish sage into a Hellenistic Gentile God, he thereby constructed the epitome icon in the madness of creating myths of threat theology to validate domination of others- i.e. “King Jesus”.

Paul took up elements of an earlier Jewish Messiah mythology to incorporate into his Christological process of reconstructing Jesus into a God.

The full divinization of the man Jesus, the complete process of Christology that turned a Palestinian wisdom sage into a Hellenistic God (the ultimate embodiment of Plato’s “philosopher king” elitism), was a process that took several centuries following Paul’s initiation of the process and was accomplished through Christian Councils that eventually resulted in the full divine validation for their Christ to rule over subjugated followers, and as proxies of the Christ, to also validate their rule over the church.

The Christian councils were kind of like today’s annual COP gatherings of the climate apocalyptic prophets as essential to their project to assert their authority over all the planet.

But this on the early Christian councils:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_seven_ecumenical_councils

“AI Overview:

“Yes, early Christian councils, primarily the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, established the divinity of Jesus by affirming he was “of one substance” with God the Father, rejecting the Arian view that Christ was a created being. The First Council of Constantinople in 381 AD later reaffirmed this, solidifying the Nicene Creed and its orthodox position on the Trinity.

“Key councils and their contributions:

• First Council of Nicaea (325 AD):

o Convened to address the heresy of Arianism, which claimed Jesus was a created being, not fully divine.
o Declared Jesus as “homoousios” (of the same substance/being) as the Father.
o Formulated the original Nicene Creed, which affirmed the divinity of Jesus.

• First Council of Constantinople (381 AD):

o Reaffirmed the decisions made at Nicaea.
o Addressed other issues, such as Apollinarianism.
o Ratified the Nicene Creed, cementing the doctrine of the Trinity.

• Council of Ephesus (431 AD):

o Focused on the person of Christ.
o Refuted Nestorianism and declared Jesus as one person.

• Council of Chalcedon (451 AD):

o Defined the two natures of Christ: fully divine and fully human, but one person.
o Condemned Eutychianism

(End of AI Overview on Christian councils)

Note, as Bob Brinsmead repeatedly tells us, that there is nothing in the products of these church councils about the actual message of Jesus to love enemies unconditionally and thereby become like God who is unconditional love (“Be unconditionally merciful just as your Father is unconditionally merciful”, as illustrated in the preceding list of Luke 6: 27-36 ethical statements).

To the contrary, the councils are all about Paul’s new message about that man Jesus, not about his message. The point? Calvin, for example, killed a fellow Christian theologian for disagreeing over the divinity of Jesus where if Calvin had focused on Jesus’ message of love your enemies, he would not have done that. Genevan Christians urged Calvin to love his “enemies”, but he rejected their pleas stating that he felt the higher obligation to uphold the honor of Christ/God. Paul’s message about the man took precedence over the actual message of the man. Loyalty to things placed above people leads to neglect and abuse of real people.

Constructing the ultimate Totalitarian

By establishing Jesus as God and as ultimate “Lord”, Christianity was reaching for a totalitarianism unlike anything that had existed before. Their supreme Lord (“King of all kings”) would be the cosmically universal Ruler for all humanity across all history, the cosmic Lord of the Zoroastrian myth who would defeat all evil, all unbelievers, all opposition in the greatest war ever as illustrated and prophesied in the great Armageddon of Revelation. Lord Christ would defeat all enemies, all who refused to bow the knee (“unbelievers in the Christ myth”).

Paul’s Christ demanded the absolute submission of all people and forever, with threats of horrific torture and punishment for any disagreement, any free spirit dissent.

Paul was motivated by his own personal fear of primitive threat theology/mythology, and he re-embodied that fear in his Christ, i.e. “knowing the terror of the Lord”. His theology then fueled his demand for submission to his new religion as the necessary condition to avoid punishment and gain salvation.

The domination of threatening Lord Jesus became the most horrific expression of totalitarianism ever imagined and yet billions still bow in reverent worship of this grotesque mental deformity.

There is an interesting commentary on this is in Alex Garcia’s “Alpha God”.

“Alpha God: The Psychology of Religious Violence and Oppression”, Hector Garcia, 2015

Amazon blurb:

“This book uses evolutionary psychology as a lens to explain religious violence and oppression. The author, a clinical psychologist, examines religious scriptures, rituals, and canon law, highlighting the many ways in which our evolutionary legacy has shaped the development of religion and continues to profoundly influence its expression. The book focuses on the image of God as the dominant male in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. This traditional God concept is seen as a reflection of the “dominant ape” paradigm so evident in the hierarchical social structures of primates, with whom we have a strong genetic connection.

“The author describes the main features of male-dominated primate social hierarchies- specifically, the role of the alpha male as the protector of the group; his sexual dominance and use of violence and oppression to attain food, females, and territory; in-group altruism vs. out-group hostility (us vs. them); and displays of dominance and submission to establish roles within the social hierarchy.

“The parallels between these features of primate society and human religious rituals and concepts make it clear that religion, especially its oppressive and violent tendencies, is rooted in the deep evolutionary past. This incisive analysis goes a long way toward explaining the historic and ongoing violence committed in the name of religion.”

(End of Amazon blurb)

We need Charles Templeton’s caution about what exactly we are worshipping. He stated that any person demanding to be the center of attention and demanding constant praise of his greatness, on pain of death, was an Idi Amin character. In stating that he exposed another example of the cloaking of bad with good.

The character of what we believe in, admire, and follow matters because “we become just like the God/ultimate ideal that we believe in”.

Does something of the prominent influence of Paul’s Christ in Western societies fuel, for example, American exceptionalism and the quest of some for American empire and world domination? There is the good side of the America project in fighting for the spread of democracy worldwide, and that is sincere and honorable. But that too often has been used to cloak something else that is not so honorable- the access to and control of other’s resources Again, see that first Joe Rogan interview of Mike Benz in early 2025.

Mike Benz revealed, in his two appearances on Joe Rogan, how state elites are trying to control public narratives that then affirm and validate their control of populations. That control requires the suppression of counter narratives, populist dissent. Dissenting narratives that are trying to re-affirm liberal democracy are demonized as “disinformation, Right-wing extremism”, and then censored, shadow-banned, even criminalized through things like “Online Harm” bills, where evil is cloaked as good with claims that projects against “disinformation” are to protect children from harm. People in Britain today are arrested in the thousands every year just for politically incorrect speech online, for dissenting from state-approved narratives.

And there is still more to come…