A Stab at the Christian Myth

The Virgin Birth

The Angel Gabriel - the strength of God - is sent to Mary and tells her to name him Jesus - Yeshua.

Let's look beyond the metaphor at the actual lived reality. The pain of childbirth requires the strength of God; Immanuel, "God is with us", is his name. It's helpful to have an attitude of trust for the Universe if the pregnancy is to go swimmingly.

Yeshua means "salvation": salvation from what? Perhaps salvation from the social structure set up by elites - by the 'wanderers' who worship power. Being Human in a deluded social world necessarily means you will evolve a false self that is needing what??? Salvation. But from whence does this salvation come? From the virgin birth - that is, from the attachment dynamic between mother and baby. It is from here, from this formative experience with ones mother, that the capacity to love is born, and hence, the capacity to love others, the world, and the universe.

Mary comes from the Hebrew word "mar" - bitter. What is Mary, and what is Joseph? Joseph, "Yosef", means "to add", and it is specifically he, Joseph, who is first greeted by the angel of YHWH. What does this mean? Since YHWH means "being" - the being of the universe - Joseph must be that part of our mind that seeks to "add" to its experience: the reflective part which seeks to make itself happier. Joseph was about to dismiss Mary -the bitter, shameful, traumatized body - on the grounds that other's thought of her in a shameful way. It took a reflection on the nature of his being - that is, the minds reflection on its being - which changed his attitude.

The Virgin birth is therefore quite clearly a reference to the 'non-essential' influence of the male/mind in the emergence of love. God is present in that interaction between mother and baby. Yet, again, that baby's gonna grow up in a deluded world, and its need for salvation - the human need for salvation - is constantly contested left, right and center. Yet Jesus - yeshua - is the experience of all of us who seek to understand ourselves and transcend our issues. This is the probable meaning of the gospels..

You Must Die to Know Your Self

What has to die? The fallen, misshapen self formed under the thumb of secret influences isn't real good at thinking or understanding - and why? Because it exists from a limited epistemological basis - it knows from the perspective of the 'fallen' or egotistical self. Jesus is constantly grating at people - constantly in conflict, and it doesn't help, does it? He preaches a true doctrine which, like Socrates, leads to various antagonisms between self and other. And the elites do a good job appealing to the egos of cognitively underdeveloped (in this case represented by the Pharisees) selves to create problems for the awaken self.

Yet, the problems are paradoxically folded into the solution, as the tensions actually lead to a greater trauma, until finally, bam! the self which seeks salvation in the world, in life, finds its true self within itself. The salvation comes from three - and hence, on the third day, in relating to the world with the logic of thesis/antithesis/synthesis, the fallen self, or egotistical self, is able to realize its unity with the universe through the logic of three.

Make sense?

a reply to: Astrocyte

A question: so you are thinking of what it means in your opinion and dismissing what the entire Bible says about Jesus, salvation, the purpose of a virgin birth?

And so, I cannot agree with your thoughts. However, it was an interesting read, truly (meant with all honesty).

a reply to: Astrocyte

Look up a picture of Isis holding Horace on her lap.

If you want The complete picture of what the Abrahamic religions are trying to portray. You should start with early Sumarian writings, and work your way up through all of the other early middle eastern teachings. You’re basically starting in the middle of the story if all you are focusing on is the Christian Bible.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Good post! "Love life and everything God created, and you'll be fine", is what I gleaned from your wisdom.

a reply to: Astrocyte

The enuma elish is the best place to start.

youtu.be...

If you are familiar with the old testament, This will sound familiar from the start.

Then look up how many thousands of years stand between these two texts. You might be surprised to find out how many reboots this story has had.

When you finish that, listen to this.

youtu.be...

a reply to: Astrocyte

I think it's more important to let yourself define you rather than an ideology.

I think that may be a different take on what you were going for, but possibly the same result from a different approach.

If you can find comfort in what you believe, you can navigate the bat sh## crazy world we live in with infinite different external ideas and find solace.

I think finding your way is just as important as not getting stuck on it. The contrast should further align you rather than seeking confirmation in the same thought.

Symbology was big back then, but now we are compelled to throw a critical eye on a message that was not intended to be analyzed that way. Actually our ancestors were much better at critical thinking, than we are.

I say we should leave our myths alone if we cannot add anything that makes them better than they already are.

I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person who was crucified by the Romans (at the behest of the top-tier Jewish preists in Jerusalem) and then returned to life, so I won't comment on your well-written take on the story.


I do, though, want to ask the artists' names for the two paintings you chose? Curious. I love the one of the cross- it's beautiful. The one with Mary and infant Jesus is somewhat freaky; Depictions of the baby Jesus during that time period (I THINK sometime in the teens? 1300 or 1500 AD?) all painted a man's face on a baby's body for some reason. A little disturbing. 😂 Also- is that man-baby holding an APPLE?! That is messed up.

originally posted by: KansasGirl
I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person who was crucified by the Romans (at the behest of the top-tier Jewish preists in Jerusalem) and then returned to life, so I won't comment on your well-written take on the story.


I do, though, want to ask the artists' names for the two paintings you chose? Curious. I love the one of the cross- it's beautiful. The one with Mary and infant Jesus is somewhat freaky; Depictions of the baby Jesus during that time period (I THINK sometime in the teens? 1300 or 1500 AD?) all painted a man's face on a baby's body for some reason. A little disturbing. 😂 Also- is that man-baby holding an APPLE?! That is messed up.

You should follow the rabit hole i left up there in my earlier post. Anyone who thinks that Jesus was a real person hasn’t read up on the origins of Judaism and Christianity.

Woodcarver you are suggesting that the old testament pretty much did not happen and it was all made up, that's great for you and your esoteric myth believing cult buddies in your boy's club but actually utterly wrong in actual truth.

It did happen so I would suggest you look at these and think about that claim that the Egyptian text is thousands of years older when in fact it may be the same age - then think on how two perspectives can interpret the same thing differently.

As for your claim about Isis, her birth of Horus was not a virgin birth she took a branch which can be interpreted to mean a relative of Osiris to replace his penis so she used a surrogate to get pregnant then declared the kid to be Osiris son which if the surrogate was a relative could be taken as fair under ancient tribal laws since the son was then given to the deceased as his heir.

arkdiscovery.com...

wyattmuseum.com...

Now I can not convince you but I can try.

You are discovering the archetypal layer. When the Truth came manifest, it is true on all layers: literal and parabolic/symbolic. I think you are spot on with the death-to-self/ego, because it is said clearly multiple times by salvation itself that you must give up everything you own if you wish to follow the Way into the Kingdom of Heaven. Otherwise you will live in mitsrayim (Egypt - meaning "shut-in"), or drunk with the luxuries of Babel (Babylon - meaning "confusion").

It is those who are bitter with this world (miryam/Mary) who are able to conceive this immaculate Truth.

a reply to: Woodcarver

Once touched, it can never be acknowledged that it is untouched.

Perhaps symbology that tells the same story, but the characters did exist.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: KansasGirl
I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person who was crucified by the Romans (at the behest of the top-tier Jewish preists in Jerusalem) and then returned to life, so I won't comment on your well-written take on the story.


I do, though, want to ask the artists' names for the two paintings you chose? Curious. I love the one of the cross- it's beautiful. The one with Mary and infant Jesus is somewhat freaky; Depictions of the baby Jesus during that time period (I THINK sometime in the teens? 1300 or 1500 AD?) all painted a man's face on a baby's body for some reason. A little disturbing. 😂 Also- is that man-baby holding an APPLE?! That is messed up.

You should follow the rabit hole i left up there in my earlier post. Anyone who thinks that Jesus was a real person hasn’t read up on the origins of Judaism and Christianity.

I have followed deeply into that rabbit hole before along with many others. But thanks for thinking of of me.

a reply to: charlyv

Sadly staunch "Christians" mistake the Bible as a true and faithful narrative of what happened.

When it is, in fact, a mish mash of Myths and legends of the preceding millennia, borrowed from those great civilisations that came before, in the region.

The fact that the Romans altered it to their own "Culture" adds even more doubt to the whole Story.

Childbirth, 2000 years ago was quite a traumatic time for most woman...particularly those that are to have their First "Virgin" birth.....their First one.
Im sure the general culture of childbirth was seen in a different light to now......whereas a young woman actually surviving the birth, let alone the child....would be seen as some sort of Deity (God) given "Miracle"...

Considering if there was a "Mary", she probably would have been Very young at the time....if Jesus was her first, then she could have been 11,12, 13 years old, certainly that was the norm of the time.

So, perhaps young girls were considered Virgins, ie her First Birth from being a Child turning into a woman, in a cultural way, even though they were married and such.

Who knows what cultural reference the nomadic Arabs and Jews put on childbirth.

I think it may have been treated with some excitement by the tribes of the period, in that area. As it was elsewhere one would think.
Life was hard in those days, we are told....unless one was a Roman or other culture aristocrat.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: Astrocyte

The enuma elish is the best place to start.

youtu.be...

Similarities among the histories of various cultures would be expected. Notice how they're not a copy and paste job, but instead share integral similarities that insist that this was actually the way the world came to be. These cultures were very close to the beginning, and had a familiarity with how it happened. You assume Hebrew history simply stole aspects from the Sumerian story, because that is what you want to conclude. But in actuality both accounts are simply telling the same historical event matter-of-factly.

People still believing in Bronze Age stories after we've sent men to the moon and mapped the human genome is so laughable. Explaining why it's bull# over and over again is like banging your head against a brick wall. People who get it get it, people who don't probably never will.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
Woodcarver you are suggesting that the old testament pretty much did not happen and it was all made up, that's great for you and your esoteric myth believing cult buddies in your boy's club but actually utterly wrong in actual truth.

It did happen so I would suggest you look at these and think about that claim that the Egyptian text is thousands of years older when in fact it may be the same age - then think on how two perspectives can interpret the same thing differently.

As for your claim about Isis, her birth of Horus was not a virgin birth she took a branch which can be interpreted to mean a relative of Osiris to replace his penis so she used a surrogate to get pregnant then declared the kid to be Osiris son which if the surrogate was a relative could be taken as fair under ancient tribal laws since the son was then given to the deceased as his heir.

arkdiscovery.com...

wyattmuseum.com...

Now I can not convince you but I can try.

I stopped going to masonic medtings 20 years ago. Have you ever read the enuma elish?

originally posted by: charlyv
a reply to: Woodcarver

Once touched, it can never be acknowledged that it is untouched.

Perhaps symbology that tells the same story, but the characters did exist.

The stories existed long before they were put into the bible. Have you ever read the enuma elish?

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: KansasGirl
I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical person who was crucified by the Romans (at the behest of the top-tier Jewish preists in Jerusalem) and then returned to life, so I won't comment on your well-written take on the story.


I do, though, want to ask the artists' names for the two paintings you chose? Curious. I love the one of the cross- it's beautiful. The one with Mary and infant Jesus is somewhat freaky; Depictions of the baby Jesus during that time period (I THINK sometime in the teens? 1300 or 1500 AD?) all painted a man's face on a baby's body for some reason. A little disturbing. 😂 Also- is that man-baby holding an APPLE?! That is messed up.

You should follow the rabit hole i left up there in my earlier post. Anyone who thinks that Jesus was a real person hasn’t read up on the origins of Judaism and Christianity.

I have followed deeply into that rabbit hole before along with many others. But thanks for thinking of of me.

Have you ever read the enuma elish?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: Astrocyte

The enuma elish is the best place to start.

youtu.be...

Similarities among the histories of various cultures would be expected. Notice how they're not a copy and paste job, but instead share integral similarities that insist that this was actually the way the world came to be. These cultures were very close to the beginning, and had a familiarity with how it happened. You assume Hebrew history simply stole aspects from the Sumerian story, because that is what you want to conclude. But in actuality both accounts are simply telling the same historical event matter-of-factly.

They were also translated thousands of years apart. It really is a copy paste job if you study it. Have you ever read the Enuma elish?