A HERMENEUTIC OF JUDEO-CHRISTIAN VALUES

(An Agnostic's Take on the Significance of Christian Virtues)

By Daniel Allen Kelley

OVERVIEW: To demonstrate how Judeo/Christian Values were instantiated, despite the

resistance of all parties involved, via a codification process using native and neighboring myths
as mythical time-capsules. This was accomplished largely through the pioneering work of
St.Paul, who borrowed the customs of the cultures he was trying to convert. The result wasn't
unlike what happened to Buddhism in China and Japan. The Dharma migrated from India to
China, merged with Taoism, then moved to Japan, merged with their customs and became what
we now know as Zen. This was NOT a smooth process. But the battle scars and lessons
gleaned from the process give new flavor to the message of the Buddha. Similarly, in 1st
Century Palestine, early Christianity was given a wide berth by the Hebrews and Romans. The
disparity between the personalities of the historical Jesus and that of St. Paul's Christ may be
due to a deliberate AND unconscious gerrymandering of the story we now recognize as the
Gospels. In any case, this hybridization served as a mythological time-capsule, preserving both
the battle scars and the boons of the religion that shaped the Western world.

INTRODUCTION: The Purpose of this Essay

I was raised Christian. But long study, extensive honest appraisal of Judeo-Christian tenets, and
a plethora of unanswered questions have led me to rest in my current Agnostic position.
Perhaps the stories in the Bible are true to some small degree. Still, I try not to draw any
conclusions that amount to an attempt to domesticate the Divine.

After decades of pursuing other spiritual paths and injunctions, I took upon myself the task of
formulating my own hierarchy of Values and commensurate Virtues (and their opposites). This
enterprise took me eight months just to flesh out a basic outline. The way I proceeded was by
examining, as best I could, the fundamental hierarchy of Values of the world's Wisdom
Traditions. Once I had my list of spiritual traditions, religions, and injunctions, I then proceeded
to examine them against two basic backgrounds. The first was the cultural and political milieu in
which they arose. The second was the central Value (s) of the tradition's respective founders.
How and why these Values were accepted or rejected by the status quo is very important, as it
reveals the unpredictable effects that Truth has on the body politic of a given time or place. For
example, when Buddhism arose in India, it immediately clashed with many of the Yoga and
Hindu sects of the time. This animosity followed Buddhism like a shadow throughout its career
in India, until pressure from the Brahmans and Jains, coupled with lack of support from the laity,
Buddhism was finally chased by this shadow into the ambivalent arms of China. In China, during
the Eastern Han Dynasty, Buddhism found a relatively stable home. But this wasn't to last very
long, and Buddhism maintained a precarious residency in China until, again, it had to migrate to
Japan.

It's important to note that the political reception and backlash against many religions,
philosophies, and spiritual traditions, aren't always related to the "truths" espoused by a given
creed. In the example of Buddhism, the Tang Emperor of China, Wu Zhong, launched a
relentless campaign against the Dharma on the grounds that foreign influences weakened the
realm. However, if we look to Buddhism's decline in the country of its birth, we see that the basic
umbrage of the Hindus centered on the fact that Buddhism didn't recognize and honor the Hindu
gods. Instead, the founder of Buddhism (Siddhartha) stripped Hinduism down to its essence,
conserving the meditation disciplines but jettisoning the Hindu pantheon of deities. This, no
doubt, angered the Brahmans, whose power was rooted in the rituals, customs, and myths of
Hinduism. In short, the "truth" embodied in the person of the Buddha was an affront to the
corruption of the sacerdotal Caste of India.

We see a similar dialectic in first century Palestine, when an itinerant preacher from Nazareth
began speaking out against the corrupt High Priests of Jerusalem. To be clear, the historical
Jesus requires a separate analysis from that of the Christ of St. Paul. Still, one feature of
personality is shared by both the historical Jesus and that of St. Paul's Christ. To uncover what
this feature is, we must ask ourselves why the Nazarene was put to death in the first place. In
his controversial book, Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, author Reza Aslan
makes a persuasive case for the argument that Jesus was just one among many Hebrew
zealots of his time. Aslan points out, for example, the disparity between the peaceful and
effeminate Jesus of St. Paul and the rather bellicose Jesus of Matthew 10:34 or Luke 22:36. In
the aforementioned Biblical passages, Jesus explicitly makes declarations of war, not peace
and love. The latter of these passages reads:

"But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your
cloak and buy one."

And the former of these passages reads:

"Think not that I have come to bring peace. I have not come to bring peace, but a Sword."

It's almost certainly true that the historical Jesus was referring to an actual sword in the
aforementioned Bible verses. I'm not contesting that. However, the Sword has often been used
as a symbol of the Logos, which is a Greek word that means "truthful expression", especially
that of speech. St. Paul, well-acquainted with Greek and Hebrew concepts alike, associated
Christ with the Logos. His student and scribe, Luke, also references the Logos (Luke 1:2), as
does the book of John (John 1:1). In the "trinitarian" scheme of Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost---though these are thought to be of a piece---the Logos is associated with the Holy Spirit.
Because the Logos is that which is the First Principle (the realest of real), its guiding star is
truthful speech and integrity. This may be why, when Jesus performs miracles and is accused of
using black magic, that he angrily protests, saying:

"Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. And so I
tell you, any sin and blasphemy can be forgiven. But blasphemy against the Spirit will not be
forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who
speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."
(Matthew 12:30-32).

By defending the Holy Spirit, Was Jesus defending his integrity?

In Hebrews 4:12, God refers to his Word as a "two-edged sword". Also, in Corinthians 10:4-5,
weapons are used as metaphors for qualities of character that expose evil and falsehoods. St.
Paul, in the book of Ephesians, admonishes followers of Christ to "put on the Armor of God".
Among the items on this divine armor is the Sword of the Spirit; a reference to courageous
commitment to the Truth in the face of corruption and falsehood.

The Canadian psychologist and professor, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, also extricates Christ from
the historical Jesus and associates him with truthful speech and integrity. In many ways, St.
Paul did the same thing in his lifetime, and I personally see Dr. Peterson as a modern-day St.
Paul (and I mean that kindly!). As for myself, I agree with St. Paul and the good doctor, insofar
as their teasing apart the message from the messenger goes. And I'm presently going to offer a
hypothetical interpretation of how one of the core Values of the Christian faith---that of faith in
the Logos of truthful speech---wasn't only shared by the historical Jesus and archetypal Christ,
but was hedged about by the attendant Virtues embodied in the unique personalities of the
twelve Apostles.

Christ himself embodies all of the Virtues: Faith, Honesty, Loyalty, Love, Courage, and Tenacity,
to name a few. But his true power was found in his willingness to speak and show, by way of
example, how Truthfulness cuts through the thick weeds of falsehood, hypocrisy, and corruption.
Historically speaking, Jesus's crucifixion on the hill of Golgotha may be considered a failure. It
was, after all, the standard Roman punishment for crimes of sedition (i.e., aspiring to kingly
rule). But looking at the Crucifixion as an archetype, we see that his sacrifice was the sacrifice of
all men and women who carry the light of Truth as far down into the Pit as they can manage. For
instance, at one point during the crucifixion, Jesus exclaims:

"Father! Forgive them, for they know not what they do."

What does this mean?

I believe that the point of this utterance, real or myth, is to highlight the fact that we're all
governed by impulses both blind and blinding. For example, it's often true that anger just masks
heartbreak. In such a case, the anger may be real, but the sorrow beneath it is more real. It's
literally more true than the anger. Thus, Jesus's plea for divine pardon on behalf of his own
murderers is a reflection of his knowledge of this fact. Jesus saw that the men who were
hammering nails into his body and mocking him were under some sort of spell. Their capacity
for sober and enlightened discernment was either missing or asleep. If you've ever been guilty
of making an error of judgement while intoxicated by alcohol, you can understand what I mean
here!

So, for the purposes of this humble essay, Christ represents the Logos. Following in the same
line of thought as St. Paul, St. John, Carl Jung, Dr. Peterson, and many other thinkers, I'll
attempt to "tell a story" of how the basic moral tenets of Christianity were ensconced in the
archetypal myth of Christ and his twelve Apostles. Again, I'm not making an argument for or
against the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. My goal is twofold:

1. To demonstrate how and why the core Values of the Christian faith conflicted with the
lies prevalent in the political and religious social structure of first Century Palestine.
2. To hypothesize that these core Values were codified as myth in the personalities of
Christ and his twelve Apostles.

It's no secret that the New Testament of the Bible is heavily marinated in Platonic concepts.
Whether Plato derived his thoughts from the ancient Jews is unknown, and is a debated topic
among scholars. But it can't be argued that the synoptic Gospels and early Church Fathers,
including St. Paul, drew from the Platonic fountain. The Greek philosopher, Aristotle, was a
student of Plato. Of the many things attributed to Aristotle, the Twelve Virtues are among the
most well-known. They are as follows:

1. Courage – bravery and valor.

2. Temperance – self-control and restraint.
3. Liberality – charity and generosity
4. Magnificence – radiance, a joyful spirit.
5. Pride – self-satisfaction.
6. Honor – respect, reverence, admiration.
7. Good Temper – equanimity, level headedness.
8. Friendliness – conviviality and sociability.
9. Candor -- Frankness. Calling it as you see it.
10. Wit – sense of humor.
11. Friendship – camaraderie, loyalty, companionship.
12. Justice – impartiality, evenhandedness and fairness.

Could it be that these, or similar Hellenistic Virtues, were at variance with many of the
established Hebraic Laws of conduct? The ancient Hebrews rejected all foreign influence. The
historical Jesus was no exception! Jesus wouldn't have recognized the authority of Aristotle's
twelve Virtues anymore than would any other Jew of his time. Not anymore than Socrates would
recognize the gods of the State (and was also executed for it). And yet a closer look at the St.
Paul version of Jesus, that is to say, the Hellenized version of archetypal Christ, and a more
Platonic Christology begins to emerge.

Is it possible that, due to the interpolation of Jewish and Greek thought in ancient Palestine, that
the aforementioned twelve Virtues were encapsulated in the mythological tale of Christ and his
twelve Apostles? And if not those very same twelve Virtues, then perhaps similar ones?
Perhaps the "story" of Christianity is really a tale of the hybridization of Jewish and Greek
Values.

(1)
LEAVE YOUR WORK AND FOLLOW ME

The order in which the Apostles are called by Jesus seems unimportant. That is to say, there
seems to be no hierarchy of Values implied by the sequence of Christ's calling his Apostles to
follow him. At first, I was tempted to assume there was indeed an implied hierarchy, as Christ
first meets Peter and tells him:

"Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means ‘rock’), and upon this rock I will build my
church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it." (Matthew 16:18)

This reference to Peter as being the "rock" (foundation) upon which Christ (integrity) builds his
Church gives the impression that the former was in possession of a certain basic quality. And
where there's something basic, a hierarchy is inevitably constructed.

But I believe this to be untrue in this particular case. In fact, I believe that the Christian Virtues
share an almost equal status, but not quite. Truthfully speech and integrity, personified by
Christ, seems to trump all the other Virtues embodied in the twelve Apostles. In other words, the
Truth is analogous to the Sun, and the Virtues of the Apostles orbit that Sun.

While pondering which Virtue goes with which Apostle, I couldn't decide whether Peter
represents Loyalty or Courage. But I eventually rested upon the latter, and attributed Loyalty to
Judas Iscariot. This may seem ironic, considering that Judas betrays Christ in the Garden of
Gethsemane and Peter denies him three times after Christ is taken prisoner. But as I'll presently
attempt to demonstrate, each of the twelve Apostles, because they're not divine and
"blameless" (un-hypocritical) like Christ, still contain within themselves the oppositional Vices to
their respective salient Virtues.

In the painting of The Last Supper, by Leonardo Da Vinci, many scholars have theorized that
the painter positioned the Apostles to represent the twelve signs of the Zodiac. Da Vinci groups
the Apostles into trios seated at the left and right of Christ. This is, of course, mere conjecture,
and no one knows for sure that Da Vinci intended an astrological theme in his masterpiece. In
any event, that the Zodiac predates Christianity is well-known enough, and the similarities
between the Sun and the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and Christ and his twelve Apostles, is
more than just intriguing. Like the Sun, which dies every evening and is resurrected every
morning, Chris dies and is resurrected too. This theme of the Dying and Resurrected God was
one with which the Greeks were very familiar. Astrology, too, was already trending in ancient
Greece long before the birth of the Nazarene.

At any rate, it's food for thought. I hope you're hungry!

One of the most shocking insights I had while pondering the possible Virtues of each Apostle,
was that some of the more popular attributes given to Christ and the Apostles lined up almost
perfectly with my own. I came up with my initial Zodiacal correspondences based solely on
private reflection upon the personalities of Christ and the Apostles. Then, after hours of
research, I settled upon a source that made the most sense to me. This fact isn't too significant,
though, as there truly is no immutable table of correspondences for the Zodiac and the Gospels.
My thoughts on this may evolve as new information reveals itself, and you might be able to think
of better ones yourself! In the meantime, however, my point is that the archetypal story of Christ
and his Apostles may have served as a time-capsule for the hybrid of Jewish/Greek Values.

The Twelve Apostles, their corresponding Zodiac signs, along with their corresponding Virtues
and Vices, are listed as follows:

1. Peter: (Scorpio: Honor/Shame)

2. James: (Aquarius=Friendliness/Hate)
3. John: (Pisces=Good Temper or Emotional Balance/Moodiness
4. Andrew: (Virgo=Joyful Spirit or Gratitude/Dissatisfaction)
5. Bartholomew: (Capricorn=Wit or Humor/Seriousness
6. James: (Taurus=Candor/Cruelty
7. Judas: (Cancer=Loyalty/Betrayal)
8. Thaddeus: (Leo=Pride/Arrogance)
9. Matthew:(Sagittarius=Temperance/Ambivalence)
10. Philip: (Libra: Fairness, Justice)
11. Simon:(Aries=Courage/Cowardice)
12. Thomas: (Gemini=Charity/Doubt or Indecisiveness)

NOTE: Readers interested in my source for these Zodiacal correspondences may consult the
following link: https://cosmicintelligenceagency.com/thelastsupper/

(2)
JESUS CHRIST: The SUN of God
In the last section, I touched on the interesting similarities between Christ, the Sun, and the
Greek myths of Dying and Resurrected gods. In this section, I'd like to offer a few examples of
these cults of the Death/Rebirth gods. There's a great deal of evidence that supports the claim
that the Hebrew notion of the Messiah blended with these cults and formed what's now
recognized as the Christian faith. One look at the accoutrements of a Roman Catholic Cathedral
should suffice as proof of this fact! The company of Saints is easily a proxy for the
Graeco-Roman pantheon of gods. And it goes without saying that the Roman God, Jove (the
Greek Zues), sounds suspiciously similar to the Hebrew Jehovah. Indeed, the Graeco-Roman
All-Father was famous for transforming Himself into birds and impregnating mortal women.
What a coincidence that Jesus's mother, Mary, is impregnated by a Dove! Some scholars claim
that the Egyptian story of Osiris, Isis, and Horus served as a template for the story of Joseph,
Mary, and Jesus. This is highly debatable, though, but not totally out of the question. More
probable is the assertion that Hebraic, Greek, and Roman creeds played off of one another. This
interpolation was probably unwanted by all parties involved, politically speaking. The evidence
for this is easily unearthed by anyone who reads the historical literature of the aforementioned
cultures. Be that as it may, the influences remained; the Gospels are an unequivocal testament
to this fact.

Perhaps a couple examples will suffice?

First, much of the synchronicities between Christ and many of the Death/Rebirth gods of other
traditions are outweighed by their many differences. In my opinion, a large swath of the
scholarship in support of these conflations is the product of allegorical juggling. I can produce an
extemporaneous example right now! Let's take the god Mithras as an example. Even though
there's a very real-world relationship between Chritianity and Mithraism, none of what I'm about
to say can be empirically validated. So, let's start with the fact that Mithras was born from a rock.
A rock can be a symbol of virginity due to its "impregnability". Jesus was said to be born of the
Virgin Mary. Mary is the "mother" of Jesus. Mother equals Matri equals Matter equals Rock
equals Impregnable equals Virgin.

Now, if you didn't know any better, you might be tempted to read my above thought-process as
genuine scholarship. But it's not! All I did is juggle a few symbols and posit them as related
historical facts. And yet these symbols actually might be related archetypally. It's hard to say.
Regardless, it's important to tease apart allegory from historical fact, and to do this without
discarding the significance of genuine symbolic amalgamations. In my opinion, of all the Dying
and Resurrected gods that may have influenced the Gospels and early Church Fathers, only
two are worth noting. These gods are Dionysus and Mithras. The latter because of his intimate
contact with the early Christian cult, and the former for reasons of unarguable identity. The other
well-known Death/Rebirth gods, such as Osiris and Attis, probably had very little impact on the
Christology of the early Christian Church, and have been largely discredited by modern
scholars.

Dionysus
One could do worse than to begin with the god of wine, Dionysus. Like Jesus, Dionysus was the
lovechild of God (Zeus) and a mortal woman (the Princess of Thebes). And just as king Herod
was said to have sent assassins to murder the baby Jesus, the Queen of the gods, Hera, sent
Titans to murder the newborn Dionysus. Also like Jesus, Dionysus was called the Great
Liberator, a soubrequette similar to that of the Jewish Messiah. Furthermore, the pine cones
that adorn many Catholic Cathedrals are themselves Dionysian symbols, as the god walked
with a staff topped with a pinecone. Lastly, Dionysus was murdered, his flesh torn to pieces like
Christ's garments at the Crucifixion, and finally resurrected. These similarities are still disputed
by some scholars, most of them probably Christian; but you can decide for yourself by looking at
the evidence.

NOTE: It's important to note that the Dionysus myth predates that of Christ, not vice versa.

Mithras

Next on our list of Dying and Rising gods is the deity known by the Romans as Mithra (the
Greek Mithras). First, Christianity and the Mithras cult were contemporaries. The Mithraic cult
was adopted by the Romans in the First Century CE, borrowed from the Iranians and Greeks.
Jesus himself, illiterate as he was, probably new of this mythological figure. Little did the
Nazarene know that he would himself be associated with this Dying and Rising god!

According to the available evidence, it's unclear whether the early Christian cult imitated the
Mithraic cult, or vice versa. Tertullian, an early Christian author, certainly adopted the latter view
when he wrote scathing remarks about the Mithra/Christ similarities. He accused the Mithraic
cult of stealing the sacramental ritual of the Eucharist. In any event, the Death and Resurrection
theme is shared by both deities.

This begs the question:

Did the other Death/Rebirth gods influence the Gospels? Perhaps. But perhaps not. Still, that
these "seasonally inspired" Death/Rebirth gods lay dormant in the collective unconscious of our
species lends credence to these mythological conflations. At any rate, the association of Christ
with the Sun is, in my opinion, unassailable. There are just too many similarities between them.
The Sun is that which "enlightens" or "initiates" the twelve signs of the Zodiac. Christ enlightens
and initiates the twelve Apostles. The Sun is born in the East from Mother Earth every morning
and is crucified on the Cross (a solar symbol) of the horizon every night. Christ is born in the
East of Mother Mary and is literally Crucified on the cross. The Sun is "resurrected" at each new
dawn. Christ is resurrected at dawn three days after his death on the cross. Again, this is
admittedly speculative; but I suspect that what we now know as "Judeo-Christian Values" were
embedded in the mythological tales of the Gospels. This is no doubt due in large part to the
cross-cultural campaigning of the ever-sociable St. Paul. Paul made it his mission to
disseminate his version of Christianity to as many Gentiles as possible; a version in
considerable opposition to the actual Jesus movement headed by Jesus's brother, James the
Just. But this didn't stop Paul from campaigning anyway. To this end he often shamelessly
borrowed the symbolism of local myths to draw parallels to that of Christ. And it's no secret that
Paul tried to "be all things to all men", which James the Just ridiculed him for.

The Sun as a Symbol of Integrity

In the Platonic Allegory of the Cave, the Sun is used as a symbol of seeing the Truth. Recall that
the Gospels are awash in Platonic themes. And not just Platonic themes, but astrological
themes as well. For example, December twenty-fifth is the agreed upon birthday of Jesus. This
is the time of the Winter Solstice, when the Sun is "reborn" and the days grow longer in duration.
Also, Jesus is born in a stable between a Horse and a Goat, that is, Sagittarius and Capricorn.
Once Jesus reaches the age of thirty, he gets baptized in the river Jordan. Roughly thirty days
into the Sun's journey through the horoscope after the Winter Solstice, it enters the sign of the
Water Bearer, Aquarius. Soon after his baptism by John the Baptist, Jesus calls his Apostles
among the fishermen of the region. Pisces is the next Zodiacal sign after Aquarius and is the
sign of the Fish. Next, Jesus becomes identified with the archetype of the Good Shepherd,
tending lambs. The lamb (ram) is associated with the next sign of the Zodiac, Aries. Lastly,
Catholics celebrate a feast in honor of the Virgin Mary as the Sun enters the sign of Virgo, the
Virgin.

I could multiply examples like this for quite a while, but you get the point.

CAVEAT: I'm well aware that it's very easy to gerrymander the Gospels to fit a preferred
narrative. And I'm well aware of the temptation to "reach" in this regard by making flippant
symbolic associations between etymologies, folk-tales, and similarities in archetypal theme. I'm
also well aware of the fact that many a scholar has been guilty of this creative license. But it's
hard to argue against the synchronicity between the twelve tribes of Israel, the twelve signs of
the Zodiac, the twelve Apostles, the twelve Virtues of Aristotle, and the central enlivening or
governing force at their center, symbolized by the Sun. As you can see by the examples listed
above, to casually dismiss the synchronicities of these shared archetypal themes would be
tossing out a lot of baby with the bathwater. I'm of the opinion that these cross-cultural themes
found their residency in the collective unconscious of the early Christian Church, and eventually
unified into what we now recognize as Judeo-Christian ethics.

At any rate, unless a seed falls to the earth and dies, it will not bring forth fruit. And the Values
ensconced in the Judeo-Christian seed has given us some nourishing and some poisonous fruit
indeed.