Christ Means What? - Part 1

Video: [link]

Notice the Euripides link there. Drug Drink

The Euripides Hippoletus entry at line 516 says "is this pharmakon a potable (drink) or a christ (salve)?"

• Talking about a drug that's going to be used to overcome a person "for sexual activity".

Look at the χριστος lexicon entry from LSJ above:

• Aeschylus Prometheus Bound 480
• Euripides Hippoletus 516
• Theocratus 11.1
• Septuagint 21.10

How much dogma or doctrine have we been giving?
None
There's no beliefs or theories
There's no echatology or exegesis
We aren't interpreting stuff for you
We aren't here for opinions
Life's too short for opinions
We need reason
We need something to trust
We need nature

Euripides' Hippolytus 516 [scaife]

Or more literally:

• Which kind, a christ or a potable, is the drug?

To find xriw in ancient texts, you don't just pull up christ, you pull up all the compound xriws, the anti, epi, en-christ.
Then you'll have a beautiful picture in the 1st century what a christ is.
And It is not a messias, it is a pharmakon.

The soviets in Ukraine stifled the classics
Why?
It's the tyrant-hating philosophy
Control via Monism is the same whether it's through Atenism; Christianity, Judaism, Islam, doesn't matter.
Monism has one mechanism of control.
And that is the fabrication of your reality.
Once you see through that fabrication, games over.
The control is gone.

The superiority of Ancient Greek is that the speaker or writer is able to create their own vocabulary. We have so many individual words. For example. Galen is creating physiology and anatomy. Imagine that these are not sciences, and you have to create the science. You can't do that without Greek. You can't do that in Latin. The Latin physicians don't do this. The Medici? no way.

10% of all geek literature is Galen.
If you've read half of Galen, you've read 5% of Ancient Greek literature
Galen is pushing the 2nd sophistic rejuvenation of the Koine into its Attic precursor, he's spearheading. He is just creating a science. Sexy mother Greek gives him the ability to do so, to create new vocabulary that other docs can read and advance from there. Some doctors do this more than others. Galen does this rapidly and ferociously. It was the Greek language that allowed that.

Ancient Hebrew only has 7000 words surviving, at that time is a dead language.

We supposedly have 1000's of pages of Bible text but only 7000 words of Hebrew? We have a problem. That's a fact because in history, Julius Africanus pointed out how crappy the vocabulary was in Hebrew.

For Hebrew we have some inscriptions and some caches of letters. No literature outside the derivative Hebrew translations of the Greek bibles.

The reason that people don't see the real beauty of mother Greek, is because they are blinded by the bog-trotting Anglo Saxon crappery that was stuffing their ears through sources of theology. We're talking about a craft here called classics. It is a skill. It is not a theology. It is a science. If you don't appreciate mother Greek, that's too bad.

One would think, that Bart Erhman said we have Hebrew texts from 10th century BCE. We don't. They Just look at the Bible and say "this must go way back". There is no history, there is no literature, there is nothing in Hebrew anytime, anywhere, and the Greek that is around it doesn't reflect it at all, there's nothing there, doesn't exist.

"We have texts from the 10th century BCE"

• no you don't!!!
• You have a Hellenistic Septuagint. Which was later copied into the Hebrew. A very primitive destroyed language that hadn't been spoken for centuries. Just like Umbrian. This shady statement, sheesh....!

• Argument from Consensus - the fact that everyone says it is that way, doesn't make it that way. That's not good academic argumentation.

Biblical scholarship has been around 300 years
Classical scholarship is +2500 years old

The Bible brothel uses Intentional obfuscation and misdirection in order to loot you.
Dishonest.

Julius Africanus

Julius Africanus is sitting around with Origin.
They're talking about what these texts are doing.
And how they're getting the Hebrew.
Africanus says "they don't even have basic words in Hebrew - how are they dialoging???"
How are the Jewish sources and the Greek sources dialoging? Answer: In Greek!
They don't dialog in Hebrew because they don't have enough words.
Who said that?
The head of the (today's) Hebrew language program.
He gave an interview to CNN.
He said "ancient Hebrew only has ~7000 word capacity".

Just like Umbrian or Oscan, it's no different, it's not special.
Languages are like this and they get swallowed up.
Have you read any Oscan lately? Well why not?
It was a nice language...., no it wasn't!
It was a primitive language that had crap for vocab.
Now you're dealing with this Greek language that can fabricate words, can create, it's plastic, allows its user to create vocabulary.
That's the difference with the Greek.
Why don't they (Hebrew) have libraries?
Why don't we have any of this Hebrew?
Well, we do have 1000 of pages (Hebrew Bible translations) with 7000 unique words,

and Julius of Africanus said "dude, they don't know basic stuff", he said "I asked them, what's the word for this plant, this tree, oh, what is it? they don't have it - basic words like that".

Those rabbis, that were handling this at the time, the religious experts, had been speaking Greek for years, they didn't speak Hebrew. They've been speaking Greek. Hebrew reached its capacity, and was blindsided. Just like Oscan and Umbrian. Just ask any classicist. "why don't we have any more Umbrian?"

The history of the earth is the history of language.

We have sources working the opposite direction of the picture Bart (Bible scholar) is trying to paint for you. They weren't walking around with Hebrew texts. They were trying to come up with them (Hebrew texts) by translating from the Greek.

This is all very simple
Take for example:

• Dick and Jane went up a hill to fetch a pail of water

If I translate to another language then the names will look foreign. The verb ran, and the hill should map over.....
But, If I put "enscarfment", or if I put "the place of the cosmic focus of the hill god" you would think "what the hell are you doing????" You do not move from simple to more complex, when translating.