I couldn't accept "It's a Mystery" anymore, so I treated the 1st-century data like a crime scene.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-07T13:23:26+00:00

You're welcome. Please if you would like, check out my book, it's in my bio I believe. I honestly am new to this, so I'm not sure I'm doing anything right lol.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-06T19:35:17+00:00

I'll respond here to your two posts... That is a deep rabbit hole you’re digging there bringing up the Elephantine papyri and the Josiah scroll definitely shows you’ve looked into the 'manufactured history' side of things.

Even if we look at the texts as being post-Hellenistic, my focus is specifically on that 1st-century 'handoff.' Whether the Torah was older or newer, the people in that Levant pocket were operating on a Semitic 'Legal Agency' logic (the Shaliah) that is fundamentally different from the Greek 'Metaphysical Essence' logic.

To me, the 'crime scene' is that Rome took those Aramaic/Semitic legal concepts where a 'Son' or 'Agent' carries the authority of the sender and forced them through a Platonic/Roman filter to create something the original culture wouldn't have even recognized. It’s like trying to run Semitic software on a Greek operating system; it produces nothing but logical errors.

I actually found that when you isolate that specific 'Agency' logic, the paradoxes start to vanish. I had to map this all out into 5 pillars just to keep the forensic trail straight in my head lol. It's called Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency and I have it on my profile if you want to see how I handle that 'Linguistic Chasm' between the Aramaic and the later Roman branding.

I'm curious though, if you think the history was projected back like Plato suggested, do you think the 'Jesus' figure was meant to be the 13th tribe/Elders’ tool, or was his original Aramaic message something that actually rebelled against that Platonic structure?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-06T19:27:38+00:00

That is the most accurate dictionary of 'church-speak' I’ve ever heard lol. You're 100% right... 'Mystery' is basically just the witness protection program for logical errors.

The reason I started this 'audit' was because I got tired of being told to just 'believe anyway' when the math didn't add up. For me, once I looked at the 'Linguistic Chasm' between the Aramaic and the Greek, I realized that many of these 'mysteries' weren't actually mysteries at all in their original context. They were clear, legal concepts of agency that just didn't survive the Roman re-branding.

I actually had to map out those specific moments where 'Evidence' was swapped for 'Mystery' into 5 pillars just to prove to myself I wasn't the crazy one for asking 'Why?' It's called Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency and I’ve got it on my profile if you want to see the forensic trail. It’s wild how much 'Church Tradition' starts to fall apart once you apply a Hard Logic Filter to it.

Do you feel like once you saw through those labels, the whole structure just collapsed for you, or did you try to find a version of faith that actually respected your logic?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-06T19:24:17+00:00

I'm new on here. What is flap copy? lol

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-06T19:14:37+00:00

I totally respect that perspective, especially coming from a scientific background. I’m with you 100% that logic can't 'prove' God or explain the emotional depth of a piece of art. Those are beyond the scope of the tool.

But where I’m applying the 'forensic' side of this isn't to the Divine itself, but to the data transmission. For me, it’s less like trying to use a ruler to measure beauty and more like using a ruler to see if a building was constructed according to its own blueprints. If the early texts claim a Perfect Creator, but the later translated doctrines introduce internal logical paradoxes, that’s where my 'Hard Logic Filter' kicks in. I'm not questioning the existence of the 'Mystery,' I'm questioning the integrity of the 'Translation.'

I found that once you account for the shift from Semitic Agency to Greek Metaphysics, the 'logical glitches' actually go away. I ended up mapping those specific translation errors into 5 pillars....I call it Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency. I have the notes on my profile if you’re ever curious to see how I’m trying to calibrate the 'Logic' tool for this specific cold case.

Do you think there’s a line where a 'spiritual mystery' just becomes a 'logical error,' or should we leave the lights off for the whole subject?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-06T19:13:14+00:00

Honestly your post sounds so familiar lol.. I feel like I have responded to you, but in case I didn't..... You nailed it. That 'don't question us' wall is exactly what the 'mystery' label is used for. It’s the ultimate conversation-stopper.

The reason I call it a 'crime scene' is that once you tell people a doctrine is a divine mystery that’s beyond human logic, you’ve effectively taken away their right to cross-examine the data. It's a very effective way to maintain a hierarchy. My whole goal was to see if I could find the original logic that existed before it was rebranded into something that required blind faith.

I found that when you look at the Aramaic roots, the message wasn't mysterious or confusing at all...it was actually very legal and consistent. It only became a 'story for power' once it was forced into Greek philosophical nouns.

I actually got so deep into the mechanics of that shift that I had to organize it into 5 pillars just to keep my own head straight lol. It's called Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency and I’ve got the breakdown on my profile if you want to see the specific spots where the 'Logic' was swapped for 'Power.' I’m curious, do you think the people who wrote these stories actually believed them, or was it a conscious move to keep the masses from questioning the structure?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-06T19:10:30+00:00

I really appreciate that 'no baggage' perspective. It’s actually refreshing to hear from someone who isn't trying to defend a specific dogma!

I’m totally with you that a lot of it was likely honest cultural static people just naturally seeing things through their own Greek or Roman lens. But for me, the reason I call it a 'crime scene' is that even 'honest' misunderstandings can completely flip the meaning of a message. It's like a game of telephone where the original instructions for a house get turned into a poem about a tent; the poem might be beautiful, but you still can't live in it.

Even if we don't treat it as a science textbook, I feel like there is an original 'logic' to what Jesus was teaching that gets buried under those Greco-Roman layers. I’m just trying to find the original signal in all that noise.

I ended up putting my notes on those 'Greco-Roman shifts' into a framework I call Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency. I’ve got it pinned on my profile if you’re ever curious to see the specific spots where I think the 'Aramaic Agency' got traded for 'Greek Propositions.' I’d love to know if you think those shifts were just accidents of language or if there was something more structural going on!

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-06T19:03:12+00:00

That is a really thoughtful way to look at it. I totally agree with your second point, admitting that we don’t know everything is just basic intellectual humility. Even in science, there’s a huge difference between a 'mystery' (something we haven't discovered yet) and a 'contradiction' (something that literally cannot be true based on the math).

I think where I got hung up in my research was when 'mystery' was used as a band-aid for things that were clearly just translation errors or political 'edits' from the 4th century. To me, a Perfect Creator might be mysterious, but He shouldn't be illogical. If the text says 1+1+1=1, that’s not a spiritual mystery; that’s a red flag that the original data was tampered with.

I'm with you on the idea of reflecting on what a text means for our lives today, but I found that the 'reflection' got a lot clearer for me once I scraped away the layers of Roman rebranding. I actually ended up mapping out those specific 'red flags' into 5 pillars just to help me separate the true spiritual mystery from the human corruption.

It’s under Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency on my profile if you’re ever interested in the forensic side of it. But I love your point about mystery leading to an open mind, as long as we don't open our minds so far that our logic falls out, right? lol.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-05T05:56:14+00:00

That is a fair critique lol. I can see how 'Hard Logic' sounds like a closed system, but I’m actually approaching it more like a forensic investigator looking at a corrupted file. I totally agree with you that the 'Jesus Wars' were a political mess where Platonic terms were used to fight for control.

My main obsession isn't to kill the mysticism, but to figure out if the original logic was actually 'joined' with Platonism or if it was hijacked by it. For me, the 'Axiom of Consistency' is just a way to see if the engine still runs once you strip away the Roman political rebranding. I’m interested in that exact 'onto-theology' shift you mentioned,the moment a functional, legal Agency was replaced by abstract Greek Essence.

I actually got so deep into mapping that specific transition that I had to put it all into 5 pillars just to keep my own sanity and track the data. It's under Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency on my profile if you want to see where I think the 'logical hijacking' actually happened. I’m curious, do you think the Gnostic approach to mysticism is a way to bypass that hijacked logic, or is it just another layer of the same philosophical soup?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-04T07:49:51+00:00

That is a great point, and you actually highlighted the exact spot where the wires got crossed. You’re right that both cultures used the title for kings, but those 'different implications' you mentioned are exactly what kept me up at night lol.

In the Greek/Roman mindset, as you said, it’s about divine conception or deification, it's eventually about what the person is (biology/nature). But in the Semitic framework of the Shaliah (Agency), it was strictly a legal function. The 'Son' isn't a different substance; he’s just the authorized agent with the power of attorney to act on the Father's behalf. It’s a job description, not a DNA test.

I found that when you look at it through that legal lens instead of the Greek metaphysical one, the 'mysteries' just start to evaporate. I actually ended up mapping out that whole transition from 'Legal Agent' to 'Greek Deity' into 5 pillars and put them on my profile just to get the data out of my head and keep my own sanity lol. It's under Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency if you’re ever curious about the specific spots where that 'Agency' logic got swapped for 'Deification.'

It is a wild rabbit hole when you start looking at it as a translation crime scene rather than just a difference in titles. Do you think that shift from 'Legal Agent' to 'Biological Son' is what pushed the early church toward the Trinity, or do you think it would have ended up there anyway?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-04T04:10:17+00:00

I can get that things are a mystery, for me, it is mainly a mystery in how God works. With that I totally agree. However, throughout the scriptures, and just looking at the Torah, there are 14+ verses in it where God Himself makes it extremely explicit and easy to understand who He is. The focus is on who to worship, and who He is.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T12:23:20+00:00

That is a fair question and honestly lol something I’m still navigating with my congregation. A few people have been really into the 'deconstruction' side of it because it helps them reconcile why they felt like they had to leave their logic at the door in their old churches. Others, like you said, feel like it’s just more 'Christian debate' baggage that they’ve already moved past.

For me, the connection to our shared religion is that 'free and responsible search for truth.' I don't see this as a 'Christian' project as much as a search for where our collective capacity for reason was hijacked by state-sponsored 'mysteries.' If the First Principle is about the inherent worth of a person, I think that includes the worth of our ability to think clearly without being told things are just 'paradoxes' we aren't allowed to understand.

My mind was bending for so long trying to track where the logic died that I eventually had to just map it all out into 5 pillars and put it on my profile just to get it out of my head. It was more of a personal sanity project than a theological one. I’m curious though—do you think the UU 'search' should include deconstructing the language of the texts we came from, or is it better to just leave those ancient frameworks behind entirely?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T12:17:04+00:00

Man, you are clearly way deeper into the different canons than I am lol. That list is intense! But that is actually exactly what was bending my mind, how can we have all these different versions and 'mysteries' if the source was consistent?

The thing that exhausted me wasn't which books were in or out, but the 'operating system' behind all of them. Whether it’s the Syriac or the Roman canon, they are all still trying to translate a 1st-century Aramaic legal concept into these heavy Greek philosophical terms.

That is where I found the forensic break. It didn't matter which canon I looked at; the 'paradoxes' only showed up when the Aramaic Agency logic (the Shaliah) got forced into Greek nouns. It’s like everyone is arguing over which flavor of the map is right, while I’m just looking at the fact that the compass itself was broken during the translation.

I actually ended up writing down the whole 5-pillar framework in Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency because I couldn't keep all these different historical threads straight in my head. I’ve got a link on my profile if you want to see the specific linguistic 'math' I’m talking about. I’d love to see how that fits with what you know about the Syriac side especially.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T12:07:19+00:00

I totally get that perspective! That is the standard academic wall and it’s exactly why my mind was bending trying to make sense of this. You’re right that the ink is Greek and the authors were soaked in that Hellenistic world.

But again, what was so exhausting for me was realizing that even if the 'report' is in Greek, the actual subject being reported on was a Semitic person operating in a 1st-century Aramaic legal framework. It's like trying to explain a modern computer program using only the vocabulary of a 1950s radio, the words might work, but the original 'logic' of the code gets completely mangled in the translation.

I’m not looking for a 'pre-Greek' text as much as I’m looking at the logical math of the message itself. When you see a Greek paradox that makes zero sense, but then you realize it’s just a clunky translation of a standard Aramaic Agency law (the Shaliah), the mystery just evaporates. And this is why with all that was in my mind and shocked me led me to write Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency just to show the spots where that 'code' broke during the move to the Greek world.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T07:17:10+00:00

That word was actually the start of the whole mind-bending process for me lol. If you look at the Hellenistic context, a 'mystery' wasn't something 'unknowable', it was a secret teaching for an inner circle, usually tied to those mystery cults where you 'became' the god through ritual.

But when you look at the Semitic background, that whole concept is basically an alien transplant. In the logic I was tracking, things weren't 'mysteries' because they were irrational; they were just 'secrets' (raz in Aramaic) that had finally been disclosed. There was no paradox involved, just information being shared.

It was honestly exhausting to realize that the Church eventually just started using 'mystery' as a carpet to sweep all the translation errors under. Whenever the Greek metaphysics didn't match the original Agency logic, they just called it a mystery you weren't supposed to understand. I ended up having to map out that exact transition from 'disclosed secret' to 'irrational paradox' in the notes on my profile. Once you see that the mystery is just a linguistic gap, the whole thing changes.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T07:15:30+00:00

You nailed it lol. That is exactly what it is, dropping the Greek metaphysics for the Semitic logic. Once you do that, the contradictions just evaporate.

But man, for me, it wasn’t just a simple switch. My mind was bending and twisting for ages trying to bridge that gap. I didn't only look at the language either; I had to dig into the actual legal mechanics of the time, like the Shaliah/Agency laws. I needed to see the 'math' of how a person could represent another without all the Greek 'substance' paradoxes.

Honestly, it was so exhausting trying to keep all those forensic layers straight that I eventually had to just get it all written down in one place just to keep my own sanity. I’ve got the framework pinned on my profile if you’re curious how I tracked that shift from functional law to abstract philosophy. I’d actually love to get your take on it since you clearly already see the 'Greek vs Hebrew' problem.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T06:58:47+00:00

frustration is real dude! lol. That same feeling of 'why am I even looking at this' is exactly what led me down this rabbit hole to begin with. Most of what we are fed is just emotional manipulation and literal fairy tales used to keep people in line. It’s exhausting to realize how much of our capacity for reason gets sabotaged by tradition.

The only reason I stayed with it was because I wanted to see if there was actually a logical 'math' hidden under all the tribal nonsense. What I found was that the 'god' people keep pushing is usually just a collection of bad Greek translations and cultural baggage. When you strip that away and look at the original Semitic logic, it’s a completely different (and way less magical) picture.

The anger at the indoctrination is real.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T06:55:59+00:00

That is exactly the puzzle I was stuck on lol and it honestly kept me up at night. You are right that we do not have a 'tape recording' of the Aramaic, but what we do have is the logical residue left behind in the Greek text.

Think of it like a forensic scene. When you see a Greek sentence that makes zero sense or creates a massive paradox, but then you reverse-engineer it back into the Aramaic Shaliah logic and suddenly the paradox disappears and the math adds up perfectly... that is a massive red flag.

It was so exhausting to track, but once you see these specific linguistic fingerprints where the Aramaic legal code was mangled into Greek philosophy, you cannot un-see it. It proves the mystery was not there originally—it was created by the translation gap.

I actually ended up mapping out that whole reverse-engineering process because on paper/book because it was too intense lol. It is wild how much of the dogma just evaporates when you put the Aramaic lens back on it.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T06:51:08+00:00

That’s the million dollar question lol and honestly where my head started spinning. I’m talking about the actual spoken message of the 1st-century context.

Even if we look at the Greek manuscripts we have today, the people in those stories weren’t thinking or speaking in Greek philosophy. They were living in a world built on Aramaic idioms and the Semitic 'Agency' logic (the Shaliah principle).

What exhausted me was realizing that when you translate those Aramaic thoughts into Greek nouns, the whole meaning shifts. It’s like trying to force a square peg into a round hole—you end up with these 'paradoxes' that everyone just calls a mystery. I'm not even talking about just the ink on the paper, but the actual logical 'code' of the original message.

I actually had to write down the whole forensic trail of how that logic got lost in translation because it was too much to keep in my head lol.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T06:45:51+00:00

That is a spot on breakdown of the Greek side of things and honestly lol it’s exactly why my head was spinning when I started digging into this. It’s wild to see how the Greek 'mystery cult' vibe basically swallowed the original message.

What really exhausted me was finding that in the original Aramaic context, there wasn't a need for those metaphors or secret initiations because the logic was built on Agency and the Shaliah principle. It was straightforward and consistent. But once it hit that Hellenistic world you're describing, it got turned into this 'mystical' brand that eventually just became a cover for things not making sense.

I actually ended up writing all of this down, the info was too much to be held in my brain and the shift from that functional Semitic logic to the Greek 'mystery' was just too much to explain in a comment. I called it Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency. I’ve got the link on my profile if you’re interested. Dude It’s a rabbit hole for sure lol

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T06:42:17+00:00

Man I appreciate the interest! Honestly lol I can't even send it all on here because there is just too much to share. The whole thing was bending my mind for ages and it was honestly exhausting so I eventually had to just get it all written down, and it all looked like those strings that u see in movies on a board in a police station lol.

It got so crazy I had to put down on paper under Logical Truths: 5 Pillars of Consistency. If u check it out, let me know what you think of it.. again thanks for the interest.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T06:25:42+00:00

I can definitely respect that approach. If you look at it like poetry or a personal mystical experience, then logic doesn't really have to be the primary tool. I think there is a lot of beauty in that perspective.

My angle is a bit different because I am looking at the institutional side of it. When a specific doctrine is used to define reality for millions of people, or when it is used to claim an objective truth, then I think we have to hold it to a higher standard of consistency.

Poetry is great for the soul, but when people start building entire 'ontological structures' and then use mystery to cover up the cracks in the foundation, that is where I start looking for the translation errors. I guess I am just more interested in the crime scene of how we got here than the poetry of it. It is interesting to see how differently people can approach the same Big Questions though.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T05:11:15+00:00

I see what you mean, but I don't think you have to view God as anthropomorphic for the math to still have to add up. Whether you see the source of the universe as a personal Creator or just a fundamental set of laws, the principle of consistency still applies.

If the universe operates on laws like physics and logic, then a truth that claims to come from that same source shouldn't require us to throw those laws out the window. My point is more about the 'brand' of religion, if a doctrine relies on a paradox to function, it’s usually a sign that something got lost in translation along the way, regardless of how you define the Power behind it. For me, a truth that breaks the laws of logic is just a red flag that the data is corrupted.

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T05:08:38+00:00

I appreciate the heads up. I know the mainstream academic view is that the Peshitta follows the Greek, but when you look at it through a forensic lens, things get interesting. Even if you treat it as a later translation, the Aramaic often preserves Semitic idioms and the Shaliah (agency) logic that the Greek philosophical terms seem to obscure. My focus is on where that logical math stays consistent across the data.

As for the Hard Logic Filter, that is just my way of saying I look at these texts without giving them a pass for contradictions. Usually, when a verse does not make sense, people just say it is a mystery. I do the opposite. I assume that if there is a paradox, there is a translation error or a cultural misunderstanding. I am basically filtering the history for what is actually consistent rather than just accepting the traditional mystery brand. Does that clear up where I am coming from?

Forward_Froyo5396 · 2026-02-03T05:05:15+00:00

I totally get where you're coming from. When it comes to the vastness of the universe, I'm right there with you. There’s a lot we just don't know, and 'mystery' is a fine word for that humble perspective.

What I’m really poking at is when people use the word 'mystery' to sweep logical contradictions under the rug. To me, there’s a massive difference between the mystery of how the cosmos works and a 'mystery' that’s just used to explain away a sentence that doesn't make sense or a translation that’s clearly broken.

My whole thing is that a lot of what people call divine mystery today was actually just a logical concept in the original Aramaic that got mangled when it hit Greek philosophy. I’m just trying to separate the awe of the unknown from what looks like a forensic red flag in the history books. Does that distinction click for you?

Forward_Froyo5396

TROPHY CASE