‘Christ’ as Linguistic Fraud

Paul, Translation, and the Invention of a Cult

By the druid mystic, Finn

Introduction

Few words in the history of religion bear the weight that “Christ” does in the Christian tradition. It appears at the very core of Christian self-identity, furnishing the name of the movement (“Christianity”), the confession of faith (“Jesus Christ”), and the liturgical vocabulary of salvation. Yet the philological fact remains: Christos in Greek means simply “the anointed one.” It is the straightforward translation of Hebrew māšîaḥ, from which the English “Messiah” is derived. That this most central word of the New Testament was left untranslated in almost all Christian languages demands scrutiny. Why should the plain sense be obscured?

This essay argues that the refusal to translate Christos is neither an innocent accident of linguistic history nor a harmless quirk of tradition, but a decisive act of strategic mystification. It enabled Paul, the true architect of the Christian cult, to transform a Jewish sect into a universalizing religion by obscuring its Jewish heritage, mystifying its central term, and rebranding a political-religious title into a cosmic identity.

I. The Jewish Context of Anointing

In the Hebrew scriptures, “anointing” is a concrete ritual. Priests (Exod. 28:41), kings (1 Sam. 10:1; 16:13), and occasionally prophets were consecrated by being anointed with oil. The title “anointed one” (māšîaḥ) belonged not to one figure alone but to many, including Saul, David, Solomon, and even Cyrus the Persian. It signified office, not ontology: a role within Israel’s covenant life, never a universal metaphysical status.

When Greek-speaking Jews translated the scriptures into the Septuagint, māšîaḥ became christos. Thus Christos was a well-worn category: it meant simply the one anointed for service to God.

II. Paul’s Transformation of “Christ”

It is Paul who undertakes the decisive move. In his letters, Christos ceases to be a title and becomes a quasi-proper name: Iēsous Christos, Christos Iēsous. At times the article is dropped; “Christ” functions as though it were Jesus’ surname. But more than grammar is at stake.

Paul employs “Christ” in a radically reoriented sense:

· Ontological identity: To be “in Christ” is not merely to follow a messiah but to inhabit a metaphysical sphere of salvation (Rom. 8:1, 2 Cor. 5:17).

· Cosmic uniqueness: The Christ Hymn (Phil. 2:5–11) portrays Christ as pre-existent, humbled, exalted above every name — no longer an anointed king within history but an eternal cosmic being.

· Doctrinal necessity: In Rom. 5:12–21, Paul claims that “through one man sin entered the world,” binding all humanity to death and guilt — a false exegesis of Genesis, but one that secures the need for Christ as universal redeemer.

Thus, “Christ” becomes the pivot of a new religious system: no longer a role within Jewish history but the very name of the universal saviour.

III. Non-Translation as Strategic Mystification

Why then did translators of the New Testament not render Christos into ordinary English (“the Anointed One”)? The refusal to translate, while translating almost every other word, is telling.

1. Obscuring Jewish roots: Had “the Anointed One” been used, readers would see instantly the Jewish heritage of the term, linking Jesus directly to the long line of Israel’s priests and kings. “Christ,” left untranslated, severs that tie.

2. Branding uniqueness: Translation exposes plurality — many could be anointed. But transliteration elevates Jesus into the only “Christ,” as if it were his proper name.

3. Facilitating universality: A Gentile convert would find “Christ” an exotic, mysterious label, easily detached from Jewish ritual. “Anointed One” might raise awkward questions about oil, ritual, kingship — and Jewish law.

4. Institutional inertia: Once Paul and his assemblies began to use “Christ” as quasi-name, the inertia of creeds and liturgy locked the word in place. To translate it later would threaten doctrinal stability.

This is why Finn calls it deliberate deception: the most important word in the New Testament was left opaque in order to advance the cult’s expansion.

IV. From Jewish Sect to Cult Startup

Up to the Jerusalem meeting around AD 50 (Acts 15), the Jesus-followers were a Jewish sect, disputing over Torah observance. Paul’s intervention turned it outward: abolishing circumcision for Gentiles, relaxing ritual law, and importing Hellenistic notions (immortal soul, universal sin, sacramental mysteries).

The sect became a spin-off startup cult:

· retaining Jewish scriptures and myths,

· disguising its Jewish core through linguistic obfuscation,

· marketing itself to Gentiles as a universal path to salvation.

Paul, ruthless in rhetoric and authoritarian in practice, emerges as cult founder and takeover adept.

V. The Cost of Paul’s Fraud

The consequence of Paul’s innovations is immense:

· Original Sin (derived from Adam) enslaves all humanity to guilt;

· Christ (mystified, untranslated) is the only cure;

· The Church monopolizes access to that cure.

This system of thought has undergirded Western Christianity for nearly two millennia. Its foundation is a linguistic sleight of hand: a title withheld from translation, a false exegesis presented as revelation, a sect rebranded into a universal cult.

Conclusion

The non-translation of Christos is not a philological accident but a strategic act. It obscures Jewish heritage, mystifies the central word of the gospel, and underwrites Paul’s cosmic rebranding of Jesus. The shift is clear: from anointed one among many to Christ alone, from Jewish role to universal ontology, from sect to cult.

The druid Finn is right to call out this a deception. Paul, ruthless in his ambition, harnessed it to found a cult that demanded absolute submission and dependence. The word “Christ” stands as both the keystone and the fraud of Christianity: the untranslated signifier of a takeover.

‘Christ’: From Jewish Title to Cult Brand

Jewish Title (before ~50 CE)	Christian Cult Brand (after Paul’s takeover)
Term: māšîaḥ (Messiah), christos = the anointed one	Term: Christ (left untranslated, treated as a name)
Meaning: Concrete, ritual act of anointing with oil; designates kings, priests, prophets.	Meaning: Mystified, stripped of ritual sense; becomes cosmic, ontological identity unique to Jesus.
Usage: Many “anointed ones” (Saul, David, Solomon, even Cyrus). A category, not unique.	Usage: Only one “Christ.” Singular, universal, absolute.
Function: Confirms role within Jewish story—leadership, consecration, covenant identity.	Function: Creates cult identity marker—“in Christ,” “through Christ alone,” distinct from Judaism.
Transparency: Easily understood in Jewish culture; bound to Israel’s history and ritual life.	Opacity: Untranslated, opaque, mystical. Detached from its Jewish context.
Identity: Followers = a Jewish sect loyal to Jesus as Messiah within Torah framework.	Identity: Followers = “Christians.” New cult defined by allegiance to Paul’s “Christ.”
Growth Model: Internal, Jewish, covenantal, slow, limited to Israel’s hope.	Growth Model: External, Gentile-focused, universalizing. Hellenistic notions added (immortal soul, original sin, sacrificial atonement).
Leadership: James and Jerusalem elders preserve Jewish observance.	Leadership: Paul, militant, expansionist, recasts Jesus as cosmic Christ and seizes control.

✅ Summary in Finn’s voice:
The word Christ was not translated because translation would have revealed its Jewish meaning—an anointed one among many, tied to oil, kingship, and Torah. By freezing it as “Christ,” Paul and the church disguised its roots, mystified its sense, and used it as a cult brand to sell a new, universal product. What began as a Jewish sect was rebranded into a Gentile growth cult, with Paul the fanatic as its architect.

From mistake to damnation

‘Original sin’ as fraud

Home