Created: Monday, ‎November ‎04, ‎2013

 

Fighting Genetically Altered Christianity

By

Robert Andrew Quaife

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            People tend too dirty up the lens that the outside world looks through. We come from a very confused world, some people worship celebrities because of their fam5e, and ignore the fact that they really just got lucky in life. Innocent lives are killed in Africa, India, and all over the world, because a group of people want to push their beliefs. The tendency to fall into our evil ways is an easy step to take.

 

            This simple evil tendency dilutes the church (Christian people) from the real laws that are found in scripture, making the Christian faith weird or unnatural for the outside world to append too. People often darken the Christian image by rationalizing their own thoughts rather than standing still and not letting their circumstance compromise their thinking; in turn their own individual preaching. This Illusion is why a Christian concept should abide to these three criteria: first, another scripture in the right context should not denote the concept; second the concept should line up with new scriptural teaching found in the New Testament; and third the concept should make sense‒ the concept does not lead to an extreme. Confining ourselves to these criteria, helps the church to believe in the concepts God intended, and brings light to the diluted church.

 

             By the time Jesus was on the earth the Pharisees, preachers of the Old Testament, already wrote at least 400 extra laws than what God laws, focused in Deuteronomy, intended. These laws were most likely made to help direct the Jewish people to God’s original laws, but after the laws started building up it became very hard to keep up and very tedious. Jesus often called the Pharisees messengers of Satan (John 8:44) because they vigorously taught the laws, but they themselves did not pursue what they were teaching. This situation that surfaced around Jesus’s time is a mirror image to what is happening today.

 

            Today, that mirror appears in deviation of scripture, individuals preaching their own genetically altered view that does not line up with scripture. My credibility in the subject is from watching a variety of preaching’s weekly, which in turn I put together around a hundred scriptures, that I try to read a few daily. I am also developing a website to equip Christians with the proper Christian concepts according to the Bible. Jesse Duplantis from Jesse Duplantis Ministries originally used the idea of “Genetically Altered Christianity” or “Christian Propaganda” too explain the churches (Christian people) diluted belief or concepts.

 

             I often see the bumper sticker or hear the argument about the Old Testament law “An eye for an eye” written in Exodus (Exodus 21:24). People often think that the Bible is a book of laws people find one sentence that is questionable and bam they got an argument. This concept is an example of another scripture denoting this concept, and in this case many, the whole New Testament preaches a new covenant in which that law does not exist anymore.  They don’t realize that the ‘Law,’ especially the eye for an eye verse, was for the people between four thousand and two thousand years ago. When the New Testament was written, two thousand years ago, Jesus preached a new covenant (focused in Matthew 22: 37-40) that does not preach that concept anymore. Romans 4:14-16 contradicts the eye for an eye concept saying, “For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression. Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed …” The ‘Law’ is the term used for the Ten Commandments, and also the laws focused in Deuteronomy including the eye for an eye concept, and this scripture denotes the concept of the teaching ‘an eye for an eye’ anymore. Romans 6:14, Galatians 3:13, and others all denote that same concept, helping to prove my criteria of one or many scriptures denoting another. Romans 3:20 and Galatians 3:19-21 explain the deviance of why the ‘Law’ was in place at that set time. Hopefully, giving you scriptural details helps explain why the ‘Law’ is not to be preached anymore and additionally why we should not have a ‘Law’ abiding sin consciousness.

 

            In the begging when Adam was in the Garden of Eden and sinned God told him that he had to till the ground with the sweat of his brow (Genesis 3:17, 19), meaning he had to work to become righteous with God because he was a sinner. Adam and all of his descendants had to use ‘works’ to become righteous with God, but as Isaiah says all are righteousness was like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6), we could never be fully righteous. Christians blindly believe in the concept because it was written throughout the Old Testament, but the concept does not line up with new scriptural teaching found in the New Testament; this is why we should not have a sin consciousness. That’s why Jesus who knew no sin became sin so we could inherit perfect right standing with God (Ephesians 1:3-5, Romans 5:19). Not by our Good ‘works’ but by the cross (crucifixion), what Jesus has done, rather than what we have done.  People before Jesus’s time had to work to become righteous, and look forward to his crucifixion. While after the crucifixion we are told to move forward, believe in our righteousness, and Gods promises (Faith).

 

           This concept, not having a sin consciousness, lines up with new scriptural teaching by saying, “Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound (Romans 5:20),” found in the New Testament. This scripture explains; were sin is, grace (Gods power) much more cleanses our stains, it does not say we need to work for grace to abound, grace acts instantaneously. 2 Peter 1:9 , Ephesians 1:7, and others address the same concept. These scriptures discard the previous idea of having a sin consciousness, and line up with the criteria of New Testament teachings.

 

           One of the biggest arguments against my case comes from the scripture, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9).” A person without Biblical knowledge would think that we need to constantly confess our sins to be cleansed and forgiven, and this implies the counterargument. However, this scripture actually talks about repentance, turning away from sin, and turning to the light. The scripture above it adds credibility to the issue saying, “But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7).” Where it says “His Son cleanses us from all sin”, in the original Greek it means, “keeps us cleansed from sin in all its forms and manifestations (Greek literal interpretation: AMP Bible)” or is ever cleansing. This misunderstanding is why it is important to understand scripture in context, and also ask a person, who is more equipped on the issue; who can help a person with the tricky things like literal meanings of Greek or Hebrew.

 

            Too many people treat Jesus as a tender hearted precious soul. This misunderstanding fails my third criteria of ‘the concept should make sense or not lead to an extreme’; reason being the ruler of the world cannot be soft hearted.  In the latest movie series “The Bible” by Fox Faith, Roma Downey, and Mark Burnett gives Jesus a feminine image. While scripture does say God is love, he doesn’t rule with a soft soul, easily changed mindset or soft character. Often when the Pharisees surround him and were plotting to kill him, Jesus walked through the midst of them. It took great strength to walk right through the heat of the situation, with the Pharisees devilish like stares, and foolish rants; there was nothing to protect Jesus, but the fear of God chaining their anger. Additionally, when Jesus was about to be Crucified scripture says, “They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. (John 18:5-6).” When Jesus said “I am he” all of the esteemed Roman soldiers fell on their butts deeply shocked about what just happened. His voice alone surprised the honored Roman soldiers, does that sound like a soft hearted man? Certainly not, Bible scholars say the “The Passion of the Christ” directed by Mel Gibson, could not fit in a movie nor fit in the rated ‘R’ rating what Jesus went through at the cross. A man who is able to endure severe suffering, could not possibly have a feminine complex. The crucifixion gives evidence to my criteria, a man able to endure severe suffering cannot be soft hearted, and it just doesn’t make sense.  The thought of Jesus’s feminine image is contradiction to scripture and an offense to Christ. Furthermore, while Jesus is love, it does not depict his whole being; his walk on earth and the crucifixion prove his Honored behavior.

 

            Moreover anyone who confesses with their mouth that Jesus is Lord and believes in their heart that God raised him from the dead is the only reason we will be saved (Salvation: Romans 10: 9-10). Likewise there is no sin to great, except renouncing Christ, that can rob a person from their Salvation. Likewise, confining ourselves to making sure another scripture does not denote the concept, the concept lines up with new scriptural teaching found in the New Testament, and the fact that the concept makes sense‒ the concept does not lead to an extreme, helps the church to believe in the concepts God intended, and brings light to the diluted church.

 

Works Cited:

 

“Genetically Altered Christianity.” Jesse . DayStar. 22 Aug. 2013. jdm.org.

         Television. 22 Aug. 2013.

 

MR Wallpaper. . mrwallpaper.com.

          Web. 26 Oct. 2013.

 

Online Parallel Bible Project. Bible Hub. N.p. n.d. Web.

           16 Oct. 2013.

 

The Holy Bible. Thomas Nelson.

            Thomas Nelson Inc. Nashville, Dallas, Mexico City, Rio De Janeiro, 2006. New King James Version.

 

Wallton. walltor.com.

             Web. 26 Oct. 2013.

 

YouVersion. Bible. ABS, BLI, B, CEB, C, GWT, HCSB, LBS, NP, NB, NLT, ZB. n.d. Web.

              16 Oct. 2013.