Deconstructing Christianity Is Not the Same as Hating God

Posted by:

|

On:

|

,

The subject matter of my first book on Christianity, “Paulianity: Identifying Christianity’s False Apostle“, appear at first blush to be a book intending to tear down Christians or the religion of Christianity.   That is not actually the intent of either that book, nor the current book I am writing on why “Jesus Didn’t Die For You“.  As with my first book, the purpose of all my writings on the matter is simply to demonstrate that the religion the world knows today as Christianity is not at all consistent with its own teachings and has created a completely new hybrid religion out of the mixing of Judaism with Greco Roman Paganism of the day.  This religion called “Christianity” is entirely based on a false understanding of the term “Christ” and a total misunderstanding of the Hebrew “scriptures” on which the religion is based.  The true religion of the man Christians call “Jesus” is a Hebrew religion (or in more simplistic terms “Judaism”).  It is my belief that very few Christians within the religion today have a clear understanding of the difference between the religion of “Jesus” and HIS understanding of the Hebrew Messiah vs the modern (pagan) “church’s” concept of a Greek “Christ”. 

As with my first book, my next book makes liberal use of quotation marks which are placed around certain words and phrases such as “New Testament”, “Old Testament”, “scriptures”, “Jesus”, “Jews”, and many other well-known Christian terms.  These quotation marks are used to indicate for those who have studied these topics more thoroughly that I understand these words are misleading and inaccurate.  For example, the spelling and pronunciation of the name “Jesus” is not even remotely close to how the individual Christians follow would have pronounced his name.  It is a modern transliteration from Hebrew, to Greek, to Latin and finally to English such that the name no longer bears any resemblance to the real name that historical figure would have been called.   This sort of change only adds to the blurring of the lines between the “Jewish” messiah and the Greek “Christ” and furthers the modern Christian’s confusion over the original meaning of the “scriptures”.   

The term “Jews” or “Jewish” is also often misleading for the law of the “Old Testament” was not given to the “Jews” and the “Old Testament” does not contain “Jewish laws”.   In reality, the law was given to ALL of Israel, not only the “Jews”.  The term “Jew” only refers to a few of the twelve tribes of Israel (namely the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and a some of tribe of Levi) of which “Jesus” and all of his apostles were from (including Paul).  This book will make much of explaining a truer meaning of terms “Israel” and “Jew” in plain english so that the modern Christian can better understand “scriptures” that make reference to them.  

Even the terms “New Testament” and “Old Testament” are horribly misleading.  The “new” covenant (at times mistakenly called the “New Testament”), I would argue, SHOULD refer to the ORIGINAL covenant simply “renewed” and not a replacement for the “old”.  Using terms like “old” and “new” helps to mislead modern Christianity into thinking the OLD is no longer valid and that a NEW way of doing things is in place, a teaching largely taught only by Paul in the so called “Bible” (which is altogether another horribly misunderstood word).  This belief is further bolstered by a Church trying desperately to separate itself from Judaism and instead embracing or incorporating the pagan concept of a “Christ” over the “Jewish” messiah that Jesus’ followers in the day believed him to be. 

There are other words too that are misleading in their English forms, words like “God” and “Lord” and even “church” for example.  Unfortunately, these misunderstood words are used by modern Christianity so frequently that to not use them would only cause mass confusion amongst my target audience when trying to tackle a weighty subject such as the true meaning of the Hebrew Messiah.  Wherever possible therefore, I will simply use quotation marks around misused or misunderstood words rather than sidetrack or derail an argument by having to explain every possible misunderstanding and erroneous teaching of a “church” which is now thousands of years removed from their original teachings.  Only when I feel it is necessary to discuss a concept fully will I explain the erroneous use of certain words, otherwise I will simply use the misunderstood word in quotations and move on.    

As with my first book, my target audience for all of my writings on Deconstructing Christianity are those struggling with their faith in the Christian church as it exists today.  I also write this with the sincerely truth-seeking modern Christian, or former Christian in mind.  It is my hope that those a little more orthodox in their understanding of “scriptures” already (such as messianic) will find my approach more honest and palatable if they understand that the words in quotations are being used tongue-in-cheek and not because I am completely ignorant to their actual meaning (or erroneous meaning as the case may be).