The Question

A question is tearing through our communities right now like shrapnel through flesh.

Not about politics. Not about eschatology. Deeper than that.

Did the religion built in Jesus’s name systematically replace his message with a control system?

Someone with a large following questioned the institutional narrative about Jesus last week. The response was immediate and synchronized. Multiple Christian influencers diagnosed him as Satanic, Luciferian, teaching occult deception.

Not one of them addressed what he actually said. They diagnosed the questioner.

I watched people I respect participate in the same pattern that killed Jesus. Scripture-bombing to avoid examination. Theological correctness deployed as a weapon. The either/or trap sprung perfectly.

Defend the institution or you’re denying Christ.

Both sides missing what he actually taught.

This is the immune response of a captured system. The same reflex that crucified Jesus now mobilized to protect the franchise that bears his name.

They will not address the question. They will diagnose the questioner.

Let’s get something straight about something before we go further.

Jesus was unequivocally divine. Full stop.

“In him dwells all the fullness of deity in bodily form.” —Colossians 2:9

He possessed the complete nature of God.

Not partially. Not symbolically. Completely.

But he drew a distinction that institutional Christianity has spent two millennia systematically erasing.

He never said “I am the Universal Father.” He said “The Father is greater than I.” He said “I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me.” He prayed to a distinct person he called “the only true God.”

His mission was not to become the sole object of worship, displacing the Father. His mission was to become the perfect conduit to the Father.

Here’s the inversion. The institution took his divinity, the very proof that God is knowable and accessible, and weaponized it as evidence of your inherent exclusion.

They made “I and the Father are one” a wall to separate you from God rather than a door he was holding open.

---

Let’s look at those six words that have fractured Christendom for two thousand years.

“I and the Father are one.”

The Greek is devastatingly clear. ἕν, hen. Neuter “one.” Unity of essence, will, purpose. Not εἷς, heis, masculine “one person.” Jesus claimed unity with the Father, not identity as the Father.

And he immediately extended the invitation. “That they may be one as we are one.”

If his oneness means he is the Father, same self, same throne, then your oneness means you become the Father too. This is a conclusion the original language and context do not support.

The verse is an invitation into a shared quality of relationship, not a claim of identical personhood.

The institution preserved every verse about his unique divinity while gutting every accompanying invitation to enter the relationship that divinity makes possible.

“No one comes to the Father except through me” was twisted from a statement about the path, himself, to a statement about the gatekeeper, themselves.

They turned the bridge into a toll booth.

The system survives by forcing a false choice, a manufactured binary.

Option A

Jesus is God, so you must submit to the institutional interpretation of him.

Option B

You question the institution, therefore you must reject Jesus’s divinity.

Both the fervent defender and the rebellious questioner are caught in this same trap.

The defender, armed with scripture, proves Jesus’s divinity with theological precision. He is factually correct but spiritually blind, defending a system that inverts the very message he quotes. He mistakes defense of the institution for defense of the Savior.

The questioner, sensing the institutional corruption, concludes the entire framework is a lie. He throws out the divine revelation because of its weaponization. He is perceptive but overcorrects, discarding the key because the lock is broken.

Both are useful to the system. The defender provides the facade of orthodoxy. The questioner provides the facade of a threat, justifying the defender’s existence.

The system wins as long as the fight is on its chosen battlefield.

The escape is to reject the binary entirely.

The third way is this: Honor Jesus’s full divinity precisely as the grounds for opposing the institution that corrupts his message.

His divinity is what guarantees the Father’s accessibility. The institution uses his divinity to deny that accessibility. Same data, same scriptures, two diametrically opposed conclusions.

There’s a term that triggers immediate institutional alarms.

Christ consciousness.

Defenders link it to new age deception, a dangerous bypass of Jesus’s uniqueness. They’re right about the distortion. They’re wrong to discard the reality.

This is not a new age invention. It’s Paul’s explicit command.

“Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” —Philippians 2:5

What is this mind? This consciousness?

It’s the consciousness of perfect sonship Jesus demonstrated. “I do nothing of myself, but as my Father taught me, I speak these things.” Absolute trust in the Father’s presence. Complete dependence on divine guidance. Total alignment with divine will.

The new age distortion says you can achieve this consciousness apart from Christ, through technique and self-effort. This is false.

The institutional defense says this consciousness doesn’t exist at all, that Jesus’s way of knowing the Father is utterly unshareable. This denies what Jesus explicitly taught and demonstrated.

The third way?

Christ consciousness is real. It’s the consciousness of sonship that Jesus lived and offers. It’s accessible only through him, never apart from him. It’s received through relationship, not achieved through technique.

“Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me.”

This isn’t making you equal with Jesus. This is Jesus sharing what he came to give.

You don’t become a creator son. You become an indwelt son. The same Father presence that was in Christ Jesus lives in you. This is the scandalous, lived reality of the early church that the institution has been neutralizing ever since.

This isn’t new theology. It’s the original, scandalous core of the faith that got buried under two millennia of institutional control.

The early church didn’t die for a theological proposition about a distant deity. They died for a lived reality.

“Christ in you, the hope of glory.”

“Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?”

“As many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God.”

Not children in name only. Children in reality. Participants in the divine nature. Indwelt by the same Father who indwelt Jesus.

This is what Jesus died to restore. Direct participation. Accessible relationship. The indwelling presence that makes the Father immediately knowable.

The institution couldn’t control this message. So they deferred it to heaven, externalized it to buildings, and theologized it into a future reward for correct belief.

They made the kingdom of God a distant place you go when you die if you believe right, instead of what Jesus actually said. The kingdom of God is within you. Now. Present. Accessible.

Forget academic debates. This is about your actual life.

Jesus didn’t teach a new set of doctrines about God. He demonstrated a new kind of relationship with God.

What does that relationship actually look like?

It’s the conscious, moment-by-moment practice of the Father’s presence within. It’s learning to listen to the still small voice that Jesus said would guide you into all truth. It’s trusting the Father’s provision not as a theological concept but as lived reality, as Jesus did constantly.

It’s doing what Jesus actually said instead of defending those who claim to speak for him.

Seek the Father’s presence directly. The door is open. The kingdom is within. You don’t need a permission slip from a middle manager.

Follow Jesus into the relationship he demonstrated. Not by worshiping him from a safe institutional distance, but by actually doing what he said.

Do this, and the whole false fight evaporates. You’re no longer a participant in their controlled opposition.

You discover that the most dangerous truth in the world is not a correct idea about God, but a direct relationship with the Father that Jesus revealed.

When this truth stirs, the system’s antibodies activate with predictable synchrony.

The crude response shouts: Deceiver! Heretic! Satan!

The sophisticated response scripture bombs you, proving a point you aren’t contesting to avoid the point you are making.

They’ll quote John 1:1 but ignore John 14:20.

“I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.”

They’ll cite the Council of Nicaea but overlook the simple, devastating promise of John 14:23.

“If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.”

They are the modern Pharisees. They have the scriptures, the doctrines, the authority. They’re biblically flawless, theologically perfect, and completely miss the Father standing right in front of them.

They’re doing it again. They’re protecting the system that stands between humanity and the direct access Jesus died to give.

Jesus faced this constantly.

He’d ask a question or make a statement, and the Pharisees would respond in perfect unison even though they hadn’t coordinated their answer.

The system had trained them so thoroughly in its defense that the defense became reflexive.

“Who gave you authority to do these things?” they demanded. Not because they’d met that morning to strategize, but because the institution had trained them to make authority and institutional permission the central question.

Jesus didn’t answer their question. He asked one that exposed the trap. “Was John’s baptism from heaven or from men?”

They couldn’t answer without losing either crowd support or institutional credibility.

The question revealed that their concern wasn’t truth. It was control.

This is what’s happening now. The question being asked reveals where the institution has replaced Jesus’s message with something easier to control.

The response reveals that control is the point.

People keep asking if there’s coordination behind the questions being raised.

There is. But it’s not what they think.

The coordination isn’t multiple accounts suddenly pushing doubt about Jesus.

The coordination is the institutional immune system activating in perfect synchronization to neutralize examination.

Multiple large accounts responding with the same themes at the same time. The same accusations. The same scripture bombs. The same either/or framing. The same threats wrapped in concern.

All without consulting each other. All independently arriving at the same defensive response.

This isn’t random.

It’s the immune system of a captured organism reacting to a threat.

The antibodies don’t need central coordination. They’ve been trained by the system they’re defending. They know the approved responses, the acceptable boundaries, the dangerous questions that must be neutralized.

When someone crosses those boundaries, the response is automatic. Immediate. Synchronized without coordination.

Jesus welcomed questions.

The woman at the well asked about worship. He didn’t diagnose her as deceived. He expanded her understanding.

Nicodemus asked how someone could be born again. He didn’t accuse him of coordination with darkness. He taught him.

Thomas doubted the resurrection. He didn’t call him a deceiver. He provided evidence.

Jesus met honest questions with honest answers. Met seeking with revelation. Met doubt with evidence.

The institution meets questions with diagnosis. Seeking with suspicion. Doubt with accusations.

You can tell which one is confident in what it’s protecting.

---

The division will increase.

As more people wake up to institutional capture across every domain, more will examine religious institutions with the same scrutiny.

The defenders will get louder. More accusations of coordination. More linking of questions to occult movements. More framing of examination as spiritual warfare.

The questioners will get bolder. More rejection of Jesus’s divinity. More claims that scripture can’t be trusted. More replacement of Jesusonian teaching with alternatives that sound similar but lead elsewhere.

Both sides will claim the other is doing Satan’s work. Both will position themselves as protecting truth.

Most people will pick a side, missing entirely that the fight itself is the trap.

But the third way will remain available for those with ears to hear.

Jesus is fully divine. The institution is corrupt. Both true.

His divinity matters. Institutional critique matters. Not either/or.

Questions are valid. Some answers lead astray. Hold both.

The way forward isn’t defending institutions Jesus opposed or rejecting the divinity Jesus demonstrated.

It’s taking him seriously.

Stop defending institutional Christianity as if protecting the institution equals protecting Jesus. He opposed the religious institutions of his day for the same patterns now defended in his name.

Stop rejecting Jesus’s divinity because institutional Christianity corrupted his message. The corruption doesn’t invalidate the revelation.

Start doing what he actually said.

Seek the Father directly. Not through institutional permission. Not through theological correctness. Directly.

Find the kingdom within. Not someday in heaven. Not if you believe right. Now. Present. Accessible.

Follow Jesus into the relationship he demonstrated. Not by worshiping correctly according to others.

By actually doing what he said.

---

Did we replace following Jesus with worshiping Jesus? Did the institution invert his message? Is the religion built in his name serving what he actually taught?

The defenders will keep calling it dangerous to ask. The questioners will keep asking. The division will keep growing.

But for those with ears to hear, the question isn’t the problem. The question is the invitation.

Examine whether the institution serves the teacher. Test whether theology produces relationship. Ask whether worship replaced following.

When defenders respond with scripture proving his divinity while protecting institutional corruption, you’ll know the answer. When questioners reject his divinity because they correctly see institutional capture, you’ll know they overcorrected.

When you find yourself honoring Jesus’s full divinity while opposing every system using his divinity to prevent direct access to the Father, you’ll know you found the third way.

The way of Jesus. Not religion about Jesus. The relationship he demonstrated. Not the institution claiming to mediate it. The Father’s indwelling presence. Not controlled access the defenders protect.

Jesus was the divine Son revealing the Universal Father’s accessible presence.

This is what they killed him for. Not his divinity claims. His access restoration. This is what the institution inverted. Not his theology. His invitation. This is what defenders protect against while claiming to protect him.

And this is what becomes available the moment you stop fighting about Jesus and start following him.

The divine Son revealing the Universal Father. The perfect bridge between human and divine. The way, the truth, the life. Not as theological proposition but as lived relationship.

Take him seriously enough to actually walk it and everything else falls away. The truth he offered stands. The Father he came to reveal becomes knowable, accessible, present. Just like he promised. Just like he demonstrated. Just like he died to make permanently available.

That’s the gospel the institution buried under correct theology. That’s the good news the questioners sense but overcorrect past. That’s the Jesusonian truth that transcends the entire false fight.

Direct access isn’t institutional heresy. It’s what Jesus died to restore. The kingdom within isn’t dangerous deception. It’s what Jesus taught from the beginning. Christ consciousness isn’t new age mysticism. It’s the consciousness of sonship Jesus demonstrated and bestowed.

The question fracturing everything isn’t destroying faith. It’s inviting you to find what faith in Jesus actually means when you take him seriously enough to do what he said instead of defending those who claim to speak for him.

The question remains. The invitation stands. The way is open.

For those with ears to hear.

<3EKO

---

If this resonated with you, I wrote an entire book unpacking the religion OF Jesus versus the religion ABOUT Jesus. It’s called The Jesus Frequency, and I wrote it as an operating manual for the relationship Jesus actually offered.

It makes an excellent Christmas gift for anyone asking these same questions.