Origins of the Christian Branches and which one is true

[Dominicvs]

I would like to bring to the attention of TWC the origins of the Christian Churches.
And how one would determine presuming Christianity is true (not saying it is, but for this research, one must assume), which Churches are more likely to be the objectivly speaking "true" or "most correct in Gods eyes" church of Christianity.

I'm not going to inform you, I would just like to hear you opinions and thoughts as a community.

Things to consider:
-Many of the early religions (Catholic and Orthodox) were common, but named as religions much later.
-All Christianity is faulted, but that is because man is faulted.
-Early Christianity was generally held in private houses, but still practiced with the gospel and the Eucharist.
-It is a common fact agreed amoung historians that Jesus really did exist.
-If you believe in miracles, consider all the divine sightings and messages over the ages.
-No matter what, all Christianity is correct in Christian eyes.

I will just give you this charter:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ground Rules:

-No flame wars
-No fighting or debating faiths
-No atheist dogma
-No Christian dogma

[Manco]

I think you can safely exclude all Sola Scriptura denominations of being "true".
Sola Scriptura explicitly says that Christianity can only be true when it's entirely based on the Bible. The NT wasn't finalised till many decennia after Jesus' death, so that would mean there wasn't a true Christianity then. Either you accept traditions have a place equal to or even greater than the Bible, or you have the explain this contradiction. (and that's even ignoring how many Sola Scriptura denominations attack for example Catholicism, when it's the RCC/Orthodox that actually "created" the Bible)

[Anarius]

Protestantism has always made the most sense to me. Not Catholicism and Orthodoxy with its rites and fancy clothes and grandeur.
Christianity glorifies a simple life and frowns upon great personal wealth, so gold and incense seems a little off.

[Dominicvs]

Protestantism has always made the most sense to me. Catholicism and Orthodoxy with its rites and fancy clothes and grandeur.

Have you ever been to the average Catholic Church. Its just plain brick walls and a priest in a white cloak, no gold or giant organs and choirs. You presume all Catholicism looks just like the Vatican and all churches like the Sistine Chapel. Besides, Protestantism (mainly started by the Church of England) was mostly created because a fat king couldn't divorce his wife under Catholic law.

I think you can safely exclude all Sola Scriptura denominations of being "true".
Sola Scriptura explicitly says that Christianity can only be true when it's entirely based on the Bible. The NT wasn't finalised till many decennia after Jesus' death, so that would mean there wasn't a true Christianity then. Either you accept traditions have a place equal to or even greater than the Bible, or you have the explain this contradiction. (and that's even ignoring how many Sola Scriptura denominations attack for example Catholicism, when it's the RCC/Orthodox that actually "created" the Bible)

Good point, never thought of it like that +rep

[Anarius]

I have been to many Catholic countries and been inside a few churches as well. They did strike me as slightly more "showy" than Protestant churches. Of course, it's possible that I mostly visited the churches with the most beautiful Baroque interior, being a tourist and all.

Now, this is in no way meant as a jape against Catholicism. I don't believe in God, so I'm just "watching from the sidelines" as it is.

[Dominicvs]

[Helm]

They all require faith to believe in them and you only need faith to believe something that you have no good reason to believe. So they're all equally true.

[Dominicvs]

I know, but the people of TWC are very scientific, as am I, they don't think with faith, so this must be objective.

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

I know, but the people of TWC are very scientific, as am I, they don't think with faith, so this must be objective.

None of them have anymore credibility than any other. Although one be true, it is impossible to know which one.

Catholics will say others are the deviants, while the others will say that Catholics have diverged from the way of Christ.

[Helm]

I know, but the people of TWC are very scientific, as am I, they don't think with faith, so this must be objective.

Believing in the virgin birth, miracles and the resurrection require faith there's no other way of doing it.

[Erwin Rommel]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...nityIsCatholic

[Sphere]

If there was some core truth in Christianity I would expect your chronology to be flipped around; many idea's narrowing down to one truth, instead of one idea continuing to fracture into many competeing ideas.

[Gromovnik]

I can't see how could this thread go anywhere.

[Col. Tartleton]

I'd say Anabaptists are closest although I can't say 100% that they're "right."

Amish folk seem to be the most "we actually do what the goddamn book says" and that's pretty big brownie points.

[Phier]

Amish folk seem to be the most "we actually do what the goddamn book says" and that's pretty big brownie points.

Jesus wasn't a Luddite though.

Added isolation and not 'spreading the word' is not a biblical virtue. All those secs of various flavors intact rules in order to keep the separate from the general population. I worked with someone from a 'modern' Amish sect (forget the name) and he was not allowed to eat lunch with me since he was a 'simple Christian'. I am not surprised that his sect wouldn't' allow something like eating with non-members since that would lead to social interactions.

I don't think Jesus would have been keen about keeping his message to yourself.

[Dominicvs]

Well really, it still no matter what, and we all knew this prior - depends on who you ask. Every 'faith' has different translations of the faith, the Bible and the possibilities vs historical fact. If you ask a Catholic, he will say, Jesus gave the keys to heaven to St Peter in Rome, declaring this will be his church. If you ask, say a Jehovah's Witness, he will translate the Bible very differently, as a literal translation, word for word, and no metaphors or meaning. If you ask a Protestant, they again will take the scripture in a different way, and so on....

[AngryTitusPullo]

Christians as in Jesus Christ's teachings or Paul's ? If Jesus then none of the above is the true church.

If Paul then I guess either Catholic or Orthodox, though I'm more incline to go for Orthodox considering that Jesus, Paul and the religion itself originates from the east.

[Dominicvs]

Well, the Bible dictates Paul taught what Jesus taught, But he taught it differently.

[AngryTitusPullo]

Well, the Bible dictates Paul taught what Jesus taught, But he taught it differently.

Yes. Jesus taught his followers to worship God and follow the commandments.

Paul taught his followers to worship Jesus and created his own commandments.

[basics]

" Paul taught his followers to worship Jesus and created his own commandments. "

LestaT,

Chapters and verses please?