What's the most accurate christian denominations?

[CrackPipeCowboy]

Yea I get what you mean. Jesus Christ and his original disciples we're jewish. I meant Jews who are pious only in church and don't practice what they preach. Too busy being political spergs and telling black people how oppressed they are by white people and cops.

I was just telling you to read my post and look into it. I had a stroke trying to understand what you posted for a second.

The Athos of the North

 

[Copesneeddilate]

So do you not understand what the word "judging" means, on top of not understanding the Bible?

I state observations I've seen, I don't judge all black people as niggers and quite frankly the latter don't even want to be saved just as how much they don't want your forgiveness as much as they tarnish your mercies. I know I am a sinner, just as you are. I hope black people don't become niggers, and I hope they can be saved as well.

I do understand that Jesus Christ come in the flesh, that he is the son of the living god. What do you think about this statement?

 

[Dyn]

I don't judge all black people as niggers

I must have missed the part where Jesus said "Judge some black people but not all of them".

 

[Little oak tree]

Okay. I'm just gonna consider you a schizo. Forget about how the epistles of paul were written barely 20 years after the crucifixion, the didache and several other writings before the gospels were even completed, but yeah 300 years.

For Give Thanks to the Lord

Oh boy, oh boy, you made me start with Apostle Paul

"There are at least nine direct mentions of the apostle Paul in various categories of literature from the first to fourth centuries. Here is a brief look.

The first category comes from what are known as the Apostolic Fathers. Clement of Rome (AD 35-95) mentioned Paul in his writings saying that Paul was killed upside down by the Emperor of Rome, Nero. Ignatius (AD 35-107) wrote a letter to the city of Ephesus that mentioned the ministry of Paul. Polycarp (AD 69-156) wrote a letter to the city of Philippi and said that Paul was a good model to follow.

The second category is historians. Eusebius (AD 263-339) mentioned Paul forty-eight times in his various writings recording history in the first century. (For me, Eusebius is perhaps the most credible because his historical writings are also quoted by Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Athanasius, and Jerome.)

The third category is Marcionites and Ebionites. The man Marcion (AD 85-160) loved Paul so much he worked hard to make a collection of all of his letters. The Ebionites (AD 140), who did not like Paul’s theology, nonetheless acknowledged his existence."
https://mwtb.org/products/pmt-historical-evidence-for-the-apostle-paul?variant=41063788675252

I'm having problems uploading stuff. I'll develop this in parrhesia and reply you the most important parts

 

[Copesneeddilate]

I was just telling you to read my post and look into it. I had a stroke trying to understand what you posted for a second.

The Athos of the North

@Copesneeddilate

cough cough

I'm sorry about that, I'll give your video a listen. I changed the original posting because I thought I powerleveled too much and I'm thinking this thread is straying off topic from the title I made. I criticized the baptist churches as being jewish social gathering clubs in the new OP, so I thought you we're calling me out when you @ me with cough cough, but I remembered Jesus Christ was Jewish like his original disciples so I clarified that the Jews today are pious, barely, in the church but no so pious outside.

 

[Little oak tree]

It's Occam's razor. Taking the position of schizos like @Little oak tree means believing in a conspiracy theory where there would be actaul motivation for all these figures from different backgrounds and political stripes to fake a Christ narrative. It's just pure idiocy. They end up being bigger crackpots than any religious person.

Again, it's projection for their own insecurities. Not to mention these are the type of dopes that tend to accuse anyone right of Mao of being "science deniers." lol Using this kind of dumb thinking you could probably come up with positiosn that Alexander the Great or a lot of historical figures were "mythical."

Haha it's politics retarded cunt, it's CONSPIRACY HISTORY.
https://cruxnow.com/commentary/2016/12/maybe-nero-didnt-persecute-christians
"The evidence is thin, to summarize Shaw, both for Nero’s persecution, and even for the possibility that Romans could so early have recognized Christians judicially or religiously as such. The persecution stands or falls on a single passage in the Annals of Tacitus, the Roman historian and imperial administrator, writing around 115 AD, some 50 years after the event"

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Arianism, the only one that makes any sense and which they had to go full jihad on to get rid of.

 

[Otoya Yamaguchi]

im not sure what the true differences of denominations, but it seems so many of them just make stuff up that isnt supported by scripture or even extra biblical/non canon texts

I don't believe in the Bible, but traditional five-point Calvinism is the only doctrine that makes sense if you're a Christian. God chose who gets saved at the start of the universe, everyone else goes to hell forever and ever, and that's an awesome thing because anything God does is glorious.

but this is not SCRIPTURAL. calvinism in a lot of cases completely delete free will out of the equation and makes the supposition that everything is pre-destined and/or god intervenes or causes every action and thing to happen

thats not backed by scripture

None of the silly "oh yeah this dude in Rome with a funny hat somehow speaks with the voice of God (except when he doesn't) and is the ruler of the church" like the Catlickers have. Like you can't possibly tell me that has anything to do with the Bible, I mean that's why he calls himself "Pontifex Maximus" just like the title some Roman pagan priests and the Roman Emperor had.

Catholicism is pure paganism. al they did was take pagan/roman iconography and pasted jesus and mary over the ideas.

the catholics worship angels and saints (something specifically forbidden in scripture) and they are obsessed with Mary. dont get me wrong. Mary is important. But she is a mortal girl. she was a bit of an anti-eve (sometimes called a "type" of eve), where eve was rebellious and did not listen to God, Mary was the humble servant and did everything god asked. Mary was a mortal servant of God, nothing in scripture denies this or puts mary as any kind of status otherwise. She is not "queen of heaven", she is not god's wife, she was not immaculately conceived.

obviusly the pagan connotations of christmas, saints, etc. Also, jesus straight up said "call no man father"....so the first thing catholics do is call the head of their church "POPE" (aka Papa, aka Father)

modern catholics are also buddy-buddy with islam these days and are saying god favors corporatism and false gods (climate "science") and are on board with faggots and baby sacrifice.

i am not 100% sure on early catholicism, havent done much research on it pre-Constantine....but constantine definitely made it into the cult we have today.

Is it also inescapably fucking correct given basic Christian teachings about God? Also yes.

have to double post because the site is broken all the time and won't let me tag you in my other post but, can you explain some of what you mean?