Christian Denonimations

Protestantism...Protestanty...Protestianity...you know, THAT one

why do jews attack Christians and attempt to destroy our civilizations?
Notice how church attendance dropped and degeneracy has increased substantially?

>believes in a Jewish creation myth
>believes in a Jewish God
>believes in a Jewish world-savior
>believes in the creation of Israel
>believes in Jewish demonology/angelology
>believes in Jewish sabbath
>believes in Jewish world history (Moses, flood, etc)

yes I can clearly see Christianity isn't Judaism for the goyim

Jews attack everyone. Islam is also Judaism. Why do Jews attack Islam?

youtu.be/BBDBW_10q-E

Attached: jfunk2.jpg (1920x2268, 1.42M)

So if the jews claim they were Romans you would believe them right? What other Jewish lies have been sold to you user, please so share.

Your reply has nothing to do with my post.
Christianity is Judaism mixed with ancient Aryan beliefs. Christianity is Judaism for the goyim replacing said ancient Aryan beliefs. The NT itself says Christians are spiritual Jews.

>Jesus, Mithras, Jeshua - whatever the details are unimportant, the story exists in various forms for a reason.
1. God manifested an aspect of himself as a mortal to experience mortal life. He paid the blood debt for our sins. Accept the gift, it's offered freely.

2. Follow the Golden rule.

That's essentially all you need to know.

Because you are so blind to Jewish lies. Christ was the first one to preach antisemitism and jews stole their shit from Sumerian, Assyrian, and Babylonian creation stories and passed them off as their own

Jesus didn't even exist as a historical person. Christianity is literally a Jewish PSYOP which encourages the replacement of Aryan religion with Judaism.

Latin Mass Catholic is legit as are Eastern Catholic, descended bishop to bishop from the Apostles taught by Our Lord.

Eastern schismatics aka Orthodox are valid but illicit as are SSPX and sedevecantist Catholic splinter sects.

Novus Ordo Catholic facing people holding hands are infiltrated by ecumenism to Protestant heretics and Jews. Valid but doctrinally weak and dubious orthodoxy.

Lutheran, Anglican, etc have no valid Sacraments or Mysteries but baptism and even that can be sketchy. Avoid.

Source?
Follow Christ. Get yourself a Bible and read the Gospel of John. Go from there and God Bless you user.

>Jesus didn't even exist as a historical person.
Stopped reading there. You are too far gone, or a jew who knows exactly what they are doing.
I bet you think the bible created at the council of nicaea by Constantine you irredeemable faggot.

Revelations 2:9
I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Revelations 3:9
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Gass yourself kike.

To answer OP's questions, look into Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, Lutheranism, etc. and pick the one you agree with the most. The most important thing is belief in the Lord and his Son, which all have.

Wrap your head around this:

Jesus was out there... raising the dead... healing the blind... and not a SINGLE Israelite thought it was a good idea to write about him? There are no written records of this Jesus from all of Judea. What's even more damning is that Jesus was tried by Rome, and not only this, but have a conversation with Pilate himself. And yet... there isn't a SINGLE written record of Jesus, from his own time period, in all of the Roman Empire? Even the New Testament writers admitted they never met Jesus and were only telling stories they heard from others. See Luke 1:1

I'm sure Jesus exist though and Christianity isn't a kike PSYOP...

Orthodox obviously

Attached: 1532701029105.jpg (2048x1516, 827K)

Read the Bible again and again. Different translations. Know the actions of God and pray to Him. He will answer.

>Israelite
> jews
> wanting to write about a God who claimed they are the devil
Holy fuck user how retarded are you?

All of the Israelites who allegedly followed Jesus didn't write about him? No one in Rome wrote about him? Give me a break.

If you're not Plymouth Brethren you're going to hell.

Baptist with a KJV Bible ALL THE WAY unless you are a Commie faggot.

Do you know how long it took for someone to write anything about Alexander the great?

Nigger.. Jesus was out there raising the dead and amassing tons of Israelite followers yet NO ONE thought it was a good idea to document his miracles?

No.

It is forgiveness(jesus) love(god) and truth(the holy ghost)

Nigger, Alexander was believed to be a son of God and CONQUERED THE ENITRE CIVILIZED WORLD AT THE TIME. The earliest biography of Alexander the Great was written 400 years

Get educated nigger

Alexander wasn't raising the dead and healing the blind. Can you actually explain why NO ONE wrote about a man who was doing those things? Can you explain why Rome didn't document Jesus' trial and execution despite keeping immaculate records? No, you can't. You can shift the goal post to other people and deflect.

*After his death

Gnostic

Whoa this jew is desperate, these events were recorded and written down quite quickly. You just choose not to believe them because you are kiked beyond belief

The orthodox are polytheistic.
They believe Jesus, The Holy Ghost and God the Father have energy that is seperate from the creation. It's complicated but they are VERY heretical.

There is only one church. the one Jesus Christ started.

There are no written records about Jesus from his own time period and the first ones come years after he allegedly died. Even the NT authors admitted to never having met Jesus and were only re-telling stories they heard. See: Luke 1:1

what's your counter argument to that?

Read gospels, read Pauline literature, and literally search up actual historical docs about Jesus's death and records of people seeing him resurrected

>No one thought to document his miracles

You are fucking gay and stupid

You don't understand history.
If you Really want to understand watch this.

Absolute 100% proof that Jesus was actually a person
from Dr. Timothy McGrew
youtube.com/watch?v=gldvim1yjYM
and
youtube.com/watch?v=MtL8hCrvctc

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_J._McGrew

Like was a disciple of Paul, but the other gospels are fucking there, Matthew, and John faggot

> what's your counter argument to that?

Not him but the fact that there are zero roman records from that time period. Rome was raided a lot my man.

Luke*

ExposingChristianity.com

Gospel writters DID NOT MEET JESUS.
They were RE-TELLING stories they heard.

>Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us,
>JUST AS THEY WERE HANED DOWN TO US by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.
Luke 1:1-2

There are no written accounts of Jesus, from his own time period, in the whole of Rome or Judea despite the fact he was allegedly raising the dead and healing the blind. You can not justify that. Jesus didn't exist as a historical person :)

all of them are a bunch of jewish fairytales

>You can not justify that. Jesus didn't exist as a historical person :)

Jew confirmed

Boom
Orthodoxy is the right path.

prove me wrong. Explain why there are no written accounts of Jesus, from his own time period, in either Judea or Rome. Go ahead. I'll wait.

>prove me wrong.
already did. There exist no records from that period whatsoever.

Unless of course you are also claiming that 1st Rome just didn't exist because we can't technically prove that it did.

I consider prechristian elements of Judaism to be legit, I am not talking about Talmudic Judaism. Perhaps a better term would be Hebrew-Christian tradition. Clarifying the difference between Judaism and Hebraic faith.

*1st century

>There exist no records from that period whatsoever.
do you have a 5th grade education or something? Of course there are written records, from both Rome and Judea, but nothing about this Jesus. Why is that? :)

Attached: jesus rome.jpg (667x187, 32K)

Orthodoxy, brother.

Alternatively, go to each Church and talk to the priests.

The late Dr. E.M. Blaiklock, a New Zealand scholar, taught Latin, Greek, and the ancient classics for more than forty years. He was recognized internationally for his scholarship. In a brilliant essay titled, “Surviving Literature from the First Century,” Professor Blaiklock has demonstrated that there are almost no primary documents that survey the period that embraces the life of Christ.

For instance, “parts of one unimportant historical work” have survived from the era that parallels the Lord’s earthly life. Velleius Paterculus (ca. 19 B.C. – A.D. 30), a retired army officer and “amateur historian,” produced a “badly written history of Rome” covering that age from the end of the Trojan War to the death of Livia (A.D. 29).

>Gospel writers DID NOT MEET JESUS.
You seriously need to watch the video. It's not creationist level tripe. It's actual history.
John the Apostle wrote a Gospel and knew Jesus personally. You are arguing against a history you have no knowledge of.

So did Paul think Jesus was a real person? In Galatians 1:18-19, Paul describes his personal meeting in Jerusalem with Peter and James, “the brother of the Lord.” Surely if Jesus was a fictional person then one of his own relatives would have known that.

Please watch the video one day when you ahve time.

Jesus was born in c. 4 BC Judea.
We have records from Herod the Great from that period and yet no record of Jesus. Odd. We even have the Consensus done from that time and yet... no Jesus. Weeeeeeird.

please produce some records of which you speak, I'll wait.

Luke 1:1-2 proves Gospel writers didnt meet jesus and were only re-telling stories they heard.

Orthodox Christianity

Attached: 41948656_2152194594814770_4595368789129822208_n.jpg (540x720, 55K)

nigger we even have maps from Herod the Great. please take a history course or at least Google this shit before you expose yourself as a know-nothing Spiritual Jew.

>John the Apostle wrote a Gospel and knew Jesus personally.
It's generally believed that John the Apostle isn't the author of The Gospel of John.

The overwhelming scholarly consensus is that there was an itinerant preacher in Judea called Jesus who inspired the one we're familiar with.

>Luke 1:1-2
John the Apostle...

>The overwhelming scholarly consensus
Where's the proofs of Jesus' histrocity?

>Judeo-Christian

What the fuck does that mean ?

SO THEN SHOW ME SOME TRIAL RECORDS NIGGER BOY

I mean pre Christian, Hebraic faith, not that Talmudic shit! See earlier post

My god you're retarded.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius

sourcebooks.fordham.edu/ancient/roman-jews.asp

don't listen to this guy. if you want to be enlightened, be Lutheran. it's the non-retarded, non mystical/spiritualist form of christianity. basically only the good parts, more philosophical than strictly religious, also you can directly consult with god and dont need a shitty priest just to be able to do that. google 95 theses

>Jesus' histrocity
> Theissen, Gerd; Merz, Annette (1996). The Historical Jesus. Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press. pp. 17–62. ISBN 978-0-8006-3122-2.
> Blomberg, Craig L. (2007). The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. InterVarsity Press. ISBN 9780830828074.
> Carrier, Richard Lane (2014). On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt. Sheffield Phoenix Press. ISBN 9781909697355.
> Fox, Robin Lane (2005). The Classical World: An Epic History from Homer to Hadrian. Basic Books. p. 48. ISBN 978-0465024971.

need more?

Just read the Bible. That's all you need.

Lutheran. It's basically the same as when Americans BTFO'd the cunty British for being utter fags about shit they shouldn't have been. Catholicism is for cucks who don't actually want to experience Christianity, but experience it through someone else (the pope). Orthodox can be pretty based. Never heard of Messianic. Stay away from Baptists though, they aren't even Christian, unlike Catholics who aren't but like LARPing that they are. Doubly so for shit like Church of Latter Day Saints, Mormonism, etc.

Orthodoxy is poly-theistic.
youtube.com/watch?v=d07mgLoOW8g

God does not have a separate essence and energy. God is the alpha and omega.
Anyone buying into the mysticism of orthodoxy and the outward traditionalism NEEDS to watch and understand this video.

In Kabbalah, the "divine vessels" (Sephirot) are "emanated" from God (called Ein Sof, "the Infinite"), so they have a beginning. It is the same in orthodoxy.

Which one of those pieces provides evidence Jesus existed? Which one shows a single written account of Jesus from his own alleged time period?

All of them, I invite you to look through them.

Catholics are NOT Christians

Attached: z BXVI monkey see no evil.jpg (400x282, 41K)

Germans ruin everything, including Christianity.

Absolute proof probably doesn't exist. Paul investigated the area 20 years after Jesus' death and met with followers (and reportedly people who personally knew Jesus).

Orthodox is the one true Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church.

Which book in particular provides written evidence of Jesus from his time period :) None of them because it doesn't exist, and if it did, we wouldnt be having this conversation because I'd a Christian.

LOL wow what a fag

>John the Apostle isn't the author of The Gospel of John.
Both Ignatius and Polycarp, his students would disagree with you and thier writing bear that out.

These posts are always so cozy. Keep it up user

You don't find it odd that not a single Israelite or Roman thought it was a good idea to write about a man raising the dead to life? Cmon..

This, fuck placing yourself into a denomination. Just read the bible. If you feel like having the church for the community is something you want then look for that but dont let your interpretation of the bible be through a filter.

>we wouldnt be having this conversation because I'd a Christian.

No you wouldn't because you are a massive faggot and I see now responding to you was a waste of time. It's okay fuck boy, cause we are both going to find out with absolute certainty eventually, now aren't we?

>cause we are both going to find out with absolute certainty eventually, now aren't we?
That's spooky.

>he's forced to admit none of his "Scholarly" works provide any real evidence Jesus existed at all
sad

Catholics are the Only Christians.
Jesus created one church. not 40,000+
Today there are so many Protestant churches because there is so much different interpretation of the Bible; there is so much different interpretation of the Bible because there is so much wrong interpretation of the Bible. And there is so much wrong interpretation because the system of interpreting it is radically wrong. You cannot have one fold and one shepherd, one faith and one baptism by letting every man and every woman distort and pervert the Scriptures to suit their own pet theories.
In our day, there is no whim, fad or fancy that some one does not claim to prove from the Bible. Almost any man or woman is conceited enough to set himself up as a competent interpreter of the word of God. "I think the Bible means this, therefore it does mean this," is their modest position. These men and women want it thoroughly understood that our forefathers in the faith were all fools that for the last nineteen hundred years, the Christian world was in inky darkness. With them, however, light has come into the world.

traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html
youtube.com/watch?v=JPC0N0U0aco

Attached: Please Don’t Call Protestants Christians by Marian T Horvat.png (641x3910, 1.39M)

Christianity is a spooky religion user.

>itinerant preacher in Judea called Jesus

Not necessarily a guy who performed miracles.

Here ya go, OP. Only through jesus can you be saved. Its so easy it's difficult.

Attached: 1537193004341m.jpg (1024x569, 184K)

Yeshua was one of the most common Israelite names! I'm sure there many Yeshua.. but not one written about who raised the god damn dead.

> Completely ignores
Awfully Jewish of you user

WRONG

It is just because there are so many different interpretations as to what the Bible means. It is the sad result of the doctrine of the right of private judgment. Every Protestant denomination claims to be founded on the Scriptures. Then how can they all be right? Is the Methodist right, or the Lutheran, or the Baptist or the Episcopalian? They can't be right for they all differ in doctrine and government. If they do not differ, then why are they separated? Protestantism says, "Let each one read the Bible for himself and then the Holy Ghost will guide him into the truth." Well, then the Holy Ghost must be blamed for the Babylon of religions around us. If the Holy Ghost guides one man he becomes a Baptist, if he guides another to be a Jehovah's Witness that does not believe Jesus is God, he becomes something else and so on until people give up religion entirely. The Holy Ghost inspires no one using his own private interpretation. The Holy Ghost was guaranteed to the Church and not to individuals in the teaching of truth.

By way of analogy, suppose our Constitution of the United States could be termed our Bible of Democracy. Just think what confusion would happen if every Tom, Dick, and Harry using the right of private judgment interpreted the laws of our nation as he felt himself inspired by the Holy Ghost. See what would soon happen to our 48 states if we didn't have the Supreme Court to tell us what the Constitution is saying. Without the Supreme Court our nation would come to an end as a democracy if we tolerated in government the absurd and fallacious principle of private judgment. As we must maintain a Supreme Court in government is it not all the more rational and reasonable that we have a Supreme Authority to interpret the Bible, our Constitution of Christianity, to avoid religious confusion? The proper authority to interpret the Bible is the Supreme Court of the Catholic Church, which gave the Bible to the world

Man, it sure is. Especially if you were taught it as a child and then lose it.