Which Christian denomination is the closest to the actual teachings of Jesus?

You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

Except Jesus came to fulfill the Old law and create a New One. No more animal sacrifice for atonement of sins. No more circumcision. No more kosher laws. That's pretty basic knowledge, but continue to pretend Christianity was meant to be pharisaism 2.0. Just don't be surprised when no one takes you seriously.

hey man I have no dog in the fight. I just think this stuff is interesting from a historical perspective.

Probably classical Lutheranism as it doesn't have all the extra baggage of apostolic traditions but it doesn't deviate into imposing the restoration of Judaic codes or emphasizing passages from spurious epistles and writings either.
Externally Orthodox churches are the most resemblant of early gentile Christian aesthetics and the interior paintings on the walls and the domed ceilings show an evolution from the catacomb frescos and those of other early cave and house churches

Ethiopian Christianity also conserves a lot of Jewish customs.
German Baptists were an early modern attempt at reconstructionism without becoming excessively radical.

No. Messianic Judaism is basically a recent movement started by a bunch of Evangelicals who wanted to revert back to Judaism and assume a model of what they assumed early Chritianity was like. The problem was, they basically just ended up adopting modern, Rabbinic Jewish practices without realizing that Rabbinic Judaism didn't start until long after the first century.

It's essentially a movement built on a lazy idea and put into motion by people who didn't bother to do research about the history they were trying to emulate.

At least it's a step in the direction. That's better than 2000 years of not making an attempt.

copts and ethiopians

Not true at all.

Matthew 5:17-519
>Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Paul and the other apostles still participated in temple rituals.

oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/resource/sacrifice_nt.xhtml

The Council of Jerusalem decided that gentile converts did not have to be circumcised, but even they still had to follow most of the dietary laws. The Law was still in full effect for Jews such as Paul himself. Paul even personally circumcised Saint Timothy because his mother was Jewish.

This, Paul hijacked the entire resurrection cult and the later church fathers put to death all the interesting derivatives that didn't conform to >muh trinity, to say nothing of Rome being Rome and >H >R >E and murrikans.

Modern Christianity is crazy cuck shit taken way too far.

Catholic.

Atheism

he's right though

this is bullshit, as jesus himself said it isnt want goes into your mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out of it, because what comes out of it is telling of a mans heart. Also he says none of God's creatures are "dirty", and to say grace over whatever you eat.

Jesus would support homosexuals and female pastors more than fat patriarchs with silk regalia and golden crowns.

Roman Catholicism, although a lot of it can be deduced (e.g. Trinity) rather than being teached by Jesus outright.

An outstanding rebuttal.

The original historic literal entity of thean himself? The ones where ur high

>what kind of Jew are you?

Lmfao
Think what you're looking for is closest to the early church, in which case it'd likely be an eastern orthodox branch

Syro-Malabar Catholic Church

He fulfilled the law and made a new covenant. The old has passed. That's whole point of many of his parable.

Christianity is not nor never was meant to be Judaism.

>Jesus wanted everyone to follow the 613 commandments, we swear
>implying modern Judaism itself isn't a ridiculously degenerated aberration of the Judaism in Christ time
wew

>Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven
What did he mean by this

The commandments Jesus spoke of. Not the 613, shlomo.

the ten commandments.

NOT you can't ever eat pork or you must sacrifice this animal for this sin on this certain day, or you must mutilate this infants penis type shit.

Remember, Jesus came for the Gentiles too, and stated that anyone who believes in him and repents his sins will come to the father.

This.

Gnostic Marcionism is objectively the closest to the pure teachings of Christ.

PROTESTANT ONLY
CAT-LICKS GO AWAY

>Not one jot or tittle
>b-b-but it only means the decalogue (nevermind that according to contemporary notions, the first one wasn't even a commandment), we swear!

Right after he says he has not come to abolish the Law, and not an iota will pass from it until heaven and earth pass away?

If this was the case why did his disciples still follow the Law?

For example, many years after Jesus died, in a vision from God, Peter says "Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean".

Even Paul's view that the Law wasn't necessary for gentile converts was controversial and he got ran out of Antioch for it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incident_at_Antioch

Except Jesus himself didn't follow the phony commandments of men that the Jews do.

yes and in that vision it was revealed to him that none of gods creatures are unclean.

Jesus himself says it is not what goes into someones mouth that defiles him, but what comes out of it.

also, if this were the case, why didnt the apostles force jewish laws on Gentiles during early christianity? Paul himself says circumcision doesnt matter.

jesus himself didnt follow the law. Doing works on the sabbath. Eating and drinking wine. Talking down to pharisees who hide behind the law they themselves made for everyone to follow. they were laws of Man, not of God.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Thomas_Christians

Purest sect by far. No fairytale "gospels", just the direct teachings of Jesus.

*tips fedora
Christians be crazy, when will they learn?

*thumps bible*
Probably never.

>yes and in that vision it was revealed to him that none of gods creatures are unclean.
So if Peter was still following the Law until then you cant say Jesus abolished it in his ministry.

>Jesus himself says it is not what goes into someones mouth that defiles him, but what comes out of it.
He said this in response to the Pharisees asking him why his disciples didn't wash their hands before they ate, which actually was a Pharisaic tradition and is not found in the Torah.

>also, if this were the case, why didnt the apostles force jewish laws on Gentiles during early christianity? Paul himself says circumcision doesnt matter.
They did, that's what the incident at Antioch was about. Paul's Christianity eventually won out but his dispute here was with two people who actually knew Jesus personally while he never met him, so I think their views were more authentic.

Reformed Protestantism

>I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them
>fulfill them

>not an iota will pass from it until heaven and earth pass away?
That's not what He said, He said until all be fulfilled, and it was fulfilled in Him.

>his dispute here was with two people who actually knew Jesus personally while he never met him
They agreed with him at Jerusalem

They did try to force the Law onto early Christians. They believed that only Jews could be saved. It was not until the 10th chapter of Acts that they realized Gentiles could be saved too.

The so-called pillars of faith, Peter James and John, were Judaizing people in the Temple without any problem from the Jews. They were basically making people better Jews. Mikvah, repent, follow the Law of Moses.

Jesus followed the Law.

Jesus did not follow the traditions of the pharisees.

His disciples still followed the Law because they did not know what else to do.

Jesus revealed to Paul the details of the New Covenant. The earlier apostles had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Christianity.

The apostles preached repentance and faith to the Jews

>Hyperdispensationalism

Again, Jesus taught the Law. And he is admonishing people who taught the Law Lite, or Very Lite, that they were not doing it right. It is the entirety of the Law that one must keep to be not guilty of violating the Law.

Jesus did not fulfill the Law until Calvary.

And it was not until Calvary that the New Covenant was in effect. Just like any man's Last Will and Testament, it has no power while the testator is still alive.

No, you can say that the early church was a mass of confusion and misinformation.

There are two ways to fulfill the Law.
1. Keep the law perfectly; or
2. Pay the penalty for violating the Law.

Jesus did both. He lived a sinless life, and then he paid the penalty not for himself, but for all of us law breakers. In that way, the Law is fulfilled.

It still exists, and there's nothing wrong with God's Law, but it is impossible for men to keep. They are God's Law.

They preached mikvah, which the Jews already had, and a commitment to follow the Laws of Moses.

Which is why the Jews had no problems with them preaching in the Temple.

As opposed to Paul, when he taught the New Covenant, and was despised by the Jews, beaten and killed.

>His disciples still followed the Law because they did not know what else to do.
They followed the Law because Jesus affirmed the Law.

And Paul did too, the only difference was he didn't think it was necessary for gentile converts.

Properly dividing the scriptures.

If you think the New Covenant is anything like the Old Covenant, you are calling Jeremiah a false prophet.

Is Jeremiah a false prophet?

>They followed the Law because Jesus affirmed the Law.

They did not follow the Law, because such a thing is impossible.

Jesus fulfilled the Law. So to be a Christian is to die in Christ, and be dead to the Law. The Law does not chase after dead men.

amish

t. Homosex

Jesus wouldn't support either things period.

Mystery Babylon has nothing to do with Jesus.

I dunno user, I'd say Orthodoxy could make a claim for it.

ONE of many vs. one of MANY

I see both claims as correct to be honest.

It's like you set out to be as wrong as possible, and exceeded your own expectations.

Yeah, Jesus never talked about the Father or the Holy Spirit at all.

It's as though you've never picked up a bible in your life.

Anything based on the Bible is not authentic since Pauline Christianity is a falsification of Jesus' original teachings and then the gospel was further edited by Romans.

So.I guess we better look at apocryphs. Is there any sect based on those?

That's not true. Church Fathers simply defined what was or wasn't Christianity.

The apocryphas take everything Orthodox Christianity is guilty of and turn it up to 11.

>Pauline Christianity is a falsification of Jesus' original teachings
Christianity isn't required to exclusively derive from the teachings of Jesus. Nice arbitrary criteria tho.

Says the fool.

No, no they did not. It was not up to them.

>hurr durr the people who put together the council to define Christianity can't do that because I don't like it.
This picture is coming up to good use today.

>Literally has Christ in it's name
>doesn't have to do anything with Christ

But Jesus is God according to Christianity. You can't hold views contradicting the word of God.

Nothing Paul says is contradictory to the teachings of Christ.

Of course you like your own made up traditions and cartoons. It's all you have.

And in fact Jesus taught Paul personally, for years. Which is how Paul knows more about Jesus and the New Covenant than all the other disciples combined. And why Paul is the greatest of the apostles.

>It's all you have.
Pretty sure I believe something tangible existed while you cling on to your autistic jew centric Christianity which is anti-Paul because he went rouge and called the Jews out.

You have the catholic church.

Which is nothing.

Google the Incident at Antioch. The actual disciples, the people who knew Jesus personally (as opposed to Paul who claimed to have saw him in a vision once) protested Paul's teachings. Imo it's obvious what was going on: an outsider tried and succeeded in coopting a fledgeling religious movement. He succeded by taking it to non-Jews, quickly outnumbering the original followers.

Saint Paul was a based gnostic versus the crypto Jews who Christ tried to warn us about.

wtf i'm #atheist now

Islam

japanize aforizm
「Bible reader don't read Bible」
we must be cosmopolitan(・∀・)人(・∀・)
one love
love is truth Bible

Tolstoyan Christianity.

Shitting dick nipples

Communism

The Christianity of Jesus's time taught by jesus

There was none, just a lone wanderer preaching a revolutionary rant with a bunch of people staring in amazement. Christianity is what came afterwards.

Literally degenerated by local Hindu customs.

One of the many Gnostic teachings.
Search your feelings: you know it to be true!

Jesus is a metaphor for the Sun, a metaphor that has been passed around all throughout the world, but then the Jewish translation of the story was twisted to make shekels off of goyim.

According to that chart it's the Assyrian Church.

dozo yoroshiku