Why are there so many versions of Christianity

[MichaelP3]

I would also couple that with how an Apostolic approved Church according to Catholicism “sees” that verse.

Not the same as Catholcism.

So let them read that history book and I am all for that. The history really does speak for itself!

 

[Sophie111]

Is this Scriptural backing for the truth of the Orthodox position?

19They went out from us, but they were not really of our number;13 if they had been, they would have remained with us. Their desertion shows that none of them was of our number.

 

[Sophie111]

The Catholic Church is the only version established by Jesus

Orthodox believe the same of their Church, hence the name. Likely they believe the Western Church was also part of the same founding but we went off the rails on a few matters concerning The Trinity and correct understanding of the Petrine office.

How would you prove them mistaken?

 

[MichaelP3]

And this is a perfect example where one should think and really think about your zealousnous (if that is a word) and start to read history.

 

[Catholicwife32]

There are so many versions of Christianity because people are prideful and like to believe they have it all figured out.

I used to consider Catholicism the solution to this. Just listen to the official Church teaching, but there’s still a question of whose version of Catholicism you’re following. But should we worry and fret? I do not think so.

One of the beautitudes is “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” A lot of homilies depict this to mean that we can be materially wealthy but have a healthy detachment to our money that saves us from our greediness. I disagree. To be poor in spirit is to be spiritually poor–to have limited opportunities for grace, to have everything in your life working against developing a faith that has you looking like a model of holiness. Theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

If you look at the parable of the talents and the parable of the workers of the vineyard, I would say that those who are given much, much is expected of us. The temptation is to look at how much we sacrifice for the Church (and I’m not just talking money. I’m talking about obedience to the moral law), as sort of earning God’s favor. We have this tendency to look down on others, to believe that because we’re so hard on ourselves and constantly feeling like we’re jumping in and out of mortal sin, that the whole world must be going to Hell in a handbasket.

But I think the reality is that to grow spiritually, we have to stop caring about Hell. If you imagine yourself falling deep into sin, seriously backwards in your faith, than what you’re actually imagining is where your heart is right now. All your obedience is rooted in self-love, not in a true and sincere love for God. And the reality is that those of us who are more devout will be called upon to open the door for those we’re jealous of because they did x y and z sin, but appreciated grace and God more than we do. The big test is will we rejoice in God’s mercy and generocity or will we grow bitter with God’s lack of acknowledgment of all we did for Him? Will we turn away from God when we realize that we are the last to enter? Will it be revealed that we never loved God at all?

We shouldn’t want to be poor in spirit so that we’d be allowed to indulge in sin more. To envy that is to not truly acknowledge and appreciate the goodness of what we have.

So don’t let the many versions trouble you. Somehow the gospel gets out in a multitude of imperfect forms. It teaches people where they’re at. Grace reigns amidst all the imperfections of the world.

 

[Beryllos]

I would like to know how to get stronger.

Pray, read the Bible, go to Mass, receive the Eucharist and go to Confession regularly.

Spend time with good and faithful people when you have the opportunity.

 

[steve-b]

The Orthodox Church would disagree with you.
Which is why around 1000AD they called themselves orthodox because guess whom they think no longer is?

Prove them wrong…

That’s NOT how it works. Prove them right.

 

[steve-b]

start to read history.

History supports the Catholic Church from the beginning

From: ECF’s

Ignatius of Antioch, ordained Bishop by the apostles, ~69 a.d. , before the book of Acts is written, a direct disciple of St John the apostle. Ignatius wrote 6 letters to the Church in 6 locations. He uses Christian in (ch 2) and Catholic Church in (ch 8) in his Epistle to the Smyrnæans
Note: schismatics won’t be going to heaven, Epistle to the Philadelphians (ch 3)

Ignatius is passing on what he learned from the apostles.

One might ask, what apostle wrote that about division?

It was Paul

Romans 16:17-20 & Galatians 5:19-21
both quotes use the same Greek word διχοστασίαι for dissension / division /schism . The consequence for that sin if one won’t return to the Catholic Church? Paul says “I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God”. IOW they go to hell when they die

Where did Paul get that warning from?

Jesus condemns division from His Church John 17:20-23 , and considering the HS only teaches what comes from Jesus John 16:12-15 no one then can say at anytime in history, the HS inspired THEM to divide from, the Catholic Church, Jesus established on Peter nor inspire all the dissensions / divisions / schisms we see today in Christianity.

The name Catholic Church is also used

St Polycarp, ~140 a.d. Bp of Smyrna, also a direct disciple of St John the apostle. He called the Church the “Catholic Church” in The Martyrdom of Polycarp

"Muratorian canon" ~170 a.d.]( Muratorian Canon (Roberts-Donaldson Translation) ) uses the authority of “Catholic Church” in determining at that time, the canon of scripture

St Irenaeus ~180 a.d. bishop of Lyon, wrote "Against Heresies” , called the Church the “Catholic Church" Bk 1 Chapter 10 v 3 . Irenaeus was taught by Polycarp, therefore, since Polycarp was a disciple of John, Irenaeus is one man away from an apostle. Irenaeus teaches all must agree with Rome Bk 3, Chapter 3, v 2-3 on account of its preeminent authority . He describes why Rome has such authority

Cyprian~250 a.d. calls the Church the Catholic Church Epistle 54

The Nicene Creed, 325 a.d., teaches it’s an article of faith to believe in the “One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church”

 

[meltzerboy2]

From a psychological (and philosophical) perspective, I think it is because the human mind is continuously restless, ever searching for truth or a “better” truth, and never entirely content with the status quo. Note that Christianity is not the only religion which has several versions: Islam and (to an extent) Judaism also have different views within their religions. I believe Buddhism does as well. It is the nature of the human mind, and also a testament to the wonder of humanity and the power of thought and reason that Gd instilled in us.

 

[LaetenturCaeli12]

Christianity is a collection of religions which often conflict with one another because Christianity is man-made and men bicker.

And there’s also something deeper at play: not every human being is ready for the exact same spiritual path, and to pretend that there is a single religion with a single set of doctrines which can fulfill every single human is something that, in practice, is demonstrated to be false again and again.

 

[steve-b]

From a psychological (and philosophical) perspective, I think it is because the human mind is continuously restless, ever searching for truth or a “better” truth, and never entirely content with the status quo. Note that Christianity is not the only religion which has several versions: Islam and (to an extent) Judaism also have different views within their religions. I believe Buddhism does as well. It is the nature of the human mind, and also a testament to the wonder of humanity and the power of thought and reason that Gd instilled in us.

From a Catholic understanding,

Pope Pius IX wrote about 80 errors in thinking listed from back in his day. Types of erroneous thinking that has become very popular today is

Excerpted From Pius IX “syllabus of errors”, errors 15-18

III. INDIFFERENTISM, & LATITUDINARIANISM

1. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true.—Allocution “Maxima quidem,” June 9, 1862; Damnatio “Multiplices inter,” June 10, 1851.
2. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation.—Encyclical “Qui pluribus,” Nov. 9, 1846.
3. Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ.—Encyclical “Quanto conficiamur,” Aug. 10, 1863, etc.
4. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church.—Encyclical “Noscitis,” Dec. 8, 1849.

Definition of indifferentism and lattitudinarian

This kind of error in thinking has really become popular these days

 

[steve-b]

Christianity is a collection of religions which often conflict with one another because Christianity is man-made and men bicker.

Jesus established one faith, and He instituted His one Church. He said, there is to be ZERO division in what He established. . PERFECT UNITY is what he wills.

“Divisions” don’t come from Him, they come from those who divide listening to and obeying Satan NOT Jesus.

LaetenturCaeli12:

And there’s also something deeper at play: not every human being is ready for the exact same spiritual path, and to pretend that there is a single religion with a single set of doctrines which can fulfill every single human is something that, in practice, is demonstrated to be false again and again.

I’m stunned