Which Christian denomination is most faithful to the Bible?

[historia]

My take on this is that the Jehovah's Wistnesses, the Christadelphians and maybe the Seventh Day Adventists have the most fidelity to what the Bible actually says.

Question for debate: Which Christian denomination is most faithful to what the Bible actually says?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 1 by historia]

That really is a tough question. I suppose it comes down to which bible? And what do you include in your bible? Also, which translation?

These questions need to be answered first because not all demoninations and sects use the same bible, cannon, and translation. These all could significantly alter the answer.

[Divine Insight]

I agree with what DanieltheDragon has said, but I would like to add my personal views on this as well.

I have never seen a logically self-consistent "Bible" yet. Therefore, as far as I'm concerned it's impossible for any Christian denomination to faithfully represent the Bible for the simple reason that the Bible itself is logically contradictory.

How can any denomination faithfully represent a paradigm that is fundamentally self-contradictory in its own right?

[historia]

I suppose it comes down to which bible? And what do you include in your bible? Also, which translation?

I would offer a couple of points in response:

First, all Christians share the same New Testament canon, which is, of course, central to Christian theology.

Second, while it is true that Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians accept a few extra books in their Old Testament canon that are not affirmed by Protestants, these play an exceedingly minor role in determining Christian doctrine.

Finally, translation has even less of a role to play here, since most denominations have theologians who are fluent in Greek and Hebrew, and can therefore read the texts in their original languages. And they are the ones who ultimately decide doctrine for a denomination.

These questions need to be answered first because not all demoninations and sects use the same bible, cannon, and translation. These all could significantly alter the answer.

Did my answers above suffice? I don't think any of these factors should significantly alter your answer.

[tfvespasianus]

I think part of the problem in answering this question is ‘what the Bible says’. Put simply, the Bible says a great many things and different churches have different points of emphasis. If there was an addendum at the end of the corpus which was presaged ‘click-bait’ with a title like ‘Top 20 things you need to understand, Ranked’ that would have helped, but, alas.

One could argue that Jesus in the gospels put more than a little emphasis on ‘the church’ (which some have interpreted as an anachronism, but never mind) and in this case one could further posit that the early institutional orthodox church has a claim. However, there’s a great deal in the epistles that could lead one to see a point in favor of ‘charismatic’ movements like Pentecostals and such with their ecstatic vibrancy. If one were to emphasize the ethical teachings over the ritual and soteriological, you could probably make a case for any movement that eschews ‘conventional’ morality in exchange for some sort of ascetic piety (e.g. Franciscans? Amish?).

take care,
TFV

[Elijah John]

The reasons I cited the above sects, is that none of them teach the Trinity, of the eternal pre-existence of Jesus. They teach a very high Christology, and blood atonement, but they do not teach that Jesus was God Himself.

In that, they are consistent with the New Testament teaching. Neither Paul nor John teach the Trinity either, though both have extremely high Christologies. (Christ as the firstborn of all Creation, etc.)

I just want to add, that I made that quoted statement in the OP as an outsider. I am not a member of any of those denominations.

[historia]

The reasons I cited the above sects, is that none of them teach the Trinity, of the eternal pre-existence of Jesus. They teach a very high Christology, and blood atonement, but they do not teach that Jesus was God Himself.

A point of correction, then: Seventh Day Adventists are officially trinitarian. There were some early SDA leaders who espoused an Arian Christology, but that view was expunged from the denomination in the early part of the 20th century.

[Elijah John]

The reasons I cited the above sects, is that none of them teach the Trinity, of the eternal pre-existence of Jesus. They teach a very high Christology, and blood atonement, but they do not teach that Jesus was God Himself.

A point of correction, then: Seventh Day Adventists are officially trinitarian. There were some early SDA leaders who espoused an Arian Christology, but that view was expunged from the denomination in the early part of the 20th century.

Thanks for the correction. That leaves the Witnesses, and the Christadelphians. Not sure if the latter adheres the the literal 144,000 doctrine of the Witnesses that I take issue with.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 4 by historia]

First, all Christians share the same New Testament canon, which is, of course, central to Christian theology.

No they do not

Catholics, orthodox, Protestants, and other denominations have different canons.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Develop ... ment_canon

They all have variations on what books they do and do not include in their canon.

Finally, translation has even less of a role to play here, since most denominations have theologians who are fluent in Greek and Hebrew, and can therefore read the texts in their original languages. And they are the ones who ultimately decide doctrine for a denomination.

Various translations use differing manuscripts. This is why the KJV and NIV are so different leading some groups to declare the NIV as heretical. Yes I understand the people translating it are fluent in Greek and Hebrew but each person has their own subjective interpretation built ontop of selective usage of manuscripts.

All I am saying is be more specific.

[historia]

The reasons I cited the above sects, is that none of them teach the Trinity, of the eternal pre-existence of Jesus. They teach a very high Christology, and blood atonement, but they do not teach that Jesus was God Himself.

A point of correction, then: Seventh Day Adventists are officially trinitarian. There were some early SDA leaders who espoused an Arian Christology, but that view was expunged from the denomination in the early part of the 20th century.

Thanks for the correction. That leaves the Witnesses, and the Christadelphians. Not sure if the latter adheres the the literal 144,000 doctrine of the Witnesses that I take issue with.

I'm not sure, either. I was going to ask you a question on your earlier point, however:

Christadelphians have a Socinian Christology, which is a very "low" Christology. They believe Jesus was just a man, and deny any pre-existence of Christ. Which is quite different from the "high," Arian Christology of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Which would you say is more faithful to "what the Bible actually says," as you put it?