Anyone wanna disagree with this?

[Moonwalk]

62. Some would Argue that Catholicism went away from the true faith....

When Christianity started there were many different types and thoughts and branches. Even books (not just Luke and Matthew, etc.). Catholicism may trace itself back to St. Peter, but that doesn't mean it was the only game in town when it started--there were other apostles and their followers, as well as those who came after them and their followers (like St. Paul).The Catholic church actually started from a split with the gnostics who, as we know, had their own books. When the Catholic church started it argued long and hard what books would be part of the new testament, what teachings, even what storyline for Jesus' life. And certain books out there were not included, and certain beliefs of early Christians were forbidden, as well as certain practices (like women having roles in the rituals). The gnostics were crushed, their faith forbidden and presumably forgotten, but the Eastern Orthodox church came out of other disagreements and survived to have its own influence--arguably as old and original as the Catholic Church.

So, arguably, a born-again, or any protestant denomination could argue that the Catholic church was not the "original" Christian church but rather one created by certain, bias folk who didn't understand what Jesus was really saying, or really meant or really intended. Thus, not true Christian at all. They could argue that they are getting back to before the Catholic church appropriated Christianity for its own purposes, and thus are more true to it than Catholicism.

And this being religion, a denomination can always have a leader or prophet who, it says, was given "true" Christianity by god, directly. Catholicism's age and origins then become moot. A leader/prophet says that god told him that Catholicism is wrong, and this new religion is right, then, to those in the new religion, what more is needed to substantiate the claim that Catholicism isn't Christianity?