“Which denomination do you belong to?”
The question came unexpectedly from my English teacher, Mr. B.G. Bhatt, during a quiet moment in class at Shreyas Vidyalaya, Baroda. I was likely the only Christian in the school, and English was my favorite subject.
“I don’t know,” I admitted.
He smiled and said, “It’s a good thing you don’t.”
His words puzzled me, but they planted a seed—a spark of curiosity that would grow into a lifelong quest to understand my faith, my heritage, and my place in the world.
That afternoon, I asked my mother the same question. Her answer opened a door to history I never knew existed.
“We are Jacobite Syrian Christians,” she said, “with our Patriarch in Antioch.”
She explained the split between Jacobites and Orthodox Christians, the latter having their Bishop in Kottayam, Kerala. Until then, I hadn’t realized Christianity had denominations because I never heard any conversation about denominations in our house. All I knew was that I was a Christian and I loved Jesus!
Christianity in India
As I grew older, I began to see how little the world around me understood about Christianity.
My friends often saw it as a Western religion, brought by the British colonisers. But Christianity in India traces its roots back to 52 A.D., when Apostle Thomas, one of the 12 disciples of Jesus, arrived on the Malabar Coast in Kerala. According to tradition, Apostle Thomas arrived at the port of Muziris (near modern-day Kodungallur) in AD 52. At that time, Kerala had flourishing trade relations with the Roman Empire and the Middle East, especially through Jewish and Arab traders. It is believed that Apostle Thomas preached the Gospel, baptized the gentiles, and established seven and a half churches (“Ezharapallikal”) along the Malabar Coast. These include churches in places like Kodungallur, Palayoor, Paravur, Niranam, and Nilackal. He turned many into Christ, including local Brahmins, Jews, and other communities.
Later, he is believed to have traveled east across the Western Ghats to the Coromandel Coast (modern-day Tamil Nadu), where he continued his missionary work. He is said to have settled near Mylapore (now part of Chennai). According to tradition, he was martyred in AD 72 on a hill now called St. Thomas Mount, pierced with a spear while praying. His body was buried in Mylapore, and a shrine was built over his tomb. The site is now the San Thome Basilica, a major Christian pilgrimage center.
Faith beyond ritual: A relationship with God
To most of my Hindu friends, Jesus is one among many gods, believing there are many ways to salvation. But unlike Hinduism, Christianity is not a religion, it’s a relationship with Almighty God through His Son Jesus Christ. It’s all about the revelation of Jesus Christ the Son of God and the Holy Spirit is the revealer of who Jesus is. Jesus makes it clear “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me”. Whoever believes in Son has the Father also (1 John 2:23). Salvation is only through faith in Jesus Christ. “The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 6:23). Salvation is free; you don’t have to earn it or pay for it. It’s a gift, offered to us because of God’s immeasurable love.
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
There is heaven, and there is hell. The choice is ours. With Jesus, God promises us heaven—a place of eternal joy, free from pain, sorrow, and sin.
The names of God in the Bible
In contrast to the Hindu belief system, where folks believe in multiple gods, in Christianity, there is only 1 God but 3 distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We call it Trinity. We see the concept of trinity in Water: vapour, liquid, and ice—but it’s still water. The Bible has different names for God.
- Yahweh / Jehovah (The LORD” or “I AM WHO I AM”)
- Elohim (Creator)
- Adonai (“Lord” or “Master”)
- El Shaddai(God Almighty” or “All-Sufficient One)
- Immanuel (“God With Us”)
- El Elyon (Most High God)
Roles of God
God the Father is the Master Planner. He commands. “Let there be light”. “Let us make man“. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, equal to God the Father, carries out the divine will of the Father like an administrator. The Holy Spirit, the third Person of the Trinity, is the Creator and Sustainer of all things. He manifests what Jesus does on this earth and in our life. The Holy Spirit makes Jesus real to us. He is the Spirit of Jesus. He is Jesus Christ without limit. He is a Person and not a power. He is the beloved of Jesus. Jesus loves the Holy Spirit so much that He says, every sin can be forgiven, except the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Before Jesus’ ascension, He blew the Holy Spirit on the disciples and said “Receive the Holy Spirit” heralding the new age of the Holy Spirit. He promised the disciples about the power of the Holy Spirit which they will receive and asked them to wait. And precisely on the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit came upon the disciples in the upper room and they were endowed with power as promised. The Bible says, this precious Holy Spirit dwells in the body of every believer. He is omni-present. Jesus is in heaven now, sitting on the throne, seated at the right hand side of the Father.
Why did Jesus come to this earth?
The Bible makes it clear: “The soul who sins shall die” (Ezekiel 18:4). And again, “The wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). Because God is holy, sin cannot exist in His presence. God declared that the sinner must die, but in His mercy, He provided a way out: Rather than you die, I will accept the death of a substitute. So in OT, we see animals being made the substitute for our sins. The Bible says, without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22). The blood of animals, however, could never fully remove sin. Those sacrifices were merely a foreshadowing, a picture of what was to come—Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). In the Old Testament, there were five different offerings required, and each one pointed to Jesus, revealing His role as the ultimate sacrifice.
Jesus came in the flesh to fulfill a divine plan far greater than any human mind could conceive.
From the moment Adam and Eve fell in the Garden of Eden, God’s promise of redemption was set in motion. In Genesis, the very first book of the Bible, we find the seed of this promise: a prophetic declaration that one day, the offspring of the woman, a virgin, would crush the serpent’s head.
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. Genesis 3:15
This was the first whisper of the Messiah, a hope that would echo through the centuries, carried forward by the priests, prophets, and kings of Israel. The story of Messiah, therefore, is not confined to the New Testament; it is the culmination of a narrative that began in Eden, unfolded through the covenants with Abraham, Moses, and David, and reached its fulfilment in the person of Jesus.
What was prophesied in the books of the Old Testament, about the coming of the Messiah was fulfilled, when God became man and dwelt among us. God loved us so much that He became one of us—Jesus—and took our place on the cross. He became our substitute, bearing the punishment for our sins so we wouldn’t have to. Jesus said to the Father, “I will take their punishment.” That’s why He came to earth: to be the perfect sacrifice for our sins. He was rich but He became poor, so that we through His poverty might become rich. He was sinless, but He bore our sins, he took our punishment, so that we might become the sons of God.
The crucifixion of Jesus wasn’t a tragic accident of history—it was the very heart of God’s redemptive plan, orchestrated from the beginning for the salvation of mankind. Jesus’ death was the ultimate act of love, a sacrifice so profound that it bridged the chasm between a holy God and sinful humanity.
Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6).
He is the only bridge between humanity and God, the only path to eternal life. The cross wasn’t the end—it was the beginning of hope, the doorway to redemption for all who believe.
The main theme of the Bible
The Bible, I came to realise, is not just a collection of stories or moral teachings but God’s grand plan of redemption through Jesus Christ, woven through generations, with the Jewish people and the nation of Israel at its core. The Bible, in its entirety, is a book of prophecies. It is a collection of 66 books, written by 40 different writers who never met each other, at different times, different places, over a period of 1600 years, from 3 different continents, in 3 different languages. There are about 2500 prophecies, out of which more than 300 prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus as the Messiah. These include prophecies about His birth (Micah 5:2), suffering (Isaiah 53), death (Psalm 22), and resurrection (Psalm 16:10). 2000 prophecies have been fulfilled already in detail and some prophecies, particularly those about the Second Coming of Christ and the end times (Revelation, Daniel, etc.), are awaiting fulfilment. The Bible has 1 message: Salvation, and Redemption through the Son of God!
To understand Jesus is to trace His footsteps through the Old Testament, to see how every prophecy, every covenant, and every act of sacrifice pointed toward Him. It is to recognise that the story of Christ is not a new chapter but the climax of a divine epic that has been unfolding since the dawn of creation.
I pray that whoever reads this experiences a personal, face-to-face encounter with Almighty God and His Son, Jesus Christ. What was the turning point in your life that helped you discover your true identity? I’d love to hear—share your story in the comments!
3 Responses
Praise the Lord, brother! I love your writing, which brings honor to the Bible. Your explanations are awesome and easy to understand, even for non-Christians. When they read your words infused with Bible verses, the Holy Spirit can guide them and bring about a divine connection. I’m grateful that God’s grace has helped me overcome physical, demonic, and financial battles. I’d love to share my testimony with you, and through your platform, bless others. If you’re open to it, I can share my stories via email ([email protected]) or on this platform. Thank you for your inspiring writing. Please convey my loving regards to your family, and may God bless you abundantly.
With God’s Love
Esther
Dear Abeesh,
My name is Abel. I read your reflection, “Spark of Curiosity,” with genuine interest. I also had commented on another blog you wrote on your page. I appreciate the sincerity with which you have written about your journey of discovering Christianity, your Jacobite heritage, the person of Jesus Christ, and the centrality of salvation. I also appreciate that your story began not with an argument, but with a question: “Which denomination do you belong to?”
That question can indeed become the beginning of a much deeper search. And I think your story raises an important question that goes beyond denominations: when we seek to understand Christianity, are we seeking merely to understand what we personally believe about Jesus, or are we also willing to ask how the Christians closest to the Apostles understood Jesus, salvation, worship, the Church, Scripture and Tradition?
I say this respectfully as a young practising Knanaya Jacobite Christian. My name is Abel, and I am not writing because I think questioning Christianity is wrong. Quite the opposite. I believe our faith is strong enough to withstand serious questions. I have personally found that the more I have examined Scripture and the earliest Christian witnesses, the more difficult it becomes to separate Jesus from the sacramental, liturgical and apostolic Church that emerged directly from the Apostles.
There are several things in your reflection that I wholeheartedly affirm.
Jesus Christ is the centre of Christianity. Salvation is through Christ. The incarnation is central. Christ’s death and resurrection are the heart of the Gospel. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not three gods but one God. The Old Testament finds its fulfilment in Christ. The Church must proclaim the Gospel. And every Christian should desire a genuine relationship with God rather than merely possessing an external religious identity.
On these things, I believe we are much closer than we may initially appear.
Where I would respectfully challenge you is in some of the conclusions you draw from those truths.
Christianity Is More Than “A Relationship”
You write that Christianity “is not a religion, it’s a relationship with Almighty God through His Son Jesus Christ.”
I understand what you mean, and I agree with the concern behind the statement. Christianity must never become merely external religious activity. A person can attend services, recite prayers and perform religious actions while having a heart far from God.
But I would be careful about creating a distinction between “relationship” and “religion” as though Christianity must be one rather than the other.
Christianity is certainly a relationship with God, but it is also a concrete faith, a covenant, a Church, a sacramental life, a community, a pattern of worship and a way of life handed down from the Apostles.
Jesus did not merely say, “Believe in Me privately.”
He established disciples. He commanded baptism. He instituted the Eucharist. He gave authority to His Apostles. He commanded them to teach and make disciples. The Apostles appointed ministers. Christians gathered together. They prayed together. They broke bread together. They fasted. They worshipped together.
In other words, Christianity is deeply personal, but it is never merely individual.
The Christian life is not “Jesus and me” detached from the Church. In the New Testament, believers become members of Christ’s Body.
That distinction matters enormously when discussing liturgy and tradition.
The Question of the Early Church
Your story begins with discovering that you were Jacobite Syrian Christian, with the Patriarch in Antioch. But I think the more important question is not simply, “Which denomination did I inherit?”
The deeper question is:
What did the Christians closest to the Apostles believe Christianity actually was?
Because if we want to go back to the beginning, we should not only read the Bible through modern categories. We should also ask how the generation immediately after the Apostles understood the Bible.
This is particularly important because some of the language in your article presents Christianity as though the original faith was essentially a simple proclamation of Jesus, which was later surrounded by denominational structures, liturgy and ceremony.
The earliest evidence does not really give us that picture.
Acts 2:42 says:
“They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.”
Look at those four things.
Apostolic doctrine.
Fellowship.
Breaking of bread.
Prayers.
The earliest Christian community was not simply a group of people listening to sermons about Jesus. It was a community gathered around apostolic teaching and Eucharistic worship.
Acts 20:7 says that on the first day of the week the disciples gathered together specifically “to break bread,” and Paul preached among them.
So preaching was present.
But so was Eucharistic worship.
The Apostolic Church did not have to choose between preaching and liturgy.
It had both.
The Eucharist Cannot Be Reduced to a Symbol
This is particularly important because the Eucharist is one of the places where the modern Christian landscape differs dramatically from the earliest Christian witnesses.
Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 10:16:
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?”
And in 1 Corinthians 11, Paul gives detailed instructions concerning the Eucharistic assembly and warns Christians about receiving the bread and cup unworthily.
Whatever one believes about the precise theological explanation of the Eucharist, it is difficult to read these passages and conclude that the Eucharist was merely an optional symbolic reminder attached to a primarily preaching-centred meeting.
And when we move outside the New Testament, the evidence becomes even more interesting.
Ignatius of Antioch, writing extremely early in Christian history, speaks about the Eucharist, bishops, presbyters and deacons. He describes the Eucharist as something administered within the ordered life of the Church.
The Didache gives instructions concerning baptism, fasting, prayer and Eucharistic thanksgiving.
Justin Martyr, in the second century, describes Christians gathering on Sunday, hearing readings from the Apostles and prophets, receiving instruction, praying together, bringing bread and wine, giving thanks, responding with “Amen,” and receiving the Eucharist.
That is already recognisably liturgical Christianity.
This is important because none of these people were medieval Byzantine Christians.
They were much closer to the Apostles than we are.
If someone argues that structured Eucharistic worship was invented centuries later, they have to explain why these early Christian witnesses are already describing it.
“The Holy Spirit” Does Not Mean “Spontaneous”
I also noticed your emphasis on the Holy Spirit making Jesus real to the believer.
Again, I agree with the fundamental point: the Holy Spirit is not an impersonal force. He is God, the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, and the Christian life cannot be separated from the work of the Holy Spirit.
But I would challenge the idea that Spirit-led Christianity should therefore be contrasted with structured or liturgical worship.
Paul himself gives us the opposite principle.
After discussing prophecy, tongues, interpretation and the conduct of Christian gatherings, he concludes:
“Let all things be done decently and in order.”
The presence of structure does not mean the absence of the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit inspired the Apostles to establish order.
The Holy Spirit does not cease to work simply because a prayer has been written down beforehand.
If a Christian reads Psalm 50 during worship, the fact that the words were written centuries ago does not make the prayer less spiritual.
If a priest reads the Gospel, the fact that he did not improvise the words does not mean the Holy Spirit is absent.
If the congregation responds “Amen” according to an established form, that does not mean the response is meaningless.
The question should not be whether something is spontaneous.
The question should be whether it is faithful to Christ, faithful to Scripture, and genuinely offered to God.
The Trinity Needs Some Care
There is another part of your article where I would gently suggest greater theological precision.
You use water in its three forms—vapour, liquid and ice—as an analogy for the Trinity.
I understand why that analogy is attractive, but historically it can be misleading because it can suggest that God is one Person appearing in three different modes.
The Christian doctrine of the Trinity is more profound than that.
The Father is God.
The Son is God.
The Holy Spirit is God.
Yet the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father.
There is one divine nature and three distinct divine Persons.
The Church has historically been extremely careful about this because the Trinity is not simply “one thing with three forms.”
Likewise, describing the Son as carrying out the Father’s will “like an administrator” can unintentionally make the Son sound subordinate to the Father in His divinity.
The Son is eternally begotten of the Father, but He is not a lesser God or a divine assistant.
As John says:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
And the Church’s confession is that the Son is truly God from God.
The Holy Spirit likewise is not merely the way Jesus operates on earth. He is truly and personally the Holy Spirit.
These distinctions may sound technical, but they matter because Christianity is ultimately making claims about who God actually is.
“Jesus Is in Heaven Now”
You write that Jesus is in heaven, seated at the right hand of the Father, while the Holy Spirit is present with believers.
That is true as far as Christ’s ascended humanity is concerned.
But this needs to be held together with another Christian truth: the Son did not cease to be God when He ascended.
The incarnation did not mean that God became limited to one geographical location.
And this becomes especially important when we talk about the Eucharist.
The ancient Church did not understand Christ’s ascension as meaning that Christians were now separated from Christ’s sacramental presence.
The mystery of Christian worship is precisely that the risen and ascended Christ remains intimately present to His Church.
This is why the Eucharist became so central to the ancient Christian understanding of worship.
Salvation Is a Gift — But Faith Is Not Merely Mental Agreement
I also wholeheartedly agree with you that salvation is God’s gift.
We cannot purchase salvation.
We cannot boast before God.
We cannot save ourselves.
Christ is the source of salvation.
But I would distinguish between saying that salvation is by grace through faith and saying that therefore the sacramental life of the Church is somehow opposed to grace.
The ancient Church did not understand baptism, Eucharist, repentance or participation in the Church as attempts to “earn” salvation.
They understood them as means by which the believer participates in the grace of Christ.
Consider baptism.
If salvation being a gift means that baptism is unnecessary because baptism would constitute “earning” salvation, then we would have to explain why Christ commanded baptism and why the Apostles immediately incorporated baptism into Christian initiation.
Grace does not mean that God gives us nothing to participate in.
Grace means that everything begins with God.
The Christian response is faith, repentance, obedience and participation in the life Christ gave His Church.
The Old Testament Did Not Teach “Ritual = Bad”
There is another assumption running through discussions like this that I think deserves reconsideration.
The Old Testament ceremonial system was fulfilled in Christ.
Absolutely.
But the conclusion cannot be that therefore all physical or liturgical worship is somehow contrary to Christianity.
Christianity is an incarnational faith.
God became flesh.
Christ used physical things.
He touched people.
He healed with physical actions.
He took bread and wine.
He commanded baptism with water.
He washed His disciples’ feet.
The Christian faith does not teach that physical things are inherently opposed to spiritual worship.
In fact, the entire incarnation challenges that idea.
The invisible God became visible in Jesus Christ.
So it should not surprise us that Christianity developed a sacramental understanding in which God communicates His grace through material things.
The issue is not whether worship contains physical actions.
The question is whether those actions point beyond themselves to God.
What About Apostle Thomas?
I also appreciated that you spoke about the ancient Christian tradition in India.
As a fellow Indian Christian, I understand why the tradition of St. Thomas matters so much to us.
The tradition that Thomas came to India is deeply rooted in the identity of the Saint Thomas Christian communities of Kerala.
At the same time, I think it is important to distinguish between historical certainty and ecclesiastical tradition.
We should not be embarrassed to say, “This is our ancient tradition.”
Tradition does not become worthless simply because every historical detail cannot be independently reconstructed.
But neither should we present every traditional detail as though it has the same level of historical certainty as something explicitly recorded in the New Testament.
That distinction actually strengthens rather than weakens our case for tradition.
We can say confidently that Indian Christianity possesses an ancient apostolic tradition while continuing to investigate the historical development of that tradition.
The Bible Is Not “66 Books” for All Christians
There is also one important point that I think needs correcting.
You describe the Bible as consisting of 66 books.
That is the Protestant canon.
It is not the universal Christian canon.
The number and arrangement of biblical books differ between Christian traditions. The Oriental Orthodox Churches do not simply inherit the Protestant 66-book canon as though it were the uncontested canon of the entire ancient Church.
This is important because it illustrates a much larger issue.
When we say “the Bible says,” we sometimes forget that the question of which books constitute the Bible is itself a question with a history.
The early Church did not receive a bound Protestant Bible containing exactly 66 books.
The Scriptures were transmitted, read, copied, proclaimed and recognised within the life of the Church.
Therefore, the question of Scripture cannot simply be separated from the historical Church that preserved Scripture.
Scripture and Tradition Are Not Enemies
This brings me to perhaps the biggest issue I would raise with your article.
You rightly emphasise Scripture.
So do we.
The difference is that the ancient apostolic Churches do not believe that Scripture exists in isolation from the Church that received and transmitted it.
Paul himself says:
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.”
Notice that.
Paul distinguishes between what was transmitted by writing and what was transmitted orally.
He does not say:
“Only accept what is written.”
He tells the Christians to hold both.
Likewise, in 1 Corinthians 11:2, Paul praises the Corinthians for keeping the traditions he delivered to them.
Therefore, “tradition” is not automatically synonymous with human invention.
There is bad tradition.
Jesus Himself condemned traditions that nullified the commandments of God.
But there is also Apostolic Tradition—the handing down of what the Apostles taught and entrusted to the Church.
The question is therefore not:
“Is this tradition?”
The question is:
“What kind of tradition is this, and does it faithfully preserve what was handed down by the Apostles?”
That is a much more historically meaningful question.
What About Mary?
You speak beautifully about Jesus as the only way to the Father, and I completely agree.
But I would also caution against assuming that honouring Mary necessarily competes with Christ.
The ancient Churches do not worship Mary as God.
We worship the Triune God.
We honour Mary because of who Christ is.
She is the mother of the incarnate Word.
The angel calls her “highly favoured.”
Elizabeth calls her “blessed among women.”
Mary herself prophesies that “henceforth all generations will call me blessed.”
So when Christians honour Mary, the ultimate reason is Christological.
The greatness of Mary tells us something about the greatness of the One whom she bore.
And asking Mary or the saints to pray for us does not require believing that they replace Christ as Mediator.
You and I already ask other Christians to pray for us.
Paul repeatedly asks Christians to pray for him.
James commands Christians to pray for one another.
The question therefore becomes whether death separates members of Christ’s Body so completely that the saints in heaven cease to participate in the worship and prayer of the Church.
The ancient Christian answer was no.
The Church is one Body in Christ.
The Cross Is More Than a Symbol
You also rightly emphasise the Cross.
But again, the ancient Church went further than merely regarding the Cross as a theological illustration.
The Cross became a physical sign of Christian identity and devotion extremely early.
Christians made the sign of the Cross.
They prayed with the Cross.
They confessed the Cross.
They died confessing Christ crucified and risen.
So when you see a Jacobite Christian making the sign of the Cross, I would not immediately ask, “Where did this ritual come from?”
I would first ask:
“Why did the earliest Christians so quickly make the Cross central to their identity?”
Because Christianity is not embarrassed by material signs.
The Cross itself is material.
The water of baptism is material.
The bread and wine of the Eucharist are material.
The human body is material.
And yet God uses these things within His saving work.
I Think Our Difference Is Deeper Than “Jesus Versus Ritual”
This is ultimately where I would frame the discussion.
I do not think the real disagreement between us is whether Jesus matters.
He clearly matters to you.
He matters to me.
I do not think the disagreement is whether Scripture matters.
It matters enormously to both of us.
I do not think the disagreement is whether salvation is through Christ.
We both confess Christ as the source and centre of salvation.
The deeper disagreement is about what Christ established and what the Apostles handed down.
Did Christ leave behind only a message to believe?
Or did He establish a Church?
Did the Apostles merely preach sermons?
Or did they establish Eucharistic communities?
Was baptism merely a public symbol?
Or was it Christian initiation into Christ?
Was the Eucharist merely a memorial?
Or did the earliest Christians understand it as participation in Christ’s Body and Blood?
Was apostolic ministry simply a later institutional development?
Or do bishops, presbyters and deacons appear in the earliest generations?
Was Christian worship originally formless and spontaneous?
Or did it already include Scripture readings, preaching, common prayer, Eucharist, fasting, sacred times and ordered ministry?
These are historical questions, not merely questions of personal preference.
And this is why I cannot accept the narrative that Christianity began as a simple, non-liturgical relationship with Jesus and was later buried under centuries of ritual.
The historical evidence is much more complicated than that.
Your Story Began With Curiosity
Interestingly, your article begins with a teacher telling you that it was a good thing you did not know which denomination you belonged to.
I actually think there is something beautiful about that.
Because perhaps the best response to that moment is not simply to reject denominations.
Perhaps it is to become curious enough to ask why these Churches exist in the first place.
Why did Christians argue over Christology?
Why did they preserve episcopal succession?
Why did they gather around the Eucharist?
Why did they baptize?
Why did they fast?
Why did they pray written prayers?
Why did they honour the martyrs?
Why did they ask for the prayers of the saints?
Why did they preserve the Scriptures within the worshipping life of the Church?
Why did the Christians closest to the Apostles speak about the Church in such sacramental and Eucharistic terms?
Those questions led me in a direction I did not expect.
They did not lead me away from Jesus.
They led me deeper into the ancient Church.
From One Young Christian to Another
Abeesh, I genuinely respect the fact that your journey began with curiosity.
I would only encourage you not to stop that curiosity at the point where modern Christianity gives you an answer that feels familiar.
If we are genuinely seeking the Christianity of Jesus and the Apostles, we have to be willing to follow the evidence even when it challenges our modern assumptions.
I do not follow the Syriac Orthodox tradition simply because my parents told me to.
I follow it because I have wrestled with the questions.
I have asked whether the liturgy is biblical.
I have asked whether the Eucharist is genuinely apostolic.
I have asked whether bishops and priests are later inventions.
I have asked whether Mary and the saints have a place in Christian theology.
I have asked whether Scripture and Tradition are enemies.
And the more I have studied the New Testament and the earliest Christian writers, the more I have found myself confronted by an ancient Christianity that looks surprisingly sacramental, Eucharistic, episcopal and liturgical.
That does not mean every modern practice can be traced directly to the first century.
Of course there has been development.
Architecture developed.
Music developed.
Vestments developed.
Languages developed.
Liturgical forms developed.
Different local traditions developed.
But development is not the same thing as invention.
A mature Christian understanding of history has to distinguish between the development of a practice and the invention of the underlying theology.
A first-century Christian house church does not need to look exactly like a twenty-first-century Jacobite church for the two to belong to the same historical tradition.
The essential question is what lies underneath the external form.
And underneath the Syriac Orthodox liturgy, I find the same things that appear in the New Testament and the earliest Christian witnesses:
Christ.
The Cross.
The Resurrection.
The Gospel.
The Scriptures.
Baptism.
The Eucharist.
Prayer.
Fasting.
Repentance.
The communion of the Church.
Apostolic ministry.
And worship offered to the Triune God.
So, as a young Knanaya Jacobite Christian, my response to your spark of curiosity would simply be this:
Do not stop asking questions.
But when you ask them, do not ask only, “What do I personally experience?”
Ask also:
“What did the Apostles teach?”
“What did the Christians immediately after them believe?”
“How did they worship?”
“What did they understand the Eucharist to be?”
“What did they believe the Church was?”
And perhaps most importantly:
“If I stood in a Christian gathering in the second century, would I recognise the Christianity being practised there?”
When I began asking those questions, I discovered something remarkable.
The ancient Church was not simply a preaching movement that eventually became ritualistic.
It was a Church that preached Christ, baptized believers, prayed together, gathered around the Eucharist, fasted, appointed ministers, read the Scriptures, confessed the faith and worshipped God in an ordered way.
The Gospel and the liturgy were never enemies.
Christ was never opposed to His Church.
And the Holy Spirit was never opposed to ordered worship.
That, ultimately, is why I remain a Knanaya Jacobite Christian.
Not because I have stopped asking questions.
But because I kept asking them.
And the further back I went, the more I found myself standing before the same Christ proclaimed by the Apostles and worshipped by the ancient Church.
May that same Christ continue to lead both of us deeper into the truth, wherever that truth leads us.
— Abel B
Thanks for your comments. I will reply as and when i get time.
You say: The Christian life is not “Jesus and me” detached from the Church. In the New Testament, believers become members of Christ’s Body.
No doubt in it.
Let me add further:
The concept of the church was first introduced by Jesus in Matthew 16:18. When Peter confessed, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus responded, “On this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” The church is not a building but the assembly of believers, called out of the world and sanctified in Christ.
In the New Testament, the church is described as the body of Christ, His bride, and the temple of the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 5:25-32 beautifully illustrates the relationship between Christ and the church, comparing it to the union of a husband and wife. Christ loves the church and gave Himself for her, sanctifying and cleansing her to present her as holy and without blemish.
Unlike the Old Testament tabernacle or temple, where God’s presence was confined to a specific location, the New Testament reveals that believers themselves are now the temple of the Holy Spirit. “Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?” (1 Corinthians 6:19). When believers gather in Jesus’ name, His presence is among them (Matthew 18:20).
The church is composed of all who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus—set apart for God’s purpose. As 1 Corinthians 1:2 states, “To the church of God which is in Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, the called saints.” Individually, we are saints; collectively, we are the church.
The church is not bound by physical structures but is a spiritual assembly of believers washed by the blood of Jesus and filled with the Holy Spirit. This is the great mystery of God: that His presence now dwells within His people, empowering them to live as His witnesses in the world.
As we await Christ’s return, we are reminded of the hope we have in Him: “Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is” (1 John 3:2).
From the tabernacle to the temple, and now to the church, God’s desire has always been to dwell among His people. Today, as the church, we are His living temple, called to reflect His holiness and carry His presence to the world.