Is the Syrian Orthodox Church the only *TRUE* Christian church

>>2739742
Didn't muzzies try to assassinate the guy in your pic like a year ago?

Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations!

>>2739742
The Greek Orthodox preserve their same liturgy in a less altered form and in the original language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiochene_Rite

>>2739742
>jacobitrs are the true church
Even if misapyhtes were correct Copts would still be older, and anyway we know Catholicism is the unbroken branch

>>2739742

are they descended from jewish converts? hence why they look whiter then most syrian?

>>2740892
That doesn't make any sense at all...

I don't think there is a direct link from the original Jesus' sect (aka non-Pauline Christians) to the Oriental Orthodox Churches. The former went extinct during the Jewish rebellion, so all the denominations we have now are descendants of the Pauline branch and thus based on the same Gospels and not on the oral tradition directly.
In other words, the Syrians learned their Christianity from the Greeks, not from James or Peter.

>>2740944
Maybe there was some transmission from the Jewish Christians. The Greek Christians probably took up greater prominence. Greek was the administrative language in those regions. Literary Syriac didn't take off until a few centuries later but perhaps there could be some vestige of the Nazarene customs in their oldest traditions. Maybe some the Aramaic speaking Jewish and Palestinian Christians assimilated to both the Greek and Syrian communities.

For some reason all the non Graeco-Roman churches split from them in union with eachother during the schisms.

In all it's about as functionally close as there is to the early Nazarene church being Hellenically influenced Aramaean.
There might be something with the Jerusalem and Antioch churches too.

>>2740892
>Ive never seen syrians, but hey they must be sandniggers

>>2741027
>For some reason all the non Graeco-Roman churches split from them in union with each other during the schisms.
The Assyrian church split first actually, they had a pseudo-nestorian christology that didn't line up with the Council of Ephesus. A whole bunch of churches (Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopian) officially split with the council of Chalcedon over further Christological differences. Basically they were the non-Roman churches that felt free to reject those councils when they disagreed as they had their own apostolic tradition outside the Roman or Greek one.

The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches behaved more like state religious institutions while the Oriental Orthodox churches were like rebel populist nationalist movements. The Church of the East is unique in that it's never been a dominant religious institution and also has the least amount of creeds so perhaps this amounts to resembling the early church more.

According to Archbishop Mar Meelis Zaia the problem of the Christological disputes was rooted in language.
>paste link to go to 12:22
https://youtu.be/ub3iSXi0iF8?t=742

>>2741416
There was probably some Persian support for the Nestorian side. Also the problem could have been in part due to misunderstanding of eachother's language.>>2741420