After my edgy atheist phase during my teen days I got interested in learning all I can about religion. Im not baptized even though my parents believe in God, but they always thought that I should get baptized knowing what it implies and actually really believing in the faith. That's why this past half year in particular I've dedicated myself to learn and study more about theology and all the scientific evidence that we have available that would lead us to believe that there is in fact a God, and I must say that despite what most of those edgy atheists (that I once was) say, there's a lot of evidence that can suggest this. After that I tried to learn the story of Jesus and after watching things like Jim Caviezel's testimony and The Pasion of Christ, and reading some books and articles from that matter, I've never been so moved by the force and attraction that JC gives me. Almost like a heavenly force. This added to the fact that there is a clear agenda to demonize christianity gives even more reason to believe that this is the Truth. But after having christianity as a middle ground to study more about this I've been getting confused lately about this inside fight between what I guess are anabaptists like Pastor Steven Anderson (from which I've seen some of his sermons and movies like Marching to Zion) who claim that churches are not in the bible and that you get saved through faith alone and not through works, and those who believe that the church is the body of Christ and you should confess your sins to the priest and do good deeds. The confusing part is that both claims that the Bible backs all of their points, but for example Steven Anderson says that the only true version of the Bible is the King James version. If anyone can enlighten me I would greately appreciate it.
The idea is to discuss this in the most unbiased way possible.
Thanks