I find your comments about Christendom laughable! What do you think Christendom is?
Be careful about what you think is amusing. Christendom is the "weeds" of Jesus parable. It is the false Christianity sown by God's adversary and has its roots in Roman Catholicism. It is not the Christianity taught by Jesus and his apostles.....regardless of what the dictionary says.
All Christians are part of Christendom or the Christian world.
How many versions of one truth can there be? Is Christendom united or divided? (1 Cor !:10) Does it fit Paul's description?
When Jesus comes to judge mankind, he will have all the nations before him to "separate the sheep from the goats". The sheep and the goats are much the same as the" wheat and the weeds", except that the weeds are more specifically counterfeit Christians. They share the same fate as the goats however. He will tell the reapers to collect the weeds first and dispose of them because he has 'never known them' or regognized them as his true disciples, even though they see themselves as Christians in good standing. (Matt 7:21-23) They even have the hide to tell Jesus all the things they did "in his name" to prove that they were good Christians.....yet his rejection of them is absolute.
This is because Christendom originates in Rome....not Jerusalem. It has its roots in the 4th century, not the first century.
Apparently, you do not consider YOURSELF a part of the Christian world, considering the way you trash it in each of your posts.
I see myself as very much a part of Christianity, but never as part of Christendom. I trash Christendom in much the same way as Jesus trashed the Pharisees. I see a parallel, but I really don't expect you to. You are as indoctrinated as you image we are.
I always thought Jehovah's Witnesses thought of themselves as Christians. I guess you don't see yourself a follower of Christ, which is what a Christian is.
KMG, from the way you post, you have no idea what it means to be Christian or you could not defend a blasphemy like the trinity. It is a breach of the first Commandment. (Exodus 20:3)
Could I please get you to respond to the following scriptures concerning how the Bible writers saw God and the relative position of his son? There is no ambiguity in these verses, unlike the ones offered for the trinity where you have to do a lot of tap dancing to squeeze a trinitarian thought into them.
Let me begin by quoting the New Catholic Encyclopedia which states:
“The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” (1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
Since this is an admission from the very church who introduced the doctrine, it is a good place to start.
Now here are a few scriptures.......
Jesus said in prayer:
“Father, . . . this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:1-3, RS.)
Most translations use the expression “the only true God” with reference to the Father. Jesus separates himself from "the only true God" as one that was "sent" by him. No knowledge of the Holy Spirit is apparently necessary for eternal life according to this scripture.
1 Cor. 8:5, 6, RS:
“Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.”
This presents the Father as the “one God” of Christians and as being distinct from Jesus Christ. No Holy Spirit is mentioned here either.
1 Pet. 1:3, RS:
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!”
Repeatedly, even following Jesus’ ascension to heaven, the Scriptures refer to the Father as “the God” of Jesus Christ. At John 20:17, following Jesus’ resurrection, he himself spoke of the Father as “my God.” Later, when in heaven, as recorded at Revelation 3:12, he again used the same expression.
"The one who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God. Never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name."
So even in heaven the Father is the God of Jesus. The Holy Spirit is never referred to as the God of anyone.
Never in the Bible is the Father reported to refer to the Son as “my God,” nor does either the Father or the Son refer to the holy spirit as “my God.” So where is the equality?
In Theological Investigations, Karl Rahner, S.J. wrote:
“Θεός [God] is still never used of the Spirit,” and: “ὁ θεός [literally, the God] is never used in the New Testament to speak of the πνεῦμα ἅγιον [holy spirit].”—(Baltimore, Md.; 1961)
I will see "God the Father" mentioned in the Bible but "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit" are two designations you will never find in God's word even though you hear them in Christendom.
Matt. 26:39, RS:
“Going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.’”
If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father’s will.
John 8:17, 18, RS: “[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:]
In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me.”
So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father....as two separate witnesses.
That is just a few of many scriptural examples of where a trinity just does not fit. (and I didn't use the NWT once) But these scriptures are largely ignored by those who cannot or will not move past 'ol faithfuls like John 1:1. These scriptures prove that John 1:1 doesn't mean what you think it does.
I invite your observations concerning these verses...
So when you bad mouth and judge ALL Christendom, you may want to think first about what it is you are really saying.
I know exactly what I am saying...but do you?
