the archangel, an archangel
I'm reading a book called "What To Do When They Knock" that goes over the JW book "What Does The Bible Really Teach?". It points out that the "Bible Really Teach" book, on page 218, makes a bit of a point about there being only one archangel. It says Michael is "the archangel" and emphasizes that "the" means only one. But in the same paragraph the "Bible Really Teach" book talks about "an archangel's voice" and Jesus' voice being that of "an archangel". Having "an" archangel's voice seems to me to mean having a voice "like one of those archangels". Does anyone know what the JWs mean by "an" archangel if there is only one?
Gabriel is an archangel as well. JWs don't seem to know that
It's not in the NWT, but In the book of Tobit, the arch angel Rafael says that he is one of seven who stands before the Lord.
In Luke, Gabriel told Mary that he stands in the very presence of God.
In Revelation, 4 beings surround the Throne - man-like, lion-like, eagle-like, bull-like.
The Book of Enoch shows they are Gabriel, Michael, Phanuel, and Raphael, respectively.
The books of Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel also have their say about angelic creatures.
If my calculations are correct, there are 101,000,000 of them - 70 are archangels.
Originally, there were 151,500,000, but 1/3 defected - 50,500,000.
Of that 50+ million, back in the days of Jared, 200 materialized into human males in order to copulate with human females.
Those 200 are confined in an area known as Tartarus until their judgment day.
All of the extra-Biblical works that I've read are in harmony with the Bible.
I am truly enjoying what I'm uncovering.
I don't agree with the WT's teaching that Jesus of Nazareth is Michael the archangel.
Amy, I wondered about that too. I had to try and explain the WTS position on Jesus being Michael. I found that in writing the WTS waffles on that.
The "Michael = Jesus" argument is one of the weakest JW positions.
If you really want to see a JW squirm, ask him to explain it, using only the Bible. He/she almost certainly can't.
Other squirm-worthy topics, if you request an explanation "only from the Bible":
-- How do you get 1914 as the start of the last days?
-- Why don't JWs celebrate Thanksgiving?
-- Why are blood fractions allowed, but not blood components?
-- What did Thomas mean when he said "My Lord and my God" when he saw the resurrected Jesus?
Those questions would stump 99.98% of JWs if asked while they are in field serve-us.
*** it-2 p. 393 Michael ***
Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God’s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be “the archangel,” meaning “chief angel,” or “principal angel.” The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host.
*** g02 2/8 p. 17 Who Is Michael the Archangel? ***
Aside from Michael, no archangel is mentioned in the Bible, nor do the Scriptures use the term “archangel” in the plural. The Bible describes Michael as the archangel, implying that he alone bears that designation. Hence, it is reasonable to conclude that Jehovah God has delegated to one, and only one, of his heavenly creatures full authority over all other angels.
Daniel 10:14 shows that Michael is ONE of the foremost or chief angels, implying there are others.
Woe to WT!!!
Having "an" archangel's voice seems to me to mean having a voice "like one of those archangels".
Note that the verse doesn't actually say, "have."
"For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first."
Although the word, "with" in English is often associated with possession, the thought in Greek is actually accompaniment or attendant circumstance.
In other words, if you walked out on stage "with the sound of a trumpet," it doesn't mean you were personally blowing the trumpet yourself.
Lexical works in Greek are virtually unanimous on this point.