Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman 103 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Sea Breeze

DJW,
Once again, you have failed to jettisone another WT assumption in your rush to adopt atheism : Annihilation
The bible assumes that the reader understands that we are a tri-partite being and that death means separation and not non-existence. WT doctrines are designed to have over-lapping assumptions.

A former JW bible teacher wrote the following:

The secular world that we behold today embraces a philosophy called Natural Materialism.
Materialism - Materialism is a form of philosophical monism that holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions.
According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products of material processes, without which they cannot exist.
Naturalism - In philosophy, naturalism is the idea or belief that only natural laws and forces operate in the universe. Adherents of naturalism assert that natural laws are the only rules that govern the structure and behavior of the natural world, and that the changing universe is at every stage a product of these laws.
"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. – Richard Lewontin Harvard Evolutionary Biologist
As you can see materialism is a world-view that is adopted as an assumption and has nothing to do with evidence. It is a highly protected religion that requires immense faith in order to ignore substantial circumstantial evidence surrounding the Resurrection of Christ, Near Death Experiences, and Terminal Lucidity cases.

Adherents of this worldview are not consistent in believing reality is only made up of physical things. For example, they accept as fact, many non-physical things that are not made of matter or energy such as math, information, language, laws of physics, morality, truth, codes, probability etc.

Likewise, the Watchtower has adopted an inconsistent materialistic worldview when it comes to the nature of man.

In this lesson, we will look at the biblical definition of man and how he is constituted. Then, in the next lesson we will consider the Watchtower’s so-called “proof scriptures” to support their naturalistic/materialistic view of man. This study is especially important because it is the key to un-locking several other key doctrines of Christianity.

1 Thess. 5: 23 …I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ…
Hebrews 4: 12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow [body], and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Now, for a brief grammar lesson:
Personal Pronoun: A personal pronoun is a short word we use as a simple substitute for the proper name of a person. It denotes personhood. Each of the English personal pronouns shows us the grammatical person, gender, number, and case of the noun it replaces. I, you, he, she, it, we they, me, him, her, us, and them are all personal pronouns.

Carnal Man 1 Cor. 3: 3 - ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions

Natural Man 1 Cor. 2:14 - the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them…

Spiritual Man Acts. 7: 59 - And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Obviously, Stephen wanted to be with Jesus.

2 Cor. 4: 16 - …we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.

Luke 24: 39 - Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Dead Souls in Heaven think, remember, speak & feel emotion:

Revelation 6: 9-11 - I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Can you see how dead souls are really persons in the bible DJW?

Phillipians 1: 21-25 - For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. - …if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: 13 Nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you. And having this confidence, I know that I shall abide and continue with you all for your furtherance and joy of faith;

Luke 1: 45-48 - And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord. And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

So did Mary's life force rejoice or her inner person rejoice. Electricity doesn't rejoice.

Without the understanding that God assigns personhood to our spirit, soul & body – both individually and/or collectively, it is impossible to reconcile some seeming scriptural contradictions:

1. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. – 1 John 1: 8 2.
2. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. - 1 John 3: 9
So which is it? Its both because we are a tri-partite being and each of our components denotes personhood. In the above verse, 1 John 1: 82 is speaking about our flesh, and 1 John 3: 9 is speaking about our renewed spirit after getting saved.
Other long-time arguments on the deity of Christ become moot with this understanding as well. It explains how Jesus could say things like, “all power has been given me in heaven and earth”, and then elsewhere declare that “the Father is greater than I”.

The reason is because one statement of truth is spoken from a standpoint of possessing the essence of God as his spirit, and the other point of view is from the standpoint of flesh as the son of Mary.

Perhaps there is no stronger example of this as when Jesus was announcing that no one was taking his life from him and that it would be he who gave it up and ALSO he who would raise it up again: “I lay down my life, that I might take it again…I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again” – John 10: 17-18

“I” is used in reference to both the body and the spirit of Jesus here. As a side note: Did you notice how we just solved the dispute over the deity of Christ without even discussing “the deity of Christ? The Watchtower likes to pick and choose which areas of reality are materialistic, and which areas of reality are spiritual. This is how they deceive.

Christians believe that the bible has the final say on doctrine and belief. All [NOT JUST SOME] scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine…That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”
Earnest

Sea Breeze : You got the wrong Jesus.
There was a lot of uncertainty about who Jesus was in the first century, and it is possible that the writer of Hebrews was addressing the view that Jesus was just an angel. As you say, Jesus was different because he was the only-begotten son, although I was not aware the scriptures use the term "essence".
However, there are other parts of scripture that indicate Jesus was the one the OT refers to as the angel of Jehovah. For example, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 10:4 that when the Israelites were in the wilderness "they used to drink from the spiritual rock that follows them, and that rock meant the Christ." Jude is even more explicit saying (in vs 5) that Jesus "saved a people out of the land of Egypt". This echoes Numbers 20:16 which says that God sent an angel and brought us out of Egypt, and Isaiah 63:9 where it says that God's own personal messenger (or, "the angel of his presence") saved them.
Interestingly, Justin Martyr routinely identifies the subject of OT theophanies with the pre-existent Christ or Logos. So (in Dialogue with Trypho, 56, 60, 126) it was the Logos who visited Abraham with two angels and destroyed Sodom, who wrestled with Jacob at Jabbok (Dialogue with Trypho, 58), and who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Dialogue with Trypho, 59-60, 126-127). While Justin's understanding may not be correct, and his writings are certainly not equivalent to scripture, it certainly shows that this understanding was held by some. How does Justin countenance this understanding with the view that Jesus is superior to the angels? He explains, as I did, that the Logos is called "angel" because he is the messenger from God to humanity (Dialogue with Trypho, 56.4, 10; 76.3), not because he is the same as the angels.
Having said all this, I should add that scripture does not directly teach that Jesus is the archangel Michael. They both share similar roles so it may be inferred but it is not explicit, and so I don't consider the viewpoint conclusive.
Ding

I always thought it strange that the WT claims that Jesus is Michael.
John 1:1 doesn't say, "In the beginning was Michael, and Michael was with God, and Michael was a god."
John 1:14 says that a heavenly person called "the Word" became flesh and dwelt among us.
But in WT theology:
1. Jesus wasn't an archangel in human flesh.
2. What Michael and Jesus shared wasn't a personality, but rather an impersonal, animating life force analogous to electricity which powers various appliances.
3. When Jesus was conceived in Mary's womb, Michael went out of existence as a heavenly personage.
4. While on earth, Jesus was a perfect man like Adam, no more and no less.
5. As a man, Jesus didn't have a separate soul or spirit that survived physical death.
6. When he died, all of his personality, thoughts, and memories died with him.
7. After the resurrection, Jehovah implanted Jesus' memories into the re-animated Michael.
If all this is true, then in what sense was Jesus Michael and Michael Jesus?
Disillusioned JW

Regarding the quote of Richard Lewontin the WTS used a small portion of it on page 22 of their brochure from 2010 called "Was Life Created?" The quoted words of Lewontin were part of a review by Lewontin of Carl Sagan's book called The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. I own a copy of that book by Sagan and I consider it a great book. I am irritated that Lewontin, an evolutionary biologist said some of what he said in his review. I disagree with some of what he said, or at least with the way he worded some of his ideas in what was quoted of him. But https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Lewontin provides a helpful context to clarify, at least to some degree, what he meant. There it says prior to the phrase of "Our willingness to accept scientific claims ... " Leontin said the following.

"With great perception, Sagan sees that there is an impediment to the popular credibility of scientific claims about the world, an impediment that is almost invisible to most scientists. Many of the most fundamental claims of science are against common sense and seem absurd on their face. Do physicists really expect me to accept without serious qualms that the pungent cheese that I had for lunch is really made up of tiny, tasteless, odorless, colorless packets of energy with nothing but empty space between them? Astronomers tell us without apparent embarrassment that they can see stellar events that occurred millions of years ago, whereas we all know that we see things as they happen. (…)".
Sea Breeze

DJW,
Can you see how dead souls are really persons with the information I presented in my last post?
You are trying to do exactly what the WT did - superimpose a materialistic naturalism definition that the bible writers never intended.
If you accept the biblical definition of man being a soul, body and spirit; then you can never again pretend that the bible is confusing or contradictory by citing examples of Jesus saying or acting inferior to God, which he clearly was in his flesh, but not in his spirit. "God is a Spirit".
But this is just one of your problems preventing understanding. Not only do you still carry a definition regarding man that the bible writers were unaware of (materialistic naturalism); you also carry a working definition of "death" that is just as foreign to the bible writers as the WT's view on the make-up of man just being physical.
As the book of Ezekiel says, 'the soul that is sinning, it itself will die'.
Absolutely, and dead souls are talking, complaining, remembering and are being comforted in heaven at Rev. 6:9. Again, you are superimposing a materialistic definition on the word "death".
Here's the biblical definition of life and death: When your body expires and is separated from your soul and spirit. At that time, you are dead. When all three are united in your breathing body... you are alive.
But, this is NOT the definition a JW thinks of after being indoctrinated by the WT. So, what exactly is death, how does it occur and what happens to the soul when the body ceases to have life?
One of the clearest examples is in Genesis 35: 18 where the death of Rachael is recorded when she gave birth to Benjamin: “And it came to pass, as her soul was departing, (for she died) that she called his name Ben-oni: but his father called him Benjamin”.
Clearly, when Rachael’s soul departed, she was dead. When her soul was still joined to her body and spirit, she was alive. We already talked about how dead souls who had been martyred during the Great Tribulation were fully conscious in Revelation 6:9 and were being comforted under the altar of God in heaven. So, death does not mean annihilation and unconsciousness. The biblical definition of death is separation of the soul from the body. When your spirit, soul and body are united, you are alive. When they are separated at the demise of the body, you are dead.
Jesus makes this clear in Luke 12: 4 : “Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yes, Fear him”.
Did you catch how a person can still be punished after their body is killed? Jesus really wants people to be aware of how they are made. He should know.... he made them.
So, if you simply change your naturalistic definition of man and death, you will eliminate much conflict in your bible reading.
But, since you have already claimed the title of atheist, I see little chance of you changing your WT indoctrination since the world views in these areas are identical.
To give up your faulty biblical exegesis, would require you to at least temporarily suspend your commitment to your new religion: naturalistic materialism.

Just know that the biblical contradictions you claim are due to your superimposition of different definitions that the writers never intended and not due to an internal contradiction of scripture.
Sea Breeze

Earnest:
There was a lot of uncertainty about who Jesus was in the first century,
Of course there was.... UNTIL he stated on several occasions that he would die and resurrect himself after three days....and then did it.
Either he is a liar, or he is God. No in between here. We all have to choose a side at some point.
Disillusioned JW

I did not rush into atheism. I moved towards atheism over a period of 15 years from 1995 to 2010! Why do you assume I rushed to it? I wish I had adopted it before the year 1981! I only jettison WT teachings and biblical teachings to the extent that I see proof of those various teachings being false! I don't rush to change my long held convictions, since rushing would likely result in me discarding many true convictions/beliefs! Christian apologists seem to think that all Christians who become atheists quickly became Christians, but they are wrong. You are not he first to incorrectly say I quickly became an atheist!
Sea Breeze do you realize that the latter part of your quote of Richard Lewontin is one which the WT has used in their efforts to disprove evolution? You have failed to jettison that WT idea (which they likely got from other creationists quoting Lewontin). You have also failed to jettison supernaturalism.
Regardless of the quote accredited to Lewontin, I strongly disagree that materialism, and especially naturalism, is a world-view that is adopted as an assumption, instead of a worldview adopted as a conclusion derived from evidence and reason. At least by me, naturalism was not adopted as an assumption. Since I was raised as a JW and thus a Christian and thus a Bible believer I started with the assumption/premise of supernaturalism and then tested with it observations and experiments of my own to determine if the premise is instead false (or extremely likely false).
My observations, including of tests, indicated supernaturalism is false or at least extremely likely false. I could not find any trace of the supernatural at all and I even searched for ghosts by visiting and searching places which were purported to have spirits and by interviewing people who claimed to have experienced the supernatural. I also prayed to God (under the names/concepts of Yahweh, Jesus, the Trinity, and an unknown god) to provide me with evidence of his/her/its existence which he/she/it knows would convince me - but i never received any evidence which convinced me of his existence! What more could I possibly do to discover proof of the supernatural? Nothing.
Furthermore, I don't claim to be a materialist, but rather a naturalist (a more inclusive term), since I do recognize non-material natural 'things'/attributes such as mathematics, ideas, emotions, and such.
It is getting very tiresome for me to argue an use reason with apologists of supernaturalism and Christian fundamentalism on the subjects of supernaturalism and theology.
---------------
Sea Breeze, I noticed that in your recent post which has a diagram of the idea of the "tri-partite nature of man (Jesus)" that you said "his spirit was the indivisible essence of God". When I read that it seemed to me that one idea expressed in that statement was that God the Father in his entirety existed fully in Jesus when Jesus was on Earth. But because I never accepted that idea, including never accepted it as being biblical, and because I read very few people express that idea, I assumed that you don't mean that idea. Are you saying you have that idea? Do you even believe that God the Father entirely existed in Jesus while Jesus was in the womb of Mary, thus making Mary literally the mother of God the Father and not just of Jesus?

Regarding your quote of the KJV translation of 1 Timothy 3:16, keep in mind that I rarely read more than a few paragraphs in any given day from the KJV. It never has been the main Bible I use. I have very little appreciation for the KJV Bible translation - I much more strongly prefer the RV and ASV to it. The main reasons why I read the KJV at all is because so many English speaking Christians read it and because much of the WTS literature prior to about the year 1940 quoted from it so very much. Keep also in mind that while I was an active believer in JW religion's core teachings [from early childhood (starting before baptism) through about 20 years as a baptized JW (though in my prior post I incorrectly wrote 25 years)] virtually the only time I read a Bible it was the NWT. The NWT says "He" in that verse instead of "God" and I remember that as a JW I read the WT make its case for its wording by quoting English Bibles which say "He" in that verse of translations of Greek manuscripts which support that wording. Thus I read the WTS make its case that the verse does not support the Trinity.

A number of Bibles (due to variances in the Greek manuscripts) including the RSV and the NASB (of 1975) except in their footnote to the verse, the NRSV, the NASB Updated edition of 1995, and the REB (not just the NWT) say 'He" in 1 Timothy 3:16 instead of "God". Nearly all of the times when I read that verse I read it in translations which say "He". I thus understood it to be talking only about Jesus Christ the Son of God and not God the Father, and I understood it to be talking about Jesus in a nontrinitarian sense. The RV, ARV (copyright 1898), and the ASV each say "He who" in the main text and in their translators' footnote to the verse they make the following impressive claim. "The word God in place of He who, rests on no sufficient ancient evidence. Some ancient authorities read which."

I find myself thinking, reading, and writing about theology far more than I think is beneficial to me. Much of that is due to discussions on this website. Since I am now an atheist I really need to spend drastically less time on the subject of theology, primarily confining it only to the purpose of convincing people to stop believing in Christianity, most of the Bible, and the existence of the biblical God and other alleged spirit beings. Furthermore my efforts of tried to convince people of atheistic philosophic naturalism should primarily be done in me completing my atheistic book which attempts to achieve such. I have spent most of last Saturday and much of last Friday thinking about theology when I could have spent that time thinking about other topics and doing other tasks.
For example today (hours before 'sunrise') I read fascinating articles about the species Homo floresiensis possibly still being alive! See the following articles.
- https://earthsky.org/earth/hobbits-indonesia-homo-floresiensis-relic-hominins/
- https://www.the-scientist.com/magazine-issue/opinion-another-species-of-hominin-may-still-be-alive-69869
If scientist finds living individuals of that species and presents the proof of them to the public that would be tremendous! It would cause many people to believe that human evolution happened, including the macro evolution of our species of humans from a species (though not necessarily of Homo floresiensis) which looks very nonhuman.
Fisherman

die and resurrect himself after three days....and then did it.
Then he wasn’t dead. But he was dead and the Bible says that God resurrected Jesus from the dead. So what did Jesus mean since obviously dead killed Jesus could not resurrect himself? WT explains that Jesus was using a literary device illustrating faith, for example “ Your faith has made you well.” Poetic language illustrating Jesus’s faith.
Sea Breeze

Since I am now an atheist I really need to spend drastically less time on the subject of theology, primarily confining it only to the purpose of convincing people to stop believing in Christianity.
DJW -

Maybe, just wear a placard that says Stop Believing in Christianity instead of trying to formulate arguments. Like I said, I have proven that the ideas you were indoctrinated with about the nature of man and death are biblically false... The entire WT logic stands on these two pillars. Ironically, so does atheism.
die and resurrect himself after three days....and then did it.
Then he wasn’t dead.
Fisherman, you have been indoctrinated the same as DJW, and the rest of us were. Your concept of die or death is a LIE. Did you not read my extensive post a few posts back regarding the biblical definition of death?

If you did, you would see no contradiction at all with Jesus claiming that he would die and resurrect himself.
Here's the diagram from page 2:

Reread my post at the top of this page and look at this diagram. Jesus could not have been human unless, like us, he had these three parts. But, Jesus was human because he had all three of these parts just as we do. The bible is clear that this is how we are designed.

Furthermore, since "God is a Spirit", he provided the spirit portion of the man Jesus with his own essence - Spirit. This was a one-time thing.... hence the term only-begotten. Get it now?
The Spirit of Jesus was out of the Father... similar to how my sons are literally out of me.
God's indivisible Spirit was veiled in human flesh. That's why the book of Revelation is called "The Unveiling". Jesus is fully revealed there in all his majesty as both God and Man.
I am not saying you must accept biblical theology any more than you must accept the idea that Jesus died for you personally and not Adam.

All, I'm saying is that the bible is internally consistent - if you use biblical definitions and not try to superimpose non-biblical definitions on words.

I have provided many scriptural proofs on this thread and they are consistent. If anyone wants to keep their WT ideas on Man and Death, they should try to defend their ideas biblically.

Fisherman and DJW,

Why don't you guys try to mount a defense of the WT's definition of Man & Death?

Surely, you see by now how critical this is to supporting both Watchtowerism and Atheism. Both will live or die on these two definitions.

What say either of you on this?
Fisherman

and so I don't consider the viewpoint conclusive
Although I agree, Are the scriptures intentionally misleading the reader to conclude erroneously?

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

Share this