Is Jesus Christ and Michael the ArchAngel one and the same person?

by booker-t 251 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Leolaia

  Dammit, I just lost my post.

  Terry....I just don't understand the basis of your disagreement with me. I am still not arguing for any existential "is-ness" or outer reality of these concepts other than within the text or in the intellectual or religious life of the people who held these concepts. Rather, you seem to feel that it is beneath a person with "intellectual talents" to waste their attention on such subjects. I have encountered this view before by some on this board who object or even have ridiculed me for trying to understand what the creation narrative in Genesis 1 was trying to convey, as it is misunderstood by both Bible literalists and Bible skeptics. But considering the hold the Bible has in our culture, I don't feel that it is beneath me to shed some light on misconceptions on the Bible text. Not to say that I have misconceptions of my own (we all do), but I often feel I have knowledge that bear directly on the sometimes naive questions being asked here. I agree that biblical research may seem arbitrary because it is often read out of context and the texts themselves span over many centuries and over many ideological and religious worldviews. I do feel that, having read much scholarly literature on the subject, it is not chaos but with additional information on context and the intellectual history of the various motifs and concepts in the texts, much does make sense.

  Rest assured too biblical studies is not the only field I put my mind to...
• 

  Narkissos

  Most scholars believe that these texts were disseminated to the churches in their written or copied format.

  Who? I think this might be true of the main 4th-century churches, but certainly not of the 1st and 2nd century. It is very unlikely sociologically. Only the main Christian centers of the 2nd century (Alexandria, Antioch) could have a fairly complete documentation available. The written material elsewhere was mainly fragments, as well as local reception (epistles) or production.

  Of course Luke 4 is anachronistic as it implies the development of pharisaic synagogues in Galilee, which did not occur before the Jewish war.
• 

  LittleToe

  Terry: You write to Leo:

  By all means; amuse yourselves here whatever way you wish.

  Is her pastime any less worthy than yours of reading exactly the same threads, and baiting anyone who holds a contrary position? At least she has something to add to the subject, rather than just running folks down. Ya pays ya money, ya takes ya choice...

  On the other subject, are you saying that we have your wife to thank for the oral-sex prohibition?
  If so, do you think the reason was that too many men were crying out " Oh God, oh Jesus!", under wifely ministrations? I can see how that would chap the WTS's hide After all, it might have been passable if they'd only yelled "Oh Michael, oh Jesus!"

  Didier:

  Of course Luke 4 is anachronistic as it implies the development of pharisaic synagogues in Galilee, which did not occur before the Jewish war.

  That's a new one on me. You state as fact that which is questionable
  http://biblia.com/jesusbible/synagogue.htm#History

  I'd be interested in your evidence, nonetheless.
• 

  Narkissos

  Ross:

  I agree that a "probably" wouldn't have hurt.

  But (1) afaik there is no archeological evidence for any synagogue in Galilee in the 1st century; (2) synagogues are especially linked to pharisaic judaism; (3) Galilee became a pharisaic center in the aftermath of the Jewish war, with the subsequent (and documented) development of synagogues from the 2nd to the 4th century.

  More generally, Luke 4 reflects a typical diaspora synagogue service (cf. Acts). And most of the Gospel references to the Pharisees are generally admitted to reflect the post-70 situation where they had become the only official representatives of Judaism, shunning all other traditions -- including "nazoreans" (whence the unending conflicts of "Jesus" with the "Pharisees").

  Btw, if Nazareth existed at all in the early 1st century (which many deny) it was a very small village which could certainly not afford a synagogue.
• 

  LittleToe

  How big does a synagogue have to be?
  Surely a tent would do
• 

  Deputy Dog

  ellderwho

  Another flip flop

  The November 1879 Watch Tower says:

  Jesus, means Saviour, and we are carried for-

  ward from the mere word to the exalted official nosition, on

  account of which he can ?save to the uttermost ail who come

  unto God bv him.? His Do&ion is contrasted with that of

  men and a&els, as he is? Lord of both, having ?all power

  in heaven and earth.? Hence it is said, ?Let all the angels

  of God worship him?; [that must include Michael, the

  chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the

  reason is, because he has ?hy inheritance obtained a more

  excellent Xame than they.? Michael or Gabriel are perhaps

  grander names than Jesus. though Jesus is arand in its

  yery simplicity, but the o&iaZ character of the Son of God

  as Saviour and King is the inheritance from his Father,

  which is far superior to theirs, for it pleased the Father

  that in him aZZ fulbess should dwell. He has given him a

  name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus

  every knee should bow both in heaven and earth. And there

  is ?none other name under heaven given among men whereby

  we must be saved.?

  D Dog
• 

  ellderwho

  Hey Ross, DDog

  Yeah Im still wondering what happened to Michael while Jesus was a un-born fetus.
• 

  Kenneson

  Elder,

  I also wonder what happened to Michael when he was crucified and died. Why would he have to be raised a spirit creature, since an archangel is already a spirit creature? Moreover, how does one get around Luke 20:36 which says that angels don't die?!!!!
• 

  heathen

  some good points being made here . I am beginning to think that enoch himself was not even real but added in at some point because to me it doesn't make sense that God wants to destroy the earth but can only find righteous Noah to build an ark so why doesn't he save enoch for the flood episode and load him on the ark to populate the earth afterward? Got me scratching my head on that one .

  blueblades kinda had a point since jesus is granted an indefinately lasting kingdom and is sitting on the throne it's as if at times he is being referred to as jehovah , revelation 4.
• 

  LittleToe

  DDog:
  Thanks for the quote.

  Something that crossed my mind whilst reading it is that if "Jesus" is the name above every other name, then why would he take the name "Michael" in Revelation, to do business?

  And all of this is without taking into account Heb.2:5, 16.
  Incidentally, the NWT has an interesting rendition of verse 16, that completely confuses the passage...