JosephMalik, I don`t understand that at all. I understand that the Word created the world of mankind, not necessarily all the other things. Hellrider, Good so far. God, YHWH created the heavens and earth alone, not the Word or with any else’s help. Hellrider: I also understand that men (like the prophets, and men like that) will turn into angels/heavenly beings, and rule over the angels. No! This is where nearly every religion errs. Our Lord’s (immortal) human sacrifice was for human beings only and not to make non-human beings out of some of them. Words such as spirit, angels, heaven, immortal, are poorly understood and often mis-applied. Most have gotten away from such roots where we learned there is only a seed of the woman (Eve) and a seed of the serpent and nothing more. They put us on a non-human level with God for which there is no sacrifice offered. They just do not grasp how Adam lost the opportunity for human immortality and how our Lord attained it for us. Hellrider: But: Jesus is not one of these, is he? The Bible says he was sent to mankind, from his Father in heaven. He was originally a heavenly being, but then became man, then a heavenly being again. True, and as a result our Lord attained a dual nature unique to Him alone. He alone as a human attained to immortality and will make this available to us. 1Ti 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. 2Ti 1:10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel: He raised His own body and ascended with it. It is promised that He will return with this body of flesh once again to rule in His Kingdom. Hellrider: And if you claim that Michael isn`t the word, then this being that was sent to earth, wouldn`t be "His only begotten Son", that is, the first being God created, would it? I do not claim that Michael is not the Word. Michael is a name, the Word is a title or position of authority. The evidence is that they are the same Being in spite of all the off the wall and non-scriptural comments made about it. The Word became the only begotten (human) Son of God. I thought I mentioned this already and gave the reasoning. He is therefore the first (human) being God created. Someone ignored the context in such texts to come up with their theology long ago and now many like the Watchtower for example are stuck with it. Hellrider in another post: And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation." (Colossians 1:15) Strange that no one notices that this is taking about the new creation, the creation that takes place with their resurrection to immortal human life. It is a creation totally dependent upon His blood. This is now the function of Christ regarding such creation. Col 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: As a consequence of this blood sacrifice all human creatures ever created by Him be they heavenly (government or ones in authority) earth (the ruled, humanity in general) visible (nearby or in the vicinity) invisible (far away and not visible as in Rome) thrones, dominions, principalities, powers (all such complex human arrangements) all (such human) things were created by him and for him (to restore to life as He chooses as a consequence of this blood sacrifice under discussion). He is the head over such things just as He is head of the Church described in the texts that follow. Joseph
Is Michael the Archangel really Jesus?
by twinkletoes 84 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
LittleToe
Joe:So humans will always be humans, but they will also be a "new creation" that has immortality, albeit not in the sense of being changed into anything other than that which is human?
Is this your argument against humans taking on "heavenly bodies", as per Paul's comments to the Corinthians?
And Adam lost the opportunity for immortality, yes? Other than by conjecture, how do you arrive at this from the canon of 66 books (as evidently you ignore the rest)?
You interpolate scripture as well as Brooklyn. Are you sure you weren't on the writing committee?
-
JosephMalik
So humans will always be humans, but they will also be a "new creation" that has immortality, albeit not in the sense of being changed into anything other than that which is human? Little Toe, Yes, as this is still according to its Kind as in Genesis. Little Toe: Is this your argument against humans taking on "heavenly bodies", as per Paul's comments to the Corinthians? Heavenly, one given by higher authority such as Christ. One other than the one we inherited from Adam. Spiritual bodies means basically the same thing. Paul’s comments were to some Corinthians that had some weird ideas regarding such future life even believing in astrology, that we become stars after we die. So his response was specifically tailored to them as well as the Jews among them. Their informational letter to him was thus refuted point for point. Little Toe: And Adam lost the opportunity for immortality, yes? Other than by conjecture, how do you arrive at this from the canon of 66 books (as evidently you ignore the rest)? Did Adam eat from the tree of life? Was it guarded to prevent access? Do we have to be hit on the head with a brick to realize the implication? If Brooklyn wants me, too bad for them. I have had to maneuver through a lot of stink to get here including such higher authorities. Not interested in going back J oseph
-
LittleToe
If you re-read Genesis, you'll find that the way to the tree may have been guarded for Adam's sake...
Imagine living eternally in a body of sin and corruption.
"Changing in a twinkling of an eye" doesn't sound like a change of authority, to me.
-
Qcmbr
The Apostle Paul has an interesting passage in his epistle to the Hebrews. He spoke of the Savior and declared him to be in the express image of his Father’s person. Then he asked this question: “Unto which of the angels said he [God] at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?” (Heb. 1:5; emphasis added). And of course the answer is immediate and obvious—none of them—none of the angels, not even Adam, or Michael, the chief of the angels.
Mormon Alert - non provable using Bible:
D&C 27:11
11 And also with Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days;
Indeed, Adam was very special and very important. Before coming into mortality, he was known as Michael. The Prophet Joseph Smith clearly identifies both Adam and Michael as one and the same person, an angel, the chief angel, or archangel, of heaven, the special servant of God and Christ.
We know and testify that mighty Michael foremost fell that mortal man might be, and that “the Almighty God gave his Only Begotten Son” (D&C 20:21) to ransom men from the temporal and spiritual death brought into the world by this fall of Adam.
The relationship between him and the first parent on earth, the father of our bodies -Adam is our father-can be read in the 107th section of the D&C. We are told there that a few years before his death, Adam gathered together his posterity, who were in the faith, (some of them went out of the faith) but all those who were in the Lord and were high priests, met in the Valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and Adam arose in the midst of the congregation and blessed his children and predicted what would befall them to their latest generations, and the Lord appeared and He blessed Adam and said, "See, I have placed thee at the head; a multitude of nations shall come of thee, and thou art a prince over them forever." And they called him Michael, the prince, the archangel. That was his station before he came here. When he came here as Adam, he was the son of God, and God was over him and he, Adam, prayed to the Eternal Father as we do. I merely mention that because there are some disputes in regard to the personality of Adam before he came into the body. The Lord said he was Michael, the archangel, and He, the Father, set him here at the head of His race to which we belong. He is "our father, Adam," and as Adam's body was of the dust of the earth, this earth on which we live, it had to return to dust because of his transgression. -
Narkissos
Ithinkisee,
Interesting point. I didn't find anything in WT literature which directly tries to reconcile Jude 9 and Matthew 4 from the perspective "Jesus = Michael" (but there may be). What comes closest is the following passage from The Watchtower 10/1/1955:
14
First on the occasion when the prophet Moses died on top of Mount Nebo. Then, when the Son of God "had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses’ body, he did not dare to bring a judgment against him in abusive terms, but said: ‘May Jehovah rebuke you.’" The spirit Son of God, as the archangel Michael, kept control of Moses’ body and buried it for Jehovah God at a place in a valley in Moab that no man has discovered and no spirit medium is able to reveal. (Jude 9, NW; Deut. 34:1-6) The other occasion is disclosed to us by the prophecy of Zechariah 3:1, 2 (AS), concerning the high priest Joshua after he and other Jews returned from Babylon to the desolated city of Jerusalem and began to rebuild the temple of Jehovah God there. We read: "And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of Jehovah, and Satan standing at his right hand to be his adversary. And Jehovah [Syriac Version: And the angel of Jehovah] said unto Satan, Jehovah rebuke thee, O Satan; yea, Jehovah that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee." (See also AT; Mo.) Jehovah’s rebuking of Satan means the divine execution of judgment against him on Jehovah’s great judgment day when he brings the end of this wicked world or system of things under Satan and ushers in the righteous world under Jesus Christ the King of kings. In view of that, in the centuries before Jesus was put to death in the flesh and made alive in the spirit by the resurrection from the dead it was not the time for Jehovah by his angelic Son to "rebuke" Satan.Too bad they didn't think of Matthew 4 at that point. They could have phrased it "in the centuries before Jesus came in the flesh" and they were safe.
-
JosephMalik
Little Toe, I read Genesis. It says: 22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. Your arguments have no merit. Imagination is not truth. That is why I am always careful where I step. Qcmbr, Then he asked this question: “Unto which of the angels said he [God] at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?” (Heb. 1:5; emphasis added). And of course the answer is immediate and obvious—none of them—none of the angels, not even Adam, or Michael, the chief of the angels. This passage was written about the Jews of times past calling them angels. Verse 8 was originally written about their Kings even calling them God. This subject of Michael has been covered pretty well except for this verse: Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Not only does Michael stand up at such a time but Daniel will stand up just a few thousand days later: 13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days. Thus linking Michael with Christ and the resurrection is scriptural. Trinitarian theology cannot stand such thinking. They must oppose it at all cost. Joseph
-
Hellrider
J Malik wrote: " Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. " Wow, I had completely forgotten about that one! Yes, that`s a great argument, Malik! It is strange that Michael is mentioned in that, linking him to the ressurection, isn`t it? I mean, why Michael? Why emphasise one of the archangels? Anyone have a counter for that one?
-
Narkissos
Joseph
I usually don't feel like picking on your interpretations but I'll make an exception.
In the same post you say:
Imagination is not truth. That is why I am always careful where I step.
Then, about Hebrews (if I read you correctly):This passage was written about the Jews of times past calling them angels. Verse 8 was originally written about their Kings even calling them God.
I appreciate the Qumran-like, peremptory pesher style (this is about that), but I have to ask: where do you find that if not in imagination? How can "angels" mean "Jews of times past" in the following passage?
Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds. He is the reflection of God's glory and the exact imprint of God's very being, and he sustains all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
Perhaps I misread you. Would you mind stating where in this passage the word "angel" means something else than "spirit creatures"?
For to which of the angels did God ever say,
"You are my Son;
today I have begotten you"? (Those words were originally to an Israelite king, not to "angels")
Or again,
"I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son"? (idem)
And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says,
"Let all God's angels worship him."
Of the angels he says,
"He makes his angels winds,
and his servants flames of fire." (does that apply to Israelites?)
But of the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
and the righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has anointed you
with the oil of gladness beyond your companions." (again, the royal oracle is opposed to the word addressed to "angels")
And,
"In the beginning, Lord, you founded the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands;
they will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like clothing;
like a cloak you will roll them up,
and like clothing they will be changed.
But you are the same,
and your years will never end."
But to which of the angels has he ever said,
"Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet"? (idem)
Are not all angels spirits in the divine service, sent to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?
Therefore we must pay greater attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it. For if the message declared through angels was valid, and every transgression or disobedience received a just penalty, how can we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? It was declared at first through the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God added his testimony by signs and wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, distributed according to his will.
Now God did not subject the coming world, about which we are speaking, to angels.
But someone has testified somewhere,
"What are human beings that you are mindful of them,
or mortals, that you care for them?
You have made them for a little while lower than the angels; (lower than the Israelites?)
you have crowned them with glory and honor,
subjecting all things under their feet."
Now in subjecting all things to them, God left nothing outside their control. As it is, we do not yet see everything in subjection to them, but we do see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels (idem), now crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. -
Narkissos
It is strange that Michael is mentioned in that, linking him to the ressurection, isn`t it? I mean, why Michael? Why emphasise one of the archangels?
As I said before, quoting all relevant texts of Daniel including this one (12:1), because in Daniel Michael does not appear as "one of the archangels" (that is, a group of faithful top-ranking angels) but as "one of the chief princes" (i.e., the heavenly rulers of the nations). The other princes here being, not Gabriel or Raphael, but "the prince of Persia" or "the prince of Greece". Michael is none other than 'the prince of Israel,' "your prince" in 10:21, " the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people" here in 12:1. The prophecy envisions Michael standing up for Israel at the latter day, and the resurrection (which only applies to Israel in this context) follows.