Posts by Disillusioned JW

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

In the above mentioned article which I provided a link to, Tabor says the following.

'One thing I had noticed in my own work on the book of Revelation over the years was that the explicit references to either “Jesus” “Christ,” or “Jesus Christ” outside the letters to the churches of chapters 2 & 3, are mostly clustered in chapters 1 and 22, with few in the middle chapters.

But what is even more astounding, to me at least, was the observation that nearly all of these references can be easily removed without detracting in any way from the structure or flow of the passages in which they occur. In other words, one could get the distinct impression that references to Jesus Christ lay quite lightly on the text and could even be seen as secondary interpolations.

In the references below I have put these interpolative elements bold italicized brackets. This exercise strongly suggests that these are later additions to an original Jewish text inserted to “Christianize” a book that in its origins had nothing to do with Jesus. This is a rather astounding phenomenon and once one sees it it seems clear that the underlying original text remains intact and makes complete sense without these references:'

In the article Tabor also says the following. 'In contrast to these references to Jesus, that so clearly exhibit a heavy hand of Christian interpolation, one finds multiple references to the LORD (Yahweh/Yehovah) God Almighty, as well as “his Messiah,” that echoes closely the language of the prophetic texts of the Hebrew Bible. None of these contain explicit references to Jesus and clearly exhibit a textual integrity that reflects the language and thought world of pre-Christian thoroughly Jewish apocalypticism:'

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

Sea Breeze, I am familiar with the idea of the tri-partite nature of man and I read your recent post about such, but some verses of the Bible seem to make a definite distinction between Jesus Christ and God, not just in regards to three persons making up one God (the trinity doctrine) but actually also as a way of distinguishing the Son (Jesus) form the Father (Yahweh) and some even implying that the heavenly Christ is not God. Yes I am resistant (like Charles Russel was and like the WT is) in accepting the idea of the tri-partite nature (as defined by you and many others) of humans, in regards to the spirit in humans, as being a biblical teaching.

I know that the earliest extant Greek NT manuscripts (such as those of the Alexandrian text type) have fewer trinitarian and binitarian sounding phrases and verses than those manuscripts used the translators of the KJV. I also know that such applies a great deal to the manuscripts of the book of Revelation. Furthermore, I know that most modern translations of the NT are primarily based upon those older manuscripts, and that the NKJV has footnotes which in many cases state the wording of those older manuscripts.

I am also aware that Church Fathers said the Ebionite Christians and some other Torah keeping very early Jewish followers of Jesus in their Gospel account rejected the divinity and the virgin birth of Jesus; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites .

Some critical NT scholars even say that the Book of Revelation was later revised by Christians into being what we find our extant Greek manuscripts; see https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12712-revelation-book-of .That Jewish Encyclopedia says the following regarding the Book of Revelation. "The last book in the New Testament canon, yet in fact one of the oldest; probably the only Judæo-Christian work which has survived the Paulinian transformation of the Church." It also says that the book includes "Christian interpolations and alterations".

Some scholars (including James Tabor) even say the original book of Revelation was a Jewish non-Christian text which was later Christianized into the text we have today. For example that see https://ehrmanblog.org/is-the-book-of-revelation-a-revised-version-of-a-non-christian-apocalypse-guest-post-by-james-tabor/ .

joey jojo, I agree that the world makes much more sense when one rejects the idea that God or a god exists.

26

JULY 15TH STUDY EDITION :"If ever that evil slave..." page 24

by raymond frantz in

box on page 24 of the july 15th titled :"if ever the evil slave....".

jesus has placed the weightiest of responsibilities on the faithful and discreet slave-namely,overseeing the domestics and giving out spiritual food atthe proper time.

jesus knew that those with greater responsibility have greater accountability.

Disillusioned JW

Vanderhoven7, from what I read of WT literature including literature of Russell, I don't think Russell thought Jesus was mistaken at all when Jesus said no human knows the day or the hour of the timing the parousia, neither the angels nor the Son. The impression that I got was that Russell and the modern day WT organization said that at the time Jesus (who had not yet died and risen to heaven) said no human, angel, nor even the Son knew the timing the Christ's parousia such was true, but that over 1500 years later God revealed to some Christians (and likely to the risen Christ even earlier) the year and possibly the month of the start of the parousia.

Consider the following. In some of the NT Gospels the disciples of Jesus who first saw the resurrected Jesus did not recognize Jesus after he had recently been resurrected (because their eyes and/or minds were kept from recognizing him, or because his appearance was different [see John 21:12 and Mark 16:12]), but those same accounts say that later their "eyes" were opened or that some other special actions took place, and that as a result they then recognized they were speaking with Jesus Christ. See Luke 24:15-16, 31, John 20:14, 16-18. and John 21:4,7. These verses possibly indicate that God and/Jesus keeps some matters hidden from Christ's disciples for a period of time, but reveals them later. Likewise Paul spoke of a mystery (sacred secret) of God which was later revealed to Christians.

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

Sea Breeze, some English translations say the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" and some say the "Revelation by Jesus Christ" (not just the NWT) and come commentaries say both meanings are plausible and that both might be correct. Namely the revelation is of Jesus in the sense of being about Jesus (a revealing of Jesus) and was also transmitted by way of Jesus. Furthermore, the translations of Revelation 1:1 agree that God gave the revelation to him/Him (namely to Jesus Christ) instead of directly to John. In verse one the NKJV has the word "him" capitalized as "Him" thus indicating divinity (according to Trinitarians), thus indicating Jesus Christ in that phrase instead of John. Verse one (NKJV) also says that "He", namely Jesus, "sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John". You in your quote of me you left out my words of "(by way of his angel?)" - perhaps I revised my post to include those words after you began composing your reply to me but before ou completed your reply to me.

I thus drew my conclusion from "a plain literal reading of scripture".

Update: Perhaps you think that the "He" mentioned in verse two is God instead of the "Him" (Jesus) mentioned in verse one. But the "He" in verse has to refer to Jesus otherwise it would conflict with verse one saying saying God sent the revelation to Jesus. The two verses combined are thus say that God (the Father) sent a revelation about Jesus to Jesus, that Jesus in turn sent it "by His angel" to John the servant of Jesus.

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

By the way folks, notice that Revelation 1:2 says "his/His angel". Is that saying an angel of Jesus Christ? If so, maybe according to the Bible Michael the Archangel is the angel of Jesus Christ, an angel directly under the command of Jesus Christ. Perhaps that applies also to to what Revelation 12:7-11 say. Revelation 12:7-11 is describing a war in heaven and we know that in the case of human militaries there are chains of command.

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

Hi Earnest. I agree that the "word for 'angel' in both Hebrew and Greek means messenger". I also recognize that humans are sometimes messengers. I thus see a degree of ambiguity of the Hebrew and Greek words which are commonly translated as angel or messenger. I also recognize that the Bible says that Jesus delivered messages - even the first chapter of Revelation 1:1-2 (NASB) says Jesus (by way of his angel?) delivered God's message of the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" to John. You thus might be right that in some sense he is an angel. It is thus possible that according to the meaning of angel/messenger used in some Bible books Jesus is an angel/messenger and that according to the meaning of angel/messenger used in some other Bible books Jesus is not an angel/messenger.

It is like to how according to some definitions of ape and human used by various scientists that: (1) Australopithecines are apes, ape-humans, or humans, depending on the definitions used; (2) Homo sapiens are non-ape humans or human apes depending on the definitions used; (3) Homo erectus is non-human or human depending on the definitions used and that even Homo neanderthalensis (which some consider to be Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) is a non-human or human depending on the definitions of "human" used. Likewise it is like how bonobos (members of the genus Pan, the same genus as the common chimpanzee) are non-chimpanzees or a species of chimpanzees (though not the same species as the common chimpanzees) depending on the definitions used; etc.

Not all people speak the same language when speaking the same language. Do you know what I mean? What I said is an apparent contradiction which is not a real contradiction. That is because I was using the phrase "same language" once with one definition and once with a different definition. It was to convey the idea that people who speak the same language sometimes assign a different definition to some words than that assigned by other people speaking basically the same language as them. It makes clear communication difficult at times. People who think they disagree with other regarding various concepts are sometimes actually in agreement conceptually with each other, but are using different definitions for some of there words.

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

Correction: In my first post of page 2 of this topic thread I should have not have said "1971 NWT" nor made the other reference to the 1971 NWT. That is because the 1971 NWT does not have a footnote at Deuteronomy 32:43 to the Septuagint, nor does it have a cross reference in Hebrews to the Septuagint translation of Deuteronomy 32:43. I had assumed that it had such, especially a a footnote to Deuteronomy 32:43 since the 1951-1960 NWT and the 1984 Reference NWT have such, but my assumption was incorrect.

26

JULY 15TH STUDY EDITION :"If ever that evil slave..." page 24

by raymond frantz in

box on page 24 of the july 15th titled :"if ever the evil slave....".

jesus has placed the weightiest of responsibilities on the faithful and discreet slave-namely,overseeing the domestics and giving out spiritual food atthe proper time.

jesus knew that those with greater responsibility have greater accountability.

Disillusioned JW

Hi Vanderhoven7. I became a strong/positive atheist about 12 years ago and thus I disagree with most of the teachings of the Bible Students movement, as well as the WTS/JWs and the all the other Christian religions/churches/denominations/sects/cults. I made the post to show that Russell did not think up the dates and predictions on his own, but obtained them from Barbour. I also made the post to support my conclusion that Russell was sincere in regards to those teachings and not evil, but I don't agree with those teachings of Russell and the Bible Students.

Since I am now an atheist I no longer believe that Jesus ever was a heavenly Christ and I don't believe that Jesus had a second presence or second coming, though I do know that the NT teaches that Jesus is a heavenly Christ. I believe that If Jesus ever existed as a human, as a historical person, he died and remained dead and will never live again. I now strongly believe (based upon my personal observations and experiences and my knowledge of science) in scientific naturalism, not supernaturalism.

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

Fisherman that is fine if you don't want to rehash matters in reply to me and I even am glad you don't want to want rehash matters to me. That is largely because I no longer agree with much of the WTS' so-called scholarship. I have adopted some of the scholarship of evangelicals, of theologically liberal biblical scholars, and even some agnostic scholars and some atheist scholars (such as of Bart Denton Ehrman, who is an agnostic atheist scholar and former fundamentalist Christian).

My post wasn't just addressed to you but also to the others in this topic thread who say that Jesus is Michael the Archangel.

I am familiar with many of the WTS' arguments since I was raised as a JW from infancy, was baptized as a JW in the early 1980s while a teenager, became a ministerial servant at age 19 in the latter 1980s shortly after entering university in pursuit a Bachelor of Science degree (which I later obtained), and years later even gave some Sunday public talks while being a ministerial servant. I also was a regular pioneer for nearly 3 years. But, in the year 1995 I started becoming seriously disillusioned with the WTS/JW religion, and eventually (in about 2010) I became a positive/strong atheist.

My primary point in this topic thread was not that Jesus is God (though I did comment on two verses seemingly claiming that Jesus is God) or equal to God, but to show that the Letter to the Hebrews very clearly makes the case that Jesus is no angel and thus is not Michael the Archangel, even if that case contradicts some other parts of the Bible (and with Philo of Alexandria). The Bible does contradict itself at times.

In my prior post I said that in Hebrews Paul quoted the OT, but I probably shouldn't have said that Paul was one who made the quote. The WT (and some other Christian groups, as well as the title used in the KJV) had taught me that Paul wrote Hebrews, but while I was an independent Christian I learned that modern critical scholars of the Bible say that the author of Hebrews is anonymous. The ARV and ASV, which are translated from better and older manuscripts than those used by the KJV, do not say "Paul" in the title of the Letter to the Hebrews.

103

Jesus is Michael the Archangel

by Fisherman in

only jesus has the power and authority to defeat satan and kick him out of heaven:.

“now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our god and the authority of his christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our god.”.

Disillusioned JW

For those who believe that the Bible reveals that Jesus is the Archangel or any other angel, how do you reconcile that belief with Hebrews chapter one?

Notice that Hebrews 1:4 says that the Son has become better than the angels. How can Jesus be angel, even the Archangel Michael, if Jesus has become better than ALL the angels?

Note that Hebrews 1:6 says that ALL of God's angels are to worship (or do obeisance) to God's Firstborn Son. [Note that in Hebrews 1:6 Paul is quoting from the Septuagint translation of Deuteronomy 32:43 (which is in harmony with the manuscripts found at Qumran by the Dead Sea, in contrast to the Masoretic Hebrew text). For examples of the quote from the Septuagint, see the footnote to Deuteronomy 32:43 in the 1951-1960 NWT, the 1971 NWT, and in the 1984 Reference NWT (and also the scripture cross-reference to the LXX in the 1951-1960, 1971, and 1984 editions of the NWT) and notice that it says "let all the angels of God worship him" - they do not say "do obeisance" in the footnote for that verse. The Augmented Third Edition of The New Oxford Annotated Bible edition of the NRSV (which says "all you gods" in Deut. 32:43) says "All you gods, the divine council (v. 8n.; Ps 29.1), probably removed from the received Heb text because of the conflict with monotheism (see v v. 8-9n.)." This is one of the evidences that the NT writers relied more upon the wording of the Greek Septuagint (and/or Hebrew texts consistent the Qumran scrolls) instead of the received/traditional Massretic Hebrew text. As a result, Christian Bibles probably should be translating their OT from the Greek Septuagint instead of the Massoretic Hebrew text.]

Notice that 1:7-8 make a contrast between angels and the Son. Contrast the NWT translation of Hebrews 1:8 with that of the KJV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, and other Bibles. Read Psalms 45:6-7 in the NWT and compare that with the translation of those verses in the KJV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, and other Bibles. Most of the non-NWT English Bibles instead of saying "God is your throne" say "Your throne, O God". [However at Psalms 45:6 the REB does say "God has enthroned you" instead, but at Hebrews 1:8 it does say "Your throne, O God".]

How do you explain 2:5 (in 1984 NWT) which says "it was not angels that God subjected the inhabited earth to come"?