Jesus and Michael

[Space Merchant]

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

WT have interesting answer, statement on question. Interesting? YES, because John 1:1 gave INFORMATION that Jesus is/was WORD ( "Word" as name or as title or both?) in his prehuman existence --- NOT MICHAEL The archangel :)))).

Indeed, Jesus is the Word because he is the Prophet of whom God puts His Word in and such applies to the Christ because he is a Prophet.

The Word is God because it is God's Spoken Word. Jesus is the Word because he speaks God's Spoken Word, professes the Father. The Word is God because the Word itself originated with God, not Jesus mainly if you understand John's Introductory and what is seen in Deuteronomy and Isaiah.

As for gods/godlike ones, God the Father refers to His children as such, in heaven and on earth, Jesus is in that same category and even quoted the law in John chapter 10, Apostle Paul himself also made reference to the Most High calling his children gods/godlike ones, and in Jesus case, it is applied to the Jews. So the JWs position on The Word (the flesh named Jesus) is correct, Jesus is refereed to as a god, he is not God, for this god, also called the Word, speaks/professes The Word, that is of God as seen in the beginning.

What some also fail to believe is that they ignore the fact of what the Light means and of whom it is referring to, and John the Baptist, for we know John himself was not even existing in the Genesis Act of Creation.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

WORD have Ultimate status that is much, much higher then just of angel, even archangel status is. Or does some of you think that archangel was somehow participated in creation of life and all that existing, as Word did? 

Yes because prior to his resurrection, God has made Jesus Lord and exalted him above the angels, according to Apostle Paul, even with this higher authority and power, Jesus is still refereed to as the Word, just as he is still refereed to as the Christ/Messiah.

The Bible only speaks of one Archangel, and that is Michael, even before that this one Archangel had existed for there are clues in the Old Testament.Plus it is clear that Jesus was not Jesus at all, for God sent an angel to have the child named Jesus, we knowing Jesus is a Prince even before he was on earth, it is safe to say he was indeed the one who was sent and before that he was just working by his Father's side, being the only one of whom God took high delight in and the like.

As for the Word, it would depend on what you are referring to, Jesus or that of God's Spoken Word that is the Word, of which we see in the Genesis Act of Creation.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

If WT said Jesus is Michael, why i have never hear or read that WT said Word is Michael???

Probably because they are making it know and professing Jesus' role on earth rather than his role in Heaven. Jesus is only known as the Word because he professes God's purpose and will - that is, if you paid attention to what God himself had said in the Old Testament and that of those who profess the coming of the Prophet sent by God, God's Son. That being said, Jesus/Michael is refereed to as The Word of God (The Word) in Revelations as well.

I am pretty sure WT knows that Jesus/Michael, is the Word, this is but a snippet of what they have said:

In his prehuman existence Jesus was called “the Word.” (Joh 1:1) He also had the personal name Michael. By retaining the name Jesus after his resurrection (Ac 9:5), “the Word” shows that he is identical with the Son of God on earth. His resuming his heavenly name Michael and his title (or name) “The Word of God” (Re 19:13) ties him in with his prehuman existence. The very name Michael, asking as it does, “Who Is Like God?” points to the fact that Jehovah God is without like, or equal, and that Michael his archangel is his great Champion or Vindicator.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Who was in the beginning?? Michael or Word? According to this Bible text of course.

The Word, if you take into account of John's Introductory, as well as Mark's, being identical to that of Genesis 1:1. God's Word was in the beginning because he spoke everything into existence, in combination with his great limitless power. The Light John refers to was indeed God's Son for Jesus is indeed the Light of this World, in addition, he is refereed to as well as the morning star.

Yes according to the Bible, only if you take everything into context, for anyone can read John 1:1 and ignore the verses after it, anyone can just read John 1:1 and not make an effort to see the cross references and passages that makes such a verse understandable, it comes to a point where even the non religious have to correct those of mainstream Christendom on this matter.

In the end, people can say they read the Bible everyday but remain ignorant to context, such ones will also not make the effort to study and realize what a verse means, example would be the captured women, to which some today refer to as sex slaves or that of cannibalism, people will read into the passages and not take in context, thus, not knowing what such passages mean or as to what came about of such, for the answer, to be brief, is the sex slave one is due to vengeance and it is not what the modern mind of men think vs Bible times, for the women were not cursed compared to their original captors. The other was due to a great famine, the reason as to why cannibalism was even present, in the end, such ones had quite the outcome. Not taking things into context with research only makes one not aware of what a passage even means, even to the point of rejecting half and or all of the Old Testament or saying that Apostle Paul was not a follower of Jesus, but of Satan. Therefore, we have to really understand what John 1:1 means otherwise the one would fit the category of Bible readers who are not serious about context and research. Only those who take the Bible serious can tackle such passages.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Surely John would named Him (Word , God or god with The or A, what ever you like) as Michael if he was been under inspiration of holy ghost, spirit while he was writing verses.

One answer is wrong. Or both are wrong? :))))  

Well the Septuagint and Coptic Text gives you a very obvious clue to John's Introductory - check the cross-references and see what God said to His people regarding the one who is to come who will speak His Word.

Last I check, Jesus had the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as soon as he got out of the water during Baptism, so of course he had the Holy Spirit as well as the works and hat he says not being of His own, but of the Father, for the Father abides in Jesus, and in True Christians.

John also knew the law of the Jews, just as Jesus have, since Jesus was a born Jew, and just like Paul, in addition to others. So it is no surprise John knows who God is, John knowing who Jesus is, those who followed Jesus, moreover, John clear awareness of the practices of such ones like the Jews and Samaritans and others.

The real question is, if you accept what John is truly trying to convey rather than accepting something without bearing any understanding of what is being said. This also goes for those who do not truly understand the Revelation of John also.

[Malum Intellectus]

16 hours ago, DefenderOTT said:

It would be interesting to note, the extent by which some millerites thought as well as some Advents in support of Miller's movement. Even though some of those Advents like Barbour, Storr, and others that quite couldn’t agree with Miller, did find themselves seeking, further, answer in which they found Russell as eager to learn scripture wholeheartedly, then, what they had been taught.

Yes, the beginning of reinterpretation of scripture was an interesting event. I guess there are some that need to use outside sources in order to accept their own publications. But a good researcher becomes agreeable. I have no problems with the Watchtower interpretation since they seem to make adjustments as new evidence is found, including linguistics. The majority of Christianity is satisfied with what has been written with their own old interpretation.

I also don’t place any faith in “Wikipedia” Web Encyclopedia, since anyone can edit any page. When they started the program, there were a lot of false entries that have taken decades to clean. That in itself doesn’t mean, everything has been corrected. However, they still encourage people to edit without fear. Yet any information is probative. It just depends on the value you place on it. The Watchtower has done a wonderful job with its publications, and Bible, knowledge. They, should open an accredited Bible School of Bible Knowledge?

Meanwhile, this might interest you, since Jesus is known by many names. Emmanuel, Master, logos (the word), Son of God, Son of Man, Son of David, Lamb of God, Last Adam, King of the Jews, Rabbani, Teacher, Good Shepard, etc.

Literary Origins of the Archangel’s Legendary Roles
Hear Michael speaking! I am he who stands in the sight of God every hour. As the Lord lives, in whose sight I stand, I do not stop
one day or one night praying incessantly for the human race, and I indeed pray for those who are on the earth; but they do not cease
committing iniquity and fornications, and they do not do any good while they are placed on earth; and you have consumed in vanity the time in which you ought to have repented.1 The Apocalypse of Paul (Visio Pauli)

St. Michael the archangel appears by name in scripture only five times: three times in the Old Testament (Daniel 10:13, 21 and 12:1) and twice in the New Testament (Revelation 12:7–9 and the Epistle of Jude 9). Despite this relative paucity of references to the archangel in canonical literature, there exists a vast store of legendary material from the
Middle Ages concerning the archangel’s roles in the unfolding of human history. In this chapter, I explore the literary origins of St. Michael’s medieval legendary roles by examining the representations of the archangel in biblical and extra-biblical literature.
The development of the archangel’s roles in this literature as healer and guardian, intercessor, psychopomp, and warrior-angel accounts for his popular appeal in early medieval England. Indeed, the representations of the archangel in the literature reviewed in this chapter can be seen as having served as the principal quarry for early medieval English writers in their representations of St. Michael the archangel. Many of the texts of the biblical era, though by no means all, which refer to St. Michael fall under the genre of “apocalypse” in their form, character, and/or content.2 Often conveying a message of the imminent end of the world, apocalyptic literature is collectively, in history and the future promise of the heavenly realm. The implicit conflict of the apocalyptic impulse is played out in what Bernard McGinn has called “the triple eschatological pattern of [present] crisis – [imminent] judgment – [future] vindication.”3 In this tripartite paradigm, it is the hope for the vindication of salvation, the transcendence of death, that provides the believer with the strength to endure the present crisis. In the context of this eschatological drama St. Michael commands a significant presence in the literature of the Old and New Testament eras.

Although St. Michael’s character and roles appear nearly fully developed in early Hebrew literature (especially 1 Enoch and Daniel), there is a significant shift of emphasis between the literatures of the Old Testament and those of the New Testament. In the biblical and extra-biblical literature of the Old Testament, St. Michael strides across the world stage in the past, present, and future. His intercessory powers
span the three periods of human time, and his efficacy extends into the eternity of God’s time. In the canonical books of the New Testament, however, St. Michael virtually withdraws from the stage of the present. Instead, Christ is proclaimed the sole mediator, “whose saving accomplishments . . . embrace past, present, and future,” on behalf of Christians in the New Testament.5 St. Michael’s appearance in Revelation 12:7–9 underscores his withdrawal from the present, while emphasizing his dual roles in the past and future: expelling the fallen angels at the beginning of time and defeating the forces of evil at the end of time.

 

The thing to note, not confusing the meaning of each definition within the names. A good example would be? Yahweh, being Baal. While there were certain Hebrews that ultimately worshipped Baal? That in no way diminishes who the real God of Israel was and is, and what his modern pronunciation should sound like.

[Srecko Sostar]

3 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

Jesus is the Word because he is the Prophet of whom God puts His Word

Bible is full of prophets ... and many of them spoke His Word.

 

3 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

The Word is God because it is God's Spoken Word

The Word is described as god, God. Michael never has been described as god or God. Prophetic Word or word in Isaiah described one person, child that is born as;   Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. So who is Jesus? Who is Michael the archangel? Who was in the beginning? God Jesus or God Word or not God Michael? Was Michael first and last? 

Michael was "just" one of the chief princes, according to Daniel book. Never titled as one of "gods", but one of chief princes. So who are, what are the names of other chiefs?? When, where and why Michael get new position, new title as Archangel?

3 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

God's Word was in the beginning because he spoke everything into existence, in combination with his great limitless power.

Do you talking about JHVH VOICE (spoken words without mediator)? Guess yes, because talking about someone with limitless power. So what was the role of the Word (prehuman Light, Jesus, Michael, or who ever) if not creating with his partner, father, God? "And God said; Let be the light... let be the earth...." Was His voice created the light, earth...and all other or was his Word (Son) working job to be done? Text said all was created to him, of him, trough him". 

For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

3 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

category of Bible readers

and categories of translations too. NWT or other translations have errors. Well, errors came not only because of our misunderstanding while reading, but because of what we reading too. 

 

3 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

Yes because prior to his resurrection, God has made Jesus Lord and exalted him above the angels

If Word is prehuman Jesus, as you agree he is, and as WT agree he is.... then He was already above all creations and above all angels. Do not understand "prior to his resurrection, God has made Jesus Lord and exalted him above the angels"? If he (Jesus) is Michael the archangel, then he was above angels too, because he is ARCHangel. Who was exalted above angels? Jesus human or Michael the prince?? 

Verses state: "Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place, and gave Him the name above all names, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,…

Text said that in the NAME JESUS all must knee. NOT In the NAME MICHAEL. So if Michael came to earth to be Jesus and then Jesus go back in heaven to be Michael again, as WT teach, then where is LORD (Jesus) who was exalted by God and all angels and all chief princes must knee to him, even archangel Michael also must bow down or worship his KING . Because Jesus is KING (was born as King) and Michael is just Archangel. I think all is about Hierarchy.  

But as JTR wisely said,  "It's intellectually interesting ... in small doses ..."     :))))

 

[JW Insider]

On 7/7/2018 at 1:12 PM, Space Merchant said:

The Word is God because it is God's Spoken Word. Jesus is the Word because he speaks God's Spoken Word, professes the Father. The Word is God because the Word itself originated with God, not Jesus mainly if you understand John's Introductory and what is seen in Deuteronomy and Isaiah.

This is a very legitimate way to read John 1:1, although it is not the way we read it as JWs. It would not make much difference if it were read this way. I see a possible small problem with the way we read it, but it doesn't mean we are reading it wrong. I think the main thing that some Witnesses do (which is not the intention of the verse) is making a big emphasis on the words "A god," and then saying, SEE?!?!?! -- It only says "A" god, therefore Jesus can't be THE [Almighty] God. This is a true statement, based on other scriptures. But this scripture is going as far as possible to RAISE the level of divinity and near "universal" authority by which Christians should understand Jesus -- and it's a misuse of the intention of the verse to use it to prove he is LESS. It is only by Jesus that we can begin to understand the full range of the power and authority of the Father. Jesus therefore allows us to "SEE" God. 

I know it's a little off topic for this discussion, so I'll wait until another John 1:1 discussion.

[Evacuated]

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

it's a misuse of the intention of the verse to use it to prove he is LESS.

I agree. Underestimating the position and role of Jesus  is definitely a hazard for those who seek to combat the attempts made by those who seek to overestimate it. The Scriptures were simply not written for that purpose, as stated by John the apostle: 

"But these have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and because of believing, you may have life by means of his name." John 20:31

[Space Merchant]

9 hours ago, JW Insider said:

This is a very legitimate way to read John 1:1, although it is not the way we read it as JWs. It would not make much difference if it were read this way. I see a possible small problem with the way we read it, but it doesn't mean we are reading it wrong. I think the main thing that some Witnesses do (which is not the intention of the verse) is making a big emphasis on the words "A god," and then saying, SEE?!?!?! -- It only says "A" god, therefore Jesus can't be THE [Almighty] God. This is a true statement, based on other scriptures. But this scripture is going as far as possible to RAISE the level of divinity and near "universal" authority by which Christians should understand Jesus -- and it's a misuse of the intention of the verse to use it to prove he is LESS. It is only by Jesus that we can begin to understand the full range of the power and authority if the Father. Jesus therefore allows us to "SEE" God. 

I know it's a little off topic for this discussion, so I'll wait until another John 1:1 discussion.

Indeed it is, however when I spoke of John 1:1, there was a specific passage in the Torah I was referring to of what God had made known about the one who is to come, we know this clearly as what we see in John chapter 4 when Jesus met the Samaritan woman, for he revealed himself to be that Prophet, the Messiah, the very man who speaks the Word of God.

And I do not think anyone is reading it wrong, however there are those thinking this is the silver bullet to making Jesus out to be God himself, such ones show a total disregard to not just the cross-references, but of what God himself said in the Old Testament.

That is also true for Any man who had seen Jesus had seen the Father in terms of the things Jesus did. God is Life and Jesus fully expressed that Life in the words he spoke and the works that he had done. God is Truth and Jesus fully expressed that Truth by everything he had said and and in regards to his actions, etc. Jesus is indeed Divine, but he problem is such ones will attack others for not seeing Jesus as God and automatically pull the "You Deny Jesus being God/Trinity, you deny the Christ" card, a hat-trick that gets old fast.

When I get back to my main computer with all my notes and research, I will probably post another gospel of John thread in Bible Discussion about John 1:1, for there is a lot I can say about this verse, but the focus on my last response was based on w cross-reference to John 1:1 regarding what God the Father had said as seen in the Old Testament.

[Space Merchant]

On 7/7/2018 at 4:44 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

Bible is full of prophets ... and many of them spoke His Word.

(bear in mind, for some reason my response tends to be all bold randomly half way through)

Indeed, the scriptures does inform us of many prophets of whom God had communicated with in many ways and occasions (Hebrews 1:1), however in the Torah (Hebrew Old Testament), God speaks of the one who is coming, this specific Prophet who has not been known to the people yet, the very one who He, God, will put his words in this Prophet’s mouth. This same prophet is sent by God, and speaks of what is to come regarding the final day, for God has spoken to us in a Son (Hebrews 1:2)

Now in the Torah we will go to Deuteronomy, more specifically, Deuteronomy 18:15-19, with the focus being more on verse 18.

A New Prophet like Moses

• (15) “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen— (16) just as you desired of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’ (17) And the Lord said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken. (18) I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. (19) And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.

Cross-references: Exodus 34:28, Numbers 12:3, Matthew 4:1, 2, 11:29, John 5:46

Now, there is no question, that Moses was indeed the meekest of men on the face of the earth during his time, but there would be one who is like him, a new prophet who is said to be like Moses himself, the very prophet who will also act as an in-between for God and men, for these men will speak to those of mankind.

The Word that God had put in this prophet’s mouth is in regards of the promise of what the Kingdom will bring that of Salvation and revealing God’s Purpose and Will and what that implies.

This prophet is indeed the one sent by God, the flesh/man, born of a woman into the Law, named Jesus, for we know of this when Mary had been visited by Gabriel, an Angel of God, Joseph, Son of David, was also informed of this news via dream for he was suspect about Mary’s pregnancy as well as what he knows about what the Law of the Land is all about (Matthew 1:20-23, 25, Luke 1:31-33, 35, 2:21). Moreover, Christ Jesus, was indeed the one Prophet that even Moses had spoken of.

We also have to take into account of what Jesus says on John 5:45-47,  which can be pointed back to Deuteronomy in the Torah:

Witnesses to Jesus

• (45) Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. (46) For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. (47) But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

So it is no surprise that we see the example in John chapter 4, for we know that the Samaritans, who follow the Torah with hardcore intent, awaited the Prophet, for we know this by the conversation Jesus had with the Samaritan woman, and eventually the reaction of the Samaritan people themselves.

• John 6:14 - When the people saw the sign that he had done, they said, “This is indeed the Prophet who is to come into the world!”

 

On 7/7/2018 at 4:44 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

The Word is described as god, God. Michael never has been described as god or God. Prophetic Word or word in Isaiah described one person, child that is born as;   Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. So who is Jesus? Who is Michael the archangel? Who was in the beginning? God Jesus or God Word or not God Michael? Was Michael first and last? 

Michael was "just" one of the chief princes, according to Daniel book. Never titled as one of "gods", but one of chief princes. So who are, what are the names of other chiefs?? When, where and why Michael get new position, new title as Archangel?

What you fail to see is that God the Father refer to all his children as gods, godlike ones, those in Heaven as well as those on Earth – gods/godlike ones (elohims and or deities ), in addition to what the passages says about sons of The Most High.

We know this for what we see in Psalms 82:1-6

Rescue the Weak and Needy

A Psalm of Asaph.

• (1) God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment: (2) “How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Selah (3) Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute. (4) Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.” (5) They have neither knowledge nor understanding, they walk about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken. (6) I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you;

Here we find out that:

• [A] These godlike ones are in the midst of God the Father and
• God himself refers to such ones as gods/godlike ones.

Verse 1 literally reads out God (El) takes His stands in the assembly of the gods (Elohim); He judges among the gods (Elohim).

Since all bene elohims are of Elohim, El Shaddai, and come into existence because of elohim, these sons of God are elohims, deities, gods, etc (whatever floats your boat)

Sons of God, the gods/godlike ones is a reference to us, those of us of mankind, and judges, and to focused on the scriptures itself, it is also a reference to human judges of Israel.

Therefore, even the Archangel, being of God, is indeed a god, godlike one, and while on earth, this applies also, for it is read that the Christ himself even quoted what was written about the Law

• John 10:34, 35 – (34) Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? (35) If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken—

The Law of that Jesus spoke of, the one that is written is of the Hebrew Old Testament, the verse described above, Psalms 82:6, in addition, Jesus is known to speak of the entire Hebrew Scriptures, not just The Law of Moses alone, the same can be said of John 12:34 and 15:25 in regards to Jesus speaking of what is written.

We also see what Apostle Paul had said in 1 Corinthians 8:5

• For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”—

At Exodus 21:6; 22:8-9, the judges were called gods (elohim). However, some translations obscure this fact by translating elohim as judges while others have translated the word as God which violates the context of the passage itself. The main purpose here in this passage is that these judges represented God. So if an Israelite came before this human judge, Elohim, they were then appearing before God Himself not because these judges were God Himself but because these human authorities were God's representatives and or a Spokesman and as His representatives they were exercising His authority in His name. As such, these human judges were Elohim, that is, gods. We can also see Exodus 4:16, Moses was told that he was to serve as God to both Aaroan and to Pharaoh.

So it is no surprise that even the Jews know of such a Law that exists even to this day.

Now as for Isaiah 9:6

• For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

small quote: Hebrews often name their babies in praise to some attribute of God at work in their life.

We see in the scriptures, as well as evidence via the practices and customs of the Jews, that such names are given to people, as well as places, and these names don't mean that these people are places are therefore God. It also show us that the one who is the Christ, The Messiah, would bear this name because he represents the Eternal Father and is the Mighty God's wonderful counsel since it was God who set things in motion, i.e. The one to raised up the Messiah to carry out His purpose and will. In short, YHWH of Hosts makes it all happen.

Very soon I will make a Bible Discussion on this verse when I get through some verses in John, Acts and Corinthians.

As for Princes (Nobles, Kings, Lords, Leaders) If you read onward in the book of Daniel, Daniel was being specific of who the Great Prince actually is, we cannot choose one point and forget the other when trying to piece together context of a passage and or belief.

On 7/7/2018 at 4:44 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

Do you talking about JHVH VOICE (spoken words without mediator)? Guess yes, because talking about someone with limitless power. So what was the role of the Word (prehuman Light, Jesus, Michael, or who ever) if not creating with his partner, father, God? "And God said; Let be the light... let be the earth...." Was His voice created the light, earth...and all other or was his Word (Son) working job to be done? Text said all was created to him, of him, trough him". 

For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

You do not get the point, God’s Spoken Word in the very beginning, Moses did not exist, nor did any spark of life on the nothingness of the earth’s earliest state for the earth was formless and void – literally. Darkness consumed the formless earth as well as its deep watery seas. After reading the verse 2 verses of Genesis, look at what the next verse, 3, and onward, “And God said” etc. etc. etc. and the cause of what he had said and the result, for instance, the Bible in the beginning said the earth was literally shrouded in Darkness, God simply spoke about light and there you have it or perhaps the living creatures that roam the earth, dwell in the depths of the sea and fly in the heavens.

It is very obvious and known by many that the Word by which God created all things in Genesis was His spoken Word. The Scriptures tell us that the Genesis creation was accomplished by means of God's SPOKEN Word, so I do not see how you missed that in John’s Introduction of the gospel.

As for the man named Jesus, in his pre-existence, he was with his Father during the Genesis Act of Creation, for God had made things through him, which is very clear in the Bible, in chapter 1 of Genesis, verse 26, God was clearly with His Son when they made man, molded in both likeness and image, the very reasons why the cross-references are clear (Prov 8:30, John 1:3, Colossians 1:16).

The same sense as a Father works through His Son to teach him how to craft and or teach, make him a better man, it is the same sense with God and his only-begotten Son, the very reason the Bible says God takes delight in His Son and that Jesus himself was with his Father, marveling at his works and what God the Father had done.

That being said, God's Spoken Word is in full display in regards to creation as seen in the very first chapter of the Bible (The Genesis Act of Creation).

On 7/7/2018 at 4:44 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

and categories of translations too. NWT or other translations have errors. Well, errors came not only because of our misunderstanding while reading, but because of what we reading too. 

You do realize I am not talking about Bible translation, the category of Bible readers I am referring to is individuals who read but do not accept fully of what the Bible says and or lacks to apply context. Now, if we are going to talk about Biblical errors vs. the NWT, I guess we can start with the hypocrisy shown by mainstream Christendom who attack Jehovah’s Witness, in addition to literally 99% of the attack being directed to Non-Trinitarians as well as Muslims to read the Bible, sure we can get into that for its been a decade since I have researched and spoke of Bible translations, inspired and uninspired verses, forgeries, etc. as well as why real Christians and even Muslims accept what the Oldest source says, which does not include Acts 8:37 and a dozen of other verses compared to the mainstream who accepts verses like Acts 8:37 and the other ones, the same people who attack others for removed Bible verses that have already been exposed to be 100% uninspired.

For this is a quote regarding the attack on JWs regarding Acts 7:59 and John 3:16:

It is disturbing that many Trinitarians have the nerve to whine and complain, and rant and rave, about the Jehovah's Witnesses doing this type of thing in their New World Translation and then turn right around and hypocritically approve of the very same type of thing in the KJV translation. If you have a KJV translation, the word "God" should be in italics (or brackets) and the KJV translators do inform their readers that words in italics (or brackets) were not present in the original Greek manuscripts. However, the Jehovah's Witnesses make their readers equally aware but for some reason Trinitarian apologists don't seem to think the Witnesses have been granted the same approval for such insertions as the KJV Trinitarians have been granted. It is blatantly misleading to add this word here, especially in view of the fact that many readers may overlook the italics convention, or do not even know about it, or blindly trust the translators to be giving them good information. The fact that this word is there in print, without any merit whatsoever, confuses and misleads the reader. It is an appalling example of adding to the Bible where it is obviously unwarranted and a device implemented only to promote a Trinitarian agenda. One truly wonders how anyone who approves of such things can suppose they are doing God a favor by distorting the very words he inspired and thereby misrepresent Him and so such things in His name.

End quote (mind you, this quote came from a man who is very neutral with JWs, moreover, he follows no denomination, just adheres to the Bible, but has common ground with those who actually has and or strives to be close to what is true)

But if you want to post a New World Translation errors that you claim, so be it, all I can say any claim you make is solely from a Trinitarian point of view and has been refuted by many, many, people over the years who know of the oldest source. You'll have to make another thread for that though.

On 7/7/2018 at 4:44 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

If Word is prehuman Jesus, as you agree he is, and as WT agree he is.... then He was already above all creations and above all angels. Do not understand "prior to his resurrection, God has made Jesus Lord and exalted him above the angels"? If he (Jesus) is Michael the archangel, then he was above angels too, because he is ARCHangel. Who was exalted above angels? Jesus human or Michael the prince?? 

Verses state: "Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place, and gave Him the name above all names, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,…

Text said that in the NAME JESUS all must knee. NOT In the NAME MICHAEL. So if Michael came to earth to be Jesus and then Jesus go back in heaven to be Michael again, as WT teach, then where is LORD (Jesus) who was exalted by God and all angels and all chief princes must knee to him, even archangel Michael also must bow down or worship his KING . Because Jesus is KING (was born as King) and Michael is just Archangel. I think all is about Hierarchy.  

But as JTR wisely said,  "It's intellectually interesting ... in small doses ..."     :))))

Yes, if we are talking about the one who professes God’s Word, the flesh that is The Word, of course he had pre-existed, came to earth welcomed by some, hated by others and eventually killed, God took him out of the pangs of death on the 3^rd day, exalted him as soon as he ascended then yes.

Indeed, Jesus was up there, but he could not do as much in the presence of his Father, like rebuking Satan when it came to Moses corpse, to what Satan had in store, that I do not want to know, but God’s Son did not want to overstep authority of which he did not have. Only later on, after being risen, God’s Son, now sitting at His right hand, the one given authority and power after being raised out of death, etc.

God did make Jesus Lord, the Bible says so Acts 2:36, God was the one who also made Jesus the Christ, the same Christ that many awaited for, in ancient times and now present day.

Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

Such has taken place in the period of Jesus’ death via crucifixion and onward to His resurrection, and what took place when Jesus ascended to heaven after his final meet up with his followers? God exalted him, placed Jesus at his right hand for Jesus, being His only-begotten, became man and represented the Father, spoke of him and what God’s Kingdom will bring for mankind in the future as seen in his ministry from Matthew-John, died for our sins and enabling the New Covenant for he had tasted death for us, and was actually dead until God himself brought the Christ back to life, glorified, appearing like a Spirit, mainly to his followers who ran into him later on, as well as Thomas who didn’t believe Jesus had risen, etc.

Yes, Jesus is indeed above the angels, but you forget what the term Archangel means. Also we should not also forget that there is but one who is the Leader of God’s Army, the same Army that battled with Satan and his demons.

For example, God’s chosen one is not just a King, but a mighty warrior, a leader, noblemen who takes charge. The Bible says that Michael and his angels battled with the dragon as seen in Revelation 12:7 as well as describing the same battle, but saying Jesus, seen in Revelation 19:14-16. Would be kind of silly to say and or think Satan had been battled twice, kicked out of Heaven twice when the Bible makes it clear the battle was only one time and the leader of the demons and the leader of God’s Army were the ones in conflict.

There is one army leader that God position to lead the angels into combat, eventually  H’Armageddon, the same one who cast out Satan from Heaven in a confrontation we only read about, but in reality must have been long and quite brutal.

No, Jesus was no longer human when he ascended into Heaven, and last I check flesh cannot enter the Spirit Realm that is Heaven that is absurd; you do not hear much about Michael until the action is revealed in Revelations.

As for the next response, that is fairly easy, because the one who has been anointed by God, the one who is the firstborn out of the dead and the first of the fruits – is the Messianic King, God’s chosen one.

Yes, it says Jesus, but you forget that God sent Gabriel to inform Mary to name the child Jesus, clearly in his pre-existence his name was not Jesus at all until he was in the womb of Mary. That passage also didn’t say Immanuel, and yet we can freely speak of this name in the same sense that we speak of Jesus, but not of Jesus’ pre-existing name, Michael.

 Technically it is seen this way, the Son of God, the only-begotten, was with His Father and clearly didn’t want to overstep his authority in the presence of his Father mainly with the whole Moses’ corpse situation. When sent to earth he was given the name Jesus (Yehoshua/Yeshua) as well as Immanuel (Emmanuel), as well as being called the Horn of Salvation. Jesus eventually became the Christ/Messiah, who was the Prophet of whom was spoken of the Old Testament, similarly, Jesus himself also made this known when he read the Scroll of Isaiah. Eventually he was accused and had been killed via crucifixion, risen on the 3^rd day by God the Father, eventually ascending into heaven assuming his role by his Father, with his position and has been made Lord, exalted, given the name above every other name, as well as authority and power. With that, God will judge through his Son and resurrect people by a great multitude, as for the wicked, God’s chosen one will come to exact judgment with God’s Army, and he will be carrying a Sword, coming in the name of his Father. The list goes on but I this is just brief.

The only reason people cannot see Jesus is Michael is for one thing, Angel. But the hypocrisy is they say Jesus is a messenger who represents God (Shaliah Principle/Angelic Agency) aka Malak. In addition, they see clearly in scripture even Paul refers to Jesus as an Angel.

But many hold this view of Michael/Jesus, however, some seem to be closer to what the connection is vs those who do not, the most absurd of some belief is saying Michael is God, which is false.

If you think of it as such, what you say about him being born as a King, that is understandable, for it further proves the point of Jesus’ position when he pre-existed, as a human, when risen, returned to haven and onward.

[Srecko Sostar]

On 7/8/2018 at 11:46 AM, Space Merchant said:

That is also true for Any man who had seen Jesus had seen the Father in terms of the things Jesus did. God is Life and Jesus fully expressed that Life in the words he spoke and the works that he had done. God is Truth and Jesus fully expressed that Truth by everything he had said and and in regards to his actions, etc

If we want to stick to Bible text and his own word, he said about self: "I am life, truth, way, bread, door, light, wine, water, rock ... " 

...so if translation are credible, he not only "expressed" those qualities, but all of that are his essence, his being, his self. 

[Srecko Sostar]

58 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment

...so all angels with princes and chief princes and archangel are in fact - GODS :)) Ok, and what with that? Humans are gods, angels are gods. I now that verse you cited. If they all are gods that not explained Is angel Michael became Jesus the Human or not.   

[Srecko Sostar]

1 hour ago, Space Merchant said:

you do not hear much about Michael until the action is revealed in Revelations.?

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him" ... not to Michael  that is firm state from Revelation 1:1

If we believe that this book was written in the end of first century, and Jesus the Human was resurrected in the year 33, ...so why he still have the name Jesus if his heavenly name, original name and identity is Michael the Archangel??? 

[Srecko Sostar]

1 hour ago, Space Merchant said:

Technically it is seen this way, the Son of God, the only-begotten, was with His Father and clearly didn’t want to overstep his authority in the presence of his Father mainly with the whole Moses’ corpse situation.

I do not think the same. If Jesus is Michael the Archangel and vice versa,  he have all authority over every single angel. Devil is also angel and his status, position is inferior in respect to same person identity, no matter if you named him Jesus or Michael, because you claim how both name are point out in fact the same person. 

Jesus the Human, rebuked satan few times while in desert and finally command devil to go away from him, so your arguments are weak. So, if Michael is the same person as Jesus, how come that he as Archangel in heaven can not done more than as Human on earth? 

[Srecko Sostar]

14 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

 

 

Dear Srecko Sostar

 

 

 

How should, this be viewed by your understanding of the authority Christ has in Heaven and had on earth.

 

 

Revelation 12:7-12 New King James Version (NKJV)

 

 

Satan Thrown Out of Heaven

 

 

 

 

 

7 And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, 8 but they [a]did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in heaven any longer. 9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

 

 

Dear Billy.

According to my present understanding i would say that Michael acting under command of his King Jesus.