Jump to content
The World News Media


Diakonos

Recommended Posts

  • Member
16 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Conquest, or on the thrown, like any Roman Emperor can announce, indoors or outdoors, I am the mighty, Caesar!!!

No, angle, just proving how wrong your point was!

 

 

But, since you can't accept when you're wrong? no further discussion needed.:D

So you reject the Biblical support I have given you so that you can continue to argue that a king announces himself. 

Like I said, sure there may have been one or two who have announced themselves, but like anything else there are exceptions to the standard. But you hold fast to the notion just because I do not agree with you. ok, you're right....sheesh. 

Shall I post this three times so that I one up your double posts for emphasis? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 7.4k
  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Jehovah has NEVER changed ... although he has changed his mind many times when entreated to do so, and he DOES "learn as he goes along". He was genuinely surprised when children were offered to t

We would assume that Michael, the archangel, became a fetus, a baby, then a toddler, then a young boy, then went through puberty, and became a young man, and then a full grown man who gave himself ove

"in Emmanuel name, amen" :)))))))))

  • Guest
Guest J.R. Ewing
7 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

Like I said, sure there may have been one or two who have announced themselves, but like anything else there are exceptions to the standard.

Gee Whiz! Good sir, are we referring to your denial on the mistake you initially made and refused to acknowledge it, the first time? In ancient time, anyone with “authority” would announce themselves to signal their superiority?

Or is it, the “fact” that even Jesus “announced” himself to a Samaritan woman, on who he really was in John 4:26.

26Jesus answered, “I who speak to you am He.”

That was also the message from the apostles.

1 John 1:5

5And this is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you: God is light, and in Him, there is no darkness at all.

 

Were the apostles, not ambassadors of Christ? by Jesus commission and God anointing them with the holy spirit?

 

Now ask yourself? Why should anyone “believe” a person that can’t even accept the error of the Pharisees? As for your “LOL”, I think you just proved the point for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
17 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Gee Whiz! Good sir, are we referring to your denial on the mistake you initially made and refused to acknowledge it, the first time? In ancient time, anyone with “authority” would announce themselves to signal their superiority?

who is this "we"? Do you have a mouse in your pocket or are you and Gnosis one and the same person? If any sane person were to read this thread they would see clearly that I have admitted that there may have been one or two persons who announced themselves, however the evidence shows that it is not customary for a king to do so. 

 

17 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Or is it, the “fact” that even Jesus “announced” himself to a Samaritan woman, on who he really was in John 4:26.

26Jesus answered, “I who speak to you am He.”

You are desperately grasping at straws. I can see you need some clarification on what you seem to think is your ace in the hole. Who was Jesus speaking to here in this scripture? oh yeah, one single person, a Samaritan woman. When was the last time you heard someone announce themselves with a freaking trumpet to your face when it was just you two? oh yeah, never! 

 

17 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

That was also the message from the apostles.

1 John 1:5

5And this is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you: God is light, and in Him, there is no darkness at all.

now is when I call into question your reading comprehension. Lets break this down a little and maybe you will see the error:

"And this is the message we have heard from Him"

ok, so the apostles heard something. 

"and announce to you:"

Take that "we in the first part and you get who announced the message.....the apostles announced. Last I checked the apostles were NOT the king.

17 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Were the apostles, not ambassadors of Christ? by Jesus commission and God anointing them with the holy spirit?

You have, right here, answered and confirmed my position. It is NOT THE KING who announced anything, but rather the ambassadors/servants/subjects/slaves etc. THE KING DID NOT. 

 

17 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Now ask yourself? Why should anyone “believe” a person that can’t even accept the error of the Pharisees? As for your “LOL”, I think you just proved the point for me.

Why should anyone "believe" a person who does not have reading comprehension skills necessary to discuss common sense topics? 

I'm finished discussing this with you, unless you come back with something coherent to this discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • Member

IS JESUS ‘MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL’?


Watchtower Teaching WT claims that Daniel 10:13,21; 12:1; and I Thess 4:16 teach that:

1) Jesus existed as Michael the archangel before his birth to Mary; then
2) Jesus gave up his spirit existence as an angel when he entered Mary’s womb to become a
human;
3) At the resurrection he was recreated as Michael the archangel.

They describe Christ’s progressive existence as angel, then human, then angel.

‘Michael, one of the chief princes’ (Daniel 10:13). ‘Michael your prince’ (Daniel 10:21).

‘Michael the great prince’ (Daniel 12:1). JWs think that Jesus must be Michael because of

Michael’s authority over other angels as a chief prince.
The WT teaches that Jesus Christ was Michael the archangel, who was born as a human, died
and was raised up as an archangel again. They refer to Jesus Christ as Michael the archangel.
(Watchtower, 15 Feb, 1979, p.31).

Bible Teaching:
1) Michael is ‘one of the chief princes’ (10:21), but Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son in
John 3:16. ‘Begotten’ in Greek is ‘monogenes’ meaning uniqueone of a kind. Michael
being ‘one of the chief princes’ means that he is just one among a group of chief angels.

Ask: Where is Jesus called a ‘chief Prince’ in the Bible?

Ask: Where is Jesus clearly mentioned in Daniel 10:13?

Ask: Isn’t Jesus as ‘King of kings and Lord of lords’ (Revelation 19:16) much higher in
authority than one of a group of chief princes?

2) Ask: ‘To which of the angels did God ever say ‘thou art my son’?’ (Hebrews 1:5)

3) The Bible mentions Michael the archangel five times as:

1. ‘Michael, one of the chief princes’ (Daniel 10:13)

2, ‘Michael, your prince’ (Daniel 10:21)

3. ‘Michael, the great prince’ (Daniel 12:1)

4. ‘Michael the archangel . . . durst not bring against him (the devil) a railing accusation, but said The Lord rebuke thee’ (Jude 9)

5. ‘Michael and his angels fought against the dragon’ (Revelation 12:7)

Ask: Which of these verses state that Michael is Jesus Christ? None of them.

4) The WT claims support from I Thessalonians 4:16 ‘the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call,with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet’(NWT)

Ask: If using an archangel’s voice makes Jesus an archangel, then having God’s trumpet makes Jesus to be God.

Note: I Thessalonians 4:16 doesn’t explicitly say that Jesus Himself speaks with the voice of the archangel. When Jesus comes from heaven to rapture the church from earth, He will be accompanied by Michael the archangel. It is the archangel’s voice that shouts, not Jesus’ voice. Jesus doesn’t shout, but Michael does shout. This is like what happens at the end of the seven year tribulation, when Jesus returns ‘from heaven with his mighty angels’ (II Thessalonians 1:7).

If angels accompany Christ at the end of the 7 year tribulation, then clearly Michael will accompany Christ at the rapture before the 7 year tribulation, so Michael cannot be Jesus.

5) In Jude 9, Michael did not have the authority to rebuke Satan, but Jesus did have the authority as follows: Jesus said ‘Get thee hence, Satan’ (Matthew 4:10) and ‘Get thee behind me, Satan’ (Mark 8:33)

Michael said to Satan,‘The Lord rebuke thee’, proving that the only one with the authority to rebuke Satan is God. So, Matt. 4:10 proves that Jesus Christ is the Lord God.

Ask: Since Michael could not rebuke Satan in his own authority, but Jesus could and did rebuke Satan, doesn’t that mean that Michael and Jesus are different persons?

6) All the angels (Michael included) are commanded to worship Christ. (Hebrews 1:6)

7) The writer of Hebrews asks several questions about angels and Jesus Christ, which prove them to be different persons:
i) ‘Unto which of the angels said he at any time, thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?’ (Hebrews 1:5)
ii) ‘To which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?’ (Hebrews 1:13)
iii) ‘Unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come (millennium)’ (Hebrews 1:13).
iv) ‘For verily, he took not on him the nature of angels’ (Hebrews 2:16)
v) Does Michael sustain all things by the word of his power? (See Hebrews 1:3). No!
vi) Is it right to honour Michael the archangel just as you honour the Father? (John 5:23)

? Ask: Do good angels refuse worship? (Certainly). When John fell down to worship the angel, the angel rebuked him, saying ‘See thou do it not ....worship God’. (Rev 22:8,9).

The Father commands all the angels (Michael included) to worship Christ. (Heb 1:6).

The ‘proskuneo’ worship that angels refuse to accept but say to give to God, the Father commands thissame ‘proskuneo’ worship to be given to the Son. Hence the Son cannot be an angel, but must be God. True Bible students soon discover that Jesus is no mere angel, but God. This lesson must be learnt so they may ‘honour the Son just as they honour the Father’. (John 5:23 NWT).

9) Jesus Christ is unchangeable: ‘Jesus Christ the same, yesterday and today and forever’. (Hebrews 13:8). The WT view of Jesus is that He was Michael who changed to become a man, and who at his resurrection changed back to Michael the archangel.

The Watchtower Jesus is changeable. They have a false and different Jesus.

10) Jesus Christ created all the angels, including the thrones and principalities of which Michael is a chief prince of a principality. ‘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’. (Colossians 1:16).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

Other than that, Jesus being Michael did not start with the Jehovah's Witnesses. Sheesh.

Space Merchant

You are correct. What would be the difference, about Michael in the Hebrew Bible that the majority of Christendom accepts as related?

Catholic Bible Dictionary 2009

MICHAEL (Hebrew, “Who is like God?”) The name of an archangel who appears in both the Old Testament and the New Testament (Dan 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 9; Rev 12:7). He is one of the three angels the Church venerates by name (with Gabriel and Raphael). In the book of Daniel, the angel Michael appears as the patron and protector of the nation of Israel.
He is given the title “prince” and contends with other angelic princes who look after Gentile nations (Dan 10:13, 21). He is also to play a leading role in Messianic times, when the Lord’s faithful will be delivered and raised up to eternal life (Dan 12:1–4). In the NT, reference is made to a dispute
between Michael and the devil over the body of
Moses, a story that probably relies on a Jewish apocryphal work called the Assumption of Moses (Jude 9). Finally, the book of Revelation depicts Michael as the leader of the angelic armies who expelled Satan and his minions from heaven (Rev 12:7–9).

Watchtower Reasoning 1989

Was Jesus Christ a real, historical person?

The Bible itself is the principal evidence that Jesus Christ is a historical person. The record in the Gospels is not a vague narrative of events at some unspecified time and in an unnamed location. It clearly states time and place in great detail. For an example, see Luke 3:1, 2, 21-23.

The first-century Jewish historian Josephus referred to the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.” (The Jewish Antiquities, Josephus, Book XX, sec. 200) A direct and very favorable reference to Jesus, found in Book XVIII, sections 63, 64, has been challenged by some who claim that it must have been either added later or embellished by Christians; but it is acknowledged that the vocabulary and the style are basically those of Josephus, and the passage is found in all available manuscripts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

This used to be very important to me, and I know all the arguments, pro, and con.

It's intellectually interesting ... in small doses ... and the older I get ... the smaller the doses I need.

There is a saying "Is this the Hill you want to die on?'

I have had and sustained enough cannonades from the REAL world that I no longer care if Jesus is Michael ... or not.

It's just not important to me ...... anymore.

Plus ... you have to give SOME consideration to the apparent mental competence of those who do still intensely care about such things.

 

Gravity Electricity Wind .mp42 CHAIR pORNEA .mp4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
9 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

It's intellectually interesting ... in small doses ...

 

9 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Plus ... you have to give SOME consideration to the apparent mental competence of those who do still intensely care about such things.

Agree, absolutely !

While watching second video with Gary's illustrations, examples, explanations in plastic way expressed ... yeah, even small doses of mental competence were NOT been visible, for sure. 

After mental gymnastic to understand and mental visualization (making  picture on/of subjects) about given lesson  on what porneia is and what is  not ::::: you can cry or laugh ...out loud. Or both... out loud.  What ever you choose is better then listen him /them again. :)))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

@Gone Away I'll have to be brief because I have no access to my research information to post it here. The belief started centuries ago. Some will say around the 7th-9th century, others have information going centuries back, but such info is small. Most information we have today is in regards to the 16th-18th century, with such ones like John Calvin who also has this belief, as with others, which also reflects that of biblical passages that seem to equal Jesus to Michael in both title and or action, perhaps even more things.

Moreover, there is a literal counterpart to JWs, known as SDAs, who also has this view, but maintain an Orthodoxy approach and they not only see Micheal as Jesus, but they see him as God,f or such ones are Trinitarians.

When I do get back, I'll be happy to post here my findings from a few years back regarding this whole Jesus/Michael thing and the view of others on this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.