- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi T8,
Yawn.
Yes they are the same word.
But Haggai is a man and the angel is an angel.
Haggai is a man who wrote the book so unless you come up with an angel called Haggai elsewhere your theory lapses.You have proven nothing.
We are not here to play intellectual games.Unless you are focussed on dogma justification lets move on.
Hi T8
You say
'That is the word for angel and it is applied to a MAN called Haggai.”Does it not also mean MESSENGER?
It is used as that 106 times in scripture so I do not know how you could have missed it.Hi T8,
Do you doubt that prophets like Haggai are messengers?
Did not prophets like John the baptist convey messages[mal 3.1] from God?Hi t8,
Prophets are messengers[mal 2.6-8]
Jesus is the GREAT PROPHET as Peter quoted Moses as prophesying in acts 3.23.
This man messenger, born as deaf and blind as any other carnal man but transformed by the rebirth, is spoken of in Is 41.27 and 42.19Hi T8,
Ecc 5.6 is translated messenger but perhaps should be angel?
Watching angels are the eyes of the Lord God.Hi,
And like a mysterious wraith t8 disappears back into the internet mists for a week or two leaving folk lashed to the hot seat.Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 23 2012,22:47) Hi,
And like a mysterious wraith t8 disappears back into the internet mists for a week or two leaving folk lashed to the hot seat.
NI believe you have lost this case long ago
messenger can be either man or angel ,
but man are not angel beings nor angels human beings
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 23 2012,23:54) Hi T,
What case?from T8
OK, you have made your stance very clear and this is truly helpful. I only now have to demonstrate one place where a man is called an angel and that will prove your stance is completely wrong.Haggai 1:13
13 Then Haggai, the LORD's messenger, gave this message of the LORD to the people: “I am with you,” declares the LORD.The word messenger is a translation from the word mal'ak {mal-awk'}.
That is the word for angel and it is applied to a MAN called Haggai.Now compare it with say Genesis 16:7.
The angel of the Lord found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur.Again the word (angel) is exactly the same word as in Haggai 1:13, mal'ak {mal-awk'}.
See how the word mal'ak is applied to both beings:
1) Angel ( mal'ak) of the Lord
2) Haggai, the LORD's messenger ( mal'ak).Same Hebrew word Nick, and Haggai is a man is he not?
So I have proven to you that the word angel/messenger/mal'ak is equally referring to a man and to perhaps the most famous heavenly being besides God mentioned in the Old Testament.The only way I can see you get out of this is to prove that Haggai was not a man, but a Cherub or Seraph or another being from Heaven.
However, I don't think you will prove this at all and instead will concentrate on the two differing English words angel and messenger. If you go there, then you have lost because they are exactly the same word in Hebrew. There is no difference in scripture and they are only different in our English translations because translators chose to interpret the same word with two different English words to make a distinction between a messenger/angel from Heaven and a man. But even then, translators will readily admit that they are both mal'ak {mal-awk'} which is the word angel in English or angelos in Greek.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 23 2012,08:47) Hi T8,
Yawn.
Yes they are the same word.
But Haggai is a man and the angel is an angel.
Haggai is a man who wrote the book so unless you come up with an angel called Haggai elsewhere your theory lapses.You have proven nothing.
We are not here to play intellectual games.Unless you are focussed on dogma justification lets move on.
OK, so you admit that Haggai is called an angel/messenger/malak in scripture.We are making progress.
Remember you said the following:
Quote Hi t8,
Wrong.
Men are never called angels.
You were clearly wrong weren't you.Men are indeed at times called angels/messenger/malak, (NOTE: same word in scripture).
Yes you have lost this case Nick.
Men and heavenly creatures are both called ans described as angels/messenger/malak (NOTE: same word) in scripture.
I have proven this to be the case and now you concur.
Thank you. I believe yes we can move on from here.
The Hot Seat has done its job, but I am happy to take it further as you seem to want to.
Hi t8,
yes both human prophets and angels are messengers of God
Jesus is a prophet [Acts 3]and a man [acts2].So why would you think he was an angel again?
Hi T8,
Winning cases is uselessness if false teaching ensues.If Jesus was lower than then greater than angels why would you say he was one?[heb]
Nick, you are acting no different to Trinitarians who deny that men and angels are called theos/elohim/gods.
Men are sometimes called malak and no amount of arguing against it is going to rewrite scripture.I just simply accept it as a fact because it is written there for all to see.
Do you accept it now? Do you accept that which is written?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 25 2012,12:08) Hi T8,
Winning cases is uselessness if false teaching ensues.If Jesus was lower than then greater than angels why would you say he was one?[heb]
Nick, it is not my fault if you cannot reconcile the way scripture uses the word Malak.I don't have a contradiction to work out, but you do. You are the one who needs to work this out. I can answer any question immediately pertaining to beings being called malak. Whereas, the questions you keep asking me are real questions that you cannot answer.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
