- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hey Istari,
This is the point of my last point to you:
You have stated this claim, and showed the scripture to support your claim. That is how things should be done here. But why then when I point out that John the Baptist also heard and did the works of God would you have to change the requirements to “also sinless”?
It seems to me like I made my point, and you don't like it, so now you're adding things into your claim that AREN'T supported by scripture. See? You started off right, but are willing to change scripture in order to be “right” on this issue.
Please address this point instead of running off at the mouth with insults that no one here really even cares about.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 16 2011,11:53) Okay all, Here's the scorecard so far:
Galatians 4:14
…….you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself.This scripture places Jesus in the “angel” category without a doubt. Add to this the fact that any messenger of God is also an angel of God, for that's what the word means. And not only did Jesus speak God's words to those on earth when he was flesh, but Revelation 1:1 shows he was still delivering God's words to us even after he had been raised to the right hand of God.
We have this verse:
Hebrews 1:5
For to which of the angels did God ever say,
“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father”?But this one is inconclusive, for the meaning could also be “to which ONE of the angels did God say………..”
Then we have:
Hebrews 1:4
So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.
This one is also inconclusive because it could mean “became as much superior to the OTHER angels……….” Similar to the fact that “King of kings” doesn't exclude that one from being a King himself. Here is another example of this:2 Kings
27 In the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the year Awel-Marduk became king of Babylon, he released Jehoiachin king of Judah from prison. He did this on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth month. 28 He spoke kindly to him and gave him a seat of honor higher than those of the other kings who were with him in Babylon.The Hebrew text doesn't have the word “other”, but most translations contain it because it is implied. It really says “set his throne above the throne of the kings in Babylon”. Without the word “other”, it would seem like Jehoiachin was something other than one of the captured kings living in Babylon, but we know this is not the case.
And we have:
Matthew 24:36
But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
t8 made a good point about this one by switching “Son” for “Michael”. But also consider that the Son wasn't “in heaven” at the time he said this, so that also could be the differentiating factor here.“between” has brought up:
1 Thess 4:16
For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
Does this mean an archangel will herald the arrival of Jesus? Or is this “voice of the archangel” the voice of Jesus himself?“between” backs up 4:16 with this one:
John 5:28
Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice………..
But again, this doesn't eliminate the theory that the archangel could herald the arrival of Jesus, and then after being announced, Jesus speaks.Are there scriptures I've neglected to add?
My conclusion is that “the angels” are heavenly spirit beings who do the will of God. Jesus is also a heavenly spirit being who does the will of God, and so fits into that group nicely. Is he an archangel? Maybe……..but if so, then he is like the four star General compared to the other “regular” generals because he is superior to all the rest.
And we can't forget that all of those other generals, along with everything else in existence, came to be through Jesus. He is also the only being to come DIRECTLY from God Himself, the only one worthy to open the scroll, and the only angel to be placed as “Lord of lords and King of kings” by his God……………among many other things that distinguish Jesus from the other heavenly spirit beings.
I don't see Jesus as “Michael”, for I see no scriptural reason to come to this conclusion.
That's my take on it so far.
peace,
mike
Hi Mike,
You said:Quote Add to this the fact that any messenger of God is also an angel of God, for that's what the word means. I don't agree with that statement Mike. I think that any angel of God is a messenger of God but not all messengers of God are angels. Some are prophets for instance. A prophet is not an angel. Jesus clearly states that He is not a prophet but many here believe that is what He is. Many seem to think that the only begotten Son goes from being an angel, to being a prophet, then to being a begotten son. This passage clearly says otherwise:
13Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He was asking His disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14And they said, “Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.” 15He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18“I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” 20Then He warned the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ.
Peter knew who Jesus was and so did Jesus…
There is a difference from one who does the will of God and proclaims God's message…that would be a prophet. Jesus said that Peter answered correctly not the people who say He is one of the prophets.
and I have more…
Kathi
Mike,
And here you go:Matt 24:36
American Standard Version
But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only.Bible in Basic English
But of that day and hour no one has knowledge, not even the angels in heaven, or the Son, but the Father only.Here we go with “is it 'of' or 'in'?”
I believe that 'of' is the correct translation since it is in the genitive form which shows possession and not in the preposition form which shows position in relation to the object of the preposition. Look it up. We know that Jesus is 'of' heaven.
And there is more…
Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,11:46) Some are prophets for instance. A prophet is not an angel.
Hi Kathi,Does your statement mean you DO agree with everything else I posted?
Anyway, Jesus was most definitely a prophet of his God. And the passage you quoted doesn't say that as the Son of the Living God who was sent down to speak the words OF his God he was not a prophet.
Also, Jesus calls John the Baptist a prophet and scripture calls him an angel.
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,11:54) Mike,
And here you go:Matt 24:36
American Standard Version
But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only.Bible in Basic English
But of that day and hour no one has knowledge, not even the angels in heaven, or the Son, but the Father only.Here we go with “is it 'of' or 'in'?”
I believe that 'of' is the correct translation since it is in the genitive form which shows possession and not in the preposition form which shows position in relation to the object of the preposition. Look it up. We know that Jesus is 'of' heaven.
And there is more…
Kathi
Kathi,If “the Son” wasn't actually in heaven at the time, then while you bring up a good point, it is nonetheless an inconclusive one.
mike
Mike,
Angels are fellow servants of God and no where are we told that we are to be a bond-servant to an angel but you know that we are to be bond-servants to the Father and the Son.Rev 22:9
But he said to me, “Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God.”Col 1:3-8
3We give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, 4since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and the love which you have for all the saints; 5because of the hope laid up for you in heaven, of which you previously heard in the word of truth, the gospel 6which has come to you, just as in all the world also it is constantly bearing fruit and increasing, even as it has been doing in you also since the day you heard of it and understood the grace of God in truth; 7just as you learned it from Epaphras, our beloved fellow bond-servant, who is a faithful servant of Christ on our behalf, 8and he also informed us of your love in the Spirit.This post is not about worship to an angel, but the fact that the angel does not relate to us as master/slave but as a fellow servant of both the Father and the Son. We do know that we are to be bond-servants of Christ. Christ is not one of the angel beings.
Kathi
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 16 2011,13:04) Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,11:46) Some are prophets for instance. A prophet is not an angel.
Hi Kathi,Does your statement mean you DO agree with everything else I posted?
Anyway, Jesus was most definitely a prophet of his God. And the passage you quoted doesn't say that as the Son of the Living God who was sent down to speak the words OF his God he was not a prophet.
Also, Jesus calls John the Baptist a prophet and scripture calls him an angel.
mike
Mike,
No, it doesn't mean that I agree with the rest. I just don't have the time it takes to unweave your confusionIn the context of that passage about Peter, Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God and that was the right answer, wasn't it…that was the inspired answer. That was WHO He is.
Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,12:25) In the context of that passage about Peter, Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God and that was the right answer, wasn't it…that was the inspired answer. That was WHO He is.
And which one of us here is denying that Christ is the Son of the Living God?But as such, he is also a servant to his God, the High Priest of his God, one of the anoited ones of his God, and an angel of his God. If being the Son of the Living God doesn't exclude Jesus from being any of these other things, then why would you think it excludes him from being a prophet of his God?
Did he not prophesy about coming events while speaking the words of his God? Does that not make him a “prophet of God”?
mike
Mike,
Jesus is many things like prophet, messenger, shepherd, vine, gate, teacher, etc. because He is the Son of the living God. He is not the son of the living God because he is those many things. Get it?Mike,
The point of Sinless was because you twist and turn your demands for proof that no matter what anyone shows you you debase with further nonsense and demands for further frivolous proofs.There are ONLY TWO SINLESS HUMAN BEINGS EVER… the first was Adam, the first Man. This means he was a TRUE HUMAN SON OF GOD…in the FLESH.
Jesus, the second Adam, was likewise, Sinless and therefore a TRUE HUMAN SON OF GOD…in the FLESH.
Since the first Adam was dead that leaves Jesus as the ONLY TRUE SON OF GOD IN THE FLESH: THerefore: The Only Son Of God In The Flesh…
The others who heard and did the words of God, like Moses, are Sons of God in the flesh but not Sinless: Did Moses go to Heaven when he died? Was Moses found to be worthy to save mankind, no, not even any David, nor any of the prophets…because they were all born sinful and all sinned at some point during their life.
Mike, if you stop working against me you will find gifts of knowledge and revelation. Even to this time there is not one single point you have 'Won' against me and yet you persist – are you jealous? Should I lie so you can 'Win'? Will that sate your desire to refute even common truth (You can't bear to agree with anything I say so you MUST find some frivory to dispute over!?)Mike, there is a difference in desiring additional proof over an issue and deliberately introducing petty points just to cause dispute!
Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,12:17) Rev 22:9
But he said to me, “Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God.”
That's a good scripture for you to remember when you're worshipping the Son OF God as if he were God Himself.But your scripture does remind me of another that has not been brought up here:
Hebrews 2
5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6 But there is a place where someone has testified:
“What is mankind that you are mindful of them,
a son of man that you care for him?
7 You made them a little lower than the angels;
you crowned them with glory and honor
8 and put everything under their feet.”It seems to me that Dennison was right about this point. Although “aggelos” does simply mean “messenger”, and was used of human beings as well as heavenly spirit beings, the NT writers do seem to distinguish a group of beings called “aggelos” from mankind in this verse. There's also Hebrews 1:14, although that mention of “aggelos” could refer to either spirit beings or human beings I suppose.
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,13:47) Mike,
Jesus is many things like prophet, messenger, shepherd, vine, gate, teacher, etc. because He is the Son of the living God. He is not the son of the living God because he is those many things. Get it?
Hi Kathi,I don't get your point. David was prophet, teacher, messenger, and shepherd, but it had nothing to do with whether or not he was the Son of the Living God.
David was not those things BECAUSE he was the Son of the Living God, but he was also not precluded from being those things because he wasn't the Son of the Living God.
I guess I don't see the point you're trying to make.
mike
Mike,
Where do you get the plural pronouns from?7“YOU HAVE MADE HIM FOR A LITTLE WHILE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS;
YOU HAVE CROWNED HIM WITH GLORY AND HONOR,
AND HAVE APPOINTED HIM OVER THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
8YOU HAVE PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET.”
For in subjecting all things to him, He left nothing that is not subject to him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him.The pronouns are singular in the Greek.
Kathi
Mike,
I keep reminding you about using a TIMELINE…Jesus WAS a Prophet, An Angel, a Servant, etc.
Mike, Jesus IS NOW… King, no longer Angel, nor prophet (Everyone who worship's God is 'Serving' God).
Jesus NOW is First over Creation, being the First born from the dead.
Every reference to Jesus should be checked against the time period the reference refers to – And ONLY used in reference to that period so confusion and wrongful references are not made that lead to wrongful conclusions and wrongful lines of thought.Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 16 2011,15:09) Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,13:47) Mike,
Jesus is many things like prophet, messenger, shepherd, vine, gate, teacher, etc. because He is the Son of the living God. He is not the son of the living God because he is those many things. Get it?
Hi Kathi,I don't get your point. David was prophet, teacher, messenger, and shepherd, but it had nothing to do with whether or not he was the Son of the Living God.
David was not those things BECAUSE he was the Son of the Living God, but he was also not precluded from being those things because he wasn't the Son of the Living God.
I guess I don't see the point you're trying to make.
mike
Mike,
It is like this,
Cody is your housemate because he is your son…right?Cody is not your son because he is your housemate. See the difference.
Cody is first your son and therefore your housemate. Not the other way around.
So Jesus, before creation was first the Son and therefore the servant. Jesus before creation was not first the servant and therefore the son.
Many people on here have it in the wrong order, imo.
Kathi
Mike,
Quote That's a good scripture for you to remember when you're worshipping the Son OF God as if he were God Himself. I worship the Son of God as if He were the begotten God Himself, along with the God who beget Him. I thought you could get that straight by now.
Kathi
Quote (Istari @ April 16 2011,13:55) Mike,
The point of Sinless was because you twist and turn your demands for proof that no matter what anyone shows you you debase with further nonsense and demands for further frivolous proofs.
I see. So you originally made a good point and backed it up with scripture. But then when I pointed out that John the Baptist fit your requirements, you added another requirement that wasn't backed up by scripture. And when I pointed out that your second requirement wasn't backed by scripture, it was not you who was in the wrong for claiming unscriptural things, but me who was in the wrong for suggesting your claims should ALL be backed by scripture, not just one of them.
Does that seem right to you, Istari?
And despite your unfounded claims against me, I agree with many people on HN about many issues. For example, Kathi and I agree on virtually every scriptural matter except for the Son's beginning and exactly how high his position is now.
And I agree 99% of the time with t8, Pierre and Irene on any scriptural matter. I even have many points of agreement with Keith and Jack and Dennison. And I have commended your own posts as “brilliant” at least three times since I've been here.
So maybe the way you're seeing things is not really the way it is. Maybe it is YOU who should work harder toward discussing the actual scriptural points we all have, and less hard on driving a wedge between us.
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ April 16 2011,14:11) Mike,
Where do you get the plural pronouns from?7“YOU HAVE MADE HIM FOR A LITTLE WHILE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS;
YOU HAVE CROWNED HIM WITH GLORY AND HONOR,
AND HAVE APPOINTED HIM OVER THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
8YOU HAVE PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET.”
For in subjecting all things to him, He left nothing that is not subject to him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him.The pronouns are singular in the Greek.
Kathi
Kathi,Read the original OT scripture that was being quoted. Tell me if only one person was being spoken of there.
mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
