- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (kerwin @ April 08 2011,20:26) T8, I just did not see how being a messenger has anything to do with Jesus being a Spiritual being.
It doesn't. The point I am making is that Jesus is called an angel. I don't believe that Jesus is a Seraph or Cherub. But he is an angel according to scripture.Quote (Istari @ April 09 2011,11:59) And Satan has horns, dresses in a red outfit and carries a pitchfork, and tortures fallen man in dispicable manners for eternity to his pleasure in the firey hell of Tartarus…!!! Right?
Actually he upgraded his pitchfork to a taser.Is Jesus an Angel?
Jesus appeared as an Angel, in times past.
Hebrews 1:1 – God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself made purification for our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have.
Inherited.
All creatures in heaven are SPIRITS…
Angel is the description given to a Spirit that is sent out by God to do his will.
Therefore any and all Spirits who are sent to do the will of God are described as Angel.
There are different category of Spirits and different ranks.
Very few Spirits are mentioned by name or rank and they themselves are careful to never overstep their area of authority and never abuse their power but they are required to perform their duties to completion by any godly means, even by open use of their awesome power.
Jesus, Scriptures says, carried out many major duties on behalf of his God, therefore he is Angel…
Many here draw on sentiment for Jesus as Son of God to claim that he is NOT angel… But this is wrong for even God calls him 'My Servant' and 'My Angel'.
Scriptures also tell us that Jesus was made a little lower than the angels. Does this mean he was higher than them or that he was not one of them?
No, it simply says he was made a little lower, but not from what level. Authoriser is simply a reference to his status as Man…(who is man … You made him a little lower than the angels … Who are greater in power…)
Later, Jesus was made to be HIGHER WITH POWER than the Angels when he was Begotten by his father and God.
What does this HIGHER WITH POWER position suggest: is it not that it is higher than that which he previously had as then why say it then… It was stated to show that he had achieved his commission and was now a TRUE SON OF GOD… and takes pride of place next to the father and even becomes the high priest to his God and Father. Surely this is higher than that which he left – which was an angel of high order and rank amongst the other angels.There is a fear of calling Jesus an Angel. Yet, those that do so cannot place him elsewhere in order.
This then leads then towards creative alternatives and hence contention with others…sad!
Quote (seekingtruth @ April 07 2011,21:11)
Mike,
Sorry but I felt my post answered that question.
No, it really didn't. It only offered your opinion that the second mention is of “higher status” than the first.Which is why I asked you this:
Quote What if Paul had said, “Welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Gabriel himself.”? Now would that mean that Gabriel is of “higher status” than “an angel of God”?
Would you answer it for me please?Quote (seekingtruth @ April 07 2011,21:11)
Is this why others are always saying they answered your questions while you claim they didn't?
Wow, Wm. I really didn't expect that from you. No, the reason they say this is because I'm more like Pit Bull than Mike Boll when it comes to their various diversions and dodges. I don't let up until they DIRECTLY and HONESTLY answer the question I set out to get answered. And that makes them frustrated and angry. Will you become frustrated and angry with me also because I've now pointed out that you DIDN'T answer my “Gabriel” question, and so I've asked it again?Let me quote a conversation that recently transpired in the “Sophia for Moderator” thread:
Keith said:
Quote AHHH, so Sophia is Princess? Why the Alias then?
WJ
Then Princess said:Quote WJ, I understand that you must combine to create one, however, you too are wrong.
Then Keith said:Quote Princess Please learn to read and comprehend.
I never accused her of being anyone.
Then Princess said:Quote wj, then your post was misunderstood by myself,
my apologies.sorry mike for not realizing, i understand now why you do what you do, good for you for being so persistent, it is an admirable quality.
Wm, take some time to actually read the hoops I have to jump through with these guys for months just to finally arrive at the DIRECT and HONEST answer they should have given the first time I asked the question. Do you realize it took me two years to get Keith to acknowledge this:
just because Jesus is called God does not mean he is God.
Now, this has been the truth since the scriptures were written, right? It has never NOT been the truth at any time in history. So why should it take me two years of back and forth hoops and diversions for him to just simply speak the honest truth that's been there the whole time?
THAT is why they say about me what they do…………..because I won't let up, and it really bothers them.
Now the question is whether or not I will have to jump through hoops for you to get the only HONEST and DIRECT answer to my question about Gabriel that there is. We both KNOW what that answer is, but will you SAY it? (Hint – The answer is: “No, if Paul said Gabriel instead of Jesus, we would not be having this discussion, because not one of us would assume that it meant Gabriel was anything other than an angel of God.”)
mike
Quote (seekingtruth @ April 07 2011,21:19) Mike,
I am not arguing that Jesus was a messenger so why don't we address the heart of the issue, I assume you believe that Jesus was created by God based on these scriptures:
Hi Wm,I don't think Gal 14 says anything about whether Jesus was created or not. But, “YES”, the other two scriptures clearly do say he was.
mike
Quote (kerwin @ April 07 2011,22:39) I understand that Scripture differently in that Adam was created in two parts one part was created from the earth while the other was a Spirit that gave the body life
Okay Kerwin.I can't say I know where you ever got an idea like that from the actual scriptures, but you're welcome to your view. Is this thought on topic?
mike
Quote (Istari @ April 08 2011,19:31) Authoriser is simply a reference to his status as Man…(who is man … You made him a little lower than the angels … Who are greater in power…)
I agree……………..I think. I agree if you're saying that Paul quoted a scripture that WAS about humankind, and applied that to Jesus just to show that he was also at one time humankind. IMO.mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 09 2011,10:33) Quote (seekingtruth @ April 07 2011,21:11)
Mike,
Sorry but I felt my post answered that question.
No, it really didn't. It only offered your opinion that the second mention is of “higher status” than the first.Which is why I asked you this:
Quote What if Paul had said, “Welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Gabriel himself.”? Now would that mean that Gabriel is of “higher status” than “an angel of God”?
Would you answer it for me please?
YESQuote Quote (seekingtruth @ April 07 2011,21:11)
Is this why others are always saying they answered your questions while you claim they didn't? Wow, Wm. I really didn't expect that from you. No, the reason they say this is because I'm more like Pit Bull than Mike Boll when it comes to their various diversions and dodges. I don't let up until they DIRECTLY and HONESTLY answer the question I set out to get answered. And that makes them frustrated and angry. Will you become frustrated and angry with me also because I've now pointed out that you DIDN'T answer my “Gabriel” question, and so I've asked it again?
I believe you misread my statement, it was an observation not an accusation. And as I said I thought I had answered your question.Quote
Let me quote a conversation that recently transpired in the “Sophia for Moderator” thread:Keith said:
Quote AHHH, so Sophia is Princess? Why the Alias then?
WJ
Then Princess said:Quote WJ, I understand that you must combine to create one, however, you too are wrong.
Then Keith said:Quote Princess Please learn to read and comprehend.
I never accused her of being anyone.
Then Princess said:Quote wj, then your post was misunderstood by myself,
my apologies.sorry mike for not realizing, i understand now why you do what you do, good for you for being so persistent, it is an admirable quality.
Wm, take some time to actually read the hoops I have to jump through with these guys for months just to finally arrive at the DIRECT and HONEST answer they should have given the first time I asked the question. Do you realize it took me two years to get Keith to acknowledge this:
just because Jesus is called God does not mean he is God.
Now, this has been the truth since the scriptures were written, right? It has never NOT been the truth at any time in history. So why should it take me two years of back and forth hoops and diversions for him to just simply speak the honest truth that's been there the whole time?
THAT is why they say about me what they do…………..because I won't let up, and it really bothers them.
Now the question is whether or not I will have to jump through hoops for you to get the only HONEST and DIRECT answer to my question about Gabriel that there is. We both KNOW what that answer is, but will you SAY it? (Hint – The answer is: “No, if Paul said Gabriel instead of Jesus, we would not be having this discussion, because not one of us would assume that it meant Gabriel was anything other than an angel of God.”)
mike
Mike,
I agree, but that is not what you asked: (What if Paul had said, “Welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Gabriel himself.”? Now would that mean that Gabriel is of “higher status” than “an angel of God”?) If Paul had said that then he would have been saying Gabriel was of a higher status, hence my answer of yes. However I agree that the status for Gabriel is unknown so it really does not fit the sentence which is why I originally answered NO, until I re-read the question. This however brings us back to my earlier observation that there may be other issues to your “not getting your answers”.My opinion – Wm
Quote (karmarie @ April 09 2011,07:06) Is Jesus an Angel? Jesus appeared as an Angel, in times past.
Hebrews 1:1 – God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself made purification for our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have.
Inherited.
I am not sure why you believe that scripture supports the idea that Jesus appeared as and angel in times past. This verse contrasts what happened in the past to what what is currently happening. What is states is currently occuring is that God has “spoken to us by his Son”. That clearly means the Son did not speak previously to the time this verse calls “at the end of these days”.Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 09 2011,08:42) Quote (kerwin @ April 07 2011,22:39) I understand that Scripture differently in that Adam was created in two parts one part was created from the earth while the other was a Spirit that gave the body life
Okay Kerwin.I can't say I know where you ever got an idea like that from the actual scriptures, but you're welcome to your view. Is this thought on topic?
mike
It comes from the event of Adam being created.Quote (kerwin @ April 09 2011,19:04) Quote (karmarie @ April 09 2011,07:06) Is Jesus an Angel? Jesus appeared as an Angel, in times past.
Hebrews 1:1 – God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself made purification for our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have.
Inherited.
I am not sure why you believe that scripture supports the idea that Jesus appeared as and angel in times past. This verse contrasts what happened in the past to what what is currently happening. What is states is currently occuring is that God has “spoken to us by his Son”. That clearly means the Son did not speak previously to the time this verse calls “at the end of these days”.
Hi Kerwin.I see my error, thankyou for pointing it out. I had confused Scripture with Early Church Writings (Justyn Martyr), it always get's me.
Quote (karmarie @ April 09 2011,12:00) Quote (kerwin @ April 09 2011,19:04) Quote (karmarie @ April 09 2011,07:06) Is Jesus an Angel? Jesus appeared as an Angel, in times past.
Hebrews 1:1 – God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself made purification for our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have.
Inherited.
I am not sure why you believe that scripture supports the idea that Jesus appeared as and angel in times past. This verse contrasts what happened in the past to what what is currently happening. What is states is currently occuring is that God has “spoken to us by his Son”. That clearly means the Son did not speak previously to the time this verse calls “at the end of these days”.
Hi Kerwin.I see my error, thankyou for pointing it out. I had confused Scripture with Early Church Writings (Justyn Martyr), it always get's me.
I certainly understand that. It speaks highly of you that you reconized your mistake and admitted it.Quote (seekingtruth @ April 08 2011,22:52) Mike,
I agree, but that is not what you asked: (What if Paul had said, “Welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Gabriel himself.”? Now would that mean that Gabriel is of “higher status” than “an angel of God”?) If Paul had said that then he would have been saying Gabriel was of a higher status, hence my answer of yes. However I agree that the status for Gabriel is unknown so it really does not fit the sentence which is why I originally answered NO, until I re-read the question. This however brings us back to my earlier observation that there may be other issues to your “not getting your answers”.
Hi Wm,If you'll look back to your post, the last one on page 11, you'll see that you didn't actually answer my “Gabriel” question. So I don't think it's fair to assert that I have “issues” about “getting answers” based on the fact that I re-asked a question you didn't actually answer the first time.
I now understand you to be saying that had Paul said “Gabriel” instead of “Jesus”, you would assume that Gabriel was of a “higher status” than an angel.
I don't agree with that anymore than I agree Paul was implying Jesus was of a “higher status” in this sentence. I agree that Jesus is higher than the other angels based on many other things in scripture………….but not from this one sentence.
Imagine the phrase “King of kings”. While this implies that one king is over the other kings, it doesn't imply that this first king is NOT a king at all, does it? It doesn't imply that this first king is of a “higher status” than “king”, does it? No. It only applies that WITHIN the status of “king”, this first one is higher than the others.
So Paul's statement, even taken with your understanding, wouldn't necessarily be saying Jesus is something OTHER THAN an angel, but that he is an angel who is higher than other angels.
The bottom line is that it doesn't say Jesus is NOT an angel at all. If I'm right, then Paul is mentioning one angel by name for emphasis. If you're right, then Paul is mentioning a high angel among angels for emphasis.
If you think about it Wm, what is higher than angel? God, right? Do you think Paul was saying they welcomed him as if he was God Himself? How? Did they bow down to him and worship him? In what way would a human being know he was being welcomed as if he were God Himself?
mike
Quote (kerwin @ April 08 2011,23:04) What is states is currently occuring is that God has “spoken to us by his Son”. That clearly means the Son did not speak previously to the time this verse calls “at the end of these days”.
Hi Kerwin,That is a brilliant point, and contradicts many thoughts about Jesus being the angel of Jehovah who went before the Israelites, or one of those who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.
It's definitely worth another look-see. Thanks.
Don't get too excited though, for it doesn't elimintate the fact that the ages were created through him.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 09 2011,23:26) Quote (kerwin @ April 08 2011,23:04) What is states is currently occuring is that God has “spoken to us by his Son”. That clearly means the Son did not speak previously to the time this verse calls “at the end of these days”.
Hi Kerwin,That is a brilliant point, and contradicts many thoughts about Jesus being the angel of Jehovah who went before the Israelites, or one of those who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.
It's definitely worth another look-see. Thanks.
Don't get too excited though, for it doesn't elimintate the fact that the ages were created through him.
mike
I realize that it does not contradict the idea that the old creation was made through Jesus. Nor was that my intention.It is noble to test what you believe.
Quote (kerwin @ April 09 2011,23:51) Quote (karmarie @ April 09 2011,12:00) Quote (kerwin @ April 09 2011,19:04) Quote (karmarie @ April 09 2011,07:06) Is Jesus an Angel? Jesus appeared as an Angel, in times past.
Hebrews 1:1 – God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself made purification for our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have.
Inherited.
I am not sure why you believe that scripture supports the idea that Jesus appeared as and angel in times past. This verse contrasts what happened in the past to what what is currently happening. What is states is currently occuring is that God has “spoken to us by his Son”. That clearly means the Son did not speak previously to the time this verse calls “at the end of these days”.
Hi Kerwin.I see my error, thankyou for pointing it out. I had confused Scripture with Early Church Writings (Justyn Martyr), it always get's me.
I certainly understand that. It speaks highly of you that you reconized your mistake and admitted it.
Thank you Kerwin.Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 10 2011,01:22) Quote (seekingtruth @ April 08 2011,22:52) Mike,
I agree, but that is not what you asked: (What if Paul had said, “Welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Gabriel himself.”? Now would that mean that Gabriel is of “higher status” than “an angel of God”?) If Paul had said that then he would have been saying Gabriel was of a higher status, hence my answer of yes. However I agree that the status for Gabriel is unknown so it really does not fit the sentence which is why I originally answered NO, until I re-read the question. This however brings us back to my earlier observation that there may be other issues to your “not getting your answers”.
Hi Wm,If you'll look back to your post, the last one on page 11, you'll see that you didn't actually answer my “Gabriel” question. So I don't think it's fair to assert that I have “issues” about “getting answers” based on the fact that I re-asked a question you didn't actually answer the first time.
I now understand you to be saying that had Paul said “Gabriel” instead of “Jesus”, you would assume that Gabriel was of a “higher status” than an angel.
I don't agree with that anymore than I agree Paul was implying Jesus was of a “higher status” in this sentence. I agree that Jesus is higher than the other angels based on many other things in scripture………….but not from this one sentence.
Imagine the phrase “King of kings”. While this implies that one king is over the other kings, it doesn't imply that this first king is NOT a king at all, does it? It doesn't imply that this first king is of a “higher status” than “king”, does it? No. It only applies that WITHIN the status of “king”, this first one is higher than the others.
So Paul's statement, even taken with your understanding, wouldn't necessarily be saying Jesus is something OTHER THAN an angel, but that he is an angel who is higher than other angels.
The bottom line is that it doesn't say Jesus is NOT an angel at all. If I'm right, then Paul is mentioning one angel by name for emphasis. If you're right, then Paul is mentioning a high angel among angels for emphasis.
If you think about it Wm, what is higher than angel? God, right? Do you think Paul was saying they welcomed him as if he was God Himself? How? Did they bow down to him and worship him? In what way would a human being know he was being welcomed as if he were God Himself?
mike
Check page 13, 9th post down, 7th line down, BOLD CAPITALIZED for my answer, directly under your request for me to answer your question, please note that the thread has not been edited.Quote (seekingtruth @ April 09 2011,22:52) Check page 13, 9th post down, 7th line down, BOLD CAPITALIZED for my answer, directly under your request for me to answer your question, please note that the thread has not been edited.
Hi Wm,Maybe the chain of events will help to iron out this discrepancy:
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 07 2011,18:40) What if Paul had said, “Welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Gabriel himself”. Now would that mean that Gabriel is of “higher status” than “an angel of God”?
Now this is the first time I asked this particular question about Gabriel. I did not forget your original answer that the second mention is one of “higher status” than the first. I was only trying to get you to see that this is not necessarily the case, so that you might see things differently. But you responded with:Quote (seekingtruth @ April 07 2011,21:11) Mike,
Sorry but I felt my post answered that question.Is this why others are always saying they answered your questions while you claim they didn't?
You couldn't have possibly answered THAT question, because I hadn't asked it before. So I responded with this:
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 08 2011,20:33)
No, it really didn't. It only offered your opinion that the second mention is of “higher status” than the first.Which is why I asked you this:
Quote What if Paul had said, “Welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Gabriel himself.”? Now would that mean that Gabriel is of “higher status” than “an angel of God”?
Would you answer it for me please?To which you responded:
Quote (seekingtruth @ April 08 2011,22:52)
YESHaving received your direct answer of “YES”, I responded with:
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 09 2011,11:22) Hi Wm, I now understand you to be saying that had Paul said “Gabriel” instead of “Jesus”, you would assume that Gabriel was of a “higher status” than an angel…………
So you see, once you DID actually answer my question, I accepted that answer and worked forward from it. I noticed though that in your eagerness to show that I had asked a question you already answered, you didn't actually address the rest of my post about “King of kings” and such.
But I have a different question for you anyway. Bear in mind that this is NOT a question I've asked before, but a DIFFERENT question altogether:
“You welcomed me as if I were a King of Israel, as if I were Solomon himself”.
Wm, do you STILL think that the second mention indicates that Solomon was of a “higher status” than “a King of Israel”? Do you think it indicates that Solomon himself was NOT also a King of Israel?
mike
Jesus is THE gate.
Jesus is THE vine.
Jesus is THE shepherd.And I can prove it with scripture
even
Jesus is the Angel of GodDon't miss the message here.
Does Jesus have a gate nature?
Does Jesus have the nature of a vine?
Does Jesus have the nature of an angel?
or
Does Jesus have the nature of a God?Whichever it is, then He is that by nature and then you know what He is, all else is what comes from being what He is by nature. Jesus has the same nature as our Heavenly Father…He is God because He is the Son of God which implies that the one He is Son of, is God also, but as the Father and not the Son.
Is Jesus the Son of God because He is a shepherd or is He a shepherd because He is the Son of God?
Is Jesus the Son of God because He is perfect or is He perfect because He is the Son of God?
Is Jesus the Son of God because He has the nature of an angel?
Or is He a messenger of God because He is God as the Son?Think about it!
Kathi
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
