- This topic is empty.
- Posts
1 CORINTHIANS 15:27
“For [God] “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that it is with the exception of the one who subjected all things to him.”Quote It seems evident to me that the words “thing” or “things” are used by Biblical writers in reference to the created order. I don't believe Yahshua or His Father are ever designated in the Bible by the word “thing”. If you can produce evidence to the contrary, lets have it… See above. 1 Cor 15:27.
The word “thing” has many many definitions, ranging from:
“a material object without life or consciousness” to “a living being or creature.”
While they don't fit that first definition, but then again, neither to do we, surely, Jehovah and his son are living beings.But notice 1 Cor 15:27. I don't know. Maybe my Bible says something yours doesn't.
It seems to me that if:
1. All things were made subject to Jesus
2. God was an exception to this.If God could never ever be called a thing (“living being,” ie: somthing) then there would be no need for an “exception.” It wouldn't be an exception because God isn't a thing and therefore doesn't fit into this at all. BUT THERE IS AN EXCEPTION, Is 1:18. Done. There.
You're looking at this verse as though God was an exception because he isn't a thing. But you can't do that. Because he's not a thing at all you say. That word could never ever be applied to him, you say. Well then, when it said that all things were subjected to Jesus, then that wouldn't apply to Jehovah at all. But we are told that Jehovah was the exception. The obvious exception–Not because he isn't a thing, but because He is Jesus father, and is obviously not subject to his son.
Quote PROVERBS 16:4
The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evilJOHN 1:3
3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.COLOSSIANS 1:16
For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.Along with these scriptures, we could also throw in the 5 or so that say that God subjected “all things” under Jesus feet. But then, we have the 1 Cor 15:27 scripture, where we see that it's obvious that His Father would be an “exception.”
Quote He he….you are jumping the gun here David. The correct order is: 1. You submit what you consider to be your best proof texts in favour of the WT assertions that 'Yahshua is a created being' and 'Yahshua and MTA are the same person'….
2. Then I submit my rebuttles….
3. I then submit my best proof texts….
4. Then you submit your rebuttles.
It's a fair format. The ball is in your court David….if you do not wish to engage in this debate, just say so….
mmm. No deal.
I've said it before: You're far too organized.
As far as Yahshua being a created being, there is a thread on Jesus somewhere that speaks of this. I”ve commented on it already, most likely to you. It's probably a large thread, and has already covered everything I would say.
As for Michael the ARchangel being Jesus, I thought that was what you wanted 2 points on, but re-reading what you said, I see you meant you wanted 2 points on each. Again, no deal.
I gave you one point, broken into three. Do with it what you want. I'll continue to do research on this topic, and post what I find. But there's about 7 threads on here about the trinity. This topic doesn't need to turn into another trinity thread. I know it is relative. But I'd still rather focus on things that haven't been discussed so greatly already.
david
Quote If it is factual that there is “a great deal of evidence” that points to the conclusion that Yahshua is MTA then you have no trouble selecting and submitting the best proof text from the abundance that you have at your disposal….right? Ya. I did that. See POINT 6.
Hi david
You say
“If Jesus is the head of the angels (which we know he is, and let me add, SO IS MICHAEL; Rev 12:7) and Michael is the archangel (or chief angel, or chief of the angels, which we know he is) then what conclusions can be drawn?Michael has “his angels.” (Rev 12:7)
Jesus has “his angels.” (Mat 13:41)
The both have angels under subjection.
Are there two armies of angels in heaven? Or one?”1Cor 11
” 3But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. “Now is God the head of woman?
Tit 2
” 9Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again;10Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.
11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; “
So if Jesus is our saviour does that mean God is not?
God is the God of the innumerable angelic hosts
Jesus has complete authority under God over all things including angels.
Archangels are chief princes with authority over angels.Just because Jesus is in charge of the angels make him no more an archangel than saying a lowly centurion is also the commander of the Roman army.
Quote (david @ Sep. 24 2006,07:46) It's a fair format. The ball is in your court David….if you do not wish to engage in this debate, just say so…. mmm. No deal.
I've said it before: You're far too organized.
Alright David. I appreciate you being upfront about it, and I respect your decision. But to be honest I doubt that your perception of my adeptness in debate, relative to yours, had much to do with the decision. I think it had a lot more to do with the total lack of credible scriptural evidence to draw upon in support of the two assertions.Maybe it's untrue what the WT assert. Have you given serious consideration to this possibility?…or do you just swallow their entire theological package lock, stock and barrel, regardless of whether the actual doctrines are underpinned by clear scriptural witness or not?
Blessings
Quote I think it had a lot more to do with the total lack of credible scriptural evidence to draw upon in support of the two assertions. No. You're wrong on this too, Is 1:18. Why do YOU get to decide precicely how many subjects we can discuss and the order of rebuttels. You asked for 2 points. I gave you 3, all connected to one scripture. Rebut.
As I explained, I'm not going to go into Jesus being a created being here, as it's been discusses ad infinitum in other threads.
As well, if you run through this thread and the other Michael threads, you will find quite a bit of me debating other people. What makes you so special that you think I am scared of you?
So, you're wrong. Rebut my point if you like. But if we have to follow you're rules and I have to jump through your hoops, or you just can't explain my points, continue to imply that it is me and not you who doesn't want to address this.
david
Quote Hi david Yes, Nick, T8 explained the same point to me and I said to him: “I realized that a while ago.”
However, when you look at what Michael is doing with “his angel,” he's doing something that it seems Jesus is also doing, or was commissioned to fulfill, against Satan.david
Hi david,
Similarities fascinate and have caused men to think that which you have,
but also that the Son of God is God Himself
just because he is in complete unity with God,
and he has all the authority and abilities of God,
but he still remains God's servant,
just as Joseph was to the Pharaoh.Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 14 2005,23:24) Was Jesus the first creation of God?
first born of all creation, he is the finished sample of GOd when he said in Gen.1:26Quote (wind_slasher52 @ Sep. 25 2006,09:07) Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 14 2005,23:24) Was Jesus the first creation of God?
first born of all creation, he is the finished sample of GOd when he said in Gen.1:26
Hi ws2
Jesus is the Firstborn of creation, but since all creation came through him he cannot be created and thus part of the work done through him can he?Quote Hi ws2
Jesus is the Firstborn of creation, but since all creation came through him he cannot be created and thus part of the work done through him can he?Look up Nick. Way up. When all those other scriptures said that God subjected “all things” under Jesus feet, there was an obvious exception–God himself, and of course Jesus too.
Similarly, it is “evident” that the “firstborn of creation” didn't create himself. Yet, he was used as a master worker by Jehovah and Jehovah created all things through him, but obviously with some obvious evident exceptions.
YOu could look at all those scriptures that say: “God subjected all things under Jesus feet” wrongly, without using soundness of mind. But it is “evident” that there is an exception.
Similarly, it is evident, without even having to be stated, that Jesus didn't create himself, even though everything was created through him.
Yet, he is the firstborn of all creation, the “beginning of the creation of God.” (Rev 3:14)david
Hi david,
So what has this to do with Michael and any other angel you care to name,
and Jesus Christ obviously existing as separate beings?Scripture never says all things have been put by God under the feet of Michael does it?
Quote Hi david,
So what has this to do with Michael and any other angel you care to name,
and Jesus Christ obviously existing as separate beings?Scripture never says all things have been put by God under the feet of Michael does it?
I'll simplify it for you if I can.You stated, somewhat shockingly to me, that Jesus isn't created, because he created all things.
I COMPARED that to something else the Bible says Nick.I compared:
Jesus creating everything (with the obvious evident exception of himself)
with
everthing being subjected under Jesus feet. (with the “evident” “exception” of God.)
My point Nick, is that just because the Bible says that God made everthing through Jesus, it should be evident that there is an obvious exception–Jesus himself,
just as,
there is an “evident” “exception” with the many scriptures that speak of God subjecting all things under Jesus feet.
You're right Nick. This has very little to do with Jesus being Michael the archangel. It simply has to do with your post in this thread above:
Quote Hi ws2
Jesus is the Firstborn of creation, but since all creation came through him he cannot be created and thus part of the work done through him can he?So now that that's clear, you're right, we should leave this thread to Michael.
david
Hi david,
I think I understand your sort of logic here.
Jesus as firstborn of creation is before all created things even including archangels.Well I have done alot of studying lately.
I do believe that Jesus was the angel of the Lord. The messenger of God in the Old testament, in particular during the exodus.
Does this mean he was “messenger” only in the sense of the word angel or was he an actual angel like the other sons of God? I don't know for sure.
I am firmly convinced, however, that Michael and Jesus are completely seperate persons.
I read through Hebrews chapter 1 very carefully. I have always considered it pretty obvious that Jesus was distinguished as different than the angels. However, in what way was he different and why was the comparison even made in the first place? Two good questions!
After reading it with a new mind set I now get a new perception of the chapter.
Jesus is being exalted above his bretheren. Because of his qualities, including being the architect at Gods side and his love for righteousness.
V. 4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.
V. 9 “YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS;THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.”
Above your companions is a pretty strong verse. Young's literal translates companions as “partners” and the KJV translates it as “fellows”.
Hi Mercy,
Do you believe these things because you have found them written or just because you believe them?Quote Hi Mercy,
Do you believe these things because you have found them written or just because you believe them?Perhaps he believes them because he has what the Bible calls the “power of reason” and “soundness of mind” and all evidence seems to point in that one inescapable direction. It is not directly stated. But then again, Jehovah's Wisdom, power and love aren't directly stated in his creation.
Yet, for someone to not perceive these things through God's creation, is “inexcusable.”
ROMANS 1:20
“For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable;”david
Quote I read through Hebrews chapter 1 very carefully. I have always considered it pretty obvious that Jesus was distinguished as different than the angels.
If you just insert the word “other” between “the” and “angels,” Hebrews 1 would still make sense. It is just as plausible as the other way to look at it.
I too have always considered it obvious that Jesus is without question distinguished from the angels, the other angels, technically. He is the Very Son of God. Ok, ok, the other angels are sons of God. But he is THE Son of God, the only begotten. He came into being in a different way. He was around for who knows how long (if time existed then, as we know it) before the other spirit creatures were created, through him. Yes, being created through Jesus puts Jesus in a different category, without question. But they are all still created spirit creatures, sons of God. And maybe the meaning of “angel” is a whole lot broader than we take it to be.Quote Jesus is being exalted above his bretheren. I'm going to use a word I rarely use:
BINGO!
There, I said it.
Quote V. 4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.
So, what does it mean to “become as much better than?” I'm not saying he wasn't always different in some great ways, but because of what he did, he was exalted, and became even higher than the other angels, even higher than he had been.david
Hi david
You said
“It is not directly stated.”
That should be enough for you to desist in your doctrinal development.Nick,
I just want you to know that I don't believe I know this beyond doubt. I am just trying to follow the evidence as faithfully as I can.
I do not believe Jesus is Michael.
Most of this evolves completely around defining angels.
I have also thought that Jesus appeared in theophanies in the old testament. I thought he could have appeared as the angel of the Lord. I just never thought that maybe he himself could actually be an angel. The firstborn with an inheritance.
Jesus is the unique son of God. He is unique but he still is a son of God.
Jesus is the Word of God. Does this mean he spoke for God? Has God ever personally spoke to men? Did God speak himself at the transfiguration or use another angel as his mouth piece.It just really hits hard to realize that Jesus was with the Israelites while they wandered in the desert. Were was he?
Exodus 14:19
And the Angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face and stood behind them.1 Thessalonians 4:13
For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.Exodus 23:20-23
20 “See, I am sending an angel (messenger) ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared.
21 Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him.
22 If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and will oppose those who oppose you.
23 My angel will go ahead of you and bring you into the land of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites and Jebusites, and I will wipe them out.Hi Mercy,
I presume this is the verse in 1Cor 10 rather than 1 Thess 4” 1Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
4And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ”
I think this verse should be read with 1 Peter 1
” 9Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.10Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
11Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. “
The rock they “drank from” spiritually was their anointing in the Spirit of Christ, which is the Holy Spirit. Christ did not himself become anointed with this Spirit till the Jordan. So it was not the being of Christ who lived on earth giving him an unfair advantage over us by virtue of a preview of life but God's Spirit which has always ministered for God through the men He has chosen.
To all who have ears to hear …
Jesus could not be the Angel of the Lord in the OT;
1) Because he is a human being NOT an angelic being
2) And as such he was not even conceived/begotten yet at the time of the OTJesus cannot be an/the 'Angel of the Lord'
Now when I speak of an 'angel' I am speaking of the non-human kind i.e. the host of heaven … angelic beings.Now if Jesus was an Angel of the Lord he could not qualify to be GOD's Only-Begotten Son!
Why? Because GOD said so, and it appears that the Early Church including the writer of Hebrews were fully aware of this & had no concept that Jesus was at anytime, an angelic being- (Heb 1:4-7) Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. 5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? 6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. 7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
- (Heb 1:13) But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
- (Heb 2:5-9) For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak. 6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? 7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: 8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. 9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
The writer of Hebrew is obviously refuting 'angel-christology' which appears was prevalent at his time; he is refuting it using the strongest possible terms.
He is showing that Jesus the Messiah, GOD's Son, was NOT an angelic being at any time!
How much clearer could the writer make it?
The questions in Heb. 1:5, 13; are NOT rhetorical questions.
The answer therefore is:- TO NONE OF THE ANGELS, DID GOD AT ANYTIME SAY …
Thus, Jesus the Messiah, GOD's only-begotten human son was NOT & is NOT an angelic being at anytime!GOD never ever intended the world to come to be put in subjection under any angel. It was always the will of GOD that the world be under subjection to human beings, not angelic beings hence the terms, 'man & son of man'.
In chapter 2, the writer of Hebrews is equating Jesus, even the risen Jesus, as a bonafide human being, a man, a son of man, and not an angelic being!Stephen [Acts 7] & Paul [Gal 3.19; cp. Heb 2.2] were fully aware of the OT and they stated that what spoke to the patriarchs were 'angels', angelic beings, plain and simple … they never equate Jesus as an OT angel … never!
There is simply no verse which equates the Messiah with the OT Angel of the Lord! No not one.
Therefore, in the OT, via what the Jews call, the law of agency, GOD spoke and acted via/thru His angels.
- (Acts 7:30) And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.
- (Acts 7:35) This Moses whom they refused, saying, Who made thee a ruler and a judge? the same did God send to be a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the angel which appeared to him in the bush.
- (Acts 7:38) This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:
- (Acts 7:52-53) Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
- (Acts 7:55-56) But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, 56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
Stephen mentions the well-known facts that it was 'angels' that appeared & spoke to the patriarchs, GOD working thru them.
He finally begins to speak of the Messiah in verse 52ff … he nevers says that it was the Messiah who spoke to the patriarchs; rather, Stephen states that it was Stephen's audience who were the betrayers & murderers of the Messiah in NT times! i.e. in their time! He does not depict the Messiah in OT times but rather depicts the Coming of the Messiah in their NT time! Not only did the Messiah come, but his audience were instrumental in his death!And finally, if GOD had spoken thru His Son in OT times via any means, the following verses would not make sense …
(Heb 1:1-2) God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
(Compare: (1 Pet 1:20) Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, )
You see!
GOD did NOT speak via His Son in time past (simply because His Son was NOT conceived/begotten yet!)It wasn't until Jesus came into being … until he was begotten … in the fulness of time, in these last days that GOD had an only-begotten Son to speak TO US thru!!!
GOD's Son was foreordained even in OT times. He did not exist in OT times. He did not exist until he was conceived/begotten like every other human being
Jesus was & ever will be a human being
He was never at any time, an angelic being!(Oh BTW, remember, the Angel of the Lord continues to appear in the NT e.g. Matt 1:20,24; 2.13, 28.2; Luke 2.9, etc; so again, it can't be Jesus the Messiah!)
Reread Hebrews Chapters 1 thru 2, again!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
