- This topic is empty.
- Posts
the great prince michael in daniel 12:1 ,is not jesus, or michael the arch angel !you all speak of ,but who is he ,and when will he come,hmmm maybee in a time of trouble as there has never been,sooon aftrer this time of trouble jesus will come to make some trouble of his own, for the ungodly and those who hate god.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 13 2005,18:24) Hi jbl,
I think there is actually NO Biblical evidence to support it. Here is one of many refutations of the JW premise that Jesus and the archangel Michael are one and the same:Colossians 1:16
For by him [Jesus]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.The Greek phrase rendered “all things” above is transliterated as “ta panta”, which literally means “the all”. The word “things” is added by the translators. “Panta” is a form of the Greek word “pas”, meaning “all”. All forms of “pas” look to the context as well as common evidence for what is included, or excluded, from the “all” that is being spoken of. Paul gives an example of evident exclusion regarding “panta” in 1 Corinthians 15:27. “Pas” rarely means absolutely everything in the universe, nor even absolutely every created thing in the universe.
The context indicates that the God of Jesus is not included in “panta” of Colossians 1:16, and that the one being referred to as “firstborn”, through whom God created the “panta”, is also not included in the panta. The context seems further to restrict the “panta” to all: “in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers.” In other words, to living creatures. Thus, the “panta” being spoken of does not necessarily include the physical universe itself, such as the creation of the physical galaxies, stars, planets, etc.
[/quote]Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 13 2005,18:24)
John 1:3
3All things were made by him[Jesus]; and without him was not any thing made that was made.According to the NT writers Paul and John Jesus created all things, an unqualified statement. Therefore, He Himself cannot possibly be both a created thing (as all angels are) and a creator at the same time. He cannot logically create Himself before He existed.
All things [Panta] were made through [dia] him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.
In John 1:3, we again have the word “panta”, which is indeed qualified both by common evidence and the context. Jesus is not being referred to as the “creator”, but rather as the agent in creation. God made “all” “through” the Logos.
John 1:10 – He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world didn't recognize him.
What did God create “through” (Greek, dia) the Logos? “The world [Greek, kosmos, Strong's #2889) was made through him.” (John 1:10) What is included in the “world” that is being spoken of? It has to be “the world [that] didn't recognize him.” So we conclude that the world that was made through the Logos does not include the angels, nor even the angels that sinned, for they surely did recgonize who he was. (Matthew 4:11; 8:29; Mark 1:13; Luke 1:35; 4:41) Other scriptures all through the New Testament use the word “world” (Greek, kosmos*) in reference to the world of mankind on earth, thus one can conclude that the “panta” of John 1:3 that the God and Father of Jesus made “through” Jesus was the world of mankind, pertaining to the order of things upon the earth, and thus not one of this creation (the world of mankind) was made without him.
*http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=2889&version=nasJesus, therefore, having been created before “the beginning” spoken of in John 1:1, was already in existence with the angels, at the time that the only true God whom the Logos was with, made all, pertaining to the world of mankind, through the Logos. That the angels were also present at the creation of the world of mankind can be seen from Job 48:4-7.
1 Thessalonians 4:16 (New International Version)
For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.1 Thessalonians 4:16 (New American Standard Bible)
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.1 Thessalonians 4:16 (Amplified Bible)
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud cry of summons, with the shout of an archangel, and with the blast of the trumpet of God. And those who have departed this life in Christ will rise first.1 Thessalonians 4:16 (New Living Translation)
For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the call of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, all the Christians who have died will rise from their graves.1 Thessalonians 4:16 (King James Version)
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:1 Thessalonians 4:16 (English Standard Version)
For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.1 Thessalonians 4:16 (American Standard Version)
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first;While on earth as a human, Jesus performed several resurrections. In doing so, he used his voice to utter commanding calls. For example, when resurrecting the dead son of a widow in the city of Nain, he said:
“Young man, I say to you, Get up!” (Luke 7:14, 15)
Later, just before resurrecting his friend Lazarus, Jesus
“cried out with a loud voice: ‘Lazarus, COME ON OUT!’” (John 11:43)
In the future, it is Jehovah’s will for JESUS to resurrect the dead, but on a greater scale. (John 6:38-40)
Instead of saying Lazarus, “come on out” he will be saying this to many.
““Most truly I say to YOU, The hour is coming, and it is now, when THE DEAD WILL HEAR THE VOICE OF THE SON OF GOD and those who have given heed will LIVE. For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted also to the Son to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to do judging, because Son of man he is. Do not marvel at this, because the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will HEAR HIS [JESUS] VOICE and COME OUT…” (John 5:25-29)
The dead are raised. They hear a voice. Who's voice? John 5:25-29 says they “will HEAR HIS [JESUS'] VOICE AND COME OUT….” It says “THE DEAD WILL HEAR THE VOICE OF THE SON OF GOD and . . . LIVE.
So, it is unquestionably Jesus voice that raises them from the dead, as scripture plainly states.
Yet, notice the second half of 1 Thess 4:16:
“because the Lord [JESUS] himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s VOICE and with God's trumpet, and THOSE WHO ARE DEAD in union with Christ will RISE first.”In my mind, there can be no question that it is Jesus' voice that raises the dead, as the scriptures state in John.
Here we have Jesus descending from heaven, with a commanding call, with an archangels voice, and the dead rise. But we know that the dead rise with Jesus VOICE. So is it just comparing his voice to that of an archangels? Maybe archangels have really loud voices. Well, first, “archangel” is never used in plural in the Bible. “Archangels” are never mentioned. “Arch” means “cheif” or “primary.” “Angel” means, ..angel, or messenger. They are the same word.
Anyway, If Jesus is not the archangel in this event and he is superior to the archangel, then why would he perform this act as though he was someone of lower rank?
It is reasonable to conclude that only an archangel would call “with an archangel’s voice.” Would it be appropriate to liken Jesus’ commanding call to that of someone lesser in authority?
Example: A king is above a noble. Would it make sense to have a great king come out and say he ordered his men with a commanding call, with the voice of a noble.
No, A king is above a noble. Why compare a kings voice to a nobles? Jesus authority is greater than everyone's but God. He has been given all authority in heaven and earth. It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14)
If the designation “archangel” applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to “an archangel’s voice” would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.WHO TAKES ACTION AGAINST SATAN, “RULER OF THIS WORLD”?
Revelation 12:7-12 says that Michael and his angels would war against Satan and hurl him and his wicked angels out of heaven in connection with the conferring of kingly authority on Christ. Jesus is later depicted as leading the armies of heaven in war against the nations of the world. (Rev. 19:11-16)
REVELATION 12:7
“And war broke out in heaven: Mícha·el and his angels battled with the dragon, and the dragon and its angels battled”
REVELATION 19:11-14
“And I saw the heaven opened, and, look! a white horse. And the one seated upon it is called Faithful and True, and he judges and carries on war in righteousness. His eyes are a fiery flame, and upon his head are many diadems. He has a name written that no one knows but he himself, and he is arrayed with an outer garment sprinkled with blood, and the name he is called is The Word of God. Also, the armies that were in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen.”
Is it not reasonable that Jesus would also be the one to take action against the one he described as “ruler of this world,” Satan the Devil? (John 12:31)
Daniel 12:1 (RS) associates the ‘standing up of Michael’ to act with authority with “a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time.” That would certainly fit the experience of the nations when Christ as heavenly executioner takes action against them.
So the evidence indicates that the Son of God was known as Michael before he came to earth and is known also by that name since his return to heaven where he resides as the glorified spirit Son of God.
Jesus himself is the one who leads the armies of Heaven to judge and make war against Satan! Which brings us to our next point.
***
Since Jesus is the one prophesied to crush Satan’s head, and since he accomplishes all these other judgment acts, it is only logical to conclude that he would lead heaven’s armies in the casting of Satan out of heaven. Hence, the conquering Michael referred to in Revelation 12 must be Jesus, who was told by Jehovah to “go subduing in the midst of [his] enemies.”—Psalm 110:1, 2; Acts 2:34, 35.WHO ELSE IS SPOKEN OF AS HAVING ANGELS UNDER SUBJECTION?
Aside from the Creator himself, only one faithful person is spoken of as having angels under subjection—namely, Jesus Christ.
MATTHEW 24:31
“And he will send forth his angels with a great trumpet sound, and they will gather his chosen ones together from the four winds, from one extremity of the heavens to their other extremity.”
2 THESSALONIANS 1:7-10
“but, to YOU who suffer tribulation, relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels in a flaming fire, as h
e brings vengeance upon those who do not know God.”
MATTHEW 16:27
“For the Son of man is destined to come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will recompense each one according to his behavior.”
MATTHEW 25:31,41
““When the Son of man arrives in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit down on his glorious throne. . . .Then he will say, in turn, to those on his left, ‘Be on YOUR way from me, YOU who have been cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels.””
MARK 8:38
“For whoever becomes ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of man will also be ashamed of him when he arrives in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.””
MATTHEW 13:41
“The Son of man will send forth his angels, and they will collect out from his kingdom all things that cause stumbling and persons who are doing lawlessness,”
The apostle Paul made specific mention of “the Lord Jesus” and “his powerful angels.” (2 Thessalonians 1:7) And Peter described the resurrected Jesus by saying: “He is at God’s right hand, for he went his way to heaven; and angels and authorities and powers were made subject to him.”—1 Peter 3:22.
The Bible states that war broke out in heaven and that “Michael and HIS angels battled with the dragon….and its angels.” (Rev 12:7) Thus, Michael is the Leader of an army of faithful angels.
Revelation also describes Jesus as the Leader of an army of faithful angels. (Rev 19:14-16) It is “his army” of angels. (Rev 19:19) And the apostle Paul specifically mentions “the Lord Jesus” and “his powerful angels” (2 Thess 1:7; Mat 16:27; 24:31; 1 Pet 3:22) So the Bible speaks of both Michael and “his angels” and Jesus and “his angels.” (Mat 13:41) Since God’s Word nowhere indicates that there are two armies of faithful angels in heaven–one headed by Michael and one headed by Jesus–it is logical to conclude that Michael is none other than Jesus Christ in his heavenly role.JESUS IS COMMISSIONED TO DESTROY ALL THE NATIONS AT ARMAGEDDON
Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to “the time of the end” (Da 11:40) and then stated: “And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel’s] people.” (Da 12:1) Michael’s ‘standing up’ was to be associated with “a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time.” (Da 12:1) In Daniel’s prophecy, ‘standing up’ frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah’s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har–Magedon.—Re 11:15; 16:14-16.Yes, there are other angelic creatures of high rank, such as seraphs and cherubs. (Genesis 3:24; Isaiah 6:2) Yet, the Scriptures point to the resurrected Jesus Christ as the chief of all angels—Michael the archangel.
The question comes down to this:
If I make these statements:
1. Jimmy is the one who stole my suitcase.
2. The architect stole my suitcase.Am I allowed to conclude that Jimmy is an architect? Nowhere does it explicitely say that Jimmy is an architect?.
3. Jimmy is in charge of the builders.
4. An architect is in charge of the builders.5. Jimmy is the one who is going to see the building constructed.
6. The architect is in charge of the building.Nowhere are we told that Jimmy is the architect. But if we believe they are not the same one, then this means there are two that have the exact same role. And which is more likely? That is the question.
Hi David,
So you admit that is is just a hunch you are following to say Jesus is one of his fellow sons of God?
Or rather it is the JW masters who say that this is so and you must defend their beliefs?
No it is patently rubbish to say Jesus was ever an archangel
and worse to say he was one called Michael.
Wake up, stand on your own feetHi RD,
You say“That the angels were also present at the creation of the world of mankind can be seen from Job 48:4-7. “\
I presume you mean Jb38No Nick. I remember about 30 pages back asking you several questions that you just flat out refused to answer. It's not that you can't answer them. It's that you know answering them means you are wrong.
Here is an example of one such question:
If I make these statements:
1. Jimmy is the one who stole my suitcase.
2. The architect stole my suitcase.The question: Is Jimmy the architect?
Everyone! Watch as Nick completely ignores this question for pages and pages and pages. Does Nick know the answer to this question? Yes, we all would hope so. So why will he ignore this question? Because that would be admitting that God has given us “power of reason” as the Bible states. And Nick will never and has never admitted to that.
Nick, you know neither the meaning of “arch” nor “angel” to assert that it is rubbish to say that Jesus is an archangel. Even if he isn't, that word expressly fits him perfectly.
He was, without question, or a shadow of doubt, Jehovah's greatest, foremost, primary (arch) messenger!
And messenger is the exact same word as angel, remember?
Even….even if none of this applied to Jesus, he could still be called the arch angel, for that word could easily be one of the many descriptions given to God's chief messenger (arch angel)!Your ability to dodge simple questions will continue to astound everyone. Go ahead nick. Amaze us.
Quote Hi David,
So you admit that is is just a hunch you are following to say Jesus is one of his fellow sons of God?
Or rather it is the JW masters who say that this is so and you must defend their beliefs?
No it is patently rubbish to say Jesus was ever an archangel
and worse to say he was one called Michael.
Wake up, stand on your own feetI believe it is called the “genesis fallacy” to believe that something is wrong based on where the idea comes from. It's like saying: “Nick is wrong about hellfire, therefore Nick is wrong about the trinity.”
It is a fallacy to believe something is wrong because of our prejudice or bias against that person.
If Nick can at least attempt to have a conversation with me, about the actual scriptures (without including apocryphyl works) it would go a long way in showing that this idea isn't biblical.david
Nick, I have a project for you. I'd like you to explain to everyone what angels are.
I believe angels are created spirit beings, or spirit creatures.To me, it seems that you are repulsed by the idea of calling Jesus an angel. Nowhere have I said Jesus is 'just an angel' or that he is no greater than any other angel.
I believe he is the arch “created spirit being” being the chief over all others.
Of course, God is not a created spirit, and so doesn't fit into this.
And Jesus is the only begotten son, the only begotten god, created directly by Jehovah. But he did have a beginning.
So that is something that he shares with the other spirit beings who were created.
Acts 23:9 reads:
“And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees’ part arose, and strove, saying we find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.” (KJV)
Some scholars understand that the “spirit” referred to here is a demon while the “angel” referred to one of the faithful holy angels. But does that mean that “angels” are not “spirits” since the passage reads “spirit or an angel”? No, the Scriptures are plain that angels are spirits. (See Psalm 104:1, 4; Hebrew 1:7; 1 Kings 22:20-22.)
Notwithstanding that fact, angels are differentiated from spirits at Acts 23:9. Could this same principle apply with respect to the citations from Hebrews 1:5, 13 and 2:5 and the question of Jesus’ status as an angel?Hi David,
“If it looks like a duck
and walks like a duck
and quacks like a duck
it is PROBABLY a duck”works fairly well for ducks
But such an approach to the precious words of God is inappropriate.The JWs would say
“If it looks like a duck
it IS a duck
and we will preach it door to door.”Quote Everyone! Watch as Nick completely ignores this question for pages and pages and pages. Does Nick know the answer to this question? Quote (david @ Feb. 03 2008,05:40) Quote Hi David,
So you admit that is is just a hunch you are following to say Jesus is one of his fellow sons of God?
Or rather it is the JW masters who say that this is so and you must defend their beliefs?
No it is patently rubbish to say Jesus was ever an archangel
and worse to say he was one called Michael.
Wake up, stand on your own feetI believe it is called the “genesis fallacy” to believe that something is wrong based on where the idea comes from. It's like saying: “Nick is wrong about hellfire, therefore Nick is wrong about the trinity.”
It is a fallacy to believe something is wrong because of our prejudice or bias against that person.
If Nick can at least attempt to have a conversation with me, about the actual scriptures (without including apocryphyl works) it would go a long way in showing that this idea isn't biblical.david
Hi david,
You can be proven right about matters of God from his written Word.
You cannot be proven right in such matters by the use of greek logic and inference.
Surely you do not elevate the thoughts of men as being equal to what is written?
That is indeed a fallacy that probably causes God to laugh in the heavens.See the “inference” thread for an instance of Nick inferring something not directly stated. (page 3-5)
Nick, I'm not sure if the Bible anywhere specifically says that “Jesus is the son of man.” Is he Nick? Do you allow yourself to “infer” that he is?
'Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.'”
“He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again.”
“But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins. . .”
Sure, Jesus forgave sins, and this “son of man” has authority to forgive sins.
YET, I'm not sure there is anywhere in the Bible where we are told that “Jesus is the son of man.” Are we? Maybe I'm wrong.
Nick, do you believe that Jesus is the son of man? As far as I can tell Nick, you make inferences all the time.
I think you may have backed yourself into a position where you can no longer say with certainty that Jesus is the son of man. Can you?
Not really talking about Jesus being a man. I'm talking about him being the “son of man.”
Quote YET, I'm not sure there is anywhere in the Bible where we are told that “Jesus is the son of man.” Are we? Maybe I'm wrong. Quote scripture says it several times. –nick
Scripture says what several times? That “Jesus is the son of man.”
Please point me to these inference like quotes. Which ones are they?
Nick, do you believe Jesus is the son of man. If so, why? Don't tell me it's because of inference, though.
Hi David,
Was Jesus a son of Adam?[adam=man]
If he was a man as scripture says…. he is a son of ADAM.
In fact he is the second ADAM[1Cor 15.45]Please do not embarrass yourself by continuing to suggest it is OK to equate inference with what is written.
Quote Please do not embarrass yourself by continuing to suggest it is OK to equate inference with what is written.
I have never suggested equating the two. I do point out that Paul “reasoned with them from the scriptures.” “The power of reason” is something mentioned in the Bible. It is something we all possess, the ability to reason.What you do not possess, apparently, is the ability to answer very very simple questions–embarrasingly simple ones. (see first post on this page)
The power of reason should tell us, or most of us, very quickly that Jimmy is an architect. Somehow, your power of reason did not tell you this.
Nick, my question to you, wasn't whether Jesus is a man, it was whether or not he is the “son of man.”
MATTHEW 10:23
“When they persecute YOU in one city, flee to another; for truly I say to YOU, YOU will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of Israel until the Son of man arrives.”ACTS 7:56
“and he said: “Look! I behold the heavens opened up and the Son of man standing at God’s right hand.””HEBREWS 2:6
“But a certain witness has given proof somewhere, saying: “What is man that you keep him in mind, or [the] son of man that you take care of him?”REVELATION 1:13
“and in the midst of the lampstands someone like a son of man, clothed with a garment that reached down to the feet, and girded at the breasts with a golden girdle.”REVELATION 14:14
“And I saw, and, look! a white cloud, and upon the cloud someone seated like a son of man, with a golden crown on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand.”Let's say there are another 75 scriptures like this, referring to this “son of man.” And let's imagine that none of them said: “Jesus is the son of man.”
Nick, would you argue that we don't know who the son of man is? Please, give an honest answer.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
