Jesus, Michael?

[david]

Quote (david @ Feb. 19 2009,10:13)

Quote (david @ Feb. 16 2009,16:38) Quote (david @ Feb. 16 2009,04:22) Nick, I'd rather discuss this here, in the main thread.  3 others have been started all exactly the same.  I prefer to have one large thread than several little threads all discussing the same thing. I though we could start with T8's point above.  Is T8 wrong? So, we have a better idea what he is saying, let's look at the full context: “We know that Jesus is not and angel because we are told just that in Hebrews.”–Kerwin. T8 responds: “Actually that is an assumption on your part. First off, it says to which of the angels, and then points to the son. This can equally be read as him not being an angel and being an angel too. Try reading it with the understanding that he is an angel and it also makes sense. Secondly scripture calls Jesus an angel. Malachi 3:1 “See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking  will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come,” says the LORD Almighty. Almost without exception this passage has been interpreted to refer to two messengers – John the Baptist as the first messenger (or angel) “preparing the way” and the Lord Jesus Christ as the second “messenger (or angel) of the covenant”. It  is also quoted in Matt.11:10. NOTE: The word for angel (messenger) in the OT is mal'ak {mal-awk'} – hence Malachi. Matthew 11:10-15, “This is he, of whom it is written, 'Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, who shall prepare Your way before You'. John 13:16 I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. The reality here is that the word 'angel' means 'messenger' and Jesus and John were both messengers. Messengers can be men, cherub, seraph, or whatever God chooses. More often than not, translators use the word “angel” when it is a being from heaven, and messenger when it is a “man” – hence why we usually think that all angels are always beings from heaven.” Then, in his next post, he says: “Hi Nick. The word angel in the OT is {mal-awk}. This word is applied to men and heavenly beings. That is my point. So in the usage of that word, Jesus is indeed an angel {mal-awk}.   I have never taught that Jesus is a cherub or seraph, so in reference to them being called messengers, I am not lumping Jesus in that group.” https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….3;st=10 I thought we could begin with this thought as it is the only apparent “contradiction” of believing Michael is another name for Jesus.  As T8 points out, it is based on an “assumption.” Is T8 wrong Nick? (I underlined it for you so you could see it and answer it.  I know you won't.) david No response from Nick. You didn't respond the first, second, or third time I posted this.  How about now?

I've posted T8's post a few times now. Do you actually want to discuss scripture now?

[NickHassan]

Hi david,
So scripture neither says Jesus is an angel nor is Michael.
If you were loyal to sacred scripture would that not be enough info to trash it?

[david]

WHOA,
one step at a time.

Your question was:

Quote

Hi david, Where does scripture say he is an angel?

So what is the point in telling me this scripture doesn't say Jesus is Michael?

if that's the way you're going to reason….

Now, focus on what YOUR question was.

Does scripture say Jesus is a Malawk?  (Obviously, it does.)

[NickHassan]

Hi David,
Please present your scripture so we can look at context.

[david]

I'm curious Nick. I've posted T8's comments a few times now. Have you read them any of those times?

[david]

Read Malachi 3:1.

Read it in Hebrew.

Then, compare Matthew 11:10. Matthew 11:10 makes plain that it was talking about Jesus. Guess what word is used in Malachi 3:1?

That's right–The Hebrew word for Angel/Messenger.

[NickHassan]

Hi david,
Surprising you would rely on a quote from t8 ahead of scripture.

Malachi 3:1
“See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come,” says the LORD Almighty.

So try putting ANGEL rather than MESSENGER in this context.

But you would claim this one verse shows Jesus could be an angel?
Have you any better evidence??

[david]

Quote

Hi david, Surprising you would rely on a quote from t8 ahead of scripture.

Of course I don't put his words ahead of scripture.  I'm just making it obvious that one of you two is wrong.  Which one of you aren't from the body of Christ?

You continue to make accusations in the other thread we are having discussions in right now, that JW's are wrong.  Yet, you two, who are moderators on this board, you being picked by T8, cannot even agree.  AND THERE IS ONLY TWO OF YOU.  

I have to think that there would be more than one individual who knows the truth.  There would be many in agreement on the truth.  Not one.

Quote

So try putting ANGEL rather than MESSENGER in this context.

They are the exact same word.

Quote

Have you any better evidence??

You have already agreed this is speaking of Jesus.  
And you agree it uses the word that is translated “angel” in that verse to apply to Jesus.

But if you want more evidence other than the Bible directly saying that he is a malawk, sure….  

(so far, I haven't been trying very hard.  I haven't actually even looked into my Michael/Jesus file.

I've just been wanting you to acknowledge, (which you just have) that Jesus is called Malawk.

Now that we've established that, from scripture….

[david]

https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=17;t=749;hl=angel

[NickHassan]

So david ,
If you think you have one verse then show us the comparative verse as you recommended in your test.

[david]

Quote

So david , If you think you have one verse then show us the comparative verse as you recommended in your test.

First of all, I don't think I have one verse. Malachi 3 is speaking of Jesus, as you yourself have already acknowledged.

Guess what it calls him? There is no symbolic language here. It wasn't allegorical, or metaphorical.

OK, I'd rather look at other scriptures that make plain Jesus is a malwak, but it's getting late, so let's skip ahead to where you want this to go:

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;

I'll comment on this later.

[NickHassan]

Hi David,
Yes you have led us on this merry dance of human logic before.
But what you are trying to say is not written.

[Author]

Posts