- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi david,
You say
“2 JOHN 9
“Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son.”Well that doesn't say anything about Jesus not being Michael. It says to remain in the teaching of Christ. We are trying to determine if my belief about Michael is in the teaching of Christ.”
Jesus never taught that he was Michael and never taught he was part of a trinity God, and neither did the apostles or prophets. That is the teaching of Christ.
So should we try to read between the lines and see if we can find hints that are good enough to make doctrine?
Quote (david @ Sep. 20 2006,02:50) The following statements are true: “Jack went into the red house and met a man.
Jamie was alone in the red house at that time.”Nick, who did Jack meet?
–Although it doesn't specifically say, reason and logic tell us that Jack met Jamie.
–Further, although it doesn't tell us specifically, we know Jamie is a man.Logic and the ability to reason on what the statment say, make it abundantly clear that Jamie is a man. Now, YOU could say that it doesn't say these things. I'm going beyond what is written. WRONG. I'm reasoning on what is written. I'm using logic to put the pieces together. And the pieces fit the best when you realize that Jesus and Michael are the same. If you don't put that together, you'll have problems to deal with, such as ones I've raised in my post. Problems and questions which you prefer to look away from.
Nick, seriously, please answer, based soley on those two sentences, who did Jack meet? Or do you really not know?
Hi david,
Surely you do not rate
LOGIC
or REASON
or MYTHS
and LEGENDS
or OLD WIVES TALES
as being EQUAL in validity
To the Word of God, the teachings of Jesus?If so you do not know the Master.
1Tim 4
” 7But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. “2Tim 4.4
” 4And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”2Peter 1
” 16For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. “1Cor 3
“19For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.20And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. “
Quote Hi david,
Surely you do not rate
LOGIC
or REASON
or MYTHS
and LEGENDS
or OLD WIVES TALES
as being EQUAL in validity
To the Word of God, the teachings of Jesus?Of course not. That's why I quickly dismiss your idea of multiple archangels based on your beloved book of Enoch. I would rate that book in the possible “legends” or “old wives tales” class of what we are discussing. I AM USING THE BIBLE Nick. And I am using something the Bible refers to as the “power of reason.” (Rom 12:1)
Nick, did Paul or didn't Paul “reason with [people] from the scriptures?” (Acts 17:2) (OF COURSE YOU WON'T ANSWER THIS. YOU TEND NOT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.)
That's right Nick. The Bible says we have “power of reason.” God gave this ability to figure things out. Paul, used that ability, to reason “FROM THE SCRIPTURES.”
Was Paul wrong Nick?Quote Nick, seriously, please answer, based soley on those two sentences, who did Jack meet? Or do you really not know?
You have trouble with the simplest questions.Was Paul wrong Nick?
If you can't answer any of the questions raised in my post, perhaps it is your belief that these scriptures apply to:
Quote 1Tim 4
” 7But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. “2Tim 4.4
” 4And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”david
Hi david,
The only advice we need is to abide in the Word of God.
Your teaching on this matter is not written.OK, Nick, different idea.
Let's do that. Let'd discuss the Word of God. Let's start with some interesting scriptures. There are about 60 of them in the post above. Let's look at one of them, to begin:POINT 6
JESUS CALLS OUT WITH AN ARCHANGELS VOICE.
Commenting on one aspect of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, Apostle Paul wrote:
“because the Lord 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. (1 Thessalonians 4:16) (NWT)
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? Wouldn’t he be using an archangel’s voice because he is an archangel?
At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 (RS), the command of Jesus Christ for the resurrection to begin is described as “the archangel’s call,” and Jude 9 says that the archangel is Michael.
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?
For example, a king is above a noble. If you have a king, someone in great power and he calls out something of importance, you wouldn’t say: ‘He called out with a nobles voice,’ unless the King was a also a noble. If the king wasn’t a noble, you would say: He called out with the voice of a king. To say he called out with a nobles voice would be to diminish him, UNLESS HE WAS BOTH A NOBLE AND A KING.
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.
Reasonably, then, the archangel Michael is Jesus Christ.POINT 6B
Also, notice the second half of 1 Thess 4:16: “because the Lord 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.”
Now let’s look at Jesus’ words:
““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 voice and come out, those who did good things to a resurrection of life, those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:25-29)
A comparison of these two scriptures seems to indicate that Jesus and Michael are the same person.POINT 6C
For those who said: ‘It was just an archangels voice accompanying Jesus, but it wasn’t Jesus himself who had the commanding call.’ John 5:25,28 solves the problem: “the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God.” So in 1 thessalonians, its the archangel's voice, but in John 5, it is the voice of the Son of God! One cannot be wrong and the other right. Michael the Archangel must be Jesus! In both Thessalonians and John we see that the voice causes the resurrection of life. The dead in Christ will rise when they hear His voice! This is the same event and Jesus and Michael must be the same person.There, that's a scripture. Let's look at it. Actually, I guess there are a couple there. It's interesting when we compare it to John 5, isn't it?
Nick, please read this scripture. Please read John 5: 25,28. Those are both scriptures, aren't they? Or are those two scriptures of no interest to you? How do they compare? What do they both say? What does one tell us about the other?
No comment Nick? At least, not on the Bible? That's fine. Accuse ME of not using the Bible.Nick, I've provided a scripture. If you don't want to discuss Michael the Archangel as being Jesus. Let's discuss this Scipture. “Michael the archangel” is a part of the Bible Nick. Let's discuss him and why he is so oddly similar in roles to Jesus. Let's start with this scriptures. I said something about this scripture. Now you say something….
dave
Hi david,
Jesus comes and is announced by the Archangel. No that does not make Jesus that Archangel. Poor and circumstantial evidence.Have you read the book of Enoch, David?
If you have not looked at it how do you know if it is just legend and not inspired writ?
If it is simply because “You only consider the western protestant canon scriptures” then please show me chapter and verse on this?
Where is is written that scripture will only ever be contained within one book and bound with leather?
God promised to preserve his word, it is man who keeps trying to mandate how they think the preservation took place.
Without a chapter and verse in the bible telling me that no inspired scripture exists outside of the canon established 100s of years after Christ (and in the case of the apocrypha only being removed from the KJV a few hundred years ago) then I will consider that maybe other writ does indeed exist.
Especially considerning the evidence of the Book of Enoch
It contains fulfilled prophecy. (messiah will arrive 70 generations from enoch. look at Lukes geneology.)
It portrays Christ not in a trinity, and describes some very accurate fulfiilled prophecies of him being a light unto the gentiles.
It is quoted directly and indirectly by Jesus, Paul, Peter and John and Jude.
Jude quotes an exact verse from Enoch. The most important part about him quoting enoch is that he is quoting a prophecy about the Lord Judging false teachers. The entire chapter is about contending for the faith and resisting false teachings.
Using logic, would you quote a book filled with false teachings in a speech about not heeding false teachings? Would you quote “prophecy” in a speech about not following false teachers if indeed the prophecy was not genuine and in return its source genuine? He didnt just quote a secular catch phrase or a philosophical one liner like Paul did when he said “Bad company corrupts good character”, Jude actually quoted an actual prophecy! I don't think these things can be ignored.You clearly didn't read my post.
“the Lord 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.
So in 1 thessalonians, its the archangel's voice, but in John 5, it is the voice of the Son of God!Jesus’ words:
““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 voice and come out, those who did good things to a resurrection of life, those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:25-29)A comparison of these two scriptures seems to indicate that Jesus and Michael are the same person.
HERE'S WHERE THINGS GET INTERESTING NICK:
For those, such as you, who said: ‘It was just an archangels voice accompanying Jesus, but it wasn’t Jesus himself who had the commanding call.’ John 5:25,28 solves the problem: “the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God.”1 Thess 4
Commanding call from an archangel and the dead rise.John 5
The dead hear the voice of Jesus and come to life.NICK, THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO OUR JACK AND JAMIE problem you couldn't answer. I now know why you didn't want to try to attempt the extremely simple logic of it.
In both Thessalonians and John we see that the voice causes the resurrection of life. The dead in Christ will rise when they hear His voice! This is the same event and Jesus and Michael must be the same person.
The more I speak with you Nick, the more clear it becomes that Jesus and Michael are the same. Your lack of any attempt to refute any of the points raised only confirms this for me.
david
Quote If you have not looked at it how do you know if it is just legend and not inspired writ?
I've read about half of it (it's somewhere on this site) and skimmed the rest on this website. I have my comments on it in the Enoch thread.Quote If it is simply because “You only consider the western protestant canon scriptures” then please show me chapter and verse on this?
The majority consider this book to be questionable. The majority have sited several problems with this book. Even those who support it acknowledge this. I have three times asked anyone to defend the criticisms laid against it. I haven't found any.
The book speaks of things no other Bible books speak of. ANd it speaks of these things quite a bit. It doens't feel like the rest of the Bible, at all. It touches on different subjects. It doesn't seem to exalt God. It seems to point to the angels.Quote It contains fulfilled prophecy. (messiah will arrive 70 generations from enoch. look at Lukes geneology.) It portrays Christ not in a trinity, and describes some very accurate fulfiilled prophecies of him being a light unto the gentiles.
Please post these prophecies in the Enoch thread, the larger one, Mercy.Quote It is quoted directly and indirectly by Jesus, Paul, Peter and John and Jude.
Is it?Quote Jude quotes an exact verse from Enoch.
We can't acutally be certain of this, of course. There are other possibilities.Quote Using logic, would you quote a book filled with false teachings in a speech about not heeding false teachings?
We don't know he actually quoted that book. They perhaps quoted from a common source. Or, perhaps it was the other way around. WE simply don't know.I'd rather discuss these things in the Enoch thread.
david
Hi david,
Fascinating hints to you they may be but they are not direct teaching from the mouth of God so you would be wiser to keep these speculations to yourself than to take celestial responsibilty fror them by preaching them as truth.1 Thess 4 says that Jesus comes with a commanding call, with the voice of an archangel, and the dead rise.
If you're uncertain about the above verse, other scriptures clarify Nick:
John 5 says that the dead hear the voice of Jesus and come to life.
I'm not speculating that these are the same. They must be. Even these two scriptures make that plain. How could they not be the same?
It could mean he is coming to earth as a warrior this time instead of a babe and a suffering servant. The analogy used is “shout of the archangel”.
Like “roar of a lion”, “warcry of the eagle”, “with a thunderous voice”
Allegory is just as likely as a canidate.
Quote (david @ Sep. 20 2006,21:28) 1 Thess 4 says that Jesus comes with a commanding call, with the voice of an archangel, and the dead rise. If you're uncertain about the above verse, other scriptures clarify Nick:
John 5 says that the dead hear the voice of Jesus and come to life.
I'm not speculating that these are the same. They must be. Even these two scriptures make that plain. How could they not be the same?
Hi david,
You can put two and two together and make 5 from scripture all day long but I will not join in your speculative fantasies.It is not written that Jesus is an angel of any kind.
Quote It could mean he is coming to earth as a warrior this time instead of a babe and a suffering servant. The analogy used is “shout of the archangel”. Like “roar of a lion”, “warcry of the eagle”, “with a thunderous voice”
Allegory is just as likely as a canidate.
Yes Mercy. I've considered that. But as I said in point 6, 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? Wouldn’t he be using an archangel’s voice because he is an archangel?
Would it be appropriate to liken Jesus’ commanding call to that of someone lesser in authority?
Nick, what does your Bible or any Bible say at Galatians 4:14?
There is certainly the sense in that verse that being received like an angel was the same as being received like Jesus Christ. Doesn’t this suggest then that Jesus Christ is an angel, albeit an exceptional one?Quote It is not written that Jesus is an angel of any kind. Nick,you really have no idea what the word “angel” means, then, do you?
Please tell us what angel means. Please don't ignore this post as you have the others, simply to repeat your attempt to make it out like I am making this up and it has no base in scripture whatsoever.
What does the word “angel” mean? What is the simple clear exact meaning ?david
Hi david,
Keep searching for helpful hints to support what you cannot let go of,
but remember sound doctrine comes not from hints
but from actual scriptural teaching
and do not follow the path of vain speculation that led to the trinity folly.Nick, if we were discussing the “trinity folly”, you would have by now showed me 100 scriptures which refute that idea. So far, I'm the one with the scriptures.
You're the one that can only keep saying: “you're wrong,” and cannot carry a conversation. HOw many questions have I asked in in the past 30 posts? 50? A lot of these questions were fairly simple, and straightforward.YOu stated:
“It is not written that Jesus is an angel of any kind.”I asked:
“What does the word “angel” mean? What is the simple clear exact meaning ?”You replied, as you usually do, by evading the question, and accusing ME of not using scipture.
ANGEL IS A WORD THAT MEANS “MESSENGER” NICK.
So, you say that “It is not written that Jesus is an angel [meaning “messenger”] of any kind.”
Scripture plainly says you are wrong Nick. Jesus was God's greatest messenger, among other things. He was God's Word, his chief messenger, if you will, ie: “arch” “angel.”
So, even if, even if Jesus isn't the archangel spoken of, you are without question…let me repeat that, YOU ARE WITHOUT QUESTION WRONG, when you say that “It is not written that Jesus is an angel of any kind.” To say that is to close your eyes to what the very word angel means.Hi david,
Further rationalisations and justifications for a foolish doctrine may entertain you but I have no more interest in it. Any wandering off the path of biblical truth here is useless at best so play with your pretty butterflies of speculation if you must but we are walking on.Quote (david @ Sep. 21 2006,20:13) ANGEL IS A WORD THAT MEANS “MESSENGER” NICK.
I agree that angel means messenger.Angels are also called sons of God as we are.
We are also told that we will become like the angels in that we will not marry.
From what I can determine, angels can refer to man, seraphim, cherubim, and perhaps other hosts of heaven.
The verses that talk of angels in heaven to my way of thinking must be talking of seraphim or cherubim.
However in the gospels we see parallel accounts of angels being called men.
Matthew 28:2
There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it.Mark 16:5
As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.Luke 24:3-4
3 but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus
4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them.John 20:12
and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.The point here is that it could have been men, cherub, or seraph. My guess is that they were the same men that appeared with Jesus when he was transfigured.
Matthew 17
1 After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves.
2 There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light.
3 Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
