• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

JW's Jesus is Archangel Michael?

Mountain_Climber

Active Member
Michael is an angel. Jesus is the perfect reflection of God The Father. God is savior. But according to the Jehovah's Witnesses the real savior is an angel.
I cannot say with certainty that you are wrong about what JW's believe in that regard.

I would hope they would see that it is the man who was Jesus who saves us by teaching us how we should walk so as to have favor in God's eyes.

But then they seem to not think it necessary for all who would be saved to be born again, and so you may be right..
 

Mountain_Climber

Active Member
You said earlier that Michael is a savior. Michael is an angel. See? You are saying that angels save.
Colossians 2:18
Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you. Such a person also goes into great detail about what they have seen; they are puffed up with idle notions by their unspiritual mind.
No, you said it in your post number 470.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I think I know who Michael is! Try this on for size. Jesus says that whenever two or more are gathered in his name he is there. People have always been for YHVH and for the will of God to do. And the law of God does not change. God's name is God's will. If Jesus for YHVH is with us who are for God's will be done, then he has always been with God's people for the will of God to do. For they are all living to Jehovah. ( that is for the Jehovah's Witnesses).

It is written that God's people are one body with God as head. So? Daniel knew that. Correct? Michael is the name for God's people in agreement for the will of God. The body of Christ. I can give you scriptures, but it might take a long time.......for.......virtually nothing.
 

Yoshua

Well-Known Member
From the standpoint of being faithfully and perfectly the Word of his Father, one could say the Word was God as that Word projected only God's will rather than the Son's.

The Word is not a personal identity for the Son. It is a similar situation to how angelic messengers of God were addressed as God, the Word they bore being recognized as God speaking in and through them. John proceeds speaking things which clearly show he did not see Jesus as personally being God. He saw Jesus as a God bearer. And that is what an image is.
Hi Mountain,

Oh. How come that your God in John 1:1 is “a god” from the NWT Bible? Do you speak the same thing with the Watchtower org.? Who is the “word” in John 1:1 to you? Jesus or God the Father?

However, it is my opinion that far too much is attempted to be built up and off of this rather isolated verse. The claims made concerning Jesus supposedly claiming to be the great "I AM" are totally preposterous beyond shear ignorance to the point of outright deliberate falsification. There is no valid equivalent in the ancient scripture as they claim. But once men have been for whatever reason manipulated into a place where they espouse falsities they also go to an unsteady man's length in trying to defend those falsities. In that way the ones who sowed the very first seeds of this deception, while merely desiring to create something clear to point to that their brethren would believe it and keep away from it, they unwittingly participated in the creation of a monster larger than they ever dreamed of.
So Archangel Michael is the only begotten Son. How can an angel become a begotten Son and a Son of God?

Where is Archangel Michael when Jesus exists on this earth? Where is Archangel Michael before Jesus exist? Where is Archangel Michael when Jesus ascended?

Can you give the sequence of Archangel Michael and Jesus appearance so I can see clearly?


I'm not confusing anything. You just refuse to see the truth. Let the scripture speak for itself.
Jude 1:9 (ESVST) 9 But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, "The Lord rebuke you." (It doesn't say, "Michael rebuked the devil")
Mat 17:18 (ESVST) 18 And Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of him, and the boy was healed instantly. (Who rebuked the demon?)
Mar 1:25 (ESVST) 25 But Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be silent, and come out of him!" (Who rebuked the unclean spirit?)

Did Jesus have to say, "the Lord rebuke you"?By djhwoodwerks

In addition with the message of djhwoodwerks,
Matt.4:10
10. Then Jesus said to him, "Begone, Satan! For it is written, `You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.'"
Matt 16:23
23. But He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God's interests, but man's."


Jesus directly rebuked Satan. There is no reason behind why He will not rebuke Satan if He is Jesus in Jude 1:9. If He is Jesus here, He should say “Get behind Me Satan!” or “I rebuke You!”

If Jesus can rebuke Satan in front of Peter, how much more He can rebuke Satan in His presence. See the analogy.

Thanks
 
Last edited:

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
In reality it was only the man born of Mary who ever was Jesus.
It was that man as a human who set us free from enslavement to sin. It is even that human who we must imitate.

And so he continues to be called Jesus by men in order to keep that connection flowing.

But that in no way changes who he was before or after being that man named Jesus.

Tell us again how it was through that HUMAN Jesus that God created all things.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I think I know who Michael is! Try this on for size. Jesus says that whenever two or more are gathered in his name he is there. People have always been for YHVH and for the will of God to do. And the law of God does not change. God's name is God's will. If Jesus for YHVH is with us who are for God's will be done, then he has always been with God's people for the will of God to do. For they are all living to Jehovah. ( that is for the Jehovah's Witnesses).

It is written that God's people are one body with God as head. So? Daniel knew that. Correct? Michael is the name for God's people in agreement for the will of God. The body of Christ. I can give you scriptures, but it might take a long time.......for.......virtually nothing.
Because there were people for Christ before Christ. John 20:29 Hebrews 12:1 Also it seems the writer of Revelations existed as an angel for a while.

I propose that the body of Christ exists on the Earth like an angel.
 

Mountain_Climber

Active Member
Tell us again how it was through that HUMAN Jesus that God created all things.
It would be just as true that he was the one through whom God created all things when he gives us his new name: Revelation 3:12 "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name."

As I told you, he was yet basically the same person. He just took on a different role and a different name for a time, and he has even another name now which you do not know because he has not written that new name on you.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It would be just as true that he was the one through whom God created all things when he gives us his new name: Revelation 3:12 "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name."

As I told you, he was yet basically the same person. He just took on a different role and a different name for a time, and he has even another name now which you do not know because he has not written that new name on you.
If Jesus and Michael are the same person then salvation is by an angel.
 

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
As I told you, he was yet basically the same person. He just took on a different role and a different name for a time, and he has even another name now which you do not know because he has not written that new name on you.

With that logic, it was through the role of Michael that all things were created, not the role of Jesus. If Michael was in heaven in the beginning and changed roles when he came to earth, it is still Michael playing the role of Jesus. Changing a name and a role doesn't change the person/being, so it was through Michael all things were created, not Jesus.
 

Mountain_Climber

Active Member
With that logic, it was through the role of Michael that all things were created, not the role of Jesus. If Michael was in heaven in the beginning and changed roles when he came to earth, it is still Michael playing the role of Jesus. Changing a name and a role doesn't change the person/being, so it was through Michael all things were created, not Jesus.
You are apparently a slow learner.

In heaven just as John told you, he was the Word of God. Yes, in heaven he was the word to the angels, which is the function of the archangel, the name of Michael indicating that he was the one angel who was like God, obviously because he was with God in the beginning and so had far greater teaching from his Father so as to come to perfectly image his righteousness, which is also why he could be the righteousness of God to us.

Now, his role was not as savior of those angels so it would have been silly to call him Jesus. His role was the Word of God and so he had the name that showed he was like God and the angels needed to respect that so that they too would go on learning through him to be God's righteousness.

This image of God business is not confined to man as some ignoramuses purport. God's goal for all of his intelligent creatures is that they image his righteousness and thus be a glory to his having created them in and through his treasured Son whom he appointed as his Word to all that God would create in and through him.

The role changed after sin necessitating a new name which showed him to be the channel of God's salvation to those who had been affected by sin and thus on the road to wrath. But it was not to the angels who fell to sin that God sent him as they were created without sin as was Adam and so they had made their choice.

We on the other hand did not have a choice because we were born to all the damage caused of Adam's sin so that we have never gotten to know what it is to live a life free of sin. And so God sent the Word to us in the role of Savior that we could learn of life without sin by way of his life and in so learning finally have the opportunity to make our choice as to which life we prefer. It is also for that same reason that, "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." Hebrews 6:4-6

Your logic is where things are getting lost and twisted around. Work on it.

Be humble enough to consider that you are wrong and care more about finding the truth than anything else at this critical time.
 
Last edited:
Angel is a job description. It means messenger. It's not referring to a type of being.

Most think their eating of the fruit from the tree was their failing a test and bringing what you call sin into the world.

It was not a test, but a warning. Partaking from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was an analogy for using freewill. God was saying use your freewill and you'll surely die. They doubted God and ate off the tree. Doubting God is what sin is. Adam brought sin to mankind by passing this doubt to his offspring. The other way that we are all punished because Adam did something wrong makes no sense.

If it was a test by God there had to be things that they were tested with. We call them temptations.

Eve ate off the tree because it was pleasing to the eye, good for food AND also for gaining wisdom. One temptation would have been from Satan, but God made the tree pleasing to the eye and good for food. Since we know God tempts no one (James 1:9) this is a lie by Satan planted in your minds that men are doomed by their acts..
 

Mountain_Climber

Active Member
Angel is a job description. It means messenger. It's not referring to a type of being.

Most think their eating of the fruit from the tree was their failing a test and bringing what you call sin into the world.

It was not a test, but a warning. Partaking from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was an analogy for using freewill. God was saying use your freewill and you'll surely die. They doubted God and ate off the tree. Doubting God is what sin is. Adam brought sin to mankind by passing this doubt to his offspring. The other way that we are all punished because Adam did something wrong makes no sense.

If it was a test by God there had to be things that they were tested with. We call them temptations.

Eve ate off the tree because it was pleasing to the eye, good for food AND also for gaining wisdom. One temptation would have been from Satan, but God made the tree pleasing to the eye and good for food. Since we know God tempts no one (James 1:9) this is a lie by Satan planted in your minds that men are doomed by their acts..
You have gotten quite a bit right, there. If you would only rethink that final conclusion.

You are right the tree was not a test. There was no reason for God to test the couple before sin and there is no record of God ever having tested anyone until after sin. Why would that be? It would be because until a cause becomes present to cause doubt to enter love, it is a violation of love not to trust. We can glean that of the description of love Paul gives at 1 Corinthians chapter 13. Therefore the trees had to be a loving warning as you say, a means of helping the couple to keep the importance of their listening to God always at the foremost of their minds.

Paul also said, "Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." 1 Timothy 2:14

So once again you are right that the serpent Satan sowed that idea to eve's mind that she "saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise." Thus being deceived, Eve fell into transgression. The word, "fell", as used by Paul meaning that Eve succumbed to the serpent's trickery.

But Adam, as Paul tells us, was not deceived. What Paul is there telling us is that Adam knew full well the choice he was making was wrong but Adam made that choice deliberately because he decided Eve was more precious to him than God.

We find both types of sin yet in the world today, (Adam) deliberate sin by choice and (Eve) sin by ignorance which pulls the ignorant one into the sin before it even registers to their mind that what they are doing is wrong. We see both types of sin evident also in Paul's words at Romans 5:14 "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."


God dooms no man, that is completely true. But some men do doom themselves. That is just how it is. Some men actually do love the sins they do so much that they would rather do them than to be faithful to God.

While your idea is childishly cute it falls short by reason of the fact that anyone who prefers sin as the love of their heart will always keep sin alive, thus causing hardship to always be for all men, including for the ones who are precious in God's eyes because they love him.

Thus it is that what you are teaching there at the end of your comment is contrary to God's justice which must champion what is best for those who love him.

You live in a fairytale if you think all men who have tasted sin can be made to afterward hate sin and so reject sin. A simple word search on the words, "destruction" and "destroy/ed" in the scriptures is all it takes to see that. You can twist some of the scriptures to make them seem to fit your idea but you will not be able to twist them all.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Is salvation by an angel?

They say Michael is the name of Jesus in Heaven before he was born God's Word on Earth. Why would God create all things with an angel called "who is like God"? If God DID create all things through the angel who is like God would that mean God is looking for his twin?

Jesus is God's exact representation. But he is Michael thus the son morphs into different things. Actually the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that God's name mean God morphs.

They say YHVH means God will become anything for the will of God to do.

God himself explained the meaning of his name to his faithful servant Moses. When Moses asked about God’s name, Jehovah replied: “I Will Become What I Choose to Become.” (Exodus 3:14) Rotherham’s translation renders those words: “I Will Become whatsoever I please.” So Jehovah can become whatever is needed in order to fulfill his purposes, and he can cause to happen whatever is required with regard to his creation and the accomplishment of his purpose.
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/jehovah-meaning-of-gods-name/
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Jesus is God's Word on Earth but is Michael God's Word in Heaven?

That would mean God's Word is an angel. Angels are created beings. If Michael is God's Word and the first person that was created, how did God do it without The Word?

John 1:1
 
Last edited:
Mountain Climber

Calling people names does not enhance your intelligence. Do you know the definition of agape love. It is unconditional love. Unconditional means no conditions have to be met. I keep hearing God is love but also just. I've never seen that written in the Bible. In fact if you go through scripture you'll see the word just or justice when talking about God is always showing love. Like show justice to the poor or widows. you'll never see it combined with retribution. Give me one verse that says God's justice is retribution. You'll be gnashing your teeth as you see my fantasy world ascend into heaven.
 
ISAIAH 8 : 20 "To the law and the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of day."

God is saying you have no light-no truth in anything you are saying.

MATTHEW 7 : 12 "so in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the law and the Prophets (Prophets wrote the testimony)

God is saying if they say anything about me that goes against the law of love it is not true.

Your agreeing with Satan when you say God will punish anyone.
 

Mountain_Climber

Active Member
ISAIAH 8 : 20 "To the law and the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of day."

God is saying you have no light-no truth in anything you are saying.

MATTHEW 7 : 12 "so in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the law and the Prophets (Prophets wrote the testimony)

God is saying if they say anything about me that goes against the law of love it is not true.

Your agreeing with Satan when you say God will punish anyone.

Sounds very much like you better be about correcting your view as to what love is.

If i failed to speak forthrightly to you knowing where your thinking is leading to for you then I would be hating you.

But if you wish to hate me for loving you enough to tell you where you are going wrong, then by all means have at it. You will be part of a huge crowd.
 

Mountain_Climber

Active Member
Mountain Climber

Calling people names does not enhance your intelligence. Do you know the definition of agape love. It is unconditional love. Unconditional means no conditions have to be met. I keep hearing God is love but also just. I've never seen that written in the Bible. In fact if you go through scripture you'll see the word just or justice when talking about God is always showing love. Like show justice to the poor or widows. you'll never see it combined with retribution. Give me one verse that says God's justice is retribution. You'll be gnashing your teeth as you see my fantasy world ascend into heaven.
There is no such thing as unconditional love. That is another false doctrine someone sold you. It is an ear tickler doctrine used by preachers whose main concern is to fill the seats in their church.

Also, your fragile feelings are getting in the way of your vision. I never called you any ill names. i just spoke honestly for your own good about what I see you doing. I would rather you hate me by falsely thinking I don't love you than to lose as a fellow in the world to come. So you can count on my being honest with you.
 
Last edited:
Top