If Jesus is an angel of God then by him God is taking back the earth. Psalms 115:16
-
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?
- Thread starter Yoshua
- Start date
So why just state his only created son? Why the confusion if we're dealing with a Jehovah creation?
It states to "God alone." Nice try.
Now as an Orthodox Jew, preaching to Orthodox Jews, don't you think Jesus would act as an Orthodox Jew and worship his Father? If he didn't, who would listen to him? Who would follow him?
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Because Jesus is not the only "son of God". That is why he is called the "firstborn".
There is no confusion if you remove the trinity. Instead of trying to make the rest of scripture support this erroneous doctrine, you just have to know the simple truth.
The Angels are called "sons of God" and so is Adam. (Job 38:7; Luke 3:38) Why? Because they are direct creations of God's spirit. It is not rocket science. When you remove the false teaching, everything falls into place.
If Michael couldn't rebuke satan but Jesus could and did, does it seem like 1 person or two? And if you agree he is Gods Son, how then is the scripture that states no angel can be called that, make sense if he is indeed Michael? It contradicts it plainly does it not? And Michael is called "one of the chief princes" correct? If he is one among equals (other chief princes) then he is not unique, whereas Jesus is the unique Son of God correct? It seems through your post you don't address the issues so much then going off on rabbit trails about the trinity and such which is not really the debate.
It is about his dual natures. In his human nature on earth, he can be given things by the Father .
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Or it was a deliberate ignore by you because of your pre-conceived ideas about the trinity.
Look at that verse from the Complete Jewish Bible?.....
Luke 4:8...."Yeshua answered him, “The Tanakh says, ‘Worship Adonai your God and serve him only.’”
Jesus was quoting Deut 6:13 (rememeber he said "it is written"? ) and the Tetragrammaton is used in Deuteronomy.
So "Adonai" is YHWH (Jehovah) not Jesus. Nowhere in the scriptures is YHWH anyone but the God and Father of Jesus Christ.
So he had to not tell the truth about his identity so that the people would accept him on the basis of a lie? Really?.....you just can't see how many holes you guys dig for yourselves when you try to justify a teaching that isn't even in the Bible at all.
Last edited:
If they understood the trinity they would understand it, but like other religions like islam, they are shrouded by blinders sad to say. I just hope they see before it's too late.
First-created would be more descriptive for your purposes, would it not? First-created would imply the first being of a different nature/property, does it not?
First-born implies a being of the same nature/property, does it not?
Look at this verse from the Complete Jewish Bible you quoted. Uh oh. I guess you can believe one and not the other?
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning
I think only-begotten and first-born pretty much nail it on the head. They totally leave out the possibility of creation. If creation were intended, I'm sure the writer would have used that simple word for the uneducated masses back then. The Father is his daddy and he has his daddy's nature/essence.
It's in there. It sure beats being baptized by God, a created transforming human and a force. Ouch. Now that's pagan to the core.
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exists," (Col. 1:15-17, for context. The New World Translation--Emphasis added. Note the NWT's addition of 'other' into the text four times. This is discussed here).
The Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the word "firstborn" here to mean "first created" because it is consistent with their theological presupposition that Jesus is a created thing. Of course, Jesus, the Word become flesh (John 1:1, 14) is not a created thing but that hasn't stopped the Watchtower organization from claiming He is. Nevertheless, there is a Greek word for "first created," and it was in use at the time of Paul's writing to the Colossians. He did not use it here. The Greek for "firstborn" is proto with tikto which would give us "firstborn" and that is what we find here in Colossians 1:15. The Greek for "first created" would be proto with ktizo, and it is not used here.
Second, the Biblical use of the word "firstborn" is most interesting. It can mean the first born child in a family (Luke 2:7), but it can also mean "pre-eminence." In Psalm 89:20, 27 it says, "I have found David My servant; with My holy oil I have anointed him . . . I also shall make him My first-born," (NASB). As you can see, David, who was the last one born in his family, was called the firstborn by God. This is a title of preeminence.
Third, firstborn is also a title that is transferable: Gen. 41:51-52, "And Joseph called the name of the first-born Manasseh: For, said he, God hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father's house. And the name of the second called he Ephraim: For God hath made me fruitful in the land of my affliction."
Jer. 31:9, " . . . for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn."
Scripture best interprets Scripture. Firstborn does not require a meaning of first created as the Jehovah's Witnesses say it means here. "Firstborn" can mean the first born person in a family, and it can also be a title of preeminence which is transferable. That is obvious since Jesus is God in flesh (John 1:1, 14) and is also the first born son of Mary. In addition, He is the pre-eminent one in all things. The Jehovah's Witnesses should consider this when they examine Col. 1:15. They should also abandon the Watchtower which guides them in their thinking and believing.
The Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the word "firstborn" here to mean "first created" because it is consistent with their theological presupposition that Jesus is a created thing. Of course, Jesus, the Word become flesh (John 1:1, 14) is not a created thing but that hasn't stopped the Watchtower organization from claiming He is. Nevertheless, there is a Greek word for "first created," and it was in use at the time of Paul's writing to the Colossians. He did not use it here. The Greek for "firstborn" is proto with tikto which would give us "firstborn" and that is what we find here in Colossians 1:15. The Greek for "first created" would be proto with ktizo, and it is not used here.
Second, the Biblical use of the word "firstborn" is most interesting. It can mean the first born child in a family (Luke 2:7), but it can also mean "pre-eminence." In Psalm 89:20, 27 it says, "I have found David My servant; with My holy oil I have anointed him . . . I also shall make him My first-born," (NASB). As you can see, David, who was the last one born in his family, was called the firstborn by God. This is a title of preeminence.
Third, firstborn is also a title that is transferable: Gen. 41:51-52, "And Joseph called the name of the first-born Manasseh: For, said he, God hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father's house. And the name of the second called he Ephraim: For God hath made me fruitful in the land of my affliction."
Jer. 31:9, " . . . for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn."
Scripture best interprets Scripture. Firstborn does not require a meaning of first created as the Jehovah's Witnesses say it means here. "Firstborn" can mean the first born person in a family, and it can also be a title of preeminence which is transferable. That is obvious since Jesus is God in flesh (John 1:1, 14) and is also the first born son of Mary. In addition, He is the pre-eminent one in all things. The Jehovah's Witnesses should consider this when they examine Col. 1:15. They should also abandon the Watchtower which guides them in their thinking and believing.
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
No contradiction when you consider the timeframe.
When did Jesus say that he was given "all authority in heaven and on earth"? It was before his return to heaven. As Michael, he did not have such authority at the time when disputing about Moses body. On earth he had been anointed as Messiah and had full authority from his Father to act in his behalf.
Since belief in the trinity is the only thing that shrouds the role of Christ in unnecessary mystery, the rabbit holes are created by the trinitarians who cannot accept that Jesus was a created being.
Angels have rank according to the scriptures. Daniel chapter 10 is an insightful look behind the scenes as to the role of angels and their interaction with demonic "princes" who rule various parts of this earth under the direction of their leader. (1 John 5:19)
The chapter concludes with these words....Daniel spoke of the angel that had appeared to him...."He said, “You man so greatly loved, don’t be afraid. Shalom to you; and be strong, yes, truly strong.” His speaking to me strengthened me, and I said, “My lord, keep speaking; because you’ve given me strength.” Then he said, “Do you know why I came to you? Although now I must return to fight the prince of Persia; and when I leave, the prince of Greece will come; nevertheless, I will tell you what is written in the Book of Truth. There is no one standing with me against them except Mikha’el your prince" (Dan 10: 19, 20. CJB)
So Michael is the Prince of Jehovah's people, standing with greater power and authority than these other Angels.
kjw47
Well-Known Member
Like this--Daniel 7:13-15--God appoints him king--you see God was king in the ot--If Jesus were God he would already be king and could not be appointed, but he wasn't God, he was the chief prince, Michael--the one who stood up for the sons of Daniel( Daniel 12:1)
JayJayDee
Avid JW Bible Student
Show me this half man half God in scripture please.
Where does it say that God has a dual nature whilst bearing three heads? He sounds like a freak!
When Jesus returned to heaven, why did he still call the Father "my God"? (Rev 3:12) Was the dual nature still there in heaven? Does one part of God recognise another part of himself as God? Is he still half man even there?
If you have to read these things into a text, then it isn't stated as fact anywhere is it? You are forcing the scriptures to say things that other scripture contradicts. God's word does not contradict itself. It is man's interpretation that contradicts scripture. The weeds were not planted yesterday.
Your a very good debater JayJayDee
Now, Literally, all authority was given... the tense used is being that which occurred at a given point of time. And that time as Philippians also points out, was at the Resurrection. I'll be cutting and pasting the Bible quotes to save some time btw.
"And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
-Philippians 2:8-11
Paul’s uses the same tense in the Greek of Philippians 2:8. The exaltation came, the authority was given, as at the moment of the Resurrection, and as the crown of His obedience unto death.
So, he had the authority to rebuke Satan Before the resurrection, Before He was given "all authority." So the argument you presented, I'm sorry, is mute. And the Fact still stands. For Jesus did rebuke satan and Michael could not. Hence two different, separate beings.
Also, it is written "prince of Persia," not "Chief Prince," correct? So Michael is clearly above the prince of Persia. But it is written that Michael is "one of the Chief Princes" meaning that there are other "Chief Princes" like him, not just a prince like in Persia. Now whether there are demonic Chief Princes and/or Heavenly ones, Michael would still be among equals in rank or title. Meaning again, he is not unique, whereas Jesus is said over and over to be unique and not one among ANY equals right? That argument still seems to stand as well.
JWs show the world a half man half angel creature. Also, you should obey your own rule which is, do not contradict scripture. To which one of God's angels did God ever say, "my son"? Hebrews 1:5
How many times do I have to tell you this before you understand a simple everyday fact. Jesus has God for a father in the same way that you have a HUMAN for a father.
But she and her father are different souls.