The Bible declares that Jesus is God

[djhwoodwerks]

The first 80 years--only error filled trinity translation existed. It took many years to undo the false teachings of the past 1750 years.

It's easy to pass the blame on others isn't it? Your 'slave' doesn't take responsibility for any of their "errors" in teaching. Why is that?

 

[kjw47]

Here's a fact. You are totally incapable of engaging in logical debate. You fail to directly respond to propositions refuting your allegations. You fail to accurately and honestly portray Trinitarian doctrines. You also fail to defend your religion (just tossing out untrue, irrelevant, or strawmen statements is not rational debate). Perhaps Twitter would be better suited to your remarks.

I studied all sides for years--I speak facts.

 

[kjw47]

So, it's ok for your sect to say that Jesus has "showed up", (as in 1918 or was it 1919, or was it 1914? I don't know if your teachers have decided when it was yet) but if another says it, they are wrong?

Rev 6 proves the JW words.

 

[kjw47]

@kjw47
This should be an easy one for you.
Where in Scripture does it say that Jesus is, was, or will be Michael the Archangel?

Rev 6--first ride of the white horse= righteous war( war in heaven) Michael took that ride--but--he receives his crown--only Jesus gets the crown
Dan 12:1--Michael stands up for the sons of Daniel( Israelites)--- who came to earth and tried to help the sons of Daniel=Jesus.
Prov 8 is Michael speaking--there is no doubt it is Jesus speaking--Jesus is Gods master worker---but he wasn't Jesus in the OT, yet was second in command all along.

 

[kjw47]

Very true, that's why your beloved false teachers have to keep making "correction".

The wise keep making correction. Why would God tell all to --Be like the Boreans, keep on making sure of all things?
Have you not read--satans #1 job--relentlessly attack Jesus seed. He rules the rest already.

 

[kjw47]

It's easy to pass the blame on others isn't it? Your 'slave' doesn't take responsibility for any of their "errors" in teaching. Why is that?

With the whole world watching--they make correction. That's not taking responsibility? You are wrong. Its all one can do is make correction.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Rev 6--first ride of the white horse= righteous war( war in heaven) Michael took that ride

That post clearly shows that you or your "teachers" don't know what you're reading.

Revelation 6:2 (ESV Strong's) 2 And I looked, and behold, a white horse! And its rider had a bow, and a crown was given to him, and he came out conquering, and to conquer.

If the first white horse is Michael/Jesus, what are they conquering? Because the second horseman takes peace from the earth and men slay each other. So what is the first horseman conquering?

The first white horse is the antichrist! Which starts the tribulation.

Please leave that cult you're in before it's too late!

 

[Rick B]

Space prohibits quoting this chapter. Here is the NWT link. Proverbs 8 | Online Bible | New World Translation

Suffice it to say it's a non-sequitur. No mention of Michael or Jesus.

Who is speaking here? The lead-in to the speech answers the question: “Does not wisdom call?” (v. 1); and in verse 12, we read, “I, wisdom, dwell with prudence.” The repeated first-person references (my lips, my mouth, etc.), therefore, are to wisdom. Wisdom is the speaker in Proverbs 8. Wisdom, someone might protest, cannot speak. Well, yes she can if she is a personification of an abstract concept.

The main subject of Proverbs chapters 1–9 is wisdom, which is an abstract quality or character trait rather than a person, but wisdom is treated as a woman from the first chapter right through chapter 9. Wisdom is portrayed as a woman of dazzling attractiveness and virtue, who teaches in the marketplace of the town (1:20), who is romantically embraced (4:8–9), who can be addressed as “my sister” (7:4), who utters a long speech commending herself to the public (chap. 8), and who builds a house and invites people to an alluring banquet (9:1–6).

Similarly, in Proverbs 1–9, wisdom is not literally a woman who speaks eloquently about herself and prepares a banquet. Wisdom is a quality of the soul. The purpose of the entire eighth chapter is to praise and exalt wisdom. In conducting this praise, the writer invents a fictional creation story in which wisdom, as an attribute of God, was actually present at creation. Proverbs 3:19 tells us propositionally that “the Lord by wisdom founded the earth.” Proverbs 8 turns that statement into a fictional narrative in which a personified wisdom was present at the creation of the world. It is as simple as that.

Is Christ the First Created Being? The specific hermeneutical principle that I have applied in this article is the need to read figurative speech in a nonliteral sense. This is part of a broader principle of interpreting a text in keeping with what we know about its genre (what type of literature it is). Interpreters have done a lot of mischief by taking figurative language literally. If an interpreter begins with the premise that Proverbs 8 is talking about Christ, then certain references can be (incorrectly) interpreted as implying that Christ is a created being. The fallacy is in thinking that the speaker in Proverbs 8 is Christ in the first place. The speaker is wisdom personified. Those who press for a literal interpretation of Proverbs 8 face the daunting task of explaining why the pronoun and language used for wisdom are feminine — is Christ feminine in His true essence or does He have a female counterpart in heaven to whom this passage refers?

We also need to apply this principle when we come to passages that speak of Christ as the “firstborn” or “beginning” of God’s creation. These titles do not refer literally to generation but figuratively to exaltation — not to a literal origin but to an exalted position. CRI - Who Is Wisdom in Proverbs 8?

None of these three "prooftexts" support your assertion. There are other texts that the JW's put out as prooftexts for the Jesus=Michael foundational doctrine of that sect. I would be happy to directly engage those as well if you are willing to offer them.

 

[Rick B]

Let's look at Rev 6 @kjw47 --first ride of the white horse= righteous war( war in heaven) Michael took that ride--but--he receives his crown--only Jesus gets the crown
Revelation 6 NWT.
And I saw when the Lamb+ opened one of the seven seals,+ and I heard one of the four living creatures+ say with a voice like thunder: “Come!” 2 And I saw, and look! a white horse,+ and the one seated on it had a bow; and a crown was given him,+ and he went out conquering and to complete his conquest.+
3 When he opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature+ say: “Come!” 4 Another came out, a fiery-horse, and it was granted to the one seated on it to take peace away from the earth so that theycolored should slaughter one another, and he was given a great sword.+
5 When he opened the third seal,+ I heard the third living creature+ say: “Come!” And I saw, and look! a black horse, and the one seated on it had a pair of scales in his hand. 6 I heard what sounded like a voice in the midst of the four living creatures say: “A quart* of wheat for a de·narʹi·us*+ and three quarts of barley for a de·narʹi·us; and do not harm the olive oil and the wine.”+
7 When he opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature+ say: “Come!” 8 And I saw, and look! a pale horse, and the one seated on it had the name Death. And the Grave* was closely following him. And authority was given them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with a long sword and with food shortage+ and with deadly plague and by the wild beasts of the earth.+
9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar+ the souls*+ of those slaughtered because of the word of God and because of the witness they had given.+ 10 They shouted with a loud voice, saying: “Until when, Sovereign Lord, holy and true,+ are you refraining from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?”+ 11 And a white robe was given to each of them,+ and they were told to rest a little while longer, until the number was filled of their fellow slaves and their brothers who were about to be killed as they had been.+
12 And I saw when he opened the sixth seal, and a great earthquake occurred; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair,* and the entire moon became as blood,+ 13 and the stars of heaven fell to the earth as when a fig tree shaken by a high wind drops its unripe figs. 14 And the heaven departed as a scroll that is being rolled up,+ and every mountain and every island was removed from its place.+ 15 Then the kings of the earth, the high officials, the military commanders, the rich, the strong, every slave, and every free person hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains.+ 16 And they keep saying to the mountains and to the rocks: “Fall over us+ and hide us from the face of the One seated on the throne+ and from the wrath of the Lamb,+ 17 because the great day of their wrath has come,+ and who is able to stand?”+

NO. No mention of Michael here. Or any other Angel for that matter.

What you and all JW's are doing here is a textbook example of reading one’s theology into a text in order to attempt to justify their imagined, false teaching. This is a patently erroneous illustration of a text supporting your false doctrine which is foundational to your religion.

Michael stands up for the sons of Daniel( Israelites)--- who came to earth and tried to help the sons of Daniel=Jesus.

Where does it say that anyone comes to earth to help the sons of Daniel?

Daniel 12:1 NWT
“During that time Miʹcha·el*+ will stand up,* the great prince+ who is standing in behalf of your people.* And there will occur a time of distress such as has not occurred since there came to be a nation until that time. And during that time your people will escape,+ everyone who is found written down in the book.+

Any statement? Any concept? Any suggestion? Any inference that Jesus is Michael?

 

[Muffled]

Everyone that knows Jesus knows 100% he teaches--the one who sent him( Father( John 17:3--John 5:30)= THE ONLY TRUE GOD- they outright refuse to believe Jesus--Paul believed him -1Cor 8:6)
I hope you will as well.

I believe Hm when He says He is the Only True God in the Flesh and that He is one with the Father. Too bad you don't believe what He says.

 

[Milton Platt]

This post is intended to address a subject which has been argued a number of times. I have read some and briefly engaged some of those who reject the deity of Christ because they say that the Bible does not state the words “Jesus is God”. I believe this argument is fallacious, violating the word-concept fallacy. Also it demonstrates a presupposed bias when so many Scriptures identify Christ as divine, attributing to Him many of the divine names given to God. I do not intend to deal with the many New Testament texts ascribing Old Testament references of Jehovah to Jesus Christ. Nor the many references equating Him as Lord in the N.T. with Kurios (Lord) in the Septuagint. I will only use the Apostle John in this post in whose writings reveal the Deity of Christ.

Revelation 19:13 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

13 He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

This section in Revelation is dealing with the coming of Christ. The Apostle John assigns a descriptive name to Jesus “The Word of God” (Gr. ho logos ho theos). This identifying Christ as “Logos”, the “Word”, is also used by John in the Prologue to his Gospel: John 1:1-18

John 1:1-18 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

The Deity of Jesus Christ

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

The Witness John

6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.

9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

The Word Made Flesh

14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John *testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’” 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

Note verse 1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. The verb “was” (Gr: en, imperfect of eimi). The continuous action in the past of the imperfect tense of the verb indicates to us that whenever the “beginning” was, the Word was already in existence. “and the Word was with God…the Logos has been in communion and communication with God for eternity as well. The verb is the same as the first clause, and the preposition pros (“with”) pictures for us face-to-face communication. The Greek reads, kai theos en ho logos. We have the same situation in 1.1c.The Greek reads, kai theos en ho logos. Notice that the term Logos has the article ho while the term theos does not. This tells us that the subject of the clause is the Logos. Hence, we could not translate the phrase “and God was the Word” for that would make the wrong term the subject of the clause. Hence, the term “God” is the predicate nominative, the nature of the Logos is the nature of God, just as the nature of God in 1 John 4:8 was that of love. Now, John does emphasize the term “God” by placing it first in the clause – this is not just a “divine nature” as in something like the angels have – rather, it is truly the nature of Deity that is in view here (hence my translation as “Deity”). Dr. Kenneth Wuest, long time professor of Greek at Moody Bible Institute rendered the phrase, “And the Word was as to His essence absolute Deity.”

What he wishes to emphasize here is the personal existence of the Logos in some sense of distinction from “God” (i.e., the Father). The Logos is not the Father nor vice-versa – there are two persons under discussion here.

John 1:1 tells us some extremely important things. First, we see that the Logos is eternal, uncreated. Secondly, we see that there are two Divine Persons in view in John’s mind – the Father and the Logos. Thirdly, there is eternal communication and relationship between the Father and the Logos. Finally, we see that the Logos shares the nature of God.

John goes on to gives to Jesus another descriptive name: “The Light”, the “True Light”, the “Light of the world”.

Verse 14: “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

The Word did not eternally exist in the form of flesh; rather, at a particular point in time He became flesh. This is the incarnation.

Verse 18: “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. NASB

He first asserts that no one has “seen God at any time.” Now, the Old Testament tells us that men have indeed seen God in the past – Isaiah saw God on His throne in Isaiah 6; Abraham walked with Yahweh in Genesis 18. So what does John mean? He defines for us that the one he is speaking of here is the Father – that is, no one has seen the Father at any time. OK, then who was it that was seen by Isaiah or by Abraham?

John tells us – the unique God. Here the phrase is monogenes theos. There is a textual variant here. Many manuscripts have monogenes huios (unique Son) – and the KJV follows this tradition. But the strongest reading is “unique God.” How are we to understand this?

The term “monogenes” is used only of Jesus in the Gospel of John. Jesus is here described as the “unique God” – John is not asserting a separate deity from the Father. Rather, this ‘unique God” is the one who is eternally in fellowship with the Father. Even when discussing the “separateness” of the Father and the Son as persons, John is quick to emphasize the unity of the divine Persons in their eternal fellowship together. Here John teaches, again, the eternal and central fact of the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The unique God makes the Father known – He “explains’ Him. What we know of the Father we know because of the revelation of the Son. We know what the Father is like because we know what Jesus Is like. Here the Son’s function as the revelator of the Father is clearly set forth, and this is directly in line with the usage of the term Logos in the Prologue. Other New Testament writers use the same theme – for Paul Jesus is the “image of the invisible God” and for the writer of Hebrews Jesus is ‘the express image of His (the Father’s) person…” Both writers (or maybe just one writer if Paul indeed wrote Hebrews) are emphasizing the role of Jesus as the revealer of the Father. In the same way, this answers the above question regarding who it was, in John’s opinion, that was seen of Abraham and Isaiah. We have already had occasion to note that John will directly assert that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus in the person of Yahweh (12:39ff), and could it be that this is the explanation for Jesus’ statement in John 8:56? Did Abraham “see the day of Jesus” when he walked with Him by the oaks of Mamre (Gen. 18:1)?

The conclusion is obvious throughout these few verses:

If Jesus is The Word. Rev.19:13

And if that same Word is God. Jn.1:1-18

Then Jesus is God.

Special thanks to James R White

Okay, we have a bunch of assertions here about what someone believes....do you have any evidence to support the assertions?

 

[Rick B]

Okay, we have a bunch of assertions here about what someone believes....do you have any evidence to support the assertions?

The premise is "The Bible declares that Jesus is God". What follows is evidence supporting that assertion.

 

[kjw47]

That post clearly shows that you or your "teachers" don't know what you're reading.

Revelation 6:2 (ESV Strong's) 2 And I looked, and behold, a white horse! And its rider had a bow, and a crown was given to him, and he came out conquering, and to conquer.

If the first white horse is Michael/Jesus, what are they conquering? Because the second horseman takes peace from the earth and men slay each other. So what is the first horseman conquering?

The first white horse is the antichrist! Which starts the tribulation.

Please leave that cult you're in before it's too late!

The war in heaven is what was conquered--satan and his angels lost and were cast to the earth. Gods kingdom rule took full control of heaven, Satan can never enter it again. Jesus received the crown and sat on his throne.1914--the turning point of it all for heaven and earth.

 

[kjw47]

Space prohibits quoting this chapter. Here is the NWT link. Proverbs 8 | Online Bible | New World Translation

Suffice it to say it's a non-sequitur. No mention of Michael or Jesus.

Who is speaking here? The lead-in to the speech answers the question: “Does not wisdom call?” (v. 1); and in verse 12, we read, “I, wisdom, dwell with prudence.” The repeated first-person references (my lips, my mouth, etc.), therefore, are to wisdom. Wisdom is the speaker in Proverbs 8. Wisdom, someone might protest, cannot speak. Well, yes she can if she is a personification of an abstract concept.

The main subject of Proverbs chapters 1–9 is wisdom, which is an abstract quality or character trait rather than a person, but wisdom is treated as a woman from the first chapter right through chapter 9. Wisdom is portrayed as a woman of dazzling attractiveness and virtue, who teaches in the marketplace of the town (1:20), who is romantically embraced (4:8–9), who can be addressed as “my sister” (7:4), who utters a long speech commending herself to the public (chap. 8), and who builds a house and invites people to an alluring banquet (9:1–6).

Similarly, in Proverbs 1–9, wisdom is not literally a woman who speaks eloquently about herself and prepares a banquet. Wisdom is a quality of the soul. The purpose of the entire eighth chapter is to praise and exalt wisdom. In conducting this praise, the writer invents a fictional creation story in which wisdom, as an attribute of God, was actually present at creation. Proverbs 3:19 tells us propositionally that “the Lord by wisdom founded the earth.” Proverbs 8 turns that statement into a fictional narrative in which a personified wisdom was present at the creation of the world. It is as simple as that.

Is Christ the First Created Being? The specific hermeneutical principle that I have applied in this article is the need to read figurative speech in a nonliteral sense. This is part of a broader principle of interpreting a text in keeping with what we know about its genre (what type of literature it is). Interpreters have done a lot of mischief by taking figurative language literally. If an interpreter begins with the premise that Proverbs 8 is talking about Christ, then certain references can be (incorrectly) interpreted as implying that Christ is a created being. The fallacy is in thinking that the speaker in Proverbs 8 is Christ in the first place. The speaker is wisdom personified. Those who press for a literal interpretation of Proverbs 8 face the daunting task of explaining why the pronoun and language used for wisdom are feminine — is Christ feminine in His true essence or does He have a female counterpart in heaven to whom this passage refers?

We also need to apply this principle when we come to passages that speak of Christ as the “firstborn” or “beginning” of God’s creation. These titles do not refer literally to generation but figuratively to exaltation — not to a literal origin but to an exalted position. CRI - Who Is Wisdom in Proverbs 8?

None of these three "prooftexts" support your assertion. There are other texts that the JW's put out as prooftexts for the Jesus=Michael foundational doctrine of that sect. I would be happy to directly engage those as well if you are willing to offer them.

1Cor 1:30--Jesus became-WISDOM. 0 doubt--Jesus is Gods master worker.

 

[kjw47]

I believe Hm when He says He is the Only True God in the Flesh and that He is one with the Father. Too bad you don't believe what He says.

He did say --I and the Father are one--He also said--The Father is greater than I--proving one means in purpose.
He NEVER said he was God--- God in the flesh is a man made up term, not found in the bible. The bible clearly teaches that Jesus while on earth was made--LOWER than the angels-Heb 2:7-9--He did not get worship as found in trinity translations--they are filled with errors to deceive and fit dogma.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

God in the flesh is a man made up term, not found in the bible.

Colossians 2:8-9 (ESV Strong's) 8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,

You say that because you are the blind being led by the blind! Explain your understanding of, "the WHOLE FULLNESS of deity" that dwells in Jesus' body.

 

[Rick B]

1Cor 1:30--Jesus became-WISDOM. 0 doubt--Jesus is Gods master worker.

You presented Proverbs 8 to support your evidence that Jesus is Michael the archangel. I responded by going to Proverbs 8 and altogether refuted your evidence. Your reaction is 2 sentences about 1Cor. 1:30? Totally inept.

Tell me. Exactly what does that have to do with your insistence that Jesus is Michael the archangel?

 

[Rick B]

He did say --I and the Father are one--He also said--The Father is greater than I--proving one means in purpose.
He NEVER said he was God--- God in the flesh is a man made up term, not found in the bible. The bible clearly teaches that Jesus while on earth was made--LOWER than the angels-Heb 2:7-9--He did not get worship as found in trinity translations--they are filled with errors to deceive and fit dogma.

John 14:1 NWT
“Do not let your hearts be troubled.+ Exercise faith in God;+ exercise faith also in me."
John 14:1 NASB
“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me."

It is only our familiarity with these words that blinds us to their wonderfulness and their greatness. Try to hear them for the first time, and to bring into remembrance the circumstances in which they were spoken. Here is a man sitting among a handful of His friends, who is within four-and-twenty hours of a shameful death, which to all appearance was the utter annihilation of all His claims and hopes, and He says, ‘Trust in God, and trust in Me’! I think that if we had heard that for the first time, we should have understood a little better than some of us do the depth of its meaning.

Further, note that, whatever may be this believing in Him which He asks from us or invites us to render, it is precisely the same thing which He bids us render to God. The two clauses in the original bring out that idea even more vividly than in our version, because the order of the words in the latter clause is inverted; and they read literally thus: ‘Believe in God, in Me also believe.’ The purpose of the inversion is to put these two, God and Christ, as close together as possible; and to put the two identical emotions at the beginning and at the end, at the two extremes and outsides of the whole sentence. Could language be more deliberately adopted and moulded, even in its consecution and arrangement, to enforce this thought, that whatever it is that we give to Christ, it is the very same thing that we give to God? And so He here proposes Himself as the worthy and adequate recipient of all these emotions of confidence, submission, resignation, which make up religion in its deepest sense.

...What signalises Him, and separates Him from all other religious teachers, is not the clearness or the tenderness with which He reiterated the truths about the divine Father’s love, or about morality, and justice, and truth, and goodness; but the peculiarity of His call to the world is, ‘Believe in Me.’ And if He said that, or anything like it, and if the representations of His teaching in these four Gospels, which are the only source from which we get any notion of Him at all, are to be accepted, why, then, one of two things follows. Either He was wrong, and then He was a crazy enthusiast, only acquitted of blasphemy because convicted of insanity; or else-or else-He was ‘God, manifest in the flesh.’ It is vain to bow down before a fancy portrait of a bit of Christ, and to exalt the humble sage of Nazareth, and to leave out the very thing that makes the difference between Him and all others, namely, these either audacious or most true claims to be the Son of God, the worthy Recipient and the adequate Object of man’s religious emotions. ‘Believe in God, in Me also believe.’

These two clauses on the surface present juxtaposition. Looked at more closely they present interpenetration and identity. Jesus Christ does not merely set Himself up by the side of God, nor are we worshippers of two Gods when we bow before Jesus and bow before the Father; but faith in Christ is faith in God, and faith in God which is not faith in Christ is imperfect, incomplete, and will not long last. To trust in Him is to trust in the Father; to trust in the Father is to trust in Him.

...And, on the other hand, the truth that underlies this is not only that Jesus Christ is the Revealer of God, but that He Himself is divine. Light shines through a window, but the light and the glass that makes it visible have nothing in common with one another. The Godhead shines through Christ, but He is not a mere transparent medium. It is Himself that He is showing us when He is showing us God. ‘He that hath seen Me hath seen’-not the light that streams through Me-but ‘hath seen,’ in Me, ‘the Father.’ And because He is Himself divine and the divine Revealer, therefore the faith that grasps Him is inseparably one with the faith that grasps God. Men could look upon a Moses, an Isaiah, or a Paul, and in them recognise the eradiation of the divinity that imparted itself through them, but the medium was forgotten in proportion as that which it revealed was beheld. You cannot forget Christ in order to see God more clearly, but to behold Him is to behold God. MacLaren's Expositions

believe also in me—that is, Have the same trust in Me. What less, and what else, can these words mean? And if so, what a demand to make by one sitting familiarly with them at the supper table! Compare the saying in Joh 5:17, for which the Jews took up stones to stone Him, as "making himself equal with God" (Joh 14:18). But it is no transfer of our trust from its proper Object; it is but the concentration of our trust in the Unseen and Impalpable One upon His Own Incarnate Son, by which that trust, instead of the distant, unsteady, and too often cold and scarce real thing it otherwise is, acquires a conscious reality, warmth, and power, which makes all things new. This is Christianity in brief...

Ye believe in God, believe also in me: or, Believe in God, ye believe in me. But the disciples’ faith in Christ as Mediator, and God man, being yet weak, and their weakness being what our Saviour hath ordinarily blamed, not magnified, or commended, the best interpreters judge the sense which our translators give to be the best sense; and judge that our Saviour doth inculcate to them his Divine nature, and again offer himself to them as the proper object of their faith. You (saith he) own it for your duty to trust in God, as your Creator, and he that provideth for you: believe also in me, as God equal with my Father; and in me, as the Messiah, your Mediator and Redeemer: so as you have one to take care or all your concerns, both those of your bodies, and those of your souls also, so as you have nothing to be immoderately and excessively, or distrustfully, troubled for; therefore let not your hearts be troubled; only, without care or distrust, commit yourselves to me. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

 

[Rick B]

Rev 6--first ride of the white horse= righteous war( war in heaven) Michael took that ride--but--he receives his crown--only Jesus gets the crown
Dan 12:1--Michael stands up for the sons of Daniel( Israelites)--- who came to earth and tried to help the sons of Daniel=Jesus.
Prov 8 is Michael speaking--there is no doubt it is Jesus speaking--Jesus is Gods master worker---but he wasn't Jesus in the OT, yet was second in command all along.

There are other verses JW's use to identify Jesus as Michael the Archangel.

Daniel 10:13, 21
13 But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia...21 However, I will tell you what is inscribed in the writing of truth. Yet there is no one who stands firmly with me against these forces except Michael your prince.

Rev.12:7
And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war,

Jude 9
But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

1Thessalonians 4:16
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.

I have already demonstrated that your evidence in the other texts you presented was fallacious. I'm not seeing in any of these verses any statement that supports JW's claim that Jesus is Michael the Archangel either.

Do you have some argument which gives warrant to equating Jesus with Michael the Archangel in theses final verses?

 

[Rick B]

He first asserts that no one has “seen God at any time.” Now, the Old Testament tells us that men have indeed seen God in the past – Isaiah saw God on His throne in Isaiah 6; Abraham walked with Yahweh in Genesis 18. So what does John mean? He defines for us that the one he is speaking of here is the Father – that is, no one has seen the Father at any time. OK, then who was it that was seen by Isaiah or by Abraham?

Are you asking me or @kjw47?