Jesus Christ, Michael the Archangel does it really matter?

by unbaptized 57 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  There is no doubt that Jesus commands angels. Michael also commands angels.

  But that is where the parallel in Scripture begins and ends. Daniel calls Michael "one of the foremost princes", you can hardly be "one of" a group of something unless there are others of that same group. It matters very much, but only for one reason: It is a clear-cut example of Jehovah's Witnesses holding as undeniable truths teachings that the Bible does not directly support.

  They have employed human interpretation to the Scriptures and invented a "truth" instead of candidly admitting that they don't know. It is an example of the hubris of the Governing Body gods served by all loyal Jehovah's Witnesses. Going far beyond what is written is a favorite pasttime of the Governing Body and its predecessor, the Society.

  That Jude calls Michael "the archangel" could be to separate Michael the archangel from the many other Michaels known to the readers of Jude's letter. It does not necessarily indicate that Michael uniquely holds that title. Not to mention that the book from which Jude's account came (Enoch) was excluded from the Bible canon.

  It matters to the degree that teachings purporting to come from the Bible and declared as Scriptural truths should be actually from the Bible, and this teaching is not from the Bible.

  —AuldSoul
• 

  LittleToe

  They ultimately only matter if you describe your religion as the "the Way, the Truth and the Life".

  Since its a subject of only a little debate (and the subject of the cross a subject of none), to be so pedantic and bigotted as to suggest having the only correct interpretation says as much about the practitioners as the organisation.
• 

  mia_b

  As for part (2) of the watchtower argument, it is faulty logic to conclude that descending "with an archangels voice" means that Jesus is an archangel. If descending with an archangels voice makes Christ and archangel, then descending "with Gods trumpet" makes him God. The same logic must be applied to the entire verse, not just part of it.

  thats an interesting argument! i like!

  but i cant see how it does matter - really and truly if we are either a bible beleiver or not and what in the bible you take literally and how you read it - as long as you live your life and treat others how you want to be treated - it doesn't matter
• 

  LittleToe

  As for part (2) of the watchtower argument, it is faulty logic to conclude that descending "with an archangels voice" means that Jesus is an archangel. If descending with an archangels voice makes Christ and archangel, then descending "with Gods trumpet" makes him God. The same logic must be applied to the entire verse, not just part of it.

  Further, when is the Archangel going to get his voice back?
• 

  Undecided

  What I don't understand is why a little blood makes so much difference to a God that he would make his son suffer and die so he could change his mind on how he felt about mankind.

  It sounds more like the pagan Gods who wanted sacrifices all the time from his subjects.

  Ken P.
• 

  carla

  Do jw's simply ignore the entire first page of Hebrews?
• 

  Perry

  IMO no reality makes sense until this question is answered.

  When God created the possibility of choice, did he not create (by default) the existence of evil and suffering? I mean if we decide not to have children then we eliminate the possibility of them suffering right? But, if we decide that the benefits outweigh the risk (even inevitability) of them suffering, we go ahead and do it.

  If a thief slips in and steals the child, many parents would beg for the perpetrator to take them instead and not the innocent child. "Take me instead", most any mother would cry.

  How would we view the parent who said, "don't take Johnny, take Lisa instead"?

  Like Kate says, it makes all the diference in the world.
• 

  Apostate Kate

  I agree Perry. If I had the chance to save my children's lives with my own I would gladly sacrifice myself. Then again if I had never had children I would never have to face that choice.

  Most parents sacrifice quite a bit for thier children and some even their lives. Why is it so hard for some to fathom the idea that God did the same with His own blood? He did not force Jesus to do it, Jesus was Jehovah, the physical manifestation of the Creator on the earth.
• 

  LittleToe

  While I don't include myself in their number, some are quite happy to apply the name and title to God the Son of God. Hence to squabble about how accurate this is would seem to miss the point, IMHO.

  Only if it is used as a theological excuse to denigrate the Son of God does it become an issue (such as the WTS uses).
• 

  unbaptized

  Hello Littletoe,

  I wanted to make a reply to your last comment. You stated that if Jesus used God's trumpet then that would consider him God. That's not true. First we need to acknowledge what God's trumpet is!

  Trumpets were used for gathering the people together in Ancient Israel for battle, meetings and so on.

  The Archangels voice and the Trumpet of God is used to call the dead back to life. This verse points to Jesus as being the Archangel Michael, because only Jesus has the God given authority to call the dead back to life. No other angel in Heaven was given that priviledge. Also there are no other names of angels in the bible with that title (Archangel)

  By Jesus having God's Trumpet this symbolized that Jesus not only had the highest status as the Archangel of God, but he also was given the Trumpet or authority to call the dead with God like authority.

  So this verse states that Jesus had both the authority of an Archangel and the authority of Almighty God.

  So this also qualifies Jesus as being made higher than the angels, because he was the first creation of God, the first of the angels, the first of mankind to be raised from the dead in God's new convenant, the first to have descended from Heaven and re-entered Heaven.