Thought some folks might appreciate this. This is based on my tough question number 41:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z34h8uhP1dM
Notice the question is not, "Why is Jesus the same person as Michael the Archangel?" but it is a question about observation through selective observation. So with that in mind I give you the following message which is probably the most indicative of all my private messages on the subject. It almost always goes this way, though this person didn't add this stupid argument about Michael "standing up" which was symbollic of standing to rulership which is in Isaiah, all based on translations they know nothing about. Anyway, away we go with the messages, first the private message I received:
In Revelation 12:7-9 we see Michael and his angels battle with Satan and cast him and his angels out of Heaven and onto earth. By Michael casting Satan out of Heaven demonstrates Michael does have authority and power, but it still does not prove that Jesus is Michael. Then in verse 10 we read that Jesus has the authority of Gods Kingdom. One logical conclusion we can come up with is, if Jesus has the authority of Gods Kingdom and he was to clean the Heavens, then it is assumable that Jesus can be Michael because Michael and his angels were the ones that casted Satan out of Heaven. But yet, this does not prove that Jesus is Michael since it is an assumption.
Then we read 1Thessalonians 4:16 where it states that Jesus will descend from heaven with the voice of an archangel and with Gods Trumpet. Another thing to take into consideration is that in the New Testament Michael is never referred to as being on earth, but yet we get an implication that Michael is in heaven at the times he is mentioned in the scriptures. So does the fact that Jesus has an archangels voice, mean that hes Michael? The fact that Jesus has Gods Trumpet signifies that Jesus has authority in heaven. The archangels voice signifies that the archangel has a position of power in heaven, which is evident since its used in describing Jesus commanding call along with Gods Trumpet. The fact that Jesus is descending from heaven and has the voice of an archangel implies that he has the authoritative voice in heaven. Since Jesus has authority in heaven, that would signify that Michael as mentioned in Revelation 12:7-9 implies that either Jesus gave authority to Michael to cast Satan out of heavn or that Jesus is Michael himself. Nowhere in the scriptures do we see that Jesus has ever given any type of authority to a celestial being, thus ruling out the possibility that Jesus might have given authority to Michael. So it is a safe conclusion to infer that Jesus is Michael! So I responded with: Hey there Ivan,
You might want to re-watch that video, no where in the video did I say there wasn't proof for Jesus being Michael. There's circumstantial evidence sure, however the question asked is why is the evidence proving Jesus as being Michael only counted and evidence proving he isn't is not. Or actually more accurately why the evidence proving Jesus is Jehovah is not counted at the same time. That's the whole point of the illustration talking about argument through selective observation.
For your evidence, I'm well aware of the proof you have, however you're missing a vital part of evidence. No where in the bible does it say that Jesus is Michael the archangel. It gives him credit for things that Michael did, that would be a whole lot more compelling if I weren't familiar with the bible and familiar with the fact that several people are given credit for doing the same thing tons of times in the bible. My best example would be who killed Goliath?
If you answered David, you're only half right. Elhanon also killed Goliath. So if we're using your method of deduction proving Jesus is Michael then David must also be Elhanon.
Now I mentioned in my video that there's evidence also for Jesus being Jehovah, that's from the fact he is described many ways that Jehovah is described. I mention alot of them in my video. Compound to that a scripture where Jesus outright says "I and the father am one".
So if I'm taking evidence to prove that Jesus is someone else, which do you think I would find more compelling. Scriptures saying Jesus did the same thing as another angel in the bible when I know the bible is notorious for having different people doing the same thing. Or similarities where one of the people say they are the same as the other person?
Similarity is not fact, it's just similarity. If you can point to me a scripture where Jesus out of his own mouth or even one of the prophets says that Michael and Jesus are the same person then great I'm with you. Until that time, you're doing what the scriptures advise to not do, which is go beyond what is written.
Thank You,
Tim To which I get the response (still somewhat cordial): "No where in the bible does it say that Jesus is Michael the archangel. It gives him credit for things that Michael did."
you're 100% right, the bible never calls Jesus the archangel, but you can also use the reason type of reasoning to say "Jesus never says he's Jehovah."
"I mentioned in my video that there's evidence also for Jesus being Jehovah, that's from the fact he is described many ways that Jehovah is described."
he's not described as Jehovah, but when he says something like "he who has seen the son has seen the father" does that literally mean that we've seen the father? no, because the scripture also says the person who sees the God will perish, or something very similar along those lines. the fact that Jesus is compared to Jehovah so closely is because Jesus it the one being in the universe who can best demonstrate God's qualities. That is why there are some texts that may seem to compare or imply that Jesus is Jehovah, but it's not saying that in the literal sense, it's talking about the qualities they both demonstrate and show towards us!
"My best example would be who killed Goliath?
If you answered David, you're only half right. Elhanon also killed Goliath. So if we're using your method of deduction proving Jesus is Michael then David must also be Elhanon."
you're right! but you also have to take into consideration 1 vital thing about this example. 2 Samuel 21:19 is where you base your reasoning of Elhanan killing Goliath, which is understandable, but if you read 1 Chronicles 20:5 scripture says Elhana killed Goliath's brother, not Goliath. Scholars argue that the difference in between the verses is due to "scribal error." an example of this is that in 2Samuel 21:19 says "Jaare-oregim" and it is believed that the scribes were in error when they wrote that name and actually meant Jaire.. so "Jaare" was actually meant to say "Jaire" so thats why that altercation happend... so to base your reasoning of Michael not being Jesus because of David/Goliath story is dangerous considering the likely possibility of scribal error in that scripture!
" Jesus outright says "I and the father am one".
can you show me a scripture please? i'm not saying there isn't one i'm just curious to which scripture you're referring too.
"So if I'm taking evidence to prove that Jesus is someone else, which do you think I would find more compelling. Scriptures saying Jesus did the same thing as another angel in the bible when I know the bible is notorious for having different people doing the same thing. Or similarities where one of the people say they are the same as the other person?
Similarity is not fact, it's just similarity. If you can point to me a scripture where Jesus out of his own mouth or even one of the prophets says that Michael and Jesus are the same person then great I'm with you."
ok, in the last message i sent i said that Revelations 12:7-9 states that michael casted satan out of heaven, then in verse 10 it says that Jesus has authority in heaven... so michael had authority to cast satan out of heaven that ONLY jesus has, since he's the one with authority. that right there makes a link between the 2 right? it's very apparent that theres a connection between Jesus and Michael.. now we read 1Thessalonians 4:16 which is emphasizing Jesus' authority in heaven and NOT coincedentially does Jesus have an archangel's voice.
i know you're probably still skeptical, but believe me there is a different way to prove that Jesus is Michael and it has to do with the israelites and stuff like that... if you're not convinence that Jesus is Michael then if you'd like i can explain to you the "other" way of knowing how Jesus is Michael... but like i said if ONLY Jesus has been given authority in heaven and michael was the one demonstrating it, who do you suppose Michael is?
"you're doing what the scriptures advise to not do, which is go beyond what is written. "
i don't see where i went beyong what is written, i truly don't...i can see if i based what i'm saying on MY OWN thinking, but my thinking is based on the bible strictly, considering my basis is biblical. Now I respond yet again: I'll try to take as much as I can on your comments as I can.
"you're 100% right, the bible never calls Jesus the archangel, but you can also use the reason type of reasoning to say "Jesus never says he's Jehovah."
Yes he does, "I and the Father am one". Those are out of Jesus' own mouth.
"he's not described as Jehovah, but when he says something like "he who has seen the son has seen the father" does that literally mean that we've seen the father? no, because the scripture also says the person who sees the God will perish, or something very similar along those lines. the fact that Jesus is compared to Jehovah so closely is because Jesus it the one being in the universe who can best demonstrate God's qualities. That is why there are some texts that may seem to compare or imply that Jesus is Jehovah, but it's not saying that in the literal sense, it's talking about the qualities they both demonstrate and show towards us!"
Similarly Jesus' qualities could be described as that of an angel. Jesus was however credited with doing many things that Jehovah was also credited with. So if Jesus being described the same way as Jehovah doesn't count, then why does it count when it comes to him being Michael? Argument from Selective Observation.
"you're right! but you also have to take into consideration 1 vital thing about this example. 2 Samuel 21:19 is where you base your reasoning of Elhanan killing Goliath, which is understandable, but if you read 1 Chronicles 20:5 scripture says Elhana killed Goliath's brother, not Goliath. Scholars argue that the difference in between the verses is due to "scribal error." an example of this is that in 2Samuel 21:19 says "Jaare-oregim" and it is believed that the scribes were in error when they wrote that name and actually meant Jaire.. so "Jaare" was actually meant to say "Jaire" so thats why that altercation happend... so to base your reasoning of Michael not being Jesus because of David/Goliath story is dangerous considering the likely possibility of scribal error in that scripture!"
Or since Samuel was an older manuscript than Chronicles, they just decided to credit David with the killing. You know that the book of Samuel was found without mention of David killing Goliath at all right? Plus if this is due to scribal error, how do you know the Michael and Jesus thing isn't as well? Argument from Selective Observation. You take the evidence you want and throw out the evidence you don't. This doesn't prove anything.
"can you show me a scripture please? i'm not saying there isn't one i'm just curious to which scripture you're referring too. "
"I and the Father am one." John 10:30.
"ok, in the last message i sent i said that Revelations 12:7-9 states that michael casted satan out of heaven, then in verse 10 it says that Jesus has authority in heaven... so michael had authority to cast satan out of heaven that ONLY jesus has, since he's the one with authority. that right there makes a link between the 2 right?"
What you mean they were both credited with doing the same thing...so what? This happens all the time in the bible. Barack Obama has authority over America, INS can still kick illegal immigrants out of the country. Does that make Barack Obama an INS agent? This doesn't mean anything to me, who cares if Jesus had authority when another angel cast Satan from heaven, what Michael couldn't have been working on Jesus' orders? This is a jump Evil Kneviel couldn't make.
"right? it's very apparent that theres a connection between Jesus and Michael.. now we read 1Thessalonians 4:16 which is emphasizing Jesus' authority in heaven and NOT coincedentially does Jesus have an archangel's voice."
No there isn't, where you see connection everyone else who doesn't jump to conclusions sees similarity. Jesus had an archangel's voice, you're kidding you mean a human compared his voice to that of an angel when he was in heaven? Why is that so significant at all. Why wouldn't a human say Jesus' voice in heaven was like that of an angel? So what.
"i know you're probably still skeptical, but believe me there is a different way to prove that Jesus is Michael and it has to do with the israelites and stuff like that... if you're not convinence that Jesus is Michael then if you'd like i can explain to you the "other" way of knowing how Jesus is Michael... but like i said if ONLY Jesus has been given authority in heaven and michael was the one demonstrating it, who do you suppose Michael is?"
Of course I'm still skeptical, you're doing exactly what I said in the video taking evidence you like and throwing away evidence you don't. Not realizing that the way you discredit the other evidence can be used to discredit yours. If ONLY Jesus has been given authority in heaven and Michael was demonstrating it who would Michael be? That's pretty easy Michael the Archangel. You're going to tell me that the Bible doesn't do stuff like that all the time. Say a prophesy is going to be fufilled by one person named something and then it turns out to be someone else. Two people doing the same thing. Really it's inconsequential, unless you can point me in the direction of Jesus saying "I am Michael the Archangel" everything you give me is just circumstantial similarities.
"i don't see where i went beyong what is written, i truly don't...i can see if i based what i'm saying on MY OWN thinking, but my thinking is based on the bible strictly, considering my basis is biblical."
If the bible doesn't say that Michael the Archangel is Jesus, then you are going beyond what is written. Simple as that. Let's take hell for instance, I don't think you believe in the fire and brimstone variety of hell because I'm assuming you're a JW. So in that vein you would say anyone teaching about hell that way is going beyond what is written right? However they do have scriptures to back it up, and they can string together several scriptures in a hap-hazard way to make their point. Just because you can string together scriptures to prove a point doesn't mean anything, it doesn't make you right. You and I would agree they're going beyond what is written in this case. You're doing no different, you're stringing together some scriptures to prove a theory you have that isn't supported by anything but pulling unrelated scriptures together. People can prove David and Jonathan had a gay relationship in the bible, really stringing together scriptures doesn't prove anything to me.
If you can point to a scripture that says unequivocally that Jesus is Michael the archangel, with those words, not just a similarity or stringing together two scriptures, then great you have me. If you're going to be grasping at straws, giving me a definition of how people "Stand up" in Isaiah or whatever tell it to someone else I've heard it before and it's unconvincing and bordering on lying.
Thank You,
Tim His last response (which leads me to think he didn't like my last message to him based on this tone): "Yes he does, "I and the Father am one". Those are out of Jesus' own mouth. "
by Jesus saying I am the Father IN NO WAY does this mean he's calling himself Jehovah! through context it's evident that Jesus is speaking of his works and his care of the "sheep" who would follow him. his works demonstrate unity between him and his Father. the phrase "I and the Father am one" is meant as unity in purpose and action not in identity. it is evident that is what he meant through context John 10:22-39.
also John 14:28 Jesus clearly says that the Father is greater than he is, so this makes a distinction between Jesus and the Father as two differnet beings. if Jesus said the Father is greater than he is, that eliminates the possibility of them being One in the literal sense.
"Similarly Jesus' qualities could be described as that of an angel. Jesus was however credited with doing many things that Jehovah was also credited with. So if Jesus being described the same way as Jehovah doesn't count, then why does it count when it comes to him being Michael?"
when Jesus and Jehovah are compared, they are compared and the SAME in the sense that Jesus perfectly resembles God's qualities and thinking, so they are the same in that sense, but not in identity. when we compare Michael to Jesus we arent talking about attributes as we do when comparing jesus and jehovah, we are taking into consideration the authorities that "they" share. Jesus has authority because it has been given to him, and the fact that Michael excercises the authority that Jesus has been given is a pretty good reason to conclude that Jesus is Michael.
"What you mean they were both credited with doing the same thing...so what? This happens all the time in the bible. Barack Obama has authority over America, INS can still kick illegal immigrants out of the country. Does that make Barack Obama an INS agent?"
no they both weren't credited with doing the same thing... what i said is that Michael excercises the authority that only Jesus has. in the example you gave Jehovah would be barack who has given authority to the INS, which would be Jesus. if the INS is the only department to have the jurisdiction to kick out illegals, then that means that the illegals would be kicked out by and ONLY by the INS.. .Jesus... and we see that Michael kicked out satan "the illegal" out of the country "heaven". so Michael used the INS' jursidiction to kick out the illegal out of the country. and again, since only jesus has that jursidiction it can only mean that Jesus and Michael are the same being. in NO scripture does it ever say that Jesus gave authority to a celestial being.
it seems you want a scripture to say "Jesus said "i am the archangel" ... well that scripture doesn't exist, just like Jesus saying "i am Jehovah" doesn't exist... true Jesus has said "I and the Father are ONE" but he never said "I and the Father are the same" .... through context your conclusion can be rebuked Loving the use of rebuked, like rebuking Satan. How funny. Here's my final response to him probably ten minutes ago: Not through context, through interpretation.
Your interpretation states that Jesus is not saying he is one with the father.
Many people see verses 22-30 as unequivocal proof that Jesus and Jehovah are one. Jesus speaks in verse 29 about the gift God gave him, a gift greater than all other gifts which no one can take away. Then follows with "I and the father am one". Many would interpret that as God's gift to Jesus for sacraficing himself is to become one with the father, to be the same as.
As I said, your interpretation states that Jesus is not saying he is the same as Jehovah. Others interpretations say that he is. It's not context, it's interpretation.
John 14:28 can be explained in the same way. Jesus was in mortal form, so at that moment since the Father was in spirit form he was in greater form than he was right then. Notice the first part of the scripture which you ignored "I am going back to my father". So he's going back to his father who is in spirit form (which Jesus is clearly talking about dying and returning to spirit form in that chapter) which since Jesus is mortal he is not as great as the father at that moment.
Interpretation Ivan, interpretation not context. Who's to say what interpretation, only one: God. And we won't know the right answer till either God comes down and tells us himself or we die and are judged for what we have believed.
Where does it say that authority of heaven was granted to Michael the Archangel? Where does it say it took authority to kick Satan out of heaven? I'm just curious because you're saying that Michael had this authority that was clearly only granted to Jesus. Can you point to a scripture where it says that it took authority over heaven to kick Satan out of heaven? Can you point to a scripture where it says that Michael was granted authority in heaven? I repeat there for emphasis because you're making some wild assumptions there without any scriptural proof.
My conclusion really should just be the first sentence of your last paragraph, you admit that there is no scripture saying that Michael and Jesus are the same, yet you persist. You have a circumstantial case, but haven't people been sentenced to death over circumstantial evidence in the judicial system. I can think of no more fitting an illustration. Many call their religion "truth", to which they state all those who believe falsehoods, or teachings of christendom will die for teaching blasphemous false teachings. If that's the case you better hope that this circumstantial case is right. Me personally I'd rather stake my life on a sure thing, an absolute slam-dunk case. Not based on a circumstantial case which is missing a smoking gun.
Thank You,
Tim I don't know if this will help any folks, the last time I posted a conversation someone stated it would help them to avoid getting put into the traps that were being set by the JW in a similar conversation. So if this helps anyone awesome, if I'm missing something let me know. If there's anything you feel I need to include on my response when he inevitably responds back to me shoot it here.