Wanted: JW apologist to explain how Michael is Jesus is Michael

by Mad Dawg 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Tuesday

  I figured you would respond here Reniaa, I forgot to post the one about Michael rebuking Satan.

  Regardless of how you look at it, you're simply pointing out similarities. If we can count similarities of Michael and Jesus then conclude them as being the same person, we should be able to do the same with Jesus and Jehovah.

  The one trump card that Jesus and Jehovah have is that Jesus says "I and the Father am one"; while no where in the scriptures does Jesus acknowledge such a thing for him and Michael.

  I would say it's a circumstantial case for Michael and Jesus, just as it's a circumstantial case for Jesus and Jehovah. You know what the scriptures say regarding drawing conclusions like this "Do not go beyond what is written."
• 

  insearchoftruth

  "Do not go beyond what is written."

  Tuesday, this is such a true statement, if one were to set up a comparison table, one would need a few rows for Jesus = Michael and a worksheet for Jesus = Jehovah, and even this being the case, the evidence is circumstantial......
• 

  Chalam

  Tuesday, this is such a true statement, if one were to set up a comparison table, one would need a few rows for Jesus = Michael and a worksheet for Jesus = Jehovah, and even this being the case, the evidence is circumstantial......

  Dude that is a great point! There is a wealth of evidence for Jesus being God. The "evidence" present for Jesus being Michael is miniscule in comparison.

  Michael is mentioned only five times in the whole bible!

  Jesus is mentioned thousands and I see evidence that "I and the Father are one" John 10:30 on every page.

  To me it is interesting that the WT have demoted Jesus to be an angel, in the same way that Mormons do (Mormons state Jesus and Lucifer are brothers).

  Both are "myths and legends" that the bible warns against 1 Timothy 1:4 1 Timothy 4:7

  2 Timothy 4:3-4 (New International Version)

  3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

  That said, there is little surprise, both religions come out of Free Masonry (to the uninitiated, Charles Taze Russell was a Mason and Mormonism includes Mason rituals).

  All the best,

  Stephen
• 

  mraimondi

  although i feel the trinity is pretty clearly wrong, i feel there isnt enough evidence to make such a big deal out of michael = jesus, tho it is plausible.

  and for everyone getting butthurt about jesus being an angel, he is created from god, and therefore spirit, angel isnt that far off...
• 

  Mad Dawg

  If Jesus, assumes the name Michael upon the Ascention, why does the Bible refer to Him as "Jesus" from Acts to Revelations? We shouldn't see the name Jesus outside of the gospels.
• 

  Witness 007

  Michael Jackson is Jesus......wow, coooool!
• 

  insearchoftruth

  If Jesus, assumes the name Michael upon the Ascention, why does the Bible refer to Him as "Jesus" from Acts to Revelations? We shouldn't see the name Jesus outside of the gospels.

  I asked this question of a jw sister my wife studied with and her answer was because the name Jesus is more common.......and that is what most people know. Well don't you think the "greatest man who ever lived' would want to be known by his proper name just as Jehovah wants to be????
• 

  Tuesday

  I asked this question of a jw sister my wife studied with and her answer was because the name Jesus is more common.......and that is what most people know. Well don't you think the "greatest man who ever lived' would want to be known by his proper name just as Jehovah wants to be????

  But Jehovah doesn't want to be known by his real name, simply the most common one. I should mention this is not my logic speaking, this is from the Watchtower website, even though it's known that Jehovah is a mistranslation of God's name and not really God's name it is more commonly known hence why it's used.
• 

  Chalam

  If Jesus, assumes the name Michael upon the Ascention, why does the Bible refer to Him as "Jesus" from Acts to Revelations? We shouldn't see the name Jesus outside of the gospels.

  I agree, total heresy. See here for example.

  Acts 26:16 (New International Version)

  " 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,' the Lord replied. 16 'Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show you.

  All the best,

  Stephen
• 

  insearchoftruth

  True Tuesday......Jehovah is a mistranslation, isn't it?