The Son in two persons (page 24)

Spike Tassel

If I ever knew the answers to these two questions, I do not recall them. Let someone else enlighten us with the truth on these matters, and not just speculation.

PSacramento

Spike, the answer is out there, if you choose to look for it.

I already researched it, with some help from a few friends at the Jewish research center here in Toronto, the ancient Hebrew writings department is where a friend of mine works, but you don't have to go that far, there is quite the info on the net, if you choose to persue it.

Deputy Dog

By the way has anyone come up with a name yet for this... "Byunity of Christ". We want to help the JWs keep their Theology straight, don't we?

Deputy Dog

To simplify this, think of it this way. One Son in two persons= One life force in Two persons

Leolaia

The point of Hebrews 1-2 is that the Son has no peer other than God; unlike the angels he has the exact same being or substance as the Father (1:3).

Michael the archangel is but one archangel out of several; there are also the archangels Gabriel, Raphael, Uriel, Remiel, etc. And one cannot rely on the artificial constraints of canon to deny that the term arkhaggelos (which more frequently occurred in the plural than in the singular in actual use) referred to a particular class of angels. The word was not invented in the NT but pre-existed it and was widely used in Jewish literature. The only place in the Bible where Michael is called an archangel is in Jude 9, and this verse is a reference to a noncanonical story from the Assumption of Moses. The rest of the short epistle is steeped in references to the book of 1 Enoch, which lists the seven archangels. So one absolutely has to look at the sources that the author of Jude cites, since his use of the term "archangel" is dependent on these sources. The function of Michael in the Assumption of Moses story alluded to in Jude 9, as a psychopomp responsible for burying dead patriarchs and carrying their souls to heaven, is quite typical of the literature of the period. Michael does much the same thing in the Greek Life of Adam and Eve with respect to the burial and assumption of Adam and the Testament of Abraham with respect to the burial and assumption of Abraham. And in the Ascension of Isaiah, Michael is one of the angels who opens the tomb of Jesus and brings Jesus outside; clearly here Michael and Jesus are distinct figures.

There were early Christians who believed that Jesus was an angel or similar to an angel; cf. Simon Peter's declaration, "You are like a righteous angel" in the Gospel of Thomas (13:2). Perhaps some even identified Jesus with Michael; such an equation would easily be encouraged by the language in Daniel. Others identified Michael with the virgin Mary, as stated in the Gospel of the Hebrews (cited by Cyril of Jerusalem). Some believed that the Son was called "Angel" but was in no sense an angel by nature (cf. Justin Martyr, Dialogue 34, 60-62). Hebrews occupies a place in this discussion. The author's interest is in showing the superiority of Jesus above the angels and the Law promulgated by them. Unlike Michael the archangel, who has his peers like Gabriel and Raphael, the Son stands alone.

The Son in two persons

Share this