Who really is Michael the Archangel? (page 31)

AK - Jeff

Actually, I am not at all ignorant. Asshole!

There is no jesus. There is no Michael the Archangle. There are only those who perpetrate such nonsense for the sake of argument.

Jeff

theMadJW

So speaks the one who thinks we made ourselves...

So, in Churchianity, they think 'Almighty' God #2 descends speaking with the voice of an angel....riding a cloud thousands of times around the earth to be seen by all- even snatching the immortal souls of those that pierced him outta Hellfire and ploping them into human bodies so that THEY can (for some reason) see it, too!

HOO-HAH!

Kenneson

Mad,

You sound like one of Judge Rutherfords records--repeating the same thing over and over again and really saying nothing. Bwahahahahahahahahahah!

theMadJW

Thanks, Kebnneson; that's the nicest thing you ever said to me....yeccch

theMadJW

Are you waitin with binocs for the fast cloud-flying Jesus? Or getting ready to be raptured? heh

Hobo Ken

The original question of this thread is "who really is Michael the archangel?"

Is it fair to say first he's a character in a book?

Is it accurate to say his name is given and his description in that book as , respectively Michael and Angel-chief?

After these rather obvious facts it becomes a matter of subjective opinion and religious belief.

Does a person believe that the Bible, has the authority and value it claims for itself in it's pages?

If you don't believe in God or the Bible the question is moot. If you do it depends on your religious environment what interpretation or version you will accept.

There are those who have no respect and no belief in the Bible and others at the other end of the scale believe the Bible to be the perfect word of God and as such a very important book.

The reason this thread has 16 or so pages about the identity of a character in a book is because no-one can really be 100% certain about everything in the Bible since God , if he exists , hasn't said much since it was written down by way of explanation.

There are those of course such as C.T. Russell and Joseph Smith who claim that God is or was using them to explain things from the Bible.

This of course why organisations such as the WTBTS and the CLDS flourish because people buy into their claim of "Divine" knowledge.

So far as I'm concerned what is not up for debate is that these events and the characters in this debate are from a time almost 2000 years ago!

What does it matter whether Jesus is Michael ?

Does it matter whether God is triune in nature?

These are issues which have been created and debated by people who claim it matters ,such as the Watchtower Society and others.

They would have us believe we need to know it all and have it all neatly parceled up.

So what if we don't? What's going to happen?

Is God going to show up and murder us for not understanding? Send us to hell/kill us at Armaggedon?

Either way Christians and JW's alike have been waiting for approximately 2000 years for the action to begin. None of us statistically are likely to see it, should it turn out the non-believers are wrong.

What makes us different from any other period in history? Nothing at all. Unless we are actually living in the "last days"..........

Matt

theMadJW

"The reason this thread has 16 or so pages about the identity of a character in a book is because no-one can really be 100% certain about everything in the Bible since God , if he exists , hasn't said much since it was written down by way of explanation."

That is YOUR conclusion and opinion- which I have found to be false.

Who or what CAN you trust in this world?

Friends and parents that have their own false beliefs? Goverenments? Churches? Science, often warped by opinion, funding, and imagination?

The Book of Morman? Muslin, Hindu 'Holy Books'?

NONE have any real merit TO trust.

Only one man did- Christ.

If you wish him to be a flight of fancy- be my guest! That a Fantasy could inspire SO many people for almost 2,000 years to do what is truly good is not science- it's opinion; and YOU know the saying @ opinions...

Hobo Ken

Madjw"That is YOUR conclusion and opinion- which I have found to be false."

So do you care to substantiate just why you have found my statement to be false?

Here are a few examples of uncertainties in the Bible.

Where exactly was the garden of eden? (i'm sure you'll recall the question mark on the map at the back of the NWT)

Why does Bible Chronology point towards mankind being on earth for approximately 6000 years when all available evidence from all feilds shows mankind to have been here for more than 100,000 years at least?

Why does the Bible describe an earth wide flood 4000 years ago when there is no geological eveidence whatsoever of this?

Since there are extinct animals approximately 30,000-40,000 years old in some glaciers which themselves have been there far longer how does that fit in with the idea the earth used to be sub tropical globally as described in the Bible?

Where is the historical and archaeological evidence of 3million people leaving Egypt as described in the Bible book of exodus?

Who was melchizedek?

When do the "last days" begin?

What is the relevance of the "gentile times"?

What do all the Numbers in Revelation and Daniel mean?

I could go on.

The problem is organisations such as Jehovah's Witnesses either think they have all these answers or they just ignore any contrary evidence, preferring to believe solely in the Bible as though it has all the answers.

There is nothing wrong in having a faith or beleif in Jesus but this must be tempered with the fact that the source of what we know about his life and why he was meant to be here comes from a book with many unanswered questions and things we may never understand.

The fact there is a thread on this forum in 2010 so long after Jesus lived where people are arguing whether he is the same person as Michael surely more than adequately proves my point.

You ask who can you trust today?

I say trust yourself first and foremost and don't go into anything blind or if you are already part of something, choose to ignore relevant information.

Matt

theMadJW

I was referring to your reference to Michael.

Christ had a life BEFORE BECOMING the Christ and being given the name "Jesus", BECOMING the Christ.

Since he is NOT the Supreme Being, he was (as is) a Messenger (of God)- the LEADER of them all.

That one HAS a name- AND is the ONLY one "Like God"- even being an "Image" of God, he's so much like his God & Father.

He comes SPEAKING as Archangel.

Thus it is CLEAR- UNLESS one's trapped in tradition with the Trinity Fairy Tale...

Who really is Michael the Archangel?

Share this