1 Thess 4:16-For God Jesus shall descend from heaven with a shout, the Master Ventriloquest, mimicking the voice of the archangel, and with his own trumpet: and the dead in Christ shall be pulled from Heaven! 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be Raptured with them in the clouds, to meet the Lords in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lords.- RCV
Who really is Michael the Archangel?
by theMadJW 309 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
TD
Newsflash:
English isn't Greek. How can you babble on about the meaning "Biblical words" when you couldn't even compose a simple sentence in the source language if your life was at stake?
Ancient Greek was a very precise language. The particular ambiguity you're taking advantage of in English didn't exist in Greek. If you were a serious student of the Bible, you would already know this and not need me to tell you:
(Scans courtesy of Leolaia)
George Milligan, St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians: The Greek Text, With Introduction and Notes, p. 60.
William Vine, Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, 1939, Vol. 4, p. 25.
Ernest Best, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 2003, p. 196.
Alfred Plummer, A Commentary on St. Paul's First Epistle to the Thessalonians, 1918, p. 76.
Charles J. Ellicott, A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians, p. 64.
Charles A. Wanamaker, The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, 1990, p. 173.
Alvah Hovey, An American Commentary on the New Testament, pp. 56-57.
-
theMadJW
GASP!
Than NONE of the Bible Translations are correct?
Why didn't they consult YOU?
O why? O Why?
-
theMadJW
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first- KJV
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first - ASV
16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. - NIV
16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the Christians who have died will rise from their graves.- NLT
16 For the Lord himself shall come down from heaven, in the commandment, and in the voice of an archangel [in the commanding, and in the voice of the archangel], and in the trump of God; and the dead men that be in Christ, shall rise again first.- Whycliffe
-
theMadJW
TD is so impressed with.. TD.
yawn
-
notverylikely
MadJW, why aren't you using the NWT version of 1 Thess 4:16? it says "with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice" (emphasis mine). It would seem to indicate that with AN archangels voice strongly suggests there can be more than one archangel.
-
TD
Than NONE of the Bible Translations are correct?
Why didn't they consult YOU?
No Mad.....They're ALL correct. There are over twenty different definitions of the word, "With" in English, not just one.
If I were to say: "MadJW descended the mountain with a loud song" does that mean that you are necessarily the one singing?
It could mean that, but the source of the song just as easily could be someone else. "With" can indicate possession (= the voice is yours) and it can also indicate accompaniment. (= the voice is someone else's)
The shout of the archangel and the blast of the trumpet accompany the Lord's descent, but even in English, the Lord is not necessarily the source of either sound.
This doesn't make or break the case that Jesus is Michael, but it eliminates 1 Thessalonians 4:16 as conclusive proof.
-
notverylikely
This is something that bugs me about the JW's. They pick small stuff like this that could go either way due to lack of conclusive proof and then make it doctrinal with their POV so you HAVE to believe rather than just say "we aren't sure on this point, but here is what we think"
-
djeggnog
@theMadJW:
I posted a message the other day in a thread stated by @UnDisfellowshipped in which the following question was asked:
6:) Can you explain, using only the Bible, why we should believe that Jesus is the same person as Michael the Archangel?
I've appended to this message my response.
@djeggnog
[APPENDED]
At Daniel 12:1, the prophet Daniel foretold a time of distress on the earth that had never occurred before on the earth, and it was indicated in his prophecy that during this same time period, the great prince, Michael, would be ‘standing up’ for the Jewish people. This angelic prince, Michael, at Daniel 10:13, is also referred to as "one of the foremost princes." In the Bible, the phrase "stand up," or words to this effect, means that the one that is said to "stand up" commences his rulership as king, and so this prince, Michael, the prophet Daniel says, stands up as king on behalf of God’s people during this time of distress.
At Matthew 24:21, Jesus Christ also predicted that such a time of distress would be coming that "[had] not occurred since the world’s beginning, ... nor [would] occur again," referring to this event as a "great tribulation." Now when reading Matthew 24:21, one can easily conclude that this is just a coincidence and nothing more, but keep in mind that Michael is described as one of the "foremost" princes, which is not to diminish other "foremost" angelic princes, for Gabriel is the only other angelic prince mentioned by name in the Bible and certainly he might be described as "foremost"among God's angelic princes. However, we notice upon reading Jude 9 that Michael is described in this verse as "Michael the archangel," where "arch-" carries the meaning of "foremost-angel" or "chief-angel." Note, too, that Michael is not just described in Jude 9 as an "archangel," but as "the archangel," which would mean that of all of the foremost princes, Michael is the only angelic prince that is an archangel. BTW, I should note here that there is an angel described at Exodus 23:20, 21, as having God's name "within him" and that the name "Michael" does mean "Who is Like God?" At Judges 2:1, 2, note that it is Jehovah's angel there speaking to Joshua, Moses' successor, the words: "I proceeded to bring you up out of Egypt.... But you have not listened to my voice."
Although this angel is not Jehovah, notice that he speaks to Joshua as if he were Jehovah, which suggests something great about this particular angel's authority to speak for God, an authority, mind you, that no other angel seems to possess. Just compare how at Luke 1:13-19, the angel Gabriel speaks to Zechariah, John the Baptist's father, not "I am here to 'declare the good news' ... [about your barren wife Elizabeth's becoming mother to a son to you, whose name you are to call John] to you," but "I was sent forth to speak with you and declare the good news ... [about your barren wife Elizabeth's becoming mother to a son to you, whose name you are to call John] to you." Also, compare how at Luke 1:26-33, Gabriel says to Mary, not "I am with you," but "Jehovah is with you," not "you have found favor with me," but "you have found favor with God," not "I will give him the throne of David his father," but "Jehovah God will give him the throne of David his father."
Note now that in Daniel's prophecy at Daniel 7:2-8, Daniel sees a succession of world powers and each "beast" in this prophecy represents a world power that "stands up" and reigns as king, one after the other (as explained in more detail in Daniel chapter 11), until we read at Daniel 7:13, 14, where "someone like a son of man" becomes a king after the reign of the "fourth" ten-horned beast, and this "son of man" is given rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him," and unlike the kingdom that preceded his kingdom, "his rulership is an indefinitely lasting [one], ... and his kingdom one that will not be brought to ruin."
So in Daniel's prophecy both this "son of man" (Daniel 7:13, 14) and this foremost angelic prince Michael (Daniel 12:1) become a king. But note that at Ezekiel 21:27, God had told King Zedekiah that after him, the kingdom would become no one else's until the time appointed by God, at which point God would then give theocratic rulership to the one with the legal right to rule from God's throne. In many places in the Bible, Jesus identifies himself as being this "Son of man," for example, while being the Lord of the sabbath, Jesus describes himself as being "the Son of man" at Matthew 12:8, and at Matthew 16:27, Jesus says that "the Son of man" is destined to come, not with God's angels, but "with his angels."
Keeping this in mind, it should jump right out at the reader of Revelation 12:7-10, that Michael is the Lord Jesus Christ, for we read there that "Michael and his angels" battled with the one called Devil and Satan, so that Satan was hurled down to the earth with his angels, at which time "the authority of God's Son, or Christ, came to pass. Is Michael not the Christ?
But while there are so many things in the Bible that point to Michael as being the alter-ego of the Lord Jesus Christ, one thing that stands out to many is the apostle Paul's description of Jesus as raising those of the first resurrection from the dead "with an archangel's voice." Is Jesus an archangel? Yes, even as Michael is one of the foremost, or chief, princes, and Jesus, the Son of man, and the one to whom rulership, dignity and kingdom is given by God, is the one that descends from heaven "with a commanding call, [and] with an archangel's voice," the only right conclusion that can be drawn is that Jesus is not only an archangel, but is THE archangel, and both he and Michael are, in fact, the same person.
-
tec
MadJW, why aren't you using the NWT version of 1 Thess 4:16? it says "with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice" (emphasis mine). It would seem to indicate that with AN archangels voice strongly suggests there can be more than one archangel.
I actually brought this up to my bible study. She looked through the verse, kind of confused for a moment, it seemed. Then laughed it off and told me not to get so caught up over a single word.
Oh, and Mad? I don't recall ever saying that I was a trinitarian. (I hate labels anyway, even if I did believe that). So when I said that thinking Jesus is Michael as being a bigger leap in interpretation than the trinity, I was speaking from a 'neutral' position. I don't favor/disfavor either. In fact, as I've said all along, I favor following Jesus... Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God.
Its also kind of disheartening when you place such emphasis on Jesus being Michael because of the 'with an archangel's voice', but dismiss 'with the trumpet call of God' in the very next verse.
Tammy
