Why did Jesus come to Earth as a man? (page 6)

poopsiecakes

Jalapenos huh? I'm fairly certain I can make that happen for you darlin!

Glander

Some folks substitute reality with a rich fantasy life. To each his own.

AGuest

THANK you, dear Poopise, dear... and again, peace to you!

Some folks substitute reality with a rich fantasy life.

Which "folks" might you be referring to, dear Glander (again, peace to you!)... and which "rich fantasy", if I may so bold as to ask?

A slave of Christ,

SA... still lookin' for those Red Vines...

Once again, you give no evidence that sinless flesh is immortal other than your opinion, which - by the way - is the same erroneous position the WT takes, so you might want to check your "I'm not stuck in a JW rut like you are" attitude.

I never said Jesus was Michael and I'm not exactly sure what's wrong with the people on this forum that they love to put words into my mouth, then post a 2-page-long response to their own delusion.

I neither confirm nor deny Jesus is Michael, as the Bible remains silent on its certainty. That being said, Michael isn't "an" anything. Michael is "the" archangel, meaning he is above the angels. If you feel there are more archangels, please demonstrate evidence. I doubt this will happen, since you can't even figure out the difference between an "ark" and the prefix "arch".

Most of all, you seem to be completely oblivious as to what an "angel" is. The word "angel" literally means "messenger" and Jesus is "the Word". If Jesus isn't God's chief messenger (or angel), I don't know who is.

As for your snide comments of "you cannot grasp", "makes me wonder at your basic education", "I am a bit embarrassed for you", "I hope this helps you", "I bid you... ears to hear" - perhaps if you take your meds, you'll see things clearer and at which time I will accept your apology.

EntirelyPossible

/Hot like your momma

AGuest

Once again, you give no evidence that sinless flesh is immortal other than your opinion, which - by the way - is the same erroneous position the WT takes, so you might want to check your "I'm not stuck in a JW rut like you are" attitude.

Greetings, again, dear WontLeave, and, again, peace to you, truly! I think the fact that Adham didn’t die while in sinLESS flesh… but did when in sinFUL flesh… should be evidence enough (along with the fact that Christ’s human form was also sinFUL… and he died, as well). Also, since sin is the REASON our flesh dies, the fact that one’s flesh is sinLESS… would preclude it from dying. See?

I never said Jesus was Michael and I'm not exactly sure what's wrong with the people on this forum that they love to put words into my mouth, then post a 2-page-long response to their own delusion.

My sincere apologies. I mistook your “embarrassment” at my “last” statement on the previous thread to perhaps indicate that you believed as the WTBTS teaches… that Michael is Christ. I wasn’t complete SURE of this, though, so I stated that you “apparently” believe this. Since most here who post here are ex-JWs… and were taught that Michael and Christ are the same… I made that erroneous assumption about you. Again, I apologize.

I neither confirm nor deny Jesus is Michael, as the Bible remains silent on its certainty.

Actually, it doesn’t. Really.

That being said, Michael isn't "an" anything. Michael is "the" archangel, meaning he is above the angels.

Ummmm… that’s exactly true, dear one. True, he is above SOME angels… but his twin, the OTHER angel of the Ark … has HIS angels, as well. That’s why John wrote that he saw “Michael and his angels… battling with the Dragon… and HIS angels.” Meaning, the Dragon’s angels.

As for the term “archangel”… that is a mistransliteration, actually. It is a late 12 th century Old French term… from the Latin “archangelus”… which some state came from the Greek “arkhangelos.” However, there are two errors, here: first, the Greek word for “archangel” is NOT “arkhangelos.” That is the PRONUNCIATION of the correct word, “archaggelos.” Guess what, though? “Haggelos” is the word for angel. Thus, it isn’t “arch aggelos,” but “arc haggelos.”

Some scholars/translators, however, make the common error of dropping the “h” when they spell the word, so that they come up with “aggelos.” This is accurate because the SPELLING includes a symbol above the “a” that denotes the word’s beginning with an “h”. As here:

?γγελος (looks like you're going to have to look it up as I can seem to get the Greek "a" to post...

The word is NOT “aggelos” as many claim, however; it is “haggelos.” However, that "h" is SILENT... so that the word is PRONOUNCED "angelos" (two gg's togther make the "n" sound in Greek). Just like written language TODAY, however, some scribes dropped the "h"... because it's silent anyway. However, the BEFORE the word “angel” are not “arch”… but “arc.” Unfortunately, this “arch” was mistransliterated to mean “chief” angel because the Greek term “arkh” (translated “arch”) means “chief.” H OWEVER… that is not what the Hebrew/Aramaic writers meant. However, the GERMANS got it right: in that language (from which English is mostly derived), the word for “ark”… is “arche.”

I would ask that, rather than rely on what the scribes… and those who claim to be able to interpret them… wrote, you give a go at looking up the ENTIRE etymology yourself. OR, even better… ask the Truth (John 14:6).

If you feel there are more archangels, please demonstrate evidence. I doubt this will happen, since you can't even figure out the difference between an "ark" and the prefix "arch".

I can very well figure out the prefix “arch”, as I just shared with you. Unlike you, I didn’t just take others’ word for it, though. As for how MANY arkangels there are, while many will tell you to the contrary (some, even up to seven or so, including Gabriel, Raphael, Uriel, and others), I will tell you that there were only two: Michael… and Belial. Both who command angels under them… who, along with their respective angels, battled against one another, and both of whom were cherubs of the Ark [of the Covenant]. Which is why there are only two depicted on the physical model. There are several “chief” PRINCES, however, which is NOT the same thing.

Most of all, you seem to be completely oblivious as to what an "angel" is. The word "angel" literally means "messenger" and Jesus is "the Word". If Jesus isn't God's chief messenger (or angel), I don't know who is.

Christ is God’s Chief AGENT, yes. But he isn’t an angel. Again, he is a Son. Angels are messengers… and, for the most part, that’s pretty much what most of them are. Like God, Christ also uses them as messengers (hence, the Revelation given to John). Michael is a chief PRINCE, yes, and as I stated above there are other “chief” princes. These are what many refer to as “archangels”… but it truly is NOT the same thing.

They are called “princes” because they have been placed over “principalities.” Eden … which was situated in Persia … was the arkangel Belial’s territory (principality). Israel was… and is… Michael’s territory, as my Lord directly revealed to Daniel and related to Ezekiel:

“But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia .” Daniel 10:13

“Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia : and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come. But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and [there is] none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.” Daniel 10:20, 21

Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God ; every precious stone [was] thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. Thou [art] the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee [so]: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God ; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou [wast] perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God : and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.” Ezekiel 28:13-16

As for your snide comments

Wait. You questioned MY sanity and stated that YOU were embarrassed for ME... and now accuse ME of being "snide"???

of "you cannot grasp", "makes me wonder at your basic education", "I am a bit embarrassed for you", "I hope this helps you", "I bid you... ears to hear" - perhaps if you take your meds, you'll see things clearer and at which time I will accept your apology.

Well, I did apologize, above, for wrongly assuming you were confusing Michael and Christ. Not to say that you DON'T, by your own admission, but I wrongly mistook your comment. You are confused, however, as to what an arkangel is. But, again, that's easily remedied by a study of the etymology, various scriptures (if you need that, after researching the word)... or directly asking Christ. Either of these should give you some clarification.

In closing, though, I have to say that questioning someone's sanity and telling them that you're embarrassed for them... when they've given you no personal cause to do so... can lead to being misunderstood. Your intentions didn't seem... shall we say... benevolent, even leaning in the direction of kind. Rather, they appeared spiteful, perhaps even hateful, and certainly unkind. To give someone that impression and then take issue when they respond and try to clear matters up is... well, a bit immature, IMHO. And worthy of an apology.

But I don't expect nor am I asking for an apology from you. I realize that you spoke "without knowing," just as I did. And because I've been on that end of the rope but wanted understanding and forgiveness when I so spoke... I already forgave you. From the start. Which is why I continued to wish you peace... and do so now.

Again, peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

AGuest

EP, dear one, I thought we discussed that smirk (peace to you). Here's a hanky - wipe it off. And wipe that grin off, while you're at it!

Peace, O Highly Smug One!

A slave of Christ,

SA

EntirelyPossible

That kitten is not smirking, Shel. He's all business.

AGuest

No, but you are - LOLOLOL! (And actually, it looks like he's sucking his thumb, the little darling. Mayhaps we're putting him to nap?)

Peace, chicken!

SA, on her own...

WontLeave

Wow... What particular part of your ass do you pull your theology from? You just make it up or is there some website put together by an underground movement of people who have escaped from the loony bin? There are just so many problems with your post and you are so convinced of them... I don't have the time, the patience, or the license to prescribe the medications to fix everything that's wrong with it.

You have a great day and say hello to the voices for me.

Why did Jesus come to Earth as a man?

Share this