my disassociation letter (page 5)

suavojr

Congrats USR! Just make sure to keep showing your love to even the people who shun you

QC

Unstop,

I agree Jesus is not Michael.

Lu 10:17 The seventy returned with joy, saying, "Lord, even the demons are subject to us in Your name.

18 “I[Jesus on Earth c. 30-33 C.E.] was watching Satan fall from heaven like lightning.”

19 “Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will injure you.”

Re 12:7 “And there was war in heaven [c. 30-33 C.E.]: Michael [archangel] and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,”

8 “And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.”

9 “And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.”

And, I agree ALL disciple of Jesus are "born anew" into the family of Jesus.

But I can’t go with you to the 4th century.

There is a caveat there.

20yearfader

way to go unstoppable now lets hope for a ravens win on sunday

Fernando

Excellent letter and reasoning.

May you enjoy soaring to new spiritual heights now that the remaining Watchtower shackles are finally off.

Greetings and blessings

Fernando

J. Hofer

congrats, unstop. you definately put some though in it.

(still your premises are flawed: "Everyone who loves has been born from God. So how can this apply to Jehovah’s Witnesses when most admit to not being born of God?" pretty much every person on earth loves.)

unstopableravens

j h ppl love ,but not the godly love that was being talked about at 1 john 4:7 that love is a fruit of the spirit, and sense jw dont have that spirit they dont have that love

J. Hofer

that doesn't make any sense, but whatever floats your boat i guess. 1. john 4:7 is full of flawed premises.

mind blown

leaving_quietly

I want to add evidence to the Jesus is not Michael thing, for anyone who cares.

I'm shocked that I overlooked some really important detail, which, for me, nails it entirely.

In Daniel 10:13, we know it speaks of Michael as "one of the" foremost or first princes. Which, that in itself would lend credence to this issue. However, more importantly, we should pay attention to who it is that is speaking, the one who had the appearance of a man.

Verses 5 and 6 describe this one who had the appearance of a man. Clothed in linen, hips girded with gold of Uphaz, body like chrysolite, face with the appearance of lightning, eyes like fiery torches, arms and feet like burnished (smooth, glossy, polished) copper, words like the sound of a crowd. Does this sound familiar? Revelation 1:12-15 has a similar description: clothed with a garment that reached to the feet, girded at the breasts with a golden girdle, eyes a fiery flame, feet like fine copper when glowing in a furnace, voice as the sound of many waters. This is none other than the Christ. Thus, in Daniel 10, this one talking to Daniel is the pre-human Jesus, and he is referring to Michael as someone else entirely.

my disassociation letter

Share this