If I had the voice of a lion would that mean I am a lion, If I sing like a bird, does that make me one? The question of "is Jesus micheal the archangel" Is a critical doctrin of the witnesses because to say he is, is to demote god. You would believe in another god which would be paganism. Birds begett chicks which turn to birds, Men begett men, fish begetts fish, GOD BEGETTS GOD. Micheal is mentioned 5 times in the bible and out of all of those times you cannot say that these are making references to Jesus. I can point out references that Jesus is equal to Jehovah because jesus is called jehovah. If some one would like me to show direct references from the old testiment to the new testiment that proves Jesus is God, Jehovah is God, and the Holy Spirit is God feel free to ask if your interested.
micheal the archangel
by trinity4life 37 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
trinity4life
Does anyone really even Know what the word Jehovah Means?
-
ClassAvenger
Hi Trinity4life,
Sure, post some direct references. I believe in the Trinity, and I want to know more on the subject.
-
LittleToe
For goodness sakes don't turn this into another Trinity thread. There have been LOADS of them, and most subjects eem to turn back to this and then deteriorate.
Try to keep it on-thread for a wee while longer, PLEASE!!!
-
NeonMadman
So when 1 John 5 speaks of all who are begotten of God, those humans share in the nature of God. And then, James 1: " 18 He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created." implying that Christians can become the "Firstborn" through the word of truth.
In a sense, yes, although the line of reasoning you are following could lead to the conclusion that Christians can become God, which is not a scriptural teaching. We are told that we will be like Christ, but I wouldn't understand that to mean that we will become God. We will be resurrected in a spiritual body like His.
While all Christians are called "sons of God," it is important to remember that we are adopted as sons. We are not, therefore, partakers in the divine nature to the extent that the "only begotten" son is. The term "only begotten" is translated from the Greek word monogenes, which most sources acknowledge literally means "one of a kind; unique." While all Christians are sons, Christ is the unique Son, who fully shares his Father's nature. I believe that part of the reason the term monogenes was chosen may have been to draw a contrast between Christ as the "only begotten" Son, and the sons who were merely adopted as sons.
-
NeonMadman
The one scripture that Trinitarians find difficult to explain away is found in Paul's words at 1 Corinthians 15:26 - 28:
" For he 'has put everything under his feet.' Now when it says that' everything' has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."I don't find that to be a particularly difficult scripture. It is clear from any number of scriptures that there is a functional subordination of the Son to the Father. This relates to the tasks that each Person performs and the position that He holds. It does not mean, however, that the Father and Son are less than equal as to their nature.
At my job, I am subordinate to my boss, but I will be greatly offended if you tell me that I am less human than he is. It's very similar within the Godhead. Three equal Persons have agreed to play different roles in accomplishing their purposes.
-
NeonMadman
I never quite understood the phrase: "only begotten, not created." Does not the word "begotten" suggest a begetter who brought into existence the life of the begotten? A father is a begetter to a son. The son is the begotten. And doesn't that suggest that the begotten was preceded by the begetter and did not exist before the process of begetting?
Note my comments above on the term "only begotten." The Greek root word simply means "unique," and many modern translations render it as such.
In other threads, I've recommended James White's book, The Forgotten Trinity, as offering a good, layman-level explanation of the Trinity doctrine. It also answers a lot of the questions raised in this thread.
-
mizpah
1 Cor. 15 does not speak of the Father but rather of God. It is clear that the Son subjects himself to God after all things are subjected to him. Obviously, it would be impossible if the Son was God.
Whatever is acheived later in life a son is always inferior to his father in the sense of time. The father is greater also in the sense that he becomes the source of life to his son. Undoubtedly, this is why we are to "honor" our fathers according to the commandment.
I don't think the early Christians were required to believe the complexities and mysteries of a Trinity. I'm sure they accepted the simple relationship of a father to a son. My main objection to orthodoxy is not in the belief in a Trinity. But it is in the tyranny of requiring a Christian to believe that this doctrine is the "central" one necessary for faith. The absence of it in the Bible makes it clear that it is not.
-
Yizuman
Scripture shows that Jesus cannot be Michael simply because....
Jude 1:9
But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!"Michael did not dare bring authority upon himself simply by saying, "I rebuke you!", but rather he said, "The Lord rebuke you."
So let's take a look at the authority of Jesus....
Mark 1:23-27
Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an evil spirit cried out, "What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are--the Holy One of God!"
"Be quiet!" said Jesus sternly. "Come out of him!" The evil spirit shook the man violently and came out of him with a shriek.
The people were all so amazed that they asked each other, "What is this? A new teaching--and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him."Notice Jesus didn't say, "The Lord rebuke you!", he plainly told the devil (or evil spirit) to come out of him and it did.
Yiz
-
Gamaliel
Someone can summarize the portions of this thread that actually related to Michael and Jesus, but "trinity4life" obviously doesn't mind if we turn his thread into one on Trinity. So I'll go for his question:
Does anyone really even Know what the word Jehovah Means?
I expect that you are going after the common "I am" meaning which would relate to the expression Jesus uses of himself in John. I believe that's too simple and opt for the implications of "I am that I am" instead, which has a much more complex meaning.
WARNING: I EXPECT SOME CHRISTIANS TO BE A BIT SQUEAMISH ABOUT THE FOLLOWING SUBJECT MATTER SO PLEASE JUST READ THE SUMMARY STATEMENT. You'll likely disagree with that and you will be even more likely to disagree after the "evidence".
Summary statement: I believe the connection between Yahweh and (Egyptian) Amun reveals a similar trait of male, patriarchal-oriented monotheism, in which both deities claim invest special meaning in the God's name itself -- and which (in both cases) speak more to the idea of self-creation rather than self-existence (I am).
The following article gives me a hint that ties in specifically with the common definition that the JWs always use: "He [himself] causes to become." It not only explains the Yahweh cults origins in Egypt, but explains partially his Yahweh's association with Mt. Sinai (volcano) and burning bushes, and fire from heaven.
It's from the site "Wholly Devoted to God" http://www.francisasburysociety.com/hcarticles/01Godmother.htm
Why We Don't Call God Mother
by Dr. John N. Oswalt, research professor of Old Testament at Wesley Biblical Seminary in Jackson, MS
...In this light it is fascinating--but not unexpected--that across the world, creation is depicted as the result of divine sexual activity. A first god and goddess have sex; they reproduce other gods and goddesses who reproduce other gods and goddesses, and ultimately the world is created. A variation of this is found in Egypt where the high god masturbates and brings about creation as the result. The analogical connection is obvious. All things came into existence along the lines which are familiar to us.
By the same token, the maintenance of life is through divine sexual activity. The analogical reasoning is evident. If the earth is to be fertile, then the gods must be fertile. If refraining from sexual activity means lack of reproduction, then the gods and goddesses must not be permitted to refrain from sexual activity, but must be made to engage in it wherever possible. Sympathetic magic is very significant in this process. The worshipper and the cult prostitute are considered to take the place of the god of the sky and goddess of the earth, and since they represent the god and the goddess, they are in fact the god and goddess. Thus when the two human beings have sex together, the god and goddess are assumed to have sex as well, and this insures the fertility of the crops. This means, of course, that around the world prostitution has always been considered a religious activity.
The Hebrew understandings and practices are diametrically opposite of this. There is no mention of sex as being instrumental in creation. Fertility cult and the accompanying magic are strictly forbidden. Throughout the Old Testament, any use of the Canaanite fertility cult centers or their cult methods is condemned in the strongest terms. Prostitution of any sort is expressly forbidden....
I know the above might be a bit more graphic or sexual than some expected, but if we look at the God as Father motif in cults that did not emphasize a corresponding Goddess as Mother, then the expression Yahweh meaning something like "He causes to become" makes sense. (I apologize for the reference to masturbation, but this was in fact the exact ritual of creation that is depicted in Egyptian stone and documents for the Egyptian God Amun. Amun/Atem was an Egyptian God corresponding to the Hebrew Yahweh in meaning. The meaning was something like self-existent, self-created -- a very important concept to a religion that leads to a true monotheism.
http://home.att.net/~freefrm1/publish/lice.html for example:
important creation rituals conducted in the inner sanctums of the main temples, like those of Amun-Ra at Karnak, where a priestess known as the "hand of god" performed ritual masturbations on the priests as a form of imitative magic (referring to the Amun masturbation/creation myth). This practice was considered necessary for the ongoing balance of nature, the annual flooding of the Nile, and regulating the seasons.
Moses was a man "learned in [such] wisdom of the Egyptians..."(Acts 7:22). As such, he was aware of, and may have been trained in, the mysteries of the Egyptian priesthood. It's even possible that Moses served as an Egyptian priest. The name Moses means to be "drawn out of" or "born of" and was usually associated with a priestly Egyptian deity, i.e., Thothmoses (born of Thoth), Amenmosis (born of Amen), or Rameses (born of Ra). The slight variations of the spelling of Moses (mosis, meses, etc) did not change the priestly Egyptian meaning. This has caused some scholars to conclude that the Hebrew Moses may have been named after a Nile deity by the Pharaoh's daughter (Ex. 2:10), and that he served as an Egyptian priest who later dropped his Nile deity-name reference upon encountering the omnipotent Yahweh—the God of his fathers.
Regarding Atum-Re, "the self-created" (after: Amun or Amen) I found the following reference: [highlights mine.]
The theology of Amen was clarified in another text of the Egyptian 18 th Dynasty. Pharaoh Hatshepsut wrote: "I have done this because of my loving heart for Father Amen ... My heart urged me to make for him two obelisks with tcham coverings, the pyramidions of which should pierce the sky ... I made them for him in rectitude of heart, for he is thinking of every God."e It is not clear whether it was Amun who was thinking of every god, or if Hatshepsut, by thinking of Amun, was herself thinking of every god. However, the effect is much the same. Amun embodied every god, and allowed the reverence of every god. Like the Biblical Jehovah (YHWH), the hidden aspect of Amun was associated with his name. "The priests of Amen claimed that there was no other god like Amen, who was the 'one one' and had 'no second.' This concept resembles that of the Hebrews, who said, 'Yahweh our God is one Lord' (Deuteronomy 6:4)"fThe obelisk was primarily a solar symbol and used to make solar measurements. Amun was a solar god after Atum-Re. Hatshepsut and other rulers proudly erected obelisks at the main Temple of Amun in Karnak. As Re (Marduk), Amun was god of the "pure mountain,"g that is the pyramid. Also in the manner of Atum-Re, Amun was considered to be self-created. He was his own father and mother. This androgynous, self-created quality of Atum had earlier been made an attribute of Ptah. The newly formed cult of Amun was not exclusive, but all-inclusive. Amun originally possessed both masculine and feminine (Amunet) natures. The cult embodied all of the major gods and goddesses. In Chapters 1-3, it was demonstrated that Jehovah (Amun) included the primeval mother goddess Iusaas (Greek Gaia/Iahu). Two Biblical passages in the Book of Exodus reveal that Jehovah could on occasion be a goddess, especially Isis. In Exodus 33:17-23, the Lord who passes in review before Moses is clearly styled as a goddess.h The Lord who appears to Moses in the account of the burning bush (Exodus 3) is also a goddess, and is specifically identified as Isis, the "I am (that) I am." In both passages, the role of the goddess is played by the dominant woman in the life of Moses, that of his mother. She ruled as Queen of Egypt and was considered the living representation of the goddess Isis/Maat (See Chapter 16).
I can't say how much of this is to be believed, but I have seen dozens of references over the years that link Yahweh to Amun. The reason I highlighted the two obelisks was because it reminded me of the association of Yahweh with the mountain of curses and mount of blessings, but the primary association is that obelisks are more obviously considered phallic especially when the sun brightens the tip, yet volcanoes, as the "special mountain" of Yahweh was described, are considered especially phallic when erupting/ejaculating "fire." (Volcanoes seem to offer mythological meaning as the meeting of earth (female) with fire/ejaculation (male) -- in much the same way as the dragon is the mythological meeting of earth (snake/crawling) with the heavens (flying creatures/wings).)
I hope I'm not offending too many with all this, but does anyone know what symbol(s) the Egyptians used in hieroglyphics to represent the sound "sh?" It often shocks those who first try to learn hieroglyphics from say, The book of the Dead, because the rather graphic symbol (ejaculation) is repeated hundreds of times.
I have a feeling this will seem far-fetched to some believers on the forum, but I believe the above arguments lends more credence to the meaning "I am that I am" which is more related to self-created one -- rather then the simpler self-existence in the shorter phrase "I am". In John, they don't argue with the phrase "I am" but with the fact that Jesus isn't quite 50 years old, max.
Gamaliel