I am saying that the bible has been tampered with for thousands of years and that the part about enoch sounds all too much like myth , Why would God kill off someone that was doing so good ? Then there is this mysterious writing of enoch that appears to be sepperate from the holy writings of ancient Israel . There was alot of apostasy going on in Israel so the likelyhood of this being a hood wink from some foney religious leader is very real to me .
Is Jesus Christ and Michael the ArchAngel one and the same person?
by booker-t 251 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Kenneson
I believe that Michael, like all the other angels, is subject to the Son. (1 Pet. 3:22} and worships Jesus(Rev. 5:11-14 and Heb. 1:4) The two are distinct. Since Michael is a Chief Angel, no worship can be rendered to him because worship of any angel is forbidden in Scripture. Col. 2:18-19 states: "Let no man deprive you of the prize who takes delight in a mock humility and a form of worship of angels..."
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Heathen
I'll take your remark as a complement, since thats what I was blatantly trying to do. Hmmm, it was very easy for me though....what if I always sound like that?!
I am saying that the bible has been tampered with for thousands of years and that the part about enoch sounds all too much like myth
If you believe the Bible's been tampered with, wouldn't you want to cross-reference it with as many independent sources as you can get a hold of? If nothing is accurate enough though, then how do you personally go about deciding on what you can confidently believe or not? I'm not arguing, but am genuinely curious, since I don't take much stock in many of the OT accounts either. Alot of myth there I'd say.
-
euripides
Sabrina wrote, "it is well known here that you [Leolaia] do not support the inspiration of the Bible." Sabrina, just think about how that sounds. It makes it sound like "the inspiration of the Bible" is a foregone reality that Leolaia denies. Substitute "inspiration of the Bible" for anything you like, such as "the truth," "theocratic order," "my way of thinking," etc and you hear how it comes across. What I want to know is, if you're not interested in scholarship Sabrina, why can't you accept that scholarship can upbuild some people and strengthen their faith? Scholarship isn't meant to endanger or tear down faith. That's anti-intellectual paranoia a la Watchtower wherein they realize that by someone else pointing out obvious rational things the masses just might realize the glaring holes in WT's theology. Scholarship is a free intellectual inquiry which seeks to rely not on theological subjectivity but the social, historical, and literary placement of these texts in their respective contexts (as if that mattered!). I say again, What is Wrong With That? What is There to be Afraid of?
-
ellderwho
That's anti-intellectual paranoia a la Watchtower wherein they realize that by someone else pointing out obvious rational things the masses just might realize the glaring holes in WT's theology
Well said. Further, if Michael is not Jesus in WT land, then what will the WT do with Jesus? This follows suite with what Russell did with eternal punishment and sin. By doing away with these, there really is not a need for a "real" savior.
The JW really has no answer for what happened to Michael, because we all know Christ can not have a dual nature to "float" WT doctrine. They have all kinds of excuses for what happened to Michael.
Discussing the scriptural standpoints is almost irrelevant. ie "a god", all [other] things, "firstborn", to get the JW to work out the mechanics of what came down from heaven, will corner the JW into a problem of what to do with Michael. As you stated "someone else pointing out obvious rational things "
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Further, if Michael is not Jesus in WT land, then what will the WT do with Jesus? This follows suite with what Russell did with eternal punishment and sin. By doing away with these, there really is not a need for a "real" savior.
Hi Elderwho,
The belief of Jesus as Redeemer isn't affected at all by his being Michael or not. All the other christian sects have no trouble with it. It is an important part of the WT's argument against Jesus being God though.
-
Deputy Dog
Midget
The belief of Jesus as Redeemer isn't affected at all by his being Michael or not.
If Jesus is Michael then he does not have the authority to forgive sins D Dog
-
Earnest
I perceive 'archangel' to be a title rather than a nature (such as human, spirit etc.). As such the question regarding what happened to Michael the Archangel if he is Jesus is the same as asking what happened to the pre-existent Jesus when he became flesh.
Earnest
-
Midget-Sasquatch
If Jesus is Michael then he does not have the authority to forgive sins
And if his ranking and nature remained unchanged I fully agree with you. I should have been a bit more careful with my posting...the quote I referenced was talking about their being no need for a saviour if Jesus was not Michael. That's what I was taking issue with. The flipside is as you say though.
-
ellderwho
...the quote I referenced was talking about their being no need for a saviour if Jesus was not Michael
I understand your reasoning. Further, Jesus redemption is basterdized by WT doctrine because they have Jesus being raised as a spirit. Not a fleshly resurection, thus perpetrating a colossal fraud of Jesus finding another body with matching flesh wounds.
The WT has the audacity to claim if Jesus rose in the "flesh" he would be "taking back the ransom" hence the fraudulent apperances.
I perceive 'archangel' to be a title rather than a nature (such as human, spirit etc.). As such the question regarding what happened to Michael the Archangel if he is Jesus is the same as asking what happened to the pre-existent Jesus when he became flesh.
The JW cannot have Jesus on earth with a dual nature. With that Michael has to be out of the picture for the earthly Jesus to exist. Remember JW doctrine Jesus was Just a man. Also, after his death, his body turned into gases so Jesus is gone forever, now Michael has to continue on in heaven.
The angels in Noahs day were able to take on bodies (and have a dual nature) and leave without changing natures. But Jesus is somehow unable to do this?????
what happened to the pre-existent Jesus when he became flesh.
Its my belief Jesus was not in heaven when he was on earth, and it was Jesus blood that saves not Michaels. And Jesus not Michael is above all authority named. Ephesians 1:20