Is Jesus Christ and Michael the ArchAngel one and the same person?

by booker-t 251 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  LittleToe

  EW:
  Interesting observation.

  Firstly, though I don't believe Jesus was Michael, I have no axe to grind with those that do. If, as Earnest suggests, it is merely a title rather than a designation of substance, there is little problem with that. I tend to go with Didier's view that there were several Archangels, however, and so that position precludes Jesus being of this class from a Trinitarian perspective.

  Its my belief Jesus was not in heaven when he was on earth...

  That wouldn't be my view, as it presents a problem with Trinity.
  I prefer the opinion that he "extended down" to earth, choosing to limit himself, whilst remaining fully in union with godhead.
  Of course when we talk in terms of omnipresence the question becomes moot anyway.
• 

  ellderwho

  That wouldn't be my view, as it presents a problem with Trinity.
  I prefer the opinion that he "extended down" to earth, choosing to limit himself, whilst remaining fully in union with godhead.

  I see I was quick to seperate the trinity. My answer is in light of "splittting hairs" as to Jesus/Michael. Its funny the last time I tackled this was with my elder study last year.

  I was quick to point out to him what came down from heaven. We must consider, John tells us the Logos becomes flesh and tabernacled among us. I do not equate the logos with an angel.

  What I also found intersting is Jo. 1:11 says of the logos, " he came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him" .......at what point did mankind belong to an angel as being his own?

  If the logos is and angel then that puts an angel in the creative process. Not the created.

  Earnest suggests, it is merely a title rather than a designation of substance, there is little problem with that.

  I have problems with that as well, such as "a god."
• 

  Deputy Dog

  LT and EW

  I don't know which one of you guys are right (or wrong), but LT you still have the same problem when the Father forsakes the Son on the cross

  D Dog
• 

  Narkissos

  This question reminds of the well-known variant Egyptian reading of John 3:13: "No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." In Johannine theology it could pretty well make sense.
• 

  ellderwho

  "No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven

  Nark, what text is this from??

  edited to add; nevermind I found it.
• 

  LittleToe

  It was described to me as three circles, representing the Trinity, with the one representing the Son being elongated down (which is just a pictoral representation) so that he remained in union, whilst also taking on a human nature.

  DD:
  Was the unity of the deity of godhead ever broken? If so, was God ever less than triune?
  This comes back to the doctrine of the Tri-part man, as an explanation of how Christ could be foresaken and yet still remain in union. It also helps us attempt to answer the question "can God die?".

  If I were raised in Protestant circles I might have the good sense to just say "therein lays a mystery" and leave it at that. However due to the WTS, my psyche will always be scarred with the quest for wanting some kind of logical premise upon which to rest understanding.

  Didier:
  Thanks for the quotation. That's exactly what I'm trying to express.

  EW:

  I have problems with that as well, such as "a god."

  The only basis upon which I can accept it is if you take the word "angel" to merely mean messenger or herald and apply that directly to the specific office of the "Word".
  I don't hold that opinion, but I'm not going to fall out with my brethren who do.

  I agree with your other reasonings.
• 

  Narkissos

  Ellderwho:

  From Nestle-Aland's critical apparatus: Codex Alexandrinus (5th century), "in heaven"; and a host of Greek manuscripts from the 9th century onward, as well as many manuscripts of Latin, Syriac and Bohairic versions, plus Origenes (latin version) and Epiphanius.

  Bruce M. Metzger in his Textual Commentary of the Greek New Testament says the variant is "supported almost exclusively by Egyptian witnesses". The UBS Committee did not include it in the main text although a minority in the Committee stood for the variant. The UBS text (without "who is in heaven") is rated "C", which is pretty low.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  LT

  Was the unity of the deity of godhead ever broken?

  Yes, when the Father forsook the Son.

  If so, was God ever less than triune?

  No, The Son did not cease to exist, nor was he annihilated as the jw's suggest. If we have a problem with this, we probably have a pagan ideal of death, not the Hebrew ideal of separation (death).
  

  This comes back to the doctrine of the Tri-part man, as an explanation of how Christ could be foresaken and yet still remain in union.

  I don't know about that. I don't know how we have relationships with the various parts of ourselves. We may have three parts, but, not three persons. (although after thinking about this, I catch myself talking to myself.)

  It also helps us attempt to answer the question "can God die?".

  Maybe the better question is "How can God die? not "if God can die".

  D Dog
• 

  Will Power

  Interesting.....

  Isn't God dead the minute you stop believing? By the pure definition of "Almighty" it doesn't seem like a real god would, why else believe in God?

  If the god you believe in is more like a super human, then I guess that kind could die.

  also, I'd like to add....

  by electronically stimulating the temporal lobes in the brain you can induce a spiritual experience - an epiphany.

  It is a proven fact that some people have more natural activity in their temporal lobes than others. This could answer why some are more spiritual than others. Why some have an easier time thinking out of the box. Personally, I believe the more stimulation of the temporal lobes - the further along on the evolution chain. Once the spark is ignited (God?) the activity feeds itself if used and stretched.

  Energy is always present in one form or another. Labels are like mother's milk?

  will P
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  If I recall correctly (please someone set me straight if I've botched this), the clause "who is in heaven" isn't a part of John 3:13 in some of the oldest manuscripts. Isn't it absent in p66, p75?

  I'm fascinated with that variant though. It can be used to support the orthodox view of Jesus' divinity, but dare I say it, even a gnostic christology. Jesus as a vessel for an emanation from the All (in the form of the heavenly Son of Man). A nexus of sorts. I'm ignorant on Philo's take on archangel though. Does it have any connotations of being a divine emanation?