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

by booker-t 251 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Will Power

  Well then - how does an angel die? - Thought that was impossible? If not why all the hubbub about lucifer? Just kill the thing.

  Did the spirit named michael of the man named jesus just float around for 3 days while the human part waited to be raised as a spirit creature?

  they were then re-united as Jesus - then Jesus ascends at pentecost - then his name is michael till he comes back to earth invisibly like a spirit as jesus in 1874, 1899, 1914, 1925........

  then will come again as michael but will really be Jesus with the call of the trumpet.

  Sounds like them there trinity arguments - that are impossible to comprehend.
• 

  ellderwho

  "Jesus" is simply Michael's earthly name. Similarly, the names of other persons were changed. Abram was changed to Abraham. Sari (spelling ?) was changed to Sarah.

  Was Michael raised from the dead or was it Jesus?

  That's fairly obvious, isn't it, since they are one and the same person.

  According to your logic then Michael was raised, because he was no longer in a earthly body and returned to the Father in heaven.

  You still do not answer the question what happened to Michael in heaven?

  Or better yet what came down from heaven?
• 

  Greenpalmtreestillmine

  Hi Schizm,

  The Bible says that Eve "saw that the tree was good for food" and that she "began taking of its fruit and eating it". How is it then that you don't believe the tree was literal?

  I believe the two trees in the Garden of Eden symbolized the same two choices that mankind has before it today, eternal life or eternal death. Genesis is a treasure house of spiritual symbolism and imo will continue to provide beautiful spiritual fruits until the Christ himself returns.

  Also, what would you say the significance is of the location of this tree, it having a particular place, namely "the middle of the garden"?

  It would seem that the placement of the Tree in the middle of the garden meant that Adam and Eve would pass by it on a regular basis. In other words, their choosing of right and wrong, of eternal life or eternal death, was before them constantly.

  Sabrina
• 

  ellderwho

  I believe the two trees in the Garden of Eden symbolized the same two choices that mankind has before it today, eternal life or eternal death. Genesis is a treasure house of spiritual symbolism and imo will continue to provide beautiful spiritual fruits until the Christ himself returns.

  What would you say Adams created values where? Another words what was Adam "loaded" with, as far as seeing a bad choice vs. a good choice. And his abilty to discern?
• 

  Swan

  If that was the case, then why didn't John Travolta play Jesus in the Passion of Christ? And also, there is no mention in the Bible of Jesus liking pie.

  Tammy
• 

  ellderwho

  LOL @ Tammy
• 

  Happy Guy :)

  That's fairly obvious, isn't it, since they are one and the same person. "Jesus" is simply Michael's earthly name. Similarly, the names of other persons were changed. Abram was changed to Abraham. Sari (spelling ?) was changed to Sarah.

  Interesting. Show me in the Bible where it says that God transplanted Michael into Mary' womb.
• 

  ellderwho

  Interesting. Show me in the Bible where it says that God transplanted Michael into Mary' womb.

  Happy guy,

  Funny isnt it, they way the Jw wants Jesus to be Michael in heaven, yet will not give Jesus on earth a dual nature.

  Oh the web they've weaved.
• 

  Greenpalmtreestillmine

  Hi Ellderwho,

  What would you say Adams created values where? Another words what was Adam "loaded" with, as far as seeing a bad choice vs. a good choice. And his abilty to discern?

  If I believe God is a loving Father then I would also believe God equipped Adam with the necessary abilities to make an intelligent choice. But if I believed the Bible is a fairytale and God a monster then I would believe that God could not care less about Adam and Eve.

  You choose.

  Sabrina
• 

  Leolaia

  It is interesting how the attempt to harmonize different biblical texts about the Messiah and Michael, which creates a new doctrine about Jesus being Michael the Archangel, ignores other texts such as Revelation 12 which distinguishes between Michael and the Messiah child, and Hebrews 1 which explicitly denies that the Son is an angel.

  Those enthusiastically embracing the angel christology either ignore the significance of these scriptures (as have done thus far in this thread) or would need to explain them in a way that forces them into agreement with their preferred christology.

  The simple truth is that the OT and NT present differing claims about the Messiah and any attempt to force them into agreement results in a new doctrine which does not correspond to anything that is actually written in the Bible (Narkissos made this point a while back). Embracing Daniel's suggestion that the Messianic king will be Michael results in a conflict with Hebrews. Accepting Hebrews at its word (or Colossians 1:15-19, for that matter) results in a conflict with Daniel as long as one identifies the promised Messianic king with Jesus.

  And since Jude drew on 1 Enoch, especially in areas relating to angels (cf. v. 6), we would have to consider how the Son is unique in preeminence and essence (Hebrews 1:3) yet is a member of a class of angels (the archangels).