G
greggy53
Guest
Yes he has many names but Michael is not on your list!
- Status
J
Javl
Guest
In scripture, the expression “the angel of the Lord” signifies God and not an actual angel, while the expression “an angel of the Lord” does signify an angel and messenger. This has been used, and still is today, by Orthodox Jews. This could present a bit of confusion.
But, as you say, we’ve beaten this subject to death. So be it. But, I don’t think I will ever truly understand your reasoning in rejecting scripture that is so evident in proving that Jesus is/was not the Archangel Michael. Peace of the Lord to you.
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
R
Richard_Kastner
Guest
Ok, Javal I in no way reject any scripture. You have your way of looking at scripture and I mine. I obviously reject your way of looking at scripture in favor of mine. But your way is not scripture nor is it the only way of percieving it.But, I don’t think I will ever truly understand your reasoning in rejecting scripture that is so evident in proving that Jesus is/was not the Archangel Michael. Peace of the Lord to you.
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
G
greggy53
Guest
You are right. There are many different ways of interpreting scripture. But everyone can’t be right. You would think that the holy Spirit would have wanted to avoid so much confusion among Christians? But everyone wants to think that they are the ones with the right answers, the select few. The only ones that God is really talking too and revealing himself too. That is why I finally rejected any form of Protestantism. God would have wanted his word to be crystal clear for his people. There only way this could happen was if he revealed it to one Church, his Church, his spouse. None other. This Church has the only correct interpretations of all scripture. If you say that his Church can be many or all denominations then we are back to confusion again and we know the author of confusion. If there can be a truly correct interpretation of all the scriptures then there can only be One Church!
J
Javl
Guest
Well said Greg, Better than what I could. Thanks and God Bless.
Len
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
R
Richard_Kastner
Guest
God certainly does have only one church. Rev. 12 :17 gives two criteria for God’s church. 17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
The CC does not qualify in that it changed the sanctity of the Sabbath to the Sunday. Jesus will be comming back to this earth to recieve His bride that has His testimony and keep His commandments, not the commandments of men.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Greggy,
Let me tell you … I just laughed and laughed and laughed …
Have a great day!
Let me tell you … I just laughed and laughed and laughed …
Let me complement you on catching this … when I read it, I just threw up my hands…Yes he has many names but Michael is not on your list!
Have a great day!
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Richard,
This is truly an interesting approach…two criteria, eh?
Now, what I found most interesting about your response is that most folks find Revelations very difficult to understand - and from the looks of things - many people can get way off track. But, go back to Matthew - and we see what Christ is doing, we read His words … and, for some, we reject them! Why? Well, we have these traditions of men (and women, apparently) that try to trump the Word of God. But, don’t stop with Matthew - go to John and look at what the Resurrected Christ tells Peter - “…feed my lambs, feed my sheep…” Peter not only did not get ‘fired’ for denying Christ, but is refocused as to what Christ wants him to do as leader of the Church - feed both lambs and sheep.
Now, we have spent a lot of time and >1,000 posts on this … and you want to throw in the towel and walk away…? All of this time and effort and emotional currency on holding onto the Sabbath - as though Christ (or was that Michael) had not come to earth and saved us from sin. Came to earth and totally changed the way we worship God - with Christ giving us the Eucharist to feed both our body and our soul.
Personally, I think you can do better … honest. This cut and paste with all of the titles for Christ was not really relevant … now was it. We were talking about a name. There are several instances where God CHANGES the name of a particular person … and that is recorded … and there is no confusion. But, this attempt to consider every messenger Michael and or Christ is just not backed up anywhere - and this is why I gave you the entire quotations from those verses you offered. Christ is God, the Second-Person of the Blessed Trinity. Michael is a created spirit. Mike did not die for your sins - Christ and only Christ did that.
God bless
This is truly an interesting approach…two criteria, eh?
So 60+ years BEFORE St. John wrote these ‘two criteria’ Christ spoke with the Apostles (as recorded in Matt 16) and asked who men thought He was. God the Father inspired Peter - and only Peter - to give Christ the correct answer. And, guess what happens next … Christ founds His Church on Peter.
Now, what I found most interesting about your response is that most folks find Revelations very difficult to understand - and from the looks of things - many people can get way off track. But, go back to Matthew - and we see what Christ is doing, we read His words … and, for some, we reject them! Why? Well, we have these traditions of men (and women, apparently) that try to trump the Word of God. But, don’t stop with Matthew - go to John and look at what the Resurrected Christ tells Peter - “…feed my lambs, feed my sheep…” Peter not only did not get ‘fired’ for denying Christ, but is refocused as to what Christ wants him to do as leader of the Church - feed both lambs and sheep.
Now, we have spent a lot of time and >1,000 posts on this … and you want to throw in the towel and walk away…? All of this time and effort and emotional currency on holding onto the Sabbath - as though Christ (or was that Michael) had not come to earth and saved us from sin. Came to earth and totally changed the way we worship God - with Christ giving us the Eucharist to feed both our body and our soul.
Personally, I think you can do better … honest. This cut and paste with all of the titles for Christ was not really relevant … now was it. We were talking about a name. There are several instances where God CHANGES the name of a particular person … and that is recorded … and there is no confusion. But, this attempt to consider every messenger Michael and or Christ is just not backed up anywhere - and this is why I gave you the entire quotations from those verses you offered. Christ is God, the Second-Person of the Blessed Trinity. Michael is a created spirit. Mike did not die for your sins - Christ and only Christ did that.
God bless
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Richard,
So, just Who died on the Cross for our sins? Christ or Michael?
So, just Who died on the Cross for our sins? Christ or Michael?
The one phrase that I had a problem with is the one here that I have emboldened. I looked up the word for one in Strongs and I got this… omitted from response
:
So, this phrase could validly be translated “first of the chief princes”
And you are hanging your eternal salvation on a, “…could validly be translated…” statement?
I see Jesus as the chief of the angels or the archangel. So for me there is no confusion.
When you do SEE Jesus, it will be as Divine Judge - and not as a created spirit.
As for your take on Rev 12 You say:
Here’s the passage:
5And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
The man-child (Jesus) is caught up to God. He doesn’t "leave"
6And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
7And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
You have to remember that Rev. does not follow a cronological progression. So the war that breaks out in heaven is long before the woman (God’s church) or Jesus’ earthly incarnation. So, I don’t see any conflict here at all. Jesus the first of the chief angels leads those angels to throw Satan and his angels out of heaven. Angels are so much more powerful then us … but, none of them fly around with name confusion. Where do you see JESUS being called the Chief of Angles as opposed to Michael? It just is not there.
There is also this. Dan.10:21But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.
The angel Gabriel that tells this to Daniel calls “Michael your prince”. Do you really think that Gabriel would refer to another angel like him as Daniel’s prince. Recall, angels are totally different from humans - and in every encounter, the angel must tell the human not to be afraid! Now, these ar good angels talking - and we, as humans, are scared to death. Can you imagine what the bad angels look like? Just because Daniel (a respected high official in the Babylonian court) is addressed in a particular way or told by Gabriel that Michael is a prince - or even ‘…your prince…’ does not mean that Michael and Christ are the same person. Really.
Also in 1 Thess.4:16 says: For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, Does this not mean that the Lord’s voice is the voice of the archangel? Richard, it is nothing short of astounding to me that you would take a pharse or a term and build an entire doctrine supporting it - yet ignore the entire NT - from Luke telling Mary that the Son she is to bear will be called Jesus (not Michael) to the sign hung on the Cross - Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews. Note, it was not Michael from wherever and he did not die for our sins.
But the most compelling evidence maybe for you, Richard, but, it really does not hold water.
for Michael being Jesus is Dan.12:1 1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. The real action of Jesus Christ is when He came to earth - first in Mary’s womb where He already had a name - and a name above every name. Note, Paul does not tell us that every knee will bend when we say the name Michael. Why do you think there would be such a slight to such a high ranking angel? Actually, this is not a slight - the adoration goes to Christ - the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity
Let me ask you Tom. Who is the only one capable of standing up for the people written in the Lambs’ book of life? Hi, Richard,My understanding is that Michael is the patron and protector of Isreal. Note, Daniel does not say that Michael will suffer and die for the sins of his people. Based on all you have said, I really do see this as denying that Christ is God…and that is serious.
God bless
J
Javl
Guest
tqualey and greggy:
Can either of you tell me as to how I can get though to a closed mind? I have presented very glaring evidence to support my case but it is rejected. Well I guess you know the rest. It does get a bit frustrating when someone does not listen to you but wants you to listen and accept what he/she says. You both do a terrific job in the posts on all the threads. Thanks and God Bless.
Len
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
Can either of you tell me as to how I can get though to a closed mind? I have presented very glaring evidence to support my case but it is rejected. Well I guess you know the rest. It does get a bit frustrating when someone does not listen to you but wants you to listen and accept what he/she says. You both do a terrific job in the posts on all the threads. Thanks and God Bless.
Len
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
C
Cinette
Guest
*I have only just come across this thread and find the subject interesting and extraordinary. It is the first time I learn that there people who believe that Jesus is the Archangel Michael!!!
Do please alert me if this discussion has a continuation
Blessings
Cinette
*
Do please alert me if this discussion has a continuation
Blessings
Cinette
*
C
Cinette
Guest
*There is only one truth and one interpretation of truth.
There is no such thing as your truth and my truth and their truth - there in only ONE TRUTH!*
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Len,
I think there are two important ‘take-home’ messages that may be helpful:
2.) It is God who grants the increase through His Grace - just continue to spread His Truth through love.
There are no easy answers here. Actually, there have been several times I have marveled at the evasions and absolute lack of logic presented. So, “…getting through…” as a goal (at least in my opinion) is simply not realistic. Praying for this poster and all of the others who are truly floundering with their own interpretation of Scripture is my only suggestion. By the way…
in your enthusiasm for adding people to your prayer list … be sure to add me (hey! Greggy, you want in on this, too?! )
God bless
I think there are two important ‘take-home’ messages that may be helpful:
1.) Do not lose heart, andtqualey and greggy:
Can either of you tell me as to how I can get though to a closed mind? I have presented very glaring evidence to support my case but it is rejected. Well I guess you know the rest. It does get a bit frustrating when someone does not listen to you but wants you to listen and accept what he/she says. You both do a terrific job in the posts on all the threads. Thanks and God Bless.
Len
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
2.) It is God who grants the increase through His Grace - just continue to spread His Truth through love.
There are no easy answers here. Actually, there have been several times I have marveled at the evasions and absolute lack of logic presented. So, “…getting through…” as a goal (at least in my opinion) is simply not realistic. Praying for this poster and all of the others who are truly floundering with their own interpretation of Scripture is my only suggestion. By the way…
in your enthusiasm for adding people to your prayer list … be sure to add me (hey! Greggy, you want in on this, too?! )God bless
J
Javl
Guest
Thanks Tom. I wish I didn’t have to agree with you, but I do. I’m almost of the belief that the great deceiver is at work here. How else could it be explained?Hi, Len,
I think there are two important ‘take-home’ messages that may be helpful:
1.) Do not lose heart, and
2.) It is God who grants the increase through His Grace - just continue to spread His Truth through love.
There are no easy answers here. Actually, there have been several times I have marveled at the evasions and absolute lack of logic presented. So, “…getting through…” as a goal (at least in my opinion) is simply not realistic. Praying for this poster and all of the others who are truly floundering with their own interpretation of Scripture is my only suggestion. By the way…
God bless
Anyway, you are all on my prayer list. Again, thank you and God Bless.
Len
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Cinette,
Here is a belated welcome … but, as you see from the posting number … this ‘thread’ is at the end of its ‘spool’…
Now, in my book, angels are really super creations … but… they are creations! So, there is no equal to God and God is not a creature. So, when Christ says, “He who sees me has seen the Father” (John 14:9) and “I and the Father are One” (John 10:30) - this is obviously a misquote!
Somehow we have to fit Michael into this arrangement …! But, the issue of fitting a creature with the Creator is obviously one the poster has just chosen to ignore.
Here is the analogy that has been going through my head when I first read this item on Michael and Christ being the same person. My wife and I have signed up for a evening ceramics class this semester … so the idea of some clay pot I am trying to make - becoming a living part of me is a pretty wild thought! What makes the poster’s idea even ‘wilder’ is that here is an example of two physical items (me and my pot…) that we can try and imagine. There is no way to ‘imagine’ God.
Personally, I find it a very sad and totally distorted idea. This group has obviously chosen to ‘re-assign’ our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ to some subordinate role. I do not have any idea how they made this incredible leap off of the cliff - away from the loving arms of the God Who has saved us from sin by His Passion and Cross…but, they have The only thing I can think of is to add this poster to our prayer list.
God bless
Here is a belated welcome … but, as you see from the posting number … this ‘thread’ is at the end of its ‘spool’…
If I see one, I will pass it on… but, in my opinion, we have basically three Scripture verses that have been stood on their head in order to ‘prove’ that Jesus Christ is not the Second Person in the Blessed Trinity! Rather, there is an effort to present Christ as a creature, with the ‘alter ego’ of Michael, the Archangel…or maybe wearing some kind of disguise!*I have only just come across this thread and find the subject interesting and extraordinary. It is the first time I learn that there people who believe that Jesus is the Archangel Michael!!!
Do please alert me if this discussion has a continuation
Blessings
Cinette
Now, in my book, angels are really super creations … but… they are creations! So, there is no equal to God and God is not a creature. So, when Christ says, “He who sees me has seen the Father” (John 14:9) and “I and the Father are One” (John 10:30) - this is obviously a misquote!
Somehow we have to fit Michael into this arrangement …! But, the issue of fitting a creature with the Creator is obviously one the poster has just chosen to ignore.Here is the analogy that has been going through my head when I first read this item on Michael and Christ being the same person. My wife and I have signed up for a evening ceramics class this semester … so the idea of some clay pot I am trying to make - becoming a living part of me is a pretty wild thought! What makes the poster’s idea even ‘wilder’ is that here is an example of two physical items (me and my pot…) that we can try and imagine. There is no way to ‘imagine’ God.
Personally, I find it a very sad and totally distorted idea. This group has obviously chosen to ‘re-assign’ our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ to some subordinate role. I do not have any idea how they made this incredible leap off of the cliff - away from the loving arms of the God Who has saved us from sin by His Passion and Cross…but, they have
The only thing I can think of is to add this poster to our prayer list.God bless
G
greggy53
Guest
Well that sounds like that came directly from the SDA playbook. So you believe then that your SDA fellowship is the remnant of the Church. However, as always it boils down to Authority. Jesus established his Church on the Rock of St Peter, and gave him and the Apostles complete authority within the Church. That authority from the Apostles continues in an unbroken line today within the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church had then and continues to posses that authority. The SDA leaders as far as I know are products of the so called reformation and consequently lack apostolic succession and so do not have the authority to interpret scripture. Therefore I cannot recognize your interpretation of any scripture without you first convincing me that the Catholic Church has either never had that authority, or lost that authority at some specific time. Apostolic succession and tradition are traditions of God passed on to us thru mother Church. We do not believe that they constitute the “traditions of men” that you speak of.
My argument to any Protestant has always been “Why should I recognize your authority over the authority of the Church that has prevailed for 2000 years?”
G
greggy53
Guest
Thanks, but we can’t get thru a closed mind…God can, and we pray that of the seeds we plant some might grow through the power of the Holy Spirit.tqualey and greggy:
Can either of you tell me as to how I can get though to a closed mind? I have presented very glaring evidence to support my case but it is rejected. Well I guess you know the rest. It does get a bit frustrating when someone does not listen to you but wants you to listen and accept what he/she says. You both do a terrific job in the posts on all the threads. Thanks and God Bless.
Len
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
C
Cinette
Guest
*It appears to me that the SDA believe that Jesus made a mistake when he said “Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” - they believe that Jesus did not keep his promise or changed his mind or…
They deny history.
The CC is the largest Christian faith going back to the Apostles - this is recorded in history. Yes we have many sinners, we are all sinners and some are very bad. But you cannot reject Peter because of Judas can you? The story of the wheat and the tares is very real and it will always be so until the day of judgement. The evil one is always at work trying to get more recruits.
We are fortunate that Jesus set up the scructures and inspired the Apostles (who were transformed at Pentecost) to pass on the Good News. Our glorious history is testimony to this. The CC belongs to all of humankind. Our Pope is the Father of ALL Christians (appointed by Jesus through Apostolic Succession).
Our world is in a bad state and all people of Faith should unite and examine history and the scriptures and come together. Jesus did say there would be one flock and one shepherd. Unity is strength and the forces of good will always prevail against the forces of darkness.
Take a look at this: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/8441813.stm*
We should really all be praying for Christian unity. This is very important and is in accordance with Jesus’ wishes.
Blessings to all
Cinette
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Cinette,
You certainly are right about this obvious confusion about Peter - it would seem that simply denying history and the Word of God (of course this puts a hole in SS if you are going to just ignore what is written) is the easies course of action!
This BBC link was rather chilling - child sacrifice in this day and age - and the cowards are stealing other people’s children to murder! That is such a sad and twisted belief structure for Uganda. What makes it sadder is that "Uganda’s Minister of Ethics and Integrity James Nsaba Buturo believes that “to punish retrospectively would cause a problem… if we can persuade Ugandans to change…” justice will be denied to these grieving parents.
God bless
You certainly are right about this obvious confusion about Peter - it would seem that simply denying history and the Word of God (of course this puts a hole in SS if you are going to just ignore what is written) is the easies course of action!
This BBC link was rather chilling - child sacrifice in this day and age - and the cowards are stealing other people’s children to murder! That is such a sad and twisted belief structure for Uganda. What makes it sadder is that "Uganda’s Minister of Ethics and Integrity James Nsaba Buturo believes that “to punish retrospectively would cause a problem… if we can persuade Ugandans to change…” justice will be denied to these grieving parents.
God bless
G
greggy53
Guest
We have the exact same child sacrifice in this country. It’s called abortion…Which reminds me of another question I have for our SDA friends. What is the official stand of the SDA concerning abortion?
- Status