Total Posts:167|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

at what age did michael ??/

EastwardTraveler
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 7:52:45 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

But that is not what the JW says on their online website. They use other examples. Why can't they just say the don't know?
https://www.jw.org...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 9:48:46 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Revelation sums it up when it says no words will be added. JW is a false cult. The watchtower is dupposedly "prophetic" yet can prophesy nothing. "Beware of false teachers..."

just sayin...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
graceofgod
Posts: 5,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 9:50:46 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 9:48:46 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Revelation sums it up when it says no words will be added. JW is a false cult. The watchtower is dupposedly "prophetic" yet can prophesy nothing. "Beware of false teachers..."

just sayin...

i know what you mean...
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 10:30:39 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Scripture doesn't give much detail on that so we are free to speculate.

However it makes sense to assume that Michael's spirit was placed in the embryonic Jesus, and the rest of his memories etc "downloaded" at his baptism when he had shown himself willing to take on his future role.

That is my personal theory, for what it is worth, it is just that I don't feel that Jehvoah would be cruel enough to try to implant all those millennia's worth of knowledge in an undeveloped human embryo.

I also believe that explain why Jesus had to go into the Wilderness for 40 days.

In a way it is very similar to the way Paul had to go into Arabia for a few years to get his head around having all he had believed turned n its head.

Ironically it is also similar to how it took me 4 years to start studying eve though I knew I have found what I had been looking for the moment I read the JWs beliefs, though in my case it didn't turn my beliefs upside down, it just shocked me finding the truth where I did, as well as the way I found it.

But eventually I realised I had to make 100% sure so I started a study with them.

The rest, as they say, is history.

There are a number of things scripture doesn't tell us, in most cases simply because there is no need for us to know.
EastwardTraveler
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 10:32:37 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Well they simply believe he gave up one existence and enter into another. Whether this was done by his own accord, by God's, or by both it's not clear how that happened. Philipians 2:5-8 is the best scripture I can give that would explain what went on.

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Even if they are right, I don't think its is always important for God to explain every detail of how he does things in the spiritual real, if we could even begin to understand it.

One point I would caution you on, and that is when you do not understand or believe someone's position is to insert a false belief to make it hard for the person make their point, such as you saying Michael committed suicide. Like I said before somethings are not for us to understand.

I'm not sure what your beliefs are on Christ but I would love to discuss them with you, especially if you are looking for answers. The key issue here I believe if the definition of the angel and this is where Orthodox Christianity and JW both make a mistake and end up arguing over what or who Jesus was.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 10:42:54 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 10:30:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Scripture doesn't give much detail on that so we are free to speculate.

However it makes sense to assume that Michael's spirit was placed in the embryonic Jesus, and the rest of his memories etc "downloaded" at his baptism when he had shown himself willing to take on his future role.

That is my personal theory, for what it is worth, it is just that I don't feel that Jehvoah would be cruel enough to try to implant all those millennia's worth of knowledge in an undeveloped human embryo.

I also believe that explain why Jesus had to go into the Wilderness for 40 days.

In a way it is very similar to the way Paul had to go into Arabia for a few years to get his head around having all he had believed turned n its head.

Ironically it is also similar to how it took me 4 years to start studying eve though I knew I have found what I had been looking for the moment I read the JWs beliefs, though in my case it didn't turn my beliefs upside down, it just shocked me finding the truth where I did, as well as the way I found it.

But eventually I realised I had to make 100% sure so I started a study with them.

The rest, as they say, is history.

There are a number of things scripture doesn't tell us, in most cases simply because there is no need for us to know.

and none of this important happening is covered by a single piece of scripture...

wow that makes it all purely jw speculation, there's a shock...

I can see why the jw's didn't believe michael was Jesus to start with, maybe they just needed something to make them different to try and get members..lol
graceofgod
Posts: 5,032
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 10:45:08 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 10:32:37 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Well they simply believe he gave up one existence and enter into another. Whether this was done by his own accord, by God's, or by both it's not clear how that happened. Philipians 2:5-8 is the best scripture I can give that would explain what went on.

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Even if they are right, I don't think its is always important for God to explain every detail of how he does things in the spiritual real, if we could even begin to understand it.

One point I would caution you on, and that is when you do not understand or believe someone's position is to insert a false belief to make it hard for the person make their point, such as you saying Michael committed suicide. Like I said before somethings are not for us to understand.

I'm not sure what your beliefs are on Christ but I would love to discuss them with you, especially if you are looking for answers. The key issue here I believe if the definition of the angel and this is where Orthodox Christianity and JW both make a mistake and end up arguing over what or who Jesus was.

I have the answer who Jesus is and it certainly is not the angel michael

even the jw's didn't believe michael was jesus, i wonder what changed their mind as it wasn't scripture...
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 10:45:08 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:32:37 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Well they simply believe he gave up one existence and enter into another. Whether this was done by his own accord, by God's, or by both it's not clear how that happened. Philipians 2:5-8 is the best scripture I can give that would explain what went on.

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Even if they are right, I don't think its is always important for God to explain every detail of how he does things in the spiritual real, if we could even begin to understand it.

One point I would caution you on, and that is when you do not understand or believe someone's position is to insert a false belief to make it hard for the person make their point, such as you saying Michael committed suicide. Like I said before somethings are not for us to understand.

I'm not sure what your beliefs are on Christ but I would love to discuss them with you, especially if you are looking for answers. The key issue here I believe if the definition of the angel and this is where Orthodox Christianity and JW both make a mistake and end up arguing over what or who Jesus was.

I have the answer who Jesus is and it certainly is not the angel michael

even the jw's didn't believe michael was jesus, i wonder what changed their mind as it wasn't scripture...

Only scripture ever changes their mind.

No they don't believe he was, they know he was, and is again now he has been resurrected ad ascended to his father's side, because scripture makes that clear enough for the simplest of minds to see.

Though apparently not yours.

MICHAEL
(MiE7;cha"el) [Who Is Like God?].

1. The only holy angel other than Gabriel named in the Bible, and the only one called "archangel." (Jude 9) The first occurrence of the name is in the tenth chapter of Daniel, where Michael is described as "one of the foremost princes"; he came to the aid of a lesser angel who was opposed by "the prince of the royal realm of Persia." Michael was called "the prince of [Daniel"s] people," "the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 10:13, 20, 21; 12:1) This points to Michael as the angel who led the Israelites through the wilderness. (Ex 23:20, 21, 23; 32:34; 33:2) Lending support to this conclusion is the fact that "Michael the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses" body.""Jude 9.

Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God"s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be "the archangel," meaning "chief angel," or "principal angel." The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with "a commanding call." It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14) If the designation "archangel" applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to "an archangel"s voice" would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.

There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to "the time of the end" (Da 11:40) and then stated: "And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 12:1) Michael"s "standing up" was to be associated with "a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time." (Da 12:1) In Daniel"s prophecy, "standing up" frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah"s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har"Magedon."Re 11:15; 16:14-16.

The book of Revelation (12:7, 10, 12) specifically mentions Michael in connection with the establishment of God"s Kingdom and links this event with trouble for the earth: "And war broke out in heaven:

http://wol.jw.org......

Like his father, and the Angels beneath him, he was and is spirit being.

It is simply the fact that he was the only one created by Jehovah alone that makes him the most special being ever apart from his father.
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 11:14:29 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:45:08 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:32:37 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Well they simply believe he gave up one existence and enter into another. Whether this was done by his own accord, by God's, or by both it's not clear how that happened. Philipians 2:5-8 is the best scripture I can give that would explain what went on.

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Even if they are right, I don't think its is always important for God to explain every detail of how he does things in the spiritual real, if we could even begin to understand it.

One point I would caution you on, and that is when you do not understand or believe someone's position is to insert a false belief to make it hard for the person make their point, such as you saying Michael committed suicide. Like I said before somethings are not for us to understand.

I'm not sure what your beliefs are on Christ but I would love to discuss them with you, especially if you are looking for answers. The key issue here I believe if the definition of the angel and this is where Orthodox Christianity and JW both make a mistake and end up arguing over what or who Jesus was.

I have the answer who Jesus is and it certainly is not the angel michael

even the jw's didn't believe michael was jesus, i wonder what changed their mind as it wasn't scripture...

Only scripture ever changes their mind.

SCRIPTURE? Why, the things that have most commonly "changed their mind" are: clocks and calendars.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2016 11:31:42 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:45:08 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:32:37 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Well they simply believe he gave up one existence and enter into another. Whether this was done by his own accord, by God's, or by both it's not clear how that happened. Philipians 2:5-8 is the best scripture I can give that would explain what went on.

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Even if they are right, I don't think its is always important for God to explain every detail of how he does things in the spiritual real, if we could even begin to understand it.

One point I would caution you on, and that is when you do not understand or believe someone's position is to insert a false belief to make it hard for the person make their point, such as you saying Michael committed suicide. Like I said before somethings are not for us to understand.

I'm not sure what your beliefs are on Christ but I would love to discuss them with you, especially if you are looking for answers. The key issue here I believe if the definition of the angel and this is where Orthodox Christianity and JW both make a mistake and end up arguing over what or who Jesus was.

I have the answer who Jesus is and it certainly is not the angel michael

even the jw's didn't believe michael was jesus, i wonder what changed their mind as it wasn't scripture...

Only scripture ever changes their mind.

No they don't believe he was, they know he was, and is again now he has been resurrected ad ascended to his father's side, because scripture makes that clear enough for the simplest of minds to see.

Though apparently not yours.

MICHAEL
(MiE7;cha"el) [Who Is Like God?].

1. The only holy angel other than Gabriel named in the Bible, and the only one called "archangel." (Jude 9) The first occurrence of the name is in the tenth chapter of Daniel, where Michael is described as "one of the foremost princes"; he came to the aid of a lesser angel who was opposed by "the prince of the royal realm of Persia." Michael was called "the prince of [Daniel"s] people," "the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 10:13, 20, 21; 12:1) This points to Michael as the angel who led the Israelites through the wilderness. (Ex 23:20, 21, 23; 32:34; 33:2) Lending support to this conclusion is the fact that "Michael the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses" body.""Jude 9.

Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God"s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be "the archangel," meaning "chief angel," or "principal angel." The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with "a commanding call." It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14) If the designation "archangel" applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to "an archangel"s voice" would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.

There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to "the time of the end" (Da 11:40) and then stated: "And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 12:1) Michael"s "standing up" was to be associated with "a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time." (Da 12:1) In Daniel"s prophecy, "standing up" frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah"s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har"Magedon."Re 11:15; 16:14-16.

The book of Revelation (12:7, 10, 12) specifically mentions Michael in connection with the establishment of God"s Kingdom and links this event with trouble for the earth: "And war broke out in heaven:

http://wol.jw.org......

Like his father, and the Angels beneath him, he was and is spirit being.

It is simply the fact that he was the only one created by Jehovah alone that makes him the most special being ever apart from his father.

Your own JW publication clarified Michael was not Jesus starting from the top Willian Taze Rusell.

We know what Michael is: Michael is an archangel or chief angel created by God to lead the Angels.

We also know what Michael is not according to JW.

Post#288 by Composer.

http://www.debate.org...

"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4

Are you going to ignore what the JW published?
EastwardTraveler
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 1:13:28 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
So I would love to discuss some more on this topic and deviate a bit. Do I stay on this forum,start a new topic, or what. I'm new to this format and am asking you.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 3:59:04 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 1:13:28 AM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
So I would love to discuss some more on this topic and deviate a bit. Do I stay on this forum,start a new topic, or what. I'm new to this format and am asking you.

You can stay on this topic if it is what you want to discuss, or make a topic of your own, even better, which states your questions more accurately.

If it's your own topic, you can deviate all you like, lol.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 11:31:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:45:08 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:32:37 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Well they simply believe he gave up one existence and enter into another. Whether this was done by his own accord, by God's, or by both it's not clear how that happened. Philipians 2:5-8 is the best scripture I can give that would explain what went on.

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Even if they are right, I don't think its is always important for God to explain every detail of how he does things in the spiritual real, if we could even begin to understand it.

One point I would caution you on, and that is when you do not understand or believe someone's position is to insert a false belief to make it hard for the person make their point, such as you saying Michael committed suicide. Like I said before somethings are not for us to understand.

I'm not sure what your beliefs are on Christ but I would love to discuss them with you, especially if you are looking for answers. The key issue here I believe if the definition of the angel and this is where Orthodox Christianity and JW both make a mistake and end up arguing over what or who Jesus was.

I have the answer who Jesus is and it certainly is not the angel michael

even the jw's didn't believe michael was jesus, i wonder what changed their mind as it wasn't scripture...

Only scripture ever changes their mind.

No they don't believe he was, they know he was, and is again now he has been resurrected ad ascended to his father's side, because scripture makes that clear enough for the simplest of minds to see.

Though apparently not yours.

MICHAEL
(MiE7;cha"el) [Who Is Like God?].

1. The only holy angel other than Gabriel named in the Bible, and the only one called "archangel." (Jude 9) The first occurrence of the name is in the tenth chapter of Daniel, where Michael is described as "one of the foremost princes"; he came to the aid of a lesser angel who was opposed by "the prince of the royal realm of Persia." Michael was called "the prince of [Daniel"s] people," "the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 10:13, 20, 21; 12:1) This points to Michael as the angel who led the Israelites through the wilderness. (Ex 23:20, 21, 23; 32:34; 33:2) Lending support to this conclusion is the fact that "Michael the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses" body.""Jude 9.

Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God"s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be "the archangel," meaning "chief angel," or "principal angel." The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with "a commanding call." It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14) If the designation "archangel" applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to "an archangel"s voice" would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.

There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to "the time of the end" (Da 11:40) and then stated: "And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 12:1) Michael"s "standing up" was to be associated with "a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time." (Da 12:1) In Daniel"s prophecy, "standing up" frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah"s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har"Magedon."Re 11:15; 16:14-16.

The book of Revelation (12:7, 10, 12) specifically mentions Michael in connection with the establishment of God"s Kingdom and links this event with trouble for the earth: "And war broke out in heaven:

http://wol.jw.org......

Like his father, and the Angels beneath him, he was and is spirit being.

It is simply the fact that he was the only one created by Jehovah alone that makes him the most special being ever apart from his father.

Your own JW publication clarified Michael was not Jesus starting from the top Willian Taze Rusell.


We know what Michael is: Michael is an archangel or chief angel created by God to lead the Angels.

We also know what Michael is not according to JW.

Post#288 by Composer.

http://www.debate.org...

"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4

Are you going to ignore what the JW published?

I do not ignore it at all.

Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.

Worship is a relative thing. It is quite correct to give Christ slightly less worship than his father, but never as much or more.

That is precisely what scripture is saying, and what the JWs teach.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 4:06:37 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 11:14:29 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:


Only scripture ever changes their mind.

SCRIPTURE? Why, the things that have most commonly "changed their mind" are: clocks and calendars.

Yes, but only when they can find room for it is scripture. Scripture still takes precedence, which is why it took them so long to correct their errors.

They didn't change just because of the calendar.

They certainly didn't change because of what others told them.

They changed because scripture made room for it as they understood the relevant passages more clearly. Proverbs 4:18.

It is a shame you don't let the calendar change your views, since it proved you wrong almost 1900 years ago. As does scripture.

I guess you must just like the darkness you are in better.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 4:10:24 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:31:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:45:08 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:32:37 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:19:01 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 2/4/2016 7:05:06 PM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Well I am not a JW but I study their doctrine and sometimes study with them on occasion. I have a good standing with them in my community so I believe I can answer this one for you. Michael did not take over the body of Jesus at any age. He ceased to be Michael in heaven and became a man in the womb of Mary. I'm not saying that I agree with or believe that or not, just saying that is their doctrine in layman's terms. Hope that helps.

well it's an answer but it does not really help..lol
so the angel michael committed suicide... to become human....
how was michael reinstated as an angel??

how is any of that supported in scripture...???
typical jw's every answer creates more questions and none of it supported by scripture...

Well they simply believe he gave up one existence and enter into another. Whether this was done by his own accord, by God's, or by both it's not clear how that happened. Philipians 2:5-8 is the best scripture I can give that would explain what went on.

5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Even if they are right, I don't think its is always important for God to explain every detail of how he does things in the spiritual real, if we could even begin to understand it.

One point I would caution you on, and that is when you do not understand or believe someone's position is to insert a false belief to make it hard for the person make their point, such as you saying Michael committed suicide. Like I said before somethings are not for us to understand.

I'm not sure what your beliefs are on Christ but I would love to discuss them with you, especially if you are looking for answers. The key issue here I believe if the definition of the angel and this is where Orthodox Christianity and JW both make a mistake and end up arguing over what or who Jesus was.

I have the answer who Jesus is and it certainly is not the angel michael


No they don't believe he was, they know he was, and is again now he has been resurrected ad ascended to his father's side, because scripture makes that clear enough for the simplest of minds to see.

Though apparently not yours.

MICHAEL
(MiE7;cha"el) [Who Is Like God?].

1. The only holy angel other than Gabriel named in the Bible, and the only one called "archangel." (Jude 9) The first occurrence of the name is in the tenth chapter of Daniel, where Michael is described as "one of the foremost princes"; he came to the aid of a lesser angel who was opposed by "the prince of the royal realm of Persia." Michael was called "the prince of [Daniel"s] people," "the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 10:13, 20, 21; 12:1) This points to Michael as the angel who led the Israelites through the wilderness. (Ex 23:20, 21, 23; 32:34; 33:2) Lending support to this conclusion is the fact that "Michael the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses" body.""Jude 9.

Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God"s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be "the archangel," meaning "chief angel," or "principal angel." The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with "a commanding call." It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14) If the designation "archangel" applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to "an archangel"s voice" would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.

There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to "the time of the end" (Da 11:40) and then stated: "And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel"s] people." (Da 12:1) Michael"s "standing up" was to be associated with "a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time." (Da 12:1) In Daniel"s prophecy, "standing up" frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah"s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har"Magedon."Re 11:15; 16:14-16.

The book of Revelation (12:7, 10, 12) specifically mentions Michael in connection with the establishment of God"s Kingdom and links this event with trouble for the earth: "And war broke out in heaven:

http://wol.jw.org......

Like his father, and the Angels beneath him, he was and is spirit being.

It is simply the fact that he was the only one created by Jehovah alone that makes him the most special being ever apart from his father.

Your own JW publication clarified Michael was not Jesus starting from the top Willian Taze Rusell.


We know what Michael is: Michael is an archangel or chief angel created by God to lead the Angels.

We also know what Michael is not according to JW.

Post#288 by Composer.

http://www.debate.org...

"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4

Are you going to ignore what the JW published?

I do not ignore it at all.

You are ignoring what the JW published.

Read again.
"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.

Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 7:50:23 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:10:24 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are ignoring what the JW published.

No I am not.

Read again.
"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.

It is Michael AKA the Word AKA the Christ (both of which are titles he has held or holds), that they are told to worship. He is not being told to worship himself.

I suggest that you read it again, properly this time, and maybe you won't make a fool of yourself in your desperation to twist things.


Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 9:02:27 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 7:50:23 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:10:24 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are ignoring what the JW published.

No I am not.

Read again.
"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.

It is Michael AKA the Word AKA the Christ (both of which are titles he has held or holds), that they are told to worship. He is not being told to worship himself.

That is not what the Watch Tower is saying. It is saying:
Michael as an angel is also reguired to worship Jesus. And hence Michael is not the Son of God. And Jesus being the Son of God by inheritance is higher than the Angels.

I suggest that you read it again, properly this time, and maybe you won't make a fool of yourself in your desperation to twist things.

You are the unschooled fool here. Even when you are give the exact quoted article, you are unable to comprehend it. No wonder you are all messed up. You are rejected and abandoned and forced to live with animals and labelled a suicidal pervert suffering from clinical depression.


Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.

Christ is the only way to the father.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

You are doomed.
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2016 9:06:23 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 4:06:37 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:14:29 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:


Only scripture ever changes their mind.

SCRIPTURE? Why, the things that have most commonly "changed their mind" are: clocks and calendars.

Yes, but only when they can find room for it is scripture. Scripture still takes precedence, which is why it took them so long to correct their errors.

They didn't change just because of the calendar.

Yeah, they did - which explains why they only abandoned their 1914 nonsense AFTER 1914. Then they briefly inserted some 1915 nonsense. They abandoned that AFTER 1915. Then they came up with 1925. When did they abandon that one? AFTER 1925! Ditto for 1926.

Most of the changes that the WatchTower has made have been due to the calendar.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
EastwardTraveler
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 1:35:55 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 7:50:23 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:10:24 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are ignoring what the JW published.

No I am not.

Read again.
"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.

It is Michael AKA the Word AKA the Christ (both of which are titles he has held or holds), that they are told to worship. He is not being told to worship himself.

I suggest that you read it again, properly this time, and maybe you won't make a fool of yourself in your desperation to twist things.


Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.

Well you are right, Yeshua is the Word AKA the logos or the Memra of Elohim, but what you are also missing is that the Memra(Word) was viewed as Elohim himself and divine to the ancient Hebrew people although I doubt you'll find that on JW.org. It is often referred to or thought to be the angel of Yahweh and all through out the Old Testament it is personified over and over again, which you would have no problem with. But on many cases it is directly called Elohim or God and religions such as the one you back and Orthodox Judaism today are ignorant of this and deny it.

The main problem you are going to have as a JW an angel being called God or a god is you say God isn't an angel. The problem here is you need a proper understanding the the Hebrew word angel, which Mal'ahk which simply means a messenger. Nothing more nothing less. It DOES not mean heavenly being with wings. It is the context in how the word is used that lets us know what the Mal'ahk is. Men are called messengers, heavenly creatures are called messengers, and theophanies of Elohim himself were called messenger or angel of Yahweh in many places.

http://wol.jw.org...
(the above link is just for definition)

Before you go calling them desperate to twist things, maybe you need to read scripture yourself without the governing body telling you how to as well as continually post links to JW. While most of my fellow Christians love to say the JWs or the NWT or JW.org is deceptive, most are just repeating what they have been told and I am sorry for that. I on the other hand will tell you that the Watch Tower and who ever is doing your research for you most definitely is and I go delve into that one should you like. On the whole the JW apps are great and there is some great study material I will be honest, but I check what people tell me and the sources they use and I can most definitely tell I have caught your organization either purposefully twisting facts or using some very very bad research techniques which makes me wonder how much can I trust your JW.org site and you literature. So lets keep the twisting calling down for a bit.

As for the reading scripture, here is my whole problem with this topic. There is no scripture that outright calls Yeshua Michael the archangel. There just isn't. Now as you have pointed out there are some very interesting passages that you have brought up such as Daniel, Thessalonians, and Revelation. You arrive at you conclusion that Yeshua(Jesus) is Michael because the passages mentioned show both individuals sharing certain things, qualities, or titles would lead you to believe they are one and the same. As you would put it they have to be the same since no one else could share them. What about the mountain of scripture where Yeshua and Yahweh(Jehovah) share qualities, titles, and names that could only be attributed to Yahweh himself and no other? Why is the logic used to link Michael with Jesus not used or ignored when this happens? That is my concern when I identify who Jesus is.

Now I know I have said a lot and I have left scripture out for sake of brevity, but on whatever subject you want to talk about I will provide whatever scripture you want or need. Any citations or evidence, such as when I was talking about JW literature as well. I am not going to call someone out without the chance to correct me or explain it.
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 3:21:47 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/4/2016 10:30:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Scripture doesn't give much detail on that so we are free to speculate.

However it makes sense to assume that Michael's spirit was placed in the embryonic Jesus, and the rest of his memories etc "downloaded" at his baptism when he had shown himself willing to take on his future role.

That is my personal theory, for what it is worth, it is just that I don't feel that Jehvoah would be cruel enough to try to implant all those millennia's worth of knowledge in an undeveloped human embryo.

I also believe that explain why Jesus had to go into the Wilderness for 40 days.

In a way it is very similar to the way Paul had to go into Arabia for a few years to get his head around having all he had believed turned n its head.

Ironically it is also similar to how it took me 4 years to start studying eve though I knew I have found what I had been looking for the moment I read the JWs beliefs, though in my case it didn't turn my beliefs upside down, it just shocked me finding the truth where I did, as well as the way I found it.

But eventually I realised I had to make 100% sure so I started a study with them.

The rest, as they say, is history.

There are a number of things scripture doesn't tell us, in most cases simply because there is no need for us to know.

And here we have mad changing his story, yet again.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 5:59:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 3:21:47 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 2/4/2016 10:30:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 6:11:48 PM, graceofgod wrote:
take over the body of Jesus??

wondered if any jw's could tell me??

Scripture doesn't give much detail on that so we are free to speculate.

However it makes sense to assume that Michael's spirit was placed in the embryonic Jesus, and the rest of his memories etc "downloaded" at his baptism when he had shown himself willing to take on his future role.

That is my personal theory, for what it is worth, it is just that I don't feel that Jehvoah would be cruel enough to try to implant all those millennia's worth of knowledge in an undeveloped human embryo.

I also believe that explain why Jesus had to go into the Wilderness for 40 days.

In a way it is very similar to the way Paul had to go into Arabia for a few years to get his head around having all he had believed turned n its head.

Ironically it is also similar to how it took me 4 years to start studying eve though I knew I have found what I had been looking for the moment I read the JWs beliefs, though in my case it didn't turn my beliefs upside down, it just shocked me finding the truth where I did, as well as the way I found it.

But eventually I realised I had to make 100% sure so I started a study with them.

The rest, as they say, is history.

There are a number of things scripture doesn't tell us, in most cases simply because there is no need for us to know.

And here we have mad changing his story, yet again.

For once you are right.

This part of my story has changed a little through continued Bible study.

Like the JWs I recognised my error and changed my belief to fit.

The vast majority of what you claimed in the pastI have changed was only in your own lack of understanding. But yes, you are actually right this time.

I live.

I learn.

As I learn I change. That is inevitable as you learn, if you are an honest man as I have to be.

Maybe you should try it sometime.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 6:18:17 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 1:35:55 AM, EastwardTraveler wrote:
At 2/5/2016 7:50:23 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:10:24 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are ignoring what the JW published.

No I am not.

Read again.
"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.

It is Michael AKA the Word AKA the Christ (both of which are titles he has held or holds), that they are told to worship. He is not being told to worship himself.

I suggest that you read it again, properly this time, and maybe you won't make a fool of yourself in your desperation to twist things.


Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.

Well you are right, Yeshua is the Word AKA the logos or the Memra of Elohim, but what you are also missing is that the Memra(Word) was viewed as Elohim himself and divine to the ancient Hebrew people although I doubt you'll find that on JW.org. It is often referred to or thought to be the angel of Yahweh and all through out the Old Testament it is personified over and over again, which you would have no problem with. But on many cases it is directly called Elohim or God and religions such as the one you back and Orthodox Judaism today are ignorant of this and deny it.

How can this be true when the Word is rarely mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures, and never claims any credit for the messages he passed on.

The point being that as when he was on the earth, everything he taught or did was credited to Jehovah, since it all originated with him.

It is the same with Michaels involvement in creation.

Though it is obvious that, as Colossians explains, the actual work of creation was carried out by Michael, AKA the Word, it is still God's creation since it was all done y his will and his instructions.

How many of the cars that bare his name did Henry Ford actually build?

And yet they remain Fords.


The main problem you are going to have as a JW an angel being called God or a god is you say God isn't an angel. The problem here is you need a proper understanding the the Hebrew word angel, which Mal'ahk which simply means a messenger. Nothing more nothing less. It DOES not mean heavenly being with wings. It is the context in how the word is used that lets us know what the Mal'ahk is. Men are called messengers, heavenly creatures are called messengers, and theophanies of Elohim himself were called messenger or angel of Yahweh in many places.

I have no problem with Michael being called a god, though he cannot rightly be called God, that should be, and usually is (except at Isaiah 9 :6) reserved for jehovah, Almighty God.

However as you can tell from the argumentation of my opposers on here, there are many in the fake versions of Christianity who do have a great deal of difficulty relating any other gods to the thought of One True God.

They cannot get their heads around the simple fact that "god" can be a description of what sort of being they are, or even whether or not they have any authority over others, whereas God is a title reserved for Jehovah. It's not that difficult really but it is amazing how many cannot handle it.

Few also realise that the authority over men, for instance, does not need to have come from God, it can even have been given to those men by other men. The same goes for all false gods' they have authority, not from God, but from the men who allow them it.


http://wol.jw.org...
(the above link is just for definition)

Before you go calling them desperate to twist things, maybe you need to read scripture yourself without the governing body telling you how to as well as continually post links to JW. While most of my fellow Christians love to say the JWs or the NWT or JW.org is deceptive, most are just repeating what they have been told and I am sorry for that. I on the other hand will tell you that the Watch Tower and who ever is doing your research for you most definitely is and I go delve into that one should you like. On the whole the JW apps are great and there is some great study material I will be honest, but I check what people tell me and the sources they use and I can most definitely tell I have caught your organization either purposefully twisting facts or using some very very bad research techniques which makes me wonder how much can I trust your JW.org site and you literature. So lets keep the twisting calling down for a bit.

That is very true, and the Governing Body do encourage that, and in fact come as close to insisting on it as they have any right to do.

That is why they so often, especially in their meetings, us Acts 17:10-11.

Why? Well it contrasts the Thessalonians who are said to be noble because they accepted what the Apostles preached, with the Beroeans who are said to be even more noble because they went home and checked it out in the bible before they accepted it.

Yes the Governing Body are happy when people accept what they teach, but they are even more happy when people check it out, then accept it, and in effect, to paraphrase what one of their songs says "Make the truth their own".

A truth you have taken ownership of feels much more valuable than one you have accepted as a gift from someone else.


As for the reading scripture, here is my whole problem with this topic. There is no scripture that outright calls Yeshua Michael the archangel. There just isn't. Now as you have pointed out there are some very interesting passages that you have brought up such as Daniel, Thessalonians, and Revelation. You arrive at you conclusion that Yeshua(Jesus) is Michael because the passages mentioned show both individuals sharing certain things, qualities, or titles would lead you to believe they are one and the same. As you would put it they have to be the same since no one else could share them. What about the mountain of scripture where Yeshua and Yahweh(Jehovah) share qualities, titles, and names that could only be attributed to Yahweh himself and no other? Why is the logic used to link Michael with Jesus not used or ignored when this happens? That is my concern when I identify who Jesus is.

That is true, and is exactly what I have said, whilst scripture does not definitively name Michael as the Word it is impossible not to come to that conclusion based on the evidence in scripture.


Now I know I have said a lot and I have left scripture out for sake of brevity, but on whatever subject you want to talk about I will provide whatever scripture you want or need. Any citations or evidence, such as when I was talking about JW literature as well. I am not going to call someone out without the chance to correct me or explain it.

I also talk scripture more than quote or cite it, so no problem with me on that.

That's OK, I have the scriptures here, many of them in my head and my heart, and holy spirit helps me remember them, but thanks for the offer.

When you have holy spirit for your helper you need no other.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 6:29:12 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 9:06:23 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:06:37 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:14:29 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:


Only scripture ever changes their mind.

SCRIPTURE? Why, the things that have most commonly "changed their mind" are: clocks and calendars.

Yes, but only when they can find room for it is scripture. Scripture still takes precedence, which is why it took them so long to correct their errors.

They didn't change just because of the calendar.

Yeah, they did - which explains why they only abandoned their 1914 nonsense AFTER 1914. Then they briefly inserted some 1915 nonsense. They abandoned that AFTER 1915. Then they came up with 1925. When did they abandon that one? AFTER 1925! Ditto for 1926.

But they haven't abandoned it.

They still hold to exactly what 1914 meant, the end of the Gentile times.

They have simply learned more from scripture about what that brings with it, and how quickly, as well as about the things that needed to be done before Armageddon could possibly be brought in.
That is why they took so long to change what they said about 1914, because they had to see, in scripture, where they had gone wrong.
As they learned, they applied it.

As they learned more, they applied that.

The JWs and I live.

We Learn.

As we learn we change and grow. If you do live and learn you cannot help but change and grow.

It's about time you started learning, you are about 2,000 years behind teh JWs.

At least they caught up with the light eventually.

That is why Jesus when asked by the young man f he could go and bury his father fist said "Let the dead bury their dead".

He was speaking of the spiritually dead, as well as the fact that, apparently the young man's father was still living at that point.

As far as Christ goes, you, and all those millions, probably billions like you are dead to the spirit.

If you actually bother to learn the truth about Jehovah and Christ then you will come back to life, but of course, unless Jehovah draws you to his son's side you will not be abel to do that.

John 6:44 No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him, and I will resurrect him on the last day.

Even as a Child I begged God to guide me to his son and his people.

Eventually he did.

Maybe you should take a leaf out of a child's book, after all Christ sad we have to become as children, not Smart Alecs, as you currently are.


Most of the changes that the WatchTower has made have been due to the calendar.

Not in the least.

The calendar raised the questions.

Scripture provided the answers.

The important fact remains that unlike you they learned from their errors.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 6:31:09 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/5/2016 9:02:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 7:50:23 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:10:24 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are ignoring what the JW published.

No I am not.

Read again.
"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.

It is Michael AKA the Word AKA the Christ (both of which are titles he has held or holds), that they are told to worship. He is not being told to worship himself.

That is not what the Watch Tower is saying. It is saying:
Michael as an angel is also reguired to worship Jesus. And hence Michael is not the Son of God. And Jesus being the Son of God by inheritance is higher than the Angels.

I suggest that you read it again, properly this time, and maybe you won't make a fool of yourself in your desperation to twist things.

You are the unschooled fool here. Even when you are give the exact quoted article, you are unable to comprehend it. No wonder you are all messed up. You are rejected and abandoned and forced to live with animals and labelled a suicidal pervert suffering from clinical depression.


Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.

Christ is the only way to the father.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

You are doomed.

He also said, (John 6:44) No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him, and I will resurrect him on the last day.

jehovah drew me to his son's side, and his son taught me how to draw close to the father.

So, no, I am not doomed, but you are unless you change.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 7:15:24 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 6:31:09 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 9:02:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 7:50:23 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:10:24 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:02:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are ignoring what the JW published.

No I am not.

Read again.
"Hence it is said, "Let all the angels of God worship him;" [that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because He has "by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they."" Zion's Watch Tower 1879 Nov p.4.

It is Michael AKA the Word AKA the Christ (both of which are titles he has held or holds), that they are told to worship. He is not being told to worship himself.

That is not what the Watch Tower is saying. It is saying:
Michael as an angel is also reguired to worship Jesus. And hence Michael is not the Son of God. And Jesus being the Son of God by inheritance is higher than the Angels.

I suggest that you read it again, properly this time, and maybe you won't make a fool of yourself in your desperation to twist things.

You are the unschooled fool here. Even when you are give the exact quoted article, you are unable to comprehend it. No wonder you are all messed up. You are rejected and abandoned and forced to live with animals and labelled a suicidal pervert suffering from clinical depression.


Christ is worthy of a great deal of respect, but he will never be worthy of equal respect to that which is due to his father.

Christ is the only way to the father.
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

You are doomed.

He also said, (John 6:44) No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him, and I will resurrect him on the last day.

jehovah drew me to his son's side, and his son taught me how to draw close to the father.

So the JW believe they are yo-yos. God draws you to the son, the son draws you back to the father, the father then gives Jesus the power to save. Now you have to go back to Jesus to be saved. In short only Jesus can save you yo-yos. If Jesus could not draw people why didn't God send someone who could.?
Just like why did he pick a wobbly lopsided handicap and a suicidal pervert to discredit him, who had to be disfellowshipped and shunned by his own witnesses?

Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Jesus is the only name given whereby we may be saved. Read your scriptures.
Any wonder why you were disfellowshipped and shunned by the JW elders. They found you unworthy and unteachable.

So, no, I am not doomed, but you are unless you change.
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 9:05:30 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 6:29:12 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 9:06:23 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:06:37 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:14:29 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:


Only scripture ever changes their mind.

SCRIPTURE? Why, the things that have most commonly "changed their mind" are: clocks and calendars.

Yes, but only when they can find room for it is scripture. Scripture still takes precedence, which is why it took them so long to correct their errors.

They didn't change just because of the calendar.

Yeah, they did - which explains why they only abandoned their 1914 nonsense AFTER 1914. Then they briefly inserted some 1915 nonsense. They abandoned that AFTER 1915. Then they came up with 1925. When did they abandon that one? AFTER 1925! Ditto for 1926.

But they haven't abandoned it.

Yeah, they have - as far as all the crap that they said was "plain as day" and "obvious" that would come along with it.

They still hold to exactly what 1914 meant, the end of the Gentile times.

They redefined what the "Gentile time" constituted.

They have simply learned more from scripture about what that brings with it, and how quickly, as well as about the things that needed to be done before Armageddon could possibly be brought in.

They learned from the calendar, if they learned anything at all.

That is why they took so long to change what they said about 1914, because they had to see, in scripture, where they had gone wrong.

That's a laugh.

At least they caught up with the light eventually.

There's never been a time in their entire sordid history that they didn't inform people that they had "caught up with the light." They were saying the SOS a hundred years ago.

Even as a Child I begged God to guide me to his son and his people.

Maybe He'll answer that prayer one day, but I doubt it.

Most of the changes that the WatchTower has made have been due to the calendar.

Not in the least.

The calendar raised the questions.

LMAO. Yeah, when they said this-and-that would happen at a certain time, and none of it ever came to pass when they claimed. Certainly the calendar ... ummm ... "raised questions."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 12:13:43 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 9:05:30 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/6/2016 6:29:12 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/5/2016 9:06:23 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/5/2016 4:06:37 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:14:29 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 2/4/2016 11:08:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:


Only scripture ever changes their mind.

SCRIPTURE? Why, the things that have most commonly "changed their mind" are: clocks and calendars.

Yes, but only when they can find room for it is scripture. Scripture still takes precedence, which is why it took them so long to correct their errors.

They didn't change just because of the calendar.

Yeah, they did - which explains why they only abandoned their 1914 nonsense AFTER 1914. Then they briefly inserted some 1915 nonsense. They abandoned that AFTER 1915. Then they came up with 1925. When did they abandon that one? AFTER 1925! Ditto for 1926.

But they haven't abandoned it.

Yeah, they have - as far as all the crap that they said was "plain as day" and "obvious" that would come along with it.

They still hold to exactly what 1914 meant, the end of the Gentile times.

They redefined what the "Gentile time" constituted.

They have simply learned more from scripture about what that brings with it, and how quickly, as well as about the things that needed to be done before Armageddon could possibly be brought in.

They learned from the calendar, if they learned anything at all.

That is why they took so long to change what they said about 1914, because they had to see, in scripture, where they had gone wrong.

That's a laugh.

At least they caught up with the light eventually.

There's never been a time in their entire sordid history that they didn't inform people that they had "caught up with the light." They were saying the SOS a hundred years ago.

Even as a Child I begged God to guide me to his son and his people.

Maybe He'll answer that prayer one day, but I doubt it.

Most of the changes that the WatchTower has made have been due to the calendar.

Not in the least.

The calendar raised the questions.

LMAO. Yeah, when they said this-and-that would happen at a certain time, and none of it ever came to pass when they claimed. Certainly the calendar ... ummm ... "raised questions."

Yes that is true it raised the question in their minds, "Where did we go wrong?"

and it answered that question for them.

Why hasn't the calendar raised that question in your mind?

Simply because you don't have the courage to admit you are 2,000 years behind teh truth.

You don;t want your faith questioned.

JWs are always looking to question their own faith, hence they learn.

Why do they do that?

Philippians 1:9, 10
9 And this is what I continue praying, that your love may abound still more and more+ with accurate knowledge and full discernment; 10 that you may make sure of the more important things, so that you may be flawless and not stumbling others up to the day of Christ;

And they do that by:

2 Corinthians 13:5
5 Keep testing whether you are in the faith; keep proving what you yourselves are. Or do you not recognize that Jesus Christ is in union with you? Unless you are disapproved.

Do you know what "proving" meant back then?

It meant to test.

Just as a Baker "proves" his loaf by putting the dough in a warm place to see if it rises before he bothers baking it.

That is what Bible study is to the JWs.

It isn't looking to find things which support what you believe, as it is for you and those like you.

It is looking to make sure they are believing the right things, to make sure that their beliefs fit with what they find in scripture,

When they don't fit, the JWs study more to find out what you got wrong.

Instead of which you change scripture, either by changing it's meaning to fit what you want it to mean, and when you can't do that you ignore it.

Of course you won't believe that. Because you would have to admit your error if you did, and that would never do would it.