The Nature of God’s Son: Is Jesus the Archangel Michael?

Comment by lost in space on 2019-05-30 21:01:21

Thoroughly flawless logic. Very impressed Eric..

Comment by messenger on 2019-05-31 03:21:40

"You will notice from this that the entire doctrine is based on inference and implication, not on something which is explicitly stated in Scripture. In fact, in the February 8, 2002 Awake! they go so far as to acknowledge this," That is a quote from this article.

Most of Watchtower's teachings are ITS interpretation of scriptures that do not even have the ideas they teach implied in the scriptures they cite. And as for what's left over after that first half is removed about half of their other thoughts come from inference and applying an implied meaning to scripture, like you cannot vote and be a Christian, or you cannot smoke a cigarette and be a Christian.

When I was studying with my aunt, we used to cover two pages in the Truth book in two hours quite often. Because I would question everything, bringing in alternative interpretations to which she argued against-using scriptures of course. Most often I still didn't buy the interpretations as the only possible truths. Any other JW would have stopped my study. But because she cared for me, and because I was interested in the Bible and God, and because I was always very well prepared she didn't drop me.

After I finally accepted WT theology, I, like all the JWs I've ever known totally accepted what WT said it was, even when I didn't hang my hopes on every thought they taught. Doing that we JWs were, over the years, brainwashed through repetitive labeling of WT ideas into our accepting consciousness. And even ex-JWs and those with doubts about WT that read from this site are still subject to that acceptance of basic WT theology.

Yes Eric there are too many scriptures that show Christ is no type of angel.
"all things through Him and for Him have been created, and He is before all things, and all things in Him consisted" Those words are from Colossians 1:16-18. A word for word translation Greek to English (The Interlinear Bible Hebrew, Greek, English), quoting the final words in vs 16, the complete words in vs 17, and the first words in vs18.

Hebrews 1:5-8 (not a word to word) reads, "5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father” ? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son” ? 6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.” 7 In speaking of the angels he says, “He makes his angels spirits, and his servants flames of fire.” 8 But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom. 9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.”


Revelation 22:12-16 NIV reads below:

“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

vs 20 reads "He that bears witness to these things says, 'Yes; I am coming quickly,'" "Amen!" "Come Lord Jesus." NWT

Compare those vss in Revelation to Revelation 21:6,7 and Revelation 1:8

Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2019-05-31 06:59:27

Excellent reasoning, Eric. It is not possible to draw a conclusion that Jesus is Michael. As you have demonstrated, there is much evidence to indicate that he is not Michael. If he is Michael, then some scriptures are a little confusing, which will then go against 2 Tim 3 16,17, although when Paul wrote that the NT canon was not available.
There is an appendix at the back of the BT book "who Michael the Archangel ?". However the reasoning, relying on the term archangel meaning there is only one archangel, is weak, as is the reference to his having an "archangel's voice".
It was interesting to note that Adventists also believe Jesus and Michael are the same.
The more I look the more JWs seem to be just a branch of Adventism. Maybe that is what history will say they were.

Comment by Mr Noodle on 2019-05-31 12:38:25

Excellent and thorough reasoning Eric?
Many ex jw who retain their faith in God still cling to this erroneous view of Michael =Jesus and it limits their spiritual progress away from the teachings of men. When I became a Biblical Unitarian it was like this giant piece of the puzzle fell beautifully into place.

• Reply by messenger on 2019-06-01 20:23:42

  When Christ answered the Devil as described in the following scripture he was also acknowledging that the Devil was not his god, thus not deserving of His worship. More than that, also he meant that the Devil should not have been worshiped by ancient Jews because they should not have recognized him as their god either.
  
  At Luke 4:5-8 you might read, " And he (Devil) led Him (Christ) up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. 6And the devil said to Him, “I will give You all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. 7“Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours.” 8Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY.’”
  
  Still we know many people worship the Devil, accepting him as their God, and that there are many gods as stated in other scriptural teachings, even by Christ.
  
  Is Christ properly a god in contradiction to Unitarian beliefs? And if so of whom would that be? Apostates or ignorant Christians? Note that Hebrews 1:6 uses a variation of the same word Christ used at Luke 4:8 that is translated in English to the word we say is "worship." In Hebrews 1:6 the recipient of that worship IS CHRIST, the worshipers are angels. So, was Christ saying at Luke 4:8 that according to his belief only one individual in the universe ever should properly be designated as God, and be considered God by others? Or was he saying that ancient scriptures stated people should only serve their own god through the means of worshipful acts? Like bowing down which is what the Devil asked him to do when he refused and made that statement.
  
  To believe Christ was saying only one person in the entire universe ever should properly be designated as God you must also assume reference to the god of the Bible Elohim, and the Tetragrammaton are definitively proved to only refer to one individual. But how would you know that? To be sure the greater number of scriptures speak of us, the human race, in our past present or future states. Most scriptures do not acquaint us with the nature of God. And except for those individuals who have been contacted by God other humans have no other reference to God's nature other than material things and scriptures. Also, if only one individual is to be properly acknowledged as God why are angels worshiping Christ, when Christ said a person should only worship his God?
  
  While not a trinitarian I believe that the argument against Holy Spirit being God is probably the weakest argument that I ever heard presented against anything. If I took a gun and shot you in the head would I be charged with a crime? If so could my valid excuse be the gun did it not me? And a gun doesn't even emanate from me as Holy Spirit is taught to emanate from God. Whether it's a separate individual as scriptures using pronouns describe it (he), or the power of the Father and Son-or if you believe it just comes from the Father (which contradicts scriptures like Revelation 5:6 which reads Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, standing at the center of the throne, encircled by the four living creatures and the elders. The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth.)-it is still God.

Comment by Mara Fayde on 2019-05-31 13:05:54

The Book of Enoch, specifically The Book of the Watchers, is revealing about this subject. I won’t get into it whether or not the text is inspired or not, but Jude and Peter refer to it. That being so, it was a text that Christ’s disciples seemed to be familiar with, regardless of how they felt about it.

What I’m getting to is this: Michael was one of many archangels, according to the text. (An interesting side note, Enoch is called Son of Man. Make of it what you will.) And Peter’s description of Tartarus seems to be taken from that text as well.

Personally, I feel it’s possible the Book of Enoch may have had its origins in a much older source. Over time it was built upon and corrupted by scribes. But it’s interesting because it explains things that were common knowledge to first century Christians and Jews, i.e. structure, hierarchy, and assignments of the archangels.

I loved this article, Eric. It’s not dogmatic at all, but an encouragement to examine and look deeper into these important things.

• Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-07 12:08:46

  Thanks! I always wondered about the Book of Enoch. Now I’ll take some time to read it.

Comment by Frankie on 2019-05-31 17:33:27

Thank you Eric for your thorough analysis. Very useful material for reasoning when discussing with brothers trapped in Org. For me, the verses in Col 1:16, Heb 1:5,13 are "bullet-proof”, especially Heb 1:5 and Heb 1:13, where our Lord and all angels are clearly differentiated.
I only have a minor comment on Rev 4:4 as for 24 elders. IMO, the symbolic elders, as kings with crowns on thrones, could relate to human part of overall God's family - comprising of Jehovah God, the Lamb as our Lord, angels and men. I think of Rev 5:9 ("... redeemed us to God ... ”) and Rev 5:10 ("And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth”).
But this is not substantial. In this article you presented apparent scriptural evidence - Jesus and archangel Michael are not the same! Thanks to God for you, Eric.
Love for all picketers.

Comment by LaRhonda T. on 2019-06-01 04:24:15

When I read Hebrews 1: 5 - 8 that convinced me that Jesus was not Michael. And now reading this article, Brother Wilson, makes everything fall into place. I am happy to see that you are still posting truth, logic and common sense here on Beroean Pickets, as I noticed that you've left Facebook. (Actually, I think I understand why, I've had to delete and block quite a few people who seem to think it's their duty to "correct my errors" for leaving Watchtower World) Keep up the good work and stay strong!

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-06-04 09:16:36

  I left Facebook as Meleti Vivlon, but kept my personal account. However, I might drop that as well. Debating it. One, it takes up a lot of time that can be better used elsewhere. Also, I get too many friend requests, and I usually accept them all, because I don't know their motives. However, every day I get many "messages" from "ministers" seeking support for their foreign missions. Some even call me out of the blue via the Messenger phone app. Total strangers acting like we're long lost friends. It's disconcerting, not to mention, very time consuming.

  • Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-05 07:00:31

    There’s a ton of scammers on Facebook now, sadly.

Comment by Alithia on 2019-06-01 05:44:03

Hello all, nice work Eric. As you explain the Org has only assumed Jesus is Michael the Archangel.

However behind this erroneous assumption there is another reason why the Org resolves the question as to the identity of this angel in the way they do. (I am of the opinion, this is another assumption).
A reason of far more importance and consequence with regards to understanding God's plan of salvation for mankind.

It is because the Org believes that Jesus had a pre-human existence. And so they attempt to fill in the gaps as to what Jesus may have been doing for eons of time before or after the Universe was created. (A quick reference back to good old "brother" Russell and his writings is an entertaining read around this subject.

It would be interesting to give thought to this idea in the same methodical, and progressive manner in which Tadua did with the hope series.

In any case I love your work on this topic so far, and I am looking forward to where this idea of Jesus being Michael the Archangel originated and spread.

Love to all from Alithia.

• Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-04 08:27:19

  While I have listened to many debates on this, I have decided to trust Jesus’ own words on this. And he said plainly in prayer to the Father “I have glorified you on the earth, having finished the work you have given me to do. So now you, Father, glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.” — John 17:4,5. And again to the Jews, ““Truly, truly, I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am!” —John 8:58.
  
  The opposite teaching requires too many ‘wise and intellectual’ mental hops for me, whereas Jesus’ clear statements even babes can understand.

  • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-06-04 09:08:39

    You've hit upon the key to it all, Sky Blue.

  • Reply by Alithia on 2019-06-05 05:22:03

    Hello SkyBLue and all others. With regards to the sayings of Jesus in John 8:58 you may need to consider actually what Jesus really said and how it should be translated or understood correctly in English. Check it out in the Kingdom Interlinear if you like, Jesus said in Greek "ego emi" or strictly literally I am.
    
    He did not say I was born, or I was created or I lived some pre-human life, but simply I am. If having a pre human existence as being alive before Abraham was born which Jesus referred to, and that is what is meant that is what the translators would have written down , if they could . Check out bible hub as follows.
    
    Except for one feeble attempt to bolster the Trinity doctrine they all say only what Jesus literally said in Greek "ego ime"!
    
    So ask yourself if you are supplying a popular yet unsubstantiated narrative not supported by scripture or teaching in the bible that Jesus had a pre human existence? See translations below.
    
    
    New International Version
    "Very truly I tell you," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
    
    New Living Translation
    Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am ! ”
    
    English Standard Version
    Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
    
    Berean Study Bible
    “Truly, truly, I tell you,” Jesus declared, “before Abraham was born, I am!”
    
    Berean Literal Bible
    Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
    
    New American Standard Bible
    Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."
    
    King James Bible
    Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    
    Christian Standard Bible
    Jesus said to them, "Truly I tell you, before Abraham was, I am."
    
    Contemporary English Version
    Jesus answered, "I tell you for certain that even before Abraham was, I was, and I am."
    
    Good News Translation
    "I am telling you the truth," Jesus replied. "Before Abraham was born, 'I Am'."
    
    Holman Christian Standard Bible
    Jesus said to them, "I assure you: Before Abraham was, I am."
    
    International Standard Version
    Jesus told them, "Truly, I tell all of you emphatically, before there was an Abraham, I AM!"
    
    NET Bible
    Jesus said to them, "I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!"
    
    New Heart English Bible
    Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I tell you, before Abraham came into existence, I AM."
    
    Aramaic Bible in Plain English
    Yeshua said to them: “Timeless truth I speak to you: Before Abraham would exist, I AM THE LIVING GOD.”
    
    GOD'S WORD® Translation
    Jesus told them, "I can guarantee this truth: Before Abraham was ever born, I am."
    
    New American Standard 1977
    Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”
    
    Jubilee Bible 2000
    Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.
    
    King James 2000 Bible
    Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    
    American King James Version
    Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    
    American Standard Version
    Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am.
    
    Douay-Rheims Bible
    Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say to you, before Abraham was made, I am.
    
    Darby Bible Translation
    Jesus said to them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    
    English Revised Version
    Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    
    Webster's Bible Translation
    Jesus said to them, Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    
    Weymouth New Testament
    "In most solemn truth," answered Jesus, "I tell you that before Abraham came into existence, I am."
    
    World English Bible
    Jesus said to them, "Most certainly, I tell you, before Abraham came into existence, I AM."
    
    Young's Literal Translation
    Jesus said to them, 'Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming -- I am
    
    Umpteen times in reply to the Jewish religious leader question as to who Jesus claimed to be, Jesus responded to them with the same reply. Ego Ime. or I am.
    
    I am what. The messiah of course! This was the burning question around Jesus the whole time.
    
    Properly translated ego ime should be I am he! Or the Messiah! They knew he was claiming this in a roundabout manner they only wanted him to spell it out plainly, so they could charge him with blasphemy and have him killed which is what they had determined at the time of this conversation. Jesu pleading with them, "ego ime"!!!!!
    
    So yes before Abraham, indeed Jesus was the Messiah, in fact from even earlier in the Garden of Eden Jesus was in this sense (ego ime) the promised Messiah!

    • Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-05 07:10:34

      You are right when you say it’s a feeble attempt to bolster the Trinity Doctrine. So many use this as what they believe a rock-solid argument, so I was blown away to learn that this is a common phrase in Greek and this is the only place where it’s translated as the cryptic “I am”. This guy has done some great research on the subject:
      
      https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/videos/john-8-58b

Comment by Psalmbee on 2019-06-01 11:29:47

There are a couple of Scriptures that I don't think I have ever heard them use to support their doctrine. Maybe they haven't thought of it yet. They are actually fulfilling these instructions and not even boasting about it in the right way, or are they just following direction? I wonder about this for the sake of my loved ones and actually for all affected, including myself, I love you all!

Matthew 24: 23-26 and Mark 13: 21-23, would actually put Jehovah as commander of the chief Micha'el' until further notice, would it not? Do I need correction? What say ye?



Psalmbee, (Micah 6:9)

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-06-01 16:20:37

  
  Hi Psalmbee,
  
  Sorry for the former comment. I was dictated and I was rushed and made the fatal mistake of trusting the dictation to work accurately. What I meant to say was, that I didn't quite understand what you are asking about. I just need a little clarification, but I can see that others got it better than I and I appreciate their insights.
  
  Your brother,
  
  Meleti
  

• Reply by messenger on 2019-06-01 21:40:55

  Trust God Psalmbee
  
  New American Standard Bible:
  "And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose."
  
  God's purpose is that all be saved, true. But he has other purposes too. One of those is that he chooses individuals to do tasks he wants them to do now and in the future. One of those future tasks is to rule the Earth one day. Even some of these chosen ones can be deceived by apostates, and if so they knowingly follow men instead of God's calling to them, and, because of that they can lose that calling.
  
  But no one down here on Earth knows everything about scripture, and God rightly doesn't hold that against us. If he did we all die. Jehovah's Witnesses have been deceived as your scriptures state. Also see Luke 21:8. But because they have been deceived they won't all die. They were not deceived in the sense scriptures say Eve was. Eve believed the Devil but she also knew she was deciding to go against God. Most Jehovah's Witnesses are not doing that.
  
  Those that work deception will die according to scripture. See Revelation chapter 22. Most JWs don't work deception. And if there is such a big difference between working deception and not understanding something to us, also believe that God recognizes that difference and acts on that difference.
  
  I know all JWs will not die in the Lake of Fire. I believe it's improbable most of those who rule the Earth as Christ's church will not die as active JWs. But I don't know that. What causes my belief is that God teaches the truths necessary for life to His called ones through opening their minds to it. And I don't think he would allow those heavenly bound to be trapped by WT deception until they die. Because WT policies and judgmental teachings are detrimental to people God wants to save, which is all people. But again, I don't know that many Jehovah's Witnesses won't be included in the church. But that members of Christ's church are not the only people saved I do know. For they are not just ruling over themselves are they?
  
  Main point, trust God to do things the right way. Right now he is teaching us. So he allows all things to presently exist for that reason. Most of what exists on Earth now can deceive people, even Christians. But those things also teach us. If it were not for WT probably none of us would have ever communicated to each other. Maybe we wouldn't have appreciated some of the Bible teachings as much as we do now. Like how detrimental it can be to be a Pharisee.

• Reply by Alithia on 2019-06-01 22:54:16

  Hello Psalmbee, read those scriptures you quote and if I understand you correctly we are i the right forum to uncover error and to free ourselves of the influence of what is basically only human teachings.
  
  Stay well brother and may Jehovah bless you.
  
  Love to all Alithia.

• Reply by Alithia on 2019-06-01 22:56:33

  Hello Psalmbee. I read the scriptures you quoted and if I understand you correctly, you me and all the others are in the right forum to uncover untruth and to free ourselves of what is only human teachings and not from God.
  
  Stay well brother.
  
  Love to all from Alithia.

• Reply by Psalmbee on 2019-06-01 23:55:59

  Hi Meleti,
  
  Logically for me, if I were a JW, I would be looking for other reasons to hold on to such a teaching and logical ways to back them up with scripture.
  
  
  If I were to be searching for a church or an assemblage of that nature, I wouldn't start with the one with the tallest cross or the brightest sign flashing, that says here is Jesus Christ and we know it!
  
  Jehovah of Armies and his chief (Arch)Angel would still seem to be at the helm considering some things that have not took place yet, mainly (Mk 14:60-62) compare (Is 1:24).
  
  
  I'm just rambling, putting myself in the atmosphere of a JW in Service having answers ready if I was ever questioned. Do you think you can pick up on that logic or should I fine tune the cha-nn-"el" ?
  
  All's been fair to medium, here, just doing my "watch duty". How are you and the entourage?
  
  Psalmbee....

  • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-06-02 12:31:17

    Hi Psalmbee,
    
    Just read your latest comment. I'm working on a video now about the nature of Jesus. There is so much more there than just whether or not he is or was an angel, even an archangel.
    
    One thing I know is that Jehovah has handed all authority to his son. Until Jesus hands over all authority to God at the end, he's the one in charge. What a wonderful trust the Father has in the Son.

Comment by Alithia on 2019-06-01 23:53:04

Hello Messenger. I think we might be taking another walk around the block on this one.
I agree with you with regards to the scripture you quoted in Luke 21:8 about being careful so as not to be deceived.

For this to be the case what do you think we need to do? Perhaps do as the scriptures say.
Test all things making sure of the important things. 1 Thess 5:21 Examine the Spirits. 1 John 5. And the list is long as it is specific.

There are many exhortations for us to apply ourselves to the task of getting to know the truth and the rewards for doing so.

Paul says at 1 Corinthians 1:19. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will set aside.
So I suppose it is for this reason we discuss issues such as whether Jesus is Michael the Archangel or not, and pick up along the way where this idea originated and took root in the theology of Jws, and in other religions.

If the belief is human of origin and not from God, (wisdom of the wise or of the clever) then as Paul said in verse 20, using Gods word and with the help of the Holy Spirit, the “wise” and their “wisdom” will be exposed as foolishness!

I think the exercise is well worth it and our efforts would harmonise nicely with the scripture you quoted in Luke 21:8.

What you say about not knowing everything is true about every single thing in life. We can only know things to a reasonable degree, say 98%. Or we can come to know what seems the best possible explanation for some matter given the facts that are available.

I accept that I could be only a brain in a vat of chemical soup, managed by aliens and my life is an illusion as in the movie The Matrix. But I do not live my life like that, nor do you or anyone else. I certainly hope not anyway!

But to resign from life and trust that one day God will give us this 100% knowledge and understanding because we cannot know now for a 100% is foolish. Not to mention worrisome that the Aliens could put a wire in my brain where it would hurt!

But this is no reason for passive resignation, the suspension of our God given ability to reason and to think upon matters in God’s Word. To make the effort to know what can be known.

This is the lazy brain teachings of the Org who after introducing us to a few basic bible teachings about the paradise and the condition of the dead, (that are plain) then demand we suspend our critical thinking and let the Governing body do the thinking for ever after for us.

Paul said at 1 Peter 3:15. New American Standard Bible
but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defence to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;

So the obligation is to not only know what we believe but also why. And also to be able to give a credible defence for what and why we believe if called upon! This takes work work work!!!

I accept what you say about God being merciful and forgiving, but there is no connection with this and not doing as Jesus said at Matthew 6:33 about seeking first the Kingdom as a priority.

Jesus knew how hard it was for the common people of his time to have a meal at the end of the day. However he still said to make seeking the Kingdom the priority in their lives.

If as you present that in the final analysis it does not matter then everything does not really matter and Jehovah would not have sent his Son, have him experience an excruciating death for our benefit and have the bible penned and recorded for our benefit.

Love to all from Alithia.

• Reply by messenger on 2019-06-02 06:27:10

  Alithia I can only assume you mean that the statement below, in the next paragraph, by me, is what you are referring to in claiming I said "IT DOES NOT MATTER." That line is in your last paragraph which reads, "If as you present that in the final analysis it does not matter then everything does not really matter and Jehovah would not have sent his Son, have him experience an excruciating death for our benefit and have the bible penned and recorded for our benefit" It's impossible to know for sure what you are referring to Alithia since you have not quoted any of my writings in your last comment. So, what is the "IT" in your statement "it does not matter?" What are you claiming I said does not matter?
  
  I guess you object to my claim,"But no one down here on Earth knows everything about scripture, and God rightly doesn’t hold that against us. If he did we all die. Jehovah’s Witnesses have been deceived as your scriptures state. Also see Luke 21:8. But because they have been deceived they won’t all die. They were not deceived in the sense scriptures say Eve was. Eve believed the Devil but she also knew she was deciding to go against God. Most Jehovah’s Witnesses are not doing that." (messenger)
  
  If that's what you object to I'll add to that thought. No human is saved by knowledge. Salvation is based on something entirely different than knowledge, i.e. why scriptures claim "the fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge." Because salvation is not based primarily on what we know. Fear causes people to do, not just know. And the knowledge or knowing Christ referred to in that scripture we, as Jehovah's Witnesses, wore out in John chapter 17 didn't mean knowing anything. That scripture means having a relationship with the Father and Son, not knowing facts about those two through Bible interpretations, even when those interpretations are valid ones. We at one time presented those scriptures to householders at their door while claiming that; but we were wrong.
  
  As I stated above no human knows everything about scripture. "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." (1 Corinthians 13) Not even those who God speaks to know everything about scripture. Hence Paul also claimed in that same chapter that partial knowledge will be done away with. And the reason it is done away with is because it is partial. Every true fact will remain a true fact, and those completely true facts will remain as knowledge. In contradiction to apostate WT theology that time when this happens about the perfect or complete thing arriving was not when that Bible was completed, and for you it has not happened yet. So even you cannot know all there is to know about every Bible teaching. You have partial knowledge. Seeing through a hazy mirror, like Paul used to. And yet you don't die because of that.
  
  Neither did I didn't write other statements that you claim I said, such as,"What you say about not knowing everything is true about every single thing in life. We can only know things to a reasonable degree, say 98%. Or we can come to know what seems the best possible explanation for some matter given the facts that are available." (Alithia)
  
  As with your other claim, I didn't write that a human (we) could not know everything about every single thing in life, and could only know things to be maybe 98% correct, or correct to a reasonable degree. In fact I don't believe that. I claim to know certain things to be 100% accurate as facts, and that includes the truth about what most of the Bible message is.
  
  As I have outlined there are ideas that you inappropriately claim I wrote, because I never stated those ideas. Some of those you directly applied to me. There are other statements that you implied I made, which I didn't. Such as, " I accept what you say about God being merciful and forgiving, but there is no connection with this and not doing as Jesus said at Matthew 6:33 about seeking first the Kingdom as a priority." (Alithia). I didn't say that either. Nor did anything I wrote deny the other scriptures in your comment, though the nature of your comment appears to imply that.
  
  In the future please only attribute ideas to me that I write, what I actually say. Because some readers believe hearsay, whether it's true or not. But if you want to challenge what I actually say. I have no problem with that.

  • Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-04 08:05:15

    Right. We cannot look to ourselves to earn salvation by how much we do or how much we learn. Not even our pinky or a hair on our head can ever qualify.
    
    At John 5:39&40 Jesus told them “You are searching the Scriptures, because you think that by means of them you will have everlasting life; and these are the very ones that bear witness about me. And yet you do not want to come to me that you may have life.”
    
    They made the mistake of thinking their own works would make them righteous. Yet they would not accept the simple answer that it was impossible for them to ever qualify, and look to the Christ for salvation instead. His work saves us, and not our own.

Comment by messenger on 2019-06-03 09:33:44

Maybe this will help you understand both my comments Alithia. As a public school teacher I am ethically required to fail someone who doesn't understand the information our subject covers. And that is just. But I'll be damned if I would ever kill anyone for that.

No person who would is fit to judge others in Christ's kingdom. Not that I ever asked for that job. I was chosen for it as were all who will judge there.

Comment by leaving_quietly on 2019-06-03 18:48:31

What sealed the deal for me was something I only noticed in my personal reading.

Go back to Daniel 10 and look at this from another angle, that of the one speaking. Verses 5 and 6 describe this one who had the appearance of a man. Clothed in linen, hips girded with gold of Uphaz, body like chrysolite, face with the appearance of lightning, eyes like fiery torches, arms and feet like burnished (smooth, glossy, polished) copper, words like the sound of a crowd. Does this sound familiar? Revelation 1:12-15 has a similar description: clothed with a garment that reached to the feet, girded at the breasts with a golden girdle, eyes a fiery flame, feet like fine copper when glowing in a furnace, voice as the sound of many waters. This is none other than the Christ. Thus, in Daniel 10, this one talking to Daniel seems to be the pre-human Jesus, and in verse 13, he, the speaker, said that “Michael, one of the foremost princes, came to help me.” The speaker is not Michael, but refers to Michael as a separate entity. If the speaker is indeed the pre-human Jesus, then Michael cannot be Jesus.

• Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-04 07:48:13

  @leaving_quietly - Good catch!

• Reply by Maria on 2019-06-04 09:41:09

  “This is none other than the Christ. Thus, in Daniel 10, this one talking to Daniel seems to be the pre-human Jesus, and in verse 13, he, the speaker, said that “Michael, one of the foremost princes, came to help me.” The speaker is not Michael, but refers to Michael as a separate entity. If the speaker is indeed the pre-human Jesus, then Michael cannot be Jesus.”
  
  I belief that is so, but my question then is:
  
  Why needed the prehuman Jesus, Michael to pass the one of Persia to come to Daniel???

  • Reply by leaving_quietly on 2019-06-04 15:58:41

    I've come to the conclusion that the scriptures don't answer all the questions we have, and that its writings produce more questions without answers. That said, my answer to your question is: I don't know. The Bible does not tell us.
    
    The premise of your question seems to be that the prehuman Jesus would not need help to pass the prince of Persia. I'm not certain that premise is true. The same question could be asked if Michael is Jesus. Remember, Michael and his angels battle Satan and his angels. Why would Jesus need an entire army to defeat Satan and his angels. Couldn't he do it on his own? Or, why couldn't God just wipe out Satan and his angels with a snap of his finger? Why a war in heaven at all? These are all things that I have wondered myself and have concluded that we just don't know enough to have the concrete answers we seek.
    
    However, I am convinced, due to the reasons Eric outlined and this striking similarity between Daniel 10:4,5 and Rev 1:12-15 that it's the same one being described. In Rev 1:17,18, that one identifies himself: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last, and the living one, and I became dead, but look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of the Grave." This can be none other than Jesus.

    • Reply by Maria on 2019-06-05 05:37:11

      Hi LQ,
      
      “ However, I am convinced, due to the reasons Eric outlined and this striking similarity between Daniel 10:4,5 and Rev 1:12-15 that it’s the same one being described. In Rev 1:17,18, that one identifies himself: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last, and the living one, and I became dead, but look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of the Grave.” This can be none other than Jesus.
      
      I agree with you.
      Thank you for pondering over my question :)
      
      I look forward to the time, we all know the answers :)
      
      Love
      Maria

Comment by Vox Ratio on 2019-06-03 22:22:48

Hi LQ,

Thank you for sharing those insights with us. Curiously, I had the exact same thoughts when I was reading through Daniel in my personal Bible reading as well. Additionally, we can note that since the one who touched Daniel is described as one "like a son of man" the text might also be alluding to the being described earlier in the cloud judgement passages of Daniel 7:

hWS hOMOIWSIS hUIOU ANQRWPOU (Dan.10:16 LXX Th)
hWS hUIOS ANQRWPOU (Dan. 7:13 LXX Th)

Furthermore, when we skip to Daniel 12 this being reappears again above the waters of a river and raises his right hand to heaven while pronouncing God's time-scale. Why is this significant? Because Revelation 10 describes a being that stands on the water, raises his hands to heaven and pronounces God's time-scale as well. What's even more remarkable about this being is that he is described as having composite attributes that only Christ elsewhere possesses:

* He is said to be clothed with a cloud, which is suggestive of the glory cloud passages in Daniel and elsewhere in the NT (cf. Dan 7:13; Mar. 13:26; Rev. 1:7)
* He is said to be covered by a rainbow, which is suggestive that he uniquely represents God and his throne (Rev 10:1; cf. Rev. 4:3; Ezek. 1:27f)
* He is said to have a face like the sun, which Christ is also represented as having elsewhere in the NT (cf. Rev. 1:16; Mat. 17:2).
* He is said to have feet like fire, which is strikingly similar to the figure in Daniel as well as how Christ is represented in the preamble to the Apocalypse (cf. Dan 10:6; Rev. 1:15).
* He is said to have a voice like a lion, which is suggestive of the one who would become the "lion" of the tribe of Judah (cf. Rev. 5:5).
* He is said to have an opened scroll in his hand, which might indicate he was the one worthy to open the previously sealed scroll in Revelation 5 (albeit with different Greek words for scroll).
* He calls the two witnesses of Revelation 11 described like Moses and Elijah "my two witnesses" (DUSIN MARTUSIN MOU), which is suggestive of Christ's being witnessed by Moses and Elijah in the NT (cf. Lu. 9:30ff).

In my opinion, the parallels in these two apocalyptic works are stunning. The one difficulty with these associations, however, is that the being in Revelation 10 is also described as a strong angel (ANGELLON ISXURON), thus making these descriptions difficult to reconcile with the introduction to the epistle to the Hebrews.

Nevertheless, some commentators have concluded similarly (Hitchcock, Chilton et al.) and argue that this being might "represent" Christ, rather than literally being "identified" as Christ. Whatever the case may be, how one comes to understand these parallels will likely depend upon their controlling hermeneutic.

• Reply by messenger on 2019-06-04 03:53:42

  Christ often referred to himself by the title Son of Man, not because he was born of a woman as a man. He was not defining his human characteristics with that title. He was identifying his divine nature. He was identifying himself to be that Son of Man written about in Daniel chapter 7.

Comment by Psalmbee on 2019-06-04 18:42:43

Hi Meleti,

Psalmbee here,..... what you say is true about the Authority,


But in the witness of two or more, (Mr 13:32) and (Mt 24:36) would tell me that Jehovah withheld knowledge from the Son.

In the witness of one,... the Son of Man gave his authority to his servants and commanded his porter to watch. (Mr 13:34)


I would imagine that Jehovah told the Christ, the Son of God. "Hey now, look here I taught you everything you know..., but I didn't teach you everything I Know! (Mr 12:29).


I know my comments may not be following context, but these are things I would be defending my religion with. Back in the day, the Witnesses would boldly claim with LOUD speakers, that Jehovah's name would be known in ALL the nations, his name MUST be known! But now they are afraid to talk to you quietly on the sidewalk! They want you to watch a pre recorded video. Things have changed so much in the way they transmit. No offence to the women, but the Society seems so feminine now.

Where is Jehovah of Armies?


Anyway, can anyone relate?

Comment by Alithia on 2019-06-05 17:48:35

Hello SkyBlue and all. Thanks Sky for your contribution to this discussion. The link you provided nicely provides scriptural references that exegetically help resolve the question as to whether Jesus is Michael the Archangel.

When bible translators exhibit bias in their translation to try and bolster the Trinity doctrine it should raise a red flags.

Using only scripture the link you provided clearly demonstrates the bias of the translators of John 8:58

If the words ego ime were translated consistently as in all of the other occurrences in the NT then there would be no suggestion or proof here that Jesus could have been the pre-existent Archangel Michael.

This series in getting very interesting!!! Jesus was called out to say clearly who he was!

I am sure he was clear and concise as the great teacher he was. We can know this by dusting off the layers of man made doctrines and ideas superimposed over the plain biblical teachings.

Love to all from Alithia.

Comment by messenger on 2019-06-06 00:48:39

I don't see that Jesus' claiming to be the messiah would necessitate excluding him from being an arch angel before or after he became the messiah. More is needed to make that jump, according to the way I see it. Also, while it's possible the Sanhedrin would have come up with that excuse (of him claiming to be the messiah) to tell the crowd in order to kill him, I think that is unlikely also. I believe the Sanhedrin had another reason that they decided on, as a charge against Christ to tell that crowd, and they gave that other reason to the crowd.

The scriptures don't reveal what the crowds were told, but they were stirred up by the message. See Mark 15:11. Remember that by the time Christ was crucified a large portion of the crowd had already accepted him as their messiah. Others thought of that as a possibility. Hosanna, "blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord," they cried as Christ entered Jerusalem. The excuse the Sanhedrin accepted was blasphemy against God, which according to Jewish law carried a death sentence. And remember scriptures state that many Jews back then were claiming to be the messiah, not just Christ.

Most scriptures in the Old Testament don't speak of the Messiah as coming from heaven or returning to heaven. When Christ spoke of his prehuman existence, and his coming again back to Earth from heaven, it had to be something new to those Jewish leaders, even though Daniel wrote about a savior from heaven. Also, most of the scriptures speaking of the deity of Christ are in the New Testament. Those ancient Jews never even read those teachings because of that. It's quite possible, and even likely, that the Jewish Sanhedrin members did believe Christ was claiming to be God because of his language. Son of God was obviously close enough to judge him of blasphemy because of Christ's heavenly allusions.

Mark 14:57-67 reads, "57 Then some stood up and gave this false testimony against him: 58 “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with human hands and in three days will build another, not made with hands.’” 59 Yet even then their testimony did not agree.

60 Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” 61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.

Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. 64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”

They all condemned him as worthy of death."

But back to the main point. In addition to the fact scriptures never labeled Jesus as an arch angel, what proves he isn't more than just his claim to be the messiah? It's because the scriptures that speak of his divinity. An angel is a messenger. Christ created the universe, and the universe was created for Christ. He is not a mere messenger. Christ with his Father is a creator of everything, and everything was created for him. Now which is greater, a creator of something or a savior of something ? The answer is pretty obvious. For nothing can be saved that doesn't already exist. As a creator and owner of the universe it could be considered a put down to call Christ an angel, or even an arch angel. Furthermore, what is an antichrist but one who denies the position Christ holds?

• Reply by Alithia on 2019-06-06 04:51:03

  Hello dear brother Messenger. I must say I have read and reread you latest post and I am struggling, because of the lack of coherence, logic and progressiveness in the building of your arguments to understand how you arrive at your conclusions.
  
  Call me stupid! Buuuuuuuut.
  
  I think you could benefit from studying logical reasoning in argumentation. How firstly you need to establish a proposition or a few of them. Provide the evidence in support of them. Present some counter arguments and how they fail to falsify your propositions. And then demonstrate how it logically follows to the conclusions you have presented. I find this absent in your reasoning dialog.
  
  Your post is rich with expressions of,"I believe, likely, unlikely in support of your arguments. In more than a few places you use conjecture, and assumptions with larges.
  
  Then you proceed to what you describe as the main point. That the scriptures detail Jesus as coming literally from Heaven, his deity, as the creator of the universe and everything in it too and more.
  
  And finish off nicely on anyone having a different view as being an anti-christ.
  
  The whole point of this series I am guessing at this stage is to investigate thoroughly each of these claims you make and a few more I can think of in light of the weight of the entire scripture narrative.
  
  Just like SkyBlue did by posting a very useful link to a source. I would like to have your thoughts on the content of this link further below in this thread and have your response to this information. In this way I can perhaps fathom your reasoning methods.
  
  I am sorry if I sound combative about this but I really would like you to comment on things I understand such as SkyBlue link to see how you think and what your general view is because at the moment I really find it difficult to see where you are coming from.
  
  Love to all from Alithia.

  • Reply by messenger on 2019-06-06 10:42:29

    Alithia we both know that is not the reason you fail to answer that question I put to you on June 2nd after your last FALSE ACCUSATION. But keep the rhetoric coming, in arrogance you put on quite a show.
    
    UNDERSTANDING IS NOT GIVEN TO ALL. I'LL STICK WITH MY FORM OF TEACHING.

Comment by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-06-06 11:19:55

Being exposed to all manner of vituperium on my two YouTube channels, I realize how challenging it is not to become emotionally involved in a discussion. Still, it is the yielding spirit of the Christ that should guide us.

Comment by messenger on 2019-06-06 13:29:55

Alithia,

Answer the question I raised to you in my June 2nd post, and why you claimed I made statements that I didn't ; and then I will provide scriptures that might help you understand my June 6th post. But the granting of that understanding is not up to me.

Comment by Chet on 2019-06-06 14:21:50

Michael

This is definitely a post/video of great interest. When someone is raised a Witness, they are taught that everything the the Society say is true, even unassailable. As a person leaves, the process of sorting through all of this begins and it can take a while to figure it all out. I know that in my case, there was a period of time when I didn’t even want to discuss spiritual/scriptural matters, because I was simply exhausted by the subject. But even I had to eventually begin the task of sorting it all out.

The Trinity is a huge issue in my mind. For the record, I do not believe that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are coequal and coeternal. The Athanasian Creed is not my creed. The scriptures make it clear that the spirit creature whom came to earth as Jesus, was the Only Begotten Son of God. So, just what does that mean? Only Begotten would indicate something unique. This spirit creature was one of a kind. The problem here, is that we don’t really know how things work in that realm. I would be hard pressed to explain just what a spirit creature is. All I really know is that they are different from material life.

So Jehovah begot one spirit creature directly and that spirit creature became our Messiah. Apparently, and I will stress the word “apparently”, this makes Christ (I will use the term Christ from this point one, whether talking about prehuman, human or resurrected) unique as spirit creatures go. Perhaps Christ has more attributes of Jehovah than the subsequent spirit creatures, all of whom were created on behalf of Jehovah, but by the hand of Christ.

I could go on, but to my mind, the big question is how we regard the resurrected Jesus. I don’t pray to Jesus, John 16:23 says “ In that day you will ask nothing of me. Truly, truly, I say to you, whatever you ask of the Father in my name, he will give it to you.” That sounds like prayers are directed to the Father.

One of the chief objections of the Muslims, with regard to Christianity is the trinity doctrine. Devout Jews find the notion of the trinity quite uncomfortable, as well. Coming from a JW background, I’m certainly not comfortable with regard to the notion of Christ being coequal and coeternal with the Almighty God, Jehovah. But that is not to say that Christ is an angel. Speaking only for myself, I always believed that Christ, in presumably form, was the firstborn of all creation and occupied a superior position to the angels. Even with regard to Michael the Archangel possibly being synonymous with the presumably Christ, I always assume that there was some attribute which differed from the angels in general.

Hebrews 1:5-8 seems to seal the deal, as far as I’m concerned. Obviously there is a significant difference between the prehuman Christ and the angels.

This leaves one huge question in my mind. How do we reconcile biblical Unitarianism with the dominant belief in Christendom. Much of the output of literature from Christendom seems to include a plug for their Triune God. Are all of these people wrong? Are they at risk of negative judgment? Why is the trinity such an issue in the minds of these people that they have to continually reinforce this belief in their literature. It’s a huge issue in my mind, because it separates me from many others whom profess to be Christian. There is a non-denominational Christian Church not far from my home, but I cannot attend services which worship Jesus as being on par with Jehovah. Nonetheless, I admire the sincerity, decency, morality and devotion displayed by many of the members of these churches.

While I don’t necessarily have much respect for the organizations behind the mainstream denominations, I have come to feel that many of these people are brothers in Christ. In my most recent workplace, there were a lot of Catholics. I didn’t agree with them on all matters doctrinal, but I came to respect that most of these were truly good people living lives of Christian principle. While I don’t support trinitarian worship, I can’t condemn them for their intention.

There is one other matter, as well; that of actual belief. I have spoken to any number of church members on the subject and found that most of them do not believe Christ to be coequal and coeternal with God. One time, I showed someone the Nicene Creed and he claimed that was a false doctrine planted by the Watchtower. Simply stated, it is my opinion that many people whom claim to believe in the trinity, do not believe Christ to be coequal and coeternal with the Father. It’s a conundrum.

• Reply by Frankie on 2019-06-06 19:14:39

  Hi Chet.
  
  Please allow me to respond to some of your thoughts and doubts.
  
  1. The Trinity: IMHO, the Bible explains that Jehovah and Jesus are not coequal as to position in Heaven and competencies - John 14:28; 1 Cor 11:3; Heb 1:13; 1 Cor 15:28; Mat 28:18 (the power WAS GIVEN to Jesus by Jehovah). This eliminates the Trinity theory.
  You wrote: “Much of the output of literature from Christendom seems to include a plug for their Triune God. Are all of these people wrong?“ IMO, yes, they are!
  You wrote: " Are they at risk of negative judgement?“ IMO, no, if they are humble enough to recognise they could be wrong (1 Cor 13:12). Only Jesus will judge in righteousness me, you, and all of them (Acts 17:31).
  
  2. Jesus is not an angel: IMHO, yes, Jesus is very special being. Our Lord and all angels are clearly differentiated according to scriptures Heb 1:5; Heb 2:5; Heb 1:13. Michael is ArchANGEL, superior one, but angel. All things (also angels) have been created THROUGH (John 1:3) Jesus and for Him, „evidently“ with the help of Jehovah’s Holy Spirit (Gen 1:2; Gen 1:26 - ... let US make ... ).
  
  3. Only Begotten Son of God: IMHO, I think, you pointed out important thing - „The problem here, is that we don't really know how things work in that realm.“ Yes. That’s why the Bible contains image of Father and Son in order to understand relation between Jehovah and Jesus, because we, men, understand very well what is the meaning of words father and his son and relations between them.
  For example - I have not any brother or sister. So I am „only begotten son“. The father’s genes are in me. He is man, I am man. I have his characteristics.
  My father loves me and I love him. And „my meat is to do the will of him“. I want to think just like he thinks, to act just like he acts, and to speak just like he speaks - „I and my father are one„. But he will be forever higher than me, because he is my beloved father. One day he said: „Let us make the harp“. He gave me his instruments, energy and knowledge. And I made one harp, then the second, third, ..... billion harps ..... all of them were made THROUGH me.
  This, maybe, could be applied to our heavenly Father and His Son.
  IMHO, Jesus has divine „genes“ of His Father, even immortality (John 5:26), in contrast to angels. I am MAN, because my father is MAN, but we are not equal. In this sense, Jesus is GOD, because He is Only Begotten Son of GOD (John 20:28).
  
  4. Nicene Creed: This creed has nothing to do with Watchtower [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_versions_of_the_Nicene_Creed#1975_ecumenical_version_(ICET)]. Only single statement of this creed - “Jesus Christ ... true God from true God” could be reason for disfellowshipment.
  
  5. Prayer to Jesus: IMHO, this depends on definition of term “prayer”. For example, I ask of our Lord for health in case of some problems, just like the apostle Paul asked (2 Cor 12:7,8). Is that prayer? Our Lord understands us better than we ever could.
  
  Love, Frankie.

• Reply by messenger on 2019-06-06 20:32:56

  Chet I don’t know if you were addressing your comment to me (messenger) or to Meleiti. There is no one named Michael on this page, so it was probably to one of us. It’s good that leaving WT didn’t cause you to leave God. Many have when they left WT.
  
  Most of us feel uncomfortable about who we should worship with after leaving WT. The reason is because WT taught us every Christian except a JW is a false Christian, not accepted by Christ, a follower of apostate demonic teachings, and that we should have NO spiritual fellowship with them unless we are teaching them WT doctrines. But you left WT for some reason. Maybe part of that reason you left had to do with what WT teaches. If you ever investigate WT you will discover it started as an apostate religion. Two of the best books to start investigating it were written by Ray Franz. You can look up his books and purchase those online.
  
  Your skepticism is a good thing. Because everything concerning worship that is not done in faith is sin. Romans 14:23 But that doesn’t mean everyone with a different view than yours will be judged unworthy by Christ, if they worship in faith. The same chapter tells us this. "1 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.” Romans 14:1-4
  
  In meeting non Witness Christians and hearing them teach I have learned they follow the instruction above in Romans chapter 14 better than Jehovah’s Witnesses do who are taught by WT. Eventually everyone will stand before Christ and acknowledge what his position actually is. Before that is there any danger in getting that wrong? Yes, BUT HOW WRONG DO WE HAVE TO GET THAT BIBLE TEACHING TO BE IN DANGER? 1John 2:18-24 reads,18Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us. 20But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know. 21I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth. 22Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 23Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. 24As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father
  
  Do Jehovah’s Witnesses and those other Christians you met acknowledge Christ as their Messiah? According to you yes. Then might Christ treat both groups who have some of those other beliefs about him that you referenced in HIS WAY, according to what we learn from Romans chapter 14 above? And importantly, is it our place to judge and claim we know how Christ will judge them?
  
  If you research WT you will learn that it is apostate. That is unmistakable if you look long enough and thoroughly enough into it having a mind that is open to God’s truth. Even though WT is apostate I know for a fact that some Jehovah’s Witnesses will live in the New World. Because I was shown that. And people who were never Jehovah’s Witnesses will be there also.
  
  I can show you a lot of scriptures that would probably convince you that those OTHER CHRISTIANS have logical reasons to believe what they do about Christ, including that he is God, was not created, and is also Almighty. But that’s unnecessary. What does the Bible tell us to do to be saved? Believe in Christ John 3:16; call upon the name of the Lord Acts 2:21, and Romans 10:13 . I have never read you must be sure about whether Christ had a beginning or not; or is equal to his Father or not to be saved, have you?

  • Reply by Chet on 2019-06-06 21:56:12

    My comments were not addressed to you in any way shape or form. “Michael” was related to the subject at hand.
    
    I’ve investigated the JWs from within and without and have absolutely no use for that organization. I’ve seen lives ruined and even a number of suicides because of their “love”. My comments were simply a widow into my own reasoning in the subject.
    
    I do find it troubling that so many Christians are convinced of the false doctrine of the triune god and this has been a subject of prayer for years. I can only assume that when Jehovah vindicates His name, this will include clarifying the issue once and for all.
    
    There are numerous works regarding the falsehood of the trinity doctrine which I have read over the year. Jesus Is Not A Trinitarian is a great exegetical consideration of the subject. When Jesus Became God is another fine book which deals mostly with the politics surrounding the adoption of the trinity in the early church. It also points out, interestingly enough, that this set the stage for the Eastern branch of the church to begin searching elsewhere and may well have contributed to the success of Islam.

    • Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-07 09:01:15

      Howdy Chet! Just wanted to share a few thoughts that I learned along the way that might bring you some clarity, that it helped bring me.
      
      First, I learned that Christ never said Christians would be identified by their accuracy of doctrine, but rather that “all will know you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.” Love unifies wherever it exists. So rather than seeking any type of religion or organization that promotes a set doctrine, I’ve found it more advantageous to seek to know the body of Christ - which is made up of individuals - by the love that they manifest toward others.
      
      Secondly about Jesus - although I’m still convinced that there is no Trinity, I do believe Jesus is divine. In fact, the WT used to believe in the divinity of Christ even up to the late 80’s. I was taught that before I was baptized, and had I not, I might have never become a JW. And I missed the WTs that later proclaimed he was no longer divine, so I continued teaching it to my students until I quit Field Service in 2016.
      
      But the most interesting things I have learned about Jesus since, has absolutely transformed my worship! Here’s a couple:
      
      First, I learned that Jehovah actually gave Jesus his name! Yes it’s true, right there in John 17:11:12:
      
      “Also, I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world and I am coming to you. Holy Father, watch over them on account of your own name which you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are. 12 When I was with them I used to watch over them on account of your own name which you have given me”
      
      As you can imagine, this on it’s own has HUGE implications...
      
      Secondly, the early Christians prayed to Jesus. Here are some examples of God's people talking/praying/giving thanks to Jesus after he became a spirit in heaven:
      
      Acts 9:10-14 There was in Damascus a certain disciple named An·a·niʹas, and the Lord said to him in a vision: “An·a·niʹas!” He said: “Here I am, Lord.” The Lord said to him: “Rise, go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man named Saul, from Tarsus. For, look! he is praying, and in a vision he has seen a man named An·a·niʹas come in and lay his hands upon him that he might recover sight.” But An·a·niʹas answered: “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how many injurious things he did to your holy ones in Jerusalem. And here he has authority from the chief priests to put in bonds all those calling upon your name.”
      
      (Notice how Ananias says “all those calling upon your name”). So all the Christians were not only calling upon the Father, but Jesus as well.
      
      Romans 10:11-12 “For the Scripture says: “None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for there is the same Lord over all, who is rich to all those calling upon him.”
      
      1 Cor 1:1 “Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through God’s will, and Sosʹthe·nes our brother to the congregation of God that is in Corinth, to YOU who have been sanctified in union with Christ Jesus, called to be holy ones, together with all who everywhere are calling upon the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours.”
      
      2 Tim 2:22 “So, flee from the desires incidental to youth, but pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, along with those who call upon the Lord out of a clean heart.”
      
      Acts 7:59 "As they were stoning Stephen, he made this appeal: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”
      
      2 Cor 12:8,9 "Three times I begged the Lord about this, that it would depart from me. But he said to me: “My undeserved kindness is sufficient for you, for my power is being made perfect in weakness.” Most gladly, then, I will boast about my weaknesses, in order that the power of the Christ may remain over me like a tent."
      
      Lastly, 1 John 1:3 says “We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ." (NIV) Fellowship: Greek: koinónia:
      Usage: (lit: partnership) (a) contributory help, participation, (b) sharing in, communion, (c) spiritual fellowship, a fellowship in the spirit. So how can we have fellowship with Jesus if we can't talk with Him?
      
      Anyhow, hope those thoughts are encouraging to you. And thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Comment by jamesbrown on 2019-06-06 20:35:03

Good morning Chet,

I just love your comments about the Trinity when you spoke from my heart:

"The Trinity is a huge issue in my mind. For the record, I do not believe that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are coequal and co-eternal.

The Athanasian Creed is not my creed. The scriptures make it clear that the spirit creature whom came to earth as Jesus, was the Only Begotten Son of God. So, just what does that mean?

Only Begotten would indicate something unique. This spirit creature was one of a kind. The problem here, is that we don’t really know how things work in that realm.

I would be hard pressed to explain just what a spirit creature is. All I really know is that they are different from material life."

Currently I am calling on a "Trinitrine" and he knows his bible very well and he showed me this scripture Hebrews 1: 8

But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the sceptre of your Kingdom is the sceptre of uprightness.

In all others translations on biblehub.com it reads:

"Your throne O God" However in our NWT it renders as above.

I am so, so, so confused.

Is Jesus Jehovah? I dont think so, but, is he Jehovah in the spirit realm?

Is everybody wrong and we are RIGHT? or are we WRONG and everybody is right.

Chet I thought their was something wrong with my thinking, but thanks to you my dear brother it seems I am not alone.

Warm Christian love

• Reply by messenger on 2019-06-08 05:45:32

  Jamesbrown since you asked if Jesus was Jehovah how about this. WT teaches Holy Spirit is not God but a power coming from God.
  
  Any part of God is God. Just

  • Reply by Frankie on 2019-06-08 12:31:41

    Hi Messenger.
    
    As to the God's Holy Spirit, IMO, he is personalized because of better comprehension of his nature, to which, we humans, cannot grasp. I think, he is some kind of power/energy/information field/whatever you want - but we do not know at all. The context of many verses in Bible reveals that the Holy Spirit is part of God, He is His (Saxon genitive), He is the God's Holy Spirit.
    
    Can you point at you finger and say: "this is Messenger”? Or, if you show your finger to someone and ask: "What is this "”, will be the answer "This is Messenger”? Probably not, but he or she says: "This is your (Messenger's) finger". Your finger is a part of YOU, but it is NOT YOU, because YOU are the entity consisting of all of your parts, physical parts as well as mental ones. You finger cannot think, in contrast to your brain. Messenger is complex of all his parts, and individual parts are the Messenger's parts.
    
    Similarly, it is with the Holy Spirit. You are right; he is a part of God, no separate person. Hence, in connection with word GOD, we should use the term God's Holy Spirit and not Holy Spirit is God. There is no definition "Holy Spirit is God” in the Bible. Nowhere. But there are plenty of terms God's Holy Spirit - Holy Spirit belonging to God.
    
    Just as your finger has the human substance, similarly the Holy Spirit has the divine substance, but he is not God. In the sense of above mentioned, there is possible to understand verse Luke 12:10 - blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is blasphemy against God Himself.
    
    Love, Frankie

    • Reply by messenger on 2019-06-09 07:28:12

      Hi Frankie,
      
      Luke 12:10 doesn't directly say blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is blasphemy against God himself, as you wrote above. You probably stated that because even though you refuted my thought, that thought I raised in your final comment reveals somewhere in your consciousness you probably know Holy Spirit is God. If Holy Spirit is not God, the blasphemy against it surely shouldn't carry a heavier penalty than blasphemy against Christ. Why would it?
      
      But your stated scripture, at Luke 12: 10, actually reads, "And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." Why? Because they blaspheme the one who they know is God, or they reject accepting God. It's not that they talk negatively about a power source or reject a power source. It's they reject or speak ill of God while knowing they are doing it. As an atheist does. No atheist claims to reject some scientific power source. They claim to reject the existence of God. That's their blasphemy.
      
      History shows many did not believe Christ was divine. But God communicated through Christ, the same as through Holy Spirit, didn't he? But it's only because they didn't believe Christ was divine that Holy Spirit was sent to give them a chance to change. It is God who communicates with these people, and he continues to teach people to give them a chance to accept Christ. That's why they die if they blaspheme Holy Spirit. They don't accept Christ, as God tells them to. He's giving them a choice to make. Do that, or don't do that.
      
      Holy Spirit is part of God, which makes him God. But if someone believes it's not, could they break God down into other parts that he consists of, and claim those other parts aren't God either? What other parts of God do you suggest we say are not God? How about his heart:
      "After removing Saul, he made David their king. God testified concerning him: 'I have found David son of Jesse, a man after my own heart; he will do everything I want him to do.'" Acts 13:22 NIV. Should people believe God's heart is not God? I wouldn't.
      
      I feel quite confident that if I purposely took my finger and poked your eye out then I, messenger, not my finger, would be criminally charged for that; and you , if you filed a civil case, would file it against me not my finger. Why am I so confident of that. Because that's how society looks at it. Why? Because my finger is not a separate entity from me. What any part of me does, I do. That's how society views it. Every part is me. Same with God.
      
      But let's consider your reasoning that the brain is not me, and my finger is not me either as you stated in your comment. Well let's agree my brain told my finger to poke you. Who did it in that case? The law says I did it. And anybody you ask would say I did it. So even if you still believe my finger isn't me, you live in a world that behaves as if you are wrong about that. If Holy Spirit does not think, as you say it does not think, and another part of God thinks as you suggest, then when God uses Holy Spirit to communicate, who communicated? God or just a force as you claim? No, it is a part of God. So it was God who communicated. It is not some outside force. And since it's an internal part of God that makes it God even, if your idea about God having a different part of him that he thinks with is correct. But according to scripture that is unlikely. And if Holy Spirit ever communicates with you I believe your thinking will sway my way. In the final paragraph let's look at an idea that Holy Spirit might be some power source outside God. One he created.
      
      To help us understand the nature of Holy Spirit it wouldn't be personalized with pronouns, as you state because God wants us to understand the nature of a power source. Anything can be figuratively personalized (called personification), but using pronouns does not help people understand the nature of a power source. God speaks (more accurately he communicates in ways that are superior to speech) with others using what we call Holy Spirit. But even if it is a power force let's consider this. When I communicate to you everyone who reads it knows the writing is from messenger, not some power source like the internet powered by electricity. My name is even auto-attached to these messages. Why? Because it is understood that these thoughts come from me, not the electricity, and the internet. So even if it is a source outside of God, because God is the one who uses it, that which is done is considered done by God, not done by some force. But personally I don't buy that, I believe it is part of God.
      
      So, it appears that thinking WT taught us that you to still apply to God is not accepted by society while applying that same idea of yours to people. Society does not disassociate the parts of our bodies or minds from our whole person, compartmentalizing those parts as accountable or free from guilt separate from our other parts. No guilt might be legally established or not by what any part of our body does. And when one part of our body or a combination of parts of our body communicates WE communicate. No one that I know of looks at that another way. So why do it with God?

      • Reply by Frankie on 2019-06-09 17:28:57

        Hi Messenger.
        
        Dear brother, thank you for your thorough respond. I will try to explain my understanding Holy Spirit through your example - your finger in my eye (but I think you love me as Christian and so you’ll never injure me :o).
        
        Your finger, your heart, your brain and other many parts are integral parts of you, they are inseparable and they all form you as a man, Messenger. Therefore, you are fully responsible for using any of your parts. In case of injury, YOU will be criminally charged for using your integral part - YOUR finger. And judge can either say “Messenger used HIS finger to injure Frankie” or “Messenger injured Frankie”.
        
        In case of God, the Holy Spirit is integral part of God, not a separate person or separate whatever. God cannot be break down into parts. God uses His Holy Spirit to enforce His intents. So if someone refuses God’s acting through Holy Spirit, such man automatically refuses the God Himself, because he or she refuses the God’s divine integral part, God’s Spirit (Luke 12:10), through which God wants to perform His intent. Jesus Christ is not an integral part of God, in contrast to Holy Spirit. And I agree with you, God acts in various ways - through Holy Spirit, through Jesus Christ and angels.
        
        You wrote: “And when one part of our body or a combination of parts of our body communicates WE communicate“. I fully agree. The same is in case of God and his Holy Spirit.
        
        And in the end - we both maybe understand some deep Bible things slightly differently; and maybe not, I think this is the matter of terms only. But surely we both correctly understand the main New Covenant theme - the Christ’s gospel. After all - „For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face ... (1 Cor 13:12). Btw, as to this article, the topic „Holy Spirit“ is off-topic :o). I'm looking forward to next Eric’s thoughts about „The Nature of God’s Son“.
        
        Love, Frankie

        • Reply by messenger on 2019-06-10 10:52:04

          Hello Frankie.
          
          Actually Holy Spirit relates to the topic of the written article. In the comment nearest the top of this page that I offer on Holy Spirit, I quoted Revelation 5:6. That scripture identifies Christ (the Lamb) in heaven WITH Holy Spirit, that is a part of him-not something coming from the Father. It's his eyes, seven of them. And the scripture states that it is sent out into all the Earth. Since it's a part of the Lamb's body the Lamb evidently sends it out. Directly above that I quoted Revelation 4:5 which says those are seven spirits of GOD.
          
          After that I included this conclusion about those two scriptures, along with a third that proceeded:
          " There are no scriptures that speak of any angel having control over Holy Spirit to send it out from himself into all the Earth, or sending this SPIRITS OF GOD anywhere. In comparing those three scriptures we see Christ shares whatever Holy Spirit is with his Father, implying he shares god-ship with his Father. For the Spirits are said be SPIRITS OF GOD, and a they are also claimed to be PART OF CHRIST (metaphorically the eyes of the lamb John saw.)"
          
          So you see Holy Spirit is attached to the nature of the Son as it is attached to the nature of the Father. Since I'm making the comparison between those two let me further the comparison. There are scriptures that identify the Son as complying with the Father's wishes. But there are not scriptures that identify Christ as having less power than his Father. "Greater," in the scriptural quote, "greater than I am," does not necessarily mean greater in power. As you might be stronger than Donald Trump. But you submit to him, making him greater than you in that sense of your submission.
          
          The Bible places Christ as being a copy of the type of being his Father is, hence the term attached to him is, only SON. God has other sons, but no other sons like Christ. And the picture the Bible paints of Christ carrying that designation is not because he was created necessarily. Whether he was created or not the designation is correct because the picture the Bible paints of Christ is that he is like the Father in all respects. "The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation" (Colossians1:15, NIV). He is different than angels and all others because no one else is like the Father. The very nature of the Father is the nature of the Son. And no place in the Bible is that nature described as being limited to any subset of characteristics in their beings. It's more than just they both have Holy Spirit. As Christ said everything the Father has he has. "All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you." John 16:15
          
          Take care Frankie.

          • Reply by Frankie on 2019-06-10 18:36:59

            Hi Messenger.
            
            Sorry, dear brother, but the Holy Spirit is off-topic, because of the title of Eric's article "The Nature of God's Son: Is Jesus the Archangel Michael?”. The article analyses two persons - Jesus Christ and Michael the Archangel, not the Holy Spirit.
            
            What you wrote in your latest comment is OK. I didn't claim something else.
            
            I responded to your comment on Chet, because I took the clause "Holy Spirit is God” as Trinitarian claim. But after our extensive discussion, the essential thing is that we both don't believe in Trinity. I only say: Holy Spirit is not God - he/it is integral part of God. That is my view and I explained it (I was doing my best :o). The definition "Holy Spirit is God" is not in Bible. You are using it only after some logical conclusions and on the basis of various Bible information. Such combining different information can be right or not. It is thin ice.
            
            In this case, when we are trying to interpret scriptural truth, we should keep in mind this verse: "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:9). None of the people owns absolute truth, neither me, nor you, Eric or Pope. So this "take care" is valid for me, for you and for everyone. May the God's Holy Spirit help us to understand the deep God's things.
            
            Love, Frankie.

            • Reply by messenger on 2019-06-10 22:08:25

              Well Frankie respectfully I disagree. Any differentiation or similarities between the innate qualities of Christ and Michael, who is called an archangel, relates to the article's theme (main topic). Because that theme asks, The Nature of God's Son: Is Jesus Michael the Archangel? Look at all the points the author brought out in discussing his topic, to lead readers to his conclusion. Since there is no scripture in the Bible that says Christ is or is not Michael the archangel, that is the only way to reach a conclusion. If there was a scripture stating Christ was or wasn't, the article could be one sentence long. But even then there would be no reason not to offer more Bible points than that one sentence in discussing this topic.
              
              Because the Bible is silent on the topic reasoning on scriptures is necessary, even to take a side, if one is willing to take a side, without just accepting what someone else believes. Those types of conclusions, if taken on this topic, arise from reasoning on scriptures that speak to the characteristics of angels, archangels, and Christ. We have no choice but to do so. And I see no reason to stick solely with ideas that are already written in the article when doing so. The Bible speaks of Christ with the seven spirits of God, that are sent out into all the earth, as his eyes. It speaks of Christ as being divine, including that he carries the designation God. Those are just two characteristics Christ is revealed to have in scripture that no angel or archangel, in scripture, is designated as possessing. So, when including those points in comparing Christ and Michael the archangel, how could those comparisons not be on topic? Again, the theme requires a consideration, in comparison and contrast, of the nature of Christ, against the nature of Michael the archangel, to reach a conclusion, which is what is asked for in the theme itself-Is Jesus Michael the Archangel?
              
              "From ALL WE'VE SEEN, it seems that the Bible is telling us that Jesus is not an angel. Therefore, he could not be Michael the Archangel. " (Quote from Eric in the article.)

              • Reply by Frankie on 2019-06-11 15:46:52

                Hi Messenger.
                
                You are the real fighter, indeed (John 2:17). That's good. I also fully agree with Eric - Jesus Christ and Michael are not the same, they are separate persons. I confirmed it in my comment 10 days ago with statement: "In this article you presented apparent scriptural evidence – Jesus and Archangel Michael are not the same! Thanks to God for you, Eric." So we both are on the same board. Many years ago, I dealt with wrong JW interpretation of Michael the Archangel on the basis of Heb 1. I'm grateful to Eric for thorough additional scriptural evidence.
                
                Btw, I am very glad to find this Beroeans forum a year ago, where I found very many views similar to those of mine and where I found many humble people who are sincerely searching for the real truth. Dear brother, I wish you plenty of God's blessings. Frankie.

                • Reply by messenger on 2019-06-13 02:11:33

                  Hi Frankie,
                  
                  My last comment on this subject, not because I don't like writing to you, but because I feel you totally understand my position already. I kept the conversation up this long for one reason only. Because WT taught us a lot of funny and unbiblical ideas about what is necessary to believe in to be a disciple of Christ, acceptable to Christ. So, because of that, I refute some funny ideas. Not because I believe you MUST KNOW THE TRUTH about it. It's because I believe you don't have to, to be acceptable to Christ about that sort of thing. This, to me, is one of those things. And in attempt to influence others not to be unbiblically judgmental, which might harm them, you might take it I am just arguing for the sake of argument when I am not.
                  
                  But my last point. Your idea that someone cannot say Holy Spirit is God, is not stated in scripture, anymore than the Bible states Holy Spirit is God. The wording does not have to be in a document to apply certain truths to items in a document. And that's what the Bible consists of, documents.
                  
                  Holy spirit, in scripture is only described as coming from the Son or the Father. Since both carry the designation God, and it appears to be part of their very being (nature), then saying Holy Spirit is God is an accurate statement to make.
                  
                  Here's an example of the point. Say Frankie, you are the supervisor in a company. And, please don't get offended, because in this example your right hand inappropriately touches a woman employee. Your hand touches her bottom. Does the woman need to say Supervisor hand, or supervisor Frankie's hand touched my bottom? Or would she claim supervisor Frankie did it? She would say supervisor Frankie did it.

                  • Reply by messenger on 2019-06-13 02:17:08

                    In the example the designation supervisor would be attached to you Frankie, not your hand. In the same way the position God, could be, but doesn't have to be attached to Holy Spirit when referring to it.

                • Reply by messenger on 2019-06-13 05:57:34

                  Frankie, check out Acts 5:3-4

                  • Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-06-13 09:09:25

                    Acts 5:3-4 English Standard Version (ESV)
                    3 But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back for yourself part of the proceeds of the land? 4 While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? Why is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to man but to God.”
                    
                    The problem with illustrations is that it is easy for us to confuse them with proof. I know we all understand an illustration's purpose is to better explain a truth that is already established. In this case, I don't believe we have established the truth about the nature of the holy spirit, or at the very least what we understand the truth to be.
                    
                    My hand is not me, nor am I my hand. My hand is not a part of me, but it is a part of my body. Where God to endow me with a different body, one that doesn't use hands, but has another way to interact with the physical world, I would still be me. The question then becomes, what do you and Frankie both believe concerning the holy spirit. Is it God, a part of God, or something God uses like an instrument to perform actions, or something else entirely?

                    • Reply by Frankie on 2019-06-13 14:34:47

                      Hi Eric.
                      
                      Thank you for your response. As to Acts 5:3-5 I agree with you. In my previous comments on the "Holy Spirit” thread I wrote, IMHO, the Holy Spirit, mentioned in various scriptures in Bible as person, is personification, through which our heavenly Father explains Holy Spirit's acting.
                      
                      I am in position of a Neanderthal man, who is trying to grasp the TV principle. How the TV designer can explain me the theory of electromagnetic field? He possibly could use the parable, which I can understand by my limited mind.
                      
                      We don't know at all about the real nature of Holy Spirit. I only imagine it as a multiscale, multipurpose something (energy/power/information field/???) through which the God operates, something like God's "hand”.
                      
                      Therefore, I believe the Holy Spirit is not God, it is not separate divine person (I am fighter against Trinity). IMO, it is (but not necessarily) an integral part of God with divine nature (similarly like my hand has human nature). It is my current understanding of Holy Spirit. But - 1 Cor 13:12.
                      
                      Love, Frankie

• Reply by messenger on 2019-06-08 06:15:24

  Jamesbrown how about this.
  
  Are all parts of yourself YOU? What about your fingers or hand, are those things part of YOU? Does the answer to that question differ with any individual you are aware of? If so, since Holy Spirit is part of God, then how could it not be God? Is it some power God gets from some place outside himself? Not ! And even WT knows better than that. It is God as surely as your hand is you. Paul wrote, "Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ." 1 Corinthians 12:12. And what about the Father? Is it the same with him?
  
  The great mystery as WT labels the great mystery between the Holy Spirit and the Father in other religions that they cannot explain (but really they explain it) should apply to Watchtower teaching about the Bible terms Holy Spirit and God. Witnesses should be wondering how the two are separate things, a person (Jehovah), and a THING (Holy Spirit-some vague energy source as WT teaches it). Even though WT knows better. How do I know it does? Because WT teaches Holy Spirit is emanating from God. WT says it comes and is used as a power from God.
  
  Holy Spirit doesn't have to be a separate person to be God. It is God. All parts of God are God, in the same way all parts of us are us. Thus the frequent use of the pronoun HE, when referring to Holy Spirit by Christ.

Comment by messenger on 2019-06-07 23:16:16

Is Holy Spirit God? Is it WITH, and part of the Son as well as the Father?

"John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from him who is and who was and who is to come, and from THE SEVEN SPIRITS who are before his throne," Revelation 1:4 ESV

"From the throne came flashes of lightning, and rumblings and peals of thunder, and before the throne were burning seven torches of fire, which are THE SEVEN SPIRITS OF GOD," Revelation 4:5 ESV

"And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain, with seven horns and WITH seven eyes, which are THE SEVEN SPIRITS OF GOD sent out into all the earth." Revelation 5:6 ESV

There are no scriptures that speak of any angel having control over Holy Spirit to send it out from himself into all the Earth, or sending this SPIRITS OF GOD anywhere. In comparing those three scriptures we see Christ shares whatever Holy Spirit is with his Father, implying he shares god-ship with his Father. For the Spirits are said be SPIRITS OF GOD, and a they are also claimed to be PART OF CHRIST (metaphorically the eyes of the lamb John saw).

The same type of comparison can be done with other phrases in Revelation or other Bible books, to conclude both Father and Son share that relationship of God to humans who accept them BOTH as such, such as, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” Revelation 22:13 ESV. You might research the other scriptures yourself in harmony with what WT taught us about Proverbs 2:1-6. (Most of my posts don't list an extensive lists of scriptures for this reason.) You do the searching.

Of course the most conclusive statement defining Christ's god-ship to those that accept him is that single term designating him as "God," in multiple scriptures.

I had a friend who is now dead. A nice fellow but he was also an arrogant fellow. Shy WT training he was no scholar. But my guess from knowing him and our relationship is that he had an above average IQ. I liked him and considered him a friend. The reason I bring him up is because he is one of the fellows that wrote the WT rebuttal in the NWT claiming John 1:1 is not really calling the Word God, even though written scriptures say he is God.

The ESV Study Bible includes a very nice rebuttal to the the WT Bible insert in the NWT about John 1:1. The ESV Study Bible was written by 95 Bible teachers who were scholars. In glancing over the three pages that lists them all, I only saw three that were not Ph.D. scholars or labeled as holding Doctorate degrees (DD).
The EVS study Bible article shows how WT was not only incorrect in its interpretation of John 1:1, the article further shows where the NWT is inconsistent in applying its reasoning when translating other scriptures they apply to Jehovah. When the scriptures use the Greek terminology and phrasing at John 1:1 WT writes the words "a god" (claiming it's a quality); but when similar Greek word phrases are used in other scriptures that the NWT applied to Jehovah, then the NWT uses the word "GOD" instead of "a god." Since I am not a Greek scholar myself, who does it make more common sense to believe, my friend and his buddy who wrote the NWT insert on John 1:1, or actual Greek scholars (95 of them in this one Bible) who also claim WT not only misinterprets John 1:1, but goes further by stating WT only misrepresents that interpretation when applying that misinterpretation to Christ?

I don't see WT's faulty interpretations as its biggest sin. WT has taught and continues to teach millions of people to act the judge, while claiming it (WT) and their followers don't judge others. That is WT's biggest sin, and it is the sin that will kill WT. Hopefully it doesn't kill too many who follow it. But some are bound to die because of this. "For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you." Matthew 7:2

Many of these judgmental people who don't die will be excluded from Christ's church because of who they prove themselves to be. Christ's church members are labeled in scripture as the elect, and chosen. Because they are CHOSEN. They are hand picked. If a person believes and teaches others over an extended period of time that Christ will kill people because they believe Christ had no beginning and/or that Christ is all powerful, then something about that type of teacher(person) is revealed. It is revealed those teachers believe Christ has the type of disposition to do that (kill people because they believe he has no beginning). And it reveals those teachers feel killing for that reason is a just thing to do. Do you see why Christ did not leave it up to people to make his will known to his chosen church members? "However when he, the Spirit of truth, has come, he will guide you into all truth, for he will not speak from himself; but whatever he hears, he will speak. He will declare to you things that are coming." Luke 24:49

We need more than just men, concordances, interlinears, and Bibles to teach us who God chooses as the church. Most everyone that teaches scriptures out there claims they only use the Bible. And it's just as big a lie no matter who is claiming that. Everyone adds interpretations. Holy Spirit working on the elect is what reveals enough truth to them individually for life, and their response to the most important Bible truths reveals to Christ that he can trust their judgment.

Comment by messenger on 2019-06-08 14:51:38

Know the answer to this!

The GB claim they along with other Jehovah's Witnesses exclusively had God's Spirit BEAR WITNESS with their individual spirits, and that because of this they hold a special relationship with Jehovah. While at the same time the GB teaches JWs that God does not contact ANYONE in modern times. WT misapplies the meaning of a scripture in the 13th chapter of 1 Corinthians in teaching God's spirit bears witnesses with each one those people without bearing witness through personal contact. (Witnessing without contacting. Try that JWs. And then put that time down on your time sheet. No, I don't mean because you get not at homes. God never gets not at homes. I mean put down time without attempting to contact ANYONE, as WT teaches God did not attempt to contact the GB members or anyone else today when he bore witness with them.)

Now here is an interesting point that relates to the question I ask you to answer in my first sentence. That question has not yet been given for your consideration. But before I reveal it consider this, that Watchtower does teach demons contact people today. So, I am wondering if God made WT through its own teachings, in essence, admit its leaders were contacted by demons? Because how would individual Jehovah's Witnesses know God's spirit bore witness with them as the scripture says, when they also believe God didn't contact them. All the time Jehovah's Witnesses claim they are sure of this calling? How would they know? Who told them?

We have all read many statements from people stating how in the distant past God spoke to them, that they were given a dream by God, or that they saw a vision from God. WT claims that contact no longer happens. I repeat the reason for this WT teaching is because of a misapplication of a scripture in 1Cor the 13th chapter. But let's go to another scripture. One in which Peter refers to one occurrence of God's spirit bearing witness with Christians. To be fair, I'll write the complete quote from a NWT, its third revision in 1971. Look to see if Peter claims what he said is happening will stop at any future time.

Acts 2:14-21 in that NWT reads:

But Peter stood up with the eleven and raised his voice and made this utterance to them: "Men of Judea and all you inhabitants of Jerusalem, let this be known to you and give ear to my sayings. These [people] are, in fact, not drunk, as you suppose, for it is the third hour of the day. On the contrary, this is what was said through the prophet Joel, '"And in the last days," God says, "I shall pour out some of my spirit upon every sort of flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy and your young men will see visions and your old men will dream dreams; and even upon men slaves and upon women slaves I will pour out some of my spirit IN THOSE DAYS, and they will prophesy. And I will give portents in heaven above and signs on earth below, blood and fire and smoke and mist; the sun will be turned into darkness and moon into blood before the great and illustrious day of Jehovah arrives. And everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved."'

You might want to comment on other points in those scriptures, but I shared those to ask if you see that Peter stated there would be a future period in which this pouring out of holy spirit, with the resultant dreams and visions would end? If you didn't see that, yet WT believes God's SPIRIT bears witness with the spirit of GB members and other JWs, while WT also teaches God no longer contacts people, but the demons do, then I'm wondering, who had WT write those teachings that allow thinkers to connect the dots? Dots that can lead to a conclusion that if JWs were contacted by any supernatural entity, those anointed JWs, according to their teachings, must have been contacted by demons. Now I am not saying they were. It's my opinion they are just biblically illiterate. Because the truth hasn't been given to them yet. But following their own teachings, if I didn't give them the benefit of the doubt that they are just ignorant, to me their own teachings can lead to a conclusion their leaders were contacted by demons. Either that or they are lying about knowing they have some special relationship with God, through claiming they are sure about their anointing. I'm pretty sure every believer accepts that when God bears witness, he makes that action undeniably apparent to all observers. He did to Bible characters. But what about to Witnesses?

Comment by Dan Adams on 2019-06-17 12:39:49

I’ve just now come across this video after being absent online for the past couple weeks. Beroean’s is one of my favorite sites and this article’s comments, particularly those from Chet, Frankie & Messenger are very interesting to me. I did some research recently on the Biblical phrase “call upon the name of the Lord” in preparation for my JW study. Of course in the NWT “Lord” is rendered “Jehovah” in the Christian Greek Scriptures, except in 1 Cor 1:2 where it reads “call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” But I think many on this site would agree that in context, the other passages are also speaking about Jesus. As Meleti states in his YouTube video linked in the beginning of this article, perhaps the One who inspired the Bible is trying to tell us something.

For those interested, I would like to share an article I came across in my research. It’s a treatise on the phrase “calling on the name of the Lord” by Joel Estes. I’m not endorsing this particular author. I’d never heard of him before this. But I found his article quite fascinating (albeit a bit slow to read as it’s very scholarly and detailed). Here’s a snippet:

The usage of ἐπικαλέω τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου in the NT confirms its function as a technical expression for worship. At no point is the phrase used among pre-Christian Jewish writers to refer to any figures (angels, divine mediators, etc.) other than YHWH, the God of Israel. However, in the NT this situation is reversed. In a startling reappropriation, “calling on the name of the Lord” is never applied to God, but only to Jesus. This phenomenon stands as a singular innovation in early Christian worship.

• Reply by Sky Blue on 2019-06-17 16:28:20

  Appreciate your post here Dan. You might also enjoy Acts 9:14. It’s pretty clear and was said to Jesus after he was resurrected. Pretty convincing that the early Christians called on the name of Jesus in prayer.

Comment by İsa Başmelek Mikael midir? – VERİYALILAR on 2021-06-23 10:05:18

[…] Kaynak: beroeans.net […]

Comment by sachanordwald on 2022-11-01 02:26:44

Dear Eric,

In your article you refer to Daniel 12:1. Michael stands up for his people, as a great prince he stands up for his people. How does what Michael did here fit into the historical context if Michael is not Jesus? What Jesus did in his time is obvious to me. But what did Michael do? Is there a biblical or historical explanation for this?

Brotherly greetings Sascha

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-11-01 09:08:00

  Good question, Sascha. From the KJV we have: "And 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 "a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time" matches with Jesus words at Matthew 24:21, "For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be."
  
  That occurred in Judea during 66 to 70 CE. Who made it possible for the Christians to escape by causing the Roman army to retreat? Michael, the Arch Angel. Jesus said he was going and wouldn't return until it was time for him to establish his kingdom. However, since all authority was now in his hands, he could send forth his angels to do his bidding. Angelic oversight was in place even when Jesus walked the earth.
  
  See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I tell you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 18:10)

  • Reply by sachanordwald on 2022-11-02 01:40:10

    Thank you for your explanations. Very interesting thoughts that I will think about.

Comment by denisamanka on 2022-12-02 20:00:09

A jaký je váš názor na andělská čísla? Věříte, že jsou skutečně od andělů nebo že je to jen teď trend? Vídám často příspěvky o andělských číslech na instagramu a facebooku a nevím, co si o tom myslet!

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-12-03 15:02:39

  This may be just an issue with automated translation, but I don't understand what you mean by "angel numbers".