The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Religion & Philosophy

The God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · >>
Wheezy_Knight On February 24, 2012

Deleted



Ankh-Morpork, United Kingdom
#16New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 12:09:58
@bob_the_fisherman Said


Do the JWs really believe that angels are equal to God?


Do you?

" And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of US , knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." (Genesis 3:22)[3] "

All mankind ever was, was a Gardener. He made all the host better than us, we are not favoured in anyway whatsoever. Your teachings, your bible.
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#17New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 12:14:41
@Wheezy_Knight Said

Do you?

" And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of US , knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." (Genesis 3:22)[3] "

All mankind ever was, was a Gardener. He made all the host better than us, we are not favoured in anyway whatsoever. Your teachings, your bible.




where does that text even mention angels, let alone suggest that they are equal to God?
Wheezy_Knight On February 24, 2012

Deleted



Ankh-Morpork, United Kingdom
#18New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 12:52:24
@bob_the_fisherman Said



where does that text even mention angels, let alone suggest that they are equal to God?


Then who are the "Us". It's taught that the "US are the heavenly host"?
Or are people being taught something that isn't true again.
That the "us" represents one who has knowledge of good and evil.

What does Gnostic actually mean Bob?

How can being learned be evil unless you need people ignorant?

Or are we talking allegory again?

Is it literal or allegory?
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#19New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 16:57:38
@bob_the_fisherman Said



where does that text even mention angels, let alone suggest that they are equal to God?



There are approximately 140 mentions of Angels between Genesis and Revvelation, however they are not equal to God any more than Christ was, though they are made in the same spirit form.

The impression the bible gives is that the basic hierarchy was:-

God
Christ (Archangel or Chief Angel)
Seraph (a type of angel)
Cherub (a type of angel)
There are other spirit creatures which are called smply angels and these are often the messengers, which is what the word translated as Angel actually means.

Some humans are also referred to as angels, because of their being messengers.
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#20New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 22:02:46
@Wheezy_Knight Said

Then who are the "Us". It's taught that the "US are the heavenly host"?

Or are people being taught something that isn't true again.


Well, from a Christian perspective, the "us" could be seen as God speaking to himself as much as anything else. However, even if we agree that the "us" is God speaking to angels, again I say, "so what?" Nowhere does this suggest that angels are equal to God, which is how this tangent started. I was questioning the belief held by JWs.

@Wheezy_Knight Said

That the "us" represents one who has knowledge of good and evil.


Well, the text actually makes it pretty clear, I would have thought, that the "us" in "man will be like us" is probably tied to the next part of that sentence which says, "having knowledge of good and evil." It does seem self explanatory that the "us" has knowledge of good and evil.

@Wheezy_Knight Said
What does Gnostic actually mean Bob?


Literally, 'knowledge'. And...?

@Wheezy_Knight Said
How can being learned be evil unless you need people ignorant?


As to the text saying or implying that man having knowledge is considered bad by God, this is blatantly wrong. Is it saying that man has knowledge from what he did? No. Is it saying knowledge is bad? No. It is saying man has knowledge of good and evil. Are they the same thing? No. Do I need to know what it is to kill, in order to understand philosophy or science? No. Do I need to see pictures of the Nazi holocaust, Islamic be-headings, suicide bombings or honour killings to know that not all belief systems are used to do good? No.

I am a teacher, and it does not take long to work out the "innocent" kids from good homes, and kids who grow up seeing things they would be better off not seeing. The kid from the bad home might have more knowledge than the innocent kid, but, is he better off?

@Wheezy_Knight Said
Or are we talking allegory again?

Is it literal or allegory?


Does it matter? The aim of this text is not to impart scientific information, it is about the nature of people and God. You don't believe in God. That's fine. You do not have to. I don't accept naturalism. So far as I know, I am allowed to disagree with naturalism. I am sure you have reasons you consider valid for having your belief, just as I have reasons I consider valid for having mine. And, I am quite sure that we could disagree with each other and attack each others belief if we really wanted to.

But, I have to ask, is there a point to this? Doubtless, you and I can both attack each others beliefs - I can bring out all the stupidity of the ET boffins and we can both have a field day (you know, the race of humans that was described in marvelous detail. Their culture, their clothing, their rituals, their history, all discussed at great length for five years, and turned out it was based on less than a couple of non-human teeth, a weather faded rock and ET boffin incompetence of the kind that said the coelecanth was extinct for millions of years while South African fisherman were catching them. The same idiocy that wrote marvelous stories about how Neanderthals were not human, until it turned out that Neanderthals are actually are human, requiring the writing of a whole new marvelous story. The outright deception of ET boffins when they refused to discuss things like awareness and free will, because they knew their argument was ridiculous, so they patently avoided discussing it... that kind of stuff). But again, is there a point?
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#21New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 22:06:08
@MadCornishBiker Said

There are approximately 140 mentions of Angels between Genesis and Revvelation, however they are not equal to God any more than Christ was, though they are made in the same spirit form.

The impression the bible gives is that the basic hierarchy was:-

God
Christ (Archangel or Chief Angel)
Seraph (a type of angel)
Cherub (a type of angel)
There are other spirit creatures which are called smply angels and these are often the messengers, which is what the word translated as Angel actually means.

Some humans are also referred to as angels, because of their being messengers.


And, that is just one of many reasons why your belief is wrong. The text under discussion clearly says that Christ was equal to God, but did not consider equality a thing to be held onto, instead, he let go of that equality in order to become like humans. I know you guys mangle the language - probably has something to with the fact that no-one on your translation committee was qualified to translate the text, but, surely you do not really need to be a scholar to see just how wrong the JWs are here?
chaski On about 18 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#22New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 22:42:20
@MadCornishBiker Said


Christ (Archangel or Chief Angel)




Ok. You got me again. Were exactly does the bible equate Christ with being an Angel or Archangel?

Please be specific... Reference Jesus is an Angel.
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#23New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 22:53:18
@chaski Said

Ok. You got me again. Were exactly does the bible equate Christ with being an Angel or Archangel?

Please be specific... Reference Jesus is an Angel.


Well, this is the reasoning behind that association, check the scriptures for yourself. There are too many to quote separately here.

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

Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God’s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be “the archangel,” meaning “chief angel,” or “principal angel.” The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with “a commanding call.” It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14) If the designation “archangel” applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to “an archangel’s voice” would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.
There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to “the time of the end” (Da 11:40) and then stated: “And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel’s] people.” (Da 12:1) Michael’s ‘standing up’ was to be associated with “a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time.” (Da 12:1) In Daniel’s prophecy, ‘standing up’ frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah’s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har–Magedon.—Re 11:15; 16:14-16.
The book of Revelation (12:7, 10, 12) specifically mentions Michael in connection with the establishment of God’s Kingdom and links this event with trouble for the earth: “And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels battled with the dragon, and the dragon and its angels battled. And I heard a loud voice in heaven say: ‘Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down . . . On this account be glad, you heavens and you who reside in them! Woe for the earth and for the sea.’” Jesus Christ is later depicted as leading the heavenly armies in war against the nations of the earth. (Re 19:11-16) This would mean a period of distress for them, which would logically be included in the “time of distress” that is associated with Michael’s standing up. (Da 12:1) Since the Son of God is to fight the nations, it is only reasonable that he was the one who with his angels earlier battled against the superhuman dragon, Satan the Devil, and his angels.
In his prehuman existence Jesus was called “the Word.” (Joh 1:1) He also had the personal name Michael. By retaining the name Jesus after his resurrection (Ac 9:5), “the Word” shows that he is identical with the Son of God on earth. His resuming his heavenly name Michael and his title (or name) “The Word of God” (Re 19:13) ties him in with his prehuman existence. The very name Michael, asking as it does, “Who Is Like God?” points to the fact that Jehovah God is without like, or equal, and that Michael his archangel is his great Champion or Vindicator.
chaski On about 18 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#24New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 22:56:59
@MadCornishBiker Said

Well, this is the reasoning behind that association, check the scriptures for yourself. There are too many to quote separately here.

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

Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God’s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be “the archangel,” meaning “chief angel,” or “principal angel.” The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with “a commanding call.” It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14) If the designation “archangel” applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to “an archangel’s voice” would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.
There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to “the time of the end” (Da 11:40) and then stated: “And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel’s] people.” (Da 12:1) Michael’s ‘standing up’ was to be associated with “a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time.” (Da 12:1) In Daniel’s prophecy, ‘standing up’ frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah’s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har–Magedon.—Re 11:15; 16:14-16.
The book of Revelation (12:7, 10, 12) specifically mentions Michael in connection with the establishment of God’s Kingdom and links this event with trouble for the earth: “And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels battled with the dragon, and the dragon and its angels battled. And I heard a loud voice in heaven say: ‘Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down . . . On this account be glad, you heavens and you who reside in them! Woe for the earth and for the sea.’” Jesus Christ is later depicted as leading the heavenly armies in war against the nations of the earth. (Re 19:11-16) This would mean a period of distress for them, which would logically be included in the “time of distress” that is associated with Michael’s standing up. (Da 12:1) Since the Son of God is to fight the nations, it is only reasonable that he was the one who with his angels earlier battled against the superhuman dragon, Satan the Devil, and his angels.
In his prehuman existence Jesus was called “the Word.” (Joh 1:1) He also had the personal name Michael. By retaining the name Jesus after his resurrection (Ac 9:5), “the Word” shows that he is identical with the Son of God on earth. His resuming his heavenly name Michael and his title (or name) “The Word of God” (Re 19:13) ties him in with his prehuman existence. The very name Michael, asking as it does, “Who Is Like God?” points to the fact that Jehovah God is without like, or equal, and that Michael his archangel is his great Champion or Vindicator.


BS

Hiding behind words again. Once again you change the words of the bible to meet your own wants and desires.

WHERE EXACTLY DOES THE BIBLE SAY THAT JESUS IS MICHAEL?

At least come up with a quote that says "the coming messiah will be the archangel Michael" or something.
Demented On January 31, 2024




, Australia
#25New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 23:08:52
Quite frankly ,Good on him for standing up for his beliefs.

I he went to any Muslim Country as a teacher,what would happen if he started to teach the Christian way of live and had tried to get them to sing songs the honor our God,we all know he wouldn't last much longer than the day.

We have them here where they say "WE" should learn their ways and to a point I think it a good idea just like they should learn ours,BUT, every time we bend and let them have their way,the more we give in to their way of life and ours get's whittled away to the point that one day we look around ourselves and every thing that we had in our country's way of life is gone,it's only a subtle thing that goes virtually unnoticed at the time,but it does happen.

Maybe the school or State Government should get behind the kid and stand up for his and their rights also.
Wheezy_Knight On February 24, 2012

Deleted



Ankh-Morpork, United Kingdom
#26New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 23:09:26
@bob_the_fisherman Said

Literally, 'knowledge'. And...?


Never mind. Having read what has been written here, this thread is a "spiritual" matter. I have no place here. Only when the discussion infringes on the natural world will I in future take part.

Willi On August 21, 2018




northinmind,
#27New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 23:10:30
@Wheezy_Knight Said

And the Lord God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." (Genesis 3:22)[3]




eternity broken into segments?
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#28New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 23:17:23
@chaski Said

BS

Hiding behind words again. Once again you change the words of the bible to meet your own wants and desires.

WHERE EXACTLY DOES THE BIBLE SAY THAT JESUS IS MICHAEL?

At least come up with a quote that says "the coming messiah will be the archangel Michael" or something.


You know only too well it doesn't say that. It gives clues, not definitive statements to many things as you well know. I really don;t see you as being as stupid as you make yourself out to be by what you post at times.

The bible doesn't say which spirit creature came to earth to become the Christ, yet you would twist the words to make it seem as if it were God himself, despite the number of scriptures which deny that.

You either believe the bible or you don't, and if you find a contradiction such as you introduce by forcing scripture to fit a trinity teaching then you know you have understood something wrongly. Since the scriptures separating God and Christ are unequivocal then it must be any which appear to make them the same that you are misunderstanding. Simple logic.

The only ones you impress by your faulty argument, which you have to bolster with false accusations are those equally determined to believe the post Apostacy teachings such as the trinity which history proves was not introduced until the 4th century at the Council of Nicea, which was called for just that purpose.

What are you afraid of that makes you run from truth so hastily?
chaski On about 18 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#29New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 23:21:32
@MadCornishBiker Said

You know only too well it doesn't say that.



Because it is not true.

Stop trying to change it to suit your needs and desires.

The BS flag is thrown again!!!!!


Willi On August 21, 2018




northinmind,
#30New Post! Feb 19, 2012 @ 23:40:39
"Father, if it be Thy will, take this cup away from me; yet not my will but Thine be done!" World English Bible
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Jokes & Humor
Thu May 27, 2010 @ 18:52
21 4160
New posts   Random
Mon Jun 11, 2012 @ 01:10
7 2402
New posts   Music
Fri Oct 31, 2008 @ 11:56
3 679
New posts   Politics
Mon May 05, 2008 @ 23:48
16 3921
New posts   Entertainment
Thu Aug 03, 2006 @ 23:52
4 1104