Divinity of Jesus

Excuse me if I did not address this point.Do I think that the archangle and Jesus are used interchangeably in First Thess. 4:16? No.I do not understand that passage to indicate that the Lord Himself is the archangle who either shouts or sounds a trumpet."Because the Lord Himself, with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangle and with the trumpet of God, will descend ..."Why should I interpret this as using "the Lord Himself" and "the archangle" as interchangeable titles?In fact in Revelation 14 we read of the Harvest of the earth being reaped by the one as the Son of Man. This should correspond to the public rapture spoken of in First Thess 4:16. And there the angle speaks and the Son of Man reaps: I no more regard the voice of the archangle as being the voice of the Lord Himself in First Thessalonians 4:16 then I regard the voice of the angel informing the Son of Man to reap, as the voice of the Son of Man.The fact that an archangle may shout something does not at all mean to me that the resurrection and rapture spoken of are not through the Lord Jesus Himself. It simply means that these acts of Christ are accompanied by the voice and/or trumpeting of the archangle.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

because it clearly says "the lord will descend with the voice of the archangle"we know the 'lord' is Jesusand here we are told that Jesus (the lord) will descend with the voice of the archangel. that is not in contention...the verse clearly identifies two distinct characters here...the Son of Man, and the other angel... they are clearly different so you agree that christ is the one who the resurrection is through, and he's accompanied by the voice of the archangle. Im sure you also agree that Jesus is the highest authority in the heavens and there is noone above him? Im sure you also know that it is Christ who leads the heavenly kingdom in to battle againsts Gods enemies.Did you know that Daniel identifies this 'Michael' as the one who fights on behalf of Gods people in the last days. Yet we are told in Revelation that it is 'The Son of Man' (Jesus) who rides forth on the white horse in behalf of Gods people ?Dan 12:1 And during that time Mi′cha‧el will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people. ...
4And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of [the] end"Rev 7:1 And war broke out in heaven: Mi′cha‧el and his angels battled with the dragon,...10And 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,"Throughout the whole bible, there are only two names associated with having authority over angels: Michael and Jesus Christ.If you believe they are two separate characters, why are we told that the Archangel is above all others? How can the archangel micheal be over Jesus? and how can Jesus be over the archangel when this very angel is supposed to be the 'cheif' angel of the heavens?do you see why it is reasonable to beleive that Michael is Jesus. Remember that Jesus was the name given him by his earthly parents...He could very well have had another name in the heavens. And interestingly "Micheal" means 'Who is like God'Jesus is very much 'like' his father...he even said "I and the father are one" & "If you have seen me, you have seen the father also"

The verse clearly says what it says. What's not so clear is how it should be interpreted. One possible linguistic interpretation is the one you suppose. Another is the one Jaywill supposes. My question for you then is this;

quote:

---

"Because the Lord Himself, with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangle and with the trumpet of God, will descend ..."

---

..with the trumpet of God, indicates something that accompanies the Lord - but which is not an intrinsic, personal part of the Lord. If something can accompany the Lord - whilst not being an intrinsic part of the Lord - then why are you supposing the verse to 'clearly say' what you suppose it says? I mean, the voice of the archangel could be on a par with the trumpet of God, could it not?- The word 'like' implies a certain similarity but not sameness. Whereas Jesus words here move beyond similarity and into the realm of same-ness/identical-ness. I'm at a loss as to why you find this interesting given your Micheal=Jesus contention. Jesus actually holes your position below the waterline.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

is the voice not an intrinsic part of the person?i can understand the trumpet, but the 'voice' is not something you can pick up and put on the table.

The voice is indeed an intrinsic part of a person. And we are told it belongs to the archangel.But the connection can't be made between the Lord and the archangel (in the sense of the Lord being the source of the voice) anymore than a connection can be made between the Lord and the trumpet(ing) of God (in the sense that the Lord is the one blowing the trumpet)The text permits us to visualise the Lord marching forth, announced by another (the archangel), all to the sound of Gods trumpeteers. When there are two possible ways to interpret the passage, neither 'side' can claim the passage their own.

no, the verse says that the 'Lord', that is Jesus will descend with the voice of the archangel Michael is the only one said to be the archangel, which means the chief angel. If he is different to Jesus, then he must be above Jesus in rank and authority. I dont beleive the scriptures indicate that Jesus is subject to anyone except God himself. This would surely make Jesus the 'cheif' one in the heavnes, not the Arch angel.You can visualize the text that way, or you can visualize it in the way i've mentioned. Either way, you'd need to be able to explain who the archangle Micheal is and why he is in the highest postion in the heavens.

You seem to be missing the partial point. Neither you nor I quibble that the voice belongs to the archangel. The question is whether or not Jesus and the archangel can be connected together so that the two are rendered one - which is your suggestion.The connecting word with isn't sufficiently strong to establish your view however. Christ descending with (the heralding) voice of another (resounding in the background) is as acceptable a suggestion as is your suggestion that the voice is his.- Which is besides the point made above. Your position was that the text "clearly says" when in fact it doesn't.As for the above point. Perhaps you could suggest what is going on when Jesus differentiates himself from your notion that he is 'like' God as 'Michael' is like God. See a couple of posts ago.Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Peg, I have seen your points and am again limited in time to participate in the public library.However, the books of Hebrew makes is abundantly clear the Christ is not to be compared to ANY angel. Furthermore it states that the coming inhabited earth is not being subjected to angels, which would be the case if Michael the angel was the king during the millennium: To these questions and issues you incorrectly supply the name Michael, an angel. You are in error here.Hebrews makes specific points concerning Christ's being separate from angels. You are seeking to nullify this aspect of the Bible. Are you not?Concerning Revelation we are told that voices came out of the throne. So we should not be surprised that Christ's activity is accompanied by angelic voices. In chapter 14 an angel even preaches an eternal gospel to fear God the Creator.Don't be distracted from the God-man Jesus by any angels. And concerning the matter of the indwelling of God and Christ in First John and elsewhere, I am not going to let you slide by ignoring this matter. This is crucial.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Jehovah Witnesses, such as Peg, who have not been "born again" by God's Spirit as the Lord Jesus declared in John 3:3-7 constantly misunderstand the Scriptures, especially the the words of the Lord Jesus and the teachings of Paul. Paul declares this in 2 Cor 2:3 concerning the truth that Jesus is Lord and the Lord is Spirit.17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.In the Godhead, Father-Jesus-Spirit are ONE, and there are no ranks in the ONE Godhead, only positions. Jesus is now LORD in the Godhead. When the Lord Jesus has finished this final work as Paul declares in 1 Cor 15, then God will be ALL IN ALL.25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.
27 For HE HAS PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him.
28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.JW's and unbelievers will continue to reject this as God's truth, but those God is drawing to Himself will receive this truth and become ONE with Him.Blessings

Hi John
you said that God, Jesus and the Spirit are all equal and are all One.Yet you used a spripture which shows that Jesus is subjected to God.

quote:

---

28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

---

Can you clarify if Jesus is subject to God or if they are equal? Im having a hard time understanding this.

Hi jaywill,what are the angels of heaven?

Peg, I hope you do not want me to write an exhaustive treatise now on angels. I prefer not to write a long article covering all the aspects of angels in the Bible.I hope I can simply mentioned enough to underline the distiction between these creatures and the Son of God in Hebrews. I am not going to write a lot about angels. This should be sufficient that they are ministering spirits of God to serve the saved. And it should be enough to prove that the Firstborn Son Christ is emphatically not one of these angelic ministering spirits.Yes Christ ministers. Yet Christ serves the saved. Yes Christ is discribed as a messenger and even as The Angel of Jehovah or a few times in Revelation depicted as "Another Angel".But it would be going against the whole concept of Hebrews chapter one to teach that Christ was the angel Michael of the book of Daniel. "To WHICH of the angels ...?" is emphatically expecting the reply "To NONE of the angels can Christ compare!" Only TWO are mentioned by name (discounting the Daystar of Isaiah or the Anointed Cherub of Ezekiel). Gabriel and Michael are the only other angelic beings mentioned by name in the Bible. The Latin "Lucifer" refers to the Daystar of Isaiah.The main point here is that Christ is not any named or unnamed angel of Scripture. Jehvoah's Witnesses desperately need to defeat this revelation to serve their purpose of denying that Christ is God incarnate.Here is further light on the matter. In Revelation 4 we see twenty four elders around God's throne worshipping the Creator (Rev.4:10). These 24 elders are not the elders of the Christian church, otherwise John should certainly be among them since he was one of the original 12 disciples. They are also not elders of the nation of Israel.I submit that these elders represent the elders of the universe. They are the eldest created beings of God, ie. the most ancient angelic elders of God's creation. In chapter five they are seen worshipping God and the Lamb. The Lamb of course being the Redeemer Jesus Christ. Their number was not reduced from 24 to 23. In other words none of the eldest or most ancient creatures of God became Jesus or else their number would have shown being subtracted by 1. The important points here is that this is a chapter about the purpose of creation planned by Almighty God the Creator. And the oldest witnesses to God's creative act are these twenty-four elders of creation. They have authority, as seen by the crowns. They cast them down before the God-man Christ the Redeemer in chapter 5.In chapter five when the Redeemer Christ, symbolized by the Lamb freshly slain but standing, opens the seal of God's economy, these twenty-four ancient ones turn their worship to the Lamb as well.Hebrews says concerning the Firstborn Son's second coming to the earth "And let all the angels of God worship Him" (Heb. 1:6). Christ is not one of the ancient angels created by God. Christ is God incarnate as a man. Christ the Lamb is worshipped by all the angels in His second coming. And His throne is not just 1,000 years but "forever and ever". It is proved here: This Son has a kingdom. It is a kingdom which is forever and ever, not simply during the millennium. Notwistanding First Corinthians 15 He continues to have the kingdom and the "scepter of Your kingdom". The God, (O God) is eternal. The Son is therefore eternal. The kingdom is eternal. The throne of the Son, being the throne of that kingdom, is forever and ever. And the righteous scepter of that kingdom is as eternal as the kingdom itself.He is worshipped by the angels. He is not among the elders as the most ancient creatures of the universe. And He is not to be compared to ANY angel either by name or otherwise.This should be enough to convince you of the error of trying to make Michael a powerful angel Jesus Christ the Redeeming Lamb of God.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

thankyou jaywill,the reason why i asked the question was because i wanted to know how you understood 'angel'the words used in Hebrew mal'akh' and the Greek ag'ge.los literally mean "messenger" and the bible makes a distinction between human messengers and spirit messengers by calling the spirit messengers "angels"Using that definition, would it be wrong to call Jesus a 'messenger'?the angles/messengers are also called 'sons' according to Psalm 38:7"When the morning stars joyfully cried out together,
And all the sons of God began shouting in applause"so now they are both messengers & sons. Why is it unreasonable to believe that Jesus was a messenger and a son?Now of course I believe he is also the 'only begotten son' which makes him above all other spirit sons. What is your understanding of 'only begotten' How do you understand that?

No it would not be wrong to refer to Jesus as a messenger. I anticipated this point and thought I spoke to it. Perhaps I was not clear. But I did say that a few times the sign (Rev. 1:1) of Christ in the book of Revelation that of "another Angel".I follow J.N. Darby's New Translation and the Recovery Version to capitalize "Another Angel" in these places where it indicates Jesus Christ (Rev. 7:2; 8:3; 10:1; 18:1).The footnote of Revelation 7:2 in the Recovery Version is helpful, I think."This Angel, as well as the One in 8:3, 0:1, and 18:1, is Christ. In the Old Testament, Christ was called "the Angel of Jehovah"; that Angel was God Himself (Gen. 22:11-12; Exo. 3:2-6; Judg. 6:11-24; Zech. 1:11-12; 2:8-11; 3:1-7). Here in the New Testament He is again referred to as an Angel (a messenger). The expression [another Angel] indicates that Christ is not a common angel but a special Angel sent by God." That is true. And Adam, in Luke's geneology, is also refered to as the son of God (Luke 3:38), as I am sure you are aware.It would be a serious error to assume that the only begotten Son of God is a "son" of the same catagory as the angels. I think the Bible does not give room to that kind of misunderstanding.Explicitly, Hebrews chapter one proves that whatever kind of messenger the Son of God may be, He is not to be thought of as one of the typical angels."To which of the angels has God ever said, "You are My Son, this day I have begotten You"? (Heb. 1:5)Incidently, this begetting in this verse refers to Christ's resurrection from the dead. It does not refer to His conception. That is probably another discussion however. Above I indicated that the Angel of Jehovah is God Himself in these places in the Old Testament - (Gen. 22:11-12; Exo. 3:2-6; Judg. 5:11-24; Zech. 1:11-12; 2:8-11; 3:1-7). You could not say the Angel of Jehovah in these passages is of the same nature and rank as the "sons of God" in the book of Job. Neither could you say that the Angel of Jehovah in those passages is of the same nature and rank as Gabriel being a messenger in either Daniel or the Gospels.Rather this Jesus Christ is "our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13). Please notice the similarity in contruction of Titus 2:13 with First Peter 1:11)" ... the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ ..." (1 Peter 1:11)

​

" ... the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13)To us Christian disciples Jesus Christ is "our Lord and Savior" and Jesus Christ is "our great God and Savior".There are many utterances in the New Testament. At least you also have these included which prove that Jesus Christ is God incarnate for the confession of "our great God" as Jesus and "our Lord" as Jesus is combined in the confession of Thomoas - "Thomas answered and said to Him, My Lord and My God!" (John 20:28).Furthermore when the apostle John did make a mistake and worshipped an angel because of the abundance of revelation shown to him, he was rebuked and told to worship God only (Rev.19:10; 22:8,9).
No angel is to be worshipped. Yet men worshipped Jesus and we certainly should still.Jesus received worship from a healed leper (Matt. 8:2),
from a ruler whose son Jesus had healed (Matt.9:18),
from the disciples after a storm (Matt.14:33),
from a Canaanite woman (Matt. 15:25),
from the mother of James and John (Matt. 20:20),
from a Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:6),
from a healed blind man (John 9:38),
from all the disciples (Matt. 28:17),
from Thomas, who said, "My Lord and my God" (John 20:28) I will have to speak to this latter. But first back to the indwelling of Christ.To have the Spirit of the Son of God is to have the Father and the Son (1 John 2:23,24)."In this we know that we abide in Him [God] and He [God] in us, that He has given to us of His Spirit ... Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in Him and he in God." (See First John 4:13-15)John here does not say that we think or hope. He says that we "know" that God abides in us because of the Spirit that He has given to us, His Spirit.Now His Spirit is the Spirit of His Son - " ... God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts ..." (Galatians 4:6)The Spirit that God dispenses into the believers in Christ is the Spirit of His Son. This Spirit is the life giving Spirit that the last Adam became - " ... the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)So we must receive the "life giving Spirit" who is Jesus Christ in His "pneumatic" form. This Spirit which is "His [God's] Spirit" assures us that we abide in God and God in us. And to have this Spirit is to have the Son. To have the Son is the have the Father also:"Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who confesses the Son has the Father also... If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father." (See First John 2:23,24)It is possible to speak highly of Jesus Christ as an angel like Michael or one of the sons of God in the book of Job yet all the while really denying the Son of God. This is a tragedy. To make Jesus out to be only a great teacher or only a great prophet or even only one of the angels or messengers of God could be an excuse to deny the Father and the Son in the true New Testament sense.It is also possible to recognize God in and outward and purely objective way without having the indwelling of the Father. In this case one may not feel comfortable to call Him "Daddy - Abba Father" in the most intimate way. This Jehovah remains only an outward great King that has not come to abide within the believer's heart and spirit. For Paul says that the Spirit of His Son causes us to cry intimately that this Jehovah is now our Daddy and Abba, such intimate terms of "organic" relationship:"And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father!" (Gal. 4:6)Witness Lee & Watchman Nee teach regeneration Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Equality and position within the Godhead are two different things. Before the eternal Word of God became flesh in the Person of Jesus (John 1:14), the position of Lord within the ONE Godhead resided with God the Father (see Isa 48:12-16). God the Father gave this position to the Son because of the redemptive work Christ accomplished on the cross (see Acts 2:32-36). Like I said, when you can repent, accept and receive Jesus as Lord into your life, then you will be "born again" by God's Spirit, and you will understand that Father-Jesus-Spirit are ONE within the Godhead. When the Lord Jesus has abolished all rule, authority and power, and has put all enemies under His feet, then the Lord Jesus will be subjected to the ONE who subjected all things to Him, that God may be all in all.The revelation of who God is and how He has manifested Himself to man is just that - God's revelation to man.Paul declares this in Col 2 concerning Jesus:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.
9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,
10 and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;We can accept God's revelation, or we can reject God's revelation, but we can't tamper with God's revelation as though it were put together with human hands and human brains.