In Watchtower’s “What Does The Bible Really Teach?” Jehovah’s Witnesses are taught that “the Bible indicates that Michael is another name for Jesus Christ, before and after his life on earth.”(Watchtower 2005: 218) They maintained:
While there is no statement in the Bible that categorically identifies Michael the archangel as Jesus, there is one scripture that links Jesus with the office of archangel. In his letter to the Thessalonians, the apostle Paul prophesied: “The Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first.” (1 Thessalonians 4:16) In this scripture Jesus is described as having assumed his power as God’s Messianic King. Yet, he speaks with “an archangel’s voice.”(Awake! 2002: 17)
Does the Bible really indicate that Jesus is archangel Michael? Contra to Watchtower’s theology, I contended in this series of articles that 1 Thessalonians 4:16 does not indicate that Jesus is an archangel Michael but the Lord God himself (Psalm 47:5; Micah 1:3; Zech. 9:13; Isa. 27:13;). I explored the meaning of this text, how early Church(ca. 30- 325 A.D.) understood it to mean and Angelology.
Bird iView: 1 Thessalonians 4:16 Context
Paul assured the Thessalonians not to be distressed over the dead, for the Lord himself will come down and the dead will indubitably not miss the parousia, the glorious coming of the Sovereign Lord, because He will descend “with a loud command”, “with the voice of archangel” and “with the trumpet call of God”. The dead in Christ will rise to join the Lord prior to the one living (verse 15). All in Christ will meet Him in the air to be with Him forever (verse 17).
Jacob W. Elias gave a wonderful word-tree (Elias 1995: 173):
Watchtower’s Absurd Reasoning
Jehovah’s Witnesses hub on the second phrase “with the voice of archangel” in this three virtually simultaneous phrases that herald the personal return of the Son of God, and concluded that Jesus is archangel Michael (Jude 9) since He speaks with “an archangel’s voice.”
I believe Watchtower eisgete (reading into the text, and not exegete) in reasoning that Jesus is an archangel because He descended, not speak, ἐν φωνή ἀρχάγγελος (MSS Trl: en phōnē archangelou “with the voice of an archangel”). If we eisgete 1 Thessalonian 4:16, then I believe we are to grant that Jesus is also God since He descended ἐν σάλπιγγι θεόῦ(MSS Trl: en salpingi theou “with the sound of trumpet call of God”).
Exegesis: With the Loud Command, With the Voice of Archangel, And With the Trumpet Call of God.
With the Loud Command
The first phrase is “en keleusmati”. A cry or a command that must be obeyed. George Milligan expounded that “[i]t is not stated by whom the κέλευσμα in the present instance is uttered, perhaps by an archangel, more probably by the Lord Himself as the principal subject of the whole sentence.”(Milligan 1908: 60)
Shadowing Milligan’s evaluation, Michael Martin echoes:
Neither the origin nor the nature of this particular command is clear. The command could be issued from Jesus to the dead to arise (cf. John 5:28–29), from Jesus to his entourage to proceed (cf. 2 Thess 1:7), or from the archangel as either a cry of announcement (like the trumpet, cf. Rev 1:10) or an order to the heavenly host.” (Martin 1995: 151)
Gene L. Green also resonated that the “text does not indicate who issues this loud command” but proposed God as a probable candidate of the one “who orders the dead in Christ to rise “(Green 2002: 224). Therefore we can only speculate who issued this loud command, which herald the personal descending of the Lord himself.
In the next article, I attempted to deal with phrase: “with the voice of archangel” as used in 1 Thessalonians 4:16, showing that Watchtower reasoning is not Biblical warranted and is at odd with early Christians understanding between ca. 30-325 A.D.
Question To Jehovah’s Witnesses: Jewish and early Christians taught that there are more than one archangel. What reason(s) could be offer to argue that there is only one archangel?
Next: With the Voice of Archangel
Bibliography:
Awake! 2002 August 2th: Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
Elias, J. W. (1995). 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Believers Church Bible Commentary. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press.
Green, G. L. (2002). The letters to the Thessalonians. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans Pub.; Apollos.
Martin, D. M. (1995). Vol. 33: 1, 2 Thessalonians. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.
Milligan, G. Ed. (1908) St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians. 1908 Classic Commentaries on the Greek New Testament. London: Macmillan and Co., ltd.
With All I Am 
“Question To Jehovah’s Witnesses: Jewish and early Christians taught that there are more than one archangel. What reason(s) could be offer to argue that there is only one archangel?”
>>>
Per Dan 10:13 Michael is “one of” the chief princes. To be “one of” something means you’re not the only one. Simple logic eh?
What a cop out. My wife timed me and it took me 4 minutes and 13 seconds to read it out load.
This is much shouter and its part of “Why I Believe Jesus Is God”.
1. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. – Mark 12:29 (spoken by Jesus)
2. Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God. – Exodus 34:14 (spoken by God)
3. Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. – Matthew 28:9
Now follow these points of logic according to those passages above:
1. There is only one Lord God.
2. No other ‘god’ shall be worshiped.
3. Jesus allows people to worship Him.
What can we conclude from the three statements above? To borrow from C.S. Lewis:
A) Jesus is a fake, lying and pretending to be God.
B) Jesus really thinks He is God but isn’t, so He is crazy.
C) Jesus really is God.
I believe conclusion C.
Some people believe that Jesus is a good man or a prophet, but not God. But if so, how can they reconcile the point of logic 3? If Jesus was not God, then what was this ‘good man, prophet, but not God’ doing going around actively encouraging people to think He was?
Surely a good man or a prophet would not intentionally mislead people – even into eternal damnation! Surely you do not get moral guidance from and look up to a nutter who thinks he is Napoleon.
Only conclusion C can be reconciled with any idea of Jesus as a good, sane person.
——————
Now let’s take it further than the title, “Why I Believe Jesus Is God”.
Among those who believe in Jesus, there are generally three types:
I) Believe that Jesus = God as one person with no distinction at all (Oneness doctrine)
II) Believe that Jesus = not God at all (Unitarianism, Nontrinitarianism, Islam)
III) Believe that Jesus = God as one being, but also as different persons with distinctions (part of the Trinity)
Why do I agree with type III? Consider the dilemmas posed by these Bible passages respective to the types of belief:
I) “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mark 13:32) and “Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you” (John 17:1). If Jesus is the exact same person as the Father with no distinction, then why do they know different things, and why does Jesus speak to the Father as if speaking to a separate person? (Compare with the strangeness of: I said to me, “Oh me, please give respect to me so that I can give respect to me.”)
II) See the first three passages cited above along with the three points of logic. If Jesus is not in any way God, then why does He let people worship Him as God?
III) Both the dilemmas above are resolved.
And that is why Christians like me believe that Jesus is God in the Trinitarian sense.
If you have a spare 1 minute and 34 seconds to read this post then tell me why, exactly, this post is in error and why you believe Jesus is not God. I’ll read it, even if it’s 8 minutes and 44 seconds.
Peace
Paul, still fighting against truth I see. I didn’t get a rebuttal in the other post about the Lords prayer, gave up on that?? I will explain Hosea – Matthew, It’s VERY easy. Then I’ll explain Matthew 23, not as easy but doable. I know you wont read large blocks of text so I’ll keep it as short as possible but you know me, sometimes it takes many words to prove a truth.
The prophet Hosea wrote in chapter 11:1,2:
1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. 2 As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images.
In verse one the prophet says that Israel is God’s son, and that God called Israel out of Egypt. This is clearly a history, and not a prophecy. There is no doubt about this.
Matthew quotes this. When Jesus returned from His flight into Egypt, because Herod was dead, Matthew associates that with the history as rendered in Hosea 11:1. Matthew writes in chapter 2:15 (according to the KJV):
15 And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.
It was stated by you that Matthew quotes the words as if they were a prophecy, being fulfilled in Jesus. But this statement is entirely wrong. There is nothing in the words of Matthew on the basis whereof one can decide that he sees it as a prophecy. He simply is quoting the history of the Jew’s exit out of Egypt, and says that it is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. But that doesn’t make it a prophecy. From nothing in the text of Matthew 2:15 appears that it is seen as a prophecy.
One may object and say: Surely does Matthew see Hosea 11:1 as a prophecy, because he writes “that it might be fulfilled”. The very word “fulfilled” is used of prophecies. So Matthew sees it as a prophecy. To this the answer is easy: The original language, the Greek, uses a word that has, besides “fulfilled” also other meanings; meanings that have nothing to do with prophecies. So, this objection is false. There is nothing in Matthew’s words that make a prophecy of Hosea 11:1.
The Greek uses the word “plero-o”. This word has to do with “becoming full”, and the like meanings. “Fulfilled” is one of its meanings, but there are many others.
The Greek word “plero-o” has two chief meanings. The first one is:
– To make full, to fill up, i.e. to fill to the full
The second one is:
– To render full, i.e. to complete
The word is used by Matthew in the second sense. Different shades in meaning are:
– To fill to the top: so that nothing shall be wanting to full measure, fill to the brim
– To consummate: a number
– To make complete in every particular, to render perfect
– To carry through to the end, to accomplish, carry out, (some undertaking)
– To carry into effect, bring to realization, realize
– Of matters of duty: to perform, execute
– Of sayings, promises, prophecies, to bring to pass, ratify, accomplish
– To fulfill, i.e. to cause God’s will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God’s promises (given through the prophets)
– To receive fulfillment
In this list of meanings you can find also “to fulfill”, namely of prophecies. But it takes up only a part of all the meanings. Another meaning is “to render perfect”, or “to carry through to the end”. It is in this sense that Matthew uses the word.
The verse then should be this:
And He was there until the death of Herod, in order that be perfected the thing spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called the son of Me.
Before you say that this all is invented, let me give the Greek text in transcription with the translation thereunder.
kai en ekei heos tes teleutes herodou
And He was there until the death of Herod
Hina plerote to reten
in order that be perfected the thing spoken
hupo tou kuriou dia tou profetou,
by the Lord through the prophet
legontos, eks aiguptou ekalesa ton huion mou.
saying, Out of Egypt have I called the son of Me.
What Matthew then is saying is this: God first called His son out of Egypt. That was Israel. This we find in Hosea 11:1. But in the second verse of that same chapter, the prophet says, “[As] they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images.” They were called out of Egypt, but as they called them, so they went from them. They served the Baalim and the graven images instead of the true God. In short: imperfection. Then Matthew continues with saying that in Jesus this history is perfected. The Israelites were called out of Egypt, but were imperfect in serving Baalim. But Jesus was called out of Egypt, and was perfect in His obedience towards God. The Israelites were the sons of God. But Jesus perfected this being the Son of God. For Jesus was the Son of God in a more perfect sense, namely directly born from the Spirit.
In short: What was done imperfect in the Israelites, was perfected in Jesus.
*************************************************
Concerning Matthew 23
Matthew found another fulfilment of prophecy in this choice of residence. The apostle obviously takes it as a fulfilment of prophecy that Jesus moved to Nazareth. The only problem for us is that Matthew does not explain how he came to that conclusion.
No such words are found in the Old Testament, and there is no clear explanation as to where it comes from. It is not easy to find the words “he will be called a Nazarene” in any of the prophetical books, or for that matter, anywhere in the Old Testament.
Perhaps the best explanation is found in the suggestion of a “shoot,” or “branch” (Isa. 11:1). Jesus was not a Nazirite. The expression “Jesus the Nazarene” carried with it overtones of contempt. Jesus was despised and rejected.
A. T. Robertson says, “It may be that this term of contempt (John 1:46; 7:52) is what is meant, and that several prophecies are to be combined like Psa. 22:6, 8; 69:11, 19; Isa. 53:2, 3, 4. The name Nazareth means a shoot or branch, but it is by no means certain that Matthew has this in mind. It is best to confess that we do not know.”
The word “prophets” is plural and can be understood to refer to the prophets in general or even to their writings.
Matthew introduces the statement as having been “spoken by the prophets” may be an indication that he was pointing out a truth in general terms that is true from what the prophets had taught.
Matthew seems to have in mind a number of the prophets when he speaks of the Nazarene. It was in Nazareth that the Messiah lived until it was time for Him to be publicly manifested to the people of Israel. The Messiah, who was born in the city of David, Bethlehem, was brought up in Nazareth, a small town never mentioned in the Old Testament. It was a place associated with Gentiles, non-Jewish pagans. Out of the land of the Gentiles, would come a Jewish Messiah who would be the Savior of the world (Isa. 9:1-9).
Yes, Matthew could be referring to a sprout or branch, like a tree that has been cut down and from the root springs forth a green sprout growing into a great tree. “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” was a question of derision from a would be disciple of Jesus. The Messiah would come from a place despised, counted as nothing, just a tiny branch, a sprout. However the truth is found in Jeremiah 33:15, “In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth.” In the LORD God’s eyes the branch, the sprout, the thing held in contempt shall count! The thing despised shall have dominion! The Sprout became the Branch, clothed with the Spirit and majesty of God.
Here are inescapable prophecies from some of the Old Testament prophets that refer to the extreme humility and exaltation of the Messiah. Isaiah said, “He was despised and forsaken of men, A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; And like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him” (Isaiah 53:3). . . . “Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, And a branch from his roots will bear fruit” (Isaiah 11:1). . . . “But I am a worm and not a man, A reproach of men and despised by the people. All who see me sneer at me; They separate with the lip, they wag the head, saying, ‘Commit yourself to the Lord; let Him deliver him; Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him’” (Psalm 22:6-8). . . . “They open wide their mouth at me, As a ravening and a roaring lion” (Psalm 22:13). The low estate and rejection by men is clear from many passages (Psa. 22:6-8, 13; 69:8, 20, 21; Isa. 11:1; 49:7; 53:2, 3, 8; Dan. 9:26; John 1:45, 46; 7:42; matt. 12:24; 27:21-23, 63; Lk. 23:11; Jn. 1:11; 5:18; 6:66; 9:22, 24; Acts 24:5). The fulfilment of the prophecy comes from many of the prophets in general, not just one.
That which was held in contempt, derision and scorn was truly God’s anointed one, the “branch” (Isaiah 11:1; 4:2; Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15; Zechariah 3:8; 6:12-13).
“Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, And a branch from his roots will bear fruit” (Isaiah 11:1).
“In that day the Branch of the Lord will be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth will be the pride and the adornment of the survivors of Israel” (Isaiah 4:2).
“‘Behold, the days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘When I will raise up for David a righteous Branch; And He will reign as king and act wisely And do justice and righteousness in the land’” (Jeremiah 23:5).
“In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth” (Jeremiah 33:15).
“Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you—indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch” (Zechariah 3:8).
“Then say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the Lord. Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the Lord, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices” ’” (Zechariah 6:12-13).
These verses seem to be the most reasonable and consistent explanation of Matthew calling Jesus a Nazarene.
The “Branch” is a “growth,” or literally “sprout” and it is used in the ancient Near East to describe the rightful heir to the throne. Isaiah uses a different word, but with the same idea in mind. This heir will be an ideal king. He will act wisely and do what is just and right. During His reign “Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely; and this is His name by which He will be called, the LORD our righteousness.”
No matter how gloomy and desperate the present situation was in Judah, God promised to raise up to David a righteous branch. This one branch of David will sit on the throne forever and He will reign in righteousness. The second David, the Messiah’s dominion will last forever. Only the one Good Shepherd of God stands in contrast to evil shepherds in Israel. What a contrast He is to Herod!
The righteous “Shoot” appeared to be dead, but it was not. This dynasty of David’s tree would burst forth like a shoot. From the most humble and despised origins sprang for the Anointed of the LORD God!
The resurrected Jesus responded to Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus when he asked, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, ‘I am Jesus the Nazarene, whom you are persecuting’” (Acts 22:8).
Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
http://WalkTheWay.org
Way…too long. I dont have time to wade through all this. Try to keep your answers shorter and to the point…
Here is another bogus prophecy from Matthew:
23There he made his home in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, ‘He will be called a Nazorean.’
There is no such prophecy in the Bible – he just made it up!
JohnOneOne, you really defend and support the NWT version?
Which is the more reliable source? The original language? Or a coptic (or any) translation of that source? Are we to give authority to the Coptic translation that the Greek text doesn’t offer? The fact remains that the Coptic translation added an indefinite article that the Greek text didn’t require and is thus questionable at best. Not to mention we know that the Church was being lured away from sound doctrine while the apostles still lived. And the debate over the divinity of Jesus is just as old. So, we should be very careful what manuscripts and translations we give credit to.
But really, John 20:28 makes it clear that Jesus is THE God. You can even see the definite article in the Greek to English Kingdom Interlinear published by Jehovah’s Witnesses. This is what came up when I did a search: http://forananswer.org/Top_JW/Scholars%20and%20NWT.htm#Horner
This reference is to an English translation of John 1:1c in the Coptic dialect known as Sahidic. One feature of Sahidic that makes it interesting in terms of understanding the meaning of the underlying Greek is that it has both an indefinite and definite article. It is thus closer to English than Greek in this regard.
The quotation from Mr. Wells is from a section of his paper called “Note on Christology in the Coptic Versions of John.” Though he does not say directly, he implies that the use of the indefinite article in the Sahidic translation indicates that the Coptic translator understood the anarthrous theos in his Greek original of John 1:1c to be indefinite (that is, “a god”). If an early translator (third Century or earlier) understood John to have written “and the Word was a god,” this would appear to be evidence in favor of the NWT’s rendering. But, as we shall see, appearances can be deceiving. The full citation of Horner’s Coptic New Testament is as follows: The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect otherwise called Sahidic and Thebaic, 4 Volumes (Oxford, 1911). Horner’s English translation of John 1:1c is as follows: “…and [a] God was the Word.” Horner’s critical apparatus defines the use of square brackets as follows: “Square brackets imply words used by the Coptic and not required by the English” (p. 376). How can Horner say that the indefinite article, while present in the Sahidic original, is not required in English? The answer lies in the usage of the Sahidic indefinite article itself. We may first note that, unlike English, the indefinite article is used in Sahidic with abstract nouns and nouns of substance (Walters, CC, An Elementary Coptic Grammar of the Sahidic Dialect, p. 12).
An example of this usage may be found in John 1:16, which Horner translates: Because out of fulness we all of us took [a] life and [a] grace in place of [a] grace. More importantly, the indefinite article does not always denote class membership. It can also be used to attribute qualities or characteristics (what in Greek grammars is called a “qualitative usage” [e.g., Wallace, p. 244]): Indefinite Article one specimen of the lexical class of … ; one specimen having the quality of the lexical class of … (Layton, Bentley, A Coptic Grammar With Chrestomathy and Glossary – Sahidic Dialect, 2nd edition, p. 43, “…” in original).
Dr. Layton explains further: The indef. article is part of the Coptic syntactic pattern. This pattern predicates either a quality (we’d omit the English article in English: “is divine”) or an entity (“is a god”); the reader decides which reading to give it. The Coptic pattern does NOT predicate equivalence with the proper name “God”; in Coptic, God is always without exception supplied with the def. article. Occurrence of an anarthrous noun in this pattern would be odd. Examples of qualitative usage may be found in John 1:33 (which Horner renders “this is he who will baptize in [a] holy spirit and a flame”) and John 3:6: That which was begotten out of the flesh is [a] flesh, and that which was begotten out of the spirit is [a] spirit (Horner’s translation). So, the use of the indefinite article in the Sahidic does not necessarily mean that the Coptic translator understood John to have written “a god.” He was not equating the Word with the proper name God, but he could have understood John to be using theos in a qualitative sense, as many Greek scholars have argued.
Dr. Layton says it is up to the reader to decide, but is there any indication in the immediate context to help us? I believe there is significant evidence in favor of a qualitative reading. In the Sahidic version of John 1:18b, the anarthrous theos in the Greek is translated with the definite article. Horner’s translation reads as follows: “God, the only Son.” It would seem unlikely in the extreme that a translator would understand John to have designated the Word “a god” in John 1:1 and “the God” in John 1:18. Instead, his use of the definite article in verse 18 would make more sense if he understood John to be ascribing the qualities of Deity to the Word in John 1:1.
Jesus Christ fulfilled the Messianic Prophecy foretold by the Old Testament authors. Study the prophecies yourself and consider the probability of just one person fulfilling even a few of these specific prophecies! Luke 24:44 says, “Then he said, ‘When I was with you before, I told you that everything written about me by Moses and the prophets and in the Psalms must all come true.'”
Consider these Old Testament prophecies and the New Testament fulfillment by Christ:
Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2, Matthew 2:1; Luke 2:4-7)
Born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:21-23) as a descendant of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3; 22:18; Matthew 1:1; Galatians 3:16), of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10; Luke 3:23, 33; Hebrews 7:14), and of the house of David (2 Samuel 7:12-16; Matthew 1:1)
Herod killing the infants (Jeremiah 31:15; Matthew 2:16-18)
Taken to Egypt (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:14-15)
Heralded by the messenger of the Lord (John the Baptist) (Isaiah 40:3-5; Malachi 3:1; Matthew 3:1-3)
Anointed by the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:2; Matthew 3:16-17)
Preached good news (Isaiah 61:1; Luke 4:14-21)
Performed miracles (Isaiah 35:5-6; Matthew 9:35)
Cleansed the Temple (Malachi 3:1; Matthew 21:12-13)
Ministered in Galilee (Isaiah 9:1; Matthew 4:12-16)
Entered Jerusalem as a king on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:4-9)
First presented Himself as King 173,880 days from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25; Matthew 21:4-11)
Rejected by Jews (Psalm 118:22; 1 Peter 2:7)
Died a humiliating death (Psalm 22; Isaiah 53) involving: rejection (Isaiah 53:3; John 1:10-11; 7:5,48), betrayal by a friend (Psalm 41:9; Luke 22:3-4; John 13:18), sold for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12; Matthew 26:14-15), silence before His accusers (Isaiah 53:7; Matthew 27:12-14), being mocked (Psalm 22: 7-8; Matthew 27:31), beaten (Isaiah 52:14; Matthew 27:26), spit upon (Isaiah 50:6; Matthew 27:30), piercing His hands and feet (Psalm 22:16; Matthew 27:31), being crucified with thieves (Isaiah 53:12; Matthew 27:38), praying for His persecutors (Isaiah 53:12; Luke 23:34), piercing His side (Zechariah 12:10; John 19:34), given gall and vinegar to drink (Psalm 69:21, Matthew 27:34, Luke 23:36), no broken bones (Psalm 34:20; John 19:32-36), buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:9; Matthew 27:57-60), casting lots for His garments (Psalm 22:18; John 19:23-24).
Rose from the dead! (Psalm 16:10; Mark 16:6; Acts 2:31)
Ascended into Heaven (Psalm 68:18; Acts 1:9)
Sat down at the right hand of God (Psalm 110:1; Hebrews 1:3)
http:WalkTheWay.org
Peace
‘Consider these Old Testament prophecies and the New Testament fulfillment by Christ:’
Most of these so-called prophecies are bogus. Read the OT passages in their original context to see what I mean. Here is just one example of made-up prophecy:
You claimed: ‘Taken to Egypt (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:14-15)’
So does Hosea 11 applies to Jesus?
Here is the original context. See if you think this is about Jesus or not:
Hosea 11
1When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.
2 The more I called them,
the more they went from me;
they kept sacrificing to the Baals,
and offering incense to idols.
Did Jesus sacrifice to idols?
One of your responders give a brief overview about Jehovah’s Witnesses Bible and its rendition of John 1:1c.
It may interest you and your readers to know that, in support and explanation of their wording of this verse (especially within the third clause with “a god”), there is soon to be published a 20+ year study (as of 7/2012), a thoroughly researched reference work – an historical analysis & exhaustive annotated bibliography – it will be entitled, “What About John 1:1?”
To learn more of its design and expected release date, you are invited to visit:
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
When finally published, apart from discussing many of the other topics and scriptures often related to the man-made Trinity doctrine, you will also discover that we have collected information on 430+ scholarly reference works (mostly Trinitarian) which, throughout the centuries, had opted to say something other than, “and the Word was God,” and that, included among them are over 120 which had chosen to use “a god” within the third clause of their renderings.
As you might expect, we are very excited at the opportunity to share our findings with others.
Agape, JohnOneOne.
The voice is the archangel’s and the trumpet is God’s. Either the voice makes him an angel or the trumpet makes him God. But he cannot be both. Or perhaps he is neither. In fact, having God’s trumpet does not make him God anymore than Solomon using God’s throne made Solomon God himself. However, if Jesus were the archangel at some point in his existence, according to the Bible, he was no longer an angel. Christ’s position in heaven AFTER his resurrection became something more than his position PRIOR to his coming to earth. According to Hebrews 1, Jesus ‘became better than the angels’ to the extent that he inherited a name, or a valuable reputation, more excellent than theirs. In fact, according to Hebrews 2:9, Jesus was made a little lower than angels when he became human. If he was lower than angels at his descent, yet better than angels as his resurrection, what was he before he came to earth? What only position is there left for him to fill? If he became better than the angels at his resurrection, yet was lower than angels as a human, what position is left that he was prior to coming to earth?
Arch means principle or first. Perhaps early commentators have referred to more than one archangel but the Bible itself only names one. In fact, Jude 9 describes Michael as THE (Greek ho) archangel, not Michael AN archangel. Prior to this he is mentioned 3 times in the book of Daniel (Daniel 10:14, 21;12:1), afterward, only once in the book of Revelation. (Revelation 12:7) In all instances, he takes a leading role in championing God’s sovereignty, a role that rhymes perfectly with Messiah. Since arch means first, archangel is a phrase that etymologically means first angel. However, at 1Thessalonians, the voice is described as AN archangel’s, thus not definitizing Jesus as THE archangel. This actually harmonizes with story of the Bible. He and the other kings who will rule in heaven are not angels, but a new creation. (Galatians 6:15; compare 1John 3:2 and 1Corinthians 15:50-57) Christ was the first angel BEFORE coming to heaven, but has become the first immortal after his resurrection. For this reason, he has AN archangel’s voice, reminiscent of his position prior BEFORE his coming to earth. He was not resurrected as the first angel so he was no longer THE archangel, but since the position of the archangel is one that leads all the angels, not merely some, he is said to have the angels under his guidance. He thus descends with an archangels voice because he dictates to the angels who to gather to himself. Interestingly, in Jesus sermons regarding the time of the end, the Son of Man sends forth his angels with a great trumpet. The action of sending forth his angels is the action of an archangel, the principle angel, the first angel. Thus, Paul sums up his act with the phrase “with an archangel’s voice” and coincides it with “God’s trumpet.”
Only trinitarians find equating Jesus with Michael a huge problem, because it would obsolete the belief that Jesus was God before coming to earth and thus would not necessitate him having to be God when he returned to heaven. It would obliterate the belief of the Trinity. So as a human, his words cannot be considered “since he was speakins as a man” and prior to coming to earth he cannot be the archangel because he would not have been God.
Interesting post Prayson!
My understanding of the verse….
1. the Master Himself shall come down from Heaven
2. and with a commanding shout, like that of the highest messengers voice
(archaggelos – Arch means highest and aggelos means messenger)
3. and with the trumpet of the Lamb
4. the dead in Messiah will rise first
(what the verse has to do with archangel Michael is a mystery to me)
What’s an organization to do when its teachings and practices are contradicted by the Bible? Why, you publish your very own version of the Bible. That is precisely what the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society did. In 1961, it published The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (NWT).
David Reed, an ex-Witness, says in his book, Jehovah’s Witnesses Answered Verse by Verse that basically the New World Translation came into being for the sole purpose of supporting Watchtower doctrines showing their own bias (pp.17-18). Reed says, “So, during the 1950’s, Watchtower leaders went beyond interpretation by producing their own version of the Bible, with hundreds of verses changed to fit Watchtower doctrine. And, their New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures continues to be rewritten every few years, with additional changes made to bring God’s Word into closer agreement with what the organization teaches.”
The New World Translation systematically sets out to eliminate evidence for the deity of Christ. Instead of falling at Jesus’ feet to worship Him, people did “obeisouce” to Him. John 1:1 no longer says “the Word was God” but “the Word was a God.” Jesus did not say, “Before Abraham was, I am” but rather to avoid association with the “I AM” of Exodus 3:14, Jesus’ statement becomes, “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”
The most widespread change in the Watchtower Bible is the insertion of the name JEHOVAH 237 times in the New Testament. Of course, it is appropriate for a translator to choose to use the divine name JEHOVAH or YAHWEH in the Old Testament where the Tetragrammator YHWH actually appears in the Hebrew text. However, the Watchtower has gone beyond this by inserting the name JEHOVAH in the New Testament, where it does not appear in Greek manuscripts. One need only look at the word-by-word English that appears under the Greek text in the Society’s own Kingdom Interlinear Translation to see that the name JEHOVAH is not there in the Greek.
Why the bias concerning Christ? Because the Watchtower teaches that Jesus is a mighty god, but not the almighty God, a creature rather than the Creator.
Source: The New World Translation Is Not The Word of God, by Clete Hux, Watchman Fellowship
The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures was completed in 1961. Dr. Hoekema agrees with what many others have said concerning this version:
“Their New World Translation is by no means an objective rendering of the sacred text into modern English, but is a biased translation in which many of the peculiar teachings of the Watchtower Society are smuggled into the text of the Bible itself” (Anthony Hoekema, The Four Major Cults, pp. 238,239). Greek scholar, Dr. Robert Countess wrote a well documented and thorough critical analysis of their New World Translation in which he concluded, “(It) must be viewed as a radically biased piece of work. At some points it is actually dishonest. At others it is neither modern nor scholarly” (The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New Testament, p. 93).
The Jehovah’s Witnesses are a cult offshoot of the Millerite movement in the late 1800’s. Founded by a known con man named Russell who used the “religion” as a scam to sell products such as “miracle wheat.” They originally taught that the world would end in 1874. When that date came and went the teaching became that Jesus had returned to earth to begin ruling in 1874 and that the world would now end in 1914! Many “proofs” were offered to back up that date. Most were completely idiotic the measurements of the pyramids and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 606 pop to mind!
However they were caught out again when 1914 came and went! So once again things had to change! Around that time a drunken adulterer actually seized control in a hostile takeover by buying out the stock of the religion and having the original “council” thrown off the Brooklyn property by the police! This self-appointed “judge” is largely responsible for the religion we know today as “Jehovah’s Witnesses” (although many of their core doctrines have changed and indeed continue to change!) It was he who banned all outside celebrations birthday, Christmas, Easter etc… He did this on the weakest of possible grounds, inaccuracies and twisting of scripture. His goal was to completely alienate the witnesses from the general population. Make them feel different, better, special, a trick used by many cults today and throughout history. It’s a practice that witnesses still continue to use today.
It’s amazing to me how people are so easily mislead.
Terrific post and solid reasoning!
The New World “Translation” they created was edited to remove all known
Proof that the Christ is God in the flesh.
They must “Witness” to even have hope for heaven.
Having denied Christ’s true identity, they must work to earn their redemption.
Very sad.
God bless,
C.C.T.
Reblogged this on The Bible Meditator and commented:
The Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that Jesus is Michael the archangel, basing that claim on the fact that the return of Jesus will be announced by the voice of the archangel! Read this article to see why that is not true.
I like the “word-tree”! If the voice of the archangel announcing the return of Jesus means that He is the archangel, then He is also the trumpet of God, since the trumpet of God will announce the return of Jesus!
Good job on this article.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are in *breach of the preach*.
Jehovah’s Witnesses proselytizing is a false Gospel. (Gal. 1:8)
Straight up doctrinal facts on Jehovah Witness.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses teach preach that Jesus had his return aka second coming October 1914,then they spin all sorts of doctrinal embellishments on that date.
They teach only 144,000 go to heaven,on and on and on with made up man made dogmas……They have infighting,crime and child abuse as bad as any church out there.
Jehovah’s Witnesses promotion of their Watchtower sect has the net effect of stumbling and turning people off to the real Gospel.
Jesus said: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte; and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves” (Matt 23:15)
–
Danny Haszard born 3rd generation Jehovah’s Witness
*Tell the truth don’t be afraid*
FMI
dannyhaszard(dot)com
Good exegesis. Thanks for your humble and steadfast heart in striving to make truth known.