BARRISTERS: @plappvile



you see arrogance? question dey answer question! that is an evidence that they have nothing to hold on again than 'arrogance'.

even 'frosbel' has ran out of gas completely with his advantage of freethinking could not reply my last question above,while i have answerd his,this is due to the fact that he ignored bible warning....''do not lean on your own understanding''prov 3:5 frosbel says noo, i must lean on my own underatanding to my own advantage. he con enter gbege!

The person of chrsit had never been ambigous. There is nowhere the Bible assumed or called the person of Jesus an angel but a watchtower interpretation\belief instilled on their members without any right to question its authority. It is only a watchtower desperation to erase the divinity of christ, the light is gettin brighter falsehood.

Now my questions are:
Can any angel worship angel? No.
Were all angels asked to worship the Son? Yes (Heb 1:6. U cant worship someone with no divinity)

Did God at anytime make a vow or decree to ANY angel 'u r my Son, this day hav i beggotten u'? No.
Did God at anytine decreed Jesus as his Son? Yes (Psalm 2:7, Heb 1:5, psalm 110:5)

Is any angel the brightness image of God's glory and express image of God's person. Non
Is christ the brightness image of God's glory and express image of God's person? Yes (Heb 1:3, John 1:14, John 14:9, col 1: 17)

Did the father call any of the angels God or Mighty God? No
Did the father call the Son God or mighty God? Yes (isaiah 9:6, 1tim 3:16, Heb 1:9, psalm 4: 6,7)

To WHICH OF THE ANGELS did God say at anytime (angel michael inclusive, cos simple english WHICH OF THE ANGELS simply means ALL ANGELS) 'sit at my right hand till i make ur enemy thy footstool? None
Did God ask the Son to sit at his right hand? Yes (Heb 1:13, psalm 110:1)

The issue here is not Barrister, truthislight,ijawkid, etc. The issue is the watchtower organization dat brought this brainwashment and muddlin together incoherent and unrelated verses to muddle-up simple and plain bible teachin. Angel michael played his role in the scriptures, especially among the isrealites and prophets of old. Arch angel michael is still an angel just as an accountant general is still an accountant. The repeated assertion, by the wriiter of hebrew, 'TO WHICH OF THE ANGELS' is a simple collective for the words 'All the angels' (no exception). The writer was plain enof and in a simple term that all angels (arch angel michael inclusive) to worship the Son. A honest person who do not want to be deliberatelt deceived by any organization will understand this simple english. Neither do i think there is any rule of exception here.

If any1 of u guys go out today or to orrow for a publishin work, open the book of Hebrews chapter 1 for the person and ask him to read it indepednetly without usin the watchtower magaine, then ask the person if the son is an angel or not and get his\her response.

The issue of 'jesus christ the arch angel michael' fallasy can only be bought by a gullible mind who closed the Bible frm himself and open the watchtower magazine as an alternative. Cos no unadulterated truth can come out of the watchtower magazine, it will keep changing (light will continue getter brighter in falsehood)

true2god: The person of chrsit had never been ambigous. There is nowhere the Bible assumed or called the person of Jesus an angel but a watchtower interpretation\belief instilled on their members without any right to question its authority. It is only a watchtower desperation to erase the divinity of christ, the light is gettin brighter falsehood.

Now my questions are:
Can any angel worship angel? No.
Were all angels asked to worship the Son? Yes (Heb 1:6. U cant worship someone with no divinity)

Did God at anytime make a vow or decree to ANY angel 'u r my Son, this day hav i beggotten u'? No.
Did God at anytine decreed Jesus as his Son? Yes (Psalm 2:7, Heb 1:5, psalm 110:5)

Is any angel the brightness image of God's glory and express image of God's person. Non
Is christ the brightness image of God's glory and express image of God's person? Yes (Heb 1:3, John 1:14, John 14:9, col 1: 17)

Did the father call any of the angels God or Mighty God? No
Did the father call the Son God or mighty God? Yes (isaiah 9:6, 1tim 3:16, Heb 1:9, psalm 4: 6,7)

To WHICH OF THE ANGELS did God say at anytime (angel michael inclusive, cos simple english WHICH OF THE ANGELS simply means ALL ANGELS) 'sit at my right hand till i make ur enemy thy footstool? None
Did God ask the Son to sit at his right hand? Yes (Heb 1:13, psalm 110:1)

The issue here is not Barrister, truthislight,ijawkid, etc. The issue is the watchtower organization dat brought this brainwashment and muddlin together incoherent and unrelated verses to muddle-up simple and plain bible teachin. Angel michael played his role in the scriptures, especially among the isrealites and prophets of old. Arch angel michael is still an angel just as an accountant general is still an accountant. The repeated assertion, by the wriiter of hebrew, 'TO WHICH OF THE ANGELS' is a simple collective for the words 'All the angels' (no exception). The writer was plain enof and in a simple term that all angels (arch angel michael inclusive) to worship the Son. A honest person who do not want to be deliberatelt deceived by any organization will understand this simple english. Neither do i think there is any rule of exception here.

If any1 of u guys go out today or to orrow for a publishin work, open the book of Hebrews chapter 1 for the person and ask him to read it indepednetly without usin the watchtower magaine, then ask the person if the son is an angel or not and get his\her response.

The issue of 'jesus christ the arch angel michael' fallasy can only be bought by a gullible mind who closed the Bible frm himself and open the watchtower magazine as an alternative. Cos no unadulterated truth can come out of the watchtower magazine, it will keep changing (light will continue getter brighter in falsehood)

Christ remains Son of God and obeys his Father and does only what the Father tells him. All authority he has has been given him by the Father. While Christ is higher than angels, fact remains that Jesus is God's messenger (Malachi 3:1), like angels are. His having additional role as Archangel ( a commander of angels) does not take away his esteemed position as the only begotten Son of God, though subordinate to the Father - 1 Cor 15:27,28.

KJV
Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
Have u seen the difference that no where in that verse is Jesus referred to as an angel. In an effort to reduce Jesus to an angel, this organisation had to change God's word to read what they wanted. Jesus was simply called a messenger (all angels are messengers but not all messengers are angels, just like John de Baptist who was a messenger but not an angel).
God's word is very simple to read and understand but carnal man will make it look complex by juxtaposing verses that are inconsistent. At the end he will come out with his bible version to deceive the gullible when he sees that God's word does not tally with what he wants.

ijawkid: Jesus being reffered to as an ANGEL does not in anyway degrade him ...........
_________________________

if you think Jesus being called an angel degrades Him,how about Jesus being reffered to as the HIGH PRIEST if Yahweh......how about Jesus being reffered to as Yahwehs apostle......how about Jesus being reffered to as Yahwehs servant.....

Right now as we speak Jesus is a servant of YAHWEH..........

""Servant"" is a title we all bear(including) Jesus except Yahweh who is over all......

As far as the scriptures is concerned Jesus remains a messenger of Yahweh......and nothing SPOIL,,,,,,,

Jesus was called 'the son Mary in the Bible (dats not degarding, cos he became a little lower dan the angels here to suffer death for evryman as fulfilment of the scriptures), that was wen he was in the flesh. He called himself 'the son of man' (dats not degradin as well) in many occasions durin his earthly ministry. A begger called him 'the son of David' (dats not degrading too). But he asked he disciples who they taught of him and Peter replied ' u r the son of the living God'. Flesh and blood did not reveal this to Peter but the spirit of God did.

The spiritual hierachy in the salvation of man lies in the father (God almighty), the son (Jesus christ) and the holy spirit. Go ye into all the world and prach the gospel to evrybody baptizin dem in the name of the father, and of the son and of the holy spirit (matthew 28:19 )

The point here is dis, dat the son was made a little lower dan the angel (philipian 2:6-end), is a humble price he had to pay for the salvation of mankind. Thats not to say God did not ask 'all angels to worship him' in his glory in heaven. Being 'lower dan the angels' was wen he put on the form of a man to save man frm their sins. So get it right here.

So there is nowhere Jesus was referref to, or regarded, as an angel. But to avoid muddlung things up, we can take ur verse, where watchtower claimed Jesus as an angel , an analyse it one after the other.

Hold while i take up the verses u guys had qouted and do my independent analysis devoid of organizational\official interpretation\misinterpretation.

don123: KJV
Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
Have u seen the difference that no where in that verse is Jesus referred to as an angel. In an effort to reduce Jesus to an angel, this organisation had to change God's word to read what they wanted. Jesus was simply called a messenger (all angels are messengers but not all messengers are angels, just like John de Baptist who was a messenger but not an angel).
God's word is very simple to read and understand but carnal man will make it look complex by juxtaposing verses that are inconsistent. At the end he will come out with his bible version to deceive the gullible when he sees that God's word does not tally with what he wants.

Apparently the word translated "messenger" can also be rendered as "angel". While most translations use the term "messenger" in Mal 3:1, some opted for "angel":

Douay-Rheims Bible ( a translation by "English College, Douai, in the service of the Catholic Church".)
Behold I send my angel, and he shall prepare the way before my face. And presently the Lord, whom you seek, and the angel of the testament, whom you desire, shall come to his temple. Behold he cometh, saith the Lord of hosts.

Darby Bible Translation
Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord whom ye seek will suddenly come to his temple, and the Angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.

Whichever term is used, meaning is clear and is the same - "messenger".

true2god: Jesus was called 'the son Mary in the Bible (dats not degarding, cos he became a little lower dan the angels here to suffer death for evryman as fulfilment of the scriptures), that was wen he was in the flesh. He called himself 'the son of man' (dats not degradin as well) in many occasions durin his earthly ministry. A begger called him 'the son of David' (dats not degrading too). But he asked he disciples who they taught of him and Peter replied ' u r the son of the living God'. Flesh and blood did not reveal this to Peter but the spirit of God did.

The spiritual hierachy in the salvation of man lies in the father (God almighty), the son (Jesus christ) and the holy spirit. Go ye into all the world and prach the gospel to evrybody baptizin dem in the name of the father, and of the son and of the holy spirit (matthew 28:19 )

The point here is dis, dat the son was made a little lower dan the angel (philipian 2:6-end), is a humble price he had to pay for the salvation of mankind. Thats not to say God did not ask 'all angels to worship him' in his glory in heaven. Being 'lower dan the angels' was wen he put on the form of a man to save man frm their sins. So get it right here.

So there is nowhere Jesus was referref to, or regarded, as an angel. But to avoid muddlung things up, we can take ur verse, where watchtower claimed Jesus as an angel , an analyse it one after the other.

Hold while i take up the verses u guys had qouted and do my independent analysis devoid of organizational\official interpretation\misinterpretation.

You can keep running away from the truth,but you can't hide...........

One basic reason why it would be hard for you to gulp in this truth is because of the trinity dogma.......
________________________

2 major t®anslations which is not the NWT were used to hit the nail on the head,but you keep running away from the truth....na you sabi....

When you are done worshipping and bowing down to marys image maybe you can settle down a bit to study hard.........

You talk like you regard Christ better than the JW's.........if you ever did respect and honour Christ you would desecrate each and every image and mouldings you use in worship(rosary included)........

ijawkid:
You can keep running away from the truth,but you can't hide...........

One basic reason why it would be hard for you to gulp in this truth is because of the trinity dogma.......
________________________

2 major t®anslations which is not the NWT were used to hit the nail on the head,but you keep running away from the truth....na you sabi....

When you are done worshipping and bowing down to marys image maybe you can settle down a bit to study hard.........

You talk like you regard Christ better than the JW's.........if you ever did respect and honour Christ you would desecrate each and every image and mouldings you use in worship(rosary included)........

Thats the issue, i am not a catholic. I worship with the assemlies of God church. The issue most JW hav is dat anytime their falsehood is being laid bare u guys assume its a catholic. If the indidividual tells u hes not catholic u blame 'christendom' thats the issue.

I dnt worship mary or bow to saints neither do i use rosary for prayer. I worship (the father and the son) and pray to God through the son Jesus.

Hope u go through my post, u can pick the points i highlighted, one after the other, and refute them.

Is Jesus called mighty God in ur NWT or not (isaiah 9:6) ? Did the father call the son, God in Heb 1:8 (compare psalm 45:6-7) for not? Did God command ALL to worship the son (do u worship an entity dat has no divinity?)?

The issue an average JW is the person of christ and his divinity. That the reason why watchtower org wants to shift him to 'an angel' status. Ur NWT called Jesus christ mighty Jehova in isaiah 9:6, y did they suddenly try to muddle-up uncorrelated verses to make the mighty Jehovah 'arch angel Michael'? I expected u to smell rat here but u didnt.

The issue is not bein a trinitarian. Did the Bible in any place directly called mighty God? Yes. Did the bible in any place directly or indirectly called Jesus an angel? No.

If the bible in any place called Jesus an angel either directly or indirectly pls shw me and if u cant stop accusin the catholics and face the argument squarelly.

TroGunn:

Apparently the word translated "messenger" can also be rendered as "angel". While most translations use the term "messenger" in Mal 3:1, some opted for "angel":

Douay-Rheims Bible ( a translation by "English College, Douai, in the service of the Catholic Church".)
Behold I send my angel, and he shall prepare the way before my face. And presently the Lord, whom you seek, and the angel of the testament, whom you desire, shall come to his temple. Behold he cometh, saith the Lord of hosts.

Darby Bible Translation
Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord whom ye seek will suddenly come to his temple, and the Angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.

Whichever term is used, meaning is clear and is the same - "messenger".

lol, the bible calls Jesus angels and they are shading tears because of trinity.

What is their problem self?

They are taken hebrews out of context and have ended up contradicting the bible.

Lol. Wont you people leave the trinity alone?

*sigh*

truthislight:

lol, the bible calls Jesus angels and they are shading tires because of trinity.

What is their problem self?

They are taken hebrews out of context and have ended up contradicting the bible.

Lol. Wont you people leave the trinity alone?

*sigh*

It is the watchtower org dat is tryin to twist the simple book of hebrew dat is written in simple english, and no longer latin, for we english speakers in Nigeria and other part of the world to understand better. No one is contractin the bible but the JW, especially on dis particular issue.

Was Jesus christ called Mighty God in NWT of Isaiah 9:6 or not? Did the writter of Hebrew quoted the Father (God) calling the Son, God in Heb 1:8? Where in ur NWT was christ directly or indirectly called an angel, without jextaposin unrelated verses to support an unfounded argument? Where? But in ur Nwt the son was directly called, Mighty God.

Anyway i wont be surprised to see later publications of NWT edit Isaiah 9:6 to read an entire new and diffrent meaning (wen the light becomes more brighter). It had been done before so im expectin those changes soonest.

true2god: Thats the issue, i am not a catholic. I worship with the assemlies of God church. The issue most JW hav is dat anytime their falsehood is being laid bare u guys assume its a catholic. If the indidividual tells u hes not catholic u blame 'christendom' thats the issue.

I dnt worship mary or bow to saints neither do i use rosary for prayer. I worship (the father and the son) and pray to God through the son Jesus.

Hope u go through my post, u can pick the points i highlighted, one after the other, and refute them.

Is Jesus called mighty God in ur NWT or not (isaiah 9:6) ? Did the father call the son, God in Heb 1:8 (compare psalm 45:6-7) for not? Did God command ALL to worship the son (do u worship an entity dat has no divinity?)?

The issue an average JW is the person of christ and his divinity. That the reason why watchtower org wants to shift him to 'an angel' status. Ur NWT called Jesus christ mighty Jehova in isaiah 9:6, y did they suddenly try to muddle-up uncorrelated verses to make the mighty Jehovah 'arch angel Michael'? I expected u to smell rat here but u didnt.

The issue is not bein a trinitarian. Did the Bible in any place directly called mighty God? Yes. Did the bible in any place directly or indirectly called Jesus an angel? No.

If the bible in any place called Jesus an angel either directly or indirectly pls shw me and if u cant stop accusin the catholics and face the argument squarelly.

You got it wrong my bro.......the scriptures supports all what we've been saying....malachi was quoted but you refute it.....what more do you want??............Jesus is called the angel of the testament...how is that not clear to you baffles me......

JW's believe that Jesus is subordinate to his Father anyday anytime,something you guys even in the face of glaring truths choose to deny.................we don't even need this angel michael issue to prove Jesus is less than his Father.........its all over the bible that Yahweh has no rival and that Jesus is his son and servant...............
_________________________

Jesus is a spirit messenger of GOD......if you choose to deny that ,its up to you........Jesus is a servant of GOD......its so clear........
Why this bothers you has got me worried........the trinity dogma is what you are out here to protect and not the truth...........


You keep calling the watchtower as if any watchtower journal was quoted here....not even the NWT was used....the scriptures has been interpreting itself here...........
_______________________

Sorry if I mistook you for a catholic....I thought I had seen you once on this forum support the use of images and the rosary......

Abi no be you??....confess o........

true2god: It is the watchtower org dat is tryin to twist the simple book of hebrew dat is written in simple english, and no longer latin, for we english speakers in Nigeria and other part of the world to understand better. No one is contractin the bible but the JW, especially on dis particular issue.

Was Jesus christ called Mighty God in NWT of Isaiah 9:6 or not? Did the writter of Hebrew quoted the Father (God) calling the Son, God in Heb 1:8? Where in ur NWT was christ directly or indirectly called an angel, without jextaposin unrelated verses to support an unfounded argument? Where? But in ur Nwt the son was directly called, Mighty God.

Anyway i wont be surprised to see later publications of NWT edit Isaiah 9:6 to read an entire new and diffrent meaning (wen the light becomes more brighter). It had been done before so im expectin those changes soonest.

My problem with you is you keep mentioning the NWT.....has anyone here quoted from the NWT??..........

And why shouldn't scriptures be juxtaposed to get clearer meanings to bible truths??.........

Are you saying we should stop juxtaposing??..........maybe throw away the books of the prophets that fortold about the CHRIST??.....

Smh!!!!!!........

My brother the scriptures are interpreting itself and not the watchtower.......got that??.....

@trugunn

(a) 1 Thess 4:16 - "For the Lord
himself will come down from
heaven, with a loud command,
with the voice of the archangel
and with the trumpet call of
God, and the dead in Christ will
rise first".

This shows Christ will resurrect
the dead, with ArchAngel's
voice.

So his loud command/shout cannot raise the dead? the trumpet of God also means nothing? Only the arch angels voice that suit what you want will raise the dead.

Please be sincere.

true2god: It is the watchtower org dat is tryin to twist the simple book of hebrew dat is written in simple english, and no longer latin, for we english speakers in Nigeria and other part of the world to understand better. No one is contractin the bible but the JW, especially on dis particular issue.

Was Jesus christ called Mighty God in NWT of Isaiah 9:6 or not? Did the writter of Hebrew quoted the Father (God) calling the Son, God in Heb 1:8? Where in ur NWT was christ directly or indirectly called an angel, without jextaposin unrelated verses to support an unfounded argument? Where? But in ur Nwt the son was directly called, Mighty God.

Anyway i wont be surprised to see later publications of NWT edit Isaiah 9:6 to read an entire new and diffrent meaning (wen the light becomes more brighter). It had been done before so im expectin those changes soonest.

lol.

Darby Bible Translation
Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord whom ye seek will suddenly come to his temple, and the Angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.

i will continue to post this to you and you will continue to argue against it.

Its your words against the words of the bible.

JW guys and gals, Jesus is not an angel, was not prior to his coming and will never be the same person as angel Michael no matter how hard you try to twist and 'squeeze' scripture to align to this rather strange concept.

.

.

Boomark: @trugunn

(a) 1 Thess 4:16 - "For the Lord
himself will come down from
heaven, with a loud command,
with the voice of the archangel
and with the trumpet call of
God, and the dead in Christ will
rise first".

This shows Christ will resurrect
the dead, with ArchAngel's
voice.

So his loud command/shout cannot raise the dead? the trumpet of God also means nothing? Only the arch angels voice that suit what you want will raise the dead.

Please be sincere.

so christ will go borrow a voice that is greater than his own when he has been made higher than all person in heaven and on earth to resurrect the dead, Abi?


Will christ need to borrow the archangels voice or the archangels voice is his own because he is the archangel?

No. The greatest voice right now is the voice of the arch angel's and it is the voice of christ not because he borrowed it but that it is his own voice.


That is the truth.

frosbel: JW guys and gals, Jesus is not an angel, was not prior to his coming and will never be the same person as angel Michael no matter how hard you try to twist and 'squeeze' scripture to align to this rather strange concept.

has the JW NWT been quoted here? No.

So what is your point.

Irrelevant point.

true2god: It is the watchtower org dat is tryin to twist the simple book of hebrew dat is written in simple english, and no longer latin, for we english speakers in Nigeria and other part of the world to understand better. No one is contractin the bible but the JW, especially on dis particular issue.

Was Jesus christ called Mighty God in NWT of Isaiah 9:6 or not? Did the writter of Hebrew quoted the Father (God) calling the Son, God in Heb 1:8? Where in ur NWT was christ directly or indirectly called an angel, without jextaposin unrelated verses to support an unfounded argument? Where? But in ur Nwt the son was directly called, Mighty God.

Anyway i wont be surprised to see later publications of NWT edit Isaiah 9:6 to read an entire new and diffrent meaning (wen the light becomes more brighter). It had been done before so im expectin those changes soonest.

its your word Gainst this:

Darby Bible Translation
Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord whom ye seek will suddenly come to his temple, and the Angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.

So simple.

Keep fighting the bible.

BARRISTERS:

if you really know what an angel is, you dont need to ask the following again;




firstly,

Douay-Rheims Bible 1899, is one of the oldest translations, i wasnt born when this translatn was made, and i think 'they'(Douay-Rheims Bible) are in the best position to answer that! you can direct the answer to them.

moreover, what of the other translations? Darby Bible Translation, also rendered jesus 'angel'

Secondly,

you can open another tread on angels, then i will contribute,we are getting more focused and will not continue to go in circles to satisfy an already made-up mind,

you guys will not respond but continue to accuse JWS that they are the ones behing jesus being rendered angel,but [size=14pt]are Jehovahs Witnesses responsible for Darby Bible Translation,or Douay-Rheims Bible 1899? both bibles are not jws! and this further exonerates JWS [/size]

you can read my write up on angels (scroll back), the greek meanings and how they are first spirit beings before beign delegated.

we cant change an already made up mind who is unyielding in the face of bible facts presented.

you think im here to convince you guys? of what relevance or significance? but only for something im doing this, sincere and objective readers, thanks.

May be we have to wait until they explain why the called john the Baptist and Jesus angels at the same time. There are so many messengers across the bible. We will have to bring them up and call them angels too.

Until then you are not suppose to chose one that favoured you when you have failed to explain the other.

Boomark: @trugunn

(a) 1 Thess 4:16 - "For the Lord
himself will come down from
heaven, with a loud command,
with the voice of the archangel
and with the trumpet call of
God, and the dead in Christ will
rise first".

This shows Christ will resurrect
the dead, with ArchAngel's
voice.

So his loud command/shout cannot raise the dead? the trumpet of God also means nothing? Only the arch angels voice that suit what you want will raise the dead.

Please be sincere.

The verses below apparently describes the same resurrection event. In both cases, a voice, a command is mentioned - and it's Christ's voice, also said to be the Archangel's. Additionally, 1 1Thess 4:16 says the trumpet is also used.


(a) 1 Thess 4:16 - "For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God , and the dead in Christ will rise first".

AND

(b)John 5:25-28 - "Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live . For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.“Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice".

How does the trumpet (an instrument of music or for raising alarm or awareness) also being used change the fact both verses indicate that Christ's voice is also the Archangel's voice?

In all the resurrections performed by Jesus when he was on earth, he used his voice only:

1) Jesus resurrects the widow's son at Nain (Luke 7:13-15) And when the Lord saw her, he had compassion on her, and said unto her, Weep not.And he came and touched the bier: and they that bare him stood still. And he said, Young man, I say unto thee, Arise.And he that was dead sat up, and began to speak. And he delivered him to his mother.

2) Jesus raises Jairus' daughter from the dead (Matthew 9:24-25) And he took the child by the hand, and said unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Little girl, I say unto you, arise.And immediately the girl arose, and walked; for she was of the age of twelve years. And they were astonished with a great astonishment.

3) Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead (John 11:43-44) And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.

Likely the trumpet at 1 Thess 4:16 is to create awareness about this most important and far-reaching event. Trumpets in ancient times were used before key events.

In the end we all decide what we want to believe - whether it's what's in the Bible or our own "superior" ideas. If the Bible equates Christ's voice to the Archangel's, who are we to dispute it? We lose absolutely nothing ( except pride maybe) by drawing conclusions based on the Bible.

Boomark: @trugunn

(a) 1 Thess 4:16 - "For the Lord
himself will come down from
heaven, with a loud command,
with the voice of the archangel
and with the trumpet call of
God, and the dead in Christ will
rise first".

This shows Christ will resurrect
the dead, with ArchAngel's
voice.

So his loud command/shout cannot raise the dead? the trumpet of God also means nothing? Only the arch angels voice that suit what you want will raise the dead.

Please be sincere.

The entire verse has no place in their funny doctrine, only the 'voice of the arch angel' makes meaning to dem. If u ask any1 of dem to explain the significance of dat particular verse and the entire chapter they will start talkin funny. They wont tell u straight.

Is christ coming back to raise the dead and take the living up in the air? They will start rig-ma roaming twisting and squeezin out falsehood without independedent reasning but will start giving a tailored\programed response rehearsed frm the assembly halls. Tufiakwa!

Let them tell their ignorant members dat Jesus is arch angel Michael. Thank some of dem dat had brought that this issue with me in my house got dissapointed wen i pointed their falsehood to their face.

truthislight:

has the JW NWT been quoted here? No.

So what is your point.

Irrelevant point.

You are simply repeating what they told you at kingdom school.

Jesus is not angel Michael, abeg !!

Boomark:

May be we have to wait until they explain why the called john the Baptist and Jesus angels at the same time. There are so many messengers across the bible. We will have to bring them up and call them angels too.

Until then you are not suppose to chose one that favoured you when you have failed to explain the other.

There really isn't that much to explain. Both John and Jesus are called angels there, because the word "angel" means "messenger"? Most translations, just use "messenger" there. Both of them performed tasks for God and thus are God's messengers.

Jesus did not consider it demeaning to carry out his Father's wishes. Why do people think it insults Christ to obey God and act in whatever capacity God wants him to (even if that capacity is to command God's holy angels) when Christ himself said: "By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me". - John 5:30?

TroGunn:

There really isn't that much to explain. Both John and Jesus are called angels there, because the word "angel" means "messenger"? Most translations, just use "messenger" there. Both of them performed tasks for God and thus are God's messengers.

Jesus did not consider it demeaning to carry out his Father's wishes. Why do people think it insults Christ to obey God and act in whatever capacity God wants him to (even if that capacity is to command God's holy angels) when Christ himself said: "By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me". - John 5:30?

Wrong.

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Who makes his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: - Psalm 104:4

A messenger can either be an angel or a MAN.

A man is never called an angel or vice versa.

Angels are extraterrestrial beings !

true2god: The entire verse has no place in their funny doctrine, only the 'voice of the arch angel' makes meaning to dem. If u ask any1 of dem to explain the significance of dat particular verse and the entire chapter they will start talkin funny. They wont tell u straight.

Is christ coming back to raise the dead and take the living up in the air? They will start rig-ma roaming twisting and squeezin out falsehood without independedent reasning but will start giving a tailored\programed response rehearsed frm the assembly halls. Tufiakwa!

Let them tell their ignorant members dat Jesus is arch angel Michael. Thank some of dem dat had brought that this issue with me in my house got dissapointed wen i pointed their falsehood to their face.

You are such an insincere fellow....I had been asking questions you and some other persons refused answering,rather you keep shouting WATCHtower,kingdom hall,etc....what's your problem......??.

I had told you to juxtapose daniel 12:1-3 with all the scriptures been quoted here.....but it seems you choose to blind fold your eyes.................

What has been happening here is scriptures suPporting scriptures..............

I asked::::

....From daniel 12:1-3.....michaels(prince of Gods people) standing up for Yahwehs people during the time of the end would bring about great tribulations,and there after the ressurection and judgement of those who had died.......

1.....can you tell me if Jesus would replicate these same actions carried out by MICHAEL??
or maybe we'll be having 2 seperate captains carrying out this assignment......
2.....Has any other spirit son or messenger of GOD been given the power to ressurect and judge the dead in the last days apart from JESUS??......
3....Why does Jesus in the first place need to use the voice of the arch angel to ressurect the dead??.....why??.......
4....which other spirit son of GOD was given the power and authority to battle the arch enemy of Yahweh apart from Jesus??......
__________________________

Don't just come here shouting watchtower,use scriptures to counter these points....

frosbel:

Wrong.

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Who makes his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: - Psalm 104:4

A messenger can either be an angel or a MAN.

A man is never called an angel or vice versa.

Angels are extraterrestrial beings !

Jesus pre-existed oooooooooo.......

Jesus was a spirit in the heavens before he was sent to the earth......spirit messengers of GOD are rightly called angels...........

frosbel:

Wrong.

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Who makes his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: - Psalm 104:4

A messenger can either be an angel or a MAN.

A man is never called an angel or vice versa.

Angels are extraterrestrial beings !

You and I know the Bible wasn't written originally in English. What you should be checking out is the usage of the Hebrew or Greek words translated "angel" in the Bible. Apparently, the exact same word is translated "angel" or "messenger" depending on context.

The English word "angel" is derived from the Greek ἄγγελος (angelos), a translation of מלאך ([[malak]]) in the Tanakh; a similar term, ملائكة (Malāīkah), is used in the Qur'an. The Hebrew and Greek words in ancient times meant messenger, and depending on the context may refer either to a human messenger or a supernatural messenger . The human messenger could possibly be a prophet or priest, such as Malachi, "my messenger", and the Greek superscription that the Book of Malachi was written "by the hand of his messenger" ἀγγήλου.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel

Of course, based on English usage of angel, it makes sense to use "messenger" if the contexts indicates a human is referenced. Douay-Rheims and Darby's translations opted to use "angel" for John and Christ instead of "messenger" used by most - their choice but meaning stays the same, both were messengers of God and the word "angel" means messenger.

No big deal, unless your belief is that Christ is not God's messenger, even though Christ says he is.

truthislight:

so christ will go borrow a voice that is greater than his own when he has been made higher than all person in heaven and on earth to resurrect the dead, Abi?


Will christ need to borrow the archangels voice or the archangels voice is his own because he is the archangel?

No. The greatest voice right now is the voice of the arch angel's and it is the voice of christ not because he borrowed it but that it is his own voice.


That is the truth.

So ur argument has turn to voice. This is a straw man's argument dat holds no water biblically. All in a desperate attemp at propagatin ur 'new light' frm watchtower org, not frm the bible.

My quextion now to u is this, does watchtower ,or u, believe dat christ will come with 'the voice' of the arch angel and the dead in christ shall rise first, den the believers alive will meet the Lord in the air accordin to dat verse u've just quoted. I mean both of us only should exchange messages base on dis verse u listed up the 'voice of an arch angel' as ur meaning the voice of the son.

true2god: The person of chrsit had never been ambigous. There is nowhere the Bible assumed or called the person of Jesus an angel but a watchtower interpretation\belief instilled on their members without any right to question its authority. It is only a watchtower desperation to erase the divinity of christ, the light is gettin brighter falsehood.

Now my questions are:
Can any angel worship angel? No.
Were all angels asked to worship the Son? Yes (Heb 1:6. U cant worship someone with no divinity)

Did God at anytime make a vow or decree to ANY angel 'u r my Son, this day hav i beggotten u'? No.
Did God at anytine decreed Jesus as his Son? Yes (Psalm 2:7, Heb 1:5, psalm 110:5)

Is any angel the brightness image of God's glory and express image of God's person. Non
Is christ the brightness image of God's glory and express image of God's person? Yes (Heb 1:3, John 1:14, John 14:9, col 1: 17)

Did the father call any of the angels God or Mighty God? No
Did the father call the Son God or mighty God? Yes (isaiah 9:6, 1tim 3:16, Heb 1:9, psalm 4: 6,7)

To WHICH OF THE ANGELS did God say at anytime (angel michael inclusive, cos simple english WHICH OF THE ANGELS simply means ALL ANGELS) 'sit at my right hand till i make ur enemy thy footstool? None
Did God ask the Son to sit at his right hand? Yes (Heb 1:13, psalm 110:1)

The issue here is not Barrister, truthislight,ijawkid, etc. The issue is the watchtower organization dat brought this brainwashment and muddlin together incoherent and unrelated verses to muddle-up simple and plain bible teachin. Angel michael played his role in the scriptures, especially among the isrealites and prophets of old. Arch angel michael is still an angel just as an accountant general is still an accountant. The repeated assertion, by the wriiter of hebrew, 'TO WHICH OF THE ANGELS' is a simple collective for the words 'All the angels' (no exception). The writer was plain enof and in a simple term that all angels (arch angel michael inclusive) to worship the Son. A honest person who do not want to be deliberatelt deceived by any organization will understand this simple english. Neither do i think there is any rule of exception here.

If any1 of u guys go out today or to orrow for a publishin work, open the book of Hebrews chapter 1 for the person and ask him to read it indepednetly without usin the watchtower magaine, then ask the person if the son is an angel or not and get his\her response.

The issue of 'jesus christ the arch angel michael' fallasy can only be bought by a gullible mind who closed the Bible frm himself and open the watchtower magazine as an alternative. Cos no unadulterated truth can come out of the watchtower magazine, it will keep changing (light will continue getter brighter in falsehood)

With all the scriptures presented to you, you were not able to cooment on any, all you say here is....Jesus is not archangel. Ok now tell me, do you believe Jesus Pre-existed? if yes, as what? if no, then give us scriptures as prove. Thank you.

ijawkid:

You got it wrong my bro.......the scriptures supports all what we've been saying....malachi was quoted but you refute it.....what more do you want??............Jesus is called the angel of the testament...how is that not clear to you baffles me......

JW's believe that Jesus is subordinate to his Father anyday anytime,something you guys even in the face of glaring truths choose to deny.................we don't even need this angel michael issue to prove Jesus is less than his Father.........its all over the bible that Yahweh has no rival and that Jesus is his son and servant...............
_________________________

Jesus is a spirit messenger of GOD......if you choose to deny that ,its up to you........Jesus is a servant of GOD......its so clear........
Why this bothers you has got me worried........the trinity dogma is what you are out here to protect and not the truth...........


You keep calling the watchtower as if any watchtower journal was quoted here....not even the NWT was used....the scriptures has been interpreting itself here...........
_______________________

Sorry if I mistook you for a catholic....I thought I had seen you once on this forum support the use of images and the rosary......

Abi no be you??....confess o........

This is the issue i hav with some of u guys. U r here apologizin to me for callin me a cathlic and yet u r not sure if i am a catholic or not. Whether u hav met me somewhere on dis forum, even after tellin u i am not a cathlic yet u r not sure. Na wa 4 u ooo.

Thats the same way u guys apply to bible doctrines. U r not always sure of wat u r saying, as long as a doctrin comes frm watchtower thats wat u go for, no qualms, whether true or false. Whether the same doctrine will be de-validated as false tomorrow as soon as JW light gets brighter on dat issue.

Scroll back and read my analysis of malachi 3:1 u will see my stands on it. One messenger was to prepare the way for another messanger. One messanger comes with the spirit of Elijah (John the baptist) and the other messanger comes as a messiah (Jesus christ), filles with holy spirit. So non of the two is an angel. Dont believe lies and dnt propagate lies.

ijawkid:

My problem with you is you keep mentioning the NWT.....has anyone here quoted from the NWT??..........

And why shouldn't scriptures be juxtaposed to get clearer meanings to bible truths??.........

Are you saying we should stop juxtaposing??..........maybe throw away the books of the prophets that fortold about the CHRIST??.....

Smh!!!!!!........

My brother the scriptures are interpreting itself and not the watchtower.......got that??.....

Im mentioning NWT cos dat the the most 'reliable' translation available to JW. U guys believe in its authority dan other translations. True or false. Besides there are many verse whose translations are quite different frm other Bible translations. Read John 1:1 of NWT and compare it with John 1:1 of most translations. Read the account of the criminals that were crucified with christ (christ final statement to the criminal) frm other translations and compare it wit wat u hav in the NWT.dats just a tip of the ice-burg, u will get the message clearer.