Are you a doubting Christian?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Facts in the bible are facts only in as far as facts in the Lord of the Rings are facts. For example it is factual that there was one ring to rule them all, but this has no bearing on the book itself being fictional.

As an atheist i do not view it as factual that he existed before he came to earth, or indeed that he existed at all as the bible des ...[text shortened]... question as to his name before he came to earth has no meaning for me. (But thanks for asking).

Facts in the bible are facts only in as far as facts in the Lord of the Rings are facts.

Nonsense! Absolute unadulterated balderdash! the Bible contains real places, dates, records of secular rulers and historical personages as well as historical events. The Lord of the rings is entirely fictional unless of course you are willing to show evidence of its reality.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Facts in the bible are facts only in as far as facts in the Lord of the Rings are facts.

Nonsense! Absolute unadulterated balderdash! the Bible contains real places, dates, records of secular rulers and historical personages as well as historical events. The Lord of the rings is entirely fictional unless of course you are willing to show evidence of its reality.

Thought we had already established sir your inability to best me in an argument and your propensity to crumple like a Barbie in a microwave?

Originally posted by divegeester
My opinion, or indeed your opinion, of what an angel is, is irrelevant. You have no scripture to back up these erroneous claims. End of.

"is irrelevant" What? Are you serious? It is totally relevant as this is what the discussion is about.
So now your backing out because you don't know the answer? Too deep for you?

Again I know what it is, as usual, I'm waisting my time as your here only to argue and not to learn ANYTHING. No changes at all I see......

Is Jesus the Archangel Michael?

Put simply, the answer is yes. The custom of being called by more than one name is common in many cultures. The same situation occurs with names in the Bible. For example, the patriarch Jacob is also named Israel. (Genesis 35:10) The apostle Peter is named in five different ways—Symeon, Simon, Peter, Cephas, and Simon Peter. (Matthew 10:2; 16:16; John 1:42; Acts 15:7, 14) How can we be sure that Michael is another name for Jesus? Consider the following Scriptural evidence.

The Bible contains five references to the mighty spirit creature Michael. Three occurrences are in the book of Daniel. At Daniel 10:13, 21, we read that a dispatched angel is rescued by Michael, who is called “one of the foremost princes” and “the prince of you people.” Next, at Daniel 12:1, we learn that in the time of the end, “Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people.”

A further mention of Michael occurs at Revelation 12:7, which describes “Michael and his angels” as fighting a vital war that results in the ousting of Satan the Devil and his wicked angels from heaven.

Notice that in each of the above-mentioned cases, Michael is portrayed as a warrior angel battling for and protecting God’s people, even confronting Jehovah’s greatest enemy, Satan.

Jude verse 9 calls Michael “the archangel.” The prefix “arch” means “principal” or “chief,” and the word “archangel” is never used in the plural form in the Bible. The only other verse in which an archangel is mentioned is at 1 Thessalonians 4:16, where Paul describes the resurrected Jesus, saying: “The Lord [Jesus] himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet.” So Jesus Christ himself is here identified as the archangel, or chief angel.

In view of the foregoing, what can we conclude? Jesus Christ is Michael the archangel. Both names—Michael (meaning “Who Is Like God?" and Jesus (meaning “Jehovah Is Salvation focus attention on his role as the leading advocate of God’s sovereignty. Philippians 2:9 states: “God exalted him [the glorified Jesus] to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name.”

It is important to note that the human birth of Jesus was not the beginning of his life. Before Jesus was born, Mary was visited by an angel who told her that she would conceive a child by means of holy spirit and that she should name the child Jesus. (Luke 1:31) During his ministry, Jesus often spoke of his prehuman existence.—John 3:13; 8:23, 58.

So Michael the archangel is Jesus in his prehuman existence. After his resurrection and return to heaven, Jesus resumed his service as Michael, the chief angel, “to the glory of God the Father.”—Philippians 2:11.

Originally posted by galveston75
You can't answer a question with a question. I'd like your comments but I asked the question what is an angel according to the bible and if Jesus is or is not an angel since this was asked of me. Do you have an answer for that as I'm trying to keep this thought going without distraction.

I replied to your reply to divegeester. As it was a reply to him, I assumed the questions were to him. I'm not quite the literalist of other people's answers as dive is, and I'm not one to continually grill people based on their beliefs. I usually ask once or twice and then derive my opinion of their integrity on their answer, or lack thereof.

So thanks for showing me that my first instinct was right, that Isaiah 43:11 is something the JWs want to sweep under the rug. So far, *none* of you have chosen to comment on it.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Thought we had already established sir your inability to best me in an argument and your propensity to crumple like a Barbie in a microwave?

just pony up the reddies me ol China cup and who knows you may do better 😵

Originally posted by galveston75
Is Jesus the Archangel Michael?

Put simply, the answer is yes. The custom of being called by more than one name is common in many cultures. The same situation occurs with names in the Bible. For example, the patriarch Jacob is also named Israel. (Genesis 35:10) The apostle Peter is named in five different ways—Symeon, Simon, Peter, Cephas, and Simon ...[text shortened]... med his service as Michael, the chief angel, “to the glory of God the Father.”—Philippians 2:11.

If that argument sits well with you then by all means believe it. But for you to claim that something is wrong with the rest of Christianity because they dont like your reasoning, says that there is something sinister and dangerous about your religion. If you cannot see that then you have a problem, not the rest of us.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I'd like an answer to this, a question that both Robbie and Roigam have evaded.

"I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour." -- Isaiah 43:11, KJV

What do you think this means? And how might this relate to John 14:6?

The logic of this argument begins with the premise that only God can save. Beside the influence of pagan thought, this idea comes from the fact that God is called “Savior” in Scripture. For example:
Isaiah 43:11
I, even I, am the Lord, and apart from me there is no savior.
Because the above verse seems to say that God is the only savior, the argument is that Jesus has to be God in order to save us, and if he is not God, then he did not save us, and we will die in our sins. But this is a fallacious argument because it fails on several counts. First, it fails to recognize the distinction between God as the Author of salvation and Christ as the Agent. God, Christ and others are all referred to as “savior,” but that clearly does not make them identical. The term “savior” is used of many people in the Bible. This is hard to see in the English versions because, when it is used of men, the translators almost always translated it as “deliverer.” For example:

Nehemiah 9:27
So you handed them over to their enemies, who oppressed them. But when they were oppressed they cried out to you. From heaven you heard them, and in your great compassion you gave them deliverers [“saviors”], who rescued them from the hand of their enemies.

This in and of itself shows that modern translators have a Trinitarian bias that was not in the original languages. The only reason to translate the same word as “Savior” when it applies to God or Christ, but as “deliverer” when it applies to men, is to make the term seem unique to God and Jesus when in fact it is not. This is a good example of how the actual meaning of Scripture can be obscured if the translators are not careful or if they are theologically biased.
BTW, I do not believe Jesus is an angel, he was a man, and did not exist before he was born except in God's foreknowledge.

Originally posted by Captain Strange
The cherubim are to have their wings spread upward.
Exodus 25:20

The angels on the Ark of the Covenant also had wings on them...

Originally posted by Suzianne
I replied to your reply to divegeester. As it was a reply to him, I assumed the questions were to him. I'm not quite the literalist of other people's answers as dive is, and I'm not one to continually grill people based on their beliefs. I usually ask once or twice and then derive my opinion of their integrity on their answer, or lack thereof.

So than ...[text shortened]... ething the JWs want to sweep under the rug. So far, *none* of you have chosen to comment on it.

Sorry Suzianne for not responding. Been a very busy day. Just bought a car, trying to sell one and getting all that I can get done for work before next Tuesday. I promise I will answer you tomorrow. Thanks....

Originally posted by galveston75
"is irrelevant" What? Are you serious? It is totally relevant as this is what the discussion is about.
So now your backing out because you don't know the answer? Too deep for you?

Again I know what it is, as usual, I'm waisting my time as your here only to argue and not to learn ANYTHING. No changes at all I see......

Opinions are irrelevant.

Do you have any cohesive scripture to support your claims?

Originally posted by galveston75
Is Jesus the Archangel Michael?

Put simply, the answer is yes. The custom of being called by more than one name is common in many cultures. The same situation occurs with names in the Bible. For example, the patriarch Jacob is also named Israel. (Genesis 35:10) The apostle Peter is named in five different ways—Symeon, Simon, Peter, Cephas, and Simon ...[text shortened]... med his service as Michael, the chief angel, “to the glory of God the Father.”—Philippians 2:11.

Is this it? I mean seriously, this is all you've got to support Jesus Christ being an angel who was crucified for you or sins and is therefore co-redemptor and the "Mighty God" (of Isaiah) with Jehovah?

Really?

Originally posted by galveston75
Again I know what it is, as usual, I'm waisting my time as your here only to argue and not to learn ANYTHING.

So soon with the pouting and Caps-lock 'shouting' Galveston75.

Are you here to learn or to teach?

Originally posted by checkbaiter
The logic of this argument begins with the premise that only God can save. Beside the influence of pagan thought, this idea comes from the fact that God is called “Savior” in Scripture. For example:
Isaiah 43:11
I, even I, am the Lord, and apart from me there is no savior.
Because the above verse seems to say that God is the only savior, the argument ...[text shortened]... s is an angel, he was a man, and did not exist before he was born except in God's foreknowledge.

"Jesus didn't exist before he was born". How do you get that from scripture? That doesn't even fit with trinitarian doctrine.

1 Peter 1 -10-11
Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow.

The spirit of Christ (which incidentally is fully interchangeable with the Holy Spirit in the NT) was active in the prophets.

Here's what I believe based on scripture:
Jesus is the author of (all) life, the firstborn of creation, everything that was created was created through him and by him, he is the alpha and the omega, the first and the last. He is the veil of flesh that was torn, the right arm of God that was laid bare, the king of kings, the everlasting father, the wonderful councillor (holy spirit), the Mighty God, the prince of peace. He is the redeemer, the saviour, the invisible God made visible, in Jesus dwelt the fullness (not a part or a third) of the godhead.

And you lot call me anti-Christ. Unbelievable!

Originally posted by galveston75
Is Jesus the Archangel Michael?

Put simply, the answer is yes. The custom of being called by more than one name is common in many cultures. The same situation occurs with names in the Bible. For example, the patriarch Jacob is also named Israel. (Genesis 35:10) The apostle Peter is named in five different ways—Symeon, Simon, Peter, Cephas, and Simon ...[text shortened]... med his service as Michael, the chief angel, “to the glory of God the Father.”—Philippians 2:11.

And you guys insist that you're not a cult.

That is so far out of the mainstream that one could be forgiven in calling you guys part of the "fringe", or, in other words, a cult.