If Jesus was Michael than why did he not rebuke Satan himself?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Deade

Called of God
Dec 17, 2017
15,841
9,508
113
74
Vinita, Oklahoma, USA
yeshuaofisrael.org
#81
“THE HOLY SPIRT IS A PERSON, for He beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God. When this witness is borne, it carries with it its own evidence. At such times we believe and are sure that we are the children of God. . .” {Ev 616.6}

“THE HOLY SPIRIT HAS A PERSONALITY, else He could not bear witness to our spirits and with our spirits that we are the children of God. HE MUST ALSO BE A DIVINE PERSON, else He could not search out the secrets which lie hidden in the mind of God. "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."--Manuscript 20, 1906. {Ev 617.1}
Do you @TheLearner believe as the SDAs then or now, Jesus as part of a trinity? Is the Holy Spirit a separate person? Can you separate that Spirit from the Father or from Christ? The Holy Spirit is what makes the Godhead united and omnipresent-omnipotent-omniscience. The Holy Spirit will make us united with the Godhead upon our resurrection. I don't call that a person. What do you think? Are you an SDA?
 

Deade

Called of God
Dec 17, 2017
15,841
9,508
113
74
Vinita, Oklahoma, USA
yeshuaofisrael.org
#82
Exactly. Furthermore any angel (including an archangel) is a creature. So how could the Creator be a creature? Absurdity is built into this false teaching.
Heb. 1:13, 14 "But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?"

Whoops! No creatures here! :oops:
 

TheLearner

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2019
1,610
360
83
#84
Do you @TheLearner believe as the SDAs then or now, Jesus as part of a trinity? Is the Holy Spirit a separate person? Can you separate that Spirit from the Father or from Christ? The Holy Spirit is what makes the Godhead united and omnipresent-omnipotent-omniscience. The Holy Spirit will make us united with the Godhead upon our resurrection. I don't call that a person. What do you think? Are you an SDA?

Note that was a quote under a subject heading to demonstrate what arian or semi arian sda believe.
 

Deade

Called of God
Dec 17, 2017
15,841
9,508
113
74
Vinita, Oklahoma, USA
yeshuaofisrael.org
#86
“As the absolute Son, He, who 'in the beginning was with God, and was God,' WAS BEGOTTEN BEFORE TIMES ETERNAL; as the Son, who was the-God-man, He was begotten by the resurrection from the dead. So shall we be 'sons of God, being sons, of the resurrection.' Luke 20:26." (W.W. Prescott Signs of the Times, Jan 8, 1929)
Well @TheLearner, I think this hits the nail on the head. We need not speculate anything more if we believe these three truths:

1. He was with God, and was God (the Eternal).
2. He was begotten by the resurrection from the dead.
3. So shall we be sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.


Isn't God great? Praise His holy name! 5thumbsup.gif
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
#87
Hi Gary I understand where that is coming from. But, Hebrews 1, the meaning is from context. Also, what you did is a word study fallacy known as Overload fallacy. This a common mistake when using Strong's Concordance.

Here are a few reasons why it is problematic to use Strong's Concordance as a lexicon:

  • Lexical ambiguity: Consider the following sentence: "She is looking for a match." Is the subject trying to light a candle or find a romantic partner? The 'gloss' definition here is ambiguous and gives us no help disambiguating the meaning in this context. Grammatical features should also be examined, which the Strong's Concordance offers no help with.1
  • Nuances of meaning: Sometimes there is more than one meaning listed for a term (this is often the case for prepositions, but there are also verbs that change meaning depending on their voice and other grammatical features). Strong's Concordance offers no help when determining which (if any) gloss is most appropriate in context. Often knowledge of the original languages is required to determine what grammatical and contextual features are present in order to determine the correct gloss (if any). Also, authors can use the same word differently in differing contexts (such as James' and Paul's usage of the word 'faith').
The meaning of a lexeme is that intended by the author using it. The Strong's Concordance often sheds little light on what this meaning is in context. Therefore, claiming the meaning of a specific word in a given context is X on the basis of the Strong's Concordance is not a reliable claim.

Etymological fallacies
I often see folks try to determine the meaning of words in specific contexts using their root lemmata. The problem here is that etymology and the later meaning of a word are often orthogonal concepts. Here are some examples:

Etymology is not the primary tool for understanding the meaning of a word in a specific context, and it is often meaningless when making such a determination.

What if the Strong's Concordance is linked to a lexicon?
Several free online tools have linked Strong's Concordance entries to lexicon entries. Unfortunately, most of them use either Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon or Smith's Bible Dictionary for definitions, both of which were published prior to 1895. As I've cautioned about elsewhere, these resources are considered to be obsolete by scholars (and contain much inaccurate information).

https://hermeneutics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/923/strongs-is-a-concordance-not-a-lexicon

Strong’s is sometimes in error
It is my habit whenever an author claims “The Hebrew (or Greek) means …, I will look up his statement, not in Strong’s, but in a dictionary. I happen to use a couple of modern works: “The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament”, and “The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.” (I find the more common “Vine’s” neither comprehensive nor always accurate.) Usually, I make no changes: but quite a few times I have felt compelled to change what was written.
https://www.tidings.org/wp/strongs-concordance-its-use-and-abuse/?v=7516fd43adaa
Yes like the word cult came form a worship term or fat chance and slim chance sharing the same.

The word Angel like the word apostle have been destroyed by catholic men violating the warning not to add new meaning to a word or subtract form it (Deu 4::2 ) Adding new meaning to the word makes its intended purpose without effect. We must be careful on how we hear using the proper prescriptions

Below he speaks of John the Baptist a angel sent as a apostle .

Malachi 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.

Moses an angel the same way .

Exodus4: 12 Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send.

Moses that time refused to be used to become an apostle an agnel with the message from God he in effect said give it to another apostle this time.

Aggelos – either human old and new testament (Mt 11:10; Lk 7:24, 9:52; Gal 4:14; Js 2:25) or heavenly (a celestial angel )

Context.

Hebrews 1:1-2 King James Version (KJV) God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

The Son of man Jesus has spoken as messenger (angel) the high Apostle (sent one) with a message from God .His food is to do the will of the father and finish the message

Even on these Christians message (angel) boards we must be careful we may need to hear a message of God or be used to offer one as two three working together under the authority of his name .The bible

Hebrews 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained "angels" unawares.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
13,506
6,160
113
#88
Heb. 1:13, 14
Whoops! No creatures here! :oops:
Are you alleging that angels are not created beings? *Ministering spirits* means spirit beings who were CREATED by God to minister to Him and to His saints.

Where do people come up with such nonsense as *No creatures here*?
 

Deade

Called of God
Dec 17, 2017
15,841
9,508
113
74
Vinita, Oklahoma, USA
yeshuaofisrael.org
#89
Are you alleging that angels are not created beings? *Ministering spirits* means spirit beings who were CREATED by God to minister to Him and to His saints.

Where do people come up with such nonsense as *No creatures here*?
I said nothing against their being created. I just said I don't believe they fall within the definition of "creature." Are they not all around us, yet unseen spirits? :unsure:
 

TheLearner

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2019
1,610
360
83
#90
Yes like the word cult came form a worship term or fat chance and slim chance sharing the same.

The word Angel like the word apostle have been destroyed by catholic men violating the warning not to add new meaning to a word or subtract form it (Deu 4::2 ) Adding new meaning to the word makes its intended purpose without effect. We must be careful on how we hear using the proper prescriptions

Below he speaks of John the Baptist a angel sent as a apostle .

Malachi 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.

Moses an angel the same way .

Exodus4: 12 Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send.

Moses that time refused to be used to become an apostle an agnel with the message from God he in effect said give it to another apostle this time.

Aggelos – either human old and new testament (Mt 11:10; Lk 7:24, 9:52; Gal 4:14; Js 2:25) or heavenly (a celestial angel )

Context.

Hebrews 1:1-2 King James Version (KJV) God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

The Son of man Jesus has spoken as messenger (angel) the high Apostle (sent one) with a message from God .His food is to do the will of the father and finish the message

Even on these Christians message (angel) boards we must be careful we may need to hear a message of God or be used to offer one as two three working together under the authority of his name .The bible

Hebrews 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained "angels" unawares.
I am curious friend, what role will angels play at our wedding with Jesus.

I had a little fun with a sister in Jesus the other day.
I said to her, one day we will have a wedding.
She puzzled look.
Me, as the bride of Christ smile.
She gave a a bear hug. And, asked if she can borrow that. Sure, have fun.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
21,302
10,057
113
55
#91
Hi bluto those are common proof texts of both JW's and SDA to claim Jesus is Michael.
I was recently in a discussion on a different Christian forum with someone who sounded very much like a SDA, but remained elusive about his church affiliation. He was trying to convince me that Jesus is Michael the archangel, yet I shared with him:

"For to which of the angels did He ever say, 'Thou art My Son, today I have begotten thee?'" (Hebrews 1:5)
"But of the Son He says: Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.. (Hebrews 1:8a).
"But to which of the angels has He ever said, 'Sit at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet?' Are they [the angels] not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?" (Hebrews 1:13-14)

He responded by saying:

In citing Hebrews 1:5, 8a, 13-14 that I am making a category error of thinking that it refers to all "angels" without exception and if I considered the context, I would see this is of created angelic hosts, and not referring to the uncreated "Angel of the LORD" (The Son). o_O

He also went on to say:

Hebrews 1:1-3 told us as much, that the Son is the Highest Messenger of the Father, and that He holds such an office as "messenger" for His Father and that He is not the only one who holds such an office. Hebrews 1:9, in its context, told us that the created hosts of Heaven (like Gabriel) are His (the Son's) "fellows" in their "office" of messengers (angels). The word "angel" only means "messenger, or ambassador or that which carries a message", and does not inherently mean created at all, ever. Context always dictates further identification.

He then further concluded:

The Son is called throughout scripture, "the Angel of the LORD" (in proper contexts) and the Son is the Highest Messenger of the Father and is in charge of the created angelic hosts and is ruler over them.

Does he sound SDA to you? :unsure:
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,958
1,523
113
#92
The use of the words Son of man and Son of God must be taken into account as to how they are used and why.

The name Michael gives us a idea as a rhetorical question. Who Is Like God? . . . ."no one". He is not a man as us as the Son of man, Jesus. But is God as the Son of God our savior

The Son of man Jesus' flesh profits for nothing zip, nada.. We do not know Christ after his birth as the temporal things seen . No power attributed to the flesh.

Romans 1:3-5 King James Version (KJV) Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;(Son of man) And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit (unseen eternal) of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: (not by birth) By whom (Son of God) we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:(Son of God)

In the last days he has spoken through the Son of man, Jesus as a messenger, angel, our high apostle sent with the messages of the father . The Son of man would never stand in the holy place of God not seen as the Son of God. The power within him is not of him Just as with us. .No such thing as holiness of the flesh .God is not a man as us .

2 Corinthians 4:7b But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.
 

TheLearner

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2019
1,610
360
83
#93
I said nothing against their being created. I just said I don't believe they fall within the definition of "creature." Are they not all around us, yet unseen spirits? :unsure:
I hope they don't have eyes because they would tear them out if they saw me naked.
I was recently in a discussion on a different Christian forum with someone who sounded very much like a SDA, but remained elusive about his church affiliation. He was trying to convince me that Jesus is Michael the archangel, yet I shared with him:

"For to which of the angels did He ever say, 'Thou art My Son, today I have begotten thee?'" (Hebrews 1:5)
"But of the Son He says: Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.. (Hebrews 1:8a).
"But to which of the angels has He ever said, 'Sit at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet?' Are they [the angels] not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?" (Hebrews 1:13-14)

He responded by saying:

In citing Hebrews 1:5, 8a, 13-14 that I am making a category error of thinking that it refers to all "angels" without exception and if I considered the context, I would see this is of created angelic hosts, and not referring to the uncreated "Angel of the LORD" (The Son).o_O

He also went on to say:

Hebrews 1:1-3 told us as much, that the Son is the Highest Messenger of the Father, and that He holds such an office as "messenger" for His Father and that He is not the only one who holds such an office. Hebrews 1:9, in its context, told us that the created hosts of Heaven (like Gabriel) are His (the Son's) "fellows" in their "office" of messengers (angels). The word "angel" only means "messenger, or ambassador or that which carries a message", and does not inherently mean created at all, ever. Context always dictates further identification.

He then further concluded:

The Son is called throughout scripture, "the Angel of the LORD" (in proper contexts) and the Son is the Highest Messenger of the Father and is in charge of the created angelic hosts and is ruler over them.

Does he sound SDA to you? :unsure:
He sounds more like a poorly educated person, more likely a JW. Studies have been done on education levels in various sects. Watchtower publications are on a third grade level. SDA literature tends to be below the average in culture. Places where Ellen White borrows from others without giving credit, the reading level is often above 12th grade. But, places where she wrote it herself averages between 6th to 8th grade reading levels. In Adventist circles the studies were done by Adventists themselves.

There is a tool built into Microsoft Word for checking reading level of a document.
https://www.techwalla.com/articles/how-do-i-check-a-reading-level-in-microsoft-word

Online there are many objective reading level tools too. One needs only to copy and paste a paragraph into one of these tools and follow the directions to determine the reading level of a document.


Quote the whole chapter and highlight each occurrence of angels. The context itself shows it is all angels.

He also does not know what he is talking about. The category error is defined as:

category mistake
(also category error)

The error of assigning to something a quality or action which can only properly be assigned to things of another category, for example treating abstract concepts as though they had a physical location.

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/category_mistake

He does not understand basic English Grammar.

Before posting a detailed basic response like above, do a post of ROFL He clearly does not want to handle the truth.