Was Jesus an angel?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Wootah
Savant
Posts: 9325
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
Has thanked: 210 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Was Jesus an angel?

Post #1

Post by Wootah »

Hebrews 2:5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6 But there is a place where someone has testified:

“What is mankind that you are mindful of them,
a son of man that you care for him?
7 You made them a little[a] lower than the angels;
you crowned them with glory and honor
8 and put everything under their feet.”[c]

In putting everything under them,[d] God left nothing that is not subject to them.[e] Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them.[f] 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.


How can Jesus be an angel if he was temporarily lower than the angels?

Wouldn't it say he was temporarily the lowest of the angels?
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826

"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image :)."

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 6495
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 358 times
Been thanked: 330 times
Contact:

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #21

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 9:26 am
tam wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2023 1:58 pm Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2023 9:00 am
tam wrote: Mon Oct 09, 2023 12:22 pm Peace to you and to you all!
1213 wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2023 4:48 am
Wootah wrote: Tue Sep 19, 2023 6:04 pm
Hebrews 2:5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6 But there is a place where someone has testified:

“What is mankind that you are mindful of them,
a son of man that you care for him?
7 You made them a little[a] lower than the angels;
you crowned them with glory and honor
8 and put everything under their feet.”[c]

In putting everything under them,[d] God left nothing that is not subject to them.[e] Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them.[f] 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
How can Jesus be an angel if he was temporarily lower than the angels?

Wouldn't it say he was temporarily the lowest of the angels?
I don't think Bible says Jesus is an angel. But, maybe this depends on also, what is an angel?
Agreed. Where angel means messenger (of God), Christ certainly fits that description. But where angel means a particular seraph/spirit being such as Gabriel or Michael, no.

Both Christ and Michael are spoken of in Revelation. Jude also speaks of both Christ and Michael without making them the same person. First Jude speaks about Christ, then in the same chapter (just a couple paragraphs later) Jude speaks about Michael not rebuking the devil. He switches names because Michael is a different person than Christ.


If Christ were God (YHWH), or Michael (or Gabriel), He could have said so. He did not.


According to the words of Christ Himself, He is the Son of God.


Matthew 17:5



Peace again to you and to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
Then why is Michael not spoken of at all in Matthew chapter 24 where the Great Tribulation is mentioned as it is mentioned concerning Michael who arose in sync with the Great Tribulation at Daniel 12:1,2?


Michael is not mentioned by name in Matt 24 (neither are any other angels). But Christ does mention angels being present and Michael is one of His angels.


If Christ were Michael, why did Christ not teach us this?

If the apostles thought Christ and Michael were the same person, why did they never mention it? Why did Jude, in fact, speak of both Christ and Michael as individual people in his letter?

If Christ was Michael, why is He spoken of in Revelation as Himself (as Christ), by His own name (Jaheshua, though the text renders this "Jesus"), instead of being spoken of as Michael? Is there a single place where Michael is ever referred to as the Christ, or as the Lamb, or as the Son of God, or as the King of kings and Lord of lords? Is Christ ever referred to as an archangel?

Michael is associated with the GT and the resurrection of the dead at Daniel 12:1,2.
Michael will be there. But he is not the one who resurrects the dead. He is not the one who calls the dead out of their graves. Christ is the One who does that.
Jesus mentioned only himself in association with the GT and the resurrection of the dead (John 5:28, John 6:40). Where is Michael? I'd like to know.
He also mentioned angels. An archangel is an angel.


Peace again to you.
So you believe that Jesus did not have the privilege of ousting Satan and his minions from heaven?
This question would be like me asking you if you believe Christ did not have the right to delegate.

It is not about privilege.

Christ ALREADY defeated the Adversary when HE gave His life and remained faithful to His Father.
It is also said that Michael HAS angels that fight with him. In your estimation, who is he that he should have angels under his command?


An archangel. A chief prince.

One who answers still to the King of Kings and Lord of lords.

Michael, himself, is under the command of Christ.

I would vote for Jesus to have those privileges.
You can vote if you want, but I am just going to listen to what Christ says, and He does not teach what you are saying.

He does NOT teach that He is Michael. None of the apostles say that He is Michael. Same as with the trinity teaching. He does not teach that He is part of a trinity or even that He is God [YHWH]. Neither do the apostles say this.


Maybe you could answer my questions now:

If Christ were Michael, why did Christ not teach us this?

If the apostles thought Christ and Michael were the same person, why did they never mention it? Why did Jude, in fact, speak of both Christ and Michael as individual people in his letter?

If Christ was Michael, why is He spoken of in Revelation as Himself (as Christ), by His own name (Jaheshua, though the text renders this "Jesus"), instead of being spoken of as Michael? Is there a single place where Michael is ever referred to as the Christ, or as the Lamb, or as the Son of God, or as the King of kings and Lord of lords? Is Christ ever referred to as an archangel?


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 9868
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 366 times

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #22

Post by onewithhim »

tam wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 12:12 pm Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 9:26 am
tam wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2023 1:58 pm Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2023 9:00 am
tam wrote: Mon Oct 09, 2023 12:22 pm Peace to you and to you all!
1213 wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2023 4:48 am
Wootah wrote: Tue Sep 19, 2023 6:04 pm
Hebrews 2:5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6 But there is a place where someone has testified:

“What is mankind that you are mindful of them,
a son of man that you care for him?
7 You made them a little[a] lower than the angels;
you crowned them with glory and honor
8 and put everything under their feet.”[c]

In putting everything under them,[d] God left nothing that is not subject to them.[e] Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them.[f] 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
How can Jesus be an angel if he was temporarily lower than the angels?

Wouldn't it say he was temporarily the lowest of the angels?
I don't think Bible says Jesus is an angel. But, maybe this depends on also, what is an angel?
Agreed. Where angel means messenger (of God), Christ certainly fits that description. But where angel means a particular seraph/spirit being such as Gabriel or Michael, no.

Both Christ and Michael are spoken of in Revelation. Jude also speaks of both Christ and Michael without making them the same person. First Jude speaks about Christ, then in the same chapter (just a couple paragraphs later) Jude speaks about Michael not rebuking the devil. He switches names because Michael is a different person than Christ.


If Christ were God (YHWH), or Michael (or Gabriel), He could have said so. He did not.


According to the words of Christ Himself, He is the Son of God.


Matthew 17:5



Peace again to you and to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
Then why is Michael not spoken of at all in Matthew chapter 24 where the Great Tribulation is mentioned as it is mentioned concerning Michael who arose in sync with the Great Tribulation at Daniel 12:1,2?


Michael is not mentioned by name in Matt 24 (neither are any other angels). But Christ does mention angels being present and Michael is one of His angels.


If Christ were Michael, why did Christ not teach us this?

If the apostles thought Christ and Michael were the same person, why did they never mention it? Why did Jude, in fact, speak of both Christ and Michael as individual people in his letter?

If Christ was Michael, why is He spoken of in Revelation as Himself (as Christ), by His own name (Jaheshua, though the text renders this "Jesus"), instead of being spoken of as Michael? Is there a single place where Michael is ever referred to as the Christ, or as the Lamb, or as the Son of God, or as the King of kings and Lord of lords? Is Christ ever referred to as an archangel?

Michael is associated with the GT and the resurrection of the dead at Daniel 12:1,2.
Michael will be there. But he is not the one who resurrects the dead. He is not the one who calls the dead out of their graves. Christ is the One who does that.
Jesus mentioned only himself in association with the GT and the resurrection of the dead (John 5:28, John 6:40). Where is Michael? I'd like to know.
He also mentioned angels. An archangel is an angel.


Peace again to you.
So you believe that Jesus did not have the privilege of ousting Satan and his minions from heaven?
This question would be like me asking you if you believe Christ did not have the right to delegate.

It is not about privilege.

Christ ALREADY defeated the Adversary when HE gave His life and remained faithful to His Father.
It is also said that Michael HAS angels that fight with him. In your estimation, who is he that he should have angels under his command?


An archangel. A chief prince.

One who answers still to the King of Kings and Lord of lords.

Michael, himself, is under the command of Christ.

I would vote for Jesus to have those privileges.
You can vote if you want, but I am just going to listen to what Christ says, and He does not teach what you are saying.

He does NOT teach that He is Michael. None of the apostles say that He is Michael. Same as with the trinity teaching. He does not teach that He is part of a trinity or even that He is God [YHWH]. Neither do the apostles say this.


Maybe you could answer my questions now:

If Christ were Michael, why did Christ not teach us this?

If the apostles thought Christ and Michael were the same person, why did they never mention it? Why did Jude, in fact, speak of both Christ and Michael as individual people in his letter?

If Christ was Michael, why is He spoken of in Revelation as Himself (as Christ), by His own name (Jaheshua, though the text renders this "Jesus"), instead of being spoken of as Michael? Is there a single place where Michael is ever referred to as the Christ, or as the Lamb, or as the Son of God, or as the King of kings and Lord of lords? Is Christ ever referred to as an archangel?


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
Jesus didn't say anything about Michael because his disciples didn't need to know that at that time. He said there are many things that they didn't need to know, but would understand them later. "I have many things yet to say to you, but you are not able to bear them at present." (John 16:12) Him being Michael was one of those things, I would surmise.

I don't find the fact that Jude mentions both Michael and Jesus is proof that Jesus and Michael are two individuals. He might not have known that Michael is Jesus' name in heaven yet, as Jesus had said there were things they couldn't understand at present.

Jesus is referred to at I Thessalonians 4:16 as descending from heaven "with an archangel's voice...". Why say that if he were NOT an archangel? If "archangel" referred to other angels and not to Jesus, then the reference "an archangel's voice" would not be appropriate at all. It would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of God's Son.

At Revelation 19:11-16 Jesus is depicted as leading the heavenly armies in war against the nations of the earth. This would mean a period of distress for the nations, which would logically be included in the "time of distress" that is associated with Michael's standing up, or, arising (Daniel 12:1). Since the Son of God is to fight the nations, it's only reasonable that he was the one who, with his angels, earlier battled against Satan and his angels.

Tammy, you and I will never agree, as you said before, therefore we should declare a truce and agree to disagree. :)

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 6495
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 358 times
Been thanked: 330 times
Contact:

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #23

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 4:27 pm
tam wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 12:12 pm Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 9:26 am
tam wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2023 1:58 pm Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2023 9:00 am
tam wrote: Mon Oct 09, 2023 12:22 pm Peace to you and to you all!
1213 wrote: Wed Sep 20, 2023 4:48 am
Wootah wrote: Tue Sep 19, 2023 6:04 pm
Hebrews 2:5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6 But there is a place where someone has testified:

“What is mankind that you are mindful of them,
a son of man that you care for him?
7 You made them a little[a] lower than the angels;
you crowned them with glory and honor
8 and put everything under their feet.”[c]

In putting everything under them,[d] God left nothing that is not subject to them.[e] Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them.[f] 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
How can Jesus be an angel if he was temporarily lower than the angels?

Wouldn't it say he was temporarily the lowest of the angels?
I don't think Bible says Jesus is an angel. But, maybe this depends on also, what is an angel?
Agreed. Where angel means messenger (of God), Christ certainly fits that description. But where angel means a particular seraph/spirit being such as Gabriel or Michael, no.

Both Christ and Michael are spoken of in Revelation. Jude also speaks of both Christ and Michael without making them the same person. First Jude speaks about Christ, then in the same chapter (just a couple paragraphs later) Jude speaks about Michael not rebuking the devil. He switches names because Michael is a different person than Christ.


If Christ were God (YHWH), or Michael (or Gabriel), He could have said so. He did not.


According to the words of Christ Himself, He is the Son of God.


Matthew 17:5



Peace again to you and to you all,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
Then why is Michael not spoken of at all in Matthew chapter 24 where the Great Tribulation is mentioned as it is mentioned concerning Michael who arose in sync with the Great Tribulation at Daniel 12:1,2?


Michael is not mentioned by name in Matt 24 (neither are any other angels). But Christ does mention angels being present and Michael is one of His angels.


If Christ were Michael, why did Christ not teach us this?

If the apostles thought Christ and Michael were the same person, why did they never mention it? Why did Jude, in fact, speak of both Christ and Michael as individual people in his letter?

If Christ was Michael, why is He spoken of in Revelation as Himself (as Christ), by His own name (Jaheshua, though the text renders this "Jesus"), instead of being spoken of as Michael? Is there a single place where Michael is ever referred to as the Christ, or as the Lamb, or as the Son of God, or as the King of kings and Lord of lords? Is Christ ever referred to as an archangel?

Michael is associated with the GT and the resurrection of the dead at Daniel 12:1,2.
Michael will be there. But he is not the one who resurrects the dead. He is not the one who calls the dead out of their graves. Christ is the One who does that.
Jesus mentioned only himself in association with the GT and the resurrection of the dead (John 5:28, John 6:40). Where is Michael? I'd like to know.
He also mentioned angels. An archangel is an angel.


Peace again to you.
So you believe that Jesus did not have the privilege of ousting Satan and his minions from heaven?
This question would be like me asking you if you believe Christ did not have the right to delegate.

It is not about privilege.

Christ ALREADY defeated the Adversary when HE gave His life and remained faithful to His Father.
It is also said that Michael HAS angels that fight with him. In your estimation, who is he that he should have angels under his command?


An archangel. A chief prince.

One who answers still to the King of Kings and Lord of lords.

Michael, himself, is under the command of Christ.

I would vote for Jesus to have those privileges.
You can vote if you want, but I am just going to listen to what Christ says, and He does not teach what you are saying.

He does NOT teach that He is Michael. None of the apostles say that He is Michael. Same as with the trinity teaching. He does not teach that He is part of a trinity or even that He is God [YHWH]. Neither do the apostles say this.


Maybe you could answer my questions now:

If Christ were Michael, why did Christ not teach us this?

If the apostles thought Christ and Michael were the same person, why did they never mention it? Why did Jude, in fact, speak of both Christ and Michael as individual people in his letter?

If Christ was Michael, why is He spoken of in Revelation as Himself (as Christ), by His own name (Jaheshua, though the text renders this "Jesus"), instead of being spoken of as Michael? Is there a single place where Michael is ever referred to as the Christ, or as the Lamb, or as the Son of God, or as the King of kings and Lord of lords? Is Christ ever referred to as an archangel?


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
Jesus didn't say anything about Michael because his disciples didn't need to know that at that time. He said there are many things that they didn't need to know, but would understand them later. "I have many things yet to say to you, but you are not able to bear them at present." (John 16:12) Him being Michael was one of those things, I would surmise.
He said He had many things to tell them but they were not yet able to BEAR them. Why would they not have been able to bear the teaching that He was Michael (if that were true)?

Could a person who believes in the trinity not give the exact same answer that you just gave?
I don't find the fact that Jude mentions both Michael and Jesus is proof that Jesus and Michael are two individuals. He might not have known that Michael is Jesus' name in heaven yet, as Jesus had said there were things they couldn't understand at present.
You do seem to be admitting that this would mean that Jude DID speak of them as two individuals; that Jude did not believe that Christ and Michael are the same person, though. Yes?
Jesus is referred to at I Thessalonians 4:16 as descending from heaven "with an archangel's voice...". Why say that if he were NOT an archangel? If "archangel" referred to other angels and not to Jesus, then the reference "an archangel's voice" would not be appropriate at all. It would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of God's Son.
Because an archangel (Michael) announces His return.

The verse also states that He descends with the trumpet of God. Does that mean He is God?

This is the exact same logic that you would use when people claim that "The Father and I are one" means that Christ is God. Because those same people know that Christ being one with His brothers does not mean that those brothers are Christ Himself (or God).

At Revelation 19:11-16 Jesus is depicted as leading the heavenly armies in war against the nations of the earth. This would mean a period of distress for the nations, which would logically be included in the "time of distress" that is associated with Michael's standing up, or, arising (Daniel 12:1). Since the Son of God is to fight the nations, it's only reasonable that he was the one who, with his angels, earlier battled against Satan and his angels.
So this is something that men have reasoned, themselves, right?

It is not something that Christ or the apostles taught. (and the apostles had the scriptures too)
Tammy, you and I will never agree, as you said before, therefore we should declare a truce and agree to disagree. :)
I don't think I would have said we will never agree (not that truth is dependent upon our agreement). I might have said I cannot agree with what you are saying, and we do always end up agreeing to disagree on this matter, lol. But at some point the truth of the matter will be made known to everyone. So if not before Christ returns (though hopefully), then at least afterward.

In the meantime, we talk, we reason, we ask questions, and hopefully (and most importantly), we ask Christ and hold all things up to Him (the Truth and the Light).



Peace again to you!
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 9868
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 366 times

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #24

Post by onewithhim »

[Replying to tam in post #23]

Jesus and the apostles DID teach that Jesus would be the one to come again and scourge the earth of all evil. Jesus says so at Matthew 24:30 and Revelation 19:11-16. I can't get this question out of my mind: So where is Michael?

User avatar
Eddie Ramos
Scholar
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2022 11:30 pm
Location: USA
Been thanked: 35 times
Contact:

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #25

Post by Eddie Ramos »

onewithhim wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 9:14 am
You contradict what Jesus said at John 3:13 that no man had or would ascend to heaven before he went back to heaven. Jesus called the Transfiguration a vision at Matthew 17:9: "And as they were descending the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying: "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of man is raised up from the dead."
First, thank you for the scripture that I neglected to remember regarding the vision. Now, regarding John 3:13, you have to be careful how you read that, it doesn't say, "that no man had or would ascend to heaven before he went back to heaven". Here is what it says:

John 3:13 (KJV 1900)
And no man hath ascended (past tense only) up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.


Since Christ died and rose from the grave before the world began (which is why he came down from heaven) every elect who died after the fall in the garden could also immediately be absent from the body and present with JEHOVAH in their born again soul. This agrees with the statement Jesus made in John 3:13 as he was the first to ascend up to heaven. His ascension up to heaven at the time of the cross was not his first time. Again, this is why Enoch could be taken up and changed into his spiritual body long before the cross of 33 AD. Because payment had already been made and Christ was the first to ascend into heaven at the point of the world's foundation. The same with Elijah and Moses and even Christ (as he was transfigured before his disciples). And even though he calls this a vision, it doesn't mean it was not real. Else what dispute could the devil have with the body of Moses if it was still in the grave? But since this is the only account we have of Moses appearing after death, along with Elijah, God is making it clear that they were indeed changed, like Enoch was, into their spiritual bodies along with Christ.

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 9868
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 366 times

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #26

Post by onewithhim »

Eddie Ramos wrote: Sat Oct 14, 2023 11:27 pm
onewithhim wrote: Wed Oct 11, 2023 9:14 am
You contradict what Jesus said at John 3:13 that no man had or would ascend to heaven before he went back to heaven. Jesus called the Transfiguration a vision at Matthew 17:9: "And as they were descending the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying: "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of man is raised up from the dead."
First, thank you for the scripture that I neglected to remember regarding the vision. Now, regarding John 3:13, you have to be careful how you read that, it doesn't say, "that no man had or would ascend to heaven before he went back to heaven". Here is what it says:

John 3:13 (KJV 1900)
And no man hath ascended (past tense only) up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.


Since Christ died and rose from the grave before the world began (which is why he came down from heaven) every elect who died after the fall in the garden could also immediately be absent from the body and present with JEHOVAH in their born again soul. This agrees with the statement Jesus made in John 3:13 as he was the first to ascend up to heaven. His ascension up to heaven at the time of the cross was not his first time. Again, this is why Enoch could be taken up and changed into his spiritual body long before the cross of 33 AD. Because payment had already been made and Christ was the first to ascend into heaven at the point of the world's foundation. The same with Elijah and Moses and even Christ (as he was transfigured before his disciples). And even though he calls this a vision, it doesn't mean it was not real. Else what dispute could the devil have with the body of Moses if it was still in the grave? But since this is the only account we have of Moses appearing after death, along with Elijah, God is making it clear that they were indeed changed, like Enoch was, into their spiritual bodies along with Christ.
Christ did not die and rise again before the world began. It was some thousands of years later that he died and rose again. You misunderstand what "before the world began" means. The "world" is the same world that is referred to at I John 2:15-17. It is the world of fallen mankind. This world did not start until Adam and Eve turned their backs on Jehovah and insisted on their own way. You'll have to reconsider your understanding of this.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 6495
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 358 times
Been thanked: 330 times
Contact:

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #27

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Sat Oct 14, 2023 4:46 pm [Replying to tam in post #23]

Jesus and the apostles DID teach that Jesus would be the one to come again and scourge the earth of all evil. Jesus says so at Matthew 24:30 and Revelation 19:11-16. I can't get this question out of my mind: So where is Michael?
I do not understand why you think Christ has to have mentioned Michael in these places to begin with?

Revelation 19:11-16 is describing what Christ does; not Michael.
Matthew 24:30 describes Christ returning. The very next verse describes something that He sends His angels to do, but no one is named.


The verses in Daniel do not state what action Michael takes. But Michael is the arkangel who serves and protects Christ.



Peace again.
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
Eddie Ramos
Scholar
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2022 11:30 pm
Location: USA
Been thanked: 35 times
Contact:

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #28

Post by Eddie Ramos »

onewithhim wrote: Sun Oct 15, 2023 4:25 pm
Christ did not die and rise again before the world began. It was some thousands of years later that he died and rose again. You misunderstand what "before the world began" means. The "world" is the same world that is referred to at I John 2:15-17. It is the world of fallen mankind. This world did not start until Adam and Eve turned their backs on Jehovah and insisted on their own way. You'll have to reconsider your understanding of this.
I will be more than glad to reconsider my understanding of this, but you have to provide me with sound scriptural evidence by comparing scripture with scripture so I can have something to examine. So, let me start by saying that you're right, Christ did indeed die thousands of years (just over 11 thousand years) after the world began. We can clearly read about that in any of the gospels. So, then what's the problem? Who in their right mind would dare say that Jesus died and then rose again to make payment for sins from the foundation of the world, rathern than at the cross? This makes no sense only if one reads the Bible like a newspaper and with the assumtion that God meant to lay all things out as plainly as possible for all to understand. But God didn't write the Bible that way, as a matter of fact, he wrote it the opposite way. The Bible tells us that the Bible is a spiritual book, yet eveyone reads it like a historical textbook. The Bible tells us that Christ spoke all things in parables and did not speak without a parable. Yet people refuse to acknowledge that scripture (Mt 13:34 & Mk 4:34) and insist that he only spoke in parables sometimes. The Bible teaches us that the purpose of parables was to conceal truth from the unsaved (Mt 13:10-16). The Bible also tells us that it is God's glory to conceal a WORD and the honor of kings (the true believers) is to search out WORDS (Prov 25:2). The Bible teaches us that God designed his word (the gospel) to be understood properly by comparing line upon line and precept upon precept, here a little and there a little (meaning all throughout the scriptures)(Isa 28:9-13). And the Bible teaches us that the record of scripture agrees as one whole truth (1 Jn 5:7-8).

Now, having this understanding is what leads me to not only read the Bible, as most people do, but also to examine the Bible for discrepencies which we dismiss by only reading the Bible like a historical textbook. For example, if we hold to Christ dying and paying for sins at the time of the cross in 33 AD, then a whole load of scriptures will contradict that understanding. In other words, ther's no question he historically physically dies in 33 Ad on an actual cross and then rose again, but that was only a demonstration of what had already taken place before the world began. How can this be? Well , here are just a few contradictions you face if you hold to payment for sins at the cross.

1. How could Christ be called the Son of God before his death and resurrection since the raising from the dead was the means by which he was declared to be called the Son of God?
Romans 1:4 (KJV 1900)
And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, BY (meaning THROUGH) the resurrection from the dead:


2. Christ (God) could never violate any of his own laws, like the law which states that without the shedding of blood (meaning death) there can be no forgiveness of sins (Heb 9:22). So, how could Christ forgive sins before shedding his blood on the cross? Furthermore, we know that animal sacrifices NEVER did anything to take away sins (Heb 10:4). So, how were people forgiven of their sins and made perfect (righteous) in the Old Testament?

3. The Bible says that Christ is the first begotten from the dead (Rev 1:5 & Col 1:18). This makes Christ have the preeminance in all things like death and resurrecting from the dead. Yet, if you count up how many people died and were raised to life before Christ, Christ was the 7th to die and rise again.

4. The Psalms tell us that Christ's soul was in hell (the grave/death) but it wasn't left there. This was in regards to the punishment of payment for sins. Yet when Christ died on the cross, we never read that his soul went to hell. instead, we read the opposite, his soul went to paradise along with the thief the day he died. Can you show me from the Bible which New Testament scripture teaches that Christ's soul was in hell (meaning dead)?

There are plenty more contradictions one faces if they hold to Christ making payment for sins at the cross. But none of these are any problem (as a matter of fact, everything harmonizes perfectly) if we can see that payment was actually made from the foundation of the world, meaning, before the world began. This means that Christ died twice (which would be another great discussion from the scriptures). Once to pay for sins from the foundation of the world, and once (in 33 AD) to demonstrate what had already been completed.

Lastly, your definition of "world" is only partly correct. It is not only the world of fallen mankind, but this same Greek word is also used to describe the the earth itself.

John 1:10 (KJV 1900)
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

John 21:25 (KJV 1900)
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Romans 1:20 (KJV 1900)
For the invisible things of him from the creationof the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:


So, that means that we have to let the Bible guide us into understanding what "before the world began" actually means. You say that, "This world did not start until Adam and Eve turned their backs on Jehovah and insisted on their own way".

Yet, since the Bible clearly allows for this word "world" to mean either the world itself or the world of the unsaved, I don't believe you can show me any scriptures to prove that the fall of man is when the world actually started. But we do have a passage that tells us when God began keepinf track of time, it's in Genesis 1:1. "In the beginning...". This means "in the beginning of time". This is why God began counting evenings and mornings and one day and two days and so forth. This is time is it not? The truth of the Bible is that God began counting time from the very beginning of his creation. So, "before the world began" means before the beginning, or before Genesis 1:1. In other words, it was in eternity past, that sin was accounted for and paid for by Christ (who is eternal God). This is why we read a very relevant piece of scripture here:

Proverbs 8:23 (KJV 1900)
I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning,
Or ever the earth was.


The words "set up" are the Hebrew word that's translated as "poured out" like drink offerings are poured out. And Christ was poured out (made an offering) from everlasting, from the beginning, not the beginning of the world, because the next line tells us that the world was not yet, but Christ was the beginning of the creation of God (Rev 3:14) which also takes us to eternity past.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 6495
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 358 times
Been thanked: 330 times
Contact:

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #29

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #28]

The Bible tells us that Christ spoke all things in parables and did not speak without a parable. Yet people refuse to acknowledge that scripture (Mt 13:34 & Mk 4:34) and insist that he only spoke in parables sometimes.
Eddie, why do you keep saying this? The bible does not say what you are claiming. The bible actually shows the opposite of what you are saying.

From Matthew:

[Jesus] spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to them without using a parable.

35 So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet:

“I will open my mouth in parables,
I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world.”[c]


(Please note the qualifiers: "To the crowd"... "to them.")

36 Then he left the crowd and went into the house. His disciples came to him and said, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field.”

He then explains the parable. He tells them plainly:

37 He answered, The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the people of the kingdom. The weeds are the people of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.


Then from Mark:

When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that,

He then explained the parables to His apostles, and those explanations are recorded in the bible.

How then can you continue to say that He did not speak except in parables?



Peace again.
- Non-religious Christian spirituality

- For Christ (who is the Spirit)

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 9868
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1389 times
Been thanked: 366 times

Re: Was Jesus an angel?

Post #30

Post by onewithhim »

tam wrote: Sun Oct 15, 2023 8:12 pm Peace to you,
onewithhim wrote: Sat Oct 14, 2023 4:46 pm [Replying to tam in post #23]

Jesus and the apostles DID teach that Jesus would be the one to come again and scourge the earth of all evil. Jesus says so at Matthew 24:30 and Revelation 19:11-16. I can't get this question out of my mind: So where is Michael?
I do not understand why you think Christ has to have mentioned Michael in these places to begin with?

Revelation 19:11-16 is describing what Christ does; not Michael.
Matthew 24:30 describes Christ returning. The very next verse describes something that He sends His angels to do, but no one is named.


The verses in Daniel do not state what action Michael takes. But Michael is the arkangel who serves and protects Christ.



Peace again.
With Michael in such an honored position, surely he would be mentioned in the Scriptures (say, Matthew 24). Not that Jesus would mention him. God, who inspired the scriptures would certainly see to it that Michael was mentioned in tandem with Christ's return and his eradicating all evil. Michael was mentioned in association with the Great Tribulation at Daniel 12:1,2. Surely he deserves a mention when Jesus comes back.

Post Reply