Evangelicals vs. Jehovah's Witnesses

[Elijah John]

Evangelicals often call Jehovah's Witnesses, a "cult" and not Christian.

Jehovah's Witnesses, seem to consider Roman Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox etc, "not-Christian" (JWs please correct me if I'm wrong on this)

Question for debate, why can't all of these groups rightly be considered "Christian"?

And part two of this OP question is directed primarily to Evangelicals, why don't you consider JWs to be Christian?

[Claire Evans]

[Replying to Claire Evans]

Extensive investigation in to the membership rolls of the Masons reveals Charles Taze Russell was never a Mason.

Who did the extensive investigations?

There is absolutely no evidence the Society practices Enochian magic, either.

There are a few things to consider:

We can infer that the WatchTower Society got its name from the Book of Enoch's Watchers:

In the Book of Enoch, the Watchers (Aramaic עִירִין, iyrin) are angels dispatched to Earth to watch over the humans. They soon begin to lust for human women and, at the prodding of their leader Samyaza, defect en masse to illicitly instruct humanity and procreate among them.

The Watch Tower is the Great Pyramid of Giza. The pyramid is associated with Freemasonry and the occult.

"In the 1920's, (after Russell's death) the Watchtower magazine continued to teach
that the Great Pyramid was God's Stone Witness. "The great Pyramid of Egypt,
standing as a silent and inanimate witness of the Lord, is a messenger; and its
testimony speaks with great eloquence concerning the divine plan."
The Watchtower. 5/15/25.pg148."

See the video at 0:13 min. The publication refers to the Golden Age. Followers of Russel were Millennial Dawnists.



"The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (or, more commonly, the Golden Dawn) was a magical order of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, practicing a form of theurgy and spiritual development. It was possibly the single greatest influence on twentieth century western occultism. Concepts of magic and ritual that became core elements of many other traditions, including Wicca, Thelema and other forms of magical spirituality popular today, are drawn from the Golden Dawn tradition."

I want to just add my own comments to tigger's excellent post #468. He has found even more info than I have. (Did I somehow miss your answer as to who did the "intensive investigations"?)

It was a claim by Tigger and I'd like to know who did those investigations.

You say "we can INFER that the Watchtower got its name from 'the Watchers" in some Enochian book." You are inferring wrong. The Watchtower got its name from 2Chronicles 20:24:

"And when Judah came toward the watch tower in the wilderness, they looked unto the multitude...." (KJV)

And, as tigger already said, Isaiah 21:8:

"And he cried, A lion: My lord, I stand continually upon the watchtower in the daytime, and I am set in my ward whole nights." (KJV)


Charles T. Russell chose the name because that is what God's people do---continually WATCH to tell people about what events are coming on the earth and what God says that we should do to deal with these things. You got it all wrong about the "watchers" in the book of Enoch. Those angels appeared on Earth before the Flood and mated with human women. The Flood destroyed their offspring, the Nephilim, and the angels went back to the spirit realm (and from henceforth were demons, which exist today).

Did you read my response to Tigger? If we are to believe the claim of the WTS practising Enochian magic, then we should look at what the Book of Enoch is saying:

"They are considered an old race who have gone past the need for physical bodies. Some claim they are light. There are legends that say they came from the stars. They are the ones known as the Watchers. It is claimed that each of the four Watchers reigns over one of the four directions of the circle.

There were star cults in Mesopotamia around 3000 bce. One of the beliefs of these cults was that there were four major stars, each ruling over one of the four cardinal points. These stars where known as "Lords" or "Watchers."

The Watcher of the East was the star Aldebaran.This star marked the time of the Vernal Equinox. The Watcher of the South was Regulus, marking the time of the Summer Solstice. Marking the Autumnal Equinox was Antares, Watcher of the West. The North Watcher was the marker of Winter Solstice, Foralhaut.

Actual towers, called Ziggurats (cosmic mountains) were built as a form of worship. Each tower bore the symbols of the Watchers. During ritual celebrations the symbols were traced in the air with torch flames or wands, and the Watchers names were called.

The Watchers were thought of as gods that guarded the heavens and earth. Lunar and Solar cults eventually replaced the Star cults.

The Watchers became the gods of the four winds to the Greeks. The Christians took them over as "guardian angels."

The Hebrews taught that all angels, known to them as Watchers, were ruled by four "higher" angels. They became the "Archangels" to the Cabalists."

http://www.oocities.org/athens/4177/watchtowers.html


We know the Book of Enoch associates The Watchers with Watch Towers."

Your accusations concerning the Great Pyramid and the occult are slanderous and misleading. Charles Russell was never involved in the occult, and his interest in the Great Pyramid was nothing more than a man's intense curiosity, which was later dismissed as irrelevant.

Since Charles was a Freemason, or even had just ties with Freemaonry and was influenced by it, then we an safely say that is the reason why Charles was interested in the Pyramid of Giza. This is a Freemasonic symbol of the pyramid and eye, the capstone.


The Founding Fathers were Freemasons and it has persisted.

https://allilluminati.wordpress.com/201 ... ate-logos/

It has persisted because that Freemasonic symbol is now on the US dollar note:



We see that the capstone is detached. The reason for this is because the Great Pyramid of Giza is also missing its capstone.

http://otherworldmystery.com/where-is-t ... at-pyramid


So it is plain to see why Russell became interested in the Great Pyramid of Giza. Occult means hidden. The hidden knowledge of the Great Pyramid of Giza is occultic.

"Several occult researchers have claimed that the Great Pyramid of Giza was built in perfect alignment with the stars, especially Sirius. The light from these stars were said to be used in ceremonies of Egyptian Mysteries.

“This ancient people (Egyptians) knew that once every year the Parent Sun is in line with the Dog Star. Therefore, the Great Pyramid was so constructed that, at this sacred moment, the light of the Dog Star fell upon the square “Stone of God� at the upper end of the Great Gallery, descending upon the head of the high priest, who received the Super Solar Force and sought through his own perfected Solar Body to transmit to other Initiates this added stimulation for the evolution of their Godhood. This then was the purpose of the “`Stone of God,’ whereon in the Ritual, Osiris sits to bestow upon him (the illuminate) the Atf crown or celestial light.� “North and South of that crown is love,� proclaims an Egyptian hymn. “And thus throughout the teaching of Egypt the visible light was but the shadow of the invisible Light; and in the wisdom of the ancient country the measures of Truth were the years of the Most High.� [1. Marshall Adams, The Book of the Master]"

http://vigilantcitizen.com/hidden-knowl ... n-history/

Therefore what I have written here is not slander. It is based on fact.

This is a brief portion of information from the interesting publication by Fredrick Zydek (a non-JW) entitled Charles Taze Russell/ His Life and Times/ The Man, the Millennium and the Message:

"In May of 1875, George Storrs publishes a long article entitled 'A Chronological Curiosity.' It is a review of Piazzi Smyth's work and essays on the great pyramid of Egypt. French scholar Jean Francois Champollion, who first translated, wrote and published a brief Egyptian grammar from what he learned about Egyptian hieroglyphics from the Rosetta Stone, encourages a SURGE IN ACADEMIC AND LAY INVESTIGATIONS INTO EGYPTIAN HISTORY, ARCHITECTURE, AND ITS MYSTERIOUS AND ANCIENT RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. Piazzi Smyth, a member of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Scotland, known as the Astronomers-Royal, a renowned academician and scholar of his day, sets forth the proposition that the great pyramid on the Giza plateau is both a tomb of a past pharaoh as well as a stone witness and library which reveals the past, present and future of humanity's relationship and history with the Judaic/Christian God.

Yet, again, the Royal Society of Edinburgh is Freemasonic.

http://www.theeducator.ca/historyofthec ... eemasonry/

http://www.freemasonry.london.museum/os ... an2012.pdf

'Through an elaborate system of mathematical calculations based on the dimensions, capacities, and proportions of its outer and inner structure, he unraveled what he called a divinely inspired Christian chronicle of man's history--past and future.'

"Storrs never fully subscribes to Smyth's proposition but Charles [Russell] finds the concept irresistible. The idea that the Great Pyramid of Cheops might be the stone witness he has read and wondered about in the writings of the prophet Isaiah[19:19,20] is a theory he feels he must pursue."

I will end here for a while. There is more, and I will post it later. Suffice it to say that Champollion, the first man to decipher the Rosetta Stone, stirred up a tremendous amount of interest in Egyptian history. Piazzi Smyth, who, like Champollion, was not associated in any way with the occult, wrote about the Great Pyramid & thought that it may hold some kind of link to the God of the Bible. Charles Taze Russell became acquainted with this proposition by way of his friend George Storrs, and Charles became intrigued by the thought, esp. since he had wondered about Isaiah 19:19,20. It was purely an intellectual curiosity as to what there could be to Smyth's idea. Wouldn't YOU look into it yourself if you were living then? There was nothing occult about it. More later.

[/b]

It is all very interesting but Freemasonry cannot be married to Christianity. Surely Russell would have known that?

Arthur Edward Waite

October 2, 1857 - May 19, 1942) was a Freemason, an English occultist and member (later Grand Master) of the magical order, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. Waite is most famous as the co-creator of the Rider-Waite Tarot deck, the most popular tarot deck in use today.

“[Freemasonry] makes no profession of Christianity, and wars not against sectarian creeds or doctrines, but looks forward to the time when the labor of our ancient brethren shall be symbolized by the erection of a spiritual temple whose moral grandeur shall be commensurate with civilization; a temple in which there shall be but one altar and but one worship; one common altar of Masonry on which the Veda, Shastras, Sade, Zend-Avesta, Koran, and Holy Bible shall lie untouched by sacrilegious hands, and at whose shrine the Hindoo, the Persian, the Assyrian, the Chaldean, the Egyptian, the Chinese, the Muhammadan, the Jew, and the Christian may kneel with one united voice celebrate the praises of the Supreme Architect of the Universe.�
- THE KENTUCKY MONITOR, p. 95, Grand Lodge of Kentucky (source)


Why would Russell be interested in Freemasonry when Freemasonry rejects Christianity?

[hoghead1]

[Replying to Claire Evans]

Back in 2001, Ms. Anderson, whom you can read online, wrote to the Pittsburgh Lodge and also the Grand Lodge, in Philadelphia, requesting information as to whether or not Charles Taze Russell was ever a Mason. Both Lodges said emphatically no, Russell was never a member of any lodge in Pennsylvania and was not on the membership rolls of any lodge in England or Ireland. So case closed on that one.

The Masons embrace members from all religions and therefore are not against Christianity. As I said before, I have my father's "Masonic" Bible, which is the KJV version. The only thing uniquely Masonic about it, is the Logo on the cover and the fact it has a place for one to list one's degrees in Masonry.

The pyramid with the all-seeing eye is a symbol used by a number of groups, from Christians to Satanists. Of interest to me is the fact it was used by Jacob Boehme, a major figure in the Christian mystical tradition. Boehme was a key figure in my dissertation, but that is another story. I'm just bringing this up to show the symbol seems to be a handy-dandy one that is claimed by all sorts of sources.

Having established the fact that Russell as definitely not a Mason, that the Masons have nothing to do with the Watchtower Society, and that the Masonic Order is not a Satanic cult, I want to get back on the OP, stick with it, discuss Jehovah's Witnesses and Evangelical Christians. I'm not comfortable about discussing any further matters about the Masons, as I believe e that is way off the OP and belongs in a separate thread.

[marco]

We see that the capstone is detached. The reason for this is because the Great Pyramid of Giza is also missing its capstone.

The Latin is taken from various works of Virgil. I have no wish to involve myself in the ramifications into the occult, but the uncapped pyramid provides a useful letter A. Then the chosen spelling of coeptis, with a diphthong, makes the word acceptis possible, giving the meaning: It favours those who've been accepted.

Of course the phrase as it is written means (It) or (He) shows favour to what has been undertaken.

[Elijah John]

Having established the fact that Russell as definitely not a Mason, that the Masons have nothing to do with the Watchtower Society, and that the Masonic Order is not a Satanic cult, I want to get back on the OP, stick with it, discuss Jehovah's Witnesses and Evangelical Christians. I'm not comfortable about discussing any further matters about the Masons, as I believe e that is way off the OP and belongs in a separate thread.

OK then. Which group Evangelicals vs Jehovah's Witnesses do you see as having the better claim to authentic Biblical Christianity, and why?

Let us for the time being, put aside the details of the book of Revelation, (obsession with this book seems escapist to me,) ...Let's consider the nature of Jesus.

-Inferior to, or equal to the Father?

And the means of salvation.

-Both groups claim one has to see things their way in order to be saved.

Which is right, JWs? Evangelicals? Both? Neither? Both partially right?

Let's add one for consideration. Is there a group/organization/denomination out there which has a better take on Biblical Christianity? Which one and why?

[tam]

Which group Evangelicals vs Jehovah's Witnesses do you see as having the better claim to authentic Biblical Christianity, and why?

JW's would have (and perhaps did), imo... unfortunately, they have added their own extra-biblical doctrines that are just as unsupported (perhaps even worse than) some of those among the 'evangelicals' (such as the traditional doctrine of eternal hellfire and also the trinity).

Such as teaching that Jesus is the archangel Michael. There is even less evidence of that from what is written than there is of Jesus being God (Most High). Though Christ taught neither of these things.

Such as the two hope (earthly or heavenly) doctrine for Christians. This doctrine specifically teaches people to disobey Christ, by refusing to partake of His body and blood. It also teaches people to believe that they have no real part in Christ, that Christ is not inviting or speaking to them at all, but only to a chosen few Christians. And the people LOVE this. (Jeremiah 5:31)

Let us for the time being, put aside the details of the book of Revelation, (obsession with this book seems escapist to me,) ...Let's consider the nature of Jesus.

-Inferior to, or equal to the Father?

He taught that He was second to the Father.

And the means of salvation.

Christ is the means of salvation. (no one comes to the father except through the son; there is one mediator between man and God: the man, Christ [Jesus])

Not a religion.

I think (not sure though) that the evangelicals may understand this more than the JW's. At the least, in practice, the JW's obey the religion and its leaders, and are taught by that religion TO obey the leaders. Evangelicals might do the same (not realizing) by obeying the traditional doctrines handed down from earlier religions.

-Both groups claim one has to see things their way in order to be saved.

Which is right, JWs? Evangelicals? Both? Neither? Both partially right?

Neither; though both groups have some truths, but also some falsehood. All religions have some truth, or else the elect (and all those who SEEK truth) would not be deceived. Even the Adversary continues to transform himself into an angel (messenger) of light, in order to deceive.

The only one who has ALL truth, and who IS right... is Christ. So it doesn't matter what anyone else says or does. WE should do as HE says. If indeed we claim to be Christian and/or disciples of Christ.

Let's add one for consideration. Is there a group/organization/denomination out there which has a better take on Biblical Christianity? Which one and why?

Not that I know of.

Of course, the Bible is not what saves, either, so perhaps some might consider that the search for 'biblical Christianity' is not quite the thing one should be searching for; rather than TRUTH (found in Christ).



May any who wish them be given ears to hear as the Spirit (Christ) and the Bride say to YOU, "Come!" Let anyone who thirsts, "Come! Take the free gift of the water of Life!"


Peace to you and to your loved ones,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Claire Evans]

Extensive investigation in to the membership rolls of the Masons reveals Charles Taze Russell was never a Mason.

Who did the extensive investigations?

There is absolutely no evidence the Society practices Enochian magic, either.

There are a few things to consider:

We can infer that the WatchTower Society got its name from the Book of Enoch's Watchers:

In the Book of Enoch, the Watchers (Aramaic עִירִין, iyrin) are angels dispatched to Earth to watch over the humans. They soon begin to lust for human women and, at the prodding of their leader Samyaza, defect en masse to illicitly instruct humanity and procreate among them.

The Watch Tower is the Great Pyramid of Giza. The pyramid is associated with Freemasonry and the occult.

"In the 1920's, (after Russell's death) the Watchtower magazine continued to teach
that the Great Pyramid was God's Stone Witness. "The great Pyramid of Egypt,
standing as a silent and inanimate witness of the Lord, is a messenger; and its
testimony speaks with great eloquence concerning the divine plan."
The Watchtower. 5/15/25.pg148."

See the video at 0:13 min. The publication refers to the Golden Age. Followers of Russel were Millennial Dawnists.



"The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (or, more commonly, the Golden Dawn) was a magical order of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, practicing a form of theurgy and spiritual development. It was possibly the single greatest influence on twentieth century western occultism. Concepts of magic and ritual that became core elements of many other traditions, including Wicca, Thelema and other forms of magical spirituality popular today, are drawn from the Golden Dawn tradition."

I want to just add my own comments to tigger's excellent post #468. He has found even more info than I have. (Did I somehow miss your answer as to who did the "intensive investigations"?)

It was a claim by Tigger and I'd like to know who did those investigations.

You say "we can INFER that the Watchtower got its name from 'the Watchers" in some Enochian book." You are inferring wrong. The Watchtower got its name from 2Chronicles 20:24:

"And when Judah came toward the watch tower in the wilderness, they looked unto the multitude...." (KJV)

And, as tigger already said, Isaiah 21:8:

"And he cried, A lion: My lord, I stand continually upon the watchtower in the daytime, and I am set in my ward whole nights." (KJV)


Charles T. Russell chose the name because that is what God's people do---continually WATCH to tell people about what events are coming on the earth and what God says that we should do to deal with these things. You got it all wrong about the "watchers" in the book of Enoch. Those angels appeared on Earth before the Flood and mated with human women. The Flood destroyed their offspring, the Nephilim, and the angels went back to the spirit realm (and from henceforth were demons, which exist today).

Did you read my response to Tigger? If we are to believe the claim of the WTS practising Enochian magic, then we should look at what the Book of Enoch is saying:

"They are considered an old race who have gone past the need for physical bodies. Some claim they are light. There are legends that say they came from the stars. They are the ones known as the Watchers. It is claimed that each of the four Watchers reigns over one of the four directions of the circle.

There were star cults in Mesopotamia around 3000 bce. One of the beliefs of these cults was that there were four major stars, each ruling over one of the four cardinal points. These stars where known as "Lords" or "Watchers."

The Watcher of the East was the star Aldebaran.This star marked the time of the Vernal Equinox. The Watcher of the South was Regulus, marking the time of the Summer Solstice. Marking the Autumnal Equinox was Antares, Watcher of the West. The North Watcher was the marker of Winter Solstice, Foralhaut.

Actual towers, called Ziggurats (cosmic mountains) were built as a form of worship. Each tower bore the symbols of the Watchers. During ritual celebrations the symbols were traced in the air with torch flames or wands, and the Watchers names were called.

The Watchers were thought of as gods that guarded the heavens and earth. Lunar and Solar cults eventually replaced the Star cults.

The Watchers became the gods of the four winds to the Greeks. The Christians took them over as "guardian angels."

The Hebrews taught that all angels, known to them as Watchers, were ruled by four "higher" angels. They became the "Archangels" to the Cabalists."

http://www.oocities.org/athens/4177/watchtowers.html


We know the Book of Enoch associates The Watchers with Watch Towers."

Your accusations concerning the Great Pyramid and the occult are slanderous and misleading. Charles Russell was never involved in the occult, and his interest in the Great Pyramid was nothing more than a man's intense curiosity, which was later dismissed as irrelevant.

This is a brief portion of information from the interesting publication by Fredrick Zydek (a non-JW) entitled Charles Taze Russell/ His Life and Times/ The Man, the Millennium and the Message:

"In May of 1875, George Storrs publishes a long article entitled 'A Chronological Curiosity.' It is a review of Piazzi Smyth's work and essays on the great pyramid of Egypt. French scholar Jean Francois Champollion, who first translated, wrote and published a brief Egyptian grammar from what he learned about Egyptian hieroglyphics from the Rosetta Stone, encourages a SURGE IN ACADEMIC AND LAY INVESTIGATIONS INTO EGYPTIAN HISTORY, ARCHITECTURE, AND ITS MYSTERIOUS AND ANCIENT RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. Piazzi Smyth, a member of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Scotland, known as the Astronomers-Royal, a renowned academician and scholar of his day, sets forth the proposition that the great pyramid on the Giza plateau is both a tomb of a past pharaoh as well as a stone witness and library which reveals the past, present and future of humanity's relationship and history with the Judaic/Christian God.

Yet, again, the Royal Society of Edinburgh is Freemasonic.

http://www.theeducator.ca/historyofthec ... eemasonry/

http://www.freemasonry.london.museum/os ... an2012.pdf

'Through an elaborate system of mathematical calculations based on the dimensions, capacities, and proportions of its outer and inner structure, he unraveled what he called a divinely inspired Christian chronicle of man's history--past and future.'

"Storrs never fully subscribes to Smyth's proposition but Charles [Russell] finds the concept irresistible. The idea that the Great Pyramid of Cheops might be the stone witness he has read and wondered about in the writings of the prophet Isaiah[19:19,20] is a theory he feels he must pursue."

I will end here for a while. There is more, and I will post it later. Suffice it to say that Champollion, the first man to decipher the Rosetta Stone, stirred up a tremendous amount of interest in Egyptian history. Piazzi Smyth, who, like Champollion, was not associated in any way with the occult, wrote about the Great Pyramid & thought that it may hold some kind of link to the God of the Bible. Charles Taze Russell became acquainted with this proposition by way of his friend George Storrs, and Charles became intrigued by the thought, esp. since he had wondered about Isaiah 19:19,20. It was purely an intellectual curiosity as to what there could be to Smyth's idea. Wouldn't YOU look into it yourself if you were living then? There was nothing occult about it. More later.

[/b]

Sorry, I was wrong that you said anything about "intensive investigations." It was Hoghead.

I read all your posts. I don't believe that the book of Enoch was inspired by God, though it has the right idea about angels of God coming to Earth and co-habiting with humans.

Several posts here have explained Bro. Russell's interest in the Great Pyramid. You either haven't read them or you choose to disagree. Please just say so, instead of just continuing to insist that he was a Freemason and practiced occult rituals, or even that he was interested in Freemasonry because of its anti-Christian ideas.

I have posted why anything Egyptian was all the rage back in the 1800s. Champollion had a great deal to do with that because no one had been able to interpret the Rosetta Stone until he figured it out around 1870. It was a huge deal. It has been asked you---why castigate a man for looking into a subject that had the world on the edge of its seat?

He wasn't interested in FREEMASONRY. He was interested in the Great Pyramid, as had been written about by Piazzi Smyth. But again, I assume you did not read my post, or tigger's, with explanations of this.

"In July of 1875, Charles writes a letter to Storrs as a separate individual instead of signing his correspondence 'J.L. Russell & Son' [he was in business with his father, running a clothing store] as he has done in the past. One presumes the letter is seeking additional literary resources to consider whileinvestigating the curiosity Smyth's ideas have fostered in Russell's thinking. Charles begins a private study regarding the Great Pyramid.

"It is a moment in history when archaeological digs have stimulated all kinds of theories about ancient Egyptian history....Articles about the pyramids and the Sphinx are being published on a wide scale....Those writers who tie the existence and meaning of the pyramids to the Judaic/Christian traditions make them all the more interesting to Jewish and Christian scholars because so much of the Old Testament history involves the time Israel enters Egypt in the Joseph narratives and exits Egypt in narratives which tell the story of Moses.

"Smyth employs interesting charts and mathematical measurements to substantiate his theories concerning the pyramid's link with the history of the Jews and forward in time to predict the coming of the Messiah, His death, resurrection and second coming. The charts presented by Smyth are not unlike those Russell has already entertained whilestudying and considering the theories of various dispensationalists."

(Charles Taze Russell by Fredrick Zydek, pp.46,47)


Charles Russell was just examining various lines of thought. Any thinking person who was interested in understanding the Scriptures would have done so.

[onewithhim]

Which group Evangelicals vs Jehovah's Witnesses do you see as having the better claim to authentic Biblical Christianity, and why?

JW's would have (and perhaps did), imo... unfortunately, they have added their own extra-biblical doctrines that are just as unsupported (perhaps even worse than) some of those among the 'evangelicals' (such as the traditional doctrine of eternal hellfire and also the trinity).

Such as teaching that Jesus is the archangel Michael. There is even less evidence of that from what is written than there is of Jesus being God (Most High). Though Christ taught neither of these things.

-Inferior to, or equal to the Father?

He taught that He was second to the Father.

And the means of salvation.

Christ is the means of salvation. (no one comes to the father except through the son; there is one mediator between man and God: the man, Christ [Jesus])

Not a religion.

I think (not sure though) that the evangelicals may understand this more than the JW's. At the least, in practice, the JW's obey the religion and its leaders, and are taught by that religion TO obey the leaders. Evangelicals might do the same (not realizing) by obeying the traditional doctrines handed down from earlier religions.

-Both groups claim one has to see things their way in order to be saved.

Which is right, JWs? Evangelicals? Both? Neither? Both partially right?

Neither; though both groups have some truths, but also some falsehood. All religions have some truth, or else the elect (and all those who SEEK truth) would not be deceived. Even the Adversary continues to transform himself into an angel (messenger) of light, in order to deceive.

The only one who has ALL truth, and who IS right... is Christ. So it doesn't matter what anyone else says or does. WE should do as HE says. If indeed we claim to be Christian and/or disciples of Christ.

Let's add one for consideration. Is there a group/organization/denomination out there which has a better take on Biblical Christianity? Which one and why?

Not that I know of.

Of course, the Bible is not what saves, either, so perhaps some might consider that the search for 'biblical Christianity' is not quite the thing one should be searching for; rather than TRUTH (found in Christ).



May any who wish them be given ears to hear as the Spirit (Christ) and the Bride say to YOU, "Come!" Let anyone who thirsts, "Come! Take the free gift of the water of Life!"


Peace to you and to your loved ones,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

I beg to differ that JWs have added their own doctrines to the Scriptures. You say the doctrines are "unsupported." I have posted Scriptural support, but I guess it was overlooked. I appreciate your saying that Jesus did not teach that he was God. Now, Michael the archangel seems to be a thorny subject to most people here. I have always been amazed that it is such a touchy subject. I never had any problem with it, especially after reading Daniel 12:1-4. It is all about the Last Days and what would occur then.

"Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people [who, in the Last Days would be spiritual Israel], will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people [true Christians], everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued. Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake...." (Daniel 12:1,2, NASB)

The fact that Michael "arises" or "stands up" around the time of the Great Tribulation, and that he is called "the great prince" convinces me that "Michael" is the name Jesus had while in heaven, and also after he went back to heaven after being on the earth. When Jesus gave the prophecy concerning his coming in association with the Great Tribulation, what other person is mentioned? No one. Just Jesus. (Matthew 24:21-29) Where does the "Michael" of Daniel 12:1 fit in with Jesus' prophecy of the Last Days and the Great Tribulation?

[tigger2]

I don't see the great importance of knowing exactly who Michael was. It certainly is nothing compared to knowing and using the personal name of the God of the Bible.

However,

From early Christian writings until now there have been many who understood Michael to be the archangel who became Jesus on earth.  (I believe JWs have identified him as such from the beginning. I find this understanding in my copy of the June, 1883 Zion’s Watch Tower.)
 
Back in the early 1800's, Bible scholar Joseph Benson stated that the description of Michael as found in the Bible "manifestly points out the Messiah." 


……………………………
 
Nineteenth-century Lutheran E. W. Hengstenberg agreed that "Michael is no other than Christ."

……………………………. 
 
Similarly, theologian J. P. Lange, when commenting on Revelation 12:7, wrote: "We take it that Michael . . . is, from the outset, Christ in warlike array against Satan."

……………………………
 
Clarke’s Commentary (Adam Clarke)
Jude :9

“Let it be observed that the word archangel is never found in the plural number in the sacred writings. There can be properly only one archangel, one chief or head of all the angelic host. Nor is the word devil, as applied to the great enemy of mankind, ever found in the plural; there can be but one monarch of all fallen spirits. Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders; the devil, great dragon, or Satan, is head of all the diabolic orders. When these two hosts are opposed to each other they are said to act under these two chiefs, as leaders; hence in Revelation 12:7, it is said: MICHAEL and his angels fought against the DRAGON and his angels.  .... in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus.�

…………………………..
 
The 1599 Geneva Study Bible: Revelation

“12:7 And there was war in heaven: [14]Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

“[14] Christ is the Prince of angels and head of the Church, who bears that iron rod….�
………………………….. 

John Gill, A Body of Doctrinal Divinity, Book 7 Chapter 5:

“1b2. Another prophecy in Daniel 12:1-3 respects the second and personal coming of Christ; for he is meant by Michael, who is "as God", as his name signifies, equal to him; the ‘great prince,’ the prince of the kings of the earth, and the head of all principalities and powers.�

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.
Daniel 12:1

“Ver. 1. And at that time shall Michael stand up,.... The Archangel, who has all the angels of heaven under him, and at his command, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ;�

.....................
 
And even trinitarian Bible scholar W. E. Vine (“recognized as one of the world’s foremost [Bible] Greek scholars�) tells us that this “voice of the archangel� (1 Thess. 4:16) is apparently “the voice of the Lord Jesus Christ�! - p. 64, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

……………………………
 
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia:

“The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the preincarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the “child� and the archangel in Rev. 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel� – vol. 3, p. 2048, Eerdmans Publishing, 1984 printing.

………………………………..

"Michael ... in Dan. 10:13,21; 12:1, is described as having a special charge of the Jewish nation, and in Rev. 12:7-9 as the leader of the angelic army. So exalted are the position and offices ascribed to Michael, that many think the Messiah is meant." -- International Bible Dictionary -- Illustrated (Plainfield, NJ, Logos International, 1977), p. 35.
………………………………

Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Patrick Fairbairn, D.D., editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing, 1957, Vol. IV, pp. 238, 239; Revised 1997, Vol. Seven, p. 800. (originally published as The Imperial Bible Dictionary, 1891), states this:

“MI’CHAEL … there have in general been two rival opinions, either that he is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, or that he is one of the so-called seven archangels. We hold the former opinion�

………………………………

Protestant Reformer John Calvin said regarding "Michael" in its occurrence at Daniel 12:1:

"I embrace the opinion of those who refer this to the person of Christ, because it suits the subject best to represent him as standing forward for the defense of his elect people." - J. Calvin, Commentaries On The Book Of The Prophet Daniel, trans. T. Myers (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), vol. 2, p. 369.
………………………………...

John Wesley:

Chapter XII
A promise of deliverance, and of a joyful resurrection, ver. 1 - 4.  A conference concerning the time of these events, ver. 5 - 7.  An answer to Daniel's enquiry, ver. 8 - 13.   For the children - The meaning seems to be, as after the death of Antiochus the Jews had some deliverance, so there will be yet a greater deliverance to the people of God, when Michael your prince, the Messiah shall appear for your salvation. A time of trouble - A the siege of Jerusalem, before the final judgment. The phrase at that time, probably includes all the time of Christ, from his first, to his last coming.
 
Wesley on Daniel 10:21 "Michael - Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of the earth desert or oppose it."
………………………………......


William L. Alexander, Doctor of Divinity, stated:

There seems good reason for regarding Michael as the Messiah.  Such was the opinion of the best among the ancient Jews.... With this all the Bible representations of Michael agree. He appears as the Great Prince who standeth for Israel (Dan. xii. I), and he is called "the Prince of Israel" (Dan. x. 21)--William L. Alexander, ed., A Cyclopedia Of Biblical Literature, originally edited by John Kitto, 3d ed. (Edinburgh: A & C Black, 1886). vol. 3, p. 158.

…………………………….

"The two passages in the New Testament, in which Michael is mentioned, serve to confirm the result already arrived at. That the Michael referred to in Rev. xii. 7 is no other than the Logos, [the Word - the Son of God] has already been proved in my commentary upon that passage." —Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Christology of the Old Testament and a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions, 1836-9, Vol. IV, pp. 304-5 (in the T. & T. Clark publication; p. 269 in the Kregel publication).

……………………………
 
Brown's Dictionary of the Bible on the words 'Michael' and 'Angel' says, that both these words do sometimes refer to Christ; and also affirms that Christ is the Archangel.


…………………………..
 
Wood's Spiritual Dictionary teaches nearly, if not exactly, the same on this subject that Brown's does. The former was a Calvinist, the latter a Methodist.

…………………

Guyse in his Paraphrase on the New Testament, on Rev. xii. 7, acknowledges that many good expositors think that Christ is signified by Michael; and also gives it as his opinion.

………………….
 
Thomas Scott, in his notes on the Bible, says the Angel that appeared to Hagar when she fled from her mistress, one of the three Angels that appeared to Abraham in the plains of Mamre, the Angel that appeared to Moses in the bush, and the Angel that spoke to the Jews at Bochim, was Jesus Christ: and also asserts that Michael the Archangel is Jesus Christ. See Gen. xvi. 9, 10. Chap. xviii throughout. Exod. iii. 2-7. Judg. ii. 1-5, Dan x. 13, 21. Chap. xii. 1, Rev. xii. 7.

[tigger2]

I don't see the great importance of knowing exactly who Michael was. It certainly is nothing compared to knowing and using the personal name of the God of the Bible.

However,

From early Christian writings until now there have been many who understood Michael to be the archangel who became Jesus on earth.  (I believe JWs have identified him as such from the beginning. I find this understanding in my copy of the June, 1883 Zion’s Watch Tower.)
 
Back in the early 1800's, Bible scholar Joseph Benson stated that the description of Michael as found in the Bible "manifestly points out the Messiah." 


……………………………
 
Nineteenth-century Lutheran E. W. Hengstenberg agreed that "Michael is no other than Christ."

……………………………. 
 
Similarly, theologian J. P. Lange, when commenting on Revelation 12:7, wrote: "We take it that Michael . . . is, from the outset, Christ in warlike array against Satan."

……………………………
 
Clarke’s Commentary (Adam Clarke)
Jude :9

“Let it be observed that the word archangel is never found in the plural number in the sacred writings. There can be properly only one archangel, one chief or head of all the angelic host. Nor is the word devil, as applied to the great enemy of mankind, ever found in the plural; there can be but one monarch of all fallen spirits. Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders; the devil, great dragon, or Satan, is head of all the diabolic orders. When these two hosts are opposed to each other they are said to act under these two chiefs, as leaders; hence in Revelation 12:7, it is said: MICHAEL and his angels fought against the DRAGON and his angels.  .... in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus.�

…………………………..
 
The 1599 Geneva Study Bible: Revelation

“12:7 And there was war in heaven: [14]Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

“[14] Christ is the Prince of angels and head of the Church, who bears that iron rod….�
………………………….. 

John Gill, A Body of Doctrinal Divinity, Book 7 Chapter 5:

“1b2. Another prophecy in Daniel 12:1-3 respects the second and personal coming of Christ; for he is meant by Michael, who is "as God", as his name signifies, equal to him; the ‘great prince,’ the prince of the kings of the earth, and the head of all principalities and powers.�

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.
Daniel 12:1

“Ver. 1. And at that time shall Michael stand up,.... The Archangel, who has all the angels of heaven under him, and at his command, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ;�

.....................
 
And even trinitarian Bible scholar W. E. Vine (“recognized as one of the world’s foremost [Bible] Greek scholars�) tells us that this “voice of the archangel� (1 Thess. 4:16) is apparently “the voice of the Lord Jesus Christ�! - p. 64, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

……………………………
 
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia:

“The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the preincarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the “child� and the archangel in Rev. 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel� – vol. 3, p. 2048, Eerdmans Publishing, 1984 printing.

………………………………..

"Michael ... in Dan. 10:13,21; 12:1, is described as having a special charge of the Jewish nation, and in Rev. 12:7-9 as the leader of the angelic army. So exalted are the position and offices ascribed to Michael, that many think the Messiah is meant." -- International Bible Dictionary -- Illustrated (Plainfield, NJ, Logos International, 1977), p. 35.
………………………………

Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Patrick Fairbairn, D.D., editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing, 1957, Vol. IV, pp. 238, 239; Revised 1997, Vol. Seven, p. 800. (originally published as The Imperial Bible Dictionary, 1891), states this:

“MI’CHAEL … there have in general been two rival opinions, either that he is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, or that he is one of the so-called seven archangels. We hold the former opinion�

………………………………

Protestant Reformer John Calvin said regarding "Michael" in its occurrence at Daniel 12:1:

"I embrace the opinion of those who refer this to the person of Christ, because it suits the subject best to represent him as standing forward for the defense of his elect people." - J. Calvin, Commentaries On The Book Of The Prophet Daniel, trans. T. Myers (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), vol. 2, p. 369.
………………………………...

John Wesley:

Chapter XII
A promise of deliverance, and of a joyful resurrection, ver. 1 - 4.  A conference concerning the time of these events, ver. 5 - 7.  An answer to Daniel's enquiry, ver. 8 - 13.   For the children - The meaning seems to be, as after the death of Antiochus the Jews had some deliverance, so there will be yet a greater deliverance to the people of God, when Michael your prince, the Messiah shall appear for your salvation. A time of trouble - A the siege of Jerusalem, before the final judgment. The phrase at that time, probably includes all the time of Christ, from his first, to his last coming.
 
Wesley on Daniel 10:21 "Michael - Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of the earth desert or oppose it."
………………………………......


William L. Alexander, Doctor of Divinity, stated:

There seems good reason for regarding Michael as the Messiah.  Such was the opinion of the best among the ancient Jews.... With this all the Bible representations of Michael agree. He appears as the Great Prince who standeth for Israel (Dan. xii. I), and he is called "the Prince of Israel" (Dan. x. 21)--William L. Alexander, ed., A Cyclopedia Of Biblical Literature, originally edited by John Kitto, 3d ed. (Edinburgh: A & C Black, 1886). vol. 3, p. 158.

…………………………….

"The two passages in the New Testament, in which Michael is mentioned, serve to confirm the result already arrived at. That the Michael referred to in Rev. xii. 7 is no other than the Logos, [the Word - the Son of God] has already been proved in my commentary upon that passage." —Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Christology of the Old Testament and a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions, 1836-9, Vol. IV, pp. 304-5 (in the T. & T. Clark publication; p. 269 in the Kregel publication).

……………………………
 
Brown's Dictionary of the Bible on the words 'Michael' and 'Angel' says, that both these words do sometimes refer to Christ; and also affirms that Christ is the Archangel.


…………………………..
 
Wood's Spiritual Dictionary teaches nearly, if not exactly, the same on this subject that Brown's does. The former was a Calvinist, the latter a Methodist.

…………………

Guyse in his Paraphrase on the New Testament, on Rev. xii. 7, acknowledges that many good expositors think that Christ is signified by Michael; and also gives it as his opinion.

………………….
 
Thomas Scott, in his notes on the Bible, says the Angel that appeared to Hagar when she fled from her mistress, one of the three Angels that appeared to Abraham in the plains of Mamre, the Angel that appeared to Moses in the bush, and the Angel that spoke to the Jews at Bochim, was Jesus Christ: and also asserts that Michael the Archangel is Jesus Christ. See Gen. xvi. 9, 10. Chap. xviii throughout. Exod. iii. 2-7. Judg. ii. 1-5, Dan x. 13, 21. Chap. xii. 1, Rev. xii. 7.

[tigger2]

I don't see the great importance of knowing exactly who Michael was. It certainly is nothing compared to knowing and using the personal name of the God of the Bible.

However,

From early Christian writings until now there have been many who understood Michael to be the archangel who became Jesus on earth.  (I believe JWs have identified him as such from the beginning. I find this understanding in my copy of the June, 1883 Zion’s Watch Tower.)
 
Back in the early 1800's, Bible scholar Joseph Benson stated that the description of Michael as found in the Bible "manifestly points out the Messiah." 


……………………………
 
Nineteenth-century Lutheran E. W. Hengstenberg agreed that "Michael is no other than Christ."

……………………………. 
 
Similarly, theologian J. P. Lange, when commenting on Revelation 12:7, wrote: "We take it that Michael . . . is, from the outset, Christ in warlike array against Satan."

……………………………
 
Clarke’s Commentary (Adam Clarke)
Jude :9

“Let it be observed that the word archangel is never found in the plural number in the sacred writings. There can be properly only one archangel, one chief or head of all the angelic host. Nor is the word devil, as applied to the great enemy of mankind, ever found in the plural; there can be but one monarch of all fallen spirits. Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders; the devil, great dragon, or Satan, is head of all the diabolic orders. When these two hosts are opposed to each other they are said to act under these two chiefs, as leaders; hence in Revelation 12:7, it is said: MICHAEL and his angels fought against the DRAGON and his angels.  .... in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus.�

…………………………..
 
The 1599 Geneva Study Bible: Revelation

“12:7 And there was war in heaven: [14]Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

“[14] Christ is the Prince of angels and head of the Church, who bears that iron rod….�
………………………….. 

John Gill, A Body of Doctrinal Divinity, Book 7 Chapter 5:

“1b2. Another prophecy in Daniel 12:1-3 respects the second and personal coming of Christ; for he is meant by Michael, who is "as God", as his name signifies, equal to him; the ‘great prince,’ the prince of the kings of the earth, and the head of all principalities and powers.�

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.
Daniel 12:1

“Ver. 1. And at that time shall Michael stand up,.... The Archangel, who has all the angels of heaven under him, and at his command, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ;�

.....................
 
And even trinitarian Bible scholar W. E. Vine (“recognized as one of the world’s foremost [Bible] Greek scholars�) tells us that this “voice of the archangel� (1 Thess. 4:16) is apparently “the voice of the Lord Jesus Christ�! - p. 64, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

……………………………
 
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia:

“The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the preincarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the “child� and the archangel in Rev. 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel� – vol. 3, p. 2048, Eerdmans Publishing, 1984 printing.

………………………………..

"Michael ... in Dan. 10:13,21; 12:1, is described as having a special charge of the Jewish nation, and in Rev. 12:7-9 as the leader of the angelic army. So exalted are the position and offices ascribed to Michael, that many think the Messiah is meant." -- International Bible Dictionary -- Illustrated (Plainfield, NJ, Logos International, 1977), p. 35.
………………………………

Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Patrick Fairbairn, D.D., editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing, 1957, Vol. IV, pp. 238, 239; Revised 1997, Vol. Seven, p. 800. (originally published as The Imperial Bible Dictionary, 1891), states this:

“MI’CHAEL … there have in general been two rival opinions, either that he is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, or that he is one of the so-called seven archangels. We hold the former opinion�

………………………………

Protestant Reformer John Calvin said regarding "Michael" in its occurrence at Daniel 12:1:

"I embrace the opinion of those who refer this to the person of Christ, because it suits the subject best to represent him as standing forward for the defense of his elect people." - J. Calvin, Commentaries On The Book Of The Prophet Daniel, trans. T. Myers (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), vol. 2, p. 369.
………………………………...

John Wesley:

Chapter XII
A promise of deliverance, and of a joyful resurrection, ver. 1 - 4.  A conference concerning the time of these events, ver. 5 - 7.  An answer to Daniel's enquiry, ver. 8 - 13.   For the children - The meaning seems to be, as after the death of Antiochus the Jews had some deliverance, so there will be yet a greater deliverance to the people of God, when Michael your prince, the Messiah shall appear for your salvation. A time of trouble - A the siege of Jerusalem, before the final judgment. The phrase at that time, probably includes all the time of Christ, from his first, to his last coming.
 
Wesley on Daniel 10:21 "Michael - Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of the earth desert or oppose it."
………………………………......


William L. Alexander, Doctor of Divinity, stated:

There seems good reason for regarding Michael as the Messiah.  Such was the opinion of the best among the ancient Jews.... With this all the Bible representations of Michael agree. He appears as the Great Prince who standeth for Israel (Dan. xii. I), and he is called "the Prince of Israel" (Dan. x. 21)--William L. Alexander, ed., A Cyclopedia Of Biblical Literature, originally edited by John Kitto, 3d ed. (Edinburgh: A & C Black, 1886). vol. 3, p. 158.

…………………………….

"The two passages in the New Testament, in which Michael is mentioned, serve to confirm the result already arrived at. That the Michael referred to in Rev. xii. 7 is no other than the Logos, [the Word - the Son of God] has already been proved in my commentary upon that passage." —Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Christology of the Old Testament and a Commentary on the Messianic Predictions, 1836-9, Vol. IV, pp. 304-5 (in the T. & T. Clark publication; p. 269 in the Kregel publication).

……………………………
 
Brown's Dictionary of the Bible on the words 'Michael' and 'Angel' says, that both these words do sometimes refer to Christ; and also affirms that Christ is the Archangel.


…………………………..
 
Wood's Spiritual Dictionary teaches nearly, if not exactly, the same on this subject that Brown's does. The former was a Calvinist, the latter a Methodist.

…………………

Guyse in his Paraphrase on the New Testament, on Rev. xii. 7, acknowledges that many good expositors think that Christ is signified by Michael; and also gives it as his opinion.

………………….
 
Thomas Scott, in his notes on the Bible, says the Angel that appeared to Hagar when she fled from her mistress, one of the three Angels that appeared to Abraham in the plains of Mamre, the Angel that appeared to Moses in the bush, and the Angel that spoke to the Jews at Bochim, was Jesus Christ: and also asserts that Michael the Archangel is Jesus Christ. See Gen. xvi. 9, 10. Chap. xviii throughout. Exod. iii. 2-7. Judg. ii. 1-5, Dan x. 13, 21. Chap. xii. 1, Rev. xii. 7.

..................

Concerning Daniel 10 in Henry‘s unabridged commentary:
Here is Michael our prince, the great protector of the church, and the patron of its just but injured cause: The first of the chief princes, v. 13. Some understand it of a created angel, but an archangel of the highest order, 1 Th. 4:16; Jude 9. Others think that Michael the archangel is no other than Christ himself, the angel of the covenant, and the Lord of the angels, he whom Daniel saw in vision, v. 5.
 
.................

An Exposition of the Bible, produced by 27 different scholars, says of Michael:
 
"It is even itself probable that the Leader of the hosts of light (in Rev. 12:7-9) will be no other than the Captain of our salvation, the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.... Above all, the prophecies of Daniel, in which the name Michael first occurs, may be said to decide the point." -- publ. in Hartford, CT, 1910, by the Scranton Co., vol. 6, p.882.

....................

In Early Christian Doctrines, J.N.D. Kelly writes concerning The Shepherd of Hermas, of the 2nd or 3rd century:
 
In a number of passages we read of an angel who is superior to the six angels forming God's inner council, and who is regularly described as 'most venerable', 'holy' and 'glorious'. This angel is given the name of Michael, and the conclusion is difficult to escape that Hermas saw in him the Son of God and equated him with the archangel Michael.