Who is like God? (Carte, Documentar)
Who is like God?
The meaning of the name Michael is „Who is like God”.
Archangel Michael, the Son of God
Anarthrous construction of John 1:1 and It's Meaning
"en arche en o logos kai o logos en pros ton theon kai theos en o
logos" John 1:1 in Greek
About the word anarthrous
an·ar·throus (n-ärthrs)
adj.
1. Linguistics Occurring without an article. Used especially of Greek nouns.
[From Greek anarthros, not articulated : an-, without; see a-1 + arthron, joint; see ar- in Indo-European roots.]
We could understand the anarthrous meaning of John 1:1 through a simple
substitution of words.
If we substitute a word of a proposition with one of the common ground words
the construction of the proposition will be the same.
For example:
"In my bag I have two apples."
"In my bag I have two plums."
Now, what we will have if we substitute some words from John 1:1?
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Let's see:
in the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was god
Compare now with this substitution:
in the beginning was the women and the women was with man and the women was man
Technically the substituted proposition shows us some very interesting things,
the nature of woman. She was also a "man" in her human nature. That
is the meaning of the non substituted John 1:1
If we compare John 1:1 with 2Peter 1:4, what we will say about our future
nature (if we accept truly and faithfully the heavenly calling)?
"Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so
that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the
corruption in the world caused by evil desires."
We will have "the divine nature" as our Lord Jesus have from the
beginning, when he was with his Father. So, we will be God or Jesus, because
our "divine nature"? No, not at all. This word "god" could
be used in both way:
- as a term for a descriptive title of God, the Father Almighty
and
- as a term for a similar nature as God have
Conclusion:
In John 1:1 we have both terms, but in the case of the Logos, we have an anarthrous construction not an articular construction and in this case the anarthrous construction emphasizes the nature of the Logos and is not a term for a descriptive title of God. So, John 1:1 shows us that the Logos was not God the Father himself, just has the same nature as his Father. Is not about a second or lesser "god", is about nature.
---
Why the disciples forgave sins if they are not God?
The question:
"WHY did Jesus forgive sin if he was not God incarnate????????????"
The answer:
"WHY did the disciples forgave sins if they were not God?"
John 20:23 "If you forgive anyone's sins, they are forgiven. If you do not
forgive them, they are not forgiven."
About the expression "Jesus was God incarnate" we do not believe
this. How could he be? If he is the Son of God? He is divine, but he is not God
himself. God is one, and he is only the Father Almighty. So, the reason why
Jesus and his disciples forgave sins, is because God, the Father Almighty gave
them the authority to do this. For the disciples, God gave this authority
through Lord Jesus. Without God's permission, they could not do this. This
couldn't be an argument in the case of proving the Trinity doctrine. With such
logic, even the disciples could join in the so called "Trinity" to be
a God with many faces.
John 5:36 "But the testimony that I have is greater than that of John. For
the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am
doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me."
---
Emperor Constantine and the Erythraean sibyl (pagan oracle)
It is very interesting how emperor Constantine used a pagan oracle in a
theological argument against his enemies. At that time, and before that time,
some Christians from the Gnostic movement believed that the pagans were also
inspired by God.
"(18.) Lend your ears and listen a little, impious Arius, and understand
your folly. O God, protector of all, may you be well – disposed to what is
being said, if it should admit of faith! For I, your man, holding to your
propitious providence, from the very ancient Greek and Roman writing (WOW!!!)
shall demonstrate clearly Arius’ madness, which has been prophesied and
predicted three thousand years ago by the Erythraean sibyl. (19.) For she
indeed says: “Woe to you, Libya, situated in maritime regions, for there shall
come to you a time, in which with the people and your daughters you must be compelled
to undergo a terrible and cruel and very difficult crisis, from which a
judgment both of faith and of piety in respect to all persons will be given,
but you will decline to extreme ruin, for you have dared to engulf the
receptacle of celestial flowers and to mangle it with a bite and you have
polluted it with iron teeth.” (20.) What then, knave? Where in the world do you
admit that you are now? There, obviously; for I have your letters, which you
have scraped with the pen of madness toward me, in which you say that all the
Libyan populace is of the same opinion with you – doubtless in regard to
salvation. But if you shall deny that this is so, I now call God to witness
that truly I send to Alexandria – that you may perish more quickly – the
Erythraean Sibyl’s very ancient tablet, composed in the Greek tongue."
http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-34
Arius view - that the Son of God has a beginning - was well received in his country
and the emperor did not contradict this notice "in which you say that all
the Libyan populace is of the same opinion with you" but tried to fight
this popularity with a pagan oracle.
---
Is the "Archangel Christology" an "Angel Christology"?
Jehovah Witnesses weren't the first to reason that Jesus is Michael the
Archangel:
"In a number of passages we read of an angel who is superior to the six
angels of 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 (was the brother of the Bishop of Rome) saw in him the Son of God and
equated him with the archangel Michael. Both, for example, are invested with
supreme power over the people of God; both pronounce judgment on the faithful;
and both hand sinners over to the angel of repentance to reform them. ... The
evidence to be collected from the Apostolic Fathers is meagre, and
tantalizingly inconclusive. There is evidence also, as we observed in the
preceding paragraph, of attempts to interpret Christ as a sort of supreme
angel; here the influence of Jewish angelology is discernible." - Early
Christian Doctrines, by JND Kelly, pp 94, 95
In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, John A. Lees says:
"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 Dnl (for a full discussion see Hengstenberg,
Offenbarung, I, 611-22, and an interesting survey in English by Dr. Douglas in
Fairbairn B{ible} D{ictionary}." (1930, Vol. III), p. 2048.
"ARCHANGEL. This word is only twice used in the Bible, 1 Thess. 4:16; Jude
9. In the last passage it is applied to Michael, who, 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 an angelic army. So exalted are the position and offices
ascribed to Michael, that many think the Messiah is meant." -
Inter-National Bible Dictionary, published by Logos International, Plainfield,
New Jersey, p. 35.
John Wesley's Note on the Whole Bible:
Daniel Chapter 10
5. A certain man; Very probably Christ, who appeared to Daniel in royal and
priestly robes, and in so great brightness and majesty.
13. Withstood me; God suffered the wicked counsels of Cambyses to take place
awhile; but Daniel by his prayers, and the angel by his power, overcame him at
last: and this very thing laid a foundation of the ruin of the Persian
monarchies. Michael; Michael here is commonly supposed to mean Christ. I
remained; To counter-work their designs against the people of God
21. Michael; Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes
of the earth desert or oppose it.
C. H. Spurgeon from "Mornings and Evenings":
"To whom do we owe all this? Let the Lord Jesus Christ be for ever
endeared to us, for through Him we are made to sit in heavenly places far above
principalities and powers. He it is whose camp is round about them that fear
Him; He is the true Michael whose foot is upon the dragon. All hail, Jesus!
thou Angel of Jehovah's presence, to Thee this family offers its morning vows."
As I wrote earlier, the so called trinity doctrine is of pagan origin, it is
wrong and is not found in the Bible, thus it is an anti-biblical doctrine. But
others say, that the Son of God did not preexist as a literal being, with God
the Father as a distinct person (ebionites, muslims, unitarians, etc.). And
others say that he was Michael the archangel, the Son of God, who chose to
become human:
"And even if there be not as yet any one who is worthy to be called a son
of God, nevertheless let him labour earnestly to be adorned according to His
first-born Word, the eldest of His angels, as the great archangel of many
names; for he is called, the Authority, and the Name of God, and the Word, and
Man according to God's image, and He who sees Israel (allusion to Michael from
the book of Daniel 12:1, from the Old Testament)."
P. 247, The Works of Philo, "On the Confusion of Tongues"
"This great tree that casts its shadow over plains, and mountains, and all
the earth, is the law of God that was given to the whole world; and this law is
the Son of God, proclaimed to the ends of the earth; and the people who are
under its shadow are they who have heard the proclamation, and have believed
upon Him. And the great and glorious angel Michael is he who has authority over
this people, and governs them; for this is he who gave them the law into the
hearts of believers: he accordingly superintends them to whom he gave it, to
see if they have kept the same."
"The Pastor of Hermas"
"And in that hour, the Highest Messenger MichaEl (the one who watches over
the sons of your people) will arise, and then a time of difficulty will begin
such as has never happened before and will never happen again. Will raise all
those whose were written in the book, and many who died and were buried will be
resurrected; some to life in the age, some to disgrace, and some will be
scattered and shamed in that age. Then those who understand my words will shine
like the brightness of the sky and like the stars in the heavens for ages of
ages."
Septuagint - Daniel 12:1-3
A very important note: Matthew Henry cites Daniel 10:13 as "The first of
the chief princes," not "on of the chief princes" ...
See also Young's Literal Translation
"And the head of the kingdom of Persia is standing over-against me twenty
and one days, and lo, Michael, first ("achad" not "echad -
one") of the chief heads, hath come in to help me, and I have remained
there near the kings of Persia;"
(...)
And he saith, Hast thou known why I have come unto thee? and now I turn back to fight with the head of Persia; yea, I am going forth, and lo, the head of Javan hath come; but I declare to thee that which is noted down in the Writing of Truth, and there is not one strengthening himself with me, concerning these, except Michael your head."
Young's Literal Translation
http://yltbible.com/daniel/10.htm
"And at that time stand up doth Michael, the great head, who is standing
up for the sons of thy people, and there hath been a time of distress, such as
hath not been since there hath been a nation till that time, and at that time
do thy people escape, every one who is found written in the book"
Young's Literal Translation
http://yltbible.com/daniel/12.htm
"The Arab historian Shahrastani (Eleventh Century) affirms that, in the
Fourth Century, Arius borrowed his doctrine, according to which the Messiah is
the first angel of God for the Magharians, "who lived four hundred years
before Arius and were known by the simplicity of their way of life and their
serene abstinence."
"Who were these Magharians, whose existence dates back to the First Century before the Christian era? Their Arab name leaves little doubt; it means "people of the cavern or the cave," because -- Shahrastani makes clear -- they hid their sacred texts in caverns."
"There is nothing surprising in the fact that the doctrine of the Angel-Messiah (the angelos-christos) was originally Essene, since it was shared by the [various] Christianities and predominated up to the historization of Jesus, undertaken in the second half of the Second Century."
http://www.notbored.org/resistance-4.html
Daniel 12:1 And at that time stand up doth Michael, the great head, who is
standing up for the sons of thy people, and there hath been a time of distress,
such as hath not been since there hath been a nation till that time, and at
that time do thy people escape, every one who is found written in the book.
So, who is this great head?
Let's see a few commentaries:
“As we stated yesterday, Michael may mean an angel; but 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.” - John Calvin. (See Calvin's writings online at http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol25/htm/vii.htm)
“Michael - Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of
the earth desert or oppose it.” - John Wesley's commentary on Daniel 10:21.
(See Wesley's writings online at http://wesley.nnu.edu/john_wesley/notes/daniel.htm)
“a) The angel here notes two things: first that the Church will be in great
affliction and trouble at Christ's coming, and next that God will send his
angel to deliver it, whom he here calls Michael, meaning Christ, who is
proclaimed by the preaching of the Gospel.” - Geneva Bible Commentary. (See http://www.ccel.org/g/geneva/notes/Daniel/12.html)
Matthew Henry about Michael as Jesus
"[2.] 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 Thessalonians 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. He came to help me (v. 13); and
there is none but he that holds with me in these things, v. 21. Christ is the
church's prince; angels are not, Heb. ii. 5. He presides in the affairs of the
church and effectually provides for its good. He is said to hold with the
angels, for it is he that makes them serviceable to the heirs of salvation;
and, if he were not on the church's side, its case were bad. But, says David, and
so says the church, The Lord takes my part with those that help me, Ps. cxviii.
7. The Lord is with those that uphold my soul, Ps. liv. 4."
"The Promised Appearance of Michael; The Prophecy Sealed Up. (b. c. 534.)
I. Jesus Christ shall appear his church's patron and protector: At that time,
when the persecution is at the hottest, Michael shall stand up, v. 1. The angel
had told Daniel what a firm friend Michael was to the church, ch. x. 21. He all
along showed this friendship in the upper world; the angels knew it; but now
Michael shall stand up in his providence, and work deliverance for the Jews,
when he sees that their power is gone, Deut. xxxii. 3. 6. Christ is that great
prince, for he is the prince of the kings of the earth, Rev. i. 5. And, if he
stand up for his church, who can be against it? . . . ."
See also: Is Michael Christ? (Part 1) by John Evans on:
http://www.planetpreterist.com/news-5298.html
But the opponents of this view say, that is wrong because "Archangel
Christology" is an "angel Christology" in opposition with the
Bible - Hebrews chapter 1.
So, the question is if Michael the archangel is an angel or something more?
I disagree with the term "angel Christology", because this term in
not fully correct.
I prefer Archangel Christology, because Michael is not a simple angel, he is the head of the angels, not one of them. He was before them. God created angels through him, so he can not be one of them! But this could be a confusion of tongues, or maybe some people want to deliberately confuse this issue. Some words could be used in parallel, but not in the same meanings:
John 1:1: the Logos is god, but not God Almighty
2Corinthians 4:4: Satan is god, but not God Almighty
Matthew.16:23: Peter is satan, but not Satan the Devil
John 10:34: Some people could be gods, but of course not God Almighty
Galathians 4:14 Paul received as angel of God, but he was not an angel
And so on... so the preexisted Son of God could be an angel of Jehovah - if we use this word as "messenger of Jehovah", but he is not "one of the angels" if we use this word as a common description for the angels.
So, who is Michael the Archangel in the Bible?
"And the head of the kingdom of Persia is standing over-against me twenty
and one days, and lo, Michael, first ('achad) of the chief heads, hath come in
to help me, and I have remained there near the kings of Persia;
(...)
And he saith, Hast thou known why I have come unto thee? and now I turn back to fight with the head of Persia; yea, I am going forth, and lo, the head of Javan hath come; but I declare to thee that which is noted down in the Writing of Truth, and there is not one strengthening himself with me, concerning these, except Michael your head."
Young's Literal Translation
http://yltbible.com/daniel/10.htm
Note: 'achad; properly, united, i.e. One; or (as an ordinal) first -- a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together,
http://biblos.com/daniel/10-13.htm
"If a translation gives a present tense when the original gives a past, or
a past when it has a present; a perfect for a future, or a future for a
perfect; an a for a the, or a the for an a; an imperative for a subjunctive, or
a subjunctive for an imperative; a verb for a noun, or a noun for a verb, it is
clear that verbal inspiration is as much overlooked as if it had no existence.
THE WORD OF GOD IS MADE VOID BY THE TRADITIONS OF MEN. [Emphases in
original.]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young's_Literal_Translation
"And at that time stand up doth Michael, the great head, who is standing
up for the sons of thy people, and there hath been a time of distress, such as
hath not been since there hath been a nation till that time, and at that time
do thy people escape, every one who is found written in the book"
Young's Literal Translation
http://yltbible.com/daniel/12.htm
"The angel here notes two things: first that the Church will be in great
affliction and trouble at Christ's coming, and next that God will send his
angel to deliver it, whom he here calls Michael, meaning Christ, who is
proclaimed by the preaching of the Gospel."
Geneva Study Bible - the old protestant Bible commentary
Another followers of the Archangel Christology was the Arians or under other
name the fellow Lucianists
Who was this Arians? They were Christians, named after Arius of Alexandria, but
also they were "the fellow-Lucianists" (supporters of Lucian of
Antioch and Arius of Alexandria)
http://www.fourthcentury.com/notwppages/arius-supporters-map.htm
At the council of Nicaea some so called Arians becames traitors of this
Christology to escape the banishment. Bishop of Ptolemais Secundus prophecy ...
has turned over one of the "traitors":
“You subscribed, Eusebius, in order to escape being sent into banishment. But I
place my confidence in a revelation made to me by God, that within a year you
too will be sent into exile.”
In fact, within three months after the conclusion of the council, returning to
his own original and manifest impiety, Eusebius was sent into exile as Secundus
had predicted.
"I pray that you fare well in the Lord, remembering our tribulations,
fellow-Lucianist, truly-called Eusebius [i.e. the pious one]."
http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-1
Who was this Lucian?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian_of_Antioch
"The Arab historian Shahrastani (Eleventh Century) affirms that, in the
Fourth Century, Arius borrowed his doctrine, according to which the Messiah is
the first angel of God for the Magharians, "who lived four hundred years
before Arius and were known by the simplicity of their way of life and their
serene abstinence."
"Who were these Magharians, whose existence dates back to the First
Century before the Christian era? Their Arab name leaves little doubt; it means
"people of the cavern or the cave," because -- Shahrastani makes
clear -- they hid their sacred texts in caverns."
"There is nothing surprising in the fact that the doctrine of the
Angel-Messiah (the angelos-christos) was originally Essene, since it was shared
by the [various] Christianities and predominated up to the historization of
Jesus, undertaken in the second half of the Second Century."
http://www.notbored.org/resistance-4.html
So, the so called "Arianism" is certainly not invented by Arius nor
by his teacher Lucian, but is certain an old, Jewish Christology. The true
Christology.
Strong conclusion
The so called "Arianism" in fact is pre-christian biblical Jewish
christology (messiahism). Was not invented by Arius.
There is, also, two echoes in the apostle Paul teaching:
"(...) but as angel of God you received me as Christ Jesus."
Galatians 4:14 Biblos Interlinear Bible
"For himself Lord with shout with voice of arch-agent and with trumpet of
God will descend from heaven (...)." 1Thessalonians 4:16 Biblos
Interlinear Bible
And in Revelation 19:14 ASV "And the armies which are in heaven followed
him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and pure."
Note: My opinions presented here may not necessarily reflect the full position
of the authors cited in this topic (nor in other topics), or in other beliefs,
doctrine or theological position of all others cited. I encourage all readers
to first and foremost carefully analyze all articles in the light of God's
Word.
---
Comentarii
Trimiteți un comentariu