SDA teaching Michael is Jesus.

Also consider this:

I don't think Jesus could have given away someone else's authority; I think he must be giving his own away, here.

Helen/AITB

 

Ok,

Firstly I am not questioning that Jesus has authority.

We are talking about the Michael conversation with Satan.

When contending with Satan about the body of Moses, Michael did not bring against him a slanderous accusation (about what I wonder) but only said ONE thing.

The LORD rebuke thee.

Who was rebuking him?

hmmm

 

It's a difficult passage. My personal opinion is that Michael's not saying "I rebuke you" but rather "the LORD rebuke you" tells me something significant - it means that Michael did not have the authority of the LORD and he did not have the authority of Jesus. And from that I conclude that Michael cannot be Jesus.

I can see that you disagree somewhat with my interpretation/opinion/reasoning.

Here's a page specifically about the SDA belief (the page disagrees that Michael is Jesus)

Michael/Jesus, who is Michael?

Helen/AITB

 

Helen,

Seriously. I do not use slam sites. I do not go to websites that have the sole purpose of slandering other groups. They are almost ALWAYS lying about something.

In the FIRST sentence of that site, there is a LIE!!

"The 7th day Adventists point you to keep the 10 commandments for salvation but they can’t seem to figure out who Michael is ? Is he Jesus, is he only another name of him?"

First of all:

We have NEVER pointed anyone to keep the 10 Commandments FOR SALVATION.

Secondly, we HAVE figured out who Michael is!

I'm sorry, but if you are going to post sites that are so wrought with lies, I can't possibly take them seriously.

Please just go with your own opinion, or pick out of those sites the things that you think are true, and we can go from there.

Slam sites are the tabloids of the internet, and not a very good tool.

God Bless

 

I prefer sites which are not 'slam' sites but I read the 'slam' sites too because sometimes they have useful information on.

I should have been clearer that I posted that link for general information on the topic of Michael, Jesus and the SDA. I didn't intend to be posting it to you even though the rest of my post was to you.

Helen/AITB

 

So when James says in Acts 15:19 "It is my judgment that we do not bother those who are turning to God" - he is really saying "IN the name of James - do not bother those that are turning to God among the Gentiles"??

When Stephan prays to God "lay not this sin to their charge" is he really saying "Forgive them in the name of Stephan"??

When Stephan prays to God saying "Lord receive my spirit" does he really mean "receive my spirit in the NAme of Stephan"?

I think you are trying to find a rule in a place where it can not be inserted.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Point.

 

Bob, none of your examples are 'commands'. What I said was about commands. Let's go through yours and see:

So when James says in Acts 15:19 "It is my judgment that we do not bother those who are turning to God" - he is really saying "IN the name of James - do not bother those that are turning to God among the Gentiles"??</font>[/QUOTE]This is not a command. This is advice and James clearly says its his opinion (his judgment).

Of course James would have used all the wisdom he had from God to form his judgment/opinion. But if he knew it were from God he would have said "God told me..." and he doesn't. So he's not 100% certain; but evidently the other people present agree with him so they must think this wisdom comes from God.

Of course not.

This is a prayer, not a command. We have all the authority we need to pray. Jesus gave it to us. We will never have the authority to 'command' God to do something.

This is a prayer request, not a command. As I said, Jesus gave us authority to pray to God the Father and ask for things.

I see that. But your examples are not relevant because they are not commands.

The point about demons is that Jesus was commanding them out. He didn't say "in my judgment you ought to leave" or "Father, please cast this demon out". No, Jesus commanded the demons out.

Of course you're welcome to test what I said about commands, but you need to find some other commands if you want to test it. You can't test it with examples of advice and prayer requests.

Helen/AITB

 

Helen,

As you can imagine - there are a huge number of places in scripture - especially in the NT where authors like Paul give commands without adding "in the name of" anyone.

If more examples that are directed to other people are of interest then how about a simple walk through almost any chapter --- picking one at random we find...

"Masters! grant to you slaves justice" Col 4:1

Col 4:2
"Devote yourselves to prayer,
"Keep Alert in it with an attitude of thanksgiving"l

Col 4:5
"Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders"

In 1Cor 14 you have a number of commands - direct imperatives - without "in the name" of someone added.

14:1
"Pursue Love"
"Desire earnestly spiritual gifts especially that you may prophesy".

14:12
"So also you since you are zealous of spiritual gifts seek to abound for the edification of the church"

20"Bretheren Do not be children in your thinking, yet in evil be babes, but in your thinking Be mature"

27 "If anyone speaks in a tongue it should be by two ar at most three and each in turn and lete one interpret"

Commands are frequent and often in the NT text.

There are really too many chapters in the NT to go through. It would be "very difficult" to argue that each time you see one of these commands the author is saying "In MY NAME I command this".

The "rule" does not work.

In Christ

Bob

 

Jude 1:9 9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

It is the Lord Jesus Christ who raises he dead. As he testifies himself in the scriptures. ( Jn. 5:26-30 ). The above verse is no exception. When the devil disputed with Christ, his authority to raise Moses from the dead, Christ did not waste time arguing that point, but simply referred him to his Father’s authority as a finality to the dispute. This is only right, since it is the Father, that will make the Son’s enemies, his footstool.

Ps 110:1-4 1The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
2The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.
3Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.
4The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

It is God the Father that will make the enemies of Christ His footstool. Therefore the Son refers the railing accusations of His Arch enemy to God the Father. The new testament also refers to the same.

Acts 2:33-36 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Heb 1:13 13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?

Heb 10:10-13 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

The last enemy to be conquered is death. The lord Jesus himself will destroy this enemy by the power of the resurrection. After which, the Son himself will also be subject to the Father, that God may be all in all. Again, it the authority of Christ which the devil disputes, The Son will not argue with the accuser, but refers him to the Father. The Father will exalt the Son, and put all his enemies in subjection to his authority. Just as the Son relies on the Father, and did so verily as a man here on earth, so are we to rely on the Son. Christ is our perfect example in all things. When the devil accuses us, we do not have a leg to stand on, but when we are in Jesus, we may refer the devil to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Christ has defeated our enemy, and in him we are victorious. When all have subjected themselves to Christ, and Christ has subjected himself to the Father, then God will be all in all.


1 Cor 15:22-28 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Phil 2:9-11 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Bye for now. Y. b. in C. Keith

 

Ben,

You can even "be" an Adventist and not accept that Michael is a pre-incarnat form of God the Son in His role as "the Word" that explains infinite God to finite creation. As you found out - the 27 FB does not include that teaching as an official doctrine of the church.

However as for your point "An Angel is not God" - in Genesis 18 God is "a man" - but as we all know "a man in the OT is not God". God is above both man and Angel. God is infinite - His creation is finite.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Clearly it is not a question of what "God CAN not do". Lots of things pop up under the heading of "What CAN God do".

The real question is "CAN WE" limit the definition by saying "MAN CAN not be God - so God would never choose to APPEAR in the FORM of a man" as in Genesis 18? If we can say that - then we know for certain that since Angels are ALSO not God - God would never appear in the form of an Angel.

ON the other hand if God shows that He WOULD appear in the FORM of that which is NOT God - that which is lower than God - that which is finite - that which is "common to us" -- MAN in Genesis 18. Then God "COULD" appear in the FORM of an Angel without breaking any spiritual principle beyond what we see in Genesis 18.

The question then is - not "COULD" He but "DID" HE. And we could only know that from observing attributes given to the MAN in Genesis 18 or given to "YOUR PRINCE" Michael that belong to God alone.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Ben,

You are too kind. As I said - this is not an official doctrine of the SDA church and differences of view on this are certainly welcomed inside the SDA church - even more so outside.

In Christ,

Bob