BibleForums Christian Message Board
Bible Talk => Apologetics => Topic started by: BluePrints on June 16, 2026, 11:24:55 AM
-
Is there a Michael - Jesus connection in scripture? What is the history of this?
An excellent resource tool for discussion on this subject is found, and made available for free, here - https://archive.org/details/michael-the-archangel-who-is-like-unto-god-the-highest-messenger_202407/mode/1up
Is the Michael - Jesus connection only a WTS/ JW (WatchTower and Tract Society / Jehovah's Witnesses) doctrine / teaching? Did such originate with them, or have they merely altered a previously held church doctrine that had been held throughout the times of this world?
Is it blasphemous to teach that Michael is the pre-incarnate (in human flesh) Son of the Father (aka, Jesus)?
Does this teaching mean that a person is automatically saying that the Son of the Father (Jesus) is a created being and finite, or is that simply an incorrect assumption / accusation without foundation?
What does the name / designation "Michael the archangel" even mean?
What does the word "angel" in Hebrew, koine Greek and English even mean? Does it define nature, or rather office / position / function?
What does the name / designation "Jesus" even mean?
Did the Son of the Father exist before the creation of this world (earth), and if so according to scripture, what was His name / designation?
Does the Son of the Father have many names, titles, designations, offices in scripture? If so, do they ever conflict with one another?
Does Michael ever bring deliverance or salvation in the contexts in which this personage is mentioned?
As always, please feel free to comment, ask questions, participate in discussion, engage in prayerful bible study together! Take the time to follow scriptural counsel and read the material before entering into conversation, Pro. 18:13,17, and come to listen to what is being presented, as in Job before speaking. There is no need to rush into anything when discussing such weighty matters. Better to ask clarifying questions, and listen to one another, and then go to the Bible together.
-
What is you agenda
All this copy paste stuff is not being read…
-
Banned for spamming.
-
Banned for spamming.
And now he'll never be able to answer our questions :o
-
The idea goes back further than most people realize. Some early Christian writers like Justin Martyr saw Christ as the "Angel of the Lord" who appears throughout the Old Testament, and from there it's a short hop to asking whether he might be Michael specifically, since Michael is the most prominent angelic figure. That angelomorphic Christology was floating around in Jewish and early Christian circles for a while before mainstream orthodoxy settled firmly against it.
The explicit Michael-equals-Jesus teaching is mostly associated with groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses and before them Emanuel Swedenborg, though you'll find threads of it in various heterodox traditions. The scriptural hooks people use are things like 1 Thessalonians 4:16 (the Lord descending with the voice of the archangel), Jude 9 (Michael rebuking Satan over Moses' body, compared to Jesus rebuking him), and the angelic general in Revelation 12. The argument is basically that these parallel so closely that they must be the same person.
The mainstream Christian pushback has always been Hebrews 1, which goes out of its way to distinguish Jesus from angels and says God never called any angel "my Son." So most of church history treats the Michael connection as a minority view that the canon itself seems to argue against pretty directly. Still an interesting historical rabbit hole if you want to dig into Second Temple Jewish angelology.
-
In Hebrew, the word for "angel" is the same as the word for "messenger". So if Justin Martyr saw Jesus as an "Angel of the Lord" it might just be another way of saying "messenger of the Lord".
-
Is there a Michael - Jesus connection in scripture? What is the history of this?
An excellent resource tool for discussion on this subject is found, and made available for free, here - https://archive.org/details/michael-the-archangel-who-is-like-unto-god-the-highest-messenger_202407/mode/1up
Is the Michael - Jesus connection only a WTS/ JW (WatchTower and Tract Society / Jehovah's Witnesses) doctrine / teaching? Did such originate with them, or have they merely altered a previously held church doctrine that had been held throughout the times of this world?
Is it blasphemous to teach that Michael is the pre-incarnate (in human flesh) Son of the Father (aka, Jesus)?
Does this teaching mean that a person is automatically saying that the Son of the Father (Jesus) is a created being and finite, or is that simply an incorrect assumption / accusation without foundation?
What does the name / designation "Michael the archangel" even mean?
What does the word "angel" in Hebrew, koine Greek and English even mean? Does it define nature, or rather office / position / function?
What does the name / designation "Jesus" even mean?
Did the Son of the Father exist before the creation of this world (earth), and if so according to scripture, what was His name / designation?
Does the Son of the Father have many names, titles, designations, offices in scripture? If so, do they ever conflict with one another?
Does Michael ever bring deliverance or salvation in the contexts in which this personage is mentioned?
As always, please feel free to comment, ask questions, participate in discussion, engage in prayerful bible study together! Take the time to follow scriptural counsel and read the material before entering into conversation, Pro. 18:13,17, and come to listen to what is being presented, as in Job before speaking. There is no need to rush into anything when discussing such weighty matters. Better to ask clarifying questions, and listen to one another, and then go to the Bible together.
This can really get complicated, as the understanding of Christ pre-incarnate is very controversial, as people get confused with the "Title" which refers to Jesus. Now, Jesus is NOT a created Angel. He is fully Man, fully God, the Messiah, the Christ, and Lord and Saviour. Jesus is Eternal. Jesus was never created. Jesus is Eternal as the Father and Holy Spirit are Eternal. Jesus has always been and always will be.
Jesus is the angel of the LORD, the angel of God, and if one looks closely the Archangel Michael, who appeared time and again in the Old Testament to speak directly to His people, prior to the incarnation.
Michael is just another "Title" to refer to Jesus just as Lamb and Lion is. Michael is not a created Angel but much more. Michael the Archangel is only a name or title, but it shows us that Christ has always been there with the Father implementing the plan of salvation. So one has to look and grasp what Gods Word shows us..
-
Is there a Michael - Jesus connection in scripture? What is the history of this?
An excellent resource tool for discussion on this subject is found, and made available for free, here - https://archive.org/details/michael-the-archangel-who-is-like-unto-god-the-highest-messenger_202407/mode/1up
Is the Michael - Jesus connection only a WTS/ JW (WatchTower and Tract Society / Jehovah's Witnesses) doctrine / teaching? Did such originate with them, or have they merely altered a previously held church doctrine that had been held throughout the times of this world?
Is it blasphemous to teach that Michael is the pre-incarnate (in human flesh) Son of the Father (aka, Jesus)?
Does this teaching mean that a person is automatically saying that the Son of the Father (Jesus) is a created being and finite, or is that simply an incorrect assumption / accusation without foundation?
What does the name / designation "Michael the archangel" even mean?
What does the word "angel" in Hebrew, koine Greek and English even mean? Does it define nature, or rather office / position / function?
What does the name / designation "Jesus" even mean?
Did the Son of the Father exist before the creation of this world (earth), and if so according to scripture, what was His name / designation?
Does the Son of the Father have many names, titles, designations, offices in scripture? If so, do they ever conflict with one another?
Does Michael ever bring deliverance or salvation in the contexts in which this personage is mentioned?
As always, please feel free to comment, ask questions, participate in discussion, engage in prayerful bible study together! Take the time to follow scriptural counsel and read the material before entering into conversation, Pro. 18:13,17, and come to listen to what is being presented, as in Job before speaking. There is no need to rush into anything when discussing such weighty matters. Better to ask clarifying questions, and listen to one another, and then go to the Bible together.
This can really get complicated, as the understanding of Christ pre-incarnate is very controversial, as people get confused with the "Title" which refers to Jesus. Now, Jesus is NOT a created Angel. He is fully Man, fully God, the Messiah, the Christ, and Lord and Saviour. Jesus is Eternal. Jesus was never created. Jesus is Eternal as the Father and Holy Spirit are Eternal. Jesus has always been and always will be.
Jesus is the angel of the LORD, the angel of God, and if one looks closely the Archangel Michael, who appeared time and again in the Old Testament to speak directly to His people, prior to the incarnation.
Michael is just another "Title" to refer to Jesus just as Lamb and Lion is. Michael is not a created Angel but much more. Michael the Archangel is only a name or title, but it shows us that Christ has always been there with the Father implementing the plan of salvation. So one has to look and grasp what Gods Word shows us..
Michael is no more another name for Jesus that Fenris is another name for Bibi…
-
This belief did not originate with the Adventist church, nor are they the only ones who make this connection...
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 #Re 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel (see Hengstenberg, Offenbarung, I, 611-22, and an interesting survey in English by Dr. Douglas in Fairbairns BD). John A. Lees (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia)
ARCHANGEL
This world is only twice used in the Bible, #1Th 4:16 Jude 1:9. In this last passage it is applied to Michael, who, in #Da 10:13,21 12:1, is described as having a special charge of the Jewish nation, and in #Re 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. ( American Tract Society Bible Dictionary)
The Rabbinical traditions about Michael are very numerous. They oppose him constantly to Sammael, the accuser and enemy of Israel, as disputing for the soul of Moses; as bringing the ram the substitute for Isaac, which Sammael sought to keep back, etc., etc.: they give him the title of the "great high- priest in heaven," as well as that of the "great prince and conqueror;" and finally lay it down that "wherever Michael is said to have appeared, there the glory of the Shechinah is intended." It is clear that the sounder among them, in making such use of the name, intended to personify the Divine Power, and typify the Messiah (see Schoettgen, Hor. Hebr. i. 1079, 1119, ii. 8, 15, ed. Dresd. 1742).( Smiths Revised Bible Dictionary)'
and as to evidence of Michael the Prince creating the universe as Christ the Creator, here are some verses that make the connection....
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. Dan 9:25 (KJV)
And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: Dan 12:1 (KJV)
14 But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; 15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses. Acts 3:14-15 (KJV)
31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Acts 5:31 (KJV)
-
Given Michael is described as one of the chief princes in Daniel, and alongside Jesus during his return in 1 Thessalonians, and as one of if not the commanders of the armies of angels, and how "earlier Protestants" tend to be misrepresented on the matter, and this being a favourite of "Jesus is an angel" JWism...
Nah, imagine suggesting "Michael" is another title for Jesus, but also that Jesus is God, but also that Jesus couldn't defeat Satan in Jude 1:9 (as if he'd even need to 'dispute' for Moses body), and which requires the JW perspective to resolve.
-
Michael is no more another name for Jesus that Fenris is another name for Bibi…
I've never seen them both in the same room at the same time. Just saying....
-
The Rabbinical traditions about Michael are very numerous. They oppose him constantly to Sammael, the accuser and enemy of Israel, as disputing for the soul of Moses; as bringing the ram the substitute for Isaac, which Sammael sought to keep back, etc., etc.: they give him the title of the "great high- priest in heaven," as well as that of the "great prince and conqueror;" and finally lay it down that "wherever Michael is said to have appeared, there the glory of the Shechinah is intended." It is clear that the sounder among them, in making such use of the name, intended to personify the Divine Power, and typify the Messiah
Ehhh these are Jewish myths and legends. They are not a factor in Judaism or Jewish theology.
-
What does the name / designation "Jesus" even mean?
"Jesus" is the anglicized version of the name, which comes to us through the Greek.
The name was not "Jesus" in Hebrew, because classical Hebrew does not have a "J" sound.
The reason why it has a "J" sound in English is because it comes to us in English via the Greek. And classical Greek does not have a "Y" sound. So any name beginning with a "Y" sound in Hebrew becomes a "J" sound in Greek. For example, Yehudah becomes Judah. Yehoshua becomes Joshua. Yosef becomes Joseph. And whatever Jesus's name was in Hebrew (Yeshua? Yeshu?) becomes Jesus.
Similarly, the name "Jehovah" is found nowhere in the bible. The unpronouncable Tetragrammaton, the ineffable Hebrew four letter name of God, starts with a "Y" sound. But it doesn't have vowels and hasn't been pronounced aloud by someone who knows how to pronounce it since the Temple's destruction by the Romans in the year 70. The way it's pronounced is just a guess and is probably wrong.
I have never heard a satisfactory answer to these matters form a JW.
What does the word "angel" in Hebrew, koine Greek and English even mean?
The word "angel" in Hebrew is "Malach" "מַלְאָךְ", which simply means "messenger" and can apply even to human beings. In Genesis 32, the patriarch Jacob sends messengers to his brother Esau, and the Hebrew word is "מַלְאָכִים֙ " "messengers" which is the same word for "angels". The root of the Hebrew word comes from the verb "שָׁלִחַ" "to send".
-
Given Michael is described as one of the chief princes in Daniel, and alongside Jesus during his return in 1 Thessalonians, and as one of if not the commanders of the armies of angels, and how "earlier Protestants" tend to be misrepresented on the matter, and this being a favourite of "Jesus is an angel" JWism...
Nah, imagine suggesting "Michael" is another title for Jesus, but also that Jesus is God, but also that Jesus couldn't defeat Satan in Jude 1:9 (as if he'd even need to 'dispute' for Moses body), and which requires the JW perspective to resolve.
We see how Jesus is referred to by titles everywhere, Matthew identifies Jesus as Emmanuel, which means “God with us” (Matthew 1:21). Emmanuel describes the concept of the incarnation—God becoming man. The identity of Jesus as “God with us” is consistent with John 1:1, which refers to Jesus as the “Word who was with God, and who was God”. Each of the Gospel writers quote Isaiah 40:3, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord.’” In Isaiah, the Lord refers to Yahweh, but now the Gospel writers see this prediction fulfilled in Jesus, whom they understand to be Yahweh incarnate.
Then note, we see in Isaiah were Christ is called the Prince of Peace..
Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
And we see this used in Daniel 10 where He is called "Michael, one of the chief princes"..
Daniel 10:13
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.
Then in Daniel 12 we see where He is called "the great prince" stands up right before the time of trouble..
Daniel 12:1
And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
And we see Christ called a prince again in Acts, here a "Prince of life", and "Prince and a Saviour"..
Acts 3:15
And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.
The title is in Gods Word..
Daniel 9:25
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
Acts 5:31
Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
And we see in Revelation He is called " prince of the kings of the earth."..
Revelation 1:5
And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
-
Given Michael is described as one of the chief princes in Daniel, and alongside Jesus during his return in 1 Thessalonians, and as one of if not the commanders of the armies of angels, and how "earlier Protestants" tend to be misrepresented on the matter, and this being a favourite of "Jesus is an angel" JWism...
Nah, imagine suggesting "Michael" is another title for Jesus, but also that Jesus is God, but also that Jesus couldn't defeat Satan in Jude 1:9 (as if he'd even need to 'dispute' for Moses body), and which requires the JW perspective to resolve.
We see how Jesus is referred to by titles everywhere, Matthew identifies Jesus as Emmanuel, which means “God with us” (Matthew 1:21). Emmanuel describes the concept of the incarnation—God becoming man. The identity of Jesus as “God with us” is consistent with John 1:1, which refers to Jesus as the “Word who was with God, and who was God”. Each of the Gospel writers quote Isaiah 40:3, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord.’” In Isaiah, the Lord refers to Yahweh, but now the Gospel writers see this prediction fulfilled in Jesus, whom they understand to be Yahweh incarnate.
Then note, we see in Isaiah were Christ is called the Prince of Peace..
Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
And we see this used in Daniel 10 where He is called "Michael, one of the chief princes"..
Daniel 10:13
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.
Then in Daniel 12 we see where He is called "the great prince" stands up right before the time of trouble..
Daniel 12:1
And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
And we see Christ called a prince again in Acts, here a "Prince of life", and "Prince and a Saviour"..
Acts 3:15
And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.
The title is in Gods Word..
Daniel 9:25
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
Acts 5:31
Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
And we see in Revelation He is called " prince of the kings of the earth."..
Revelation 1:5
And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
"Michael" isn't one of Jesus' titles, nor is Jesus merely "one of the chief princes".
So you have Isaiah 9:6, which doesn't mention Jesus.
Daniel 10:13 which doesn't mention Jesus, but does mention Michael, and refers to him as "one of" not "the"
Daniel 12 which doesn't mention Jesus, but does mention Michael
Acts 3:25 which mentions Jesus but not Michael
Back to Daniel 9:25 which doesn't mention Jesus or Michael
Back to Acts 5:31 which mentions Jesus but not Michael
to Revelation 1:5 which mentions Jesus but not Michael
The work you need to do is argue that "Michael" is a title for Jesus (which is quite unlike all those other titles you mention), which means now you have to explain away Daniel 10 which undermines that notion. You can't just say "It's a title, see?" and cite a bunch of verses that mentions neither, or one, but not both.
I guess you're also just going to ignore everything else I said.
-
:Raises hand:
Uh hi, so I'm just the local Jewish guy, I don't really know a lot about the topic in question. But I have an question to ask.
The Council of Nicea in the year 325 made a ruling that Jesus is of the same essence (homoousion) as God the Father. Since Michael is designated as some kind of angel, wouldn't that preclude him from also being God? Isn't adopting this position some sort of heresy?
I'll sit down now and wait for an answer.
-
the Messiah the Prince
This is a mistranslation. The Hebrew says "an anointed leader". There is no definite article, and the word "מָשִׁ֣יחַ " "messiah" simply means "anointed". All kings and priests at the time were anointed upon taking office. The word appears multiple times in Leviticus when referring to priests, and numerous times in the book of Samuel, referring to the king.
-
:Raises hand:
Uh hi, so I'm just the local Jewish guy, I don't really know a lot about the topic in question. But I have an question to ask.
The Council of Nicea in the year 325 made a ruling that Jesus is of the same essence (homoousion) as God the Father. Since Michael is designated as some kind of angel, wouldn't that preclude him from also being God? Isn't adopting this position some sort of heresy?
I'll sit down now and wait for an answer.
This guy may be of the homoiousion persuasion.
-
the Messiah the Prince
This is a mistranslation. The Hebrew says "an anointed leader". There is no definite article, and the word "מָשִׁ֣יחַ " "messiah" simply means "anointed". All kings and priests at the time were anointed upon taking office. The word appears multiple times in Leviticus when referring to priests, and numerous times in the book of Samuel, referring to the king.
Well here is Youngs Literal Translation..
Daniel 9:25
Young's Literal Translation
25 And thou dost know, and dost consider wisely, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader [is] seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks: the broad place hath been built again, and the rampart, even in the distress of the times.
-
Daniel 9:25
Young's Literal Translation
25 And thou dost know, and dost consider wisely, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader [is] seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks: the broad place hath been built again, and the rampart, even in the distress of the times.
I don't need "Young's literal translation", I'm reading it in the original Hebrew.
But if you're hung up on "Young's literal translation", here's how they translate Isaiah 45:1:
"Thus said Jehovah, To His anointed, to Cyrus"
This is the same Hebrew word as in Daniel 9:25, yet in one instance it's translated as "messiah" and in the other it is translated as "anointed". Curious, no?
Leviticus 4:3, 4:5, 4:16, 6:22, 1 Samuel 2:10, etc etc etc same Hebrew word, "Young's literal translation" has it as "anointed".
-
Daniel 9:25
Young's Literal Translation
25 And thou dost know, and dost consider wisely, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader [is] seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks: the broad place hath been built again, and the rampart, even in the distress of the times.
I don't need "Young's literal translation", I'm reading it in the original Hebrew.
But if you're hung up on "Young's literal translation", here's how they translate Isaiah 45:1:
"Thus said Jehovah, To His anointed, to Cyrus"
This is the same Hebrew word as in Daniel 9:25, yet in one instance it's translated as "messiah" and in the other it is translated as "anointed". Curious, no?
Leviticus 4:3, 4:5, 4:16, 6:22, 1 Samuel 2:10, etc etc etc same Hebrew word, "Young's literal translation" has it as "anointed".
Fenris,
Please do not confuse our confirmation bias conclusions with facts.
Thank you.
The Management (TM)
-
Daniel 9:25
Young's Literal Translation
25 And thou dost know, and dost consider wisely, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem till Messiah the Leader [is] seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks: the broad place hath been built again, and the rampart, even in the distress of the times.
I don't need "Young's literal translation", I'm reading it in the original Hebrew.
But if you're hung up on "Young's literal translation", here's how they translate Isaiah 45:1:
"Thus said Jehovah, To His anointed, to Cyrus"
This is the same Hebrew word as in Daniel 9:25, yet in one instance it's translated as "messiah" and in the other it is translated as "anointed". Curious, no?
Leviticus 4:3, 4:5, 4:16, 6:22, 1 Samuel 2:10, etc etc etc same Hebrew word, "Young's literal translation" has it as "anointed".
Read your Bible..
Luke 4:16-21
King James Version
16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.
17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
The word "Christ" or "Messiah" means "Anointed One". Quoting from Isa. 61, Jesus claimed He was anointed of God, not only to preach to the poor, but also to heal the broken hearted, to give the oil of joy for their mourning.
Isaiah 61:1
King James Version
1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
-
Although Fenris knows more about the New Testamnet than about 80% of the Christians I know, he doesn’t believe the NT to be scripture so an argument that he, a devout God fearing Jew, should accept what is unabashedly a Christian gloss on an unambiguous Hebrew text is likely unsatisfactory.
At least we Christians need to be honest and say that using the word “Messiah” with the capital ‘M’ is interpretive, not straight translation
-
Although Fenris knows more about the New Testamnet than about 80% of the Christians I know, he doesn’t believe the NT to be scripture so an argument that he, a devout God fearing Jew, should accept what is unabashedly a Christian gloss on an unambiguous Hebrew text is likely unsatisfactory.
At least we Christians need to be honest and say that using the word “Messiah” with the capital ‘M’ is interpretive, not straight translation
Ah, I see the problem. But truth is truth...
-
Although Fenris knows more about the New Testamnet than about 80% of the Christians I know, he doesn’t believe the NT to be scripture so an argument that he, a devout God fearing Jew, should accept what is unabashedly a Christian gloss on an unambiguous Hebrew text is likely unsatisfactory.
At least we Christians need to be honest and say that using the word “Messiah” with the capital ‘M’ is interpretive, not straight translation
Ah, I see the problem. But truth is truth...
You're doing textual criticism with Fenris. Now is not the time to appeal to the NT with "truth is truth" as if that's remotely respectful of the argument or Fenris (who has made a solid point about translational bias).
-
Luke 4:16-21
King James Version
16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.
17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
The word "Christ" or "Messiah" means "Anointed One". Quoting from Isa. 61, Jesus claimed He was anointed of God, not only to preach to the poor, but also to heal the broken hearted, to give the oil of joy for their mourning.
Isaiah 61:1
King James Version
1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
The speaker in Isaiah 61 is the prophet himself. Kings, priests, and prophets were all anointed with oil in biblical times.
You have to be consistent with the translation of the word "מָשַׁח֩ ". You can't decide that it means "the messiah" in some verse and then use that as proof that the verse is talking about the messiah.
-
Although Fenris knows more about the New Testamnet than about 80% of the Christians I know, he doesn’t believe the NT to be scripture so an argument that he, a devout God fearing Jew, should accept what is unabashedly a Christian gloss on an unambiguous Hebrew text is likely unsatisfactory.
At least we Christians need to be honest and say that using the word “Messiah” with the capital ‘M’ is interpretive, not straight translation
Thank you!
Also, I don't know any Greek. So I can't have an opinion about the Greek text quoting Hebrew text.
Did I ever tell you about a co-worker I had? Evangelical Christian. Super nice fellow, we had many interesting discussions on the bible and our respective beliefs. He was so devout, and so intellectually curious, that he took the time to learn both biblical Hebrew and classical Greek. Just so that he could read both bibles in their original language and without having to worry about messy translations.
-
You could know Greek and it wouldn't make a difference here. The problem is simply that the Greek of Luke 4 has no bearing on the Hebrew of Daniel 9. While the question is one of translation, we've quietly skipped over to interpretation. The only way we can appeal to an interpretation like this is to say "it's inspired, and that settles the translation question". But if the task is to prove that, it's just assuming the conclusion over here, begging the question over there...