Out of the Mouth of The Beast

[civilwarbuff]

How could a science fiction writer with interests in the occult, whose spectacularly failed Naval career involved the illegal shelling of Mexico, become the most prolific male writer in history?

Alright, cough up the answer....

 

[ViaCrucis]

Do you believe that God will send a prophet for these last days as He has promised?

I'll bite, where did God promise He would "send a prophet for these last days"?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Confusing the uncreated Son of God with the creature St. Michael is contradictory to the Bible and the Holiness of Christ. Really, everyone should just stop reading Ellen White and throw her books in the dumpster, at that point.

Actually, it's Biblically sound if you chose to study it out instead of making off hand comments in ignorance... the name Michael means 'who is like God'... he is called the archangel, most believe this means that he is a created angel but the word means leader of the angels, which the Son of God is.

Rev 19:13-16
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.

1 Thessalonians 4:16
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

All these attributes, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, with the trump of God are possessive of the subject, the Lord.

Jude 1:9
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.

This scripture is in line with how Jesus dealt with Satan in the wilderness, by not contending with him. Do you think God would have sent another created angel to do this work of going up against Satan who was one of the covering cherubs? Only the Son of God would have done this work.

Daniel 12:1-2
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 many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

No where in the Bible is a created angel called a prince that standeth for the Israelites. We do see however Jesus given this name... prince of peace, prince Emmanuel, etc.

Daniel 10:21
But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.

Again we see that Michal is our prince...

I hope you have been blessed by this short study on this matter...

How could a science fiction writer with interests in the occult, whose spectacularly failed Naval career involved the illegal shelling of Mexico, become the most prolific male writer in history?

Your comparing an educated man with admitted occult leanings to an uneducated 17 year old girl.

Good question, since that hasn't actually happened, nor will it. Even if Rome does a deal with one or two larger Protestant churches, substantial fragments will break away and carry on as before. The most ardently Protestant churches in the USA, like the LCMS and PCA, will never reunite with Rome.

You are obviously not aware of things that are happening in the churches today...

This from back in 2013
http://ncronline.org/blogs/small-c-catholic/catholic-lutheran-joint-celebration-good-start-toward-interdenominational

Also check out the World Council of Churches to see who it's membership are...

 

[ViaCrucis]

No where in the Bible is a created angel called a prince that standeth for the Israelites.

You mean except in Daniel. Because a created angel (there are no uncreated angels) is called prince in Daniel.

St. Michael the Archangel is not Christ. Michael, as a creature, serves Christ who is God.

Saying Christ is an angel is both blasphemous and idolatrous.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I'll bite, where did God promise He would "send a prophet for these last days"?

-CryptoLutheran

Amos 3:7
Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

Acts 2:17-18
And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

Interestingly enough, this is fulfilled perfectly in the 1840 time period. William Miller had at least one prophetic dream (old men), and before Ellen White was given her gift, two black men, William Foy and Hazen Foss were given the same prophetic vision that Ellen Harmon later received.

1 Thessalonians 5:20
Despise not prophesyings.

You would do well, to test Ellen Whites gift rather than dismiss it out of hand.

Revelation 10:10-11
And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

Again this scripture was fulfilled by the great disappointment in 1844 and the prophesies which followed.

 

[Commander Xenophon]

Actually, it's Biblically sound if you chose to study it out instead of making off hand comments in ignorance... the name Michael means 'who is like God'...

This by itself is reason enough to reject the confusion of St, Michael with our Lord. For our Lord is not "like God," but is God.

The Semi-Arians or homoiousians argued that our Lord was of "like essence" but not homoousios, or the same essence, as God.

If we were to say St. Michael was our Lord because of his name meaning "like God," I believe this would have dangerous semi-Arian implications. Particularly in light of known Arian sentiments that existed among some Adventists. Not Ellen White, to her credit.

he is called the archangel, most believe this means that he is a created angel but the word means leader of the angels, which the Son of God is.

The word means "ruler of the Angels," but the problem there is that St. Michael is one of several angels (four, or seven, depending on the source) with that attribute.

Rev 19:13-16
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.

1 Thessalonians 4:16
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

All these attributes, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, with the trump of God are possessive of the subject, the Lord.

Jude 1:9
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.

This scripture is in line with how Jesus dealt with Satan in the wilderness, by not contending with him. Do you think God would have sent another created angel to do this work of going up against Satan who was one of the covering cherubs? Only the Son of God would have done this work.

I think if St. Michael were Jesus Christ, the Gospels would have said as such.

Daniel 12:1-2
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 many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

No where in the Bible is a created angel called a prince that standeth for the Israelites.

Except in the passage you just quoted. And strictly speaking, all archangels are "princes" in the sense of "archons." There are the ranks of angels known as "thrones" "dominions" "powers" and "principalities."

We do see however Jesus given this name... prince of peace, prince Emmanuel, etc.



Daniel 10:21
But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.

Again we see that Michal is our prince...

I hope you have been blessed by this short study on this matter...

To the extent that it has helped confirm my rejection of this doctrine, yes, I do regard it as a blessing. For I had not hitherto considered the disturbing ramifications in light of homoiousios, which are by themselves enough reason to utterly reject this doctrine as a grave error, if not blasphemy, and to regard Ellen White as a false prophetess.

Your comparing an educated man with admitted occult leanings to an uneducated 17 year old girl.

Like I said, quality is not quantity.

You are obviously not aware of things that are happening in the churches today...

This from back in 2013

http://ncronline.org/blogs/small-c-catholic/catholic-lutheran-joint-celebration-good-start-toward-interdenominational

Also check out the World Council of Churches to see who it's membership are...

I am, actually. There is no hint of a desire for reunion between the RCC, the LCMS, the PCA or the SBC; the ecumenism involves Roman Catholics and the declining "mainline" Protestant churches, together with the Orthodox.

Oh btw, the Roman Catholic church is not a member of the WCC and never has been. They hold "observer" status.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Acts 2:17-18
And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

I was hoping this was the passage you were thinking of.

So if you believe that this prophecy of Joel, quoted by St. Peter on Pentecost, refers to some far off future time, then could you explain what was going on in the passage in which it was quoted.

After all, if the Spirit wasn't being poured out on Pentecost but instead is to be poured out at some future date, then could you explain why the Apostle Peter is quoting the passage here as the Spirit was poured out on all flesh? Especially, you know, given the setup for the quote, noting verse 16.

"This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel"

Anyway, shovel delivered, I'll let you get to digging.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Commander Xenophon]

Alright, cough up the answer....

Well, I have no idea actually, but Tom Cruise or John Travolta just might.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

You mean except in Daniel. Because a created angel (there are no uncreated angels) is called prince in Daniel.

I stand corrected as I was doing this study on the fly but here is a passage that should help

Daniel 8:25
And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

St. Michael the Archangel is not Christ. Michael, as a creature, serves Christ who is God.

Please provide scripture...

Saying Christ is an angel is both blasphemous and idolatrous.

-CryptoLutheran

Never said that... Christ is the archangel, which I have shown is an attribute of Christ.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I think if St. Michael were Jesus Christ, the Gospels would have said as such.

At the very least that it would have been mentioned by someone, at some time, somewhere, in the last two millennia of Christian history.

It doesn't bode particularly well for a doctrine as being "biblical" when literally nobody heard or thought of such a thing ever until sometime in the last century or so.

Further, if being called "prince" makes Michael Christ, then shouldn't Cyrus being called Messiah make Cyrus Christ?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I was hoping this was the passage you were thinking of.

So if you believe that this prophecy of Joel, quoted by St. Peter on Pentecost, refers to some far off future time, then could you explain what was going on in the passage in which it was quoted.

After all, if the Spirit wasn't being poured out on Pentecost but instead is to be poured out at some future date, then could you explain why the Apostle Peter is quoting the passage here as the Spirit was poured out on all flesh? Especially, you know, given the setup for the quote, noting verse 16.

"This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel"

Anyway, shovel delivered, I'll let you get to digging.

-CryptoLutheran

Do you believe prophesies can have more than one fulfillment?

 

[Wgw]

Please provide scripture...

This I fear is rather akin to asking @ViaCrucis or @Commander Xenophon to provide scripture showing that our Lord is not also the Purple People Eater.

We do not need to negate that which is not actually stated in the original text.

Never said that... Christ is the archangel, which I have shown is an attribute of Christ.

Having read through your post, you have not shown that I fear; your exegesis breaks down on the mere fact of the existence of Ss. Raphael and Gabriel, for example.

Your view also, I would note with a certain wry amusement, neglects to consider archangelology in Semitic mythology generally. Archangels are, at most, viewed as emanations of God; they cannot be God, which is precisely what John 1:1-14 explicitly says our Lord is.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Satan who was one of the covering cherubs?

Huh?......

 

[Commander Xenophon]

At the very least that it would have been mentioned by someone, at some time, somewhere, in the last two millennia of Christian history.

It doesn't bode particularly well for a doctrine as being "biblical" when literally nobody heard or thought of such a thing ever until sometime in the last century or so.

Further, if being called "prince" makes Michael Christ, then shouldn't Cyrus being called Messiah make Cyrus Christ?

-CryptoLutheran

Well, I guess we can anticipate the Millenial Kingdom anticipated by chiliasts will turn out to be the glorious second reign of Shah Cyrus, having rebuilt the Persian Empire!

 

[ViaCrucis]

I stand corrected as I was doing this study on the fly but here is a passage that should help

Daniel 8:25
And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.



Please provide scripture...

That Christ isn't an angelic creature? Okay, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. ... And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth." John 1:1, 14

Never said that... Christ is the archangel, which I have shown is an attribute of Christ.

An archangel is a chief (archos) angel (angelos). Christ isn't an angel, to be one of the chief angels one needs to be an angel in the first place. Michael is only one of the archangels, and is only called an archangel in Scripture because there existed a tradition among Jews and Christians of archangels (plural) of which Michael is but one.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Commander Xenophon]

Huh?......

Oh, I had completely missed that.



We see what we expect to see; I think that means we read what we expect to read, and I just did not expect to read, and therefore did not read, ECR writing that Satan is a cherubim.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

At the very least that it would have been mentioned by someone, at some time, somewhere, in the last two millennia of Christian history.

You mean like the seventh day Sabbath being changed to the first day? Except of course, the RC believing they have the authority to do so outside of scripture.

Further, if being called "prince" makes Michael Christ, then shouldn't Cyrus being called Messiah make Cyrus Christ?

-CryptoLutheran

Cyrus was a type of Christ...

 

[ViaCrucis]

Huh?......

An idiosyncratic interpretation of Ezekiel's prophecy against the king of Tyre in chapter 28.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

You mean like the seventh day Sabbath being changed to the first day? Except of course, the RC believing they have the authority to do so outside of scripture.

Never happened.

Cyrus was a type of Christ...

Is Jesus Christ Cyrus the Great? Your reasoning would, concerning the use of the term "prince", seem to require that this be so given that Cyrus is called God's messiah. Who else is the Messiah but Jesus, therefore Cyrus is Jesus.

Here's another shovel by the way.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Wgw]

An idiosyncratic interpretation of Ezekiel's prophecy against the king of Tyre in chapter 28.

-CryptoLutheran

I fear it rather transcends idiosyncrasy, and takes us into roughly the angelological, daimonological equivalent of the Twilight Zone.

Actually, it's too weird for the Twilight Zone. Coast to Coast AM. perhaps...