| Covenant-House One |
| Focusing on the Kingdom and the Abrahamic Faith |
![]() |
|
![]() |
WAS THE ARCHANGEL MICHAELTHE AGENT OF THE GENESIS CREATION?Ray Faircloth(A JW teaching, therefore New World Translation used)THE UNBIBLICAL IDEA OF A PERSONAL AGENT OF THE GENESIS CREATIONThe concept that Jesus Christ had preexistence has been believed by many since the Christian philosopher Justin Martyr first used the word 'preexistence' with reference to Jesus in about 150 AD. However, Justin was a believer in the idea that Socrates and Plato were inspired by God. Justin had been thoroughly schooled in the Greek Philosophical thinking of his day, which he began to apply in his interpretation of the Christian scriptures. When coming into contact with the ideas of Middle Platonic philosopher Numenius, Justin's mind was readily receptive. The idea of preexistence originated with PLATO, was developed by XENOCRATES (d. 314 BC) In time NUMENIUS introduced the idea of a 2nd transcendental entity between the Supreme Being and the universe. This is the Demiurge who is subordinate to the Supreme God and acted as agent of creation. JUSTIN'S background of Greek philosophical schooling attracted him to Numenius' teaching, which he, Justin, adopted and adapted in his reinterpretation of the Christian scriptures. JUSTIN applied the Demiurge concept to Jesus and spoke of him as an " arithmetically second God". This was the first major step away from biblical Christianity. To accomplish this Justin inaccurately quoted and even modified scripture. He also held that Jesus only came through Mary not from her as in Matthew. Catholic theologian Karl-Josef Kuschel makes the comment on this that:
From the earlier perspective the Apostle Paul had said as recorded in 2 Tim 4:3, 4, ESV: "They will...wander off into myths." This pagan Greek teaching was further developed by the Gnostics who already taught that Jesus was not a human but a spirit being. This was the very problem that the Apostle John dealt with in his first two letters.
NO SCRIPTURE MENTIONS ANY PERSONAL AGENT OF THE GENESIS CREATION WT teaches that Jesus was not a Co-Creator but an agent of creation. Jehovah was the architect. ACCORDING TO JEHOVAH
ACCORDING TO HEBREW SCRIPTURE WRITERS
ACCORDING TO JESUS
If Jesus had been the agent of the Genesis creation he gave no hint of this in spite of having many opportunities to do so. Could humility have been the reason? He was still humble although he revealed that he was their Messiah, Son of Man and Son of God. ACCORDING TO PAUL
ACCORDING TO HEAVENLY BEINGS
Because all these statements are completely personal to Jehovah it is impossible to imply that He is only the architect and that a personal agent did all the actual work, especially in view of the statement that 'God rested' after the creation work, not anyone else. GOD USED HISWORD-WISDOM-POWER-SPIRITFORTHE GENESIS CREATION.
Why would God need a personal agent? This smacks of the Demiurge concept. WHAT ABOUT GENESIS 1:26: "LET US MAKE MAN IN OUR IMAGE"?
Therefore, no archangel was used to create mankind. 1. THE PLURAL OF DELIBERATION This is when the speaker is conferring or consulting with himself. (With God this may be a consulting with His wisdom as in Prov 8.)
Most modern interpreters take this explanation. The question is: Does God talk to himself? 2. THE PLURAL OF EXCELLENCE/MAJESTY This is the use of a Hebrew idiomatic mode of expression.(see Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 1, p. 968, e.g. elohim plural in form but singular in meaning). Examples of the royal 'We'
NOTE: These 2 approaches, if correct, would preclude the JW view that a 2nd person was spoken to and therefore destroy their argument that Michael was the agent of creation. 3. TO GOD'S HEAVENLY COURT OF ANGELS
If this is the case, then Jehovah would also have been speaking to Michael; but that does not in any way mean that he was speaking to Jesus whose coming into existence is in Mary's womb. An honest examination of the NT texts used by JW's to link Michael to Jesus can be shown to be without substance. But that would be the material of another talk. THE PORTRAIT OF THE MESSIAH IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES But doesn't MICAH 5:2 show that the Messiah would exist before the beginning of the world?
Firstly it must be noted that in Micah 7:20 we see that a similar phrase is used to point back, not beyond the world's creation, but only as far as the Hebrew forefathers: "the loving-kindness given to Abraham, which you swore to our forefathers from days of long ago."
The New American Bible study notes explain Micah 5:2 as a reference to the Messiah's descent from the ancient Davidic dynasty:
Additionally, the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges says: "origins" in Micah 5:2 refers to his (the Messiah's) descent from the ancient Davidic family.
Likely, it is the words of Micah 5:2 that the first century Jews had in mind when they said:
Similarly, in trying to assess who Jesus is: "Some of the crowd...began saying: 'This is for certainty the prophet', Others were saying: 'This is the Christ'" John 7:40, 41.
In no case does anyone suggest that Jesus may have been an archangel. WHAT ABOUT PROVERBS 8:22, 23, 24 and 30? In these texts God's wisdom is wrongly taken by JWs as a person who acted as agent of creation. Hence wisdom is personalised rather than correctly viewed as PERSONIFICATION. Personification is a figure of speech whereby something such as an inanimate object or an abstract idea, e.g. a quality, is given animated (human or animal) characteristics So in Proverbs God's wisdom becomes Lady Wisdom. Personification never involves a literal person.
Proverbs 1:20, 21; 2:2-4; 3:13-18; 8:1-21; 8:22-36; 9:1-5 all PERSONIFY wisdom by using the pronouns she and her in all Bible translations, the Hebrew interlinear and the LXX. However, the NWT translates these pronouns as I and Us; yet the personification is still obvious throughout these chapters because of the use of the pronouns I and me. Insight on the Scriptures, on the subject of SPIRIT under the subheading Personification does not prove personality, says:
The feminine gender of 'wisdom' ('hokma' Heb and 'Sophia' Gk) does not bear on our study. Verse 24 speaks of wisdom being 'brought forth as with labour pains". This would be the case because we are dealing with personification. Lady wisdom, as the figure of speech, would have been born at a point in time. This in no way implies that Jehovah's actual wisdom came into existence. It was always with Him. However, the specific wisdom that is God's purpose and plan, i.e. His 'word,' was produced at a particular point in ancient time. Nevertheless, Jesus was not 'brought forth as with labour pains" until his birth from Mary. Therefore, Jesus is not in this picture of wisdom in Proverbs. Yet, Jesus does become the embodiment of God's wisdom after his birth.
"There is no clear indication that the wisdom language of these writings has gone beyond vivid personification" (Professor James Dunn, Christology in the Making, p. 170).
There is no disconnection between8:21and8:22. The word meconnects both verses.Soit is stillLady Wisdom speaking and therefore, the master worker ofvs. 30 is also her. Catholic theologian Karl-Josef Kuschel states:
Right within this passage are contained statements that Jehovah was the actual maker of the Genesis creation:
It is the context and the proper understanding of language that help one to properly understand this section of Proverbs which is evidently not speaking of a literal person. JESUS NEVER WAS AN ARCHANGEL An archangel is nevertheless an angel but of higher rank. So Michael is indeed of the category of 'angel'. He is one of several archangels according to Daniel 10: 13: "Michael, one of the foremost (chief) Princes". In fact, it was a common Jewish belief that there were seven named archangels, each acting as chief over their own body of angels. At least by Jesus' time angels had been granted immortality.
How could an immortal Michael, an angel, become a mortal human and die on the torture stake?
Michael being in the category of angel is, therefore, not Jesus. If the author of Hebrews thought that Jesus is the archangel why does he labour to prove that he is superior to angels, to Moses, to Joshua and to Levi? All he need say is that Jesus is the archangel. So was Jesus, as he walked the earth, actually Michael? If we answer yes' we have an immortal archangel teaching the disciples and being murdered. If we answer 'no' then Michael just disappeared. If we answer that Michael's essence was genetically combined with Mary's egg then we have a hybrid. He is no longer Michael (similar to a Nephilim, the product of angelic/human sexual union, Gen 6:1-4 and therefore not a genuine human). He would be neither human nor angel and could not be the 2nd Adam (1Cor 15:45-49); yet Jesus called himself 'Son of Man, ' meaning 'human being', THIS RAISES THE PROBLEM OF A CONTRADICTION WITHIN WT TEACHING The concept of the preexistence of Jesus means that he would have had Two Natures, one human, the other archangel, combined and with one being dominant. Yet WT states that he was fully human. Catholic writer Thomas Hart comments:
Yet the scriptures show that Jesus has a single nature - human.
Indeed, Adam (the first, which is natural) came into existence before Jesus (that which is spiritual). To deal with the problem of two natures Trinitarians teach that 'God the Son' assumed impersonal human nature so that Jesus is called man in the generic sense but not 'a man'. A similar problem arises for those with the Arian belief (substitute 'God the Son' for 'Archangel? To deal with this problem they apply the Doctrine of Kenosis based on Philippians 2:7 which is the supposed 'emptying out of the essence and nature of Michael the archangel'. This doctrine does not solve the problem of a dominant archangelic nature. This 1860's ff doctrine is also scripturally unsupportable -- see notes on Philippians 2. FOR MICHAEL TO HAVE BECOME JESUS IS ILLOGICAL What WT teaching regarding Michael means: soul (whole person) = body + spirit. spirit = life, life force or life principle all of which are impersonal (Insight, vol. 2, p. 246)
DIVINE SUICIDE
Yet WT maintains that "the child retained identity as the same person who had resided in heaven as the Word...and that he was a genuine descendant of David" Conclusion: So apart from the many inconsistencies of this teaching we have seen that Gen 1:26, Mic 5:2 and Prov 8:22, 30 cannot legitimately be used to indicate that Jesus, as Michael, could possibly have been the agent of creation. Although I had a great emotional struggle to come finally to see through this WT pagan Greek teaching, what a blessing it is now to have the clear understanding and to be able to focus on Jesus as the agent of the New Creation. |