lsenders@hotmail.com wrote:
> Gary McNees wrote:
>
>
>>God being sovereign does not mean that man cannot do that which
>>God forbids, and which God does not will that he do.
>>
>
> Your error is defining "when." Prior to the fall man had the capacity
> of the either or. But after he had shot himself in the head, he was
> dead. How does a dead man choose?

Your definition of dead is false. The scriptures teach that the
unregenerate are "dead in sin."

After Adam fell, and died spiritually, he still heard the voice of God,
and responded to it.

So much for the unregenerate not responding to God.

Gary

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

>Next week I will be 75 years old, and I must say, I thought I had come
>across just about all the theories concerning the Bible, but I must
say
>the "Jesus is Michael" theory Is a new one for me.

JWs are far from the first people to believe Jesus is Michael. But why
do we?

to quote a post by a JW: ( I did not write this but I agree with it)

"The basis for our understanding Jesus is Michael is that many of the
same things said of Michael are also said of Jesus. You could liken it
to the many instances where something is said of God and then said of
Jesus, causing you to conclude Jesus is God. Now you may think you see
a double standard here but in reality you do not. Why do we think
similarities between Jesus and Michael suggest he is Michael but
similarities between Jesus and God do not mean Jesus is God? Mainly
because we see too much counter evidence to Jesus being God. In other
words, if we saw a number of scriptures that say Jesus is standing next
to Michael; was sent my Michael or that Jesus sent Michael; that he
gave Michael life; that Michael's God was Jesus; etcetera, then we
would not allow these similarities between Jesus and Michael to cause
us to think he is Michael. But this is precisely what we see with Jesus
and God. Thus, we have no real counter evidence that Jesus could not be
Michael (other than a preconceived belief that he is God) to overturn
the many similarities between the two. The first evidence is that both
are said to take a position as King.

Note Daniel 12:1

Michael rules as King:

"And during that time Mi´cha·el will stand up, the great prince who
is standing in behalf of the sons of your people"

What does it mean to "stand up" in the book of Daniel? Note earlier
contexts in the previous chapter of Daniel:

And now what is truth I shall tell to you: "Look! There will yet be