Jehovah's Witnesses: Can you prove "chief princes" are not "archangels"?

Question

Keiichi...You didn't understand my question. When you read the above definitions do you honestly conclude the chief princes cannot be archangels??? Are you also honestly concluding princes cannot be angels???

Answer 1

You argue proof that your silly doctrines are superior to the silly doctrines of the Jehovah's. Lol. How idiotic. How childish. How delusional.

The Tooth Fairy is an archangel. Can you prove she isn't?  

Answer 2

Simple enough.  The word Archangel means head or leader.  You can not have more than one head.  There is order among Jehovah's organizations.  As the Bible states, God is head of the Christ, the Christ is head of the man and man is head over his wife.  Too many cooks spoil the pot.  

Answer 3

Dictionaries aside- you show Vot a verse in the Bible (any version you prefer) where "archangel" appears in plural.

Then we'll open dictionaries.

=========

Realised it never appears in plural, huh?

Again, your issues with the Society literature aside. Vot is not the Watchtower Society. You want to prove that the chief princes are archangels, I say show Vot where you find any more than ONE archangel in the BIBLE.

Again, Vot emphasises, ANY version you prefer.

*makes second cuppa tea*

=======

*comes to see if Bible verse has been shown*

*not surprised to find a rant instead of a verse*

Simple explanation: ARCHangel= chief of the angels.

Are all the chief princes all "chiefS of the angels" then? Well then, who is the top chief? Again, you come down to a word found only in the singular- a word such as archangel.

Stop letting your bias against the Society cloud your logic.

Send me an email when you find that verse, ok?

*goes to warm dinner*

========

I asked you to email me because I might miss your posting the verse here on the question. I did not mean we have a private discussion.

Surely Vot is not the only one interested in seeing the verse where archangel is in plural?

Anyway, someone will let me know when you post the verse.

Ah... did I say "when"? I meant, "if". Oooops, me English going down the drain!!!

Answer 4

Angel means messenger.

So archangel would mean "chief messenger". Who is God's chief messenger? Who is the word of God? See John 1:1.

There is no Hebrew term "archangel," only malakim or angel. This answerer is unable to locate a passage in Hebrew that uses the term "sar malakim".

Question: Do you agree the words "chief prince" can be an archangel according to the Bible dictionaries?

Prince: Son of a king.

Messenger: One that carries messages

Where all sons of God are princes not all princes perform messenger functions.

"So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

As the above scripture shows, not all sons of God (or princes) are angels. Some are Cherubims others are  Seraphim and perform duties for their king besides being a messenger.

Question: concluding princes cannot be angels?

As previously stated all angels are princes but not all princes are angels. The questioner is assuming there is but one type of spirit creature in heaven, an angel. And assumes again there is but one authority over the angels besides God, an Archangel. However the bible gives examples of other types of spirit creatures with different degrees of authority. Any spirit creature with more authority then an angel can be considered a chief prince.

“in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities.”

Question: are chief of princes not archangels, are princes not angels???

Hebrew Lexicon for Sar: prince, ruler, leader, chief, chieftain, official, captain, chieftain, leader

Being one of the chief princes, only shows that there are chief princes (rulers, leaders, Captains, Generals, Commanders*), and that here Michael is classified as one of these "chief princes" -- Commanders-in-Chief, as we might say today.

It is a military classification, not a classification of rank of being. Nothing is said about these "chief princes" all being equal in being. Nor is there anything here that would make all the angels "chief princes". What brings the classification together, however, is that these are chief rulers -- Commanders, Generals, not that they are angels.

*The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Question: Can you prove "chief princes" are not "archangels"?

Yes.

"Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I [am] against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal"

Gog is not an archangel.