The Bible is about the vindication of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. That's the short answer.

The long answer is that the tree of the knowledge of good and bad represented, to Adam and Eve, Jehovah God's sovereignty. That is, his right, as our creator, to decide for us what was good and what was bad until we, like children, matured to the point where we could do that for ourselves within the parameters of that sovereignty. Knowledge is facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. The knowledge in this case is experience. Good and bad had been defined by Jehovah and at that point it was very simple. Fill the earth and subdue it, that was good. Don't touch or eat the fruit of the tree, that was bad. The knowledge Adam and Eve had acquired was the decision to decide for themselves what was good and what was bad. That's why they suddenly considered nudity to be bad. (Genesis 2:25; 3:6-11)

The footnote to Genesis 2:17 in the 1966 Jerusalem Bible explains it really well: "This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, is to lay hands on, Genesis 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen man does not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being. It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognise his status as a created being. The first sin was an attack on God's sovereignty, a sin of pride."

God created Michael first. Then Michael, as Jehovah's master worker, created everything through Jehovah's Holy Spirit or active force. (Proverbs 8:22-31; Colossians 1:15-17; John 8:23; 17:5) The word Holy means sacred, or belonging to God. Spirit means an invisible active force, like wind, breath, mental inclination. Something that we can't see but that produces results that we can see. So, the holy spirit is God's active force, invisible to us. The first thing that Michael, through Jehovah's holy spirit, created, was the spiritual heavens. This was followed by the spirit beings, often called angels. (Job 38:4-7) Then the physical heavens, or universe, including Earth, the stars, sun and moon and finally everything on Earth eventually concluding with Adam and Eve.

The angels existed for a very long time before man was created, and they had time to mature, like children, so that they knew what was good and bad from their creator. (Genesis 1:26; 3:22) It is important that you understand that being created perfect is much like being born a baby. Parents see their newborn children as perfect, but think about it. They can't walk, talk, feed themselves, go to the bathroom properly - they are bald, toothless, chubby, defenseless little creatures. Perfect in the sense that they have great potential and innocence.

By the time man was created the angels had likely already reached their potential.

On the seventh day, when the creation was complete, God "rested." Not that God was tired or that he stopped working, it means he set aside a period of time in which we were allowed to mature, as the angels had done. When we would have accomplished this, we could, as the Bible says, enter into God's Day of rest. In other words, the seventh "day" or more accurately, period of creation, continues to this day. So, the knowledge of what is good and what is bad is the eventual possession of that maturity. The ability to decide for ourselves what was good and what was bad, predicated upon an acknowledgement of our own accord, of our creator, Jehovah's rightful sovereignty. (Psalm 95:11; Isaiah 40:28; John 5:17; Romans 8:22; Hebrews 4:1-5)

Once Adam rejected that concept by deciding for himself what was good and bad on his own before he had matured enough to best do that, Jehovah had to shorten his life from living forever to eventually dying. Apparently because if he and his offspring, mankind, were allowed to live forever under those conditions, they would never reach that maturity and they would bring about an endless series of chaos and destruction.

So, in effect, Satan charged Jehovah with the crime of withholding some knowledge from mankind. He knew this wasn't true, but he wanted to try and seize control of the power that Jehovah's sovereignty represented even if it meant destroying all that it represented and everything else in the process. Even destroying himself. Like a jealous child breaking a toy so no one else can have it.

But to Jehovah justice is very important. You can't just wave away a crime due to the damage that has been incurred. So, he allowed the charges against him to be tried, as in a court of law. He allowed Satan's theory to be tested in a manner of speaking. With the stipulation that 1. he wasn't going to allow it to prevent his original purpose for the angels and mankind from being fulfilled beyond what was necessary to establish his defense. That they should live forever in peace, in heaven and on earth respectively. And 2. that justice would be done.

That is why immediately after Adam's sin Jehovah put in motion the plan for all of this to take place while Satan's theory was being tested. In a basic sense the steps were as follows.

1. Select a group of people.
2. Form a nation for those people.
3. Demonstrate to them what was going on by establishing a law which they couldn't keep due to their imperfection, or the incomplete nature; their lack of the aforementioned maturity.
4. Provide a way out through a Messiah or Christ, namely, Michael, who volunteered due to his love for mankind and his father, Jehovah's purpose. So, Michael came to earth as a man, Jesus the Christ.

From Jehovah's perspective the life he created, the life he gave us, is sacred. Belonging to God. According to the Bible our soul is our life, represented by our blood, so blood is sacred. To kill someone, or take their soul, requires the payment of the killer's own soul because it is taking something sacred to Jehovah. The blood sacrifices represented a respect for or acknowledgement of his created life granted to us. For example, if a person was found murdered and no one knew who did the killing then they had to sacrifice a bull and spill its blood on the ground as a symbolic acknowledgement of God's possession. Sacred life. A sort of gesture of justice. (Deuteronomy 21:1-9)

Since we inherited sin through Adam then the only man who could pay the price for the blood of Adam, which had been perfect and without sin from the start until he did sin - was the blood of a man who was without sin.

If that 'interpretation' is 'true' for you, I'm happy for you.
You have found a subjective belief system that makes you content.

Don't propose to force that same belief system on us/others, as that makes us discontent.
And invalidates your belief system/Bible teachings.

14 minutes ago, MigL said:

If that 'interpretation' is 'true' for you, I'm happy for you.
You have found a subjective belief system that makes you content.

Don't propose to force that same belief system on us/others, as that makes us discontent.
And invalidates your belief system/Bible teachings.

Say something about religion. On a science forum. That isn't stupid or derogatory or just a blatant example of petty ideological sociopolitical frustration of a quasi-theocratic culture.

You know . . . something interesting, intelligent and not predictable. Something that doesn't expose occidental education as propaganda for the willfully ignorant. Something that doesn't involve you standing for nothing because you'll fall for anything and then . . . blame the guy who doesn't do that . . .

Do that.

2 hours ago, Pathway Machine said:

The Bible is about the vindication of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. That's the short answer.

And it's wrong. The bible has no intrinsic meaning of its own; only the meaning you choose to assign to it. Whatever that was you wrote (tldr).

12 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

And it's wrong. The bible has no intrinsic meaning of its own; only the meaning you choose to assign to it. Whatever that was you wrote (tldr).

Thanks, seth. Excellent comment. I've been told I'm full of rage, and have no argument.

So the scientific method prediction made here is that you can impose any meaning on the Bible you want. Go ahead then. Show us. (tstr)

Edited October 28Oct 28 by Pathway Machine

13 minutes ago, Pathway Machine said:

Thanks, seth. Excellent comment. I've been told I'm full of rage, and have no argument.

So the scientific method prediction made here is that you can impose any meaning on the Bible you want. Go ahead then. Show us. (tstr)

Personally, I try to be an adult: that is, I choose to take full ownership of my actions, inactions, and their consequences, foreseen or otherwise.

If I succeed, I try at least sometimes to give credit to others. If I fail, I blame no one (natural or otherwise) but myself.

I understand that their are different paths to take - my wife of 22 years for example, is quite religious, and it doesn't lead to conflict; the diversity of approach can be made into a common strength.

However, on my chosen path, there is no place for a either a god or his babble. They simply become irrelevances.

Edited October 28Oct 28 by sethoflagos

11 minutes ago, Pathway Machine said:

So the scientific method prediction made here is that you can impose any meaning on the Bible you want. Go ahead then. Sh

The Bible has different views on subjects because there were multiple authors, most anonymous, writing in different times places over 100s of years.

The OP is a didactic sermon based on the beliefs of a Christian sect known as the Jehovah's Witnesses who maintain that the archangel Michael and Jesus Christ are one and the same person.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/archangel-michael/

The basic idea is that Michael was the first being created by God, and that Michael was the name of Jesus Christ before and after his life on earth.

It’s a teaching that has no following in any other branch of the Christian faith (with the exception of some  dissident factions of the Seventh Day Adventist churches). Nor does it play any part in the Juadaic and Islamic traditions that also refer to the archangel Michael.

The English word “bible” comes from the koine Greek expression τὰ βιβλία - Ta Biblia  meaning “the books”  (it’s a nominative neuter plural of the noun βιβλίον). The bible is not a book, it’s an a reading list of texts written by many different authors at different times and places, and in quite different languages too - principally ancient Hebrew and koine Greek. You cannot assign any single meaning to it.

Great summary +1

The only thing I would add is not only is the 'Bible' a folder containing several books from disparate sources, there are different versions with a different selection of books.

22 minutes ago, toucana said:

The OP is a didactic sermon based on the beliefs of a Christian sect known as the Jehovah's Witnesses who maintain that the archangel Michael and Jesus Christ are one and the same person.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/archangel-michael/

The basic idea is that Michael was the first being created by God, and that Michael was the name of Jesus Christ before and after his life on earth.

It’s a teaching that has no following in any other branch of the Christian faith (with the exception of some  dissident factions of the Seventh Day Adventist churches). Nor does it play any part in the Juadaic and Islamic traditions that also refer to the archangel Michael.

The English word “bible” comes from the koine Greek expression τὰ βιβλία - Ta Biblia  meaning “the books”  (it’s a nominative neuter plural of the noun βιβλίον). The bible is not a book, it’s an a reading list of texts written by many different authors at different times and places, and in quite different languages too - principally ancient Hebrew and koine Greek. You cannot assign any single meaning to it.

Fascinating.

For some reason, which I could never quite understand, it seems extremely difficult for some people, especially skeptics, to understand that Jesus and Michael are the same. Lets look at the facts regarding Jesus and Michael.

1. Jesus existed in heaven before he came to earth. Proverbs 8:22; John 1:1,3, 14; 3:13; 8:23, 58; 17:5; Colossians 1:15-17; 1 John 2:13; Revelation 3:14 all speak of Jesus' existence before the world began, in fact before anything was created Jesus was created. Before Heaven, the heavens, the Earth, and of course, man. He is the firstborn of creation, the beginning of creation, he came from somewhere other than this world, he descended from heaven. There can be no doubt that he had a pre-human existence in heaven before he came to Earth as the man Jesus Christ.

2. Jesus' position in heaven before he came to the earth must have been an important one, considering he was the first of Jehovah's creation and all things were created through him and for him. (Proverbs 8:22; John 1:3) That means not only the heavens and earth as we know them but the angels and heaven as well. Jesus is referred to as the "word of God," this means he is the spokesperson. (John 1:1) As the spokesperson for Jehovah God we can assume that when an angel performed some important tasks on earth, like guiding and protecting the early Israelites from Egypt or taking the physical form of men in performing an important task, it was likely Michael as he existed before he came to earth as Jesus.

3. The term archangel means chief of the angels. Arch means chief or principal. The term is only applied to one angel in the Bible. Michael. It is always used in the singular. There is only one archangel. The term archangel itself only appears twice throughout Scripture. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 Paul writes of Jesus as having the voice of the archangel, and Jude 9 indicates Michael disputed with Satan over the body of Moses. So, there is a connection with Jesus as well as an indication that Michael was connected in some way with the people of the exodus of Egypt.

4. Other than Jehovah God himself only two people in the Bible are said to be in charge of or over the angels. They are Michael and Jesus Christ. The name Michael appears only five times throughout Scripture. At Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 9 and Revelation 12:7.

5. Are there any others who believe Michael and Jesus are the same? Yes, there are many. Joseph Benson, E. W. Hengstenberg, J. P. Lange, Butterworth, Cruden, Taylor, Guyse all wrote that Michael and Jesus were the same.

Clarke's Commentary (Adam Clarke) - "Let it be observed that the word archangel is never found in the plural number in the sacred writings. There can be properly only one archangel, one chief or head of all the angelic host .... Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders .... hence by this personage, in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus."

W. E. Vine - the "voice of the archangel" (1 Thessalonians 4:16) is apparently "the voice of the Lord Jesus Christ" - An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 64.

The 1599 Geneva Study Bible: Christ is the prince of angels and head of the Church, who bears that iron rod."

The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia: - "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 Rev. 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel" – vol. 3, p. 2048, Eerdmans Publishing, 1984 printing.

John Calvin: "I embrace the opinion of those who refer this to the person of Christ, because it suits the subject best to represent him as standing forward for the defense of his elect people." - J. Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Daniel, trans. T. Myers (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), vol. 2 p. 369.

Brown's Dictionary of the Bible - on 'Michael' and 'Angel,' both these words do sometimes refer to Christ; and also affirms that Christ is the Archangel.

The NIV Study Bible - "The Angel of the LORD .... Traditional Christian interpretation has held that this 'angel' was a preincarnate manifestation of Christ as God's Messenger-Servant. It may be ..., the angel could speak on behalf of the One who sent him." - footnote for Gen. 16:7. Zondervan Publishing, 1985

Smith's Bible Dictionary (says of Michael) - "Angel of the Lord. ... Christ's visible form before the incarnation. p. 40"

Today's Dictionary of the Bible - "Angel of the Lord [angel of Jehovah] - occurs many times in the Old Testament, where in almost every instance it means a supernatural personage to be distinguished from Jehovah .... Some feel the pre-incarnate Christ is meant." Bethany House Publ., 1982, p. 39.

Edited October 28Oct 28 by Pathway Machine

20 minutes ago, toucana said:

The OP is a didactic sermon based on the beliefs of a Christian sect known as the Jehovah's Witnesses...

Stands to reason. The JWs are obligate proselytisers with much persistence and few scruples over method. From family experience, I know they targetted the deaf community and other vulnerable groups in the UK.

I would have thought that even they would realise that there are slim pickings to be had amongst the science community. Honing his debating skills possibly?

Edited October 28Oct 28 by sethoflagos
Spellcheck error