Michael is Jesus who is God the Son

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
In another thread in the Jehovah's Witness section of the forum, a conversation was begun. As the conversation had deviated from the poster's original intention, we were asked to continue the conversation elsewhere. This is the result.

The JW's believe that Jesus Christ is Michael the archangel despite their founder believing otherwise. Because Jesus is called an angel, they therefore conclude He cannot be the One True God. I believe that Michael is what Jesus was called before He was born of Mary, but I also believe that He is God the Son and that the concept of angel (messenger) and God the Son (deity) are not mutually exclusive. @jamesh had responded to a portion of an article I wrote defending this position from scripture. Here is his post quoted and my response to it.

~~~~
Ok Kade, let me address what you posted. These verses and others like at Genesis 17:1-2, Genesis 18 or Judges 2:1 I use to prove that Jesus Christ preexisted His incarnation as a man. The Jw's deny Jesus preexisted and also claim Jesus Christ Himself was created being. They use Proverbs 8:22 and Revelation 3:14, just to name a couple.
Agreed. The JW's are incorrect. Not only did Jesus preexist His incarnation, He IS God and the Creator of all else that exists besides God. You and I both know this from John 1:1 and Heb. 1:2.
Now, to the point! Jesus is not Michael the arc angel and God Almighty at the same time. Jesus created Michael and the Jw's believe Jesus who to them Michael created all the other angels. To the Jw's Jesus is God the Father's first creation. Ask yourself this question? Why does or why would Jesus be Michael, an angel? What purpose would it serve since Jesus Himself as God the Son created the angels and everything else for that matter.
This is a common objection and it is based on the premise that "angel" is a word used to describe a kind or species of being. It is not. Malak/aggelos is a job description and both the Hebrew and Greek words are properly translated as "messenger".

A. Angel – (Greek – ἄγγελος/aggelos; Hebrew – מַלְאָך/mal’ak) means messenger and can apply to any being who is a messenger of God. For instance, men were called angels several times in scripture.

1. Jesus referred to John as an angel in Matt. 11:10.2. John sent human angels (messengers) in Luke 7:24.3. Again, Jesus sent human angels before him into Jerusalem in Luke 9:52.4. Caleb and Joshua were called angels in James 2:25.
These are just clear examples, though I believe there are several others. Angel is not a term that is reserved solely for creatures like Gabriel.

B. Arche – (Greek - archo) means top, chief, principle, supreme, or ruling. From this word we get such terms as anarchy (no rule), monarch (single ruler), oligarchy (few rule), arch-nemesis (primary nemesis) and so on. Even the stand alone word arch derives its meaning from this as a construct "over" something.

C. Archangel – (Greek archaggelos) there is only one mentioned and in each case that the term is used it is with the definite article. There is only one archangel, not many. Taking the two parts of the word arche and angel we understand that the archangel is the chief messenger, the supreme messenger, the number one or ruling angel.

Who was God's primary messenger to mankind? Who has the authority to rule all other messengers of any type both by command and by the message He brought? Only one person fits this designation. Jesus.

Jesus created all the cherubim and seraphim, creatures like Gabriel who are spiritual in nature and take on the semblance of physical life without actually incarnating. Jesus also created mankind. These are the names of the kinds or species of being. Both of which served as messengers of God. Jesus, too, was a messenger. In fact, He was the ultimate Messenger of God the Father. (Matt. 21:33-41)

Things in the Bible often have multiple names. Jesus = Immanuel; Sinai = Horeb; Jethro = Reuel = Hobab; etc.
John 1:3, "All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him, (or without Him) nothing came into being that has come into being." Colossians 1:16, "For by Him ALL things were created, (the word all means without exception), both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, (angels are in the heavens, and angels are invisible by nature) whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--ALL things have been created BY Him and for Him."
Agreed. Jesus is uncreated, Creator, and coequal with God the Father and God the Spirit.
I mentioned the Jw's use Revelation 3:14 to prove Jesus was created. "The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God." The Greek word for "beginning" is arche. We get our English word "architect" from this word. What does an architect do? He's the "origin" the planner or the creator of anything that is made. John 1:3, Colossians 1:16, Hebrews 1:10 back up what Revelation 3:14 means.
Agreed. 100%
Getting back to the angel of the Lord. First of all the angel of the Lord never appears in the New Testament, even though he is mentioned in the NT, by Stephen at Acts 7. Acts 7:2, "And he said, Hear me, brethren and fathers. The God of glory APPEARED to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran." John 17:5, what Jesus said, "And now glorify Thou Me together with Thyself, Father, with the glory which I had with Thee BEFORE THE WORLD WAS."
That exact phrase does not appear, I agree.
I could go on and on explaining about the angel of the Lord and him be Jesus Christ, not Michael, but I want to get to the bottom line. You quoted Genesis 22, one of my favorite chapters. Just before vs 11 Abraham is going to slay his son. Vs11, "But the angel of the Lord called to him from heaven, and said, "Abraham, Abraham! "And he said here I am." Vs12, "Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him, for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son from Me." (Actually Abraham had a son older than Isaac).
Vs15, "Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven. vs16, and said, (the angel of the Lord is speaking here). By Myself I have sworn declares the Lord, because (or why) you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son, vs17, "indeed I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall posses the gate of their enemies."
Now look at what the writer of Hebrews says at Hebrews 6:13-14, "For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, HE SWORE BY HIMSELF, vs14, saying, I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply you."
The point is that an angel cannot swear an oath on behalf of God Himself. Why? Because angels are not greater than God Himself. Therefore, Jesus can't be an angel, let alone Michael the arc angel. Jesus has two natures, one of deity and the other human being. Jesus Christ is God on His Fathers side because it is a universal law that a son shares the same nature as his father. This why Jesus Himself referred to Himself as (1) the Son of God, and (2) the Son of Man."
I think you have set up the context perfectly and then come to exactly the wrong conclusion because you are holding to the idea that the word angel (Hbr. malak) is a kind of creature rather than a job description.

1. The messenger of Jehovah is speaking.
2. The messenger of Jehovah says "I have sworn by myself that I will multiply you".
3. Hebrews says that God is the one who swore by Himself the promise to Abraham.

Therefore, the messenger of Jehovah is therefore God speaking, God swearing by Himself, God promising.

Just because God the Son is being referred to as a messenger, does not make Him any less God. It's just one of His many job titles.
Everything you stated and all the verses you quoted are just fine, the problem is the conclusion you came up with that Jesus is Michael. And your right, "angel" simply means messenger. The Hebrew word for angel is "malak." Your also right that the word can refer to humans. Malachi 3:1, "Behold, I am going to send My, "malak/angel/messenger" and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the "malak/angel/messenger" of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming, says the Lord of hosts."
I am glad we agree that malak/aggelos is not a kind or species designation but a job description that can apply to multiple different kinds of beings. That being the case, why would being a messenger of God the Father preclude that messenger from being God the Son?
The person preparing the way of the Lord is John the Baptist, please read Mark 1:1-4. Who do you think is the messenger of the covenant? It sure ain't Michael. Who do you think is coming to His temple?
My mistake. You are correct. This particular angel is John the Immerser preparing the way for God the Son.
In short, angels cannot multiply descendants, they cannot make covenant's, and they certainly cannot swear oaths on behalf of God Almighty.
Why not? If angel is just a job description, is it not a job that Jesus held? Isn't God the Son the greatest messenger sent to mankind (Matt. 21:37) as the mediator between God and man? (1 Tim. 2:5)
Does this make sense to you Kade, and you to JRR?

IN GOD THE SON,
jamesh
In Truth and Love.
 

jamesh

Active member
In another thread in the Jehovah's Witness section of the forum, a conversation was begun. As the conversation had deviated from the poster's original intention, we were asked to continue the conversation elsewhere. This is the result.

The JW's believe that Jesus Christ is Michael the archangel despite their founder believing otherwise. Because Jesus is called an angel, they therefore conclude He cannot be the One True God. I believe that Michael is what Jesus was called before He was born of Mary, but I also believe that He is God the Son and that the concept of angel (messenger) and God the Son (deity) are not mutually exclusive. @jamesh had responded to a portion of an article I wrote defending this position from scripture. Here is his post quoted and my response to it.

~~~~

Agreed. The JW's are incorrect. Not only did Jesus preexist His incarnation, He IS God and the Creator of all else that exists besides God. You and I both know this from John 1:1 and Heb. 1:2.

This is a common objection and it is based on the premise that "angel" is a word used to describe a kind or species of being. It is not. Malak/aggelos is a job description and both the Hebrew and Greek words are properly translated as "messenger".

A. Angel – (Greek – ἄγγελος/aggelos; Hebrew – מַלְאָך/mal’ak) means messenger and can apply to any being who is a messenger of God. For instance, men were called angels several times in scripture.

1. Jesus referred to John as an angel in Matt. 11:10.2. John sent human angels (messengers) in Luke 7:24.3. Again, Jesus sent human angels before him into Jerusalem in Luke 9:52.4. Caleb and Joshua were called angels in James 2:25.
These are just clear examples, though I believe there are several others. Angel is not a term that is reserved solely for creatures like Gabriel.

B. Arche – (Greek - archo) means top, chief, principle, supreme, or ruling. From this word we get such terms as anarchy (no rule), monarch (single ruler), oligarchy (few rule), arch-nemesis (primary nemesis) and so on. Even the stand alone word arch derives its meaning from this as a construct "over" something.

C. Archangel – (Greek archaggelos) there is only one mentioned and in each case that the term is used it is with the definite article. There is only one archangel, not many. Taking the two parts of the word arche and angel we understand that the archangel is the chief messenger, the supreme messenger, the number one or ruling angel.

Who was God's primary messenger to mankind? Who has the authority to rule all other messengers of any type both by command and by the message He brought? Only one person fits this designation. Jesus.

Jesus created all the cherubim and seraphim, creatures like Gabriel who are spiritual in nature and take on the semblance of physical life without actually incarnating. Jesus also created mankind. These are the names of the kinds or species of being. Both of which served as messengers of God. Jesus, too, was a messenger. In fact, He was the ultimate Messenger of God the Father. (Matt. 21:33-41)

Things in the Bible often have multiple names. Jesus = Immanuel; Sinai = Horeb; Jethro = Reuel = Hobab; etc.

Agreed. Jesus is uncreated, Creator, and coequal with God the Father and God the Spirit.

Agreed. 100%

That exact phrase does not appear, I agree.



I think you have set up the context perfectly and then come to exactly the wrong conclusion because you are holding to the idea that the word angel (Hbr. malak) is a kind of creature rather than a job description.

1. The messenger of Jehovah is speaking.
2. The messenger of Jehovah says "I have sworn by myself that I will multiply you".
3. Hebrews says that God is the one who swore by Himself the promise to Abraham.

Therefore, the messenger of Jehovah is therefore God speaking, God swearing by Himself, God promising.

Just because God the Son is being referred to as a messenger, does not make Him any less God. It's just one of His many job titles.

I am glad we agree that malak/aggelos is not a kind or species designation but a job description that can apply to multiple different kinds of beings. That being the case, why would being a messenger of God the Father preclude that messenger from being God the Son?

My mistake. You are correct. This particular angel is John the Immerser preparing the way for God the Son.

Why not? If angel is just a job description, is it not a job that Jesus held? Isn't God the Son the greatest messenger sent to mankind (Matt. 21:37) as the mediator between God and man? (1 Tim. 2:5)

In Truth and Love.
Hi Kade dude! Who told you or where did you get the idea that Jesus being Michael the arc angel is a job description? Angels by nature are spiritual beings who minister to those who will inherit salvation. Hebrews 1:14, "Are they not ALL ministering spirits, sent out to render SERVICE for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?"

Sometimes they are sent by God to answer prayers, one example is at Acts 12. What is ironic about this is the fact that at Hebrews 1 the service of angels are contrasted the GREATER work of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is superior to angels. Just read Hebrews 1:5-14. Moreover, angels are to worship Jesus Christ, Hebrews 1:6.

Luke 2:11, "for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, WHO IS Christ the Lord." This is "NOT" some sort of a job title, it's a fact. At Matthew 1:23, "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel," which is translated means, "God with us." Being God is not a job title.

The job title for Joe Biden is "President of the United States." He can only serve in this job for 8 years, and that's it. After 8 years he longer has the job of being the President, this is not hard to understand. Btw, I am in no way endorsing or even implying I support him, ugh!

Now, did you happen to look up how many times the actual angel Michael is brought up in Scripture? At one of those places is Jude 1:9. "But Michael the archangel when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not DARE pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said the Lord rebuke you." Or, "The Lord will punish you!" In other words, it's not in Michael's job title or description to make a judgment for the Lord Himself.

Just like I told you that an angel cannot swear an oath on behalf of God Himself. You need to lose this idea that Jesus is Michael the arc angel. It is NOT a Biblical teaching, makes no sense and causes people to stumble when there is no need. 2 Timothy 2:23, "But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations/questions, knowing that they produce quarrels." Again, get this heretical non Biblcal view out of your mind.

IN GOD THE SON,
jamesh
 

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
My apologies for the delayed reply. My nephew came to visit this weekend to play with my kids and I was wrapped up in that. :)
Hi Kade dude! Who told you or where did you get the idea that Jesus being Michael the arc angel is a job description? Angels by nature are spiritual beings who minister to those who will inherit salvation. Hebrews 1:14, "Are they not ALL ministering spirits, sent out to render SERVICE for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?"
So, again, the word angel is not only applied to celestial beings like Gabriel, cherubim, and seraphim, it is also applied to humans per the example I gave. Being applied to two different kinds of beings and noting that the word means simply "messenger", that is why I believe it is a job description and not a specific kind of being.

Furthermore, the concept of an archangel means exactly what Hebrews says. Jesus was over all the angels because He was the archangel.
Sometimes they are sent by God to answer prayers, one example is at Acts 12. What is ironic about this is the fact that at Hebrews 1 the service of angels are contrasted the GREATER work of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is superior to angels. Just read Hebrews 1:5-14. Moreover, angels are to worship Jesus Christ, Hebrews 1:6.
Agreed. Hence the reason Jesus is the chief/ruler/arch angel. He is above all other messengers God has sent in power, majesty, and authority.
Luke 2:11, "for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, WHO IS Christ the Lord." This is "NOT" some sort of a job title, it's a fact. At Matthew 1:23, "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel," which is translated means, "God with us." Being God is not a job title.
Agreed. God is a specific kind of being of which there is only one that exists in three persons. King is a job description. So is Messenger. Archangel - "chief of messengers" - is a job description because it describes what a person does, not what they are by nature.
The job title for Joe Biden is "President of the United States." He can only serve in this job for 8 years, and that's it. After 8 years he longer has the job of being the President, this is not hard to understand. Btw, I am in no way endorsing or even implying I support him, ugh!
Heh. I feel your pain.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
Now, did you happen to look up how many times the actual angel Michael is brought up in Scripture? At one of those places is Jude 1:9. "But Michael the archangel when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not DARE pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said the Lord rebuke you." Or, "The Lord will punish you!" In other words, it's not in Michael's job title or description to make a judgment for the Lord Himself.
I did. Here is the section from my article on that name specifically:

III. Michael

There are 15 references to the name Michael in Scripture. Ten of these are humans named Michael. It is in reference to the prince/archangel mentioned in the last five verses the name is used that we seek. The first three of these references to Michael are in the Old Testament book of the prophet Daniel. The last two are mentioned in the New Testament books of Jude and Revelation. By study and comparison of these and other verses, evidence presents itself, which leads us to an inescapable conclusion of who Michael really is. The Hebrew name "Michael" (Miyka'el/Micahl) found in the Old Testament, means "who is like God". So the title "Michael the archangel" can be translated as "The chief messenger who is like God".

V. Answers to Common Questions

A. Rebuking the Accuser​

The prophet Zechariah was given a vision of Joshua, the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord. Satan is standing at his right hand to resist him. Here we see two adversaries contending over a sinful human being. Joshua's filthy garment symbolizes his sin. (Zech 3:3).

In this narrative, the name changes quickly from "the angel of the Lord" (verse 1) to "the Lord" (verse 2), indicating again that they are the same. Then the Lord makes an interesting statement. "And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan" (Zech 3:2). There is only one other place in Scripture (Jude 1:9), where this sentence is found—and Michael the archangel speaks it!

In the short epistle of Jude, we witness a scene similar to Joshua and the angel in Zechariah. "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" (Jude 1:9). The situations are almost exactly parallel: Christ and Satan are contending over the fate of two of God’s great human leaders (a living one in the case of Joshua, and a dead one in the case of Moses). The debate is ended abruptly when Jesus says, "The Lord rebuke thee."

This passage raises another valid question. Some people are confused by part of this verse in (Jude 1:9) where Michael rebukes the devil. They wonder: If Michael is really another name for Jesus, then why does he invoke the name of the Lord when rebuking Satan? Why not do it Himself as He did when tempted in the wilderness. "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan" (Matt 4:10).

In studying the Scriptures and language of Jesus, we quickly see it was a very common practice for Jesus to speak of Himself in the second person, as in' Luke 18:8: "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" And if there is still any lingering question, we have this other clear Scripture in Zech 3:2, where the Lord does the same thing Michael does in Jude. He invokes His own name when rebuking the devil. "And the Lord said to Satan, 'Jehovah rebuke you, Satan!" Since Jesus does nothing in Himself but says and does all in accordance with the Father's will (John 14:10 and yea, even John 14-17). These Scriptures are examples of God the Son, appealing to the name of His Father in rebuking Satan.

B. Michael in the book of Daniel​

1. Michael is mentioned more in Daniel than in any other book in Scripture. (See Daniel 10:13; 10:21; 12:1) In all three references, He is called a prince—your prince and the great prince. Isaiah's prophecy about the Messiah (Isa. 9:6) reveals one of the key names he says that would apply to the Messiah is "Prince of Peace."

There is another verse in Daniel 8:25 where the "Prince of princes" is mentioned. Again, the cosmic conflict is being played out with Christ on one side and the devil on the other, with humanity serving as the battlefield. "Prince of princes" is actually the same term that is translated "prince of the host" in verse 11. This is similar to "Lord of lords" (Psalm 136:3), "God of gods" (Deuteronomy 10:17), and "King of kings" (Revelation 19:16). All these are titles of deity. He is even referred to as "Messiah the Prince" (Daniel 9:25).

a. Isaiah 9:6: "And his name shall be called …The Prince of Peace." b. Acts 3:14, 15: "But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and … killed the Prince of life." c. Acts 5:30, 31: "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour." d. Revelation 1:5: "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth."
These verses clearly echo with three verses in Daniel in which Michael is called a "prince."

Who is this being that the angels call the Great Prince? Let's let the Bible tell us.

2. But Is Michael Only One of Many?

Daniel 10:13 is probably the most difficult verse regarding Michael: "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me." It appears at first glance that Michael is only "one of" the chief princes. This is an unfortunate translation in the King James. The word "one" comes from the Hebrew word "echad," which is also frequently translated as "first," just as Genesis 1:5 refers to the evening and morning as the first (echad) day. This changes the whole meaning of the verse to Michael being first of, greatest or highest of, to the chief of princes—again a reference to Jesus. Young's Literal translates verse 13 this way:

And the head of the kingdom of Persia is standing over-against me twenty and one days, and lo, Michael, first of the chief heads, hath come in to help me, and I have remained there near the kings of Persia;

Daniel 10:21 says, "But I will show 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." Notice here that the angel refers to Michael as your Prince. Who was Daniel’s prince? In the previous chapter, we see the answer. In Daniel 9:25, Daniel’s Messiah is called the prince, which is another clear indication of Michael’s identity! So Gabriel is saying that Michael the archangel is Jesus, who knows all the truth of Scripture.

The final reference to Michael in Daniel is in chapter 12: "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people." Notice here that Michael is not called a great prince but "the great prince." The definite article there lends more credence to the idea of Michael being the first or head rather than just one of many. He is also identified as the one who "standeth for the children of thy people." This means that He intercedes, defends and even stands as a substitute. Who could this be other then Jesus?

Michael standing up (Daniel 12:2) is also a reference to the Lord preparing to come as per my commentary on Daniel 12 in a direct connection to Revelation 12.
Just like I told you that an angel cannot swear an oath on behalf of God Himself. You need to lose this idea that Jesus is Michael the arc angel. It is NOT a Biblical teaching, makes no sense and causes people to stumble when there is no need. 2 Timothy 2:23, "But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations/questions, knowing that they produce quarrels." Again, get this heretical non Biblcal view out of your mind.

IN GOD THE SON,
jamesh
I believe I have addressed each of your objections in turn. If I left anything out, please let me know.

In Truth and Love.
 

jamesh

Active member
I did. Here is the section from my article on that name specifically:

III. Michael

There are 15 references to the name Michael in Scripture. Ten of these are humans named Michael. It is in reference to the prince/archangel mentioned in the last five verses the name is used that we seek. The first three of these references to Michael are in the Old Testament book of the prophet Daniel. The last two are mentioned in the New Testament books of Jude and Revelation. By study and comparison of these and other verses, evidence presents itself, which leads us to an inescapable conclusion of who Michael really is. The Hebrew name "Michael" (Miyka'el/Micahl) found in the Old Testament, means "who is like God". So the title "Michael the archangel" can be translated as "The chief messenger who is like God".

V. Answers to Common Questions

A. Rebuking the Accuser​

The prophet Zechariah was given a vision of Joshua, the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord. Satan is standing at his right hand to resist him. Here we see two adversaries contending over a sinful human being. Joshua's filthy garment symbolizes his sin. (Zech 3:3).

In this narrative, the name changes quickly from "the angel of the Lord" (verse 1) to "the Lord" (verse 2), indicating again that they are the same. Then the Lord makes an interesting statement. "And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan" (Zech 3:2). There is only one other place in Scripture (Jude 1:9), where this sentence is found—and Michael the archangel speaks it!

In the short epistle of Jude, we witness a scene similar to Joshua and the angel in Zechariah. "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" (Jude 1:9). The situations are almost exactly parallel: Christ and Satan are contending over the fate of two of God’s great human leaders (a living one in the case of Joshua, and a dead one in the case of Moses). The debate is ended abruptly when Jesus says, "The Lord rebuke thee."

This passage raises another valid question. Some people are confused by part of this verse in (Jude 1:9) where Michael rebukes the devil. They wonder: If Michael is really another name for Jesus, then why does he invoke the name of the Lord when rebuking Satan? Why not do it Himself as He did when tempted in the wilderness. "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan" (Matt 4:10).

In studying the Scriptures and language of Jesus, we quickly see it was a very common practice for Jesus to speak of Himself in the second person, as in' Luke 18:8: "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" And if there is still any lingering question, we have this other clear Scripture in Zech 3:2, where the Lord does the same thing Michael does in Jude. He invokes His own name when rebuking the devil. "And the Lord said to Satan, 'Jehovah rebuke you, Satan!" Since Jesus does nothing in Himself but says and does all in accordance with the Father's will (John 14:10 and yea, even John 14-17). These Scriptures are examples of God the Son, appealing to the name of His Father in rebuking Satan.

B. Michael in the book of Daniel​

1. Michael is mentioned more in Daniel than in any other book in Scripture. (See Daniel 10:13; 10:21; 12:1) In all three references, He is called a prince—your prince and the great prince. Isaiah's prophecy about the Messiah (Isa. 9:6) reveals one of the key names he says that would apply to the Messiah is "Prince of Peace."

There is another verse in Daniel 8:25 where the "Prince of princes" is mentioned. Again, the cosmic conflict is being played out with Christ on one side and the devil on the other, with humanity serving as the battlefield. "Prince of princes" is actually the same term that is translated "prince of the host" in verse 11. This is similar to "Lord of lords" (Psalm 136:3), "God of gods" (Deuteronomy 10:17), and "King of kings" (Revelation 19:16). All these are titles of deity. He is even referred to as "Messiah the Prince" (Daniel 9:25).

a. Isaiah 9:6: "And his name shall be called …The Prince of Peace." b. Acts 3:14, 15: "But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and … killed the Prince of life." c. Acts 5:30, 31: "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour." d. Revelation 1:5: "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth."
These verses clearly echo with three verses in Daniel in which Michael is called a "prince."

Who is this being that the angels call the Great Prince? Let's let the Bible tell us.

2. But Is Michael Only One of Many?

Daniel 10:13 is probably the most difficult verse regarding Michael: "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me." It appears at first glance that Michael is only "one of" the chief princes. This is an unfortunate translation in the King James. The word "one" comes from the Hebrew word "echad," which is also frequently translated as "first," just as Genesis 1:5 refers to the evening and morning as the first (echad) day. This changes the whole meaning of the verse to Michael being first of, greatest or highest of, to the chief of princes—again a reference to Jesus. Young's Literal translates verse 13 this way:

And the head of the kingdom of Persia is standing over-against me twenty and one days, and lo, Michael, first of the chief heads, hath come in to help me, and I have remained there near the kings of Persia;

Daniel 10:21 says, "But I will show 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." Notice here that the angel refers to Michael as your Prince. Who was Daniel’s prince? In the previous chapter, we see the answer. In Daniel 9:25, Daniel’s Messiah is called the prince, which is another clear indication of Michael’s identity! So Gabriel is saying that Michael the archangel is Jesus, who knows all the truth of Scripture.

The final reference to Michael in Daniel is in chapter 12: "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people." Notice here that Michael is not called a great prince but "the great prince." The definite article there lends more credence to the idea of Michael being the first or head rather than just one of many. He is also identified as the one who "standeth for the children of thy people." This means that He intercedes, defends and even stands as a substitute. Who could this be other then Jesus?

Michael standing up (Daniel 12:2) is also a reference to the Lord preparing to come as per my commentary on Daniel 12 in a direct connection to Revelation 12.

I believe I have addressed each of your objections in turn. If I left anything out, please let me know.

In Truth and Love.
Well Kade, I guess it's time to bring out the "big guns." You said, "I believe I have addressed each of your objections in turn." No, you still are unable to give me an answer to "Angels cannot swear oaths on behalf of God Himself." Hebrews 6:13-14.

Also, and this is "big!" At Daniel 10:5-8, can you tell me who Daniel saw and who do you think spoke to him? Please read what John Gill says who it is. https://bibleapps.com/gill/daniel/10.htm Also, Keil & Delitzsch say the same thing.

So why is this important? Daniel 10:13 says, "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, (and yes, I read what you stated about one/first) CAME TO HELP ME, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia." Who do you think the person is that needed help? Hint: Revelation 1:13-14. This proves that Jesus Christ and Michael are "NOT" one and the same person. Again, your propagating heresy.

IN GOD THE SON, Not, "In Michael the arc angel." :rolleyes:
jamesh
 

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
Well Kade, I guess it's time to bring out the "big guns." You said, "I believe I have addressed each of your objections in turn." No, you still are unable to give me an answer to "Angels cannot swear oaths on behalf of God Himself." Hebrews 6:13-14.

Also, and this is "big!" At Daniel 10:5-8, can you tell me who Daniel saw and who do you think spoke to him? Please read what John Gill says who it is. https://bibleapps.com/gill/daniel/10.htm Also, Keil & Delitzsch say the same thing.

So why is this important? Daniel 10:13 says, "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, (and yes, I read what you stated about one/first) CAME TO HELP ME, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia." Who do you think the person is that needed help? Hint: Revelation 1:13-14. This proves that Jesus Christ and Michael are "NOT" one and the same person. Again, your propagating heresy.

IN GOD THE SON, Not, "In Michael the arc angel." :rolleyes:
jamesh

B. Michael in the book of Daniel​

1. Michael is mentioned more in Daniel than in any other book in Scripture. (See Daniel 10:13; 10:21; 12:1) In all three references, He is called a prince—your prince and the great prince. Isaiah's prophecy about the Messiah (Isa. 9:6) reveals one of the key names he says that would apply to the Messiah is "Prince of Peace."

There is another verse in Daniel 8:25 where the "Prince of princes" is mentioned. Again, the cosmic conflict is being played out with Christ on one side and the devil on the other, with humanity serving as the battlefield. "Prince of princes" is actually the same term that is translated "prince of the host" in verse 11. This is similar to "Lord of lords" (Psalm 136:3), "God of gods" (Deuteronomy 10:17), and "King of kings" (Revelation 19:16). All these are titles of deity. He is even referred to as "Messiah the Prince" (Daniel 9:25).

a. Isaiah 9:6: "And his name shall be called …The Prince of Peace." b. Acts 3:14, 15: "But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and … killed the Prince of life." c. Acts 5:30, 31: "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour." d. Revelation 1:5: "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth."
These verses clearly echo with three verses in Daniel in which Michael is called a "prince."

Who is this being that the angels call the Great Prince? Let's let the Bible tell us.

2. But Is Michael Only One of Many?

Daniel 10:13 is probably the most difficult verse regarding Michael: "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me." It appears at first glance that Michael is only "one of" the chief princes. This is an unfortunate translation in the King James. The word "one" comes from the Hebrew word "echad," which is also frequently translated as "first," just as Genesis 1:5 refers to the evening and morning as the first (echad) day. This changes the whole meaning of the verse to Michael being first of, greatest or highest of, to the chief of princes—again a reference to Jesus. Young's Literal translates verse 13 this way:

And the head of the kingdom of Persia is standing over-against me twenty and one days, and lo, Michael, first of the chief heads, hath come in to help me, and I have remained there near the kings of Persia;

Daniel 10:21 says, "But I will show 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." Notice here that the angel refers to Michael as your Prince. Who was Daniel’s prince? In the previous chapter, we see the answer. In Daniel 9:25, Daniel’s Messiah is called the prince, which is another clear indication of Michael’s identity! So Gabriel is saying that Michael the archangel is Jesus, who knows all the truth of Scripture.

The final reference to Michael in Daniel is in chapter 12: "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people." Notice here that Michael is not called a great prince but "the great prince." The definite article there lends more credence to the idea of Michael being the first or head rather than just one of many. He is also identified as the one who "standeth for the children of thy people." This means that He intercedes, defends and even stands as a substitute. Who could this be other then Jesus?

Michael standing up (Daniel 12:2) is also a reference to the Lord preparing to come as per my commentary on Daniel 12 in a direct connection to Revelation 12.

In Truth and Love.
 

4Him

Administrator
Staff member

Are Jesus and Michael the Archangel the same?​

by Matt Slick | Aug 9, 2009 | Jesus, Questions
Jesus and Michael the Archangel are not the same. Jesus is God in flesh, but Michael the Archangel is an angel which is a created being. Furthermore, there’s a problem with the idea of an archangel becoming a human being. An archangel has certain characteristics consistent with being an angel. By definition, an angel is not a human being. So is not possible for an angel to become a human being because the attributes and nature of each are different. It would mean that the archangel Michael stopped existing as the archangel Michael. The essence of the mind and heart of an angel is tied to the nature of that angel. If that angel ceases to exist, the mind and the heart ceased to exist. So an angel cannot become a man.
Now some may then ask how can God become flesh. The truth is that the Word became flesh (John 1:1, 14). In other words, the single person of Jesus has two distinct natures the divine (Word) and he human. Jesus has two distinct natures (Col. 2:9). So, the divine nature never ceased being the divine nature. It continues in the person of Christ alongside human nature. We call this the hypostatic union and it is the correct teaching of who Christ is. Nevertheless, let’s get back to the topic of whether or not Jesus and Michael the Archangel are the same.
  • Daniel 10:13, ““But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.”
  • Jude 9, “But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.”
In Jude 9 Michael would not pronounce judgment against the devil. Instead, he said, “the Lord rebuke you.” If Michael and Jesus were the same, and Jesus is God in flesh, then Michael would have had the authority to rebuke the devil. But, since Michael deferred to the Lord, Michael is not the Lord. Instead, Michael is in Archangel, a created being.
 

4Him

Administrator
Staff member

Is Michael the Archangel really Jesus?​

by Matt Slick | Jun 12, 2017 | Jesus, Questions
No, Michael the Archangel is not really Jesus. The non-Christian cult known as the Jehovah’s Witnesses teaches that they are the same. The Seventh Day Adventists teach the same; but Michael the Archangel is just that–an Archangel, and Jesus is not a created angel. There are three archangels named in the Bible: Michael (the warrior Angel), Gabriel (the messenger Angel), and Lucifer (who became the devil).
Michael the Archangel is mentioned in different passages.
  • Daniel 10:13, “But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.”
  • Daniel 10:21, “However, I will tell you what is inscribed in the writing of truth. Yet there is no one who stands firmly with me against these forces except Michael your prince.”
  • Daniel 12:1, “Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued.”
  • Jude 9, “But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.”
  • Rev. 12:7, “And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. And the dragon and his angels waged war.”
Perhaps the best proof text to demonstrate that Michael the Archangel and Jesus are not the same people is found in Jude 9. The Lord Jesus would not have to call on the name of anyone else in order to rebuke the devil because the Lord Jesus is God in flesh. However, we see that Michael the Archangel said, “The Lord rebuke you,” thereby demonstrating that he is not the Lord.
 

4Him

Administrator
Staff member

Logical problem with the Michael becoming Jesus who became Michael again.​

by Matt Slick | Jun 10, 2016 | Jehovah's Witnesses, World Religions
The Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Michael the Archangel became Jesus who then later returned to being Michael the Archangel. But, this position has logical problems – and scriptural ones, as well. First, here are quotes that show the position held by the Watchtower Bible and tract Society which says that Jesus is Michael the Archangel.
  • “In the last book of the Bible, Revelation, the apostle John relates how Jesus, as Michael the archangel, defeats the Devil, (Watchtower 9/1/2011, p. 8, The World’s Secret Ruler Exposed).
  • “So Michael the archangel is Jesus in his prehuman existence. After his resurrection and return to heaven, Jesus resumed his service as Michael, the chief angel, “to the glory of God the Father.” (Watchtower, 4/1/2010, p. 19, Is Jesus the Archangel Michael?)
  • “These spirit sons of God have personality, divine qualities, and free will. They are superbly organized and have high positions in God’s arrangement, the archangel being Michael (Jesus’ heavenly name).” (Watchtower, 5/15/2009, p. 21 par. 2, The Angels—“Spirits for Public Service”).
  • “The angel foremost in power and authority—the chief angel—is named Michael the archangel. (Jude 9) He is none other than Jesus Christ.” (Watchtower, 3/15/2007, p. 21 par. 4, Angels—How They Affect Mankind)
In Jehovah’s Witness theology Michael the Archangel became the man Jesus, who then became Michael the Archangel again. But there’s a problem. Let me explain.
Michael the Archangel is a living being who has characteristics consistent with being an angel. His “personhood” is tied up with his nature. Just as a human being’s personhood is tied up with his nature.
Personhood
When we speak of personhood we are talking about the quality of self-awareness, self-identity, having a will, emotions, etc. Therefore, each human being is his own person and each angel likewise is his own person.
Nature
If we were to take a man and cut off his arms and his legs and blind him and make him deaf, is he still human? Yes, he is. This is because the essence of what makes someone human is not defined by physical attributes. There is an inner quality, an inner essence that makes a human being a human. Likewise, there is an inner quality, an inner essence that makes an angel, an angel. But the nature of an angel and the nature of a human are not the same thing. They are completely different even though they can share similar characteristics such as being self-aware, having a will, emotions, etc. Likewise, we are completely different in nature when compared to God, yet we also share characteristics similar to him in personhood such as self-awareness, having a will, emotions, etc.
In addition, the mind, personality, and personhood of a living, sentient being is tied to the nature of that being. So, if an angel were destroyed so as to not have existence, his personhood is also destroyed. He no longer has existence. In the case of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, when Michael the Archangel became a man, the angelic nature was destroyed because it was no longer in existence. After all, the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that the angel became human. But since being a human is not the same thing as being an angel, then logically the angelic nature had to cease to exist. However, the Jehovah’s Witnesses say that the essence and personhood of Michael the Archangel was changed into that of a human being, and then later that same essence and personhood was changed back into an angel. But how can this be since a person’s identity and personhood is tied to the nature of what he is? If the nature ceases (Michael stopped being an angel), then the personhood of Michael ceased and could not become what it was not: human. Therefore, in the Jehovah’s Witness theology there is a loss of continuity of the personhood between Michael the Archangel became Jesus and who then became an angel again. Their position makes no sense and it cannot be true.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
I have already addressed all of these objections. My arguments do not come from the perspective of a Jehovah's Witness paradigm.
 

4Him

Administrator
Staff member

The Seventh-day Adventists teach that Michael the Archangel and Jesus are one and the same. However, some people mistakenly think that the SDA Church is teaching that Jesus is a created angel and therefore not truly divine. But that is not the Seventh-day Adventist position. Instead, they are saying that the Old Testament manifestation of Michael the Archangel was actually the pre-incarnate Christ and that He is not created. They are incorrect in their comparison, but in it, they are not denying the deity of Christ. Still, it is noteworthy how their incorrect interpretation influenced their paraphrase, the “Clear Word Bible.”

New American Standard BibleClear Word BibleComment
John 8:58Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”Jesus answered, “Because I existed before Abraham was born.”This is problematic because the Greek ego eimi literally says, “I am.” The Jews wanted to kill Jesus for saying these words because it was so reflective of Exodus 3:14 where God says his name is “I am” (see later in John 10:30-33 for confirmation of this). The SDA affirm the deity of Christ, but changing this is quite odd and is more in line with the Jehovah’s Witness version than the biblical one.
John 10:30“I and the Father are one.”You see, my Father and I are so close, we’re one.This is a bad rendition because Jesus’ oneness with God is not based on closeness, but on his nature. He is by nature both human and divine. This is called the Hypostatic Union.
1 Thess. 4:16For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.When Christ descends from heaven as the Archangel, He will give a shout like a trumpet, which is God’s call to the dead, and those who died in Christ will rise first.The Seventh-day Adventist theology comes shining through in this alteration, which is more commentary than anything else. The SDA church teaches that Jesus is Michael the Archangel; hence, changing the meaning of the text to make it fit their theology. This is not good. Let the Bible speak for itself.
Jude 9But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”In contrast to these ungodly men is the Lord Jesus, also called Michael the Archangel, for He is over the entire angelic host. When He was challenged by Satan about His intentions to resurrect Moses, He didn’t come at Satan with a blistering attack, nor did He condemn him with mockery. He simply said, “God rebuke you for claiming Moses’ body.”This is another example of the Seventh-day Adventist theology governing the paraphrase. Biblically speaking, Jesus is not Michael the Archangel. They are separate, and this combining of them is an error that is reflected in this modification of the text.
Rev. 12:7And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war,This controversy between God and the dragon began years ago in heaven. God’s Son Michael and the loyal angels fought against the dragon and his angels.Notice again how the theology that Jesus and Michael the Archangel are one and the same comes out in this verse. That is not what it is saying.
 

jamesh

Active member
I have already addressed all of these objections. My arguments do not come from the perspective of a Jehovah's Witness paradigm.
First of all you have not addressed all the objections. I ask you regarding Daniel 10:13 who it was that ask for help in the verse and you did not tell me. So let me put this another way.

At Daniel 10:5-12 who is the person at vs5 dressed in linen? At vs6, who was the person who's face had the appearance of lightning, and his eyes were like flaming torches? Read the rest of the verses up to vs12 where this person says, "your words were heard, and I have come in response to your words."

Now we come to vs13, "BUT" the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty one days: See that word "but" that vs13 begins with? That means that what follows is going to be the antithesis of what preceded it. The person who is talking with Daniel is the Angel of the Lord. This is according to the context.

It's also according to commentators John Gill, who I quoted for you and Keil & Delitzsch. Here:

Daniel 10:13 Commentaries: "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.
In the war against the hostile spirit of the kingdom of Persia, the archangel Michael came to the help of the Angel of the Lord. The name מיכאל, who is as God, comes into view, as does the name Gabriel, only according to the appellative signification of the word, and expresses, after the analogy of Exodus 15:11; Psalm 89:7., the idea of God's unparalleled helping power. Michael is thus the angel possessing the unparalleled power of God. He is here said to be "one of the chief princes," i.e., of the highest angel-princes, - Daniel 10:21, "your prince," i.e., the prince who contends for Israel, who conducts the cause of Israel. The angel of the Lord is the preincarnate Jesus Christ.

So this brings up the following question? Since the Angel of the Lord is Jesus Christ before His incarnation as a man, how can He also be Michael the arc angel who He is asking for help? Also, at Daniel 9:27 the person identified in this verse is the anti-Christ who makes a covenant ushering in the great tribulation and then breaks his word.

So another question? Who is coming back at the end of the tribulation, Jesus or Michael? Read Matthew 24:30-31. Also, read 1 Thessalonians 4:16. Is this Jesus or Michael? Lastly, can you please give me the source from where you get your information in your post? Thank You!

IN GOD THE SON,
jamesh
 

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
First of all you have not addressed all the objections. I ask you regarding Daniel 10:13 who it was that ask for help in the verse and you did not tell me. So let me put this another way.

At Daniel 10:5-12 who is the person at vs5 dressed in linen? At vs6, who was the person who's face had the appearance of lightning, and his eyes were like flaming torches? Read the rest of the verses up to vs12 where this person says, "your words were heard, and I have come in response to your words."
This is a messenger from God like unto Gabriel who receives help from Michael. I don't know that he actually asks for help or the details of that help, only that he receives it from Michael.
Now we come to vs13, "BUT" the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty one days: See that word "but" that vs13 begins with? That means that what follows is going to be the antithesis of what preceded it. The person who is talking with Daniel is the Angel of the Lord. This is according to the context.
It's also according to commentators John Gill, who I quoted for you and Keil & Delitzsch. Here:

Daniel 10:13 Commentaries: "But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.

In the war against the hostile spirit of the kingdom of Persia, the archangel Michael came to the help of the Angel of the Lord. The name מיכאל, who is as God, comes into view, as does the name Gabriel, only according to the appellative signification of the word, and expresses, after the analogy of Exodus 15:11; Psalm 89:7., the idea of God's unparalleled helping power. Michael is thus the angel possessing the unparalleled power of God. He is here said to be "one of the chief princes," i.e., of the highest angel-princes, - Daniel 10:21, "your prince," i.e., the prince who contends for Israel, who conducts the cause of Israel. The angel of the Lord is the preincarnate Jesus Christ.
So this brings up the following question? Since the Angel of the Lord is Jesus Christ before His incarnation as a man, how can He also be Michael the arc angel who He is asking for help?
I don't concede that who Daniel is speaking to is "The Angel of the Lord". The being is a celestial messenger for certain, but I don't read in the context where this being is The Angel of the Lord as we read of in places like Exodus 3 (burning bush) or in Judges 6 with Gideon. Furthermore, if the person speaking to Daniel is God the Son, why would He need help from Michael, a lesser being (in your paradigm)?
Also, at Daniel 9:27 the person identified in this verse is the anti-Christ who makes a covenant ushering in the great tribulation and then breaks his word.
That is another discussion entirely. I apologize, but I'm not sure how this relates to our discussion.
So another question? Who is coming back at the end of the tribulation, Jesus or Michael? Read Matthew 24:30-31. Also, read 1 Thessalonians 4:16. Is this Jesus or Michael? Lastly, can you please give me the source from where you get your information in your post? Thank You!
Oh, I think I see now. You are tying this in to Daniel 12. I'll answer these questions, but know that there is a lot of foundation that I'm drawing from as a partial preterist that you are likely not going to agree with. I'll lay out the premises and then you can pick which ones you disagree with for discussion.

1. Anti-christ is not part of Daniel, Revelation, or the last days prophecies which I believe surround the events concerning the destruction of the Temple and the fall of Jerusalem and Judaism in AD 66-74. Anti-christ is a term associated in scripture only to the Gnostic heresy and is not applied to a singular person but to anyone who denies that Jesus Christ came in the flesh (1 John 2:18; 4; 2 John 1:7).
2. The tribulation was the period between the cross and the fall of Jerusalem where the Jews were persecuting the church. This intensified steadily over the 40 year period until the Jews were taken out of the way.
3. To answer your question, then, Jesus/Michael is He who came back. In Daniel 12 and Revelation 12 He is referred to as Michael, but in the other locations you have cited He is God the Son saying "I will come".
4. 1 Thess. 4 is about the end of the kosmos and is not related to the apocalyptic events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem, but here Jesus is speaking with the voice of the archangel which the Bible only indicates there is one of. If Jesus is speaking with the voice of the chief messenger of God, He must actually be that messenger of God.

The source of the posts is my own article on my website. All the articles were written or edited by me save for a few written by men close to me (such as my little brother).
IN GOD THE SON,
jamesh
I appreciate the discussion and that we are able to stick to the topic rather than attacking one another.

In Truth and Love.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
In another thread in the Jehovah's Witness section of the forum, a conversation was begun. As the conversation had deviated from the poster's original intention, we were asked to continue the conversation elsewhere. This is the result.

The JW's believe that Jesus Christ is Michael the archangel despite their founder believing otherwise. Because Jesus is called an angel, they therefore conclude He cannot be the One True God. I believe that Michael is what Jesus was called before He was born of Mary, but I also believe that He is God the Son and that the concept of angel (messenger) and God the Son (deity) are not mutually exclusive. @jamesh had responded to a portion of an article I wrote defending this position from scripture. Here is his post quoted and my response to it.

~~~~

Agreed. The JW's are incorrect. Not only did Jesus preexist His incarnation, He IS God and the Creator of all else that exists besides God. You and I both know this from John 1:1 and Heb. 1:2.

This is a common objection and it is based on the premise that "angel" is a word used to describe a kind or species of being. It is not. Malak/aggelos is a job description and both the Hebrew and Greek words are properly translated as "messenger".

A. Angel – (Greek – ἄγγελος/aggelos; Hebrew – מַלְאָך/mal’ak) means messenger and can apply to any being who is a messenger of God. For instance, men were called angels several times in scripture.

1. Jesus referred to John as an angel in Matt. 11:10.2. John sent human angels (messengers) in Luke 7:24.3. Again, Jesus sent human angels before him into Jerusalem in Luke 9:52.4. Caleb and Joshua were called angels in James 2:25.
These are just clear examples, though I believe there are several others. Angel is not a term that is reserved solely for creatures like Gabriel.

B. Arche – (Greek - archo) means top, chief, principle, supreme, or ruling. From this word we get such terms as anarchy (no rule), monarch (single ruler), oligarchy (few rule), arch-nemesis (primary nemesis) and so on. Even the stand alone word arch derives its meaning from this as a construct "over" something.

C. Archangel – (Greek archaggelos) there is only one mentioned and in each case that the term is used it is with the definite article. There is only one archangel, not many. Taking the two parts of the word arche and angel we understand that the archangel is the chief messenger, the supreme messenger, the number one or ruling angel.

Who was God's primary messenger to mankind? Who has the authority to rule all other messengers of any type both by command and by the message He brought? Only one person fits this designation. Jesus.

Jesus created all the cherubim and seraphim, creatures like Gabriel who are spiritual in nature and take on the semblance of physical life without actually incarnating. Jesus also created mankind. These are the names of the kinds or species of being. Both of which served as messengers of God. Jesus, too, was a messenger. In fact, He was the ultimate Messenger of God the Father. (Matt. 21:33-41)

Things in the Bible often have multiple names. Jesus = Immanuel; Sinai = Horeb; Jethro = Reuel = Hobab; etc.

Agreed. Jesus is uncreated, Creator, and coequal with God the Father and God the Spirit.

Agreed. 100%

That exact phrase does not appear, I agree.



I think you have set up the context perfectly and then come to exactly the wrong conclusion because you are holding to the idea that the word angel (Hbr. malak) is a kind of creature rather than a job description.

1. The messenger of Jehovah is speaking.
2. The messenger of Jehovah says "I have sworn by myself that I will multiply you".
3. Hebrews says that God is the one who swore by Himself the promise to Abraham.

Therefore, the messenger of Jehovah is therefore God speaking, God swearing by Himself, God promising.

Just because God the Son is being referred to as a messenger, does not make Him any less God. It's just one of His many job titles.

I am glad we agree that malak/aggelos is not a kind or species designation but a job description that can apply to multiple different kinds of beings. That being the case, why would being a messenger of God the Father preclude that messenger from being God the Son?

My mistake. You are correct. This particular angel is John the Immerser preparing the way for God the Son.

Why not? If angel is just a job description, is it not a job that Jesus held? Isn't God the Son the greatest messenger sent to mankind (Matt. 21:37) as the mediator between God and man? (1 Tim. 2:5)

In Truth and Love.
I do not believe that Michael the archangel is also Jesus Christ. Michael is an angel, a created being. Hebrews 1 says "Let ALL God's angels worship Him."

But especially Jesus cannot be Michael is because of what is written in Jude:

9 But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

Jesus had no problem rebuking Satan out in the wilderness...nor did He have any problem with rebuking demons and driving them out of people. He had the authority as God. So, if Michael is Jesus, then why would He not "dare" to pronounce a railing judgment against the devil, but instead say "the Lord rebuke you!"? When Jesus IS the Lord? Why did He suddenly not have the authority to judge the devil? Why would He not dare do so? IF He truly is God from all eternity?

Angel can mean "messenger" but it also means created spirit beings. Depends upon context.

I certainly agree that Jesus is fully God as well as fully Man. No problem there. The eternal Word of God.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
I do not believe that Michael the archangel is also Jesus Christ. Michael is an angel, a created being. Hebrews 1 says "Let ALL God's angels worship Him."
The word all is often problematic in that many who read it assume a generic or unqualified all. If Jesus is the archangel, then He would be an exception to the all. Just as we read in Romans 3:10-12 that "there is none righteous, no not one...they are all gone out of the way...". If we understand the all here to be generic and without exception then Jesus gets included as a sinner. However, using remote context, we understand that this all is a qualified all (and in fact is referring to all types of people - both Jew and Gentile - rather than all individuals).

The all angels in Hebrews would be any and all messengers distinct from the person who is the target of worship. Naturally Jesus would be excluded from the list even though He is the greatest messenger sent by God (Luke 20:13).
But especially Jesus cannot be Michael is because of what is written in Jude:



Jesus had no problem rebuking Satan out in the wilderness...nor did He have any problem with rebuking demons and driving them out of people. He had the authority as God. So, if Michael is Jesus, then why would He not "dare" to pronounce a railing judgment against the devil, but instead say "the Lord rebuke you!"? When Jesus IS the Lord? Why did He suddenly not have the authority to judge the devil? Why would He not dare do so? IF He truly is God from all eternity?
The prophet Zechariah was given a vision of Joshua, the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord. Satan is standing at his right hand to resist him. Here we see two adversaries contending over a sinful human being. Joshua's filthy garment symbolizes his sin. (Zech 3:3).

In this narrative, the name changes quickly from "the angel of the Lord" (verse 1) to "the Lord" (verse 2), indicating again that they are the same. Then the Lord makes an interesting statement. "And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan" (Zech 3:2). There is only one other place in Scripture (Jude 1:9), where this sentence is found—and Michael the archangel speaks it!

In the short epistle of Jude, we witness a scene similar to Joshua and the angel in Zechariah. "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" (Jude 1:9). The situations are almost exactly parallel: Christ and Satan are contending over the fate of two of God’s great human leaders (a living one in the case of Joshua, and a dead one in the case of Moses). The debate is ended abruptly when Jesus says, "The Lord rebuke thee."

This passage raises another valid question. Some people are confused by part of this verse in (Jude 1:9) where Michael rebukes the devil. They wonder: If Michael is really another name for Jesus, then why does he invoke the name of the Lord when rebuking Satan? Why not do it Himself as He did when tempted in the wilderness. "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan" (Matt 4:10).

In studying the Scriptures and language of Jesus, we quickly see it was a very common practice for Jesus to speak of Himself in the second person, as in' Luke 18:8: "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" And if there is still any lingering question, we have this other clear Scripture in Zech 3:2, where the Lord does the same thing Michael does in Jude. He invokes His own name when rebuking the devil. "And the Lord said to Satan, 'Jehovah rebuke you, Satan!" Since Jesus does nothing in Himself but says and does all in accordance with the Father's will (John 14:10 and yea, even John 14-17). These Scriptures are examples of God the Son, appealing to the name of His Father in rebuking Satan.
Angel can mean "messenger" but it also means created spirit beings. Depends upon context.
Yes, context is key. I agree.
I certainly agree that Jesus is fully God as well as fully Man. No problem there. The eternal Word of God.
I am glad we agree on this much. :)
 

jamesh

Active member
Hi Kade! Yes, the use of the word "all" can be problematic at times depending on the context. For example at Acts 2:4, "And they were "ALL" filled with the Holy Spirit." The ones that were filled with the Holy Spirit are specifically the ones that were saved.

What your doing is "assuming" Jesus Christ is an arc-angel. You said, "If" Jesus is the arc-angel, well He is not an are-angel nor any kind of an angel. When it says, "Let ALL the angels worship Him, all means all because the word "all" is referring to a specific category, i.e angels only. By you stating categorically that Jesus is Michael who is an angel then he HAS to be included in worshipping Jesus Christ who is not an angel. This is not hard to understand. And bonnie brought up a glaring contradiction in which your trying to "reconcile" but you can't.

IN GOD THE SON,
james
 

Bonnie

Super Member
The word all is often problematic in that many who read it assume a generic or unqualified all. If Jesus is the archangel, then He would be an exception to the all. Just as we read in Romans 3:10-12 that "there is none righteous, no not one...they are all gone out of the way...". If we understand the all here to be generic and without exception then Jesus gets included as a sinner. However, using remote context, we understand that this all is a qualified all (and in fact is referring to all types of people - both Jew and Gentile - rather than all individuals).

The all angels in Hebrews would be any and all messengers distinct from the person who is the target of worship. Naturally Jesus would be excluded from the list even though He is the greatest messenger sent by God (Luke 20:13).

The prophet Zechariah was given a vision of Joshua, the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord. Satan is standing at his right hand to resist him. Here we see two adversaries contending over a sinful human being. Joshua's filthy garment symbolizes his sin. (Zech 3:3).

In this narrative, the name changes quickly from "the angel of the Lord" (verse 1) to "the Lord" (verse 2), indicating again that they are the same. Then the Lord makes an interesting statement. "And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan" (Zech 3:2). There is only one other place in Scripture (Jude 1:9), where this sentence is found—and Michael the archangel speaks it!

In the short epistle of Jude, we witness a scene similar to Joshua and the angel in Zechariah. "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" (Jude 1:9). The situations are almost exactly parallel: Christ and Satan are contending over the fate of two of God’s great human leaders (a living one in the case of Joshua, and a dead one in the case of Moses). The debate is ended abruptly when Jesus says, "The Lord rebuke thee."

This passage raises another valid question. Some people are confused by part of this verse in (Jude 1:9) where Michael rebukes the devil. They wonder: If Michael is really another name for Jesus, then why does he invoke the name of the Lord when rebuking Satan? Why not do it Himself as He did when tempted in the wilderness. "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan" (Matt 4:10).

In studying the Scriptures and language of Jesus, we quickly see it was a very common practice for Jesus to speak of Himself in the second person, as in' Luke 18:8: "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" And if there is still any lingering question, we have this other clear Scripture in Zech 3:2, where the Lord does the same thing Michael does in Jude. He invokes His own name when rebuking the devil. "And the Lord said to Satan, 'Jehovah rebuke you, Satan!" Since Jesus does nothing in Himself but says and does all in accordance with the Father's will (John 14:10 and yea, even John 14-17). These Scriptures are examples of God the Son, appealing to the name of His Father in rebuking Satan.

Yes, context is key. I agree.

I am glad we agree on this much. :)
In the OT, some Scholars think THE angel of the refers to the pre-incarnate Jesus,which could be true. But Jesus is never referred as that in the NT.

It happens several places in the OT where the "Lord says to the Lord", such as "The Lord rained fire and brimstone from the Lord in heaven"..."the LORD said to my Lord,' Sit at my right hand until I have made your enemies footstools...'" (slightly paraphrased) Also, your example in Zechariah is in a little different context than Jude. Nowhere in that example does it say the Lord did not DARE to bring a railing accusation against the devil.

You are practicing eisegis with Jude, instead of exegesis. Because you want it to say what you want it to mean--that Michael is Jesus arguing with Satan. But again, you ignore where it says that Michael DID NOT DARE to bring a railing accusation against the devil...

DID NOT DARE. Since when would the Lord God of heaven and earth, Jesus Christ, not dare to rebuke the devil? Since when would Jesus Christ NOT have authority to rebuke the devil? He rebuked the devil in the wilderness! He rebuked the devil in Peter, when the latter tried to persuade Jesus not to let those terrible things happen to Him! Why then, in Jude, would He NOT DARE to give a railing accusation against the devil?

I respect your opinion, butI think you are wrong.
 

jamesh

Active member
Hi Bonnie! I wrote the following a long time ago addressing the question, "Does Jesus Christ appear in the OT?"

Absolutely! In fact the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ is all over the OT and He is known as "The angel of the Lord." He first appears as the angel of the Lord at Genesis 16:7. He says at Genesis 16:9 to Hagar, "I will greatly multiply your descendants so that they shall be to many to count.

He also tells Hagar, vs11, Behold you are with child, and you shall bear a son and you shall call his name Ishmael. At vs12 he tells Hagar what kind of a person he will be. Hagar says the following at vs13, "Then she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, "Thou art a God who sees;" for she said, "Have I even remained alive here after seeing Him."

Now, look at Genesis 17 starting with vs1-2, "Now when Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, "I am God Almighty, Walk before Me, and be blameless. vs2, And I will establish My covenant between Me and you, And I will multiply your exceedingly." Keep in mind that God is a spiritual being and cannot be seen. This is according to Hagar and at Exodus 33:20.
So the question is this? Is the being that multiplied Hagar's descendants the same being who multiplied Abram's descendants? The answer is yes. The Hebrew word for "angel" is "malak." This word means "messenger" and it can also refer to an actual angel like Michael or Gabriel. It can also be used for human beings.
A good example is at Malachi 3:1, "Behold, I am going to send My "malak/angel/messenger," and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord , whom you seek will suddenly come to His temple; (Who might that be?) and the "malak/angel/messenger" of the covenant in whom you delight behold, He is coming," (Who might that be?) says the Lord of hosts."

The one that is going to clear the way of the Lord is John the Baptist and he is no actual angel. (Mark 1:1-4). Incidentally the prophet "Malachi" who is also a human being, well his name is from the word "malak/angel." Now, getting back to Genesis 17. The reason I know this is a physical appearance of God is because of Genesis 17:22, "And when He/God finished talking with him/Abraham , God went up from Abraham." That is straight up north.
Let's now go to Genesis 18. At vs1, "Now the Lord appeared to him/Abraham by the oaks of Mamre, while he/Abraham was sitting at the tend door in the heat of the day." Vs2, "And when he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the earth."

I'm going to shorten this and say that one of the men was the angel of the Lord and the other two men were actual angels. You can read the dialogue between Abraham and God from the rest of the chapter. At vs33, "And as soon as He had finished speaking to Abraham, the Lord departed; and Abraham returned to his place. At Genesis 19:1 it says, "NOW THE TWO ANGELS came to Sodom etc.

Now comes the best part which is at Genesis 22. The Lord God ask Abraham to sacrifice his only son Isaac. Vs10, "And Abraham stretched out his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. Vs11, BUT the angel of the Lord called to him from heaven, and said, "Abraham, Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am." Vs12, And he said, "Do not stretch out your hand to him, for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me."
God provides a ram for Abraham to sacrifice. Now to vs15, "Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven." vs16, "and said, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have not withheld you son, your only son, vs17, "indeed I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies." Vs18, "And in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, (why?) because YOU OBEYED MY VOICE."

The objections by the Jews to nullify all of this is based on the principle of "agency." The actual word used is "shaliach." This means (to them) that an agent can can legally authorize someone to act on one's behalf as if the agent is the principal himself. In this presentation God assigned an angel to act in His behalf.
There is one "GIANT" problem with this excuse. Angels "CANNOT" swear oaths on behalf of God Almighty Himself. Swearing an oath is a matter of one's conscience. In other words, the agent (even according to the Jewish Virtual Library) says there are limitations on what an agent or emissary can do. One of these limitations is the swearing of an oath.

Now, notice I have not used one verse from the New Testament to prove my point in all of this other than rightly dividing the word of God concerning the prophecy of John the Baptist. There is not one excuse you can bring up that I don't know how to answer or address. I am not "bragging" but just saying I've hear them all.

Some questions to think about. One, the angel of the Lord never appears in the NT as the angel of the Lord. Two, it's interesting that the angel of the Lord calls out of heaven two times when God Himself has called out of heaven Himself. (Exodus 20:22 and at NT Mark 1:11). Look at what the writer of the Book of Hebrews states at Hebrews 6:13,14, "For when God made the promise to Abraham, since HE COULD NOT SWEAR BY NO ONE GREATER, He swore By Himself, vs14, saying, I will bless you, and I will surely multiply you." Luke makes mention of this at Luke 1:73. Finally, keep in mind there are other places in the OT where the angel of the Lord makes appearances including the burning bush at Exodus 3." Hope this helps and keep up the good work.

IN GOD THE SON,
james
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Just like I told you that an angel cannot swear an oath on behalf of God Himself. You need to lose this idea that Jesus is Michael the arc angel. It is NOT a Biblical teaching, makes no sense and causes people to stumble when there is no need. 2 Timothy 2:23, "But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations/questions, knowing that they produce quarrels." Again, get this heretical non Biblcal view out of your mind.

IN GOD THE SON,
jamesh
Hey Herman! What's up? You do know that angels, messengers, can relay oaths to others that God has spoken, right? Such is the case in Genesis 22. I'm just trying to help you out, Herman. ROTFL...
 
Top