The information below was once submitted to a yahoogroup that I used to moderate which is now inactive. I have changed the names of those who participated in this discussion; however, I have not edited the material itself.
To help you appreciate the context, a question had been asked regarding Michael's possible identity with Christ.
[BEGIN DIALOGUE]
Quadratus said:
Aurelius, I'd like to take your second question. I don't know of anyone who
says that the Bible EXPLICITLY calls the Christ, Michael.
However, I believe that there are a number of lines of evidence that point
to this conclusion. Here is one.
1) The Resurrection: ONLY ONE VOICE CAN COMMAND THE DEAD TO RISE
a) There is only ONE VOICE that can raise the dead in the coming
resurrection. This authority has been given to the Christ by
his Father. (John 5:25-28).
b) It is the VOICE of an ARCHANGEL that raises the dead during
the unique SINGULAR act of the resurrection at the time of
the end. (1Th 4:16; cf Da 12:2 ).
c) Since the archangel shares the unique characteristic that only
Christ posesses, the authority to raise the dead with his voice,
Christ is an archangel.
Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words -- Topic:
Archangel says regarding the character of the Lord Jesus' voice
"In 1 Thess. 4:16 the meaning seems to be that the voice of the
Lord Jesus will be of the character of an 'archangelic' shout."
1Th 4:16 NWT
"because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a
commanding call, with an archangel's voice and with God's
trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will
rise first."
Vines assigns the voice of Jesus with the character of
the archangel, because the grammar demands it.
Thayers calls the voice that raises the dead at John 5:28 "the
Resurrection-Cry" and "Christ's voice that raises the dead" at
1Th 4:16 as "an awakening shout". The Greek for 'with an archangel's voice'
is literally 'EN FWNHi ARXAGGELOU', in the oblique dative case.
In all other occurences of this idiom in the Greek New Testament it
describes the voice of the subject in the clause.
TO ATTRIBUTE THE VOICE OF A LESSER BEING TO CHRIST WOULD NOT HONOR HIM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is only logical that the voice expressing this commanding call be
described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great
authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of
lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14). If the designation "archangel" applied,
not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to "an
archangel's voice" would be describing a voice of lesser authority
than that of the Son of God.
Protestant Reformer JOHN CALVIN said regarding "Michael" in its occurence at
Daniel 12:1:
"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.
John A. Lees, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1930, Vol. 3,
page 2048 states:
"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 Dnl"
Sunday, January 01, 2012
Michael the Archangel as Christ?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
There are many places where it is implied that Jesus and Michael the archangel are one and the same. That means that we have to use our reasoning ability to unravel Jehovah's sacred secrets and not expect everything to be simply spelled out.
It should be noted that Trinitarians have a very peculiar way of reasoning on the Scriptures. Although they may insist that Jesus cannot possibly be Michael the archangel because the Bible does not specifically say so, nonetheless, the Trinitarian insists that Jesus is God even though, amazingly, there is not so much as one verse in the Bible where Jesus ever claimed to be God—not even one! Neither does the word "trinity" appear in the Bible.
But, the reason we know that Jesus is Michael is because Michael, or an archangel, is ascribed doing all the things that are the sole prerogative of Jesus Christ. For example, Christ is going to perform the resurrection of the 144,000. But in 1st Thessalonians 4:16 Jesus is said to have the commanding voice of an archangel. It reads: "because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel's voice and with God's trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first."
Elsewhere, in Revelation, Michael is depicted as leading all of God's angels in warfare against Satan and his demons. But, in the 19th chapter of Revelation Jesus Christ, the Word, is portrayed leading the angelic armies against the demonic forces arrayed against God at Armageddon.
Also, the book of Daniel contains a series of visions that all end the same way—with God's kingdom taking control. For instance, in the second chapter of Daniel we are told that God's kingdom crushes all opposing kingdoms of the world and it rules to time indefinite. In the 7th chapter we are given a more detailed vision, which depicts "someone like a son of man" being given authority over all the nations—a prophecy that Christ personally applied to himself.
In the 8th chapter we are given yet another vision of God's victorious kingdom. That prophecy ends with the Prince of princes destroying the king of fierce countenance. Finally, in the last chapter of Daniel the king of the north, which is obviously the same political entity as depicted in the other visions, comes all the way to his end when the great prince, Michael, stands up as ruler and destroys him.
According to the overlapping prophecies of Daniel it is obvious that the Son of man, the Prince of princes and Michael, the great prince, are the same person.
Source: Ewatchman
The first part of this video, Anthony Buzzard gives some objections to Jesus being Michael.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXEUJ-h0NEk
Also, how would you respond to this objection:
"...in revelation 12 Michael is mentioned--but we are told Messiah has a NEW NAME--ergo he cannot be Michael"
Thanks.
1 Thessalonians 4:16 does indeed mention the voice of an archangel, but it also mentions the trumpet of God. The verse outlines three distinct elements accompanying Jesus' return: a shout, an archangel’s voice, and the trumpet of God. These are not all descriptions of Jesus Himself but rather elements that will accompany His return. The passage does not state that Jesus is the archangel; rather, it suggests that the archangel's voice is part of the divine announcement of His coming.
While Jesus does indeed have the authority to raise the dead (John 5:25-28), this authority is not necessarily tied to the voice of an archangel. In fact, in John 11:43, Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead by commanding him to "come out" with His own voice. The authority to raise the dead lies in Jesus’ divine identity as the Son of God, not in Him being an archangel.
The description of Jesus' voice as having the "character of an archangelic shout" is metaphorical, emphasizing the authority and power of His command rather than equating Him with an archangel. Metaphors in the Bible often describe aspects of Christ's ministry or attributes without suggesting a literal identity. For instance, Jesus is called the "Lamb of God" (John 1:29), which is a metaphor for His role as a sacrificial offering, not a statement that Jesus is a literal lamb.
Throughout Scripture, angels frequently accompany significant divine events (e.g., announcing Jesus’ birth, ministering to Him, etc.). The mention of an archangel’s voice in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 fits this pattern of angelic involvement, emphasizing the grandeur and authority of the event. It does not necessitate that Jesus is the archangel.
While it’s true that some early Protestant scholars entertained the idea that Michael could be a preincarnate appearance of Christ, this was not a universally accepted view, nor does it align with a consistent reading of Scripture. Calvin’s opinion, while respected, is not infallible and should be weighed against the broader biblical testimony that clearly distinguishes Jesus from all angelic beings.
The Bible makes clear distinctions between Jesus and angels. Hebrews 1:4-5 states that Jesus is "much superior to the angels" and that God never called any angel His Son. This distinction is crucial and underscores that Jesus, being God’s Son, is not merely an exalted angel but shares in the divine nature of God Himself.
Michael is indeed described as a protector of God’s people in Daniel 12:1 and as a leader of angels in Revelation 12:7. However, these roles are consistent with Michael being an archangel—a high-ranking angelic being—rather than Jesus. The term "prince" used for Michael does not equate him with the "Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6), who is explicitly identified as the Messiah, Jesus Christ.
In Revelation, Jesus is depicted as the "Lamb" who alone is worthy to open the scroll (Revelation 5) and as the "King of kings and Lord of lords" (Revelation 19:16). These titles and roles are never attributed to Michael or any other angel. Jesus' unique role in salvation and His divine authority set Him apart from all created beings, including Michael.
The argument that Jesus is Michael the Archangel is not supported by a careful and consistent reading of Scripture. While both Jesus and Michael play significant roles in God’s plan, the Bible clearly distinguishes between them. Jesus is the eternal Son of God, possessing divine authority and power that surpasses all angels. Michael, on the other hand, is a powerful archangel, but he is still a created being who serves under God’s command. Therefore, the identification of Jesus with Michael the Archangel is a misunderstanding of biblical texts and an underestimation of Jesus' unique divine nature.
@Xibons
While it’s true that not every detail in the Bible is spelled out, the Bible does provide clear distinctions between Jesus and all other beings, including angels. The Bible explicitly teaches that Jesus is the unique Son of God, distinct from angels. For example, Hebrews 1:4-5 states, "So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. For to which of the angels did God ever say, 'You are my Son; today I have become your Father'?" This passage makes it clear that Jesus holds a unique position above all angels, including Michael.
While reasoning is essential in interpreting Scripture, it is important to avoid reading assumptions into the text that are not supported by the broader biblical context. The identification of Jesus with Michael the Archangel is an assumption not explicitly supported by Scripture.
The belief that Jesus is God is based on multiple biblical passages that clearly ascribe divine attributes to Him, such as John 1:1 ("the Word was God"), John 20:28 (Thomas calling Jesus "My Lord and my God"), and Philippians 2:6 ("who, being in very nature God..."). These verses, among others, provide a solid foundation for the doctrine of the Trinity. In contrast, there is no comparable scriptural evidence that directly or indirectly suggests that Jesus is Michael the Archangel.
The roles and titles given to Jesus throughout Scripture—such as "Son of God," "King of kings," "Lord of lords," and "the Word"—are unique and set Him apart from all created beings, including angels. The Bible consistently makes a clear distinction between Jesus and angels, indicating that Jesus’ identity and authority surpass that of any angel.
The mention of "the voice of an archangel" in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 is one of several elements accompanying Jesus' return, including "a loud command" and "the trumpet call of God." This does not imply that Jesus is the archangel but rather that His return will be heralded by powerful heavenly signs, including the voice of an archangel. The text does not say that Jesus is speaking as the archangel but that His coming will be accompanied by an archangel’s voice.
Jesus’ authority to raise the dead and to judge the living and the dead is rooted in His divine nature as the Son of God, not in Him being an archangel. This authority is clearly stated in passages like John 5:25-28 and is unique to Jesus as the divine Son.
In Revelation 12, Michael is depicted as leading a heavenly battle against Satan and his angels, a role that fits with his position as a high-ranking angelic being. However, Revelation 19 describes Jesus as leading the armies of heaven in final judgment, a role that is uniquely His as the King of kings and Lord of lords. The text makes a clear distinction between Jesus and all other beings, including Michael. Jesus is portrayed as the divine warrior who executes God’s judgment, whereas Michael serves as one of His powerful angelic leaders.
While it’s true that Daniel uses various titles to describe figures who play key roles in God’s plan, these titles do not necessarily refer to the same person. The "Son of man" in Daniel 7:13-14 is given authority, glory, and sovereign power, which Jesus identifies with Himself in the Gospels. On the other hand, Michael, described as a "great prince" in Daniel 12:1, is portrayed as a protector of Israel. The fact that both are described as "princes" does not mean they are the same person; rather, it reflects their respective roles within God’s overarching plan.
The Bible consistently differentiates between Jesus, the divine Son of God, and Michael, a powerful angelic being. For instance, Hebrews 1:13 says, "To which of the angels did God ever say, 'Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet'?" This rhetorical question emphasizes that no angel, including Michael, shares the same status as Jesus.
Post a Comment