1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Michael

Discussion in 'Jehovah's Witnesses DIR' started by may, Feb 16, 2006.

  1. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    The Bible indicates that Michael is another name for Jesus Christ, before and after his life on earth.

    (Mi´cha·el) Means [Who Is Like God?]

    The Bible describes Michael as the archangel, implying that he alone bears that designation. so,it is reasonable to conclude that Jehovah God has delegated to one, and only one, of his heavenly creatures full authority over all other angels

    (Matthew 13:41; 16:27; 24:31)

    Paul made mention of "the Lord Jesus" and "his powerful angels." (2 Thessalonians 1:7) and peter said

    He is at God’s right hand, for he went his way to heaven; and angels and authorities and powers were made subject to him 1 peter 3;22

    there is one scripture that links Jesus with the office of archangel.

    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...1 thessalonians 4;16

    In this scripture Jesus is described as having assumed his power as God’s Messianic King. Yet, he speaks with "an archangel’s voice." Note, too, that he has the power to raise the dead

    While on earth as a human, Jesus performed several resurrections. [font=Arial][size=2]

    Jesus "cried out with a loud voice: ‘Lazarus, come on out!’" (John 11:43)

    [/size][/font][font=Arial][size=2]"Young man, I say to you, Get up!" (Luke 7:14, 15) [font=Arial][size=2]

    After his own resurrection, Jesus was raised to a "superior position" in heaven as a spirit creature. (Philippians 2:9) [font=Arial][size=2]

    No longer a human, he has the voice of an archangel

    [/size][/font][/size][/font][/size][/font]
    Yes, there are other angelic creatures of high rank, such as seraphs and cherubs. (Genesis 3:24; Isaiah 6:2) Yet, the Scriptures point to the resurrected Jesus Christ as the chief of all angels—Michael the archangel.[font=Arial][size=2]

    The Bible states that "Michael and [i]his[/i] angels battled with the dragon . . . and its angels." (Revelation 12:7) [font=Arial][size=2]

    Michael is the Leader of an army of faithful angels. Revelation also describes Jesus as the Leader of an army of faithful angels. (Revelation 19:14-16) And the apostle Paul specifically mentions "the Lord Jesus" and "his powerful angels." (2 Thessalonians 1:7; Matthew 16:27; 24:31; 1 Peter 3:22) So the Bible speaks of both Michael and "his angels" and Jesus and "his angels." (Matthew 13:41) Since God’s Word nowhere indicates that there are two armies of faithful angels in heaven—one headed by Michael and one headed by Jesus—it is logical to conclude that Michael is none other than Jesus Christ in his heavenly role

    [/size][/font][/size][/font]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. James the Persian

    James the Persian Dreptcredincios Crestin

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    4,416
    Ratings:
    +656
    I find all this extremely tenuous to say the least. Just on the last point, though, if Christ is God (which I know you dispute) then why can't you talk of both His angels and St. Michael's angels? There's absolutely no justification for your interpretation that this would mean that there were two groups of angels. It would be perfectly correct to refer to any regiment in the British army as the King's (or Queen's) regiment, but it would also be perfectly correct to refer to a particular regiment as belonging to its direct rather than overall commander. An example would be the existence of the Duke of Wellington's regiment formed in the Napoleonic wars. It was the King's because he was supreme commander and all of the army was his but it was the Duke of Wellington's because he was the direct commander of that regiment. This is far from the only regiment referred to as such. I see no difference between this concept and the idea that Christ has His angels (all of them including St. Michael) and St. Michael has angels as commander of he angelic host. Your logic only makes sense if you assume that Christ is an archangel rather than above them but this is an invalid assumption to make when you are trying to conclude that Christ is an archangel. The logic is circular.

    James
     
  3. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    Back in the early 1800’s, Bible scholar Joseph Benson stated that the description of Michael as found in the Bible "manifestly points out the Messiah." Nineteenth-century Lutheran E. W. Hengstenberg agreed that "Michael is no other than Christ." Similarly, theologian J. P. Lange, when commenting on Revelation 12:7, wrote: "We take it that Michael . . . is, from the outset, Christ in warlike array against Satan." Does the Bible support this identification? Yes, it does

    Since Michael is called an archangel, some feel that identifying him as Jesus detracts in some way from Jesus’ dignity or rank. (Jude 9) Yet, the evidence for such an identification led the above-mentioned scholars of Christendom to recognize Michael as Jesus despite the fact that they presumably believed in the Trinity

     
  4. jeffrey

    jeffrey †ßig Dog†

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    5,366
    Ratings:
    +1,008
    So Michel is Christ! I knew you were special! Now you know why all your muscles ache all the time! Them beatings the Romans gave you! :D
     
  5. sushannah

    sushannah Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Messages:
    102
    Ratings:
    +13
    I know you will agree that the Messiah is not G-d, he is also not an angel. He is a Human.
     
  6. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    he is also Gods first-born , yes he was a man but now at this point in time he is a mighty warrior king in the heavens
    Jesus, in his prehuman existence, was "the first-born of all creation." (Colossians 1:15, NJB) He was "the beginning of God’s creation." (Revelation 3:14, RS, Catholic edition).

    1 Pet. 3:18, RS: "Christ also died for sins once for all, . . . being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit ["in the spirit," NE, AT, JB, Dy].

     
  7. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    The angels were made subject to him. He is greater than the angel. Meaning, therefore, that he is not an angel. He's not "the greatest of the angels" but "greater than the angels." Michael does not equal Jesus. Jehovah, however, does. ;)
     
  8. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    yes thats right the angels are subject to him
    We are introduced to the one named Michael in the book of Daniel. There an angel of God refers to him in these words: "But the prince of the royal realm of Persia was standing in opposition to me for twenty-one days, and, look! Michael, one of the foremost princes, came to help me . . . And now I shall go back to fight with the prince of Persia. When I am going forth, look! also the prince of Greece is coming. However, I shall tell you the things noted down in the writing of truth, and there is no one holding strongly with me in these things but Michael, the prince of you people."—Daniel 10:13, 20, 21.​

    Here we have a fascinating glimpse of the spirit realm. We see that spirit creatures—good and bad—are very much involved in world affairs. There was a spirit "prince of the royal realm of Persia," opposing the activities of God’s angel. After Persia there would be a "prince of Greece," promoting the interests of that world power. Among these spirit creatures, Michael was one of "the foremost princes." Which nation did he guide and protect? Clearly, it was Daniel’s people, the Jews.

     
  9. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    But micheal, the archangel is still an angel. Christ is better than the angels, including Michael. Christ is not an angel. Christ is not even and archangel. He's not michael.
     
  10. dawny0826

    dawny0826 Mother Heathen

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    14,071
    Ratings:
    +2,168
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    Jesus Christ and Michael are NOT one in the same.

    Michael is the most esteemed angel. The name Michael means "he who is like God". But that doesn't make him CHRIST.
     
  11. dawny0826

    dawny0826 Mother Heathen

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    14,071
    Ratings:
    +2,168
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    May, apologies. I just realized that you posted this in the Jehovah Witnesses section. Thought this topic was up for debate.:sorry1:
     
  12. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    Ah, so did I. :eek:
     
  13. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    thats ok, i do realize that most people in christendom do not recognize that michael is Jesus, some do though.
     
  14. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    And I realise that most JW don't recognise that Jesus is not Michael, some do though.

    That was quite a backhanded statement you made there. Would you care to debate this in open forum, or will you continue to hide behind the discussions?
     
  15. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    why was it back handed :confused: i am only saying what is true , they dont recognize michael as Jesus, i think i am correct in saying that ,or am i wrong?
     
  16. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    I think you are wrong. It is backhanded to say, "Most christians don't recognise this" because you're pretty much saying, "Most christians are too stupid to be JWs." Anyway, though, would you care to debate this in open forum? I think it would be a fun one, and you seem strong enough in your position to give me a good fight.
     
  17. ray97

    ray97 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Messages:
    6
    Ratings:
    +1
    I asked may a question about this, hence her very good posting. I've since did a great deal of research on the matter. One article that I found that a was an excellent eye opener was this, for anyone who wants to look into it more:

    Biblical and Historical Views of Christ as an Angel

    BY HAROLD L. FLEMINGS
    JANUARY 1993


    TESTIMONY OF EARLY CHURCH FATHERS AND OTHERS

    From time to time representations that Jesus Christ has appeared as an angel or that Jesus Christ is an angel have been made by various religious figures and religious communities. Some firmly reject these theological views while others solidly accept them.

    On this subject scholar, Martin Werner, wrote:

    "... in the Post-Apostolic period the appearances of angels in the Old Testament narrative, so far as they occurred in some way for the succour of men, had already begun to be interpreted as appearances of Christ. This identification long remained a favourite one, as Origen, Justin, Irenaeus, Novatian and the Letter of Hymenaeus as well as other documents abundantly show us." 1

    Another scholar, John A. Lees asserted:

    "The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael (the archangel) with the preincarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the ‘child’ and the archangel in Revelation 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Dnl [Daniel]..." 2

    A popular, contemporary Protestant evangelist, Billy Graham, claimed that:

    "Some places in the Old Testament tell us that the Second Person of the Trinity appeared and was called either ‘the Lord’ or ‘the angel of the Lord’. Nowhere is it clearer than in Genesis 18 where three men appear before Abraham. Their leader is clearly identified as the Lord, whereas the other two are merely angels... We must remember, then, that in some cases in the Old Testament God Himself appeared in human form as an angel..." 3

    Also, J. N. D. Kelly noted:

    "In a number of passages (from church father Hermas) we read of an angel who is superior to the six angels forming God’s inner council, and who is regularly described as ‘most venerable’, ‘holy’, and ‘glorious’. This angel is given the name Michael; and the conclusion is difficult to escape that Hermas saw in him the Son of God and equated him with the archangel Michael." 4

    1. Martin Werner, D.D., The Formation of Christian Dogma, p. 130

    2. John A. Lees, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1930, Vol. III, p.2048.

    3. Billy Graham, Angels: God's Secret Agents, (Doubleday), p. 33

    4. J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (Harper Brothers), p. 95


    Finally, the Cyclopedia of Biblical Theological & Ecclesiastical Literature by McClintock and Strong submitted:

    "...the ‘Sons of God’, or even in poetry, the ‘gods’ (Elohim), the ‘holy ones’, etc. are names which, in their full and proper sense, are applicable only to the Lord Jesus Christ. As He is ‘the Son of God’, so also is He the ‘angel’ or ‘messenger’ of the Lord." 5

    TESTIMONY OF THE BIBLE

    What does the Bible tell us regarding this question? We shall see that it is not silent on the matter. Some posit that the Bible excludes Jesus as an angel while others firmly declare that it includes him as one.

    Perhaps the most frequently quoted passages to make the case that Jesus was not and is not an angel are found at Hebrews 1:5, 13 and 2:5 which are translated this way in the Revised Standard Version:

    Hebrews 1:5 - "For to what angel did God ever say, ‘Thou art my Son...’"

    Hebrews 1:13 - "But to what angel has he ever said, ‘Sit at my right hand...’"

    Hebrews 2:5 - "For it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come..."

    Since God said to Jesus ‘Thou art my Son’, ‘Sit at my right hand’ and subjected the coming world to him, then it would appear Jesus is not an angel, unless Jesus is an angel in a way that differentiates him from the others.

    To illustrate this point, look at Psalm 82:7, where Jehovah said to Israelite judges:

    "Nevertheless, you shall die like men and fall like any prince." (Revised Standard Version)

    Does the expression "you shall die like men" mean that those judges were not men or does it mean that they were being differentiated from ordinary men? In kind, the Hebrew passages could be complying with this same idea, that is, that Jesus though an angel, is to be distinguished from "ordinary" angels.

    5. Volume I, "Angel", p. 226.

    Another example might be brought forth to demonstrate this thinking. The account at Acts 23:9 reads:
    "And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees’ part arose, and strove, saying we find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God." (KJV)

    Some scholars understand that the "spirit" referred to here is a demon while the "angel" referred to one of the faithful holy angels. But does that mean that "angels" are not "spirits" since the passage reads "spirit or an angel"? No, the Scriptures are plain that angels are spirits.6 Notwithstanding that fact, angels are differentiated from spirits at Acts 23:9. Could this same principle apply with respect to the citations from Hebrews 1:5, 13 and 2:5 and the question of Jesus’ status as an angel? Let us move forward into the Bible to see.

    With Pharaoh’s armies pursuing them, Moses and the Israelites were accompanied by an angel through the miraculously parted Red Sea. At Exodus 14:19-22, we find:

    "Then the angel of the true God who was going ahead of the camp of Israel departed and went to their rear, and the pillar of cloud departed from their van and stood in the rear of them. So it came in between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel. On the one hand it proved to be a cloud together with darkness. On the other hand it kept lighting up the night. And this group did not come near that group all night long. Moses now stretched his hand out over the sea; and Jehovah began making the sea go back by a strong east wind all night long and converting the sea basin into dry ground and the waters being split apart. At length the sons of Israel went through the midst of the sea on dry land..." (NWT)

    The Apostle Paul identified the angel that followed them through the Red Sea at 1 Corinthians 10:1-4:

    "Now I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea and all got baptized into Moses by means of the cloud and of the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock-mass that followed them, and that rock-mass meant the Christ." (NWT)

    6. See Psalm 104:1, 4; Hebrew 1:7; 1 Kings 22:20-22.

    Interestingly, the angel that had been assigned to Israel is named "Michael" in other passages.7

    Commenting on one aspect of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, Apostle Paul wrote:

    "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. (1 Thessalonians 4:16) (NWT)

    If Jesus is not the archangel in this event and he is superior to the archangel, then why would he perform this act as though he was someone of lower rank? Wouldn’t he be using an archangel’s voice because he is an archangel?

    Once more, the Apostle Paul made this comment:

    "And what was a trial to you in my flesh, you did not treat with contempt or spit at in disgust; but you received me like an angel of God, like Christ Jesus". (Galatians 4:14) (NWT)

    There is certainly the sense here that being received like an angel was the same as being received like Jesus Christ. Doesn’t this suggest then that Jesus Christ is an angel, albeit an exceptional one? 8

    The Septuagint translation of Isaiah 9:6, 7 next commands our attention. Both Jews and Christians alike understand that Isaiah 9:6, 7 is a prophecy about the Messiah, the Christ. Translator Lancelot C.L. Brenton rendered the Septuagint verses:

    "For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him. His government shall be great, and of his peace there is no end..."

    The phrase "Messenger of great counsel" translates the Greek "Mεγαλης βουλης αγγελος" which is also translated "Angel of great counsel". This inference may be more than suggestive.

    7. See Exodus 23:20-23; Daniel 10:21; Daniel 12:1.

    8. The Greek text reads: "ως αγγελον θεου εδεξασθε με ως χριστον ιησουν"

    In the highly symbolic book of Revelation, chapter nine depicts the disciplining of individuals who "have not the seal of God in their forehead." Those administering the discipline are said to have "a King over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon". (vss. 4, 11) (King James Version). Who is this angel who is a over subjects of God performing his will? We know that Jesus is called a King in heaven and so too Jehovah and humans that are resurrected to heaven. Clearly, Jehovah is not the "angel who is a King" and the heavenbound resurrected humans are not angels at all. Doesn’t this leave Jesus as the likely candidate? (Jeremiah 10:10; Zechariah 14:9; Psalm 2:6-8; Luke 1:32,33; Daniel 7:13, 14, 27; and 2 Timothy 2:11,12)

    CONCLUSION

    Having considered both some historical and scriptural data, it ought to be clear that the argument that Jesus is or was the principal angel, even Michael the archangel, is not without some weight and ought not be discounted as untrue.
     
  18. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    i never said that ,you did. but i am not out to fight, and do not see anyone as stupid .
    While there is no statement in the Bible that categorically identifies Michael the archangel as Jesus, there is one scripture that links Jesus with the office of archangel.

    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. 1 thessalonians 4;16

    But when Mi´cha·el the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses’ body, he did not dare to bring a judgment against him in abusive terms, but said: "May Jehovah rebuke you..... jude 9

     
  19. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    thanks for that research ,i do tend to agree that it seems likely that Jesus christ is indeed michael:)
     
  20. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    There's a difference between fighting and debating. I want to debate, not fight.
     
Loading...