Are Michael and Jesus one and the same? The answer is, no.

[Gregory Matthews]

Comment on Rachel:

 

Rachel and I disagree on many things, but not on everything.  Some of the things on which we disagree, are of much less importance than are other things.  Rachel has put more energy and effort into the study of her beliefs than have many of the other people who post here.  She is sincere and she is open to considering opposing viewpoints. She is both forceful and appropriate in presenting her views.  I welcome her here to this forum.  I will defend her presence here, not because of any right that she has, but because of her behavior here.  She has set the standard for how people should behave who come here and challenge us.

[TrevorL]

Greetings Scuba,

 

God uses mediators to interact with His creation. God has spoken to His creation in many different ways throughout the Old Testament (Hebrews 1:1-2). Michael, as the Archangel or chief messenger of God, is one of those ways.

Even though I disagree with some aspects of your Post, I agree that the Angels represented God and as such they are sometimes revealed bearing the Name of God and God’s titles. Even the Judges in Israel were called gods, or Hebrew “Elohim”, as stated by Jesus:
John 10:34-36 (KJV): 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
Jesus says the Judges were called gods because the Word of God came to them

It may help to understand John 10 by clarifying why the judges were called God or gods. It is interesting to note that the translators had difficulty with the relevant verses where the Judges acted in the role of God (Hebrew Elohim):
Exodus 21:6 (KJV): 6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
Exodus 21:6 (ASV): then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.

Exodus 22:8-9 (KJV): 8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods. 9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.
Exodus 22:8-9 (ASV): 8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall come near unto God, to see whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor’s goods. 9 For every matter of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, whereof one saith, This is it, the cause of both parties shall come before God; he whom God shall condemn shall pay double unto his neighbor.

The role and responsibility of the judges is indicated in the following:
Deuteronomy 1:17 (KJV): Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.
2 Chronicles 19:6 (KJV): And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment.
So the judges were called God or gods because they were united in administering the work or judgements of God.

The Angel who was to lead Israel into the Promised Land also was given the Name of God, because he represented God and acted with God’s authority. I assume that this Angel was Michael.
Exodus 23:20-21 (KJV): 20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

There are instances where there is a distinction between the Name-bearing Angel, Michael and Yahweh Himself. The Angel that appeared before Abraham has the Name “Yahweh”, but he calls fire down from heaven from Yahweh Himself:
Genesis 19:24 (KJV): Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;

Similarly the Angel bearing the Yahweh Name calls upon Yahweh Himself to rebuke Satan:
Zechariah 3:1-2 (KJV): 1 And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. 2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?


Kind regards
Trevor
 

[8thdaypriest]

Thank you Gregory.  I am humbled by your words. 

[Ted Oplinger]

Scuba, you said...

 

 

I have yet to receive answers to my question. I agree that I should not be speaking against what one believes but if what one believes is not true then I have an obligation to speak.

 

How do you reconcile these verses with Jesus being the Angel Michael?

 

I think you need to rephrase that. You are not getting the answers you want to get. Your premise of what an angel is...we will not follow. You have been given answers which reconcile the relationship between the named archangel Michael, and God the Son Jesus - I particularly commented on the very definition of what an angel is. Yet...these answers are not what you want in an answer.

 

That appears to be why you blew right past my post. You also ignored Tom Whetmore's post...who said the same thing.

 

I do not mean to be confrontational; that said, you seem to be taking upon yourself the role one correcting error on this issue. Even the wording of the thread title presupposes what you would intend to do with this thread. I noticed Rachel took the issue to you earlier. I think she is correct in her assessment. It seems you want to vindicate your premise in the thread title, not discuss why an Adventist would come to such a conclusion.

 

I commented earlier that people get caught up in the definition assumed by man of what an angel is, rather than allowing the Bible to make that definition. That is apparently what you are doing here - making the assumption an archangel is a created being, when God's Word does not make that distinction or definition. If you see such a defnition, please show me where in the Bible an archangel - or even simply an angel - MUST NECESSARILY be a created unfallen being BY definition. You will see examples of holy beings serving in the office/role of angels, but as I already pointed out in Hebrews 13:2, this well applies to humans as well.

 

I have rejected the premise that an angel is Biblically defined solely to be an unfallen race of beings. I accept the premise the Bible defines two unfallen races (Cherubim and Seraphim), and that these two races do indeed serve in the role defined in the Bible by the word "angel". 

 

I go to Daniel 12:1. Michael is NOT called the archangel here - He is called the "great prince". I don't know about you, but everywhere I look in the Bible, I see the Word painting Jesus as the great prince of heaven, rather than a great angel. Christ is the "Prince of Peace", before whom "every knee shall bow". (Isaiah 9:6; Philippians 2:10 and Isaiah 45:23, Hebrews 1:6). The same usage is found in Daniel 10:13 and 21. Semantics can be made of verse 13's reference to "one of the chief princes", but verse 21 makes it abundantly clear the name Michael references THE great prince of the Redeemed.

 

In Daniel 12:1, this great prince stands up for Daniel's people - also known as Israel, the people of the covenant...also known cosmically as the redeemed. The word "guard" found in some translations is not there in the Hebrew. The word there is the active participle "amad" meaning, "to stand up for", "to present before".

 

That hearkens to Jude 24, where the same phraseology is used again, only in the Greek. Who is doing the presenting, making you stand? That's right...Jesus, who is standing for you before the Father, presenting you to Him with "great joy". This, after verse 9 references Michael being the protagonist confronting Satan concerning the right for Moses to be resurrected to eternal life.

 

So, again, I read those verses and have no issues reconciling the point of Michael and Jesus being one and the same. I also have no misunderstandings on the point Jesus has a multitude of names He goes by...including one we will never hear - it is only hinted at in Revelation 19:12.

 

Why are you coming to an Adventist site and making a fuss over definitions and premises informed Adventists will not accept? You have not put forth a problem we have no answer for. After reading the remainder of this thread, it seems clear you will not accept the answer being given - that we disagree with the assessment you made in the thread title. You made a declaration there; in answer, we have said we disagree.

 

When I tally up how many times Michael is named in the Bible is used in the referred context, it is all of 5 times - Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 9, and Revelation 12:7.

 

In each instance, "Michael" is seen in direct confrontation with the Serpent and/or his forces. There is only one person who has that role, and we find that in Genesis 3:14-15, where the Serpent is foretold of his demise, to have his head crushed by the coming Redeemer - universally recognized to be Christ Jesus.

 

There is only one person who stands between the saints of all time, and the devil and his forces - that person always has been and always will be Jesus Christ. And Jesus did this - all the way to the Cross, where no angel could go. Christ was our great Prince, taking a stand for us on the Cross, so that He might be able to make us take a stand before the Father after all is said and done.

 

A quick reading of Genesis 3:1-5 shows the rebellion has everything to do with slandering the character of the Living God, such that His Word will not be trusted, and exalting one's self to be the Most High instead. The name's meaning - again, I repeat this from my earlier post - is "Who is like the Most High?" It is a direct, confrontational question which seeks a direct, singular answer. Since in the Bible, one's name had significant meaning of character, it is incumbent then to ascertain whether there is an angel in existence who can correctly convey the character of God perfectly, in every form of fashion, such that whosoever should see them would know the character of the Living God.

 

The Bible never mentions any such being. Never in the Bible has an "angelic" being come to human beings to declare the glory of God's character. Such appearances instead belong to religions we know to be false. However, we can read in John 14:9 that Christ Himself exemplified this perfectly when He told Philip, "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father." Christ's character demonstrates the answer to the very question the name Michael poses. Who is like the Most High? Christ Jesus, the Prince of Peace.
 

Next, those serving in the role of angel have ministries of service, to serve (and sometimes protect) God's people. However, we do not belong to the angels - they are not to us as prince royalty, nor are we obliged to bow before them as our princes. The disciple John tried to do that twice in the book of Revelation, only to be told twice to not do that - they are brother creatures to us. They are not our great princes to bow before. But God did tell these beings described as angels/messengers to bow before and worship someone beside Himself - Jesus Christ. God the Son is as worthy of worship as God the Father is.

 

Hence, Biblically speaking, one can logically come to the conclusion the names Michael and Jesus refer to the same Person in certain key points in the Bible.

 

Blessings,