Posted on Apr 14, 2014 in Faith Debates by Rob Rennie 5 Comments
Shortcake Apr 21 2014 - 10:21 pm Reply
Jesus fulfills many titles in the Bible. We are not the only ones who believe the Bible shows that Michael the Archangel is another title for Jesus–a number of Protestant sources agree with our position, including John Calvin, John Wesley, the Geneva Bible Commentary, and Matthew Henry. Here are quotes from each of those 4:
“As we stated yesterday, Michael may mean an angel; but 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.” – John Calvin.
“Michael – Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of the earth desert or oppose it.” – John Wesley’s commentary on Daniel 10:21.
“The angel here notes two things: first that the Church will be in great affliction and trouble at Christ’s coming, and next that God will send his angel to deliver it, whom he here calls Michael, meaning Christ, who is proclaimed by the preaching of the Gospel.” – Geneva Bible Commentary.
According to Matthew Henry’s commentary: “The parties-Michael and his angels on one side, and the dragon and his angels on the other: Christ, the great Angel of the covenant, and his faithful followers; and Satan and all his instruments.”
I’m wondering… Do you perhaps feel it’s slanderous to say that Jesus lived in the form of an angel before He came to Earth? If so, then why do you have no problem accepting the fact that Jesus lived in the even LOWER form of a man while was on Earth? Just food for thought…
It makes sense to many that the first–or only begotten–Son would be Chief of all the other sons or angels that came afterward, (the same are described as sons of God that shouted for joy when the Earth was created at Job 38:7). Jesus was at Jehovah’s side when everything–with the exception of himself, was created (Proverbs 8:22-31, Colossians 1:15). That’s why he is called the ONLY begotten Son of God. None of the other angels (sons of God) can be called the only begotten, just as none of them can be called the Archangel.
Now, down to specific scriptures about why I believe him also to be Michael the Archangel… I’ve used the King James Version, fyi. (This will take some length, so I apologize to the readers in advance for the long post.)
A good place to start is with 1 Thessalonians 4:16 where Paul describes Jesus after his resurrection, saying: “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God…” (KJV)
Question: 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? Isn’t Jesus’ voice good enough? Why would Jesus use the Archangel’s voice if he wasn’t the Archangel?
The fact that the word “archangel” is NEVER used in a plural form in God’s word convinces me that there is only one Archangel, not lots of them. (Lots of Archangels wouldn’t make sense, since Archangel means the chief angel, doesn’t it?) So I feel that this verse is identifying Jesus as the archangel.
Jude 9 identifies the Archangel as Michael. At Daniel 10:2, Michael is identified as the Prince of God’s people: “But I will shew 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.” (KJV)
Jesus is called the Prince of Peace in God’s word. There are many princes, and that is true, but Michael is the arch or very top chief of the princes or angels. Also, it is true that Jesus also has the title of King. He is foretold and later anointed and appointed to be the King of the Kingdom government we pray for in the Lord’s Prayer/Our Father/Model Prayer. But, Jesus is also given several OTHER titles. Can he be called our Prince of Peace and still be called our King? Of course, the following shows why:
At Daniel 12:1, we learn something about the archangel Michael’s role foretold in the time of the end of this system of things: “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.” (KJV)
NOTE: If you read the context, the chapter before this talks about several other kings standing up. Since those standing up are said to be kings, is it such a stretch to assume that right after, that Michael’s “standing up” in Daniel 12:1 is appropriate, because he, too, is a King? Sure, if just single out certain verses, you can make the case that it doesn’t say Michael is a king. But, if you read the context, it certainly does imply it.
Jesus is the one in Revelation who stands up for God’s people in the time of the end. Clearly, he is the one depicted in verses such as the following scripture, which is another reason why I believe Michael and Jesus are one and the same: “And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.” -Revelation 6:2 (KJV)
As for Jesus standing up, he takes action in the above verse from Revelation which is in effect standing up. It’s interesting, however, that usually in the Bible Jesus is depicted as SITTING at the right hand of his father, Jehovah, EXCEPT notably, why did he stand up when Stephen was being murdered for the witness he gave? “But he (Stephen), being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” -Acts 7:55-56
Jesus stands up for God’s people just as Michael the Archangel does, in my opinion, because they are one and the same.
Prior to the war of Armageddon on Earth, Revelation 12:7-10 speaks of a different war that took place up in heaven. Michael and his angels are described as fighting this vital war up in heaven that results in the ousting of Satan and his wicked angels: “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.”
Clearly, the above scriptures show that Michael has power over Satan, otherwise how could he have kicked him out of heaven? Jesus also has power over Satan, I’m sure you would agree. In addition, the connection is made between the two because Jesus obviously was looking forward to the time when the heavens would be rid of Satan once and for all, from what he said in Luke:
Long before this happened, when Jesus was still on Earth, he looked forward to this future cleansing of the heavens. At Luke 10:16-18, he had just comforted the 70 disciples which he had sent out in pairs of two to witness house-to-house, that whoever despises them, also despises Jesus himself, and Jehovah, the one who sent Jesus. Then the disciples come back with a great report of their efforts and when even the demons were subject to Jesus’ name, Jesus seemed to really be looking forward to the day when he would be the one to cast Satan out of heaven: “He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me. And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name. And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” (KJV)
Jesus is the one who had power over that enemy, Satan, so I believe he is also Michael the Archangel who had the power to defeat Satan, casting him and his wicked angels out of heaven, and that Jesus was looking forward to accomplishing this when he said the above words. His above words show that he couldn’t WAIT for this to be his first action after he began to rule the Kingdom government… to cast out of heaven the ones who had been accusing all his heavenly brethren (the angels) and his earthly brethren (God’s people) before God, (just as the Bible describes Satan as doing in Job). What a breath of fresh air it must have the heaven free of them! (Even though it meant woe to the Earth, because he came down to us having great anger, as Revelation chapter 12 continues.)
At Luke 1:31, Mary was told to name the child: Jesus, after Jehovah apparently transferred the life force of his prehuman existence (which I believe to be Michael the Archangel) to her womb. Interestingly, the Hebrew meaning for the word: Jesus, is “Jehovah is Salvation” and the Hebrew meaning for the word: Michael, is “Who is like God?” Both names indicate that they are both advocates of Jehovah’s sovereignty, and I believe them to be one and the same.
Nobody should be troubled by the fact that both the names Jesus and Michael are used for the same person because this is common in the Bible. Why? Because names have meanings and different situations called for different names for the same person… Consider Jacob and Israel being the same, Abram and Abraham, Saul and Paul, and the Apostle Peter is named in five different ways! So it is not anything unusual nor does it take away from him being the only begotten Son of God that Jesus is also called Michael, the Archangel.
Finally, I want to make clear that the Bible also says Jesus is our Messiah, our Saviour, our King and Ransomer/Redeemer and YES, the Son of God–all of which Jehovah’s Witnesses believe wholeheartedly, so the fact that he has many other titles, too, does NOT take away from that.
Shortcake Apr 19 2014 - 6:39 pm Reply
Jesus fulfills many titles in the Bible, so it’s not a contradiction for Jehovah’s Witnesses to both believe he is indeed the Son of God, while also believing he is the Archangel, just as we believe he is the Prince of Peace, but is also our King.
We are not the only ones who believe the Bible shows that Michael the Archangel is another title for Jesus–a number of Protestant sources agree with our position, including John Calvin, John Wesley, the Geneva Bible Commentary, and Matthew Henry. Below are what each of these 4 said on this topic, and I quote:
“As we stated yesterday, Michael may mean an angel; but 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.” – John Calvin. (See Calvin’s writings online at http://www.ccel.org/c/calvin/comment3/comm_vol25/htm/vii.htm)
“Michael – Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of the earth desert or oppose it.” – John Wesley’s commentary on Daniel 10:21. (See Wesley’s writings online at http://wesley.nnu.edu/john_wesley/notes/daniel.htm)
“a) The angel here notes two things: first that the Church will be in great affliction and trouble at Christ’s coming, and next that God will send his angel to deliver it, whom he here calls Michael, meaning Christ, who is proclaimed by the preaching of the Gospel.” – Geneva Bible Commentary. (See http://www.ccel.org/g/geneva/notes/Daniel/12.html)
It makes sense to many that the first–or only begotten–Son would be Chief of all the other sons or angels that came afterward, (the same are described as sons of God that shouted for joy when the Earth was created at Job 38:7). Jesus was at Jehovah’s side when everything–with the exception of himself, was created (Proverbs 8:22-31, Colossians 1:15). That’s why he is called the ONLY begotten Son of God. None of the other angels (sons of God) can be called the only begotten, just as none of them can be called the Archangel. Only Jesus fulfills both of those titles.
Shortcake Apr 19 2014 - 4:51 pm Reply
Now, down to specific scriptures about why I believe him also to be Michael the Archangel… (This will take some length, so I apologize to the readers in advance for the long post.)
Finally, nobody should be troubled by the fact that both the names Jesus and Michael are used for the same person. This is common in the Bible, because names have meanings and different situations called for different names for the same person… Consider Jacob and Israel being the same, Abram and Abraham, Saul and Paul, and the Apostle Peter is named in five different ways! So it is not anything unusual nor does it take away from him being the only begotten Son of God that Jesus is also called Michael, the Archangel.
Finally, I want to make clear that the Bible also says Jesus is our Messiah, our Saviour, our King and Ransomer/Redeemer–all of which Jehovah’s Witnesses believe wholeheartedly, so the fact that he has many other titles, too, does NOT take away from that.
I hope some of the above helps to relieve your alarm that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe one of Jesus’ titles is Arch Angel. This should NOT cause you to assume that because of that additional title, they don’t believe he is the Son of God, because they certainly do accept Jesus as the Son of God. Hope the above clears this up, I tried my best. Thanks.
Shortcake Apr 19 2014 - 4:42 pm Reply
In your YouTube clip, your objection to Jehovah’s Witnesses not getting involved with politics not being “Christian” does not make sense to me, since the Bible says Jesus ran away when the people of his day wanted him to become involved in politics, wanted him to be King. Jehovah’s Witnesses share Jesus’ position that their Kingdom (or government) is no part of this current world. Why would it be wrong to run away from any involvement with this world’s politics, if it was okay for Jesus to do so?
Perhaps it might help you to understand our reasoning if you think of Jehovah’s Witnesses like “ambassadors” for that Kingdom government with Jesus as their King… As you know, ambassadors may reside in lands ruled by other governments, but they do not take part in the political process of those governments, as they belong to a DIFFERENT government and work for it.
Another reason not to get involved with worldly politics is that the Bible makes clear that Satan is the ruler of this world. (Otherwise, how could he had tempted Jesus with all the kingdoms (governments) of this world? Also, when Daniel was praying, remember that an angel told him that he was delayed by a demonic angel from an Earthly government, who tried to stop him.) Rather than work from the top of this world’s governments down to accomplish good, Jehovah’s Witnesses prefer to copy how Christ Jesus trained his disciples to instead make a grass-roots effort to change things individual by individual, family by family, reaching the HEART.
Also, please keep in mind that our ministry is world-wide. If we got involved with the politics of one particular country, wouldn’t that make it harder for us to reach the hearts of people in a different country? Or immigrants within a country? Or Republicans vs. Democrats if we were to take sides? Why foster such political resentment when it is their SPIRITUAL well-being we should be concerned with, not the politics of whatever country we are preaching and teaching in.
Why polish the brass on the Titanic? Daniel 2:44 clearly foretells that Satan’s world is going to be replaced by God’s Kingdom government, on a world-wide scale.
With all of the above in mind, I feel it is more Christian to follow the way Christ accomplished good, by avoiding politics and directly helping the people. Sure, it might not get you the most media attention, but it is Christ’s example we should follow, not what is popular. Politics has become like a religion to more and more people, in rivalry to true worship of God. Psalm 146:3 is one example of how the Bible tries to warn us not to put our trust in such things.
This being said, the doing of good and the helping of the poor and those in need are being done by Jehovah’s Witnesses. We are often among the very first to bring relief during a disaster and have an active ministry work in prisons and we help people family-by-family where we see a true need. But, it’s never under compulsion and the SPIRITUAL help takes priority over the physical. If that way was good enough for Jesus, I feel that’s how it should be, with the spiritual teaching taking priority. Giving people HOPE for the future is certainly what the GOOD NEWS of God’s Kingdom that Jesus preached was all about! It had nothing to do with politics, which is so often a nasty, cut-throat business.
Shortcake Apr 19 2014 - 4:28 pm Reply
All you have to do to prove that you are incorrect and that Jehovah’s Witnesses DO believe that Jesus is indeed the Son of God is to read chapter 3 “Who is Jesus?” of their Bible Course book, “What Does The Bible Really Teach?” and you will see that they certainly do believe Jesus is the Son of God. (You can download the book free on JW.org) I want to give you the benefit of the doubt as to why you would air such a falsehood, and am assume that perhaps you were so thrown by hearing another title for Jesus used (Arch Angel) that you jumped to the wrong conclusion about their other beliefs? If so, an apology is in order and that You Tube clip should either be corrected or removed, please. Thank you.
Email - will not be published
* Copy This Password *
* Type Or Paste Password Here *
Get the latest testimonies, faith debates, and much more sent straight to your inbox in a weekly email alert. Enter your first name and email below to sign up . . .
*Your information will not be shared.100% privacy guaranteed.
Does Your Church Attract Plenty Of Young, Hot Women Looking For Marriage?
Eternalplanner.com © 2014. All Rights Reserved