--> Is Michael the Archangel really Jesus? <--Newly Updated as of Wednesday, 06 August 2008 In Memory Of: Jesus of Nazareth (Eternity past - 4 BC) ; (4 BC - AD 29) ; (AD 29 - Present) ; (Present - Time-unending)
The Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that this is true on page 218 of their publication, Reasoning from the Scriptures.
They chiefly cite Rev. 12:7-12 as showing Michael as a commander of the heavenly armies and also compare that with Rev. 19:11-16, showing Jesus as the commander of the heavenly armies. They also cite I Thes. 4:16, which says: “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:”
Admittedly to have the Lord descend with the voice of the archangel is a strong argument that maybe the Lord Jesus is the archangel, Michael. However, we run into problems early and often with this analogy: If we conclude Jesus is an archangel, then, we must also conclude that Jesus is a Trumpet:
If Jesus is an archangel from this passage “with the voice of the archangel,” then He must also be a trumpet from the same usage in that verse, “with the trump of God.” Clearly, Jesus is not a trumpet, so this verse alone does not identify Jesus as Michael. (Here, we have the JW reading things into the verse that it does not literally say, but we don‘t make fun of them, for they are in many instances dedicated, sincere, and well-educated in the scriptures!) We might also gather from this passage that the Lord Jesus is God -because He in fact uses the trump of God. (While most Protestant Christians accept the “Jesus=God” doctrine to be true, the Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t accept the Godhood of Jesus, and this would be a problem for them.) Also, the scriptures above might merely depict Michael as a mere captain in the army, under Jesus as General, so we don’t really know from these scriptures alone: Either side could be right! (OK, scripture nowhere explicitly says: “Jesus is Michael” or “Michael is Jesus,” and this should send up warning flags: **_WARNING FLAGS: Hello?_** But let’s look further -and let’s not get down too hard on the JW: We all make mistakes! Real Christians don’t make fun of others’ mistakes, but show good manners and love.)
Some other scriptures that hint at the issue but don’t prove or disprove either competing doctrine:
Hebrews 1:4, in which Jesus is “so much better than the angels” (This is a hint that Jesus is not an angel, but, I admit, not definitive proof.) Hebrews 1:5-8 also hints that Jesus is not just an angel, but a son of God. (This actually is not definitive proof of Jesus being anything more than an angel, for we remember in Job how mere angels -even including at least one fallen angel -are called sons of God! Job 1:6; 2:1: “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them…Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.”) If this were the only scripture, then maybe Jesus could be one of the “sons of God” and yet still an angel, such as Michael. One more verse comes from my friend, Dr. Chuck Hollowell, the preacher of Victory Baptist, the church where I got saved, in Plant City, Florida. Pastor Hollowell suggests that Hebrews 2:16 gives insight. It reads: "For verily he [Jesus] took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham." Hebrews 2:16 (KJV, italics in original, the word "Jesus" added in brackets for clarification) This suggests that Jesus can't be an angel, however, whenever you see italics in the KJV, it means words were added by the translators. A better translation might be the Amplified Version, which reads: "For, as we all know, He [Christ] did not take hold of angels [the fallen angels, to give them a helping and delivering hand], but He did take hold of [the fallen] descendants of Abraham [to reach out to them a helping and delivering hand]." Hebrews 2:16 (AMP, comments in brackets were in the Amplified Version) So, we can see that while this verse offers a hint, it is not definite.
Call in the “A” Team: Here are scriptures which definitively disprove the doctrine that Jesus = Michael:
(Credit given to Dr. Ron Rhodes’ Angel book for ideas below here.)
First, Michael is not in the same class as Jesus: Dan. 10:13 says that Michael was merely “one of the chief princes,” but contrast that with Jesus as “King of Kings and Lord of Lords,” not merely a “chief prince” and certainly not one of several “of the chief princes!” (Cf.: I Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; Rev. 19:16, where Jesus is K of K and L of L.) Translation: Jesus not = Michael.
Also, Heb. 2:5 clearly says that God did not put the world into subjection of the angels, so, when Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, this immediately disqualifies Him from being any angel at all: The world is clearly under his subjection, and thus He can’t be an angel according to this scripture here.
Lastly, Michael could not rebuke Satan (Jude 1:9; cf: 2 Peter 2:10-12), but clearly Jesus could rebuke the fallen angels: Matt. 17:18 (And Jesus rebuked the devil…) Mark 1:25 Jesus rebuked another fallen angel aka unclean spirit. (Trivia: Zech. 3:1-2 shows the Lord rebuking Satan, but this may not have been Jesus; It may have been God the Father.) Thus, Michael was not Jesus, or else he would have been able to rebuke Satan himself: “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.” THEREFORE: These disqualify Michael from being Jesus.
Ah, it looks like Dr. Rhodes forgot a few scriptures! I shall add them in here, and promptly email him my new updated find:
"Even in His [heavenly] servants He puts no trust or confidence, and His angels He charges with folly and error--" (Job 4:18; Cf: Job 15:15, Amplified Version) Yet, Jesus did not commit any folly or error, that is, Jesus did not sin (2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Peter 3:18). So Jesus obviously can not be an angel, and, of course, as such, Jesus can't be Michael, the archangel. Hmm...
What's more, Michael, the Archangel, could not be omnipresent [in all places at once] when Gabriel was fighting the Prince of Persia (Daniel 10:13), but JESUS CAN be omnipresent. (See Matthew 18:20; Matthew 28:20; Revelations 1:1; and, Revelations 3:20.)
Therefore, we have NEW math: JESUS is NOT equal to Michael, and the Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong. In what else are they wrong?