Sunday, August 30, 2015

Michael and The Angel of The LORD

The Jehovah's Witnesses are infamous for believing Jesus was Michael The Archangel.  What makes the JW view of Jesus extremely Blasphemous though isn't about Michael at all but about denying Jesus divinity, making Him a created being and denying The Trinity.

Meanwhile they don't even believe God The Father is Infinite but rather Finite.  They used to officially teach He lived on a star in the constellation Pleiades, but later abandoned that.  I think it could be possible God has a Tabernacle in the Heavens just as He's had one on Earth, and that could be New Jerusalem, the Heavenly Zion by the Sides of The North.  But ultimately God exists outside Space-Time.

Here is a brief analysis of why the Watchtower Bible's translation of John 1:1 is wrong.

However the idea that Michael (which means "Who is Like God") might be a name given to The Angel of The LORD, who Jews and Christians both agree to be God manifested within The World, a Theophany, is I think a worthwhile possibly to investigate.

Michael appears in The New Testament, and usually the view among Christians is that The Angel of The LORD is a form or title Jesus took only in The Hebrew Bible (besides occasional New Testament quotations of those incidents), and that upon the Incarnation it does not apply to Jesus anymore.

 In English we keep forgetting that angel is just a word for messenger, Jesus used it of John The Baptist which should prove gaining humanity does not take away the term's accuracy.  Everything that made that word apply to John, Jesus was doing also.  The term "Word of God" certainly still applies to Jesus in the New Testament, and in my view those titles are related in concept, messages are made up of words after all.

At any-rate the reference to Michael in Jude at least is an incident that probably took place in the Old Testament era.  And Revelation is often defined as the most Old Testament part of The New Testament.  Together those are every NT usage of the name Michael.

Many Christians have argued The Angel in Revelation 10 could be Jesus, pointing to parallels between it's description and Jesus in the first chapter.  Jesus certainly takes many forms throughout Revelation, The Lamb in chapter 5, the Son of Man in 14 and so on.  Could it be the Angel in chapter 10 is Michael preparing for the actions he shall take in chapter 12?

I now believe The Man-Child in chapter 12 is The Church rather then Jesus, so seeing Jesus as Michael at that moment becomes far more plausible.  But even if you still think The Man-Child is Jesus, that the Man-Child takes the form of Michael as soon as He's in Heaven is a possibility.

It's largely because of Revelation 12 that Michael gets defined in popular imagination as the military commander of God's Angels.  In Joshua The Angel of The LORD appears to him before the battle of Jericho and identifies himself as The Captain of The LORD's hosts.

Jude alone actually quotes Michael.  And what Michael says to Satan is the same thing The Angel of The LORD said to Satan in Zechariah 3.  Now those are clearly not the same incident so Michael could be quoting Zechariah.  But still, the fact that the only statement attributed to Michael is also attributed to The Angel of The LORD is interesting.

Jude alone is the reason we call Michael The Archangel.  I now unlike in the past believe Archangel is a term that applies to multiple angels.  Because the only other time it appears is in I Thessalonians 4, in the infamous Rapture passage, but while it reads singular in the KJV in The Greek it is actually in a plural form there, which to me verifies connecting this to The Seventh Trumpet in Revelation 11 where many voices are in Heaven after The Trumpet sounds.

I think Archangel is a synonym for when you see "Principality" used in the KJV as seemingly a type or rank of Angels.  In the Greek "Principality" is Arca or Arche, the same word that combines with Angel to make Archangel.  This I believe correlates to in Hebrew the word Sar (one of many Hebrew words translated Prince) when used of Angels.

In Daniel 10 Michael is called the Chief Prince, and in chapter 12 he's the Great Prince, Daniel 10 also shows other Angels are Princes too, but Michael has a higher rank among the Princes.  Daniel 8 calls Jesus the Prince of Princes, likewise Isaiah 9 calls Jesus The Prince of Peace (Which could be interpreted as Prince of Salem).  In each of these cases the Hebrew word is Sar.

Daniel 10 5-9 describes Daniel seeing a being who many interpret as a Theophany, again with parallels to Revelation 1 and also Revelation 10.  Interestingly this same entity's voice is also described as being "Like the Voice of a Multitude".  After this encounter Daniel passes out.

The Angel speaking to Daniel after he wakes up in verse 10 (and is really saying everything in chapter 11 and the beginning of 12) can't be Jesus because he needed help to get past the Prince of Persia to get to Daniel.  It is common to use that fact to refute the idea of seeing a Theophany here at all, but others have suggested this isn't necessarily the same Angel.

Here is the thing, it is Michael who this Angel says came to help him and enabled him to finally reach Daniel.  So it seems logical to consider that perhaps Michael is The Angel that Daniel sees in verses 5-9.

What happens when Michael "Stands Up" in Chapter 12 is that those who's names are written in The Book are Delivered(Saved) and many are Resurrected.  I think this Prophecy as I argued before has a dual fulfillment.  That it can apply to both Jesus Resurrection in 30 AD and The Rapture at the middle of the 70th Week.  I argued that independent of possibly seeing Michael and Jesus as the same, but them being the same certainly makes that fit even stronger.

Again this is nothing to be dogmatic on.  But I think when debating JWs we should be willing to say, Yes maybe Michael is Jesus, but that is separate from the debate of if Jesus is God.

No comments:

Post a Comment