We, Jehovah's Witnesses, consider that Jesus is also the Archangel Michael. It is not just our belief, as many biblical scholars of other religious denominations have considered the matter in the same way.
Can this idea be demonstrated with the Bible? If that is not the case, the idea will not even be part of the Jehovah's Witness body of doctrines. In no way would we consider as belief something that did not have sufficient biblical support.
I would like to talk about that matter on this topic, as there is a lot of information that I would like to share about it. The subject of debate is: can it be demonstrated with the Bible that Jesus is the Archangel Michael? My answer is that you can do that, and in passing the topic I will try to prove it.
Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Moderator: Moderators
- otseng
- Savant
- Posts: 20522
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 337 times
- Contact:
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #41Moderator CommentCheckpoint wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:51 am Hence I suggested this was a little homework for you. That way you have a better chance of actually learning something new, and that from an expert or two.
As a bonus, you may even enjoy the journey.
No, you cannot ask someone to do the homework if you've made a claim.
Please review the Rules.
______________
Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
- onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9060
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1238 times
- Been thanked: 314 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #42I have already done a lot of research and have come to conclusions about this, which I have stated, with scriptural backing, in several posts. Now I am asking what YOU think about the meaning of Michael "standing up" for his people. If you have thought of this, please share your conclusions.Checkpoint wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:51 amYes, I do realise you asked me what I thought.onewithhim wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 11:35 amI asked YOU to concisely explain to me what YOU think "support" for the people meant in the scenario in Daniel 12:1. What do YOU think it means that Michael "stands up" for his people? What exactly is he doing by standing up for them?Checkpoint wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 3:16 amNo, I wouldn't.onewithhim wrote: ↑Wed Nov 17, 2021 6:33 pm [Replying to Checkpoint in post #35]
You wouldn't call "mediating" being "a support"? What exactly is being a support?
You can answer your own question. Some homework for you.
And while you are at it, you could ask and find answers the same question regarding a mediator.
I declined because I am no expert, and do have some bias.
It is obvious that you too are no expert, and do have some bias as well.
Hence I suggested this was a little homework for you. That way you have a better chance of actually learning something new, and that from an expert or two.
As a bonus, you may even enjoy the journey.
.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 4069
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 63 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #43onewithhim wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 11:20 amCheckpoint wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:51 amYes, I do realise you asked me what I thought.onewithhim wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 11:35 amI asked YOU to concisely explain to me what YOU think "support" for the people meant in the scenario in Daniel 12:1. What do YOU think it means that Michael "stands up" for his people? What exactly is he doing by standing up for them?Checkpoint wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 3:16 amNo, I wouldn't.onewithhim wrote: ↑Wed Nov 17, 2021 6:33 pm [Replying to Checkpoint in post #35]
You wouldn't call "mediating" being "a support"? What exactly is being a support?
You can answer your own question. Some homework for you.
And while you are at it, you could ask and find answers the same question regarding a mediator.
I declined because I am no expert, and do have some bias.
It is obvious that you too are no expert, and do have some bias as well.
Hence I suggested this was a little homework for you. That way you have a better chance of actually learning something new, and that from an expert or two.
As a bonus, you may even enjoy the journey.O.k.I have already done a lot of research and have come to conclusions about this, which I have stated, with scriptural backing, in several posts. Now I am asking what YOU think about the meaning of Michael "standing up" for his people. If you have thought of this, please share your conclusions.
I think the same as this expert does.
(Macmillan's Dictionary)stand up for someone/something) to defend someone or something that is being criticized or attacked
]
- onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9060
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1238 times
- Been thanked: 314 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #44Checkpoint wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 3:46 pmNow, please, connect that with what Michael does in Daniel 12:1. How does he defend his people? And also, how does this compare with what Jesus does at Armageddon? Please explain.onewithhim wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 11:20 amCheckpoint wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 2:51 amYes, I do realise you asked me what I thought.onewithhim wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 11:35 amI asked YOU to concisely explain to me what YOU think "support" for the people meant in the scenario in Daniel 12:1. What do YOU think it means that Michael "stands up" for his people? What exactly is he doing by standing up for them?Checkpoint wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 3:16 amNo, I wouldn't.onewithhim wrote: ↑Wed Nov 17, 2021 6:33 pm [Replying to Checkpoint in post #35]
You wouldn't call "mediating" being "a support"? What exactly is being a support?
You can answer your own question. Some homework for you.
And while you are at it, you could ask and find answers the same question regarding a mediator.
I declined because I am no expert, and do have some bias.
It is obvious that you too are no expert, and do have some bias as well.
Hence I suggested this was a little homework for you. That way you have a better chance of actually learning something new, and that from an expert or two.
As a bonus, you may even enjoy the journey.O.k.I have already done a lot of research and have come to conclusions about this, which I have stated, with scriptural backing, in several posts. Now I am asking what YOU think about the meaning of Michael "standing up" for his people. If you have thought of this, please share your conclusions.
I think the same as this expert does.
(Macmillan's Dictionary)stand up for someone/something) to defend someone or something that is being criticized or attacked
]
.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 4069
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 63 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #45[Replying to Checkpoint in post #43]
I do not know how he defends his people in Daniel 12:1, because it does not tell us that in that verse.
However for me, you have offered Armageddon as a comparison point, as a replacement of your mediator comparison point.
O.k. then.
To move this little exchange along, let's say that Michael in Daniel 12 will be doing similarly what Jesus will be doing at Armageddon.
Where does this leave you?
]I think the same as this expert does.
stand up for someone/something) to defend someone or something that is being criticized or attacked
(Macmillan's Dictionary)
Now, please, connect that with what Michael does in Daniel 12:1. How does he defend his people? And also, how does this compare with what Jesus does at Armageddon? Please explain.
I do not know how he defends his people in Daniel 12:1, because it does not tell us that in that verse.
However for me, you have offered Armageddon as a comparison point, as a replacement of your mediator comparison point.
O.k. then.
To move this little exchange along, let's say that Michael in Daniel 12 will be doing similarly what Jesus will be doing at Armageddon.
Where does this leave you?
- onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9060
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1238 times
- Been thanked: 314 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #46Where does this line of thinking leave you? Where, in the account at Matthew 24:21-31 is there mentioned that someone other than Jesus will be involved in "standing up" for the people? I see only Jesus there in that account.Checkpoint wrote: ↑Sat Nov 27, 2021 12:48 am [Replying to Checkpoint in post #43]
]I think the same as this expert does.
stand up for someone/something) to defend someone or something that is being criticized or attacked
(Macmillan's Dictionary)Now, please, connect that with what Michael does in Daniel 12:1. How does he defend his people? And also, how does this compare with what Jesus does at Armageddon? Please explain.
I do not know how he defends his people in Daniel 12:1, because it does not tell us that in that verse.
However for me, you have offered Armageddon as a comparison point, as a replacement of your mediator comparison point.
O.k. then.
To move this little exchange along, let's say that Michael in Daniel 12 will be doing similarly what Jesus will be doing at Armageddon.
Where does this leave you?
.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 4069
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 63 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #47[Replying to Checkpoint in post #45]
It leaves me somewhat confused.
Why on earth did you ask me that question, and then give your own answer?
Sorry, but you have lost me!
Whether I agree with your answer or not. why would that, in your mind, onewithhim, have any significance?
This line of thinking seems to be going around in circles, which gets one nowhere.Where does this line of thinking leave you? Where, in the account at Matthew 24:21-31 is there mentioned that someone other than Jesus will be involved in "standing up" for the people? I see only Jesus there in that account.
It leaves me somewhat confused.
Why on earth did you ask me that question, and then give your own answer?
Sorry, but you have lost me!
Whether I agree with your answer or not. why would that, in your mind, onewithhim, have any significance?
-
- Sage
- Posts: 842
- Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:13 pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 27 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #48Dear Eloi, Onewithhim and other JW's,
It appears that the evidence presented by others is overwhelming that Jesus is not Michael. I think there following scriptures also bear this point out clearly:
Your man made made doctrinal beliefs do not make an idea correct doctrine. In fact the evidence may clearly demonstrate your doctrine false.
As I see it your doctrine is patently absurd for the following reasons :
Christ is as he testified, the son of God.
2. In essence, you are claiming that Michael the archangel was not perfect and needed to learn obedience.
(Hebrews 5:8
Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;)
3. In essence you are claiming that god’s angels are not pure and need to come to this earth to gain a physical body and learn obedience to be made perfect as Christ did.
4. In essence you are claiming that all of God’s holy angels are impure and imperfect and must needs come to this earth to receive a body and learn obedience by the things which we suffer and become perfect as Christ did that we also may become joint heirs with Christ.
5. You should also clearly understand that Michael (the ancient of days “Daniel 7:9-10) was according to scripture a Son of God as shown in Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
Luke herein makes it very clear that Adam was also the son of God. Adam was also obviously born thousands of years before Christ.
See also:
Daniel 7:
13
I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
14
And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
6. Jude 1:9m 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.
You should clearly observe in the above that even Michael the archangel did not make did not bring against the devil an accusation, but deferred the matter to the Lord.
Others have spoken very well on this topic in opposition to your doctrine.
It is self evident that your doctrine claiming Michael the archangel to be Christ is not based upon divine revelation, but is clearly a man made doctrine based upon your deductive hypotheses.
Kind regards,
RW
It appears that the evidence presented by others is overwhelming that Jesus is not Michael. I think there following scriptures also bear this point out clearly:
Your man made made doctrinal beliefs do not make an idea correct doctrine. In fact the evidence may clearly demonstrate your doctrine false.
As I see it your doctrine is patently absurd for the following reasons :
Christ is as he testified, the son of God.
2. In essence, you are claiming that Michael the archangel was not perfect and needed to learn obedience.
(Hebrews 5:8
Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;)
3. In essence you are claiming that god’s angels are not pure and need to come to this earth to gain a physical body and learn obedience to be made perfect as Christ did.
4. In essence you are claiming that all of God’s holy angels are impure and imperfect and must needs come to this earth to receive a body and learn obedience by the things which we suffer and become perfect as Christ did that we also may become joint heirs with Christ.
5. You should also clearly understand that Michael (the ancient of days “Daniel 7:9-10) was according to scripture a Son of God as shown in Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
Luke herein makes it very clear that Adam was also the son of God. Adam was also obviously born thousands of years before Christ.
See also:
Daniel 7:
13
I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
14
And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
6. Jude 1:9m 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.
You should clearly observe in the above that even Michael the archangel did not make did not bring against the devil an accusation, but deferred the matter to the Lord.
Others have spoken very well on this topic in opposition to your doctrine.
It is self evident that your doctrine claiming Michael the archangel to be Christ is not based upon divine revelation, but is clearly a man made doctrine based upon your deductive hypotheses.
Kind regards,
RW
- onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9060
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1238 times
- Been thanked: 314 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #49It does have significance, and I'm sad that you can't see it. Please just answer my question. It is not going around in circles. If you'd just answer, it would contribute to an interesting discussion.Checkpoint wrote: ↑Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:02 pm [Replying to Checkpoint in post #45]
This line of thinking seems to be going around in circles, which gets one nowhere.Where does this line of thinking leave you? Where, in the account at Matthew 24:21-31 is there mentioned that someone other than Jesus will be involved in "standing up" for the people? I see only Jesus there in that account.
It leaves me somewhat confused.
Why on earth did you ask me that question, and then give your own answer?
Sorry, but you have lost me!
Whether I agree with your answer or not. why would that, in your mind, onewithhim, have any significance?
.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 4069
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 63 times
Re: Michael the Archangel, a characterization of Jesus in heaven?
Post #50[Replying to onewithhim in post #49]
I agree with the answer you gave to your question about that Matthew 24 passage.It does have significance, and I'm sad that you can't see it. Please just answer my question. It is not going around in circles. If you'd just answer, it would contribute to an interesting discussion.