Is Jesus also Michael the archangel?

This was my response to someone who had raised the topic back in the Pathways-Online days, and the original topic can be found here. I recently posted this on a site (Hourglass2 Outpost) that I occasionally post at, thinking that it would be nice to here what thoughts others might have on the subject, some 6 1/2 years later… and to expand on my own understanding.

What follows then, in a 5-part series, is not only the 6 1/2 year old post, but my response to someone who asked me to comment on their own observations. I hope that it at least provokes further discussion on the topic.

Follow-up Post #4

A well thought out conclusion. Each person needs to make sure on their own, of course.

Please also consider a scripture you didn’t include:
Daniel 10:21, DRC, “But I will tell thee what is set down in the scripture of truth: and none is my helper in all these things, but Michael your prince; [/b]“

If you have the time, please look at my conclusions here:

http://bythebible.page.tl/Jesus-h–Prehuman-Existence.htm

If you still believe your prior conclusion, I would be happy to be informed as to why. I like to see if I am wrong. ha ha

Christian greetings, ‘Fuzzy,’

Thank you for your response and the invitation to review your own observations. What follows are my responses to the link you provided, and my reasons for those responses. They are given in the spirit of exchange only, and are not to be taken as dogma.

For the sake of my tendency toward longwindedness, I will respond in segments, to allow for focused responses as well, and to make it easier for others to follow the discussion.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Notes: Your original material will be colored in blue to avoid confusion later on.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

B. This argument is strengthened by the following:
Daniel 12:1 clearly refers to Michael the archangel of Jude 9.

Dan 12:1,2 reads, “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince who 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. 2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame [and] everlasting contempt. (Webster)

I think that I have sufficiently addressed this part of your article, actually, and will refer you to the previous segments for what I had to offer on this aspect of the discussion–at least in regards to my own findings and conclusions.

I do look forward to continuing this discussion and seeing everyone’s responses.
Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
A brother in Christ, Timothy

Is Jesus also Michael the archangel?

This was my response to someone who had raised the topic back in the Pathways-Online days, and the original topic can be found here. I recently posted this on a site (Hourglass2 Outpost) that I occasionally post at, thinking that it would be nice to here what thoughts others might have on the subject, some 6 1/2 years later… and to expand on my own understanding.

What follows then, in a 5-part series, is not only the 6 1/2 year old post, but my response to someone who asked me to comment on their own observations. I hope that it at least provokes further discussion on the topic.

Follow-up Post #3

A well thought out conclusion. Each person needs to make sure on their own, of course.

Please also consider a scripture you didn’t include:
Daniel 10:21, DRC, “But I will tell thee what is set down in the scripture of truth: and none is my helper in all these things, but Michael your prince; [/b]“

If you have the time, please look at my conclusions here:

http://bythebible.page.tl/Jesus-h–Prehuman-Existence.htm

If you still believe your prior conclusion, I would be happy to be informed as to why. I like to see if I am wrong. ha ha

Christian greetings, ‘Fuzzy,’

Thank you for your response and the invitation to review your own observations. What follows are my further responses to the link you provided, and my reasons for those responses. They are given in the spirit of exchange only, and are not to be taken as dogma.

For the sake of my tendency toward longwindedness, I will respond in segments (this being the second segment), to allow for focused responses as well, and to make it easier for others to follow the discussion.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Notes: Your original material will be colored in blue to avoid confusion later on.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

The fact is that Paul gives a powerful reason for associating that archangel with Jesus whom he also says speaks with an archangel’s voice. (Quoted above) In 1 Cor 10:1-4, Paul associates Jesus directly with the angel that represented God to the Israelites in their exodus. Verse four demonstrates this without doubt:

And, all, drank, the same spiritual drink,—for they continued to drink of the spiritual rock that followed them, and, the rock, was the Christ. (Rotherham)

It’s interesting that you refer to Paul’s own writings as “a powerful reason for associating that archangel with Jesus, and therefore is deserving of a part in my response here.

As you and others may well know, Paul spent a great deal of his time in the ministry trying to help his spiritual brothers and sisters to look beyond the Law and towards what the Law represented in a spiritual sense. Jesus, too, engaged his audience in the same manner.

Too, Paul was a former member of the Pharisees, and as such, he would have been able to readily call upon teachings and common knowledge in order to convey his point.

The example you refer to from 1 Corinthians 10 is one such example.

Let me cite the passage here, using a couple additional Bible translations:

For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. — 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 (NIV)

My brothers, here is something you should know. Long ago, all our fathers were led by the cloud of God over them. They all went through the Red Sea. It was as if they were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. They all ate the same food from the Spirit. They all drank the same water sent by the Spirit. The water they drank came from a Rock of the Spirit which went with them. That Rock was Christ. — 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 (BWE)

I would strongly recommend that you research further on Jewish tradition (exegetical and otherwise) regarding the “rock” that Paul is referring to in reference to the Israelites as they endured the wilderness. Suffice it to say, however, Paul was trying to make the argument that it foreshadowed the Christian congregation’s own time in the wilderness on the way to the Promised Land, nourished and watered by the Rock, which is Christ.

However, it seems that you are taking a significant leap in suggesting what you say here:

In 1 Cor 10:1-4, Paul associates Jesus directly with the angel that represented God to the Israelites in their exodus. Verse four demonstrates this without doubt…

There is no such connection to be found. There is no evidence that the cloud and/or pillar was the manifestation of Michael, an archangel of Jehovah. Is it even implied? No, I do not believe so.

Still, there are Jewish rabbinic traditions that hold that Michael played a significant role as advocate and defender of Israel and intervened not a few times in the Israelites’ behalf. Paul, as a Pharisee, would have been privy to these traditions, and I suspect that such traditions were also common knowledge. This would support what Daniel wrote in reference to Michael being a strong advocate for Israel, of course, and who is the prince of the people. What it does not support is that Michael is synonymous with Jesus.

One more point I want to mention before I close this segment is that we hear often how the name “Michael” means “Who is like God?” and that this is further “evidence” that Michael and Jesus are one and the same. However, this assumption is made on the basis of two arguments:

1) That Jesus is the only persona in existence who is like God and therefore can answer such a question as that– an argument that lends itself to either Bitarianism and Trinitarianism, wherein Jesus shares in the very nature of Jehovah.

2) That is a question in the first place.

But, for the sake of discussion, what if it isn’t a question? What if it’s a challenge? From what I have learned about the role that the archangel Michael has had throughout history, his is an unrelenting supporter of Jehovah God amongst the heavenly forces. He wouldn’t hold the position of archangel (“foremost princes”) otherwise, I believe. As such, he takes an avid interest in God’s people and acts as their soldier when the need arises. In Revelation, we find Michael and the angels under his command entering into a cosmic battle with Satan and his own angels, to the point where there is out-and-out war in heaven, but that Michael prevails in that battle and Satan is consequently cast out of heaven, along with his treacherous horde. With that in mind, Michael’s name becomes everything it means. Like David of old, Michael proves that he has God’s backing and is able to overpower and evict this fellow spiritual persona, Satan.

But, you may argue, that victory over Satan and casting him from heaven is a right belonging to Jesus himself.

While it is true that Jesus has the right to do that, there remains a very basic problematic, logical question that rises in assigning the battle/war role to Jesus as described in Revelation, and I think I mention this in my initial post: The entirety of Creation was brought into existence by means of or through the Logos, which is held to be Jesus in his pre-human existence. Everything that exists, mind you. The power that would have required is far, far beyond our capacity to imagine.

Having said that, why would it take–as some suggest–Jesus and his angels to enter into war with Satan, to cast our Accuser out of the heavens? Seriously, now. The Logos was sufficient to bring everything into existence–angels, archangels, the heavenly realm, the earthly realm, humankind… everything. And yet Jesus in his now glorified state needs assistance with dealing with the likes of Satan and his brood?

Quite frankly, I find such a notion insulting to the glory that has been given to Jesus.

Far be it from that being the case, then. Instead, at least to me, it makes much more sense that the angels themselves–like us–have a battling with powers in the spiritual realm, with principalities and forces far beyond our physical senses. We have to take our stand for our God, Jehovah, and for our King, Jesus as the Christ. The angels, too, have to take their stand. The battle involving Michael and Satan is the climax of that confrontation, the finale to a long, ongoing, arduous struggle in the heavens between heavenly angelic brothers. Jesus does not play a role in that battle, for it must be carried out by those whose loyalty remains to be determined. Jesus’ role is as Judge and High Priest and as the rightful Heir to the Kingdom prepared by Jehovah Himself. Jesus has already proven his position on the issue, and shown himself faithful even unto death, and as a result forever removed from access by Satan.

Michael’s name is a challenge to anyone who would dare to undermine Jehovah’s rightful position as Sovereign, and I’m certain that Michael is equally willing to challenge anyone who would dare to undermine Jehovah’s assigned King, Jesus. And there are myriads of angels likewise at-the-ready to do the same, under Michael’s command as their archangel.
Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
A brother in Christ, Timothy

Is Jesus also Michael the archangel?

This was my response to someone who had raised the topic back in the Pathways-Online days, and the original topic can be found here. I recently posted this on a site (Hourglass2 Outpost) that I occasionally post at, thinking that it would be nice to here what thoughts others might have on the subject, some 6 1/2 years later… and to expand on my own understanding.

What follows then, in a 5-part series, is not only the 6 1/2 year old post, but my response to someone who asked me to comment on their own observations. I hope that it at least provokes further discussion on the topic.

Follow-up Post #2

A well thought out conclusion. Each person needs to make sure on their own, of course.

Please also consider a scripture you didn’t include:
Daniel 10:21, DRC, “But I will tell thee what is set down in the scripture of truth: and none is my helper in all these things, but Michael your prince; [/b]”

If you have the time, please look at my conclusions here:

http://bythebible.page.tl/Jesus-h–Prehuman-Existence.htm

If you still believe your prior conclusion, I would be happy to be informed as to why. I like to see if I am wrong. ha ha

Christian greetings, ‘Fuzzy,’

Thank you for your response and the invitation to review your own observations. What follows are my further responses to the link you provided, and my reasons for those responses. They are given in the spirit of exchange only, and are not to be taken as dogma.

For the sake of my tendency toward longwindedness, I will respond in segments (this being the second segment), to allow for focused responses as well, and to make it easier for others to follow the discussion.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Notes: Your original material will be colored in blue to avoid confusion later on.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

The only other archangel mentioned in the Bible is found at Jude 9. Here we read:

(Webster) “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.”

As mentioned in the previous segment I posted, the original Greek language by which our Christian Greek Scriptures are derived did not use what we in the English-speaking world refer to as “definite” and “indefinite” articles, used as “a,” “an,” and “the.” Because of this, there is a tremendous shift in interpretation between a Bible translation that says “Michael the archangel” and one that says “Michael an archangel.”

If the Bible translation someone uses has “the archangel” here, it conveys the idea to the cursory reader that there is only one archangel. Even the word itself, archangel, conveys the idea of utmost or pinnacle. However, as I intimated in my previous segment, archangel is a station–and as such, does not require that there be only ONE such persona holding that station.

Now I know, I know, much of what I’m going into here does not fall within the so-called orthodoxy or widely-accepted view. I already know the widely-accepted view. What I am doing is putting that view to the test, to see if it holds up. And I invite anyone else to do the same. I am looking for the broader truth behind what we have available to us. I am digging. And as such, I would never presume to claim that I’ve found the truth, because the truth can be elusive and our reasoning can be deceptive. But that is where discussion comes into the issue. Being able to talk and reason our way through a topic such as this is a boon to us and to others.

Now, let me get back to the station of archangel and elaborate further.

Any U.S. resident would recognize that the office or station of U.S. President is the highest station an individual can hold. Right now, that station is held by Obama. Does that mean that he is the only President? No, because others have held that station before him. Bush Jr., Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan, Carter, Ford, and on the list goes backwards.

Ah, but— you start to say— right there you have proof that only ONE person can hold that station, and that’s proof positive that there is only ONE archangel.

Now, before you start waving the flag of triumph, answer me this: Is Obama the only President currently? In other words, are there any other individuals holding a similar station of authority in any other country? If so, then you can understand a little better my view on the archangel station of authority.

Turn in your Bible to Daniel 10:13:

But the prince of the royal realm of Persia was standing in opposition to me for twenty-one days, and, look! Mi’cha?el, one of the foremost princes, came to help me; and I, for my part, remained there beside the kings of Persia. (NWT)

I refer to this passage in my original post of this topic. Notice that it says that Michael is one of the foremost princes. Logically, if we equate Jesus with Michael’s pre-Jesus existence, we still have to cope with how Jesus/Michael is but ONE of the foremost princes. However, IF we allow the Bible to stand on its own merits, we can better realize that these “foremost princes” are later referred to as “archangels” in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Otherwise, we have to try to compensate and explain away this rather simple scripture.

Let me explain.

IF Jesus is Michael, as some would suggest, then we should be able to insert Jesus’ name in lieu of Michael’s in that scripture and still have it make sense. So, does it work?

But the prince of the royal realm of Persia was standing in opposition to me for twenty-one days, and, look! Jesus, one of the foremost princes, came to help me; and I, for my part, remained there beside the kings of Persia.

On initial glance, it works. But now, we have a new problem: If Jesus is but one of these “foremost” princes–who are the other “foremost” princes Daniel is referring to?

The new problem is easily resolved, however, by realizing that Michael simply is NOT Jesus, whether in some pre-human persona or otherwise. In fact, the angels (archangels included) were created through or by means of the Logos of God. Jehovah did not create all things in existence through an archangel, and neither does the Bible claim this. Neither should we suggest it.

To determine who Michael is, then, if he is not Jesus himself, I will refer you to my original post, which goes into much more detail than I need repeat here regarding the role Michael plays as “one of the foremost princes.”

More to follow in the next segment…

Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
A brother in Christ, Timothy

Is Jesus also Michael the archangel?

This was my response to someone who had raised the topic back in the Pathways-Online days, and the original topic can be found here. I recently posted this on a site (Hourglass2 Outpost) that I occasionally post at, thinking that it would be nice to here what thoughts others might have on the subject, some 6 1/2 years later… and to expand on my own understanding.

What follows then, in a 5-part series, is not only the 6 1/2 year old post, but my response to someone who asked me to comment on their own observations. I hope that it at least provokes further discussion on the topic.

Follow-up Post #1

A well thought out conclusion. Each person needs to make sure on their own, of course.

Please also consider a scripture you didn’t include:
Daniel 10:21, DRC, “But I will tell thee what is set down in the scripture of truth: and none is my helper in all these things, but Michael your prince; [/b]“

If you have the time, please look at my conclusions here:

http://bythebible.page.tl/Jesus-h–Prehuman-Existence.htm

If you still believe your prior conclusion, I would be happy to be informed as to why. I like to see if I am wrong. ha ha

Christian greetings, ‘Fuzzy,’

Thank you for your response and the invitation to review your own observations. What follows are my responses to the link you provided, and my reasons for those responses. They are given in the spirit of exchange only, and are not to be taken as dogma.

For the sake of my tendency toward longwindedness, I will respond in segments, to allow for focused responses as well, and to make it easier for others to follow the discussion.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Notes: Your original material will be colored in blue to avoid confusion later on.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

A. We know from 1 Thess 4:16 that Christ is an archangel.

(Webster) “For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first.”

It is easy enough to equate Jesus with the archangel spoken of in this scripture, I admit. For centuries, Christendom has insisted that this scripture proves that Jesus is Michael.

However, here are the problems for me:

First, we can establish that “the Lord” referred to here is Jesus because we can cross-reference the scene of Jesus descending from heaven with that described at Acts 1:11, where we read:

“This Jesus who was received up from YOU into the sky will come thus in the same manner as YOU have beheld him going into the sky.” (NWT, et al)

What, then, of the usage of the terms “with a shout,” “with the voice of an archangel,” and “with the trumpet of God”?

Traditionally, Christendom holds the view of Jesus blowing a trumpet, etc. This imagery can be seen going back across the centuries in church artwork, for example. As a result, when we read the scripture today, because we have been descendants of this long-held notion, we automatically infer that Jesus himself descends while shouting, while speaking as an archangel, while sounding the trumpet of God.

But is this really the image that the Bible writer is trying to convey? Even in our modern times, a person of noteworthy recognition is announced by someone else, either before they enter a room, or as they are are entering a room. Take, for example, a judge in a courtroom. The bailiff or other assigned individual will usually say the words, “All rise for Judge So-and-So,” and everyone on the courtroom rises from their seats. In the United States, when the President enters the room, it is announced authoritatively, and everyone comes to attention. And this has been the case for centuries. In our contemporary lives, in other words, we do not hear a judge announcing himself as he enters his courtroom. We do not hear the President announce himself as he enters the press room or whatever ever surroundings he is arriving upon.

And yet, when it comes to the arrival or entrance of Jesus in full glory, we conjure up that very image. He is announcing his own arrival. Tooting his own horn, as the expression goes.

That is why I am more and more convinced that when Jesus arrives as described at 1 Thessalonians 4:16, that he does so with the pronouncement of an archangel, or, the “voice of an archangel” as it is written. Not to put too fine a point on it, but an archangel acts as bailiff or dignitary to make sure that the audience for the arrival of this very important persona is brought to a proper and rightful state of attention and respect. Just the use of the term “archangel” denotes a high-stationed persona of the heavenly realm, much like “Secretary of State” denotes a high-stationed person in our contemporary times and government hierarchy. In Revelation, this particular angel is referred to as the seventh angel (Revelation 10:7) who is to sound a trumpet. How appropriate that the climax of the outworking of God’s redemption of Humankind be announced by proclamation and trumpet by an archangel!

Another difficulty we face as we try to understand this scripture is the absence of what we refer to as “indefinite articles” such as “a,” “an,” and “the.” Bible translations vary on usage of “the” and “an” in this scripture, probably depending on their interpretational leanings. Even so, my explanation above eliminates the indefinite article difficulty, I believe. Still, I need to also share my observations in regard to the station of “archangel” and whether there is one, many archangels, etc. That will need to wait until a separate segment in this discussion, I’m afraid.

What, then, of the use of the term “with the trumpet of God”? As many may already be aware, the sounding of a trumpet in the Bible preceded a period of judgment, the arrival of a royal dignitary, a battle, or any other significant event that required the arousal of a people to attention. In this case, we’re not talking about just some watchman’s sounding of a trumpet–no, this time it is the trumpet of God Himself being sounded.

It may also bear relevance that the Bible writer’s use of “the trumpet of God” in precedent to their noting that the “dead in Christ shall rise first” is intended to bring to mind what Jesus is recorded as saying at Matthew 24:30-31:

…they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send forth his angels with a great trumpet sound, and they will gather his chosen ones together from the four winds, from one extremity of the heavens to their other extremity. (NWT)

The phrase “dead in Christ shall rise” is without question (at least in my mind) a part of the this “gathering” of Jesus’ “chosen ones together from the four winds, from one extremity of the heavens to their other extremity” and the use of a trumpet to announce that event seems further verification that we are talking about the same event in both scriptures.

There is much to be noted on the Bible’s use of a trumpet within worship and other activity, but for the sake of brevity, I think it bears worthy consideration that at Numbers 29:1, we read:

“‘And in the seventh month, on the first of the month, YOU should hold a holy convention. No sort of laborious work must YOU do. It should prove to be a day of the trumpet blast for YOU. (NWT)

Why this particular passage? Because there seems little reason to doubt that the event described at 1 Thessalonians 4:16 comes at the end of the preaching work that Christians have been assigned. Their labors will have come to their completion. The idea of a “holy convention” surely conjures up the imagery set forth in the rising of the “dead in Christ” and the gathering together of the “chosen ones,” does it not?

Additional points of interest regarding trumpets and their usage in the Bible:

Numbers 10:2,4: 2 “Make for yourself two trumpets of silver. You will make them of hammered work, and they must be at your service for convening the assembly and for breaking up the camps… And if they should blow on just one, the chieftains as heads of the thousands of Israel must also keep their appointment with you. (NWT) [See also: Numbers 10:7-8; Numbers 10:10

1 Corinthians 15:52: Look! I tell YOU a sacred secret: We shall not all fall asleep [in death], but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, during the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we shall be changed. (NWT)

Revelation 4:1: After these things I saw, and, look! an opened door in heaven, and the first voice that I heard was as of a trumpet, speaking with me, saying: “Come on up here, and I shall show you the things that must take place.” (NWT)

Revelation 10:7: …but in the days of the sounding of the seventh angel, when he is about to blow his trumpet, the sacred secret of God according to the good news which he declared to his own slaves the prophets is indeed brought to a finish. (NWT) [See also: Revelation 11:15]

More to follow in regards to the rest of your article…

Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
A brother in Christ, Timothy

Is Jesus also Michael the archangel?

This was my response to someone who had raised the topic back in the Pathways-Online days, and the original topic can be found here. I recently posted this on a site (Hourglass2 Outpost) that I occasionally post at, thinking that it would be nice to here what thoughts others might have on the subject, some 6 1/2 years later… and to expand on my own understanding.

What follows then, in a 5-part series, is not only the 6 1/2 year old post, but my response to someone who asked me to comment on their own observations. I hope that it at least provokes further discussion on the topic.

Original Pathways-Online post

Having said that I will probably shock not a few on this forum by admitting that by Witnesses teaching that Jesus is, in fact, Michael, we probably have erred. I say “probably,” because I do not claim to be an expert on this topic.

I say this because to teach that Jesus is Michael leaves some challenging questions which I don’t think have been addressed by the Society nor by Witnesses. I know that I personally can’t come up with a satisfactory answer to the perplexities of the doctrine.

First, we know that Jesus, having served as the Christ to redeem mankind, was then essentially handed the rulership of the heavens and earth, to begin ruling when his Father, Jehovah deemed the appropriate time. That Jesus had immense power preceding his being born as a human is a pale glimmer to his being absolutely glorified following his faithfulness unto death and subsequent being raised to life once more by Jehovah. His power is all the more limitless, second only to that of Jehovah.

Now, given that realization, let’s take it to the next step of the discussion.

And war broke out in heaven: Mi´cha·el and his angels battled with the dragon, and the dragon and its angels battled 8 but it did not prevail, neither was a place found for them any longer in heaven. 9 So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him.–Revelation 12:7-9 (NWT)

This is our first problem.

If Jesus’ power is now second only to that of Jehovah, then how much of a war would it really be if Jesus was actually Michael? How much of a battle would it be? While we can affirm that Satan and his angels do not prevail in this cataclysmic war in heaven, does that in and of itself give us enough to infer that because “Michael and his angels” win, that “Michael” is Jesus?

Tying in the passage from Daniel, namely the previously mentioned reference to Michael as “one of the foremost princes,” we know two more facts: one, that the angels themselves engaged in opposing conflicts with other angels. Notice how Daniel recorded what the angel told him:

13 But the prince of the royal realm of Persia was standing in opposition to me for twenty-one days, and, look! Mi´cha·el, one of the foremost princes, came to help me; and I, for my part, remained there beside the kings of Persia. –Daniel 10:13 (NWT)

“The prince of the royal realm of Persia” cannot be a mere reference to a human prince, for what human can be said to be able to stand “in opposition” for even 21 days? Even Paul mentioned the unseen influence of various demonic princes, did he not, in his letter to the Ephesians, to whom he wrote the following:

Put on the complete suit of armor from God that YOU may be able to stand firm against the machinations of the Devil; 12 because we have a wrestling, not against blood and flesh, but against the governments, against the authorities, against the world rulers of this darkness, against the wicked spirit forces in the heavenly places.–Ephesians 6:11-12 (NWT)

A more succinct rendering follows:

For we are not fighting against people made of flesh and blood, but against the evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against those mighty powers of darkness who rule this world, and against wicked spirits in the heavenly realms.–Ephesians 6:12 (NLT)

Paul’s statement supports the understanding that while we have our “flesh and blood” rulers, those rulers are watched over and essentially controlled by the “evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world.” It follows, then, that the “prince of the royal realm of Persia” that was said to be “standing in opposition” to this angel sent to deliver a message to Daniel was none other than one of those demonic “evil” rulers that Paul mentions.

On that occasion, another angel, “one of the foremost princes” named Michael, came to the aid of that messenger. If there was a valid reason to say that Michael and Jesus are one and the same, would not Daniel have written that “Michael, the foremost prince (not one of those princes)” came to help this messenger?

In fact, when we reference Strong’s 08269, we find that the original word is sar, which translates into “captain, commander, prince, ruler.”

Thus, Michael is one of the foremost “captains,” “commanders,” “princes,” or “rulers” among the angelic ranks. Much like our human armies have admirals, generals, and captains as commanders of our armies (and since war is of demonic origin, there’s no surprise that our carnal warfare emulates and even may mirror demonic familiarity with ranks!), the angels have rank and station.

Which brings me back to my earlier point about Jesus’ absolute power and glory now. Could Satan and his angels really war against Jesus? It certainly wouldn’t amount to any sort of battle. We’re talking about the glorified Jesus, whose power is second only to Jehovah. Through Jesus, all of Creation came into being, so of what great feat would throwing Satan and his cohorts to the earth be for a fully empowered Jesus?

Thus, we’re left with the conclusion that Jesus himself will not personally engage in this war in heaven–but rather, will give the command, which will then be carried out by the angels which will have been loyal through the millennia. These angels will then engage in a war in heaven (this war is likely already underway, but has yet to reach a climactic point when Satan and his demons are afterwards cast to the earth), fighting against fellow angels in an unimaginable battle. Among those loyal angels will be those angelic captains, or chiefs, commanders or princes, leading the war of righteousness to its final, decisive end. And among those captains will be Michael, who obviously is a staunch supporter of Jehovah’s arrangement to the extent of having as his own name the banner of “Who is like God?”– a very challenge in itself to anyone who would dare usurp Jehovah’s sovereignty.

And yet we can identify Michael, in spite of his high station among angels, as one who leaves judgment to Jehovah, as recorded for us in Jude the following:

9 But when Mi´cha·el the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses’ body, he did not dare to bring a judgment against him in abusive terms, but said: “May Jehovah rebuke you.” –Jude 9 (NWT)

Clearly, Michael is an angel to be reckoned with, which makes it no wonder that he is looking forward to carrying out the work of casting the Devil and his followers from heaven.

But is he Jesus? Do the scriptures support the view that Jesus and Michael are one and the same?

No.

Humbly,
Timothy