Some might say, "If Jesus was the Word, and master worker, wouldn't he have already had a higher position then all other angels before he came to earth?", and my response to that is, where do you find that? I can't seem to find that scripture. Therefore doesn't that tell us that impression isn't supported in the text?

Note, in Philippians 2. Jehovah gives Jesus, a name above every name. So Jesus, before receiving the name that is above every name, had a name that wasn't above every name.

I personally think, this is referring to his millennial reign. He will be in charge of the kingdom for 1000 years, then Jehovah will take back the name/throne/kingdom.

 

Joshua, you gave us a lot to ponder on, I will give a little more. We will turn in our bible to Heb:2:5- For it is not to "Angles" that he has subjected the inhabited earth to come. In this vs it is clear that Jehovah is not going to subject the earth to come by "Angeles" and we know to whom Jehovah has given that work to, it is to Christ and all the first fruits of this earth Rev:5:10. In the Bible their is always two side to the medal for understanding it, and maybe we have to look on the rim of it to. Ahh, things are not so simple, but in this exchange of "Love" we are accomplishing Heb:10:24,25, May Jehovah's blessing be with you all, Regent

 

Michael is not exactly "who is like God", but "who is like God?", with the question mark at the end.
The one who bears this name asks who is comparable to God. In what event was it alleged that it was possible to be like God? Genesis 3:5: For God knows that in the very day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and bad.
So this Michael was present at that point in history and offended that someone could claim to be like God.

 

(Isa 9:6-7) “. . .For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. 7 To the abundance of the princely rule and to peace there will be no end,. . .”



-

 

In the original Greek, they somehow got by without needing to specify "a," "an" or "the," leaving open enough room for sides to believe which one goes in the hole there. With the Hebrews, they didn't need vowels. They were the shorthand texters of their day.

It seems that one begins here by deciding whether to put "an" or "the" or just paraphrase the passage entirely. If one inserts "an" here, then you have your first piece of scriptural proof that there were more than one archangels. If you go with "the," then you have a proof-text that there is only one archangel.

Then there's the question: Did the Jews in Paul's day believe there was more than one archangel during the first century, and are there any Jewish writings contemporary with Paul that could shed light on the Jewish understanding of the hierarchy within the heavens. For example, we know that Paul was among the Jews who believed there were at least three (2 Corinthians 12:2) unique heavens, or tiers, perhaps. There are Christians today who believe that Gabriel is also an archangel, but what was the first century's Jew's belief about Gabriel? Surely we have the means to find out easier than any other time in history, right?

As to Clarke's Commentary, the "sacred writings" he is referring to are those chosen by the Roman Catholic Church, upon which the Protestant Bible is derived. But the writers of the epistles never really viewed their letters as sacred in a way that the Torah, for example, was sacred. It would be later followers of followers who followed followers of Jesus's apostles. And the scrolls of the Prophets were sacred, of course. As a Pharisee, Paul would've had access to still more texts considered sacred among Jews. What other scrolls have Jews gone to great lengths to preserve? What light do the Dead Sea Scrolls shed on the goings-on of the heavenly realm? Someone clearly saw fit to preserve those writings alongside the treasured scrolls of Isaiah and Daniel and all the others we are very familiar with.

[Continued in next post]

~~Earthbound

 

This still is dependent on whether one inserts "a" or "the" in front. Are we talking about a "chief angel" or a "ruling angel" -OR- are we talking about the "chief angel" or the "ruling angel," because whichever one a person chooses here will set the course for what they build on this into their system of belief.

Again, this is entirely dependent on someone asserting "the" where "an" is equally possible, given the absence of articles in the original language of Greek.

Is it your position that Michael was promoted from being "one of the foremost princes" to "chief angel" or "ruling angel" through his earthly existence as Jesus of Nazareth?

​

I believe you are mistaken when you say "Michael was the Prince of mankind" in regard to the two verses you cited above. "Your people" is in reference to the Jews. That is how Daniel understood it and wrote it down. I'll leave it to others to argue that Daniel was wrong, or that the angel who was delivering the message misled Daniel by meaning some other people.

It is the same with the second verse cited: "your prince" is in reference to the angel who held a station over the Jews, considering how we read earlier in this passage you quoted in part:

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 Persians had a prince of their own, one who was preventing the angel from getting through to Daniel. If Jacob was able to wrestle with an angel all night, imagine two angelic beings fighting for 21 days! The angel here describes Michael as "one of [gap] foremost princes." Who were the other princes considered foremost among angels in Daniel's day?

I'm not sure I understand the "some might say" part. Do they provide any scriptures they believe support their position? And are you referring to the belief that Jesus existed as the Word before he came into existence as Jesus of Nazareth, and that through Jesus in his pre-human existence, Jehovah created all things, by default making him greater than what was created through him...? Or is there something else I'm missing here?

Alright, this is a great time for me to ask you this question:

Do you personally believe that the extent of Jesus' glorification makes him equal to "the dragon and its angels?"

Because the Jesus *I* try to follow is now second in command of Creation, and Satan is part of the Creation. With a word, Satan could be removed from existence by Jesus. To suggest that Satan could actually battle Jesus at this point is incredulous to me. It seems far more reasonable to me, then, to see Michael as one of the foremost princes among the angelic hosts who is in command of a battalion of angels who battle with Satan and his "third of the angels," later described in the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Jesus is overseeing this heavenly housecleaning, but it is the angels who participate in the battle, casting their fallen brethren to the earth in a powerful display of recognition of not only Jehovah's sovereignty, but of Jesus' rulership over even them. The angel who has earned the greatest reputation for standing with integrity before Jehovah earned the title of challenge to any who would stand opposed. Just as Jacob earned the name meaning "wrestled with God," becoming known as Israel, this angel earned the name meaning "Who is like God?" which we translate as "Michael."

The apostle Paul indicated a belief that he and others would be placed in a position over the angels, which arguably would include the foremost angels and any archangel(s).

Do you not know that we are to sit in judgement upon angels--to say nothing of things belonging to this life? — 1 Corinthians 6:3, Weymouth

Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
~~Earthbound

 

“Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued.” ( Dan 12:1 NASB ) Where do we find that book that is going to be opened?

I will state that the following scriptures will prove to anyone with common sense, that the person we know as Jesus Christ, the anointed of Jehovah God, is Michael The Archangel! The name Michael, meaning in Hebrew: who is like god, is not a question. It is a descriptive statement. The Hebrew and Aramaic words translated as “prince” is sar. As I stated in my post to “Did the gentile times begin in 607 BCE or 70 CE? - #11”, the name is a composite word; miy = (me/mah) = who, an interrogative pronoun of persons, + ka (kaw) = is like, + el = god. “...the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” (2 Co 4:4 NASB ) “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” (Col 1:15) Who else in the Bible is “like God”?

He “stands guard over the sons of your people,” = not Jews, it’s Israel! The Nation! These were the people that Jehovah God chose to represent Him. Jews are from one tribe of the twelve, Judah. So, now we have another people who represent Jehovah God, and, His Son Jesus Christ, our king to be; we are Spiritual Israel.

The following scriptures tie this together. I assume that everyone here knows who the lamb is!
Rev 13:8, mentions those not written in the “book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.”

“And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.” ( Rev 20:12 NASB )

Then we find, “And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.” ( Rev 20:15 NASB )

Who is the one judging from this “book of life”? It is the person we know as Jesus. He existed as the first creation of his father Jehovah. His name is Michael! “the firstborn of all creation.” (Col 1:15)

 

I am surprise that you say this, Tsaphah, because I have always read that it was a question. In fact, I did not find a website that says the contrary. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_ut_Deus?.
Do you have some valid reason to think that it is a descriptive statement?

 

Thank you, but it is midnight! We are already tomorrow.

 

Before I answer, I have other things to post. It will take me some time due to other things going on, that I have to deal with. We are not dealing with tradition here; where your Wikipedia information comes from. You may want to read my new post about Tradition.

 

Generally, I'm not a fan of Wikipedia. First, because anyone can write anything. In addition, I also had to deal with moderators, especially from Wikipedia france, who feel invested with the power of life and death on who writes in what should be a participatory encyclopedia. If an idea or a person does not have the chance to please them, immediately they delete the posts.

 

OK, Baruk,
Let me first explain that we do not speak in Hebrew, or Greek. This is especially true today. Before we can understand those languages, we have to put our minds back into the customs of those people and places. We also must realize the customs, idioms, phrasing, and sentence structure. We (military) had a saying; “Language is code!” Depending on which language you use, it will depend on how many digits/letters, or combinations of these you use. If you are familiar with computer languages, you will understand where I’m going with this. Today, the top 9 computer coding languages are: SQL, JAVA, JAVASCRIPT, C#, PYRHON, C++, PHP, IOS, and RUBY/RAILS.

To start simply, both of the ancient languages we are speaking about did not use capital letters, or punctuation marks. Sentences did not have spaces to separate them. They also, unlike English have a noun, verb, placement that is different. The Hebrew also was written from right to left. Here is an example:
“Now these [are] the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob.” (Exo 1:1 English Translation)

“and these names of sons of israel the ones coming egypt ward with Jacob man and household of him they came” (Hebrew manuscript word for word order Translation)

In order for us to be able to read and understand these manuscripts, it is necessary to depend on a person who have what are titled hermeneutical training. This is a person trained in knowing which right words to use in the translation of the message. Example: English = “name”, Hebrew and Aramaic has 7 different words for name. (amar, zeker, kanah, naqab, qara’, shem, shum). Shem = Hebrew, Shum = Aramaic.

Hermeneutics = interpreting (code) of languages, the science of interpretation, especially of the scriptures. The branch of theology that deals with the principles of Biblical exegesis.

This word is from the Greek word, hermeneia (her-may-ni'-ah) was used by Paul, in his letter about those speaking “in tongues”. (1 Cor 14:26) The other is from the same base, hermeneuo (her-mayn-yoo'-o) which comes from the Greek god of language, Hermes. The other thing we must take into account of a translation is the translators’ background and training. Is he a non-believer? Was he trained in a religious school? What are his beliefs? Who is paying for his skills?

Getting to my point, a name is used to identify someone or some thing that describes what or who it is. Does it describe shape, looks, material, actions, etc. As far as punctuation, which should it be? Who is like god? Who is like god. Who is like god! I read it as like the last two. They are descriptive of who Michael is.

Here are a couple of sites you may be interested in checking out.
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/marks/marks.htm

Chuck Missler July, 2017 - Prepare for End Times Apostasy!

 

Fantastic post Joshua.

 

Thanks for the explanation.
As you say, we do not speak Hebrew, or Greek. Why did not God have the Bible written in English? It would have saved us headaches! What a lack of anticipation on his part!
For Michael, I have always seen things like this:
The Devil claims to Eve that she and her husband may be like gods. On this statement, Michael stands up, offended, for to him there is only one God, and it is folly to think that one can be equal to him. In fact, Michael himself never wanted to be equal to him. Then he says: who is like God? That is, how dare you pretend that?
Michael will fight and defeat Satan during the final war, which is only fair, since he was the first to take the defense of God.
If we believe that Jesus is Michael, as we have always been taught, then yes, we can think that he took the defense of his father at the moment of the rebellion, and that he will have the privilege to defeat Satan. He did not want to be equal to his father (Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God – Phil. 2:6), but he is the reflection, the glory: God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend—of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground— and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
He asked the question "who is like God?”, and God gave him a position that enabled him to be effectively like God, to be his reflection, his glory: He is the reflection of [his] glory and the exact representation of his very being.
If Michael is not Jesus, it changes nothing. He could be an angel who took the defense of God and that will have a reward in fighting Satan. But Jesus’ role is always the same. And Michael could say that only one is like God, Jesus.
This is only a personal idea, based on my own reflections, so I am open to any counterargument.

 

I'm still gathering my thoughts and brushing back up on this subject, but am having another crazy week with the day-job so my time is restricted at the present time.

I do want to thank Tsapah for the clarification below, as they are correct (in my estimation):

"He “stands guard over the sons of your people,” = not Jews, it’s Israel! The Nation! These were the people that Jehovah God chose to represent Him. Jews are from one tribe of the twelve, Judah."

~~Earthbound

 

Why did the Watchtower replaced Jesus with Jehovah in Jude 1:5 and if Jesus is able to place demons in dark chains, why can't he judge Satan?