THE ORIGINAL WTS BELIEF WAS THAT JESUS NEVER WAS MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL
His [Jesus’] position is contrasted with that of men and angels, as he is Lord of both, having ‘all power in heaven and earth.’ Hence it is said, ‘Let all God's angels worship him;’ [that must include Michael, the chief angel; hence, Michael is not the Son of God] and the reason is, because he has ‘by inheritanceobtained a more excellent name than they.’ (Bold and italic emphasis ours).
The Watchtower November 1879 page 4 stated:
However, this does not mean that the WTS did not teach that Jesus pre-existed. Indeed they have always promoted a form of Arianism; whereby Jesus pre-existed as a spirit being.
CURRENT TEACHING ONLY GAINED BY "INFERENCES''
Likely the change came in the WTS teaching, on the subject of who Michael was, after its founder Charles Russell had died. The teaching that Michael was the pre-human Jesus is what is currently taught by the WTS.
Just as Trinitarians make inferences from certain Scriptures to arrive at the doctrine of the Trinity, so too, with modern-day JWs concerning the teaching that Michael the archangel was the pre-existent Jesus. There is, however, no clear statement in Scripture that Jesus was previously Michael. The WTS teaching is arrived at by combining the following texts: 1 Thessalonians 4:16; Revelation 12:2-12; 19:11-16; John 12:31; Jude 9; and Daniel 10:13, 12:1. So this too is a doctrine from inferences rather than from direct strong connections.
THE WEAK CONNECTIONS CONCERNING MICHAEL
Daniel 10:13, 21 and 12:1 inform us that: “Michael was one of theforemostprinces…the prince of YOU people ... the great prince who is standing in behalf of your people.”
Jude 9 informs us that: Michael is an archangel
Revelation 12:7-10 informs us that: In the war in heaven Michael and his angelsfight the dragon and defeat him. The dragon is thrown to the earth and then the kingdom of God and the authority of Christ come. This is the 5th and last mention of Michael.
CONCERNING JESUS
Revelation 19:11-16 informs us that: The one “called Faithful and True,” also called “The Word of God,” strikes the nations and wars with “the wild beast and the kings of the earth and their armies.” He kills off “the rest” with the long sword.
1 Thessalonians 4:16 informs us that:
“...the Lord [Jesus] himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first.”
THE WTS ASSUMPTIONS AND INFERENCES:
1. That an archangel is a completely different creature to an angel.
2. That there is only one archangel – Michael.
3. That because the name Michael means “who is like God” then Michael must be the pre-human Jesus because that name means “Jehovah is salvation.”
4. That it must be Jesus “who is standing in behalf of [God’s] people.”
5. That because Michael is “the great prince” only he could descend with a commanding call and with an archangel’s voice.
6. That only Jesus could defeat the dragonand the connection is made to John 12:31 which informs us that:“now the ruler of this world will be cast out.”
7. That Jesus must be Michael because they both have troops
8. That the Son of God had a pre-human existence.
These eight assumptions will be examined point by point below:
1. AN ARCHANGEL IS AN ANGEL
An archangel is an angel but of higher rank and acts as chief over his own body of angels. To illustrate: a chief engineer is still an engineer but in charge of other engineers. Or an alpha-male gorilla is still a gorilla. The idea that an archangel is a different creature to other angels is never stated in the Scriptures.
2. THERE IS MORE THAN ONE ARCHANGEL
“Michael, one of the foremost (Heb. rishown) princes”(Dan. 10:13). Or, as in most translations: “Michael, one of the chief princes” ESV.
This verse clearly shows that there must be other “chief princes.” The Hebrew word rishown means “chief” and is translated in Greek as arche and thereforeverse 10 is speaking of “arch-princes.” With Jude 9 calling him “Michael the archangel” and with Daniel 10:3 clearly showing that Michael is an angel it is clear that he is “one of the arch-princes” i.e. ‘one of the archangels.’
Furthermore, the fact that 1 Thessalonians 4:16 speaks of “an archangel’s voice” shows that there is more than one archangel.Although only Michael and Gabriel are the only named angels in the Scriptures it was a common Jewish belief that there were seven named archangels, four of whom stood in God’s presence. An examination, in Scripture, of the duties and activities of Gabriel show him also to be an archangel i.e. one who “stands near before God” even though he is not called an archangel.
3. BECAUSE THE NAME MICHAEL MEANS“WHO IS LIKE GOD?” AND THE NAME JESUS MEANS “JEHOVAH IS SALVATION” MUST THEY BE THE SAME PERSON?
The argument that Jesus was previously the archangel Michael because of similarity of the meanings of their names is a false argument because these meanings are not all that close. In the Scriptures, there are 10 humans named Michael as well as Saul’s daughter Michal whose name also means “Who is Like God.” Yet, having this name hardly means that they were all pre-human Jesus.’ Furthermore, there were another three Jesus’ in the Bible
record as well as Joshua, Jehoshua and Jeshaiah all of which names have the same meaning of “Jehovah is salvation;” yet again none of these was Michael in a pre-human existence. Certainly there are many other names in the Scriptures of different individuals who have names similar in meaning to that of Jesus and equally glorify God e.g. Jeremiah = “Jehovah Exalts,” Jehoram = Jehovah is Exalted,” and Jehu = “Jehovah is He.” Similarly for Michael e.g. Micaiah = “Who is Like Jehovah?” So the idea that only Michael takes the lead in upholding God’s sovereignty and therefore he must be Jesus who does the same is made completely null and void by these facts.
4. DERELICTION OF DUTY WHEN JESUS FAILS IN “STANDING IN BEHALF” OF GOD’S PEOPLE
“Michael…the great prince who is standing in behalf of your people” (Dan. 12:1).
The Hebrew Interlinear translates as “the one protecting over…” NASB gives“who stands guard over…” So if Michael left his post to become Jesus for about 33 years he would have been guilty of dereliction of duty. Nowhere in the Scriptures is it stated that someone else was assigned to protect Israel during this period, something that Jesus certainly wasn’t doing.
5. “WITH A COMMANDING CALL AND THE VOICE OF AN ARCHANGEL” DOES NOT MEAN JESUS IS AN ARCHANGEL
First Thessalonians 4:16 most likely is giving a metaphorical description of the power of Jesus’ voice when he returns e.g. like the roar of a lion. The 3 point phrase “with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet” was commonly used Hebrew emphasis and intensification. This would then indicate that Jesus will come with great power and authority as is stated in other Scriptures (Matt 24:30, 31). Or, possibly, the commanding call, trumpet andvoice are literally the voice of an accompanying archangel, indicated by the fact that “the Lord descends with...” In either case Michael is not mentioned.Furthermore, 1 Thess. 4:13-18 is about a sequence of events rather than aboutthe nature of Jesus.
The IVP Bible Background Commentary states that:
Michael, the chief archangel of Jewish literature, was considered Israel’s guardian angel and thus figures in Jewish texts about the final battle; here Jesus seems to assume Michael’s role on behalf of believers, God’s people p. 593.
However, Jesus cannot possibly actually be Michael for the reasons stated in Hebrews 1 and the further reasons given below.
6. CAN ONLY JESUS THROW SATAN OUT OF HEAVEN?
Throughout the book of Revelation a variety of ordinary angels are shown to have significant roles in God’s purpose. For instance:
“…another angel emerged from the temple that is in heaven, he, too, having a sharp sickle … put your sharp sickle in and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, and he hurled it into the winepress of the anger of God” (Rev. 14:17).
· This angel is not even described as an archangel so there is no reason why Michael could not be assigned to hurl Satan out of heaven.
· Jesus comes onto the time-of-the-end scene in Revelation 19 where his battle is, not with Satan, but with the wild beast, the false prophet and their armies.
· In fact, even the locking away of Satan for the 1000 years is done by “an angel” (Rev. 20:1).
7. MUST THE EXALTED JESUS BE MICHAEL JUST BECAUSE THEY BOTH HAVE TROOPS OF ANGELS? SATAN ALSO HAS HIS OWN ANGELS
The fact that the post-resurrection Jesus has his own angels (Matt. 25:31, 2 Thess. 1:7), and that Michael has his own angels (Rev. 12:7) does not make them the same person because:
· The dragon [Satan] also has his own angels (Rev. 12:9), but this does not make him Jesus or Michael.
· Jesus is never shown to have his own angels prior to his resurrection. At his arrest he would have had to ask his Father for help from angels:
“Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father to supply me with at this moment more than twelve legions of angels” (Matt. 26:53).
8. AN ASSUMPTION THAT THERE WAS A PRE-HUMAN EXISTENCE
It is axiomatic that one cannot be pre-human and human and still be the same person. Literal pre-existence is not taught in the Scriptures although a number of individuals were foreordained i.e. were in existence in God’s thoughts before they came into literal existence. The idea of literal pre-existence is of pagan origin, in particular from Greek mythology. It is properly termed incarnation which means enfleshment.
WHY JESUS CANNOT BE MICHAEL
1. Nowhere in Scripture is Michael called “the Son of God” as though he were unique in this respect. Nevertheless, as with all other angels, he was one of “the sons of God” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:7).
2. Nowhere in Scripture is there even a hint that Michael left heaven to become Jesus.
3. Nowhere in Scripture is there even a hint that Jesus, in going to heaven, resumed a supposed identity as Michael. He is always called by combinations of the terms Jesus and Christ after his arrival in heaven. The WTS argument that the post- ascension retaining of the name Jesus to show his identity with the Son of God on earth is extremely weak.
4. The early parts of the Gospel accounts of Matthew, Luke and John are about the origin of Jesus. These would all be the perfect places to reveal that an archangel was about to leave or had left heaven to take on human form. However, none of these writers took this perfect opportunity. In saying that “the word became flesh” (John 1:14) John could have made it clear by naming Michael if “the word” really was Michael. However, even Jesus isn’t directly mentioned until verse 17.
ANGELS CANNOT DIE - BUT JESUS DIED
As shown earlier, an archangel is an angel but of higher rank and acts as chief over his own body of angels. However, contrary to WTS teaching angels are immortal. So: MICHAEL IS IMMORTAL
“...those...neither marry…neither can they [i.e. resurrected Christians] dieanymore, for they are like the angels” (Luke 20:35, 36).
Just as “Christ…dies no more” (Rom. 6:9) because he was granted immortality so too God’s holy angels (Mark 8:38) were earlier granted immortality and cannot die. This implies that Michael, too, had been granted immortality before Jesus’ time. Since immortal beings have no need of procreation to replace their kind they do not need marriage.
NOTE: Similar to the KJV the NWT has failed to include the word “for” which gives the reason why resurrected Christians will no longer marry, namely, “becausethey can no longer die.”
ESV renders as: “…for they cannot die any more, because they are equal to angels.”
NJB renders as: “...because they can no longer die, for they are the same as angels.”
DOES ‘IMMORTAL’ MEAN ABSOLUTELY INDESTRUCTIBLE?
Is there validity to the argument that the phrase “neither can they die anymore”with reference to angels cannot mean that they are immortal because that term means absolutely indestructible? No. The term ‘immortal’ does not mean indestructible in the absolute sense. To explain: Man was created as a ‘mortal being.’ This means that he was perishable/corruptible i.e. under normal circumstances his body would wear down until it ceased to function and so he was subject to death. ‘Immortal’ simply means the negating of this process. So even the “indestructible life” (Heb 7:16) that Jesus now has is in respect to a negating of his original mortality. Because God is “the Almighty One” he clearly has the power to end the life of even an immortal person, otherwise he is no longer almighty.
AS A MORTAL JESUS WAS ALWAYS SUBJECT TO DEATH AND DIED
“...Christ…dies no more…death is no longer master over him” (Rom. 6:9).
In contrast to the angels, Jesus, before his resurrection was always subject to death and, of course, he died a real death. So it is impossible that an immortal Michael, an angel, could become a mortal human and then die on the execution stake. Jesus was only granted immortality at his resurrection when he became “the firstborn from the dead” (Col 1:18, Rev 1:5). These facts indicate that Jesus could never have previously been Michael.
THE SCRIPTURES DIFFERENTIATE JESUS FROM THE ANGELS
Throughout Hebrews chapters 1 and 2 angels, and therefore archangels, are compared with the exalted Jesus and are shown to be inferior. This comparison must, of course, include the archangel Michael:
(Heb. 1:7, 8).
JESUS IS SUPERIOR TO ALL ANGELS
“So he [the Son] has become better than the angels, as he has inherited amore excellent name than they” (Heb. 1:4).
If Jesus was not better than the angels before his exaltation, he could not have been an archangel, because such an angel would be in charge of a body of angels.
MICHAEL COULD NOT BE CALLED “MY SON”
“…to which one of the angels did he ever say: ‘You are my Son’” (Heb. 1:5).
Therefore things said to the Son were never said to Michael - an angel. God has never addressed an angel as my son. So Michael was never the Only-begotten Son i.e. the uniquely begotten Son.
NO ANGEL HAS THE EARTH SUBJECTED TO HIM
“For it isnot to angelsthat He has subjected the inhabited earth to come....What is man...or theSon of Man...You...have appointed him over the works of Your hands; You have put all things in subjection under his feet” (Heb. 2:5-7).
So Michael is not to have the inhabited earth brought into subjection to himself. This is reserved for Jesus the Son of Man. If the author of Hebrews thought that Jesus is the archangel why does he labour to prove that Jesus is superior to angels, to Moses, to Joshua and to Levi? All he needed to say was that Jesus is the archangel, thereby, automatically making him superior.
JESUS DIFFERENTIATES HIMSELF FROM THE ANGELS
“Concerning that day and hour, nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavensnor the Son” (Matt. 24: 36).So Michael, who is indeed of the category of angel, lacks this knowledge.
JESUS HAS AUTHORITY TO REBUKE WHEREAS MICHAEL DOES NOT
Jesus:
At the temptation in the wilderness Jesus used the Scriptures to rebuke Satan(Luke 4:1-13). Later he rebuked demons and Peter:
“Then Jesus rebuked it, and the demon came out of him...” (Matt. 17:18).
“He [Jesus] turned... rebuked Peter, and said: ‘Get behind me Satan...’” (Mark 8:3).
Michael:
“But when Michael the archangel...did not dare bring a judgment against him [the Devil] in abusive terms, but said: ‘May Jehovah rebuke you’” (Jude 9).
FOLLOWING THE LOGIC OF WTS TEACHING
The WTS teaches that:
1. Spirit persons have bodies:
“the bodies of spirit persons (God, Christ, the angels) are glorious”
INSIGHT Vol. 1 p.348.
2. The soul (the whole person) = body + spirit.
3. Spirit = life, life force or life principle all of which are impersonal. See INSIGHTVol. 2, p. 246, sub-heading ‘Organism.’
Yet the WTS also teaches that only Michael’s life was transferred to Mary’s womb. INSIGHT Vol. 2, p. 56 speaks of: the transferral of the life of his first-born son from the spirit realm to earth.
WHAT THE ABOVE WT TEACHINGS LOGICALLY MUST MEAN REGARDING MICHAEL AND MARY : MICHAEL REALLY GOES OUT OF EXISTENCE.
If only Michael’s life was transferred to Mary’s womb by being separated from his body, then his lifeless spirit body would be left in heaven. He would no longer be a soul (whole person). His person would have ceased existence when his bodyand life were separated.
NO PERSONALITY IS TRANSFERRED TO MARY
If only Michael’s life was transferred to Mary’s womb, it would mean that animpersonal force would have come from heaven and into Mary so that no personality from Michael could be present in Mary’s womb because life (spirit) isimpersonal.
Yet the WTS maintains the contradictory position that:
the child retained identity as the same person who had resided in heaven as the Word...and that he was a genuine descendant of David.
This proposition that “the child retained identity as the same person who had resided in heaven as the Word” clearly contradicts the above WTS teachings and creates the impossible situation that Jesus would have been geneticallyentirely from Mary and nothing to do with the characteristics/personality of Michael. It would also mean that Michael’s impersonal life force simply and impossibly used Jesus’ body as a carrier for 33 years until Jesus was killed.
THE PRE-HUMAN EXISTENCE OF A PERSON IS ILLOGICAL
Because no one can exist before they exist it is posited that Michael gave up who he was to become a human. However, no one can give up who they are and continue to be the same person. So the connection with Michael is completely lost. Again, such ideas only originate in Greek mythology.
THE DESCENDANT FROM DAVID OR THE PERSON FROM HEAVEN— BUT NOT BOTH
Although we do not have detailed information to explain how the conception of Jesus took place we do know that “power of the Most High will overshadow you[Mary]” (Luke 1:35). In this statement there is no mention of the transfer of another entity into Mary’s womb. However, if we imagine that it had been actually possible for a real disembodied personality of Michael to be transferred to Mary’s womb and to have been combined with the Davidic genetics in one of Mary’s eggs, then Jesus would have been a hybrid who was half human and half archangel. Such a concept does not fit with the biblical data.
Alternatively, if, in this belief, a spirit creature was transferred directly to the womb of Mary with no connection being made with any of her genetics then Mary would simply have been a surrogate rather than Jesus’ real mother and Jesus would have been fully spirit but changed into human form and so have been an incarnation or even a materialization. This false concept smacks of paganism inasmuch as it is associated with the idea of pre-existing souls commonly found in Buddhism and Hinduism.Such a concept, found within Greek Gnosticism, is totally at odds with the Scriptures because Jesus is shown to be a lineal descendant of Abraham and David (Matt.1:1) and so having genetics transmitted from them to Mary.
THERE WAS NEVER ANY ISSUE OVER A PRE-EXISTENT JESUS IN THE FIRST CENTURY
Whenever there is a change of highly significant beliefs or procedures controversy is inevitable. This was true in the 1st century during the transition period from Judaism to Christianity when there were indeed a number of major teachings and practices that changed. Some of these issues caused controversies among Christians themselves and some of these issues led to persecution of Christians by the Jewish leaders. So did the issue of a pre-existent Jesus fall into either of these categories?
· Was there, in the biblical record any issue among Christians over whether or not Jesus had been the archangel Michael who then was transferred into Mary’s womb?
· Was this, according to the biblical record, a teaching that was preached so that there would be discontent and even persecution of Christians by the Jewish leadership who were expecting a Messiah entirely from the human gene pool i.e. one descended from Abraham through David?
· Was this a teaching that was preached only to the Gentiles who would be more receptive to the Platonic concept of pre-existence
THE MAIN FIRST CENTURY CONTROVERSIES AMONG CHRISTIANS
1. The accepting of Gentile Christians as now being the people of God along with Jewish Christians (Gal. 2:11-14).
2. Gentile believers not being required to keep the Mosaic Law (Acts 15:23-29).
3. Jewish Christians not being required to keep the Mosaic Law (Col. 2:16, 17; Heb 10:10).
4. Correct usage of the Gifts of the spirit (1 Cor. 12-14).
5. Orderliness at meetings (1 Cor.14:34-40; 1Tim. 2:8-15).
6. The respectful celebrating of the Lord’s Evening Meal (1 Cor. 11).
However, it is evident that the controversies of the 1st century Christian Congregation never involved whether or not Jesus had previously been Michael the archangel or any other spirit person. Was this because the Jewish Christians expected a Messiah who had pre-existed and therefore it was not an issue for any of them? No. The Jews of the 1st century did not believe in a coming Messiah who pre-existed himself i.e. one who had previously been a different creature in heaven, but rather one who was fully part of humanity. They expected a Messiah entirely from the human gene pool i.e. one descended from Abraham through David? (Please see STUDIES 13 and 14). Furthermore, almost all leading scholars agree that the concept of pre-existence was entirely of pagan Greek origin and not taught in the Hebrew Scriptures.
ISSUES BRINGING PERSECUTION FROM THE JEWISH LEADERSHIP
1. The resurrection of Jesus as proclaimed by Peter and John (Acts 4:2; 5:28).
2. That Jesus would destroy the temple and “alter the customs which Moses handed down to us” as supposedly proclaimed by Stephen (Acts 6:14; 7:54-58).
3. That Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God as proclaimed by Paul (Acts 9:20-22). (Acts 9:23-25).
4. For Paul’s bringing a Gentile [Trophimus from Ephesus] into the inner courts of the Temple in Jerusalem (Acts 21:28-29).
5. For Paul’s preaching that Jesus had died and was now alive” (Acts 25:18-19).
As can be seen from this list the Christian teaching issues concerning Jesus which brought down the wrath of the Jewish religious leaders concerned the claim that he is the Messiah and that he was resurrected. If the earliest Christians had preached about a pre-existent Messiah they would have been severely persecuted by the Jewish leadership for preaching a significantly distorted version of the coming Messiah. However, the record shows that the earliest Christians were never persecuted over this subject and so showing how very unlikely it was that they ever believed in a pre-existent Jesus.
ISSUES BRINGING PERSECUTION BY GENTILES
1. The advocating of “customs that are not lawful for us [in Philippi] as Romans to accept or practice” (Acts 16:21) by Paul and Silas.
2. The proclaiming that Jesus, as the Messiah, had to die and rise from the dead (Acts 17:3) [Paul and Silas in Thessalonica].
3. An accusation that Christians [in Thessalonica] were “acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus” (Acts 17:7).
4. For Paul’s teaching that idols were not really gods (Acts 19:26) and so causing the crowds to chant for many hours: “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians.”
Not once were the earliest Christians accused by Gentiles of teaching that Jesus was actually God’s agent for the creation of the universe. (Please see STUDIES 10 and 11).
In fact, there is nothing in the biblical record, particularly in Acts, of the preaching by 1st century Christians that the archangel Michael had descended into Mary’s womb. (Please see STUDIES 15 and 16).
THERE NEVER WAS AN ISSUE OVER A PRE-EXISTENT MESSIAH IN THE 1stCENTURY
All of this is evidence that the earliest Christians never changed their view away from the biblical and Jewish statements concerning the coming human Messiah as one who would be descended from Abraham and in the line of David i.e. entirely within the human gene pool.
It would indeed be strange if Christians had engaged in the above controversies and put up with persecution over the above listed issues and yet never engaged in a controversy or suffered any persecution because of Christian acceptance of a teaching that Messiah had now been revealed as being the archangel Michael descended from heaven through Mary’s womb. Such a major issue would surely have brought controversy if it really had been taught.
A MID-2ND CENTURY ISSUE
The first century Middle Platonic philosopher NUMENIUS introduced the idea of a 2nd transcendental entity between the Supreme Being and the universe. The Christian philosopherJustin Martyr first used the word pre-existence with reference to Jesus in about 150 C.E. However, Justin had been thoroughly schooled in the Greek philosophical thinking of his day, including the thoughts of Numenius whose ideas he found attractive. So JUSTIN applied Numenius’ ideas to Jesus, speaking of him as an “arithmetically second God” saying:
There is and there is said to be another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because he announces to all men whatsoever the Maker of all things.
Justin also stated:
…though I should not be able to prove his pre-existence…For some of our race, who admit that he is the Christ, while holding him to be man of men; with whom I do not agree.
This shows that even by 150 C.E. the majority Christian view was that Jesus was not pre-existentbut a “man of men.”
Catholic theologian Karl-Josef Kuschel shows this to be the first major step away from biblical Christianity when he makes the comment that:
The Christology of Jewish Christianity which had been dominant for decades and knew of no pre-existence Christology was increasingly swept aside and was finally branded heretical.
Earlier the Apostle Paul had foretold that: “They will ... wander off into myths.” (2 Tim. 4:3, 4 ESV). He also said at 2 Corinthians 11:4 that some would come“preaching another Jesus.”
From the above it is evident that neither Jesus nor the earliest Christians taught or believed that Jesus was a pre-existent being.
FIRST STEP TOWARD THE TRINITY
Once some 2nd century Christians had accepted the concept of pre-existence with reference to Jesus the next stage was that of making it an eternal pre-existence as taught by Origen later in the second century, and finally into the full-blown Trinity in 481 C.E. and onward. However, some Trinitarians try to teach that the doctrine of the Trinity was believed by the earliest Christians. To show that this is not true one only has to consider all the above noted controversial issues and the resulting persecutions.
................................
APPENDIX
JESUS WAS NOT THE ANGEL THAT APPEARED TO JOSHUA
There is no linguistic or logical connection between the angel who appeared to Joshua as: “the prince of the army of Jehovah” in Joshua 5:14 and “Messiah the Leader” in Daniel 9:25. Two different Hebrew words are used. Only by assumption could any connection be made.
JESUS WAS NEVER AN ANGEL
· “…with reference to the angels”... is contrasted with ...“but with reference to the Son”
(Heb. 1:7, 8).
· “So he [the Son] has become better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they … to which one of the angels did he ever say: ‘You are my Son’”
(Heb. 1:4, 5).
· “For it isnot to angelsthat He has subjected the inhabited earth to come ... What is man...or theSon of Man...You...have appointed him over the works of Your hands; You have put all things in subjection under his feet” (Heb. 2:5-7).
Therefore things said to the Son were never said to any angel. God has never addressed an angel as my son. So no angel was ever the Only-begotten Son i.e. the uniquely begotten Son of Man to whom the earth will be subjected and not to any angel.
THE RAINBOWED ANGEL OF REVELATION 10:1 IS NOT CHRIST
Hebrews chapter 1 shows the great difference between all angels and Christ. The rainbowed angel is described as “another strong angel.” Earlier a strong angel is noted in Revelation 5:2.
The description in Revelation 10:1 is not the same as the description of Christ in Revelation 1:13-16. The differences are that Jesus has:
· A golden sash.
· Eyes that are flames of fire.
· A voice like the sound of many waters.
· A sharp 2 edged sword protruding from his mouth.
· He holds 7 stars.
The only similarity with the angel is that he has a face like the sun, (yet the woman of chapter 12 and the angel of 19:17 are also associated with the sun). This angel’s appearance displays the glory of God and Christ and he is likely a special angelic herald of Christ, but he cannot actually be Christ.
Elijah Returns
