Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.


English flagItalian flagKorean flagChinese (Simplified) flagChinese (Traditional) flagPortuguese flagGerman flagFrench flag
Spanish flagJapanese flagRussian flagGreek flagDutch flagBulgarian flagCzech flagCroatian flag
Danish flagFinnish flagHindi flagPolish flagRomanian flagSwedish flagNorwegian flagFilipino flag
Hebrew flagIndonesian flagLithuanian flagSerbian flagUkrainian flagTurkish flag  

Articles & Posts

Who is Michael the Archangel?

Click here for the new and updated article:  Who is Michael the Archangel 2014_08_27

Below is the older version of the article which is less complete.

Is Michael the Archangel Jesus or is Michael just a mighty angel?  Does the Bible answer this question?

We believe that a careful examination of scriptures will provide compelling evidence that Michael the Archangel is Jesus.  Yet since Hebrews 1:4-14 shows that Jesus is greater than the angels, how can Jesus possibly be an angel?

The honest and sincere student of scripture will want to carefully examine the evidence. 



The word “Michael” in Daniel 12:1 comes from Strong’s 4317 meaning, “who is like God.”  Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon also agrees with this definition.

Who else is like God but Jesus Himself?



The word “angel” itself, Strong’s #32 is defined as, “a messenger; especially an “angel”; by implication, a pastor.”

On occasion, the Greek and Hebrew words for angel simply have the meaning of messenger and do not refer to angels. Here are examples where the Greek and Hebrew do not refer to angels:

Matt 11:10 (NKJV ) “For this is he of whom it is written: “Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, Who will prepare Your way before You.’”  [Here Jesus is speaking of John]

Luke 7:24 (NKJV) “When the messengers of John had departed, He (Jesus) began to speak to the multitudes concerning John:”

James 2:25 (NKJV ) “Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?” 

Gen 32:3 (KJV) “And Jacob sent messengers before him to Esau his brother” 

Many say Jesus cannot be Michael because Jesus is not an angel.  The scriptures quoted above prove that the Greek and Hebrew words for angel broadly mean “messenger” and can apply to others besides angels.  Jesus is God’s ultimate and supreme messenger.  That is why he is called the “Logos” or the Word of God, i.e. God’s spokesperson or messenger.

Jesus is called an “angel” or “messenger in Malachi 3:1 (NKJV)  where we read, “Behold, I send My messenger (John the Baptist Matt 11:10-11), And he will prepare the way before Me  (Yawheh). And the Lord (Jesus), whom you seek, Will suddenly come to His temple (“Which Temple ye are.” 1 Cor 3:17), Even the Messenger (Jesus) of the covenant, In whom you delight. Behold, He is coming,” Says the LORD of hosts.

In Revelation 20:1, 2 we have a great angel coming down from heaven with a chain in his hand to bind Satan. This great angel is generally accepted to be Jesus who is the one responsible for binding Satan.

Jesus  is the “seed of the woman” who crushes the serpent’s head.  Hebrews 2:14 (RVIC) says, “… that through death he might bring to nought the one having the power of death, that is, the devil;”  Is there an angel powerful enough to bind Satan?  Of course not.

Yes, it is Jesus who binds Satan. Gen 3:15 shows that the seed (Jesus) crushes Satan’s head. More broadly, it is The Christ, Head and Body who binds Satan (Rom 16:20). Jesus death’ on the Cross guaranteed Him the authority to destroy Satan (Hebrews 2:14).



We find the word archangel in 1 Thes 4:16 and Jude 9.  It is from Strong’s 743 meaning “a chief angel,”  Let’s break the word up into its two parts.  “Arch” is Strong’s 757 meaning, “to be first (in political rank or power):– reign (rule) over”  The other part, “angel” is from Strong’s 32, meaning, “a messenger, especially an angel.” 

So how does comparing 1 Thess 4:16 and Jude 9 help us to identify who Michael is?  Well we know that Jesus descends from heaven with the “voice of Archangel” and that Michael is the “Archangel.”  So therefore, Michael must be Jesus.  After all, I cannot have your voice, even if I can use your trumpet.  So Jesus must be using his own voice, yes the voice of the archangel (meaning chief messenger – the Word of God – the Logos). 



In Daniel 12:1 (NKJV), Michael is described as, “the great prince (Strong’s 8269)who stands watch over the sons of your people (Israel).”

Compare Isaiah 9:6 which calls Jesus the “prince of peace” (Strong’s 8269)

Jesus is also called the “prince” in the New Testament

Acts 3:15: “prince of life”

Acts 5:11: “prince and Savior”

Remember how in Daniel 12:1, Michael is described as, “the great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people (Israel).”

Compare with Matthew 2:6:

Matt 2:6: “out of thee [Bethlehem] shall come forth a governor, Who shall be shepherd of my people Israel.”  (Micah 5:2 Governor/Ruler = Strongs 4910-6.)

In both cases Michael/Jesus is ruler over Israel.  Does Israel have two spiritual rulers – Michael and Jesus?  Of course not.  Jesus is Michael.

In contrast, in Eph 2:2 Satan is the “prince of the power of the air”



The argument that Michael is “one [of many] of the Chief Princes” in Daniel 10:13 is not correct.

Notice the more accurate rendering in Young’s Literal Translation –

Daniel 10:13 `And the head of the kingdom of Persia is standing over-against me twenty and one days, and lo, Michael, first of the chief heads, hath come in to help me, and I have remained there near the kings of Persia;”

Albert Barnes’ Commentary:   “the first.” That is, the first in rank of the “princes,” or the angels. In other words, Michael, the archangel.””

John Gill’s Commentary:  “…is no other than Christ the Son of God… who is “one,” or “the first of the chief Princes””

The word “first of,” sometimes translated “one of” is Strongs 259 meaning, “a numeral from 258; properly, united, i.e. one; or (as an ordinal) first:” This word is translated “first” four (4) times in the book of Daniel, i.e. Dan 11:1 which says, “…in the first year of Darius the Mede…” KJV.  So we see that Daniel 10:13 is not indicating that there are several chief heads or princes.

The word translated “heads” or more often “princes” is Strongs 8269, the same Hebrew word as in Daniel 12:1 associated with Michael the Archangel who is the great prince.

The word “chief” as in “chief princes” is from Strongs 7223 and it means “first, in place, time or rank.”

So Michael is the first or number one prince.  In other words, Michael is Jesus.

Dan 12:1 calls him the “GREAT prince” and Dan 10:21 calls him “Michael your prince.”  Over Israel, God would have appointed His highest ranking prince.  Right?  Is there a prince that ranks higher than Jesus?   Another spirit being would not have been given more responsibility and authority than Jesus.


Paul tells us about Jesus in Hebrews 3:3 that He, “…was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.” So Jesus is the one that built Moses’ house (the nation of Israel under the Law Covenant).  As the builder of the house, Jesus was the main messenger appearing to Moses at the burning bush (Ex 3:2) and on Mount Sinia (Gal 3:19; Acts 7:53) as the Word or representative of Jehovah.

The point is that during the Jewish age, Jesus was the chief prince/messenger/angel speaking to Moses on behalf of Jehovah/ Yahweh, at the burning bush and on Mount Sinai.  If Michael is the chief prince of Israel, Michael must be Jesus, the chief prince.  Otherwise, would you conclude that Michael is higher ranking than Jesus?  If Michael was the chief prince and Jesus was not, than how is Jesus superior to Michael?  Therefore they must both be the same person.



Daniel 11 brings us up to the time of the end and Daniel 12 brings us 5 signs of the time of the end:

1) Increase in knowledge (i.e. technology, mobile phones, Internet, etc.)

2) Increase in travel (cars, planes, space travel)

3) “children of your people delivered” (Israel a nation)

4) Great time of trouble (world wars, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, Mao, Hitler, Stalin, etc. murder over 100 million non-combatants last century)

5) Book of Daniel unsealed and explained (If not Volume 3, “Thy Kingdom Come,” then how is that fulfilled?)

So if this does not prove that we have been in the time of the end and that Jesus (pictured here as Michael) has returned, then what does this all mean?

Once prophecy is fulfilled, it’s meaning becomes more evident.  For example, in Jesus day, people looking at Daniel 9 (70 weeks) thought that Messiah would defeat the Romans and set up the earthly kingdom at that time.  Once history played out, the purpose of the Messiah became clear to Jesus disciples.  In spite of the miraculous evidences, people rationalized what they knew, and then rejected Jesus. 

Based on Daniel 12:4, Sir Isaac Newton concluded that some day man would travel at 50 miles per hour.  Who would have imagined then, how much greater a fulfillment of prophecy would take place.  The miraculous evidences today are inescapable.  Perhaps the biggest underlying issue is the dramatic changes on planet earth in the past two centuries, particularly Israel restored, then the increase in knowledge & travel and for the first time in history, great trouble that impacts the whole world – not isolated geographically.  Clearly God somehow has a hand in all this.  Right?  How else are these changes coming about?  How then is it such a leap of faith to imagine that the invisible returned Jesus, God’s Chief Messenger in accomplishing this?

As is historically evident, this increase in knowledge spans every area, i.e. science, technology, medicine, agriculture, the Bible, etc.  Regarding the Bible, Daniel says that at the time of the end the Wise would Understand (Dan 12:9-12).  Daniel says this in regard to the 1290 and 1335 days and indicates the book of Daniel will be unsealed.  This was fulfilled in Volume 3 of Studies in the Scriptures, “They Kingdom Come.”  If we are wrong, would you then say that we cannot understand Daniel today and its meaning is yet to be revealed in the future?  On the other hand, if the book of Daniel is now unsealed, than Michael has already stood up. Right?  If now fulfilled how, how do you think it was?  Who explained the meaning of Daniels prophecies if not Brother Russell in volume 3 “Thy Kingdom Come”?

Most people make a mistake with end time prophecies, thinking that everything happens quickly, however most parables and historical prophecies play out over centuries, as in the prophecy of the destruction of Tyre, which was fulfilled in stages taking several centuries till all the prophetic declarations were fulfilled. Even the Apostles were thinking that Jesus might  be setting up his kingdom in their time until Jesus told them it was not for them to know when (Acts 1:6).  In Daniel 12 – When Michael Stands up in the time of the end: Knowledge increases.  One source claims the world’s knowledge is doubling every two years now – http://www.digitalstrategyconsulting.com/netimperative/news/2011/06/worlds_data_more_than_doubling.php 



Understanding the role of the Lord’s people at the time of Jesus second presence can best be learned by a careful study of the scriptures relating to this topic.  We recommend the link below as a good place to start.



196 comments to Who is Michael the Archangel?

  • NO ONE HAS ASKED WHO IS THE OTHER PERSON WITH MICHEAL in Daniel chapter 10? Read His description – it is JESUS!

    Daniel chapter 10. Verse 5 says: “I also proceeded to raise my eyes and see, and here was a certain man* clothed in linen, with his hips girded with gold of U′phaz. 6And his body was like chrys′o·lite, and his face like the appearance of lightning and his eyes like fiery torches, and his arms and the place of his feet were like the sight of burnished copper and the sound of his words was like the sound of a crowd. ” 

    Here, we meet a ”certain man”, his eyes are like ”fiery torches” and the place of his ”feet like burnished copper”. When we turn to Revelation 1:13 – 15. We read “and in the midst of the lampstands someone like a son of man, clothed with a garment that reached down to the feet, and girded at the breasts with a golden girdle. 14 Moreover, his head and his hair were white as white wool, as snow, and his eyes as a fiery flame; 15 and his feet were like fine copper when glowing in a furnace; and his voice was as the sound of many waters. ” This is Jesus.

    Also in Revelation 2: 18 it says: “And to the angel of the congregation in Thy·a·ti′ra write: These are the things that the Son of God says, he who has his eyes like a fiery flame, and his feet are like fine copper. If it is HE (the son of God, Jesus Christ) who has his eyes like a fiery flame and his feet like fine copper, how could anyone else have a similar description. The ”certain man” of Daniel has this same description, and is, therefore, Jesus.

    Note: if your Bible contains references, very likely the descriptions of the certain man in Daniel 10:5 will take you to Jesus Christ in Revelation, chapters 1 and 2.

    Now, think, Michael came to help this certain man (the man who had the eyes and feet, the appearance of Jesus). Dan 10:13 says: 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; There are two different entities, Micheal and the certain man. Michael came to HELP the certain man. Therefore, Michael cannot be Jesus (the certain man).

    Are there any other spirit creatures with this description? That appears Negative? Especially, when Jesus himself says, it is ‘he who has’. “These are the things that the Son of God says, he who has his eyes like a fiery flame, and his feet are like fine copper.

    Due to the fact that there are certain arguments against this conclusion, included is this information:
    Some say that Michael’s standing up means Michael has become King:

    But Standing up is not a good argument to indicate kingship. A throne, and sitting down on it signifies the moment one becomes a King. Daniel uses the words ”standing up”to signify a course of action, and use of power and authority, NOT KINGSHIP. For instance:

    Daniel 11:1 The certain man ”stood up as a strengthener”. This is an action, it does not indicate kingship.

    Daniel 12:1 “Michael will stand up, the great Prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of your people.” This is an action, he is standing as a protector of God’s people in the time of tribulation.

    Daniel 12:13 Daniel will stand up at the end of the days. Does this mean that he becomes a King? No, it means he is resurrected – be activated, come alive.

    Daniel 11:11, 14 ”a large crowd stands up”. Does this large crowd become a King? No.

    Daniel 8:23, 2:51 A King stands up twice. Does he become king twice? The 1st time the King stands up to take action – to cause ruin, etc. The second time he ”stands up”, he stands up to take action against the Prince of Princes. He is standing up to take action, not kingship.

    Daniel 11:31 ”arms that will stand up”. Do arms become king?

    All of these Scriptures talk about a standing up, and none of them refer to anybody becoming a King.

    Why does Michael stand up?
    Micheal is not standing up as King, He is standing up to help God’s people: the reason – there is going to be a time of distress. Note how different Bible translations word Daniel 12:1

    New International Version “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise.

    New Living Translation “At that time Michael, the archangel who stands guard over your nation, will arise.

    English Standard Version “At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people.

    King James Bible And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people:

    Holman Christian Standard Bible At that time Michael the great prince who stands watch over your people will rise up.

    International Standard Version “‘At that time, Michael will arise, the great prince who will stand up on behalf of your people,

    GOD’S WORD® Translation [The person who looked like a human continued,] “At that time Michael, the great commander, will stand up on behalf of the descendants of your people. 

    The ”Certain Man” is God’s messenger
    There are no messages recorded in the Bible that Michael, by name, uttered. His only recorded words were, “May Jehovah rebuke you,” in the book of Jude.

    In Daniel chapter 10, 11 and 12, the ”Certain Man” was the messenger, not the Archangel, Michael. The ”Certain Man’s” message/prophecy to Daniel was long and important – so important that the certain man has a description to identify him. 

    Reaction to the Certain Man’s appearance The remaining verses of Daniel chapter 10 also describes the importance of this man, it is a description as to how one would view Jesus Christ himself. Daniel was truly overwhelmed by this man’s presence. Daniel calls the certain man ”my Lord” 3 times – Daniel chapter 10: 16, 17, 19. 

    Daniel description of the certain man tells us that he was a very great personage. The fact that others ran away (a great trembling) trying to hide themselves tells you he was a great man. In Daniel 10:8 Daniel says ”I saw this great appearance. And there was left remaining in me no power”; Verse 15 says he became speechless; Verse 16 Daniel says,”O my Lord, because of the appearance my convulsions were turned within me, and I did not retain any power. This is a description of Jesus, not Michael, and certainly not of Gabriel (who Daniel had met in the chapter 9).

    The certain man gives this message, not the Archangel Michael. Here are the events in Daniel chapter 10. Daniel prayed, God heard that prayer, and the certain man came because of that prayer. But the Prince of the Royal realm of Persia stood in opposition to him for 21 days. The Certain man says “Michael, one of the foremost princes came to help me”. The Certain man was then free to come to Daniel and give him the prophecy.

    If Michael is the Word of God (if Michael is Jesus) why did Michael take the lowly position of holding the Prince of Persia at bay (or keeping him busy) while the certain man (in this case, the lesser man) went to Daniel?

    Yes, Michael the Archangel was left behind – left behind to ”help” the Certain man in regards to the confrontation that the certain man was having with the Prince of Persia. Michael did this to allow the real messenger, the Certain Man, to go to Daniel with the message.

    If the Certain man was Jesus, (with superior power) why didn’t he overpower the prince of Persia?
    Dan. 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”.

    Was this a question of strength?
    Well Ask: If Michael is Jesus, and Micheal came to help the certain man, why didn’t he (Michael – if he is Jesus) overpower the prince of Persia when he came to help?? He did not. Then later, in verse Daniel 10:22 says that the certain man was going back to fight with the Prince of Persia. This argument does not hold water.

    Also, if this was a physical fight, why didn’t they both, together, (the Certain Man and Michael) subdue the Prince of Persia?

    Remember, after the Certain Man talked to Daniel, the Certain Man went back to continue the confrontation with the Prince of Persia. (Dan. 10: 20) ”So he went on to say: “Do you really know why I have come to you? And now I shall go back to fight with the prince of Persia. When I am going forth, look! also the prince of Greece is coming.” Why? Was the reason – unfinished business (perhaps in regard to the prophecy or future action allowed the King of Persia) [standing in “opposition”],…. or an unfinished physical battle? Many times we call an argument, a difference of opinion between a man and a wife, a fight. So, which scenario makes the most sense? 

    The Prince of Greece was also coming. Was the Prince of Greece coming to battle him too? Maybe Micheal should should’ve stayed close by. Boy, then it would’ve been two against two! 

    Remember in 10:15 the Prince of Persia was simply “standing in opposition” for 21 days. Standing in opposition means they had a difference of opinion. It could have been a diplomatic argument over boundaries, limits, rights, what Persia could and could not do, etc.

    Therefore, Michael cannot be Jesus. The certain man claims the higher position– a position higher than Michael.

    • jeffmezera

      JD, perhaps I am mistaken, but it does not appear that in Daniel 10 that the angel is named. Most commentaries believe it actually refers to the angel Gabriel because of the context from chapters 8 and 9. Michael is not mentioned until verse 12 of chapter 10….and therefore another angel mentioned in this context.

    • Chuck M (Bible Student)

      “Yes, Michael the Archangel was left behind – left behind to ”help” the Certain man in regards to the confrontation that the certain man was having with the Prince of Persia. Michael did this to allow the real messenger, the Certain Man, to go to Daniel with the message.”
      I find it hard to believe that Jesus would need the help of Michael to handle the Prince of Persia. It is more believable that Michael (Jesus) stepped in to allow the certain man (messenger) to deliver his message to Daniel.

    • QNA ....

      JD…. I was skeptical when I first learned that Jesus was Michael the Archangel so when I read what you wrote, it peeked my interest. I can clearly see why you would think that the certain man in Daniel, might be Jesus because of the description also mentioned in Revelation. However, after doing some bible research, I have to say that Chuck’s and Jeff’s points are valid. It is hard to believe that Jesus would need assistance. Plus also, I checked Daniel 9:21 in at least 15 different bibles, including one in the jewish virtual library, and all had Gabriel as the name of the certain man. Can you please tell me which bible version you used?

    • Peter K. (admin)

      JD Brenner – Welcome to our site.

      Let me summarize your four arguments that Jesus is the “Certain Man,” not Michael with my response.

      1) Michael standing up is not good evidence of him being king.

      In context “stand” may refer to kings and kingdoms standing or falling (Dan 11:16, 17, 25, 31, 12:1). However, this is not a great point and you seem to not be aware of over a dozen lines of stronger evidence in our article to show Michael is Jesus.

      2) The Certain Main” was God’s messenger in Daniel 10, 11 and 12, not Michael.

      As the article shows, God has many messengers. Jesus is God’s greatest messenger, but not his only one.

      3) Daniel calls the certain man ”my Lord” 3 times – Daniel chapter 10: 16, 17, 19.

      Sarah called Abraham Lord, but that does not make Abraham Jesus. (1 Pet 3:6)

      4) The “Certain Man” described in Daniel 10 has the same description as Jesus in Revelation and in context cannot be Michael. (Rev 1:13-15; 2:18 compare Dan 10:5-6)

      The similarities between Daniel and Revelation are good evidence to support that the “certain man” might be Jesus. However, there are also differences in the description in Revelation.

      Rev 1: 13-14 “13 …girded across His chest with a golden sash. 14 His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow…”

      I think that perhaps the similarities with Revelation 1&2 are that being described in both cases is a powerful, glorious, majestic spirit being and messenger of Jehovah. We find similar language in regard to the creatures Ezekiel saw in vision in chapter 1.

      Ezekiel 1:7, 14 (NASV) “7 Their legs were straight and their feet were like a calf’s hoof, and they gleamed like burnished bronze. 14 And the living beings ran to and fro like bolts of lightning.”

      Below is an edited summary of Daniel 10 to help us follow that the “certain man” in verse 5 turns out to be the same one speaking in verse 13, who is commonly believe to be Gabriel.

      Daniel 10 (NASV) “5 I lifted my eyes and looked, and behold, there was a certain man dressed in linen…
      7 Now I, Daniel, alone saw the vision… 9 But I heard the sound of his words 11 He said to me… 12 Then he said to me, “… I have come in response to your words. 13 “But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.”

      Comments from Br. David Doran are of interest here: “It is wise to begin in Dan. 8:15. There “a man” instructs Gabriel (v.16) to explain the vision of Chapter 8 to Daniel. The “man” here MUST BE GREATER THAN GABRIEL. That vision is (vs. 3ff) about the succession of Gentile empires. Gabriel does as he was requested by “the man.” (See vs. 20ff.) When we get to Chapter 9, we see in verse 21 THE SAME GABRIEL as in 8:15 sent to give MORE UNDERSTANDING OF THE SAME VISION. When we get to Chapter 10, the first verse appears to yet be about the SAME VISION and that Daniel (with Gabriel’s help) DID HAVE SOME understanding of it. The context of Chapter 10 shows clearly that the “certain man” of verse 5 IS NOT Jesus nor Michael. The “man” (v.13) explains that the Prince of Persia HELD HIM UP and that Michael took care of the matter. If the “man” were Jesus, he wouldn’t need help from some “Michael.” So, “the man” is not Michael. And the “man” is not Jesus. Who does that leave? The best and most honest answer is that it is STILL Gabriel. Thus, verses 5 and 6 would be describing Gabriel. He continues speaking in 11:2 and following with the SAME INFORMATION (but with much more detail) as his previous explanations of the Gentiles empires. THEN, in 12:1 he refers to Michael in a text which Jesus’ quotes in Matt. 24 as belonging to HIM at his second advent.

      “The fact that Michael is so strong a deliverer and that he is ISRAEL’S PRINCE (10:21) and that he (in 12:1) does what Jesus predicted of his second advent in Matt. 24:21 — ALL of this seems to seal the matter. The “man” of 8:15 is likely Jesus — instructing Gabriel.The “man” of 9:21 IS Gabriel. The “man” of 10:5, by all of his contextual elements, seems also to be Gabriel. It is also likely that he is IN CHARGE of the events of Rev. 10 — although the description in Rev. 10:1 is PROBABLY an EVENT rather than a PERSONALITY. But a REAL personality was likely in charge of “The time of the End” — and since it IS Gabriel who brings up and defines THE TIME OF THE END in Daniel, it is probably he who is behind all of the events in Rev. 10.”

  • Thomas Palmieri

    The primary thing to remember is that the Apostles and Prophets were speaking under holy inspiration owing to personal noetic encounter with the eternal uncreated light of God, which divinized their understanding above the realm of created reality. Language is a tool which employs concrete objects to convey spiritual realities, and thus must be understood metaphorically in regard to Scriptural usages. It is a great error to suppose that Jesus as the Word of God is literally an angelic figure standing beside the Father in heaven. Who and what is the Father? He is God Almighty, who dwells ‘above all, and through all, and within all’ (Eph 4:6). Howso? Because God is incorporeal Spirit (Jn 4:24), which exists everywhere, at all times, in all things. The Son is the Word proceeding forth (Jn 8:42) from the Father’s bosom (Jn 1:18), which existing everywhere in all things, creates, sustains and pervades the universe (Jn 1:3; Heb 1:2, 11:3). The incorporeal Word of the incorporeal Father is from everlasting to everlasting (Heb 13:8); in the beginning, the Word already was (Jn 1:1), hence the Word does not exist in time, but from and in eternity. The Word became incarnate (Jn 1:14) in time, in Jesus Christ, in order to redeem our fallen nature. Hence in Jesus Christ, the one mediator (1 Tim 2:5), God and man are one. Jesus is not Michael, for the Word of God created ALL things (Jn 1:3), and Michael was one of the things created by the Word proceeding from the Father’s bosom. The Father spoke the divine Word, and Michael and the angels came to be. Hence the angels worship the Word as their Creator (Heb 1:6). Hebrews 1:6 refers to Psalm 97:7 in the Septuagint, which refers to the angels’ worship of God (i.e. YHWH). Hence the Word of God is YHWH himself, as the Word. For the Spirit of YHWH is YHWH Himself, and the Spirit of YHWH, the Holy Spirit, is the Spirit of Christ also (Rom 8:9; 1 Pet 1:11), that is, the Spirit of the Word of the Father. Hence the three, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, are one YHWH, one God.

    • QNA

      Thomas – Are you saying that God is Jesus and therefore the mediator between himself and man? That he lied and we have been praying to him direct? That he prayed to himself over and over again? That he needed do so in order to strengthen himself? He forsook himself? Resurrected himself? In the end that Satan will attempt to destroy him? To do battle with the Almighty Creator? And in the end, when satan is in the abyss that he will give the kingdom back to himself? Okay, that’s enough. With only a few hours sleep my own common sense is struggling to comprehend how anyone can say that Jesus is not God’s son but a word that came from his mouth. So why was his word granted a better (higher) position? Or how is he sitting at his own right of hand waiting to tell himself when it is time to start judging? Because after all if my child was me then he would certainly know all, wouldn’t he?

      • Thomas Palmieri

        You do not understand what the Scripture means when it says Christ is mediator between God and man. He is BOTH God and man. As God he is Lord (1 Cor 12:3) and Creator (Jn 1:3; Heb 1:2, 10-12), who as God receives the worship of angels (Heb 1:6, referencing Ps 97:7 in the LXX, which you will not acknowledge because it destroys your whole belief system). As man he hungers and thirsts and dreads suffering in the flesh and prays to the Father for guidance. He rose from the grave (ultimately) owing to the power and glory of the Father (the Son being the very inseparable brightness of that selfsame glory [see Heb 1:3, which is a gloss on Wisdom 7:25, which itself describes Divine Wisdom as “the brightness of the everlasting light, viz. God himself], but as he says himself, “I have power to lay it (i.e. his life) down, and I have power to take it up again” (Jn 10:18). Again, John says that the Word created ALL things (Jn 1:3). Michael then is a creation of the Word. The Son of God is the eternal incorporeal Word of the Father, the inseparable brightness of the eternal light of the Father, which exists everywhere and creates and sustains all things (Heb 1:2), including Michael the Archangel. The Son of Man is the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14), which emptied itself (himself) of its (his) eternal glory and took on the form of a man and servant (Phil 2:6-8). When Christ died, the eternal Word did not die, or else the worlds would have dissolved. Only the mortal nature of the humanity lay dead in the sepulcher.

        I am aware of the 19th century Protestant biblical exegetes who thought that Michael in Daniel prophesied Jesus Christ. They maintained nevertheless that the Scriptures clearly taught that the Son of God was truly God. I have also read the Jehovah’s Witnesses Reasoning from the Scriptures, which tries to show in detail that Jesus is Michael. I assume your material incorporates the same arguments.

        In response to those arguments I make the following observations. Psalms 24 and 47 (KJV) appear to be antitypes of Christ’s ascension into glory, the imagery of Psalm 47 (esp. 47:5) with respect to the ascent of God from the earth being mirrored in Christ’s Second Coming as prophesied in 1st Thessalonians 4:16, which for its own part does not mirror Michael’s headship of the angels in Revelation 12:7 (Christ being seated in glory with the Father [Rev 12:5]), but rather Zechariah’s prophecy which tells of YHWH standing upon the Mount of Olives in the day of his wrath (Zech 14:1-5), which prophecy is itself alluded to in the Book of Acts when the angel prophesies that the Lord Jesus Christ will return in glory to the Mount of Olives in the Day of Judgment (Acts 1:9-12).

        The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not to be conceived as finite discrete persons, but rather as infinite personages, one the primal archetype and the other two as processional images, all belonging to the one Godhead. They are not to be conceived like as to Tom, Dick and Harry, but rather like as to Mind, Reason and Spirit within one subsisting entity, distinctive but not divided from one another. As St. Augustine taught, God, in contemplating himself as eternal subject, eternal goodness, truth, beauty, and so forth, generates an image of himself, which is the Son of God, whom knowing, he loves, the movement of love being none other than the procession of the Holy Spirit. Hence the Father, in knowing himself, generates the Son, and in loving himself, processes or spirates the Spirit of his love. Now in God knowing and loving are eternal activities, hence the Trinity itself is eternal. Hence also the Son of God is eternally begotten of the Father, as the Father’s very own wisdom, while the Son of Man comes to be in time within the womb of Mary, when the eternal Word was made flesh for the salvation of mankind. There was no Jesus in heaven seated next to the Father before the incarnation. Jesus is God united to man; he has no pre-existence in heaven except in the forecounsel of God (1 Pet 1:20). For how indeed can the Son of God instruct the very Spirit of God himself (Jn 16:13) and send him forth (Jn 16:7), unless the Son was God himself? God sends forth his Word, his Wisdom and Power (1 Cor 1:24), bearing with it the Spirit of truth (Jn 16:13). But in God these realities are not mere attributes but rather personal subsistences, as the Scriptures enigmatically teach us.

        I ask you to explain to me how it is that Christ as a mere angel is capable of giving instruction to the Spirit of God? Do you have any grasp at all about was is being said by Christ in John 16:1-16? If you can free yourself of the notion that the Father and Son are discrete persons existing in bodies, then the mysteries of the holy gospel will reveal themselves to your yet unbelieving eyes.

        • Jacqueline

          Thomas since you quote St. Augustine I might assume you are of the Catholic faith maybe. But where exactly does the Bible mention that God is a trinity. Without all the extra words explaining the scriptures, please let them talk. Such a great subject should say exactly that God is a trinity., not binity (2) but all three in one, exact words in scripture. Without quotes from other men or explanation. Just the scriptures please and let them tell a story.

          Most of this is Superfluous and we have to assume your statements are true and follow you to a conclusion that you are leading us to.This is not proof but what you believe or how you see it. I appreciate your zeal but this below is not facts. It is simply what you believe.

          {“The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not to be conceived as finite discrete persons, but rather as infinite personages, one the primal archetype and the other two as processional images, all belonging to the one Godhead. They are not to be conceived like as to Tom, Dick and Harry, but rather like as to Mind, Reason and Spirit within one subsisting entity, distinctive but not divided from one another. As St. Augustine taught, God, in contemplating himself as eternal subject, eternal goodness, truth, beauty, and so forth, generates an image of himself, which is the Son of God, whom knowing, he loves, the movement of love being none other than the procession of the Holy Spirit. Hence the Father, in knowing himself, generates the Son, and in loving himself, processes or spirates the Spirit of his love. Now in God knowing and loving are eternal activities, hence the Trinity itself is eternal. Hence also the Son of God is eternally begotten of the Father, as the Father’s very own wisdom, while the Son of Man comes to be in time within the womb of Mary, when the eternal Word was made flesh for the salvation of mankind. There was no Jesus in heaven seated next to the Father before the incarnation. Jesus is God united to man; he has no pre-existence in heaven except in the forecounsel of God (1 Pet 1:20). For how indeed can the Son of God instruct the very Spirit of God himself (Jn 16:13) and send him forth (Jn 16:7), unless the Son was God himself? God sends forth his Word, his Wisdom and Power (1 Cor 1:24), bearing with it the Spirit of truth (Jn 16:13). But in God these realities are not mere attributes but rather personal subsistences, as the Scriptures enigmatically teach us.”}

        • QNA ....

          Thomas, you seem to be pretty knowledgeable in how to present the meaning of the scriptures.
          I first learned that Jesus was Michael the Arc Angel from the Jehovah Witnesses. I was skeptical and did research to see what others believed and found both, those who supported it and those who didn’t. I didn’t do any further research concluding that if there came a point in time that I had to, I would. They also preached about Jehovah being the one and only Almighty God and Jesus being his only begotten son. I didn’t do any research on that because I didn’t need to. As an infant I was baptized into the Catholic religion, but raised up going to multiple churches. I was taught by a Born Again, Pentecostal, Methodist, and as an adult, the Catholic religion. Nothing any of them have ever taught convinced me of God and Jesus being one being. (or one entity, or one incorporeal spirit) In fact I learned very little about the bible itself.
          The fact that God himself introduced Jesus to the world as his beloved son says a lot. He did not use terms to trick or confuse anyone. He gave us our language and knew what words to use to help to fully understand. He also loved his son and he wanted us to accept and have faith in him, and in the ransom sacrifice that he provided. Jesus in turn did not take any credit for himself or ever make himself his father’s equal. Everything he did was for his father and his words clearly express those thoughts. “For I (Jesus) gave them, (his disciples) the words you (God) gave me and they accepted them.” There are no play with words.
          In reading your interpretation of the scriptures about whether or not Jesus and Michael the Arc Angel are one and the same, it seems to go hand in hand with your belief in the trinity doctrine. Why does that have to be? Is that the real focus? On proving that Jehovah God, and Jesus are one and the same. No one knows how Jesus came into existence as we do not have the capacity to understand it, but we know that he was the only begotten son of Jehovah God.. (or Yahweh) To suggest that certain scriptures imply that they are one, equal to each other in every sense of the word, would be to reject scriptures upon scriptures that prove otherwise.
          Thomas, you speak well, so if you would please appease me for a moment and simplify your answers as a teacher would for his students and answer these questions. I mean, if you wouldn’t mind.
          Imagine quoting Jesus’ words, in part, to one of your students, “I and the father are one” and asking that student if that statement meant that they were one and the same person. Do you think their answer might be yes? Maybe?
          Now change it to quote it in this manner, “That they all shall be one, just as you, my Father, are in me, and I am in you, so that they also shall be one in us.” Do you think then that they might still be thinking maybe yes? Or do you think a legitimate argument could be made for a definite no?
          How about, (the first half of this scripture) 26″Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness”… Do you think a student would interpret “us” or “our” as a clear indication of one person? (Or a being, entity, or incorporeal spirit?) Or would you positively get the answer that anyone would give, which is that “us” and “our” clearly proves that it is speaking of more than one being?
          Also, you used John 5:18 to prove?? That the jewish people accused Jesus of making himself equal to the father? And?? What about the latter part of 5:30 where Jesus himself says, “I can do nothing on my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me.” Should not any thinking person conclude that they are talking about two distinct persons having two distinct wills? One clearly indicating that they could not do anything on their own initiative? Why? Because the fact is, Jesus came to do his father will as he indicated many times. And in the very end, what will he do? Exactly what 1Cor 15:24 says.
          I have to wonder, how trinitarians can put satan on the same level as the Creator. To think that he could tempt the Almighty God. That he could battle with the Almighty God the Grand Creator of the Universe for his position. I am baffled.
          Matthew 11:25 in part says…. “At that time Yeshua answered and said, “I thank you my Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and you have revealed them to infants.”
          I am also not implying that the those who are intelligent have not been revealed bible truths. Nor am I saying that I am child like. However, sometimes I think the confusion comes in when we dig deeper than we need to instead of seeing what is clearly written, praying to our Father in heaven, for the correct understanding, and having true faith.
          What I’ve written here is what I truly believe is the truth, as I read it from the God’s word the Bible. I don’t think that I am being mislead. Of course you are entitled to your own belief as well.

        • Jeff


          You stated, “The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not to be conceived as finite discrete persons, but rather as infinite personages, one the primal archetype and the other two as processional images, all belonging to the one Godhead. They are not to be conceived like as to Tom, Dick and Harry, but rather like as to Mind, Reason and Spirit within one subsisting entity, distinctive but not divided from one another….”

          I find your description of the trinity to be quite philosophically interesting, however it appears you may be expending beyond the traditional Trinitarian view that there are three separate and distinct persons in the trinity. Perhaps I am mistaken, but your idea seems to me to blend across into the oneness concepts of god.

          I would however disagree with your interpretation of Revelation 12. I’ve done much research on the Protestant interpretation of Revelation 12 over the last several centuries and have found that you would find believers on both sides of the Trinitarian/non-Trinitarian fence.

          Interestingly enough many of them did not interpret the man-child/Michael figure mentioned in Revelation 12 as the archangel, but rather a symbolic representation of what many of the Protestants has defined as the anti-Christian system of Babylon.

          As for Hebrews 1:6, I would state that the previous verse references Jesus position in the heavens after his resurrection. After the resurrection, Jesus is no an angel. The Apostle Luke in the book of Acts makes this clear.

          Acts 13:33 “that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.’”

          As you stated, Hebrews then quotes from Psalm 97. The Septuagint reads, “Worship Him, all you angels” while the NAS reads, “Worship him, all you gods.”

          This chapter in Psalms references a future coming of judgment which will have an effect on the heathen and on Zion itself. The heathen will turn and worship the Lord. This is the time we look forward to when all will have an opportunity to know and serve the Lord and there will be no question who he is.

    • Peter K. (admin)

      Thomas – QNA said it better than I could.

      The article here brought up dozens of points of scriptural evidence to show that Jesus is a created being, that he is Michael, the Chief Messenger/Logos of Jehovah. Did you disagree with every line of evidence and scriptural support? Did you read the article?

      Respectfully, I am sad to say that I disagreed with nearly everything you said, which if you are open to it, I would be willing to refute. I will tell you what. Rather than taking the next hour to respond to every point you made, give me one arguement that you made and I will explain why in my opinion that your reasoning is not correct.

      Let me assume the best and thank you in advance for being willing to discuss this topic with an open mind.

      • Thomas Palmieri

        I accept your challenge. One argument. Hebrews 1:6 says that “ALL of the angels of God worship him”. If the Son of God is Michael, then Michael, being one of the angels, worships himself. Hebrews 1:6 references Psalm 97:7, which, in praise of God, declares: “worship him, all ye his angels.” How do you interpret this clear reference to the Godhead of the Son of God on the part of the author of Hebrews?

        • Peter K. (admin)

          Thomas – To me, that you would select this as your one argument to prove the Trinity demonstrates it’s weakness. There is no passage in the Bible anywhere in any verse that explains the Trinity and tells us that God is made up of three persons. To see how the Trinity is adopted from heathen religions which taught the same concept click here:

          I would encourage you to read the article since it answers your challenge and more. The article explains how “angel,” meaning messenger is a job description given to spirits working in the services of Jehovah/Yahweh. You will see examples of both the Greek and Hebrew words for “angel” are applied to Jesus in both the Old and New Testament. With that background let’s examine the passage your are referring to:

          Hebrews 1:6 (NASV) “But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: “Let all the angels of God worship Him.””

          When did the angels of God worship Jesus? It says, “when He again brings the firstborn (Col 1:15 Jesus) into the world.” That would be at the time Jesus was born, when the angels worshiped him (Luke 2:13-14)

          Since Jesus was not greater than the angels until he ascended before Pentecost, then we have angels worshiping the human baby king.

          Heb 2:9 (AV) says, “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death…” So actually what we have here are the angels worshiping Jesus as a perfect human, who at that time was lower than the angels in respect to His nature. Jesus was always higher ranking than any of the other messengers, yet he obtained a higher nature, the Divine Nature, at His resurrection and a much higher office at His ascension. (Eph 1:21)

          Since Michael, the chief messenger (archangel) is the same as Jesus, then at the time the angels worshiped him, Michael was not a spirit, but human.

    • Brettstone

      Jesus a God
      I believe this clarifies the confusion if someone honestly considers these texts from an open mind..

      King James Version
      Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

      Joh 10:34-35 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken

      In verse 34 here Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6 “I have said, ‘You are gods, All of you are sons of the Most High.”

      Jesus refuted the religious leaders who claimed he was making himself equal to God or God, however you read into it..
      If Jesus were God there would be no reason to refute this accusation!

      But instead Jesus tells us he could be called “A God”, because even human men the Judges were called Gods…

      • Thomas Palmieri

        You are misinterpreting Christ’s words in this passage. He does not say here that he is one of the ‘gods’ mentioned in the Psalm. He cites that reference to mention that even men, who are made in the image of God (Gen 1:26), have a spark of the divine within them. As for himself, he says, “if he called them gods…say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, thou blasphemest, because I said I am the Son of God?”. The Son is the only begotten, a Son by nature, we become sons by adoption (Gal 4:5), through the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit given to us in baptism (Tit 3:5).

        John writes that in calling God his Father, Christ was “making himself EQUAL with God” (Jn 5:18). Jesus then says: “all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father” (Jn;23). How do men honor the Father, except by acknowledging and worshipping him as Lord and God and Creator and Savior. The Apostle Thomas shows the proper pattern for Christian honor for the Son, acknowledging him to be both Lord and God (Jn 20:28). Hebrews 1:10-12 acknowledges the Son to be the Creator of the universe, whilst 2 Timothy 1:10 honors Christ as Savior. Do any of these titles belong to mere men or angels? God forbid!

        • Peter K. (admin)

          Thomas – Apparently Trinitarians have different interpretations for “gods” in Psalms. The point here is that Theos (Greek) and Elohim (Hebrew) are used of gods and of “a god,” Jesus. These words are not exclusive to Jehovah/Yahweh. Click here for more detail:

          The Greek and Hebrew for “Savior” is not exclusive to God or Jesus, for the Judges of the Old Testament for example are called saviors (Strong’s 3467). God saved Israel through them, just as God saved the world through his son Jesus.

          GOD AS SAVOIR

          Ps 106:21 They forgat God their saviour <03467>, which had done great things in Egypt;

          Isa 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour <03467>:

          MEN AS SAVIORS (agents of God in saving)

          Jud 2:16 Nevertheless the LORD raised up judges, which delivered <03467> them out of the hand of those that spoiled them.

          Jud 3:15 But when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised them up a deliverer <03467>, Ehud the son of Gera,

          Ex 2:17 And the shepherds came and drove them away: but Moses stood up and helped <03467> them, and watered their flock.

  • Bill Nippel

    Hi Peter, to answer your question…I suppose having a precise and accurate knowledge of who and what Christ was before He became flesh is not an “all important” issue in terms of one’s personal relationship with YHWH and the Lord Jesus Christ, however,I personally feel it is a most glorious issue in terms of coming to a better appreciation of what the Logos – the Only Begotten Son of God “gave up” in leaving his place and spirit nature in heaven in order to come down to earth and take on human nature. I leave my comments as thought for consideration and don’t hold it to be a litmus test for who is a true consecrated Christian.

    • Peter K. (admin)

      Bill – Well said. If we have a real passion for Jesus, out heart’s desire will be to more fully understand everything about him. Not only did he give up the glory and safety of heaven and daily fellowship with the Father, but he risked losing his eternal existence should he have failed in his mission.

      Hebrews 5:7-8 NASB
      “In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered.”

      I think Philippians helps give us a sense of what Jesus gave up to come to earth and save mankind at great cost to himself.

      Philippians 2:5-11 NASB
      “Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

  • Bill Nippel

    Hello Peter and thankyou for your follow-up comment.
    I think the whole crux of the matter boils down to whether the pre-existent Logos (Jesus) in being referred to by several different names and titles such as Michael (the Chief Messenger of God) and “The Suffering Servant” as well as “the Only Begotten Son of God” was in fact brought forth, begotten, created, of the same divine substance as YHWH or was He of some lower level of spirit substance in the same class as angels.In otherwords, was the pre-existent Christ ‘brought forth’ with the same divine nature as YHWH or of a lower spirit substance or essence than YHWH in the same class as the ministering angels.

    • Peter K. (admin)

      Bill – Does the Bible specifically tell us either way? Do you feel this is a very important issue? If so, why so imprtant?

      Certainly Jesus was far greater and more poweful than the spirits we refer to as angels.

      I will give you my understanding. Jesus did not have “life within himself” (Life that is self perpetuating and not dependant on anything for its existense) until He was resurrected. Isn’t that the Divine Nature?

      John 5:26 AMP
      “For even as the Father has life in Himself and is self-existent, so He has given to the Son to have life in Himself and be self-existent.”

      Jesus uses the same Greek word for “life in himself” applying it to those who would recieve the Divine Nature after faithfully fulfilling the memorial emblems in their life.

      John 6:53 NASB
      “So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.”

  • Bill Nippel

    Hello everyone… I would just like to comment on whether Jesus pre-existed as the “angel” (chief messenger) Michael.
    Would any here be in agreement that Jesus is unique and far superior to angels in that he was brought forth (begotten) directly from YHWH and hence is literally “the Son of God”.
    This would mean the only begotten Son of God (the Logos) has the same divine nature as the Father without being Almighty God himself but rather the divine son of the Almighty God from before the creation.

    • Peter K. (admin)

      Bill – I moved your comment over to an article that will address your concerns. As you will discover from the article, the word “angel” is a job description for “messenger.” For example, Malachi 3:1 describes Jesus as the “messenger” (same Heberew for “angel”) of the Covenant. Yes, Jesus from His creation was far superior to all of the other messengers – the only direct creation of Jehovah. I believe the expression “divine nature” applies more accurately to Jesus when He was resurrected, glorified and exalted back to heaven. Perhaps others have comments or you have more to add.

  • Hi there and may you all be happy and content now and humble enough to accept everything prophesied when it actually occurs.
    In the meantime, and haven’t I said that before somewhere, Jesus and Michael are entirely separate living creatures/beings.

    I don’t invent matters connected with Jehovah’s inimitable purpose.
    All things written aforetime . . . here in Paul’s own words:
    “For all the things that were written aforetime were written for our instruction, that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.” (Romans 15:4)NWT. set the tone of and provide the foundation for the NT and all connected to or disconnected from His purpose.
    That was all Jesus and the NT writers had, save for a few necessary clarifications of the inspired kind.

    Some dramatic events were especially written aforetime to not only connect with Jesus lying down his life, but to also provide the very pattern or type of the reality of the actual event thus prefigured:

    Abraham / his only-miraculously-begotten-son / a saving SHEEP.
    Jehovah / His only-miraculously-begotten-son / a saving SHEEP.

    That was the procedure to save the seed of Abraham Israel, so that they, the small flock to be given the Kingdom, who are neither male or female, Jew or Gentile, can fulfil all Jehovah promised Abraham.

    The Up Shot?:
    Jesus is neither Jehovah’s only-begotten son nor Michael.

    Once the reality of the procedure sinks into the Christian mind, besotted and preoccupied as it is with personal salvation, Jehovah’s love for the entire human race in general and for Seed of Abraham Israel in particular as THE only but temporary means for getting humanity back on the starting line with no sins and transgressions to answer for, will just blossom in the hearts and minds of those still imprisoned by the same Hagarian slavery of the Law Israel was unwilling to keep -Galatians 5.

    Bye, and thank you for this venue

    • Peter K. (admin)

      Dieter – To summarize your conclusions as best as I understand them: Jesus is not Jehovah’s only-begotten son, nor is He Michael the Archangel.

      I do not understand what you are saying??? I think perhaps that as evidence that Jesus is NOT Jehovah’s only begotten Son, you point to the type of Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac replaced by a ram.

      Hebrews 11 (NWT) “17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, as good as offered up Isaac, and the man that had gladly received the promises attempted to offer up his only-begotten son, 18 although it had been said to him: “What will be called ‘your seed’ will be through Isaac.” 19 But he reckoned that God was able to raise him up even from the dead; and from there he did receive him also in an illustrative way.”

      As I understand it, in type Isaac, as Abraham’s only begotten son, was in type (or illustration) raised from the dead when he came off the alter alive. So I don’t know what your point is.

      It is evident from the scriptures that in fact, Jesus was God’s only begotten son.

      John 3:16 (AV) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
      John 3:18 (AV) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
      1John 4:9 (AV) In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

      Regarding this post “Who is Michael the Archangel?”, can I presume that you never read any of this article? You make no attempt to rebut any of our evidence.

      • (Sorry about having posted this already as a general reply
        I got mixed up)

        Thank you Peter, from the bottom of My heart,
        Sorry for the delay occasioned by Life and age-related responsibilities.

        Your final comments re my not having possibly read the essay ‘Who is Michael the Archangel?’ were right on the button, for I did not, simply because I was fully conversant with the details via my rather studious 50 year association with the Witnesses. Nonetheless, since Proverbs 18:13 suggests I better unless I want to be found a fool, I subsequently did, confirming my hesitancy.

        Now, in reply, perhaps even in answer, to your contribution:
        Paragraph 1 –¬ Yes
        Paragraph 2 – Absolutely Yes
        Paragraph 3 – Hebrews 11:17-19 needs to be understood in the context
        of Galatians 4:21-28 written 10 years before and Romans
        11, written 5 years before Hebrews.

        That is like needing to understand Romans 5:12 in the context of 4:15 (and 5:13) as well as Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians 6:12; 10:23 written earlier.

        Here once again about the Abraham Isaac drama type:
        his only-miraculously-begotten-son Isaac offered in sacrifice
        having the Seed of Abraham Israel in his loins, while still
        part of his family\
        a SHEEP saving the seed of Abraham.

        His only-miraculously-begotten angelic son Michael the
        Archangel offered for the seed of Abraham
        Israel, but remaining in heaven in the presence of
        his creator and father\
        Jesus the SHEEP substituting
        for Jehovah’s only-begotten
        son offered to save the Seed
        of Abraham Israel -Isaiah 41:8

        Miraculously begotten Sons were offered in both instances, but replaced by a sheep to ensure the survival of the Seed of Abraham Israel.

        Other than that, he whole scenario that was meant to ultimately lead to the promised blessing of humanity would morph from the sublime to the most ridiculous nonsense of Mary giving birth to an only-begotten son AND a sheep.

        The second of the two most important OT types fundamentally ignored by Christianity is the hand-over from Elijah to Elisha.
        The transfiguration identifies the other two types prefiguring the roles assigned to the son of man Jesus:
        1. Mediator as prefigured by Moses and 2. Prophet by Elijah.
        Elijah transferred all he was and had accomplished to Elisha.
        Jesus transferred all he was and had accomplished to Jehovah’s OBS.

        The heavenly OBS, having also inherited Jesus’ right to rule as King over Israel in the flesh, now rules over them in the Kingdom of the son of God’s love the Israel of God of the little flock of Jesus’ anointed brothers had been transferred into by God, until they become the 1000 year heavenly kingdom of God, where all earthly relationship legacies cease Colossians 1:13 with a cross-reference to Romans 11:24.

        Because these matters are so vitally important to all Christians, but more especially to JWs and Bible Students, that I have decided to add relevant page-references of my 144 page site.

        You can either forgive me or ban me. In the meantime, I promise not to do that again.


        The following pages contain varying detail of the Elijah → Elisha transfer.

        Please note that I have gone back to my normal email address.
        My provider and/or the Government agency involved, have fixed the problem of someone blocking personal emails

        Please pardon my brevity
        May Jehovah bless all of us, Dieter

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>