Michael the Great Prince!

[ViaCrucis]

So when the Bible says “sons of God” in the OT or NT that is NOT referring to angels correct?

Probably depends on context. The bnei elohim ("sons of God") mentioned in Job is clearly a reference to the angelic hosts.

But that has nothing to do with who Jesus is. Jesus isn't a son of God, in either the poetic way in which angels are sometimes described, or in other ways Scripture uses such language. Jesus is the monogenes of the Father, the only-begotten. Jesus is the eternal and uncreated Son, only-begotten of the Father, having His eternal Source and Origin from the Father's own Being, and therefore is Himself God of God, just as we confess in the Nicene Creed.

Jesus is not an angel.
Michael is an angel.

It's really that simple.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ewq1938]

Jesus is not an angel.
Michael is an angel.

Plus Jesus created Michael.

 

[ChetSinger]

So when the Bible says “sons of God” in the OT or NT that is NOT referring to angels correct?

The "sons of God" (bene Elohim) in the OT refer to a high-ranking class of angels (Gen 6, Job 1, Deut 32). These are different than the "malakhim", which are lower beings. The NT seems to conflate them together as "angels".

The "princes" seem to be those of the bene Elohim who were given territory on earth to govern. In Daniel two of them are mentioned, the Prince of Greece and the Prince of Persia. Some of these, including those two, grew to oppose God.

There is a lot of scholarly material regarding these beings. I can point you to some, if you wish.

Jesus is completely different: he is the Word of God made flesh. He is the instrument of God's creation, while the angels are created beings. So like us, the angels, including Michael, were created by the Father via his Word.

Whoever created the Jehovah's Witness theology that equates Jesus with Michael doesn't seem to be have been well-acquainted with Hebrew beliefs. That JW teaching is quite wrong.

 

[klutedavid]

“And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.”
‭‭Daniel‬ ‭12:1-3‬ ‭KJV‬‬


From the research i’m doing, all im getting is Jehovas witnesses theories on this. Id like some outside ideas of who Michael the great prince is. Was he already here? If not, when is he coming? And in any way does this correlate Michael with Jesus? And if not, why is this Michael a “great prince”?

In the book of Daniel, the person speaking to Daniel is described below.

Daniel 10:5-6
I lifted my eyes and looked, and behold, there was a certain man dressed in linen, whose waist was girded with a belt of pure gold of Uphaz. His body also was like beryl, his face had the appearance of lightning, his eyes were like flaming torches, his arms and feet like the gleam of polished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a tumult.

If you do not know the identity of the speaker described above, then you have some serious reading to embark on.

Here is a passage that describes the identity of Michael.

Daniel 10:12-13
Then he said to me, “Do not be afraid, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart on understanding this and on humbling yourself before your God, your words were heard, and I have come in response to your words. 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.

Micheal was one of the chief princes of Israel.

Though the speaker in Daniel is far above the rank of Michael.

Here is an identical vision of the man described in Daniel 10:5-6 above.

Ezekiel 1:26-28
Now above the expanse that was over their heads there was something resembling a throne, like lapis lazuli in appearance; and on that which resembled a throne, high up, was a figure with the appearance of a man. Then I noticed from the appearance of His loins and upward something like glowing metal that looked like fire all around within it, and from the appearance of His loins and downward I saw something like fire; and there was a radiance around Him. As the appearance of the rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the appearance of the surrounding radiance. Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord.

These two descriptions are of the same person and in Ezekiel this person is YHWH.

Further, we have an astounding vision from John of a man with the identical description as both Daniel and Ezekiel.

Revelation 1:12-16
Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lamp stands; and in the middle of the lamp stands I saw one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across His chest with a golden sash. His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and His eyes were like a flame of fire. His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been made to glow in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters. In His right hand He held seven stars, and out of His mouth came a sharp two-edged sword; and His face was like the sun shining in its strength.

If you see the revelation of the Word throughout the scripture, then you are indeed blessed.

Our God is an observable God and was never invisible, YHWH walked in the garden, appeared to Moses and to many others.

Micheal is a mere angelic prince of Israel, that God allows to assist in the greater spiritual war.

The scripture is all about Jesus Christ; everything was created through Jesus and for Jesus. And that includes the prince of Persia and the arch angel Michael.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

“And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.”
‭‭Daniel‬ ‭12:1-3‬ ‭KJV‬‬


From the research i’m doing, all im getting is Jehovas witnesses theories on this. Id like some outside ideas of who Michael the great prince is. Was he already here? If not, when is he coming? And in any way does this correlate Michael with Jesus? And if not, why is this Michael a “great prince”?

I believe Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the "Prince of Peace". Other forms of "prince" in Hebrew scriptures refer to other types of princes in heaven namely angels. For example, Michael is also referred to as a "chief prince".

The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, but Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I was left there with the kings of Persia. Daniel 10:13

 

[ewq1938]

I believe Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the "Prince of Peace". Other forms of "prince" in Hebrew scriptures refer to other types of princes in heaven namely angels. For example, Michael is also referred to as a "chief prince".

Prince also does not carry the same meaning we think of in modern times. A Greek example:


Joh 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince (ruler) of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.



Prince here doesn't mean second in command or something like we think in modern English, it means the ruler, the first in rank or power:

G758
a?´????
archo¯n
ar'-khone
Present participle of G757; a first (in rank or power): - chief (ruler), magistrate, prince, ruler.


G758
a?´????
archo¯n
Thayer Definition:
1) a ruler, commander, chief, leader
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: present participle of G757
Citing in TDNT: 1:488, 81

 

[ViaCrucis]

I believe Jesus Christ of Nazareth is the "Prince of Peace". Other forms of "prince" in Hebrew scriptures refer to other types of princes in heaven namely angels. For example, Michael is also referred to as a "chief prince".

The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, but Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I was left there with the kings of Persia. Daniel 10:13

The idea of "prince" here seems to suggest an idea that nations have supernatural agents protecting them. In the ancient near east it was common for different tribes, kingdoms, city-states, etc, though believing in a plurality of gods, saw themselves as having a particular patron deity. For example Babylon had Marduk. So the idea of national patron gods was baked into the belief of the ancient near east.

This idea may have morphed into the idea of tutelary or guardian angels as guardian "princes" over the nations.

Some commentators here think the prince here isn't supernatural at all, but rather a very ordinary prince, perhaps Cambyses II.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Adventist Heretic]

This is a false and heretical belief.

Michael is an angel, a creature.
Jesus Christ is the Eternal and Uncreated Logos, the only-begotten Son of the Father, true God of true God, the One by whom all things were made--including all the angels.

As it is written, "or to which of the angels did God ever say, 'You are my Son, today I have begotten you'? Or again, 'I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son'?" (Hebrews 1:5)

-CryptoLutheran

you sound like a fanatic. heresy should be used only when it effects our view of God and his nature or the nature of sin or salvation. any thing else is an error or difference of opinion. People who view Michael as Jesus think it is his name when he goes war. it is just another name of God like Immanuel, Elohim, Adonai. It is not a heresy. It is an error.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

So when the Bible says “sons of God” in the OT or NT that is NOT referring to angels correct?

correct, that make for an interesting discussion on Aliens though. Is there life in other parts of the universe, based on those texts I would have to say yes.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Elohim - Wikipedia
Elohim occurs frequently throughout the Torah. In some cases (e.g. Exodus 3:4, "Elohim called unto him out of the midst of the bush ..."), it behaves like a singular noun in Hebrew grammar, and is then generally understood to denote the single God of Israel. In other cases, Elohim acts as an ordinary plural of the word Eloah, and refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple gods (for example, Exodus 20:3, "You shall have no other gods before me").

The word Elohim occurs more than 2500 times in the Hebrew Bible, with meanings ranging from "gods" in a general sense (as in Exodus 12:12, where it describes "the gods of Egypt"), to specific gods (e.g., 1 Kings 11:33, where it describes Chemosh "the god of Moab", or the frequent references to Yahweh as the "elohim" of Israel), to demons, seraphim, and other supernatural beings, to the spirits of the dead brought up at the behest of King Saul in 1 Samuel 28:13, and even to kings and prophets (e.g., Exodus 4:16).[12] The phrase bene elohim, translated "sons of the Gods", has an exact parallel in Ugaritic and Phoenician texts, referring to the council of the gods.[12]

Elohim occupy the seventh rank of ten in the famous medieval rabbinic scholar Maimonides' Jewish angelic hierarchy. Maimonides said: "I must premise that every Hebrew [now] knows that the term Elohim is a homonym, and denotes God, angels, judges, and the rulers of countries, ..."[3]

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Sons of God - Wikipedia

 

[Adventist Heretic]

I like the word magistrate when describing sons of God. They are rulers. This make for an intresting view in Job and when the scripture says the magistrate (sons of God) sang at the creation of the world.

 

[ViaCrucis]

you sound like a fanatic. heresy should be used only when it effects our view of God and his nature or the nature of sin or salvation. any thing else is an error or difference of opinion. People who view Michael as Jesus think it is his name when he goes war. it is just another name of God like Immanuel, Elohim, Adonai. It is not a heresy. It is an error.

The word "heresy" isn't some monstrous word. It is a word which refers to matters of opinion (haeresis) which are at odds with established orthodox teaching. Another term would be heterodox.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Adventist Heretic]

that may be the technical definition, but the common association is with the punishment of people, burning people at the stake, flogging and imprisonment. disagreement of Michael's identity do not merit punishment of any kind, rebuke maybe, debate certainly, but nothing more. religious people though that word around carelessly.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

I like the word magistrate when describing sons of God. They are rulers. This make for an intresting view in Job and when the scripture says the magistrate (sons of God) sang at the creation of the world.

magistrates imply territory and being under there charge.

 

[ViaCrucis]

that may be the technical definition, but the common association is with the punishment of people, burning people at the stake, flogging and imprisonment. disagreement of Michael's identity do not merit punishment of any kind, rebuke maybe, debate certainly, but nothing more. religious people though that word around carelessly.

This isn't 13th century Spain, nobody's going to be burned at the stake, flogged, or imprisoned.

The term "heresy" wasn't invented during the Spanish Inquisition. It's a term used itself in the New Testament. And in continued use through two thousand years of Christian history.

You seem to be wanting to pretend that use of the term "heresy" means that I think a person should be deprived of their basic human rights. Punishing heretics was, and always has been, wrong. The civil government shouldn't be involved in spiritual matters of the Church. Heresy shouldn't be a capital offense in a civil court of law. I support the separation of Church and State. I think it strange that I should have to say this, but apparently I do.

But thank you for assuming the absolute worst about my character.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[charsan]

Michael is st. Archangel Michael. He is called great prince because he is head of all Angels of God.

I was thinking the same things.

------------------------------
There is a payer to St. Micheal the Archangel:

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil; May God rebuke him, we humbly pray; And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.

We pray this at my Church after Mass very Sunday

 

[Adventist Heretic]

This isn't 13th century Spain, nobody's going to be burned at the stake, flogged, or imprisoned.

The term "heresy" wasn't invented during the Spanish Inquisition. It's a term used itself in the New Testament. And in continued use through two thousand years of Christian history.

You seem to be wanting to pretend that use of the term "heresy" means that I think a person should be deprived of their basic human rights. Punishing heretics was, and always has been, wrong. The civil government shouldn't be involved in spiritual matters of the Church. Heresy shouldn't be a capital offense in a civil court of law. I support the separation of Church and State. I think it strange that I should have to say this, but apparently I do.

But thank you for assuming the absolute worst about my character.

-CryptoLutheran

you're welcome, any time glad to oblige