SDA: Christ is actually Michael the archangel?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Church_Militant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
BlackKnight:
Though Catholics believe that there were pre-incarnate instances when Jesus appeared to people in the OT, .
Hmm, interesting. I never knew this. Can you point out some instances?
 
40.png
BlackKnight:
Though Catholics believe that there were pre-incarnate instances when Jesus appeared to people in the OT, there is nothing at all that specifies Michael as Jesus, and in fact Hebrews 1 seems to refute that pretty well, without any gymnastics to make something appear to be so that is simply not there. The Catholic Church has not, does not, and will not ever teach that St. Michael and Jesus were one and the same, since that would be a case of worshipping and serving “the creature rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:25).
If one accepts that the “angel of the Lord” may refer to Jesus in the Old Testament, then there is nothing that stands in the way of archangel having the same meaning. There is no verse in scripture that proves Michael the Archangel is anything less than a valid title for the Creator of all creatures, the Captain of the host, Jesus Christ.
 
40.png
Genesis315:
Hmm, interesting. I never knew this. Can you point out some instances?

Isaiah 6 is one possibility. There is reason to think that St. Paul (IIRC)thought this.​

 
40.png
Genesis315:
Hmm, interesting. I never knew this. Can you point out some instances?
It appears that Irenaeus was one.
As an instance of how convinced some of the Fathers were in holding the opposite view, we may note Theodoret’s words (In Exod.): “The whole passage (Exodus 3) shows that it was God who appeared to him. But (Moses) called Him an angel in order to let us know that it was not God the Father whom he saw – for whose angel could the Father be? – but the Only-begotten Son, the Angel of great Counsel” (cf. Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., I, ii, 7; St. Irenaeus, Haer., iii, 6).
newadvent.org/fathers/0103306.htm
(See paragraph 2)

I have seen SDAs cite several ECF quotes that they pull out of context to support their belief, but a look at each one in it’s context and the context of the Bible itself makes the assertion look just like what I think it is…An error fleshed out with a bunch of Bible passages and other sources cited, all out of context, to make it appear valid to those who are not knowlegeable in the Bible of Catholic teachings. In fact, SDAs will use Catholic versions of the Bible to do this when talking to a Catholic.

But there is no doubt whatsoever that none of the ECF confused Jesus & Michael the archangel, (and as I said above) that is not Catholic teaching, and even the context of the above quote makes it plain that St. Irenaeus did not hold the SDA belief.
 
40.png
BlackKnight:
In fact, SDAs will use Catholic versions of the Bible to do this when talking to a Catholic.
What a dastardly tactic, using a Catholic Bible. We Adventists are clearly devoid of any sense of what’s fair.
 
Book of Malachi, Catholic Douay Rheims Bible:
Code:
CHAPTER 3.

Christ shall come to his temple, and purify the priesthood. They that continue in their evil ways shall be punished: but true penitents shall receive a blessing.

Mal 3:1 Behold* I send my angel, and he shall prepare the way before my face. And presently the Lord, whom you seek, and the angel of the testament, whom you desire, shall come to his temple. Behold he cometh, saith the Lord of hosts.

* Matt. 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 1:17; and 7:27.

Now based on the Catholic DR Bible, is John the Baptist called an angel? Yes. Read the verses in the footnote. O.K., How did he hide his wings? Note that Jesus is also called the angel of the testament!

Hint: angel can mean just a messenger, without meaning a heavenly being with wings. Conclusion: Archangel can mean just a messenger too, without meaning a heavenly created being with wings.
 
I guess as a few people have already said Hebrews Ch1 destroys heresy very quickly:1In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 3The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. 5For to which of the angels did God ever say,
“You are my Son;
today I have become your Fathera]”**(“http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=heb1&version=31#fen-NIV-29953b”)]?

Or again,
"I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son"c]?

6And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
"Let all God’s angels worship him."d]

7In speaking of the angels he says,
"He makes his angels winds,
his servants flames of fire."e] 8But about the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy."f] 10He also says,
"In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end."g] 13To which of the angels did God ever say,
"Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet"h]? 14Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?
 
Catholic Dude:
I guess as a few people have already said Hebrews Ch1 destroys heresy very quickly:
Only for those who know only one definition for the word angel, and so assume that the archangel must be created. That is the fundamental problem to discussing this topic.
 
Gottle of Geer said:
## Isaiah 6 is one possibility. There is reason to think that St. Paul (IIRC)thought this. ##

Just a side note, what does “IIRC” mean, I see it all the time.
 
THE FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN MARTYR.

Chapter LXIII.[63] - How God Appeared to Moses.

And all the Jews even now teach that the nameless God spake to Moses; whence the Spirit of prophecy, accusing them by Isaiah the prophet mentioned above, said "The ox knoweth his owner, and the *** his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know Me, and My people do not understand."131 And Jesus the Christ, because the Jews knew not what the Father was, and what the Son, in like manner accused them; and Himself said, "No one knoweth the Father, but the Son; nor the Son, but the Father, and they to whom the Son revealeth Him."132 Now the Word of God is His Son, as we have before said. And He is called Angel and Apostle; for He declares whatever we ought to know, and is sent forth to declare whatever is revealed; as our Lord Himself says, "He that heareth Me, heareth Him that sent Me."133 From the writings of Moses also this will be manifest; for thus it is written in them, "And the Angel of God spake to Moses, in a flame of fire out of the bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, the God of thy fathers; go down into Egypt, and bring forth My people."134 And if you wish to learn what follows, you can do so from the same writings; for it is impossible to relate the whole here. But so much is written for the sake of proving that Jesus the Christ is the Son of God and His Apostle, being of old the Word, and appearing sometimes in the form of fire, and sometimes in the likeness of angels; but now, by the will of God, having become man for the human race, He endured all the sufferings which the devils instigated the senseless Jews to inflict upon Him; who, though they have it expressly affirmed in the writings of Moses, “And the angel of God spake to Moses in a flame of fire in a bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,” yet maintain that He who said this was the Father and Creator of the universe.

ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-46.htm
 
TERTULLIAN, AN ANSWER TO THE JEWS, TRANSLATED BY THE REV. S. THELWALL.
Code:
   CHAP. IX. -- OF THE PROPHECIES OF THE BIRTH AND ACHIEVEMENTS OF CHRIST

   ... For He who ever spake to Moses was the Son of God Himself; who, too,      was always *seen*.169 For God the Father none ever saw, and      lived.170 And accordingly it is agreed that the Son of God      Himself spake to Moses, and said to the people, "Behold, I send mine angel      before thy"-that is, the people's-"face, to guard thee on the march, and to      introduce thee into the land which I have prepared thee: attend to him, and      be not disobedient to him; for he hath not escaped171 thy notice,      since my name is upon him."172 For Joshua was to introduce the      people into the land of promise, not Moses. Now He called him an "angel," on      account of the magnitude of the mighty deeds which he was to achieve (which      mighty deeds Joshua the son of Nun did, and you yourselves read), and on      account of his office of prophet announcing (to wit) the divine will; just      as withal the Spirit, speaking in the person of the Father, calls the      forerunner of Christ, John, a future "angel," through the prophet: "Behold,      I send mine angel before Thy"- that is, Christ's -"face, who shall prepare      Thy way before Thee."173 Nor is it a novel practice to the Holy      Spirit to call those "angels" whom God has appointed as ministers of His      power. For the same John is called not merely an "angel" of Christ, but      withal a "lamp" shining before Christ: for David predicts, "I have prepared      the lamp for my Christ; "174 and him Christ Himself, coming "to      fulfil the prophets,"175 called so to the Jews. "He was," He      says, "the burning and shining lamp; "176 as being he who not      merely "prepared His ways in the desert,"177 but withal, by      pointing out "the Lamb of God,"178 illumined the minds of men by      his heralding, so that they understood Him to be that Lamb whom Moses was      wont to announce as destined to suffer. Thus, too, (was the son of Nun      called) Joshua, on account of the future mystery179 of his name:      for that name (He who spake with Moses) confirmed as His own which Himself      had conferred on him, because He had bidden him thenceforth be called, not      "angel" nor "Oshea," but "Joshua." Thus, therefore, each name is appropriate      to the Christ of God-that He should be called Jesus as well (as Christ).

   169 Comp. Num. xii. 5-8.
170 Comp. Ex. xxxiii. 20; John i. 18, xiv. 9; Col. i. 15; Heb. i. 3.
171 Oehler and others read "cela*vit*"; but the correction      of Fr. Junius and Rig., "cela*bit*," is certainly more agreeable to the      LXX. and the Eng. ver.
172 Ex. xxiii. 20, 21.
173 Mal. iii. 1: comp. Matt. xi. 10; Mark i. 2; Luke vii. 27.
174 See Ps cxxxii. 17 (cxxi. 17 in LXX.).
175 Matt. v. 17, briefly; a very favourite reference with      Tertullian.
176 John v. 35
177 Comp. reference 8, p. 232; and Isa. xl. 3, John i. 23.
178 See John i. 29, 36.
179 Sacramentum.

   [     http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0308.html](http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0308.html)
 
So… do any of you see any reason to believe that St. Michael the Archangel is actually some pre-incarnation personification of Jesus?

All I see is a very confused and convoluted attempt to make something appear true that neither the Word of God nor the teachings of the ECF support.

What possible purpose could anyone have to concoct such a teaching?

Pax vobiscum,
 
Church Militant:
So… do any of you see any reason to believe that St. Michael the Archangel is actually some pre-incarnation personification of Jesus?

All I see is a very confused and convoluted attempt to make something appear true that neither the Word of God nor the teachings of the ECF support.

What possible purpose could anyone have to concoct such a teaching?
Pax vobiscum,
1Jn2:
22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also. 24 Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you will abide in the Son and in the Father. 25 And this is what he has promised us, eternal life. 26 I write this to you about those who would deceive you.
2Jn1:
7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, men who will not acknowledge the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh; such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Look to yourselves, that you may not lose what you have worked for, but may win a full reward. 9 Any one who goes ahead and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God; he who abides in the doctrine has both the Father and the Son. 10 If any one comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house or give him any greeting; 11 for he who greets him shares his wicked work.
 
I found this quote as the summation of an SDA online article on this topic. Talk about twisting the meanings of scriptures. :eek:
This has to be one of the most convoluted and messed up interpretations of anything that I, personally have ever seen.

This would mean then that the SDA actually are adoring Michael the Archangel, thinking him to be Christ? :bigyikes:

About the only thing that he gets right is that Jesus is not created.

But they plainly assert that Jesus and Michael the archangel are one and the same person. A conclusion that can only be reached by the most strenuous of mental and theological gymnastics IMO.
Pax vobiscum,
It is a common misconception how that Adventists currently teach that Jesus was created; so too are the Bible reasons we do have for seeing Jesus as “Michael;” very twisted by many of the apologetics cults. It is quite Biblical to see Jesus as “The Archangel,” for this is how Scripture portrays Him to be. Please don’t make fun of us or belittle us. Lets just get into the Bible and see what is Truth. Catholics would do well to steer clear of the cult ministries from which they draw their “Adventist truth” from. It is so cherry-picked on these sites; no one can tell for sure what is right or wrong. Catholics, as far as I understand, should never need “Protestant” sources to “prove” their points. This article shows how one cult has been publicly proven wrong about us and how we see Jesus. May He bless us as we study together.
 
The belief that Jesus Christ is Michael is completely departing from the truth. I know one SDA who always talk about Jesus, I don’t know if he believes that though, he may have kept to himself. This is just shocking and I have to say heretical
 
It is a common misconception how that Adventists currently teach that Jesus was created; so too are the Bible reasons we do have for seeing Jesus as “Michael;” very twisted by many of the apologetics cults. It is quite Biblical to see Jesus as “The Archangel,” for this is how Scripture portrays Him to be. Please don’t make fun of us or belittle us. Lets just get into the Bible and see what is Truth. Catholics would do well to steer clear of the cult ministries from which they draw their “Adventist truth” from. It is so cherry-picked on these sites; no one can tell for sure what is right or wrong. Catholics, as far as I understand, should never need “Protestant” sources to “prove” their points. This article shows how one cult has been publicly proven wrong about us and how we see Jesus. May He bless us as we study together.
I read over that but ultimately it is an argument from silence and stringing passages here and there together. It is all virtually built on this verse:
"The Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: (1 Thessalonians 4:16).
The only other time the word “archangel” is used is Jude 1:9
But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”
This in no way indicates Jesus and Michael are the same person, the clear reading is that a loud voice and trumpet of God will sound off signifying the end times. It is eisegesis to the nth degree.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top