SDA: Christ is actually Michael the archangel?

[RyanL]

While some, very early in Adventist history, held that Christ had been created,[15] by 1888 it was widely accepted that he had preexisted from “so far back in the days of eternity that to finite comprehension” he was “practically without beginning.” Whatever that beginning may have involved, it was not by “creation.”[16]

[15] E.g., Uriah Smith, Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Revelation (Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1865), 59. He later repudiated this view (idem, Looking Unto Jesus [Battle Creek: Review and Herald, 1898], 12, 17).

[[16]](http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/moon/moon-trinity1.htm#*note16) E. J. Waggoner, *Christ and His Righteousness *(Oakland, CA: Pacific Press, 1890), 21-22; cf. Uriah Smith, *Looking Unto Jesus*, 12, 17.

Apparently, many SDA’s think that Jesus was created, but they move the date of creation back so far that for all “practical purposes” (whatever that means) Jesus is eternal. They may claim that the don’t believe Jesus was created, but if He ever ‘was not’ and then ‘was’, it’s creation. That’s just good logic (see: ‘First Cause’).

Any claim to the contrary must be seriously examined after it has been presented. Without a presentation (that going from non-being to being is not creation), the claim is sufficiently amorphous as to justify just about anything. That’s why the burden of proof rests on the claimant.

Source = sdanet
%between%

 

[Montie_Claunch]

RyanL:

Apparently, many SDA’s think that Jesus was created, but they move the date of creation back so far that for all “practical purposes” (whatever that means) Jesus is eternal. They may claim that the don’t believe Jesus was created, but if He ever ‘was not’ and then ‘was’, it’s creation. That’s just good logic (see: ‘First Cause’).

Any claim to the contrary must be seriously examined after it has been presented. Without a presentation (that going from non-being to being is not creation), the claim is sufficiently amorphous as to justify just about anything. That’s why the burden of proof rests on the claimant.

Source = sdanet
%between%

What??? Alright I am confused. Jesus was created but, he wasn’t created??? screams I…don’t…understand.It…isn’t…logical…another scream

 

[RyanL]

Montie Claunch:

What??? Alright I am confused. Jesus was created but, he wasn’t created??? screams I…don’t…understand.It…isn’t…logical…another scream

That’s only according to Uriah Smith. I trust he’s a reliable indicator of what SDA’s believe (being that he learned directly from E.G. White); others may disagree.

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

RyanL:

Apparently, many SDA’s think that Jesus was created, but they move the date of creation back so far that for all “practical purposes” (whatever that means) Jesus is eternal. They may claim that the don’t believe Jesus was created, but if He ever ‘was not’ and then ‘was’, it’s creation. That’s just good logic (see: ‘First Cause’).

Any claim to the contrary must be seriously examined after it has been presented. Without a presentation (that going from non-being to being is not creation), the claim is sufficiently amorphous as to justify just about anything. That’s why the burden of proof rests on the claimant.

Source = sdanet
%between%

Let me draw a parallel here. Suppose I took the works of an early church father, any ECF, and assumed everything he wrote on doctrine, approved or not, applied to today’s Catholic Church. Would that be an accurate gauge of Catholic doctrine? No, obviously not. Neither would it be fair to call Catholics dishonest because they are “hiding” what the ECF teach. So, why are you doing this with Adventism? The works cited were never adopted by the Adventist denomination as a whole as definative or authoritative, and certainly do not represent the doctrinal beliefs today.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

So here is what I saw their main “proof texts” to be:
Rev12:7-8;
7 Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, 8 but they were defeated and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.9 And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world–he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. 10 And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, "Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God. 11 And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death.
In this same Chapter the first few verses indicate the vision in which Mary was Assumed into Heaven, but they wont accept that for some reason. Anyway, if they keep reading after v8 in v10 a voice from heaven indicates its not Christ talking here by what it says, could it be Michael talking? Maybe, but not Christ. No indication that M.AA. is Jesus.

Next they use 1Thess416;
14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; 17 then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.
In the very next verse, v17, it says that they will “MEET THE LORD” in the air, to confuse the AA mentioned in v16 with the Lord Jesus is a serious error. If they look to Matt, Mark and Luke they will see the the same thing explined, Matt24:
29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken; 30 then will appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory; 31 and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
It is very clear that there is no hint that Jesus is Michael the ArchAngel.
They also use Jude9:
9 But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.”
But that falls right on its face, it says MAA did NOT pass judgement BUT “THE LORD rebuke you” in v4 of this same letter it says:
4 For admission has been secretly gained by some who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly persons who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
… 17 But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of** our Lord Jesus Christ**; 18 they said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.” 19 It is these who set up divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. 20 But you, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; 21 keep yourselves in the love of God; wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. 22 And convince some, who doubt; 23 save some, by snatching them out of the fire; on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. 24 Now to him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you without blemish before the presence of his glory with rejoicing, 25 to the only God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and for ever. Amen.

So WHO is doing the rebuking here??

 

[RyanL]

Like I said, some may deny even Uriah Smith. How about Ellen White, herself?
E.G. White:

"…yet, Jesus, God’s dear Son, had the pre-eminence over all the angelic host. He was one with the Father before the angels were created. Satan was envious of Christ and gradually assumed command which devolved on Christ alone…

***Note: Devolve: To transfer from one person to another: hand down. *Webster’s Dictionary *(i.e., not possessing it from the start) ***

"…The great Creator assembled the heavenly host, that he might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon his Son…The Father then made known that it was ordained by himself that Christ, his Son, should be equal with himself." (Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, pp. 17,18, emphasis supplied)

Immutable God? Apparently not. It seems as though he can grow in power (contrary to the clear teachings of scripture).

What about the precursers to the SDAs?
E.G. White:

The gospel had been planted in Bohemia as early as the ninth century. The Bible was translated, and public worship was conducted, in the language of the people. … Heaven had provided other agencies for the preservation of the church. Many of the Waldenses and Albigenses, driven by persecution from their homes in France and Italy, came to Bohemia. Though they dared not teach openly, they labored zealously in secret. Thus the true faith was preserved from century to century.
– Ellen White, Great Controversy, Chapter 6, paragraph 1, p97.

Century after century the blood of the saints had been shed. While the Waldenses laid down their lives upon the mountains of Piedmont “for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ,” similar witness to the truth had been borne by their brethren, the Albigenses of France.
– Ellen White, Great Controversy, Ch 15, p271.

Briefly, the Albigensians were a Gnostic sect. Gnosticism is described in the Bible - 1 John 2:18,22 and 2 John 1:7 - they are called “antichrist.” An analysis of their beliefs will show that they cannot be the true Christianity of Jesus and the Apostles. Briefly, these people denied that Jesus was God. They believed in 2 Gods, one good, and one evil. The evil God was the God of the Old Testament, the creator of all physical matter (including the human body) and what it does, and the author of evil. The good God was the creator of the spiritual world and was the God of the New Testament. He sent Jesus, a created being, to earth to liberate the divine souls trapped in the physical bodies by the evil God. They did not believe that Jesus really came in the flesh (cf 1 John 2:18,22 and 2 John 1:7) but rather that this was an illusion. His celestial essence penetrated Mary’s ear, and this is how it got into her to later appear to be born. His suffering was not real, but also merely an illusion. Jesus never actually saved us, he merely showed us the way by which me might obtain salvation. They believed in reincarnation, and eventually salvation after many rebirths. They believed that marriage was to be avoided, and practiced instead extramarital sex. They also practiced ritual suicide.

 

[Ferdinand_Mary]

Like I said, some may deny even Uriah Smith. How about Ellen White, herself?
E.G. White:

"…yet, Jesus, God’s dear Son, had the pre-eminence over all the angelic host. He was one with the Father before the angels were created. Satan was envious of Christ and gradually assumed command which devolved on Christ alone…

Note: Devolve: To transfer from one person to another: hand down. Webster’s Dictionary (i.e., not possessing it from the start) "…The great Creator assembled the heavenly host, that he might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon his Son…The Father then made known that it was ordained by himself that Christ, his Son, should be equal with himself." (Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, pp. 17,18, emphasis supplied)

Immutable God? Apparently not. It seems as though he can grow in power (contrary to the clear teachings of scripture).

What about the precursers to the SDAs?
E.G. White:

The gospel had been planted in Bohemia as early as the ninth century. The Bible was translated, and public worship was conducted, in the language of the people. … Heaven had provided other agencies for the preservation of the church. Many of the Waldenses and Albigenses, driven by persecution from their homes in France and Italy, came to Bohemia. Though they dared not teach openly, they labored zealously in secret. Thus the true faith was preserved from century to century.
– Ellen White, Great Controversy, Chapter 6, paragraph 1, p97.

Century after century the blood of the saints had been shed. While the Waldenses laid down their lives upon the mountains of Piedmont “for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ,” similar witness to the truth had been borne by their brethren, the Albigenses of France.
– Ellen White, Great Controversy, Ch 15, p271.

Briefly, the Albigensians were a Gnostic sect. Gnosticism is described in the Bible - 1 John 2:18,22 and 2 John 1:7 - they are called “antichrist.” An analysis of their beliefs will show that they cannot be the true Christianity of Jesus and the Apostles. Briefly, these people denied that Jesus was God. They believed in 2 Gods, one good, and one evil. The evil God was the God of the Old Testament, the creator of all physical matter (including the human body) and what it does, and the author of evil. The good God was the creator of the spiritual world and was the God of the New Testament. He sent Jesus, a created being, to earth to liberate the divine souls trapped in the physical bodies by the evil God. They did not believe that Jesus really came in the flesh (cf 1 John 2:18,22 and 2 John 1:7) but rather that this was an illusion. His celestial essence penetrated Mary’s ear, and this is how it got into her to later appear to be born. His suffering was not real, but also merely an illusion. Jesus never actually saved us, he merely showed us the way by which me might obtain salvation. They believed in reincarnation, and eventually salvation after many rebirths. They believed that marriage was to be avoided, and practiced instead extramarital sex. They also practiced ritual suicide.

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

Regarding devolving:

John 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
…
John 5:27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

Does that say the Father confired on Jesus a special authority?
Yes it does. Did judgment devolve onto Jesus? Yes it did. The principle IS biblical.

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

Rev 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, …

Who leads the angelic host of heaven, who is their captain?

Josh 5:13 And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?
Josh 5:14 And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?
Josh 5:15 And the captain of the LORD'S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.

Notice that Joshua worshipped the captain of the Host? If this were a mere angel, then the angel would have protested Joshua worshipping him, just as the angel protested John the Revelator worshipping him (Rev 22:8-9). So Joshua met with God (Jesus Christ) the captain of the Host. That is why he stood on holy ground and was asked to remove his shoes (just like Moses was asked in Exo 3:5 and Acts 7:33). Therefore, in Rev 12:7 you have Satan and his angels, and Jesus (Michael, the captain of the Host) and His angels - this was the war that began in heaven and continues today.

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

1 Th 4:16 For 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:

Who raises the dead with His voice? Not a created angel, indeed not even a created archangel. The shout is given with the voice of the archangel, the LORD Jesus Christ Himself:

John 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
John 5:27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.
John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
John 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

It is the voice of Jesus Christ (the Son of man) that raises the dead. Just as 1 Th 4:16 says, the Lord Jesus shall descend from heaven and shout with the voice of the Archangel, because He is the Archangel. With that shout, the righteous dead will be raised from their graves!

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

Jude 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

This verse is a virtual duplicate of another Old Testament event-

Zec 3:1 And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.
Zec 3:2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

In both Jude 9 and Zech 3:1-2 it is Jesus, the angel of the LORD who is also Michael the archangel, contending with Satan for both Moses and Joshua.

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

Dan 10:13 But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia

The prince of the kingdom of Persia is a reference to Satan, and Michael refers again to Jesus. It is the created angel Gabriel that is speaking with Daniel (See Dan 8:16, 9:21). The reference to Michael as one of the chief princes probably alludes to the Trinity, with Jesus being one part of the triune Godhead.

Dan 10:21 But I will show thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.

Gabriel says that only he and Michael know certain truths which Gabriel will reveal to Daniel. Who could this Michael be but Jesus, God Himself, giving Gabriel the truths to reveal to Daniel?

Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people:

Michael standing up is a reference to the second coming of Jesus at the end of time.

Some might propose that, in these three preceding texts from Daniel, the description of Michael as a mere prince is inappropriate for Jesus, so it must be speaking of a created angel. Note the following verses:

Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Acts 3:14 But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;
Acts 3:15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

And what does the name Michael mean? It means who (is) like God? A very good question indeed - who is like Jesus?

As this study shows, according to scriptures, Jesus is the angel of the LORD, the angel of God, the angel of the covenant, the Archangel Michael, who appeared time and again in the Old Testament to speak directly to His people. Michael is just another title for the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who is God in the flesh, the principle messenger of the gospel (archangel) to humanity, but He is not a created being.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Is this thread working? It says that someone named Michael Sheifler posted today at 7am but I dont see any posts.

 

[Church_Militant]

I found this quote as the summation of an SDA online article on this topic. Talk about twisting the meanings of scriptures.

And what does the name Michael mean? It means who (is) like God? A very good question indeed - who is like Jesus? (my comment: Non-sequitur.)

As this study shows, according to scriptures, Jesus is the angel of the LORD, the angel of God, the angel of the covenant, the Archangel Michael, who appeared time and again in the Old Testament to speak directly to His people. Michael is just another title for the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who is God in the flesh, the principle messenger of the gospel (archangel) to humanity, but He is not a created being. 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,

 

[Anima_Christi]

Don’t the Jehovah’s Witnesses also believe this? . . . I do think their founder was a former Adventist though so they share a lot of beliefs in common.

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

Church Militant:

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

And the inverse of that assessment is that most Christians have demoted an office clearly held by deity, to an angel, that being the Archangel / Captain of the hosts of the Lord (Josh 5:13-15), not realizing that the word angel has more than one definition.

 

[BlackKnight]

Anima Christi:

Don’t the Jehovah’s Witnesses also believe this? . . . I do think their founder was a former Adventist though so they share a lot of beliefs in common.

Most of the “adventist” groups have some similar teachings. Have you ever seen John 1:1 in the JWs New World Translation? " In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

But that’s not what this thread is about…we are dealing here with the SDA and their beliefs about Jesus and Michael the archangel being one and the same. If we peripherally refute someone else’s error along the way all the better I guess. (Does that constitute “collateral damage”?)

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

Anima Christi:

Don’t the Jehovah’s Witnesses also believe this? . . . I do think their founder was a former Adventist though so they share a lot of beliefs in common.

To repeat, SDA and JWs beliefs are NOT identical. Please review the previous posts in the thread.

 

[Mike_Scheifler]

It is evident to many Christians who have studied the issue, that the phrase “angel of the Lord” throughout the Old Testament, is actually a Christophany, a pre-incarnation appearace of Jesus. I have even cited church fathers that deduced this. It is sad that any of you find this so difficult to even consider, as it diminishes your understanding of how attentive God has been to the needs of His people.

 

[BlackKnight]

It is evident to many Christians who have studied the issue, that the phrase “angel of the Lord” throughout the Old Testament, is actually a Christophany, a pre-incarnation appearace of Jesus.

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).