Who Is The Archangel Michael ?

[Willa]

On 8/28/2019 at 6:22 PM, ShinyGospelShoes said:

I haven't suggested anything yet in regards Michael as Jesus (yet).  I am simply providing what others stated and correcting several errors with scripture.  For instance, here is what others stated on the matter:

Melito of Sardis (wrote AD 165 – AD 175, died c. AD 180 – Jesus is “among the angels, archangel”

Roman Catholic Encyclopedia: Jesus is the Angel of the Great Counsel, the Angel of the LORD, etc

Augustine of Hippo (AD 13 November 354 – AD 28 August 430) Jesus is the “Angel of the Testament”, etc

Irenaeus (AD early 2nd century – c. AD 202) Jesus is the one that came down and spoke to the Patriarchs under the designation “Angel”.

Titus Flavius Clemens (Greek: Κλήμης ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεύς; c. 150 – c. 215), known as Clement of Alexandria – Jesus is the “Angel of the Great Counsel”.

Justin Martyr, also known as Saint Justin (c. AD 100 – AD 165) – Jesus is called “Angel”, etc

Eusebius (AD 260/265 – AD 339/340); also called Eusebius of Caesarea and Eusebius Pamphili, - Jesus is called the “Angel of the mighty counsel”.

Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, anglicised as Tertullian (c. AD 160 – c. AD 225 AD) – Jesus is the ‘Angel’ that spake to Moses from the midst of the bush.

Roman Catholic New American Bible with Footnotes [along with Douay Rheims], 1986: - Jesus is the “Lord’s Angel”, and “Angel of the LORD”, and etc.

Charles Buck (AD 1771 – AD 11 Aug 1815) Jesus is called “Angel” and “Archangel”.

John Butterworth, minister (born AD 1727- died AD 1803) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Alexander Cruden (AD May 31, 1699 – AD November 1, 1770) – Jesus is called “Angel”.

Thomas Taylor (AD 15 May 1758 – AD 1 November 1835) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Patrick Fairbairn (AD 28 January 1805 – AD 6 August 1874) – Jesus is “Michael”.

William Baxter Godbey (AD June 3, 1833 - AD September 12, 1920) cites Dr. Clarke that Jesus is “Michael”.

Matthew Pool[e] – (AD 1624 – AD 1679) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Sir William Smith (AD 20 May 1813 – AD 7 October 1893) – Jesus is “Michael” and cites others Luther, Hengstenberg, etc.

Thomas Coke (AD 9 September 1747 – AD 2 May 1814) – Jesus is “Michael”.

John Guyse (AD 1680 - AD 1761) – Jesus is “Michael”, and called “Angel”, etc

Elhanan Winchester (AD 1751 in Brookline, Massachusetts – AD April 18, 1797) – Jesus is “Michael”.

George Sale (AD 1697, Canterbury, Kent, England – AD 1736, London, England) ; George Psalmanazar (AD 1679? - AD 1763),; Archibald Bower (AD 17 January 1686 – AD 3 September 1766) ; George D. Shelvocke (baptised AD 1 April 1675 - AD 30 November 1742) ; John Campbell (AD 1708 - AD 1775); John Swinton (AD 1703 - AD 1777) – Jesus is “Michael”.

The Church of England Magazine. Under the superintendence of the clergymen of the United Church of England and Ireland. Vol. IV. No. 85; January 6, 1838. By James Burns. – Jesus is “Michael”.

Robert Hawker (AD 1753 – AD 1827) – Jesus is “Michael” and “Archangel”.

Samuel Horsley (AD 15 September 1733 – AD 4 October 1806) – Jesus is “Michael”.

The London Encyclopedia, or Universal Dictionary … 1839. – Jesus is “Michael”.

The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible; Volume 4; M-P, Revised, Full-Color Edition; - cites that many Protestants, Hengstenberg, etc that Jesus is “Michael”.

Zondervan NIV Study Bible (Fully Revised): Wide Margin Loose-Leaf Edition; copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. – Jesus is the “angel of the Lord”, etc.

Hermann Witsius (Herman Wits or in Latin Hermannus Witsius) (AD 12 February 1636 – AD 22 October 1708) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Reinerus Vogelsangius (AD 1610 - AD 1679) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Johannes Cloppenburg (AD 1592 - AD 1652) - Jesus is Michael the “Angel of the Lord”.

Ralph Griffiths (AD c.1720 – AD September 28, 1803) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Campegius Vitringa Sr., or Kempe Vitringa[1] (born at Leeuwarden, May 16, 1659; died at Franeker, March 31, 1722) – Jesus is “Michael” the “Archangel”.

Martin Luther (AD 10 November 1483 – AD 18 February 1546) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Philipp Melanchthon (AD 16 February 1497 – AD 19 April 1560) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Johann Wigand (ca. AD 1523 - AD 21 October 1587) – Jesus is “Michael”.

David Chytraeus or Chyträus (26 February 1530, Ingelfingen – 25 June 1600, Rostock) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Giovanni Diodati or Deodati (AD 6 June 1576 – AD 3 October 1649) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Andrew Willet (AD 1562 – AD 4 December 1621) - Jesus is “Michael”.

William Miller (AD February 15, 1782 – AD December 20, 1849) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Ellen G. White (AD November 26, 1827 – AD July 16, 1915) – Jesus is “Michael”

Carl L. Beckwith, - Jesus is “Michael”.

Robert W. Bertram (AD 27 March 1921 - AD 13 March 2003) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Dr. Frances N. Lee (AD 1934 - AD Friday 23rd December, 2011) - - Jesus is “Michael”.

David Harold Chilton (AD 1951 – AD 1997) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Milton Spenser Terry (AD 1840 - AD 1914) - Jesus is “Michael”.

George Whitefield - December 27 [O.S. December 16] 1714 – September 30, 1770) speaks by symbol, Jesus is our “Michael”.

James Petigru Boyce (AD 1827 – AD 1888) citing John Pye-Smith, Jesus is “probably” “Michael”.

The Rev Dr John Pye-Smith FRS, FGS (AD 25 May 1774 - AD 5 February 1851) - Jesus is “probably” “Michael”.

Christmas Evans (AD 25 December 1766 – AD 19 July 1838) – Jesus is “Michael”.

The Christian Gleaner and Domestic Magazine
The Christian Gleaner and Domestic Magazine for 1825, Volume II; London; published by B. J. Holdsworth, 18, St. Paul's Churchyard. – Jesus is “Michael”.

Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm Walther (AD October 25, 1811 – AD May 7, 1887) - Jesus is “Michael”.

John Gill (AD 23 November 1697 – AD 14 October 1771) – Jesus is “Michael”.

Charles Spurgeon (AD 9 June 1834 – AD 31 January 1892) Jesus is the “True Michael”.

Matthew Henry (AD 18 October 1662 – AD 22 June 1714) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Thomas Adams (AD 1583 – AD 1653) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Heinrich [Henry] Bullinger (AD 18 July 1504 – AD 17 September 1575) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Isaac Watts (AD 17 July 1674 – AD 25 November 1748) - Jesus is “Michael”.

William Kinkade (AD 22nd Sept. 1783 - AD 20th Sept. 1832) [became Arian later; Heresy] - Jesus is “Michael”.

Jonathan Edwards (AD October 5, 1703 – AD March 22, 1758) - Jesus is “Michael”.

1560/1599 Geneva Study Bible- Jesus is “Michael”.

John [Jean] Calvin (born Jehan Cauvin: AD 10 July 1509 – AD 27 May 1564) - Jesus is “Michael” and does not disagree with others who see the same.

Francois Du Jon aka Franciscus Junius (born François du Jon, AD 1 May 1545 – AD 13 October 1602) - Jesus is “Michael”.

John Wesley (AD 28 June [O.S. 17 June] 1703 – AD 2 March 1791) - Jesus is “Michael”.

John Brown of Haddington (AD 1722 – AD 19 June 1787) - Jesus is “Michael”.

James Wood (AD 1751 – AD 1840) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Ernst Wilhelm Theodor Herrmann Hengstenberg (AD October 20, 1802, Fröndenberg – AD May 28, 1869, Berlin- Jesus is “Michael”.

Wikipedia, The Online Encyclopedia – Michael (Archangel); subsection - “Protestant Views” – cites John A. Lees, and Hengstenberg, Jesus is “Michael”.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, comment on section “Michael” by John A. Lees. - Jesus is “Michael”.

John Bunyan (AD 28 November 1628 – AD 31 August 1688) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Henry Ainsworth (AD 1571 – AD 1622) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Thomas Watson (c. AD 1620 – AD 1686) - Jesus is “Michael”.

James Glasgow D.D. (AD 27 May 1805 – AD 1890 ) - Jesus is “Michael”.

James Hastings (AD 1852 – AD 1922) and George Cunninghame Monteath Douglas (AD 1826 – AD 1904- Jesus is “Michael”.

Thomas Hobbes Scott (17 April 1783 – 1 January 1860) - Jesus may indeed be “Michael” as “many” others say.

Hezekiah Holland (born ca. AD 1617, living AD 1660) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Adam Clarke (AD 1760 or AD 1762 – AD 1832) - Jesus is “Michael”.

George Balderston Kidd (Cottingham, near Hull, AD 28 July 1794 – AD 1852) - Jesus is “Michael”.

James Durham (AD 1622 – AD 1658) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Bryce Johnston (AD 1747 - AD 1805) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Vine's Expository Dictionary, by William Edwy Vine Section: "archangel” – the “archangels” “voice” is the “voice” of Jesus.

Thomas Haweis (AD 1 January 1734 - AD February 11, 1820) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Abingdon Bible Commentary, 1929; Editor, Edwin Lewis (AD 1881 – AD 1959) was an American Methodist theologian primarily associated with Drew University in New Jersey. Others involved - Frederick Carl Eiselen; David G. Downey. - Jesus is “Michael”.

Johann [John] Peter Lange (AD 10 April 1802 in Sonneborn (now a part of Wuppertal) – AD 9 July 1884), and Elijah Richard Craven (AD Mar. 28 1824, in Washington D.C. - AD Jan. 5 1908, in Philadelphia, Pa) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Thomas Robinson (AD 1813/14 - AD 1890) - Jesus is “Michael”.

Johann Friedrich Haug ((AD * 1680, AD † 18. May 1753) and The Berlenburger Bibel [aka 'Berleb. Bible', 'Berleburger Bibel', etc.] is in the years AD 1726 - AD 1742) - Jesus is “Michael”.

These are men's sorry opinions and are not based on Scripture.  They are all in error.

[Willa]

2 hours ago, ShinyGospelShoes said:

Yes.  You have understood correctly.  Michael is just another name/designation/title for the Son (Jesus), just as Immanuel, or David, or Adam, etc is.

For when I said: "... He is the one who is the express image of the person of the Father, He is Who is as God the Father is.", this is a reference to Hebrews 1:3, as well as Rev. 12:7; see also Exo. 15:11; 1 Kin. 8:23; Psa. 71:19; see also Deut. 33:26; 2 Chro. 6:14; Job 36:22; Psa. 35:10, 86:8, 89:8, 113:5; Jer. 10:6-7; Mic. 7:18.

No, Michael is just another created being and not another name for the Christ, the Word made flesh.  Christ is called the Commander and Chief of the Lord's armies in the old testament.  This is not the archangel Michael.  He is occasionally called the Messenger (Angel) of the Lord, not meaning a created angel.  Again it is not the archangel Michael.   Calling Jesus "Michael" is Jehovah Witness doctrine.  

[missmuffet]

2 hours ago, ShinyGospelShoes said:

Yes.  You have understood correctly.  Michael is just another name/designation/title for the Son (Jesus), just as Immanuel, or David, or Adam, etc is.

For when I said: "... He is the one who is the express image of the person of the Father, He is Who is as God the Father is.", this is a reference to Hebrews 1:3, as well as Rev. 12:7; see also Exo. 15:11; 1 Kin. 8:23; Psa. 71:19; see also Deut. 33:26; 2 Chro. 6:14; Job 36:22; Psa. 35:10, 86:8, 89:8, 113:5; Jer. 10:6-7; Mic. 7:18.

Are you Jehovah Witness?

[ShinyGospelShoes]

35 minutes ago, Willa said:

These are men's sorry opinions and are not based on Scripture.  They are all in error.

I have read each of their studies, and they are based upon the scripture.  So I am not citing them for their 'opinion'.  I am citing them for their conclusion based upon the evidence they gave from scripture.  I have my own study on the subject here in quite some thorough detail (have you read it, or theirs?) - http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=13632827453459163007

If you have not read it, nor theirs, then I think this verse speaks to this situation:

Pro 18:13  He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

Pro 18:14  The spirit of a man will sustain his infirmity; but a wounded spirit who can bear?

Pro 18:15  The heart of the prudent getteth knowledge; and the ear of the wise seeketh knowledge.

Pro 18:16  A man's gift maketh room for him, and bringeth him before great men.

Pro 18:17  He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him.

Edited August 30, 2019 by ShinyGospelShoes

[ShinyGospelShoes]

10 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

Are you Jehovah Witness?

This question was already answered in the thread (here), directly and indirectly in so many ways (here).  I am not WTS/JW.  Thank you for asking.

[ShinyGospelShoes]

39 minutes ago, Willa said:

No, Michael is just another created being and not another name for the Christ, the Word made flesh.  Christ is called the Commander and Chief of the Lord's armies in the old testament.  This is not the archangel Michael.  He is occasionally called the Messenger (Angel) of the Lord, not meaning a created angel.  Again it is not the archangel Michael.   Calling Jesus "Michael" is Jehovah Witness doctrine.  

The first sentence is your "apriori" or "opinion", not at all backed by any statement from scripture, nor evidence given therefrom.  It may be safely put aside.

The second sentence is true, though you should at least reference it with  2-3 witnesses thereof.  For instance:

Jos 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?
Jos 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?
Jos 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.

This with the same as Moses:

Exo 3:1  Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb.
Exo 3:2  And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
Exo 3:3  And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.
Exo 3:4  And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I.
Exo 3:5  And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.

Thus the Father sent the Son:

Exo 23:20  Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
Exo 23:21  Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

Exo_23:23  For mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off.

Exo_32:34  Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them.

Exo_14:19  And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them:

Exo_14:24  And it came to pass, that in the morning watch the LORD looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians,

Exo_16:10  And it came to pass, as Aaron spake unto the whole congregation of the children of Israel, that they looked toward the wilderness, and, behold, the glory of the LORD appeared in the cloud.

The third sentence is again your "apriori" or "opinion", not at all backed by any statement from scripture, nor evidence given therefrom.  It may be safely put aside.

The fourth sentence is correct though you should at least reference it with  2-3 witnesses thereof, as I gave above.

The fifth sentence is again your "apriori" or "opinion", not at all backed by any statement from scripture, nor evidence given therefrom.  It may be safely put aside.

The sixth and final sentence is incorrect, from the very sources I gave you, showing even from Melito of Sardis, as many of the Reformation, existing long before the existence of the WTS/JW society, so even from an historical perspective, your statement is in error on the face of it.  Then theologically speaking, the WTS/JW come from the Bible students, and got much of the their theology from the 'advent' movement of the mid 1800's (19th cent), which carried a great deal of Reformation theology in it, so your statement is in error upon this point also.  The WTS/JW borrowed the doctrine and then corrupted it as many other things.

Edited August 30, 2019 by ShinyGospelShoes

[George]

All the theophanies in the Old Testament are very different than connecting it to Michael the archangel.

To connect the two ... is a far stretch and bordering saying that Jesus is a "created" being, as the angels are.

Do you realize there is a VAST difference between the two?  Before you ask, have you read my document -- I did download it -- and its 1200+ pages ... so no, I can't say I read your entire document.  

I wrote quite a few devotionals connecting the Angel-Lord ... and the pre-incarnate Jesus.  If you're curious, but it's a few paragraphs each ...

https://www.worthydevotions.com/christian-devotional/its-all-in-his-wonderful-timing

https://www.worthydevotions.com/christian-devotional/hes-in-the-midst-of-the-fire

https://www.worthydevotions.com/christian-devotional/the-lord-is-sending-you

https://www.worthydevotions.com/christian-devotional/whose-side-are-you-on

https://www.worthydevotions.com/christian-devotional/is-there-anything-too-hard-for-the-lord

But in no way, is this connected to Michael.  If you really think about it, Mormons say that Jesus and Satan were "brothers".  And Satan was an "arch-angel" ... this is the line of thinking you're heading down.  You see, that different cults ... JWs and Mormonism ... they get the issue of who Yeshua (Jesus) is WRONG ... if your foundation is crooked ... then your house will be slanted ... this is why it's crucial to get who Jesus is ABSOLUTELY correct STRAIGHT from the Word.  

Which verse ... without any "interpretation" says that Michael is Jesus?  

That will be your answer.

Your brother in the Lord with much agape love,

George

 

[George]

Heb 1:1  God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, 
Heb 1:2  hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds; 

Through Jesus all the WORLDS were created ... 

Heb 1:3  who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; 
Heb 1:4  having become by so much better than the angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they. 

Far above every angel ... even archangels!

Heb 1:5  For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee? and again, I will be to him a Father, And he shall be to me a Son? 
Heb 1:6  And when he again bringeth in the firstborn into the world he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. 

The angels worship HIM!  That means even MICHAEL worships the Son!

Heb 1:7  And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels winds, And his ministers a flame of fire: 
Heb 1:8  but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 

The Son is God ... not an ANGEL.

Heb 1:9  Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee With the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 
Heb 1:10  And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of thy hands: 
Heb 1:11  They shall perish; but thou continuest: And they all shall wax old as doth a garment; 
Heb 1:12  And as a mantle shalt thou roll them up, As a garment, and they shall be changed: But thou art the same, And thy years shall not fail. 
Heb 1:13  But of which of the angels hath he said at any time, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet? 

Finally, easily seen ... 

Heb 1:14  Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation? 

... and what about the world to come?

Heb 2:5  For He has not put in subjection to the angels the world to come, of which we speak.

Finally, angels will NOT receive worship ...

Rev 22:8  And I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel showing me these things. 
Rev 22:9  Then he said to me, Behold! See, do not do it! For I am your fellow-servant, and of your brothers the prophets, and of those who keep the Words of this Book. Do worship to God. 

Your brother in the Lord with much agape love,

George

[ShinyGospelShoes]

35 minutes ago, George said:

All the theophanies in the Old Testament are very different than connecting it to Michael the archangel.

To connect the two ... is a far stretch and bordering saying that Jesus is a "created" being, as the angels are.

Do you realize there is a VAST difference between the two?  Before you ask, have you read my document -- I did download it -- and its 1200+ pages ... so no, I can't say I read your entire document.  

I wrote quite a few devotionals connecting the Angel-Lord ... and the pre-incarnate Jesus. 

The first sentence is your 'apriori', your 'opinion', and you are welcome to it, but that in no way is demonstrating evidence contrary to that which I have provided.

The second sentence is faulty logic, or non-sequitur.  That Jesus is in the office (not nature) of "Angel" in no way equates to Jesus being created, and it was not once hinted at by myself in all this thread, in fact I stated quite the opposite in several instances.  People confuse "office" and "nature" when the word in Hebrew/Syriac/koine Greek or English only means 'messenger', 'ambassador', or 'that which is sent with a message'.

The third question follows from the non-sequitur.  It may be safely set aside for the moment, until scripture is presented opposing what has been given already.

Thank you for downloading the document.  It is 1200 in total, but not in the main.  The main is quite short compared to the appendices which take up the vast bulk of the 1200 and are uneccessary for the main, though useful, and another large section in the main is taken up by the historical citations in their original where possible with citations.  So it is not that daunting, and I provided a Table of Contents to stick to that which is pertinent.

I am glad that you agree about the OT appearances of the Son, being "the Angel of the LORD".

35 minutes ago, George said:

But in no way, is this connected to Michael.  If you really think about it, Mormons say that Jesus and Satan were "brothers".  And Satan was an "arch-angel" ... this is the line of thinking you're heading down.  You see, that different cults ... JWs and Mormonism ... they get the issue of who Yeshua (Jesus) is WRONG ... if your foundation is crooked ... then your house will be slanted ... this is why it's crucial to get who Jesus is ABSOLUTELY correct STRAIGHT from the Word.  

Which verse ... without any "interpretation" says that Michael is Jesus?  

That will be your answer.

Your brother in the Lord with much agape love,

George

What LDS (Mormons) say is non-sequitur.  What the WTS/JW say is also non-sequitur.  Error is error.  This thread is not about their theology, but is instead about what the scripture actually says.  Therefore, please address that which has been stated in this thread, and in the study itself.

To answer the question, Each of the verses which mention this specific "Michael" and the one which says "archangel" so say when studied in their proper context (Revelation 12 especially due to the chiastic and unbreakable (John 10:35) structure of Revelation, see the Appendix pertinent to that); Otherwise do you expect me to leave that (proper context and line upon line (Isa. 28:10,13)) out simply to satisfy a question similar to that which Muslims ask, "Where does it say in scripture that Jesus said, "I am God worship me."?")  The question is faulty itself and stems from an incorrect apriori in how the scripture functions in interpreting itself (Genesis 40:8; 2 Peter 1:10; Isaiah 8:20, etc).

I could ask Paul where, in the OT specifically in one verse, he got the names "Jannes and Jambres" from couldn't I?  Would it be a valid or invalid question?

I only ask for an unbiased and prayerful study.  If, at the end, you still choose as your present position, then I cannot force (and would not) you (or anyone) to be otherwise as your conscience allows.

Edited August 30, 2019 by ShinyGospelShoes

[ShinyGospelShoes]

1 minute ago, George said:

...

Heb 1:5  For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee? and again, I will be to him a Father, And he shall be to me a Son? 
Heb 1:6  And when he again bringeth in the firstborn into the world he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

Your brother in the Lord with much agape love,

George

Already addressed brother George (twice) in this very thread (you did read this thread through, yes?)

Already addressed, and you did not rebut, you only disagreed (ie, your 'opinion', your 'apriori'):

I will here quote it again:

"Hebrews 1:13 refers to the created (hence "maketh") angelic hosts, not the uncreated "Angel of the LORD" - Son of the Father, as we see in Hebrews 1:1-3, the highest Messenger sent from the Father.  In fact, Hebrews states that the created angelic hosts (Gabriel, etc) are the "fellows" in office of messengers to the uncreated Son, who is the highest Messenger.

Mat_21:37  But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.

Heb 1:9  Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Context? Hebrews 1 vs 7.

Heb 1:7  And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

The context of Hebrews 1:6 is the created angelic hosts, not the uncreated Angel of the LORD.

Therefore, when it says, "Let all the angels ..." it only refers to the created "fellows" of the uncreated Son, and Highest Angel (Messenger) of the Father, as seen in Vs 1-3.

You already admitted that the OT refers to the Son as the "Angel of the LORD", thus proving the point.

Your assumption is in regards Michael not being the Son.  You did not prove that the two are not the same Being.  I gave very much evidence that they are."

Remember, I am just quoting from a previous time I already addressed the text.