Is it true Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Michael the archangel and Jesus are the same person?
Answer
In
a word, yes. The Jehovah's Witnesses maintain that Jesus was Michael
the archangel prior to his coming to earth. They assert: "Scriptural
evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God's Son before he
left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return" (Aid to
Bible Understanding, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1971, 1152).
They arrive at this erroneous belief primarily
through a misinterpretation of (1) Daniel 10:13, 21, where reference is
made to a "great prince," Michael; and (2) First Thessalonians 4:16,
where the Lord Jesus is described as descending from heaven at the sound
of the archangel's voice. The JWs' own New World Translation of the
Bible reads, " . . . the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a
commanding call, with an archangel's voice."
According to the JWs, Michael is the only angel
other than Gabriel mentioned in the Bible, and Michael is the only one
who is called an archangel. (The angel Raphael is mentioned in the book
of Tobit, but since the Jehovah's Witnesses sprang from Protestantism,
they use the Protestant canon of Scripture, which is missing this Old
Testament book plus six others.)
Since the Lord Jesus descends from heaven "with an
archangel's voice," the JWs understand this passage as "suggesting that
he is, in fact, himself the archangel" (Aid to Bible Understanding,
1152).
While there are several problems with this line of
reasoning, two points in particular easily reveal its fallacy. First,
the fact that the Lord Jesus descends "with an archangel's voice" does
not automatically mean that it is his own voice spoken of. This passage
simply says that an archangel's voice will accompany the Lord's descent
from heaven, in the same manner that the bailiff's voice ("All rise!")
accompanies the judge's entrance into the courtroom.
Second, Hebrews 1:5 says, "For example, to which of
the angels did he [God] ever say: 'You are my son; I, today, I have
become your father'?" (New World Translation). The answer to the
question is, of course, "none."
Thus, if God never called an angel his Son, then
Michael--who is an angel--cannot be the Son. The fact that Michael is an
archangel does not change anything, as he is still an angel by nature.
An archangel is simply a "higher order" of angel, but an angel
nonetheless; "arch-" simply means "ruling" or "high ranking."
No comments:
Post a Comment