Jesus is Michael the Archangel

Greetings, I appreciate your professional conduct in this debate. Rebuttals Con P1 - The Son is distinct from angelic beings In this point we are in complete agreement. Jesus Christ is entirely different from the angelic servants of God. However, as I showed above, the word angel simply means messenger. “Michael the Archangel” is simply means "the chief messenger" Jesus is an angel in the same terminology as David and Paul where they are described as Angels. In the Bible the words for angel are “malak” in the Hebrew and “angelos/aggellos” in the Greek. See Strong's Lexicon where it states: [1] 4397 mal'ak mal-awk' from an unused root meaning to despatch as a deputy; a messenger; specifically, of God, i.e. an angel (also a prophet, priest or teacher):--ambassador, angel, king, messenger. 32 aggelos ang'-el-os from aggello (probably derived from 71; compare 34) (to bring tidings); a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication, a pastor:--angel, messenger. 743. archaggelos ar-khang'-el-os from 757 and 32; a chief angel:--archangel. Cons point derived from Hebrews 1:5-8 is moot as there would be nothing wrong with all the angels worshiping Michael if he was indeed in the form of Jesus. [2] Con P2 - Angels do not accept worship Once more we are in complete agreement. But what Con does not realize is that in Joshua 5:14-15 Michael appears to Joshua and accepts worship!. “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? 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" In all other places where regular angels appear to humans and they worship them, the angles do not accept the worship (e.g. Rev 19:10), but this one, “the captain of the Lord’s host,” does. In Revelation 12:7 it is clear that Michael is the leader of the angelic army that apposes Lucifer. It is thus logical to conclude that Michael is the commander of the Lords army. Now, as Con has stated “angels do not accept worship,” yet here we see the commander of the Lords army, seen in Revelation to be Michael, accepting worship. It would then be blasphemous to call the Commander of the Lords army anyone other than Jesus Christ, because that would mean that their is another being in the universe worthy of our worship... Con P3 - Jesus Accepted Worship Once again we agree, and in Joshua 5 we see him accepting worship again. Con states “Time and again Jesus accepted the kind of praise from men that is due only to God. He never sought to correct His followers, and redirect the worship away from Himself as did the angel in Revelation.” If Con holds to this position (As I do), but does not apply this to Michael, then how can he explain Joshua 5:14-16? Con P4 - The World to come is not subject to Angels Stating that Michael is not going to be in charge of the world to come because only Jesus will be is like stating the Messiah would not be in charge of the world to come, only Jesus. My point is that Michael the Archangel (chief messenger/General of the Lords Army) is just another one of the many names for Jesus. He is no normal angel, because he accepts worship because he is God. What Con must understand is that “angel” is a very broad term that applies to pastors, teachers, kings, the commonly called “angels” who are known not to accept worship, and Jesus Christ. Con P5 - Angels cannot judge Satan It is instructive to consider the context and meaning of both 2 Peter 2: 11 and Jude 1: 9 before making unfounded conclusions as to their implications. A key to interpreting the passage is to understand what is meant by a "railing accusation". A railing accusation is not a fair statement of judgment, but in contrast, it means to pronounce "slanderous judgment." The original word is “blasphēmias” which in the lexicon we see is “988 slander” [4] So, What message are Peter and Jude trying to present? A contrast is drawn between the conduct of evil human teachers and heavenly beings in relation to the way they speak of others. Evil human teachers are naively unafraid pronounce a slanderous judgment (bring a railing accusation) on anyone, even God and the angels of heaven. Sadly this is the reality of what we see amongst many people in the world today. In contrast the inhabitants of heaven treat everyone in the universe with respect and refrain from slander even when it is Satan. The lesson is that we should do the same. It is never right to slander other humans regardless of how evil they are. We should not even pronounce slanderous judgment on Satan for not even God stoops to that level. Consider: 1. The Bible (Jude) does not say that Michael cannot judge Satan. To say so is purely an assumption. 2. The Bible (Jude) does say that Michael would not dare to pronounce a slanderous judgment on Satan which is entirely consistent with the character of Christ who will pronounce a fair (not slanderous) judgment on Satan. 3. The Bible (2 Peter) does not say that it is impossible for angels to pronounce slanderous judgment against God and the angels of Heaven. Rather, it presents that they choose not to do so because of their holy character. Clearly it is possible for them to slander God as Satan and his angels have been doing that from the very beginning of evil. 4. Jesus statement in John 8:44 is not a railing accusation but a simple plain statement of truth. The reaction of both Michael and Satan in Jude 1: 9 is entirely consistent with what we would expect from a confrontation between Jesus and Satan. Jesus does not slander but simply rebukes Satan. [1] http://www.eliyah.com... [2] http://biblehub.com... [3] http://biblehub.com... [4] http://biblehub.com...