was Michael ANOTHER name/Title For Jesus In Both OT/NT?

[JesusFan]

Read where some of the most famous reformers in past, such as Calvin and Turretin, held/allowed for the idea that when Michael was referenced in both OT/NT could very well be another title/name for jesus Christ..
And that the geneva Bible of the period in spots second that idea..

NEVER heard before this, wasn't Michael an archangel in bible, not another name/tille for jesus?

Wouldn't this be getting close to Jehovah Witness/Seventh day Adventist territories concerning Christ?

Are their ANY baptist theologigians past/present wrote concerning this?

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

Read where some of the most famous reformers in past, such as Calvin and Turretin, held/allowed for the idea that when Michael was referenced in both OT/NT could very well be another title/name for jesus Christ..
And that the geneva Bible of the period in spots second that idea..

NEVER heard before this, wasn't Michael an archangel in bible, not another name/tille for jesus?

Wouldn't this be getting close to Jehovah Witness/Seventh day Adventist territories concerning Christ?

Are their ANY baptist theologigians past/present wrote concerning this?

What article did you read that said Calvin said Jesus & Michael were one & the same? I know some of the early Patristic theologians such as Justin Martyr used “angel” as a title for Jesus, which some believe opened the door for connecting the Angel of the Lord with the pre-incarnate Christ, but I’ve never personally seen any orthodox reformer identify Michael as Jesus, b/c Michael is clearly called an archangel (Jude 9) & 1 of the chief princes (Dan 10), while Jesus is identified as God (e.g. Phil 2:5-8, ect). While certain cults have made this claim, I’d be interested in seeing if any orthodox reformers actually made the Michael/Jesus connection or if the article was misrepresentative.

 

[SBCPreacher]

Sounds a little JW to me.

 

[JesusFan]

What article did you read that said Calvin said Jesus & Michael were one & the same? I know some of the early Patristic theologians such as Justin Martyr used “angel” as a title for Jesus, which some believe opened the door for connecting the Angel of the Lord with the pre-incarnate Christ, but I’ve never personally seen any orthodox reformer identify Michael as Jesus, b/c Michael is clearly called an archangel (Jude 9) & 1 of the chief princes (Dan 10), while Jesus is identified as God (e.g. Phil 2:5-8, ect). While certain cults have made this claim, I’d be interested in seeing if any orthodox reformers actually made the Michael/Jesus connection or if the article was misrepresentative.

The article that I read stated that the geneva Bible in 2 specific footnotes said that Jesus could be referred to in OT with name/title of Michael, as he was pre incarnate form the captian of the LORDS Hosts, like being Joshua met...

Had a long quote also from John calvin, that 'allowed" for the belief that jesus was NOTan arch angel, but in the OT was the being referred to as titles/named Michael..

Almost like while as the "Angel of theLORD" on OT his name was Micheal, but now called jesus..

Calvin did state in the quotes sections this did NOT mean he was less than God, but was under a different title/name before he incarnated...

So the title/name of Michael showed him as being over/head of the Angelic Hosts, but not an Angel...

Still seemed getting close to JW beliefs here!

 

[Allan]

Read where some of the most famous reformers in past, such as Calvin and Turretin, held/allowed for the idea that when Michael was referenced in both OT/NT could very well be another title/name for jesus Christ..
And that the geneva Bible of the period in spots second that idea..

NEVER heard before this, wasn't Michael an archangel in bible, not another name/tille for jesus?

Wouldn't this be getting close to Jehovah Witness/Seventh day Adventist territories concerning Christ?

Are their ANY baptist theologigians past/present wrote concerning this?

In NO way can Jesus be the arch angel.
Scripture does not allow for such a view, so I agree that I never heard of it in Baptist thinking or anyone else aside from JW and 7th day. Thus if those you state did hold it.. it was incorrect.

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

Still seemed getting close to JW beliefs here!

I completely agree—to be honest I’ve found similar articles (on the internet) that had JW’s (or other groups that deny the deity of Christ) as their source. They will take historical quotes & twist there meaning to fit their anti-biblical agendas. But there were some reformers who did connect Jesus to Michael in the sense that Michael was the pre-incarnate Christ, not that Christ was a lesser being or angel (as the JW's claim). They could possibly be referring to this. Was the Calvin quote from his commentary on Daniel?

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

JW agenda web sit are very common—they will take a long list of quotes by Trinitarian theologians (orthodox Christians) about Michael possibly being the pre-incarnate Christ & twist them to seem like they support their ideas. One site even admits

“More quotes could be presented from trinitarians who believe that Jesus is Michael the archangel. Please note that we do not agree with all the conclusions given by these trinitarian authors. Trinitarian authors often present the idea that that Michael the archangel is uncreated, which we certainly disagree with.”

The difference between how the JW’s are using the quotes & what the orthodox Christians actually meant is worlds apart. There was at 1 time a semi-popular theory that Michael was the pre-incarnate Christ. This idea was similar to the Angel of the Lord pre-incarnate Christ connection. But this idea never denied that Christ was God. It just taught that Michael was one of Christ pre-incarnate appearances. The JW’s say that Michael was Christ, but when they say it-- they are implying that Jesus is a lesser created being (ie not God). They attempt to use orthodox theologians as their evidence—but in reality all they do is misrepresent what the original author actually meant.