Reasons Why Michael
Might Not Be Christ
1. Daniel 10:13, 21. . . . If the figure
Daniel sees in 10:4-6 is the Divine Angel [note: the authors believe that the Divine
Angel/Angel of the Lord is the premortal Jesus] and if the hand that touches
Daniel and speaks to him in 10:10-14 is the same person, then the Divine Angel
cannot be Michael, because he speaks of Michael helping him. However, it’s possible
that 10:4-6 is not the Divine Angel (though we argue that it is). It’s also
possible that the figure switches in 10:10-14 and is a different angel than in
4-6, in which case the identity of the Divine Angel as Michael is still
possible.
2. Revelation 12:7. The imagery of this
passage is also notoriously difficult. But since 12:5 references the birth of
Jesus and a child who was “caught up to God and to his throne” and then
separately mentions a war in heaven with “Michael and his angels fighting
against the dragon,” the plain reading of the text might suggest they are
different figures. The writer John had the opportunity of making clear that the
Christ and Michael were the same person, but he did not.
3. Jude 9. Similarly, Jude has
no problem identifying Jesus as active in the OT (Jude 5). When he cites the
archangel Michael as “disputing about the body of Moses,” the plain reading
again suggests that he doesn’t identify the two. If he wanted to make the
identification between the two clear, he could have, but didn’t. Also, when
Jude says that Michael “did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment,
but said, ‘The LORD rebuke you,’” he seems to suggest that Michael ls a
properly subservient creature who doesn’t presumes to pronounce judgment by his
own authority. This does not seem to characterize the Angel of the LORD, who sometimes
will speak of Yahweh in the third person, but will sometimes also speak as Yahweh
himself and pronounce judgment directly. (Matt Foreman and
Doug Van Dorn, The Angel of the Lord: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological
Study [Dacono, Colo.: Waters of Creation Publishing, 2020], 361-62; this is
significant as one of the authors states he believes Michael and Jesus to be
one and the same person [p. 359])