The fact of the matter is that there is absolutely no Bible verse which argues against Jesus being Michael. Heb.1:4ff is good examples of how people force an illogical interpretation into the Bible's words.
Heb. 1:4ff does not provide evidence that Jesus is not the Archangel nor does it even exclude Christ from being an angel.
In fact, the context explicitly INCLUDES him as one of the angels. Vs 9 says that Christ was elevated above his "companions" (KJV, NIV, RSV). So, Christ is included as one of the messengers here by the terminology. But, this does not make all angels equal since we know they are divided into different orders.
William Kinkade said: "Although this text abundantly proves that Christ is exalted above all other Messengers, it by no means proves that he never was a Messenger himself....The drift of the writer in the first chapter of Hebrews, was not to show that Christ was no Messenger, but to show that he was made greater than all the Messengers of God: therefore, when the above text is brought to prove that Christ never was an Angel, that is, a Messenger of God it is pressed into a service for which it was never designed by the writer."—The Bible Doctrine of God, Jesus Christ, The Holy Spirit...
He demonstrated his point by using the parallel example of if we were to say of General Washington that "he was made superior to all the other officers, for to which of the officers was it ever said ‘thou art commander-in-chief,' and again they said ‘let all the officers obey him.' Therefore the government hath ‘exalted thee above thy fellows.'"
He pointed out that this statement could in no way be used to prove that Washington was not an "officer." Similarly, the statement in Hebrews cannot be used as evidence that Jesus was not an "angel."
We can also look at the statement: "ALL men must bow down to the king." Does this mean that the king is not a man? No. The Trinitarian logic would force a personal opinion on this sentence, like "the king is not a man and this proves it!"
We also have a close parallel in the account of Haman. He was "exalted above all the other princes (SAR)" yet later he was still included as "one of the Kings's noble princes."(Est 3:1-2; 6:7-10).
So, Heb.1 is comparing Christ to all the angels who are of orders less than the only archangel, for the Son alone is the Archangel, the highest angelic creature. Witnesses agree that Jesus is higher than all the other angels or messengers, but that does not exclude him from being the Archangel nor from even being called an "angel."
The scriptures show that Jesus was properly associated with the angelic host until he was elevated to a higher position (1Pt.3:22; Php.2:9-11; Mt.28:18; 1Cor. 15:27; Heb.1:4; Dan.7:13,14).
The context of the first chapter of Hebrews describes Christ's position *under* Almighty God, not as equal to Him! Jesus is not all-powerful since it says he has a *God* over him (Heb.1:9)!! God had to subject all things under him (1:13; 2:5,8) and he was "appointed" to his position by *God* (1:2,7; 3:2). He is said to be "God's son" (1:2,5,6,8,), God's "firstborn" (1:6), God is his "father" (1:5), and he is the "reflection" and "image" of God, not God himself (1:3). He is "at God's right hand" (1:3,13). He "obtained" a better name (1:4), he was "anointed" by his superior, God (1:9) etc. etc.
Every explicit scripture which shows that Jesus was less than Almighty God at every point of his existence (Jn. 14:28; 20:17; Mk.13:32; Rev.3:2,12). At the highest position he will ever attain, Jesus is still "subject" to *GOD* the same way we are "subject" to him (1Cor.15:27,28).
Because of this solid scriptural evidence that Michael is Christ, even many Trinitarians have agreed that Michael is one of the names of the Christ, including most early "Church Fathers," and many modern scholars.
Because of the solid scriptural evidence that Michael is Christ, most early "church fathers" and many Trinitarian scholars from different religious denominations have agreed that Michael is one of the names of the Christ, including most early Protestants Scholars.
John A. Lees, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1930, Vol. 3, page 2048 states: *The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the preincarnate Christ."
Protestant Reformer JOHN CALVIN said regarding "Michael": " I embrace the opinion of those who refer this to the person of Christ."-Commentaries on Daniel
Many have posted the extensive Scriptural evidence which has led many Bible scholars throughout history to conclude that Jesus is Michael the Archangel.
BAR-ANERGES[/quote]
