About This File
The identification of Michael as Christ in Revelation 12:7 has a long history in the Lutheran exegetical tradition. Both Luther and Melanchthon make the identification and the Lutheran exegetes of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries follow suit with apparent unanimity. But why? Given that many church fathers identified him as a created angel, one would expect that there would be more disagreement amongst Lutheran exegetes. More than this, the identification appears to be problematic, since Michael’s appearance in Daniel 10 lists him as one of the other leaders in Israel and seems clearly to distinguish him from the manlike figure who appears at the beginning of the chapter and who is to be identified with the pre-incarnate Christ. Moreover, we see near unanimous agreement even among Lutherans that the Michael of Jude 9 is a created archangel. Why this insistence that the Michael of Revelation 12 is Christ? Were later Lutheran exegetes simply following the opinion of Luther and Melanchthon, the two great fathers of the Reformation? Or was their identification of Michael with Christ in Revelation 12 due to other factors? In the Lutheran exegetical tradition as it relates to Michael’s identity in Daniel, Jude, and Revelation, there were several factors that contributed to the identification of Michael as Son of God by the Lutheran exegetes of Reformation and Post-Reformation times.... ..