Interesting. I am by no means saying that it is impossible but I still can't see it as an absolute that Satan is or was greatest. I believe that Michael would be a stronger contender being, as you said, expicitly refered to as arch angel. I was not under the impression that all angels are cherubim. Chief cherubim may not equate to chief angel. And I am not 100% that ezekiel 28 refers to Satan although obviously there is merit ot that opinion.
All of your points are valid. archangel may refer to Michael's position as field-marshall in the angelic hosts. I didn't mean to imply that all angels were cherubim; only that they seem to have greatest proximity to God. The descriptions in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, though contested by some, would seem to set Satan/Lucifer at the pinnacle of creation.refs to Michael: Dan. 10:13,21; 12:1; Jude 1:9; Rev. 12:7These two phrases are interestingthe devil and his angels:(Matt. 25:41, KJVS)Michael and his angels(Rev. 12:7, KJVS)
_________________Ron Bailey
You are correct. Michael himself could not contend with the Angel of Light. None could. Yet with the power of the Great I AM, even the lowliest of angels could defeat Lucifer.Lucifer is, period, the strongest Angel of the Lord.
_________________Arnaldo Santiago, Jnr.
TiltedHalo wrote:You are correct. Michael himself could not contend with the Angel of Light. None could. Yet with the power of the Great I AM, even the lowliest of angels could defeat Lucifer.Lucifer is, period, the strongest Angel of the Lord.
Lucifer is, period, the strongest Angel of the Lord.
taco writes:
Where does scripture say that Michael could not contend with "the angel of light"?
Of heaven's angels Michaei is referred to as the archangel; Gabriel is not an arch-angel. Jude seems to indicate that even Michael could not take on Satan without God special support.Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.(Jude 1:8-9, KJVS)
Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.(Jude 1:8-9, KJVS)
I don't want to make a bigger deal out of this than it is But I don't believe that the evidence warrants such a definitive statement about Satan especialy when Michael is the one named as Arch-Angel.
OK, this is my last post on this issue, or I shall be venturing into wrangling over words. Also I hope that we all can continue looking at the rest of this interesting subject.
I still don't understand Michael's deference to his authority, in the context of Jude
I agree, however, that none of this can be proved mathematically. Consider the evidence; make your own choice.
Jude does not actualy explicitly say that Michael defered to Satan's authority it simply says that he did not bring a railing accusation against him.