How mainstream is the claim that Early Christians believed that Jesus was Michael the Archangel?

[ABuddhist]

I am aware that the claim that Jesus and the Archangel Michael were not the same in early Christianity has been challenged, most notably by Darrell Hannah’s doctoral dissertation, later revised and published by Moer Siebeck and then Wipf & Stock in 1999: "Michael and Christ: Michael Tradition and Angel Christology in Early Christianity".

For a useful summary of its claims, see Dr. Carrier's blog post "Was Jesus-Is-Michael an Early Christian Mystery Teaching?": https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/18485

In order to assuage concerns that Dr. Carrier would only endorse or reject insane ideas, I quote him as writing, "I have not thought this equation defensible enough to include as any premise in my work to date. I still consider it an intriguing possibility with some support in the evidence, but not something one can reliably “prove.” Although I think now, after having read Hannah, the case is better than I thought (even if still not iron clad). Hence in On the Historicity of Jesus I only mentioned it as a potential (not proven) path in thinking from Daniel 9 and 12 to the core originating Christian concept of Christ".

The following blog-post, "Michael the Great Prince and Saviour of Israel", https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/ ... of-israel/ , draws upon commentaries to the Revelation to John and the Shepard of Hermas in order to further this claim. A relevant quotation is: "Another intriguing connection is made in The Shepherd of Hermas, a second-century Christian text sometimes included in early Bibles. It describes a glorious angel who justifies the penitent (Mandate 5) and tests believers (Parable 8) among his various roles. In Parable 8, this angel, previously referred to as Christ, is given the name Michael.".

To further clarify, key texts found within the Christians' current canon canon supporting the claim that Jesus is Michael are:

Revelation to John 12:7, in which Michael is said to lead a heavenly army against Satan.

Philippians 2:5-11 (which, in describing Jesus as being a name given to him after he became an Earthly being, leaves unanswered the question of what his name before was).

Letter to the Hebrews, talking about Jesus as saving people through acts done in heaven - in Hebrews's case, serving as a high priest in a heavenly temple.

These three traditions, together, suggest a possible model in which Jesus, before he was on Earth as Jesus, was in heaven as Michael - and may in future as Michael play a heavenly role again. The other early Christian text to which I referred (Shepard of Hermas), strengthens this interpretation.

It is true that Jesus, in GJohn and in later Christian theology, is not said to be an angel, but theologies differ and change over time, as the proliferation of sects reveals.

[GakuseiDon]

The following blog-post, "Michael the Great Prince and Saviour of Israel", https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/ ... of-israel/ , draws upon commentaries to the Revelation to John and the Shepard of Hermas in order to further this claim. A relevant quotation is: "Another intriguing connection is made in The Shepherd of Hermas, a second-century Christian text sometimes included in early Bibles. It describes a glorious angel who justifies the penitent (Mandate 5) and tests believers (Parable 8) among his various roles. In Parable 8, this angel, previously referred to as Christ, is given the name Michael.".

I don't think that is correct I'm afraid, from what I can read from the Shepherd of Hermas. The Son of God and the angel Michael appear to be different people. From here: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... pherd.html

First, the Son of God:

... the gate is the Son of God. This is the one entrance to the Lord. In no other way, then, shall any one enter in to Him except through His Son. You saw," he continued, "the six men, and the tail and glorious man in the midst of them, who walked round the tower, and rejected the stones from the building? "I saw him, sir," I answered. "The glorious man," he said, "is the Son of God, and those six glorious angels are those who support Him on the right hand and on the left.
...
Because," he said, "these apostles and teachers who preached the name of the Son of God, after falling asleep in the power and faith of the Son of God, preached it not only to those who were asleep...
...
"Listen," he said: "these mountains are the twelve tribes, which inhabit the whole world. The Son of God, accordingly, was preached unto them by the apostles."
...
"God planted the vineyard, that is to say, He created the people, and gave them to His Son; and the Son appointed His angels over them to keep them; and He Himself purged away their sins, having suffered many trials and undergone many labours

As highlighted above, the Son of God appointed the angels over the people to keep them.

Then we get to the key passage:

This great tree that casts its shadow over plains, and mountains, and all the earth, is the law of God that was given to the whole world; and this law is the Son of God, proclaimed to the ends of the earth; and the people who are under its shadow are they who have heard the proclamation, and have believed upon Him. And the great and glorious angel Michael is he who has authority over this people, and governs them; for this is he who gave them the law into the hearts of believers: he accordingly superintends them to whom he gave it, to see if they have kept the same.

Given the earlier passage, it seems to me to read that Michael is one of the angels appointed by the Son of God over the people. I can't see a reading that supports them being the same person. God creates the people, gives them to the Son of God, whom appoints angels over the people. One of them is Michael, who is given authority over the people, to send the law (which is the Son of God) into the hearts of believers.

To further clarify, key texts found within the Christians' current canon canon supporting the claim that Jesus is Michael are:

Revelation to John 12:7, in which Michael is said to lead a heavenly army against Satan.

Philippians 2:5-11 (which, in describing Jesus as being a name given to him after he became an Earthly being, leaves unanswered the question of what his name before was).

Letter to the Hebrews, talking about Jesus as saving people through acts done in heaven - in Hebrews's case, serving as a high priest in a heavenly temple.

These three traditions, together, suggest a possible model in which Jesus, before he was on Earth as Jesus, was in heaven as Michael - and may in future as Michael play a heavenly role again. The other early Christian text to which I referred (Shepard of Hermas), strengthens this interpretation.

It may I suppose, but Jesus as pre-existent Adam, or pre-existent Holy Spirit, or pre-existent Logos, or even as pre-existent Christ, are all equally as likely as a pre-existent Michael. I don't see anything in those texts that leans towards it being Michael, I'm afraid.