Leaderboard

Praying over a Bible would, in my opinion, be appropriate. Not different from praying over literature, church pews, etc. Asking that God will bless the material and that it will fall on fertile grounds. And, yes, perhaps akin to Baby Dedication.

Lyndon, your post clearly demonstrates the critics of the denomination that assume the worst, without any attempt to check and document the facts in then come out with conclusions that are devoid of fact and truth. For those who wish to learn more about this Bible see: http://news.adventist.org/all-news/news/go/2014-10-23/adventist-church-releases-its-first-womens-study-bible/ For those interested, the text of this Bible is the New King James. President Ted Wilson has stated that he believes it will be a blessing to women. Lyndon, do you believe that President Ted Wilson would say such about a Bible that had been corrupted? Nonsense!

hopefully, you don't kick them as they go out the door...

Why You Really Left the Church Commentary: Throw out the popular explanations for why young people are leaving the church. The roots lie in the mind and the media. Posted March 5, 2015 Editor's note: Commentaries are intended to express the richness and variety of informed and responsible Adventist opinion on current issues. They do not necessary convey the viewpoint of the Adventist Review editorial team or the General Conference. BY JAMES D. STANDISH, communication director, and religious liberty and public affairs director for the South Pacific Division Most of my best friends from Far Eastern Academy in Singapore have left the Seventh-day Adventist Church. So have most of my friends from grade school in Australia, my friends from Andrews University in Michigan, and a bunch of my friends from Newbold College in Britain. And it isn’t just my friends. My generation — Generation X — has left the church in droves. We were, it turns out, a little foretaste of what was to come. Today, Christian literature is littered with articles about Millennials abandoning church, with various hobbyhorses being flogged to explain the exodus. So let’s look at a few of them. That old chestnut suggests “someone said something wrong.” Now let’s get real here. No one could hold down a job, stay in school, or have a relationship if they were so sensitive that they left as soon as they bumped into a grumpy person. Of course people at church should be kind, pure, and true. In my experience, Adventists generally are, although not always and not everyone. But outside of extreme circumstances, people don’t reject things they value simply because they come in contact with real human beings, warts and all. They walk out because they don’t value the underlying substance. A second explanation popularized by U.S. author and columnist Rachel Held Evans is that Millennials are abandoning church because it focuses on sexual morality rather than social justice. But this doesn’t work on two counts. First, the denominations that are biggest on talking social justice and the smallest on biblical sexual morality are the ones shrinking the fastest. Second, it turns out all those traditional evangelicals are hardly indifferent to poverty. World Vision, one of the largest aid and development outfits in the world, is an evangelical initiative. The Salvation Army? They’re evangelicals too. And you would be hard pressed to find a community that does more, pound for pound, to provide health and education to the poor around the globe than the Adventist Church. So if it isn’t grumpy people, unfashionable views on sex, or cold indifference to the poor, it must be dull and uninspired worship services! Apparently not. Perhaps no community has embraced contemporary worship more enthusiastically than U.S. evangelicals, and yet they are losing Millennials left, right and center. Pastors in black T-shirts, churches with espresso machines, and Daft Punk-style praise bands just aren’t packing ’em in. This leaves a superficially profound answer: Organized church is directly opposed to the authentic Christ. The problem with this line of reasoning? It was Jesus who set up the church, and He began it with 12 very imperfect people. So if the real Jesus set up a church full of real people, how could disassociating from a real church be consistent with loving the real Christ? But there’s an even more fundamental problem: All these explanations rest on age-old phenomena. There is, for example, nothing new about Christian teachings on sex or flaws in organized churches. If the rate of defections has increased, the underlying reason for the drift away must also be increasing. New events require new explanations. So what’s new? One of the most profound changes in our culture is the explosion of media consumption. Back in the early 1990s, the average Australian, for example, watched about 17 hours of television per week. According to McCrindle Research, Australians today spend close to four hours online every day, and about three hours a day watching television, for a staggering 49 hours of media consumption per week. The figures are even higher in other countries. As mass media has become more heavily entwined with our lives, the content has simultaneously become increasingly incompatible with, and even hostile to, Christianity. Our media consumption profoundly impacts the way we see the world. Ellen White comments on a popular truism this way: “It is a law both of the intellectual and the spiritual nature that by beholding we become changed. The mind gradually adapts itself to the subjects upon which it is allowed to dwell. It becomes assimilated to that which it is accustomed to love and reverence” (The Great Controversy, p. 555). Could the answer to the spiritual malaise infecting society have little to do with the inadequacies of everyone and everything else, and all to do with how we choose to invest our thoughts? Is the exodus from church the inevitable, natural result of our media consumption patterns? The solution could be as simple as spending less time watching “Game of Thrones” and more time focused on the Throne of Grace. This commentary is slightly adapted from one that appeared in the South Pacific Adventist Record in 2013.

Children are going to find ways to hurt themselves, they just do. Whether or not they live in a household with guns, ATV's, trampolines or anything else deemed dangerous. Just because they may not live with the perceived danger doesn't mean they aren't going to have friends who might. It comes down to supervision. Instead of a knee-jerk reaction of "you own guns, therefore you can't foster/adopt" a better solution would be, "What's your game plan?" "Exactly how are you going to keep your child safe" start a dialogue and go from there.

One thing I just noticed in this Bible that is a real plus for me, is that there are footnotes for when the manuscripts differ. I like to be aware of those differences. Another feature that I discovered is a series of topical studies at the back of the book including charts on the 1260 and 2300 days, the Sabbath and the state of the dead, among other things. Definitely a Seventh-Day Adventist study Bible!

It seems that the church is failing in helping Christians know how to live. I don't mean in telling them dos and don'ts, but in teaching them how to dig into their Bibles for the answers to those questions. Many are far too dependent on their pastors to do that digging for the precious gems the Bible holds which are timeless.

NIV 1 Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. NIV John 5:25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. (Joh 5:25 NIV) If you put these two verses together, "the voice" that raises the dead is "the voice of the Archangel", who IS the Son of God. Michael is called "the archangel" (Jude 1:9) - the chief of, or commander of - the angels. Gabriel is just an angel. He is not called "the archangel".

Some would prefer to deny women even a token of special recognition... It is ironic that those who are most likely to consider women as something quite different from men, bristle and bluster at the idea of women having anything uniquely designed for women. I might expect more opposition from some hard core equality ideologue... But to me what that sort of reaction seems to reveal more than anything is simply a distain of women which cares little for them, having little or no regard for them, not whether they are special and unique, nor whether they are equal and very much the same as men in many ways. It is an attitude that says they deserve nothing special or different or helpful to them, nor anything at all. Just forget about them because they are not all that important.

When the question that is asked is "What does it mean to be a good person and live a good life?" (a question at least as old as the Greek philosophers and likely as old as humanity), the answers offered need to be real. The post a little while ago about beliefs and actions is apposite. When we spend so much time telling people they are wrong - not just their beliefs but their very selves - we are not answering that first question.

The Question. Why is the life that Christ lead while on earth not the focus of organizations claiming to be His church. What was the work of Christ? Healing, teaching, bringing hope, unshackling the souls from the bondage of the religious leaders, living with out fear for their eternal life, seeking a relationship once again with His creation. The work of His Father, God. Speaking from my own experience and also through the eyes and minds of my children, We have not advanced from the days of Christ on earth. The .orgs continually 'circle the wagons', bicker about who is in charge, worry about correctness in everything, keep saying the 2nd coming is just around the corner, for decades, making list of what a person must do to prove they are saved, in other words the same as ancient Israel. We discuss prophecies always looking for the latest and greatest 'truth', traveling in circles. Reminds me of a desert crossing from history. We do not even know how to be help those in need, we have a list of items for determining worthiness, before attempting. We spend our time worrying about this group or that group, which is it going to bring the end of the world. Christ had a simple message and life, treat other as your self, lighten the load of those in need, listen to the voice of God, Holy Spirit, and believe in Christs words, Believe in me and you shall have eternal life. What do people look for, doers, those that walk the talk. Has nothing to do with 'cheap' salvation, although that is a truth, not looking for man made steps or hoops to jump through, the relationship with Christ determines a persons life. When will the followers of Christ reproduce what He produced in His short life on this earth? I see no great mystery, just a reluctance the escape the bondage of being in control rather than God in control. We need a earthquake shift in our thinking and focus.

Heartbroken' Couple Denied Foster Children Because of Legal Gun Permits Mar 07, 2015 // 11:52am As seen on Fox and Friends Weekend A Nevada couple has been told that they can't adopt a 12-year-old child because they have legal concealed-carry permits. Brian and Valerie Wilson asked the Assembly Judiciary Committee last week to approve a bill that would allow them to carry loaded weapons and serve as foster parents. The couple’s attempts at adopting have been stopped by regulations requiring that guns and ammunition be stored in separate, secure containers in any home where foster children reside. "My wife Valerie and I have been together since high school," Wilson told the committee. "We have always planned from early on that we would adopt later in life. We, in 2013, decided it was now time to go ahead and adopt and complete our family." "There [are] a lot of older children in the system that need homes." "I am really heartbroken that the Department of Child and Family Services gave us this denial letter,” Valerie Wilson said to the committee. "I really want a family." A spokesperson for the department said the reason the Wilsons were denied was a concern about the ability of a foster child to gain access to a loaded weapon. Tucker Carlson reacted this morning on "Fox and Friends Weekend." "They're ideologues and they hate guns," he said. "The sad part is all the kids who are languishing in the foster care system, going from home to home. And all the creepy, unfit people who do get to adopt. And they're penalizing these people? It's pretty unbelievable." Watch the clip above.

24 Cheshvan Yahrtzeit of Baron Edmond de Rothschild (1845-1934). A member of the Rothschild banking dynasty, he preferred to pursue artistic interests, acquiring an important collection of drawings and engravings that he bequeathed to the Louvre. In 1882, Rothschild became a leading proponent of the Zionist movement, buying land throughout Israel and subsidizing Jewish settlements. He financed the first new Jewish town, Rishon Letzion ("the first of Zion"), as well as Zichron Yaakov, Caesarea and some 30 other settlements. He also established Israel's wine industry when he helped Russian Jews flee pogroms in the 1880s and plant vineyards in Israel. In 1954, Rothschild's remains were re-interred to Israel. To honor his memory, his son paid for the construction of the Knesset building in Jerusalem.

Myths Debunked Some myths are easy to discredit. Others, not so much. Here are seven urban legends that just aren’t true. Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/Entertainment/Galleries/7-Urban-Legends-You-Thought-Were-True.aspx#kVcFAKLbUzKTfH2H.99

What do I mean by "the true gospel must legally fulfill God's law"? Ez 18:19 ....'Why should the son not bear the guilt of the father?' Because the son has done what is lawful and right, and has kept all My statutes and observed them, he shall surely live. 20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. The Bible teaches that guilt can't be transferred legally under law. The law demands that the sinner must die, not the sinless. All false gospels teach that Christ vicariously died in the sinners place and that this constitutes the gospel. In fact all false gospels have their connection to the Immaculate Conception as taught by Roman. The true gospel must answer the following: How can God justify the ungodly [Romans 4:5] and still maintain His integrity to His holy law which condemns sinners [Galatians 3:10]?

Some of you may be interested to learn that the SDA Church has produced a so-called woman's Bible. As I am not a woman and this book is sold in our ABCs, you can ask Gail for more information.

Notice in Hebrews 1:1-2 how God spoke in various ways in times past but it wasn't through a Son. Hebrews 1:1-2 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds. Jesus Himself bears witness to the fact that He has become a witness with His Father. John 8:17-18 It is also written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me.” Prior to Jesus, the Father had no other witness. Hebrews 6:13-14 For instance, there was God’s promise to Abraham: God took an oath in his own name, since there was no one greater to swear by, that he would bless Abraham again and again, and give him a son and make him the father of a great nation of people. Many people say that it was Jesus who created us but Jesus Himself tells us that it wasn't He who created us. Mark 10:5-6 And Jesus answered and said to them, “Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ Matthew 19:4 And Jesus answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female.'

So true... Phil is one of the good guys.

Amen, CoAspen! I believe that if we let Him, the Spirit will lead us into all truth; through revelation, study, or circumstance. If we seek Him with all our hearts (i.e., crave relationship with Him), we shall surely find Him. Exact, irrefutable knowledge of doctrine will not save us; belief in and relationship with the Messiah will.

May be, Gail, that is an issue, but without a relationship reading your Bible will avail very little. The age we live in is very much about me, my rights, what I want. When you are in a real relationship with someone that focus changes. When a person feels safe about that relationship the natural desire is to please. Christ said, believe in me and be saved. When that takes place the individual feels safe and will seek to increase that relationship. Since the beginning forces have sought to take away that 'safety' with success. More is spent on questioning that safety than maintaining it through a relationship with Christ. .Orgs have sought and still continue to caution people about feeling safe in their desire for making sure the individual is doing all the correct things to order to maintain 'safety'. Humans want to control instead of letting the Holy Spirit be the guide.

Not even an apples to oranges comparison... More like a dog to poisonous snake as family pet comparison. A significant difference is the nature and intended purpose of that which causes harm. An ATV and Imodium used as intended are not designed to cause harm. And if used as intended they are not inherently dangerous. A gun is. It's inherent design and purpose is a weapon designed to kill. Used as intended it is dangerous and can cause great harm.

I thought of another verse that suggests the Messiah preexisted. 1 Peter 3:18 "For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death din the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, 20 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark" (NAU). Let me see if I can connect the dots. Jesus said, "God is Spirit" (John 4). The Son of God was "in the form of God" before He incarnated. So the Son was in the same "form" as His Father - meaning the Son was also "spirit". As "spirit" -He - the Son of God - inspired the preaching of the Old Testament Prophets - like Noah. "He predicted" His future sufferings. He - testified to "spirits in prison" - THOUGH Noah. The minds of the people in Noah's day were held in prison to sin and Satan. The phrase is used in other passages of Scripture, to describe people whose minds were held captive to falsehood, or sin. 1 Peter 1:11 trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow. (NIV) He had to EXIST in order to "preach" or to "testify" or to "predict".

I think perhaps the emphasis of observation of the topic title and the OP is on the questions the Church seems most preoccupied with, rather than the multitude of possible questions that the culture are asking. We are simply focusing on issues that are of no interest to the culture that surrounds us, and in fact many of our own are very much a part of. We have marginalized ourselves from culture and they lose interest in our increasingly irrelevant obsessions.

These verses do make sense.

It amazes me about how long some people will chew on an old bone. The Clear Word was never designed to be a Bible, but a "devotional paraphrase of the Bible expanded for clarity". All of this dates back to the early 90ties .... have we not gone beyond that? Secondly, why spend time on Adventist Hater websites? There are many people out there who are waiting for someone to come to them in love and share God's Holy Word with them ... IMO isn't that closer to being disciples than some negative site? Just curious, have you read the Clear Word or any devotional, study Bible? Lastly, who is criticizing the JW and their Bible? We are no one's judge and the holy Spirit will deal with issues such as this. Who really cares if the Adventist Haters Websites calls us a cult ... we know the truth and the truth will set us free. Before our Lord returns we will be called much worst things .... just hold fast to the Bible truths and share the gospel.

Heb 11:31 By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were disobedient. 32 And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel and the prophets, 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies. 35 Women received back their dead, raised to life again. All good news, huh? But wait: Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection. 36 Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. 37 They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated-- 38 the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. 39 These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. 40 God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

from the news release: "Adventist Church President Ted N. C. Wilson prayed over a copy of the Woman’s Bible last week at the denomination’s Annual Council, saying the project would be a blessing for women worldwide." I'm curious as to the purpose of "praying over a copy" of a book... Is that something akin to a baby dedication? I've never heard of that being done..

you can't bring people into a church, unless you're willing to step out of a church...

Girl Scouts...

Whatever.................

The Middle East threatens with physical death but the RCC keeps people from the true God and that death is eternal.

From reading Deuteronomy 15:7-11: "Lending to the Poor 7 “If there is a poor person among you, one of your brothers within any of your gates in the land the Lord your God is giving you, you must not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. 8 Instead, you are to open your hand to him and freely loan him enough for whatever need he has. 9 Be careful that there isn’t this wicked thought in your heart, ‘The seventh year, the year of canceling debts, is near,’ and you are stingy toward your poor brother and give him nothing. He will cry out to the Lord against you, and you will be guilty. 10 Give to him, and don’t have a stingy heart when you give, and because of this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you do.[c] 11 For there will never cease to be poor people in the land; that is why I am commanding you, ‘You must willingly open your hand to your afflicted and poor brother in your land.’" What if the person made himself poor through bad living and he doesn't deserve the help? What if he is lazy?

Enjoy. Appreciate feed back on my editorial on page 5 http://adventist.ca/3dissue/lemessager/02-02/index.html?r=72

Many people misunderstand what the immaculate conception means. They think it means Jesus was born without sin. The true meaning is not that Jesus was born without sin, but rather, Mary was born without sin. This is why you will soon see Mary having a position in the Godhead and deserving worship.

Since when did preaching the true gospel insure to acceptance by the majority? When I left the church for a time, it was not because someone did or said something bad to me. It was not because the Church was answering questions nobody was asking. I left in response to the world beckoning me. I suspect many who are leaving today were/are in the same boat I was in. And as in the parable of the sower, many are leaving because the Seed could not take deep root because of a stony ground. In the other instance, the Seed was choked by the weeds.

I agree with Scuba, that our turn for martyrdom could come at any time. Jesus said that the servant is not greater than his Lord (John 15:20) and that we ARE to expect persecution. We just happen to live in a time and place of relative safety here in N. America. Myself, I believe that the point is not to hope in physical rescue, although that happens, true. If one's heart longs for God and is at peace with Him it doesn't matter if you live or die on this earth. God has given us the ultimate hope. We well might come to the place where we surrender our lives to Him in the ultimate sense. But I wouldn't consider it out of place to pray for safety, not at all. David called out to God when his life was endangered. I can praise when the life is saved and praise when it isn't if someone died trusting in the promise of the Resurrection.

Sharing the health message comes to mind as possible meaningful common ground

It is agreed by most believers that Satan formerly known as Lucifer is a fallen angel. Michael fought against Lucifer and prevailed, (Revelation 12). Lucifer's problem was he wanted to be like God in power and status. (Ezekiel 28). Lucifer battled against Micheal because he wanted to be like God. Michael was incarnated as Christ, God the Son. Otherwise Lucifer predates Christ. One of the attributes of God is preexistence so saying Lucifer predates Christ causes some serious theological issues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fhqXgBzy5E

Scuba, you said... I think you need to rephrase that. You are not getting the answers you want to get. Your premise of what an angel is...we will not follow. You have been given answers which reconcile the relationship between the named archangel Michael, and God the Son Jesus - I particularly commented on the very definition of what an angel is. Yet...these answers are not what you want in an answer. That appears to be why you blew right past my post. You also ignored Tom Whetmore's post...who said the same thing. I do not mean to be confrontational; that said, you seem to be taking upon yourself the role one correcting error on this issue. Even the wording of the thread title presupposes what you would intend to do with this thread. I noticed Rachel took the issue to you earlier. I think she is correct in her assessment. It seems you want to vindicate your premise in the thread title, not discuss why an Adventist would come to such a conclusion. I commented earlier that people get caught up in the definition assumed by man of what an angel is, rather than allowing the Bible to make that definition. That is apparently what you are doing here - making the assumption an archangel is a created being, when God's Word does not make that distinction or definition. If you see such a defnition, please show me where in the Bible an archangel - or even simply an angel - MUST NECESSARILY be a created unfallen being BY definition. You will see examples of holy beings serving in the office/role of angels, but as I already pointed out in Hebrews 13:2, this well applies to humans as well. I have rejected the premise that an angel is Biblically defined solely to be an unfallen race of beings. I accept the premise the Bible defines two unfallen races (Cherubim and Seraphim), and that these two races do indeed serve in the role defined in the Bible by the word "angel". I go to Daniel 12:1. Michael is NOT called the archangel here - He is called the "great prince". I don't know about you, but everywhere I look in the Bible, I see the Word painting Jesus as the great prince of heaven, rather than a great angel. Christ is the "Prince of Peace", before whom "every knee shall bow". (Isaiah 9:6; Philippians 2:10 and Isaiah 45:23, Hebrews 1:6). The same usage is found in Daniel 10:13 and 21. Semantics can be made of verse 13's reference to "one of the chief princes", but verse 21 makes it abundantly clear the name Michael references THE great prince of the Redeemed. In Daniel 12:1, this great prince stands up for Daniel's people - also known as Israel, the people of the covenant...also known cosmically as the redeemed. The word "guard" found in some translations is not there in the Hebrew. The word there is the active participle "amad" meaning, "to stand up for", "to present before". That hearkens to Jude 24, where the same phraseology is used again, only in the Greek. Who is doing the presenting, making you stand? That's right...Jesus, who is standing for you before the Father, presenting you to Him with "great joy". This, after verse 9 references Michael being the protagonist confronting Satan concerning the right for Moses to be resurrected to eternal life. So, again, I read those verses and have no issues reconciling the point of Michael and Jesus being one and the same. I also have no misunderstandings on the point Jesus has a multitude of names He goes by...including one we will never hear - it is only hinted at in Revelation 19:12. Why are you coming to an Adventist site and making a fuss over definitions and premises informed Adventists will not accept? You have not put forth a problem we have no answer for. After reading the remainder of this thread, it seems clear you will not accept the answer being given - that we disagree with the assessment you made in the thread title. You made a declaration there; in answer, we have said we disagree. When I tally up how many times Michael is named in the Bible is used in the referred context, it is all of 5 times - Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 9, and Revelation 12:7. In each instance, "Michael" is seen in direct confrontation with the Serpent and/or his forces. There is only one person who has that role, and we find that in Genesis 3:14-15, where the Serpent is foretold of his demise, to have his head crushed by the coming Redeemer - universally recognized to be Christ Jesus. There is only one person who stands between the saints of all time, and the devil and his forces - that person always has been and always will be Jesus Christ. And Jesus did this - all the way to the Cross, where no angel could go. Christ was our great Prince, taking a stand for us on the Cross, so that He might be able to make us take a stand before the Father after all is said and done. A quick reading of Genesis 3:1-5 shows the rebellion has everything to do with slandering the character of the Living God, such that His Word will not be trusted, and exalting one's self to be the Most High instead. The name's meaning - again, I repeat this from my earlier post - is "Who is like the Most High?" It is a direct, confrontational question which seeks a direct, singular answer. Since in the Bible, one's name had significant meaning of character, it is incumbent then to ascertain whether there is an angel in existence who can correctly convey the character of God perfectly, in every form of fashion, such that whosoever should see them would know the character of the Living God. The Bible never mentions any such being. Never in the Bible has an "angelic" being come to human beings to declare the glory of God's character. Such appearances instead belong to religions we know to be false. However, we can read in John 14:9 that Christ Himself exemplified this perfectly when He told Philip, "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father." Christ's character demonstrates the answer to the very question the name Michael poses. Who is like the Most High? Christ Jesus, the Prince of Peace. Next, those serving in the role of angel have ministries of service, to serve (and sometimes protect) God's people. However, we do not belong to the angels - they are not to us as prince royalty, nor are we obliged to bow before them as our princes. The disciple John tried to do that twice in the book of Revelation, only to be told twice to not do that - they are brother creatures to us. They are not our great princes to bow before. But God did tell these beings described as angels/messengers to bow before and worship someone beside Himself - Jesus Christ. God the Son is as worthy of worship as God the Father is. Hence, Biblically speaking, one can logically come to the conclusion the names Michael and Jesus refer to the same Person in certain key points in the Bible. Blessings,

"A new way of thinking, a new way of doing Christianity." Sounds like this may be the counterfeit of the "Revival and Reformation" that is to come to the Church?