I want to start a novena to St Michael. Found one at [Novena in honor of St. Michael the Archangel and in honour of the nine angelic choirs](http://maryourhelp.org/St-michael-the-arch-angel-novena.html) . How can I say it as there is no specific guide on the page?

There's a suggested duplicate to this question but that question deals with how the Jehovah's Witnesses explain the begotten divinity of Jesus while still maintaining that He is unequal to God. This question is directed toward the distinction between the Son and angels as portrayed in Hebrews chapter 1. I've included the entire chapter so that the context is plain in the reading (bold is added for focus): > Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. **For to which of the angels did God ever say**, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”? Or again, “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son”? And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God's angels worship him.” **Of the angels he says**, “He makes his angels winds, and his ministers a flame of fire.” **But of the Son he says**, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.” And, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.” **And to which of the angels has he ever said**, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”? Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation? Hebrews 1:1-14 Twice the question is raised "To which of the angels has God ever said...?" and sandwiched between these questions is a direct contrast between angels and the Son. The answer demanded by any plain reading within context for these questions is 'God has never said any such thing to any angel.' In claiming that Jesus, the Son of God, is Michael the archangel Jehovah's Witnesses appear to be stating that God did, in fact, say such things to an angel. My question is, how do Jehovah's Witnesses explain this seemingly clear contradiction to the context?

I recently found references that suggest both Baptists and Methodists used to believe that Jesus and Michael the Archangel are one and the same. This surprised me because both Baptists and Methodists are Trinitarian and understand Jesus to be the eternal Word of God who was never created. The Bible says that angels are created beings, hence my confusion. Here are some of the references I found: From my Morning and Evening devotionals of Baptist preacher Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892) I found this quote (morning October 3) regarding angels, based on Hebrews 1:14, and speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ: >“He it is whose camp is round about them that fear Him; He is the true Michael whose foot is upon the dragon. All hail, Jesus! thou Angel of Jehovah’s presence, to Thee this family offers its morning vows.” From a Spurgeon sermon ‘The Angelic Life’ (22 November 1868) comes this partial quote: >“Our Lord is called an angel. He is the angel of the covenant... We read that Michael and his angels fought against the dragon and his angels, and the dragon was cast down. The fight is going on every day. Michael is the Lord Jesus, the only Archangel.” John Gill, a Baptist pastor (circa 1750) wrote this about Michael the Archangel based on Jude 1:9: >"Yet Michael the Archangel.... By whom is meant, not a created angel, but an eternal one, the Lord Jesus Christ;” I know that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe Jesus, as the Word of God, was created by Jehovah as the mighty spirit creature who was known in heaven as Michael before he came to earth, and that he is still known in heaven as Michael since his resurrection. However, this question is not about the beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses, although I welcome any modern, up to date insights they might have about the beliefs of Baptists and Methodists regarding Jesus and Michael. This question is specifically about the beliefs of Baptists and Methodists NOW, as to whether they believe that Jesus and Michael are one and the same, and, if so, how can this be explained in light of the Trinity doctrine. I’m not looking for more old quotes, but for up to date information about Baptist and Methodist beliefs on the person of Jesus and if he is also Michael the archangel. The article 'Who do mainline Protestants believe an “archangel” (such as Michael) to be?' is not specific with regard to what Baptists and Methodists believe about Jesus being Michael the Archangel (or not).

The author of this blog makes a claim that the asteroid belt in space was formed from the remains of the planet that was destroyed when war arose between Michael and Lucifer, and some of the craters on the moon too. >It's possible the fifth planet (now the asteroid belt) was destroyed and many of the craters visible on the Moon's surface were caused at that time. (Subsection Title: Rebellion) Is there any Biblical basis that supports this claim?

**Summary of the question**: How can the "angel of the Lord" be the pre-incarnate Jesus if Hebrews 1:5 makes the point that God never said "Thou art my Son" to *any angel*? Those who believe Michael the archangel is Jesus (JW, SDA, and others) usually get Hebrews 1:5 quoted by those who don't share their belief about Michael in an effort to disprove their belief. But what about those who believe the angel of the Lord is the pre-incarnate Jesus? Doesn't the same verse disprove that belief? This is a fairly widely accepted stance, in my opinion. We even have the following question with good answers on this very site: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/89609/on-what-basis-do-some-protestants-believe-the-angel-of-the-lord-is-the-pre-incar However, some groups like Jehovah's Witnesses (due to the belief that Jesus is Michael the Archangel) have to respond to questions like this one: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/78168/dont-the-questions-of-hebrews-15-and-113-demand-an-answer-of-none-so-how-c **How would a Protestant who believes the angel of the Lord is the pre-incarnate Jesus (or any Christian who believes this) respond to a very similar question?** If one believes that the angel of the Lord was the pre-incarnate Jesus, how can that be reconciled with Hebrews 1:5 (KJV): > For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? I've heard some explain this by saying that the angel of the Lord was not a created angel so that excludes him from the context of "the angels" in this passage. However, the verse doesn't say, "For unto which of the *created* angels said he at any time"... Of course, the basic meaning of "angel" in both the Hebrew and Greek is "messenger". But that doesn't really change the meaning of the passage either. I'm curious how this could be answered satisfactorily.

#### Question: If you believe "Michael" = "Jesus". How does your soteriology work if Jesus is not God but merely another created being?

Congregations such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-day Adventists believe that Jesus is Michael. What is the Biblical basis for the belief that Jesus is Michael? **Jehovah's Witnesses** >...it is logical to conclude that Michael is none other than Jesus Christ in his heavenly role. [Source](http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/who-is-michael-the-archangel/) **Seventh-day Adventists** >Moses passed through death, but Michael came down and gave him life before his body had seen corruption. Satan tried to hold the body, claiming it as his; but Michael resurrected Moses and took him to heaven. Satan railed bitterly against God, denouncing Him as unjust in permitting his prey to be taken from him; but Christ did not rebuke His adversary, though it was through his temptation that the servant of God had fallen. He meekly referred him to His Father, saying, "The Lord rebuke thee." Early Writings, p. 164.

Many Christians believe that the Archangel Michael is actually Jesus, most notably the Jehovah's Witnesses and Baptist preacher [Charles H. Spurgeon](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/63123/6071) . We have a question asking [for the Biblical basis for this belief](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/26253/6071) . This question asks: what is the Biblical basis **against** this belief, that Michael is not Jesus, but a separate angelic being?

Daniel 8:11 > It became great, even as great as **the Prince of the host**. And the > regular burnt offering was taken away from him, and the place of his > sanctuary was overthrown. Daniel 8:25 > By his cunning he shall make deceit prosper under his hand, and in his > own mind he shall become great. Without warning he shall destroy many. > And he shall even rise up against **the Prince of princes**, and he shall > be broken—but by no human hand. Daniel 9:25 > Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to > restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of **the Messiah, the Prince,** > there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built > again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. Daniel 10:13 > The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, > **but Michael, foremost of the chief princes**, came to help me, for I was left there with the kings of Persia, Daniel 10:21 > "But I will tell you what is inscribed in the book of truth: there is > none who contends by my side against these **except Michael, your > Prince.**" Daniel 12:1 > “At that time **shall arise Michael, the great Prince who has charge of > your people**. And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has > been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your > people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written > in the book." From these six key passages, we learn that the Messiah is the Prince, and that Michael is our Prince. How can this be, and does this imply that we have two princes, or that the Messiah is the incarnation of Michael?

I recently came across the idea of identifying the angel Michael as Jesus. I'm surprised I hadn't heard it before. Wikipedia documents it as common to Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm not interested in biblical support of this theory; there are several other questions in that vein with good answers. I'd like to know more of its origin. Sub-questions to help guide what I'd consider a good answer: - How old is this idea? Wikipedia says "early Protestants", but cites John A. Lees (1939) who in turn cites Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg (1849) who doesn't appear to have a source beyond himself. They are far too recent to be "early Protestants". - Who (or what group) came up with the idea? - If it started with the adventists , how did it spread to Jehovah's Witnesses? - Do any orthodox forks* of Christianity accept the idea? - Do any orthodox forks* of Christianity explicitly reject the idea? (I'm surprised not to see it mentioned in the Catholic Encyclopedia.) \* **fork**: picture the christian religion as a road. Way back, promoters of Arianism were a fork in the road that dead ended fairly quick. The Protestants led many forks in the road. Mormons are yet another fork in the road. EDIT: Re: "early protestants". I just found a reference by John Calvin in his Commentaries on Daniel vol. 2, pg 243 . > Some think the word Michael represents Christ, and I do not object to > this opinion. [...] But as this is not generally admitted, I leave it > in doubt for the present [...] and there's a bit more in chapter 12 , but so far I haven't found who he is referencing by "some". Calvin does go on to defend associating Michael with Christ.

The angel Gabriel foretells what many Christians interpret to be the Great Tribulation, followed by salvation of the saints and the judgment of the wicked. **Daniel 12:1-3** >“At that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, Even to that time. And at that time your people shall be delivered, Every one who is found written in the book. 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise shall shine Like the brightness of the firmament, And those who turn many to righteousness Like the stars forever and ever. How is arch-angel Michael standing up for Israel(or the new Israel) and triggering the apocalypse if he is not Jesus himself?

In Revelation 12:7-9 a war breaks out in heaven. Michael and his angels fight against the dragon, who fights back with his angels, but the dragon, named the Devil or Satan, is defeated. The dragon is then thrown out and all his angels with him. Why, according the Catholic Church, did God not throw the dragon out of Heaven Himself?

The answer to another question referenced a website that discusses the LDS endowment ceremony . I was looking through the part about creation and was a bit surprised to see that the angel Michael actually takes on flesh and becomes Adam. I had read that Brigham Young had once taught the so-called "Adam-God" theory, but I had never heard the "Adam-Michael" concept. > JEHOVAH: Brethren and sisters, this is Michael, who helped form the earth. When he awakens from the sleep which we have caused to come upon him, he will be known as Adam and, having forgotten all, will have become as a little child. So, my question is, "What specifically is the basis for the LDS teaching that Michael took on flesh and became Adam, the first man?" Is this in the D & C or anywhere else in particular? *With apologies to anyone who might be offended by this question... I understand that this is from the sacred endowment ceremony. However, I am asking just about the doctrine itself, which happens to appear in the endowment ceremony. I am assuming that the basis for the doctrine is not the ceremony itself, but comes from elsewhere. That is what I am asking about.*

> Daniel 11:1 New American Standard Bible
In the first year of > Darius the Mede, I arose to be an encouragement and a protection for > **him**. In my own interpretation, the speaker is Jesus and the "him" is an angel named Michael. From the internet I know that the Seventh-day Adventist holds that Michael = Jesus (or vice versa, Jesus = Michael). Hence, my interpretation is wrong in the point of view of Seventh-day Adventists. I've already tried to search in the internet to find out how Seventh-day Adventists interpret Daniel 11:1... but I can't find one. I did find some articles about Daniel 11 from (I think) the point of view of Seventh-day Adventists, but it either starts from Daniel 11:2 or Daniel 11 as a whole. So I put my question here.

Many places are cited 'angel of the Lord' as if whatever is said is said by the angel themselves not by the angel as messenger for the Lord. Judges 2:1 and on is an example but there are several. Then Michael who is called the 'archangel' becomes Jesus when Jesus is God, or Yehoshua in Hebrew. ASIDE: This is my first couple of attempts at fulfilling the requirements for an acceptable question while on a tablet. I invite all good criticism that helps better question construction. I believe SDA and JWs follow this interpretation. Are they the only ones?

I was looking up exorcism stuff on the Vatican website and stumbled across this from (then) Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI) > From these prescriptions it follows that it is not even licit that the faithful use the formula of exorcism against Satan and the fallen angels, extracted from the one published by order of the Supreme Pontiff Leo XIII, and even less that they use the integral text of this exorcism. Bishops should take care to warn the faithful, if necessary, of this. > > [Letter to Ordinaries regarding norms on Exorcism]( http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19850924_exorcism_en.html) So does that mean that the St. Michael Prayer: > Glorious St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the Devil, and do thou o Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the Earth seeking the ruin of souls. Amen I learned by heart this prayer some 15 years ago and say every time the creepy crawlies pound on my windows at 3 AM is verboten?

My point is why does Michael the arch-angel swear an oath on behalf of God and multiply Abraham's seed at Genesis 22:16-17 in light of what Hebrews 6:13-14 states? "For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, verse 14, "saying, "I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply you." So again, how can Michael swear an oath on behalf of God since no one is greater than God Himself? It's right there in Genesis 22:15,16, "Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, and said, "By Myself I have sworn etc. How can this be "reconciled?" The Hebrew word for "angel" is "malak." This word means "messenger." The word can refer to an actual angel like Michael or it can refer to human "messengers," it all depends on the context. At Malachi 3:1, "Behold I am going to send my "malak/angel/messenger," and he will clear the way before Me, and the Lord whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the "malak/angel/messenger" of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming," says the Lord of hosts." Mark 1:1-4 identifies John the Baptist as the angel/messenger who will clear the way of the Lord. By the way, the prophet "Malachi" is obviously a human prophet and his name is from the Hebrew word, "malak." I contend that the angel of the Lord is not an actual angel named Michael. The angel of the Lord is the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ. This is because God the Father has no separate manifestation from the Son. The Son is the only manifestation and revelation of the Father. To see the Son is to see the essence of the Father, John 1:1, 18; 10:30; 12;45; Colossians 1:15; Hebrews 1:3. Moreover, the angel of the Lord first appears as the angel of the Lord at Genesis 16:7-14, Genesis 22:11-15, Exodus 3:2-4, Numbers 22:22-38, Judges 2:1-3, Judges 6:11-23, Judges 13; 3-22, Zechariah 1:12 and at Zechariah 3:4. Since Jehovah Witnesses believe Michael is an actual angel, well, angels CANNOT SWEAR OATHS on behalf of God, especially since God Himself claims there is no one Greater than Him at Hebrews 6:13-14. And another thing, the following is what the Jehovah Witnesses said? Under the article "The Word" in the JW reference work Insight on the Scriptures Vol. II page 1203 it says this: "In a similar way God’s firstborn Son doubtless served as the Mouth, or Spokesman, for his Father, the great King of Eternity. He was God’s Word of communication for conveying information and instructions to the Creator’s other spirit and human sons. It is reasonable to think that prior to Jesus’ coming to earth, on many of the occasions when God communicated with humans he used the Word as his angelic mouthpiece." Citing a number of scriptural citations, the article assumes that Jesus was the angel that: stopped Abraham from sacrificing Isaac; spoke to Moses through the burning bush; may have been the angel that was charged with leading the nation of Israel through the wilderness. In all except the latter case, the scriptures referenced specifically mention "Jehovah's angel." So the Jehovah's Witnesses belief that Jesus appears in the OT is primarily based on Jesus identity as "The Word" as well as the OT wording "Jehovah's angel." It is true that Jesus Christ is the "Word/Logos" and Jehovah's angel/the angel of the Lord. The problem they have is twofold. They claim that the Word/Logos/Son is "a god." Even "a god" cannot swear an oath on behalf of "THE GOD." So if the JW's are right, who swore the oath, Michael,"a god" or both?

When examining the wikipedia page on St. Michael it says: > Michael the Archangel is the patron saint of ***grocers***, mariners, > paratroopers, police officers, and military personnel. Mariners, military, and cops I can understand. But how did St. Michael come to be known as the patron for grocery store workers?

In Ken Graham's answer to [a separate question](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/81426) , he cites a prayer to Saint Michael used in the Catholic rite of exorcism. The Latin text of the prayer includes the passage: >tibi trádidit Dóminus ánimas redemptórum in supérna felicitáte locándas which I am reasonably sure translates as: >The Lord has handed over to you the souls of the redeemed, to be placed in supernal happiness Have I perhaps mistranslated? Does this reflect a Catholic tradition or teaching (of which I have been unaware)? If not, what is the import of the passage?

I am looking for the biblical references to Michael the angel ? And what are/were his/her role? There are some christian groups that attributes Michael same with Jesus. Is there any biblical reference to it?