Revelation 22:16

                              "I AM THE... BRIGHT AND MORNING STAR"

                                    "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to tesify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star" --- Revelation 22:16 (Most translations have it this way)

                   Jesus, in this passage, is specifically telling us His Glory; affirming all the revelations given to John the apostle and then He further goes further to identify Himself as "The Root and the Offspring of David" and "The Bright and Morning Star" (some have "The Bright Morning Star"). Jesus was fund of this in the Book of Revelation, back in Revelation 3:14, He identifies Himself as "The Amen," "The Faithful and true Witness" and "The Beginning of God's creation". These titles are overwhelmingly great and for the fact that they refer to just one man, Jesus, I feel there is a lot about Jesus (which surely doesn't include being Michael) that meets the eye. However, Jesus/Michael believers have struck again and this time, they've chosen a specific title, "The Bright and Morning Star," to be a "proof" that Jesus COULD BE Michael the archangel.

                        I remember discussing in an online forum some years back and this very day, the onliners happened to be a lot. I scrolled over to the religious forum and found a thread where the topic "Jesus Christ and Michael the archangel, the same or different?" was raised. That day, however, wasn't really a friendly one for me because I had too many things to do, a lot of chores and I was even getting late for church. I therefore had to forget about having a dialogue that afternoon until I was back from fellowship and fully relaxed. As soon as I got back to the forum, it was even fuller, thus, making older responses disappear quickly and this made it harder to collect earlier arguments on time. I gathered as much points as I could (most of which talked about I Thessalonians 4:16; Daniel 12:1-2; Jude 9 and so on) but there was this very claim that was made by one of the Jesus/Michael believers with which I was a little impressed; not for the point itself however, but for its uniqueness.

She made mention of Jesus' words at Revelation 22:16 and pointed to Job 38:14 as "proof" that Jesus and Michael the archangel are one in the same. I have come across such points several times but that very day was my first time to present a refutation to it. I actually can't locate the exact thread in debate.org but I think I can remember what I wrote to her in response to her point.

            Before I address this issue, I'd like to point out that 1.) The above statement was used by Jesus as a title, which he used alongside "The Root of David" which definitely is pointer to the prophecy at Numbers 24:17, and; 2.) That Job 38:14 doesn't explicitly says that the "Morning stars" where angels nor that they are identical with the "Sons of God" but COULD be a personification of "Kowkab" "Aster proinos" "Morning Star" (which people believed to be the Planets Mercury and Venus which appear in the sky in day times as "stars"), and so on as well as it COULD also refer to angels.

The logic depicted in that point is that since angels are supposedly called "Morning stars" and Jesus refers to himself as the Bright "Morning Star" then he must be Michael the archangel. Let us see how it turns out if the same logic is applied to other titles:

This is said of angels:

 "The heavens praise your marvels, O Jehovah, Yes, your faithfulness in the congregation of the holy ones. For who in the skies can compare to Jehovah? Who among the sons of God is like Jehovah? God is held in awe in the council of holy ones; He is grand and awe-aspiring to all who are around him." (Psalms 89:5-7)

"As I viewed the visions of my head while on my bed, I saw a watcher, a holy one coming down from the heavens." (Daniel 4:13 cf. Daniel 4:23)

"This is by the decree of the watchers, and the request is by the word of the holy ones, so that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he wants, and sets up over it even the lowliest of men." (Daniel 4:17)

This is said of God:

"For this is what the sovereign Lord Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, says: "By returning to me and resting, you will be saved, Your strength will be in keeping calm and showing trust." But you are unwilling" (Isaiah 30:15)

"To whom can you liken me to make me his equal?" says the Holy One" (Isaiah 40:25)

"The Holy One from mount Paran (selah) His majesty covered the heavens; with his praise the earth was filled." (Habakkuk 3:3)

From the aforestated logic, Jesus Christ is "identical" with Michael the archangel because angels are supposedly called "Morning stars" (in Job 38:14) and Jesus Christ refers to himself as "The Bright Morning Star" (in Revelation 22:16). How would it look if it were applied to the above quoted verses; that God is "identical" to Michael the archangel because angels are called "Holy ones" (in Psalms 89:5-7; Daniel 4:13, 17, 23) and God is referred to as "The Holy One" (in Isaiah 30:15; 40:25; Habakkuk 3:3)?

Such logic doesn't work. It is NOT even clear, like I said, if the "Morning star" title in Job 38:14 refers to the "Sons of God" or not.

The term "Morning star" could carry a whole lot of meanings. Quoting Lenski,"The adjective of 'of the morning' suggests unfading; glorious brilliance both for Jesus in 22:16 and here [2:28] for us. The Victorious King, Jesus, is the brilliant Morning star in the royal splendor; and he gives to every faithful believer the gift to be like him in royal splendor" (R.C.H 1963. The Interpretation of St. John's Revelation. Augusburd: Minneapolis; MN. pp. 124-155)

Philosophically, the literal Morning stars, Mercury and Venus, appear in the sky just before or just around dawn; ushering a whole new day. Thus, Jesus' usage could have been an indication that he is the starter of the new day; bringing all into a whole new light after being in darkness that is why, perhaps, he accompanies the title with the word "Bright", "Brilliant", "Magnificent" or "Splendid" (Gk, lampros). It may even be a fulfillment of Psalm 118:24 as "The new day the LORD has made"

Theologically, it is likely a reflection of Numbers 24:17 which talks of the "celestial" nature of the Messiah. Jesus doesn't have to be an angel to be regarded as a --or in this case, the-- bright Star. At the Transfiguration, we are told that Jesus' face "shone like the sun" (Matthew 17:2). This may be Jesus showing his disciples His looks in the celestial. The same was said of God at Habakkuk 3:4; stating that his brightness was like light. Psalm 84:11 even states that "The LORD is a sun and a shield" which is figuratively true of God; as "shield" stands for God being a Mighty Defender and Protector (Deuteronomy 32:4; II Samuel 22:2) while "sun" stands for God having a glorious brightness like light (Habakkuk 3:4). It is interesting when we note that the Sun is also a Star (a yellow dwarf) but of course, doesn't mean that God is also an angel. In fact, taking a look at the Greek, we have Revelation 22:16 to read "ho aster ho lamprios ho proinos" which would literally mean "The Star the Bright the Morning" thus, Jesus is showing himself to be:

1.) Celestial ("The Star"); John 20:28; Revelation 19:11-16; John 6:62.

2.) Light ("The Bright"); John 1:4; 8:14; 14:6.

3.) Overshadowing darkness ("The Morning"); John 1:4-5

From this, we can draw from his statement that He is Celestial, is Light and Overshadows darkness. He is the Victorious King and he has promised to give us the Morning star (Revelation 2:28); those who believe will be celestial (Matthew 22:30) shall bear the image of the heavenly one, Jesus (I Corinthians 15:49) shall shine like the sun (Matthew 13:43) and as overcomers, shall overshadow darkness (Ephesians 5:8-10) thus, we, too, shall be called morning stars but not angels.

Jesus Christ our Lord is not, has never been and will never be Michael the archangel.

STAY BLESSED.