Program 171: Michael & Yahushua:One & the Same?

Scripture repeatedly refers to Michael as an angel, but is just as clear that Yahushua never was an angel. Thus, they are two different beings.

Welcome to WLC Radio, a subsidiary of World’s Last Chance Ministries, an online ministry dedicated to learning how to live in constant readiness for the Savior's return.

For two thousand years, believers of every generation have longed to be the last generation. Contrary to popular belief, though, Christ did not give believers “signs of the times” to watch for. Instead, he repeatedly warned that his coming would take even the faithful by surprise. Yahushua urgently warned believers to be ready because, he said, “The Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.” [Matthew 24:44]

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.

* * *Part 1: (Miles & Dave)

Miles Robey: Michael and Yahushua. Are they one and the same being? Best buds? Different forms of the same entity?

Hello, I’m Miles Robey and today Dave Wright is going to be taking us through the Biblical evidence that proves Yahushua and Michael are two different beings. If you already believe that way, keep listening. Knowing Dave, he’s got some powerful Biblical proof to back this up that just might be helpful to have should this topic ever come up with someone who believes Michael and Yahushua are the same being.

If you don’t agree with our stance, if you believe that Michael and Yahushua are one and the same, know that we never ask anyone to believe anything based solely on our say-so. It’s not our job to convict. That’s the Holy Spirit’s job.

So, grab a pen and paper and get ready to jot down some Bible verses because, whatever your current belief, you’ll want to look into this more on your own so Yah’s spirit can convince you of what is truth.

Later, during our Daily Mailbag segment, Dave will be answering a question about whether or not it is appropriate for believers to laugh and joke considering the solemn times in which we’re living.

And finally, Elise O’Brien will be sharing with us a surprising origin story about an institution most of us have at least heard about as well as a promise we can all claim, so stay tuned. We’ve got a program you’re not going to want to miss.

Dave? I’m going to turn the time over to you. Take it away!

Dave Wright: Well, you like words, Miles, right?

Miles: Oh, yeah. It embarrasses my kids, but I’ve been known to read the dictionary for fun.

Dave: All right. Could you define “extrapolate” for us?

Miles: Sure! You extrapolate when you infer something by projecting or extending based on known information.

Dave: So, it’s not just pulling a conclusion out of thin air or making an assumption based on preconceived ideas.

Miles: No. You’ve got a set of facts and, based upon those facts, you analyze and come up with a conclusion that you hope is reasonable and consistent.

Dave: You hope.

Miles: Right! You hope, at any rate.

Dave: Are extrapolations generally correct?

Miles: They can be, but not always. In fact, I recently read a funny story online where this guy made a very reasonable extrapolation. At university, he saw this really pretty girl. She was vivacious and friendly . . . and talking with her friends in . . . sign language!

Well, that was a bit of a problem because he didn’t know sign language, but he was really attracted to her, so he decided to learn sign language so he could communicate with her and ask her for a date!

Dave: That’s commitment!

Miles: Right? So, he spent, like, the next six months or so studying sign language really hard. Finally, after spending hours and hours learning what is, for all intents and purposes, another language, he figured he was fluent enough to carry on a conversation with her, so he approached her on campus one day, introduced himself and they started talking.

Dave: In sign language.

Miles: Yeah, yeah. Of course. After a little bit, he invites her to go with him to, I don’t remember. A café maybe? So anyway, they’re walking across campus and a small group of students is walking the other way and she starts talking to them!

Dave: In sign?

Miles: No! In verbal speech just like we’re talking now!

She turns around and sees him standing there, utterly gobsmacked with his jaw hanging up and she’s like, “What? What’s wrong?”

Dave: In sign, of course.

Miles: Right, right! ‘Cause she’s never heard him speak. So, he finally picks his jaw up off the ground and explains—speaking audibly—that he thought she was deaf because the only times he’d ever seen her, she was always signing.

Dave: So what happened?

Miles: Well, he admitted that he’d spent the last six months or so learning to sign for the express purpose of asking her on a date. She thought that was incredibly sweet so they started dating and, at the time of his writing up the story, they were engaged and getting married the next month!

Dave: Glad it ended so well for them! What a story to tell their grandkids some day!

But yes. That’s a perfect illustration of how an extrapolation can get you way off. The only time he ever saw the girl of his dreams, she was always “speaking” in sign language. So, from the facts he had available, it seemed reasonable to conclude that she was deaf and that the only way they could communicate was if he learned her “language.” And yet, obviously, his conclusion was way off.

That’s what we need to guard against when it comes to Scriptural references to Michael. Is it logical to extrapolate that the archangel Michael is the pre-incarnate Christ? That’s what a lot of Christians believe.

Miles: That’s what was taught in the church I attended growing up, too.

Dave: Were you raised a Jehovah’s Witness?

Miles: No. No. But that’s what we were taught, too. I remember once being approached by a Jehovah’s Witness missionary. I’d recently learned that they taught Michael was the pre-incarnate Christ, so I was interested in talking to him. Not to become a Jehovah’s Witness, but I wanted to know what Scripture they based that belief on.

See, in my church, while they taught that Michael or “the angel of the Lord” was the pre-incarnate Christ, they didn’t actually have any Bible verse that said that. There was just a bunch of Old Testament stories that referred to Michael or the “angel of the Lord” and the church just sort of … decreed that any time it referred to Michael or the angel of the Lord, it was referring to the pre-incarnate Christ.

Dave: “Michael is the pre-incarnate Christ because we say Michael is the pre-incarnate Christ; therefore, Michael is the pre-incarnate Christ.”

Miles: Yeah, pretty much.

Dave: So, how’d it go with the Jehovah’s Witness missionary? What did he offer as proof for that doctrine?

Miles: Well, he didn’t know. And, to his credit, he was honest enough that he admitted he didn’t know. He said he would look into it and get back to me. So that’s what he did.

Dave: And?

Miles: Well, I now know that there is no Bible verse that establishes Michael and the angel of the Lord are Christ. He couldn’t give me what simply doesn’t exist. But, like I said, he was honest. When he got back to me, he admitted that there wasn’t a clear passage that establishes that belief. He basically just shared with me the same Old Testament stories my denomination used to support that belief. But, again, he was honest, and I respected that about him.

Dave: I agree. I always have more respect for people who, if they don’t know something, honestly admit they don’t know.

All right, let’s look at this idea of the Old Testament references to Michael, as well as the various places that use the phrase, “the angel of the Lord,” and see why these can’t be referring to Yahushua.

One very obvious reason, as we’ve more recently learned ourselves, is that Yahushua is fully human. Now, I know that might be a shock to some of our listeners, but the Biblical evidence is there. If you missed those programs, you can still listen to them on our website or YouTube.

Miles: There’s a two-part article series as well, called “When Did Yahuwah’s Son Come into Existence?” It looks at the Biblical evidence for the true nature of Yahushua.

There’s another article, too, called, “New Light Reveals the True Nature of Christ: 100% Fully Human.” So, check those out if you haven’t done so already.

Dave: And the true nature of Yahushua also reveals the true nature of Yahuwah, which, as Scripture repeatedly states, is “one.” Not three; not three-in-one. Just … one.

The evidence is there, you just have to be willing to lay aside your preconceived ideas and be willing to consider new evidence with an open mind.

Miles: It’s true. That can be hard, but it’s so important. Can’t learn anything new if you stubbornly cling to your preconceived ideas.

Dave: It’s true. But remember, folks: Yahushua promised he’d send the Comforter to …? What?

Miles: Lead us into truth.

Dave: To lead us into all truth. You’re not going to be led astray against your will when considering new ideas. That’s an idea from Satan. He tries to scare us away from considering anything different from what we already believe. Yah won’t let you be deceived. But we do have to study for ourselves.

All right. Michael. Yahushua. This idea that Michael is the pre-incarnate Yahushua is a natural extension of the trinity doctrine. If you believe that Yahushua is divine, then of course he would have to have had an existence prior to his life on earth. That is fact.

Now, before you say anything—I can see you’re about to–I’m not saying that Yahushua is divine. We know from a careful study of Scripture that the idea that he’s divine came in much later. It’s not in Scripture, just as the trinity doctrine is not in Scripture.

Miles: Right. And for anyone saying, “But-but-but what about 1 John 5:7 that says the Father, the Word and the Spirit are one?!” Well, that was added to medieval manuscripts over a thousand years after Christ.

Sorry. Go ahead.

Dave: No! That’s important to know. Thank you.

What is fact is that if you accept the error that Yahushua is divine, then by extension, you must accept that he also had a pre-existence prior to his life on earth. And if you accept that he had a pre-existence, it is logical to extrapolate from that that Michael and the angel of the Lord both refer to a pre-existent Christ. That’s where extrapolation enters into it. But, as we’ve seen, extrapolations aren’t always correct!

Miles: You wouldn’t have spent six months learning sign language just to court your wife?

Dave: Probably not … and I would have missed out on having such an amazing woman in my life.

Miles: Good answer! You won’t have to sleep in the doghouse tonight if she’s listening.

Dave: Well, “Michael” and “the angel of the Lord,” or—as it’s sometimes called—the “angel of His presence” are rather mysterious figures. They aren’t mentioned very often. In fact, Michael and Gabriel are the only two angels mentioned by name in the Bible. So you can see how it’s easy to jump to the conclusion that Michael is Christ in his pre-existent form.

Miles: Sure. Sure. But where does the idea come from that Michael and Christ are one and the same? We know there’s no clear text that says so, but the idea has to come from somewhere. Where does it come from?

Dave: There are two passages that are used to try and “prove” Yahushua is Michael. We’ll look at them both. First, let’s read 1 Thessalonians chapter 4, verse 16.

No, it’s all right. I want to look at it in several different translations so I’ve printed them off for you. Here … go ahead and read through those; just start at the top there. What’s the first one from?

Miles: Uhhh, this is from the New World Translation, the 2013 revision. This is the version Jehovah’s Witnesses use, isn’t it?

Dave: Yes.

Miles: Okay, it says, quote: “Because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first.”

Dave: So if you think Yahushua had a pre-existence in angelic form, you can see how you could impose that meaning on this text. You could assume that it’s saying that Yahushua will descend from heaven, sounding like an archangel.

Miles: Sure.

Dave: Most translations say basically the same thing. What’s the next one?

Miles: Um, the New International Version. It says: “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.”

Dave: What’s next?

Miles: The New King James Version. It says: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.”

Dave: So, basically, they’re all saying the same thing and you could interpret this to mean that when the Saviour returns, he will speak with the voice of an archangel. Now, because the word “archangel” is given in the singular, and because we know that Michael is an archangel, it’s argued that Yahushua and Michael are the same being.

Miles: Wait a minute. Where do we get that Michael is an archangel?

Dave: In Jude. Verse 9.

Miles: Which chapter—uh! Never mind. There’s only one chapter in Jude. Let me read that real quick … it says: “Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

Huh! You’re right. It spells it out right there that he’s an archangel. So people extrapolate from this that, since Michael is an archangel, it stands to reason that Yahushua is Michael.

I’m sensing a logical fallacy here. This would be what? “Begging the question”?

Dave: I think so. Whatever it is, it doesn’t prove that Yahushua is Michael just because he comes with the voice of an archangel and Michael is an archangel. Not all translations imply that the “voice of an archangel” he comes with is Yahushua’s own voice.

Let’s look at a few other examples from some other translations. How does Young’s Literal Translation give this verse?

Miles: “Because the Lord himself, in a shout, in the voice of a chief-messenger, and in the trump of God, shall come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ shall rise first.”

Dave: And the New Life Version?

Miles: Uh … “For the Lord Himself will come down from heaven with a loud call. The head angel will speak with a loud voice. God’s horn will give its sounds. First, those who belong to Christ will come out of their graves to meet the Lord.”

Dave: What else do you have there?

Miles: Um, the New International Reader’s Version says, “The Lord himself will come down from heaven. We will hear a loud command. We will hear the voice of the leader of the angels. We will hear a blast from God’s trumpet. Many who believe in Christ will have died already. They will rise first.”

The Good News Translation says: “There will be the shout of command, the archangel's voice, the sound of God's trumpet, and the Lord himself will come down from heaven. Those who have died believing in Christ will rise to life first.”

The Contemporary English Version says, “With a loud command and with the shout of the chief angel and a blast of God's trumpet, the Lord will return from heaven. Then those who had faith in Christ before they died will be raised to life.”

The New Jerusalem Bible says: “At the signal given by the voice of the Archangel and the trumpet of Yahuwah, the Lord himself will come down from heaven; those who have died in Christ will be the first to rise.”

Dave: Okay, that’s enough. You don’t have to read them all.

You can see, though, that not all of them are translated in a way to suggest that the archangel and Yahushua are one and the same entity. That is an imposed understanding, based upon the assumption that Yahushua had a pre-existence, which is a natural extrapolation from the trinity heresy.

Miles: Okay, we’ve got to take a quick break. You said, though, that there was another text people base this belief on. Let’s get into that as soon as we return.

Dave: Sure!

Miles: Stay tuned!

* * *

Advertisement

One of the most misunderstood topics in all of Scripture is the subject of an ever-burning hell. This doctrine alone is responsible for changing more believers into atheists than perhaps any other Christian belief. Certainly it seems unjust for even the most heinous sins of a finite lifetime to be punished by an infinity of unspeakable suffering and indescribable torture.

The confusion has arisen over the difference between smoke—which Revelation 14 says ascends forever and ever—and fire, which Isaiah 33 describes as both “devouring” and “everlasting.”

There is an all-consuming, devouring, everlasting fire . . . but it won’t be used to torture the lost. When this Biblical truth is properly understood, the heavenly Father is revealed to be the same loving, compassionate, long-suffering, tender Father He has always been. To learn more, listen to the radio program titled “Living (and dying) by the ever-lasting burnings.” That’s “Living (and dying) by the ever-lasting burnings.” Your faith will be strengthened and your love deepened once you understand precisely what the everlasting burnings are and what they mean to you.

Previously aired radio programs can be listened to on WorldsLastChance.com or look for them on YouTube!

* * *Part 2: (Miles & Dave)

Miles: Annnnd, we’re back!

So what’s this other text you said is used to extrapolate from, to try and prove Yahushua and Michael are the same being?

Dave: Well, there are some verses in Daniel. They’re kind of scattered about so I’ve printed them off here. It’s Daniel chapter 10, verse 13 and 21, and Daniel 12 verse 1.

Go ahead and read those three verses. They’re in the New Word Translation, the Jehovah’s Witnesses bible.

Miles: Okay, verse 13 says: “But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.”

Dave: And verse 21?

Miles: “But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.”

Dave: And verse 1 of Daniel 12.

Miles: “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.”

Dave: So here we’ve got three references to Michael and it’s clear that he’s a very important being.

Miles: Yeah, but there’s nothing here that establishes Michael is Yahushua. Just naming him doesn’t mean he’s the same being as Christ.

Dave: No, and in fact, when you take a careful look at these verses, it actually proves the opposite. Grab your Bible there and let’s go back to Daniel 10. What translation do you have?

Miles: Uhhh … New King James Version?

Dave: That’s fine.

What we’ve got here in Daniel 10 is a fascinating glimpse “behind the scenes.”

At this point, Daniel’s an old man. Babylon as an empire is no more. It’s the third year of the reign of Cyrus the Mede. Daniel gets a vision, and he understands it, but he’s upset because the prophecy is long. So, he starts to fast and pray. He fasts—not a diet of total abstinence, but of simple fare—and prays, according to verse 3, for three whole weeks.

Then one day, as he’s out walking on the banks of the Tigris, he sees a vision of an angel. Verse 5 and 6 describe this bright, glorious being. Let’s read now what he says. Verses 12 to 14. Go ahead.

Miles:

Then he said to me, “Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart to understand, and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard; and I have come because of your words. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days; and behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left alone there with the kings of Persia. Now I have come to make you understand what will happen to your people in the latter days, for the vision refers to many days yet to come.”

Dave: This is a truly fascinating glimpse of what’s going on behind the scenes in the war between good and evil. This angel—who very well could have been Gabriel. He’s the angel of prophecy and had been sent to Daniel before—he tells Daniel that from the very first day he started to pray, his prayer had been heard and he’d been sent to Daniel. But something happened. What was it? Verse 13.

Miles: “But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days; and behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left alone there with the kings of Persia.”

Dave: So this prince withstood the angel for three weeks.

Miles: This “prince” … are we talking about Cyrus? Or his son? Or an evil angel?

Dave: Honestly, I don’t know. I’ve heard it argued either way. But whichever way it was, a human stubbornly resisting Yah’s will, or an evil angel, it required Michael coming and throwing the weight of his strength, power, influence, whatever in with this angel and helping him so he could continue on his way to Daniel.

So what does this interesting by-play tell us about Michael?

Miles: Well … he’s very powerful. He’s a special angel with greater than average strength and influence.

Dave: Sure. But is he so far above all the other angels that he could be considered the pre-incarnate Christ?

Notice, verse 13, that Michael is described as “one of the chief princes.” A chief prince, yes, but only one of them. So, in that sense, he’s not unique.

Miles: It’s interesting that Michael is described as a chief prince. Just like the “prince” of the kingdom of Persia, which would suggest that the one that withstood him was an evil angel.

Dave: Very well could have been. The important thing to see here, though, is that Michael is not unique in the way you’d expect him to be if he were the divine “God the Son” in his pre-incarnate form.

Miles: That’s true.

Dave: Okay, drop down and read verses 20 and 21. These also mention Michael. This angel is wrapping up his message to Daniel. Let’s see what he says.

Miles:

Then he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? And now I must return to fight with the prince of Persia; and when I have gone forth, indeed the prince of Greece will come. But I will tell you what is noted in the Scripture of Truth. (No one upholds me against these, except Michael your prince.”

Dave: Okay. “Michael your prince.” That could be argued that this is an allusion to the fact that Christ is the Saviour of the human race. But we can‘t forget that, just a few verse before, he was almost casually dismissed as “one of” the chief princes. So, again, not totally or entirely unique as you’d expect the pre-incarnate form of “God the Son” to be.

Let’s read the last reference to Michael in Daniel now. Daniel 12 verse 1.

Miles:

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.

Dave: So, unquestionably, Michael is a very important, powerful, holy being. But once again there is nothing in here that even hints he’s divine or could be the pre-incarnate Christ. Just because he “stands watch over the sons of your people” does not mean he’s the pre-incarnate Yahushua.

Miles: Yeah, that’s true. Matthew 18: “Be careful that you never despise a single one of these little ones—for I tell you that they have angels who see my Father’s face continually in Heaven.” [Matthew 18:10-11] Just because angels work closely with humans doesn’t mean they’re all divine.

Dave: There’s actually very good Scriptural evidence that no angel could be the pre-incarnate Christ, and Michael’s an angel. He may be an arch angel, but he’s still an angel.

Let’s turn to the first chapter of Hebrews. Could you please read the first three verses? The author of Hebrews writes these paragraph-long sentences, so even though we’re going to look at verse 3, let’s read it in context.

Miles: Okay, uh …

[Yahuwah], 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; who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.

You want me to keep going?

Dave: No, not yet. We will in a moment.

All right. It’s clearly talking about Yahushua here. After he purged our sins by his death on the cross, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Sounds lofty, right? Yahushua is sitting on the right hand of the monarch of the universe.

Miles: And he’s the “brightness of His [Yah’s] glory and the express image of His person.”

Dave: Right. But he’s different from the angels. There’s no question that Michael is an angel. Scripture says he is. An arch angel is still an angel.

Furthermore, the “angel of the covenant” is also an angel. It’s right there in that phrase! So now, bearing this in mind, let’s keep reading from Hebrews 1 because the author of Hebrews is going to draw a comparison by contrast between Yahushua and angels. Go ahead.

Miles: Uh, well, verse 4 is actually the end of the sentence that started in verse 1. It’s all a complete thought so let me read that again. It says:

[Yahuwah], 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 Sson, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become so much better than the angels, as he has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Dave: This is explicitly stating that Christ has become “so much better than the angels.” And that doesn’t mean he started out as an angel because the very next phrase is that “he has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name” than the angels.

The word “than” is a conjunction. The dictionary says it’s “used after a comparative adjective … to introduce the second element or clause of an unequal comparison.” It indicates a difference. The “unequal comparison,” of course, is between Christ and the angels. He’s more excellent—than—they.

Miles: So … he couldn’t be an angel.

Dave: Clearly.

All right. Keep going. Verse 5. The comparison between two unequal elements continues.

Miles:

For to which of the angels did He ever say:

“You are My son,
Today I have begotten you”?

And again:

“I will be to him a Father,
And he shall be to Me a son”?

Dave: This is a virtual denial of Christ being angelic in any way prior to his incarnation. You can’t get more clear than this. The author of Hebrews is using every way he can to emphasize the difference between angels and Christ.

He’s saying, “What angel did Yah ever say this to?” And the conclusion is clear: “Ergo, Yahushua is not and has never been an angel or in angelic form.”

Uh … verses 6 to 12.

Miles:

But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says:

“Let all the angels of [Yahuwah] worship him.”

And of the angels He says:

“Who makes His angels spirits
And His ministers a flame of fire.”

But to the son He says:

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed you
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

And:

“You, Yahuwah, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
They will perish, but You remain;
And they will all grow old like a garment;
Like a cloak You will fold them up,
And they will be changed.

Dave: So, again, the comparisons continue. We have here all the things Yahuwah has said to Yahushua and we’re told flat out that Yahuwah has never said such things to any angel.

The author of Hebrews wants to avoid confusion: Christ is better than the angels. Consequently, he couldn’t be an angel.

Miles: All right, but what about this idea that, prior to his incarnation in human flesh, he was still divine but simply took on the appearance of an angel?

Dave: Well, as we’ve covered in other programs, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that Yahushua had a pre-existence. That idea comes in with the trinity heresy which, as we’ve covered before, was adopted from paganism.

But, for the sake of argument, if we were to accept that Christ had a pre-existence, to say that he just took on the appearance of an angel while still being divine, while still being one-third of a triune godhead, he’s … what? Play-acting? There is absolutely nothing in Scripture, nothing whatsoever, to suggest that Yahushua ever assumed the body of an angel and, in fact, there is quite a bit of evidence that proves he did not exist prior to Mary’s conception.

Miles: Could we take a few moments to look at some of that? I think it’s a new concept to most people that Yahushua didn’t exist prior to his conception.

Dave: Sure! Uh, turn to Matthew chapter 1. We’ve got two lineages given for Yahushua. In Matthew is given the lineage of his earthly father, Joseph. It starts in verse 2 where it says, “Abraham begot Isaac, Isaac begot Jacob, and Jacob begot Judah and his brothers.” It ends in verse 16. Go ahead and read what that says.

Miles: “And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Yahushua who is called Christ.”

Dave: Of course Joseph did not physically sire Yahushua, but notice the emphasis on Yahushua’s beginning. He was born of Mary. It says so right here.

Luke 3 gives Mary’s lineage. It’s in Luke that we have the clearest explanation of Yahushua’s origins, and it’s not eternity past. Read Luke 3 and verses 20 and 31.

Miles: “The angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with [Yah]. And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Yahushua.’”

Dave: And verses 34 and 35?

Miles:

Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” The angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of [Yah].”

Dave: Mary was naturally curious to know how this could happen since she was a virgin. So, thanks to her curious question, we’ve got a very clear statement delineating just how Yahushua came to be, and it was just as Gabriel explained: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore—[that’s an important word—therefore] the child to be born will be . . . called the son of Yah.” It is due to his miraculous conception that allows him to be the son of Yah. Not “God the Son.” He’s not divine and never was.

Miles: Yeah, you’d think if Christ actually had a pre-incarnate existence, this would have been the perfect time to talk about it.

Now, quick change of topic here, Jehovah’s Witnesses have a book that’s called Reasoning from the Scriptures. I’ve got a copy of it here. On pages 218 and 219 there’s this quote. It says: “So the evidence indicates that the Son of Yahuwah was known as Michael before he came to earth and is known also by that name since his return to heaven where he resides as the glorified spirit Son of Yahuwah.”

Dave: It says “the evidence indicates.” What’s the evidence? Do they share any actual Bible passages?

Miles: Well, no. It’s more of a “take my word for it” type of situation.

Dave: And that is never basis on which to build doctrine!

All right, one final point. In Jehovah’s Witnesses’ 2013 revision of their New Word Translation of the Bible, they make a mistake that, unbeknownst to them, actually ends up refuting their entire doctrine.

Miles: Really? What’s that?

Dave: They link Luke 10:18 to Revelation 12:7-9. Let’s read it.

Miles: Uh, Luke 10:18 says: “At that he said to them: ‘I see Satan already fallen like lightning from heaven.’”

Dave: Now, here’s where it gets a bit sticky. They include a cross reference to Revelation 12, verses 7 to 9. Let’s read that.

Miles:

And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels battled with the dragon, and the dragon and its angels battled but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them any longer in heaven. So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him.

Dave: Notice how linking these two passages invalidates their stated beliefs. If, as they put it, Yahushua is on earth seeing the devil being cast out of heaven, how can he also be Michael up in heaven who is doing the casting out?

Miles: Huh! That’s a good point. You can’t be in heaven warring with the devil, then on earth at the same time watching it happen.

Dave: It’s very important we bring all our beliefs to the test of Scripture and make sure our doctrines are consistent with all of Scripture.

Miles: That’s true. Truth doesn’t contradict itself. It’s always consistent.

Don’t go away folks. When we return, Dave will be answering a question about just what is appropriate behavior for Christians. Stay tuned!

* * *

You are listening to World's Last Chance Radio.

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.

* * *Advertisement

The gifts of the spirit are different from the fruit of the spirit. Since the days of the apostles, believers have longed to be blessed with the gifts of the spirit, one of which is speaking in “tongues” or other languages.

May Christians believe that the ability to speak in tongues is evidence of their faith and devotion. This can put a burden of pressure on other believers who don’t feel they can speak in tongues.

While speaking in tongues is certainly one of the gifts of the spirit listed in the Bible, should it be taken as proof of one’s devotion to Yah? Furthermore, if a person does not manifest all the gifts of the spirit, is it because he or she lacks faith? Does Yahuwah even expect us to have all the gifts of His spirit?

If you would like to learn the answers to these questions and more, listen to the previously aired radio program entitled “Speaking in Tongues.” [Program 170] You can listen to “Speaking in Tongues” on our website or look for it on YouTube!

* * *Daily Mailbag (Miles & Dave)

Dave: So where is today’s Daily Mailbag question coming from?

Miles: From Australia!

Dave: Hmmm. Apparently, Australia was the second country in the entire world to give women the right to vote. My daughter just shared that factoid with me the other day. This was in 1902, if I remember correctly.

Miles: That’s interesting. Go Australia! Today’s question is coming specifically from Melbourne. Here’s something else that’s interesting. A John Batman was one of the city’s founding fathers.

Dave laughs: Batman?

Miles, amused: Wait. It gets better. Before the city was renamed Melbourne it was known as Batmania.

Dave laughs: What a great name. I think they should have left it as that.

Miles: I know, right?

Well, Cecily from … Batmania, Australia writes, quote: “My family recently celebrated New Moon with some family friends who are also fellow believers. We had—I thought—a lovely time. However, the next day, one of the friends called me up and told me that she felt impressed to share with me something on her heart that our family needed to ‘take to the Lord.’ She said that our family’s tendency to laugh and joke reflected poorly on our expressed faith. Since these are such solemn times to be living in, cracking jokes and laughing as much as we do in our family, she said, was inappropriate.

“Honestly, at first I thought she was joking and found it funny. But, no. She was serious. Now, I can’t decide whether I still find it funny or whether to be offended. Before responding either way, I thought I’d ask for your perspective. I do believe we’re living in solemn times so is she right? We weren’t laughing about inappropriate topics, but is laughing and joking itself truly inappropriate for believers living during these last days?”

Dave: I-I … well, I—

This is a hard question to answer. You know, I wasn’t there. I didn’t hear what was said. Certainly, there are some forms of humor that believers shouldn’t be participating in. Anything that is sacrilegious or blasphemous, scatological humor—that sort of thing really isn’t appropriate for believers and, quite honestly, different people have different definitions of what’s appropriate and what’s not.

Miles: Fair enough. So, let’s take the question at face value. Cecily says they weren’t laughing about anything inappropriate. It was that they were laughing and joking at all that the friend found inappropriate.

Dave: I’ve heard that expressed before. That “light and trifling” conversation is not something true believers will waste their time on.

Miles: Do you agree?

Dave: Well, having agreed that there are certain topics that are inappropriate for Christians to laugh and joke about, I would have to say that laughing and joking isn’t a sin just because it’s laughing and joking.

Look, let’s put this into perspective. There are certain things in life that are, for various reasons, addictive. For example, what causes someone to be addicted to smoking?

Miles: Uh, the nicotine.

Dave: Right! The strength or “pull” of cigarettes is found in the nicotine they contain. What about wine, beer? What is the strength of wine and beer?

Miles: Alcohol and how it makes a person feel.

Dave: Correct. That’s why it can be addictive. Now, Yahuwah has a “pull” if you will, too. And, just like the nicotine in cigarettes, it pulls or attracts believers to Him. Let’s read what that is. Turn to Nehemiah chapter 8.

Now Nehemiah, you’ll remember, was cupbearer to the king of Persia and he had been given permission to return to Israel and build the temple. The people were ignorant of Yah’s requirements so one of the first things Nehemiah did was to read to them the book of the law.

Now it just so happened that the day he read to them was on New Moon of the seventh month or, as it is otherwise known–?

Miles: Feast of trumpets.

Dave: Right. A holy day. So Nehemiah reads to the people the book of the law and their consciences were stricken as they saw that they’d not been keeping Yah’s law. Start with verse 9 of Nehemiah chapter 8. What does that say?

Miles: “And Nehemiah, who was the governor, Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who taught the people said to all the people, ‘This day is holy to Yahuwah your Elohim; do not mourn nor weep.’ For all the people wept, when they heard the words of the Law.”

Dave: So, you could say that, the solemnity of the occasion, the sobering realization of how they had dishonored Yah was what caused the people to weep. And Christians today, as they view Yahuwah’s holiness, have that same sobering realization.

So, did Nehemiah commend the people for their heart-broken reaction? Read verse 10.

Miles: “Then he said to them, ‘Go your way, eat the fat, drink the sweet, and send portions to those for whom nothing is prepared; for this day is holy to our Lord. Do not sorrow, for the joy of Yahuwah is your strength.’”

Dave: Go ahead and read to the end of that passage, verses 11 and 12.

Miles: “So the Levites quieted all the people, saying, ‘Be still, for the day is holy; do not be grieved.’ And all the people went their way to eat and drink, to send portions and rejoice greatly, because they understood the words that were declared to them.”

Dave: Israel had been taken into Babylonian captivity for breaking the law of Yah, so now these Jews that had returned were upset as they saw that they, too, had been breaking Yah’s law. In ignorance, certainly, but still breaking it. Their sorrow for sin was appropriate. And yet. What does Nehemiah tell them?

Miles: Basically, he tells them to celebrate. Feast.

Dave: Because the day is holy to Yah. And then he adds, “Do not sorrow, for the joy of Yahuwah is your strength.”

This is what draws us to Yahuwah: the joy that comes from serving Him. And I’m not talking about a joy that is too deep, too “holy” to appear in an outward smile. I’m talking about true happiness. Yahuwah wants us to have joy! He wants us to be happy! It is not inappropriate to laugh, have fun, and yes, even crack clean jokes. That’s fine.

I’m not the first one to say it, but I’ll repeat whoever said it. And that’s: Christians should be the happiest people on the face of the earth.

Miles: It’s true. Not only are our sins forgiven and we have help for the present, but we’ve got hope for the future, too.

Dave: So, yes! Joy, happiness, laughter, and even joking is appropriate for happy people because our strength comes from the joy of Yahuwah.

Now, I want to address something else that I’ve witnessed over and over again, and that is the tendency to find fault with our fellow believers. I think this actually starts in a good place, but if we can understand where this is coming from, we can guard against it in ourselves.

Miles: How does finding fault with others start in a good place? As I recall, in Revelation, what is it? Chapter 7 where it talks about 12,000 being sealed from each tribe? There’s a new tribe. The tribe of Joseph, and that’s because the tribe of Dan was left out. And when you look back at what Jacob had to say on his deathbed about Dan, and the characteristics that developed in that tribe, you see that it’s for fault-finding and back-stabbing. So, again: how can fault-finding come from a good place?

Dave: I didn’t say it comes from a good place but it can start there. What I mean is, some of the most conservative, devout and dedicated Christians are also those who are often the most critical of others. This sounds contradictory so let’s analyze how this happens.

Sincere, devout and dedicated Christians often have the clearest views and the deepest understanding of Yahuwah’s holiness. As they see His high holiness, they also see clearly their own deficiencies. Now, it’s not fun seeing our failings and deficiencies so Satan is ready to sweep in and distract them, and the way he does this is by redirecting their attention to fellow-believers.

“Oh,” he says, “you feel guilty for This or for That? Well, look at Mr. So-and-so. He’s even worse than you because he does it even more! Look at Ms. Such-and-such. She’s so worldly because she dresses like this or that.”

Miles: So, by comparing ourselves to others, he gets us feeling pretty good about ourselves.

Dave: And it takes our eyes away from Christ while simultaneously puffing us up with spiritual pride. It’s a real trap.

Now we don’t know all the circumstances that would lead this sister in Christ to feel like she had to contact Cecily and … uh, remonstrate with her—

Miles: Scold her; criticize her.

Dave: —for laughing and joking. And I don’t want to speculate. Speculating as to another person’s motives is an easy trap to fall into and a quick, easy way to start fault-finding. But, for whatever reason, she felt the need to share her criticism with Cecily which, obviously, was hurtful. She wasn’t doing Christ’s work in finding fault with a sister in Christ.

Turn to Revelation 12. Here, John is given a vision of war in heaven, where Michael and his angels fought against the dragon and his angels. And the dragon—which verse 9 tells us is actually Satan—loses and he and his angels are cast to the earth. Now read verse 10. What does that say?

Miles: “Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, “Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down.’”

Dave: Satan is the accuser of the brethren. And when we find fault with, criticize and accuse our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, we’re joining with Satan in doing his work.

Christ was the most loving, kind, non-judgmental, accepting-of-others person you’d ever wish to meet. In fact, that’s one of the reasons the Pharisees found fault with him. And if we want to be like Christ, we’ll be the same. What did he say to the woman caught in adultery?

Miles: “Neither do I condemn you.” [John 8:11]

Dave: The Pharisees didn’t like Christ because he accepted those that they rejected. You almost get the feeling that if Christ had been aloof and fault-finding, they would have accepted him, but he wasn’t like that. He welcomed everyone who came to him, because that’s what Yahuwah is like. And if we want to be like the Father, if we want to reflect His image to the world, we’re not going to do it by going around and tearing down or criticizing others.

Miles: Have you ever noticed that what is often criticized is the failure of one person to live up to another’s person’s self-imposed standards? Not the Bibles standards, but what we think we need to do in order to live by the Bible’s standards.

Dave: I have noticed that. It’s Pharisaism all over again. In reality, the Bible’s requirements are very simple. Why don’t you read that for us? It’s Micah 6 verse 8.

Miles: Oh, I’ve got that one memorized. It’s a Scripture song we sing in our family. It goes: “For He has shown you, O man, what is good. And what does Yahuwah require of thee but to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?”

Dave: We’re not loving mercy and we’re not walking humbly when we tear down others for not living up to our self-imposed rules. Remember, according to John 16 [verse 8], it is the Holy Spirit’s job to convict others of sin. That’s his work, not ours. Our job is to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with Yah.

Miles: Thank you. I, too, have noticed how often it’s the most conservative Christians that are the most critical of others. This really helps explain the psychology behind it and, you’re right: it’s not our job to convict others of their failings. This helps put it all into perspective.

Thanks, Cecily, for a great question. If you have a question, comment or prayer request, just go to our website and click on Contact Us. That’s Contact Us on WorldsLastChance.com.

* * *Daily Promise

Hello! This is Elise O’Brien with today’s daily promise from Yah’s word.

Harland David was not what you would call a “smashing success.” He was still very young when his father died. The family was not wealthy and those were very difficult years. At only six years of age, the little boy was left in charge of his younger siblings while his mother worked to support the family in a factory canning tomatoes. She was often away for days at a time, leaving the children to forage for food to survive. As a young man, Harland held a variety of jobs, from a farm hand to gas station attendant. For a while he was a streetcar conductor and also a steam engine stoker. He even sold insurance for a time.

Later, Harland opened a hotel and restaurant which were subsequently destroyed in a fire. He was able to rebuild but was forced to close the businesses when gas was rationed, and tourism dried up during World War II. Then, in 1947, he and his wife divorced. By any definition of the word, Harland was a failure.

But he had one thing going for him, and that was he had faith in a recipe he had perfected which his friends and family really enjoyed. He decided that this was something he could sell so, by now into his 60s, Harland began to travel around the United States. He would cook his special recipe and offer to give it to restaurants for free. All they had to do was pay him a small amount of money for every serving they sold. Today, we call that franchising but at the time, this was a new and revolutionary idea. And it wasn’t very popular.

Traveling around and cooking up samples was both time-consuming and expensive. One thousand and nine restaurants said no. But Harland believed in his recipe. Finally, the 1,010^th restaurant agreed. From there, more and more restaurants began to accept his offer. His “franchise” spread.

As of 2022, Harland’s franchise had spread to 24,998 outlets in 146 countries around the world. You might know Harland as Colonel Harland David Sanders, the founder of Kentucky Fried Chicken, or KFC as it is now known world-wide.

In 1 Corinthians 9, Paul says, quote: “Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last, but we do it to get a crown that will last forever.” [1 Corinthians 9:24-25]

Hebrews 12 verses 1 and 2 says:

Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Yahushua, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of [Yah].

We’ve been given great and precious promises. Go and start claiming!

* * *Part 3: (Miles & Dave)

Miles: Well, this was an interesting discussion today. Thank you, Dave. I think, speaking for myself, it underscores the importance of basing any and all doctrines on Scripture, as well as making sure that our beliefs are consistent with all revealed light.

Dave: We don’t want to cling to error just because we inherited it.

Miles: That’s true. Reminds me of that Old Testament passage that says:

Those from among you
Shall build the old waste places;
You shall raise up the foundations of many generations;
And you shall be called the Repairer of the Breach,
The Restorer of Streets to Dwell In.

Dave: Mmm, yes. Isaiah 58:12. And the way we do that, the way we “build the old waste places” is by going to Scripture and making sure our beliefs are based on the Bible alone.

Miles: Sola scriptura! The Bible and the Bible only. That should always be our rule of faith.

Join us again tomorrow, and until then, remember: Yahuwah loves you . . . and He is safe to trust!

* * *

You have been listening to WLC Radio.

This program and past episodes of WLC Radio are available for downloading on our website. They're great for sharing with friends and for use in Bible studies! They're also an excellent resource for those worshipping Yahuwah alone at home. To listen to previously aired programs, visit our website at WorldsLastChance.com. Click on the WLC Radio icon displayed on our homepage.

In his teachings and parables, the Savior gave no “signs of the times” to watch for. Instead, the thrust of his message was constant … vigilance. Join us again tomorrow for another truth-filled message as we explore various topics focused on the Savior's return and how to live in constant readiness to welcome him warmly when he comes.

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.