Wilson: Jehovah's Witnesses are a "cult," that is, they believe they are right and that all others are wrong and will not be saved unless they become Jehovah's Witnesses, too.
All strands of Christianity have minor variations. What unites Christians, however, is our belief in Jesus as the unique and divine Son of God. This gives us a sense of unity with all Christians as brothers and sisters despite differences in history and style.
It is typical of cults, however, to see themselves as the only right way of serving God, and the only ones who will be saved when God judges mankind. In the case of Jehovah's Witnesses, they systematically proselytize people who attend Christian churches, categorizing Christendom as "false religion," "the Harlot," and "Babylon the Great."[1]

If we take a look at say, Bob Larson's Book of Cults, we realize that according to mainstream evangelicals, there are many many cults. According to the criteria set out in this book, five american presidents are cultists, as is Isaac Newton and other prominent people. People write to me to tell me that Catholicism is a cult, as is Islam and the Eastern religious cults. This accounts for most of the world's population.  Evidently, anyone is a cultist if they simply don't believe the same as you. The word "cult" is so overused it has completely lost its power.

I have been tracking fundamentalists Baptists online for awhile, and people might be interested in what they are thinking. Fundamentalist David Cloud on the Gideons as posted by Baptist John Henry:

 "Another foundational problem with the Gideons is their ecumenism. They go to all sorts of unscriptural churches, including modernistic Protestant ones, such as United Methodist, Presbyterian Church USA, and Evangelical  Lutheran Church in America, that are affiliated with the World Council of Churches."

"Dear Hinez, [sic]
Independent fundamental local church Baptists do hold the only true saving faith (salvation by grace through faith in Christ apart from any works), but we are not the only ones that have this saving faith.
Independent fundamental local church Baptists are, however, Christ's true churches whereas the Roman Catholic "Church", all Protestant "churches", Universal "Church", and cults [including SDA] are not."

"Now, when I was growing up, I heard that the Baptists were the only true faith because we went back past Peter, to John the Baptist, who baptized Jesus by immersion. Anybody that had not received believer's baptism by being dunked under the water, not some little sprinkling, had a defect."
By Pastor Lanny Peters
http://www.oakhurstbaptist.org/obc/Sermons/Sermon_2000_10_01_WorldCommunion=.htm

"It is not to be understood that each of these groups was entirely free from error or entirely embraced the truth. Through these groups can be traced the people called Baptists. In these groups is to be found the true church -- not in Catholicism.
http://members.aol.com/libcfl/history.htm

"Baptists did not come out of the Reformation under Martin Luther, for they were never a part of the Catholic Church. In fact Baptists were on the scene long before the Catholic Church ever came into existence. For those who are interested in studying more on this subject we highly recommend The Trail of Blood, by J. M. Carroll.
We do not believe in a so-called "Universal Invisible Church." We believe that Jesus established a local, visible church, and we are sure that this is the only kind of true church that is in existence today.
http://www.victorybaptist.org.uk/whatwebelieve.html

"At another extreme, the follower of one faith approaches the other from a position of superiority. She/he assertively presents theirs as the only true religion. Other faiths, including the religion of the listener, may [sic] described as inferior, filled with errors, and even Satan-inspired. The proselytizer might state that the other will spend eternity being tortured in Hell unless they convert to the proselytizer's religion...."However, the implicit suggestion in Southern Baptist prayer guides is that 'others, including Christians, who do not practice the Christian faith as they do are not as Christian,' contended United Methodist Bishop C. Joseph Sprague, a member of the inter-faith council. 'That is insulting to us and conducive to real hurt.' With the recent defamation of synagogues and deaths attributed to hate crimes in the Chicago area, the bishop said, 'it's no stretch to look back at history and see cause and effect.' "
"Sprague said the incident reflects the theological divide between Christians about evangelism. Evangelical Christians, like Southern Baptists, believe that salvation comes only by accepting Jesus Christ as savior. Others consider Christ as the decisive revelation and that believers witness their faith by living life 'with Jesus Christ as savior, living and proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ.' It is clear as the Southern Baptist leadership has communicated that they have a hold on truth, and others who do not agree are outside the fold of salvation,' the bishop said. 'That is offensive and theologically suspect...This raises deep historic wounds, particularly in the Jewish community. It is important for us as Christians to remember that this is still the century of the Holocaust.' "
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chi_decl.htm

"Is Evangelism the only true faith? It is the truest. The Lord decides [I'm a big believer in the absolute sovereignty of God] what is best for each of us and guides us to what food we can digest."
http://www.atheists-for-jesus.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?action=oct99_1&startwith=40

"The Pentecostals of Clearwater is part of the United Pentecostal Church International, which has 2.6-million members around the world. Greg Bowe, 30, an analyst at an insurance and security firm, said he began attending a year ago "because it's the only true faith ... it doesn't cut things out of the Bible."  "The spirit of God is like nothing else," he said about speaking in tongues. "It's a joy no amount of alcohol, money or drugs can give you."
http://www.sptimes.com/2002/07/06/NorthPinellas/Congregation_is_thril.shtml

"the only true Church of Christ is the Catholic Church."
http://www.truecatholic.org/baltapx.htm

"I would like to teach this week on the deity of Christ, and the truth concerning the Jesus only faith, which is the only true faith set forth by God's apostles and the old testament writings that firmly establish the oneness of God."
http://truelightpentecostal.org/042902.html

"The Slavophils thought that Russian people live by the Orthodox faith, which is the only true faith containing the entire
truth... http://www.earlham.edu/archive/opf-l/May-2001/msg00043.html

"it has Apostolic foundations and it has the Apostolic Succession. The Orthodox Church believes it is the only true Church which has kept all these distinctive marks." http://latter-rain.com/ltrain/ortho.htm

Orthodox Church
"Thinking (like so many others) that they are the One And Only True Church" http://www.godulike.co.uk/az.php?order=o

JESUS CHRIST was accused of being a drunkard, a glutton, a Sabbath breaker, a false witness, a blasphemer of God, and a messenger of Satan. He was also accused of being subversive.—Matthew 9:34; 11:19; 12:24; 26:65; John 8:13; 9:16; 19:12.
After Jesus' death and resurrection, his disciples were likewise the target of serious accusations. One group of first-century Christians were dragged to the city rulers by people yelling: 'The men who have made trouble the whole world over have now come here.' (Acts 17:6 REB)
Of Paul they said that he was a "pestilent mover of sedition among the Jews throughout the world" and accused  of "a violation of the temple." (Acts 24:5, 6 Knox) It was these Christians "The only thing we do know about this sect is that there is universal opposition to it."—Acts 28:22 Barclay.
It is obvious that this new group established by Jesus Christ was considered by some to be a religious group with radical views and practices that clashed with what was accepted in those days as "orthodox" or "mainstream." Their accusers were often prominent and respected members of the community, and this seems to have added weight to the allegations. Many believed the accusations against Jesus and his disciples. Yet, as you probably know, every one of these charges was false!
How do we identify Jesus followers? Jesus said, "You must have love for one another. This is how everyone will know that you are my disciples." How has this love shown itself in "orthodox" or "mainstream" Xtianity. Let us see:
Rwanda: The general secretary of the Catholic Institute for International Relations, Ian Linden, made the following admission in the journal The Month: "Investigations by African Rights in London provide one or two examples of local Catholic, Anglican and Baptist Church leaders being implicated by omission or commission in militia killings. . . . There is absolutely no doubt that significant numbers of prominent Christians in parishes were involved in killings." Sadly, fighting between so-called Christians continues to plague central Africa.

As Daniel Defoe wrote in his work The True-Born Englishman: "And of all plagues with which mankind are curst, ecclesiastic tyranny's the worst."

The Christian Century: "The earliest Christians did not serve in the armed forces. Roland Bainton notes that 'from the end of the New Testament period to the decade A.D. 170-180 there is no evidence whatever of Christians in the army.' . . . Only gradually did Christians abandon their opposition to military service . . . Once Augustine endorsed 'just war' as authorizing Christians' participation in military activities, 'just war' soon became whatever war their government engaged in."
The article then exposes the real issue for Christians: "Can anyone seriously conceive of Jesus hurling hand grenades at his enemies, using a machine gun, manipulating a flamethrower, dropping nuclear bombs or launching an ICBM which would kill or cripple thousands of mothers and children? . . . If Jesus could not do this and be true to his character, then how can we do it and be true to him?"
"Augustine's ['just war'] perversion of Christianity on this critical issue was the greatest calamity that ever befell the faith. It has cost Christians endless opportunities to witness for their central ethical principle: love your enemies and do good to them who despitefully use you. It may have done as much to hamper Christian evangelism as anything that has ever occurred."

British Brigadier General Frank P. Crozier said of the situation during World War I: "The Christian Churches are the finest blood-lust creators which we have, and of them we made free use."
That the position of the churches was indeed hypocritical was acknowledged by the late Protestant clergyman Harry Emerson Fosdick. He admitted: "Our Western history has been one war after another. We have bred men for war, trained men for war; we have glorified war; we have made warriors our heroes and even in our churches we have put the battle flags . . . With one corner of our mouth we have praised the Prince of Peace and with the other we have glorified war."
The situation did not change during World War II. Friedrich Heer, a Roman Catholic professor of history at Vienna University, later acknowledged in his book God's First Love:

"In the cold facts of German history, the Cross and the swastika came ever closer together, until the swastika proclaimed the message of victory from the towers of German cathedrals, swastika flags appeared round altars and Catholic and Protestant theologians, pastors, churchmen and statesmen welcomed the alliance with Hitler."—Page 247.

"I bring you this stately matron named Christendom, returning bedraggled, besmirched, and dishonored from pirate raids in Kiao-Chow, Manchuria,  South Africa, and the Phillipines, with her soul full of meanness, her pocket full of boodle, and her mouth full of pious hypocrisies. Give  her soap and a towel, but hide the looking-glass."--Mark Twain, Speech to the Red Cross

"Then the Holy Inquisition was born...thousands of torn and mutilated heretics shrieking under the torture, and other thousands and thousands of heretics and witches burning at the stake, "always in the pleasant shade flung by the peaceful banner of the cross," as Satan remarked.
And in the midst of these fearful spectacles, as an incidental matter, we had a marvelous nightshow, by the light of fitting and flying torches the butchery of Christian by Christian in France on Bartholomew's Day.--- Mark Twain

Wilson: Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Jesus is the fully divine Son of God.
Several heretical groups deny that Jesus is the fully divine, unique Son of God--Unitarians, Mormons, Christian Science, and Jehovah's Witnesses. Jehovah's Witnesses revive the ancient heresy put forward by Arius in the Fourth Century[2] and rejected by faithful Christians at the Council of Nicea.

"The conciliar decisions plunged Chrisitianity into undreamed-of theological confusions with constant entanglements in church politics. They produced splits and sparked off a persecution of heretics unique in the history of religion. This is what Christianity became as it changed its nature from a persecuted minority to a majority persecuting others."

"Constantine, who treated religious questions solely from a political point of view, assured unanimity by banishing all the bishops who would not sign the new profession of faith. In this way unity was achieved/ 'It was altogether unheardof that a universal creed should be instituted solely on the authority of the emperor, who as a catechumen was not even admitted to the mystery of the Eucharist and was totally unempowered to rule on the highest mysteries of the faith. Not a single bishop said a single word against this monstrous thing." [Walter Nigg, The Heretics, Heresy Throught the Ages, p127]

"The three-in-one/one-in-three mystery of Father, Son and Holy Ghost made tritheism official. The subsequent almost-deification of the Virgin Mary made it quatrotheism . . . Finally, cart-loads of saints raised to quarter-deification turned Christianity into plain old-fashioned polytheism. By the time of the Crusades, it was the most polytheistic religion to ever have existed, with the possible exception of Hinduism. This untenable contradiction between the assertion of monotheism and the reality of polytheism was dealt with by accusing other religions of the Christian fault. The Church - Catholic and later Protestant - turned aggressively on the two most clearly monotheistic religions in view - Judaism and Islam - and persecuted them as heathen or pagan. "
"The external history of Christianity consists largely of accusations that other religions rely on the worship of more than one god and therefore not the true God. These pagans must therefore be converted, conquered and/or killed for their own good in order that they benefit from the singularity of the Holy Trinity, plus appendages." -- The Doubter's Companion (John Ralston Saul)

Wilson: For Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus is not fully God, but "a god."

Wilson: They identify him as Michael the archangel.

"The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the pre-incarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the "child" and the archangel in Rev 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Dnl.

"I embrace the opinion of those who refer this to the person of
Christ, because it suits the subject best to represent him as standing
forward for the defense of his elect people."
J. Calvin, COMMENTARIES ON THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET DANIEL, trans. T. Myers (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), vol. 2 p. 369.

There seems good reason for regarding Michael as the Messiah. Such was the opinion of the best among the ancient Jews.... With this all the Bible representations of Michael
agree. He appears as the Great Prince who standeth for Israel (Dan. xii. I),
and he is called "the Prince of Israel" (Dan. x. 21)--William L. Alexander,
ed., A CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE, originally edited by John Kitto,
3d ed. (Edinburgh: A & C Black, 1886). vol. 3, p. 158

"Here Arius joined an older tradition of Christology, which had already played a role in Rome in the early 2nd century--namely, the so-called angel-Christology. The descent of the Son to Earth was understood as the descent to Earth of the highest prince of the angels, who became man in Jesus Christ; he is to some extent identified with the angel prince Michael. In the old angel-Christology the concern is already expressed to preserve the oneness of God, the inviolable distinguishing mark of the Jewish and Christian faiths over against all paganism. The Son is not himself God, but as the highest of the created spiritual beings he is moved as close as possible to God. Arius joined this tradition with the same aim--i.e., defending the idea of the oneness of the Christian concept of God against all reproaches that Christianity introduces a new, more sublime form of polytheism."
http://mamma66.mamma.com/Search?eng=MSN&cb=Mamma&dest=http%3A%2F%2
Fwww.britannica.com%2Fbcom%2Feb%2Farticle%2F1%2F0%252C5716%252C1083
01%2B3%252C00.html&engid=599&af=0&qtype=0&qw=angel+christology&idx=0

"Michael ... in Dan. 10:13,21; 12:1, is described as having a special charge of the Jewish nation, and in Rev. 12:7-9 as the leader of the angelic army. So exalted are the position and offices ascribed to Michael, that many think the Messiah is meant." -- INTERNATIONAL BIBLE DICTIONARY -- ILLUSTRATED (Plainfield, NJ, Logos International, 1977), p. 35

"By the personage, in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus." (his multi-volume commentary -- not just the 1-volume abridged ed. by Ralph Earle----published by Abingdon Press, vol. 6, page 952).

AN EXPOSITION OF THE BIBLE, produced by 27 different scholars, says of
Michael:

"It is even itself probable that the Leader of the hosts of light (in Rev. 12:7-9) will be no other than the Captain of our salvation, the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.... Above all, the prophecies of Daniel, in which the name Michael first occurs, may be said to decide the point." -- publ. in Hartford, CT, 1910, by the Scranton Co., vol. 6, p.882

Concerning Revelation 12:9 in Henry’s unabridged and concise commentaries.
2. The parties-Michael and his angels on one side, and the dragon and his angels on the other: Christ, the great Angel of the covenant, and his faithful followers; and Satan and all his instruments. This latter party would be much superior in number and outward strength to the other; but the strength of the church lies in having the Lord Jesus for the captain of their salvation.

Verses 7-11 The attempts of the dragon proved unsuccessful against the church, and fatal to his own interests. The seat of this war was in heaven; in the church of Christ, the kingdom of heaven on earth. The parties were Christ, the great Angel of the covenant, and his faithful followers; and Satan and his instruments.

Concerning Daniel 10 in Henry’s unabridged commentary.
Here is Michael our prince, the great protector of the church, and the patron of its just but injured cause: The first of the chief princes, v. 13. Some understand it of a created angel, but an archangel of the highest order, 1 Th. 4:16; Jude 9. Others think that Michael the archangel is no other than Christ himself, the angel of the covenant, and the Lord of the angels, he whom Daniel saw in vision, v. 5.

Chapter XII
A promise of deliverance, and of a joyful resurrection, ver. 1 - 4. A conference concerning the time of these events, ver. 5 - 7. An answer to Daniel's enquiry, ver. 8 - 13.1 For the children - The meaning seems to be, as after the death of Antiochus the Jews had some deliverance, so there will be yet a greater deliverance to the people of God, when Michael your prince, the Messiah shall appear for your salvation. A time of trouble - A the siege of Jerusalem, before the final judgment. The phrase at that time, probably includes all the time of Christ, from his first, to his last coming.

Wesley on Daniel 10:21
Michael - Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes
of the earth desert or oppose it.

Da 12:1
12:1 And at that {a} 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.
(a) The angel here notes two things: first that the Church will be in great affliction and trouble at Christ's coming, and next that God will send his angel to deliver it, whom he here calls Michael, meaning Christ, who is proclaimed by the preaching of the Gospel.

Da 10:1310:13 But the {h} prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, {i} Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. (h) Meaning Cambyses, who reigned in his father's absence, and did not only for this time hinder the building of the temple, but would have further raged, if God had not sent me to resist him: and therefore I have stayed for the profit of the Church. (i) Even though God could by one angel destroy all the world, yet to assure his children of his love he sends forth double power, even
Michael, that is, Christ Jesus the head of angels.

"The two passages in the New Testament, in which Michael is mentioned, serve to confirm the result already arrived at.  That the Michael referred to in Rev. xii. 7 is no other than the Logos, has already been proved in my commentary upon that passage.  Hofmann (Schriftbeweis i., p. 296) objects to this explanation, and says, 'in this case it is impossible to imagine why the Archangel should be mentioned as fighting with the dragon, and not the child that was caught up to the throne of God.' But we have already replied to this in the commentary, where we said, 'if Michael be Christ, the question arises why Michael is mentioned here instead of Christ'. The answer to this is, that the name Michael [Who is like God?, that is, 'Who dares to claim that they are like God?'] contains in itself an intimation that the work referred to here, the decisive victory over Satan, belongs to Christ, not as human, but rather as divine [compare 1 John iii. 8].  Moreover, this name forms a connecting link between the Old Testament and the New.  Even in the Old Testament, Michael is represented as the great prince, who fights on
behalf of the Church (Dan. xii. 1).' The conflict there alluded to was a prediction and prelude of the one mentioned hero.  The further objections offered by Hofmann rest upon his very remarkable interpretation of chap. xii., which is not likely to be adopted by any who are capable of examining for themselves."

                Paul says, 'For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout,
                with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God" and the dead
                in Christ will rise first.' I Thes. iv. 16.  From this text it appears
                that when the Lord shall descend with a shout, his voice will be that of
                the Archangel, or head Messenger; therefore the Lord must be that head
                Messenger.  This text says the dead shall rise at the voice of the
                Archangel; and Christ affirms that the dead shall be raised by his
                voice.  He says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, the hour is coming,
                and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and
                they that hear shall live. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming,
                in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
                forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life, and they
                that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." John v. 26,
                28, 29.

Brown's dictionary of the Bible on the words Michael, and Angel says, that both these words do sometimes refer to Christ; and also affirms that Christ is the Archangel.  Wood's Spiritual Dictionary teaches nearly, if not exactly, the same on this subject that Brown's does. The former was a Calvinist, the latter a Methodist.  Buck in his Theological Dictionary says, under the article Angel, d) that Christ is in scripture frequently called an Angel.[1] Butterworth, Cruden, and Taylor in their concordances, assert that Michael and  Angel are both names of Christ.
Doctor Coke, a Methodist bishop, in his notes on the Bible, acknowledges that Christ is sometimes called an Angel.  See his notes of that passage where the Angel of the Lord spake to the people at Bochim. Winchester has taught the same doctrine in the 152 page of the first volume of his lectures on the prophecies.  Whitefield, in his sermon on the bush that burnt and was not consumed,   says that the Angel that appeared to Moses in the bush was Christ. Pool, in his Annotations, explains those passages where the Lord appeared to the Patriarchs under the character of an Angel, as referring to Jesus Christ. Bunyan makes the pilgrim ascribe  his deliverance from  Apollyon to  Michael. He says, "Blessed Michael helped me." Pilgrim's Progress, Cincinnati edition, page 54. Guyse in his Paraphrase on the New Testament, on Rev.
xii. 7, acknowledges that many good expositors think that Christ is signified by Michael; and also gives it as his opinion.
Doctor Watts in his [G]lories of Christ, page[s] 200, 201, 202, 218, 223, and 224, teaches the same doctrine.  Watts, Dodridge and some others have called this Angel of the covenant, or Angel of God's presence Christ's human soul, whom they think was the first Being that God ever created.  I agree with them that Christ is the first Being that God created, but I cannot see the propriety of calling the pre-existent Christ a human soul, seeing he did not descend from humans but existed before the human family was created.

E.W. Hengstenberg, in his Christologie des Alten Testaments und Kommentar uber die messianischen Weissagungen, Bd. iii. 2 Aufl. 1857 identifies the archangel Michael with the Logos-Christ.

Thomas Scott, in his notes on the Bible, says the Angel that appeared to Hagar when she fled from her mistress, one of the three Angels that appeared to Abraham in the plains of Mamre, the Angel that appeared to Moses in the bush, and the Angel that spoke to the Jews at Bochim, was
Jesus Christ: and also asserts that Michael the Archangel is Jesus Christ. See Gen. xvi. 9, 10. Chap. xviii throughout. Exod. iii. 2-7. Judg. ii. 1-5, Dan x. 13, 21. Chap. xii. 1, Rev. xii. 7.

"the influence of the late-Jewish speculation about the archangel Michael in the earlier period of Post-Apostolic Christianity helped to preserve the Angel-Christology: indeed it even provided new stimulus for the further development of Christology. In his day Wilhelm Bousset had already alluded to the fact, being the first to do so, in his writing about the 'Antichrist'. The figure of the archangel Michael had perhaps already influenced Philo's speculation about the Logos, and Philo bad affected Christian authors of the Post-Apostolic period. in any case Philo did not identify the Logos with the Messiah, but with an archangel,s and he predicated to him that which was appropriate to the archangel Michael. Thus the late-Jewish speculation about Michael (which imparted Messianic traits to the archangel), the Philonic Logos-doctrine and the PostApostolic Logos-Christology appear in a sequence and indicate that the late-Jewish doctrine of angels was their common presupposition."
Martin Werner, The Formation of Christian Dogma, p. 133

Formerly the older people [the Israelites] had an old covenant, and the law disciplined the people with fear, and the Word was an angel; but the fresh and new people  [the Christians] has also been given a new covenant, and the Word has appeared, and fear turned into love, and that mystic angel is born—Jesus.—The Instructor, Book I, chapter VII (7); ANF, Vol. II, p. 224.

"And lo, Michael." and Who is Michael but the angel assigned to the people? As (God) says to Moses. "I will not go with you in the way, because the people are stiff-necked; but my angel shall go with you.—Scholia On Daniel, 13; ANF, Vol. V (5), p. 190. (Compare, Exodus 14:19; 23:20, 3; 32:34; 1 Corinthians 10:4; Insight On The Scriptures, Volume 2,  p. 816, paragraph 9.)

He who in the law is the Law; among the priests, Chief Priest; among kings, the Ruler; among prophets, the Prophet; among the angels, Archangel; in the voice of the preacher, the Word; among spirits, the Spirit; in the Father, the Son; in God, God; King for ever and ever.—On Faith; ANF, Vol. VIII (8), pp. 756-7.

In a number of passages we read of an angel who is superior to the six angels forming God's inner council, and who is regularly described as 'most venerable', 'holy' and 'glorious'. This angel is given the name of Michael, and the conclusion is difficult to escape that Hermas saw in him the Son of God and equated him with the archangel Michael...Christ's pre-existence, was generally taken for granted, as was His role creation as well as redemption. This theme, which could point to Pauline and Johannine parallels, chimed in very easily with creative functions assigned to Wisdom in later Judaism...There is evidence also...of attempts to interpret Christ as a sort of supreme angel ... Of a doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense there is of course no sign, although the Church's triadic formula left its mark everywhere—pp. 94-5.

"For Justin the Logos-Christ was, therefore, the archistrategos, the highest angel-prince and leader of the angelic host." Werner, ibid. 135

What about Heb 1:5, "For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee?" The main point of Hebrews 1 is to elevate Jesus above the angels (an elevation that an Almighty would not need). Hence the ARCH in ARCHangel. For more click here.
If the title "archangel" also applied to other angels, then the reference to "an archangel's voice" would not be appropriate.
Jesus has been given authority by his Father to raise the dead. (Jn.5:25,26).
But the voice of the archangel also raises the dead (1Thes. 4:16; cf Dan.12:2).
Michael is called "the great prince" (Dan. 12:1).
Christ is called a "princely ruler" and "prince of peace" (Isa.9:6).
In Daniel chapter 7, there is a prophecy about the march of world powers to the end of the age. At the climax of that prophecy we read that "someone like a son of man" was "given rulership and dignity and kingdom," and that one is Jesus Christ. (Dan.7:13, 14) In another prophecy Daniel wrote that reached down to "the time of the end" (Dan.10:13;11:40) Michael would stand up: "And during that time Michael will stand up." (Da 12:1) In Daniel's prophecy, 'standing up' frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as King. (Dan.11:2-4,7,16,20,21)
Michael's "standing" indicates a ruler and supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah's/Yahweh's appointed King.
Both prophecies deal with the same time and the same event...thus the conclusion is obvious.
Satan is abyssed by an *angel* for a thousand years. (Rev.20:1, 2, 10)
The demons identified Christ as the one who was to hurl them into the "abyss" (Mt 8:29).
The nations are destroyed by Jesus and *his* army of angels. (Rev.12:12; 17:16, 17; 19:11-16)
Jesus is also prophesied as the seed that is to crush Satan's head (Gen.3:15), but yet Michael with "his angels" who does this in Revelation 12.

Wilson: They believe he is God's first creation, and thus a creature rather than the Creator.

Wilson: The Bible, on the contrary, says of Jesus, "In Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form."

Wilson: For Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus' resurrection was not physical but spiritual.[7] Like the angels, "he was obliged to materialize a body of flesh in order to make himself visible."[8] This is how Jehovah's Witnesses explain that Jesus' second coming--his second "presence," as they call it--"is unseen to natural human eyes."[9] True Christians believe that Jesus' resurrection was physical. The body was gone. He told his disciples. "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; touch me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have."[10] True Christians also expect to see Jesus return in the same way he was taken up into heaven.[11]
Jehovah's Witnesses deny Jesus' full divinity, his physical resurrection, and his visible return.

"But Christ having come a high priest of the good things to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption. For Christ entered not into a holy place made with hands, like in pattern to the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of God for us: nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place year by year with blood not his own; else must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once at the end of the ages hath he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."

This page is brought to you by John C's persistence (http://www.geocities.com/jcostouros/jw2.html), who notes:

JohnC: "When I wrote to him, I believed all along that our correspondence was private and at a basic level. Certainly, I did not think to create a dissertation to impress him or the internet public. However, that was not the case with Heinz. He chose to take parts of my letters and publish them in his web site."