I have and it is shown that Jesus is the "fellow" of the Angelic hosts there, as well as being the Uncreated and eternal Son. Hebrews 1 shows that Jesus is the highest messenger of the Father in Hebrews 1. See this full study from the scripture (KJB), Chapter 10:
Specifically see Question:
[10-G] Question 07: How can Jesus, who is JEHOVAH [E/I]mmanuel, be “Michael the archangel”, or “the angel of the LORD” since in Hebrews 1:1-14 KJB the passage says that Jesus is “so much better than the angels” [Hebrews 1:4 KJB], has “a more excellent name than they” [Hebrews 1:4 KJB] and all the “angels of God” are to “worship him [Jesus]” [Hebrews 1:6 KJB] because He is “the brightness of his [the Father's] glory, and the express image of his [the Father's] person” [Hebrews 1:3 KJB]?
If you do not desire to read, then I will cover it here with you.
Thus you are calling all these heretics, see Chapter 11 (detailed list) and Appendix 2 (short list):
99.9% correct. Jesus is the "Angel" (Messenger of the Father) which is Uncreated and eternal Deity. Jesus is Deity (Nature) and Angel (Office).
Actually, Jesus is not in Revelation 4. That is only the Father, the 4 Living Creatures and 24 Elders. Chapter 5 is where Jesus and the other angels show up, after His ascension.
It seems you are afraid to actually consider evidence contrary to your Idol Matt Slick, which, by the way, I sent him all the material on the subject also. Do you know how he responded to it? He responded by ignoring it.
Not at all. I do not appeal to authority, except as Scripture is that authority (Isaiah 8:20). What I have done is shown that Calvin, even Calvinists and many others taught that Michael and Jesus are the same Being from the scripture. So I am not appealing to them. I appeal to the scripture they cited, even without them being present in the study. See the very first introductory statements in Chapter 11:
https://archive.org/download/michael-the-archangel-11-messengers-of-the-lord-the-reformation-etc/Michael the archangel [11] - Messengers of the LORD & the Reformation & etc.pdf
It reads thus:
"... [11] Messengers of the LORD & the Reformation, along with various prominent Theologians, Commentators, Concordances, Dictionaries, Lexicons and others who teach that “Michael the archangel” is the Eternal Almighty Son of God, JEHOVAH [E/I]mmanuel - Jesus, and/or the “angel of the LORD”, the very highest messenger from the bosom of the Father
Side note, IMPORTANT, PLEASE READ BEFORE CONTINUING:
[
*This list is by far from complete, though representative, and may be added to by any who will continue to diligently search the historical records in various languages and places. By no means, is any source listed herein, rare though they be, that actually denies the Eternal Deity and Godhood of Jesus [or that of the Holy Spirit] in any way, agreed to in that specific point, nor herein promoted as correct or to be advocated, but is rather scripturally heretical and to be roundly shown to be in error in the love of Jesus.]
Roman Catholicism, and those calling themselves 'Orthodoxy' [whether Greek, Eastern or Oriental, etc] in their sources and that which they call 'church-fathers' which they often cite [Augustine, Tertullian, Irenaeus, etc], in spite of others who disagreed with them, in general, do not teach that Michael the archangel is the Son of God, but deny this.
However, they will often times identify the “angel of the LORD” as the Son of God, and so separate this single person into two beings, and degrade the Eternal and Heavenly Deity of Michael the archangel to that of a differing lesser created being, which is what all pagan religions do – ie, attack the Eternal Deity of Jesus in some way or another, lowering Deity in some form or fashion and elevating creation [such as their angel 'veneration' and 'Mary' hyper-dulia/veneration]. In point of fact, this was one of the very issues of contention between those of the Reformation and those of Roman Catholicism, in which Luther, Melanchthon and others, having gone back to the study of the scriptures, identified clearly that Michael the archangel is the Son of God – Jesus, the very Eternal JEHOVAH God, the Son, the Uncreated “angel of the LORD”.
Another group, identifying themselves as the Watch Tower and/or Jehovah's Witnesses, having gone half-way back unto the teachings Roman Catholicism, denying the Reformation and the work of the person of the Holy Spirit that was working therein, are merely the opposite side of the coin of Roman Catholicism in this issue, for while they, borrowing from the earlier studies of the Reformation, teach rightly that Michael the archangel is the same person as the Son of God – Jesus, they then wrongly do as Roman Catholicism does in the other portion of the character and reduce the Uncreated Deity of His nature [Philippians 2:5-11 KJB, etc] to that mere creation, even of the 'first created' who created 'all [other] things' [thus both adding and taking away from scripture; Revelation 22:18-19 KJB], and even alter the scriptures in their KIT [Kingdom Interlinear Translation] and NWT [New World Translation], which itself is really nothing more than another [harsh] English version of the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts, namely Codex Aleph [Sinaiticus], B [Vaticanus] and A [Alexandrinus], etc. They are not cited herein though they would also say that Michael the archangel is the Son of God, and the “angel of the LORD”.
One or two others cited below later became Arian [they deny the Eternal Deity of the Son of the Father' nature, which is a clear heresy and deadly in eternal matters, John 8:21,24 KJB], and they are cited only for their many resources in regards this subject, as they identify many scriptures and other person who, through their own study of the scriptures, teach that Michael the archangel is the Son of the Father, and that He is Eternal God, Deity.
All sources cited from herein are not to determine what the scripture [KJB] says, nor are to be the foundation of any teaching. They are cited for the texts and passages they cite in coming to their conclusions, and how they came to their conclusion/s ..."
Indeed. Now will you take back the false charge you laid against me, and consider the evidence from scripture alone with me? Or will you do as Matt Slick has done? Ignore the evidence?
Are you afraid of what you will find? I have no such fear. Let us study the matter from scripture, and go point by point, question by question. Ready when you are, that is if you are able to control your emotion.