Do SDA believe Michael is God?

interestingly 'the LORD rebuke thee' here in Zechariah is not imperative, as it is in Jude. in Jude the tense is operative active -- definitely a 3rd person who acts.
it's declarative, in imperfect tense, in Zechariah. not so definite that a 3rd party is the actor.

in Jude, it is specified that Michael Himself does not dare act - i.e. He is not the LORD; He is not Christ.
in Zechariah, it is the LORD who both declares and acts.

and the LORD saying 'the LORD rebuke thee' is indicative that God exists in more than one person ((just like Hebrews 1)) -- the Father is God, the Son is God, the Father is not the Son.

so very interesting.
so very damning to the SDA/JW hybrid position.

thanks for the reference
sorry it denigrates your preaching

No. That is an abuse of Jude 1:9. It plainly says:

Jud 1:9: "Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee."

Michael/Son of God "durst not bring against him (the devil) a railing accusation".

Michael came down from Heaven to resurrect Moses [Matthew 17:1-12; Mark 9:1-13; Luke 9:27-36; John 11:25; 2 Peter 1:16; Romans 5:14; Jude 1:9 KJB] just quoted Zechariah 3, correct and stated that "the angel" (vs 1; The Son, as messenger) "of the LORD" (Father), was identified (vs 2) as also "LORD" (the Son) which stated to satan, "The LORD [THE FATHER] rebuke thee ..."?

Notice that the “durst not” is not isolated, but is connected with the words “railing accusation”. Michael/Jesus, therefore “durst not” bring against Satan, a “railing accusation” even when the devil was directly opposing Him. Consider the word:

[1] “railing” as found in Jude 1:9 KJB:

The Koine Greek: βλασφημίας

The Transliterated Koine Greek: blasphemias

The King James Concordance listing: G988

Total KJB Occurrences: 20

blasphemy, 11

Matthew 12:31 (2), 26:65; Mark 7:22, 14:64; John 10:33; Revelation 2:8-9 (2), 13:1,6, 17:3

blasphemies, 5

Matthew 15:19; Mark 2:7, 3:28; Luke 5:21; Revelation 13:5

evil, 1

Ephesians 4:31

railing, 1

Jude 1:9

railings, 1

1 Timothy 6:4

speaking, 1

Ephesians 4:31

[2] The related word, “railing”, as found in the parallel text, 2 Peter 2:11 KJB:

The Koine Greek: βλάσφημον

The Transliterated Koine Greek: blasphemon

The King James Concordance listing: G989

Total KJB Occurrences: 5

blasphemous, 2

Acts 6:11,13

blasphemer, 1

1 Timothy 1:13

blasphemers, 1

2 Timothy 3:2

railing, 1

2 Peter 2:11

[3] A third related word, “railed”, as found throughout the King James Bible, is variously translated and defined as:

The Koine Greek: βλασφημοῦμαι

The Transliterated Koine Greek: blasphemoumai

The King James Concordance listing: G987

Total KJB Occurrences: 46

evil, 9

1 Corinthians 10:30; Titus 3:2; 1 Peter 4:4,14; 2 Peter 2:2,10,12; Jude 1:8,10

blasphemed, 7

Acts 18:6; Romans 2:24; 1 Timothy 6:1; Titus 2:5; Revelation 16:9,11,21

blaspheme, 6

Mark 3:28-29 (2); Acts 26:11; 1 Timothy 1:20; James 2:7; Revelation 13:6

speak, 5

Titus 3:2; 2 Peter 2:10,12; Jude 1:8,10

spoken, 5

Matthew 26:65; Romans 14:16; 1 Corinthians 10:30; 1 Peter 4:14; 2 Peter 2:2

blasphemeth, 2

Matthew 9:2-3 (2); Luke 12:10

railed, 2

Mark 15:29, Luke 23:39

blasphemers, 1

Acts 19:37

blasphemest, 1

John 10:36

blaspheming, 1

Acts 13:45

blasphemously, 1

Luke 22:65

blasphemy, 1

Matthew 26:65 (2)

defamed, 1

1 Corinthians 4:13

reported, 1

Romans 3:8

reviled, 1

Matthew 27:39

slanderously, 1

Romans 3:8

speaking, 1

1 Peter 4:4

Would Jesus “durst” ever to speak a “railing” or blasphemous accusation?

Never.

Would He “durst” ever even do so against his arch-opponent, Satan?

Never. God is love [1 John 4:8,16 KJB], Jesus/Michael, in the office as “the archangel” of the Father, therefore referred the matter of Satan's accusations against Moses' sin [Numbers 20:8-12, 27:13, 31:2; Deuteronomy 4:21,22, 31:2,14,16, 32:51,52, 34:1-8 KJB] to the Judgment of the Father, for it had been the Father who sent Jesus/Michael to resurrect Moses, having forgiven the sin of Moses and would even bring him into the land of Canaan later [Matthew 16:28, 17:1-12; Mark 9:1-13; Luke 9:27-36; John 11:25; 2 Peter 1:16-18; Romans 5:14; Jude 1:9 KJB], Satan was tempting Jesus even then to be like himself, to have his character. Jesus refused.

Angels of the heavenly host, being created beings [like Gabriel, Seraphim, Cherubim, etc] are indeed more powerful than men, and therefore much moreso,
the “Angel of the LORD”, “Michael the archangel” being the LORD God, the Son, Uncreated Creator, who is above and beyond by an infinite margin, and more holy and powerful than even they. He is the example set forth of the
Father's character.

1 Peter 2:19 KJB - For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully .

1 Peter 2:20 KJB - For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ve do well, and suffer for ye take it patiently, this acceptable with God.

1 Peter 2:21 KJB - For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us. leaving us an example, that ve should follow his steps :

1 Peter 2:22 KJB - Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his
mouth :

1 Peter 2:23 KJB - Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again : when he suffered, he threatened not : but committed himsel to him that judgeth righteously :

Michael/Jesus then, would never render “evil for evil” or “railing for railing” and therefore would “refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no
guile”:

1 Peter 3:9 KJB - Not rendering evil for evil , or railing for railing : but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.

1 Peter 3:10 KJB - For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile :

Therefore, you, as we do, in Zechariah 3 , have the Son saying, "The LORD (The Father) rebuke thee (satan)." and yet in Jude, you say the Son cannot say this, why?

Jud 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

Do the same as you have for Zechariah, in that "Michael the archangel" is the "angel (Son) of the LORD (Father)", who says to satan again, "The LORD (Father) rebuke thee (satan).", since in both instances the Son came on behalf of the Father's will as Highest Messenger of the kingdom of Heaven. All that Michael the archangel means is that, "Who is as like God the highest messenger", and who can this be but the express image of the Father, specifically the person of the Son (and dealing with the resurrection of Moses)?

Why would the Son directly rebuke the devil (satan) in either case on His own behalf, and in His own name, when He (the Son) in both instances came on behalf of the Father, in His Father's name and will and word?

Michael/Jesus does not rebuke satan with a "railing accusation" or blasphemous accusation, for that would be like what the devil does, and Jesus would never do that. Since the name Michael archangel is used, Jesus came on behalf of the Father to resurrect Moses, as highest messenger, and therefore can only say what the Father gave the Son to say, like as in the NT (John 12:49 KJB). In Zechariah 3:2, the "LORD" (the Son, called "Angel of the LORD (Father) in Zechariah 3:1 KJB)) does the same thing by saying to the devil, "the LORD (the Father) rebuke thee". Jude 1:9 and Zechariah 3:2 are parallel in language.

John 12:49 - For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

In Matthew 4:10,16, Jesus was given authority from the Father to say what He did at that time. You do not seem to understand the timing (Ecclesiastes 3:1 KJB).

The LORD distinguishes Himself whenever He appears, and never coyly. He wasn't being coy even in the instance of Jacob wrestling with Him. Even though He only response to Jacob's request for His name was, "why do you ask me my name?,' He didn't leave Jacob with any wonder about who He Is. And also as in the instance when Manoah asked the Angel of the LORD His Name He replied, "Why do you ask my name, seeing it is beyond understanding?" No doubt He was referring to His ineffable Name, YHVH, both times.
In Micah 7:18 the question is asks, "Who is a God like You?" (mi-) (el-) (ka-mo-v-cha). Now, since there is suggestion that the name of Michael is meant to be a rhetorical question of Michael's identity, it was seem to me that his name would rather have been something more like Mielcah rather than Michael but the most significant distinguishing mark that would've left no question as to his identity that is conspicuously missing can be seen in Psalm 113:5, "Who is like the LORD our God?" (mi-) (cha-yhvh) (el-o-hei-nu), His signature! This is present in the Name Jesus and He wasn't coy in saying, "I Am."

Thank you for stating here what I shared already. In the very midst of Michael is JEHOVAH, and thus The Son of God is the presence of the LORD (wherever the Son goes it is always representative of His Father's will). Thus "my name is in Him" -

Exo 23:21: "Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him."

notice that Jude 1:9 is not isolated:

see that little word 'yet' ? and the 'but' which follows?
Michael's confrontation with the dethroned prince of the angels is contrasted with those who 'speak evil of dignitaries'

to Michael, Satan is an 'authority' and 'dignitary' - and there are things Michael does not know.
effectually Michael does not dare 'speak evil of a ruler of his people' ((c.f.e. Exodus 22:28, Acts 23:5))

not so with Christ, who, while patient and full of grace, does not hesitate Himself to rebuke Satan, because the Son knows all things, and judges all things.

You've missed the point that although Michael's name can be seen in the Psalm 113:5 statement, "Who is like the LORD our God," where YHVH is present to specify speaking of the LORD, YHVH is actually conspicuously missing in Michael's name.

Jesus is certainly not afraid to speak judgement and rebuke - directly accusing Satan of lies and murder.
He does so with all knowledge and all authority, saying, 'from the beginning'

not so, Michael, who in contrast dares not speak without knowledge of a ruler/dignitary.

yet our Lord, by way of contrast, His name is "YAH IS SALVATION" -- the name of God being definitely present

very interesting point Mem

the sense in Jude is that wicked men 'blaspheme' because they do not have the requisite knowledge or authority to speak about those things they speak about. to blaspheme is to slander, speaking wrongly.

Michael dares not accuse Satan, because Michael is not omniscient, is only a created being, an angel, and positionally lower than Satan, who was the 'covering cherub' in the garden of God - akin to the 'Adam' of the angelic order. Michael dares not misspeak in ignorance, and Michael dares not neglect to show deference.

Christ however, who is very God of very God, perfect in knowledge and having all authority, openly accuses Satan, and openly rebukes him.

Satan is not and never has been positionally above or at par with Christ.
Satan has no authority that Christ would be remiss to disrespect.
there is nothing about Satan that Christ does not know, such that Christ might misspeak were He to rebuke him.


Jude gives us a very clear and powerful contrast between Michael & Christ -- destroying the hybrid SDA/JW argument.

Jude 1:9

New International Version
But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not himself dare to condemn him for slander but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

New American Standard Bible
But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him an abusive judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

If I misread you, I apologize Brother, Friend.

read to here

Whew! this s lengthy to erase using my cellphone. The posted article have many loopholes but i would tackle the very core which the article collapses. In it said the the hebrew word echad is unfortunately in error as translated "one" and not the ordinal "first". In the Kjb, echad is translated in many ways like another, other any, once etc aside from one or first. Of course, this is dependent on the context and that it wouldn't contribute to the contradiction of parrallel passages of scripture. The overwhelming fact is that the Hebrew word echad was translated in the Kjb 952x as per Strong. Out of it, 687x was translated as "one" and only 36x translated as the ordinal "first". The rest is gor the others as mentioned. Translating given passage relative to Michael, the archangel contradicts the reality of Christ being worship against the angel and Christ, being so much better than the angels. Heb.1:4-8. The article is bias enough to put Michael, in the pedestal and this make it a heresy if not a hearsay.

in Daniel 9:25 the word referring to Christ translated as prince is Strong's Hebrew: 5057. נָגִיד (nagid or nagid)

in Daniel 10:13 the word referring to Michael as one of ((not first of, that's dumb)) the chief princes is Strong's Hebrew: 8269. שָׂר (sar)

"in other words" Michael is not referred to with the same word as the Messiah in Hebrew.

as far as i can tell,
sar ((what Michael is called)) is usually translated as a commander or official. a word indicating high position but not singularly authoritative.
nagid ((what Christ is called)) is usually translated as ruler or leader. it's the word often used to describe Israel's kings ((next to melech which is probably more properly 'king')) -- indicating singular authority.

someone who actually knows something about Hebrew ((@oldhermit ? @Angela53510 ?)) can probably shed some light on the topic.
i am only looking up words in dictionaries and doing a little poking at some articles trying to understand.


the main point of this post tho, is that even tho kjv says 'prince' in both cases, it isn't actually the same word. translators take liberties with languages.
one must not make to much of words in translations; very often the same word in Hebrew or Greek is rendered many ways in English, and likewise many different Hebrew or Greek words might be translated to English as all the same word. when looking for connections in scripture, we certainly must not look only at English translated words. scripture is simply not written in English; the Bible is not an English-language book. you can't just take one of many Greek words translated as prince in English and assume it is equivalent to all of many Hebrew words also translated as prince into English.

that is horrendously poor scholarship. it's like saying a Kia is a car, and a BMW is a car, therefore all Kias are equivalent to all BMW's.

if we want to study words in scripture, we have to put away translations and dig into the actual languages God purposed to transmit His Word in. i only wish i had the time to devote myself to such things

Jesus is not Michael. The are not in the same category. Jesus is the firstborn, perfect unblemished. He does no labour as He is solely God's. Michael struggles and labours as an serving angel should.

Michael can only be understood as the antithesis of satan. Or rather satan is the antithesis of Michael. The name Michael is a question "who is like God?" not a direct ascription of Godliness

All verses pertaining to Michael, A war of ideas.

Revelation 12:7-9
And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war, and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Paraphrase - The adherents of satan rebelled against God's Order and were met by the adherents of "who is like God?" The adherents of satan were tossed out of heaven.

Daniel 10:13
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.

Paraphrase - The ideology of persia (liberal governance and Zoroastrian - good evil duality) interfered with the principles and doctrines of God. For 3 x 7 days, kairos, it was decreed to endure.

Daniel 10:20Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come. 21But 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.

Paraphrase - The spiritual war continues with persian philosophy. Even the hellenistic philosophy will come to challenge the wisdom of God, but the Law, Psalms and Proverbs (Michael) will guide you.

Daniel 12:1
“Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued.

Paraphrase - Hellenistic cultural integration and contamination. Antiochus IV Epiphanes will cause the abomination of temple but the Holy Words of God (Michael) will guard you. Those who are faithful will be rescued.

Jude 1:9
But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

Paraphrase - The utmost Principles of God and the Conduct of Jesus apply to all. Against the hordes of the devil and the hosts of Michael are the same. It is from God.

1 Thessalonians 4:16 archangel's voice
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

Paraphrase - Pertaining to the resurrection. There will be a shout, archangels' voice and the trumpet of God. Jesus is already King then. He commands, the herald shouts the command, the leader of the host barks his command and the trumpeteers signals the host to destroy the hordes.

The Hebrew in Daniel 10 is "one of" in no way "first".

Revelation 17:1 NIV. One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, "Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters.

This text was a cross reference in my Bible.

read to here

Jude is built in a specific chiastic structure which turns your reply into foolishness, and it is even specifically connected to the Epistles of Peter -

https://archive.org/details/michael-the-archangel-x-1-appendix-1-the-epistles-of-peter-jude-compared

Begin

Jude 1:5 KJB - I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

Jude 1:6 KJB - And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

Jude 1:7 KJB - Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jude 1:8 KJB - Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

[1]

Jude 1:5 KJB - “... out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.”

[like Dathan, Abiram, and Korah [aka Core], Numbers 16:32, 26:10 KJB, etc, these all spoke evil of dignities [against Moses, Aaron and others also later spoke against Joshua]

Jude 1:8 KJB - “... speak evil of dignities.”

[2]

Jude 1:6 KJB - “... the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation ...”

[“first estate” refers to the arch-offices that many of the angels left in following Lucifer, who left his own God-given place and sought the place of the Son of God, hence the word: anti-christ, for they came to despise to be ruled by 'Jesus']

Jude 1:8 KJB - “... despise dominion ...”

[3]

Jude 1:7 KJB - “... Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh ...”

Jude 1:8 KJB - “... [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh ...”

Also a comparison is to be made with the parallel texts of 2 Peter 2:1-22 KJB and its own chiasm. Only two brief comparisons will be made at this time.

For instance, compare 2 Peter 2:10 KJB with Jude 1:8 KJB:

2 Peter 2:10 KJB - But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.

Jude 1:8 KJB - Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

[1]

2 Peter 2:10 KJB - “... chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness ...”

Jude 1:8 KJB - “... these filthy dreamers defile the flesh ...”

[2]

2 Peter 2:10 KJB - “... despise government ...”

Jude 1:8 KJB - “... despise dominion ...”

[3]

2 Peter 2:10 KJB - “... Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.”

Jude 1:8 KJB - “... speak evil of dignities.”

For instance, compare:

2 Peter 2:11 KJB - Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.

Jude 1:9 KJB - Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

[1]

2 Peter 2:11 KJB - “... angels ...”

Jude 1:9 KJB - “... archangel ...”

[2]

2 Peter 2:11 KJB - “... bring not railing accusation ...”

Jude 1:9 KJB - “... not bring … railing accusation ...”

[3]

2 Peter 2:11 KJB - “... against them ...”

Jude 1:9 KJB - “... against him ...”

[4]

2 Peter 2:11 KJB - “... the Lord.”

Jude 1:9 KJB - “... the Lord ...”

Therefore, since one New Testament writer was inspired by the Holy Spirit to use the words “angels”, “against”, “railing accusation” and “the Lord”, the second witness [2 Corinthians 13:1 KJB, etc.] would use similar phrasing, “archangel”, “against”, “railing accusation” and “the Lord”, as it refers to those whom are sent of God, and as the Holy Spirit is inspiring both holy persons as per 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21 KJB.

Compare also these passages side by side and look for the parallel language:

Daniel 10:4-21 to
Zechariah 3:1-10 to
Jude 1:9 to
Revelation 12:1-17

Consider:

[01]

Daniel 10:13 KJB - “... Michael, one of the chief princes ...”

Zechariah 3:1-6 KJB - “... The Angel of the LORD ...”

Jude 1:9 KJB - “... Michael the archangel ...”

Revelation 12:7 KJB - “... Michael and his angels ...”

[02]

Daniel 10:13 KJB - “... the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood [me, Gabriel a lesser arch-angel, but then Michael/Jesus arrives to “help” Gabriel withstand and overcome the arguments of the devil] ...”

Zechariah 3:1 KJB - “... Satan standing at his right hand to resist him ...”

Jude 1:9 KJB - “... the devil disputed ...”

Revelation 12:7 KJB - “... fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels ...”

[03]

Daniel 10:13 KJB - “... came to help me [Gabriel, the lesser arch-angel] ...”

Zechariah 3:1-10 KJB - “… Joshua ...”, the high priest, servant of the LORD

Jude 1:9 KJB - “... Moses ...”, the prophet, servant of the LORD

Revelation 12:7 KJB - “... and his angels [like Gabriel, the lesser arch-angel, Seraphim, Cherubim, etc.] ...”

[04]

Daniel 10:13 KJB - [there is no direct parallel in this passage to the other two, but the absence thereof would parallel in chiastic nature that of Revelation 12:7 KJB]

Zechariah 3:2 KJB - [The LORD Himself said:] “... The LORD rebuke thee ...”, “... even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee ...”

Jude 1:9 KJB - [Michael the archangel said:] “... said, The Lord rebuke thee ...”

Revelation 12:7 KJB - [there is no direct parallel in this passage to the other two, but the absence thereof would parallel in chiastic nature that of Daniel 10:13 KJB]

Please notice that in Zechariah 3, that the “Angel of the LORD”, whom is also stated as “the LORD” [being Jesus] who was speaking, says to Satan, “... the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?”

In comparing the two, Jude 1:9 and Zechariah 3, we see the servants of God, Moses and Joshua the priest, are being accused to God, by Satan, because of their sin. For instance, Joshua the high priest is clothed in “filthy garments” [Zechariah 3:3,4], and clothing in scripture, represents the character.

There is also the example of how Jesus responds to accusations. "Speaking evil of dignities" and "railing accusation" etc.

1 Peter 2:19 - For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.

1 Peter 2:20 - For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.

1 Peter 2:21 - For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

1 Peter 2:22 - Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

1 Peter 2:23 - Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:

Michael/Jesus then, would never render “evil for evil” or “railing for railing” and therefore would “refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile”:

1 Peter 3:9 KJB - Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.

1 Peter 3:10 KJB - For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile:

This is the short summary (really). The lengthier demonstration of these things is in the linked material. See "Michael the archangel [09] - The Comparisons of the “Angel of the LORD” throughout the KJB", and subsection "[09-G] “The LORD rebuke thee.” - with subsection Moses Resurrection"

https://archive.org/details/michael...angel-of-the-lord-throughout-the-kjb/mode/2up

The text says "railing accusation", "κρίσιν ... βλασφημίας". It is not merely 'speaking wrongly'. It is dealing with accusations about justice and mercy, or how one governs, as God, or as the devil. The two parties. God rules his dominion, and satan rules his usurped dominion as the 'god of this world' (then, before Calvary).

The context is over Moses and his sin, of which satan had tempted Moses to commit. The devil claimed Moses as his prize in death, a prisoner of the grave. Yet God had forgiven Moses, and sent His Son Michael as highest messenger, to raise Moses from the dead (texts cited previously).

When Michael/Son of the Father arrives, the devil is there to resist in argument that all who sinned and died belonged to him for the battle at the last day to command.

Michael/Son of the Father, instead of returning argumentation as the devil would want (for he really sought to accuse the Son/Michael of such), the Son as messenger of the Father, does not enter into the grounds of the devil, using his tactics of blasphemous accusation, but refers the matter back to the Father as final judge, thus ending the confrontation, and giving the devil no excuse for his own sins and accusations.

You made it up. Next time cite scripture, not 'you' as final authority.

Lucifer had been the 'anointed cherub that coverth', but was no longer, but is now "fallen". Lucifer is "created" as Isaiah and Ezekiel, etc., state. Having been that cherub as Gabriel now is, used to stand in the presence of God.

Michael archangel/Son of the Father, the very Angel of the LORD is the presence of God.

Standing in one's presence, is never the same as actually being the presence.

Michael is never once lower than satan in scripture. It is always the other way round every time (texts already previously cited).

Lucifer meant one who bears God's light.

Michael means one who is as God.

You are woefully confused. You maginfy the devil over the heavenly name of the Son of God.