Arranging the revealed falls of Satan

[Wretched Man]

In recent discussions regarding angels, I became intrigued at the apparent successive instances in which Satan falls and/or is cursed, crushed, cast out, or bound throughout scripture. In my current view (with an Amillennialist lens), there are three categorical occurrences as follows:

1. God curses Satan during or shortly following the first week of creation and either physically, spiritually, or metaphorically subjects him to that of the present form of a serpent: Genesis 3:14-15
2. *Satan is cast out at the first coming of Christ and is bound during his millennial reign: Luke 10:18, John 12:31, Revelation 12:7-9, Revelation 20:1-3
3. Satan is cast into Hell: Revelation 20:10

*Regardless of one's millennial view, Satan appears to fall at the beginning of the millennial reign of Christ. For those who are premillennial or postmillennial, do you view the cited scripture references as separate instances? Does Luke 10:18 refer back to Satan's prior fall, imply a fall at that time of Christ's ministry, or look ahead to the bounding of Satan (Revelation 20:1-3) whether it be at Christ's resurrection or later on?

Other verses I struggle with are:

• Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:12-19 - If these verses regard Satan (which I think they do), where would they align with the aforementioned falls? Or would they describe another fall of Satan - possibly before or transcendent (in the spiritual realm) of the physical universe? Was there a cosmic rift between God and Satan corresponding to his deception in the physical garden of Eden?
• 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 - Though these do not specifically mention Satan, they are likely related to Satan. How would these align?

 

[RamistThomist]

If these verses regard Satan (which I think they do), where would they align with the aforementioned falls? Or would they describe another fall of Satan - possibly before or transcendent (in the spiritual realm) of the physical universe? Was there a cosmic rift between God and Satan corresponding to his deception in the physical garden of Eden?

I think Satan is the larger figure in the background. I place these somewhere between Gensis 1 and Genesis 6.

2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 - Though these do not specifically mention Satan, they are likely related to Satan. How would these align?

Those are the specific angels that sinned in Genesis 6. It isn't talking about every fallen angel, otherwise Paul wouldn't warn us about the principalities in the air. If they are bound in Tartarus, how are they semi-autonomous in the aerial places?

 

[Wretched Man]

I think Satan is the larger figure in the background. I place these somewhere between Gensis 1 and Genesis 6.


Those are the specific angels that sinned in Genesis 6. It isn't talking about every fallen angel, otherwise Paul wouldn't warn us about the principalities in the air. If they are bound in Tartarus, how are they semi-autonomous in the aerial places?

I am more persuaded the Sons of God were not angels, but the line of Seth...

But your point regarding the chained angels mentioned in 2 Peter suddenly raises another question for me... they were apparently in Hell until judgment... is the Hell referred to here a temporary holding place? The word ‘Hell’ seems to be used by most translations.

 

[RamistThomist]

I am more persuaded the Sons of God were not angels, but the line of Seth...

My larger argument doesn't depend on that one way or another, but Jude and Peter refer to Sodom and the angels that fell, which are best explained by sons of God, angels, not the Sethites (and their are other exegetical problems with the Sethite view).

But your point regarding the chained angels mentioned in 2 Peter suddenly raises another question for me... they were apparently in Hell until judgment... is the Hell referred to here a temporary holding place? The word ‘Hell’ seems to be used by most translations.

I try not to use the word "hell" since that isn't what the Greek uses and it brings connotations that aren't there in the text. Yes, Tartarus is more of a holding place.

 

[Wretched Man]

My larger argument doesn't depend on that one way or another, but Jude and Peter refer to Sodom and the angels that fell, which are best explained by sons of God, angels, not the Sethites (and their are other exegetical problems with the Sethite view).


I try not to use the word "hell" since that isn't what the Greek uses and it brings connotations that aren't there in the text. Yes, Tartarus is more of a holding place.

Is Tartarus also the word used for ‘Hades’ (I.e. Rev 20:14)?

 

[RamistThomist]

Is Tartarus also the word used for ‘Hades’ (I.e. Rev 20:14)?

Yeah, it's not a good translation. Hades is simply the realm of the dead.