Demons vs. Fallen Angels

[Rylan -redacted-]

I've been looking through various threads here, and a couple of people have stated (or at least implied) that demons and fallen angels are two separate types of beings. I'm not familiar with this idea, so can someone explain exactly what the difference is and how it affects your interpretation of the Bible?  

[real eyes realize]

There are two main reasons why I see them as distinct entities:

1) Bodies.

When angels are described, whether in the Heavens or on Earth, the description illustrates that the angels had bodily characteristics of their own; the angel was not possessing anyone. For example, in Judges 13, Manoah and his wife thought they were simply dealing with a man of God until he disappeared/ascended up into the flame [arguably, this is the Old Testament incarnation of God himself because they said "We have seen God!"], but even with this example, it's not a spirit entering and then leaving a man behind. Body and all was gone once the angel of the Lord ascended up the flame. However, since the example in Jg 13 is arguably God himself, I'll give another example: the cherubim at YHWH's throne in the Heavens are described as having hands [Ezekiel 10:7] thus having their own body. Same for the angel seen by David, Araunah and Aarunah's sons, whom God commanded, “Enough! Withdraw your hand.” Then it describes that "the angel of the Lord was then standing at the threshing floor [...]" in 1 Chronicles 21:15. So, for something to be "standing at" one place or another, and to withdraw its hand, suggests that it does have a physical body. In verse 27 of that chapter, it says, "Then the Lord spoke to the angel, and he put his sword back into its sheath." In all three cases (Manoah and his wife's encounter, the Heavenly vision given to Ezekiel, or David's and Araunah's [and his sons'] encounter) it's not a spirit entering or exiting a vessel; whereas demons (a.k.a impure spirits, evil spirits, "devils" plural as they're called in the KJV) must possess someone, whether human or animal (i.e. Matthew 8:28-33). In canon, they're never described as having a body of their own nor manifesting physically without invading a host. Angels, on the other hand, can manifest physically without possessing people (in scripture, I've never come across an example of an angel possessing someone) and they do have a body of their own unlike demons—regardless of whether they're in the Heavens or the Earth.

2) Prison.

The angels that fell away were imprisoned in Tartarus to await their condemnation on judgment day.


Quote:
2 Peter 2:4 (NIV)

4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them in chains of darkness[b] to be held for judgment;

Footnotes:

a. 2 Peter 2:4 Greek Tartarus
b. 2 Peter 2:4 Some manuscripts in gloomy dungeons


They can't be roaming around if they're restricted to Tartarus. (note: the Greek says, "Tartarus" but most versions just translate it as "hell".)

How that distinction between fallen angels and demons affects my interpretation of scripture elsewhere? Of what I'm cognizant of:

(1) I view that canon doesn't give an origin for the existence of demons.

(2) it suggests that Satan/the devil is a special case being used by YHWH to sift the loyal subjects from the disobedient ones of YHWH's kingdom: both in the Heavens and on Earth. But because of Satan's disinterest in repenting of his pride / not wanting to walk humbly with God, he will be disposed of too once YHWH is done with him.

This isn't necessarily related to how I define a demon, but since I do think Satan is an angel who is not currently walking humbly under YHWH, it would be appropriate to mention his role and how I view it. I do think he is an angel (like the other Sons of God described in the Book of Job, Job 1:6-7; 2:1-2), but YHWH's use of Satan is similar to Nebuchadnezzar: at first he humbly served YHWH, then he got prideful.

Nebuchadnezzar served as YHWH's instrument to judge Israel while at the same time his actions preserved the loyal remnant. But emphasis on similar, not identical, because Nebuchadnezzar's role did consist of preserving the good basket in his midst and I'm not sure that that's what Satan is doing [Jeremiah 24; 25:9; 27:6; 43:10]. But like Nebuchadnezzar, Satan did have all the nations/kingdoms under his authority, that's why he offered them to Jesus as temptation (Matthew 4:8-9). Satan is/was the prince of this world (John 14:30), god of this age (2 Corinthians 4:4). Just like YHWH put all the nations, and even the wild animals under Nebuchadnezzar's reign, Satan also reigned over the earth on a spiritual level. Nebuchadnezzar too got prideful, so YHWH sent destruction to humble him (as he had warned a year previously through a dream which Daniel interpreted), and Nebuchadnezzar did respond by humbling himself (i.e. Daniel 4). But Satan, unlike Nebuchadnezzar, has no interest in repenting/humbling himself back under YHWH; so, he'll be cast into the lake of fire.

So, YHWH does put his servants in positions of authority to serve his purposes. But if his servant gets prideful in the process, there are two outcomes: either (A) respond to YHWH's discipline, humble yourself back into submissive servitude under YHWH or (B) try to fight YHWH, your reign is destroyed in the process, replaced by someone else, some even getting their line/descendants totally wiped off the planet (i.e. 1 Kings 16:3; 1 Kings 21:21,29).

Nebuchadnezzar and Ahab fall under category A because they did repent. Rehoboam is another King who falls under category A because he repented (2 Chronicles 12). Satan/the devil falls under category B (Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43), just like King Baasha (which if you clicked the links I cited, you'll see mentioned how YHWH threatens to wipe out his sons too), as is Jeroboam and his household (1 Kings 13:34), another category B case.

For the record, I do not believe Eve had sex with the Devil to produce Cain (what some people are passing around under the title "Serpent Seed doctrine"; I'll mention it here because it comes to mind and is related to fallen angels); the devil's house/descendants are those who act like him (John 8:44). They will be wiped out for not submitting to YHWH, for not loving his truth, hating righteousness, loving wickedness, just like the many examples YHWH made out of wicked reigns in the past. Those who suggest Eve had sex with the devil to get Cain are flat-out contradicting/ignoring Genesis 4:1 which says Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain.

I'll mention how I view Genesis 6 just to say that how I distinguish fallen angels from demons does not affect it. I view Genesis 6 as fallen/disobedient angels and not humans, mainly because of Job's use of the phrase "Sons of God" (in the Hebrew originally "bene elohim") in Job 38:4-7 applied to entities that aren't human. And I don't see the Old Testament ever using that phrase in the plural to refer to humans; that's New Testament behavior. So when I see "Sons of God" plural in Genesis 6, thus Old Testament, I identify that as the angels.

That was the interpretation I reached before venturing to books outside of canon such as "the Book of Enoch" which also expressed that view: that angels came down and married human women. A detail the Book of Enoch does say, but that canon does not comment on, is how their offspring, once they died, are what we know of as the "evil spirits" today; the evil spirits came from the bodies of the giants begotten by the angels with human women (according to Chapter XV, verses 6-11). So, in this book, the evil spirits are not the fallen angels themselves as well, but the spirits of their deceased half-breed offspring.

I'm not sure how my distinction between fallen angels and demons may affect my interpretation elsewhere. All I know is that scripture just matter-of-factly mentions the evil spirits, never explaining where they came from, how they began, just that God uses them for his purposes (i.e. sending one unto King Saul, 1 Samuel 16:14-16, 23; 18:10-11; 19:9).

Some people interpret the incorporeal aspect of demons to suggest that it's just a mental state or a lust. But when a demon is exorcised, it travels somewhere. In the example I quoted earlier from the gospel of Matthew, the spirit entered the pigs whom drove the pigs to their death (by drowning). It's not a mental state/attitude if it's moving from one being and forcefully entering another. Both in the pigs' and Saul's case, it forcefully entered their victim. As for angels, fallen or not, they didn't forcefully enter anyone; they have their own bodies. They don't need to invade others and if they can, they're not described as doing so in scripture/in canon (I'm aware of shows that depict this, but the bible does not support the notion).

Again, I'm not sure how my distinction between fallen angels and demons may be affecting my interpretation elsewhere. So, I guess I'll leave it at that. Hopefully, you didn't find this too long and the links informative instead of cumbersome.