Is Satan an archangel who rebelled against God? Many believe so, but one may search Genesis and read on until the end of Revelation, but one would never read that Satan is an archangel. In order to discover information that says Satan is an archangel, one must read extra-biblical literature. The idea is not scriptural, because it simply is not in the Bible! In fact, the scriptures reveal the existence of only one archangel, and that is Michael (Jude 1:9).
On the other hand, if Satan is not an archangel could he be an angelic being? No, neither is he an angel, although some might conclude that he is by reading 2Corinthians 11:14.
2 Corinthians 11:14 KJV (14) And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
Nevertheless, when one considers the context, this idea lacks support. 2Corinthians 11:13 says men were troubling the church at Corinth, claiming to be apostles, but Paul calls them false apostles. Using the logic many derive from 2Corinthians 11:14, one could hardly conclude from verse-13 that by virtue of their power to transform their appearance, these false apostles became actual apostles. They were never apostles to begin with, for Paul calls them false apostles and later (verse-15) refers to them as ministers of Satan, who transformed themselves to appear as though they were ministers of righteousness.
Therefore, using this same reasoning about false apostles, can we say with certainty that verse-14 claims Satan is an angelic being, when it calls him an angel of light? This, itself, is an oxymoron. How could we ever believe, by the virtue of his power of deception, that Satan is an angel of light. The whole idea of his transformation is for deception or to impersonate the reality. The act of transformation, vis-à-vis the deception, does not make Satan the real thing. However, if Satan is not an angel of light, could 2Corinthians 11:14 be construed to indicate that he is at least an angelic being? In other words, could Satan be an angel, whom God created in the beginning (cp. Genesis 1:1)? I don’t believe so, because nowhere else in scripture are the words Satan, devil, serpent, wicked one or dragon associated with the word angel! One needs more than one verse in the Bible to build a doctrine.
Many believe Job chapters one and two and Revelation chapter 12 show that Satan is an angelic being, but even in these scriptures Satan is not called an angel or an archangel. They cannot be used to support the assumption that Satan is an angel.
The word ‘satan’ is from the Hebrew satan (H7854) and simply means “adversary” or “enemy.” Christians have used the word for a title for a rebellious being, but the scriptures cannot be used to prove that a being, of the nature we describe in our doctrine of Satan, ever existed. Consider, for example, in 1Samuel 29:4 David is called the Philistine’s satan (H7854). In 2Samuel 19:22 one of David’s close associates acted as his satan by giving him bad advice. 1Kings 5:4 reveals that God gave Solomon peace on all his borders, and he had no satans or enemies! Later, however, God stirred up several satans, because of Solomon’s unfaithfulness (cp. 1Kings 11:14, 23, 25). We can even find that the Angel of the Lord, who later became Jesus, was Balaam’s satan or adversary (H7854, cp. Numbers 22:22, 32)!
In scripture referred to above, the same word is used. Therefore, just because we see the word satan in scripture does not necessarily indicate some evil and powerful being is presented in the text. On the contrary, what would we do with David (1Samuel 29:4) or the Angel of the Lord (Numbers 22:22, 32)? For that matter, what would we do with Peter? The Lord called him a satan, when Peter tried to give Jesus bad advice about the necessity of Jesus having to die on the cross (Matthew 16:23), just as David’s close associate did to him (2Samuel 19:22).
If we believe the scriptures are accurate testimony to teach us what we should believe, not only can’t we prove Satan is an archangel, but we can’t even say he is an angel. 2Corinthians 11:14 simply cannot be used to show he is an angelic being. The context simply doesn’t support this proposition, and there are no other scriptures in all the Bible that claim Satan is an angel. So, if he isn’t an angel, what is he?[1]
_____________________________________________________
[1] This study has been revised and updated as of December 2024.
Smoodock's Blog 
16 responses to “Is Satan an Archangel or Even an Angel?”
AMG, greetings, and you are always welcome here. :-)
I know I told you that I would not discuss with you anymore, but when I see someone lost and confused, I cannot help but respond.
Whatever the reason for your return is fine with me.
I wonder how much a believer can obey when they cannot read the scriptures correctly.
God is a good parent. He is patient and helps us along as we are able to receive, not wishing to judge anyone unnecessarily.
God reveals to others too, and not just you. We should study the scriptures to see if what a person tells us is true. I have only spoken the scriptures to you. You are the one who believes you can add and change what the scriptures say. You think that studying Greek will lead you to the Truth, but that is not so. You change what the bible says with your Greek interpretations. You cannot see the obvious message of the scriptures because the Greek study is throwing you off. It is not the learned whom God reveals His Truth. We do not have to learn another language, in fact, the studying Greek is a Calvinist’s staple. If it were not so serious…I would laugh about it. I believe there is some kind of spirit Calvinists follow, and that is not of God, it makes you all frantic scholar wannabes, and you Calvinists follow the spirit of maybe Calvin himself.
I am aware that God speaks with all Christians. I never tried to imply I was unique. If you understood me in that manner, I am sorry, but that is just not what I believe God does. I am not unique in any way in my relationship with him.
I understand you have spoken Scripture to me, but, whether you are aware of it or not, you have not spoken **only** Scripture. You have added to it. For example, nowhere in Scripture will you read that Jesus was created before creation, but you have specifically stated that before God created anything else, he created Jesus. In fact, you have claimed that Jesus is reincarnated, and the Bible never teaches anything about reincarnation. These things are examples of your insertions.
Of course, it is good to struggle with the scriptures! However, you struggle with certain words and look for the Greek. In addition, you keep struggling and do not accept scripture.
I look to the Greek, because men have tried to tell me the meaning of the Scriptures, and they were wrong. I proved several wrong by looking at the original language. Every English Bible is a translation from the original Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic. Nothing was written in English, so I appreciate the work of the translators who give me a general knowledge of what God has said, but I don’t trust them wholly to have done a perfect job. They too have their prejudices and it comes out in their works. I don’t believe most have deliberately tried to deceive, but deception is there at times. Some translators specifically do the work for their particular denomination, so why wouldn’t I suspect prejudice in a work like that?
I have shown you were you are wrong, but you are blind to the truth. You actually think that the Bible says all Israelis will be saved! I explained it to you plainly, but you will not accept the truth.
Friend, if I am blind to the truth, no one (including you) could possibly have **shown** me where I am wrong!
Concerning Israel, I said: “All Israel will be saved.” Romans 11
And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. (Romans 11:26-29 KJV) [emphasis mine]
Concerning this Scripture you said: “You misunderstand that scripture, just like many do. When Paul says that all Israel will be saved, he means because God did not harden the Jews forever that they still have a chance at salvation along with the Gentiles…”
Where does the Bible say this? Are you not inserting your belief? Paul claims that God made a covenant with **Jacob** (meaning the whole people called **Jacob** or Israel) that he would take away their sins. He didn’t say he would take away the sins of **part** of Jacob. He mentions only Jacob, so we must assume he means **all** and Paul says **all**. What am I supposed to believe? Paul even claims that the very ones whose sins will be removed are our enemies as far as the Gospel is concerned.
So are you just trying to be a rebel? In addition, that is ridiculous to say that my beliefs are “popular opinion”.
I was not implying that what you believe about the Bible is popular opinion. I meant that what you believe about **me** is popular opinion! :-)
As far as my rebellion is concerned, I am confident in my Savior and Parent to root out all evil in me. In him alone will I put all my trust.
I have shown you the scriptures. You blame me for your blindness.
I have quoted above where you have shown me more than Scriptures. As for my blindness, I never claimed to be blind. My blindness is an accusation I receive from others.
This is a perfect example of your mistakes with the scriptures. You will not even consider listening to someone else unless it is said what you already believe. For one, angels DO NOT have sexual intercourse, UNLESS OF COURSE IF THEY TURN THEMSELVES INTO HUMANS. The scriptures tell us angels CAN turn themselves into humans.
You are implying that this is what occurred in Genesis 6. However, the plain statement of Christ is they are sexless. If they seem to have a human body when they appear to men, they are still what God created them to be. They are no more human than God who also appeared to Abraham in human form. He was not human then. He didn’t become human until John 1:14. What you say above is another example of your own insertions into the Scriptures—something you accuse me of doing! :-)
Again, the angels turned themselves into humans. In addition, these angels did not give the human women normal children; they gave them giants. The name of the children from the half-human half angel was the Nephilim. Do you need scriptures to show you that angels can appear as humans?
Yes, I would need Scriptures to show me that angels can make themselves human. I have no trouble understanding that they can appear as men, but they are no more human than before their appearance. The Scriptures never tell us that a creation of God can make himself into something he is not. Men can “appear” good when they are evil, and angels can “appear” as men when they are truly angels. The Scriptures support this, but Genesis 1 denies your claims of Genesis 6.
Have a good day, my friend, and may the Lord bless you and yours,
Eddie
Thank you for the greetings and saying I am always welcome.
You said, “I understand you have spoken Scripture to me, but, whether you are aware of it or not, you have not spoken **only** Scripture. You have added to it. For example, nowhere in Scripture will you read that Jesus was created before creation, but you have specifically stated that before God created anything else, he created Jesus. In fact, you have claimed that Jesus is reincarnated, and the Bible never teaches anything about reincarnation. These things are examples of your insertions.”
I have not ever added to scripture. Jesus is firstborn over all creation, period. That IS what the scriptures says, and that is ONLY what I said. It is laughable when you say I added scripture. Jesus is the firstborn over all creation.
It is also laughable that you think I was using the word reincarnation in the typical way. All I was trying to get you to understand is that Jesus was alive and existed before God prepared for him a human body….lol
You said, “I look to the Greek, because men have tried to tell me the meaning of the Scriptures, and they were wrong. I proved several wrong by looking at the original language.”
Yes, you look outside the bible, the written word, so that you can go by what a man says in a dictionary, or you go by what a man says in a commentary. Furthermore, you have not seen the original bible scriptures….lol…
You said, “Friend, if I am blind to the truth, no one (including you) could possibly have **shown** me where I am wrong!”
Spoken just like a blind man.
You said, “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.”
The bible tells us who and what Israel is. That passage is about Jews not cut off forever. It is about all Israel will be saved because true believers who are Jew, they will not be left out.
You said, “Where does the Bible say this? Are you not inserting your belief? Paul claims that God made a covenant with **Jacob** (meaning the whole people called **Jacob** or Israel) that he would take away their sins. He didn’t say he would take away the sins of **part** of Jacob. He mentions only Jacob, so we must assume he means **all** and Paul says **all**. What am I supposed to believe? Paul even claims that the very ones whose sins will be removed are our enemies as far as the Gospel is concerned.”
Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel! For you to believe that the scriptures then say that God saves even those Israelis who are evil unbelievers just because they are Israelis is ridiculous.
Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.
You said, “You are implying that this is what occurred in Genesis 6. However, the plain statement of Christ is they are sexless. If they seem to have a human body when they appear to men, they are still what God created them to be. They are no more human than God who also appeared to Abraham in human form. He was not human then. He didn’t become human until John 1:14. What you say above is another example of your own insertions into the Scriptures—something you accuse me of doing! “
I am not inserting my own beliefs. There are more than one scripture saying the sons of God are called angels. Furthermore, you are the one inserting that once these angels can become human that they do not really have working human parts. Show me scripture that says that. If you cannot, then you are the one inserting.
You said, “Yes, I would need Scriptures to show me that angels can make themselves human. I have no trouble understanding that they can appear as men, but they are no more human than before their appearance. The Scriptures never tell us that a creation of God can make himself into something he is not. Men can “appear” good when they are evil, and angels can “appear” as men when they are truly angels. The Scriptures support this, but Genesis 1 denies your claims of Genesis 6.”
You probably think that the sons of God were humans…lol…is that why the “human children” called Nephilim became unlike normal humans, that they actually became “giants”….lol….
I want to discuss more about angels… You are claiming that angels who appear as human are just an illusion. Tell me; when you are being hospitable to an angel, will you not offer the angel food and drink?
Hebrews 13:1 Keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters. 2 Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it
Genesis 19:2 2 “My lords,” he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.”
I guess the angels had real feet that needed washing.
3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.
The angels ate, Eddie. Did they have real mouths with teeth, an esophagus, and a stomach?
4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house.
The angels were going to go to bed; I guess if I believe you then I would have to believe they would fake sleep? …lol
Greeting AMG; I’m glad to see you are responding.
I have not ever added to scripture. Jesus is firstborn over all creation, period. That IS what the scriptures says, and that is ONLY what I said. It is laughable when you say I added scripture. Jesus is the firstborn over all creation.
It is also laughable that you think I was using the word reincarnation in the typical way. All I was trying to get you to understand is that Jesus was alive and existed before God prepared for him a human body….lol
If your definition of reincarnation is not the typical definition, why is it “laughable” if I have misunderstood you? In what sense would you conclude that Jesus was “alive and existed before God prepared him for a human body”?
Concerning what you have not added to the Scriptures, below is a quote from you
“There are topics you brought up and I would like to discuss them more with you. What do you think of the possibility that God, who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see, only Jesus has seen Him, the invisible God, created an image of Himself, before the creation of the world, and who is the reincarnate Jesus?” [AMG quote (emphasis mine); July 5, 2011 at 8:58 PM (EDT) on What I Believe]
Concerning using the original Greek to understand a passage:
Yes, you look outside the bible, the written word, so that you can go by what a man says in a dictionary, or you go by what a man says in a commentary. Furthermore, you have not seen the original bible scriptures….lol…
I suppose the English Bible you read is the only Bible Jesus ever wrote!
I said, “Friend, if I am blind to the truth, no one (including you) could possibly have **shown** me where I am wrong!”
Spoken just like a blind man.
You are very kind, and as usual very insightful!
You said, “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.”
No, actually I was quoting the Bible there in Romans 11.
The bible tells us who and what Israel is. That passage is about Jews not cut off forever. It is about all Israel will be saved because true believers who are Jew, they will not be left out.
“It is about all Israel will be saved…” If I say “all Israel will be saved”, why am I wrong when the Bible says “all Israel will be saved, yet when you say “all Israel will be saved, you are correct? What form of logic are you using, or could it be you are not telling me the complete story here?
Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel! For you to believe that the scriptures then say that God saves even those Israelis who are evil unbelievers just because they are Israelis is ridiculous.
Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.
Oh, okay, now you offer what perhaps to you appears to be the rest of the story. So, let me understand this before I comment on Romans 9. Are you saying that only those Israelites who believe will be saved, or, in other words: faith in Christ = salvation? If this is so, I would also like to know from you from where does anyone—Israelite or Gentile—get this faith. Reply to this and I will give my reply concerning not all Israel is Israel.
I am not inserting my own beliefs. There are more than one scripture saying the sons of God are called angels. Furthermore, you are the one inserting that once these angels can become human that they do not really have working human parts. Show me scripture that says that. If you cannot, then you are the one inserting.
The first time the phrase “sons of God” is mentioned in the Bible is in Genesis 6. When Moses wrote the first five books of the Law, the Israelites had nothing to compare this phrase with except for Deuteronomy 14:1 where Moses called them the children (sons—same word as in Genesis 6: H1121) of the Lord their God. On the other hand you don’t have a single verse in the Bible which says an angel is a ‘son’ of God or angels are the ‘sons’ of God. On the contrary Hebrews 1:5 would seem to belie them being specifically called a child or son of God. If one would not allow the references in Job to the “sons” of God to be angels by the fact of creation, they couldn’t even be generally understood as “sons” of God in the Scriptures. You have no Scriptural foundation for your understanding of Genesis 6 except for an implication in Job. All specific references in Scripture to the “sons” of God are to men.
You probably think that the sons of God were humans…lol…is that why the “human children” called Nephilim became unlike normal humans, that they actually became “giants”….lol….
Nephilim is the Hebrew word for “giants” (H5303). It is simply not translated and carried over into the English language unchanged. When the translator does this, he gives the appearance of mystery. “Oh! Wow! What does this mean?” This is why we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to interpret, so our imaginations don’t get carried away. The very same Hebrew word is used for the sons of Anak in Number 13:33. If God sent the Flood to destroy all these wicked Nephilim, how is it they survived? Although the Scriptures don’t say specifically, no doubt Goliath was a nephilim or a giant.
Moreover, the Scripture merely mentions that these giants were present about the time that the sons of God married the children of men. The Scriptures do not come out and say that the ‘nephilim’ were the progeny of this marital relationship. They specifically say that the children of these marriages were mighty men of renown, but the understanding that the children are ‘nephilim’ is imposed upon the Scripture by the interpreter.
Lord bless and have a good evening,
Eddie
Friend, you have misunderstood me, as you have often done in our discussion. I have never claimed that angels are illusions. They are real spirit beings. They simply are not human, nor do the procreate whether as angels or when they appear as humans. When they appear as they actually are, men are very afraid. Daniel, although, he had a number of visions of angels, simply had no strength in him. He was in awe of them.
Lord bless.