[HarleyD]

Selecting and verifying only those scrolls that were deemed inspired based on the knowledge of the faith...You guys never cease to amaze me!

Just quoting the fathers.

It's not a matter of (dis)agreement, HD; it's a fact: the Jews did not/do not consider Satan a fallen angel but one of the "sons of God." Find me ONE Jewish reference that says otherwise.

What the Jews believe today is inconsequential. We would have to find out what they believe 3,000 years ago. I suspect their theology has changed over that time.

Is this [sic: Marcionism] somehow related to the current topic?

Your statement seemed to indicate that you don't accept the Old Testament as the inspired word of God.

Ancient Jewish teaching never considered ha-satan (which is not even a proper name) anything but a servant of God.

How can you tell? I've gone through several sources now (including the online Jewish Encyclopedia) and, although I understand what today's thinking is, there is not much indication as to what the thinking was centuries ago by Jewish scholars. In fact, the Jewish Encyclopedia sound strangely like New Advent. As you've pointed out the Saducees and Pharisees both held radically differing views.

You are then denying that Satan is the fallen angel...

No. I denying angels have "free" will which, btw, is another Jewish teaching.

It's Christianity that's in a dire predicament to explain God conversing with His fallen angel, and not Judaism.

I'm not in any "dire predicament". Satan fell because God ordained it but He stills retains control over and converses with Satan and other fallen angels to do His will. It's the rest of Christianity that's in a dire predicament.

[kosta50]

I suspect their theology has changed over that time

We are talking scripture not theology.

How can you tell?

Read the Old Testament! I am sure you don't believe that has changed too. Find in it one instance where Satan (ha-satan) is linked to, associated with, or called "the devil."

Satan is mentioned only a few times in the OT. In none of those instances is he portrayed as anything but God's loyal servant, and not a rebellious, fallen angel.

The word "devil" who is synonymous with Satan appears for the first time in Deuterocanonical books and from there in the New Testament. The fall of Satan is mentioned by +Luke, +Paul and +John. Whine this cannot be found in the mainstream Jewish canon, it is in deterocanonical books. My point was and is: the so-called "apocryphal" books were included in the Christian canon because the Apostles used them extensively, while the Protestants reject them. That makes the disconnect glaringly obvious!