Yet both Mark and Luke tell us Jesus would not allow the demons to speak ‘because they knew that he was the Christ’. I really don’t think think these writers shared your emergent theology that demons were simply impersonal curses.

 The problem is that you have no passage that deals with a "fallen angel."

Actually there are quite a few that deal with their fall or their sin and judgment. We have Revelation 12 which deal with Satan and his angels being cast out of heaven. You have provided no evidence for your claim that heaven should be treated metaphorically. Paul’s reference to battle in the heavenly places is given in contrast to ‘flesh and blood’ and you have shown no reason why Paul or his Ephesian readers should interpret heavenly places as the temple cultus. It run counter to the plain meaning of the text.

Jude 1:6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day.

Ezekiel refers to a guardian cherub being cast from Eden the mountain of God to the ground.

Yes, I agree that the messenger to Daniel was as genuine as the one who spoke to Mary.  However, contrary to your claim, I did not interpret the messenger in Daniel 10 "metaphorically."  I merely implied that the action concerning the "prince of Persia" did not take place in the "heavenly realm" and neither did the messenger’s actions concerning Mary.  Both events took place on earth in real time and space.

There is no reason to understand the battle as happening in heaven, though a battle between angels will certainly be a spiritual one. If the angel who spoke to Daniel was an angel as you seem to agree, how could a human prince of Persia hold him up for three weeks?

What is the basis for you claim that Michael was Christ?

Deacon