gnostic said:My problem is this.
Satan looks like he was working for God in the Book of Job. They don't look like arch-enemies. There are no indication that Satan is fallen here. So when was Job written? Most likely after the Exiled at Babylon. Perhaps even after their return.
If Satan had fallen before Adam (pre-existence as Optunia) was created or during the temptation at Eden, then why are there no mention of this fall?
As to the Revelation, you should no better than to rely on it as coherent texts. The contents in Revelation have far too many symbols that you can't take a single verse literally. The Revelation is too open to interpretations, and how many times have Christians tried to decipher it, and got it wrong. So many times, they thought they found the date of Christ's 2nd coming, but each time he doesn't show up on the reported dates.
Don't get me wrong, optunia. The Revelation is a very interesting book, but the so-called visions and revelations have made fools of many.
Answer this.
Why did none of the books give us the name of Satan until the Jews had been exiled to Babylon? Why did archangels Michael and Gabriel wasn't mention until this time as well?
I find it a coincidence that Satan, Michael, Gabriel, and other angels and demons have not been given any name until their contact, first with the Neo-Babylonians and then with the Persians. Babylon, at the time of Nebuchazzar, had contact with Zorastrianism (because Persia and Media was part of the Persian Empire), which had a very complex angelology and demonology.
The pseudigrapha books of Enoch and book of Daniel are a classical example of direct Zorastrian influence. There are bunch of Jewish literature that had expanded narratives in the Torah.
The OT bible, or the Hebrew Tanakh, have no mention of Satan until the later books. Not a single time, did the Torah, or the 1st books of the OT, mention the Fall of Satan.
I did find the Fall of Satan, but not in the canonical texts. It is found in the Haggada, which consisted of exaggeration of the canonical texts, derived from Talmud, Midrash and other texts that were used by the Jews as interpretations of narratives and the Mosaic laws. You will find the English translation of the Haggada (titled the Legends of the Jews) at Sacred Texts (Judiasm).
By the time of Jesus and his disciples, they would be familiar with such legends of the Fall of Satan, or that of the books of Enoch.
Ushta Gnostic
While I totally agree with you , being a Zoroastrian, I will have to make a couple of clarifications. True the Jews , specially the sects, borrowed heavily from Persian religion, indeed this borrowing was probably encouraged at least during the Early Achaemenians, by the Persians themselves.
However, the 'Zoroastrian' religion that was 'borrowed' was a much corrupted version of the original teachings. Zarathushtra does not teach of a Devil at all. Another clarrification the Persian devil of the Achaemenians )Angra Mainyu , was an uncreated being. Co-eval with Ahura Mazda who in due time would defeat Angrah Mainyu and then reign supreme. So there were big differences indeed. The sectarian Jews, adapted Persian Theology and dressed it in Jewish clothing so to speak.
You might also be unaware of a latter and more direct link to Chriatianity. Namely Paul himself! Paul was a native of Tarsus which was in the old region of Cappadocia, which the Romans divided into several provinces including Asia. However Cappadoccia had a very large and influentual Zoroastrian presence *( Sects but powerful ones) until way into the 3rd Century AD. Tarsus was famous in the 1st Century for two large Fire temples and for processions of Vohuman and other Amesha Spentas
Some of Paul's concepts, notably his description of the Complete in 1 Cor. 13 is almost a reading from a Zoroastrian theology text.
Ushta Te
Ashai