Interesting, I guess it depends on your view of PSA and the Cross. For example, I was under the impression the Cross reconciled all creation or at least the world.
Yep. What was that scripture I read recently that implicated the redemption of dark powers?
Ah well. 
If I recall, there is a scripture that says we’ll judge the angels. It would be my hope that if such mercy was shown on me to be saved, I likewise would hope to be like my Father hoping to save even my foes. It would be such a devastating, and yet remedial humiliation to the dark angels who so desperately sought to destroy man and rebel against God - that they would be judged by man to be made as right as God is right, and as man has been made to be right. I think that would be a greater justice than letting them revel in their hateful rebellion forever.
Mark probably has in mind a verse from Hebrews 2:16, “For assuredly it is not taking hold of messengers * but it is taking hold of the seed of Abraham.”
Many translations render the “it” or “this” as meaning Christ (which is not strictly impossible, grammatically), so reading instead “For assuredly He is not taking hold of angels but He is taking hold of the seed of Abraham.” And then for “taking hold” they read “save”, which isn’t an unreasonable inference either; and from there it is only a small step to reading this as meaning, in effect, “For assuredly He is not saving angels from sin but He is saving the seed of Abraham from sin.”
Even then, however, the meaning might be that Christ does not have to save loyal angels from sin, but does have to save the seed of Abraham.
But the original grammar more likely, by appeal to immediate context, means “slavery” in reference to the subject “it”. Or, back beyond that, “fear of death”. Or “the might of death”. Or even “him who has the might of death, namely the Adversary”!
So most likely the verse isn’t about Christ not saving demons but saving other sinners. It’s about slavery or fear of death not grabbing hold of angels but grabbing hold of men.
That leaves the question of salvation of rebel angels entirely up in the air. Except insofar as the Hebraist quotes the Psalm, back in chapter 1, where rebel gods are expected to convert back to loyalty to the Son! (Thus putting to shame those who placed their faith in them. 
)
Which of course synchs up perfectly well with the blood of the cross reconciling all things (including in the heavens) to God, and with all things (in the heavens or on the earth or under the earth) loyally confessing Christ as Lord. 
*
LOL, a few years ago in seminary I wrote a paper on the possibility of “demonic redemption” which concluded that it was impossible based on Heb 2:16 and the thoughts of Augustine, Anselm and Calvin on it. Needless to say, my theology has changed since then, so here’s some recent thoughts I’ve had:
Maybe Christ’s work is sufficient to redeem ALL of creation precisely because he became human. Becoming human didn’t limit the atonement, but because of the place humans have in creation, the atonement is actually opened to all creation. As powerful as angels are, they don’t have (that is, weren’t created in) God’s image, and they were never given charge over creation. Isn’t that kind of the point to Romans 8:19-25 and Col 1:15-20? The incarnation wasn’t just a divine being (or a powerful one) who became part of creation to bless it. No, this was the One by and through whom every creature that has been made has come. And he incarnated as the apex of God’s creation, his image-bearer and steward and dominion-holder, God’s very representative. Therefore, there is no other way God could have worked redemption of his creation! (cf also Col 2:9-15) Jesus did not become man just to save men, but to save the whole creation. When we recognize the significance of humankind’s role in God’s creation, we see that, in order for God to reconcile EVERYTHING he has made to himself, the incarnation is EXACTLY what we would expect. The Creator becoming the image-bearer, swallowing up all evil and sin and death, leaves NOTHING outside the scope of his redeeming work. Jesus has all authority because he is the God-man, both the one with whom authority originated, and the one to whom authority was given (Genesis 1). Nothing in heaven (or things that have spiritual being) and nothing on earth (things that have physical being) is excluded from salvation. God becoming man did not LIMIT the atonement, but EXPANDED it to everything. Wow! Praise God! He is good!
Anyway, thoughts?
Neal,
I think that makes good sense of the Rom 8 material!
I’ve always been more partial to the notion from Lewis (that he doubtless picked up from various Fathers), that Christ dives deepest in the Incarnation in order to bring up all the ruined creation with Him when He rises. But your way of putting it makes sense of us judging angels, and of these matters being something that angels strain to look into (the expectation being that we humans would have unique insight on the matter thanks to the Incarnation.)
Yes, yes, yes, you two! This is something I JUST WATCHED TODAY by Michael Heiser on a panel about ETs and how they would fit in with theology. This is Heiser’s talk: youtube.com/watch?v=83MrvfCTaMk
I think it’s about mid-point where he dives into the issue of what ramifications the presence of ET life would have and whether it would necessitate multiple incarnations and atonements. He argues that that was discussed at length in the Christian world centuries before modern times where the possibility of ETs would seem to cast a bad light on the possibility of Christianity (something that Thomas Paine suggested).
Then he states how annoyed he is that people don’t refer back to Romans 8 and Colossians 1 (which is something I was almost about to get annoyed at him for, before he mentioned them! 
)
Another point he had made (before or after; can’t remember right now as I’ve watched too many other things) is that we are image-bearers of God in the sense that we have the status of being His representatives on earth (that we should do things as He would do them), not that we have intelligence or will, though those can help us in our task.
Anyway, point being to confirm everything you guys are saying, with an interesting twist about ETs (though I’m not sure why multiple atonements wouldn’t be possible, as one former atheist who had an NDE that possibly revealed something on this has talked about).
As for my own personal take, this fits nicely into my larger “Christian unified theory” about how the universe possibly came about, combined with our role being to fight entropy, darkness and the void of meaninglessness on earth and possibly in the universe as a whole.
Good discussion! I’d forgotten that this relates to ETs too.