Is Satan Currently Bound?

[Trout]

I have heard that many of those who are adherents to the Preterist school of thought, believe that Satan is currently bound.

Did I hear correctly?

[GhostontheNet]

I have heard that many of those who are adherents to the Preterist school of thought, believe that Satan is currently bound.

Did I hear correctly?

Yes;

Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.

Therefore, it is an indisputable Biblical fact that the satan has been bound since the ministry of Yeshua Christ.

[{Undersecretary of Internal Affairs}]

You didn't give an option for "undecded as yet".

I was actually just about to post a thread asking about this. How's that for coincidence? I would appreciate it if those who believe YES can explain why (as GOTN has done -- are there other verses besides that one?). Also, is it an integral part of preterist doctrine that Satan is now bound? Or can you be a preterist and not believe it?

Thanks! I hope this doesn't constitute a hijacking...

[Trout]

{Tim}:
Thanks! I hope this doesn't constitute a hijacking...

Not at all, welcome aboard.

[GhostontheNet]

You didn't give an option for "undecded as yet".

I was actually just about to post a thread asking about this. How's that for coincidence? I would appreciate it if those who believe YES can explain why (as GOTN has done -- are there other verses besides that one?). Also, is it an integral part of preterist doctrine that Satan is now bound? Or can you be a preterist and not believe it?

Thanks! I hope this doesn't constitute a hijacking... I need another verse? There its all laid out, either the satan is bound or the entire Christian enterprise would fail because of the satan defending his usurped territory. Instead it is quite obvious that the kingdom of God, contrary to popular opinion of many then and some now, had come smashing, evident in in light of Christ's dramatic success over the demonic forces of darkness. He is powerless to stop us because of of Christ's work, what more do we need?

As to whether the present binding of the satan is crucial to orthodox preterism, I would say its not. For example, inspired by Ben Witherington's Revelation: The New Cambridge Bible Commentary taking on his highly optimistic brand of premillenialism, although what I would dub such a view is questionable. Obviously "postmillenial historic premillenialism" doesn't work. Perhaps "optimistic historic premillenialism" will do.

[studyhound]

Yes;

Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.

Therefore, it is an indisputable Biblical fact that the satan has been bound since the ministry of Yeshua Christ.

Ya that :teeth:

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

:highjack:

OK. So Satan is bound. Agreed.

This is something until recently I was agnostic about until recently, but now agree with GON.

However, I still am undecided on the nature of Satan's binding.

Is Satan completely and totally bound, and has absolutely no influence on the world today?

OR

Is Satan only bound in his ability to "decieve the nations", and still has some influence in human affairs?

[mossrose]

I'm not a preterist, but I voted anyway. Hope this doesn't throw your poll off, Fish!

:slinkoff:

[GhostontheNet]

Is Satan only bound in his ability to "decieve the nations", and still has some influence in human affairs? Personally, I always thought that part of the passage was a statement of intent. Perhaps studyhound's quote of N.T. Wright in his sig will help; Paul's vision of the Christian life is thus (as has often been pointed out) of a life lived between D-Day and VE-Day. The decisive battle has been won; the battles we face today are part of the mopping-up operation to implement that victory. The satan even still has the ability to decieve the nations, but he is powerless to halt the plundering of his kingdom like Christ said, which will result in losing his ability to decieve the nations as time goes on, for Christ has achieved the D-day victory as he declared in the passage previously cited states and YHWH has equiped us to win the battle eventually. He is, as Jaltus once pointed out, not merely bound in the Greek of Revelation, but strongly bound. But rather than Jaltus' proposal that the referent is different as a result, I believe that John wished to emphasize that there is no possible way he can stop Christ's grand enterprise.

[Trout]

So then, the binding of Satan is dependent upon one passage of scripture?

Or are there other passages that would help to make the case for Satan being bound?

[Sheepdog]

personally? I would like to study more about eschatology before i come to opinions on stuff like this.

[GhostontheNet]

So then, the binding of Satan is dependent upon one passage of scripture?

Or are there other passages that would help to make the case for Satan being bound? Nothing that specifically states the satan is bound worded as such. Indeed, a combined search for the words satan and "bound" or "bind" together only reveal one non-relevant entry; "Then should not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has kept bound for eighteen long years, be set free on the Sabbath day from what bound her?”" (Luke 13:16 ESV). Though there are verses perhaps similar in concept though lacking the satan binding specifically mentioned; ""Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself."" (John 12:31-32 ESV) "The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, "Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!" And he said to them, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you."" (Luke 10:18-19 ESV)

[kofh2u]

I need another verse? There its all laid out, either the satan is bound or the entire Christian enterprise would fail because of the satan defending his usurped territory. Instead it is quite obvious that the kingdom of God, contrary to popular opinion of many then and some now, had come smashing, evident in in light of Christ's dramatic success over the demonic forces of darkness. He is powerless to stop us because of of Christ's work, what more do we need?

As to whether the present binding of the satan is crucial to orthodox preterism, I would say its not. For example, inspired by Ben Witherington's Revelation: The New Cambridge Bible Commentary taking on his highly optimistic brand of premillenialism, although what I would dub such a view is questionable. Obviously "postmillenial historic premillenialism" doesn't work. Perhaps "optimistic historic premillenialism" will do.


Islam faults the West as "The Great Satan" mostly because of our wide open culture and unbridled sexual license growing evermore blantant since the Protestant "Revofmation."

How do you account for us, Christianity,... now 20% Roman Catholic in Europe and down to 55% Protestant membership in the New World, from 99% in 1776?

[Darth Executor]

The house Jesus refers to is a posessed man's body. I see absolutely no indication in that passage to believe Satan is bound. All it says to me is this:

1: It is illogical to think that the devil would fight himself.
2: One(Jesus) must be stronger than the "master of the house"(the demon that has taken over the "house" which is the body of his victim) to defeat him. If one cannot cast out demons by Satan, than one must do it by God, which is the point Jesus was trying to get across to the pharisees when He was accused of working with the devil's power.

[GhostontheNet]

Islam faults the West as "The Great Satan" mostly because of our wide open culture and unbridled sexual license growing evermore blantant since the Protestant "Revofmation."

How do you account for us, Christianity,... now 20% Roman Catholic in Europe and down to 55% Protestant membership in the New World, from 99% in 1776? Proving that we have earned harsh nicknames due to the degeneration of our society does not equal demonstrating us to be the Biblical satan. Also, your cause and effect relationship is off as regards to what caused this, for rember that the renniassance and its aftermath parallels in time the protestant reformation.

The house Jesus refers to is a posessed man's body. I see absolutely no indication in that passage to believe Satan is bound. All it says to me is this:

1: It is illogical to think that the devil would fight himself.
2: One(Jesus) must be stronger than the "master of the house"(the demon that has taken over the "house" which is the body of his victim) to defeat him. If one cannot cast out demons by Satan, than one must do it by God, which is the point Jesus was trying to get across to the pharisees when He was accused of working with the devil's power. Sorry, you forgot the sentence "But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you." Unless He is saying that these exorcisms have a grander implication than being merely exorcisms, His argument falls flat. Compare N.T. Wright's lecture on "Jesus and the Kingdom" at http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Jesus_Kingdom.mp3 (in turn a summary of much of his Jesus and the Victory of God ), and it makes no sense to say; "Because I can free a couple of individuals from posession, the end of exile and the return of YHWH to Zion is here", unless the next sentence explains that because the satan must be bound in a cosmic sense for Him to be doing what His entire work is doing.

[kofh2u]

Originally posted by kofh2u:

Islam faults the West as "The Great Satan" mostly because of our wide open culture and unbridled sexual license growing evermore blantant since the Protestant "Revofmation."

How do you account for us, Christianity,... now 20% Roman Catholic in Europe and down to 55% Protestant membership in the New World, from 99% in 1776?


GhostontheNet

Proving that we have earned harsh nicknames due to the degeneration of our society does not equal demonstrating us to be the Biblical satan. Also, your cause and effect relationship is off as regards to what caused this, for rember that the renniassance and its aftermath parallels in time the protestant reformation.

KOFHY:
I didn't mean Protestantism caused Satan to be loosed for "a little while."

Yes. I agree. The sudden change in cultural norms was observable at the beginning of the Renaisannce.
There was a general falling away from the repression of open sexual expression. The power of the church was waning, and the sexual corruptuon within, the toleration of "Jezabel" by the church is evidence that the Protestants were a force trying to keep the sexual expression repressed.

Rev. 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, (Church of Rome), because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, (tolerating a homosexually deviant sect), which calleth herself a prophetess, (proclaiming insight into doctrines of celibacy), to teach and to seduce my servants, (particularly the altar boys), to commit fornication, (to engage in pedophilia and sodomizes), and to eat "things" sacrificed unto (phallic) idols.

[Trout]

All right, another question for those who believe that Satan is bound: It seems to me that there is ample evidence within the last century that would seem to indicate a real evil presence in the world. There were more people killed in the last century than any prior century. Hitler, Pol Pot, Chairman Mau, Stalin, Mussolini, Idi Amin, and I could go on, all seem to be influenced by something very evil. What tangible, demonstrable evidence do you have to indicate that Satan is bound?

[kofh2u]

troutk
I didn't say I thought Satan was STILL bound.

Satan was only bound for 1000 years, then he got loose for the lottle while since the Renaisance.

Rev. 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit (of time), and shut him up (so as to inhibit the culture of sexual freedom and license), and set a seal, (the Cross), upon him, that he (could not maintain that subculture that) should deceive the nations no more, till the a thousand year (of the Dark Age) should be fulfilled: and after that, (in a Renaissance), he must be loosed (and the pagan subculture reinstated) a little season (of @500 years).

[Darth Executor]

Proving that we have earned harsh nicknames due to the degeneration of our society does not equal demonstrating us to be the Biblical satan. Also, your cause and effect relationship is off as regards to what caused this, for rember that the renniassance and its aftermath parallels in time the protestant reformation.

Sorry, you forgot the sentence "But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you." Unless He is saying that these exorcisms have a grander implication than being merely exorcisms, His argument falls flat. Compare N.T. Wright's lecture on "Jesus and the Kingdom" at http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Jesus_Kingdom.mp3 (in turn a summary of much of his Jesus and the Victory of God ), and it makes no sense to say; "Because I can free a couple of individuals from posession, the end of exile and the return of YHWH to Zion is here", unless the next sentence explains that because the satan must be bound in a cosmic sense for Him to be doing what His entire work is doing.


I do not believe Jesus meant the word "bound" to be used literally. By bound, it seems to me that He means He defeats Satan. We know from the story with the demoniac and the pigs that the Legion asked Him to let them loose into the pigs instead, and Jesus agreed. There was no binding, Jesus simply kicked them out of a villa and into a shack. The demons then easily drove the pigs to kill themselves. They were not bound in any way.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

All right, another question for those who believe that Satan is bound: It seems to me that there is ample evidence within the last century that would seem to indicate a real evil presence in the world. There were more people killed in the last century than any prior century. Hitler, Pol Pot, Chairman Mau, Stalin, Mussolini, Idi Amin, and I could go on, all seem to be influenced by something very evil. What tangible, demonstrable evidence do you have to indicate that Satan is bound?

Are there people who are more evil, or has technology made the evil more efficient allowing evil people to propagate more evil in a lifetime?

Also, just because Satan is bound, does not mean that there is no longer a sin nature in man.

Note: I lean towards a limited binding of Satan, but those are some arguments I have seen used against the points you made.

[GhostontheNet]

All right, another question for those who believe that Satan is bound: It seems to me that there is ample evidence within the last century that would seem to indicate a real evil presence in the world. There were more people killed in the last century than any prior century. Hitler, Pol Pot, Chairman Mau, Stalin, Mussolini, Idi Amin, and I could go on, all seem to be influenced by something very evil. Though its depressing to think of, perhaps even all these didn't need any external help in becoming what they became, much as the satan himself didn't need external help in what he became. At any rate, that's why Christ has sent us on our great commision, and has ensured our sucess.What tangible, demonstrable evidence do you have to indicate that Satan is bound? What tangible, demonstratable evidence do you have that Christ sits at the right hand of the Father? In matters like this, is not the Scripture's testimony enough?

I do not believe Jesus meant the word "bound" to be used literally. By bound, it seems to me that He means He defeats Satan. We know from the story with the demoniac and the pigs that the Legion asked Him to let them loose into the pigs instead, and Jesus agreed. There was no binding, Jesus simply kicked them out of a villa and into a shack. The demons then easily drove the pigs to kill themselves. They were not bound in any way. You have evaded my question and not plotted your interpretation on the map of first century kingdom of God views and Christ's own variant of them, as He specifically relates the binding of the strong man (by the continuity of the passage, obviously the satan) with the present manifestation of the kingdom of God. Furthermore, this story harms you more than it helps you, if the security of these demons was so obvious, why did they feel the need to defeat themselves by jumping off a cliff (or perhaps being supernaturally pushed, the text doesn't say which exactly, merely what happened) rather than go infest some other poor unfortunate soul? As with anything involving the kingdom of God, there is an already-not yet tension that things have already occured in the ministry, death, burial, and resurrection of Yeshua Christ, but they will be fully accomplished at the Second Coming and Final Judgment.

[Trout]

Though its depressing to think of, perhaps even all these didn't need any external help in becoming what they became, much as the satan himself didn't need external help in what he became. At any rate, that's why Christ has sent us on our great commision, and has ensured our sucess.


Has the world changed since Satan's incarceration? What are the distinguishing differences in a world with or without Satan?



GotN:
What tangible, demonstratable evidence do you have that Christ sits at the right hand of the Father? In matters like this, is not the Scripture's testimony enough?

Why the empty tomb of course!

[GhostontheNet]

Has the world changed since Satan's incarceration? What are the distinguishing differences in a world with or without Satan? Perhaps I should cite some comments by William Barclay on the Parable of the Leaven at Matthew 13:33 to try and explain;


The imperceptable Influence

But there are more ways than one of interpreting this parable. It is possible to argue that the leaven stands for the imperceptible influence of the Kingdom. We can no more see leaven working than we can see a flower growing, but working it is all the time. And so is the power of the Kingdom. One of the commonest debates is, "Is the world getting better or worse?" Once Oliver Cromwell said of his son's Richard's education, "I would have him know a litle history." To the man who knows anything of history there is only one answer to that question - the world is getting better.

When we look at things, not so much year to year as age to age, we see the difference. Here is a quote from Seneca, the great Stoic philosopher, who lived at the same time as Paul. (Some people think that he may have known Paul.) He writes like this, "We strangle the mad dog; we slaughter a fierce ox; we plunge the knife into sickly cattle lest they taint the herd; children who are born deformed or weakly we drown." In the sands of the Egyptian desert it is still possible to dig up letters written on papyrus. Some of them are private letters such as anyone might write to his friend and relation. Here is one. Its date is A.D. 1.

Hilaron to Alis his wife heartiest greetings, and to my dear Berous and to Apollonarion. I want you to know that we are still in Alexandria. I beg you to look after the little child and as soon as we get our wages I'll send something up to you. If - good luck be with you - you bear a child, if it is a boy, let it live; if it is a girl, throw it out. You told Aphrodisias to say to me to not forget you. How can I forget you? So I beg you not to worry.

It is a strange letter with its mixture of deep affection and absolute mercilessness. Now we could not possibly imagine anyone in a civilized country today talking about slaughtering weakly children or throwing out baby girls. Yet that was the normal custom when Christianity came into the world. Why the change? It is not that the world is yet a Christian world; but the influence of Christian ideals has so permeated society that certain things can no longer be entertained. Imperceptably ut surely, the influence of the Kingdom is there.

Why the empty tomb of course! Even the best case for the resurrection involves not seeing the empty tomb and the risen Christ (I exclude the Apostles, by definition witnesses of the resurrection from this set), but in taking the effort to confirm the reliability of the testimony of those who said they had.

[Trout]

Perhaps I should cite some comments by William Barclay on the Parable of the Leaven at Matthew 13:33 to try and explain;


The imperceptable Influence

But there are more ways than one of interpreting this parable. It is possible to argue that the leaven stands for the imperceptible influence of the Kingdom. We can no more see leaven working than we can see a flower growing, but working it is all the time. And so is the power of the Kingdom. One of the commonest debates is, "Is the world getting better or worse?" Once Oliver Cromwell said of his son's Richard's education, "I would have him know a litle history." To the man who knows anything of history there is only one answer to that question - the world is getting better.

When we look at things, not so much year to year as age to age, we see the difference. Here is a quote from Seneca, the great Stoic philosopher, who lived at the same time as Paul. (Some people think that he may have known Paul.) He writes like this, "We strangle the mad dog; we slaughter a fierce ox; we plunge the knife into sickly cattle lest they taint the herd; children who are born deformed or weakly we drown." In the sands of the Egyptian desert it is still possible to dig up letters written on papyrus. Some of them are private letters such as anyone might write to his friend and relation. Here is one. Its date is A.D. 1.

Hilaron to Alis his wife heartiest greetings, and to my dear Berous and to Apollonarion. I want you to know that we are still in Alexandria. I beg you to look after the little child and as soon as we get our wages I'll send something up to you. If - good luck be with you - you bear a child, if it is a boy, let it live; if it is a girl, throw it out. You told Aphrodisias to say to me to not forget you. How can I forget you? So I beg you not to worry.

It is a strange letter with its mixture of deep affection and absolute mercilessness. Now we could not possibly imagine anyone in a civilized country today talking about slaughtering weakly children or throwing out baby girls. Yet that was the normal custom when Christianity came into the world. Why the change? It is not that the world is yet a Christian world; but the influence of Christian ideals has so permeated society that certain things can no longer be entertained. Imperceptably ut surely, the influence of the Kingdom is there.[q/uote]

I couldn't agree more, there has been a perceptable difference in the world since Christ's visit. The entire course of human events has been changed. I also agree that the kingdom is here. But what does this say of Satan? It would seem that the kingdom of God could flourish in a world where Satan was still free to influence it.

[quote]
GotN:
Even the best case for the resurrection involves not seeing the empty tomb and the risen Christ (I exclude the Apostles, by definition witnesses of the resurrection from this set), but in taking the effort to confirm the reliability of the testimony of those who said they had.

But, the resurrection of Christ is quite obvious from the text of scripture, Satan being bound as we speak, doesn't seem to come out as clearly.

[GhostontheNet]

I couldn't agree more, there has been a perceptable difference in the world since Christ's visit. The entire course of human events has been changed. I also agree that the kingdom is here. But what does this say of Satan? It would seem that the kingdom of God could flourish in a world where Satan was still free to influence it. On the contrary, it shows that the satan is not free to halt the progress of the kingdom of God as much as he would like to, and it shows that things have indeed changed greatly as he would like to make sure they didn't. Surely saying that the satan is bound is an appropriate metaphor for this impotency where it hurts him and his agenda the most. As I demonstrated, this is how Christ explained that the kingdom of God had come, that the reason He could cast out demons by the Spirit of God was that the strong man was already bound.

But, the resurrection of Christ is quite obvious from the text of scripture, Satan being bound as we speak, doesn't seem to come out as clearly. But as already mentioned, there is no Scripture about the binding of the satan at all outside of Revelation if my first passage doesn't apply this way, and the one passage that could be used for comparing Scripture to Scripture states it is a present event, which I have not yet been effectively countered on, nor recieved an explanation why if the entire passage talks about the satan, the "strong man" who is bound and plundered is not the satan metaphorically represented.

[kofh2u]

Do you also ignore the Salem wtch trials?

Satan was sexually active in the woods and groves with women who were dunked until they confessed to sexual activities... with Satan... read the history books, it is all there in detail. Sex = Satan

What was it about the 1000 years of monasticism that made that universal religious culture so different... if not the repression that bound up the lust of our sexual appetite?

Rev. 20:1 And I saw an angel, (a psychic vision), come down from heaven, (of my subconscious insights) ), having the key, (the authority to impliment social change), to the bottomless pit (of time) and a great chain (of cultural restraints) in his hand.

[kofh2u]

Ghosternet,...
... the binding of Satan IS supported elsewhere,...
...and it is mentioned iIMPLICITLY again in Rev 12:

SATAN IS DESCRIBED AS A RED DRAGON:

Rev. 12:4 And (the red dragon of devilish sexual manipulation and satanic libidinal sexual excess), his tail (dragging behind his long historical presence in these societies, as he passed) drew the third part, (three), of the (ten planetary) "stars" of heaven, and did cast them (in the days of his unbinding) to the earth (revealing THE TRINITY OF Uranus, 1799 AD, Neptune, 1845-6 AD, and Pluto, 1930 AD, to all the earth: [Rev 3:12]): and the dragon, (Paganism, that SYSTEM OF SEXUAL MORES: [Rev 20:1-3) stood, (in 325 AD), before the woman (Judaeo-Christianity) which was ready to be delivered (by the Edict of Milan, the Toleration of Constantine, 313 AD), for to devour her Church (in Arianism) as soon as it was born.


THE MONASTIC BINDING:

Rev. 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness (of the Dark Age), where she hath a place (in Monasticism) prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand, two hundred and threescore days, (until the Reformation of Luther, 1624. [363 + 1260 =1624])

[GhostontheNet]

Do you also ignore the Salem wtch trials?

Satan was sexually active in the woods and groves with women who were dunked until they confessed to sexual activities... with Satan... read the history books, it is all there in detail. Sex = Satan

What was it about the 1000 years of monasticism that made that universal religious culture so different... if not the repression that bound up the lust of our sexual appetite?

Rev. 20:1 And I saw an angel, (a psychic vision), come down from heaven, (of my subconscious insights) ), having the key, (the authority to impliment social change), to the bottomless pit (of time) and a great chain (of cultural restraints) in his hand.
Ghosternet,...
... the binding of Satan IS supported elsewhere,...
...and it is mentioned iIMPLICITLY again in Rev 12:

SATAN IS DESCRIBED AS A RED DRAGON:

Rev. 12:4 And (the red dragon of devilish sexual manipulation and satanic libidinal sexual excess), his tail (dragging behind his long historical presence in these societies, as he passed) drew the third part, (three), of the (ten planetary) "stars" of heaven, and did cast them (in the days of his unbinding) to the earth (revealing THE TRINITY OF Uranus, 1799 AD, Neptune, 1845-6 AD, and Pluto, 1930 AD, to all the earth: [Rev 3:12]): and the dragon, (Paganism, that SYSTEM OF SEXUAL MORES: [Rev 20:1-3) stood, (in 325 AD), before the woman (Judaeo-Christianity) which was ready to be delivered (by the Edict of Milan, the Toleration of Constantine, 313 AD), for to devour her Church (in Arianism) as soon as it was born.


THE MONASTIC BINDING:

Rev. 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness (of the Dark Age), where she hath a place (in Monasticism) prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand, two hundred and threescore days, (until the Reformation of Luther, 1624. [363 + 1260 =1624]) Your daily dose of anachronism and eisegesis brought to you by kofh2u.

[kofh2u]

Your daily dose of anachronism and eisegesis brought to you by kofh2u.

Can you straighten me out on those verses?

[James Peter]

Assumptions like the fact that the stars being spoken of were the planets and not angels/spirits as would be the most common interpretation, one supported by usage throughtout the OT etc.

Assumptions such as Satan being chiefly identified sex instead of by pride and rebellion which would probably be more accurate.

The fact that the rest of Revelation 12 fits much more strongly in a 1st century context than it does in a fourth century context?

Whether you see the woman as Mary, Israel or the Church any of those 'traditional' interpretations fits much more closely to the symbolism used in the texts and to history.

I don't have time to break down each and every symbol used in the passage but in brief your interpretation cannot be supported and there are much stronger alternatives, even if I would not said definately that any specific one was the correct interpretation.

[Anoetos]

The view that the binding of the strong man refers to the binding of Satan in the church age is not specific to preterism; it is held by nearly all orthodox Amillennialists in one way or another as well.

I didn't read the whole thread, so I will possibly repeat someone when I hasten to point out that this binding refers to his inability to hinder the spread of the gospel and does not refer, necessarily, to his being actually, physically tied up in some actual location.

[dizzle]

Exactly.

[kofh2u]

Yes, it sure does that, hinder the spreading of the gospel.

From the Renaissance to this day, @ 500 years gone by, professing Christians have declined from @ 99% of the Western Culture that reconizes Jesus, to less than 20% Euopean catholic membership and down to 55% in Protestant America. The gospel was supressed in the USSR and Eastern Europe from 1917 until just recently.

We can agree in this effect of Satan, exactly.

We might also notice the satanic incubation period is symptomic of a broading tolerance for sexual license. It is no coincidence that the flat gothic art of the Middle Ages was suddenly replaced in the 15th century with realistic nudes in marble and nakeness on the canvasses of the renaissance masters.

Rev. 20:1 And I saw an angel, (a psychic vision), come down from heaven, (of my subconscious insights), having (the authority of Universal Christianity) to impliment social change), the key to the bottomless pit (of time) and a great chain (of cultural restraints) in his hand.

[Rightglory]

To All,

I was just scanning this thread and since I don't hold to either side of this issue I was not going to respond. However, you are dealing with the idea of 'Satan being bound" and I had some info on it so I will post it and you can do with it as you like.

First some things to identify Satan. He is a spirit. His dwelling place is the earth. He is ruler of the air, the mind. He works not by force but by lies and manipulation. See Story of Eve. St. Paul speaks of him as the prince of the air.(Eph.2:2). The Bible also calls his realm, his house.

Because of the curse God put on Lucifer, in the Garden for decieving Eve, the world has been given over to Satan. His influence and power grew. Man continued to move further from God. Read the OT prior to Noah. The sickness of sin, death, was the norm and all men who had suffered the first death (body) would also suffer the second death (soul) were it not for God's undeserved grace in the gift of His Son.

There are numerable texts that describe Christ as a robber, thief Matt 26:25, transgressor Is 53:12 and in Rev 3:3 as a thief again. Then Luke 12:39 Jesus calls Satan a good man. A good man if he had known would have watched and not have his house broken into. Matt 12:29. Jesus states that he bound the "strong man". By so doing He, Jesus would be able to take the spoils, goods from his possession.

Satan had unlimited power here on earth. Luke 4:5-6. The story of Christ's temptations where satan had the power to give Christ all kingdoms.

Some similarities. Christ's second coming will be witnessed first in Satan's realm, the realm of air and we will know that Satan has been totally conquered. Also, Matt 24:27. The devil works via the mind, but so does Christ. Rom 12:2, Phil 2:5.

The binding of Satan.

When Christ was crucified His death represented the second death that would be the end of man if not redeemed. He decended into Hell. When he rose from the dead, Christ had bound Satan, in that He now has limited power over the second death. Christ also took with him those of the OT saints. This is the taking of the spoils of the strong man, Satan. Rev 20: 1-3. The devil is bound in that he lost some of his power over death and Hades. From the time of Christ's first coming Christ's Church is formed where the Gospel is preached. Man is summoned to the Kingdom of God and the devil is barred from preventing their entrance into it. The abyss refers to the hearts of those who have rejected God. That is the evil one sees in the world today. Satan is working mightly to overcome but knows that he will fail.

Texts dealing with Satan Bound:

1. Mt 12:29
2. Mk 3:22-27
3. Lk 10:17-19
4. Jn 12:30-32
5. Eph 4:8
6. Col 2:15
7. Zech 13:2

[kofh2u]

Yes, though not mentioned specifically, that sexy red-tailed social attitude permeated the cultural spirit of Rome as we all know.

Zech. 13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, (beginning in 324 AD, with the conversion of Constantine), saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols (of mythological and astrological Gods) out of the land (of Roman Empire), and they, (the pagans), shall no more be remembered, (both Greek and Roman mythologies banned): and also I will cause the prophets (of Judaism and even Christianity) and the unclean (psychcc) spirit (of men, their lustful Libidinal cultural excesses) to pass out of the land (of the entire Western Culture during a 1000 years of Monasticism).

[Darth Executor]

You have evaded my question and not plotted your interpretation on the map of first century kingdom of God views and Christ's own variant of them, as He specifically relates the binding of the strong man (by the continuity of the passage, obviously the satan) with the present manifestation of the kingdom of God. Furthermore, this story harms you more than it helps you, if the security of these demons was so obvious, why did they feel the need to defeat themselves by jumping off a cliff (or perhaps being supernaturally pushed, the text doesn't say which exactly, merely what happened) rather than go infest some other poor unfortunate soul? As with anything involving the kingdom of God, there is an already-not yet tension that things have already occured in the ministry, death, burial, and resurrection of Yeshua Christ, but they will be fully accomplished at the Second Coming and Final Judgment.

How was Satan bound? Last time I checked he did a good job in killing Christians all over the place.

About the story, who would the Legion jump into? There was the demoniac, Jesus, and the apostles. I'd love to see the demons try to posses Jesus...
In addition, we are not familiar with the physics of demonic posession, so we don't know how demons get into this world, nor if they are capable of waltzing around the planet doing what they feel like doing. Maybe they had a limited range and the pigs were the closest thing they could possess(even if other humans were nearby, they likely knew Jesus wouldn't allow them to harm anybody else). The pigs, lacking the willpower of man, or being unable to think and trying to get the demons out of them killed themselves. Maybe demons tried to get the man to kill themselves but the man was fighting their influence. Now one must ask the question: if Jesus bound the demons, why adid He let them move out? Is one who is bound allowed to go to another house?

[GhostontheNet]

How was Satan bound? In His inability to stop Christ, the kingdom of God, and His/its movement, which will destroy Him. Last time I checked he did a good job in killing Christians all over the place. "The blood of the martyrs is seed for the church."

About the story, who would the Legion jump into? There was the demoniac, Jesus, and the apostles. I'd love to see the demons try to posses Jesus...
In addition, we are not familiar with the physics of demonic posession, so we don't know how demons get into this world, nor if they are capable of waltzing around the planet doing what they feel like doing. Maybe they had a limited range and the pigs were the closest thing they could possess(even if other humans were nearby, they likely knew Jesus wouldn't allow them to harm anybody else). The pigs, lacking the willpower of man, or being unable to think and trying to get the demons out of them killed themselves. Maybe demons tried to get the man to kill themselves but the man was fighting their influence. Now one must ask the question: if Jesus bound the demons, why adid He let them move out? Is one who is bound allowed to go to another house? The first thing I must note is that one must be able to spot figurative language, when we say "I am bound by my word", we don't suppose they are wearing strangely alphabetic chains, nor do we think being bound by their word inhibits all their activity. Ultimately, the story does not indicate why the pigs went over the cliff, however, whether it was because the pigs drove themselves off in madness (something Christ evidently knew they would do, explaining His decision), or the demons drove themselves off the cliff out of fear of Christ, or Christ Himself drove them off in an ironic fusion of compliance and defeating, the point of the story is the defeat of an entire legion of demons, for otherwise, why include this story at all?

[kofh2u]

Darth Executor:
How was Satan bound? Last time I checked he did a good job in killing Christians all over the place.

KOFHY:
Right.
Satan had been bound for the 1000 years of Christian Monasticism, prior to his release in the Renaissance.

Darth Executo:
About the story, ... we are not familiar with the physics of demonic posession, so we don't know how demons get into this world, nor if they are capable of waltzing around the planet doing what they feel like doing.

KOFHY:
Demons can be internal, in the kingdom of our personal mind, or when external they are collective sociological expressions, like in America, Islam recognizes The Big Satan, focusing on our sexual license.

Darth Executo:
Maybe they had a limited range... ...the pigs were the closest thing they could possess(even if other humans were nearby, they likely knew Jesus wouldn't allow them to harm anybody else). The pigs, lacking the willpower of man, or being unable to think and trying to get the demons out of them killed themselves. Maybe demons tried to get the man to kill themselves but the man was fighting their influence.

KOFHY:
Maybe the observes suffered from Mass Hysteria? Or, maybe this report to us from the testimony of the bible writer who observed the whole thing attributed this rather superstitious idea to a coincidence.

The matter of casting out "devils" from people, though, seems easily reconcilable with hypnosis and/or psychological intervention.

Darth Executo:
Now one must ask the question: if Jesus bound the demons, why did He let them move out? Is one who is bound allowed to go to another house?

KOFHY:
No.
IMO, scripture doesn't tw]ell us that Jesus bound devils, merely recognized the maladjusted psychic state in people who he transformed from their mentally ill state to a higher level of sanity.

King Solomin did the same thing, remmber: Two women, probably the mother-in-law and the "baby's" wife were fighting over who ought be his "boss."

Solomon intended to cut the man in half so they could both have half.

The evil self centeredness left the mother and she gave in.

See what I mean about piritual healings and psychic interventions?


Rev. 20:1 And I saw an angel, (a psychic vision), come down from heaven, (of my subconscious insights), having (the authority of Universal Christianity) to impliment social change), the key to the bottomless pit (of time) and a great chain (of cultural restraints) in his hand.

[apple]

KOFHY:
Demons can be internal, in the kingdom of our personal mind, or when external they are collective sociological expressions, like in America, Islam recognizes The Big Satan, focusing on our sexual license.


Hi Kofh. Are you saying Islam doesn't like us because we enjoy sex?

[CJD®]

I think Jesus himself said something about this when he gave the analogy about the binding of the strong man, etc. If this applies to the adversary (ha-satan), then it has to do with the notion that "the gates of hell will not prevail" against new covenant Israel (i.e., Jew+Gentile, i.e., the Church).

Regarding apple's question, whatever kofh2u meant, yes indeed, Islam despises the West precisely because of its barbarism — such things as forgetting ancestors, derogating religion, exalting triviality (sports, entertainment, fashion), endorsing sexual shamelessness, deprecating family, and discarding honor. The root cause of non-Western nations' anger toward the West does not lie in economics, religion, or foreign policy (i.e., 'let freedom ring'). Methinks our understanding of 'barbarism' ought to be corrected to reflect Scripture, and then, at the very least, the church ought to reform to this end.

Best,

CJD