Binding of Satan

[seanD]

The faithful can't be deceived. The dragon is chained. The doubting nations are always in danger because they don't have undoubting faith. Satan isn't chained for them.

Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

I don't accept apocalyptic time periods as literal earthly time periods. They represent spiritual time. I recommend reading the "Shepherd of Hermas." Modern scholars believe it was written in the first half of the second century. Internal evidence points to late in the first century. Some in the early church believed it was written by the biblical Hermas. Hermas is the man to whom the revelation was given. Hermas is not the false prophet.

Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

Paul was talking to the faithful.

[eschaton]

Scripture Verse: Revelation 20

And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. ² He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. ³ He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

© Copyright Original Source

What you are saying contradicts Scripture. Actual Scripture, not Gnostic knockoffs.

The false prophet is also a literal man:

Scripture Verse: Revelation 19

²⁰ But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. ²¹ The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

© Copyright Original Source

Ideas aren't thrown "alive" into the lake of fire.

The nations are those capable of being deceived. Do you think they could be deceived if they couldn't be deceived? Do you consider the second-century church, many of whom were martyrs, false gnostics? If so then the apostles couldn't teach. I think the scriptures that are being contradicted are Col 2:15 and John 12:31.

2 Corinthians 3:6
Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

^{2 John9} Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
¹⁰ If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

It is those who don't abide in the doctrine who are antichrist. Do you expect Jesus to come on a literal horse and with a literal sword in His mouth swinging his head side to side against tanks planes and atomic bombs? If that is the case then why did Jesus teach in parables? Some still believe the earth is flat. Are you one of those?

[eschaton]

Paul was talking to the faithful.

Absolutely. Jesus said don't be deceived. Remember what Peter said.

Luke 12:⁴¹ Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
⁴² And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
⁴³ Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
⁴⁴ Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
⁴⁵ But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
⁴⁶ The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
⁴⁷ And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
⁴⁸ But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
⁴⁹ I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?

[seanD]

Absolutely. Jesus said don't be deceived. Remember what Peter said.

Luke 12:⁴¹ Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
⁴² And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
⁴³ Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
⁴⁴ Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
⁴⁵ But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
⁴⁶ The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
⁴⁷ And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
⁴⁸ But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
⁴⁹ I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?

Then how does that square with your claim that the devil has been rendered incapable of deceiving the faithful. Do you see the logic I'm grappling with here?

[Darfius]

The nations are those capable of being deceived. Do you think they could be deceived if they couldn't be deceived? Do you consider the second-century church, many of whom were martyrs, false gnostics? If so then the apostles couldn't teach. I think the scriptures that are being contradicted are Col 2:15 and John 12:31.

This was unintelligible, but you are clearly missing the point. When Satan is bound, it will be so that he does not deceive the nations. You can't get around that with doublespeak. Paul and John both said Gnostics had infiltrated the church and your incredulity doesn't make Hermas a reputable source, especially when it is as unintelligible as you are. By the way, Hermas/Hermes was the Greek Gnostic equivalent of the god Thoth of Egypt, so the author of the document was broadcasting their Gnostic intent by selecting the name for authorship.

It is those who don't abide in the doctrine who are antichrist. Do you expect Jesus to come on a literal horse and with a literal sword in His mouth swinging his head side to side against tanks planes and atomic bombs? If that is the case then why did Jesus teach in parables? Some still believe the earth is flat. Are you one of those?

I do expect Jesus to come on a literal horse with a literal sword, yes. Whether that is all He will come with is a different matter. Jesus taught in parables to hide the truth from the "wise" like you and reveal it unto babes (those humble enough to accept and love it).

You're equating searching and respecting the Scriptures with believing in untrue ideas like a flat earth. You're a heretic.

[eschaton]

Then how does that square with your claim that the devil has been rendered incapable of deceiving the faithful. Do you see the logic I'm grappling with here?

Because the devil is chained from deceiving the faithful. How does that not make sense? It is the faith I am talking about here. To be deceived is to have an imperfect faith. Faith is supposed to be grounded on sound doctrine, not the claims of antichrist.

Ephesians 4:12
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

[eschaton]

This was unintelligible, but you are clearly missing the point. When Satan is bound, it will be so that he does not deceive the nations. You can't get around that with doublespeak. Paul and John both said Gnostics had infiltrated the church and your incredulity doesn't make Hermas a reputable source, especially when it is as unintelligible as you are. By the way, Hermas/Hermes was the Greek Gnostic equivalent of the god Thoth of Egypt, so the author of the document was broadcasting their Gnostic intent by selecting the name for authorship.



I do expect Jesus to come on a literal horse with a literal sword, yes. Whether that is all He will come with is a different matter. Jesus taught in parables to hide the truth from the "wise" like you and reveal it unto babes (those humble enough to accept and love it).

You're equating searching and respecting the Scriptures with believing in untrue ideas like a flat earth. You're a heretic.

Perhaps Hermas should not be considered a perfect source, but I think that a book that was part of some early NT's is a lot better source than some modern-day guy that goes around condemning preterists to hell and calling others who don't agree with him heretics. The name Hermas is found in the NT. I'm not talking about Greek gods. There were many martyrs in the early church who were willing to die for the true faith. I don't doubt that some today would call them heretics. BTW, I'm glad you're not a flat-earther, but just a little bit surprised considering your interpretation of Rev 19:14-15.

1. Ephesians 6:17
   And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
2. Hebrews 4:12
   For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

[seanD]

Because the devil is chained from deceiving the faithful. How does that not make sense? It is the faith I am talking about here. To be deceived is to have an imperfect faith. Faith is supposed to be grounded on sound doctrine, not the claims of antichrist.

Ephesians 4:12
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

It doesn't make sense because on one hand you're saying the devil is chained so he can't deceive the faithful. On the other hand, you're agreeing with Paul in that we ourselves have to prevent from being deceived by an already (as you argue) chained devil who's supposedly chained so that this doesn't happen. It's redundant. If we have to be proactive ourselves in this regard, what is the purpose of him being chained? Your interpretation is dubious and vague.

[eschaton]

Sean,

Think of it this way. Who is being warned against deception? Is it primarily believers or non-believers? Isn't it believers? Non-believers are already deceived. Why warn believers if they can't be deceived? Why is that confusing? If you have perfect understanding and faith the devil is chained from harming your understanding and faith.

Hebrews 12:23
To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

[seanD]

Sean,

Think of it this way. Who is being warned against deception? Is it primarily believers or non-believers? Isn't it believers? Non-believers are already deceived. Why warn believers if they can't be deceived? Why is that confusing? If you have perfect understanding and faith the devil is chained from harming your understanding and faith.

Hebrews 12:23
To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

No offense, but I'd prefer to take even the preterist interpretations of scripture than the way you approach it. Your approach has gnostic undertones. Also, just a heads up, some of the most vocal skeptics against the bible, like Dominic Crossan, also frown on literal interpretation of scripture and instead argue in favor of more mystical and parabolic interpretations of scripture. Maybe you should consider your approach a bit more cautiously.

[Darfius]

Perhaps Hermas should not be considered a perfect source, but I think that a book that was part of some early NT's is a lot better source than some modern-day guy that goes around condemning preterists to hell and calling others who don't agree with him heretics. The name Hermas is found in the NT. I'm not talking about Greek gods. There were many martyrs in the early church who were willing to die for the true faith. I don't doubt that some today would call them heretics. BTW, I'm glad you're not a flat-earther, but just a little bit surprised considering your interpretation of Rev 19:14-15.

1. Ephesians 6:17
   And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
2. Hebrews 4:12
   For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

The truth is not about "a lot better sources", it's about reading, discerning and respecting God's word above all else, disregarding whatever contradicts it. The fact that you do not have such respect for God's word is why you so often go off into the weeds of philosophical speculation instead of Christian doctrine. "Where is the philosopher of this age?" Paul knew what the Gnostics in his day were up to just as I do in mine. Some of us have chosen to be as wise as serpents and as gentle as doves as we've been instructed to.

We'll all see soon enough who is willing to lay down their lives for Jesus Christ, since the plan of the enemy is progressing rapidly to the point where that will be necessary. Somehow I think you'll find a way to "spiritualize" your disloyalty away under the guise of a "higher understanding."

Jesus will have a literal sword and the sword of the Spirit. Both. Try understanding the latter without neglecting the former, as He told the Pharisees.

I condemn those who need condemning and praise those who deserve praising. I fear neither responsibility because I am a man of God, rather than an emasculated worshipper of the State or political correctness. If those who receive rightful condemnation repent, then it will be my responsibility to praise and support them. But love is responsible for both and one most both praise truth and condemn the lies which would prevent the truth from reaching the eyes, ears and heart of the lost.

[eschaton]

Darfius,

I'm glad to see you've set yourself up as the sole interpreter of the Bible and judge of people's beliefs. You rarely give a reference to anybody else, or even to the Bible. How many commentaries have you studied? I would be surprised to see you give any support for your views, except maybe the Left Behind novel. I've read 147 books on eschatology, 40 books on the church fathers, and 151 other books on religion. Most of those in the last ten years. That's documented at Goodreads.com. I've read several translations of the Bible cover to cover. The NT over a dozen times and the OT three times. That's dwarfed by the amount of time I've spent studying it. You can believe whatever you want based on your own opinions, but to this point, I haven't seen any reason to take you seriously.

[eschaton]

seanD,

I'll ask you the same question I'm asking Darfius. Do you base your opinions on anybody's research, or simply a couple of fundamentalists who don't care anything about the early saints and martyrs? Or is it all simply your own opinion, or maybe you received your ideas in a dream? I'm 69 years old. I was a big fan of Hal Lindsey about 50 years ago. When I was a child...

[seanD]

seanD,

I'll ask you the same question I'm asking Darfius. Do you base your opinions on anybody's research, or simply a couple of fundamentalists who don't care anything about the early saints and martyrs? Or is it all simply your own opinion, or maybe you received your ideas in a dream? I'm 69 years old. I was a big fan of Hal Lindsey about 50 years ago. When I was a child...

Well, there's your mistake. You were listening to dispensationalist grifters like Hal Lindsey, and so when you found out he was spewing out nonsense to sell books, you went full on gnostic.

[eschaton]

You're a funny guy Sean. Gnostic comes from gnosis, which is knowledge. Are you against knowledge? It would seem so. Show me one verse in the Bible that is against knowledge. I know of one.

1 Tim 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: KJV
O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” ESV

Who was probably the biggest opponent of Gnosticism in the early church? I would say, Irenaeus. In his fourth book he says:

1. By transmitting to thee, my very dear friend, this fourth book of the work which is [entitled] The Detection and Refutation of False Knowledge, I shall, as I have promised, add weight, by means of the words of the Lord, to what I have already advanced; so that thou also, as thou hast requested, mayest obtain from me the means of confuting all the heretics everywhere, and not permit them, beaten back at all points, to launch out further into the deep of error, nor to be drowned in the sea of ignorance; but that thou, turning them into the haven of the truth, mayest cause them to attain their salvation.

Irenaeus wasn't against knowledge. The correct doctrine is based on knowledge.

When I was a kid I loved comic books. Even as an adult I've enjoyed the Marvel brand of movies. However, over the top action where superheroes wrestle with tanks, planes, and other totally ridiculous scenarios have kind of lost me. Maybe I've finally outgrown this sort of thing.

1 Corinthians 13:11
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

The idea that Jesus comes to earth on a literal horse and dispatches modern armies with wild gyrations of his head seems sort of like an Avengers movie. It was even considered ridiculous in the ancient world.

36. CHRIST AS A SWORD.
The texts of the New Testament, which we have discussed, are things said by Himself about Himself. Isaiah, (49:2) however, He said that His mouth had been set by His Father as a sharp sword and that He was hidden under the shadow of His hand, made like to a chosen shaft and kept close in the Father's quiver, called His servant by the God of all things, and Israel, and Light of the Gentiles. The mouth of the Son of God is a sharp sword, for "The word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart." And indeed He came not to bring peace on the earth, that is, to corporeal and sensible things, but a sword, and to cut through, if I may say so, the disastrous friendship of soul and body, so that the soul, committing herself to the spirit which was against the flesh, may enter into friendship with God. Hence, according to the prophetic word, He made His mouth a sword, like a sharp sword. Can anyone behold so many wounded by the divine love, like her in the Song of Songs, who complained that she was wounded: "I am wounded with love," and find the dart that wounded so many souls for the love of God, in any but Him who said, "He hath made Me as a chosen shaft." Origen - Commentary on John, Book I