Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
JESUS did not call Beelzebub as Satan = you are missing why JESUS did not call Satan Beelzebub
Absolutely right. He is having to invent things not found anywhere in scripture to support his view. The only king of the evil spiritual realm is Satan. It calls all of the other fallen angels "his angels" (Revelatoin 12:9, Matthew 25:41). Premils have to invent an imaginary other king of the symbolic demonic locusts besides Satan in order to keep their doctrine afloat.
Yes, He did. You are not even reading the text carefully at all. The same being who the Pharisees were accusing him of drawing power from to cast out demons is the one who Jesus said would be divided against himself if he cast himself out. It would make no sense for Jesus to reference Satan in response if that is not who the Pharisees were talking about. How can you miss something so obvious as this? They simply referred to him by another of his names, Beelzebub.
When Satan was cast out of heaven it says this happened:
Yes, he is. There is no other king over the evil spiritual realm except for Satan. It calls the other fallen angels "his angels" (Matthew 25:41, Revelation 12:9). You are not allowing scripture to interpret scripture for you. Instead, you have to resort to making things up like saying that demons are not fallen angels. Yes, they are. You noticeably did not even attempt to answer my question about what the difference is between fallen angels, demons and evil spirits. They are all the same.
Well said. Here is something that Premils do not seem to consider. Satan doesn't work alone. Satan and the beast work hand in hand (Revelation 13:4). And, of course, Satan doesn't work without the help of his angels, either. So, it only follows that while the beast and the fallen angels (symbolically represented by locusts) are bound in the bottomless pit/abyss, then Satan is, also. He is dependent on the beast and his angels in order to do his dirty work. If they are bound from doing so, then so is he. It makes no sense to think that the beast and Satan's angels would be bound without Satan himself being bound at the same time. And, of course, we understand as Amils that the binding of spirit beings relates to spiritual restraint and not to being literally bound with a literal chain.
Mis-alignment of scriptures will cloud the waters of Truth
Absolutely. Those first few verses you referenced have fallen angels being in chains in the bottomless pit, yet you don't see Premils claiming that all the fallen angels are literally chained up in a literal bottomless pit or prison. Some try to say that it's only talking about some of the fallen angels and not all of them in those verses, but that's just a weak argument that can't be taken seriously whatsoever. No, those verses are talking about all fallen angels being chained up and reserved for judgment and, yet, we all know that the fallen angels are not completely inactive. Satan's binding should be understood similarly.
Yes, your posts prove that repeatedly.
You lack the discernment to know when scriptures relate to each other and when they don't. Ask God for wisdom about that (James 1:5-7). Where do you see anything there about Michael and his angels going to war against Satan and his angels? Nowhere. Just because Michael is mentioned there doesn't mean that passage has anything to do with Revelation 12. Where do you see a description of the resurrection of the dead taking place in Revelation 12? Nowhere. There is no basis for directly relating the passage from Daniel 12 to Revelation 12.
This type of reasoning is how pre-tribs decide that 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 is not the same event as Matthew 24:29-31. They say there is no mention of the angels gathering the church in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17, so it can't be the same event. As if every passage about an event has to contain all of the same details. That's the kind of argument you're making here. It's a weak argument, at best.
See above. Two passages related to the same events or time periods do not have to contain all of the same details. There are no details given in Revelation 12 that contradict details given in Revelation 20. The two passages compliment each other with each having different details about the New Testament time period during which the gospel of Christ and salvation has gone out in the power of the Holy Spirit, spoiling the efforts of Satan and his angels to keep the world in spiritual darkness like it was in Old Testament times.
His post was excellent, but you can't even be bothered to address even one of the points he made. I wouldn't expect you to address every point, but not even one? You have made a number of very long posts yourself at times, so it's rather hypocritical for you to criticize him for making a long post.
You don't read scripture carefully at all. You read it through a biased Premil lens and that causes you to often miss what it means. Let's look at the text carefully, which I am certain you have never done before.
Already did = there are clear distinctions from Rev ch9 and Rev ch12
My error =Apollyon is locked up in prison and another angel is sent to unlock him
In your opinion. But, I don't believe you can convincingly support your opinion.
By taking this literally, you are missing what that passage is about. That is about the church preaching through the power of the Holy Spirit with nothing being able to stop the spread of the gospel throughout the world. That is described symbolically. By taking so much of Revelation literally the way you do, you completely miss the message of the book.
Everyone should care about that. Understanding what the locusts represent is a key to understanding what Revelation 9 is all about. It figures that you, as a Premil, would undermine the importance of that.
And what is your point? I have no idea of what you're trying to get at here.
They symbolically represent the church, so they certainly are active well before the 6th trumpet. Revelation 11:1-14 is a parenthetical passage and not a continuation of the description of the 6th trumpet. The description of the trumpets continues in Revelation 11:15 with the sixth trumpet/second woe being referenced as being passed a verse before that. The verses prior to that (1-13) are part of a parenthetical passage that is not directly related to the trumpets.
What is the point here? I'm not seeing it. What does that have to do with Revelation 9?
That is correct. You have gone off on some kind of unrelated tangent here for whatever reason. None of what you're saying addresses what is written in Revelation 9 as far as I can tell. And you are doing nothing, as usual, to actually address what I said in my post.
LOL. What?!! I really wish I knew how you get thoughts like this in your head. This makes about as much sense as your 8 days and 7K years nonsense. Nowhere does it indicate that the 2Ws are what loose the demonic locusts. How about you actually look at what the text says?
You have nothing.
In other words, you have nothing to refute what I said. So, this response is all you could muster. Your posts are very, very weak and unconvincing, David. I can barely take you seriously because you are apparently unable to form even one coherent argument to support Premill. You are in way over your head when it comes to debating Amil vs. Premil. You are only able to make vague comments. The times when you do actually reference scripture, you try to relate scriptures that are clearly not directly related like Daniel 12:1-4 and Revelation 12:7-10.
Which emphatically proves that Apollyon is not Satan.
the Book of Daniel dismantles amil-ism
The story of Premils on these boards over recent years is that they are incapable of addressing or rebutting one argument. They just avoid and derail. They cannot address arguments. They cannot answer questions. They cannot put up a coherent rebuttal. All they do is name-call and avoid.
