Christadelphians, the Devil and Satan

[David Lamb]

You believe in a fallen angel so no need to deny the obvious.

Correct - a common misconception which speaks to its origins.

Correct.

Correct.

I’m able to connect the dots, David. Where you leave out certain details, I can draw the necessary conclusions, especially since there’s no historical evidence outside of what’s found in pagan sources.

I still don't understand how you can take my comment that cartoon versions of Satan with horns and a red cloak owe nothing to what the bible says about Satan, and see that comment as an acknowledgement that my perspective is rooted in mythological beliefs.

Just because the unbelieving world portrays Satan as a horned being with a tail and a giant toasting fork, that doesn't mean that belief in Satan has its origins in mythology. Many of the people who portray Satan like that imagine God as an old man in the clouds, but that likewise doesn't mean that true belief in God is based on mythology.

I am not looking at pagan sources. Why bring them up?

 

[Hiddenthings]

I am not mixing things. The bible says that Satan, the devil and the serpent are the same entity:

Can you identify the symbol in Rev 12?

Re 12:9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Re 20:2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;

Since the devil of this passage is a "great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth" (vs. 3, 4), is or is not this a literal description of the fallen-angel devil?

Please explain a literal interpratation of this event?

I'll be waiting.

 

[Hiddenthings]

I still don't understand how you can take my comment that cartoon versions of Satan with horns and a red cloak owe nothing to what the bible says about Satan, and see that comment as an acknowledgement that my perspective is rooted in mythological beliefs.

You have openly acknowledged your belief.

Just because the unbelieving world portrays Satan as a horned being with a tail and a giant toasting fork, that doesn't mean that belief in Satan has its origins in mythology.

It's origins is not in Scripture but in mythology itself. What this reveals is that the ideas surrounding this mythological creature have been imagined by deceived believers and gradually built upon over thousands of years. Its origins lie not in Scripture, but in mythology itself.

Whether you do or don't hold those notions you still believe in a fallen angel

Many of the people who portray Satan like that imagine God as an old man in the clouds, but that likewise doesn't mean that true belief in God is based on mythology.

Your comparison is flawed, because the Bible clearly reveals the character and attributes of God. In contrast, you don’t have a single verse that outlines the existence, features, or character of the being you claim exists.

You ran to Revelation in a section which is highly symbolic and rather than interpret the symbol you attach your false notions to the text.

I am not looking at pagan sources. Why bring them up?

You belief is founded upon pagan sources.

 

[David Lamb]

Can you identify the symbol in Rev 12?

Since the devil of this passage is a "great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth" (vs. 3, 4), is or is not this a literal description of the fallen-angel devil?

Please explain a literal interpratation of this event?

I'll be waiting.

The fact that Revelation consists of a vision given by Jesus Christ to John means that there is plenty in the way of symbolism in it. The fact that Satan and the devil are mentioned in many other passages of Scripture as a real being shows that he is not a symbol. As for interpreting Revelation 12, it is part of the final judgment of Satan by God.

 

[David Lamb]

You have openly acknowledged your belief.

Yes, but based on the bible. I know you don't agree that the bible teaches the reality of Satan, but the belief is bible-based.

It's origins is not in Scripture but in mythology itself. What this reveals is that the ideas surrounding this mythological creature have been imagined by deceived believers and gradually built upon over thousands of years. Its origins lie not in Scripture, but in mythology itself.

Whether you do or don't hold those notions you still believe in a fallen angel

Your comparison is flawed, because the Bible clearly reveals the character and attributes of God. In contrast, you don’t have a single verse that outlines the existence, features, or character of the being you claim exists.

I have quoted many such verses. Again, you interpret them differently.

You ran to Revelation in a section which is highly symbolic and rather than interpret the symbol you attach your false notions to the text.

You belief is founded upon pagan sources.

No it is not. You can tell me as many times as you like that it is, but my answer is that my belief is based on what the bible says. My beliefs obviously differ from your Christadelphian beliefs because I am not a Christadelphian. I would guess that the majority of us here are not.

 

[Hiddenthings]

The fact that Revelation consists of a vision given by Jesus Christ to John means that there is plenty in the way of symbolism in it.

If you don’t understand how to interpret the symbol of the red dragon, how can you justify applying non-biblical ideas to it?

The fact that Satan and the devil are mentioned in many other passages of Scripture as a real being shows that he is not a symbol. As for interpreting Revelation 12, it is part of the final judgment of Satan by God.

You see, you couldn’t even address the core question — is it meant to be taken literally or not? You recognize the dilemma, yet you lack the honesty to acknowledge it.

I'llask you again.

Since the devil in this passage is described as “a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth” (verses 3–4), is this meant to be a literal description of the fallen-angel devil, or not?

Answer the question but this time do so directly and honestly.

 

[David Lamb]

If you don’t understand how to interpret the symbol of the red dragon, how can you justify applying non-biblical ideas to it?

You see, you couldn’t even address the core question — is it meant to be taken literally or not? You recognize the dilemma, yet you lack the honesty to acknowledge it.

I'llask you again.

Since the devil in this passage is described as “a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth” (verses 3–4), is this meant to be a literal description of the fallen-angel devil, or not?

Answer the question but this time do so directly and honestly.

I am not going to continue discussing with you, as you falsely accuse me of dishonesty. I may have different beliefs to you, but that doesn't mean I am lying when I state them.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Yes, but based on the bible. I know you don't agree that the bible teaches the reality of Satan, but the belief is bible-based.

No, I don't agree with what you teach - how is it that you have missed this?

Consider my position: I know you’re unable to define this creature from Scripture, and yet I’m still compelled to ask for evidence you simply cannot provide.

It’s a futile position you're in.

I have quote many such verses. Again, you interpret them differently.

You have not interpreted a single verse to my knowledge.

Take Revelation 12, for example — what exactly is the red dragon? Why is it described as a false accuser, a liar, and a slanderer?

What is Revelation 12 to you? Interpret if you can!

No it is not. You can tell me as many times as you like that it is, but my answer is that my belief is based on what the bible says. My beliefs obviously differ from your Christadelphian beliefs because I am not a Christadelphian. I would guess that the majority of us here are not.

You don't need to belong to a denomination to interpret a symbol - who taught you that?

 

[Hiddenthings]

I am not going to continue discussing with you, as you falsely accuse me of dishonesty. I may have different beliefs to you, but that doesn't mean I am lying when I state them.

I asked you a question and instead of answering honestly you diverted away from the answer.

Is your red dragon literal or figurative?

This is not a difficult question....why avoid it?

 

[Hiddenthings]

I am not going to continue discussing with you, as you falsely accuse me of dishonesty. I may have different beliefs to you, but that doesn't mean I am lying when I state them.

Go back and show me if you answered my question or avoided it?

Be honest.

This may not be a question you’re willing to answer, and if that’s the case, you can simply say so. But the question still stands and deserves a response.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Let's ask everyone in this thread - is the Red Dragon of Revelation 12 a literal dragon or figurative?

I'm willing to explore both possibilities.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Let's assume @David Lamb states the Red Dragon is literal for a moment.

How can the tail of this creature literally drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth?

What if David conceding that the dragon in Revelation 12 is symbolic, we must then ask: is the "heaven" mentioned in verse 7 also symbolic?

The typical response to that question is “no” that it refers to a literal heaven. But this claim requires careful examination in light of the use of "heaven" throughout the chapter and the distinction between literal and figurative language established at the start of this discussion.

Let’s consider verse 1: is the "heaven" there literal? The answer must be “yes” or “no” — and logically, it must be “no,” because the woman is said to be clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, which is clearly not possible in a literal sense. Therefore, verse 1’s heaven is figurative.

Now, is the "heaven" in verse 3 the same as in verse 1, or a different one? Consistency demands that it is the same and therefore, also figurative. However, if someone claims it is a different heaven (i.e., literal rather than symbolic), the burden is on @David Lamb to explain the basis on which they distinguish between the literal and figurative. Is David applying the same interpretive criteria agreed upon at the outset of this discussion?

Assuming, then, that the "heaven" in verse 3 is figurative, we are left with verse 7. To remain consistent, and by applying the same reasoning, we must conclude that the "heaven" in verse 7 is also figurative, the same symbolic realm referenced throughout the chapter.

What to do

 

[talons]

@talons can you review #28 and advise on what is being requested? Note the post cannot be replied to.
Thanks

Ok .
Here is a cut and paste of the question for you .

There are fallen angels mentioned in Daniel chapter 10 , I quoted the scripture in post #7 .
If the "prince of Persia " and the "prince of Grecia " are not fallen angels what are they in your estimation ?

 

[Hiddenthings]

Ok .
Here is a cut and paste of the question for you .

There are fallen angels mentioned in Daniel chapter 10 , I quoted the scripture in post #7 .
If the "prince of Persia " and the "prince of Grecia " are not fallen angels what are they in your estimation ?

Sorry I'm not following you - Daniel 10 are divine angels who are working with the nations and thier princes. Where do you get these are fallen angels?

The political affairs of the nations were directed by the elohim (See Dan 2:20–22; 4:17, 25, 35; 5:18).

Elohim are angels who do God's commands - you get this right?

 

[talons]

Where do you get these are fallen angels?

What human could have withstood the angel sent to Daniel ?

12Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.

13But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.

The angel must return to fight a fallen angel or do you think it is a human prince ?

20Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.

 

[Hiddenthings]

What human could have withstood the angel sent to Daniel ?

12Then said he unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.

13But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.

The angel must return to fight a fallen angel or do you think it is a human prince ?

20Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.

Daniel 10:13

The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, but Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I was left there with the kings of Persia

It took the angel 21 days to influence the political realm in order to align the Persian empire’s policies with Yahweh’s purpose, something Daniel had been fervently praying for. At the start of this period, Daniel had turned to God in mourning, fasting, and prayer for the restoration of his people (v2–3). Although Daniel's prayers were heard immediately, he was unaware of the angelic activity taking place behind the scenes during this time.

To accomplish God's will, political circumstances had to be adjusted so that the Persian ruler would choose to act in a specific way of his own volition. That same year, King Cyrus issued a decree permitting the Jewish exiles to return, a moment that fulfilled God’s sovereign intention. This event demonstrates the truth of Daniel 4:17,32: “God rules in the kingdom of men.” The Elohim (mighty ones or angels) silently influence leaders and events to fulfill God's plan.

The term “prince” (Hebrew: sar) means a leader or commander, and in this context refers to Cyrus (v.1), who was moved by circumstances to issue the decree recorded in Ezra 1. Ezra explains that “Yahweh stirred up the spirit of Cyrus” (Ezra 1:1). Though Cyrus may not have realized it, his actions fulfilled the will of the Sovereign of heaven, guided by divinely orchestrated political developments.

The Hebrew word translated “withstand” (amad) appears in 2 Chronicles 26:18, describing how Azariah and fellow priests opposed King Uzziah when he attempted to enter the temple to offer incense unlawfully. Similarly, angels act invisibly to shape human government. An angel blocked Balaam’s path to prevent him from opposing God's purpose (Numbers 22:32, though a different Hebrew word is used there), showing how divine influence shapes both personal and national events.

Such turning points in history may seem to unfold through natural means, but they often require time and coordination. This behind-the-scenes work is part of the angels’ ministering role on behalf of the saints (Hebrews 1:14).

Talons, the very idea that Christians believe Heaven is in disarray and that God has lost control of His own servants is deeply irreverent and is mockery toward God. It reveals that many, like Matthias have no understanding of the God of Israel and the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[talons]

Daniel 10:13

The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, but Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I was left there with the kings of Persia

It took the angel 21 days to influence the political realm in order to align the Persian empire’s policies with Yahweh’s purpose, something Daniel had been fervently praying for. At the start of this period, Daniel had turned to God in mourning, fasting, and prayer for the restoration of his people (v2–3). Although Daniel's prayers were heard immediately, he was unaware of the angelic activity taking place behind the scenes during this time.

To accomplish God's will, political circumstances had to be adjusted so that the Persian ruler would choose to act in a specific way of his own volition. That same year, King Cyrus issued a decree permitting the Jewish exiles to return, a moment that fulfilled God’s sovereign intention. This event demonstrates the truth of Daniel 4:17,32: “God rules in the kingdom of men.” The Elohim (mighty ones or angels) silently influence leaders and events to fulfill God's plan.

The term “prince” (Hebrew: sar) means a leader or commander, and in this context refers to Cyrus (v.1), who was moved by circumstances to issue the decree recorded in Ezra 1. Ezra explains that “Yahweh stirred up the spirit of Cyrus” (Ezra 1:1). Though Cyrus may not have realized it, his actions fulfilled the will of the Sovereign of heaven, guided by divinely orchestrated political developments.

The Hebrew word translated “withstand” (amad) appears in 2 Chronicles 26:18, describing how Azariah and fellow priests opposed King Uzziah when he attempted to enter the temple to offer incense unlawfully. Similarly, angels act invisibly to shape human government. An angel blocked Balaam’s path to prevent him from opposing God's purpose (Numbers 22:32, though a different Hebrew word is used there), showing how divine influence shapes both personal and national events.

Such turning points in history may seem to unfold through natural means, but they often require time and coordination. This behind-the-scenes work is part of the angels’ ministering role on behalf of the saints (Hebrews 1:14).

Talons, the very idea that Christians believe Heaven is in disarray and that God has lost control of His own servants is deeply irreverent and is mockery toward God. It reveals that many, like Matthias have no understanding of the God of Israel and the Lord Jesus Christ.

You missed the word FIGHT !


20Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.

And here we have more angels fighting in scripture . The dragon and his angels .

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

 

[Hiddenthings]

You missed the word FIGHT !


20Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.

Gabriel was to return to overseeing the affairs of Persia, but before doing so, he needed to explain his role to Daniel. While Michael had been summoned to assist with the angelic work in Persia (v13), the situation had evolved, requiring further angelic intervention. Certain circumstances had arisen that could potentially hinder the angelic plans unless action was taken to counter them. Gabriel's presence was crucial to ensure the safe return of the exiles to their homeland, including the rebuilding of the city and temple. The angel was engaged in a spiritual battle, as Israel faced strong opposition, and Yahweh’s power was essential to push His divine purpose forward. Cyrus had to be prompted to fulfill the decree for the restoration of the temple.

Obedient angels dealing with willful men.

 

[Matthias]

You missed the word FIGHT !


20Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.

And here we have more angels fighting in scripture . The dragon and his angels .

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

What would it take to persuade you that Michael and the angels were fighting not the Satan but a Satan; and not his fallen angel gang, but his human nature gang, in heaven?

***

There is nothing (short of narcotics - which isn’t the culprit with the Christadelphians - that could persuade me to believe it. It’s a supernatural deception.

 

[talons]

Obedient angels dealing with willful men.

I don't agree with you and I am not the only one that disagrees .

If the heavenly messenger was so powerful, why would it take 21 days to overcome the opposing force, as implied in Daniel 10:13?

biblehub.com