Is Satan Bound Today?

BibleBB ^ | Mike Vlach

[drstevej]

***If you are, then it is not faith in the Cross that saves you but Election that does***

Faith is directed toward the object of faith, Jesus Christ. He is the one who saves. The Father elected me in eternity past, the Son died for me on the cross at Calvary, and the Holy Spirit brought me to faith. Prior to faith I was not justified.

***Are you regenerated before you believe or not? ***

I affirm the logical not temporal precedence of regeneration to faith. KEY POINT, pay attention. They are simultaneous.

[xzins]

This "Satan is Bound" thread has taught me that there are many Christians on both sides of the calvarm fight who truly honor the word of God and have every intention of dealing with it faithfully.

On some things they come out a different places. They do on premil/amil, they do on calvarm, they do on baptism, they do on lots of things. I'm not preaching relativism here, but I'm preaching that all of us are growing in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus.

I ran across an AW Tozer story the other day while surfing. I'm tired of the infighting among Christians on these threads. AW Tozer is one who believed that these inerminable arguments did no one any good. He said once to a young friend who was preparing to attend seminary. "When you get to seminary you will discover many people sitting around arguing with one another about calvinism and arminianism. You should go to your room and pray to God. At the end of your 3 years, you will find that they are still arguing about calvinism and arminianism. But...You will know God." (That's paraphrased but fairly close.)

Somehow there's a way for me to acknowledge the love of Christ both by fortheDeclaration and DrSteveJ and RnMom and Winston Churchill and ShadowAce and Wrigley and Frumanchu and ComputerJunkie.....etc., etc., and at the same time make a comment about scripture that I might see a different way than they do on a particular subject.

It must be loving. It must reflect Christ's love for believers who all follow him. I see no other way.

[Starwind]

This "Satan is Bound" thread has taught me that there are many Christians on both sides of the calvarm fight who truly honor the word of God and have every intention of dealing with it faithfully.

It must be loving. It must reflect Christ's love for believers who all follow him. I see no other way.

I wholeheartely agree with you.

I would commend you, personally, for the fruit of the Spirit which you bear; love, patience, and kindness. You set an example for all of us, myself included.

[xzins]

Thank you Star. You have yourself had some long, insightful, but ever patient posts. They'll know we are Christians by our love.

[xzins]

Let me add that I went through a period when I thought being bellicose and louder than the next guy just might get their attention and make them hear.

It didn't.

It simply stole my witness.

[wai-ming]

Calvinism does not believe you need the Cross to be saved, but are saved without the Cross before you believe.

This does not sound like Christianity to me.

[the_doc]

In your arrogance you seem to believe that you are God's lone apostle in the modern world. - You Err - You are subject to delusion.

See my #2152.

I have repeatedly pointed out that John 5:25-29 rules out premillennialism. You have not come up with a cogent counterargument. As far as I can tell, you have just avoided that passage like the plague.

So, I'm not being arrogant. I am merely correct. (Hey, it happens.) And since you are the one who is not correct in this particular argument, I am not especially surprised at your attitude toward me.

Relax, brother. Read John 5:25-29. See if you can figure out why I "think" it rules out premillennialism. (It's really cool. And it's incredibly simple.)

[AndrewC]

They'll know we are Christians by our love.

Jhn 17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
Jhn 17:10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.
Jhn 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we [are].
Jhn 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
Jhn 17:13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
Jhn 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Jhn 17:15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
Jhn 17:16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Jhn 17:18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
Jhn 17:19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
Jhn 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
Jhn 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
Jhn 17:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
Jhn 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
Jhn 17:25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.
Jhn 17:26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare [it]: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

[the_doc]

Premillenialism does not ignore anything. - As to John 5:28, the premil correctly interprets the verse which reaffirms that the hour (a point in time, obviously) is indeed coming for both of those prophecied events. - To read it as though it mandates that they both occur simultaneously is a massive revulsion of the consistant style of God's word as to it's relationship to the concept of time.

This is grammatically and contextually preposterous, brother. It's a single hour with a single resurrection unto two different destinies.

Time is the dimension that brought about our present material continuum. When time is revoked, it will all revert to it's true nature in a powerful display of what we know as heat, or energy. Time is only for fleshly man, not for spiritual man.

No, it just won't wash, brother.

Some people cannot grasp these concepts; I don't know why, but such people do exist. I do not attempt to put down those who can't deal with it, as I'm sure that there are other concepts that I don't grasp.

You can't grasp the Biblical idea of the millennium, I think. The 'thousand years is as one day' idea that Peter stated is an attempt to explain how a single event for God can take a literal 1000 years to play out in the material realm. Please don't try to use it to obfuscate the revelations in his word.

Talk about obfuscation. You are not even stating the amillennial argument correctly, brother.

All Prophecy will be fulfilled.

Some prophecies are being fulfilled, including some which you can't seem to figure out, brother.

[xzins]

Jhn 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: Jhn 17:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Excellent verses, Andrew.

Our unity proves to the world that God sent Christ and that God loves us.

Let us not be like Esau who sold his birthright for a bowl of pottage.

[xzins]

Jhn 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

Editor, you keep on believing that the scripture will be fulfilled. The highlighted portion above caught my eye relative to this discussion. "That the scripture may be fulfilled." is what it says. That's so clear and so focused a demand.

These other scriptures will also be fulfilled. Completely, totally, unequivocally, undeniably, literally.....just as they always have been.

Doc, your insistence on saying "read it...read it again..." about John 5 shows you believe what you're saying. It's just that your way is not the only way to look at it. And the other way is better.

[BibChr]

That's nicely put.

The analogy I (A) have found most helpful and (B) use is: which happens first — light, or my flicking the light switch? Of course, I flick first, but to all appearances they are simultaneous. Yet no flick, no light.

The position that regeneration precedes saving faith is difficult for the Calvinist, if you ask me. But the position that saving faith precedes regeneration is impossible for the non-Calvinist, as it defies both the direct statements of Scripture (i.e. 1 John 5:1, "Everyone who believes [present tense] that Jesus is the Christ has been born [perfect tense] of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whomever has been born of him"), and Scriptural logic (how does a dead man [Ephesians 2:1f.] do that which brings him life?).

Dan

[drstevej]

Nice add (1 John 5:1) hadn't thought of that text.

[the_doc]

No, what you call the "other way" to read passages like John 5:25-29 and 2 Peter 3 is just a matter of your literalistic PRESUPPOSITIONS for Revelation 20 being FORCED upon John 5:25-29 and 2 Peter 3.

You can't even begin to prove that your literalistic way of reading Revelation 20 is correct.

You merely assert that the literalistic reading is the "natural" way of reading Revelation 20. Well, if you will pardon a little teasing, I happen to prefer the amills' supernatural way of reading it.

In other words, I don't give a fig for your "natural reading" argument. The problem is, your so-called "natural reading" of Revelation 20 forces you to adopt a wickedly UNNATURAL reading of John 5:25-29.

And your premillennial reading of 2 Peter 3 is even more ridiculous. You just won't admit that you are incompetent in eschatology.

Again, there are two and only two resurrections in John 5:25-29. And the first of these is in v.25. It is not at all "natural" to read it any other way.

Besides, the amills "supernatural" reading (ha!) of Revelation 20 is not at all un-natural for that chapter. Why? Because the Book of Revelations is a mighty strange book containing LOTS of things even premills don't interpret literally. And Lord doesn't intend for everyone to understand Him. He even tells us this in more than one place in the Bible. He is not trying to be clear to everyone (Proverbs 25:2).

So, when we use all three passages to compare the premill and amill readings, we discover that

1) the premills' "natural" reading of Revelation 20 forces the premills into UNNATURAL readings for John 5:25-29 and 2 Peter 3; and

2) the amills' "supernatural" (Calvinism-oriented!) reading of Revelation 20 permits completely NATURAL readings for John 5:25-29 and 2 Peter 3.

So, this means that the premills' literalistic hermeneutic is just a wildly mistaken presupposition. That means that the God-ordained joke is on you. You need to be more respectful God's Word. Manifestly, you are a kind of Pharisee. (But I already knew that, didn't I? [ha!])

Furthermore, your claim that later revelatory material "surely interprets" earlier materials is hermeneutically idiotic.

The Book of Revelations is for "those who have wisdom."

[lockeliberty]

"When you get to seminary you will discover many people sitting around arguing with one another about calvinism and arminianism.

I thought this was an on-line seminary.

I'm in my second year.

[drstevej]

***I'm in my second year.***

Watch out for professor xzins! 8<)

[RnMomof7]

This does not sound like Christianity to me.

Thats because he loves to talk about things he knows nothing about

[DouglasKC]

DouglasKC isn't talking about the same God as some of us are. He believes that "he" will BE God, as God is God. He doesn't believe in the Scriptural, Triune God (one what, and three whos), he plans on being one of what he thinks will be many more "whos". And The Trinity is only the tip of the iceberg of the essential beliefs of the historic Christian faith that he rejects.

Wow. I'm glad my wife and kids don't read your stuff. They would be as scared of me as you apparently are. :-)

In the future if you wish to attack and demonize me please be courteous enough to link to my response and not just the charge.

Now do you have anything substansive in response to my posts on this thread?

[xzins]

***I'm in my second year.*** Watch out for professor xzins! 8<)

On the other hand, don't be afraid of DrSteve. I've learned a lot from him. He's among the very best here. Merry Christmas, ProfSteve. X

[xzins]

Because the Book of Revelations is a mighty strange book containing LOTS of things even premills don't interpret literally.

Hi, doc.

There is no figure in the Revelation that isn't explained as a figure in context, either immediate or biblical. We don't need to create them unless they're demonstrated to be such.

I'm not confused. It's quite clear to me. God has blessed me abundantly in Christ.