Posted on 09/12/2002 7:19:20 AM PDT by xzins
Who is "too much"?
Will superficial *thinking* help anyone figure out how these "bound angels" mentioned below were able to engage in any of their "deceptive activities"? LOL
To reiterate from my #1520 just for emphasis:
Jude reveals what God did to the angels who rebelled with Satan: “And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day.”
These angels are described as locked up in chains, yet we know that demonic activity occurred throughout Christ’s ministry.
DUH!!!!
Those angels who 'kept not their their first estate' were those angels from Genesis 6 who mated with human women.
They were not all of the Fallen Angels, but only those who mated with the human women (Gen.6:1-4 cf Ps.82:6-7) and were drowned in the flood and placed in 'everlasting chains under darkness' (Jude 6)
See Clarance Larkin, 'The Spirit World'
How do you address the change in tenses in Revelation 20?
See the vision
Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.(past tense)
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection.
Close of Vision...now the explaination of it end of the vision(again past tense)
Beginning of interpretation
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy [is] he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. Future tense
Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, future tense
Rev 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom [is] as the sand of the sea.Future tense
Rev 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. A continuation of the interperation
Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
This coincides with "the great famine" that will come upon the earth, when the saints are gone and the Word goes with them.
Liked the chronicles of secondperson. Tell us more sometime.
You're reeeeeeeally embarrassing most of those on the premill side of the debate with such an *explanation*.
THAT is a riot!!! Do you watch a lot of TBN??? LOL
Just when I thought I'd seen everything here. Yikes!
I could have lived without hearing that one again.
I guess that is what passes for sound exegesis these days in the church.
Flatly contradicted by Scripture....
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
Normally, I don't like the RSV, but their rendering of v. 29 drives the point home in plain English -- "You are wrong!!!"
(Jude24 washes himself off for quoting the RSV....)
You are just 'willingly ignorant' (2Pet.3:5) of these things.
See also the footnote in the Ryrie Study Bible (2Pet.2:4) and Appendix #23 in the Bullinger Study Bible.
The best and most important work to read is Clarance Larkin's Dispensational Truth
A sober, well-reasoned post. If all the discussion here was of that caliber, this would be a much more pleasant discussion.
Not to say that I am in agreement with you, but I point this out as a model for others to follow. However, it is arguments such as yours which can be found in several of the camps that are in part responsible for my indecisiveness when it comes to defending any eschatological position.
Read carefully the passage!
It states as the angels of God in heaven!
Those are those who were obedient to God and thus are in heaven,.
Nowhere does it say that Angels are (were)incapable of mating with women, if they turned their appearance into men, as they did a number of times in Scripture (Gen.18-19).
Thank you. But I can assure you I have gone through the Bible more then once.
And I have made a diligent study of all these things and found them to be so (Acts 17:11)
That is because they do not understand the Pretribulation doctrine.
On the other hand, the Amill/Postmill. crowd have gotten comfortable in the world and compromised with it (Rev.3:14-19)
Don't import pagan mythology into the scriptures; it really makes things messy.
And I love your "amillenial math" -- it would be welcome in public schools with the new guessing and creative math. To you guys a thousand means anything but a thousand. It means a long time, forever, 2000, 2500, 3000 -- anything but 1000.
Here let's try amillenial math: What is 440 + 560? ????
Johnny, what is the answer? ---- anything but 1000 -- right!
Billy, what about you? -- 2227 -- that's right.!!
And Lucy, how about you? --- a lot, a big number -- right.!
And you John, what do you say? -- 1000 -- no, you're wrong, Try again and don't use a calculator or a bible or logic this time -- use your imagination, your amillenial imagination.
Truly, You are too much. And I mean that mathematically, as well --- what you mean by 1000 is too much too much. You guys symbolize what you want redacted from the scriptures, but it won't fly. You guys have dug a pit for yourselves and it is only getting deeper, and it is not a symbolic one. It may be unseen, but it is real.
Mic 5:2, KJV, But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
I would agree that Mic 5:2 trumps the memory of the king's counselors in Matthew. (Incidentally, an interesting verification of the authenticity of the account.....matthew made no effort to reconcile the words of Herod's priests & teachers. Unless someone tells me that the Mt account is the Septuagint rendering, and that will get us back to ftD's argument against the Septuagint.)
Do any premil folks have a thought ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.