Captives of Eph 4:8

AJTruth said:

There's been no change of their place or condition.

Click to expand...

Well, as you almost pointed out,
there
are more seats available, or more being accomodated,
and more burning condemned souls present(or going to be), than ever before.

Greg Merrill said:

In all respect to your freedom of speech, and personal feelings, etc., why should I listen to something that is contradictory to what I have already learned to be true from God's Word Himself in the Bible. Not calling you the devil mind you, but if the Devil were to start up a conversation with me, as he did with Eve, my mind is not to be open to him, to discuss, debate, or argue what he wants to talk about. Jesus, when confronted with the Devil's same tactics, did not have an "open mind" to discuss things. He went back to what was already established (God's written Word in Deut. 6:13,16; 8:3) and held to that. In some cases on this site, I am not looking for answers, but sharing God's answers that are written in the Bible. 'When you say There's nothing that says a " demon " is necessarily evil / bad" ... for me, that is not really something to even consider as having a possibility of being true and entering into a discussion for me to come to understand it as true. That is just a false statement that demands my response of denial and refutation. My mind should not be open to that statement, but guarded against those kind of misleading statements. My intention of course is not to fight with you, but help you. If you are not at all helped, possibly someone else that reads this may be.

Click to expand...

" why should I listen "

well, mainly because you are unschooled about Mesopotamian literature and I am not ?

I guess you people are just too smart for me

Evil literature has it's place.....
not for ekklesia ,
but it has its place.... (for punishment, and to be punished finally)

What is the significance of the Babylonian Empire in biblical history?

"Babylonian Empire
Question: "What is the significance of the Babylonian Empire in biblical history?"

Answer: Babylon rose from a Mesopotamian city on the Euphrates River to become a powerful city-state and later the capital city and namesake of one of the greatest empires in history. The city was located on the eastern side of the Fertile Crescent about 55 miles south of modern Baghdad. Babylon’s history intersected the biblical timeline early and often. The influence of Babylonia on Israel and on world history is profound.

The Founding of Babylon
The Bible’s first mention of Babylon comes in Genesis 10. This chapter is referred to as the table of nations as it traces the descendants of Noah’s three sons. In the genealogy of Ham, “Cush was the father of Nimrod, who grew to be a mighty warrior on the earth” (Genesis 10:8). Nimrod founded a kingdom that included a place called “Babylon” in Shinar (Genesis 10:10).

The Tower of Babel
The Tower of Babel is found in Genesis 11. In English it is easy enough to make the connection between “Babel” and “Babylon,” but in Hebrew it is the same word. This chapter cements Babylon’s reputation as a city of rebellion against God. From then on, the biblical writers consistently use Babylon as a symbol of evil and defiance (see 1 Peter 5:13 and Revelation 17:5).

Babylon’s Early Growth
Near the time of Abraham, Babylon became an independent city-state ruled by the Amorites. The first Babylonian dynasty included Hammurabi, the sixth king, known for his code of laws. Hammurabi expanded the kingdom, and the area around Babylon became known as Babylonia. During the second dynasty, Babylon was in communication with Egypt and entered a 600-year struggle with Assyria. After a time of subjugation to the Elamite Empire, a fourth dynasty of Babylonian kings thrived under Nebuchadnezzar I. Then Babylon fell under the shadow of Assyria.

Babylon’s Ascendency
By 851 B.C., Babylon was only nominally independent, requiring Assyrian “protection” and facing many internal upheavals. Finally, the Assyrian Tiglath-pileser III took the throne. The Assyrians and Merodach-baladan, a Chaldean, traded power more than once. During one of his times of advantage, Merodach-baladan sent emissaries to threaten Hezekiah, king of Judah (2 Kings 20:12-19; Isaiah 39). When the Chaldean chief Nabopolassar took control of Babylon in 626 B.C., he proceeded to sack Nineveh, the capital of Assyria.

Nebuchadnezzar II’s Conquest of Judah
Under the Chaldean dynasty, and, arguably, throughout the rest of history, no king surpassed the glory and absolute power of Nebuchadnezzar II’s reign. As the crown prince (son of Nabopolassar), he defeated Pharaoh Necho II, who had come to the aid of the Assyrian army, winning for Babylonia the former Assyrian lands, including Israel. After being crowned king, Nebuchadnezzar forced King Jehoiakim of Judah to “become his vassal for three years. But then [Jehoiakim] changed his mind and rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar” (2 Kings 24:1). The king of Babylon, who did not take kindly to being rebelled against, captured Jerusalem and took the king and other leaders, military men and artisans as prisoners to Babylon (2 Kings 24:12-16). This deportation marked the beginning of the Babylonian exile of the Jews.

Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah to rule Judah. However, Zedekiah, against the prophet Jeremiah’s counsel, joined the Egyptians in a revolt in 589 B.C. This resulted in Nebuchadnezzar’s return. The remaining Jews were deported, Jerusalem was burned, and the temple was destroyed in August of 587 or 586 BC (Jeremiah 52:1-30).

The Prophet Daniel and the Fall of Babylon
Babylon is the setting for the ministry of the prophets Ezekiel and Daniel, who were both deportees from Judah. Daniel became a leader and royal advisor to the Babylonian and Persian Empires. He had been captured after the battle of Carchemish in 605 B.C. (Jeremiah 46:2-12). The book of Daniel records Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Daniel 2) and foretells the fall of Babylon to the Medes and the Persians (Daniel 5). Earlier, the prophet Isaiah had also foretold the fall of Babylon (Isaiah 46:1-2).

Conclusion
In the Bible, Babylon is mentioned from Genesis to Revelation, as it rises from its rebellious beginnings to become a symbol of the Antichrist’s evil world system. When God’s people required discipline, God used the Babylonian Empire to accomplish it, but He limited Judah’s captivity to 70 years (Jeremiah 25:11). Then, God promised to “punish the king of Babylon and his nation” (Jeremiah 25:12) “for all the wrong they have done in Zion” (Jeremiah 51:24). Ultimately, all evil will be judged, as symbolized by Babylon’s demise in Revelation 18:21: “The great city of Babylon will be thrown down, never to be found again.” "

Greg Merrill said:

Wuest says the captives of Eph 4:8 are the demons of the air, clinging to Jesus in an attempt to prevent him from ascending through the air (their realm, Satan being the prince of the power of the air, Eph 2:2).
The Complete Biblical Library, and others say the captives are the O.T. Paradise saints, now being taken to Heaven as Jesus ascends their having just been raised from the dead.
Anybody out there have something convincing to say which one is right?

Click to expand...

Colossians 2:15
Verse Concepts

When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.

I pulled out a copy of my word studies by wuest. From other sources, commentators, church fathers, Jesus led OT saints to heaven. Paradise was moved from the ground to heaven at that time.

Wuest is talking about doing battle with demons to prevent him from ascending to heaven.

Augustine would agree with you, "4. Of Him it is said, He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, He gave gifts unto men. What is, He led captivity captive? He conquered death. What is, He led captivity captive? The devil was the author of death, and the devil was himself by the Death of Christ led captive. He ascended up on high. What do we know higher than heaven? Visibly and before the eyes of His disciples He ascended into heaven. This we know, this we believe, this we confess. He gave gifts unto men. What gifts? The Holy Spirit. He who gives such a Gift, what is He Himself? For great is God's mercy; He gives a Gift equal to Himself; for His Gift is the Holy Spirit, and the Whole Trinity, Father and Son and Holy Spirit, is One God. " CHURCH FATHERS: Sermon 78 on the New Testament (Augustine)

Augustine elsewhere writes that it is men, "23. But what is, You have led captivity captive? Is it because He has conquered death, which was holding captive those over whom it reigned? Or has he called men themselves captivity, who were being held captive under the devil? Which thing's mystery even the title of that Psalm does contain, to wit, when the house was being built after the captivity: that is, the Church after the coming in of the Gentiles. Calling therefore those very men who were being held captive a captivity, as when the service is spoken of there are understood those that serve also, that same captivity he says by Christ has been led captive. For why should not captivity be happy, if even for a good purpose men may be caught? Whence to Peter has been said, From henceforth you shall catch men. Luke 5:10 Led captive therefore they are because caught, and caught because subjugated, being sent under that gentle yoke, Matthew 11:30 being delivered from sin whereof they were servants, and being made servants of righteousness Romans 6:18 whereof they were children. Whence also He is Himself in them, that has given gifts to men, and has received gifts in men. And thus in that captivity, in that servitude, in that chariot, under that yoke, there are not thousands of men lamenting, but thousands of men rejoicing. For the Lord is in them, in Sina, in the holy place.. .."CHURCH FATHERS: Exposition on Psalm 68 (Augustine)


Against Heresies, II.20 (St. Irenaeus) has another view:

"3. But, in truth, the passion of Christ was neither similar to the passion of the Æon, nor did it take place in similar circumstances. For the Æon underwent a passion of dissolution and destruction, so that she who suffered was in danger also of being destroyed. But the Lord, our Christ, underwent a valid, and not a merely accidental passion; not only was He Himself not in danger of being destroyed, but He also established fallen man by His own strength, and recalled him to incorruption. The Æon, again, underwent passion while she was seeking after the Father, and was not able to find Him; but the Lord suffered that He might bring those who have wandered from the Father, back to knowledge and to His fellowship. The search into the greatness of the Father became to her a passion leading to destruction; but the Lord, having suffered, and bestowing the knowledge of the Father, conferred on us salvation. Her passion, as they declare, gave origin to a female offspring, weak, infirm, unformed, and ineffective; but His passion gave rise to strength and power. For the Lord, through means of suffering, ascending into the lofty place, led captivity captive, gave gifts to men, and conferred on those that believe in Him the power to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and on all the power of the enemy, that is, of the leader of apostasy. Our Lord also by His passion destroyed death, and dispersed error, and put an end to corruption, and destroyed ignorance, while He manifested life and revealed truth, and bestowed the gift of incorruption. But their Æon, when she had suffered, established ignorance, and brought forth a substance without shape, out of which all material works have been produced— death, corruption, error, and such like."CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, II.20 (St. Irenaeus)

Ambrose wrote:

"
66. Nor does it escape our notice that some copies have likewise, according to St. Luke: How much more shall your heavenly Father give a good gift to them that ask Him. This good gift is the grace of the Spirit, which the Lord Jesus shed forth from heaven, after having been fixed to the gibbet of the cross, returning with the triumphal spoils of death deprived of its power, as you find it written: Ascending up on high He led captivity captive, and gave good gifts to men. And well does he say gifts, for as the Son was given, of Whom it is written: Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; Isaiah 9:6 so, too, is the grace of the Spirit given. But why should I hesitate to say that the Holy Spirit also is given to us, since it is written: The love of God is shed forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, Who is given to us. Romans 5:5 And since captive breasts certainly could not receive Him, the Lord Jesus first led captivity captive, that our affections being set free, He might pour forth the gift of divine grace.

67. And He said well led captivity captive. For the victory of Christ is the victory of liberty, which won grace for all, and inflicted wrong on none. So in the setting free of all no one is captive. And because in the time of the Lord's passion wrong alone had no part, which had made captive all of whom it had gained possession, captivity itself turning back upon itself was made captive, not now attached to Belial but to Christ, to serve Whom is liberty. For he who is called in the Lord as a servant is the Lord's freedman.1 Corinthians 7:22"
CHURCH FATHERS: On the Holy Spirit, Book I (Ambrose)

CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 11 on Ephesians (Chrysostom)
NEW ADVENT: Search

CHURCH FATHERS: Letter 188 (St. Augustine)

Justin wrote: "Justin: You have inquired most discreetly and most prudently, for truly there does seem to be a difficulty; but listen to what I say, that you may perceive the reason of this also. The Scripture says that these enumerated powers of the Spirit have come on Him, not because He stood in need of them, but because they would rest in Him, i.e., would find their accomplishment in Him, so that there would be no more prophets in your nation after the ancient custom: and this fact you plainly perceive. For after Him no prophet has arisen among you. Now, that [you may know that] your prophets, each receiving some one or two powers from God, did and spoke the things which we have learned from the Scriptures, attend to the following remarks of mine. Solomon possessed the spirit of wisdom, Daniel that of understanding and counsel, Moses that of might and piety, Elijah that of fear, and Isaiah that of knowledge; and so with the others: each possessed one power, or one joined alternately with another; also Jeremiah, and the twelve [prophets], and David, and, in short, the rest who existed among you. Accordingly He rested, i.e., ceased, when He came, after whom, in the times of this dispensation wrought out by Him among men, it was requisite that such gifts should cease from you; and having received their rest in Him, should again, as had been predicted, become gifts which, from the grace of His Spirit's power, He imparts to those who believe in Him, according as He deems each man worthy thereof. I have already said, and do again say, that it had been prophesied that this would be done by Him after His ascension to heaven. It is accordingly said, 'He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, He gave gifts unto the sons of men.' And again, in another prophecy it is said: 'And it shall come to pass after this, I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh, and on My servants, and on My handmaids, and they shall prophesy.'"
CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue with Trypho, Chapters 69-88 (Justin Martyr)

The understanding that Wuest gave in his word studies falls in line with church fathers.

In short from church fathers, Jesus kicked Satan's but while ascending to Heaven because the Devil and his demons tried to prevent him. Jesus also moved paradise to heaven. As you recall after the ascension, Paul was caught up to paradise, not down. II Cor 12. Also, many OT saints were raised and went into town.

Matt 27:51-53

“Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.”

FrankDux said:

perhaps some etymology would help ?

Greek daimon "deity, divine power; lesser god; guiding spirit, tutelary deity" (sometimes including souls of the dead); "one's genius, lot, or fortune;" from PIE *dai-mon- "divider, provider" (of fortunes or destinies), from root *da- "to divide"

There's nothing that says a " demon " is necessarily evil / bad

Click to expand...

I believe your intention was good. Though this was met with some strong resistance. I hope that does not cause a lasting frustration or anger.

If I understand the 'issue' correctly (meaning the reason for the resistance), it is due to the difference between the way demon is defined (the source you cited) and the way it was used (the translation of the scriptures being discussed). This is conceptually similar to trying to limit God's ability by the physical laws He built into the universe He created. It isn't sufficient to use a dictionaries definition of a word (which may be more generous) to describe the meaning of the scriptures. Instead, it is necessary to understand the meaning within the context of the text (which is more restrictive). Thus, it may be correct to use 'demon' in our own context today according to the generous definition, it isn't necessarily correct to allow that definition to modify the context in which it was used in the translation of the scriptures.

Greg Merrill said:

In all respect to your freedom of speech, and personal feelings, etc., why should I listen to something that is contradictory to what I have already learned to be true from God's Word Himself in the Bible. Not calling you the devil mind you, but if the Devil were to start up a conversation with me, as he did with Eve, my mind is not to be open to him, to discuss, debate, or argue what he wants to talk about. [...] My intention of course is not to fight with you, but help you. If you are not at all helped, possibly someone else that reads this may be.

Click to expand...

Greg, am I understanding correctly? Attempting to use the more liberal or modern definition of the word would be invalid per the context and therefore it isn't up for discussion (rightfully so, in my opinion).