locusts in the pit vs. satan in the pit--assuming Amil

DavidPT said:

Revelation 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall(pipto) from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.


I assume you agree an angel is meant here.

Click to expand...

Incorrect. This is the most common mistake among people thinking the Lord was talking about literal angel here. The star in this passage and others are to represent the MESSENGER of the church. Not Christ. Not Satan. God already has defined the stars:

Revelation 1:20

• "The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the messengers of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches."

Here, without ambiguity, God Himself tells us the secret mystery of the symbolism of what the stars in Revelation would illustrate. He says that these stars were to represent His Messengers (not angels) of the churches. And it is a mystery that was also revealed as always representing the people of His congregation. May it either be Elect or Professed Christians. For example:

Daniel 8:10

• "And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them."

Why would anyone think this refers to literal stars when we know literal stars cannot be cast down to the earth from heaven without "totally" destroying the earth?! Even a so-called small one. Obviously this is symbolic language just as we see in Revelation, and the stars refer to the messengers of God's church on earth. When Daniel says these stars were cast down by the little horn, it refers to those of His congregation being overcome by Satan. Or again as indeed we saw in Revelation chapter 12.

Revelation 12:3-4

• "And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold 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: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born."

Here the same third part of the stars cast down in the time of Christ's coming refers to the same people of the Lord's congregation. It's no coincidence then that Revelation chapter 8 speaks of this great star from heaven burning as a lamp falling upon the third part of the rivers and fountains of waters. Learn the symbolism, my friend! The symbolism of Revelation chapter 12 and you learn the symbolism of Revelation chapter 8, and then 9 and then 20! There is no physical woman floating in physical heaven having 12 physical balls of fire on her physical head, and Satan is not a physical fire-breathing Dragon, who has a great tail and is residing in physical heaven with this woman and casting down her literal stars to the literal earth. Come on!

As we see in the "key" revealed in the beginning of Revelation (for our learning) the stars represent the messengers of the church. Satan casts them down by overcoming them where ultimately God brings judgment upon so that they are no longer representatives of the Kingdom of heaven. Selah! The Kingdom is in effect removed from them, as also is represented by Christ in passages such as Matthew 11:12 and 21:43. In these instances the kingdom of heaven is representing God's congregation on earth.

It is my view that the star is the messenger of the church as signified and plainly interpreted for us in Revelation 1-3; 1:20 by Christ. So who are the stars? They are the pastors, leaders, ministers, messengers of the church, whom Christ addressed in Revelation chapter 2 and 3 saying that the star (messenger) of His church had fallen from its place, forgotten his first love, and pronounced dire consequences upon this messenger's church if he didn't repent. God tells this star.

Revelation 2:5

• "Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent."

The Candlestick God Himself revealed "represented" the church. So here we see God clearly using the symbolic language of this star being His messenger and being a fallen star, and that he was to remember from where he had fallen, or else suffer God's judgment. This is a precursor to Revelation chapter 8 and the star indeed does fall and judgment indeed does come upon his church. What was Christ's warning to this star? He said that if he didn't repent, He would bring the judgment of removing his candlestick (church) out of its place. So clearly / Unambiguously God is not talking about a literal star falling nor Satan falling. This is the meaning of the symbolism of the star falling and this judgment upon the rivers and fountains of waters with this bitter poison of wormwood. The apostasy of the church is what helped loosened Satan from the bottomless pit because of their rebellion to God, so God will use Satan as a tool of judgment upon them. This is why God commanded them not to hurt HIS ELECT, only those professed Christians who have not yet sealed (saved) within His congregation. They are being deceived to believe the lies coming out of the false prophets and Christs - signifies as the locusts of the bottomless pit! For they are men coming with the SPIRIT OF ANTICHRIST who is responsible for destroying God's Word in spiritual Egypt, the Church, just as the Locusts were eating the crops of physical Egypt as an example back in Exodus! and Satan is their king whom they serve!

Selah!

DavidPT said:

Provide one passage in Revelation where an angel comes down from heaven and that 'pipto' is used to describe the manner it comes down, and then I have no argument at all. But in the meantime I still have an argument. BTW, from what I gather, there are other ways to look at some of these things, such as the argument I found below, via a Google search recently.

--------
Now we ask, “Is the star in Revelation 9:1-2 Satan?” The answer is suggested by the fact that Revelation 9:1 says that the star “had fallen” from heaven. The phrase “had fallen” is the English translation of the perfect participle form of the Greek verb pipto. Pipto means “to fall” and since the word is a perfect participle, we should understand that the star “had already fallen and remained fallen.” That is, the star fell and remained fallen. This strongly indicates that this is a reference to Satan, who had already fallen according to Ezekiel 28:12-16 and Luke 10:18. In Luke 10:18 Jesus said that He had seen Satan fall from heaven. He was thrown out of heaven and was no longer allowed to remain in heaven. Therefore, the star in Revelation 9:1-2 refers to Satan and the angel in Revelation 20:1-3 is a holy angel.
%%title%% %%sep%% %%sitename%%
----


If I understand this argument correctly, nothing you have stated in your post would be a contradiction of anything, because this argument suggests that no one is falling from heaven at that particular time, but that one who has previously fallen from heaven at an earlier time, that this one is being given the key to the pit.

Click to expand...

That argument makes no sense to me whatsoever. You're trying to tell me that even though the star (which we both understand symbolically represents an angel) is said to fall (or descend) from heaven, I'm supposed to believe that he already had fallen from heaven? Sorry, I'm not buying that. I thought you always have put an emphasis on being logical? This is completely illogical. There is no indication in the text whatsoever that the angel had already fallen from heaven before it falls (I think "descends" is a better word here) from heaven to open the bottomless pit.

Why would Satan even be allowed to have the key to the bottomless pit, anyway? Please explain that.

DavidPT said:

You and any other Amils agreeing with you here about that are simply not grasping some of my arguments. I tend to think outside of the box a lot, not that others don't as well, so, you're just not grasping what I'm meaning a good portion of the time. It's not that I don't understand Amil, it's that some of these things I bring up don't support Amil, but support another position instead.

Click to expand...

Except that they don't. And you do nothing to prove that. If you're not able to clearly explain what you believe then that says something about what you believe, in my opinion.

Such as, per Amil those recorded in Revelation 20:4 have zero to do with satan's little season after the thousand years. Why is that?

Per Amil why isn't there anyone recorded in Revelation 20:4 that does have an involvement with satan's little season? What is the point in mentioning martyrs in verse 4 if they have no connection with the events recorded in verses 7-9 whatsoever? Why didn't John at least record in that verse someone who would?

Click to expand...

I truly don't see your point here. Why do they need to be involved in Satan's little season? What involvement do you think they have in Satan's little season?

Spiritual Jew said:

That argument makes no sense to me whatsoever. You're trying to tell me that even though the star (which we both understand symbolically represents an angel)

Click to expand...

Actually, the Bible, the unadulterated Word of God, says that they're MESSENGERS. Man TRANSLITERATED what God said and then wrote, "angels". God never inspired such a word to be penned. He inspired {mal'ak} in the Hebrew Scripture and {aggelos} in the Greek New Testament, and anyone who has eyes, can read, and can comprehend can see that neither {mal'ak} nor {aggelos} is the word, "angel." Both words in their language means messengers. That is not private interpretation or personal opinion, that is a verifiable, biblical fact.

That is "legitimate," which means that it is "conforming to the law or to rules" of receiving what the Bible actually says, rather than man's transliterations of an anglicized Greek. Which (by the way) they also curiously transposed even back into the old Hebrew placing the Greek anglicized word "Angel" there as well. Those prophets knew nothing about an angel. They knew of a [mal'ak] or messenger but called no one angels. You don't have to understand that, but you surely cannot deny it. There's no angel in Hebrew, there is only [mal'ak], meaning messengers. So these are, by God's own lips, that inspired words, "fallen or cast down messengers."

Revelation 12:4
And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born."

Were any literal stars cast down to the literal earth when Mary was pregnant with Christ? No. If the third part of literal stars were cast down to the earth, there would be no more earth. I can assure you of that. Selah. But I can also assure you that stars (messengers) were cast down from the Kingdom of heaven "represented" by the congregation of God. There was apostasy and a war that was raging that Christ came to bring peace to. The messengers are men who represent either the kingdom of Satan or the Kingdom of God. Not created being with feather wings or bat wings.

Why would Satan even be allowed to have the key to the bottomless pit, anyway? Please explain that.

Click to expand...

Of course, nowhere in Scripture tells us God will give the key to Satan. It was given to the church in the first place, Matthew 16:18-19. The key is the key of the kingdom of heaven. It was given to the fallen messenger of the church who is responsible for loosening Satan so that the unfaithful be judged. And the way they are deceived is BY THESE MESSENGERS (false prophets and christs) who have fallen away. They are the locusts God talked about who is coming to deceive the unfaithful of the congregation who have not yet sealed of God, Rev 9.

Hope it helps.

TribulationSigns said:

Actually, the Bible, the unadulterated Word of God, says that they're MESSENGERS. Man TRANSLITERATED what God said and then wrote, "angels". God never inspired such a word to be penned. He inspired {mal'ak} in the Hebrew Scripture and {aggelos} in the Greek New Testament, and anyone who has eyes, can read, and can comprehend can see that neither {mal'ak} nor {aggelos} is the word, "angel." Both words in their language means messengers. That is not private interpretation or personal opinion, that is a verifiable, biblical fact.

Click to expand...

Can angels not be messengers? Of course they can. So, what you're saying here does not prove whatsoever that it's not talking about an angel.

That is "legitimate," which means that it is "conforming to the law or to rules" of receiving what the Bible actually says, rather than man's transliterations of an anglicized Greek.

Click to expand...

Don't talk to me this way. I've told you that before. Who do you think you're talking to here, a child? You are not my teacher. You are sharing your OPINION here, not a FACT. Remember that.

Which (by the way) they also curiously transposed even back into the old Hebrew placing the Greek anglicized word "Angel" there as well. Those prophets knew nothing about an angel. They knew of a [mal'ak] or messenger but called no one angels. You don't have to understand that, but you surely cannot deny it. There's no angel in Hebrew, there is only [mal'ak], meaning messengers. So these are, by God's own lips, that inspired words, "fallen or cast down messengers."

Click to expand...

Who exactly do you think it is then? Stop all this rhetoric and tell me who you think it is exactly.

Revelation 12:4
And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born."

Were any literal stars cast down to the literal earth when Mary was pregnant with Christ? No

Click to expand...

Why in the world are you saying that to me as if I believe it was referring to literal stars? Stop talking to me like I'm an idiot or I will just put you on ignore. I've already told you before that I don't like your approach and I think you're arrogant and annoying. I'm not going to be very patient with you at this point. I'm not going to play your games.

If the third part of literal stars were cast down to the earth, there would be no more earth. I can assure you of that. Selah. But I can also assure you that stars (messengers) were cast down from the Kingdom of heaven "represented" by the congregation of God. There was apostasy and a war that was raging that Christ came to bring peace to. The messengers are men who represent either the kingdom of Satan or the Kingdom of God. Not created being with feather wings or bat wings.

Click to expand...

You are taking that verse completely out of context.

Read all of the following to see the context of Revelation 12:4.

Revelation 12:3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. 6 The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days. 7 Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

First, it talks about the dragon's tail sweeping "a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to earth". We know the dragon is Satan. We can see who the stars represent by reading further where it says the dragon "was hurled to the earth, and HIS ANGELS with him". That clearly shows that the stars that were flung down to the earth were the dragon's (Satan's) angels. This is actually quite easy to discern and, yet, you still missed it because you decided to make this more complicated than it actually is.

Spiritual Jew said:

You are taking that verse completely out of context.

Click to expand...

Hardly.

First, it talks about the dragon's tail sweeping "a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to earth". We know the dragon is Satan. We can see who the stars represent by reading further where it says the dragon "was hurled to the earth, and HIS ANGELS with him". That clearly shows that the stars that were flung down to the earth were the dragon's (Satan's) angels. This is actually quite easy to discern and, yet, you still missed it because you decided to make this more complicated than it actually is.

Click to expand...

I see that you are using NIV. Let read again...with KJV

Rev 12:1-4
(1) And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
(2) And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.
(3) And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
(4) And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

Rev 12:7-8
(7) And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
(8) And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

Not fall from "sky" but heaven. You need to reconsider what "HEAVEN" the Lord is really talking about here. It is not literally heaven where God rules that the "angels" were fighting in. The heaven here is the KINGDOM OF HEAVEN which the Old Testament congregation as a physical representative on Earth. And the angels here are the MESSENGERS. They are human messengers of Christ v.s. the human messengers of Satan. Christ's chosen against people Satan deceived. The Pharisees, Scribes, and all people deceived by Satan wage spiritual war against Michael who is Christ Himself and his fellowers. And the enemies were removed out of their habitation in the Kingdom of Heaven by Christ. In other words, they have lost the kingdom representative when Christ went to the Cross. These were NOT literal angels in the literal war in God's literal Holy Heaven where they were literally accosting a woman with stars on their head, and eventually cast out... from the "sky." How absurd. The fact is, there is NO WAR in God's eternal paradise of heaven! Never has been or never will be. For NOTHING that offends can enter into it anyway! Don't forget that!

No, the angels/messengers that will not bring railing accusations are the good messengers, not the ones who left their first estate and are reserved in chains of darkness unto eternal punishment. The Messengers that are greater in power and might are messengers with the Spirit of God, those who fight along with Michael, their arch-angel (Chief-Messenger), and prevailed over Satan and his messengers. This vision represents two sets of messengers of the kingdom of heaven fighting each other. They were all corporately sons/children and messengers of God, messengers of the kingdom, both claiming heritage, but only one truly born of Christ, the child of God wherein they are greater in power and might.

Don't forget that the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses Seat as sons, children, messengers of God, but were not afraid to bring railing accusations before God, calling His messenger a blasphemer, making all sorts of vain accusations and holding to their congregation's traditions (sound familiar?) rather than the word of God. So what Angel/Messenger was greater in power and might that they won't bring railing accusation? Was it the true messengers of God, or the messengers of God who corporately sit and rule in their authority in the congregation? Two Messengers, contrasted with each other. Even as it's always been! As it is written:

Malachi 2:7-8

• "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.
• But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts."

These messengers of the Lord (same Hebrew word transliterated Angel) are corporately a child or son of God because Israel represents the Lord. The Priests that were chosen of God are the Messengers of the Lord. They were those who were supposed to keep knowledge, but who had departed out of the way. They left their first estate, thereby causing many to stumble and forsak the law. They had become corrupt from the faith. Therefore did God judge them.

Jude 1:9

• "Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee."

Arch Angel literally means "Chief Messenger." We can compare scripture with scripture and see clearly who Jude is talking about, because it identifies Michael the arch (or Chief) Messenger, who is obviously Christ alone! As stated, Revelation 12 shows Michael and his army of messengers against Satan and his army of messengers, at war in the kingdom (represented by heaven). Now which messengers were greater in power and brought not railing accusation, but overcame the other messengers by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony, and loved not their lives unto the death? Are these your literal angels in heaven who overcame them by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony, or are they true sons of God versus false sons of God who brought violence to the kingdom. Matthew wrote:

Matthew 11:12

• "And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force."

Not Literally war and violence in a literal heaven where stars are literally falling and a Woman literally floating there as you thought, but the kingdom of heaven on earth, where the woman is...which is God's covenanted congregation! Selah!

And Spiritual Jew... if you really chose to understand Scripture "literally," then you must understand that the Lord never inspired the word angel anywhere in scripture. He inspired the Hebrew word [mal'ak] and Greek word [aggelos], both of which VERY LITERALLY transliterates to messenger, NOT angel. Here's the literal truth. It was man who superimposed the word "Angel" upon these two Biblically inspired words. He turned God's messengers into God's angels, and Satan's messengers to Satan's angels. It's not "literally" there at all. So if you "really" want to understand Scripture "literally" and accept what God's word "literally" said, you would chose the TRUTH that God "literally" says messengers. The word "angel" is not a transliteration, it's not even a translation, it's a mongrelized or hybridized form of old English, old French and late Latin words rooted in the Greek. Anglicanized, not translated. If you "really" want to know what God very literally said:

[Young's Literal Translation] Revelation 12:7

• "And there came war in the heaven; Michael and his messengers did war against the dragon, and the dragon did war, and his messengers,"

...but I'm guessing you really didn't want to hear what God very "literally" said there, did you?

If you "really" choose to understand scripture very literally and accept what God's word actually said (like you claim), you would either accept that there is a literal pregnant woman floating in literal heaven with 12 literal stars on her head and a literal Dragon casting them down to earth, or accept the sun, moon and stars in the heaven there are not literal. One or the other.

...proving of course you actually "chose" to selectively choose words in that context literally or figuratively depending upon your own presuppositions and preconceived ideas and teachings. And that is a very unsound hermeneutic to try and understand what "God" is saying.

2nd Timothy 2:15

• "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

Study unto rightly dividing or "cutting" proportionally, or equally, so there is consistent agreement and no discrepancy between this verse and that one. That is the only sound hermeneutic or system of interpretation of God's prophesy. Comparing Scripture with Scripture, the Spiritual with the Spiritual. Because inconsistency is the hallmark of error. The metaphor here being God's children must be "faithful and honest Stewards" (1st Corinthians 4:1) that cut or proportion and distribute straight/honorably/rightly so that we come to "His" truth. Not our own personal opinions of, nor private interpretation of truth, but God's unadulterated truth.

Oh and one more thing to think about...

When Christ (the manchild) was born to Israel, that was the beginning of Satan and his messengers, the antichrists, rejecting him and being cast out of the kingdom (Matthew 21:43). It was then that the woman (Israel) fled into the wilderness or desert to the Nations/Gentiles where she brings the Water of Gospel to through the Two Witnesses (Elect). See, BOTH the Woman and the Two Witnesses share the same time period of 1,260 days which symbolically the period of building the Church with Gospel. Complete harmony because the truth is always like that (Mark 14:59). Besides, you still have not addressed the question put to you of HOW is it that this Serpent is in literal heaven with this Woman Israel in the first place, when since the beginning, God cursed the Serpent in the garden of Eden to live in the dust anyway?!

Genesis 3:14-15

• "And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
• And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

If the Serpent was cursed in the earth above all to go on his belly and eat dust of the earth, and to have a great enmity between it and the woman, tell me Spiritual Jew, HOW is that literal that both he and the woman he was at enmity with are now (Revelation 12) in literal heaven with a host of messengers? Literal Woman, Serpent, Beast, enmity between her seed and his? Hmmmm, or is this yet another example of how God speaks in the way which many people seem to hate so much--this symbolism, spiritualizing serpents, sun and stars, perhaps?

Proverbs 25:2

• "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."

The "fact" is, Revelation 12 is NOT speaking of literal heaven, nor a literal serpent up there, nor a literal woman. But the enmity is real, because it is between Christ's messengers of Israel and the Devil's messengers who seek to thwart the Deliverer's plan. It's a very symbolic portrait of very literal reality. The reality of the real Christ and the anti or pseudo Christ. The true Christ and the false Christ. The man of sin-less-ness and the man of sin. Two spirits working within two groups of people.

TribulationSigns said:

And Spiritual Jew... if you really chose to understand Scripture "literally," then you must understand that the Lord never inspired the word angel anywhere in scripture. He inspired the Hebrew word [mal'ak] and Greek word [aggelos], both of which VERY LITERALLY transliterates to messenger, NOT angel. Here's the literal truth. It was man who superimposed the word "Angel" upon these two Biblically inspired words. He turned God's messengers into God's angels, and Satan's messengers to Satan's angels. It's not "literally" there at all. So if you "really" want to understand Scripture "literally" and accept what God's word "literally" said, you would chose the TRUTH that God "literally" says messengers. The word "angel" is not a transliteration, it's not even a translation, it's a mongrelized or hybridized form of old English, old French and late Latin words rooted in the Greek. Anglicanized, not translated. If you "really" want to know what God very literally said:

[Young's Literal Translation] Revelation 12:7

• "And there came war in the heaven; Michael and his messengers did war against the dragon, and the dragon did war, and his messengers,"

...but I'm guessing you really didn't want to hear what God very "literally" said there, did you?

If you "really" choose to understand scripture very literally and accept what God's word actually said (like you claim), you would either accept that there is a literal pregnant woman floating in literal heaven with 12 literal stars on her head and a literal Dragon casting them down to earth, or accept the sun, moon and stars in the heaven there are not literal. One or the other.

...proving of course you actually "chose" to selectively choose words in that context literally or figuratively depending upon your own presuppositions and preconceived ideas and teachings. And that is a very unsound hermeneutic to try and understand what "God" is saying.

2nd Timothy 2:15

• "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

Study unto rightly dividing or "cutting" proportionally, or equally, so there is consistent agreement and no discrepancy between this verse and that one. That is the only sound hermeneutic or system of interpretation of God's prophesy. Comparing Scripture with Scripture, the Spiritual with the Spiritual. Because inconsistency is the hallmark of error. The metaphor here being God's children must be "faithful and honest Stewards" (1st Corinthians 4:1) that cut or proportion and distribute straight/honorably/rightly so that we come to "His" truth. Not our own personal opinions of, nor private interpretation of truth, but God's unadulterated truth.

Click to expand...

So, what is the Greek word for a literal angel and the Greek word for heaven where Jesus is now?

DavidPT said:

I'm not saying I have adopted that argument, I'm just pointing out that there is apparently more than one way to understand some of these things, and that if that argue is a valid argument, it doesn't contradict anything you submitted in the post I was initially responding to. But even if it isn't a valid argument, and it very well may not be, maybe some of us are wrong to think that satan already got kicked out of heaven 2000 years ago, where I tend to basically agree with, but that it is not until the 5th trumpet when he actually gets kicked out of heaven? But even if that can't work either, and maybe it can't, we both are seeing things involving this that are not making any sense to us.

You are not seeing it making any sense to you that satan can be meant in Revelation 9:1, basing that on your arguments in the post you were addressing. And I don't see it making sense to me, that a good angel could be meant in Revelation 9:1 if it is being depicted as falling from heaven, which matches with exactly how Jesus described satan falling. Should we just chalk that up as a coincidence, thus no connection whatsoever? Or should we instead be trying to use Scripture to interpret Scripture here?

As to your final question, all I can do is speculate. Imagine having been given the key to something, then this same key is taken away from you and given to someone else instead, and that this same key is used to lock you up in this same place others have been locked up inside, that you were able to open up and let them out, and now you can't get out yourself because you are no longer in possession of the key, someone else is, and that you have to wait until they open it again.

Speculation aside since speculation doesn't prove anything one way or the other in most cases, there is still no way that when the pit is being opened in Revelation 9 that this is meaning when the pit is being opened in Revelation 20 in order to loose satan. satan is loosed in order to deceive the nations. In what possible way would be loosing locusts that are sent out to torment unrepentant men correlate with satan deceiving the nations?

Click to expand...

You ignore so many posts to arrive at your position. The question is: is it a fallen angel or is it an elect angel? This word pipto (Strong’s 4098) interpreted “fall” carries the idea of alighting or descending. It is derived from the Greek word petomai (Strong’s 4072) meaning ‘to fly’. This would certainly support the idea that we are looking at an angel. The Greek word pipto itself carries several meanings; the first of which we encounter is ‘to descend from a higher place to a lower’. All these interpretations are consistent with the picture of an angel descending from heaven to earth.

Revelation 9 proves that the abyss is the invisible spiritual restrained domain where demons operate now upon "earth."

Let us first establish that John is actually looking at "a star" in Revelation 9:1. That is what he identifies. He is seeing a symbolic vision. Whilst it is likely the star represents an angel the vision relates to an actual star. Because a star is inanimate, it is described as falling. Basically stars “fall” (Revelation 8.10; 9.1). Good angels on the other hand are said to “come down” (Revelation 10.1; 20.1). Whilst the same picture is been painted in both, one relates to a symbol (representing an angel) the other to a literal angel.

It is worth noting, Revelation 8:10-11 uses similar language to Revelation 9:1, saying, “there pipto (or) fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters; And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.”

This star/angel that descended from heaven seemed to be on a heavenly assignment to open-up the bottomless pit before the second coming. It would clearly be wrong to view this as a demonic being.

TribulationSigns said:

Hardly.



I see that you are using NIV. Let read again...with KJV

Rev 12:1-4
(1) And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
(2) And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.
(3) And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
(4) And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

Rev 12:7-8
(7) And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
(8) And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

Not fall from "sky" but heaven. You need to reconsider what "HEAVEN" the Lord is really talking about here. It is not literally heaven where God rules that the "angels" were fighting in. The heaven here is the KINGDOM OF HEAVEN which the Old Testament congregation as a physical representative on Earth. And the angels here are the MESSENGERS. They are human messengers of Christ v.s. the human messengers of Satan. Christ's chosen against people Satan deceived. The Pharisees, Scribes, and all people deceived by Satan wage spiritual war against Michael who is Christ Himself and his fellowers. And the enemies were removed out of their habitation in the Kingdom of Heaven by Christ. In other words, they have lost the kingdom representative when Christ went to the Cross. These were NOT literal angels in the literal war in God's literal Holy Heaven where they were literally accosting a woman with stars on their head, and eventually cast out... from the "sky." How absurd. The fact is, there is NO WAR in God's eternal paradise of heaven! Never has been or never will be. For NOTHING that offends can enter into it anyway! Don't forget that!

No, the angels/messengers that will not bring railing accusations are the good messengers, not the ones who left their first estate and are reserved in chains of darkness unto eternal punishment. The Messengers that are greater in power and might are messengers with the Spirit of God, those who fight along with Michael, their arch-angel (Chief-Messenger), and prevailed over Satan and his messengers. This vision represents two sets of messengers of the kingdom of heaven fighting each other. They were all corporately sons/children and messengers of God, messengers of the kingdom, both claiming heritage, but only one truly born of Christ, the child of God wherein they are greater in power and might.

Don't forget that the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses Seat as sons, children, messengers of God, but were not afraid to bring railing accusations before God, calling His messenger a blasphemer, making all sorts of vain accusations and holding to their congregation's traditions (sound familiar?) rather than the word of God. So what Angel/Messenger was greater in power and might that they won't bring railing accusation? Was it the true messengers of God, or the messengers of God who corporately sit and rule in their authority in the congregation? Two Messengers, contrasted with each other. Even as it's always been! As it is written:

Malachi 2:7-8

• "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.
• But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts."

These messengers of the Lord (same Hebrew word transliterated Angel) are corporately a child or son of God because Israel represents the Lord. The Priests that were chosen of God are the Messengers of the Lord. They were those who were supposed to keep knowledge, but who had departed out of the way. They left their first estate, thereby causing many to stumble and forsak the law. They had become corrupt from the faith. Therefore did God judge them.

Jude 1:9

• "Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee."

Arch Angel literally means "Chief Messenger." We can compare scripture with scripture and see clearly who Jude is talking about, because it identifies Michael the arch (or Chief) Messenger, who is obviously Christ alone! As stated, Revelation 12 shows Michael and his army of messengers against Satan and his army of messengers, at war in the kingdom (represented by heaven). Now which messengers were greater in power and brought not railing accusation, but overcame the other messengers by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony, and loved not their lives unto the death? Are these your literal angels in heaven who overcame them by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony, or are they true sons of God versus false sons of God who brought violence to the kingdom. Matthew wrote:

Matthew 11:12

• "And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force."

Not Literally war and violence in a literal heaven where stars are literally falling and a Woman literally floating there as you thought, but the kingdom of heaven on earth, where the woman is...which is God's covenanted congregation! Selah!

Click to expand...

I don't find anything you said here or in your other posts to be convincing. You're coming across like you don't even believe in the existence of angels. Is that true?

I stand by my interpretation of the text. Yes, the Greek text means "messengers". Great. For some reason you act as if angels can't be messengers, which makes no sense. Was Gabriel not acting as a messenger of God when he gave a vision to Daniel or when he told the old man Zechariah that he was going to have a son who turned out to be John the Baptist?

Where did Satan accuse believers before he was cast out? It was in heaven. Have you ever read the book of Job? Satan and his angels were cast out of heaven once Christ died and rose again and Satan could not accuse believers before God in heaven anymore. Which is why Paul rhetorically asks in Romans 8:33 "who can lay any charge/accusation against God's elect?". The answer is no one. Including Satan. He was cast out of heaven forever, never to accuse anyone again because there is nothing he can accuse us of as our sins have been forgiven and covered by the blood of Christ.

DavidPT said:

They would be some of the ones that have been ruling with Christ with a rod of iron over the nations, for one thing. There has to be a reason for the rebellion after the thousand years. And that is one good reason, that they didn't like the strict rules during the thousand years. I hate having to bring up Zechariah 14 yet again to argue with since it is obvious you and I are not even remotely able to get on the same page involving one single verse in that chapter, thus seems like a big waste of time on my part yet again, as if anything I might present this time around you might actually consider it this time(not), but that chapter records that there will be those remaining having been spared the fate recorded in verse 12 at the time, that if they don't come up, there are punishments for that.

Click to expand...

Yes, you are completely wasting your time bringing up Zechariah 14. And, yet, you did it, anyway. I have no interest in debating with you about that passage yet again.

Please be honest with me here. Does the following give a description of strict rule or of utter destruction in relation to Christ ruling with a rod of iron?

Revelation 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords. 17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; 18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

In this passage Him ruling with a rod of iron is associated directly with Him smiting the nations and treading "the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God". Just read Revelation 14:19-20 if you don't know what that means. It definitely has to do with utter destruction.

The passage also described birds consuming "the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great".

How exactly do you get the idea of "strict rule" from this rather than complete destruction? Honestly, that boggles my mind.

I'd like to know how you get that from the OT passage that it references as well.

Psalm 2:7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

How does the figurative description of Him dashing them in pieces like a potter's vessel equate to strict rule rather than complete destruction?

That describes ruling with a rod of iron IMO, and I can see ppl like that rebelling once satan is loosed and manages to deceive them by having them think they can actually overtake and overthrow the immortals that have been ruling over them with a rod of iron for the past 1000 years. Sounds similar to how satan initially deceived countless angels by having them rebel with him against the God that created them, the same God they have literally been in the presence of and saw Him in all of His glory, yet they still rebelled, on a mass scale even.

But no portion of mankind would or could ever do anything silly like that themselves, allow themselves to be deceived by satan after having been in the literal presence of God and all of His glory, and then still rebel in the end? Maybe you might not believe something like that is even remotely possible, regardless that satan basically already did something similar on a mass scale to begin with, but I do believe something like that is possible, though.

Since there has to be a reason for a mass rebellion after the thousand years, what do Amils think they are rebelling about on a mass scale and against after the thousand years finish?

Click to expand...

You're missing something here. Did Satan and the angels try to destroy God? I'm sure they didn't. They are not dumb. They would know that God is immortal and invincible. But they didn't want to serve Him anymore and wanted to do their own thing. That's different than what is described in Revelation 20:7-9.

The premil understanding of Revelation 20:7-9 has a number of people "as the sand of the sea" going to Jerusalem to attack Christ in all His glory along with immortal believers who had been "changed" at His return and mortal believers who would be alive at the time. Premil has these rebels going up against Christ Himself and immortal believers thinking they can somehow destroy them. Really? How would they think they could do that? Would they somehow not be aware that Christ and His followers who had been "changed" were immortal?

DavidPT said:

Thinking outloud here for a moment, thus this is not addressed to any post in particular.

Revelation 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.


What we all need to be asking ourselves, thus trying to come up with an answer for, why is it important that he must be loosed once the thousand years expire? The only thing I can think of, is in order to test someone. Per Amil I don't see it involving testing anyone, though. Maybe the way Tribsigns interprets it, it very well may involve the testing of someone. But the way most Amils typically interpret it, it doesn't seem to involve testing anyone. Per Premil it would involve testing those that were spared death at the 2nd coming, and after having lived a thousand years under Christ's and His saints rulership, it is now time for them to decide once and for all what they want to do ultimately.


Something else we need to try and get to the bottom of, does Revelation record 2 battles, one prior to the beginning of the thousand years, then another following the thousand years? Or are these battles one and the same? A part of me wants to think 2 separate battles are meant, while another part of me wants to think they are one and the same. The latter of course would indicate Amil rather than Premil.

Click to expand...

You create a faulty premise of your own thinking that is not in the text and then transpire to judge Amil by this faulty premise. I do not know why you do this. The release of Satan is to subdue the Gospel before Jesus comes and prevent the global enlightenment of the nations

Spiritual Jew said:

I don't find anything you said here or in your other posts to be convincing.

Click to expand...

Not up to me, but to God that reveal the Truth to you. I merely testify to His Word.

I stand by my interpretation of the text.

Click to expand...

According to God's Word, no.

Yes, the Greek text means "messengers". Great.

Click to expand...

Hallelujah.

For some reason you act as if angels can't be messengers, which makes no sense.

Click to expand...

Not true. It depends on what Scripture says. For some reason, people are too obsessed with "angel" that every time they read "angel" somewhere in Scripture, they gave in to their imaginative ideas about chubby angelic winged children flying around in heaven fighting evil there. But it is not always true.

Example One:

Galatians 4:13-14

• "Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
• And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus."

Literally, Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first, and my trial which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected, but received me as a Messenger of God, even as Christ Jesus. Even as Jesus Christ because Jesus Christ was a messenger (angel) from God. As it is written:

Malachi 3:1-2

• "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
• But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:"

Clearly, the Lord Jesus Christ is this Messenger spoken of here, not an angel. And not just a messenger. That is why He is Arch Messenger or Chief Messenger Michael (which means "likeness of God"). This is the Messenger Christ, who came and confirmed the Covenant. Not as a "literal angel."

Example Two:

Do you realize that we shall judge the messengers? Yet the translators wrote that we will judge angels.

1st Corinthians 6:3

• "Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?"

Here you go, that word, "angels", is the Greek word messengers in the original autographs. So actually it reads, "Know ye not that we shall judge messengers?" Angels is an anglicized transliteration of [agelos], meaning messenger, and is decidedly "NOT" what the Greek (or Hebrew) word translated angel means! Why would we be judging angelic beings in heaven, God says we will be judging the 12 tribes of Israel. They are not angelic beings, they are the congregation of God's People! Not the Hollywood theories of chubby angelic beings with wings. Humans can be either "messengers" of God or "messengers" of Satan.

Example Three:

Thanks to many foolish movies and TV series about the angels or Lucifer today, many Christians are starting to believe that they could accidentally bump into actual angels unawarely? Really?!

Hebrews 13:1-2

• "Let brotherly love continue.
• Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares".

The word translated "entertain strangers" is the Greek word [philoxenox], meaning to be friendly to those who you don't know. It's taken from the root words [philos] meaning friend, and [xenos] which here means someone with whom you are not acquainted. This is the only place where this is translated entertain strangers, its normal translation is hospitality. This verse is declaring that we should always be hospitable or friendly to those who we do not know, because thereby some have entertained (or hosted) messengers. All believers and particularly Pastors are God's Messengers [aggelos], and some have been a guest of another believer who was unaware that they were the elect of God. The hospitality that Christians show should be to all men, that the love of God will be illustrated in their good conduct. In fact, that Greek word [xenos] in certain contexts can mean any of three things. It can mean a stranger (an alien or pilgrim), or by implication it can mean a guest (being a visitor in your household), or by extension it can mean to be a host (to entertain or be a host to a stranger to your household).

Where did Satan accuse believers before he was cast out? It was in heaven. Have you ever read the book of Job?

Click to expand...

Ahhh that famous book of Job where historical church teachings often said that Satan was walking among the "sons of God" (literal angels) in literal heaven. I will tell you why this doctrine is wrong. Its not what you think what happened.

I believe that the whole conversation between God and Satan is designed for our learning, illustrating patience and that God is always in control, even when we are among wicked men, in suffering, persecution, pain, catastrophe, calamity or tragedy. Its narrative is of God's people, their attitudes, weaknesses and the adversary in the midst of them. It's another God-breathed lesson in Biblical History. Let examine this...

Job 1:6

• "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them."

Job 2:1

• "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord."

By the way, if anyone's bible translates these words (sons of God) as "angels", that is a serious error. The words "sons of God" in these verses are the exact same Hebrew words found throughout scripture for sons and God. It is the same words found in Genesis chapter 6. The words are [ben 'elohiym] or as some write it [bane el-o-heem] which is literally offspring or children/Sons of God. The exact same words in all the verses. There is no word "angel" or "messenger" there in the original Hebrew. Any Bible that translates these words as an angel is making an "unjustifiable commentary" and that's not really a translation or transliteration of the Hebrew. And believe me, there is a difference. Commentaries can be helpful, but when they find themselves on the pages of scripture masquerading "as Scripture," that is a serious error. It is an unrighteous act for anyone to translate [ben 'elohiym] as angels when God inspired the words meaning "Children of God."

As for the actual verse, some people have legitimately been confused by the language that these sons of God "came to present [yatsab] (meaning, to station or position) themselves before the Lord." Some think that this must mean that they were in "literal" heaven. That is not the case. We have to keep in mind the times that we are reading about. The time of Job was the early years of the world. The language of "presenting themselves before God", is common in Biblical History, and doesn't denote literally appearing in physical Heaven before Him. It is simply common language of the day denoting coming to a place designated for the presence of God, in order to inquire of Him. For exmaple, today, we'd go to a church to do this. That would be our coming to present ourselves and inquire of God. In Job's days, they would have their own designated Holy place. We see this clearly for example in Deuteronomy chapter 31:

Deuteronomy 31:14-15

• "...call Joshua, and Present Yourselves in the tabernacle of the congregation, that I may give him a charge. And Moses and Joshua went, and presented themselves in the tabernacle of the congregation.
• and the Lord appeared in the tabernacle in a pillar of a cloud:...."

God told Moses to present [yatsab] (same word) himself and Joshua before Him in the tabernacle, and "God" appeared there and spoke to them. Please note, they did not appear in Heaven, but in a place of the Earth. Comparing scripture with scripture we see this language of presenting oneself before the Lord doesn't denote an appearance in the third heaven. Here they presented themselves before God, but it was in the physical tabernacle on earth. It's the exact same thing as the sons of God presenting themselves in Job! In these early days, God spoke to His servants the Prophets in a special way. And often times that meant an appearance or His presence in a special way. But don't take my word for it, just compare scripture with scripture.

1st Samuel 10:19

• "...Now therefore Present Yourselves before the Lord by your tribes, and by your thousands."

Present (same Hebrew word) themselves before the Lord and there they would inquire of God. That didn't mean that the tribes of Israel literally went into Heaven to present themselves before the Lord. This is the language God uses to describe the official, recognized gathering together into the place of the presence of God. Another verse is, Numbers 11:16 where the Lord tells Moses to gather 70 into the tabernacle to STAND (same Hebrew word PRESENT) themselves with Moses, and "GOD" would come down and talk with Him there. You see, this was simply the language used in the old days when the believers or sons/children of God would come to pray, worship and inquire of the Lord. They would present themselves before the Lord for instruction. There is no different in saying, "the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord," and in saying "the believers came to present themselves before the Lord." It's human beings in view here, not angels, and it's the designated place of worship on earth, not in physical heaven.

Next literally we read in Job 1:6 says "..and there doth come Satan in their midst." So the sons of God came to present themselves before God, and Satan (the adversary) came in the midst of the congregation with them. As indeed Satan normally does among God's people. Not at all unlike the 12 Disciples with Christ in Jerusalem, and Satan coming in the midst of them within Judas. There we have an example of Judas as the adversary coming in the midst of the sons of God at the Sop with our Lord, and Christ telling him, "That thou doest, do quickly." Once again we see that Satan makes his appearance on earth through men.

Yes, it's an event that took place, but not in heaven, not with angels, not with a "created being" called Satan, but in the early assembly of God's children, where the adversary came among them to bring railing accusation, and God responds with a teaching lesson for all of us that would last in His word until Christ returns. The adversary meant it for evil, but God used it for good.

Moreover, REMEMBER like I told you earlier, this also proves to any Bible-believing, rationally thinking person that if this were very literally Satan in heaven at the time of Job, then undeniably he couldn't have been the fallen angelic being in the Garden of Eden that was allegedly cursed because that would necessarily mean that after that cursing, God allowed him back into heaven as an evil angel, huh?! Yet again "proving" the total and clear bankruptcy of this doctrine that this was the same being Satan that was in the Garden. How is Satan cursed in the Garden, and then years later at the time of Job, back in heaven with God and other supposed angels. It makes no sense because it's not true! Period! It's a church tradition of fallen angels that have been passed down through the years and that many Christians cannot seem to let go of. Even when they know it's contradictory, convoluted and inconsistent!

God talking to Satan is no different from God asking Adam and Eve where they were, when of course He knew perfectly well where they were. Or Him telling the Serpent in the garden that he had been cursed. It's all for our learning. Not a discussion for Satan, but for us. In this conversation, we understand the mind of wicked man who inserts himself into God's assembly and reviles and speaks evil against God's faithful. There is nothing new under the sun. What does God do? God allows adversity upon Job, knowing the end from the beginning, for our benefit and edification.

Selah.

Satan and his angels were cast out of heaven once Christ died and rose again and Satan could not accuse believers before God in heaven anymore.

Click to expand...

Not true. The traditional teaching of Satan and angels being in heaven is false and inaccurate but that is a huge subject to be discussed later as I have errands to run now that my lunch break is over.

Which is why Paul rhetorically asks in Romans 8:33 "who can lay any charge/accusation against God's elect?". The answer is no one. Including Satan. He was cast out of heaven forever, never to accuse anyone again because there is nothing he can accuse us of as our sins have been forgiven and covered by the blood of Christ.

Click to expand...

Rev 12:9-11
(9) And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
(10) And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
(11) And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

The answer is yes, Satan did.

Take care.

TribulationSigns said:

Not up to me, but to God that reveal the Truth to you. I merely testify to His Word.

Click to expand...

He has. And He didn't need to use you to do it.

According to God's Word, no.

Click to expand...

Yes, according to God's Word. Certainly not according to your false interpretation of God's Word.

Not true. It depends on what Scripture says.

Click to expand...

Of course it does. Wow, you are so insightful.

Rev 12:9-11
(9) And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
(10) And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
(11) And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

The answer is yes, Satan did.

Click to expand...

You have trouble with reading comprehension. In Romans 8:33 Paul wasn't asking if anyone could ever make a a charge/accusation against God's elect, he was asking if anyone could at that time when he wrote that letter (or any time from that point on). The answer is no.

For some reason, people are too obsessed with "angel" that every time they read "angel" somewhere in Scripture, they gave in to their imaginative ideas about chubby angelic winged children flying around in heaven fighting evil there. But it is not always true.

Click to expand...

That isn't how I look at it, so why are you talking to me as if I'm one of those people? Your approach is terrible. You're abrasive and arrogant and very annoying. I'm not going to bother with you anymore after this post. Humble yourself.