• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Can Amil prove with Scripture that the beast is in the pit during the thousand years?

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For the record, maybe some of this misunderstanding is my fault by me not being clearer at times. For example. When I say things like---assuming Amil--I'm not meaning what they might take something to mean, I'm meaning as in, assuming Amil is the correct position, meaning that satan is currently bound and has been since the cross or maybe the ascension, depending on which Amil you ask, why then am I seeing evidence, from both Scripture and reality, that satan is not bound? Deception is still taking place while he is supposed to be bound. That's evidence of his activity in the real world, meaning reality.

These locusts in Revelation 9 appear to be inactive while they are in the pit though, since I see no evidence in the real world, of their activity. Meaning I don't see any evidence of anyone being tormented by these locusts. But I see plenty of evidence of satan's activity though he is alleged to be in the pit. Nations are still being deceived, which contradicts Revelation 20:3 in my mind. I fully realize Amils see that differently, but so what? Does that mean I'm required to see it the same as them and that I don't have a right to see it differently?

In my mind then, if Amil is the correct position, I fail to understand how the pit can make the locusts inactive while imprisoned, and that satan can be active while imprisoned? And no, I'm not saying Amils are saying the locusts are inactive while in the pit, I'm the one saying that it appears to me they are inactive while in the pit, thus solely my opinion, not Amil's opinion.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
8,618
2,872
MI
✟442,971.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Let's get something clear if that's even possible with some of you. I'm not speaking on behalf of Amils. I'm not saying what Amils believe or don't believe, I'm saying what I believe if Amil is supposed to be true. If Amil is supposed to be true, then why am I seeing zero evidence of the locust's activity while in the pit and seeing plenty of evidence of satan's activity while he is supposed to be in this same pit when the locusts are?
We agree that the locusts represent demons, right? And we agree that they are in the pit up until the 5th trumpet. So, what Christian would think that demons are not active during that time, regardless of whether they're Amil or Premil? I think probably none. So, why is it that you need 100% proof that they're not active in any way during that time? Does the text say they are not active in any way during that time? No. They apparently are not doing what it describes them doing when they are loosed (at least not to the extent that it talks about), but anything we conclude beyond that is just speculation.

You all don't even remotely understand the majority of my arguments.
So, whose fault is that? Everyone but you? Do you imagine that you're being very clear in what you're saying?

Instead you twist what I say and mean then insist I'm misrepresenting Amil. That's really being fair to me, isn't it? Since I know what I said and was meaning, but instead I get some of you twisting what I said and was meaning, then acting as if I did something wrong.
So, all of us are twisting what you're saying? It has nothing to do with you? Do you think we're all in on a conspiracy to make you look bad by purposely twisting your words?
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,078
3,472
USA
Visit site
✟225,378.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For the record, maybe some of this misunderstanding is my fault by me not being clearer at times. For example. When I say things like---assuming Amil--I'm not meaning what they might take something to mean, I'm meaning as in, assuming Amil is the correct position, meaning that satan is currently bound and has been since the cross or maybe the ascension, depending on which Amil you ask, why then am I seeing evidence, from both Scripture and reality, that satan is not bound? Deception is still taking place while he is supposed to be bound. That's evidence of his activity in the real world, meaning reality.

These locusts in Revelation 9 appear to be inactive while they are in the pit though, since I see no evidence in the real world, of their activity. Meaning I don't see any evidence of anyone being tormented by these locusts. But I see plenty of evidence of satan's activity though he is alleged to be in the pit. Nations are still being deceived, which contradicts Revelation 20:3 in my mind. I fully realize Amils see that differently, but so what? Does that mean I'm required to see it the same as them and that I don't have a right to see it differently?

In my mind then, if Amil is the correct position, I fail to understand how the pit can make the locusts inactive while imprisoned, and that satan can be active while imprisoned? And no, I'm not saying Amils are saying the locusts are inactive while in the pit, I'm the one saying that it appears to me they are inactive while in the pit, thus solely my opinion, not Amil's opinion.

Are there demons on this earth today?
Are they tormenting people?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Earburner
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
8,618
2,872
MI
✟442,971.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A lot of those things are simply my opinion of things. I have a right to my opinions as you all have a right to yours.
I don't think of any of us should have the right to misrepresent each other's views. That is what we're talking about here. We're not talking in general about the right to express our opinions. Obviously, no one should have any issues with that.

You never seem to want to answer any questions specifically. It was pointed out by SG that you had said this:

DavidPT said:
Amils never use both the OT and NT together to prove they are the correct position. They go by what the NT alone says, not by what the OT and the NT together says.
And then you were asked if this is accurate or false? Can you please answer the question?

Shouldn't Amils get to decide if it's true or not instead of a Premil like yourself? Let me make it very clear that no Amil would agree with your statement. So, you misrepresented Amil with your statement. That's undeniable. So, do you think it's okay to do that? That goes beyond just giving an opinion on what a certain scripture passage means. That is a case of a non-Amil thinking that he can speak for Amils as if he knows what Amils believe as much or more than Amils do.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
8,618
2,872
MI
✟442,971.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's not an easy question to answer. Not everyone is going to interpret that the same way. Who's interpretation should we assume might be correct if not everyone interprets it the same way?

As to the 7 heads, in Revelation 13:1 it is noted that a beast with 7 heads emerges from the sea. What is meant by the sea? There are numerous interpretations of that as well. And the way I interpret it is by comparing Scripture with Scripture.

Revelation 17:7 And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.


This tells us that the beast which hath the seven heads and ten horns, it shall ascend out of the bottomless pit.

Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

And here we see a 7 headed beast ascending, it ascending out of the sea. Using Revelation 17:7-8 to interpret Revelation 13:1, I feel it's reasonable to assume the bottomless pit might be meant by sea in Revelation 13:1. And if so, Revelation 13:1 records when the beast ascends out of the pit. The question is, assuming I'm correct here, is Revelation 13:1 involving a time before the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 are martyred for not worshiping the beast, or is it involving a time post their martyrdom?
Why didn't John just refer to the bottomless pit in Revelation 13 then? Why refer to the sea instead? He referred to the bottomless pit as the bottomless pit in Revelation 9:1-2, Revelation 9:11, Revelation 11:7, Revelation 17:8, Revelation 20:1 and Revelation 20:3. So, why would he refer to it as the sea instead of the bottomless pit in Revelation 13:1? I don't believe that makes any sense, so the sea has to be referring to something else other than the bottomless pit.

Also, in Revelation 11, the beast is portrayed as ascending from the bottomless pit at the end of the 42 months/1260 days (see verse 7). If Revelation 13 was portraying the beast as ascending from the bottomless pit at the beginning of the 42 months, then that would contradict Revelation 11:7.

I think it makes a lot more sense to relate "the sea" to the "many waters" mentioned in Revelation 17.

Revelation 17:1 One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits by many waters...15 Then the angel said to me, “The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages.

I assume you've heard the phase "sea of humanity" before? I believe Revelation 13:1 is talking about the beast rising up from the sea of humanity to be worshiped by all whose names are not written in the book of life (Rev 13:8).

Here is one other thing that occurred to me when thinking about the beast. You say the beast being in the pit means it is completely inactive, right? In Revelation 17:8, John said the beast "is not" at the time he was writing the book and we know that means that beast was in the pit because it talks about the beast ascending from the pit at some later time. Yet, he also said that one of the heads of the beast "is" at the time. So, if the beast was completely inactive at the time then how could John say that one of the heads of the beast "is" at the time?
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,078
3,472
USA
Visit site
✟225,378.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For the record, maybe some of this misunderstanding is my fault by me not being clearer at times. For example. When I say things like---assuming Amil--I'm not meaning what they might take something to mean, I'm meaning as in, assuming Amil is the correct position, meaning that satan is currently bound and has been since the cross or maybe the ascension, depending on which Amil you ask, why then am I seeing evidence, from both Scripture and reality, that satan is not bound? Deception is still taking place while he is supposed to be bound. That's evidence of his activity in the real world, meaning reality.

These locusts in Revelation 9 appear to be inactive while they are in the pit though, since I see no evidence in the real world, of their activity. Meaning I don't see any evidence of anyone being tormented by these locusts. But I see plenty of evidence of satan's activity though he is alleged to be in the pit. Nations are still being deceived, which contradicts Revelation 20:3 in my mind. I fully realize Amils see that differently, but so what? Does that mean I'm required to see it the same as them and that I don't have a right to see it differently?

In my mind then, if Amil is the correct position, I fail to understand how the pit can make the locusts inactive while imprisoned, and that satan can be active while imprisoned? And no, I'm not saying Amils are saying the locusts are inactive while in the pit, I'm the one saying that it appears to me they are inactive while in the pit, thus solely my opinion, not Amil's opinion.

You do that a lot! You start with "assuming Amil" and then you transpire to present a description that no Amils believes and which you know is a blatant misrepresentation. Stop doing that! It is wrong and annoying. You have been doing it for so long it will likely be a hard habit to break.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Spiritual Jew
Upvote 0

Earburner

Active Member
Feb 14, 2022
103
26
75
South Carolina
✟29,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
This discussion/debate about locusts, demons, the bottomless pit, etc. Is getting crazier by the minute.

It's all about prophetic symbolism being manifested in real life and in real time.
Because of the sensitive issues of our times, I will only ask you all some questions. It's up to you to find the answers.

1. Is it true that Locusts can only chew?
2. Can both Hornets, wasps etc chew and sting?
3. Animals and humans get stung all the time.
4. Is there more danger in the venom or in the sting?
5. Stings can be instantaneously painful, but the venom doesn't have an effect until later.
6. Locust swarms are not global, but do you know of someone who fell as "lightning", that can operate globally?
7. Paul the Apostle was bitten by a venomous snake, and it had no effect. Do you know why??
8. Has anyone ever seen a picture of the W.H.O. building?
9. What universal symbol is commonly used on most ambulatory vehicles?
10. What did Jesus say about knowing where "satan's seat" is, when speaking about the church of Pergamos?
11. Who was the Greek god "Asclepius", and what was he known for in Pergamos?
12. Since Jesus knew where "satan's seat" was then, might He know where it is today? KJV Revelation 2:13.
13. In item #10, do you think that Jesus was being prophetic for us today, when he said that He knew where satan's seat is?
14. Did you know that satan and the demonic horde have no power or authority over Born Again Christians? Unfortunately for all others, he does!

Edit: in the reference following, is some background of historical data about Pergamon, the city where Jesus said that satan dwelled in. But now that we are 2000+ years into the future, we can assume that he has moved elsewhere, having expanded upon his subtle benevolence through medicine.
Pergamos: A Church Dwelling Where Satan’s Throne Is (1)
You also should reference KJV Galatians 5:20, and research the word "witchcraft" in the Strongs Concordance.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Earburner

Active Member
Feb 14, 2022
103
26
75
South Carolina
✟29,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
^ cont'd.
Since Satan had a demonic influence over the city of Pergamon, and the church there was being opposed by the heavy onslaught of belief in a Greek god called Asclepius, what global organization of today, uses the Greek alphabet to identify an illness?
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This discussion/debate about locusts, demons, the bottomless pit, etc. Is getting crazier by the minute.

It's all about prophetic symbolism being manifested in real life and in real time.
Because of the sensitive issues of our times, I will only ask you all some questions. It's up to you to find the answers.

1. Is it true that Locusts can only chew?
2. Can both Hornets, wasps etc chew and sting?
3. Animals and humans get stung all the time.
4. Is there more danger in the venom or in the sting?
5. Stings can be instantaneously painful, but the venom doesn't have an effect until later.
6. Locust swarms are not global, but do you know of someone who fell as "lightning", that can operate globally?
7. Paul the Apostle was bitten by a venomous snake, and it had no effect. Do you know why??
8. Has anyone ever seen a picture of the W.H.O. building?
9. What universal symbol is commonly used on most ambulatory vehicles?
10. What did Jesus say about knowing where "satan's seat" is, when speaking about the church of Pergamos?
11. Who was the Greek god "Asclepius", and what was he known for in Pergamos?
12. Since Jesus knew where "satan's seat" was then, might He know where it is today? KJV Revelation 2:13.
13. In item #10, do you think that Jesus was being prophetic for us today, when he said that He knew where satan's seat is?
14. Did you know that satan and the demonic horde have no power or authority over Born Again Christians? Unfortunately for all others, he does!

Edit: in the reference following, is some background of historical data about Pergamon, the city where Jesus said that satan dwelled in. But now that we are 2000+ years into the future, we can assume that he has moved elsewhere, having expanded upon his subtle benevolence through medicine.
Pergamos: A Church Dwelling Where Satan’s Throne Is (1)
You also should reference KJV Galatians 5:20, and research the word "witchcraft" in the Strongs Concordance.


What is your point about locusts? Most of us aren't taking them to mean literal locusts.


Speaking of satan, in regards to the 7 churches, is the following supposed to be meaning when satan is in prison himself, or is this meaning before he is in prison, or maybe after he is in prison?

Revelation 2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison

Revelation 20:7 indicates that the bottomless pit was his prison during the thousand years. What do prisons typically do? For one, they hold someone against their will.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You do that a lot! You start with "assuming Amil" and then you transpire to present a description that no Amils believes and which you know is a blatant misrepresentation. Stop doing that! It is wrong and annoying. You have been doing it for so long it will likely be a hard habit to break.


It's becoming clear to me what's really going on here. Amils don't like it when their view is challenged, so they then keep claiming they are being misrepresented when someone like me challenges it. My method of challenging it is by first assuming Amil, which means satan is currently bound, does that agree with Scripture, does that agree with reality? Amils have put their own spin on what some of these things are supposed to mean, the same way PreTribbers put their own spin on what things are supposed to mean. Me, I don't need to put a spin on what the pit is designed to do, and that is, imprison someone, make them inactive at the time.. I can see, for example, that when the locusts are in the pit, this makes them inactive at the time. This means the pit is doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, thus make them inactive at the time.

Assuming satan is currently in the pit himself, it doesn't match when the locusts are in the pit. They are inactive while they are in the pit, thus the pit is doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, therefore making them no threat to anyone outside of their prison. satan is active while he is in the pit, if assuming he is currently in the pit, thus the pit is not doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, therefore making them no threat to anyone outside of their prison. That doesn't add up. Except Amils have to put their own spin on things by insisting it does add up because they don't see this meaning the locusts are inactive while in the pit, but if someone like me sees it differently, that I see it meaning the locusts are inactive while in the pit, this means I am misrepresenting Amil since I refuse to agree with their spin they put on some of these things.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Earburner

Active Member
Feb 14, 2022
103
26
75
South Carolina
✟29,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
What is your point about locusts? Most of us aren't taking them to mean literal locusts.


Speaking of satan, in regards to the 7 churches, is the following supposed to be meaning when satan is in prison himself, or is this meaning before he is in prison, or maybe after he is in prison?

Revelation 2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison

Revelation 20:7 indicates that the bottomless pit was his prison during the thousand years. What do prisons typically do? For one, they hold someone against their will.
Instead of attacking my post, and then imposing your own thoughts over it, try discerning what I have said, digest it, and then you will need no further explanation.
I provided the clue for understanding:
"It's all about prophetic symbolism being manifested in real life and in real time."
 
Upvote 0

Earburner

Active Member
Feb 14, 2022
103
26
75
South Carolina
✟29,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
^ Right of the gate, with my question #1, it should have begged you to question WHY the symbolism of a Locust, when Locusts DON'T "sting", and CAN'T sting. But, we DO KNOW W.H.O. can intiate it!!

Stop skimming what you read from "Amil" posters! You are on your own ride, because you choose to miss the "boat" that WILL deliver you to your desired destination.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,078
3,472
USA
Visit site
✟225,378.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It's becoming clear to me what's really going on here. Amils don't like it when their view is challenged, so they then keep claiming they are being misrepresented when someone like me challenges it. My method of challenging it is by first assuming Amil, which means satan is currently bound, does that agree with Scripture, does that agree with reality? Amils have put their own spin on what some of these things are supposed to mean, the same way PreTribbers put their own spin on what things are supposed to mean. Me, I don't need to put a spin on what the pit is designed to do, and that is, imprison someone, make them inactive at the time.. I can see, for example, that when the locusts are in the pit, this makes them inactive at the time. This means the pit is doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, thus make them inactive at the time.

Assuming satan is currently in the pit himself, it doesn't match when the locusts are in the pit. They are inactive while they are in the pit, thus the pit is doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, therefore making them no threat to anyone outside of their prison. satan is active while he is in the pit, if assuming he is currently in the pit, thus the pit is not doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, therefore making them no threat to anyone outside of their prison. That doesn't add up. Except Amils have to put their own spin on things by insisting it does add up because they don't see this meaning the locusts are inactive while in the pit, but if someone like me sees it differently, that I see it meaning the locusts are inactive while in the pit, this means I am misrepresenting Amil since I refuse to agree with their spin they put on some of these things.

Everyone puts a spin on Scripture apart from you. Yea right? No!

You render a hyper-figurative passage hyper-literal. Anything that gets in the way of that error is ignored or dismissed.

Your arguments on this have been repeatedly addressed and refuted over the years yet you choose to ignore or reject them. This is your pattern. You have to. Truth and logic are against your theology.

Is a literal prisoner in a prison inactive and incapable of doing harm or evil?

Are the wicked in a spiritual prison inactive and incapable of doing harm or evil?

Can a fierce dog on a long chain do harm to a human being that gets close to it?

Finally, you still have not addressed all your deliberate misrepresentions! Why? Because you have no answer or justification for them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Please stop avoiding: what are the 7 heads the beast possesses and what do they relate to? When did the beast start performing his evil?

Quit playing games. If you know the correct answer to that yourself then simply provide it. Maybe it will be something I had never considered before, something that might let me maybe see some of these things differently.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,078
3,472
USA
Visit site
✟225,378.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Quit playing games. If you know the correct answer to that yourself then simply provide it. Maybe it will be something I had never considered before, something that might let me maybe see some of these things differently.

Revelation 13:1: "And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.”

Revelation 17:3 says, “So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.”

Revelation 17:7 says, “And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.”

What are these seven heads of the beast? We do not have to guess.
Revelation 17:9-13 further enlarges, The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.”

There are layers to the symbolism of Revelation. The seven heads represent seven mountains, but the next level of interpretation seems to render the seven mountains seven kingdoms which seven kings reign over. After describing the seven mountains, we learn: “And there are seven kings.” Kings reign over kingdoms, not over physical mountains. The fact is: throughout Scripture, mountains represent kingdoms that kings reign over.

The symbolism is very deliberate. Jerusalem is built on seven mountains, so is Rome. The writer takes these and broadens them out to describe global realties. He may well have lent the idea of the Roman empire to impress the wider influence of godless power through the generations by using the symbolism of seven mountains to depict the completeness of the wickedness of this world.

Mountains in Scripture are often identified with kingdoms. The mountain of the house of God is clearly the kingdom of God. Mountains are identified with carnal kingdoms while hills are associated with smaller worldly nations. The seven heads, which are mountains, represent seven carnal kingdoms that have been arrayed against God’s people in Scripture. Of these seven kingdoms, five are prior to John’s prophecy, one present to him and one is yet future. Moreover, the seventh kingdom is predicted to manifest for “a short space.” Interestingly, there is an eighth kingdom. This is the beast himself, obviously rising up in his own right rather than in a delegated sense (through other evil earthly empires) like before.

The woman sitting upon the beast represents the religious harlot sitting upon “seven” secular “mountains” (or kingdoms) ruled by “seven kings.” The seven heads expressly symbolize seven kingdoms before, during and after John’s day. Each has a distinct individual ruler.

The beast is said to be integral to the other seven previous kingdoms; this beast “was” before John – obviously manifesting through the five tributary kingdoms before John, he “is” to John in the form of the one kingdom in existence at the time of John, and one is still future to John as it has “not yet come.” Additional to this we learn, “the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.” The seven kingdoms are seven heads on the beast – thus the beast is described as being “of the seven.” The seven heads are part of this being. The number seven is significant as it normally represents completeness in Scripture. This book places the beast within the complete scheme of this dark antichrist reign.

This beast obviously represents the overall influence of Satan from which all the other individual kingdoms emanate throughout time. The beast system is that demonic spirit/influence/empire overseeing every wicked kingdom upon earth from the beginning. This worldly beast embodies the wickedness that controls the kingdoms of this world. It seems to influence the overall system that is energized by the spirit of this world.

At the cross the beast went “into perdition” being curtailed in his wholesale deluding of the Gentile people. Notwithstanding, the beast is associated with the reign of evil on this earth throughout this intra-Advent period, although restrained from what the beast would have desired through the Gospel influence. Prior to the end this beast is released from his spiritual restraints and moves to the fore. This is his time to finally flex his muscles. This is his final throw.

As he starts to perpetrate his antichrist agenda, the beast establishes “ten kings” to do his dirty work. These operate from within the beast kingdom. They are described as the beast’s “ten horns.” This reign of havoc only seems to be short: they are said to “receive power as kings one hour with the beast.” There is unity amongst these kings, “These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.” These emissaries of the devil's kingdom promote and enforce the devil's antichrist system.

We need to piece together this symbolism and align it with history in order to establish its full meaning. Firstly, Rome was one of the four kingdoms Daniel saw. It was also the existing kingdom when John received this prophesy here. John sees five great kingdoms before the one existing in his day (Rome). Three of the five former kingdoms probably refer to Daniel’s kingdoms: Babylon, Media and Persia and Grecia. This leaves two more – obviously subsequent to them. I believe these refer to the Egyptian Dynasty and the Assyria rule.

1. Egyptian empire
2. Assyrian empire
3. Babylonian empire
4. Media and Persia empire
5. Greek empire (five were)
6. Roman empire (one is existing at the time of the writing of Revelation)
7. One further evil empire (between Rome and the beast at the end)
8. The beast.

Simon Kistermaker suggests a slight modification:

1. Assyrian empire
2. Babylonian empire
3. Neo-Babylonian empire
4. Media and Persia empire
5. Greek empire (five were)
6. Roman empire (one is existing at the time of the writing of Revelation)
7. One further evil empire (between Rome and the beast at the end)
8. The beast.

Many commentators see these kingdoms as those who stood against God’s people but also invaded and subjugated natural Israel.

If we are seeing this right then that still leaves two other significant wicked empires after Rome. Whilst we know the last empire is the beast (after his release from the abyss), that still leaves us with the seventh kingdom which appears before end. With the aid of history, we could certainly speculate what the penultimate wicked kingdom is in-between the Roman Empire (in Bible times) and the last wicked unrestrained manifestation of the beast at the end. A popular view that many Bible students and historians hold is that it is the Ottoman Empire. This was certainly one of the greatest empires in history. Moreover, it actually spanned three continents. This in essence was an Islamic Empire? Whilst there have been other evil systems like Fascism and Communism that have arisen in this past hundred years, the only empire to be a direct threat to Christianity since the Roman Empire of the first century has been the Ottoman Empire. This also totally overrun natural Israel.

1. Egyptian empire
2. Assyrian empire
3. Babylonian empire
4. Media and Persian empire
5. Greek empire
6. Roman empire
7. Ottoman empire (???)
8. The beast empire

It could be argued that Christianity significantly wounded the Ottoman Empire. But today it is returning. The Ottoman empire was of course, Muslim. And we see Islam rising again, and with the same goals of a global Islamic Caliphate. It is today, once again, a direct threat to Christianity (and everybody else for that matter).

Could the revived kingdom be Mystery Babylon – a wicked global manifestation of all that opposes God, and a reflection of the evil character of ancient Babylon. Could it be a revitalized Rome, in the shape of the Roman Catholic Church?

The fact that the beast possesses seven obnoxious heads representing seven evil kingdoms throughout time, five of which were already destroyed before John, the sixth was the Roman Empire existing when he lived, the seventh was to appear somewhere between the Roman Empire, and the second coming of the Lord shows the absurdity of the contention that the beast is a man. What human being in history survived submerged below the sea for more than a few minutes? The next thing the literalist will be telling us is that babies really do come from under cabbage plants!
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Everyone puts a spin on Scripture apart from you. Yea right? No!

You render a hyper-figurative passage hyper-literal. Anything that gets in the way of that error is ignored or dismissed.

Your arguments on this have been repeatedly addressed and refuted over the years yet you choose to ignore or reject them. This is your pattern. You have to. Truth and logic are against your theology.

Is a literal prisoner in a prison inactive and incapable of doing harm or evil?

Are the wicked in a spiritual prison inactive and incapable of doing harm or evil?

Can a fierce dog on a long chain do harm to a human being that gets close to it?

Finally, you still have not addressed all your deliberate misrepresentions! Why? Because you have no answer or justification for them.


To be fair, we all put our own spin on Scripture from time to time, including me. But that is beside the point since one has to first deal with the spin Amils have put on some of these things, and then deal with getting attacked if one doesn't agree with the spin they put on some of these things, by then being accused of misrepresenting their view.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If satan is currently in the pit this paints a picture that satan can be in more than one place at the same time. The reason this paints a picture like that is because, for example, if a lion is imprisoned in a pit and at the same time, this same lion is walking about outside of the pit looking for whom it might devour, this causes an absurdity with reality since no such thing is remotely possible, that a lion can be in more than one place at a time. If satan is depicted in a pit and is also depicted as a lion walking about looking for whom it might devour, both can't be true at the same time, anymore than the real world example can be true at the same time concerning the lion, that if it's in the pit, it can't also be walking around outside of the pit at the same time. Therefore, the Bible is not going to be using real world imagery that leads to an absurdity. Having someone bound in a pit and walking about outside of the pit at the same time, that leads to an absurdity since nothing like that is possible in the real world, and that the Bible is not going to be using real world imagery that leads to an absurdity.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,078
3,472
USA
Visit site
✟225,378.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
To be fair, we all put our own spin on Scripture from time to time, including me. But that is beside the point since one has to first deal with the spin Amils have put on some of these things, and then deal with getting attacked if one doesn't agree with the spin they put on some of these things, by then accusing that person of misrepresenting their view.

Amils have a general solid consistent system of hermeneutics. You don't seem to have anything apart from "what will enable Premil?"
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Spiritual Jew
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,078
3,472
USA
Visit site
✟225,378.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It's becoming clear to me what's really going on here. Amils don't like it when their view is challenged, so they then keep claiming they are being misrepresented when someone like me challenges it. My method of challenging it is by first assuming Amil, which means satan is currently bound, does that agree with Scripture, does that agree with reality? Amils have put their own spin on what some of these things are supposed to mean, the same way PreTribbers put their own spin on what things are supposed to mean. Me, I don't need to put a spin on what the pit is designed to do, and that is, imprison someone, make them inactive at the time.. I can see, for example, that when the locusts are in the pit, this makes them inactive at the time. This means the pit is doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, thus make them inactive at the time.

Assuming satan is currently in the pit himself, it doesn't match when the locusts are in the pit. They are inactive while they are in the pit, thus the pit is doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, therefore making them no threat to anyone outside of their prison. satan is active while he is in the pit, if assuming he is currently in the pit, thus the pit is not doing what it is designed to do, imprison someone, therefore making them no threat to anyone outside of their prison. That doesn't add up. Except Amils have to put their own spin on things by insisting it does add up because they don't see this meaning the locusts are inactive while in the pit, but if someone like me sees it differently, that I see it meaning the locusts are inactive while in the pit, this means I am misrepresenting Amil since I refuse to agree with their spin they put on some of these things.

Why will you not apologize for your false charges against Amils? You allege (1) "Amils never use both the OT and NT together to prove they are the correct position. They go by what the NT alone says," (2) "if one thing is not literal then neither is anything else that is involved," (3) "they have to first be influenced by outside sources." Are these true or false?
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,609
2,107
Texas
✟204,831.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why will you not apologize for your false charges against Amils? You allege (1) "Amils never use both the OT and NT together to prove they are the correct position. They go by what the NT alone says," (2) "if one thing is not literal then neither is anything else that is involved," (3) "they have to first be influenced by outside sources." Are these true or false?


When are you going to get around to proving my opinion false involving what I said about influenced by outside sources? I clearly provided you with a way to prove that opinion false. I provided that way, in post #95 I think.

Years ago when I was still a teen, maybe 17 at the time, I got in a bit of trouble involving doing petty things here and there, therefore the cops had my number, so to speak. And since the cops knew me, there was this one time some detectives came to where I was living saying they suspected me of a recent crime, except this was a major crime, then told me what they suspected me of, then asked me if I would voluntarily take a lie detector test. Why not, I had nothing to hide. So I went with them and took the lie detector test. I think it was maybe 10 AM when I took it. After I took the test and they then reviewed the test, one of them came back and said to me, why did you even bother taking the test since you know you did what we suspect you of doing, and this test prooves it, you flunked that test on every question relating to this crime, therefore we are going to have a warrant for your arrest by 2 pm today and you are looking at maybe 20 years in prison.

Then they took me back home and that I was so traumatized by this that I took to the freeway and hitch hiked out of Dodge that same hour when I got back home. Not because I was guilty of the crime they were trying to pin on me, but because I feared going to prison for something I didn't even do. Eventually I finally came back home, maybe a week later, and that I never heard a single word out of these detectives ever again, in regards to what they suspected me of doing. I don't know why that detective lied to me like that by telling me I flunked that test when he knew good and well that I didn't. But all I know is, ever since then I take it quite personal when one is falsely accusing me of something that I know I didn't do, and sometimes it even makes me angry. Especially when one persists to accuse me of something when I already said that I didn't do nor am doing what I'm being accused of. So, yes, being falsely accused is a major major major pet peeve of mine. Instead of someone maybe falsely accusing me of something, why not first ask what I was meaning by that? Apparently, some ppl must find it more satisfying to shoot first and then ask questions later.

And you all want me to apologize for something I'm not guilty of. That's like, well maybe I should have also apologized to that detective at the time for falsely telling me I did something I didn't do, since he told me that I flunked the lie detector test, implying that I was guilty of what I was being charged with, then me experiencing some trauma because of it. And everytime someone falsely accuses me of something after that, it's like reliving some of that trauma all over again that I experienced when I was 17. I can put up with a lot of stuff, but I draw the line when I'm being accused of something that I know I didn't do.

To misrepresent something means any or all of the following---give a false account of, give a false idea of, misstate, misreport, misquote, quote/take out of context, garble, misinterpret, put a spin on, falsify, fudge, pervert, belie, distort, warp, strain, color, manipulate, parody, travesty, conceal, disguise

How am I doing any of that if assuming satan is in the pit, assuming that is meaning now, that I, not meaning Amils, compare that with Scripture, compare that with reality, then I, not meaning Amils, don't see it computing that satan is currently in the pit after all? How is someone supposed to be able to argue against a position they don't agree with if they are not even allowed to at least demonstrate, for example, why satan can't be bound now? If I was arguing with someone about whether or not Jesus is God, I couldn't care less about their spin on things, which allegedly proves Jesus is not God, I don't need to agree with nor accept their spin on things as being facts in order to prove they are wrong that Jesus is not God.
 
Upvote 0