The War With Satan

[Roymond]

On 1/5/2020 at 1:33 PM, Da Puppers said:

No one is denying the 3 heavens.   I have asked you to provide your evidence of scripture that Satan does not have access to the third heaven.   Actually the question is now bigger than that. 

Let's just suppose that your premise is true,  and that Satan is restricted to only the 1st two heavens.   

QUESTION:

What about the angels that will follow him when Rev 12 takes place.   Are they currently restricted too? 

I ask this because it says the angels OF HEAVEN.   It could have simply said angels.  I think that you are going to have to deny them the same access because the raptured church would be keeping company with "Satan's angels" before they too are expelled from the 3rd heaven.   What is your response? 

Be Blessed 

The PuP 

Neither Satan nor his angels would have been able to remain in Heaven once Jesus ascended:  humans were meant to rule the angels, and here is the first of those, whose mere presence means Satan has lost, and the intensity of that glory would have been impossible for them to bear.

[Roymond]

On 1/5/2020 at 2:55 PM, Da Puppers said:

Concerning a claim that remains without support,  nothing.   Your deflection is noted. It's not that i think that the church will be raptured into the presence of Satan's angels.  Your belief that the church will be raptured before he is removed that I have a problem with.   If the church is to be raptured to a place where he is not,  then prove it.  You believe that Satan does not have access to heaven,  Because you believe in pretrib.   You are using the doctrine of pretrib to prove (without any scripture to support) the doctrine that says that satan doesn't have access to the third heaven.   Without any scripture to verify the conclusion (3rd heaven)  your premise is baseless and contradictory to God's promise to those who are to inherit salvation. 

Be Blessed 

The PuP 

I don't believe in any "trib" and I think the scriptures are pretty clear:  when the One Who is Like God (Jesus) showed up after ascending, Mr. "I will be like God!" wouldn't have been able to handle that presence.  The mere presence of Christ's glorified human nature would have reduced the Enemy to a quivering blob needing a place to hide.

[iamlamad]

17 hours ago, Roymond said:

I don't believe in any "trib" and I think the scriptures are pretty clear:  when the One Who is Like God (Jesus) showed up after ascending, Mr. "I will be like God!" wouldn't have been able to handle that presence.  The mere presence of Christ's glorified human nature would have reduced the Enemy to a quivering blob needing a place to hide.

Quote

I don't believe in any "trib"

"AFter the tribulation of those days..." Words spoken by Jesus and written in Matthew 24.

[iamlamad]

For what it's worth, one day God spoke and gave me a synopsis of Revelation 12?

"This chapter was Me introducing John to the Dragon, and in particular what the dragon would be doing during the last half of the Week. Count how many times the dragon is mentioned, including pronouns."

(He waited while I counted  - if I remember, 32 times. I then answered, "I counted 32 times.) He continued.
 

"I also chose to show John what the Dragon did while I was a very young child. Those first five verses were a 'history lesson' for John."

This first five verses were about His birth, then how the devil used King Herod in an attempt to kill Jesus. Verse 5 shows His entire time on earth in one verse.

Many people attempt to make things in those first five verses apply to today. I don't think so.

I also believe that war where the dragon's tail took 1/3 of the angels, happen before the days of Adam. 

The future war, starting in 12:7, will begin a few seconds after the 7th trumpet that marks the exact midpoint of the week.

[Roymond]

4 hours ago, iamlamad said:

"AFter the tribulation of those days..." Words spoken by Jesus and written in Matthew 24.

The use of a word in one verse does not a theology make. 

 

[Roymond]

3 hours ago, iamlamad said:

For what it's worth, one day God spoke and gave me a synopsis of Revelation 12?

"This chapter was Me introducing John to the Dragon, and in particular what the dragon would be doing during the last half of the Week. Count how many times the dragon is mentioned, including pronouns."

(He waited while I counted  - if I remember, 32 times. I then answered, "I counted 32 times.) He continued.
 

"I also chose to show John what the Dragon did while I was a very young child. Those first five verses were a 'history lesson' for John."

This first five verses were about His birth, then how the devil used King Herod in an attempt to kill Jesus. Verse 5 shows His entire time on earth in one verse.

Many people attempt to make things in those first five verses apply to today. I don't think so.

I also believe that war where the dragon's tail took 1/3 of the angels, happen before the days of Adam. 

The future war, starting in 12:7, will begin a few seconds after the 7th trumpet that marks the exact midpoint of the week.

I don't try to make any of it apply to today because the leading reason that got Revelations into the canon was that people reading it in the very late first and all through the second century and into the third saw in what John wrote all the things going on around them.  Add to that that the end times began at Jesus Ascension (or the leveling of Jerusalem; it's been argued either way) and everyone between then and now has been (and are) living in the end times -- which makes sense of the fact that just about every generation of Christians has seen Revelation as talking about their time.

What I do say is that this very fact, that it's been relevant to every generation, indicates that it's meant to keep us alert!  Whether or not we're the last generation(s) on Earth, for all we know we could be -- and that declares, "Be watchful!"

[iamlamad]

18 hours ago, Roymond said:

The use of a word in one verse does not a theology make. 

 

He could have said, BEFORE the tribulation of those days...He did not. He specifically said AFTER. That one word makes a big difference in timing.

[Roymond]

12 hours ago, iamlamad said:

He could have said, BEFORE the tribulation of those days...He did not. He specifically said AFTER. That one word makes a big difference in timing.

It still doesn't mean there's a thing called "The Tribulation". 

An of course He didn't say "BEFORE", because we've been in the end times since He ascended -- the big kick-off being the persecution of the church in Jerusalem and the scattering of Christians across half the Roman Empire, and the leveling of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. being the exclamation point.

[iamlamad]

9 hours ago, Roymond said:

It still doesn't mean there's a thing called "The Tribulation". 

An of course He didn't say "BEFORE", because we've been in the end times since He ascended -- the big kick-off being the persecution of the church in Jerusalem and the scattering of Christians across half the Roman Empire, and the leveling of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D. being the exclamation point.

Jesus disagreed with you:

Matthew 24:29

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

[Roymond]

8 hours ago, iamlamad said:

Jesus disagreed with you:

Matthew 24:29

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

No, He doesn't -- that's twisting the grammar.  It has nothing to do with any specific time labelled "The Tribulation".  The word is actually being used adjectivally; it's describing the nature of "those days".  That's obvious because it's followed by "of those days", meaning that the distressing events are characteristic of the days being discussed.  Basic English grammar.

Edited December 22, 2022 by Roymond