Covenant Theology vs. Dispensationalsim

[CrowCross]

He is bound from deceiving the nations. That is all

Really? Turn on the news.

I just read an article YESTERDAY that speaks of people not being allowed to bring a bible into Nicaragua.
Two days ago I read an article about Canada where they want to ban a form of free speech and make it illegal to present some of the "hateful" passages in the bible.

 

[Arial]

But I never said some of the verses in Revelations couldn't be symbolic. You are consistently misrepresenting what I say and that violates forum rules. (That violates the rule that says member are not to act as moderators.)

I never said that you did say that. So, show me where I did.

 

[CrowCross]

It is the hermeneutical method that produces the interpretation. The method itself is not the interpretation.

Is your hermeneutical method the only way? Revelations isn't allowed to be viewed as a book containing prophecy....future?

 

[Arial]

Really? Turn on the news.

I just read an article YESTERDAY that speaks of people not being allowed to bring a bible into Nicaragua.
Two days ago I read an article about Canada where they want to ban a form of free speech and make it illegal to present some of the "hateful" passages in the bible.

Persecution of the church was taking place in the NT era as well. And has been ever since. You are confusing categories. Bound from deceiving the nations in CT means that he is not able to stop the preaching of the gospel wherever God is having it preached. It means he cannot stop the great commission as Christ gathers his people from all nations.

 

[Carbon]

Covent theology vs Dispensationalism in many instances is about how one interprets Revelations. You do know that?

That’s just a part of it. Like I said it’s a different hermeneutic

 

[Arial]

I never said that you did say that. So, show me where I did.

Ha, ha does not show me where I said you said nothing in Rev is symbolic.

 

[Arial]

Is your hermeneutical method the only way? Revelations isn't allowed to be viewed as a book containing prophecy....future?

CT does see Revelation as prophecy. And if CT were the only hermeneutical method there would be no reason for this thread.

 

[CrowCross]

CT means that he is not able to stop the preaching of the gospel wherever God is having it preached.

A Dispensationalist would agree with that statement...but it doesn't mean Satan is currently in the pit and can't get out.

 

[CrowCross]

Ha, ha does not show me where I said you said nothing in Rev is symbolic.

You never did get back to me with your thoughts on symbolism and the possibility of April 13, 2029 literally being what we read about in Rev. 8.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Covent theology vs Dispensationalism in many instances is about how one interprets Revelations. You do know that?

The reason this keeps coming back to hermeneutics is because the disagreement isn’t over whether the Bible is true, prophetic, or literal where it intends to be. The disagreement is over how Scripture itself tells us to read different kinds of texts.

For example, Acts 1 is historical narrative. The angels speak plainly: Jesus will return in the same way He ascended — visibly, bodily, and in glory. Covenant theology affirms that without qualification. Nothing in that passage mentions a horse, weapons, armies, or symbolic imagery, so there’s no reason to import those elements into it.

Revelation 19, by contrast, is a visionary apocalypse. John tells us what he “saw,” not what occurred on earth in narrative sequence. The white horse, sword from the mouth, robe dipped in blood, and armies clothed in linen are all symbolic elements drawn directly from Old Testament prophetic imagery. No one reads the sword literally coming from Christ’s mouth, because Scripture itself teaches us not to read visionary imagery that way (Isa 11:4; Heb 4:12).

The issue, then, isn’t whether Jesus returns bodily, but whether apocalyptic symbols are allowed to redefine the nature of that return described elsewhere in clear prose. Covenant theology says no — visions illustrate doctrine; they do not replace it.

The same hermeneutical principle applies to the binding of Satan. Revelation 20 says he is bound “so that he might not deceive the nations.” It does not say he is inactive, absent, or no longer opposing believers. Jesus Himself explains what binding means when He says He has already bound the strong man in order to plunder his house (Matt 12:28–29). The New Testament repeatedly teaches that the nations are now being gathered through the gospel, something that was not happening prior to Christ’s victory (Matt 28:18–20; Col 1:6).

So pointing to evil, persecution, or deception in the world doesn’t refute the binding — because Scripture never defines the binding as the absence of evil. It defines it in relation to Satan’s ability to prevent the nations from being reached.

This is why the method matters. Dispensationalism tends to read apocalyptic visions as if they function like historical narrative, while covenant theology reads them the way Scripture itself teaches us to read symbolic prophecy — in harmony with clearer teaching elsewhere.

That’s not avoiding Revelation. It’s letting Scripture interpret Scripture.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Really? Turn on the news.

I just read an article YESTERDAY that speaks of people not being allowed to bring a bible into Nicaragua.
Two days ago I read an article about Canada where they want to ban a form of free speech and make it illegal to present some of the "hateful" passages in the bible.

When Scripture speaks about Satan being “bound,” it defines what he is bound from doing. Revelation 20 does not say Satan is unable to persecute, oppose, intimidate, or influence governments. It says he is bound so that he might not deceive the nations anymore.

That distinction matters, especially when modern examples are raised.

The fact that some nations restrict Bibles, suppress Christianity, or persecute believers does not contradict the binding. Scripture repeatedly teaches that persecution increases after the gospel goes to the nations, not before it (John 15:18–20; 2 Tim 3:12). Satan opposing the gospel is expected. What he can no longer do is successfully prevent the nations as nations from being reached.

Before Christ, the nations were largely given over to darkness while God dealt primarily with Israel (Acts 14:16; Ps 147:19–20). After Christ’s death, resurrection, and exaltation, that changes. Jesus declares that all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Him, and on that basis the nations are commanded to be discipled (Matt 28:18–20). Paul can then say the gospel is bearing fruit “in the whole world” (Col 1:6), even while persecution exists.

So when you point to places like Nicaragua or Canada, those examples don’t show Satan is unbound. They show him doing exactly what Scripture says he will do in this age — resisting, pressuring, and persecuting — while still failing to stop the gospel from advancing. The church continues to exist, believers continue to be saved, and Christ continues to build His church in every generation (Matt 16:18).

The binding is not the absence of opposition. It is the certainty of Christ’s victory and the inevitability of the gospel reaching people from every nation, even in hostile environments.

That is why the news doesn’t overturn Revelation 20 — it actually fits the biblical picture of the present age

 

[Arial]

You never did get back to me with your thoughts on symbolism and the possibility of April 13, 2029 literally being what we read about in Rev. 8.

That doesn't provide the evidence that I said you said "nothing in Rev was symbolic" either.

 

[Arial]

A Dispensationalist would agree with that statement...but it doesn't mean Satan is currently in the pit and can't get out.

Who said he was in the pit and couldn't get out? Show the evidence.

 

[CrowCross]

Who said he was in the pit and couldn't get out? Show the evidence.

Those that say we are currently in the millennial reign would say so....as the description of Satan being locked up currently isn't so.
Satan is still deceiving the nations.

 

[Carbon]

Those that say we are currently in the millennial reign would say so....as the description of Satan being locked up currently isn't so.
Satan is still deceiving the nations.

Who said it’s a literal pit, other than dispensationalists?

 

[Arial]

Those that say we are currently in the millennial reign would say so....as the description of Satan being locked up currently isn't so.
Satan is still deceiving the nations.

I believe we are currently in the reign of Christ now and that the thousand years of Rev refer to this age as I have said, and I do not say and never have said that Satan is locked up and can't get out. That is a gross misrepresentation (rule violation) of the teaching of amillennialism, This misrepresentation is being offered after having been told repeatedly the covenant view of the binding of Satan from deceiving the nations and his future release to deceive the nations. So, either you are offering a deliberate misrepresentation, or you simply dismiss everything you don't agree with and those who present it, or you simply aren't able to comprehend and absorb it. Either way---stop it.

 

[CrowCross]

The reason this keeps coming back to hermeneutics is because the disagreement isn’t over whether the Bible is true, prophetic, or literal where it intends to be. The disagreement is over how Scripture itself tells us to read different kinds of texts.

Jesus tells us what to expect...or how to interpret Revelations when He said..."19 Therefore write down the things you have seen, the things that are, and the things that will happen after this."

For example, Acts 1 is historical narrative. The angels speak plainly: Jesus will return in the same way He ascended — visibly, bodily, and in glory. Covenant theology affirms that without qualification. Nothing in that passage mentions a horse, weapons, armies, or symbolic imagery, so there’s no reason to import those elements into it.

And that is the huge elephant in the room issue with CT. A return of Christ mentions a white horse. The white horse in any kind of scenarion is found void in Acts 1.

Revelation 19, by contrast, is a visionary apocalypse. John tells us what he “saw,” not what occurred on earth in narrative sequence. The white horse, sword from the mouth, robe dipped in blood, and armies clothed in linen are all symbolic elements drawn directly from Old Testament prophetic imagery. No one reads the sword literally coming from Christ’s mouth, because Scripture itself teaches us not to read visionary imagery that way (Isa 11:4; Heb 4:12).

Even if you fully symbolize the return of Jesus on a white horse...the sword, robe dipped in blood etc., this portrail of the return of Christ isn't anything like the description of ascention of Christ in which Christ returns in the same way as per 1 Thes 4:16ish.

The issue, then, isn’t whether Jesus returns bodily, but whether apocalyptic symbols are allowed to redefine the nature of that return described elsewhere in clear prose. Covenant theology says no — visions illustrate doctrine; they do not replace it.

Rev 19 defines how Christ The Word of God, the KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS will return. What John saw in his vision...was reality.
The reality is scripture.
The ascention in Acts chapter 1 is also reality and the reality presented in Revelations chapter 19 is different. So different they must be representations of different events...pertaining to the return of Christ Jesus as told by the Angels (men in white).

11“Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen Him go into heaven.”

The same hermeneutical principle applies to the binding of Satan. Revelation 20 says he is bound “so that he might not deceive the nations.” It does not say he is inactive, absent, or no longer opposing believers. Jesus Himself explains what binding means when He says He has already bound the strong man in order to plunder his house (Matt 12:28–29). The New Testament repeatedly teaches that the nations are now being gathered through the gospel, something that was not happening prior to Christ’s victory (Matt 28:18–20; Col 1:6).

Satan according to Rev 20 was..thrown into the Abyss, they shut it, and sealed it over him, so that he could not deceive the nations until the thousand years were complete. It's a bit more than not being able to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Satan will not have any influence on earth during the millennial reign. We can no Satan has not been thrown into the abyss because he still has influence....we are not in the millennial reign.
In fact Satan can masquerade, disguise, transform himself as an angel of light. 2 Cor:11;14
Satan is like a roaring lion...prowls around, seeking someone to devour. 1 Peter 5:5

So pointing to evil, persecution, or deception in the world doesn’t refute the binding — because Scripture never defines the binding as the absence of evil. It defines it in relation to Satan’s ability to prevent the nations from being reached.

Scripture doesn't refer to Satan as being thrown into the abyss as a means of allowing the Gospel to be spread.

This is why the method matters. Dispensationalism tends to read apocalyptic visions as if they function like historical narrative, while covenant theology reads them the way Scripture itself teaches us to read symbolic prophecy — in harmony with clearer teaching elsewhere.

"in harmony with clearer teaching elsewhere."....OK, if you say so.

That’s not avoiding Revelation. It’s letting Scripture interpret Scripture.

I've just demonstrated how the symbolic or misinterpretation of the CT meaning of the symbols isn't supported by the real world examples
In this particular reply....the proble wth no white horse at the ascention of Christ as well as Satan still being free and not locked away in the abyss which means we are not in the millennial reign...literally of symbolically.

 

[Arial]

Jesus tells us what to expect...or how to interpret Revelations when He said..."19 Therefore write down the things you have seen, the things that are, and the things that will happen after this."

And that is the huge elephantin the room issue with CT. A return of Christ mentions a white horse. The white horse in any kind of scenarion is found void in Acts 1.


Even if you fully symbolize the return of Jesus on a white horse...the sword, robe dipped in blood etc., this portrail of the return of Christ isn't anything like the description of ascention of Christ in which Christ returns in the same way as per 1 Thes 4:16ish.

Rev 19 defines how Christ The Word of God, the KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS will return. What John saw in his vision...was reality.
The reality is scripture.
The ascention in Acts chapter 1 is also reality and the reality presented in Revelations chapter 19 is different. So different they must be representations of different events...pertaining to the return of Christ Jesus as told by the Angels (men in white).

11“Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen Him go into heaven.”

Satan according to Rev 20 was..thrown into the Abyss, they shut it, and sealed it over him, so that he could not deceive the nations until the thousand years were complete. It's a bit more than not being able to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Satan will not have any influence on earth during the millennial reign. We can no Satan has not been thrown into the abyss because he still has influence....we are not in the millennial reign.
In fact Satan can masquerade, disguise, transform himself as an angel of light. 2 Cor:11;14
Satan is like a roaring lion...prowls around, seeking someone to devour. 1 Peter 5:5



Scripture doesn't refer to Satan as being thrown into the abyss as a means of allowing the Gospel to be spread.


"in harmony with clearer teaching elsewhere."....OK, if you say so.

I've just demonstrated how the symbolic or misinterpretation of the CT meaning of the symbols isn't supported by the real world examples
In this particular reply....the proble wth no white horse at the ascention of Christ as well as Satan still being free and not locked away in the abyss which means we are not in the millennial reign...literally of symbolically.

Just to butt in for a second (I am looking forward to your response Hazel) I will remind you Crow, was pointed out to you before, that the Bible never says Jesus returns on a white horse. John is seeing something in the heavens that have been opened for him to see, and never once does that vision show Jesus returning to earth. You are presuming it and you are wrong in the presumption. It is possible for that to be the case believe it or not.

 

[CrowCross]

When Scripture speaks about Satan being “bound,” it defines what he is bound from doing. Revelation 20 does not say Satan is unable to persecute, oppose, intimidate, or influence governments. It says he is bound so that he might not deceive the nations anymore.

Yes, it does mention deceive the nations...but, when you're thrown into the abyss and then the abyss is shut, and sealed it over Satan...it doesn't mean Satan gets out on work release.

Al Capone may have been arrested for federal income-tax evasion...but when he was in Jail on Alcatraz he couldn't sit in a dark back room in Chicago smoking cigars and run the Mafia.

When Satan is thrown into the abyss...he's there. Period.

That distinction matters, especially when modern examples are raised.

The fact that some nations restrict Bibles, suppress Christianity, or persecute believers does not contradict the binding. Scripture repeatedly teaches that persecution increases after the gospel goes to the nations, not before it (John 15:18–20; 2 Tim 3:12). Satan opposing the gospel is expected. What he can no longer do is successfully prevent the nations as nations from being reached.

As I pointed out....there's more to it then stopping Satan from opposing the gospel. You need to leave your single thought behind. {Violation of 2.2, 2.1}

Before Christ, the nations were largely given over to darkness while God dealt primarily with Israel (Acts 14:16; Ps 147:19–20). After Christ’s death, resurrection, and exaltation, that changes. Jesus declares that all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Him, and on that basis the nations are commanded to be discipled (Matt 28:18–20). Paul can then say the gospel is bearing fruit “in the whole world” (Col 1:6), even while persecution exists.

Yup, I have no problem with that despite Satan roaming through the earth, and and walking back and forth in it.

So when you point to places like Nicaragua or Canada, those examples don’t show Satan is unbound. They show him doing exactly what Scripture says he will do in this age — resisting, pressuring, and persecuting — while still failing to stop the gospel from advancing. The church continues to exist, believers continue to be saved, and Christ continues to build His church in every generation (Matt 16:18).

Yes, Satan is doing that because he's not locked up as the millennial requires....and that shows we are not in the millennial.

The binding is not the absence of opposition. It is the certainty of Christ’s victory and the inevitability of the gospel reaching people from every nation, even in hostile environments.

When Satan is bound when the millennial reign begins in the future...there will be an absence of opposition from Satan.

That is why the news doesn’t overturn Revelation 20 — it actually fits the biblical picture of the present age

The news is currently pointing at the birth pangs....and the building of the tehnological Beast System.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Ill reply later.