Paul claimed 3 times that Rev 20:4 was a current reality.

[Josheb]

I forget the location but Lewis says Satan operates by rumor. The rumor is he has power; if it gets repeated often enough, it has its own power.

I like Lewis. He's often very interpretive but also correct more often than not. I'd offer explanations, such as simple rhetoric, understanding any given claim in the context of whole scripture, possible references to Jewish theology/mythology, and the writers writing in the context of culture, but there is some validity to the premise of rumor.


Take, for example, satan said to be roaming the earth looking for those he may devour. Since satan cannot devour the redeemed, the implication is he's feeding solely on the already dead, those dead in sin and not those dead and alive in Christ. That makes him a carrion eater. Animals who ate other dead animals were unclean in Judaism. Jesus is simply saying the adversary is an unclean creature, one to be avoided and not one who has any power of his own to harm anyone against his Creator's will. Job would be the precedent for understanding satan's limits to harass or devour God's people. Romans 8 would be another: if there is such an occasion where God has seen fit to unleash satan in your life or mine then we can rest confidently on the promise God works all things for good according to His purpose.

 

[TibiasDad]

Oh, wait. There is no trial. Jude says the matter is decided. It's John 3:18 with no option for redemption. Salvation form sin is the sole privielge of humanity and NOT the angels who failed to keep their proper abode.

I was only making a simile, the binding is not that the Devil and his angels are being held in isolation waiting to be finally judged and thrown into “jail”, that being hell, where he will “be tormented day and night forever.” (Rev 20:10)


Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

It says right there: "soon." So why do you call them (distant) future?

Please do not appeal to Psalm 90:4 or 2 Peter 2:9 because those verses do not contain the words "soon" or "near."

But they do portray the relevance of time to God, and his words are spoken from his perspective so if a day equals 1000, and it’s been nearly two thousand years since the resurrection, then two days is near and soon.

Doug

 

[EarlyActs]

But they do portray the relevance of time to God, and his words are spoken from his perspective so if a day equals 1000, and it’s been nearly two thousand years since the resurrection, then two days is near and soon.

Doug

So when the next chapter refers to a church in western Asia Minor should we just skip and think of a church in Seoul, SK? What did the first readers think when they heard it?

 

[TibiasDad]

So when the next chapter refers to a church in western Asia Minor should we just skip and think of a church in Seoul, SK? What did the first readers think when they heard it?

??? I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here.

Doug

 

[EarlyActs]

??? I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here.

Doug

Do we depart from the normal meaning and sense of urgency and timing because of some other stray verse somewhere?

 

[TibiasDad]

Do we depart from the normal meaning and sense of urgency and timing because of some other stray verse somewhere?

All timing is God’s timing. His perspective is paramount! The only way to walk by faith is to see things through his perspective. What is soon and near to a God outside of time? Our only job is to remain faithful to him and rely on his faithfulness and promises that it will happen just like he declares.


Doug

 

[Josheb]

I was only making a simile, the binding is not....

Which binding? The binding of sin, the binding of Jude or the binding of Revelation Revelation 20:2 or Revelation 20:10?

I was only making a simile...

Appreciate the clarification.

But they do portray the relevance of time to God, and his words are spoken from his perspective so if a day equals 1000, and it’s been nearly two thousand years since the resurrection, then two days is near and soon.

Doug

Lame. 2 Peter 3:9 does not use the word "near." 2 Peter 3:9 is spoken about the urgency facing the Church in the first century. When God uses the word "near" in the New Testament He ALWAYS means near in time and space. Look it up. Revelation 1:3 and 22:10 are not excepts to the rule. In the New Testament the word "near" always means near, whether days are like years and years are like days to God or not.

Look it up.

If you can show me an example of the specific word "near" used to mean anything remotely close to two thousand years I will amend my thinking and position accordingly. Otherwise, you might want to consider adjusting your thinking and position to reconcile with the fact God means near when he says, "near."

 

[EarlyActs]

All timing is God’s timing. His perspective is paramount! The only way to walk by faith is to see things through his perspective. What is soon and near to a God outside of time? Our only job is to remain faithful to him and rely on his faithfulness and promises that it will happen just like he declares.


Doug

So Rom 13 is not his perspective--the place that tells us what our govs are supposed to be like in honor of the Son of Ps 2 and 110?

 

[TibiasDad]

So Rom 13 is not his perspective--the place that tells us what our govs are supposed to be like in honor of the Son of Ps 2 and 110?

First, what are “our govs”?

Secondly, how is anything I assert not in honor of the Son?

Thirdly, Rom13 is very much like Heb 10:

19Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. 24And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

This is the passage for my current sermon series. If “the Day approaching” is past, what value is there for us alive today, 2000 years later?

Doug

 

[EarlyActs]

First, what are “our govs”?

Secondly, how is anything I assert not in honor of the Son?

Thirdly, Rom13 is very much like Heb 10:

19Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. 24And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

This is the passage for my current sermon series. If “the Day approaching” is past, what value is there for us alive today, 2000 years later?

Doug

Governments, rulers. You may be seeking to honor the reigning Son (Acts 2:30) but what that looks like in government is in Rom 13's opening. This is why, if you read a bit of tacticalcivics.com you would see the sanity of Paul on these things. Gov as servant; as enforcer of known standards of righteousness; and so transparent that no officer (the person) is above question once his position is attained. All these are the things communist dictators piss on as soon as possible.

As far as the Day goes, remember the 2 parts of NT eschatology. Denying either is a catastrophe. 1, all the Judean calamity was in the 1st century, that generation; 2, there has been the delay of 2 Peter 3 of the final day of judgement. This is also allowed for by 'only the Father knows' in Mt 24, and by the 4 options for the time of the return in Mk 13. If Hebrews, as the title suggests, is about them, you might read that with a slight emphasis on 'that generation,' right? That's why the detailed review of their traditions, practices. That's why the 40 years reference is almost too chilling to mention--because their calamity and destruction did take place in 40 years.

 

[TibiasDad]

Lame. 2 Peter 3:9 does not use the word "near." 2 Peter 3:9 is spoken about the urgency facing the Church in the first century. When God uses the word "near" in the New Testament He ALWAYS means near in time and space. Look it up. Revelation 1:3 and 22:10 are not excepts to the rule. In the New Testament the word "near" always means near, whether days are like years and years are like days to God or not.

The common denominator is about time! “A day”, “years”, “soon and near” are time element terms. Day does not always mean 24 hours, so why can’t soon and near have different applications of meaning?

If Revelations is finished then why aren’t we in the new heaven and earth yet? They too are deemed soon and near. We wouldn’t be here today if your narrow application of meaning is the only possible option!

When God speaks of soon and near, is it unfathomable to see that from his perspective of time? I mean even if the fall of Jerusalem was in view, which of course Revelations is 20 years after the fact, that was around 20-40 years after most scriptures were written, and even in our parlance today, soon and near, are not “near and soon” to us.

Doug

 

[Josheb]

The common denominator is about time!

No, it is not.

Rationalizing does not make it so, and an examination of how the word, "near" is uniformly used in God's word proves it. Do not take my word for it. Look it up. Do the study and see for yourself. The outcome is alarming. It will change the way you read much of scripture and provide a perspective on everything you read outside of scripture on this subject.

Let scripture be the authority.
Let God be true and all men liars.
Look it up.

 

[TibiasDad]

No, it is not.

Rationalizing does not make it so, and an examination of how the word, "near" is uniformly used in God's word proves it. Do not take my word for it. Look it up. Do the study and see for yourself. The outcome is alarming. It will change the way you read much of scripture and provide a perspective on everything you read outside of scripture on this subject.

Let scripture be the authority.
Let God be true and all men liars.
Look it up.

Then what is the common denominator?

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

No, it is not.

Rationalizing does not make it so, and an examination of how the word, "near" is uniformly used in God's word proves it. Do not take my word for it. Look it up. Do the study and see for yourself. The outcome is alarming. It will change the way you read much of scripture and provide a perspective on everything you read outside of scripture on this subject.

Let scripture be the authority.
Let God be true and all men liars.
Look it up.

Near and soon are indefinite terms, deriving their meanings from their relevant contexts and the speaker’s perspective, none of which are static. The interpreter must be the ultimate value giver. No where in scripture is there a specific value to “near or soon”!

Doug

 

[Josheb]

Then what is the common denominator?

Doug

Other than all the passages being part of God's providence and sovereign plan for creation, there isn't one. The premise is faulty. At least three of the five texts are said to be in the past, one might be past, or it might be present, or it might be future (I think it past), and one is future (unless a person is full-pret).

Both Revelation bindings occur within the context of Rev. 1:3's near and Rev. 22:10's near but there is a ondition in Revelation that could indicate Rev. 20:4 and Rev. 20:10 are temporally distant from one another. Absent that, we'd be compelled to either view the two as already having occurred or be compelled to measure scripture by our perceptions of history (post hoc).

 

[Josheb]

Near and soon are indefinite terms...

Not in scripture.

Go look it up. And stop conflating "near" with "soon." The word tachus can and often should be translated "quickly," not "soon." The ambiguity confuses the specific matter of "near."

In many places you will find the mention of "near" is conditional. "When X happens then Y is near." When the Messiah comes then the judgment is near, for example. ALL of the messianic prophecies are fulfilled. Jesus is the Messiah and the Messiah has come. There will not be any other Messiah. Jesus, and only Jesus, is that guy. That means ALL of the conditional nears have also come and gone. The only ones not to have already happened are those that either Jesus said would occur at some far distant time or those said to occur related to some subsequent occasion after Jesus ascended.

Revelation 20:4 is not one of those latter conditions.

In point of fact, there is not a single verse in the entirety of the whole chapter (Revelation 20) that explicitly states Jesus is on earth during any of those events. Not one.

Look it up.

....deriving their meanings from their relevant contexts and the speaker’s perspective,

Yes, and on every single occasion in our conversation YOU have ignored both!!!

I'm the one pointing to the context of the text, the statements of events previously occurring, the context of expectation, the longitudinal history of satan's (multiple) bindings. And every step of the way I have asked and encouraged you to get out your Bible and LOOK IT UP rather than take my word for it.

...none of which are static.

Red herring

The interpreter must be the ultimate value giver.

Absolutely not. I penned an op in another forum and you cited the importance of understanding the text as the original writer and his original audience understood those words when originally written. The "value" is stipulated, provided y the author, not the 21st century reader.

No where in scripture is there a specific value to “near or soon”!

That is incorrect.