Chained In The Abyss

[journeymanisnothing]

Journeyman, the subject matter was tradition, not inherency or the canon. You think everything which is not canon should be thrown out and rejected en toto?

I never even implied that. I believe if any NT era writing conflicts with any OT scripture Jesus himself confirmed, then that writing can only be wrong and I don't care what the writers credentials are,

For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there arecontentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? 1Cor.1:11-13

Then you must either believe that every word that comes out of your mouth is pure canon or you are being hypocritical about it, yes?

Actually I'm stunned that what the OT says was confirmed by Jesus Christ. For years I thought the Jewish religion and Christianity were two different religions. Jews still believe this.

I know what you said, but that was the tenor of your post. Those who respect the fact that formal education does have some value are not going to make derogatory statements like that so easily. Those who have little to no education or respect for education will do so, however, and flippantly. Without qualification, your statement was leaning well into the latter camp.

The only tenor of my post was that no matter how educated a person may be, it's no guarantee he's teaching the truth.

I used the example of the scribes, the most well educated people within Judaism. Their word was so revered that to this very day, the "oral law" (the Talmud, their interpretantation of scripture) is equal to the "written law" (the Torah, inspired by God, written by his prophets.

I only pointed out how they misunderstood their own written scriptures.

At no time did I ever say that everything the the scribes and Pharisees believed was heresy.

In fact, It was an Orthodox Jew I met who told me that God doesn't punish the righteous in place of the wicked. I argued with this guy for a long time. I quoted every scripture there is defending the Protestant doctrine of penal substitution because that's what I was taught for years.

It took me a long time to understand what he was saying, because all I did was talk past him, quoting Bible verses that appeared contrary to his belief that God simply forgives sinners who are truly sorry for sinned against him.

I can't go into all that, Lol. My apologies but I don't have the time unfortunately. But you should try reading extrabiblical material, and especially the early fathers. The more deeply you get into New Testament theology, the more clearly you will recognize the same exact things being taught in the fathers of the first two centuries, and it's because they were teaching the same traditions handed down to the church from the beginning.

Please reconsider this teaching you are giving. There are many who are almost completely irretrievable, having closed their minds off to even when the grammar of the original languages makes their interpretations completely impossible. But they have closed their ears completely. I would hate to see that happen to you.

God bless, and have a great Sunday.
Hidden

I appreciate your heart. I used to dismiss anything that disagreed with substitutionary sacrifice. Would not even consider it, but dismissed it outright as heresy. I learned from that Jewish guy never to dismiss anything any believer is saying without closely examining it against both Old and New Testaments.

It's not necessary to defend what wasn't included in scripture. It's necessary to defend what is included in scripture,

The word of the LORD came unto me again, saying, What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. Eze.18:1-3

That false proverb is the cornerstone of penal substitution. Don't use a commentary. Just read the chapter without preconceived ideas. Don't add to it or subtract from it. Tell me what you think this chapter says in your own words.

 

[Hidden In Him]

The only tenor of my post was that no matter how educated a person may be, it's no guarantee he's teaching the truth.

This I fully agree with, but it's a long ways from your original statement.

Just read the chapter without preconceived ideas.

This I also fully agree with, and it's what I have always subscribed to, only In my own case doing so through a strict study of the original MSS led me to eventually fully endorse the teachings of the early church. They were correct, on virtually all of it. It was only as you start getting into the latter second century that you start to see errors creeping in.

Anyway, again, I would advise you not to cast aside early church tradition so easily. But I've said my piece.

God bless, and thanks for the courteous exchanges.
- H

 

[journeymanisnothing]

2 Peter 2:4 (NASB)
4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment;

2 Peter 2:4 (ASV)
4 For if God spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

2 Peter 2:4 (WYC)
4 For if God spared not angels sinning, but betook them to be tormented, and to be drawn down with bonds of hell into hell [but betook them to be tormented, drawn down with bonds of hell into hell], to be kept into doom;
2 Peter 2:4 (RSV)
4 For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell[a] and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment;
Looking further into this verse, I examined all the English translations of it I could find (some sixty of them) and saw that several versions referred not at all to "chains" but only to "caves of darkness/deep gloom" or "pits of darkness." The majority of versions, however, included "chains of darkness" or "chains of gloomy darkness," or even "chained in gloomy caves." Why do some versions of the verse speak of "chains," and others only of "pits" or "caves," and others still of "chained in pits (or caves)"? The Greek word "seiros," or "siros," is the problem.

Greek Word: σιρός
Transliterated Word: siros
Root: a prim. word;
Definition: a pit (for grain storage):--

(New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.)


Greek Word: σειρά
Transliteration: seira
Phonetic Pronunciation:si-rah'
Root: probably from <G4951> through its congener eiro (to fasten, akin to <G138>)
Part of Speech: n f

probably from <G4951> (suro) through its congener eiro (to fasten; akin to <G138> (haireomai)); a chain (as binding or drawing) :- chain.

(Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary.)

Whichever version of the verse one follows, neither "siros" nor "seiros" actually refer explicitly, or directly, to "chains." The main idea expressed by "siros" or "seiros" in 2 Peter 2:4 isn't what holds the fallen angels, but that they are held in darkness. It is actually something of a descriptive flourish to say that "chains" bind the fallen angels in a "pit (or cave) of deep gloom (darkness)."

Anyway, this is all "straining at a gnat," as far as I'm concerned; a red-herring actually.

Pit or chain isn't really important to me. To me they both convey being confined or trapped in a state, such as,

He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings. Psa.40:2

Of course whatever Davids' situation, I think we can agree he wasn't in a hole lin the ground.

Your initial contention from 2 Peter 2:4 was that all fallen angels were bound in the Pit, which, as has been shown, is not what Peter wrote. Not one English version of the verse includes "all" or "every" in reference to the fallen angels held in the Pit.

I know that. It also doesn't say "some" either. Both are assumptions.

I understand by your logical thinking that if fallens angels are bound already, how are they roaming all over the earth causing havoc.
My answer is the same way David was in a horrible pit. Maybe committing adultery and murder put him in a state of guilt and condemnation that he couldn't get out of.

But you haven't provided Scripture that describes people "chained in darkness doing a lot of evil."

You don't think blindness confines people. I do. Christ said the blind don't know where they go. That restriction in itself is a chain of confinement.

Being unable to do anything good. Never to feel joy, or peace, or being barred from Gods' Kingdom are all firms of imprisonment.

Such people would be chained figuratively, not literally, of course; are you saying, then, that the fallen angels in the Pit are likewise only bound figuratively?

I used think things aren't literal if they have no physical substance, but that isn't true, because our minds, our thoughts, our feelings, the spirit world, etc. are as real and as literal as anything we can see.

I mean thiis world is a place of monotony. Solomon called it vanity, emptyness, a place which can never satisfy, like a great big empty hole.

And, again, is this parallel you're trying to draw between the figurative "binding" of sinful people in "darkness" and the binding of fallen angels in the Pit a legitimate one? It doesn't seem so to me. There is nothing in Peter's description in 2 Peter 2:4, nor in its immediate context, that suggests he is speaking figuratively.
Isaiah 59:10 is clearly a figurative description. 2 Peter 2:4 is not.

Well, all will face judgement for their figurative thoughts.

This is a deflection from my point that there is no "all" or "every" in 2 Peter 2:4 in reference to the fallen angels. You've added this universality to the verse.

God defened rebellion, not me. It's simple to see how God defined stubborness as rebellion. You may believe the stubborn aren't in the pit with the rebellious. I disagree.

This is all entirely ignoring my point.

Not at all, because fallen angels influence men to carry out their wickedness.

Here's something you might like to comment on. Rebellious spirits were kicked out of Gods' house. They were cast to the earth. Where is Gods' house on earth?

 

[Tenchi]

I know that. It also doesn't say "some" either. Both are assumptions.

Not so. I can point to all of the instances in the rest of the NT where the demonic was encountered, or warnings concerning the demonic are issued, or strategies for dealing with demonic are outlined. These things all bear out my contention that neither Peter nor Jude intended to mean all fallen angels are bound in the Pit. What have you from the rest of the NT to indicate otherwise?

I understand by your logical thinking that if fallens angels are bound already, how are they roaming all over the earth causing havoc.
My answer is the same way David was in a horrible pit. Maybe committing adultery and murder put him in a state of guilt and condemnation that he couldn't get out of.

So, you're taking a figurative approach even to the angels chained in darkness? Again, nothing in what Peter wrote in 2 Peter 2:4, or its immediate context, indicate he was being figurative. King David may have written of being in a pit in a figurative way, but this by no means secures the idea that Peter was being figurative, too. Such an idea is drawn out of the verse itself and its immediate context, not by showing an unrelated figurative use of "pit" in some other book of the Bible entirely.

I mean thiis world is a place of monotony. Solomon called it vanity, emptyness, a place which can never satisfy, like a great big empty hole.

So? Solomon did and said things that didn't reflect God's will, or reality, very well at all. At the end of his life, under the influence of his many, many pagan wives (which he had taken in disobedience to God's command), Solomon helped to erect "high places" in worship of pagan gods that involved the murder and sacrifice of children. Solomon also multiplied horses which God had forbidden. I don't, then, take Solomon as the last word on the world God has created, subscribing to his cynicism and metaphysical ennui. Neither should you.

Well, all will face judgement for their figurative thoughts.

This is rather beside my point; a deflection of it, actually.

God defened rebellion, not me. It's simple to see how God defined stubborness as rebellion. You may believe the stubborn aren't in the pit with the rebellious. I disagree.

??? I have no idea what you're going on about here...

Not at all, because fallen angels influence men to carry out their wickedness.

Yes. Which they can't actually do if all of them are chained in darkness. But this isn't what Peter wrote. Nor in writing of these angels bound in the Pit was he speaking figuratively. So, then, some fallen angels are held in bondage but others - legions of them, in fact - are not, but are actively luring people into sin and destruction.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

This I fully agree with, but it's a long ways from your original statement.
You misquoted my original statement.

My intention was to show that one error can spread like crazy and turn into a TULIP garden.

This I also fully agree with, and it's what I have always subscribed to, only In my own case doing so through a strict study of the original MSS led me to eventually fully endorse the teachings of the early church. They were correct, on virtually all of it. It was only as you start getting into the latter second century that you start to see errors creeping in.

Anyway, again, I would advise you not to cast aside early church tradition so easily. But I've said my piece.

God bless, and thanks for the courteous exchanges.
- H

I think the clash of Jewish and gentile cultures had a lot to do with heresy being taught. Peter said even OT saints had false prophets among them.

God bless you and all those you hold dear.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Not so. I can point to all of the instances in the rest of the NT where the demonic was encountered, or warnings concerning the demonic are issued, or strategies for dealing with demonic are outlined. These things all bear out my contention that neither Peter nor Jude intended to mean all fallen angels are bound in the Pit. What have you from the rest of the NT to indicate otherwise?

Jesus' teaching on the only way a fallen angel can be bound,

how can one enter into a strong man's house,and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. Mt.12:29

Satans' was booted out of Gods' abode in heaven. Gods' dwelling place on earth is his people,

I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit Isa.15

Gods' Kingdom consists of intangibles such as,

righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost Rom.14:17

The devil is bound and cast out by these things contained in the gospel.

the heavenly place

Exactly and the one on earth too.

I give unto you power.....over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Lk.10:19

he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. 1Jn.5:18

They were persecuted to death, but they were never touched spiritually. This is reality and eternal, whereas the evil ones' place is described in Gal.5:19-21. It's temporal and filled with emptiness.

Concerning the state we're in,

against such there isno law. Gal.5:23

The devil has no place there and he can't get in because there is no condemnation for those who walk by his Spirit.

So, you're taking a figurative approach even to the angels chained in darkness? Again, nothing in what Peter wrote in 2 Peter 2:4, or its immediate context, indicate he was being figurative.

Call darkness a figure, symbol, whatever you want. It conveys spiritual reality. What's really going on according to God,

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Gal.5:1

No being chained by sin mentioned. Only slavery as the result of sin. In my mind a slave is chained, whether he's wearing a metal chain or not. No different from the devil. Many believe the following passage refers to satan and I believe it does

I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more. Eze.28.18-19

In bringing the devil to ashes, he's regarded by God as nothing nore than a man. A man with no way out.

King David may have written of being in a pit in a figurative way, but this by no means secures the idea that Peter was being figurative, too. Such an idea is drawn out of the verse itself and its immediate context, not by showing an unrelated figurative use of "pit" in some other book of the Bible entirely.

Then I believe Heaven and earth are more closely related than you do. Looking through a mirror, is looking an exact image.
He separated the light from the darkness and not just for sleeping.

So? Solomon did and said things that didn't reflect God's will, or reality, very well at all.

Solomon may have done things that God wasn't pleased with, but he didn't lose the wisdom. He somtimes writes from the perspective of a party monster, but it's meant to teach us that all the sinful pleasure in this world amounts to vanity...
emptiness.

At the end of his life, under the influence of his many, many pagan wives (which he had taken in disobedience to God's command), Solomon helped to erect "high places" in worship of pagan gods that involved the murder and sacrifice of children. Solomon also multiplied horses which God had forbidden. I don't, then, take Solomon as the last word on the world God has created, subscribing to his cynicism and metaphysical ennui. Neither should you.

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. Ecc.12:13

I agree.

This is rather beside my point; a deflection of it, actually.

??? I have no idea what you're going on about here...

Yes. Which they can't actually do if all of them are chained in darkness. But this isn't what Peter wrote. Nor in writing of these angels bound in the Pit was he speaking figuratively. So, then, some fallen angels are held in bondage but others - legions of them, in fact - are not, but are actively luring people into sin and destruction.

What's amazing is how God wants us to fast,

to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke? Isa.58:6

Bands of wickedness? Straighten Isaiah out.