Re 9:11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

What is Apollyon?
active participle of 622; a destroyer (i.e. Satan):--Apollyon.

622. apollumi
to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively:--destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.

Elle, do you think Rev 9:11 says the angel of the bottomless pit is a destroyer?


1Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Does devour, gulp, swallow, drown count as destroying?

Is it not also written: And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2Th 2:11, 12 KJV

Therefore do not walk in the way of the Roman Catholic Church, lest you also be blinded and persecute the righteous. Mat. 12:7

• Do not change the gospel crying aloud in the streets, "THESE TESTIMONIES! The Testimonies of Ellen White are these!"
   
• Of every human being it will be asked, "Do you believe in the One whom God gave for a test, HIS ONLY-BEGOTTEN SON, that you may follow and learn from; or not?" There is salvation in no other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. Acts 4:12 Around and about Him, and Him only, the world would be divided and shaken. Haggai 2:6-9
   
• Prov. 30:5-6

///

Tx kland for moving the discussion forward. I will come back addressing the angel of the bottomless pit of Rev 9 as this is an important text to understand the true Biblical definition of Appolumi and Abad by which is translated at times as "destroy". But note that this angel is not identified as Satan.


Your over-extending the lion example while ignoring the context of the text. The lion picture is used to qualify the devil work as an ACCUSER, not as an destroyer. See the context as it is used above. See what accuser means and the devil means in this context. The devil accuses us in God's court of law or elsewhere. That's his job. Without an adversary or an accuser in a court of law would make Jesus job too easy. So that's Satan's job that God gave him. He's our adversary or prosecutor who uses partial law to make us look guilty by not presenting all the facts or bringing all the laws in our favors. However, Jesus our defender and advocate knows all the facts and all the law to set us free.

Also the Bible defines satan, the devil as a liar and a deceiver.
Of course Satan's lies and deceits does lead to many people getting "lost", or "perish" or be "destroyed" in their lifetime.

But the main point is the Bible doesn't define Satan as a destroyer despite he or other entities are used to execute God's divine judgment that results in some destruction.

For example King Nebuchadnezzar was called to execute God's judgment to destroy Jerusalem. It was God's judgment that destroyed Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar was only God's servant in this and was sent to do His bidding despite Nebuchadnezzar had no knowledge of this. The same with satan, God will use him to do some "destructive" work but it is God that sets the timing with limitation as we read in Job and other places. Satan cannot make one of our hair fall without God's calling it.

That's why we find in the Bible many texts saying that God destroys. God is Sovereign above Satan and all the others that exist. He calls the shots while the others below Him executes the shots. It is His plan that is unfolding, not Satan's. God is in control and has never lost control of His plan.

However the Hebrew word Abad and the Greek word Appolumi translated as "lost", "perish", or "destroy" has to be understood within how God uses it in His scriptures and how it fits in His plan of salvation in mind.

I don't know what Ellen White meant with her statement "God destroys no one". Depending what is her definition of "destroy" this statement could be true or be false. But reading that statement as it is while taking "destroy" as we define it in our language today; I would say that this is a true statement as I believe that scriptures teaches us that everybody will be saved. So yes God deosn't destroy no one in the long run, but in the short run there's lots of "destruction" or "losing" or "perishing" going on.

However, as far as I know Ellen White didn't receive the "everyone is saved" revelation but instead believed that over 90% of all that ever existed will be completely annihilated; thus there's severe contradiction in that statement -- that is if she wrote that statement herself.

The better question would be -- what is Abaddon?

Apollumi is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word Abad. So to get a truer definition of any Greek word is to seek out its Hebrew equivalent. Rev 9:11 spelled it directly by linking apollumi with abad.


I find Strong did bring out a truer definition with the Hebrew word 'abad than the Greek word apolumi. Strong was not a linguistic; so I did find him incorrect at some places but most of the time, he did a pretty good job overall.

One way to check the Hebrew definition is to look at each consonant letter definition. The composition of the letters definition equals the word definition. So let's look at 'abad more closely :

'a = alef literally means an ox that has to do with strenght or being first.
b = beth means house or household.
d = daleth means door or opening.

The word picture by combining these letters shows someone who has wandered out from the strength (security) of the house. So, Strong’s definition “to wander away; i.e., lose oneself, by impl. To perish.” I think is spot on.

So in 1 Samuel 9:3 we find Saul seeking out to find his father's donkeys that had wandered away and were “lost” (abad).

We find a very important law in Deuteronomy 22:1-3 that uses abad in speaking of lost sheep and how we are to care for them until the owner can be located. Basically, the people are a "lost[abad] sheep" and the ones in God's Church are responsible to care for them until Jesus, the owner, comes back.

If we look back when the house of Israel entered the promised land -- for many centuries they did not observe many laws including caring for the lost sheep inside their own nations and outside among the nations. So God sent out the Assyrians to bring judgment by destroying the house of Israel by which at that time represented the 10 northern tribes. Some were killed; but many were deported out of the promised land and they themselves became "the lost sheep of the house of Israel"

So we read in Ezk 34:4 that God chides the shepherds [of Judah] who abused the lost sheep of the house of Israel. In verse 6 they "wondered through the mountains" and became prey to wild beast. Basically the shepherds(pastors) refused to keep the Deut 22:1-3 law by caring for them until the owner came to claim them.

So because the shepherds (pastors) failed to seek for the lost sheep and care for them we read in Ezk 34:11 "For thus says the Lord God, “Behold, I Myself will search for My sheep and seek them out.” I believe this prophecy and work will only start at His 2nd coming.

So coming back to the proper definition of abad or apollumi, we see in this example that the nation of Israel as a national unit was destroyed but the sheep(people) itself were lost and wandered among the nations. These lost sheep are not dead nor or they beyond the reach of the Great Shepherd. Even if they die God provided another way to recover them which is call the resurrection.

So many Christian defines abad or apollumi as "destroyed fully". I do not agree with that definition. I believe they are only lost temporarily for Jesus said himself : "For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost [apollumi]."

Jesus real work "to seek and to save" by Jesus himself as according to Ezk 34:11 prophecy have not even started. I believe it will start at Jesus 2nd coming when He and the 144k (his body) will be united and succeed in that work that the other Shepherds (Pastors) has failed to accomplish during the first 6000 years.


No. Based on the proper definition of 'abad I would not define Abaddon as "the one who destroy" but more accurately as "the one who loses".

Rev 9:1-12 relates to the 5th trumpet where God called out the angel of the abyss who inspired Islam to bring judgment on the Catholic church. In verse 4 & 5 God set up limitation that men should not be killed but tormented for 5 months (5x30=150years). During those years this caused many to be lost.

I believe this same angel was called to bring judgment on the House of Israel via inspiring the Assyrians. That angel caused the nation of Israel to be lost and dispersed them among the nations.

So in another word this angel from the abyss job or mission is to disperse the people and cause them to be lost. The keys of the bottomless pit that was given to him for a time in Rev 9 to bring out the army of locust(Islam) from the bottomless pit; we read in Rev 20:1 another angel [a good one] has these keys. The keys of the bottomless pit is not in satan's hand but in a good angel's hand that hands it to the angel of the abyss when it is time for him to do his work. But when the millennium comes the keys of the bottomless pit is back in the good angel's possession where he uses it to open the bottomless pit up to cast satan in it; but that good angel also has a chain to bond satan up during the millennium. So to me this means that the work to cause the people to be lost is finish before the millennium. During the millennium I believe a counterpart good angel will be called to gather back the lost sheep to Jesus.

All of these angels whether evil or good always works according to God's plan at His timing. God is always in control.

Thus, I don't believe this angel in Rev 9 is satan as the text doesn't qualify him as such; but for sure I would say he is one of satan's hi-ranked generals.

You're welcome.
Yes, I figured you were laying out the bait so I gladly obliged.

"Over-extending"? Hmmm.....
I'll remember that use when someone points out something to me I don't like.

as a roaring lion,
seeking whom he may devour.

Sorry Elle, no over extension there. That's the main point of the verse.

Elle, you have just said/demonstrated, Satan does not destroy and nothing can disprove it.

So if something is disprovable, then it's merely a personally held opinion.

Seems several on this thread have rejected the testimonies as being God's gift to light the way through the final great conflict.

But to answer one question:
What did EGW mean by "God destroys no man"?
The context explains it.
Man fixes his own destiny.


" God destroys no one. The sinner destroys himself by his own impenitence...We want all to understand how the soul is destroyed. It is not that God sends out a decree that man shall not be saved. He does not throw a darkness before the eyes which cannot be penetrated. But man at first resists a motion of the Spirit of God, and, having once resisted, it is less difficult to do so the second time, less the third, and far less the fourth. Then comes the harvest to be reaped from the seed of unbelief and resistance. Oh what a harvest of sinful indulgences is preparing for the sickle! {5T 120.2}


"A life of rebellion against God has unfitted them for heaven. Its purity, holiness, and peace would be torture to them; the glory of God would be a consuming fire. They would long to flee from that holy place. They would welcome destruction, that they might be hidden from the face of Him who died to redeem them. The destiny of the wicked is fixed by their own choice. Their exclusion from heaven is voluntary with themselves, and just and merciful on the part of God…. {DD 16.5}

Obviously the belief that all will eventually be saved and that the resurrection, rather than the time of rewards, is the means of then preparing people who rejected salvation in life to be put through a program whereby they are prepared to be saved, and eventually fitted for heaven --- all that is "rejecting the testimonies".

EGW writes that "Jesus Christ has died in order that all men may have a chance to make their calling and election sure." {RH, September 28, 1897 par. 5}
So the door is open to all -- but all will not enter.

Some flatter themselves that the Lord will give them another chance, that there will be a second probation. Fatal delusion! Just now, day by day, hour by hour, we are building for the last great day.{RH, January 22, 1901 par. 10}

The formation of character is the work of a lifetime, and it is for eternity. If all could realize this, if they would awake to the thought that we are individually deciding our own destiny for eternal life or eternal ruin, what a change would take place! How differently would this probationary time be occupied, and what different characters would fill our world! {CG 162.2}

Oh, but your "over-extending" things. See, killing means saved. Destroy means create. We just change the meanings of words, and nothing can be refuted....

Amen!

Thanks for the kind joke. I had a little giggle out of it. So tx for the little good medicine.

But really I did hoped that APL would of started a new thread because this type of discussion can get long. I was hesitant to get into this because I like how Charity started this discussion, the direction it was taking and the many good points made by a few. I was hesitant to reply to APL as I really don't want to go off-topic. So be ready to be ignore if I see you don't bring any sensible points-arguments.


No, it's definetly a case of over-extending the lion qualification to destruction and trying to attribute 1Pe 5:8 as saying "Satan is the Destroyer". 1Pe 5:8 says Satan is the adversary...normally in a court room. So in the court room satan will be like a devouring lion....meaning he will slander, falsely accuse you, not present all the facts, only bring part of the laws that will condemn you, etc... he will use anything he can use against you without mercy. But we have Jesus as an advocate.



I said :
#1. Kland usage of 1Pe 5:8 to prove text that Satan is the destroyer is not valid as the context does not say what kland suggest it says. See above, as I've already detailed what the context reads.

#2. Kland quoting Rev 9:11 as a proof text that satan is the destroyer.... Rev 9 doesn't say that the angel that was given the keys is Satan. So you are speculating there.

#3. Kland preferred definition of apollumi == "to destroy fully" does not match with the true definition of it and it's Hebrew word equivalence 'abad. The proper definition of 'abad is "properly, to wander away, i.e. lose oneself; by implication to perish (causative, destroy):"

#4. Elle said that the Bible does not qualify satan as the destroyer despite he may be used directly to do some destructive work as in the case of Job. Right now, I can't think of another example where Satan is used directly...so there must be very few. However, God is above Satan and has to give Satan permission to do such work always with specified limitation as we read in Job.

Often the destructive work read in the Bible is a result of God's divine judgment brought forth by some human agencies like it was in the case of Nebuchadnezzar was sent to bring divine judgment on Jerusalem and the house of Judah. This is why we read in the Bible many texts God taking the credit of these destruction/judgment. That's why we read in many places in scriptures "God destroys". But always keep in mind the true definition of 'abad. Destruction doesn't necessarily means "fully destroyed" in God's mind and long term plan.

So, kland, you haven't disproved anything yet.


I really don't care about my personal views or my pre-conceived ideas wherever they come from. We all have some that needs to be shed.

Obviously everyone should of figured out by now that I'm not bound by the SDA Church or EGW views.

If my personal opinions wherever they came from -- aren't in harmony with the Lords true view found in scriptures...then I won't hold on to them and will be happy to let them go. That's why these studies are mostly for me. I expect to still have some false views in my head and expect to be corrected some more. I am corrected a little here and there, every time I engage to do a study before posting my reflections.

That may be the ONLY thing you've said that I could agree with.