Origins, the fall of Satan and his angels

If you read the chapter carefully you can see that this is prophetic.
One of the most basic errors concerning end times prophecy, is the failure to recognize globalism in all end of days prophecy, and to understand that the warfare becomes global.

Note above that Lucifer weakened the nations. He does this at the time of the end by globalism and it’s inherent weakening of God given national sovereignties.

Note the question asked is “How” Lucifer fell from heaven, not why.
The answer points to why many are confused as to when.
The answer as to how he fell is by the ascension of Jesus Christ, God’s only begotten Son, and by his blood.

The reason the angels on earth in Noah’s day were chained before time is because they willing left their first estates in heaven thus stupidly giving up their legal rights there.

It should be noted that Satan has no legal right to authority on earth which why he behaves as he does. He is however a usurperer. And now he must install a man as global king. There isn’t any honor nor faith in the kingdom of darkness. For that reason Satan seeks reprobates for his kingdom on earth. Reprobates are beasts as is Satan, and they can’t rebel against their own carnal nature, and are thus ruled by sin.




The above shows Satan being forced to come down in panic mode when made aware of the seventy.

The reason Nebuchadnezzar is involved is because he was given king of kings rule over all the earth and its beasts, wherever men dwell.
When Satan heard this that is when he moved his forces to bring in the final one world governance as depicted by the four winds (principalities) of heaven striving on the great sea of mankind. Satan wants to usurp that God given kingship.

This implies that there is an heir of Nebuchadnezzar on earth.

But there was notably an heir to Caesar by Cleopatra, of which Daniel mentions in chapter eleven.

I am uncertain on this.
The last known location was north western Africa. I still suspect Obama’s lineage as not being clarified. I don’t know if that will matter but similarities exist between him and the rider on the white horse who is given a crown and has a bow, and goes forth conquering and to conquer until the global government is installed on Satan’s behalf.

IMO this statement by Christ is a prophetic vision He observed in the future. The verb for “saw” [ἐθεώρουν] is in the imperfect tense and indicative mood. The time element of the verb is past tense and the verbal aspect of it is continuous. This means when Jesus made this statement, He had continually observed something in the past. Most likely He observed the prophetic events described in Isa 14:12-16 and Rev 12:7-9 unfold. These events describe Satan being cast down to the earth at the middle point of the 70th week when the antichrist rises to power.

I think it refers to a prophetic vision that Jesus was given by the Father at some point during His ministry.

Oft times we will read a prophesy in the past tense. I have been taught over the years this means it is a done deal, but not necessarily a past event, at least not for us in this age..

Another thin about prophecy is when our Father repeats any one prophecy it is sealed and not to ever change.

That is not what the grammar in the Greek suggests in this instance.

When it comes to the Word, sometimes grammar is God's rules, actually it always is.

Many passages dealing with events to come for us all are in the past tense, read Revelation for one…….. I think God knows more than any grammarian or any linguist, and I did study linguistics at the U of Il...

Yes it is. God is the creator of languages so if you don’t follow the rules of grammar, you have a nonsensical illogical jumble of confusion. So just as it is in this case the Greek grammar cannot be violated unless you are happy with people changing the word of God into anything that suits them. That’s one of the reasons why false doctrines occur in churches, because they fail to follow the logical rules of grammar which God created so we can understand His word. Make you to sense did yeah that? Exactly, no grammar no logical conclusion.