We Must Heed the Vital Message of 1 Corinthians 10:18-20

Kevin Miller wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

When people team up with demons to engage in this vile, sinful behavior that mightily provokes God to wrath, what do you think that means concerning the ability of demons to strongly influence such people?

 

You've used the behavior of the people in the GCI as some sort of example that demons have been given total control over the worshippers, yet there is no indication in the Genesis chapter that demons are even involved. The only way you link demonic activity to the event is by using the word "fellowship" from 1 Cor 10, and then you make up your own "ability of demons" to explain the "fellowship" in the Genesis chapter. It's all circular reasoning and leaps of logic. You then take another big leap, beyond the first leap, to say that this supposed "strong demonic influence" is soooo strong that it doesn't just cause the people to sin, but it also affects that which humans produce, such as their music. Somehow demons have developed the ability to plant supernatural evil sounds within the music that humans compose, and they do so in such a way that an entire style of music would be ungodly. I just don't see your leaps of logic to be supported by explicit Scriptural teaching.

For starters,  you need to pay closer attention to what you write. This is the second comment in which you have written things about "the Genesis chapter." There is no Genesis chapter that I have been talking about. The chapter is Exodus 32. 

Kevin Miller wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

They partner with demons to deny God the worship that is due Him. They partner with demons to advance demonic interests, fulfill demonic desires, and accomplish demonic objectives.

 

I agree with these sentences about what it means to fellowship with demons. In fact, this is what I meant when i wrote on page 3 of this thread, "To me, fellowship means something like "going in the same direction," " and "We as humans shouldn't be traveling in the same rebellious path as demons do," I used slightly different wording, but the thought was the same, and you dismissed it.

No, this is wrong. When Paul talks about having fellowship with demons, Paul says that when humans offer sacrifices on altars to idols, they are offering sacrifices to demons, who are the living entities behind the lifeless idols. These people are directing worship to demons. The demons are the recipients and beneficiaries of their actions.

These people are not just spiting God with what they do; they are expressing allegiance to demons and becoming partakers of their evil deeds.

Such sinful humans are not just going in the same direction as demons. They are not just "traveling in the same rebellious path as demons do."

When humans direct actions to demons, the demons are not just uninterested observers of what is going on. Satan roams the whole earth seeking people to devour. When humans direct actions to demons, they give the demons the opportunity to influence and control them in ways that the humans have no knowledge of.

You are asserting that people who partner with demons in performing exceedingly wicked acts somehow still remain immune to actual demonic influence upon them. You do not have any Bible basis for asserting such inability on the part of demons.

Kevin Miller wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

When people team up with demons to engage in this vile, sinful behavior that mightily provokes God to wrath, what do you think that means concerning the ability of demons to strongly influence such people?

 

What do i think it means concerning the "ability of demons"? Now THAT is a good question. It's one I've been trying to deal with in this thread. What "abilities of demons" do we have explicit teaching about in the Bible? You are proclaiming some sort of "strong demonic influence' asa n ability of demons. We know demons can possess people, so that's why I asked if the "strong demonic influence" was possession. You assured me that it wasn't, even though you describe it as an inescapable condition that causes people to not be in their right minds. That sounds like possession to me, but you say it isn't. We know demons have the ability to tempt people, yet this "strong demonic influence" you proclaim is much greater than just temptation. You simply don't have any explicit verses to support your claim that demons have this ability. You infer it from ideas like "giving place" and "fellowship." A warning that we should not give the devil opportunities to tempt us is hardly an explicit teaching that demons can inescapably control us. A warning that eating idol meat causes one to practice rebellion along with demons is not an indication that demons have been given inescapable control. If Paul had wanted to show that demons were being given total control over the person, he would have used a word such as control or subjection.

Apparently, your theology of demonic activity is limited to either possession or tempting people to evil. If that is true, you have a dangerously deficient understanding of what the Bible teaches.

Again, I have never said directly that believers cannot be possessed. I said the Bible never uses that terminology when speaking about believers.

The Bible does not support what you seem to understand about the limits of demonic activity.

1. Scripture says that Satan provoked David to sin against God:
 
1 Chronicles 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

Scripture does not say that Satan merely tempted David. The burden of proof is on you to show that “provoked” simply means “tempted.”

Scripture does not explain the mechanism of how Satan did what he did.

2. Scripture says that Satan fills the hearts of people to commit sin.

Acts 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

Scripture does not say that Ananias was possessed and what Satan did to him was far more than just tempt him. Satan controlled the heart of Ananias.

3. People are ensnared by the devil and taken captive by him at his will.

2 Timothy 2:25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Certainly, these verses are not at all speaking of merely the devil's tempting people. Moreover, what these verses speak about is not possession because no one recovers himself by his own choice or ability from possession. Yet these verses speak of people who are taken captive by the devil at his will.

This is not possession, but it is still captivity to the devil to do his will, which is something that you seem to deny that the devil can do to people that he does not possess.

4. You claim that Ephesians 4:27 is only talking about giving place to the devil to tempt someone: "A warning that we should not give the devil opportunities to tempt us is hardly an explicit teaching that demons can inescapably control us." 

That is not what the text says. The text does not limit it merely to tempting someone. You are adding your own idea to Scripture and using that as a basis to assert something that the Bible does not teach.

5. Scripture warns believers that they must be sober and vigilant because the devil wants to devour them:

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

The burden of proof is on you to show that this is merely talking about Satan tempting people.

We have no way of knowing whether this means possession or not. You do not have a basis for saying that it does not.

What it does warn us implicitly about is that if we are not sober and vigilant, Satan will be able to devour us.

6. Scripture speaks of people who are punished by being delivered over to Satan:

1 Timothy 1:20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

We are not told further what this entails. We do not know whether this is the same thing as possession so saying that it is not is going beyond what the Bible says. It certainly is not merely tempting.

7. Scripture speaks of people who are punished by being delivered over to Satan to the destruction of their flesh (i.e. their death).

1 Corinthians 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

There is no necessity that we must hold that this is the same thing as 1 Tim. 1:20. Whether this means possession before their deaths is unknowable. It certainly does not mean merely tempting.

The Bible says far more than saying merely that Satan can only possess people or tempt them.

1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. 13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it. 14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.

This passage does not in any way say that people who give in to temptation and sin are promised a way of escape after they have done so. People who sin presumptuously against God and fall into the snare of the devil when they do so do not have any scriptural assurances that they certainly still will be able to escape from that snare in spite of their willfully sinning against God.

God's way to escape the temptation to idolatry is to flee from it! Those who choose not to flee from it will suffer the consequences of their disobedience to God.

Kevin Miller wrote:

You've used the behavior of the people in the GCI as some sort of example that demons have been given total control over the worshippers, yet there is no indication in the Genesis chapter that demons are even involved. The only way you link demonic activity to the event is by using the word "fellowship" from 1 Cor 10, and then you make up your own "ability of demons" to explain the "fellowship" in the Genesis chapter. It's all circular reasoning and leaps of logic.

It is not necessary for the chapter in Exodus to say that demons were even involved. Using explicit NT revelation about what happens to people who eat in a worship context what has been offered to an idol to explain what happened on all previous occasions where people engaged in that behavior is fully legitimate and not at all "circular reasoning and leaps of logic." It is wrong to imply that what He reveals for our profit must not be applied to other passages to illumine our understanding of what He did not choose to reveal earlier in Scripture.

Moreover, I established what "fellowship with demons" means through treating the specific Greek word used by the Spirit and its biblical use. There is much more that I could do in this regard, but I will not since you choose to insist that your understanding is correct even though you do not have any lexical sources to support your ideas. Nor do you have any Bible to back up your views.

Kevin Miller wrote:

You then take another big leap, beyond the first leap, to say that this supposed "strong demonic influence" is soooo strong that it doesn't just cause the people to sin, but it also affects that which humans produce, such as their music. Somehow demons have developed the ability to plant supernatural evil sounds within the music that humans compose, and they do so in such a way that an entire style of music would be ungodly. I just don't see your leaps of logic to be supported by explicit Scriptural teaching.

Claiming that demons cannot influence people in what they do musically is begging a crucial question. 

I never said, "Somehow demons have developed the ability to plant supernatural evil sounds within the music that humans compose, and they do so in such a way that an entire style of music would be ungodly." On the other hand, however, apparently you think that you have the ability to assert definitively what is possible and is not possible for supernatural beings to do in this regard yet you do not have Bible to support your notions about their inabilities concerning music. 

Again, you are begging key questions, perhaps apparently because you have presuppositions concerning music that are not based on the Bible, but are only your own ideas.
 

Kevin Miller wrote:

I'm heading off to the doctor soon to have a surgical consultation about removing some tumors, so I won't even have much time today to respond.

Sorry to hear about your having this problem. May God be merciful in granting you full healing.

Kevin Miller wrote:

Where exactly is your lexical source that shows "fellowship" means "control"? That didn't show up in the lexical source you previously quoted. Did you have a different one that does so? I understand that your position also specifies "it's biblical use" within the 1 Cor 10 passage, but as you do that, you are making an interpretational assessment. Because the fellowship happens "with demons," you are making claims that certain effects, such as "control," are going to logically happen. I just don't see how "control" would have to logically happen, especially since the Greek word for fellowship doesn't indicate control.

I have never made the claim that "fellowship" lexically means "control."

Paul says in 1 Cor. 10:20 that the things the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God. He then says that he does not want that we should have fellowship with demons. This clearly means that the consequence of the sacrificing to demons is fellowship with them and that the Gentiles who do this have fellowship with demons.

To understand more about what that fellowship with demons entails, we must look at other passages that talk about when Gentiles serve their idols. Here are two warnings from God to His own people:

Exodus 23:31 And I will set thy bounds from the Red sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the desert unto the river: for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand; and thou shalt drive them out before thee. 32 Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. 33 They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me: for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee.

Deuteronomy 7:16 And thou shalt consume all the people which the LORD thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity upon them: neither shalt thou serve their gods; for that will be a snare unto thee.

In these passages, God declared that those who serve their gods would surely be ensnared by doing so. To be ensnared is to be caught in a trap. God warns in these two passages and elsewhere that serving the gods of the peoples will certainly cause His people to be snared. God does not say, "Maybe, it will happen or maybe it will not. Maybe, you can escape it or maybe you cannot."

God emphatically says that by serving the gods of the peoples, His people surely would be snared.

We know that their gods do not exist, and that demons are the realities behind those gods. When God warned that serving idols would surely cause His people to be snared, His warning was about them being caught in the snare of the devil and his demons.

Because that is true, Christians are commanded to flee idolatry because if they do not do so, they will fall. 

They are not to have any contact with it. They are not to think that they stand and will not fall. They must not ever have any fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness.

Based on what I have presented from the Bible in this comment, if you think that people who are caught in the snare of the devil will not be controlled by him, on what basis do you think that?

Kevin Miller wrote:

 You then take another big leap, beyond the first leap, to say that this supposed "strong demonic influence" is soooo strong that it doesn't just cause the people to sin, but it also affects that which humans produce, such as their music. Somehow demons have developed the ability to plant supernatural evil sounds within the music that humans compose, and they do so in such a way that an entire style of music would be ungodly. I just don't see your leaps of logic to be supported by explicit Scriptural teaching.

According to you, my "leaps of logic" about music are not "supported by explicit Scriptural teaching." What "explicit Scriptural teaching" supports your holding that it is impossible that "an entire style of music would be ungodly," or is this view of yours just one of your "leaps of logic" that are not "supported by explicit Scriptural teaching"?

Perhaps, you do not hold that it is impossible, but just that Scripture never says that "any entire style of music is ungodly." In that case, on what grounds do you hold that unless the Scripture says explicitly that there are entire styles of music that are ungodly, we must hold that there are not any?

Kevin Miller wrote:

In this comment, you used warnings given to the nation of Israel in Exodus and Deuteronomy. Do you believe all the warnings in Exodus and Deuteronomy apply to Christians today? Exodus 23:31 is telling the nation of Israel to drive out ungodly people from their nation, so that they are not under the constant temptation from their neighbors to serve false gods. Serving false gods, as all the unbelieving nations around them did, is the snare, Serving false gods traps people into not being able to monotheisticly serve the one true God as God demands. Do you believe Christians should drive out unbelievers from around us so we are not under the same snare that the Israelites would be under? I'm not sure how you are claiming, from the verses presented in this comment, that the snare is satanic control.

Obviously, Christians are not supposed to drive out unbelievers . . . That part of those commands was for Israel as a nation.

You are missing the main point of these commands. The idols had no real existence. When the peoples served them, especially by offering sacrifices to them, they were sacrificing to demons and came into fellowship with them by eating what had been sacrificed to them.

Doing so, they were ensnared by Satan and his demons, who were the actual objects of their worship. God warned His people that if they did the same things, they would surely be ensnared. Such ensnarement was not to the idol, which as Paul says was nothing, but to the demons behind them.

Kevin Miller wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

According to you, my "leaps of logic" about music are not "supported by explicit Scriptural teaching." What "explicit Scriptural teaching" supports your holding that it is impossible that "an entire style of music would be ungodly," or is this view of yours just one of your "leaps of logic" that are not "supported by explicit Scriptural teaching"?

Perhaps, you do not hold that it is impossible, but just that Scripture never says that "any entire style of music is ungodly." In that case, on what grounds do you hold that unless the Scripture says explicitly that there are entire styles of music that are ungodly, we must hold that there are not any?

 

The bolded section is correct. I do NOT hold that it is impossible. I believe ungodly styles are possible, godly styles are possible, and neutral styles are possible. My position is that the Bible isn't clear about whether styles are one way or the other or the other. The Bible also isn't clear about whether any ungodly/godly/neutral aspect of music is inherent and changeable or whether such aspects are assigned by usage in particular situations.

Godly heavenly beings use musical instruments to worship God, and they also use those instruments at other times for other purposes. We know that the style(s) in which they have played/play those instruments are godly styles that are not "assigned by usage in particular situation."

God has also commanded His people as well all human beings to worship Him by playing musical instruments to His glory. We know, therefore, that there are styles that are inherently godly that are not "assigned by usage in particular situations."

Kevin Miller wrote:

The bolded section is correct. I do NOT hold that it is impossible. I believe ungodly styles are possible, godly styles are possible, and neutral styles are possible. My position is that the Bible isn't clear about whether styles are one way or the other or the other. The Bible also isn't clear about whether any ungodly/godly/neutral aspect of music is inherent and changeable or whether such aspects are assigned by usage in particular situations.

In Isaiah 14, Scripture reveals to us that there is instrumental music that is ungodly:

Isaiah 14:4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!

Isaiah 14:11 Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

NAU Isaiah 14:11 'Your pomp and the music of your harps Have been brought down to Sheol; Maggots are spread out as your bed beneath you And worms are your covering.' 

The king of Babylon would be judged, including his pomp being brought down to the grave. "The noise" of his viols (a stringed instrument) would also be brought down to the grave.

The passage is not teaching that the instruments would be judged because they were ungodly--it is saying that the noise that the king of Babylon produced on those instruments would be judged. This verse is not teaching that certain individual musical tones or sounds that comprised his music would be judged. It is teaching that his ungodly music that was played on those stringed instruments would be judged by its being brought down to the grave.

pvawter wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

Godly heavenly beings use musical instruments to worship God, and they also use those instruments at other times for other purposes. We know that the style(s) in which they have played/play those instruments are godly styles that are not "assigned by usage in particular situation."

God has also commanded His people as well all human beings to worship Him by playing musical instruments to His glory. We know, therefore, that there are styles that are inherently godly that are not "assigned by usage in particular situations."

 

 

Rajesh,

Could you identify just one of those objectively godly styles that is not in any way dependent on cultural context?

Thanks, 

Paul

Good question for a new thread, which I encourage you to start so that you can control how that thread develops.

I do not want to take up in this thread an important discussion that certainly would further divert the specific thrust of this thread. These brief comments of mine about godly styles were a brief response to Kevin's comment and my goal with them is to keep the discussion focused specifically on what the Bible reveals.

More importantly, I want this thread to remain focused on a discussion of how 1 Cor. 10:18-20 illumines our understanding of the GCI and what that reveals to us about demonically influenced music.

Thanks.

pvawter wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

Good question for a new thread, which I encourage you to start so that you can control how that thread develops.

I do not want to take up in this thread an important discussion that certainly would further divert the specific thrust of this thread. These brief comments of mine about godly styles were a brief response to Kevin's comment and my goal with them is to keep the discussion focused specifically on what the Bible reveals.

More importantly, I want this thread to remain focused on a discussion of how 1 Cor. 10:18-20 illumines our understanding of the GCI and what that reveals to us about demonically influenced music.

Thanks.

 

 

My question is directly related to the subject of this thread. Objective standards by which one might know that a style of music is influenced by demons are absolutely necessary to make any application from whatever principles you draw. Your unwillingness to provide them makes me question your seriousness in this discussion, although your desire to control the discussion is duly noted. 

Paul

I have not yet gotten to a discussion of the material in Exodus 32 that pertains to what it reveals about their style(s) of music that were demonically influenced. When that discussion has been completed, perhaps some of what you are wanting will have been provided to you. 

Kevin Miller wrote:

Okay, so the commands were for Israel, but the warnings about breaking the commands are for Christians even though the commands were given to Israel. Are the blessings for obedience to the commands in verses 25-26 also for Christians?  25 Worship the Lord your God, and his blessing will be on your food and water. I will take away sickness from among you, 26 and none will miscarry or be barren in your land. I will give you a full life span.

No, these blessings are not directed to us. You are missing the point that I am making in discussing these passages.. The same dangers in the certainty of demonic entrapment that were the ultimate reason for the divine warnings to Israel are the same reasons that Christians are commanded to flee from idolatry. That is the point of similarity.

Kevin Miller wrote:

Quote:
You are missing the main point of these commands. The idols had no real existence. When the peoples served them, especially by offering sacrifices to them, they were sacrificing to demons and came into fellowship with them by eating what had been sacrificed to them.

 

Doing so, they were ensnared by Satan and his demons, who were the actual objects of their worship. God warned His people that if they did the same things, they would surely be ensnared. Such ensnarement was not to the idol, which as Paul says was nothing, but to the demons behind them.

 

I don't think I'm missing the point at all. I'm looking at the passage itself to find the point. God was telling them that if they left their idol-worshipping neighbors in the land, those neighbors with their idolatry would be a trap encouraging the Israelites to further idolatry and wickedness themselves. I found a number of commentaries that support this view.  Have you found any commentaries that support yours? Here are some excerpts from the ones I found:

Yes, you are missing the point. The commentators are only treating the passage for what it says in the passage. That's what commentators typically do, although some go beyond and bring in truths from elsewhere as well to explain the fuller significance in ways that the passage does not. 

The NT provides further understanding that explains things that the OT did not say about the ultimate realities behind the idols--demons who are insatiably evil and will entrap anyone they can. Are you asserting that what Paul says in 1 Cor. 10:20 was not true for those in the OT who practiced consuming in a worship context what was sacrificed to idols?

Kevin Miller wrote:

So let's talk about a particular example of when godly heavenly beings were making music. Job 38:6-7 talks about the creation of the world. "On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone—7 while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?" The mornings stars are typically understood as a reference to angels and we see here that they were singing. The verse doesn't mention instruments, but even the singing alone without lyrics would have been in some sort of style. I'm sure we can agree that it would have been a godly style that expressed joy.

 

So here's my question. When one third of the angles fell, what would have prevented them from adding wicked lyrics to this "style that expressed joy" and using it to express joy at Satan's wickedness? Satan wanted to be like God, after all, so it seems logical that he would want the same styles of praise and joy directed to him as had been previously directed to God.

By their very nature, demons are not going to want anything done in ways that are inherently godly. If it is possible to corrupt something, they will seek to corrupt it.

Kevin Miller wrote:

You mentioned the music of the king of Babylon from Isaiah 14. Verse 12 tells us who the king of Babylon is in this context. "How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!" It is Satan who is being talked about, since Satan fell from heaven. When verse 11 mentions "the music of your harps," it is Satan's harps being spoken of. Satan knew the style of praise and joy, since he was a part of that first angelic chorus. What would have prevented him from using the godly style of praise and joy in an ungodly way by directing the praise and joy to himself instead of to God? The composite sound would have certainly been ungodly and would have been "brought down to the grave," but would the style itself have stayed godly or would Satan's usage have made the style ungodly as well.

No, verse 12 does not tell us who the king of Babylon is in this context. Interpreters dispute whether verses 12 and following talk about Satan or not.

In any case, whoever is the one being talked about in verse 11 is someone who has a physical body that is susceptible to worms spreading under that body and covering it:

Isaiah 14:11 Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

Satan is a spirit being who does not have a physical body. It does not make any sense to talk about worms spreading under Satan and covering him.

Verse 11 is talking about a human ruler of Babylon who was brought down to the grave along with his pomp and the sound of his harps.

Also, Satan is an invisible being whom none of the kings of the earth would have known anything about his activities other than if he had chosen to reveal himself as the devil to them. We do not have any evidence that the devil has ever done anything like that for all the kings of the earth. 

The person talked about in vs. 9-10 whose demise into hell is cheered by all the kings of the nations that he oppressed was someone that those kings of the nations knew was the one who had oppressed them. In Isaiah 14, we can be certain that at least verses 4-11 are only talking about a human ruler of Babylon, not the devil.

pvawter wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

Yes, you are missing the point. The commentators are only treating the passage for what it says in the passage. That's what commentators typically do, although some go beyond and bring in truths from elsewhere as well to explain the fuller significance in ways that the passage does not.

 

 

Now we're finally getting somewhere, Rajesh. You admit that you're looking for the great doctrines that are found in the white spaces in the Bible. Why bother with those pesky commentaries when they only treat what it says in the passage and you're interested in what it doesn't say?

Typical remarks from someone who distorts what was actually said and by doing so thereby attacks another believer.

You conveniently skipped right over my saying, "That's what commentators typically do, although some go beyond and bring in truths from elsewhere as well to explain the fuller significance in ways that the passage does not."

It is a well-known fact that some commentators bring in truths from elsewhere in the Bible that pertain to help explain what is said in a particular passage.

You display what kind of person you are by using such ungodly tactics as you have in these remarks of yours.

.

Kevin Miller wrote:

You mentioned the music of the king of Babylon from Isaiah 14. Verse 12 tells us who the king of Babylon is in this context. "How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!" It is Satan who is being talked about, since Satan fell from heaven. 

E. J. Young explains Is. 14:12 as follows:
 

Tertullian, Gregory the Great, and others have referred this verse to the fall of Satan, described in Luke 10:18. But the present passage pictures the end of a tyrannical reign. The Babylonian king had desired to be above God, and so fell from heaven. He falls to Sheol, and his power is done away. Not so Satan. His fall was against God, but he continues yet his tyrannical acts against God's people. 'His doom is sure,' for Christ has died, but not until the final judgment will he be confined to the lake of fire. Inasmuch, then, as this passage describes a king's downfall and removal from the scene, it cannot apply to Satan.

--The Book of Isaiah, 441, emphasis added.