"Appointed unto men ONCE to die" contradicts the rapture's "translation" myth

[Sparko]

Hey again Sparko,

Sorry about the "word salad". You're right that it's a lot to wade through. I used to work for several years in a library, so maybe that's the root cause for my wallowing in mounds of verbiage. My only excuse is that Jesus was also called "The WORD" before His incarnation, so maybe He loves words too.

Your #1 question: "When did the 1,000 years occur?"
Answer: The literal one-thousand-year millennium of Rev. 20 ran from 968/967 BC until AD 33. It began with Solomon's temple foundation stone being laid, and lasted until Christ laid Himself down as the True Foundation Stone of the temple not made with hands at His resurrection-day ascension. Rev. 12:12 compared with Rev. 20:3 and 7 proves that the millennium was already past when John was writing Revelation. And there are other scripture indications in the OT of when the already-fulfilled millennium would first begin.


Your #2 question: "When did the first resurrection mentioned in Rev. 20:1-6 occur?"
Answer: The "FIRST resurrection" was in AD 33, and was composed of "Christ the First-fruits" and the "remnant of the dead" 144,000 "First-fruits". These were same as the Matthew 27:52-53 saints raised along with Him. Christ became the unique "FIRST-born", and the "FIRST-begotten" out of that "FIRST-fruits" group, when He became the FIRST EVER to ascend to the Father in heaven that morning in His resurrected body form. "THIS DAY have I begotten thee..." (in heaven) was fulfilled then.

OK so we have 1,000 years from 968 BC to 33AD, then the resurrection?

That is backwards to what Revelation 20 says:

⁴ I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They^[a] had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. ⁵ (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection

It clearly says that the resurrection happens first, and then they reigned with Christ for 1,000 years. And that is BEFORE the rest of the dead came to life (which you put in 70AD)

So if that resurrection occurred in 33 AD, then we would have seen them and Christ ON EARTH, alive until 1033AD. Then we would have the second resurrection.

Your #3 question: "When did the second resurrection mentioned in Revelation occur (or will occur) where everyone is judged and if not found in the book of life tossed into the fire?"
Answer: The SECOND resurrection already took place, (as the New Testament writers - and Christ - predicted was "ABOUT TO" occur), in AD 70 on that year's Pentecost Day; a day pinned down on the calendar by Daniel 12's prediction about the 1,335thday.

See above, this clearly is wrong.

Your #4 question: "Is that Resurrection (point 3) the same one where you and I will be resurrected?" If not, where is that one mentioned?
Answer: NO, that second bodily resurrection in AD 70 was NOT the same THIRD bodily resurrection event you and I will experience in the future. I'm already guilty of heaping up a "word salad" describing how the type of the THREE required harvest feast celebrations under Mosaic law (Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles) was meant to prefigure the THREE "harvests" of the dead out of the ground in THREE mass bodily resurrection events spaced out over the span of human history.

So where does the bible talk of this extra resurrection in the future? The two other resurrections mentioned in Rev 20 covers EVERYONE. Everyone who wasn't in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. Nobody left.

[3 Resurrections]

As for Darfius and your question, Sparko, about how to explain any resurrections performed BEFORE Christ's "FIRST resurrection"....

It is not good enough for us just to get above ground ALIVE and REMAIN there in an incorruptible, changed condition of a body that will never die again. The very reason in the first place for getting that incorruptible body form given to us as part of our promised salvation inheritance is so that we can enjoy a death-free face-to-face communion in intimate fellowship with our Creator. THAT was what Moses instinctively longed for. He knew that He could ask for nothing better than that..."I beseech thee, SHOW ME THY GLORY." God explained to Moses that no man in a mortal state could look upon God's face and live through that experience.

It takes a change for our bodies into the immortal state for us to be able to look upon our God's face and survive the exposure to such utter holiness. While in His resurrected body form on earth for those 40 days, Christ shielded His disciples from that risk of death by assuming "another form" (hetera morphe) of subdued glory that would not harm them. But in heaven, Christ's fully-manifested, glorified human body has eyes like flames of fire and hair as pure white wool, with feet that appear to burn in a furnace, and a voice that sounds like many waters. Even in a vison, John fell at His feet as dead.

Those raised to an incorruptible life again in those various individual resurrections since the OT times were remaining on earth and waiting for what Hebrews 11:35 called "the BETTER resurrection" for the rest of the faithful. The BETTER resurrection for the saints took place in AD 70 when they could all together be finally ushered into the opened heavenly temple and into a face-to-face fellowship with the Creator.

[Darfius]

So your contention, 3 Resurrections, is that the boy Elijah raised circa 850 BC continued to live on earth--as a boy--until 70 AD? That doesn't sound at all absurd to you?

[Sparko]

As for Darfius and your question, Sparko, about how to explain any resurrections performed BEFORE Christ's "FIRST resurrection"....

It is not good enough for us just to get above ground ALIVE and REMAIN there in an incorruptible, changed condition of a body that will never die again. The very reason in the first place for getting that incorruptible body form given to us as part of our promised salvation inheritance is so that we can enjoy a death-free face-to-face communion in intimate fellowship with our Creator. THAT was what Moses instinctively longed for. He knew that He could ask for nothing better than that..."I beseech thee, SHOW ME THY GLORY." God explained to Moses that no man in a mortal state could look upon God's face and live through that experience.

It takes a change for our bodies into the immortal state for us to be able to look upon our God's face and survive the exposure to such utter holiness. While in His resurrected body form on earth for those 40 days, Christ shielded His disciples from that risk of death by assuming "another form" (hetera morphe) of subdued glory that would not harm them. But in heaven, Christ's fully-manifested, glorified human body has eyes like flames of fire and hair as pure white wool, with feet that appear to burn in a furnace, and a voice that sounds like many waters. Even in a vison, John fell at His feet as dead.

Those raised to an incorruptible life again in those various individual resurrections since the OT times were remaining on earth and waiting for what Hebrews 11:35 called "the BETTER resurrection" for the rest of the faithful. The BETTER resurrection for the saints took place in AD 70 when they could all together be finally ushered into the opened heavenly temple and into a face-to-face fellowship with the Creator.

You seem to have a "just so" explanation for everything. Reminds me of an old joke:

A psychiatrist was talking to a patient who claimed he was dead.

"Can dead people feel pain?" asked the doctor.

"Of course not!" replied the patient

So the doctor reaches over and sticks a pin in his hand.

"OW!" yelled the patient.

"see? you felt pain so you are not dead" said the doctor.

"Well, what do you know? Dead people CAN feel pain!" said the patient.

--
In this case you explain away any prior resurrections as "they don't count cuz there are different degrees of resurection..."

[3 Resurrections]

Hi Sparko,

Here is where you are making an assumption in the Revelation 20:4 phrase "And they came to life and [THEN] reigned with Christ a thousand years." THERE IS NO "THEN" in that verse. This is a compound verb of TWO activities that these saints performed. You could just as easily say "they reigned with Christ a thousand years and came to life again". There is NO "AFTER THAT" indication in this verse of which of those two activities came first. Since that first sentence in Rev. 20:4 gives no indication of which of these two actions were performed FIRST, John takes time to explain in the very next Rev. 20:5 sentence exactly WHEN they came to life again. "But the remnant of the dead" (which dead saints John had just been discussing in Rev. 20:4) "lived not again UNTIL the thousand years were ended. So that tells you that their faithful reign in life with Christ of their natural lifetime on earth sometime during the literal thousand years was FOLLOWED by a remnant fraction of those same dead saints coming to life again as a group AFTER the thousand years had ENDED. That very occasion of the relatively small remnant of the dead coming to life again WAS the "First resurrection" in AD 33. And that remnant of the dead were all called "blessed and holy", because it was only saints that were raised along with Christ in Mathew 27:52-53. This is NOT "backwards" of what Revelation 20:4-5 says.

The SECOND resurrection in AD 70 truly raised ALL the saints that had died UP UNTIL that time. NO saints were left in the grave. As I Cor. 15:51-54 says, ALL the righteous dead who had died up to that point were going to be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last, (7th) trumpet of Revelation. For the wicked dead, NONE of them received a resurrection-changed body. By throwing death and Hell (Hades - the grave) into the Lake of Fire, that meant all the wicked dead inhabitants of the grave were disposed of on that occasion. No conscious eternal torment decreed for them. Just a fate of body and soul being cast out and destroyed, as in the "fishing net" parable when the bad were cast away and discarded.

I am not "explaining away" the individual resurrection examples prior to AD 70. They did indeed "count" as bona-fide resurrections to an incorruptible life, even though they had to remain on earth for a time in those incorruptible bodies. And there ARE progressive "degrees" of our salvation / resurrection mentioned in Romans 8:30 - all the way from predestination, calling, justification, and finally concluding with our body's glorification when we are fitted to "stand before His presence with exceeding joy". NONE of those "degrees" are going to be left out for any of the saints. Each step of our total salvation / resurrection is vital and WILL be finally and totally completed when we stand in a glorified human body before His presence. "Being confident of this very thing, that He which hath begun a good work in you will finish it until the day of Jesus Christ." (Phil. 1:6).

That WAS a good joke you gave about the doc and the patient. I hadn't heard that one before. I'll likewise use a commonplace comparison to show how all the steps of the resurrection "degrees" are necessary. Take a marriage for instance (which is actually compared to Christ and the church's relationship). An engagement between a man and a woman could be compared to our being spiritually resurrected to a living relationship of faith in Christ while we are on earth. The eventual marriage ceremony could be compared to our bodily resurrection. But that's not where marriage ends, is it? The goal is for the couple to establish a physical, face-to-face, intimate union begun on that day, with hopefully a total merging of bodies, minds, and hearts. This is symbolic of the ultimate goal which all the saints will eventually enjoy to the fullest when their resurrected bodies are in God's presence forevermore. Is it such a shock that God would choose to do this by staging THREE separate mass resurrection events?


For Darfius,

You asked if I thought it at all absurd to have the boy Elijah raised from the dead to remain on earth until AD 70.

No, I don't. It's not any more absurd than to read that Melchizedek who had an "endless life" was STILL ALIVE even when Hebrews 7:8 was being written. That's even longer than the young boy raised by Elijah remained on earth in that resurrected condition. If our resurrection to an incorruptible life is to mimic that of Christ's, then we too will be able to assume "another form" (a hetera morphe as in Mark 16:12) at our own discretion. In that case, a "young boy" such as the boy raised by Elijah didn't need to remain looking like a young boy as the centuries passed, unless he desired to.

[Darfius]

What evidence do you have that Melchizedek was still alive during the writing of Hebrews? Do you also believe he literally had no father or mother? How could he have been human if not? These absurdities I am pointing out are meant to get you to see the implausibility of your theory.

You are also saying that before Jesus came to redeem us, a young boy was given carte blanche to change not only his body but presumably all of nature (Jesus showed that a body without sin commands obedience from even the wind and waves) at will for roughly a thousand years and no one noticed. And why would God have given him this ability? When, for example, John the Baptist was not given this ability and we have from Jesus' own mouth that John was the greatest man ever born.

[Sparko]

Hi Sparko,

Here is where you are making an assumption in the Revelation 20:4 phrase "And they came to life and [THEN] reigned with Christ a thousand years." THERE IS NO "THEN" in that verse. This is a compound verb of TWO activities that these saints performed. You could just as easily say "they reigned with Christ a thousand years and came to life again". There is NO "AFTER THAT" indication in this verse of which of those two activities came first. Since that first sentence in Rev. 20:4 gives no indication of which of these two actions were performed FIRST, John takes time to explain in the very next Rev. 20:5 sentence exactly WHEN they came to life again. "But the remnant of the dead" (which dead saints John had just been discussing in Rev. 20:4) "lived not again UNTIL the thousand years were ended. So that tells you that their faithful reign in life with Christ of their natural lifetime on earth sometime during the literal thousand years was FOLLOWED by a remnant fraction of those same dead saints coming to life again as a group AFTER the thousand years had ENDED. That very occasion of the relatively small remnant of the dead coming to life again WAS the "First resurrection" in AD 33. And that remnant of the dead were all called "blessed and holy", because it was only saints that were raised along with Christ in Mathew 27:52-53. This is NOT "backwards" of what Revelation 20:4-5 says.

just, wow. No, it clearly says that the 1,000 years comes after they came back to life. You are adding in words not there. It doesn't even make sense for them to reign with Christ 1,000 years before they were resurrected. How? How did they live for 1000 years before they were resurrected? Christ was not even alive then, other than as the Son. There was no Jesus Christ until he was born. And verse 1 says the ones who came to life were "beheaded because of their testimony about JESUS (again, "Jesus" wasn't around 1000 years before he was born)

And the people in 20:5 is clearly referring to the people later in the chapter in the second resurrection.

For someone who wants to take the bible literally when it say "die once" you sure do play loose with the language when it clearly shows your theory is wrong.

REV 20:1 And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. ² He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. ³ He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

⁴ I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They^[a] had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. ⁵ (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. ⁶ Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

This obvious twisting of the plain words of scripture to fit your theory is exactly why I said earlier it wasn't worth my time to argue scripture with you, but rather go to the root of the problem, your pride that you can't be wrong and are special.

[Christianbookworm]

And where is the historical evidence for these supposed mass resurrections in the past? No mention of empty tombs? No glorified humans playing superhero?

[3 Resurrections]

Sparko, here's another commonplace example that shows how Jesus could be referred to by the prophets of old, who "told before of the coming of the Just One." Suppose you tell someone, "My wife went to kindergarten at such and such a school." We know very well that the little 5-year old girl was not your wife at the time she was attending kindergarten. This is just the ordinary way we refer to older people when discussing activities in their younger days. It's the same with references to the martyred ones in Revelation 20:4 who were "beheaded for the testimony of Jesus". The "Word" which became Jesus in His incarnate form did not have to be existing yet in that body of flesh for the prophets to be giving testimony of the "coming of the Just One", which you and I (and John's readers as well) associate with the name of Jesus. John's audience knew then that the second person of the Trinity was revealed in Jesus, so that is why John used His name when speaking of what was done back in the OT days when the millennium period of Satan's binding was launched.

And no, none of these saints mentioned in Revelation lived, (like Methuselah almost did), for a literal thousand years total. The language Revelation 20:4 uses doesn't require that. Suppose an art teacher is showing examples of classical paintings to her students, and tells the class, "These were done by a Renaissance painter". The students do not automatically presume that the painter lived for the entire duration of the Renaissance period, start to finish.

It's the same with the millennial saints that faithfully "reigned in life" with Christ (formerly titled "The Word") for that thousand years when Satan was bound. It's not necessary that they all had extended lifetimes of a thousand years duration, start to finish, with all of them reigning jointly with each other for the entire period. All that is required for the language of Rev. 20:4 is that at some point on the timeline of the millennium years from 968/967 BC until AD 33, these saints had in their turn lived ordinary lives of faith before their God while He had Satan bound from deceiving the nations. Some were martyred for their faith - like the prophets Jezebel slew. Some were not - like Elisha. Some had not participated in giving homage to the Sea Beast as far back as in Nebuchadnezzar's days - like Daniel and his three friends . Some did not take the mark of the Sea Beast imposed on the Jewish people by their own leadership, the Land Beast, ever since 19 BC when the abominable, pagan Tyrian shekel minted at Jerusalem began to be required for temple sales and purchases.

And NO. The Revelation 20:4-5 saints that came to life again WERE called the FIRST resurrection - not the second. "THIS is the First resurrection", John says. That word "THIS" is pointing directly to the Rev. 20:4-5 resurrected saints he had just mentioned. Don't know how you can miss that. And you still have not addressed the very clear evidence in Rev. 12:12 compared with this Rev. 20:3 & 7 verses proving that the millennium was ALREADY OVER by the time John was writing Revelation. Unless you don't think that Satan's "little season" and "short time" are speaking of the same time period.

I'm not trying to be prideful, Sparko, truly. I'm just trying to give Jesus His rightful place as the "First resurrection" in time. In proper chronological order, it was "Christ the First-fruits, THEN they that are Christ's at His coming", which was going to be the second AD 70 resurrection soon to come that almost every book of the NT spoke about.

[Darfius]

Unless you don't think that Satan's "little season" and "short time" are speaking of the same time period.

They're not. One is speaking of the period right before he is bound for the Millenial reign and the other is speaking of his release at the end of the Millenial reign.

[3 Resurrections]

For Christianbookworm...

You asked about historical evidence of empty tombs as proof of the two past mass resurrections. One would be the Matthew 27:52-53 passage about the tombs that were broken open by the earthquake at Christ's crucifixion. When He rose from the dead in AD 33, they rose out of those broken tombs as well. It was not God's purpose for them to play at being "superheroes". Ephesians 4:8-12 tells us the reason that Christ in the "First resurrection" brought all those 144,000 "First-fruits" out of the tomb with Him. Some of that "multitude of captives" were given to act in the church as "apostles" (meaning "sent ones"), and some were evangelists, and some were prophets, and some were pastors, and some of them were teachers. The resurrection of this "multitude of captives" given as gifts to men was for "the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." That doesn't sound as if this resurrected "multitude of captives" led out of the grave were playing at being "superheroes".

Part of their job was to fulfill Christ's promise that before the end came, the gospel would be preached in all the world, and THEN the end would come. Paul said this had been accomplished (Col. 1:6,23). Do you realize how much evangelistic ground each of those 144,000 resurrected saints could have covered between AD 33 and AD 70, with no ordinary physical limitations that even the disciples had? God had told His disciples to pray the Lord of the Harvest to send forth laborers into that harvest. Those resurrected 144,000 Matthew 27 "First-fruits" saints were a major part of the answer to that prayer.

You might be interested in reading about the Siebenberg House Museum in the Old City of Jerusalem. Excavations at that site go down as far as King Solomon's time, with an (empty) burial chamber.

You might also be interested in the true Cave of Machpelah location, (which is also completely empty), where Jacob and Leah, Isaac and Rebekah, Abraham and Sarah were all buried in that double cave.

You might also be interested in the dozen or so Tophets of the Mediterranean, like the very large, ancient Carthage Tophet, that have multiplied thousands of crematory urns of infants and young animals sacrificed to Baal and the goddess Tannit. Some are completely empty. Some have only cremated animal remains. Some have cremated infant remains. All I can say is that an incorruptible, resurrected body is not given to those who are not chosen to be children of God. And that nobody comes into this world without the capability of sinning - even infants.

You might be interested in researching why so many of the limestone ossuaries around Jerusalem are found completely empty, while others buried in the same vault are not.

And I have already mentioned that there is proof of Christ's returning to stand on the Mount of Olives for the AD 70 resurrection. The predicted breakup of the Mount of Olives (prophesied in Zechariah 14:4-5 in the LXX) generated rubble layers that slid downhill and filled up the Kidron Valley as far as Azal (the Wadi Yasul on today's maps). That AD 70-dated layer of earthquake rubble isn't going anywhere. If it's still there, that proves that Christ returned to that location and gathered His resurrected saints to that location, as scripture said He was going to do.

[3 Resurrections]

No Darfius, Satan was only released ONCE for a "short time", which was the same occasion as the "little season" during which he was released, just after the millennium period had expired. Satan did not have TWO brief periods to deceive the nations at full throttle. Just ONE, with a last "hail Mary pass", if you will, before God was going to slay that dragon.

And that "short time" of Satan's release was just after Christ's ascension. Christ warned the people in John 12:31, about 5 days before His crucifixion, that "NOW is the judgment of this world: NOW shall the prince of this world be cast out." (Cast out of heaven with his angels unto the earth, that is, to wrathfully oppress the inhabitants of the earth and sea). And even closer to Satan's time of being cast out of heaven, on the very night He was betrayed, Christ said again in John 14:30, "Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me."

If Satan was going to have TWO brief periods to deceive the nations again, He would not have been so angry as scripture portrays him at that time when he became a "roaring lion walking about, seeking whom he could destroy". If he knew he had another second shot at being released again, he wouldn't have needed to go full throttle. His very desperation shows that his one-and-only short time of release was his last chance to deceive the nations. Since Satan's AD 70 destruction, we still manage to deceive ourselves plenty, without his assistance.

[Christianbookworm]

I'm referring to historical documents. Most dead bodies won't be around thousands of years later. And infants don't have the cognitive ability to sin. Unless you want to claim other mammals sin?

[Darfius]

No Darfius, Satan was only released ONCE for a "short time", which was the same occasion as the "little season" during which he was released, just after the millennium period had expired. Satan did not have TWO brief periods to deceive the nations at full throttle. Just ONE, with a last "hail Mary pass", if you will, before God was going to slay that dragon.

And that "short time" of Satan's release was just after Christ's ascension. Christ warned the people in John 12:31, about 5 days before His crucifixion, that "NOW is the judgment of this world: NOW shall the prince of this world be cast out." (Cast out of heaven with his angels unto the earth, that is, to wrathfully oppress the inhabitants of the earth and sea). And even closer to Satan's time of being cast out of heaven, on the very night He was betrayed, Christ said again in John 14:30, "Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me."

If Satan was going to have TWO brief periods to deceive the nations again, He would not have been so angry as scripture portrays him at that time when he became a "roaring lion walking about, seeking whom he could destroy". If he knew he had another second shot at being released again, he wouldn't have needed to go full throttle. His very desperation shows that his one-and-only short time of release was his last chance to deceive the nations. Since Satan's AD 70 destruction, we still manage to deceive ourselves plenty, without his assistance.

You're right, there is only one release, at the end of the Millenium. There's only one binding, too, at the beginning of the Millenium. It is the events during the tribulation (when the dragon empowers the beast) that he ends up bound and must spend a thousand years in prison, which is enough to make anyone "furious."

You claim the prince of "this world" was cast "out of heaven". What sense does that make? Christ is clearly stating that Satan's power over the earth is being taken from him, that is by Christ and those who belong to Christ. And there is no mention of deceit when he is thrown out of heaven during the events of the tribulation. Only wrath at the people of God. That wrath will be out in the open, which is why the beast will be beheading the saints.

It's as if you have selective reading ability meant to prop up your house of cards of a theory. Give it up, it's nonsense. Which is why you still haven't defended the young boy god who could control nature around him, shapeshift and never die for hundreds of years, because it's a fiction and not even a believable one.

[3 Resurrections]

Darfius, I am simply taking God at His word in Hebrews 9:27, which would mean that the young boy Elijah raised from the dead only had to die ONCE, with a judgment for rewards occurring later - not another death process for his body to experience. If this is beyond your skeptic ability to believe, that will be your issue, not mine. All we have to do is study the characteristics and abilities of the risen Christ - and those Matthew 27 saints raised along with Him - to know what the young boy that Elijah raised was also capable of doing in a resurrected state. Not that he was necessarily required at very opportunity to display everything that a resurrected person is capable of doing.

You need to consider the life of the resurrected Lazarus. After his resurrection, Lazarus did not go out of his way to perform feats of superhuman accomplishments to impress the masses in Israel with his capabilities. Even Christ when raised from the dead selectively limited just who He showed Himself to during those 40 days. You would think Jesus would have splashed Himself all over the place after His resurrection, lavishly displaying to everyone the powers that His resurrected body possessed. But He didn't. That would have been to cast pearls before a lot of people who were "swine". Instead, Peter in Acts 10:40-41 says that "Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; NOT TO ALL THE PEOPLE, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead." Selective revelation for a distinct purpose. Not flaunted before all the people. Which Jesus could have done, but didn't. Which the young boy that Elijah raised could have done, but apparently didn't.

Darfius, you've proposed that deceit was not mentioned when Satan was thrown out of heaven, (which I claim was in AD 33 at Christ's ascension). There are plenty of texts scattered throughout the NT that mention a growing problem of deception for those times, even in the church, as those last days progressed towards "the end of all things" which was "at hand" (I Peter 4:7). "Little children, let no man deceive you..." is repeated numerous times throughout the NT writings. We have II John1:7's observation of an existing deception problem: "For MANY DECEIVERS are gone out into the world..." Christ had already said that demonic oppression of that first-century generation would increase 7-fold in that wicked generation's "last state", compared to what it had been like during Christ's ministry of casting out devils (Matthew 12:43-45).

Satan's main, default operation had always been to deceive mankind to its own ruin, as he gave evidence even from the beginning as the "Father of lies". Christ even warned the disciples that deception by "false prophets" and "false christs" under the soon-to-come Great Tribulation would be of such magnitude in that generation that, "if it were possible, they would deceive even the very elect" (Matthew 24:24). The "beginning of sorrows" prior to that Great Tribulation period, immediately followed by Christ's return were ALL "ABOUT TO COME TO PASS" for Christ's first-century generation (Luke 21:36). The disciples were to pray that they themselves would be worthy to escape all those things that were "ABOUT TO COME TO PASS, and to stand before the Son of Man" - when the resurrection occurred.

You and I in our generation, Darfius, are not exempt from regular periods of tribulation that challenge the believers. But even as we rapidly approach the turbulent transition to the next 7th millennial period of human history on this planet, it won't ever duplicate that type of demonically-oppressed Great Tribulation back in AD 66 which that "wicked generation" experienced. We have Christ's promise of that in Matthew 24:21: "NO, nor ever SHALL BE" the same type of tribulation. Because the entire demonic realm has been completely destroyed.