In defense of Satan

[Minimalist]

@ minimalist
(in my opinion)
its on how we believe it.

since we are talking about satan in revelations here then we should consider revelation a fact temporarily

I'm not prepared to grant that.

Frankly, revelations has a few earmarks of having begun as a Jewish apocryphal text that was usurped by xtians when it became apparent that jesus wasn't coming back all that quickly. (And, before you get any ideas, understand that I don't think he's coming back at all because he wasn't here the first time!)

Anyway, I suspect that revelations started out as a fairly sublime piece of Jewish propaganda in the Great Revolt as it dates itself to late 68/early 69 BC in 17:10.

Revelation 17:10, "And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

Five kings are fallen: Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero.
One is: (Servius Sulpicius) Galba who ruled from June 68 to January 69
One yet to come: (Titus Flavius) Vespasian who everyone in Judaea knew had been proclaimed by Josephus to be the future emperor when he defected to the Romans. Vespasian was gathering his armies in Northern Israel after subduing Galilee and watching the political situation in Rome.

(The author of revelations - no god...just a man...can be forgiven for missing the short-lived "emperors" Otho and Vitellius who grabbed the throne before Vespasian was able to transport his army to Italy. Nonetheless, Vespasian did "continue a short space." His rule lasted 10 years.)

In any case the "one is" comment can only refer to Galba which gives us a date within a six month range when revelations began to take shape.

I have seen xtians twist themselves into knots trying to invent other answers to save this for themselves but, frankly, those answers are as loony as most of revelations itself.