Thanks for bringing this up here. Let's see if I can clear things up a bit.
First, here's the question as originally asked. Note that the question strongly implies that the book of Revelation should be understood literally, for example, when it says "we do know what is 666 and why it will be used for."
Perhaps you disagree with my judgment on this – that the OP wasn't actually assuming a literal understanding of Revelation. However, looking at this version of the question, I see only two options:
- The OP is coming from a dispensational background – not dispensational in a general sense, but in a theological sense, and thus would most benefit from that type of answer.
- The OP is confused, doesn't really understand his or her assumptions about the book of Revelation, and is just asking a truth question about Satan's motives.
If #1, then the question should be edited to clarify that a dispensational viewpoint is desired. If #2, then the question should be closed. After some deliberation, I went with option #1, but #2 wouldn't have been wrong either. But in neither case would it be appropriate to post an answer coming from a non-dispensational perspective.
Why not? Because this is not a free-for-all forum, where different traditions compete amongst themselves for dominance. To avoid this, we established early in this site's history that answers must match the question's perspective.
Practically speaking that means it is not appropriate on this site to answer a question of the form "What do Catholics think about X?" with "Here's what Mormons think about X." Or, "What do Mormons think about Y?" with "Here's what Calvinists think about Y." Such "answers" are actually not answers at all, and will be deleted.
Back to this question
Returning to this particular case, you may disagree with my interpretation of the OP's question, and believe that it was inappropriate to edit it as I did. Feel free to challenge users making such edits if you feel strongly about it. But even if you are right on that point, and I am wrong, the question would have been closed as primarily opinion based or a truth question – and as such should not have been answered.
As for your post, it clearly challenges the assumptions of the question, when it says, for example:
However, we do not believe that John's Revelation can be interpreted so literally that, as you ask, it becomes a blueprint Lucifer is somehow compelled to follow.
The fact that you had to do this at the beginning of your question should be a clue that you are not following the guidelines of this site, like those I've linked above. You are clearly coming from a perspective that is different from what the OP wants to know, and that's simply not what this site is for.