Understanding the Mark of the Beast

The “mark” is a number, six hundred sixty six; That is what scripture says. You are re-defining the number of the beast to fit your theories and grieving Holy Spirit while you are at it.

And NO! I cannot lose my salvation because I’m standing in the hands of almighty God, indwelt by God Holy Spirit and He has promised my Savior Jesus that He would lose none. God Holy Spirit testifies with my spirit that I am a child of God. That can never change.

And if the anti-Christ himself chained me down and tattooed the mark of the beast on my forehead, my salvation is as certain as the first day Christ revealed Himself to me and I responded with faith.

Nothing can separate me from the Love of Jesus. You can look that up in the Bible while you re-write God’s word to fit your theories. It’s somewhere in the back.

Peace to you

 

Wow, for someone who has applied for patents, you are absolutely clueless about the creative process.

That’s exactly what he did. And he filed a patent for it.

peace to you

 

Thanks for the conversation.

I’ll leave you to it.

peace to you

 

That’s the heart of your argument. No matter what anyone else says, it doesn’t matter.

Brothers in Christ have shown you that you have changed scripture to fit your theories. Scripture clearly says the mark of the beast is “a number”, that number is six hundred sixty six. You change scripture when claim the mark is three numbers…. 6…..6……6 separated by other numbers.

Your response? “All your comments are immaterial”. The only thing that matters is your theories.

It is as if you are living the fantasy of the “Left Behind” books and movies. Nothing anyone says can break you out of your fantasy. No amount of scripture, no amount of rational discussion.

Peace to you

 

How else would St. John write that the mark is three 6s? As simple as you did in your question. Who is it who's really getting tripped up over nothing? For someone who claims to take this passage literally, you are clearly changing what it literally says.

The Bible was written using many different literary forms. We interpret history one way, poetry another way, and prophecy yet another way. Did the stars literally stop shining in Isaiah 13:10-13? Of course not. This language was describing judgment on Babylon. Isaiah 34:3-5 describes judgment on Idumea, not cosmic events. Was the Lord literally riding a cloud in Isaiah 19:1? Were the cosmic events described in Acts 2:17-21 literal or was St. Luke using figurative language?

The Jews were familiar with this figurative "apocalyptic" language, and they never took it literally. Jesus and the New Testament writers addressed 1st Century Jewish audiences, so they used the same type of language. In our modern western world, we don't have the same understanding of this prophetic language, and we can easily make the mistake of taking everything literally. We use some figurative phrases and never think twice about it. "It's raining cats and dogs." "Time is money." "Clint Eastwood is a very popular star." I suggest you stop reading Revelation through the lens of your particular interpretation.

By the way, you never have provided the advice of what Christians are to do.

 

The real point is that the mark upon the foreheads in Ezekiel was for what was in the heart and thinking of a person. Likewise, when we look at the use of "forehead" in Revelation, there are seals and writings and marks on them, all over the place. They are all symbolic and not a single one is literal. God is not the author of confusion. His use of words is consistent within context. The context is thoughts and intentions of man. With God, it is always what is in the heart of the person or persons in question that is at issue. God judges the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Man looks upon the outward appearance. Your interpretation claims that it is some outward appearance, mark or tattoo that condemns a man. This is not in harmony with the teaching of the rest of the Bible. Interpretation must be harmonious with all scripture. And in the context of Revelation, it is clear that all forehead markings, seals and writings are not literal marks, seals and writings, but symbolic of the content of the thoughts and intentions of those kinds of peoples.

The Bible itself is our guide to its interpretation.

Have a great day. If not, at least have a great burrito.

 

Just a technical point here: Jesus' final instructions for Christians are given in Revelation 2 and 3. Nothing about taking a mark in those messages. Everything starting in chapter 4 is for after the Church is resurrected. Then begins Daniel's 70th week, the last 7 years of the age of Israel.

So the only commandment one need obey is to not get a tattoo? Somehow, I don't think that's what is meant in Revelation 14:12. I'm inclined to think the meaning is along the lines of John chapters 14 and 15. Those who love God keep His commandments.

You mean being cut off from commerce, like Parler? Why did that happen? Was it because the owners of Parler didn't get a tattoo? Or was it rather because their free-speech policy didn't agree with the owners of Amazon, Google and Apple? Their crime was a thought crime. They didn't "tow the correct line". They didn't adopt the correct policy. They did think and implement the correct thoughts. So they could no longer buy and sell in the social marketplace. It was not about getting a tattoo.

The imagery of the mark is symbolic of acceptance and submission. Notice that the mark is not said to be imposed but rather compelled to be "received". It requires acquiescence, i.e. attitude/decision. The point is the notion symbolized by the mark in the text which is the thoughts/decisions. The mark is associated with worship of the beast and/or his image. That concept is never separated from the idea of receiving the mark. That the mark is associated with personal attitudes is mirrored in the prophetic passage of Ezekiel 9.

Well, there's a big difference here. There is no symbolic language in the Mt. Sinai episode. That passage is narrative historical literature. It is not poetic/prophetic literature, neither is it couched in symbols, symbolism or symbolic imagery that also happens to be echoed in other prophetic books couched in the same symbols.

Revelation is prophetic literature couched in symbolism and symbolic imagery. It has to be that way in order to remain equally relevant in the vast progress of time. Knowledge of a specific, transient technology is not likely to be a key to Biblical interpretation. Since what you are suggesting depends upon a specific current technology, that in itself is a red flag that the interpretation on that basis is not what was intended.

Best Regards,