It's important to interpret passages of scripture acording to the intended context and audience of the author. In this case, the audience was first century jews wh understood symbology (especially when coming from a person who wrote it in prison) A jew referring to one's hand and/or forehead would be understood to refer to a person's thoughts and deeds. In that context, the passages is saying that followers of the Beast will be known to others by what they say and do. For that reason, it's reasonable to interpret this passage as the mark being a spiritual mark, not a literal mark.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Mark
- Thread starter JohnDB
- Start date
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
The bible doesn't say a lot of things. However, just like real estate people say "location, location, location". When studying the bible you must understand "context, context, context." So he makes a good point. John the Revelator audience are christians that many are converted Jews and a favorite type of literature was apocalyptic which we can see with the Essene community. And there is a way to understand this type of literature. I'm sure "this present darkness" would be confusing to a first century Christian.
Actually if we look to what the Preterists say about the mark we can see some things as to what are possibilities of the future (being either a spiritual mark, physical mark, or both)
The Caesars were brutal. They required everyone to worship them as if they were indeed gods. The merchants used banks and anyone that was a truly successful merchant had to have a brand (yes a real one) on their head with their servants having one on their hands which claimed alegiance to Caesar. (Nero being the one who enforced this branding)
It was a custom from the slaves that people owned. Head slaves were branded on their foreheads as belonging to a particular household. (slaves had many rights from the many revolts they held and even a retirement program)
The banking system that the Romans used was also filled with their pantheon of gods as well. (still based upon Daniel's institution of banking) If a person was to deposit money or cash a check they had to profess alegience to gods of silver or gold and a few other ones as well. Christians obviously refused to use the banks.
The passage "buy or sell" doesn't refer to small amounts but actually large amounts. Paul never would have needed to have a mark on him for what little work that he actually ever did. (spending more time in jail than anything)
The Greek word for Mark is also not one of branding...it is the one used for coin making. A likely allusion to the opposite of what the priests wore on their turbans when working in the Temple. Considering the overturning of the money changers in the Temple courts...I don't think that the problem was with the money itself.
Which leaves us right back to square one...what is the mark and how and why is it applied in the fashion that it is employed here in this passage?
The Caesars were brutal. They required everyone to worship them as if they were indeed gods. The merchants used banks and anyone that was a truly successful merchant had to have a brand (yes a real one) on their head with their servants having one on their hands which claimed alegiance to Caesar. (Nero being the one who enforced this branding)
It was a custom from the slaves that people owned. Head slaves were branded on their foreheads as belonging to a particular household. (slaves had many rights from the many revolts they held and even a retirement program)
The banking system that the Romans used was also filled with their pantheon of gods as well. (still based upon Daniel's institution of banking) If a person was to deposit money or cash a check they had to profess alegience to gods of silver or gold and a few other ones as well. Christians obviously refused to use the banks.
The passage "buy or sell" doesn't refer to small amounts but actually large amounts. Paul never would have needed to have a mark on him for what little work that he actually ever did. (spending more time in jail than anything)
The Greek word for Mark is also not one of branding...it is the one used for coin making. A likely allusion to the opposite of what the priests wore on their turbans when working in the Temple. Considering the overturning of the money changers in the Temple courts...I don't think that the problem was with the money itself.
Which leaves us right back to square one...what is the mark and how and why is it applied in the fashion that it is employed here in this passage?