Mark of the Beast

[kenod]

I like the KJV, cause it's so consistent. The word dragon never, ever, refers to anything but a serpent. The great red dragon is Satan.

The antichrist is a man, real and living, his mark is tangible and visible. The symbolism in Revelation does not take away from the very real physical events that it describes as occuring in the natural world.

The most obvious thing to me about the "great red dragon" is that it is not a great red dragon with 7 heads and 10 horns and a huge tail - it is a spirtual being.

To understand the "mark" I believe we must first understand where the mark is placed: in the "foread" and in the "right hand".

Here are the Scriptures that describe the "foreheads" of the righteous:

Rev 7:3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have

sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

Rev 9:4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not

the seal of God in their foreheads

.

Rev 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having

his Father's name written in their foreheads

.

Rev 22:4 And they shall see his face; and

his name shall be in their foreheads

.

It seems unlikely to me that "foreheads" in this context can be the literal, physical forehead, but rather what one thinks and believes. If this is so, then it is inconsistent to interpret the foreheads of the ungodly as their literal, physical foreheads. It must also refer to what they think and believe.

The seal of of God is in the foreheads of the righteous; the mark of the beast is in the foreheads of the unrighteous.

.

Edited January 1, 2007 by kenod

[buckthesystem]

I like the KJV, cause it's so consistent. The word dragon never, ever, refers to anything but a serpent. The great red dragon is Satan.

The antichrist is a man, real and living, his mark is tangible and visible. The symbolism in Revelation does not take away from the very real physical events that it describes as occuring in the natural world.

The most obvious thing to me about the "great red dragon" is that it is not a great red dragon with 7 heads and 10 horns and a huge tail - it is a spirtual being.

To understand the "mark" I believe we must first understand where the mark is placed: in the "foread" and in the "right hand".

Here are the Scriptures that describe the "foreheads" of the righteous:

Rev 7:3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have

sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

Rev 9:4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not

the seal of God in their foreheads

.

Rev 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having

his Father's name written in their foreheads

.

Rev 22:4 And they shall see his face; and

his name shall be in their foreheads

.

It seems unlikely to me that "foreheads" in this context can be the literal, physical forehead, but rather what one thinks and believes. If this is so, then it is inconsistent to interpret the foreheads of the ungodly as their literal, physical foreheads. It must also refer to what they think and believe.

The seal of of God is in the foreheads of the righteous; the mark of the beast is in the foreheads of the unrighteous.

.

Why cannot the mark of the beast, AND the seal of God both be a physical mark, perhaps a "holographic tattoo" readable under an ultraviolet light - or, of course, by God who wouldn't need an ultraviolet light?

I think it is more significant that the scripture says "in" their foreheads and not "on" their foreheads. This might indicate a mark burned into the skin, a tattoo is "in" the skin, not written "on" the skin and a microchip would be embedded "into" the skin or bone of the forehead.

As I said, a physical, tangible mark would be necessary to differentiate between those who belonged to God and those who belonged to satan. Of course it would be an attitude thing too.

[kenod]

Ever think that the people who have to get the mark in their forehead may have lost an arm or a hand in an accident or by birth defect?....sounds too simple but you have to look at every possible scenario.

Peace

CJ

How many people with no hands do you know?

And why does Scripture specifically state the "right hand"? (Rev 13:16)

.

Edited January 2, 2007 by kenod

[kenod]

Why cannot the mark of the beast, AND the seal of God both be a physical mark, perhaps a "holographic tattoo" readable under an ultraviolet light - or, of course, by God who wouldn't need an ultraviolet light?

I think it is more significant that the scripture says "in" their foreheads and not "on" their foreheads. This might indicate a mark burned into the skin, a tattoo is "in" the skin, not written "on" the skin and a microchip would be embedded "into" the skin or bone of the forehead.

As I said, a physical, tangible mark would be necessary to differentiate between those who belonged to God and those who belonged to satan. Of course it would be an attitude thing too.

In Ezekiel's prophecy, a similar thing occurs. I see it as a symbolic representation of a spiritual fulfillment.

I don't think there was a literal man dressed in linen with a writer's inkhorn going around putting marks on men's foreheads.

Ezekiel 9:3-4

And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the writer's inkhorn by his side;

And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem,

and

set a mark upon the foreheads

of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof.

[Adarian]

The right hand is the hand of power. A seal or mark in the forehead is a mark of ownership.

[sweetycakes]

Maybe it's a combination of the lot.

By that I mean that maybe it is the TECHNOLOGY used which is the real mark.

I.E...computers.

If you use the base 6 numbering system, i.e.....a = 6, b = 12, c = 18, etc, and you add together the numbers corresponding to the word 'computer'.........you get the number 666

Basically, though, for my thinking, there are just too many contenders for this title. We will just have to wait and see.

[kenod]

The right hand is the hand of power. A seal or mark in the forehead is a mark of ownership.

Yes, I see it rather like that too. The right hand and forehead are symbolic of a deeper meaning.

[kenod]

Maybe it's a combination of the lot.

By that I mean that maybe it is the TECHNOLOGY used which is the real mark.

I.E...computers.

If you use the base 6 numbering system, i.e.....a = 6, b = 12, c = 18, etc, and you add together the numbers corresponding to the word 'computer'.........you get the number 666

Basically, though, for my thinking, there are just too many contenders for this title. We will just have to wait and see.

The Bible says wisdom and understanding are needed to recognize the number. I believe that means spiritual wisdom, not education. I feel that it will be something the "common people" can work out for themselves.

Your name or my name might add up to 666 in Latin, or Hebrew, or some other system, but do we match all the other criteria mentioned in 2 Thes 2, Rev 13 & Rev 17?

It is interesting to note that the "man of sin" (2 Thes 2) will be revealed before his actual coming:

2Thes 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be

revealed (apokalupto),

the son of perdition;

2Thes 2:9 Even him, whose

coming (parousia)

is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

[MorningGlory]

I think it is clear from these and other indications, that the city is the Vatican, and the beast is papal succession. Some Popes have been notably good (JP11), but there have also been those who were corrupt and debauched. In the future, I believe such a man will gain control of the papacy.

The RCC is the

[kenod]

I agree with you, Kenod, for I have always believed the Vatican to be anti Christian. I don't know exactly why but I truly believe the Vatican will be associated with the AntiChrist.

I don't see the RCC as anti-christian in the sense that they do not deny that Jesus Christ is divine. The question we have to ask is: does the teaching of the RCC, and other denominations for that matter, contain false teaching along with the true. God's Church (the universal body of believers) will only believe what is true. Lukewarm, is a mixture of hot and cold (right and wrong) and God will reject that. (Rev 3:16)

There is a difference between the people and the system. Look at the history of the papacy and you see the effects of the system being imposed on the people. Nevertheless, many people in the RCC are genuine Christians, and serve Jesus Christ, not the church.