mark, name, or number of the beast.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bladestunner316

Bladestunner316

Puritan Board Doctor
16He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666

http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin...ge=english&version=NKJV&showfn=on&showxref=on

This im starting over a discussion about an article I posted concerning RFID and chip under skin tracking technology. I can do more research on the advances and developments of this technology but that is not completely necessary at this moment.

My main concern is in understanding the correct meaning of the above passage and how it applies to us today.

Now I realize we or most of us come from a Dispensational background and have been spoon fed the ranting and banter of their eschatological base for their off center theology. I want to leave any anger or bitterness and humour about this aside and discuss what this passage means.

I also will take into consideration that correct me if Im wrong that most in the reformed community either sit with the pope as the antichrist and the roman church as his dominion/kingdom.

Also I know some may as well consider that nero was the antichrist and some also may consider the tribulation/or the great tribulation occured then. (AD 70)

what is the biblical significance of the forehead and right hand represent in this passage?

Also until recently I never thought of the 'mark of the beast' as three seperate things ie. a mark, name, or number. Which or what is the significance of this?

My thanks for taking anytime to reading this and helping explain the proper understanding to me if at all possible.

In Christ
Blade
 
Thank You Paul. But what does your post have to do with buying or selling without the mark, name, or number?

blade
 
Paul,
Dont mistake. I said the following above(This im starting over a discussion about an article I posted concerning RFID and chip under skin tracking technology. I can do more research on the advances and developments of this technology but that is not completely necessary at this moment.

My main concern is in understanding the correct meaning of the above passage and how it applies to us today)

This discussion is not about 'chips' none whatsoever. I started this in respect to an article I posted; thats all. In some respects it is related. But now it is not pertinent to this discussion.

Now lets get back to what I was asking and your responses thereof.

Paul said,
That the beast seeks to ursurp the law of God. Those who follow him practice lawlessnes. Remember, Christ says that those who work iniquity shall be sent to hell.

On the contrary the follower of Jehovah will do the opposite. He tells us through Moses etc...

My response,
I do not disagree with this and am appreciative of you bringing this up, but again this should be a 'given'. Considering the verses preceeding the above I wish to discuss. (13He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14And he deceives those[5] who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived. 15He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. )

Paul quoted,
Deut 6

6 These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. 7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. 8 Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. 9

My response,
This to me from what I gather shows the parallel to REV. 13:16 in that this is symbolic or spiritual representation of the 'hands' our works and 'foreheads' our mind. In that the christian will keep the commandments of God in his works(hands) and in his thoughts(forehead). Correct me if Im wrong here.

Paul quoted,
REV 14 and the 144,000 again this isnt a discussion about 'chips' nor am I imposing that into the context of these verses. The article refering to the 'chips' was an inspiration so to speak for this discussion.

Question:
1.) Is this section on the 144,000 symbolic of christians witnessing in the world?
2.) If so then what is the significance of the numbered amount?
3.) Is this literal by any means in the sense that this occurs before the second advent? as part of the what Paul spoke of when he in the end the jews will be saved?(I forget the verse I believe its in Romans).
4.) also a side question if these passages are symbolic or spiritual representations then why use numbers or amounts? Or do the numbers represent something ie. 666 being the number of man(or a man).

Thank you again Paul :)

Blade
 
Doesnt Deut 6:6-9 refer to "Christians" (or what ever you want to call them at the time) and the passage from revelation refer to the non-Christians?
 
[quote:5b3c9939e4="Bladestunner316"]Question:
1.) Is this section on the 144,000 symbolic of christians witnessing in the world?
2.) If so then what is the significance of the numbered amount?
3.) Is this literal by any means in the sense that this occurs before the second advent? as part of the what Paul spoke of when he in the end the jews will be saved?(I forget the verse I believe its in Romans).
4.) also a side question if these passages are symbolic or spiritual representations then why use numbers or amounts? Or do the numbers represent something ie. 666 being the number of man(or a man).[/quote:5b3c9939e4]

Blade, maybe the 144,000 might literaly be from the different tribes of Israel that have accepted Jesus as Lord (or Messianic Jews)

I see no reason to read this passage in any other form than a literal account.

I am not sure if that makes much sense but I am sure there are others here who have studied this more than me :gpl: although they would have to explain why this shouldnt be literal.

Fraser
 
Fraser,
Thanks for your response from what I understand personally I would take this as literal at this point thats the only thing in refernce to the 144,000 thats seems to make sense to me. But if any have a better explantion on this then feel free to respond.

blade
 
Blade

I didn't read many of the posts regarding the mark. I believe that the mark is significant as man's number. Man's law attempts to oppose God's law and His people.
I wanted to throw in that the pope is not seen as the antichrist by many outside of the Dispensational, baptist influence. You hit the nail on the head. This is an influence that I believe has been completely derived from dispensationalism. Most of us postmil Presbyterians believe that the antichrist, as referred more commonly in scripture, is to be seen in a sense of plurality. it is unified as the spirit of the antichrist (or all of those under the head that seeks to oppose and hold thoughts against the knowledge of God). I am still trying to form my complete view, but I do not believe that scripture gives much warrant for any literal interpretation of Revelation, including the mark. :book:
Just my two cents.

Knight
 
Gregory,
Thanks for your reply. I agree I think the 'antichrist' is a plurality of all unbelievers but if I may I also think that there is a specific 'Antichrist' or aka man of sin. Appreciate your input though:)

blade
 
By my reading I certainly believe there is at some time 'a antiChrist" although this does not rule out the plurality thing as such. I believe there will be a singular person though at some point in accordance with Revelation.
 
I am not going to be of much help here.

I simply have another question.

Do members here believe one can be "reformed" in their theology and hold a futurist position in regard to Revelation?
 
"Awake, O Sword, against My Shepherd, and against the man that is My fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: Smite the Shepherd and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn Mine hand upon the little ones.

And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, Two Parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third part shall be left therein.

And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and try them as gold is tried: they shall call on My name, and I will hear them: I will say, it is My people: and they shall say, the Lord is My God." Zech.13:7-9

1/3 will be saved and they represent the elect,while 2/3 will be lost and they represent trhe unsaved.The number 666 is the fraction of the 2/3.Regarding the forehead and hand ,they symbolise their minds and their works.
andreas. :candle:
 
[quote:68501af38f="Paul manata"][quote:68501af38f="houseparent"]I am not going to be of much help here.

I simply have another question.

Do members here believe one can be "reformed" in their theology and hold a futurist position in regard to Revelation?[/quote:68501af38f]

well everyone holds that at least some of revelation is still future. Not all of it, though.

One example:

Revelation 1


Prologue

1The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must [b:68501af38f]soon[/b:68501af38f] take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2who testifies to everything he saw--that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. 3Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is [b:68501af38f]near[/b:68501af38f].

Now, if I wrote you a letter and said that I was going to tell you (reveal) things which must *soon* take place and that you should take heed because the time of these things were *near* would you assume that I meant over 2,000 years in the future?[/quote:68501af38f]

No!

But how often is the return of the Lord cited as "near" in the bible? Seems to be often.
 
andreas,
I agree and thanks for bringing that up I think that sums up double predestination of an orderly and most excellent God:)

Houseparant,
I have to agree and disagree imsure their are instances where God warned us(the elect) that something soon will take place like Jesus telling Abraham that he was going to destroy sodom and gomorah. But I also remeber not the verse number I think its in daniel or the Psalms?? That a day to the Lord is but a thousand years.

I remeber reading on a historicist site that futurism was started by the Jesuits?

blade
 
I am confused, what is futurism? Of course the things in Revelation have not taken place as for one thing, Christ has not returned.
 
Main Entry: fu·tur·ism
Pronunciation: 'fyü-ch&-"ri-z&m
Function: noun
1 : a movement in art, music, and literature begun in Italy about 1909 and marked especially by an effort to give formal expression to the dynamic energy and movement of mechanical processes
2 : a point of view that finds meaning or fulfillment in the future rather than in the past or present

number 2-
 
Futurists believe that nothing in Revelation has occured yet...that it's a prophetic book waiting fulfilment. WHile anti-Christs have come and gone, and tribulation upon the saints has occured, Revelation speaks to the "great" Tribulation, such a time like has never been seen, and THE antiChrist who will literally be posessed by Satan himself.
 
Blade

[quote:57c2802298="Bladestunner316"]Gregory,
Thanks for your reply. I agree I think the 'antichrist' is a plurality of all unbelievers but if I may I also think that there is a specific 'Antichrist' or aka man of sin. Appreciate your input though:)

blade[/quote:57c2802298]

What exactly in scripture do you read that causes you to think there is going to be a "man of sin"? There are not many apart from the Tim Lahaye groupies and Dispensationalists that believe that there will be a literal beast coming out of the sea, a harlot riding this beast, or even a literal 144,000 reigning with Christ. i don't recall what I said in my last post, but, in regards to Armageddon nothing pertaining to it at least can be taken literal. Christ, or the rider on the white horse, appears to battle with a sword coming out of His mouth. It is apparent when time is taken to analyze this that this battle is a spiritual battle. It is not a physical battle because of this imagery. It is also apparent that the sword coming from His mouth is His Word. He will slay His enemies and take every thought captive to himself through His Word by means of the spirit by which He told us that He would lead us [believers] into all Truth. This is the proper interpretation, though so many have allowed their impatience, or a plethora of other false-justifications, to thwart the true meaning of this text. If there is a literal antichrist, there seems to be little justification made by any theologians thus far for believing this or causing others to believe this.
 
I'm trying to extend the judgment of charity and assume you just don't remember...2 Thessalonians 2:3-4

[b:e35e6431c7]3. Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4. who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.[/b:e35e6431c7]

Tim LaHaye did not invent this term "man of sin", though I'm sure he mis-applies it.
 
While we futurists get the rep of believing what we WANT to believe, I honestly think that applies to all beliefs in regard to Revelation.

Case in point right here.
 
My mistake!

Jesus was only saying to Peter if that's what he wanted...

Jn.21:20 Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, "Lord, who is the one who betrays You?"
21 Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, "But Lord, what about this man?"
22 Jesus said to him, "If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me."
23 Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, "If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?" - Jn. 21:20-23
 
Opps you replied before I did...

I found a verse that sounds like it and maybe it is the verse in another translation. John 21:22 - 'Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me."'

KJV - "If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me.""

Afterward it says this sparked a belief that Peter was going to live until Jesus' return but it is written as if they missunderstood Jesus...

I would read it as different. I would read it that it is Gods choice how long someone lives and it is that classic case of not judgeing someone elses servant and in the end we dont rule over our brothers or sisters lives.
 
Paul,
Im confused how can Christ return twice? Or do you mean return in judgment? sorry Im just not understadning this.

blade
 
Paul, while you explained this position better than ANYONE I have ever even seen attempt to, I am still slightly confused.

Are you saying in 70 AD people actually saw Jesus when this judgment came?
 
Is there any text that tells us that in &) AD some considered the happenings the tribulations on Revelation?

Just wondering...
 
Ok Paul... I am getting this and I am happy about that!

But can you bare with me a bit more?

Where does the "FIANL" judgment come in? The seperation of the sheep and goats, the great white throne, the eternal Kingdon coming down out of heaven?

Does Revelation talk of AD 70 AND a future time as well? If so, why? And where does the seperation occur?
 
And if I may ask...what do you think of this comment?

Now, why does "this generation" not refer to Christ's contemporaries? Because the governing referent to "this generation" in Matthew 24:34 is to "all these things." Since Jesus has given an extended prophetic discourse of future events, one must first determine the nature of "all these things" prophesied in verses 4-31 to know what generation Christ is referring to. Since "all these things" did not take place in the first century, then the generation that Christ speaks of must be future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
The Mark Of The Beast
Replies
29
Views
10K
GulfCoast Presbyterian
GulfCoast Presbyterian
Free Christian
  • Locked
The Mark of the Beast question?
2
Replies
40
Views
10K
Peairtach
Peairtach
O
  • Locked
Soccer & the Mark of the Beast
Replies
5
Views
2K
VirginiaHuguenot
V
P
Ammillenialism and the Mark of the Beast.
2
Replies
43
Views
3K
Andrew35
Andrew35
J
  • Locked
What is the mark of the beast?
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
Jeremy
J
Back
Top