187 replies to this topic

[Mr Right Wing]

Lookitisoneofthosepeople, on 18 August 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

This thread is based on the RFID one but come on let us just cut to the chase. Would you accept the MOTB? Please try and be serious but also imagine it really was real. Maybe the dude won't be as evil as others claim? Maybe you still want to eat without having to skin your own deer. And who says it can't be a chick?

The Mark of the Beast vs the Mark of God -

http://www.firstchur...stions/p23a.htm

How will you know the difference?

[Etu Malku]

Bluefinger, on 23 August 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

What if accepting the mark was worshiping a deity or deities you don't believe to be true?  What if TMOTB was becoming a Roman Catholic at the risk of death otherwise?

Refusing the mark wasn't refusing a microchip according to the first century readers.  It was public worship of Roman gods at the pressure of the cult tribune.  

Seeing that many people absolutely detest Christians, I figured I'd make the mark of the beast relatable to them.

If this truly became the case, wouldn't it prove the existence of the Abrahamic god? This would certainly make a few believers out of us I would think?

[WoIverine]

You don't need a chip. Biometric tatoos are already in development. They can even be literally transparent as well. The whole idea is actually very stupid. Everyone has a unique DNA marker, keep a database of everyone's DNA, all they need to do is walk through a scanner of some sort and you're automatically authenticated, there is no need for a mark, or a chip. However, RFID tech is probably a lot cheaper than biometric scanners. If embedded in a tatoo, that is not easily removed, vs. extracting a chip from somebody's hand, or forehead would take seconds. Tatoos are a lot more difficult to excise.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3, 23 August 2012 - 02:14 PM.

[Jackofalltrades]

There is always going to be more questions being asked rather than answers (same goes for other topics on this site)

The one thing that does concern me is the one similarity that is highly possible between the MOTB (the one stated in the Bible) and the RFID chip

I dont mean what it is or what it looks like (as no one knows the answer to that, if there is an answer)

You cannot buy or sell = MOTB

And it is highly probable that the RFID chip will not allow anyone to buy or sell unless they accept it (could replace money credit cards etc)

[Bluefinger]

Etu Malku, on 23 August 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

If this truly became the case, wouldn't it prove the existence of the Abrahamic god? This would certainly make a few believers out of us I would think?

Why would that make you believe?

Logically, that is the case.  Romans have treated people the same since before Christianity became legal.  Whatever the state religion is, atheists aren't necessarily people who don't believe in any deity, just ones that don't believe in the state religion.  (The Romans called the Christians atheists.)

Follow the Roman history.  Once Christianity became legal, it was Romanized and was made the state religion.  After that people who believed differently started getting killed in wars, and eventually inquisitions, which were run like tribunes.

It has been Christian belief since the first century that Jesus would overthrow the Roman Empire.  Its still alive and well, otherwise atheists would have no issues with state religion.

I hope I have helped shed some light on the mark of the beast.  it seems like many haven't heard this interpretation...

Edited by Bluefinger, 23 August 2012 - 03:21 PM.

[Etu Malku]

Bluefinger, on 23 August 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

Why would that make you believe?

Because there would be some tangible evidence.

[Bluefinger]

Etu Malku, on 23 August 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

Because there would be some tangible evidence.

Well, seeing that the first century context was the Roman tribune, shouldn't that be enough tangible evidence?

The mark was a public denunciation of Jesus and worship of pagans and the number of the beast's name was paying off the tribune.

How does that apply today?

[Etu Malku]

Bluefinger, on 23 August 2012 - 07:22 PM, said:

Well, seeing that the first century context was the Roman tribune, shouldn't that be enough tangible evidence?

The mark was a public denunciation of Jesus and worship of pagans and the number of the beast's name was paying off the tribune.

How does that apply today?

Whichever way you like to define/explain it, the MotB would entail some divine intervention and actual transference of symbol to the physical, which would mean in your scenario, we would all at one point be in the presence of some angelic type of being who is dishing out the Abrahamic god's mark onto us.

That might be enough for even me to concur the existence of this god.

[Bluefinger]

Etu Malku, on 23 August 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

Whichever way you like to define/explain it, the MotB would entail some divine intervention and actual transference of symbol to the physical, which would mean in your scenario, we would all at one point be in the presence of some angelic type of being who is dishing out the Abrahamic god's mark onto us.

That might be enough for even me to concur the existence of this god.

Well, I don't think the author of Revelation imagined a divine being dishing out marks.  In Deuteronomy, when Moses handed the Jews the copy of the Law, he told them to bind it on their forearm and keep as a leaflet between theor eyes.  He was telling them to meditate and strictly adhere to the Law.  

So the mark of the beast was a strict adherance to the Roman religion.  Its nothing divine (but really more superstitious.)

Edited by Bluefinger, 23 August 2012 - 08:00 PM.

[Etu Malku]

Bluefinger, on 23 August 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

Well, I don't think the author of Revelation imagined a divine being dishing out marks.  In Deuteronomy, when Moses handed the Jews the copy of the Law, he told them to bind it on their forearm and keep as a leaflet between theor eyes.  He was telling them to meditate and strictly adhere to the Law.  

So the mark of the beast was a strict adherance to the Roman religion.  Its nothing divine (but really more superstitious.)

Dang . . . then forget about my convergence!
So, what's with all this Mark of the Beast crap in Revelations and 666 (it's actually 616 by the way )

I guess I jumped the gun in 1978 when I got this tattoo?

[Bluefinger]

Etu Malku, on 23 August 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

Dang . . . then forget about my convergence!
So, what's with all this Mark of the Beast crap in Revelations and 666 (it's actually 616 by the way )

Actually, its 666.  The 616 number was being circulated as early as the second century and early Christian fathers like Iranaeus were discussing the error in 616.  

I'm yet to find a confident number with 666, but I believe it has to do with money.

King Solomon's house income one year was 666 talents, and his house shadowed the temple.  State religion at its best.

So the number of the beast represented, I believe, those who paid off the tribune to leave them be.  So they didnt worship the state religion, but they didn't stand by what they believed and make a strong testimony.

Quote

I guess I jumped the gun in 1978 when I got this tattoo?

haha, yeeeeeah.

[WoIverine]

Bluefinger, on 23 August 2012 - 07:22 PM, said:

Well, seeing that the first century context was the Roman tribune, shouldn't that be enough tangible evidence?

The mark was a public denunciation of Jesus and worship of pagans and the number of the beast's name was paying off the tribune.

How does that apply today?

The nation of Israel being reestablished, "the generation shall not pass away". 50-60 years ago, those people are now old, but still around.

Not being able to buy, or sell, says it all. We should also mention what the Bible says that happens to those who refuse to take the mark.

Edited by Spid3rCyd3, 23 August 2012 - 09:34 PM.

[Etu Malku]

Bluefinger, on 23 August 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

Actually, its 666.  The 616 number was being circulated as early as the second century and early Christian fathers like Iranaeus were discussing the error in 616.  

I'm yet to find a confident number with 666, but I believe it has to do with money.

King Solomon's house income one year was 666 talents, and his house shadowed the temple.  State religion at its best.

So the number of the beast represented, I believe, those who paid off the tribune to leave them be.  So they didnt worship the state religion, but they didn't stand by what they believed and make a strong testimony.



haha, yeeeeeah.

So, you're saying that what is talked about in Revelations has come and gone already? That's not as prophetic as we were all hoping

According to Gematria the number 666 refers to The Number of the Beast, the Qliphoth, the Spirit of the Sun, Kether, Ra, the "Evil Triad" of Satan-Typhon, Apophras, and Besz, and the Name Jesus.

666 is the sum of the first 36 natural numbers. It is also the sum of the squares of the first 7 prime numbers. The first 144 digits of pi sum to 666.

In Qabalah 666 reflects Tiphareth, the Sephirah of the Sun, and the place of the God-Man/Man-God on the Tree of Life.
The Sun and Man are both reflections - in Macrocosm & Microcosm respectively - of the Life Force or Creative/Generative Energy.

The phrase Scarlet Woman can be written in Hebrew as AShH ShNI. That is 306 + 360 = 666

Lastly, 666 is the first of the triple scale numbers that will never appear on a digital clock.

[Jackofalltrades]

Etu Malku, on 23 August 2012 - 10:42 PM, said:

So, you're saying that what is talked about in Revelations has come and gone already? That's not as prophetic as we were all hoping


Lastly, 666 is the first of the triple scale numbers that will never appear on a digital clock.

I dont believe what is stated in Revelations has come and gone yet

Wouldnt 661 or even 660 for that matter be the first triple scale number to never appear on a digital clock ?

[Bluefinger]

Etu Malku, on 23 August 2012 - 10:42 PM, said:

So, you're saying that what is talked about in Revelations has come and gone already? That's not as prophetic as we were all hoping

I think it is.  If you recall the beast to which the number represents, the beast was foretold to receive a mortal wound and be healed.  Obviously the beast was the Roman Empire.  Revelation was received at the traditional date of 98 CE.  The Roman Empire fell in 476 CE when Romulus Augustus' father was killed and he was dethroned by Oadacer of the Heruli tribe.  The Franks proceeded to conquer Gaul and the Roman bishop crowned Charlemagne as imperator Augustus, forming the Germanic Roman Empire, later called the Holy Roman Empire.  The mortal wound was healed.  Upon the healing of this wound, the beast was also given a mouth speaking great things, and that mouth was give dominion (territory) for forty-two months (1260 years?) and was allowed to persecute the saints.  It just so happens that Charlemagne's father was crowned the first Carolingian king by the bishop of Rome in 752 CE.  In return, Pepin promised to give the Exarchate of Ravenna to the bishop of Rome.  They later became known as the Papal States.  The pope was officially a king.  Later, he was the authority on who was a heretic and who wasn't, which would determine who lived and who died after the official establishment of the Office of the Inquisition.

So much lines up hundreds of years after John received the Revelation.  The mark of the beast, if this interpretation is correct, continued throughout the Dark Ages, and still continues to this day.

It wasn't ever Christianity that was bad.  It was Romanism that was.  Therefore Roman Christianity as a state religion was just a different name to the same brand of oppressive and cruel state religion that paganism once dominated.  It is no wonder why Revelation dedicated two whole chapters (17-18) to the denunciation of mystery state religions that were often the instigators to the state oppression of God's people.

So, instead of focusing on the negativity of Christianity, I instead turn the reader's attention to the cruelty of Romanesque state religion.  It is foretold in Christian prophecy that Jesus Himself layeths the smacketh down on it.  Even the prophecy of St. Malachy predicts that the last pope (who comes after Benedict XVI) will see the destruction of the city of Rome.  (Interestingly enough, 1260 years from the day the bishop of Rome first crowned a king [Pepin} brings us to 2012, the year Pope Benedict XVI elected the next Papal Conclave, amid leaks of secret information that assassination attempts have been planned against the pope.)  We'll see if this interpretation even holds water.

Quote

According to Gematria the number 666 refers to The Number of the Beast, the Qliphoth, the Spirit of the Sun, Kether, Ra, the "Evil Triad" of Satan-Typhon, Apophras, and Besz, and the Name Jesus.

  And Hitler, Nero, Stalin, Obama, and several others.  I think Gematra wasn't being referred to here for two reasons.  One, the author says, "Let him who has wisdom calculate the number of the beast..."  Solomon, who earned 666 talents of gold one year just for being king, was the wisest of men.  Seeing that the book of Revelation quotes so many Old Testament books it makes my head spin, it seems more logical to conclude that 666 is a reference to an Old Testament passage.

Quote

666 is the sum of the first 36 natural numbers. It is also the sum of the squares of the first 7 prime numbers. The first 144 digits of pi sum to 666.

  But that meant nothing to the original audience, and doesn't really strike anything with me.  Sorry, I just don't see how that is relevant, or how that applies to the Roman Empire.

Quote

In Qabalah 666 reflects Tiphareth, the Sephirah of the Sun, and the place of the God-Man/Man-God on the Tree of Life.
The Sun and Man are both reflections - in Macrocosm & Microcosm respectively - of the Life Force or Creative/Generative Energy.

  Can you show me where you found that?  Also, how does this apply to the Roman Empire?

Quote

The phrase Scarlet Woman can be written in Hebrew as AShH ShNI. That is 306 + 360 = 666

  Interesting.  However, the beast that the woman rides is scarlet, not the woman.  The woman is dressed in purple and scarlet though, if that is what you meant.

Quote

Lastly, 666 is the first of the triple scale numbers that will never appear on a digital clock.

lol.  Funny.  But seems irrelevant, especially since the original audience had sundials.