My theory on the mark of the beast - just my idea

[jennifer_bloom]

I believe the name of the beast in revelations is Ham / Hamath / Hamathites and that the beast in revelations is heathenism.

To carry the mark on the forehead is to worship heathen gods of money and power and beauty

To carry the mark on the right hand is to practice heathen bound love through impurity, corruption and selfishness.

I’ve observed from troll posts on this site mocking female bodies that a lot of people behave like a marriage is simply a relationship between two animals that are biologically interested in each other, this is impure; selfish and corrupt heathen love.

There 8 manifestations of this corrupt love

1 - Manipulation

2 - Bigotry

3 - Snobbishness

4 - Superficial worship and Passivity

5 - Hypocrisy and Falsity

6 - Pride

7 - Possessiveness and Control

8 - Unbelief

To me these 8 things characterize heathen love as opposed to the pure and untainted philanthropy of God’s children.

[ChiTown33]

Interesting. It makes sense when you consider that the Bible says you cannot worship both God and money.

[collie22]

i always think the mark of the beast would be in somebody's thinking

[Slartybartfast]

Maga hat qualifies.
In fact Trump and his administration meet the description of the anti Christ with amazing accuracy.

He even tweeted this. Trump shared the message that he is "the greatest President for Jews and for Israel in the history of the world," that "the Jewish people in Israel love him like he's the King of Israel" and even that "They love him like he is the second coming of God."

"He will speak GREAT and HAUGHTY words and blasphemies and seek to change the laws of God and man.. "

he even tear gassed a church for a photo op where he used a bible as a prop"The bible even predicted he would only get one term in office. And if ANYONE can be called "the lawless one" that's Donald Trump.

[Seangreen]

I can tell you what the number of the Beast means in the occult version and when I say I called I mean by the literal definition of the word meaning to hide from view or to hide in plain sight. The number of the Beast is not a number of a man it's the number of man it represents the ego. If you follow certain types of numerology 666 adds up to nine. 9 is a representation of the ego. It's up to you to do further research and what do you want to believe me or not. You seem pretty set in your ways which isn't always a virtue.

[GreenLanternI0I]

If you are a True Christian, than you should already know that the Mark, the Physical mark is already here, it has been here for almost 2 years now. Without it you cannot fly internationally anymore, nations world wide firing people if they don't have something, a huge amount of nations also not allowing people to buy food, gas or water if they don't have something. In Australia they sending people to a so called ""Summer Camps"" if they refuse or don't have something and in United States they are trying to pass a law that forbids people to even go to a hospital without the proof of something. It is very Very obvious what this thing is.

[Tyric331988]

Everything we need to know about the mark of the beast is in the bible.
After the rapture when all the believers go to be with Jesus then begins the 7 years of tribulation depending if u belive the pretrib.
The mark of the beast is not the vaccine people think it is and isn't not because I don't have 666 branded on your forehead or right hand.
Also if you get the mark there is no going back and will not be forgiven if you get the mark keep that in mind its all in rev.
There will be 30 minutes of silence in heaven before God unleashes his wrath on the earth after the rapture because after the rapture the world in filled with wicked people and or unbelievers.
Read the bible and or
youtube Isaiah Saldivar does a live stream on the entire book of revelations.

[ADFSDF1996]

The mark of the beast will either be an oath to a worldwide totalitarian system known as the “beast” or some global mandate implemented by said “beast”.

My guess is that after the world superpowers destroy each other in WWIII, resulting in the collapse of this current world order. A new world order will rise providing false hope to the survivors of WWIII, the only catch would be that they would need to take the “mark of the beast”.

[normalice]

It had something to do with the ruler at the time. Like if the book of revelation was written today, someone might say the number 45 was the mark of the beast.

[Jaron72]

Interesting, but I believe the mark will be something physical, something that is required to actually interact and survive in modern society.

Though, there is no doubt that what you described is a tool of the enemy meant to lead people away from Elohim

[Anonymous]

My possible theory is that people who have proof of getting the COVID jab (s) will be eligible to have their hand or forehead marked to give visual indication that they've been given the full dosage of that stuff. And along with it will be a requirement to pledge an oath of obedience to Satan (Lucifer)

[purplepoppy]

Don't most religious scholars believe 666 was code at the time for emperor nero?

[jennifer_bloom]

That is the most common view point I think but I believe it’s allegory.

[Cubus]

I have always thought the beast is Lavos from Chrono Trigger.

Do not take this 100% seriously.

[rod23]

Wow too complicated for me, I Do believe in Jesus, and he died so we could live amen

[SupremeWarlord]

Most likely it was just a code to refer to Nero, the Roman emperor at the time.

[OddBeMe]

Unfort…all those are traits of Christianity.

[ADFSDF1996]

Wrong, those are all traits of left wingers.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 have you read the Bible?

[ADFSDF1996]

Of course I have and unlike you I don’t take things out of context.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 what’s the context of slavery?

[ADFSDF1996]

www.theologyofwork.org/.../christian-masters-eph-65-11

[ADFSDF1996]

The Bible also speaks against slavery
www.bibleref.com/Exodus/21/Exodus-21-16.html

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 right, so buying a slave already stolen is fine though….

[ADFSDF1996]

There you go taking things out of context. So predictable

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 mmmm...
`Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property."

[OddBeMe]

oh and the new testament...
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear and sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ."

[ADFSDF1996]

You do realize that the Bible was written in a language other than English right?

Slavery mentioned in those passages isn’t the same slavery from the 1800s.
emergencenj.org/.../does-the-bible-condone-slavery

But keep taking things out of context like the typical anti Christian Commie that you are.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 so your rationalization for owning a person is translation? If that’s true, then so much other Christian shit can’t be trusted either.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

It isn’t just translation smart one.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 yeah it’s common morality: don’t own anyone.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

And the Bible specifically condemns slavery. But you read what you want to read.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 “buy slaves from the heathen around you.” Christian Law

[ADFSDF1996]

workers and contracts. Looks like you didn’t read the article because it refutes your anti Christian propaganda, what else is new?

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 I don’t value apologetics. I read words as they’re written. BUY slaves from the heathen around you. If you beat a SLAVE and he doesn’t die, you’re not to be punished because he’s your PROPERTY.

[ADFSDF1996]

Allegories mean shit to you then. And that’s where you left logic fails again.

This isn’t apologist rhetoric, it’s critical thinking

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 those ain’t allegories. Those are direct commandments just as important as thou shalt not kill.

[ADFSDF1996]

“Debt slavery” back then was a person offering their services in exchange for a debt he couldn’t pay. You argue the morality of that kind of servitude but it’s not the same type of slavery where a person is pretty much a prisoner like the one the democraps practiced before the US civil war.

Again clearly you didn’t read the article that goes into detail of those passages. All while you ignore the passages that condemn involuntary slavery.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 no, that’s apologetics nonsense. Hebrew slaves were let go after seven years. Not heathen slaves. They were your property for life and past down to your children.

It’s this bullshit that Christians try to ad hoc defend that pisses me off the most,

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

Oh so now you are spouting off pseudo history? Like the typical anti theist pinko that you are. Your are literally nitpicking a faulty translation of “Bond servant” to suit your anti Christian argument all while you ignore passages like Exodus 21:16.

Typical bullshit from anti theists

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 Leviticus 25:46
You may leave them to your sons after you to inherit as property; you can make them slaves for life. But as for your brothers, the Israelites, no man may rule harshly over his brother.

[OddBeMe]

And kidnapping ain’t the same as buying slaves.

[ADFSDF1996]

Oh so you want to keep playing that game?
hebraicthought.org/.../

You do realize that the Bible was written during a time when there were various forms of slavery, right? The entire passage, not just the nitpicked out of context passage you quoted doesn’t condone slavery it specifically condemns the mistreatment of slaves. That’s the point you anti theists don’t get.

“Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.” Exodus 21:16

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 again, my friend…buying a slave isn’t considered stealing. And slaves aren’t considered “men”l. They’re like a chair to their owners.

[OddBeMe]

You know, I’d be fine if you said, “Yeah…the laws back then were fcked up, and it deserves criticism. But I find solace in Christianity.”

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

When did I ever try to justify the laws back then?

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 you didn’t. That’s the fcking problem. You keep trying to rationalize owning another human being.

[ADFSDF1996]

Now you are backpedaling

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 backpedaling? Let me scan the past comments as its been awhile... Oh yes... you were defending slavery.

[ADFSDF1996]

Now you are putting words in my mouth. I never defended slavery, I was pointing out how you were misinterpreting the Bible.

Typical left winger so predictable.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 so you didn't say "Slavery mentioned in those passages isn’t the same slavery from the 1800s"?

[ADFSDF1996]

Not my fault you can’t tell the difference between contractors and slaves.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 so you’re defending owning people as slaves.

[OddBeMe]

Same time next month?

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

This is why you left wingers are a joke. You clowns like to put words into people’s mouths.

I never defended slavery smart one.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

“Same time next month”

?

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 yeah you vanished after defending slavery. So I thought maybe we regroup every month. Try to fix your morality.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe The difference between you and me is that I am a very busy man.

And again I never defended slavery that’s just you putting words in my mouth. Typical left wing fallacious method of argumentation.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 I’m putting your own words in your mouth.
“Slavery mentioned in those passages isn’t the same slavery from the 1800s”

Sounds like you defending slavery…. poorly

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe Nope I’m explaining that slavery in those passages isn’t actually slavery. But I guess you lack the intellect to actually understand what I was saying. So no I’m not defending slavery

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 those passages talk about owning human beings.

[ADFSDF1996]

Are you that dense that you can’t tell the difference between a contract worker and a slave? And before you strawman again, I’m not defending slavery. I even pointed a passage that condemns slavery but you ignore it cause it refutes your entire bogus argument.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 so the Bible is wrong when it says "buy your SLAVES from the heathen around you?"

[ADFSDF1996]

How many times do I have to tell you that they are not slaves?

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 the Bible says slaves.

[OddBeMe]

And they’re being purchased.

[ADFSDF1996]

You don’t seem to understand that when something is translated into another language, the word isn’t always the equivalent.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 so the Bible doesn’t say it’s ok to purchase human beings who would have no rights under law?

[ADFSDF1996]

The Bible puts emphasis on the worker’s rights which I already mentioned.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 not for non-Hebrew slaves.

[ADFSDF1996]

Wrong again

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 tell me. Hebrew slaves have rights. Gentiles don’t. They’re not even people.

Your holy book is fcking immoral.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe Wrong yet again pinko

https://www.openbible.info/topics/gentiles

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 you really are an idiot. Again the Bible mentions slaves and yet you ignore it. They wrote shit like Colossians to placate the enslaved.

No where in the Bible does it say not to own slaves or to free gentile slaves.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe The idiot here is you. Nitpicking and taking things out of context is a very pitiful excuse of an argument.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 nitpicking... yeah. I prefer not to allow enslavement. And you call that nitpicking.

Ephesians 6:5-8 Paul states, “Slaves, be obedient to your human masters with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ” which is Paul instructing slaves to obey their master.

[ADFSDF1996]

The problem with your argument is that you take texts out of context as do many anti theists when analyzing religious texts.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 it’s Feb! And we’re back. Ok… what context should I put owning a human being?

[ADFSDF1996]

The fact you blatantly keep ignoring everything I say in order to keep spouting off the same BS narrative.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 No, tell me what context should I put owning a human being?

[ADFSDF1996]

I’m not going to repeat myself. It’s not my fault you chose to ignore all the links explains the context.

You’re probably one of those who thinks beast in revelations is an actual beast.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 you think revelations is real? Then I’m wasting my time…

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe No I’m wasting my time arguing with a commiecrat that is too foolish to understand the counter arguments right in front of him.

[OddBeMe]

Ahh…can’t defend your deepest beliefs.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe
I already did defend them and completely destroyed all your drivel. I don’t need to say anymore considering how you keep ignoring everything I say, since it is you who lacks valid counter arguments.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 no you didn’t. And all your blathering you could have just typed out the “context” but you don’t have anything. Owning a human being is wrong in EVERY context.

[ADFSDF1996]

Keep denying it all you want pal. It’s not my fault you chose to ignore logic slapping you in the face. Typical left winger spouting off and blatantly ignoring everything the opposite side says.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 all your religionists keep trying to win arguments by just saying you won. That’s not how logic works. Tell me what context owning human beings is ok.

[ADFSDF1996]

I’ve already given you context in my previous replies it’s not my fault you don’t want to read into it cause you know you’ll be proven wrong.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 you haven’t. You’re sidestepping and trying to exhaust me into forfeiting, classic religionist strategy. Because you have no logic for owning people as property.

[ADFSDF1996]

I’ve given several different articles and paraphrases which you blatantly ignored cause they refute your BS anti theistic rhetoric. You are the one that’s trying to exhaust me by constantly asking for more substance that I have already given you. How do you think that makes you look?

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 yeah those BS apologists try to redefine “slave”. But if ignore the “buying and owning” part…

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

Think contract workers and contractors you bucko.

Yet again your logic fails.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 OWNING HUMAN BEINGS…isn’t contract work. They weren’t paid. Not even the Hebrew slaves were paid. They were just let go after 7 years.

[ADFSDF1996]

How many times do I have to reach you this lesson?
www.catholic.com/.../does-the-bible-support-slavery

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 (sigh) you keep sidestepping that the Bible teaches to not eat shellfish but can’t find the time to say “don’t own people”. I know the Bible says “love fellow humans” but slavery is about seeing slaves as less than human.

And even tho Hebrew’s were given a 7 year break, gentile slaves were owned for life. And could be beaten as long as they didn’t die.

[ADFSDF1996]

The only one who keeps sidestepping here is you. You keep “bu bu but how about this and how about that?” when your BS narrative has already been refuted.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 no, you keep pasting links to apologetics and never address what I say.

Your link suggests the Bible actually disavows slavery because it teaches love and not to steal. But slavery is about buying human beings who aren’t considered human. They’re considered livestock.

[ADFSDF1996]

It’s called referencing.

And I don’t know why I’m bothering to argue with some random pinko that clearly doesn’t understand the Bible and who is more focused on finding imaginary errors in the text than actually understanding the text.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 see again, you’re sidestepping my point because it doesn’t follow your apologetics.

[ADFSDF1996]

You don’t even have a point. You are so delusional

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 I just spelled it out. Your apologetics says the Bible teaches love fellow humans so it can’t be for slavery. And I’m saying the Bible tells you to buy slaves because they aren’t human.

Point made.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe Where’s your point? All I see is the same BS of “I don’t agree so it’s apologetic”.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 are you not reading my replies and skipping to a dumb retort? I laid it out as simply as I could above.

[ADFSDF1996]

I am the one who is reading all your replies thoroughly. Quit projecting

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 then respond to them.

[ADFSDF1996]

Facepalm, I already did. Not my fault you don’t like it.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 Just to clarify then, you think slavery is ok because of the time period. But also because the Bible preaches love. Yes?

[ADFSDF1996]

How many f*cking times do I have to tell you that I don’t condone slavery?

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 You keep saying the slavery back then wasn’t the same as slavery today. Then pointing to Exodus 21:16, which refers to people. Not slaves.

[ADFSDF1996]

Are you illiterate?

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 is that a real question? I’m reporting back what you’ve written.

[ADFSDF1996]

Yeah it’s a real question cause it shows yet again that you are only reading what you want to read.

[OddBeMe]

@ADFSDF1996 well, I’m done. You have proven you’re unwilling to debate honestly. I even tried rephrasing your side and you just keep sidestepping.

So long.

[ADFSDF1996]

@OddBeMe

“Debating honestly”? The irony there. I don’t think you know how to debate honestly.

[emperor90]

I dont believe in that sfuff at all