Timeline For The Motb

[Kushne]

I tried to discuss this topic a while back, but got few responses that helped other than a link to a video from a Yale Professor that was informative-- but I still would like to discuss this topic a bit more, as my earlier thread was locked.

 

When I read Revelation 13, it seems clear that the Beast (Antichrist) becomes known to the world-- possibly as a false god, and people begin to worship him. Then the MOTB is introduced as a way to show allegiance and worship to this person. Of course the explanation of this mark is incredibly vague.

 

I would like to explain to my Christian friends who like to inundate me with the latest technology, that none of this can be the actual MOTB until the Beast himself occurs according to what their bible says. I want to be able to use their bible to disprove their theories that microchips, tattoos, etc. are the mark.

 

Now, I know that a great number of you dismiss the MOTB and anything that the bible says out of hand-- and will just say to ignore my friends. That is hard to do. Also, as we do have technological advances, we all will have to grapple with how far we want to go with tech. I understand all of the governmental fears and loss of freedom fears, but I want to use what the bible actually says to be able to eliminate any "end of the world" fears.

 

If you can't take the mark until a leader has arisen and has control of the world-- and then demands to be worshiped, then we don't need to fear microchips, etc. Christians try to claim that the beast system is being set up with cashless societies, and chips, etc. but how can that be without the Beast? Am I right on this?

 

Please, lets have a good discussion on this without just saying that the MOTB isn't real, or was Nero-- I want to help people like me who are being indoctrinated by churches and Christians that the mark is microchips, tattoos, and other things we might see in the future-- but if the bible doesn't match what they say, we can use that as a valid argument.

 

I am trying to be a nonbeliever and know that most of the bible is bunk-- but some of the best ways to fight false Christianity is to use their very tools against them. Please help.

[florduh]

I am trying to be a nonbeliever ...

 

One must try to believe the unbelievable. Unbelief is the default position for all such magical assertions.

 

Otherwise, I don't know what to say that might be helpful. In my experience one cannot logically argue against axiomatic nonsense. Faith always trumps reason, and most Christians have faith that their pastor has chosen the correct interpretation of the nonsense that is the Bible.

[Shinzon]

This seems like making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

Disproving more important bible issues will take out reveletions by proxy.

[Kushne]

I really want help with this issue-- not to be treated like my question can't be answered because it is so dumb. Please-- I come to this site for help with questions that I can't easily have answered anywhere else. Dismissiveness don't help-- it just makes me frustrated. There may be someone else who needs help with this issue who is ion the fence about believing-- how would they feel about your answers? I am begging for insight in the biblical passages-- that is why I put them in the General Theological Discussion area-- because I want to discuss theology. If you are fully over this type of thing-- dealing with Revelation, awesome for you. I sure wish I was. But I need more reassurance than the Bible is false so don't believe it. I NEED to understand WHY I should not believe it. I felt like I was on to something with how I was interpreting Revelation that would aid in my non- belief. Can anyone else who has studied this please tell me if I am on the right page?

 

I have a lot of trouble with this site because people don't get me or why I am afraid of things. They seem to think I should-- get over it-- doncha know the Bible is full of crap? Why have this site at all if it isn't designed to have somewhat intellectual discussion on things people need to talk about?

[florduh]

Doctrinal differences between Christian sects are often discussed but never solved by believing Christians. Perhaps you've noticed this site is for Ex-Christians. I don't mean to be dismissive, but those who have left the faith upon realization the Bible is not a trustworthy source for anything simply cannot weigh in on such topics without noting that there are indeed no facts whatsoever to argue for or against. Any position one takes based on what the Bible says takes it, by necessity, on faith.

[Kushne]

Yes-- ex Christian's and those trying to leave Christianity. The second group come to ask advice from those that have left the church. I am tired. I have Christians on one side of me telling me the Bible is truth. And now I have ex-Christian's telling me the Bible is wrong. Who the hell am I supposed to ask for help anymore.

[Kushne]

Please. Will someone just answer the questions I have in my OP? I explained how I was seeing the way the scripture is read as a way to prove some of the bedtimes Christianity wrong. Wasn't anybody a former pastor or bible geek who could work with me on this? Do you have to have the beast before you can have the mark?

[florduh]

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/does-the-mark-of-the-beast-come-before-or-after-the-rapture/

 

http://www.thefamilyinternational.org/en/viewpoints/future/66/

[LogicalFallacy]

Kushne

 

My church is strong on mark of the beast doctrine. I will respond in depth to your questions later tonight (that's 9 hours in my time!)

 

I can't answer it quickly now and do the topic justice. Please hang in there and check back once I reply.

 

LF

[Kushne]

Thank you for those links Florduh. Both seem to support what I am saying. I can't wait to hear from you Logical Fallicy. Inappreciate it very much

[Shinzon]

I wasnt intending to flippant, it was mostly a attempt to point out that, you have to assume alot of things to be true that arnt to even need to worry about revelations.

[Kushne]

Yes, I get that. But I am asking about this topic in particular and asking a question related to Revelation. Perhaps I am not far enough along to have full confidence that so many other things are untrue that I don't need to worry about Revelation.

[florduh]

No Adam and Eve (demonstrably true), no talking snake (self evidently true), no "fall" (deduced from previous examples) and therefore no need for a "savior." The story is tainted from its initial premise so any subsequent elaborations cannot possibly have any factual basis.

[bornagainathiest]

Kushne.

 

My Spock avatar is a clue to one of my major strengths.  Logic.  I have no fear at all concerning hell or judgement or even the existence of the God of the Bible.  My freedom from fear is largely down to using logic to examine if the Bible could possibly be true.  I now know that it isn't.  If it's a help to you, I can unmake the threat of hell in six steps.

.

.

.

1.  Everything in Revelation depends on the Gospels being true.  If Jesus didn't die for our sins and wasn't resurrected, then none of Revelation can be true.

 

2.  Everything in the Gospels depends on Genesis being true.  If there was no original sin, then there is no reason for Jesus to die for ours sin and therefore, none of the gospels can be true.

 

3.  But none of Genesis can be true because verse 1 : 1 is totally contradicted, refuted and falsified by the scientific evidence of the origin of the universe.

 

4.  Therefore, since Genesis isn't true, neither are the Gospels and neither is Revelation.

 

5.  So, whatever is causing you fear and distress in Revelation can only be true if Genesis 1 : 1 is true.

 

6.  Since Genesis 1 : 1 isn't true, neither are the Gospels and neither is Revelation.

.

.

.

Kushne,  you therefore don't have to fear hell or be worried about anything in Revelation.

 

Please let me know if this has been of any help to you.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[rjn]

Come on guys, Kushne is specifically asking about Revelations, not Genesis or the Gospels. Sometimes, to some people, it doesn't matter if they know that something is bullshit intellectually, because even a bullshit story can have a sense of internal logic, and that can be enough to convince someone who's emotionally entangled in it.

 

 

I am trying to be a nonbeliever and know that most of the bible is bunk-- but some of the best ways to fight false Christianity is to use their very tools against them. Please help.

 

I assume Kushne wants to dismantle just that, that perceived "internal logic". If it doesn't even have that, it's definitely harder to maintain a stable faith.

[bornagainathiest]

rjn,

 

I'm not working with or taking my cue from Shinzon or Florduh, but I think it's very significant that without coordinating our posts in any way, we three members have separately and independently recommended very similar things to Kushne.  That the whole Bible stands or falls on passages outside of Revelation.  That delving into the minutiae of the MOTB really isn't necessary, when the whole Bible can be demolished in a few easy moves.

 

Anyway, I'll be fascinated to see if LogicalFallacy takes the path Shinzon, Florduh and I have suggested or if he's happy to drill down into the small details of the MOTB timeline.

 

 

[rjn]

rjn,

 

If someone intellectually knows something is bs, yet they are emotionally entangled in the internal logic of said bs, what do you suggest can be done to help them?

 

I think you're making a big mistake if you reduce an entire religion and the deconversion process from that religion to nothing more than "Genesis = BS. Therefore, deconvert". That may have been enough for you and many others, but that sure isn't the case for everyone.

 

I don't have any good answers to this particular question right now however, so I'll have to think on it. I'm not a Bible scholar, and Revelations is just something I've read for the laughs.

[bornagainathiest]

rjn,

 

I'm not working with or taking my cue from Shinzon or Florduh, but I think it's very significant that without coordinating our posts in any way, we three members have separately and independently recommended very similar things to Kushne.  That the whole Bible stands or falls on passages outside of Revelation.  That delving into the minutiae of the MOTB really isn't necessary, when the whole Bible can be demolished in a few easy moves.

 

Anyway, I'll be fascinated to see if LogicalFallacy takes the path Shinzon, Florduh and I have suggested or if he's happy to drill down into the small details of the MOTB timeline.

 

We cross-posted rjn.

 

I was editing when you posted.

 

Sorry for any confusion caused.

[sdelsolray]

...

3.  But none of Genesis can be true because verse 1 : 1 is totally contradicted, refuted and falsified by the scientific evidence of the origin of the universe.

...

 

 

 

How do you conclude that none of Genesis can be true if Genesis 1:1 is not true?  Put another way, how is the remainder of Genesis dependent on Genesis 1:1?

[bornagainathiest]

I plan to go thru this with LogicalFallacy, over in the Science vs Religion sub-forum, sdelsolray.

 

All will be explained there.

[Shinzon]

I really dont have a take on the subject, to be frank about it. I never thought much of the whole mark of the beast thing because even while i was a christian the whole thing seemed like a acid trip that got turned into theology.

 

The idea ex post facto ramroding modern day events into a ancient text seemed like circular reasoning. A really smart person could figure out even in the first century that a cult of personality is a bad thing and also fairly likely given human nature and that typically symbols of allegiance are also used. The reason its circular reasoning is because your agreeing to what your wanting to disprove there narrative and the concepts the narrative states. Like how do we know we arnt making shit up from the start here. The world is still here, no antichrist to speak of ( though plentybof volunteers) and plenty of things that could be used for the mark of the beast yet no end of the world. Ever heard of the rorschbach test with the blots? I would demand they meet there burden of proof here and leave there end times claim on the ashheap. They need to prove to you the world is ending. Its okay to say hey i dont know what was going on.

 

Saying oh because this guy some people in the second century says that this guy named john weote the book doesnt cut it and even if it did, how do we know he wasnt making shit up when the book hasnt come true in nearly 2000 years. I know that isnt a scholaroly answer but as i said this wasnt a issue for me.

[rjn]

rjn,

 

I'm not working with or taking my cue from Shinzon or Florduh, but I think it's very significant that without coordinating our posts in any way, we three members have separately and independently recommended very similar things to Kushne.  That the whole Bible stands or falls on passages outside of Revelation.  That delving into the minutiae of the MOTB really isn't necessary, when the whole Bible can be demolished in a few easy moves.

 

Anyway, I'll be fascinated to see if LogicalFallacy takes the path Shinzon, Florduh and I have suggested or if he's happy to drill down into the small details of the MOTB timeline.

 

Good point. And btw, I'm not trying to argue or anything, just trying to share my perspective.

[LogicalFallacy]

rjn,

 

I'm not working with or taking my cue from Shinzon or Florduh, but I think it's very significant that without coordinating our posts in any way, we three members have separately and independently recommended very similar things to Kushne.  That the whole Bible stands or falls on passages outside of Revelation.  That delving into the minutiae of the MOTB really isn't necessary, when the whole Bible can be demolished in a few easy moves.

 

Anyway, I'll be fascinated to see if LogicalFallacy takes the path Shinzon, Florduh and I have suggested or if he's happy to drill down into the small details of the MOTB timeline.

 

I understand where BAA, Shinzon and Florduh are coming from - but I've been through the gritty details myself so have managed to work my understanding to look primarily at the macro picture the three of you mention. However, if Kushne is anything like me, she is going to want a direct answer to her question and will not be satisfied with the macro answers - as obvious and correct as they are. Maybe I'm still close enough to my de-conversion and coming out that I still remember wanting to argue every gritty detail Incidentally because of the current family dynamic and communication I am talking all the time about the nitty gritty. I mean down to whether evolution is a science or biology is the science... seriously I had to explain that because a quote of mine was taken out of context. I digress.

 

Kushne, my answers to your post in blue below.

 

I tried to discuss this topic a while back, but got few responses that helped other than a link to a video from a Yale Professor that was informative-- but I still would like to discuss this topic a bit more, as my earlier thread was locked. When I read Revelation 13, it seems clear that the Beast (Antichrist) becomes known to the world-- possibly as a false god, and people begin to worship him. Then the MOTB is introduced as a way to show allegiance and worship to this person. Of course the explanation of this mark is incredibly vague. I would like to explain to my Christian friends who like to inundate me with the latest technology, that none of this can be the actual MOTB until the Beast himself occurs according to what their bible says. I want to be able to use their bible to disprove their theories that microchips, tattoos, etc. are the mark.

 

First the bible says nothing about the mark being technology. This seems Seventh Day Adventist/Jehovah Witness/Brethren doctrine.

 

Revelation 13:16 states "And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads"[/size]

 

Revelations is a symbolic book - its not literal. Therefore a more accurate way of interpreting the verse above is to say that the mark is doing the work of the beast, or having the understanding of the beast. This can be understood by the 'hand' doing work, and the forehead being where the brain is, and where you think from. (Of course that's the doctrine I was brought up with - the mere fact that there are numerous interpretations of this should ring a warning bell. It's certainly not "simple" if I can have a dig at Ironhorse )

 

Regarding timeline, certainly a natural reading of Revelation 13:11-16 indicates that the beast appears first and does great wonders, then people get a mark in the hand. Now your problem is that literally ANYTHING can be interpreted as great wonders. Example in my church and early doctrine was that the beast was the pope because the words Vicarius Filii Dei in Latin numerology comes to the number 666, and the wonder would be the Pope making peace between Israel and the Arab nations. Imagine the horror when Clinton was the one - hmm maybe Clinton is the beast? I hope you can see from these examples what kind of rabbit hole you can go down into when dealing with this stuff.

 

Revelations - the pertinent versus to the mark of the beast:

 

11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. Literal or symbolic?

 

12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. So we need the first beast to appear FIRST, having great power, and makes war with the saints for 3 1/2 years. Holy schoodles! Basically, depending on your doctrine, if you are around at the time of the second beast you are in tribulation anyway. It's curtains already. The war with the saints has been had. Never mind being saved!

 

13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men So here is a definitive claim - we will see fire from heaven... or is it symbolic?

 

14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

 

15 And he (the second beast) had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. So we have the first beast, the second beast, and the image to the beast... I'm losing count.

 

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: Note here and in the following versus that unlike the first beast, where all would worship EXCEPT those whose names are written in the lambs book of life, here there is no out. It simply says "all". This ties into the doctrine of this is at the time of tribulation where no flesh shall be saved.

 

17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

 

18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. And thus our current day "devils number"

 

 

Now, I know that a great number of you dismiss the MOTB and anything that the bible says out of hand-- and will just say to ignore my friends. That is hard to do. Also, as we do have technological advances, we all will have to grapple with how far we want to go with tech. I understand all of the governmental fears and loss of freedom fears, but I want to use what the bible actually says to be able to eliminate any "end of the world" fears. If you can't take the mark until a leader has arisen and has control of the world-- and then demands to be worshiped, then we don't need to fear microchips, etc.

 

What denomination are your friends? I ask because I KNOW our local Brethren people said that eftpos cardswhen they first came out were the mark in the hand because the early one had a 3 stripe symbols that vaguely looked like a 6 - there were 3 stripes, thus 666 from Revelations 13:18. Skip forward to 2016 - they all use eftpos, both personally and in their shops... why? Because commerce today is driven electronically. They also ever used to watch TV, have cell phones etc. Why? Because Satan is the prince of the power of the air, and these things were transmitted through air. They were blown out of the water when advised even their landlines had communication via 'air' with satellites lol

 

And when you say technological advances everything a human uses is basically a technological advance. The first stones used to chip wood was a technological advance. Was that a mark in the hand? Some cultures put markings on the forehead - is that the mark in the forehead? I even heard one preacher say that Asians slit eyes were a mark in the forehead/the mark of cain. Racist bastard!

 

Here is another thought: Obviously Revelations is symbolic... unless they actually think the beast will come out of the earth having two horns like a lamb, and speaks like a dragon. Anyone know what a dragon speaks like? So why would the bit about buying and selling suddenly be literal? And if that's not literal then the fears of microchips used to track people and conduct commerce is unfounded.

 

Christians try to claim that the beast system is being set up with cashless societies, and chips, etc. but how can that be without the Beast? Am I right on this? Please, lets have a good discussion on this without just saying that the MOTB isn't real, or was Nero-- I want to help people like me who are being indoctrinated by churches and Christians that the mark is microchips, tattoos, and other things we might see in the future-- but if the bible doesn't match what they say, we can use that as a valid argument. I am trying to be a nonbeliever and know that most of the bible is bunk-- but some of the best ways to fight false Christianity is to use their very tools against them. Please help.

 

Finally, if you want to nail the coffin shut read Revelation 1:1 "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John"[/size]

 

In what human understanding is "shortly come to pass" 2000 years hence? This book was written by first century Christian, for first Century Christians, possibly just before the fall of the temple in Jerusalem to give it historical context.

 

Your friends might argue that either it was "shortly" in Gods time. This fails as God is telling John from Johns perspective. Or they might argue, that if God said "in 2000 years" that there would be no Christians. In which case this makes him deceptive... which based on other Bible versus I wouldn't put past God to do that.

 

However, a final word of warning: Applied in a subjective manner, and to any particular persons beliefs and worldview, you can make the bible say anything. This is why, as the others above advocate, I'd suggest to go for the big picture. Is the bible true in the first place? If not then God, Devils, Angels, Demons, Hell and Heaven are irrelevant. However, if you want to get into details, and argue by verse or book, I hope some of what I have said will be of use.

[Shinzon]

I think i will leave this one to you logicalfallacy.  You seem to have taken what i was thinking and put it in better words.

[Kushne]

Thanks to all who replied--

 

rjn, you really understood me.  I am looking for "logic" in how I am reading something in the bible.  Bornagainathiest states that I shouldn't have to believe what I read in Revelation because what HE reads in Genesis proves that the rest of the bible is bunk.  OK-- but you had to read the bible to come to that conclusion.  Your cite logic, and that is exactly what I am attempting to pull together when I read Revelation.  Thanks LogicalFallacy for understanding enough to know that I do need to get down to the gritty details, otherwise I wouldn't be asking.  It seems like those of you that have been out of religion for a while and have no fear of it anymore are unsympathetic to those of us who are struggling and asking for help.  Maybe it was easy for you to deconvert.  It hasn't been for me, and I venture to guess that there are others lurking around this site looking for help.  Perhaps you should think about them when you post your answers--I am not trying to be mean, but some of you seem a little arrogant.

 

LogicalFallacy, I was born hardcore Pentecostal, so I have end times b.s. running through my veins.  I have friends and family who don't know that I am no longer much of a believer, so they love to send scary stuff my way-- to keep me on the righteous path.  But what they find glee in, I find terror in.  They have a myopic view of life, technology is evil, every world event is heading toward the apocalypse with Israel front and center, and on and on. 

 

It seems like you agree with what I was trying to say with regard to the Antichrist or Beast having to appear before the mark ever would be implemented.  Ok, so all of this is bunk-- but how nice would it be for me to be able to respond to one of my Christianf friends who sends me an article on Dr. Oz supporting the MOTB because he talked about implanted microchips on his show that this can't be the Mark, since there is no Antichrist promoting it as a form or loyalty or worship towards him.  And, I would be using the bible to do this!  Their own scripture-- seems like a good way to fight back!  Here is how I see Revelation:

 

the first beast arises

he is injured but comes back more powerful

the second beast encourages everyone to worship the first beast

a mark is enforced to show worship and loyalty of the first beast

 

So, the Antichrist ( First Beast) has to appear and  promote himself as God, wonders and signs would ensue to convince everyone of this-- and then people would see him as God and want to worship him.  Then the mark is instituted to provide proof of worship.   

 

If we have a cashless society today, and eventually move to microchips or tattoos for payment-- I don't see how it could be the MOTB as there is not a man that we are worshipping as God and with whom this chip or tattoo is tied to.  So, if apple comes out with an apple pay microchip, it isn't the MOTB. 

 

This is what the bible itself has to say.  Just like if Genesis is wrong, then if Revelation is also wrong, then it can also be used to disprove what Christians say.