What do you think the Mark of the Beast is?? And what is sin about it?

BobRyan · Jan 9, 2019

woobadooba said:
Then why do you argue with people if you are only interested in hearing their view?

It seems you are not being sincere.

on the contrary - everyone can give their speculation/proposal. I am free to ask a few questions about it so that all the options provided at least have some sort of serious nature to them... as opposed to looking for a fairy tale name for example -- just trying to get to some set of good solid proposals for people to consider.

woobadooba · Jan 9, 2019

BobRyan said:
on the contrary - everyone can give their speculation/proposal. I am free to ask a few questions about it so that all the options provided at least have some sort of serious nature to them... as opposed to looking for a fairy tale name for example -- just trying to get to some set of good solid proposals for people to consider.

But you have already determined in your mind what is "true" regarding the subject matter. You aren't here merely to ask questions, but to lure people into debate in hopes to argue your way into their hearts and make them see things the way you and the SDA church interpret them. Your intentions are obvious. Your argumentative approach betrays you.

BobRyan · Jan 9, 2019

woobadooba said:
But you have already determined in your mind what is "true" regarding the subject matter.

Certainly I don't claim to have no information at all... But this is a thread for those who participate to "give it a shot" tell us what they view as the solution.

ewq1938 · Jan 9, 2019

BobRyan said:
So then your proposel is that John wanted his readers to use English?? Seriously?

Obviously it depends on what language the Antichrist's name is in. It could be any language or a language created 1000 years from now. It is not limited to any languages only John or his generation knew because the AC did not exist at that time.

woobadooba · Jan 9, 2019

BobRyan said:
Certainly I don't claim to have no information at all... But this is a thread for those who participate to "give it a shot" tell us what they view as the solution.

It's all speculation at this time. Even your own view should be regarded as speculative until proven true. You have no proof that worshiping God on Sunday is or will be the mark of the beast. The writings of Ellen White and those who put their trust in her words tell you that. Not the Bible.

SamanthaAnastasia · Jan 9, 2019

BobRyan said:
It looks like you have just argued against saying what it is because then you will oppose what it is.

Does God warn us of a future event so that we will be forewarned only to hide the event from us?

In Noah's day it was specific.

In John the baptizer's day it was a specific warning.

In Matthew 23 Christ gives the Jews a specific warning.

A focus on the warnings that we are given by Christ is not what I would call a distraction.

The problem with that is that it is very unlikely that some future scenario will arise that is of the form "here is the mark of the beast - we would like you to accept this in your forehead or your hand... forget why we are doing it -- we just need you to accept it".

Rev 13 gives us a "clue" as to its identity precisely because it will not come with "mark of beast goes here" documentation and diagrams.

you appear to have said that we should not try to figure out what the mark is - because in so doing we might miss what it really is.

Did I misunderstand your point?

No, I meant not to focus on just one thing that could be the mark because you might be wrong

BobRyan · Jan 9, 2019

Bipolargirl said:
No, I meant not to focus on just one thing that could be the mark because you might be wrong

I agree we should not think that we have all the answers on this one. It is one of those topics that you have to work at -- studying all the clues that we have and getting closer to the details over time.

The Jews were studying to find out about the coming of the Messiah - but they still missed a lot of the details and in some cases substituted creative man-made fables instead of what the Bible predicted.

BobRyan · Jan 9, 2019

woobadooba said:
It's all speculation at this time. Even your own view should be regarded as speculative until proven true

I have not gone in to much detail at all about my view so far.

Come to think of it - I think you have said even less about your view than I have said about mine. Or do you have a view on this topic?

BobRyan · Jan 9, 2019

tz620q said:
Here is another:
E = no value
L = 50
L = 50
E = no value
N = no value
--------
100
.

So then your proposel is that John wanted his readers to use English?? Seriously?

Or are you saying that english is a latin language (instead of Germanic) and it is using roman numerals for letters?

In any case - thanks for your guess at that point.

ewq1938 said:
Obviously it depends on what language the Antichrist's name is in.

True. And exegesis can help us with that. John is writing in Greek but he is also writing at a time when the official documents of the Empire are in Latin since it is under the Roman Empire. He could safely conclude that his readers would have expected him to be talking about either a Greek name/title or a Latin name/title that would add up to the 666 total.

so though creative writing/thinking might suggest Swahili -- that is a remote shot in the dark given that he would know his readers had no such reference... so then the more obvious choices are the more likely.

ewq1938 · Jan 9, 2019

BobRyan said:
True. And exegesis can help us with that. John is writing in Greek but he is also writing at a time when the official documents of the Empire are in Latin since it is under the Roman Empire. He could safely conclude that his readers would have expected him to be talking about either a Greek name/title or a Latin name/title that would add up to the 666 total.

so though creative writing/thinking might suggest Swahili -- that is a remote shot in the dark given that he would know his readers had no such reference... so then the more obvious choices are the more likely.

It's not important what John or his contemporary readers knew. It only matters what language the name of the AC is and the AC isn't here yet so it could be any existing or past language. It is not limited to what you are proposing about only Latin or Greek.

BobRyan · Jan 9, 2019

ewq1938 said:
It's not important what John or his contemporary readers knew.

it is when it comes to actual exegesis because the first rule is to hold yourself accountable to the "intended meaning" of the author - and how his readers would have read it.

If you know what the author intended to convey to his readers then you are a long way toward accurate rendering of the text. Because "Bible details matter" as we always say.

If you let go of all reasonable guidelines and just settle for 'making stuff up as long as it sounds good to you' --- then pretty much anything goes. And that is not very useful or reliable.

ewq1938 said:
It only matters what language the name of the AC is and the AC isn't here yet so it could be any existing or past language.

That is one option. But each time we take the option of "throw out every guideline and just assume you can start from scratch in the future" leaves a pretty limited and dimmed level of light to work with.

I prefer "Bible details matter". In Luke 24 when the disciples claimed that they have no clue at all as to what was going on - Jesus said they were slow to believe all that scripture had taught on the subject. Meanwhile they claimed they had no info from scripture to explain what they had seen or that would predict it.

ewq1938 · Jan 9, 2019

BobRyan said:
it is when it comes to actual exegesis because the first rule is to hold yourself accountable to the "intended meaning" of the author - and how his readers would have read it.

All that does is make a person be able to limit the possibilities when the text is not limited to what the contemporary people knew. Scripture says knowledge will be increased in the endtimes so whatever language the name of the AC will be, the people at the time will be able to understand and identify the AC.

If you know what the author intended to convey to his readers then you are a long way toward accurate rendering of the text. Because "Bible details matter" as we always say.

That's only true if John was the author and was the person behind the coded wording and symbolisms but he isn't. He is only writing down what he was shown.

If you let go of all reasonable guidelines and just settle for 'making stuff up as long as it sounds good to you' --- then pretty much anything goes. And that is not very useful or reliable.

My position is the most reasonable not yours. The text also does not support your timeframe-limited concept.

Have the last word if you wish but this a completed matter for me.

woobadooba · Jan 9, 2019

BobRyan said:
I have not gone in to much detail at all about my view so far.

Come to think of it - I think you have said even less about your view than I have said about mine. Or do you have a view on this topic?

Bob, you are an SDA. SDAs believe the mark of the beast is Sunday worship. Are you saying you don't believe that?

As for me, I don't have a view on the subject. I am OK admitting I don't know.

You know what's more important to me? Making sure my life is right with God. If my life is right with God, I don't need to be concerned about what the mark of the beast is, because I won't receive it. God will never lead His people astray.

Tone · Jan 9, 2019

ewq1938 said:
All that does is make a person be able to limit the possibilities when the text is not limited to what the contemporary people knew. Scripture says knowledge will be increased in the endtimes so whatever language the name of t5he AC will be, the people at the time will be able to understand and identify the AC.

That's only true if John was the author and was the person behind the coded wording and symbolisms but he isn't. He is only writing down what he was shown.

My position is the most reasonable not yours. The text also does not support your timeframe-limited concept.

Have the last word if you wish but this a completed matter for me.

I think this view is more accurate. Many forget another clue that goes with this account:
Revelation 13:18
"Here is wisdom: The one who has understanding must calculate the number of the beast, because it is the number of a man. His number is 666. "

Tone · Jan 9, 2019

"Understanding is often, though not always, related to learning concepts, and sometimes also the theory or theories associated with those concepts. However, a person may have a good ability to predict the behaviour of an object, animal or system—and therefore may, in some sense, understand it—without necessarily being familiar with the concepts or theories associated with that object, animal or system in their culture. They may have developed their own distinct concepts and theories, which may be equivalent, better or worse than the recognised standard concepts and theories of their culture. Thus, understanding is correlated with the ability to make inferences."
---Wiki

This is interesting:

"Understanding helps one relate all truths to one's supernatural purpose; it further illuminates one's understanding of Sacred Scripture; and it assists us to understand the significance of religious ritual. This all gives us a profound appreciation for God’s providence"

Seven gifts of the Holy Spirit - Wikipedia

Whoever is patient has great understanding,
but one who is quick-tempered displays folly.
Proverbs 14:29

The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom.
Though it cost all you have, get understanding.
Proverbs 4:7

The unfolding of your words gives light;
it gives understanding to the simple.
Psalm 119:130

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,
and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
Proverbs 9:10

Get wisdom, get understanding;
do not forget my words or turn away from them.
Proverbs 4:5

We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.
1 John 5:20

Blessed are those who find wisdom,
those who gain understanding.
Proverbs 3:13

I think we should start with getting the understanding first, then we can calculate and solve the riddle.

Sabertooth · Jan 10, 2019

I updated my blog post. The transliterative Latin initials "CXÇ" could satisfy the "number of his name" form of the mark, given in the Greek as "χξς," and be interchangeable with his full name.

This isn't offered as an exact prediction, but rather as a plausible one.

BobRyan · Jan 10, 2019

woobadooba said:
Bob, you are an SDA. SDAs believe the mark of the beast is Sunday worship.

On the contrary SDAs teach "nobody has the mark of the beast" and that "includes" those who attend church on Sunday.

"No one has yet received the mark of the beast".—Evangelism, 234 (1899). {LDE 224.5}

GC 382-383
in what religious bodies are the GREATER part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.

Your task here according to the OP was not to "tell us what someone else believes and that you don't agree with them" ... the task as per the OP is to tell us what you believe about the mark of the beast.

woobadooba said:
As for me, I don't have a view on the subject. I am OK admitting I don't know.

You know what's more important to me? Making sure my life is right with God. If my life is right with God, I don't need to be concerned about what the mark of the beast is, because I won't receive it. God will never lead His people astray.

To be right with God one has to Love Christ.

Christ is "The WORD and the WORD was with God and the WORD was God" John 1:1.

In Rev 19 at the second coming He is called "the WORD"

God's WORD warns us of events that are coming - which is how it happens that those who LOVE God are kept from danger. Noah is a good example of how that works.

woobadooba · Jan 10, 2019

BobRyan said:
On the contrary SDAs teach "nobody has the mark of the beast" and that "includes" those who attend church on Sunday.

"No one has yet received the mark of the beast".—Evangelism, 234 (1899). {LDE 224.5}

GC 382-383
in what religious bodies are the GREATER part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.

Bob, saying Sunday worship will be the mark of the beast is essentially the same thing as saying it is the mark of the beast. I don't understand why you can't see the logic of that. In other words, it is the mark of the beast according to the SDA church, but hasn't gone into effect as such yet.

My question for you is where in the Bible do you find support for such a belief?

Moreover, if such a law is established, will it mean true Christians will refrain from worshiping God on Sunday? What if they continue to go to church on Sunday at that time, will they have the mark of the beast? Will it be sinful for Sabbath keepers to gather together to worship God on a Sunday? Where in the Bible does it say it will be sinful to worship God on a Sunday?

I believe we should keep the Sabbath day holy just as God commanded. I don't see anything in the Bible saying the command to do so has been changed or done away with. But at the same time, I don't see anything in the Bible saying it is wrong for believers to go to church on a Sunday to worship God, nor do I find any biblical support stating it will ever be wrong.

BobRyan · Jan 11, 2019

woobadooba said:
Bob, saying Sunday worship will be the mark of the beast is essentially the same thing as saying it is the mark of the beast. .

Creative writing "noted"...

The reason that such a thing is not the mark of the beast is because of the "details" listed in Rev 13 -- conditions which do not exist.

SDAs teach "nobody has the mark of the beast" and that "includes" those who attend church on Sunday.

"No one has yet received the mark of the beast".—Evangelism, 234 (1899). {LDE 224.5}

GC 382-383
in what religious bodies are the GREATER part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.

Your task here according to the OP was not to "tell us what someone else believes and that you don't agree with them" ... the task as per the OP is to tell us what you believe about the mark of the beast.

woobadooba said:
As for me, I don't have a view on the subject. I am OK admitting I don't know.

Interesting.

====================

What is more SDAs have worship services on Sundays all the time - during things like our "ten days of prayer" and our evangelistic outreach programs.

woobadooba said:
Bob, saying Sunday worship will be the mark of the beast is essentially the same thing as saying it is the mark of the beast. .

That is not the case - because "details matter" -- even the ones you are currently ignoring.

woobadooba · Jan 11, 2019

Nevermind....

I've had enough of this back and forth nonsense. I have better things to do with my time than to argue with stubbornly rude people.

What do you think the Mark of the Beast is?? And what is sin about it?

Junior Member

Legend

Junior Member

I love you three.

Legend

Just a library lady

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

I love you three.

Junior Member

I love you three.

Legend

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

Repartee Animal: Quipping the Saints!

Junior Member

Legend

Junior Member

Legend

Similar threads