Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: 666 and RFID chips

  1. #11
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,749
    Amen (Given)
    195
    Amen (Received)
    712
    Quote Originally Posted by simplicio View Post
    But every passage in the bible is controversial, what does it mean is the all encompassing question. Rushing Jaws above tied the mark to the Old Testament, which suggests that the technology was extant 3000 years ago.

    The ancient Hebrews took it literally. And made the connection to worship and even commerce. So the question is what is the literal?

    Each generation has some who declare with certainty that they understand St John's Apocalypse, and declare that they understand all the signs. And are able to place the times of the signs as that generation.
    RJ was essentially arguing that the writer of the gospel of John and Revelation was antisemitic, and that the allusion to the mark was a castigation of Deu 6:8. I doubt very many orthodox Christians, whether of the futurist or preterist flavor, would be willing to go with that interpretation lol. The ancient Christians didn't interpret Rev 13 literally because it wasn't possible to do so. Neither Nero nor Domitian (the likely time Rev was written) had the manpower to make everyone in the world not buy or sell without a certain mark. Thus they had to interpret it as metaphorical -- i.e. the world was just metaphor for Rome, the mark was probably just an idea or doctrine (a la Deu 6:8), buying and selling was just local commerce or imperial commerce, etc. -- in order for it to meet the criteria of the times. None of this was possible in a literal sense even in the 20th century until about just three or four decades ago. Now, not only will currency be entirely digital soon, but, forget RFID chips, they now can store terabytes of information in a single human cell, and even making strides in nanotechnology. In other words, the technology is already in place for this to be literal in a plausible way. It's just a matter of populace sentiment and acceptance of such a system that isn't yet plausible. But if you see my post here, I document where the UN and World Bank have already laid out a strategy and desire for global citizenry via global registration (which will unquestionably be digital). Even if the interpretation is wrong and thus just a coincidence, 21st century science and technology is providing a way for futurists to interpret Rev 13 as a literal reality, which wasn't possible at any other time in history.

  2. #12
    tWebber
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by seanD View Post
    RJ was essentially arguing that the writer of the gospel of John and Revelation was antisemitic, and that the allusion to the mark was a castigation of Deu 6:8. I doubt very many orthodox Christians, whether of the futurist or preterist flavor, would be willing to go with that interpretation lol. The ancient Christians didn't interpret Rev 13 literally because it wasn't possible to do so. Neither Nero nor Domitian (the likely time Rev was written) had the manpower to make everyone in the world not buy or sell without a certain mark. Thus they had to interpret it as metaphorical -- i.e. the world was just metaphor for Rome, the mark was probably just an idea or doctrine (a la Deu 6:8), buying and selling was just local commerce or imperial commerce, etc. -- in order for it to meet the criteria of the times. None of this was possible in a literal sense even in the 20th century until about just three or four decades ago. Now, not only will currency be entirely digital soon, but, forget RFID chips, they now can store terabytes of information in a single human cell, and even making strides in nanotechnology. In other words, the technology is already in place for this to be literal in a plausible way. It's just a matter of populace sentiment and acceptance of such a system that isn't yet plausible. But if you see my post here, I document where the UN and World Bank have already laid out a strategy and desire for global citizenry via global registration (which will unquestionably be digital). Even if the interpretation is wrong and thus just a coincidence, 21st century science and technology is providing a way for futurists to interpret Rev 13 as a literal reality, which wasn't possible at any other time in history.
    While I do not believe that John is antisemitic (or even if that was Rushingjaws point), there is a strong tendency to interpret revelation in the light of the Old Testament, to tie the meaning of passages in Revelations to the Torah.

    I think that the twentieth century history shows totalitarianism is possible, even without totally swaying the people's sentiment. (Hannah Arendt made the point that totalitarianism, total control, was not possible until the twentieth century). But history does give examples of forced worship, many post reformation wars in Europe were fought over the faith of the king, since the idea of people's faith being independent of the monarch is a recent idea. the faith of the people was expected to follow the faith of the king, neither Protestants nor Catholics were comfortable with a ruler of a different creed, because they saw no protection for freedom of conscience in faith.

    And commercial activity has always been feared to be at the mercy of ungodly forces. That idea lays at the heart of polemics against Templars, cabals of international Jews, and the international banking system; and it spans the centuries.

    Revelations and the mark of the Beast have political power, religious power, and commercial power in view. Each generation looks at the threats, convinced that things are in place for the end times. Some see Rome. some see aliens, some see communism; the more imaginative combine all three. Even in the eighteenth century, some saw American democracy as a threat to the established order with its rejection of authority as an anchor for society, with the leveling of distinctions and uniformity of all peoples.

    I am not convinced that this era is really more susceptible than past generations. After the rise of totalitarianism, the counterbalance of the international order, NATO, World Bank, UN, etc., have imperfectly provided a platform to resolve problems short of war. Europe was war torn every few years, the vision men like Maritain has been implemented, and has so far worked, held in check the baser instinct of human nature and politics.

  3. #13
    tWebber Rushing Jaws's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Near my best friend (see photo above)
    Faith
    Papist XPian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    311
    Amen (Given)
    987
    Amen (Received)
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by simplicio View Post
    While I do not believe that John is antisemitic (or even if that was Rushingjaws point), there is a strong tendency to interpret revelation in the light of the Old Testament, to tie the meaning of passages in Revelations to the Torah.
    It wasn't. Maybe I should have explained. I think St John is re-evaluating something familiar from Deuteronomy to make it a sign of belonging, not to God's People - and thus to the People of the Messiah - but to the people of the substitute Messiah. I think that for the theology of the book being Jewish is defined by having faith in Christ - so that Christian Jews count as Jews, and so do Gentile Christians, whereas non-Christian Jews do not count as Jews, just as Gentile non-Christians do not.

    Re-evaluation of Jewish/OT things is found elsewhere in the NT. The universal dominion of the Messiah in Daniel 7 is treated in the Temptation narratives not as a legitimate hope, but as a temptation of the devil. Jesus is taken to a "high mountain", as to a second Mount Nebo: the use of the OT in the Gospel text is contrast Him with Moses and Solomon, and to re-interpret the earthly Jewish hopes of this-worldly power and salvation as a contradiction of the mission of Jesus: He does have universal domimion, but precisely because He does, it cannot be accepted from the "prince of this world". He has to be lifted up - an echo of Isaiah 6.1 ? - on the Cross first. That Christ redeemed men through the accursed and unclean death of the Cross is itself an example of this "re-evaluation".

    Again, he enters Jerusalem riding on a donkey. That this is an allusion to Zechariah 9.9 is made explicit. Another passage which is also perhaps present is 1 Kings 1.34 - Solomon rides to his coronation on a donkey. As the "greater than Solomon", Jesus does likewise. By doing so, He replaces this-worldly, political notions of power with those of the Kingdom of God.

    The re-evaluation and re-identification of Israel which I think is present in Revelation can be seen as a radical but logical extension of Amos' treatment of the Day of JHWH not as a day of God's vindication of Israel and Judah against the nations round about, but as a vindication of God against the nations *including* Israel and Judah. Amos undercuts their ideas about themselves, as, by means of a humourous tale, the Book of Jonah does. The Gospels take this re-evaluation further, especially by the anti-Pharisee, anti-Temple polemic; and Revelation gives us the final canonical step in the process. The NT contains a good deal about the reversal of expectations - and this is found in Revelation.

    The OT is all over Revelation. The book is crammed with OT echoes and concepts - in chapter 13 not least. I think that looking at these echoes, and seeing how they are used in the book, can illustrate the theology, ideas, themes and meaning of the book. I think reading it as though it were "history before the events" is a false trail, and that it should be interpreted as a product of its times - as truly (though not merely) so as any other text of that period.
    I think that the twentieth century history shows totalitarianism is possible, even without totally swaying the people's sentiment. (Hannah Arendt made the point that totalitarianism, total control, was not possible until the twentieth century). But history does give examples of forced worship, many post reformation wars in Europe were fought over the faith of the king, since the idea of people's faith being independent of the monarch is a recent idea. the faith of the people was expected to follow the faith of the king, neither Protestants nor Catholics were comfortable with a ruler of a different creed, because they saw no protection for freedom of conscience in faith.

    And commercial activity has always been feared to be at the mercy of ungodly forces. That idea lays at the heart of polemics against Templars, cabals of international Jews, and the international banking system; and it spans the centuries.

    Revelations and the mark of the Beast have political power, religious power, and commercial power in view. Each generation looks at the threats, convinced that things are in place for the end times. Some see Rome. some see aliens, some see communism; the more imaginative combine all three. Even in the eighteenth century, some saw American democracy as a threat to the established order with its rejection of authority as an anchor for society, with the leveling of distinctions and uniformity of all peoples.

    I am not convinced that this era is really more susceptible than past generations. After the rise of totalitarianism, the counterbalance of the international order, NATO, World Bank, UN, etc., have imperfectly provided a platform to resolve problems short of war. Europe was war torn every few years, the vision men like Maritain has been implemented, and has so far worked, held in check the baser instinct of human nature and politics.
    Totally agree with that second-last paragraph in particular.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •