What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Mark of the Beast and the Mark of God

By Walid Shoebat (Shoebat Exclusive)

Today we see that donning marks written on badges already placed on the foreheads by the most anti-Christ religion on earth; Islam. And this phenomenon is becoming a growing trend and has become a reality; the Muslim is literally posting a blasphemous badge on his forehead.

Scripture talks about two marks, one good “the seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God” (Revelation 7:3) and the other evil “the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.” (Revelation 13:17)

But are such marks spiritual marks or are they intended to be literal as a physical mark that is visible by the naked eye? Is only the Christian marked with a spiritual mark, or is he also required to have a physical mark, or even both? Or is it possible that this whole issue be simpler than we all think; is it unusual after all for two opposite sides, the followers of Christ on the one side and the followers of Antichrist on the other, to express their allegiance to their god by displaying physical marks that are visible to everyone; either for Christ or for Antichrist to show the world which side they are on?

mark-of-the-beast2

It sounds like these are simple questions that require simple answers and it’s a simple decision to make. While the decision is simple on what to do, how we get to that conclusion is not.

The typical person who is reading so far would probably spark a short-spanned quick thought and a quick conclusion, “I won’t take the chip, the barcode of whatever and I will get beheaded and I will be just fine”.

So by now its time to click out of this page and find a more pleasant subject to read about. You perhaps already think that you know all the verses from whatever was etched in your psyche during Bible studies and since “I’m saved” its time to move on.

If it’s that easy, why is there such a serious biblical warning to heed regarding a mark on the forehead? Reading this long article to examine historical and biblical accounts is asking too much from a culture where people would rather be dozing off while they watch several 4 minute snippets of news on the TV,  or by perusing the type of short, less then a thousand words articles that provide just enough information to make us all make dangerous conclusions.

Indeed, the lack of patience and the hatred of knowledge is one of the signs of the times, which plagues the church.

But before we even begin to answer this simple question it is necessary to clear the runway with a hundred words or so since at times quoting a verse or two in order to reach a conclusion is a style used on the comment section on blogs, which too could get us in serious trouble if we make theological errors. Isolating verses is the best method used to get yourself involved in a schismatic cult.

I once asked, “who” or “what” exactly killed Goliath: a) the smooth stone, b) David, c) God, or d) all of the above?

“What a silly question” you might ask. Any of these four choices is correct. But a schismatic individual will always use a verse or two and isolate them or add extra words that are not in the text to pull a fast one on you.

Did “God alone kill Goliath?” or “Did David alone kill Goliath?” or “Did the stone alone kill Goliath?” Say “yes” and you just got yourself in some serious theological trouble. One cannot eliminate the hand of God that led David to kill Goliath.

The devil, just as he too isolates sheep and he also plants wolves to kill, he also isolates words and adds additional words in order to kill. And while this is a simple example, serious cults started by meddling with the nature of Christ; was Jesus “God and not man?” or was He “man and not God?” Cults can find verses to show Jesus was God and argue He was not man and other cults can find verses and argue that Jesus was man and argue He was not God; either choice is a very serious heresy that could end you up in eternal penitentiary while you delude yourself “I’m saved”.

The basic Christian knows that God inspired David to direct the smooth stone that crushed Goliath’s head. Even children know that story, yet few even know it’s significance: why didn’t God simply just strike Goliath with lightening from heaven but instead He had man participate in the act of killing and even saving Israel in that fateful day when Goliath mocked and blasphemed the God of Heaven?

dg

There is more to the story of David and Goliath than meets the eye. While the stone was no spiritual stone, it too had a hidden spiritual meaning regarding the most crucial literal event in the history of mankind; that at some point in time, that another smooth and perfect stone will proceed from David and crush the devil’s head; Jesus, the Rock of all ages and the rejected foundation stone.

Only if we contemplate when we read Scripture and its multiple layers of meaning do we fully see and learn how not to be swayed by simplistic arguments that proceed from wolves in sheep clothing. Even Scripture, while inspired by God, man was the agent writing it using his best ability and as he wrote it and it was amazingly infallible. God wanted man to participate in the process of giving the message of redemption using his own language. So when the Muslim critic who fancies himself that the Quran is the word of God verbatim, dictaphoned to Muhammad by an angel of light, and he asks you the Christian: is the Bible God’s word or man’s?

The wise can see the tactics of wolves. The Muslim’s psyche is molded to always think in a singular and narrow tunnel vision. His nature mimics the nature of his Unitarian god, Allah, while the Christian God is Triune Who can be on earth, in Spirit and in Heaven all at the same time.

cc

The whole process of saving man, God had man participate in the plan of redemption and such a plan is etched in so many themes written in Scripture. And in everything Bible, no matter how valuable is the nugget one tries to share, scoffers are not far away ready to crush every logical conclusion. For example, I ask, and since all, God, man and rock, killed Goliath, who kills the Antichrist; a) Christ alone, b) Man alone, or c) Both?

I always get “It is Christ who will crush the head of Antichrist by the sword proceeding out of His mouth,” adding that “you see, therefore “man” has nothing to do with the act of killing the man of sin.”

And why do they give such an answer? It is either a lack of inductive study or the person is too lazy and wants Christ to do everything; Christians, according to the lazy scoffer, do nothing at all. The simpleton will even provide Scripture and verse as if they need to participate in nothing, that Jesus does it all:

“And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.” (2 Thessalonians 2:8)

“Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations.” (Revelation 19:15)

At face value, such an argument seems true, Scripture after all was provided and the matter is closed.

The lazy usually quotes correct verses but reaches the wrong conclusion. These verses, while true, standing ‘alone’ and ‘isolated’ without a complete understanding is a recipe for a disastrous conclusion. First of all, these verses are mixed with symbolism, a “sharp sword” is symbolic from the obvious context, and such a conclusion is in reality the process of literalizing what is symbolic.

While it is true that Christ is capable just to speak it and it would be done, but we must also seriously consider that without searching other similar themes in Scripture by using an inductive approach, which demands we search the whole of Scripture, we could get ourselves in serious trouble. Also, letting everybody be judge and jury over Scripture without capable pastoral church supervision and authority, is also a recipe for disaster, and if in doubt, just peruse the internet by plugging one word in your search engine “prophecy”. If you do this and you still think that all what you read is normal, than you are in the camp of the sick and you need healing.

The lazy servant ignores most of Scripture, which also speaks of literal weapons and even armies of men that combat Antichrist who is indwelled with Lucifer. This is found in several themes, for example, Ezekiel 28-39. In Ezekiel 28 we find:

“you say, “I am a god;
 I sit on the throne of a god …” (Ezekiel 28:1) “I am going to bring foreigners against you,
the most ruthless of nations;
 they will draw their swords against your beauty and wisdom
and pierce your shining splendor. They will bring you down to the pit,
and you will die a violent death
in the heart of the seas …” (Ezekiel 28:7-8) “You were in Eden,
the garden of God; 
every precious stone adorned you …” (Ezekiel 28:13).

When one reads: “They will bring you down,” there is no question that “they” pertains to the most “ruthless of nations” in battle. Think “Hiroshima” and which nation was the most ruthless in such battles that destroyed it. God will still use man to carry out His judgments. The Antichrist and his armies will be this future Goliath who will mock and blaspheme the God of Heaven. And then his end comes when Christ pronounces judgment proclaiming war against him by sending the most powerful nations against him. Think of an alliance of nations, think of a Russia allied with the U.S and Europe. While Christ leads this battle against Antichrist, He sends forth men to destroy him.

Therefore, the “sharp sword” in Revelation 19 is simply Christ’s proclamation of war in which we need to find much of the other detail such as in Ezekiel who includes all the nations that go with the devil into “the pit” with him, and each and every one of these nations is today Muslim.

And if in doubt of what I am saying here, just search the Bible for the word “pit” and see for yourself the amazing geographic detail. Lucifer will possess the Antichrist is clear from Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 in which his confederacy of nations are all specifically mentioned by name and are finally thrown into the pit. These are Sudan (Cush) and North African states (Phut) Lydia (Turkey) and all Arabia and Egypt (see Ezekiel 30:5); “Cush, and Put, and Lud (Lydia/Turkey), and all Arabia, and Libya, and the people of the land that is in league, shall fall with them by the sword.

Pay close attention to this “league” a confederacy of nations that make up Antichrist kingdom. They also include Asshur (Iraq – Syria), (see Ezekiel 32:22-23) and Elam (Iran) (see Ezekiel 32:24-25) and Meshech & Tubal (Asia minor which includes the Southern Russian Muslim states) (see Ezekiel 32:26) and the harlot (Arabia) (see Ezekiel 32:29, also see Ezekiel 25).

isismap

While many popularize Ezekiel 38, such popularization is also a problem of isolating Scripture, as if God had favorite “chapter and verse,” but what about the whole theme starting from Ezekiel chapter 28 to Ezekiel chapter 38?

Therefore, to isolate, always spiritualize, and always allegorize what is literal, and then literalize what is allegoric is a dangerous practice of schismatic groups no matter how popular they are. You can usually find them by the great volume of their book sales.

I peruse a litany of worthless books and websites that say: the Mark of God and the Mark of the Beast can never be a literal mark. For example, Rick Joyner, a Dominion Theology cultist writes:

 “The mark of the beast is probably far more subtle than many have been led to believe, just as the mark of God is not something literal, but spiritual.”

While that is a possibility, one must never exclude that the biblical verses could also be referring to something that is quite literal and we must reserve our decisions as we move further into the future. Who knows after all, will the two witnesses or will the church authority in the future require us to be physically marked and reserved for God? Will we be disobedient to such authority? And if so, what does that say about us being the lazy servant or the obedient servant that Christ calls us to be?

We must never take the strict approach on the issue, especially since the marking of Christians either with the sign of the cross or other means was a regular practice commanded during the ancient Church even until this very day; the physical mark was abhorred way later by certain so-called reformers like John Calvin and their Puritan followers. These have made a great impact on how westerners psyche even in our modern times so when we review verses in Scripture that pertain to markings on the forehead we reflect their teachings while we ignore church history on how they interpreted such verses. One needs to decide whom to follow, Calvin, the Puritans or the church and what was practiced throughout all Christian history.

In the early church, baptism often involved the actual marking of the child with the sign of the cross on the forehead, which was seen as an exact parallel to the marking with a taw that Ezekiel envisaged in 9:4, since taw in the ancient script took the shape of a cross (see Origen, Selecta in Ezechielem, 13.800d; Tertullian, Against Marcion, 3.22; Jerome, Commentary on Ezekiel, 9:4–6).

ash-wednesday

Yet some so-called reformers were unconvinced by this observation (see Calvin, Ezekiel I, 218, Institutes 4.17.28), and their Puritan followers argued strenuously against the “noxious ceremony” of signing the cross seeing it as a “superstitious,” “man-made ritual” as so many see it today and post the most common line by jotting a quick line that this is “all manmade tradition”.

Is it?

But perhaps its not, even the Anglican Church of England adopted the mark:

“WE receive this child into the congregation of Christ’s flock, and do sign him with the sign of the Cross, in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, and manfully to fight under his banner, against sin, the world, and the devil; and to continue Christ’s faithful soldier and servant unto his life’s end. Amen. (The Proposed Book of Common Prayer (1928) of the Church of England)

And lest someone criticizes that this is “infant baptism,” besides the Old Testament mandated commands on several occasions, during the early Church we find the sign of the cross:

Tertullian (160- 225 AD): (De cor. Mil., iii), 
”in all our coming in and going out, in putting of our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupieth us, we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross”.

Origen (185- 284 AD): 
”This (the letter Tau) bears a resemblance to the figure of the cross; and this prophecy (Ezek. ix. 4) is said to regard the sign made by Christians on the forehead, which all believers make whatsoever work they begin upon, and especially at the beginning of prayers, or of holy readings” (T. iii. Select. in Ezek. c. ix).

St. Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-86 AD): 
”Let us not, therefore, be ashamed of the cross of Christ, but even though another hide it do thou openly seal it on thy brow, that the devils beholding that royal sign may flee far away trembling. But make thou this sign when thou eatest and drinkest, sittest or liest down, risest up, speakest, walkest; in a word, on every occasion, for He who was here crucified is above in the heavens” (Catech. iv. n. 14).

St. Cyril of Jerusalem: 
”Many have been crucified throughout the world but none of these do the devils dread, but Christ having been crucified for us, when they see but the sign of the cross the devils shudder” (Catech, xii. n. 22).

St. Augustine (354-430 AD): 
”What is the sign (or seal) of Christ, but the cross of Christ ?” (T. iii. Tract. cxviii. in Toan. n. 5).

St. Macarius of Egypt (300- 390 AD): 
”After the sign of the cross, grace immediately thus operates, and composes all the members and the heart, so that the soul from its abounding gladness seems as a youth that knows not evil” (Rom. ix. p. 481).

Were Tertullian, Origen, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Augustine and Macarius including countless others throughout Church history all wrong? Even when a Catholic is baptized, the priest makes the sign of the cross on the person’s forehead three times, one for each Person of the Blessed Trinity.

And lest someone exclaims that such practices were merely symbolic, even when the Muslims tried to invade Rome when it was under the pontificate of Sergius II, the Muslims reached the Church of St. Paul, only to be crushed by resilient Italian Catholics. When the Muslims were about to enter Montecassino, southeast of Rome, monks begged God for mercy with prayer and ashes on their foreheads. Right before the Muslims gained entry, a storm struck and the floodwaters flowing through the Garigliano River blocked the barbarians. The Muslims made a truce, Pope Sergius II accepted, and the enemy departed. (See the commentary of Raymond Davis on the Liber Pontificalis, 104: Sergius II, n. 92)

The major problem with prophecy studies is that it focuses on end times only. “Alone” and “only” is dangerous; prophecy came for all times. While Revelation has an end time theme, it also speaks for the whole history of the church so when Christ warns about the Temple, and the Romans surrounded it, the Christians heeded and fled because Matthew 24 also included them and not only the end of days.

Even worshipping the “image of the beast” which at times can be the icon or idol of a cult, it wasn’t as the Christians for the first time had to deal with being forced to bow down and worship images and meteors that supposedly came from heaven. Today, Christians are still being forced to make a decision; to bow to Mecca’s black stone, an image of Islam’s beastly empire or get beheaded. A “beast” is a threat to the Church.

image

 

Even during the fourth century during the Roman era, The Book of Revelations was being fulfilled when the political idol of the Romans was a certain shield believed to have fallen from heaven and to have been sent by Jupiter or Mars. The Christians were repulsed by this, and gave not the slightest bit of worship to it, and this of course was to the animosity of the 4th century pagan king Julian, who was so vindictive toward the Christians that he wrote a book entitled, Against the Christians, in which he chided them for rejecting the idolatrous shield, for drawing the Cross (the mark of God) on their foreheads, and for worshiping Jesus:

 “But you, O unfortunate men! neglecting to adore and reverence the heaven-descended shield which is preserved by us, and which was sent by the great Jupiter, or by the father Mars, as a most certain pledge that he will perpetually defend our city, you adore the wood of a cross, marking your forehead with the images of it, and engraving it in the vestibules of your dwellings. Whether, therefore, may any one deservedly hate the more intelligent, or pity the more insane among you, who following you have arrived at such perdition, as to neglect the eternal gods, and betake themselves to a dead body of the Jews.” (Julian, Against the Christians, p. 56, in The Arguments of the Emperor Julian, p.56)

And isn’t this what we are dealing with today? Isn’t this what ISIS, the Wahhabists, the Salafist, the Sufis, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood—no matter what brand of Islam it is—they all want the Christians to honor the image of their empire and bow to an object they believe fell from heaven? Does one think that because we live in the 21st century that things changed? The Bible is written for all times.

From the advent of Christianity to the Crusaders in the time of Godfrey of Boullion, the Nights of St. John in the Battle of Malta, Don Juan of Austria in the Battle of Lepanto to the Conquistadores in the invasion of Mexico, the cross was put on foreheads, arms and chests and was the symbol of battling evil. Armageddon is also like these, a battle, although it is the final battle between God and the devil, not much has changed, and we must never assume that marking ourselves simply became obsolete.

But objections will arise that God condemned the Christian from battling in wars and that the Crusaders including the Conquistadores were completely evil. Perhaps such views will finally be the proof test against the lazy servant who will suffer Christ’s proclamation “Depart from me,” since the wicked always see that even David and Solomon sinned and were ultimately pardoned, yet, they refuse to pardon others for similar sin as if they themselves were God announcing and denouncing who is and who is not saved, for such are the lazy servants whose motto is always “thou shall not judge” while not realizing how much judgment they pass on daily basis.

Therefore, we must give Scripture latitude that a physical mark, an identity mark if you will, is therefore plausible in order to proclaim to the world that we are Christian.

 

crusader-clothing-southend_199185_image

Nothing changed, from Genesis and the mark of Cain, Moses and the mark on doorposts, to the Temple era in which the Tefillin is placed on all believers on the foreheads to the coming of Christ, markings are commanded by God. In Ezekiel 9:4 Ezekiel depicts a vision in which the tav plays a Passover role similar to the blood on the lintel and doorposts of a Hebrew home in Egypt. In Ezekiel’s vision, the Lord has his angels separate the demographic wheat from the chaff by going through Jerusalem, the capital city of ancient Israel, and inscribing a mark, a tav, “upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof.”

In Ezekiel’s vision, then, the Lord is counting tav-marked Israelites as worthwhile to spare, but counts the people worthy of annihilation who lack the tav and the critical attitude it signifies. In other words, looking askance at a culture marked by dire moral decline is a kind of shibboleth for loyalty and zeal for God, (Cf. the New Testament’s condemnation of lukewarmness in Revelation 3:15-16) and so it will be when Christ comes, that the ones with the proper mark are saved while the ones without it are excluded as worthless lazy servants, regardless that they consider themselves “Christian” “saved”, do not be deceived into easy believism.

Since Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and onward, even when Christ finally comes, if we examine the history of the faith, God always had divided between the “Cain” and the “Abel”; people who followed the correct instruction and people who refused to obey. Imagine if you were there during the Exodus and you told Moses “Its all simply blood, man,” “Yahweh is in my heart,” and then to be only shocked that your eldest son is found dead in the morning. It is an issue of obedience and disobedience. If we disobey in an investment of one talent, what then will we be like when the investment is a higher amount?

So many speculate about the Mark of the Beast in Revelation 13:16-17. They usually speculate about computer chips and such, yet they rarely if ever think of the Mark of Christ:

“… they were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any green growth or any tree, but only those of mankind who have not the seal of God upon their foreheads” (Revelation 9:4)

“Do not damage the land or the sea or the trees until we put the seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.” (Revelation 7:3 NAB)

“And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads.” (Revelation 14:1)

“And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.” (Revelation 22:4)

The Hebrew letter “taw” which in its primitive form of that letter is the “North Semitic taw” which is the common ancestor of both that Hebrew letter and our own letter “T,” and it looked like a plus sign. (See This Rock, September 1990, page 4, article by Don Schenk.)

The sacred symbol of the Cross went as far back even to Moses’ time. When the Israelites fought in a battle in the Seventeenth chapter of Exodus Moses prayed for God’s help. However, Moses prayers were only heard when he prayed with his hands extended making a cross or a “T” shape similar to the form of Christ when He was crucified. (Exodus 17, 9-14, see Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 90.) Moses who was an Old Testament prefigurement, or type of Christ demonstrated, probably unknowingly, the symbol by which we would be saved.

tav

So many who never mention the Mark of God, yet they give themselves the liberty to expound on computer chips and bar codes while so many others say that the Mark of the Beast is also an invisible mark.

But today we are already seeing that donning marks written on badges already placed on the foreheads is done by the most anti-Christ religion on earth; Islam. And this phenomenon has become a reality; the Muslim is posting a blasphemous badge on his forehead already, do we ignore this? The mark of the beast is defined in Revelation 13 as “the mark, which is the name of the beast.” First we need to understand that in the Bible, a “name” does not always indicate a literal name, as the modern Western mind understands the term. Consider, for example Isaiah prophesied that His Name shall be called Immanuel.

So, in the case of the Messiah, Mary and Joseph did not call him Immanuel, nor did Jesus’ friends call him “the Word of God.” Instead, these are all titles and/or descriptions that refer specifically to the nature and the character of Jesus. Also, the creed, or declaration of faith, in this Messiah matches His name: for we believe in God with us, and the Word was God, and He is also called Mighty God. (Isaiah 9:6) Those who call Jesus by these names affirm that they worship “the man-befriending God”, who “for our salvation, came down from heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary,” (Nicene Creed). He is “the word which became flesh and dwelt amongst us,” (John 1). In conclusion, the name is a creed, dogma, article of faith, or statement of faith.

The significance of the Name of the Beast is that it is The Name of Blasphemy (Revelation 13:1). Biblically speaking, blasphemy is an anti-Yahweh or anti-Christ word or deed—to claim the attributes of God, claim to be Messiah, deny the Holy Spirit, deny the trinity, the cross, or even denying God’s edicts and declarations—are all blasphemy. Satan blasphemed when he said, “I will be like the Most High,” (Is. 14:14). Satan has always desired to be like God. He wishes to be considered equal to or greater than God. The name Allah in Islam is always used in conjunction with the word Ta’ala, The Most High. If we look again at the verse, we see that the Name of the Beast is not simply a name of blasphemy, but rather it is the name of blasphemy. It is the highest quintessential blasphemy—it claims to possess the attributes or nature of the God of the Bible. As such, the Name of the Beast is a claim to be equal to or greater than God and the Messiah. The Name of the Beast will contain or imply some form of anti-Christ doctrinal or creedal language that will exalt another above God.

We know that the Antichrist will be the premiere representative of a faith that worships not the God of the Bible, but rather the adversary, Satan disguised as God. The god of the Antichrist will not only be God’s premiere enemy, but he will masquerade as the Most High God.

This masquerading serves a two-fold purpose. First, of course, it fulfills Satan’s desire to be like God. Secondly, it confuses and deceives mankind into offering their worship to him instead of God.

The theology of Islam thoroughly—even systematically—fulfills all of the definitive elements of anti-Christ theology as specified by John the Apostle in his first epistle. Beyond denying the Father and the Son, Islam totally rejects the Trinity, Islam also denies the Divine Incarnation of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, as well as his death, burial and resurrection. But beyond all of this, Islam has memorialized its anti-Christ theology specifically in a creedal formula, The Shahadatan which is the Islamic creed or declaration of faith “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is The One sent by Allah [The Messenger of Allah]”

shahadatan number-of-the-beast-real-codex-vaticanus1

The two elements of this creed are the following: Allah is the only One True Supreme God and Muhammad (The Praised One) is the seal and final messenger of Allah.

These two components of the Shahadatan, in a very succinct manner, perhaps better than any creedal statement could, perfectly fulfill both dimensions of the definition of blasphemy that we just discussed. First, it attempts to claim that another god other than Yahweh is the Only True God.

And secondly, the Shahadatan is blasphemous toward the God of the Bible because it attempts to place Muhammad in the position that only Jesus the Messiah can fill and even give Muhammad attributes that belong to deity, as Al-Insan Al-Kamel, the perfect man; Rahmatan-lil-A’alameen, a mercy to all mankind; Al-rasul Al-A’tham, greatest of all sent by God; Shafi, Healer; Munji, saviour; Mahdi guided one/deliverer; Mustafa, chosen; Amir, the prince; Awal, first; Akher, last; Rasul Al-Malahim, messenger of the Last-Days battles, and finally Muhammad, the praised one.

Such are the blasphemous names of Muhammad. This in itself reconciles how when the Muslim Mahdi sits in the Temple of God and while he declares that he is God (2 Thessalonians), he also worships “honors a god” (Daniel 11) and “advances its [this god’s] glory” (Daniel 11:39) and will not “honor the god of his fathers” because he comes from a land that was previously Christian where the Seven Lamp stands and Seven Churches were.

While many spiritualize the mark, they need to look at the language. When we come to the biblical Greek word “charagma,” used for “mark” means “a stamp, an imprinted mark.” (Strongs #5480) So a follower of Antichrist will have a stamp on some sort of material as a badge to be placed on the forehead or arm. In John’s time, the use for “charagma” was reserved for slaves in what was called a badge of servitude.” (Strong’s 5482) So it’s a literal badge that declares slavery and ownership by the master and followers use it to demonstrate allegiance to this master. This would fit with Islam since according to Islamic theology, Muslims are “slaves of Allah.” Islam, after all, is the religion of submission.

These followers have an option to either place this badge of servitude on the foreheads or the arms. Western analysts think that the mark is placed on the hand. This is not necessarily the only spot. We know from the Greek word “dexios,” which could also be translated “right side”, “right arm” or “right shoulder”.

To become a Muslim (literally means submitter), one must confess the Shahadatan declaration to demonstrate allegiance and servitude to Allah and Muhammad. This submission is always combined with commitment to fight the world: “Men, do you know what you are pledging yourselves to in swearing allegiance to this man? ‘Yes. In swearing allegiance to him we are pledging to wage war against all mankind.’” (Ishaq: 204) “We are steadfast trusting Him. We have a Prophet by whom we will conquer all men.” (Ishaq: 471) “In faith I do not fear the army of fate. He gave us the blood of their best men to drink when we led our army against them. We are a great army with a pungent smell. And we attack continuously, wherever our enemy is found.” (Ishaq: 574)

This declaration is worn by millions of Muslim Jihadists and it is fairly unique to Muslims and is becoming a prominent feature of the Jihadi movement. Do we just simply brush what we see and heed not John’s warnings? We study historic Christianity, but what about the future of Christianity and the path ahead? John’s prophecies were precisely written to look forward and heed God’s warnings.

The Lord is raising righteous nations to obliterate the Antichrist religion that is spreading its tentacles to shed innocent blood throughout the earth. So it is possible that this whole issue be simpler than we all think; it is not unusual after all for two opposite sides, the followers of Christ on the one side and the followers of Antichrist on the other, to express their allegiance by displaying physical marks that are visible to everyone; either for Christ or for Antichrist to show the world which side they are on and from reviewing the theme in Revelation, this conclusion makes sense. Its just what it says in the Bible and the way it says it.

The lazy servant always says: “all that I need to know is that I’m saved”, after all, it’s all about salvation. I already heard it so many times.

Beware of such isolated mottos. In fact, what you will find out is that when you reverse their mottos, you get the correct motto; reverse “its all about salvation” and you get “Its what salvation is all about” and when the Muslim says “its all about worshiping God alone,” reverse that and we get; “God alone worship” is what Islam is all about; indeed, Islam’s bottom line is that we do not worship Father, Son and Holy Spirit and is why it’s the religion of Antichrist. And when the lazy servant says vague mottos like “its all about Jesus”, tell him “this is vague, reversing lonely mottos makes more sense, “it’s not all about Jesus only, but its also what Jesus is all about””.

The lazy knows how to isolate a few verses as if this is all what is required. He is keen on how to literalize the allegory and allegorizing literal. He does whatever it takes to keep him a lazy servant and he believes that man will never participate in any act of man’s redemption; “Christ does it all” as if God would strike Goliath with lightening and no stone was necessary, after all, its all spiritual. The lazy servant does not even know he is unintentionally deceiving since even Scripture exposes them as “deceiving while being deceived.” (2 Timothy 3:13)

You who is reading, examine your heart, it is possible that its time to repent. I too need much repentance. But the question I have is; whom do I confess my sins to; God, man, or both?

print