The Cure For The Mark Of The Beast

It may help you to read just where the impetus for this page comes from scripturally. I would heartily recommend it so that you are in a prepared way of mind;

-- Click To Expand/Collapse Bible Verses -- Ezekiel ch18:v9-17
Eze 18:9 Hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, saith the Lord GOD.
Eze 18:10 If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and that doeth the like to any one of these things,
Eze 18:11 And that doeth not any of those duties, but even hath eaten upon the mountains, and defiled his neighbour’s wife,
Eze 18:12 Hath oppressed the poor and needy, hath spoiled by violence, hath not restored the pledge, and hath lifted up his eyes to the idols, hath committed abomination,
Eze 18:13 Hath given forth upon usury, and hath taken increase: shall he then live? he shall not live: he hath done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him.
Eze 18:14 Now, lo, if he beget a son, that seeth all his father’s sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like,
Eze 18:15 That hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hath not defiled his neighbour’s wife,
Eze 18:16 Neither hath oppressed any, hath not withholden the pledge, neither hath spoiled by violence, but hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment,
Eze 18:17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury nor increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live. (KJV)

I made the case for the proposition that If God chooses to save one 'x' whose redemption is from something so severe that he could not be saved, then the perfection of God was such that it required the necessity of the salvation of the individual. Then the ultrafilter of perfections made the contradiction since salvation is contingent upon redemption, therefore an accusation of damnation against such a soul 'x' would be logically contradictory. The accuser would deny God is God consistent to His face, or affirm there was no guilt but that belonging to the accusation.

Whilst this title sounds like something out of hollywood, it is a fact that within the book of Revelation, there is described a mark of the beast that once received is supposedly "proof sure" of damnation. God makes every effort to undo such a mark in the passages that describe it. It however becomes His instrument to damn the vast majority of mankind.
It is a much saddening fact to see that the vast majority of those who ascribe to the 'rapturist' doctrine are using the necessity of their salvation as a reason why precisely they must be evacuated from Earth before this happens. Then giving themselves the "cure" for the mark of the beast, in complete non-presence.

It is also comedic irony that these people are doing so despite the vast scriptural, literary, historical, (and logical) evidence to the contrary. Irony perhaps, because these people are acting contrary to scripture and the will of God. And not just so - that these individuals are precisely the people seeking such a cure (because as they know the judgements of God) they declare by their own words they will surely be the ones to receive such a mark! One is reminded of the reworked joke for the common cold along the lines of "What is a good thing for the mark of the beast?" The reply "The rapture will get you it real quick!" springs to mind.

By refusing to redeem their stance apart from the truth of God's own declaration that the whole world will have the mark forced on them by making necessary the evacuating of themselves, they claim to be the very people who are irredeemable! Since they state they will receive the mark unless they be evacuated, they remove the very thing needed for their salvation, (a "t2" in the previous page.)

By requiring logically their non presence they immediately state N¬(f(x)&¬(x is raptured)) i.e. that the mark applies as a temptation to only those not raptured. But N¬(A&¬B) is the statement A=>B and ¬B=>¬A the modus tollens.

So therefore if you are going to be raptured, you would receive the mark of the beast. That is, you are logically the very type of person that would accept the mark. However we must examine the case of those plausibly "left behind". In order for the set of rapturists to be shown totally corrupt there must be the possibility that an individual may choose to refuse the mark of the beast. If that is a possibility then rapture doctrine is in itself equivalent to the mark of the beast.

If the rapture cannot be necessarily true as the one cure for the mark of the beast, then it must be possibly false. If it is possibly false then it may not be sound doctrine. but if it is possibly not sound doctrine then it is not written by God. If it is not written by God then it is made up by an adversary to true sovereign grace. The rapture has to be as much a doctrinal lie as the logical consequence that the mark of the beast cannot be overcome.

I would hope you hear these sure words of Jesus Christ.

-- Click To Expand/Collapse Bible Verses -- John ch17:v1-12
Joh 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
Joh 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Joh 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
Joh 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
Joh 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.
Joh 17:7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.
Joh 17:8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.
Joh 17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
Joh 17:10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.
Joh 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
Joh 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. (KJV)

So, to examine this logically, we proceed as follows. We assume the mark applies to an 'l' or the "least in the kingdom of heaven" - and we attempt to find that if 'l' is "free" from condemnation "D" of such a mark (consequent of our 'f') that is always persistent and consistent despite the forgiveness of God, then we state that the rapture may be a valid doctrine. We assume that as long as D(l), then we infer ¬P(f(l)&¬f(l))

However we have a fallacy of equivocation here, for D(l) may be the statement that "that 'l' will die some day if D(l)". The initial fault f would be as the "fall in Eden" and the persistent state "D(l)" would incur the concept of condemnation from original sin, that all men are biologically contingent and will face D(x) for all x.

However given forgiveness even for the fall, God has overcome this manner of fault in such a reasonable fashion that if the fall is forgiveable (or an individual's first fault if the wages of sin be death) Such a curse of death for all who sin or otherwise do well to repent is not so to state that the existence of "D" is enough to separate us from the forgiveness of God. (For we defined a God who saves)

Then the mark if it applies is merely a like token of death, and it has already been overcome with the resurrection.

If the mark occurs at some time t[d] where we find ourselves tempted with it between t1 < t[d] < t2 then forgiveness of D over that interval is as equivalent to stating that some fault f at t[d] is forgiven in the interval. Likewise if death is similarly as D a contingency from a fault that carries over the whole interval; then by simply "living" - the curse of original sin may not apply at any point in the interval. (Then t1=t2 so as to permit death), that death is not present continually across the interval is as good enough a proof for the ability to "choose not to receive" the mark likewise. I.e. 'D' is not continuous past redemption at t2.

If God can raise the dead (and the living are spiritually raised) then the mark similarly has no force or "merit": It can likewise be repented of. (Since "D" becomes then non-necessary or non-universal after t[d], by analogy forgiveness to life eternal at t[d] is stronger). By putting t2=t1 the individual simply may not choose to receive it. (Likewise with t2=t1, t1 may increase as equal with t2). No one alive today chose to die as a result from Adam's sin either.

Therefore the reality of the mark of the beast is such that "death" as a curse is as forgiveable as the state "D" truly is. If death may not apply to the least in the kingdom l, then D does not and will not apply to any saved x either, since God saves and does so perfectly.

Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. (KJV)

The mark then is only in force if you give "death" your worship over God; that you have no faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In faith in Christ one overcomes death with Him throughout this and all eternal life, in the exact same and equal manner one overcomes the mark if one shares in that resurrection. If one is spiritually dead and will not repent then you can not overcome the mark, since God will not have forgiven you the result of all sin from Adam, that "you shall surely die."

So if one such state D is redeemable by God, there can be no such universal D. Jesus Christ is the cure for the mark.

Luk 12:4 And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
Luk 12:5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.

Continue To Next Page

Return To Section Start

Return To Previous Page