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;

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.

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