Monday, March 22, 2021

The Mark of the Beast is NOT Sunday Worship

It appears necessary to refine an issue regarding the nature of the mark of the beast.  Specifically, the Seventh Day Adventist Church (SDAC) claims that the "mark" of the beast is Sunday worship.  This is a result of their fixation with an old view that the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) is the whore of Babylon and because the RCC removed one of the ten commandments, regarding the command not to make an image of any idol, and split the final commandment, regarding coveting that which belongs to another, into two commandments in order to make up the ten.  This, they say, constitutes the changing of times (Sunday worship instead of traditional Saturday - Sabbath) and laws (altering the commandments) as mentioned would occur in the book of Daniel, chapter 7.

In Revelation 13 we read:

Rev 13:16-17  And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:  (17)  And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

The Strong's concordance entries for the word, "mark", and associated root or source words are as follows:

G5480 χάραγμα    charagma    khar'-ag-mah
From the same as G5482; a scratch or etching, that is, stamp (as a badge of servitude), or sculptured figure (statue): - graven, mark.

G5482 χάραξ charax khar'-ax
From charasso (to sharpen to a point; akin to G1125 through the idea of scratching); a stake, that is, (by implication) a palisade or rampart (millitary mound for circumvallation in a siege): - trench.

G1125 γράφω graphō graf'-o
A primary verb; to grave, especially to write; figuratively to describe: - describe, write (-ing, -ten).

It is very clear from the meaning of the word used that an indelible mark, as in one that is written or engraved or stamped, is being referred to.  This is why it is "received".  The act of Sunday worship does not fit such a description, whether literally or figuratively, since Sunday worship is not something one receives but is something one does, and it is not a mark that can be received in oneself, whether literally on the skin of the right hand or forehead, nor can it be a figurative description of choosing to worship on Sundays, for the act of Sunday worship is not a thing received but an action taken.  The claim that it is the "thought" of it that is a mark in the forehead or the act of working on the true Sabbath that is the mark in the right hand is stretching any idea of metaphor well beyond the ridiculous.  As evidence and a reason for eternal condemnation, which the mark will be, it must not be possible to change, it must be evident at all times and not only when it is convenient or on certain days of the week.  A person worshiping on Sunday who wishes not to do so may be under duress, oppressed by a government.  How would that stack up in court?  Well, it wouldn't, so it provides no ground for an accuser in the great court of God Almighty.  Everything done by the Lord is absolutely free of any, even the slightest, incertitude, and is absolutely legally perfect meeting every requirement of all the true law, for He will never condemn any person except that his own conscience has already condemned him clearly and unambiguously.  Thus has God warned us, that by our own words we are justified and by our own words we are condemned and that we will be judged by our own measures of others for such measures are expressed by our words, words of accusation and condemnation.  Do not judge, whether in word or thought or deed, and you will not be judged.  That is tough and we will all be found to be hypocrites, yet God affords every soul a right to his own defence.  Ours is Christ.

Finally, how can anybody refuse to trade with a person who chooses not to worship on a Sunday?  How can such a bizarre idea be enforced?  How can anybody prove that you worship God on a Saturday and since when was it a requirement to worship God specifically on the day of rest, the Sabbath?  Doesn't a true believer continually worship God from the heart, in spirit and in truth, all the time?  Alternatively, could that person not be an atheist?  What if he is a pagan and worships the earth on "earth day" only once a year but does not take part in any other worship?  Doesn't the global false religion include all deities in one giant hodge-podge pantheon, with pagan idols, such as Gaia, being the chief gods of that pantheon?  Isn't that what the ecumenical movement merging with environmentalism is all about?  Surely atheists must also be accommodated in such a scheme!

No, Sunday worship is not the "mark of the beast", and the SDAC, just like every other so-called "Christian" church, has gone astray.  Many years ago, the Lord led me through various denominations, including the SDAC.  Personally, I was born to Catholic parents, not strict Catholics but Catholics nonetheless.  I have spent a little time in a few other denominations, also, and wondered why it was that I found no home among any of them.  Certainly I found true believers as well as many who pay lip service but I found no home.  The words of the Lord came back to me one day years after I quit searching; "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head."  Likewise, I think, it is also true for those who really have placed their trust in the Lord and do not look to mankind and this world for their home.  After all, we are merely sojourners in this corrupt and dying world.  Our eternal home is yet to come.

In considering why the SDAC makes such a claim, I wander off-topic here but I do so in order that a more complete picture of things becomes apparent, since all these issues are related to these final days and seeing how things connect helps us to perceive where we are in terms of God's plan.  Of course, this is only what I currently believe so take it all with a pinch of salt.

The SDAC, much like every other denomination, whether protestant or otherwise, has made the same old mistake of concluding that it was the true vessel of God's word.  The Lord reveals a thing, simply a single aspect, to a person or group of people, and they, having found this revelation to be true (with the SDAC it was the revelation that Friday sunset through to Saturday sunset was still the true Sabbath), they conclude that they are somehow special and above others, somehow closer to God, and hearing from Him correctly where others are not.  Man (not God) then, in his pride, creates a "church" on this basis and it becomes infused with the ways and traditions of men instead of revelation from God through His Spirit.  Any little thing the "chief prophet" has to say becomes sacrosanct and unquestionable.  In the RCC, the pope is the chief example of this, wherein the RCC claim is that the pope is infallible.  It is so ridiculous and laughable that it would be a bad joke except that so many deceive themselves into accepting it as truth.  Again, it is the problem of the "traditions of men".  Each denomination has some basis, some revelation, given to it that it has used as its claim to a monopoly of "the truth".  Consequently, none of them are the true Christian Church, the true Body of Christ, and it is the reason that they all differ on so many points.  They cannot all be correct.  Bear in mind that every single one of them can be traced back to the RCC at some point in the past, whether directly or indirectly, which is the reason they are all converging again, since the (spiritual) conditions in the world at the return of the Lord will be very much like those at His departure, including the presence of the true Christian Church as an organised entity in the world.  The RCC was the outcome of a state-corrupted Christian Church, after the true church had already been corrupted to some extent with the introduction and tolerance of Roman pagan ideas and celebrations.  The state simply made it all "official" and the RCC was born.  The true church, a group of scattered believers, now went out into the world, the "wilderness", and every "Christian" denomination will have a handful of true believers in it, as wanderers awaiting the return of their spiritual nation, whether they see it in their lifetime or not.  Just as physical Israel was in a diaspora, its people scattered among the nations (the wilderness) and has come back into existence as an existential entity, likewise will occur for spiritual Israel, which is the true Body of Christ.  This is the mission of the final manifestation of the "Elijah to come", for in "restoring all things", which is to restore all truth to the understanding of scripture and God's plan, all actual believers will recognise the truth and come out of the false churches and unite once again as the true Christian Church, whereupon can begin the final tribulation of the saints, the final great persecution of the true followers of Yeshua the Christ, most especially by those in the false churches who reject the message of the two witnesses and prefer the worldly church in which they partake.

The seemingly "dead tree", the lost Body of Christ, will come back to life, in a real sense resurrected, and the apparently "living tree", the global religion of the end, the whore of Babylon (a whore has many lovers which equates to many gods) perhaps headed up by the RCC in concert with the UNEP, will collapse as the world is split by this great earthquake, the coming of the two witnesses, among which is the final "Elijah" to come.  A question now is whether the final manifestation of the (first) beast will be under China's CCP or under the UN/EU/USA.  Could there be a merging of all these into one totalitarian socialist superstate?  How does the beast from the abyss, the other leg of the beast out of the many waters and the brotherhood of Islamic nations, play into this?  Time will tell.  These issues will gradually become more clear as we near the end.

As always, assume much of this is speculation, but do not assume that being speculation means it is incorrect.  Speculation means, simply, unproven beyond doubt or having incomplete evidence.  That I have touched upon many things with evidence already does not prove them true but does provide an impetus to be alert to what is going on regarding all the aforementioned entities.  As the Lord said, "Watch!"