The Mark of the Beast

[sundin13]

padib said:

sundin13 said:

Again, you believe it to make clear that it is a person, because it fits best in modern contexts by your personal estimation. It is not made clear by the scripture, as the scripture intentionally makes very little clear. 

However, I will say this in regards to your interpretations. If science allows individuals to be brought back from the dead, why would this bestow any theological significance on any individual? That is to say, why would people be astounded and follow such a man, when his resurrection was the product of science? That would be like following the first man who had received a heart transplant as if he had done anything. It would make far more sense to deify the doctor or scientist in such a scenario. As such, I see little logic in your interpretation that this will be a byproduct of scientific advancements. 

To cheat death means to be immortal, it has big implications. What human has not sought to ascend to immortality or at least had a curiosity of it at some point in their existence? The only constant other than life right now is death. Why would he be able to perform this feat and not others? Perhaps he is extremely rich and powerful and privy to certain technologies that are only given to one person, perhaps he caused his people to create this technology and only allowed himself to use it, since he is expected to call himself God.

But also, why have you not read the references? They, along with the citations I made, clarify everything if you read them. It is a man.

To "cheat death" does not mean to be immortal. I'm not sure where you pulled that from. 

As for all of your suppositions, I find it to be far more likely, given the greater trajectory of the scientific and medical fields, that such technology would not be created under the singular and selfish efforts of one man and those he employs, but instead by the greater scientific community. While it may be used on one man at first (likely after clinical trials demonstrating its efficacy), again this affords no idea of divine providence to such a man. If someone came to me and said "I just had a cool surgery, follow me", I would tell him to kindly fuck off. 

As for your "references", they do little to prove your point. While they imply that there may or may not be a man (again, depending on how much you assume is literal), they do not clarify whether the head or beast referenced in Revelations is a literal man who suffers a literal wound and a literal resurrection.