By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - The Mark of the Beast

craighopkins said:
Worldwide vaccines and on children. this is the conditioning before they have us quantam entangled to artificial intelligence..Know as mark of the beast warned in the Bible
The bible says antichrist will be revealed after the restrainer is removed. I believe those who have their faith in Jesus will be raptured to the lord. And then the antichrist will showup. He eventually has everyone take the mark of the beast. People who refuse the mark will get their head chopped off.
2025 I believe they will have worldwide patches or vax that will connect u to artificial intelligence. Instead of being connected to God they will be connected to the beast through quantum entanglement.
Bible says Satan will dwell in the Holy place and declare himself to be God in the tribulation period. Are bodys are the temple of God. Soon Satan will connect hiself to the people who get the mark of the beast
Crypto currency will be used because those who take the mark will use crypto to buy and sell. Thats why it says in the bible those who dont get the Mark wont be able to buy or sell

Why by 2025?


Around the Network
padib said:
JWeinCom said:

The lulz is not because my ideas are not contestible. The lulz is because you are failing miserablyto contest them. Likely because you have not critically evaluated the ideas you are parroting, as demonstrated by the fact that you can merely copy paste something from a website. A website that is not at all responsive to what was said.

The website starts my addressing the historicity, but then quickly switches the ball.

"And this is where things get especially interesting. Around 12 manuscripts are essential for determining the wording of Caesar’s account."

Note the change here. Determining the wording of Caeser's accounts. They are not disputing that there is reliable evidence that these accounts testify to the existence of Julius Caeser or that they were written by contemporaries. They are arguing that we can not reliably determine the original wording due to the loss of manuscripts, ancient books aren't that good at surviving, and the lesser amount of manuscripts, which would be expected of historical documents vs. religious texts.

But, they then change things again. When they talk about the Caeser manuscripts they are referring to manuscripts. Then... when they talk about the New Testament... "The fragment p52 is dated around AD 125. It only has a few portions of John 18, but it starts a trail that has full manuscripts of the Gospels appearing by the fourth century." See, now we're comparing fragments for new testament vs full manuscripts for Caeser. They're putting a thumb on the scale. A fair comparison would be either fragment to fragment or full manuscript to full manuscript. And by their account, we don't have full manuscripts until about 400 years after his death.

See, they're not in any way attesting to the accuracy of the sources themselves (although they try to switch the ball back at the end), they're just saying that the New Testament wording changed less from the earliest fragments to its modern form than certain documents attesting to Caeser. Which, I'll just for the sake of ease accept as that contention as true. It's probably bullshit, but I don't know enought about sourcing historical documents to show that.

But, even taking everything they say as true, it is a rather laughable argument. Essentially it boils down to, "Hey, we've got a little itty piece of John: 18 from 100 years after Christ died. Clearly everything the Bible said must be true. And, anyone with critical thinking abilities can only respond with lulz. That is not enough evidence to establish anything. If you think that's less evidence than we have for Caeser (it's not) then you shouldn't believe that Caeser existed either. 

So, you have failed completely to dispute the fact that there is no contemporary source testifying to either the fact that Jesus lived, much less that he was resurrected. There are on the other hand tons of sources on Caeser, even if we should take exact wording with a grain of salt. The more important point that your copypasta missed is that nobody is attesting to anything as specific as the resurrection for Julius Caeser. Nobody is claiming to know anything that specific, because that would be a stupid claim to make.

As for why people died for believing in that, two clear possibilities. One, that it was all bullshit, because there is no evidence of people who actually would have seen Jesus post resurrection being killed for that belief. The other possibility, which would be the best explanation for anyone who died later on, is that they genuinely believed it, and were wrong. Tons of people believe idiotic things. See exhibit A, this topic. Sometimes, people even die because of that. Just because the 9/11 hijackers believed there were 72 virgins awaiting them doesn't mean Mohammed flew to the moon on a pegasus. 

So, yeah. Stand by my lulz.

Why are you so pompous though, do people you talk to enjoy that about you? It's trashy.

Did you even read the quora commentary? It's filled with answers.

Stand by your lulz I couldn't care less. Definitely doesn't make my opinion of you any brighter.

Read and educate yourself a bit:

To answer, this is a list of contemporary* sources that mention Jesus:

  1. The Gospel of Matthew
  2. The Gospel of Mark
  3. The Gospel of Luke
  4. The Gospel of John
  5. Tacitus’ Annals
  6. A letter by Mara bar Serapion
  7. Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus
  8. Passing of Peregrinus by Lucian of Samosata

*Within 100 years roughly. Peregrinus is slightly farther than that but it’s close enough so I’ll count it.

Now, you’ve probably noticed a couple main things:

1: I listed the gospels

The gospels are considered historical sources by historians. Be careful whenever anyone asks a question saying “aside from the Gospels…” That person is trying to selectively choose the data to suit their theories (Texas sharpshooter fallacy). This is a big no-no in intellectual fields (especially the sciences), although armchair historians still attempt it on a semi-regular basis.

Furthermore, each of these sources has an impressive historical certification. For instance, we have 5,000 gospel manuscripts dating to within 40 years of authorship. In contrast, we have 33 within 750 years for all of Tacitus’ writings combined.

Additionally, four biographies is not a small number. Tiberius has only that many, and he was the emperor of Rome. (And Cassius Dio, the author of one of these, was not even born until a century after Tiberius’ death).

It’s also worth noting that the gospels explicitly state which people were present at the main events so that the stories could be corroborated. This virtually guarantees that they are primary sources.

2: I listed all four gospels separately

This is not a mistake. While it’s obvious the Gospels are inter-related, they are also clearly four separate historical accounts, not just one divergent text. This diagram is helpful:

This is called the synoptic problem, but the TLDR is that it’s virtually impossible to reduce the 3 first gospels to anything fewer than 3 original sources.

John is off on his own because his gospel is nothing like the other 3.

People will tell you the Bible was “written” in 300s AD, but that is false. The Bible was not “written” at all. It is basically an anthology, a collection, of other written works. The actual accounts of Jesus were all written separately before 100AD, and only assembled in the 100s-300s. Further, we have manuscripts dating to pre-300, so we know they were not edited at the time of assembly.

3: Half the sources for Jesus are in the Bible

This makes it very difficult to argue that “historical Jesus” is any different from “bible Jesus,” because MOST of the information we have of Jesus was later incorporated into the Bible. Any way you slice it, the Bible should carry as much weight as any of the other sources.

4: None of the other sources are specifically aimed at Jesus.

Tacitus’ Annals cover the entire state of the Roman Empire at the time. Josephus’ Antiquities likewise mostly covers the Judeo-Roman war. Mara’s letter is just a letter, not a history, and Lucian mostly wrote satire about Roman life.

While the gospels each dedicate a small book to the life of Jesus, the other documents spend, at most, a few paragraphs describing him. This makes it hard to construct a “historical Jesus” aside from the gospel

So, what’s the takeaway?

The sources all agree on 3 main points:

  1. Jesus was a real person who was baptized by John the Baptist and crucified by Pontius Pilate
  2. Three days after Jesus’ execution, his tomb was empty
  3. Jesus’ disciples claimed they had seen him rise from the dead.

Obviously, not all historians are Christian (or atheist), but if you question any of these 3 you’ll probably be laughed out of any serious discussion, because all the documents agree on these 3.

Additionally, no ancient sources largely question the Bible account of Jesus.

This is not a statement in favor of Christianity; as I mentioned earlier, only 4 sources dedicated to the life of Jesus exist. The others all mention him offhand or briefly.

And yes, I’m aware of several small disagreements with other historical sources (such as the census). But those are largely immaterial.

DISCLAIMER: I did my best to answer this question purely as a historian with as little bias as possible. Please keep your comments in the same light.

Some Common Questions:

But what about the council of Nicea? Didn’t they edit the Bible afterwards?

This is a very common misconception, but no. In fact, the Council of Nicea did not even discuss biblical canon. It was not even on the agenda.

Why should it be?

Those who have been paying careful attention will have noticed that the manuscripts we have date to 130AD. This means that the documents were already written by that point… two hundred years before the council convened. Why should they re-discuss what had already been canon for two hundred years?

And even if they did, why should we listen to them? We have the original document, who cares what people two centuries later had to say about it.

But the Romans kept very good records… Why only four accounts for Jesus?

Well, mainly because four full accounts is considered a very good record. No, scratch that. Four full accounts is considered a spectacular historical record. Let me put this into comparison: Tiberius Caesar, the Emperor of Rome from 14–37 AD (Jesus’ time) has only 5 biographical accounts:

  1. Paterculus' Roman History (30 AD)
  2. Josephus' Antiquities (93 AD)
  3. Tacitus' Annals (117 AD)
  4. Suetonius' Twelve Caesars (121 AD)
  5. Cassius Dio' Roman History (229 AD)

In comparison, Jesus, an itinerant preacher from backwater Judea, has four accounts all dating before 110 AD. In essence, he has about as much written about him as the Roman Emperor.

But isn’t the Bible just a collection of folklore? Why should we treat it as any more real than the Greek myths?

Well, most of the Old Testament is, and those who are intellectually honest will admit that. The problem is that the New Testament, specifically the Gospels, cannot be considered folklore by any stretch of the imagination.

For one thing, the author of Luke explicitly states that he’s writing a history. Paul says that if Jesus didn’t actually die “all our faith is meaningless,” and several of the accounts actually name eyewitnesses to the events, and go to great trouble to point out that some of them are still alive as of the time of the writing. Now, obviously, they aren’t still alive 2000 years later for us to go and ask them, but the fact that the accounts mention specific eyewitnesses still living is a huge blow to the “folklore” argument.

Furthermore, we have to remember that Christianity was illegal in Rome until 313 AD (punishable by death for much of that period). One could argue that the Gospels are an elaborate hoax, but a casual campfire story which spread out of control simply does not hold water: people don’t casually spread stories which lead to them being executed.

But how do we know the story wasn’t changed afterwards?

Well, the whole reason to bring up the number of manuscripts is precisely so we know the record hasn’t been changed. Since we have so many manuscripts, we have a very good idea of what the story looked like in 100AD, 200AD, 300AD, and so forth. We just have to look at the manuscripts we found from 100, 200, 300 (respectively).

From here:

Why am I pompous? Because I feel like it. Couldn't give a fuck less if you think I'm trashy.

Actual photo of me. :)

Although, I don't see it as being pompous, I see it as calling out bad ideas and logic for what they are. I'm not going to respond to everything you want to copy and paste, because it takes about 2 seconds to copy and paste a website, and a lot more than that to actually explain why the logic is flawed. It is essentially a strategy of piling up more and more bullshit, because I cannot possibly address every bad argument on the internet. Especially when, again, this source does not actually support your argument as it is not claiming anything about the historicity of Jesus vs Caesar, or claiming that the resurrection is verified. So, lulz.

As for getting educated, I'm good on that. The sign of being educated is actually being able to synthesize information and turn it into something, i.e. your own argument. So, maybe try that... with someone else though. Because at this point I'm essentially just arguing with google search results, so...

padib said:

So you want to keep pretending like you know the prophecies to be able to judge them?

What do you know exactly? I don't believe you had any proper prior knowledge, or direct contact with the prophecies (such as reading them in the scriptures) prior to entering into debate with me.

Prove me wrong. Go.

You don't need to know the prophecies to judge them vehemently.
A "prophecy" by it's very definition means to "predict" something that may or may not occur in the future.

Any rational thinking, logical person would thus discard such garbage for a more evidence, logical based approach.

For example... You can make a different, random prediction/prophecy every day, eventually probability mathematics will win-out and you will eventually end up being correct.
Doesn't mean the prophecy is correct however or is coming from some "special source of truth" that is pertinent to the prophecy... Those need to be judged on a different set of merits.
It's all a game of chance. Not truth.

padib said:

Despite your lack of belief in something recorded historically in a way that is more trusted than Julius Cesar himself due to historical and archeological evidence, you concede that nobody has ever cheated death.

Speak to sundin

No religion has evidence to backup it's assertions. Period.

We know Julius Cesar lived due to...
- Caesars written works on the Gallic and Civil Wars in which he participated.
- Extensively documented by historians during his life.
- Monuments and coins bearing Caesars likeness and name being ubiquitous from the era.
- Without Caesar, the entire historical timeline of the Roman empire ends up being a rubbish mess.
- Caesars namesake carried on through his heirs.
- Acknowledged by competing/enemy empires of the era and also written in their historical works.
- Caesars Temple to signify his remains and personal belongings/achievements. (Cremated.)

padib said:

However you're not speaking out of knowledge since you don't know the prophecies, and I know this because in order for the end times to be possible, Israel must be a nation and has only been one for around 70 years, for nearly 2000 years the prophecy was not ready and impossible to be fulfilled.

 It's just one example, if you are genuinely interested I will offer more.

The "end times" will happen eventually. It is a part of life.
If we humans don't royally screw the planet, the sun will eventually turn into a Red Giant and roast everything.

Nothing lasts forever.

But for thousands of years, Theists have been arguing about an "end time" coming.
How many thousands of years worth of chances are you going to give them? Eventually a prophecy that is as vague and wildly applicable as that will eventually turn out to be correct due to how the universe functions... Completely separate to your non-proven God.

JWeinCom said:

To put it simply, religion evolves. The tactics that have caused people to believe in these things have been honed for millenia, if they hadn't been the religions would have died off. At no point was it ever based on rational epistemology or evidence, so those things aren't going to work for many people. 

Well.. Arguably, religion doesn't evolve. Peoples interpretations of religion evolves. Well some.
There are some denominations that stand-by a literal interpretation of the Bible, including all it's hate, death, violence, misogyny, homophobia and cruelty.

Once it was normal for women to serve men, for the LGBTQI community to be chastised by conservative Christians... But the interpretation of the Biblical text changed to accommodate those issues.

padib said:

Remember that the people marvelled and follow the beast after the event. It's a person who was known to be absolutely dead and people were astonished that he came back to life by some kind of cheat.

Yes revelation is written in images, but to someone who wants to understand the images, it's possible. Don't forget that these are future events that appeared in a vision to a person from 2000 years ago.

No. It's not possible.
Because once your prophecies are proven incorrect, they just get "reinterpreted" and the cycle begins again.

People have spent THOUSANDS of years constantly telling people the "end times are cometh". - Here we are.

padib said:

When in history apart from Christ has any human cheated death properly speaking? That they fully died, were decomposing and revived, to a point where people can't believe their eyes?

Also, don't forget that if you take the pieces together, some possibilities are impossible. How would we be looking at a war general that is a leopardbearlion?
"and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who is able to wage war with him?”"

He is referred to as him, someone against who war can be decalred, but is too powerful that nobody would dare. He is a leader of a region of the world.

The problem is that if you take pieces out of context and are not familiar with the whole picture, it's like trying to make sense of a movie after only having seen a single frame. It will never work.

There is no evidence Christ fully died, decomposed and was revived.
There is no evidence Christ was a divine individual or the Son of any kind of God or a God himself.

But I am going to chime in here... Because what the fuck do I know about death?

I have done road crash rescues where a car was turned completely into a chunk of solid steel... Where the passenger walked away without a bruise... And the driver was like a crushed tomato... With no identifiable remains.

I have scaled down the side of high cliffs and held onto a woman for 12 hours, keeping my hand on her wound to try and keep her alive while she bled out all over me.

I have fought the largest fires in the planets history... And see how it destroys everything in it's path, except for a small home with a family inside... Survived entirely by chance.

I could keep going, but I think you get the gist.

People cheat death all the time... It's not divine, sometimes it's chance, sometimes it's training, sometimes it's PPE, sometimes it's preparation.

craighopkins said:
Worldwide vaccines and on children. this is the conditioning before they have us quantam entangled to artificial intelligence..Know as mark of the beast warned in the Bible

You just did a word vomit without understanding what the words actually meant and their implications.

Quantum Entanglement (And I will dumb it down as much as possible...) is where two particles are "connected" in a way, so that one action performed on one particle, effects the other particle, irrespective of distance... That means, observing one particle will tell you the result of the other particle.

Think of it as more of a "network cable" between two points in a way.

For A.I it doesn't really mean much, nothing we haven't seen now over shorter distances via the Internet or Ethernet cable.

craighopkins said:
The bible says antichrist will be revealed after the restrainer is removed. I believe those who have their faith in Jesus will be raptured to the lord. And then the antichrist will showup. He eventually has everyone take the mark of the beast. People who refuse the mark will get their head chopped off.

The Bible is a book written by man interpreted, translated and altered from the original Abrahamic texts... Which is also the same texts that forms the Islamic Quran that Muslims follow and the Torah that the Jewish follow.
All the same stuff, just a different perspective.

I.E. The Bible has the word "Homosexual" in it, which as a word has only existed for a few hundred years, yet conveniently ended up in a book that is thousands of years old? Common. You can do better than this.

Now the fact that you assert that ONLY those who have "faith" (Which by it's definition is blind belief without evidence...) are the only ones who will be "saved" and the others... Well. They get less than an ideal ending... Is just your typical coercion of others by using the power of fear and threats. - Which is a powerful tool to bend people to your indoctrinated ideology. It's blatant bullshit.

If your "apparent" God is willing to subject people, people who may have saved lives by stopping a fire from burning a home down, cutting a person out of a vehicle, parent donating an organ to save their child and more... To eternal torment, damnation, torture and "get their head chopped off" because they won't worship them?
Then that is not a loving, fair or just God and thus your God doesn't deserve recognition or respect... Let alone followers.

I am happy to live an eternity of torment, my conscience will be clear.

craighopkins said:
2025 I believe they will have worldwide patches or vax that will connect u to artificial intelligence. Instead of being connected to God they will be connected to the beast through quantum entanglement.

What you believe is irrelevant.
People believe all sorts of rubbish, like the world being Flat.

What matters is the evidence.

We aren't at a technological level where Quantum Entanglement can be leveraged in such a way as you describe.

craighopkins said:
Bible says Satan will dwell in the Holy place and declare himself to be God in the tribulation period. Are bodys are the temple of God. Soon Satan will connect hiself to the people who get the mark of the beast

The Bible is the claim, not evidence.

I don't believe in Satan anymore than I believe in your God.

craighopkins said:
Crypto currency will be used because those who take the mark will use crypto to buy and sell. Thats why it says in the bible those who dont get the Mark wont be able to buy or sell

The Bible also says stupid shit like...

We should cut off a woman's hand for defending her husband. - Deuteronomy 25:11-12.
If your Brother dies, you need to have sex with his wife and get her pregnant. - Mark 12:19
God commit genocide and murders everything to make the world less violent. - Genesis 6:11-13.

Let's not forget things like incest, slavery, killing of children and more that the Bible promotes.

It's not a "good" book or a "good" God.

Not to mention the Bibles entire timeline of how the Earth was created and life came to be, completely and UTTERLY contradicts the evidence we have now.
I.E. The Big Bang, Evolution and so forth.

The Bible also does not, will not and can not ever explicitly mention "cryptocurrency" otherwise it's just another rubbish alteration to fit an agenda... You are just trying to shoehorn rubbish to make your belief system more relevant to the current day.

Last edited by Pemalite - on 24 January 2022

--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

padib said:
mZuzek said:

Pretty sure this never happened. As in, including Christ.

Despite your lack of belief in something recorded historically in a way that is more trusted than Julius Cesar himself due to historical and archeological evidence, you concede that nobody has ever cheated death.

Speak to sundin

I wasn’t even going to respond to any of your nonsensical ramblings as I quite enjoyed reading them, but when you claim entirely incorrectly that there is more evidence for Jesus than Caesar I have to intrude. Absolute bollocks. There is a mountain of evidence for Caesar and mere fragments for the historical character of Jesus. Biblical scholars aren’t even sure if the character is based on a real individual or an amalgamation of eccentric frauds operating at that time. And oh yes, I have researched and researched this topic over a span of twenty years (historian). Also, just as an aside, Jesus’s resurrection isn’t a fact nor could it be a fact; there are to this day zero examples of any previously living thing being brought back to life from the early or late (or any) stages of decomposition. Everything you claim and assert is based on a wildly popular work of fiction that has just been taken way, way too seriously. It strikes me as both funny and scary that around 4.5 billion people on this planet live their entire lives based around ancient fairy tales and to make matters worse, wish to dictate to others how they should live their lives based on said fairy tales.

Last edited by Majora - on 24 January 2022

Around the Network
TallSilhouette said:

“We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.” - Richard Dawkins

Somebody should come up with a nicer God to sell people. I'd be a lot less opposed to abrahamic religion if they didn't have such a narcissistic, vindictive prick to worship.

Last edited by VAMatt - on 24 January 2022

Wtf is this thread 😂


padib said:
sundin13 said:

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 references in Revelations is a literal man who suffers a literal wound and a literal resurrection.

If he can cheat death, then he can cheat death again. Esp. if he holds the power to perform this miracle on himself, he would have access to that power and could make use of it again. Can you also reflect for yourself or do I have to spoonfeed everything? It gets me impatient, try to think for yourself.

As for the scriptures, you need to correlate them. I'm a bit tired to do it for you given you can't make the link between cheating death and immortality. If your train of thought won't go beyond 1 point, I won't do the work for you it gets my energies low.

As for what the political climate will be when this man comes to power, I wouldn't be surprised if people followed him like sheep. You only need to look at how people gobble everything the goverment is throwing to us today to predict given the trends that people will soon be nearly completely brainwashed.

Here in Quebec, people believe that non-vaccinated people are putting the population in danger and people are desiring that the government constrain non-vaccinated people by stripping away their priviledges.

In such political climates, anyone in power can do anything.

There is no necessity for an individual who cheated death to be able to do so multiple times. You asked earlier if anyone throughout history (other than Jesus) has been resurrected after being proper dead and there is one example: Lazarus. Lazarus was resurrected by Jesus after being dead for several days, yet he was not immortal. Again, you are introducing a number of ifs and suppositions as if they are certainties or requirements. While it is possible that an individual who "cheats death" may be immortal, it is in no way a requirement or certainty dictated by the provided scripture. 

Also, unvaccinated people are literally putting the population in danger. There is no mystical belief there. It is objective reality. 

To summarize, my issue is not with your explanation for how scripture could be explained in modern contexts. I very much agree that it is possible to translate scripture onto modern contexts. My issue is with your assertion that scripture could only be applied to modern contexts. As I previously stated, the metaphorical nature of Revelation allows it to be grafted onto many different contexts by making different assumptions regarding how much is literal and how much is figurative. You seem to be buy your confidence by making assumptions that aren't necessitated by the scripture which I have further problems with.

The theological view of Preterism is largely based on this idea, assuming that many of the things foretold by the bible have already happened over the last several thousand years and lining them up to certain points in history, so it isn't even consistent within the church how these things are to be interpreted.