what does it mean, "to take the Mark" ?

Hello Bora, 

When we look at the verse above, Rev 14, it explicitly says that the ones with the with the father's name on their foreheads is the 144,000 Jews.  This is not us, nor is it those Gentiles who become Christians in the Tribulation.   

We shouldn't take one verse that is explicitly stated to be for a specific group of Jewish witnesses and apply it to us, - in the same way that many Christians take promises that God made specifically to Israel and misapply it to us today -I'm not saying you do this.    
One example of this is the prosperity Gospel heresy. "Health and wealth Gospel"  in which they commonly take one verse out of Isaiah that God "forgives all our sins and heals all our diseases", and misapply this to mean God promised to heal every illness/ disease, - we just have to name it and claim it.    **They also disregard all the passages where Christ turned people away, and where he didn't heal everyone, and where Paul himself suffered some thorn, and God never took it away.      

I don't want to sidetrack the thread, or argue about what the Mark is or isnt, since Barb put that in the opening thread.  I don't think we can simply make an assumption - false parallel that those who worship the beast have some Mark on their forehead, - and assume it's not visable, - and therefore by extension - we as Christians also have a mark.  
It's worth noting that one of the things that makes so many people afraid/ skeptical of this vaccine is that it uses near-ultraviolet light, - Luciferase particle - which is invisible to the naked eye, but visable to scanners and smart phones.     

The text says very intentionally, and clearly that it would be in the right hand or forehead.  Not the forearm, or shoulder, or left hand.  This kind of precise specificity is like what we see in other passages,  Passover blood was applied with a branch of hyssop - also used to give the vinegar to Jesus at the Cross - the fulfillment of Passover.  Hmmmm.  
I totally agree boraddict,  that it may be invisible to the naked eye,  [but not necessarily] - using this near-ultra-violet light Luciferase particle /Microdot tattoo, but the important thing is that it is measurable and it's not a thought or heart condition. 
It clearly has to be yes/no, black/white, identifiable that you have it or you don't.  Objective.  Testable.  A shop owner can't verify your thoughts or mind - because without it, people can't buy or sell, and everyone - will be forced to take it.  Those who don't will die - starve or be martyered.   

mike ,
You beat me to it. I'd also suggest, the idea that a physical mark on the right hand or forehead is obvious. What is not, is a spiritual mark. 

I'm not making an assumption. I believe that John saw these images in the spirit (as God's word says) and the spirit testifies they have real applications, but they are spiritual matters. From the onset of the book, it has to do with the spirit of men and Israel (both branches). 

I may have missed it, but I don't think anyone has ever argued against that on these forums.

That is an opinion. Was Shadrach, Mechak and Abed-Nego's failure to bow a condition of the heart? I'd say yes because they'd rather die then worship a false image. The act of them disobeying was measurable; but it was a condition of the heart based upon their faithfulness. 
Daniel knew the law of the Medes and the Persians but he prayed to God regardless knowing full well what would happen. His act was measurable, but his heart was based upon faithfulness. The right hand, in scripture, has been attested to mean at times what one does or an act. The forehead was what one believes, follows and shown as being the frontal space, the brain case, that protects mans thoughts. Thereby, we have man's thoughts and man's actions. 

It seems to me that "the 144,000 are Jews" is taught in several Christian denominations; however, Rev. 7:5-8 clearly shows that Judah makes up only 1/12th of that population. Can anyone prove Judah makes up more than 1/12th of that population as stated in Rev. 7:5-8?

Please consider that that there are several books as stated in Rev. 20:12 and everyone that has ever been upon this earth are recorded in one of those books. Perhaps those with the mark of the beast are in the book of those who follow the beast . Also, those who follow Christ are in the book of life and this would be those with the mark of the Father's name in their foreheads (Rev. 12:1).

Is the mark visible? Are beautiful women going to allow a physical mark to be placed in their foreheads? Are men going to allow a physical mark to be placed in the foreheads of their beautiful women? Like all the beautiful women having a Charles Manson like mark in their foreheads. I don't think so.

The mark is a statement that the individual belongs to the beast just like the statement that those in the book of life belong to Christ. We all already have marks stating to what God we belong (in our foreheads) and in our hands via our oaths to God. Thus, the mark identifies who belongs to whom (forehead) that is proved by the second witness that is the oath of that individual (the hand). IMO

Perhaps the image of the beast is the outwardly physical attesting like an ID card or something like that.

boraddict ,disciple4life ,mike ,venge ,

I am okay with these sidetracks, as it surrounds the topic. In case anyone was worried about going off topic. As long as there is a tie-in to the overall thing:

I am suggesting (now), [not at the start of the thread because I was curious to what it means, and wanted to study it live and in type (person),]

that the Mark in the Vision is reserved for a type of person, and that it may already be going on now. I juggle the meaning in my hands as to what it would look like literal physical. My LITERAL SPIRITUAL assessment is that it is designated to a type of people deceived by the earthdwellers who made an image to a "christ-like" version of "salvation" (safety), justification (knowledge of right and wrong), sanctification (entitled to do things like live and exist aka "buy and sell")

I think that John sees who is part of this Earth beast/mark regulations, and this is something that the 'saint' is not part of, though we may be worried because we dont understand that A in the vision does not equal A in our physical realm..

I am also not saying that A equal a roof shingle either...  Psalms/Isaiah/and many of the prophets, have keys to what A in the vision means on earth.  You cant just make up a thing on earth and say it is A, B or C in the vision.  It must be validated with Scripture (s).  One must have found examples in other writings and not claim it so out of thin air.  Does that make sense? I have a plethora of reasons why the 144K are not literal physical virgin men of modern day Israel (Israeli passport holders), or a Joy Behar or Dan Shapiro..or even Jonathan Cahn..  I rest to what Mike says, that God knows the dna, but is it really about geneology of the physical?

ever notice the word "religion" is found within the word "regulation'?  

big edit/addition here meant for disciple4life,   Let's just say you are correct in your assessment of the 144K... that does not change my premise for ch 13..  The 144 K be it literal male jews, or something of the spiritual definition, still tells me that are NOT part of the group that receive the Mark.  So the debate on 144K does not really need to be debated or be in consensus to see my point.  It still is a designated group no matter who they are on physical earth.

I also agree that the Mark will be both spiritual and physical.  Like venge and i think others mentioned -- worshipping the AC, and the Beast undoubtedly relates to the heart and mind, but my point was that it's measurable/ observable/ testable.  You can't enforce people not having the Mark,  keep people from buying or selling, based on an inner thought or heart attitude.  
You can't enforce what you can't test/ prove/ measure.  That's why I and many end-times teachers see the Covid vaccine as a crucial step of incrementalism - setting the stage for the mark of the beast.  People all over the world are already used to having their forehead scanned, just to enter a skating rink, or go to the dentist, etc.  

With the Micro-dot tattoo thing, it can easily be scanned [this is the part i was trying to explain that it's not subjective] with a scanner, and even an APP on a smart phone, that 'sees' or reads the near-infrared ink [Luciferase particle].  
That's also what i was trying to explain to Bora - that it may be "Invisable" to the naked eye - not like having some occultic tattoo on your forehead 666, but it's some kind of thing - Tattoo, RFID chip, or biometric vaccination that is scannable.   

If it's only spiritual - [In other words, if it's only a condition of the heart] then no one can really say who has it and who doesn't.  Has to be some aspect that is visable or observable to be enforced.     
    - The other thing is that if it were only in one's mind, then anyone could say "Yes, i have the Mark".    This is exactly what we are already seeing now with the COVID passport.  

A person can't just say- Yeah, I got the vaccine, and expect that the airlines people will say,  OK - you're good to go.  You have the Vaccine Passport, just like a real passport - which is scannable to prove that You are You and that the person really did get the vaccine. 

Guys, multiple leaders on the left are literally coming out and suggesting that we have some kind of tattoo or visible way to prove that people have been vaccinated.  Quantas has already said that it is requiring prove of vaccination for COVID, and that the entire airlines industry will follow.   newsthud.com/creepy-peak-orwell-mark-of-the-beast-andrew-yangs-idea-to-brand-us-with-vaccine-barcode-does-not-go-well/      Even non-Christians can see how this is setting the stage for the Mark of the Beast. 

It's so hard sometimes to communicate what we mean in words/ typing, when you miss the tone, body language and eye contact.  Ugggghhh.   
About the 144,000 - my point there was that scripture doesn't say we - all Christians will have God's name on our foreheads.  It specifically mentions the 144,000 - that being the 12,000 from each tribe of Israel - So they are Jews.   

And as barbiosheepgirl said - these are not the God-haters like Joy Behar, or Stephen Shpielburg or Debbie Wasserman Shultz, but they are from the 12 tribes of Israel - Not Russian or Polish or Irish Christians.  
While we are told to bind God's word on our hearts, - there's nothing that indicates that all Gentile Christians have a visible mark.,

Hope that helps- guys.  
I love my dear fellow watchmen.   

Even though I'm on the record like 3000 times saying I'm convinced that the Harpazo happens on a Fall Feast - I'd also be fine if God just decided to come on the 21st of December.    LOL.   

mike, that was so funny   .


disciple4life, Israel and Jew are two different things. Actually, three different things because the northern ten tribes were called Israel. But, Jew refers to the tribe of Judah and Israel refers to all twelve tribes (Rev. 7:5-8). Am I the only one that knows this?    Perhaps the modern nation of Israel should have been called the nation of Judah.

I am with you that the mark might something in or under the skin. I heard today that some US regulation requires that microchips can not be smaller than six nanometers in size. I think a nanometer is about one cell wide as in human cells that can be observed under the microscope. So six would be something like six human cells wide and that also takes a microscope to view. I guess a biochip that is six nanometers wide could be placed-on and absorbed-into the skin without being visibly noticeable.

barbiosheepgirl ,

I also want to point out Irenaeus on the mark.

Its also interesting in keeping in like with the mark and that time frame, that early church father's like Irenaeus believed we would go through this time period and not be removed from it.



Irenaeus points out a few things.  He believes that the churches last great contest (before we receive an incorruptible crown) was the great tribulation of Matthew 24:21, not the Jews. That is important because it leads back to his ideas on how the early church views the mark and it it would effect believers. He said in book 5, Ch.29 above, that the world was rebellious before Noah's time and the church would see that time again. It appears to Irenaeus that the number of the mark is not physical at all. It "sums up all the wickedness which took place previous to the flood". 

EDIT:

What was that wickedness that we would see again?

Now, some take this as angelic beings; but we are told they neither marry nor are given in marriage. Preferably, I take this as others have taught. Those who are the sons of God are those that do his will. Look at Genesis 4

The seed of Seth were sons of God in that sense. They eventually gave themselves over to a lustful eye (Gen 6:2) and mingled themselves with women who were not "daughters of God". Most likely, the line of Cain. When the Israelites did this, the strange women brought in their idols and things that caused Israel to sin and apostate. We see more reasons, below, of how the world was before the flood so that we may look today at what the mark may resemble.