MOTB by itself does not always = LOF ??

[PeterAndroz]

Rev 20:4...and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads
Rev 14:9 ...If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
.....
An interesting point has been raised .
If a Christian takes the MOTB yet does not worship the beast/image, will said Christian go to the LOF since the verses appear to imply that BOTH take mark and worship are required

 

[David Lamb]

Rev 20:4...and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads
Rev 14:9 ...If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
.....
An interesting point has been raised .
If a Christian takes the MOTB yet does not worship the beast/image, will said Christian go to the LOF since the verses appear to imply that BOTH take mark and worship are required

Are there really genuine Christians who receive the mark of the beast? That mark of the beast is mentioned just twice in the Bible (though there are a few other verses that refer to it as "the mark" or "his mark", but none of them give the slightest hint that Christians can have it). The first time is here:

(Rev 16:1-2 NKJV) Then I heard a loud voice from the temple saying to the seven angels, "Go and pour out the bowls of the wrath of God on the earth." So the first went and poured out his bowl upon the earth, and a foul and loathsome sore came upon the men who had the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image.

So it seems that people with the mark of the beast are recipients of the wrath of God. That is not a description of a Christian. The wrath that our sins deserve has been taken on our behalf by Jesus Christ. I like this verse from a hymn about the saving work of Jesus:

"Complete atonement thou hast made
And to the utmost farthing paid,
Whate'er thy people owed;
How then can wrath on me take place
If sheltered in thy righteousness,
And sprinkled with thy blood? " (Augustus Toplady)

The other place where the mark of the beast is mentioned is:

(Rev 19:19-20 NKJV) And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.

These verses tell us that those who receive the mark of the beast, and those who worship his image are deceived by the beast. Again, how can a genuine believer in the Lord Jesus Christ be deceived by the beast? Paul tells the Christians in Rome:

(Rom 8:35-39 NKJV) Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written: "FOR YOUR SAKE WE ARE KILLED ALL DAY LONG; WE ARE ACCOUNTED AS SHEEP FOR THE SLAUGHTER." Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

That seems to take away any possibility of a Christ having the mark of the beast or being cast into the lake of fire.

 

[Lambano]

I'm going to violate the rule against making duplicate appends:

Rev 14:9 ...If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
.....
An interesting point has been raised .
If a Christian takes the MOTB yet does not worship the beast/image, will said Christian go to the LOF since the verses appear to imply that BOTH take mark and worship are required

No. From a grammatical point of view, the word translated "any man" is the indefinite pronoun τις. Who or what is the author referring to? He follows with a list of groups defining who the specified referents of that indefinite pronoun are:

1. The group of those who worship the Beast, AND
2. The group of those who worship the image of the Beast, AND
3. The group of those who receive the Mark on their forehead or hand.

All those groups are headed for the Lake of Fire. That effectively makes that AND an OR. You wouldn't argue that it was okay to worship the Beast as long as you don't worship his statue, would you? Same logic.

Main takeaway: Don't worship the Beast, Peter. Don't worship the image of the Beast, Peter. Don't take his mark, Peter. And DON'T counsel others that it's okay to take the Mark of the Beast. Okay?

 

[Davidpt]

Rev 20:4...and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads
Rev 14:9 ...If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
.....
An interesting point has been raised .
If a Christian takes the MOTB yet does not worship the beast/image, will said Christian go to the LOF since the verses appear to imply that BOTH take mark and worship are required

I disagree it's an interesting point the fact it is not even a valid point to begin with.

The OP's question assumes something Revelation itself never assumes---that someone can receive the MOTB while not worshiping the beast.

But John's narrative points in the opposite direction.

First, look at the sequence in Revelation 13. The first beast appears (13:1-10), and the world is already marveling after and worshiping him (13:3-4). Only afterward does the second beast appear (13:11). The second beast then has an image made of the first beast and compels worship of that image (13:14-15). Only then does he cause people to receive the mark (13:16-17).

In other words, there is no mark available to receive until the beast's worship system is already established. The mark is not introduced independently of worship but as part of that very system.

Revelation also provides a parallel with God's own people. Revelation 7:3 says---Do not harm the earth... till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads."

Notice they are already called 'the servants of our God' before they are sealed. No one would argue that God first seals people who are not His servants and only afterward they may decide whether to serve Him. The seal identifies those who already belong to Him. No one would argue that His servants are not already worshiping Him before they are sealed in their foreheads first. Nor would anyone argue that they are sealed first. then after that they may or may not begin worshiping Him

After all, that is what the OP is arguing in regard to the beast. That one receives the MOTB first. Then later on they can choose whether to worship it or not. And if they choose not to worship it after having received it's mark, they can have the MOTB and not even be cast into the LOF. Because to be cast into the LOF requires that both be true, that they worship the beast and also have it's mark. I fully agree with the latter here but not in the manner the OP is arguing, though.

There is no such thing as having the MOTB without also worshiping it. In the same way there is no such thing as being servants of God and having His seal in their forehead without them worshiping God first.

The beast's mark functions the same way. It identifies those who belong to the beast. It is the counterfeit counterpart to God's seal.

Therefore, asking, "What if someone takes the mark but doesn't worship the beast?" is like asking, "What if someone receives God's seal but isn't one of God's servants?" Revelation never presents either as a real possibility.

This is why Revelation 14:9-11 and 20:4 should not be read as though they describe two unrelated groups---those who worship the beast and those who receive the mark. Rather, they describe the same group from complementary perspectives. Those who worship the beast receive his mark, and those who refuse his mark refuse to worship him.

 

[Scott Downey]

My thoughts are the mark is not inadvertently taken, like by surprise.
Those who take such a thing, do it with their full will and knowledge

Just like today unbelievers fulfill the lusts of their flesh unbridled, rejecting Christ and follow the prince of the power of the air, Satan, nothing has really changed has it? Because all the unsaved are judged unworthy of the age of the resurrection

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 20 - 21st Century King James Version

And it came to pass that on one of those days, as He taught the people in the temple and preached the Gospel, the chief priests and the scribes came upon Him with the elders and spoke unto Him, saying, "Tell us by what authority doest thou these things? Or who is he that gave thee this...

www.biblegateway.com

26 And they could not take hold of His words before the people. And they marveled at His answer and held their peace.

27 Then came to Him certain of the Sadducees, who deny that there is any resurrection, and they asked Him,

28 saying, “Master, Moses wrote unto us that if any man’s brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife and raise up seed unto his brother.

29 There were therefore seven brethren, and the first took a wife and died without children.

30 And the second took her as wife, and he died childless.

31 And the third took her, and in like manner the seven also; and they left no children, and died.

32 Last of all the woman died also.

33 Therefore, in the resurrection whose wife is she, for seven had her as wife?”

34 And Jesus answering said unto them, “The children of this world marry and are given in marriage.

35 But they that shall be accounted worthy to obtain that World and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage,

36 neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush when he called the Lord ‘the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.’

38 For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for all live unto Him.”

39 Then certain of the scribes answering said, “Master, thou hast said well.”

40 And after that they dared not ask Him any question at all.

41 And He said unto them, “How say they that Christ is David’s son?

42 For David himself saith in the book of Psalms: ‘The Lord said unto my Lord, “Sit Thou on My right hand,

43 until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”’

44 If David therefore calleth Him ‘Lord,’ how is He then his son?”

 

[Marty fox]

Rev 20:4...and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads
Rev 14:9 ...If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
.....
An interesting point has been raised .
If a Christian takes the MOTB yet does not worship the beast/image, will said Christian go to the LOF since the verses appear to imply that BOTH take mark and worship are required

The mark on the forhead is symbolic for devotion to the beast, the mark on the right hand is symbolic for doing the beast will

 

[Davidpt]

The mark on the forhead is symbolic for devotion to the beast, the mark on the right hand is symbolic for doing the beast will

How can the mark be symbolic in this case, that unless someone has the mark, they are unable to buy and sell? How would it be determined via a symbolic scenario regarding the mark, that this person is allowed to buy and sell but this person isn't?

Let's not forget, with AI now a reality and it's technology rapidly advancing, what may have been seen as fiction prior to AI may no longer be fiction whatsoever.

TBH with you, prior to AI I likely agreed with your view to some degree. But after AI, I don't know anymore. Anything is possible now, even what seemed impossible prior to AI.

 

[Davidpt]

My thoughts are the mark is not inadvertently taken, like by surprise.
Those who take such a thing, do it with their full will and knowledge

Just like today unbelievers fulfill the lusts of their flesh unbridled, rejecting Christ and follow the prince of the power of the air, Satan, nothing has really changed has it? Because all the unsaved are judged unworthy of the age of the resurrection

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 20 - 21st Century King James Version

And it came to pass that on one of those days, as He taught the people in the temple and preached the Gospel, the chief priests and the scribes came upon Him with the elders and spoke unto Him, saying, "Tell us by what authority doest thou these things? Or who is he that gave thee this...

www.biblegateway.com

26 And they could not take hold of His words before the people. And they marveled at His answer and held their peace.

27 Then came to Him certain of the Sadducees, who deny that there is any resurrection, and they asked Him,

28 saying, “Master, Moses wrote unto us that if any man’s brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife and raise up seed unto his brother.

29 There were therefore seven brethren, and the first took a wife and died without children.

30 And the second took her as wife, and he died childless.

31 And the third took her, and in like manner the seven also; and they left no children, and died.

32 Last of all the woman died also.

33 Therefore, in the resurrection whose wife is she, for seven had her as wife?”

34 And Jesus answering said unto them, “The children of this world marry and are given in marriage.

35 But they that shall be accounted worthy to obtain that World and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage,

36 neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush when he called the Lord ‘the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.’

38 For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for all live unto Him.”

39 Then certain of the scribes answering said, “Master, thou hast said well.”

40 And after that they dared not ask Him any question at all.

41 And He said unto them, “How say they that Christ is David’s son?

42 For David himself saith in the book of Psalms: ‘The Lord said unto my Lord, “Sit Thou on My right hand,

43 until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”’

44 If David therefore calleth Him ‘Lord,’ how is He then his son?”

The MOTB is connected with buying and selling. Should we take the buying and selling in the literal sense or some other sense? If the latter, what other sense might explain it? Especially now that technology such as AI is a reality.

 

[Marty fox]

How can the mark be symbolic in this case, that unless someone has the mark, they are unable to buy and sell? How would it be determined via a symbolic scenario regarding the mark, that this person is allowed to buy and sell but this person isn't?

Let's not forget, with AI now a reality and it's technology rapidly advancing, what may have been seen as fiction prior to AI may no longer be fiction whatsoever.

TBH with you, prior to AI I likely agreed with your view to some degree. But after AI, I don't know anymore. Anything is possible now, even what seemed impossible prior to AI.

Dave we have gone over this many times before technology has no bearing on this a literal mark contradicts John 3:16 and many other verses that promise salvation to anyone who truly repents.

God's character doesn't change, if God accepted Paul's repentance for persecuting and killing some members of the church wouldn't God allow someone to repent from who took the mark due to ignorance?

Whoever takes the mark either if its literal of symbolic will know exactly what they are doing

 

[Davidpt]

Dave we have gone over this many times before technology has no bearing on this a literal mark contradicts John 3:16 and many other verses that promise salvation to anyone who truly repents.

God's character doesn't change, if God accepted Paul's repentance for persecuting and killing some members of the church wouldn't God allow someone to repent from who took the mark due to ignorance?

Whoever takes the mark either if its literal of symbolic will know exactly what they are doing

Keep in mind John saw all these events from start to finish. Where then is there anything in what he saw that even hints that those that receive the MOTB can still repent, thus reverse having taken it?

You are not factoring in that taking the MOTB is not done out of ignorance. The reason many will take the MOTB is in order to not be persecuted by it, and in some cases, to not be killed by it. It's persecuting, and in some cases, killing, only those that refuse to worship it. Everyone else are experiencing a time of peace and safety in comparison. And another reason they will take the MOTB is in order to continue freely buying and selling. Whatever that might look like. Maybe it's meaning in the literal sense. Maybe it isn't. But with AI being relevant these days, I wouldn't discount the former, that it is meaning in the literal sense.

 

[Marty fox]

Keep in mind John saw all these events from start to finish. Where then is there anything in what he saw that even hints that those that receive the MOTB can still repent, thus reverse having taken it?

You are not factoring in that taking the MOTB is not done out of ignorance. The reason many will take the MOTB is in order to not be persecuted by it, and in some cases, to not be killed by it. It's persecuting, and in some cases, killing, only those that refuse to worship it. Everyone else are experiencing a time of peace and safety in comparison. And another reason they will take the MOTB is in order to continue freely buying and selling. Whatever that might look like. Maybe it's meaning in the literal sense. Maybe it isn't. But with AI being relevant these days, I wouldn't discount the former, that it is meaning in the literal sense.

My point is that no one can repent, thus a literal mark would contradict John 3:16 so it can't be literal.

I know its not taken out of ignorance the reason most people took it was because they believed in and were apart of it.

 

[IndianaRob]

My point is that no one can repent, thus a literal mark would contradict John 3:16 so it can't be literal.

I know its not taken out of ignorance the reason most people took it was because they believed in and were apart of it.

The Bible says the beast causes all to take his mark doesn’t it?

 

[Marty fox]

The Bible says the beast causes all to take his mark doesn’t it?

The beast is a demonic being that deceives people into taking the mark,

 

[IndianaRob]

The beast is a demonic being that deceives people into taking the mark,

The key piece of evidence in this account is that everybody gets the mark - no exceptions, whether by deception or by choice. How a believer recovers from that is a separate issue.

 

[PeterAndroz]

The mark on the forhead is symbolic for devotion to the beast, the mark on the right hand is symbolic for doing the beast will

......receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
Yet the verse states OR not AND
Based on that verse, if a Christian receives the mark in his hand OR in his forehead yet does NOT worship the beast/image then he has not met all 3 conditions required to be sent to the LOF

 

[Davidpt]

The key piece of evidence in this account is that everybody gets the mark - no exceptions, whether by deception or by choice. How a believer recovers from that is a separate issue.

If you are implying what I think you are implying, I then 100% disagree. So let's look at the text itself.

Revelation 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 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.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.


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

Let's don't be like, for example, a Universalist that believes everyone is saved regardless, where any time 'all' is used in a passage connected with the subject salvation, that it means to them every single person, including the unsaved. Except, in general, the 'all' is determined via the context. Therefore, the 'all' meant in verse 16 above is not meaning every single person on the planet. It is only meaning those that don't refuse to worship the beast.


Not to mention, Revelation 20:4 already makes this plainly crystal clear---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands

The text does not say 'had'. It says 'had not'. Therefore, the 'all' meant in Revelation 13:16 is not literally meaning every single person on the planet at the time. It certainly isn't meaning anyone in Revelation 20:4, the fact that verse says 'had not' worshiped, rather than 'had worshiped'.

It certainly can't be including anyone that refuses to worship the image of the beast. But there are consequences for refusing to worship it's image. Such as, that person is to be killed. That person is unable to buy and sell unless that person has the MOTB. The latter alone proves that not everyone takes the MOTB. Because if everyone did, that would mean everyone on the planet are able to buy and sell. The point would be moot if everyone has the MOTB.

 

[Davidpt]

How a believer recovers from that is a separate issue.

The question that seems to resolve this is a simple one--- when John sees the entire sequence of events from beginning to end, does he give any indication that someone who receives the mark of the beast can later repent and reverse that decision?

Because if the claim is that “everybody gets the mark---no exceptions, whether by deception or by choice, and that a believer can later recover from that, then that assumes the mark is something a true believer can receive and later undo.

But is that what John actually shows us?

When John describes those who receive the mark, he consistently connects it with worship and allegiance to the beast.

Revelation 14:9-11 says---If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,thr same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God

Notice that John does not describe a group of believers who received the mark, later repented, and were restored. The warning is presented as a final act of allegiance that brings judgment.

Revelation 16:2 likewise speaks of judgment coming upon---the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.

Again, those with the mark are identified with those who worship the beast.

Then in Revelation 19:20, those connected with the beast’s worship are judged---...them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire

Now compare that with Revelation 20:4---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands

John specifically identifies the faithful as those who did not receive the mark.

So when we look at John's entire account, where is the example of someone receiving the mark, later repenting, and reversing it? I do not see one.

Someone may argue that God's forgiveness is greater than any sin, and that is a broader theological discussion. But from the text of Revelation itself, the mark is not presented as a minor mistake that a believer makes and later corrects. It is presented as an act of worship and allegiance to the beast.

That is why the statement 'how a believer recovers from that' seems to assume something that Revelation never actually shows---that a true believer receives the mark then recovers from it later on.

The text repeatedly presents the saints as those who overcome by refusing the beast, refusing his image, and refusing his mark.

 

[PeterAndroz]

The question that seems to resolve this is a simple one--- when John sees the entire sequence of events from beginning to end, does he give any indication that someone who receives the mark of the beast can later repent and reverse that decision?

Because if the claim is that “everybody gets the mark---no exceptions, whether by deception or by choice, and that a believer can later recover from that, then that assumes the mark is something a true believer can receive and later undo.

But is that what John actually shows us?

When John describes those who receive the mark, he consistently connects it with worship and allegiance to the beast.

Revelation 14:9-11 says---If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,thr same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God

Notice that John does not describe a group of believers who received the mark, later repented, and were restored. The warning is presented as a final act of allegiance that brings judgment.

Revelation 16:2 likewise speaks of judgment coming upon---the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.

Again, those with the mark are identified with those who worship the beast.

Then in Revelation 19:20, those connected with the beast’s worship are judged---...them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire

Now compare that with Revelation 20:4---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands

John specifically identifies the faithful as those who did not receive the mark.

So when we look at John's entire account, where is the example of someone receiving the mark, later repenting, and reversing it? I do not see one.

Someone may argue that God's forgiveness is greater than any sin, and that is a broader theological discussion. But from the text of Revelation itself, the mark is not presented as a minor mistake that a believer makes and later corrects. It is presented as an act of worship and allegiance to the beast.

That is why the statement 'how a believer recovers from that' seems to assume something that Revelation never actually shows---that a true believer receives the mark then recovers from it later on.

The text repeatedly presents the saints as those who overcome by refusing the beast, refusing his image, and refusing his mark.

Yet in Revelation 14:9, Rev 14:11 , John uses the word AND not OR
Both conditions are required not one or the other.
Rev 16:2 writes of a punishment for taking the mark yet does not teach go to LOF.
What verses teach otherwise ?

 

[Davidpt]

Yet in Revelation 14:9, Rev 14:11 , John uses the word AND not OR
Both conditions are required not one or the other.
Rev 16:2 writes of a punishment for taking the mark yet does not teach go to LOF.
What verses teach otherwise ?

Maybe we can find some common ground here we both can agree on? The following makes it crystal clear repentance is still possible at this point, except John sees that they never repent. And if they never repent, how does that not equal they are cast into the LOF in the end? We have to keep in mind that John sees everything, how it begins and how it ends. And it would be a false prophecy if any of it ends any differently than what John had observed via all the visions throughout.

Revelation 16:8 ¶And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire.
9 And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.

 

[Davidpt]

Yet in Revelation 14:9, Rev 14:11 , John uses the word AND not OR
Both conditions are required not one or the other.
Rev 16:2 writes of a punishment for taking the mark yet does not teach go to LOF.
What verses teach otherwise ?

I understand the point you're making about the word 'and', but I think your argument is separating two things that John never separates.

The issue isn't whether the word 'and' joins two conditions. Of course it does. The issue is whether Revelation ever presents the mark of the beast as something that can be received apart from allegiance to the beast.

Look at the flow of Revelation 13.

First, people worship the dragon and the beast (Rev. 13:4).

Then the false prophet causes the earth to worship the first beast (Rev. 13:12).

Then we're told that those who refuse to worship the image of the beast are to be killed (Rev. 13:15).

Immediately after that, John says the beast causes people to receive the mark (Rev. 13:16).

The mark isn't introduced as some neutral identifier that someone can receive while remaining faithful to Christ. It is introduced in the very context of worship and submission to the beast's authority.

So when Revelation 14:9 says---If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark...

I don't think John is describing two unrelated actions that can be separated. He's describing the same allegiance to the beast. Worship and the mark belong together throughout the narrative.

Revelation 20:4 confirms this. Notice how John describes the faithful---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark...

Again, John doesn't separate the two. He presents the saints as those who refused both the worship and the mark.

You also mentioned Revelation 16:2 doesn't explicitly say those with the mark go to the lof. I agree it doesn't use those exact words. What it does show is that those with the mark are under God's wrath. Then Revelation 14:9-11 explains that wrath, and Revelation 19 and 20 shows the final outcome of those aligned with the beast.

So my question is this.

Where does Revelation ever describe someone who receives the mark but remains faithful to Christ by refusing allegiance to the beast?

I don't see John giving us that category anywhere in the book.

In fact, it seems to me that your argument creates a category that John himself never describes---a person who has the mark but has not actually aligned himself with the beast.

If such a category exists, I'd be interested in seeing where Revelation explicitly presents it. From what I can see, every time John discusses the mark, it is tied to the beast's worship, while the overcomers are consistently identified as those who refused both.