Friday, July 22, 2022

The Mark of the Beast Slayer

You want this mark….

Ezekiel 9: 1 Then he cried in my ears with a loud voice, saying, “Bring near the executioners of the city, each with his destroying weapon in his hand.” 2 And behold, six men came from the direction of the upper gate, which faces north, each with his weapon for slaughter in his hand, and with them was a man clothed in linen, with a writing case at his waist. And they went in and stood beside the bronze altar.

There is one way out:

3 Now the glory of the God of Israel had gone up from the cherub on which it rested to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed in linen, who had the writing case at his waist. 4 And the Lord said to him, “Pass through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it.”

You really want this mark.  Sigh and groan over all the abominations in the city.

5 And to the others he said in my hearing, “Pass through the city after him, and strike. Your eye shall not spare, and you shall show no pity. 6 Kill old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women, but touch no one on whom is the mark….”

Like I said, you want this mark.


The beast slayer:

Revelation 19: 11 Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war.

16 On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

19 And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth with their armies gathered to make war against him who was sitting on the horse and against his army. 20 And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur.


  1. The imagery in Ezekiel is no doubt used in Revelation when describing the Mark of the Beast. In both cases the mark provides protection from judgment and includes the marked person as the part of a tribe or kingdom. It looks clear in Ezekiel that the mark is not physical or tangible but spiritual. It isn't as clear to me in Revelation since the Beast is a human being while the man clothed in linen is probably an angel.

    Still the Mark of the Beast is given to those who worship the Beast so the foundation of the whole situation is still spiritual. It's just that the mark is seen by other men so they can tell if you are eligible to buy or sell in the market. I actually wrote several pieces about the Mark and its implications.

  2. In his book, "The Days of Vengeance", David Chilton carries this concept all the way back to the days just after the Exodus from Egypt by the Hebrews, in which the priests were instructed to wear, as part of their clothing, items on their foreheads and right hands. Marks, in other words, which proclaimed the message, "Holy to the Lord" and which set apart the wearer as special and someone who was not to be harmed in any way.

    Many Jews today still practice this by wearing phylacteries, little boxes which carry certain Scriptures inside them, as a part of their faith. (

    The symbolism is quite striking.

  3. Forty years ago, +/-, I ordered a book, "Government by Emergency", from Gary North. On the front cover was an image of a smallish, bald-headed man in a suit, holding a clipboard and pencil. On either side of him was a larger man, a goon, dressed to the hilt in protective gear and carrying a shotgun propped up against his shoulder. All of them looking at you, as if you had opened your front door in response to a knock, and saw them standing there.

    Like the man clothed in linen, the suit was the most important part of the trio. He dealt with information, asked questions, and demanded answers. The others provided muscle to ensure those answers were forthcoming.

    The scripture referenced above took me back. Vivid memory.

  4. An atheist libertarian may see such passages in the Bible and think, wow, what an unjust God! He violates the NAP!

    To that I would reply that the NAP is only the least common denominator among righteous men and women and it does not apply to our Creator. In the same way that I can raise a chicken from an egg and then eat it one day without moral blemish, God can choose what afflictions and punishments to put on us. Of course, the gap between God and us is much much greater than the one between myself and a chicken.

    1. What a puny god it would be if it could be measured by our human standards or human understanding....

  5. You try to attach all of this imagery with current happenings. There is nothing happening now that is spoken of in scripture,
    You are wrong in that mindset. You / and all of us need to re think our place in history

    1. Chad, this imagery has been manifest countless times in history and is now and will be again. You are wrong to think that such events happened once and only once. You are wrong to think that the punishment God doled out for sin was valid once but today He doesn't care about the same sin.

      You are thinking too small when it comes to the value of such passages. You think they aren't applicable to us today, just as they have been applicable to countless generations of our ancestors and will be applicable to an unknown number of our least until the final return....

  6. Something preternatural is going on. The scope of the assault against the rights given by God, grounded in nature, goes beyond anything envisioned except in fictional accounts, 1984, Brave New World. And the assault is global. The suppression of these rights in the wake of the Covid business is, of course, alarming. What is more alarming is that the opposition to the usurpation has yet to concretize itself, and that many of our "fellow citizens" either do not believe such bad things are happening or do not view such suppression, of the right of political speech or inquiry, for instance, as a
    bad thing. Even abrogation of the rule of law has its defenders: see the plight of the January 6th political prisoners. All these actions by the ruling elite might be viewed as simply the natural way oligarch operates (see Aristotle on the cruelty of oligarchs) . What I find very hard to ascribe to sheer oligarchical viciousness centers upon the abortion issue. President Brandon informs us that the provisions of the Bill of Rights are simply provisional. The only absolute right is the right to abortion, no longer, it seems, limited to one sex, given gender fluidity. The Churches, used to being closed down since the Faucian plague, are now open targets for vandalism. The church leaders, for the most part, remain silent. At least one church I saw on line had a banner that read, "God demands open access to abortion", raising the question of which God is It that that Church worships. Tucker showed a video of young women now volunteering to be sterilized in the aftermath of the Roe v Wade reversal. How soon will it be that voluntary euthanasia becomes an acceptable moral course for those opposed to that reversal? All these actions are indicative of a hatred of life. And who might it be (clue: ask Screwtape) that so hates life and creation?

    1. Deacon, I find the same hatred of life in those who say "the world has too many people who are destroying the planet; for this reason I could never bring another child to the world."

      Sterilization, euthanasia, actions taken to never have a child - if these our the actions of civilizations enemies, they will breed themselves out and we will win! (He says, with only a little tongue-in-cheek).

      As to what is behind these actions...yes: the prince of the power of the air, working through the sons of disobedience. Our battle is not against flesh and know the rest. That is the fight.

    2. I think the first beast is dying currently, and the false prophet is rising. The first beast uses lies to war with reality (god = reality = truth) and obtains a blow to the head. The first beast used mass formation psychosis to control people, the blow to the head is reality reasserting itself. People will be aware of what they are choosing when they take the mark of the beast. Its a choice. The judgments in revelation are a gift from god, not a curse. They point us away from the wrong path and force people to acknowledge the reality of God. Hell is literally manifesting on Earth because people are choosing untruth instead of truth. With every lie they submit to they fall further and further into the abyss and lose a little more of themselves. Its a choice.

    3. Deacon, for over a decade I've been asking people why the mainstream narrative isn't more vocal about voluntary sterilization. The tell-tale signs of societal decay are pervasive, but one that I find particularly interesting is the reason why most people, but senior citizens in particular are openly reluctant to consider anything that might extend their life. The reason being that they don't want to go back to work, or suffer the degradation of living below the standard of living they've become accustomed to. They have literally sacrificed their lives to Mammon, and don't want to disappoint him by living in poverty.

    4. I read a comment elsewhere last week that said, “there are no such things as human rights; there are only Laws given by God”. If people would realize this and stop whining about their “rights”, we’d probably be in a lot better shape. But because people are so preoccupied with their rights, they miss the forest for the trees.

  7. That mark is a mark counter to the one that is soon coming from the beast/antichrist catholic church, long identified by protestants from Daniel and Revelation.

  8. Now I'm confused. I thought we were supposed to NOT take the mark.

    1. Different mark. You must have missed that point....

  9. So it is written, so it is done. Amen and amen.

  10. You may search the New Testament from one end to the other and never find an exhaustive list of abominations. They're only found in the Old Testament which for some incredibly odd reason is ignored by most of mainstream Christianity. One thing is for sure, all sin is an abomination to God, and one cannot knowingly or intentionally sin without committing an abomination (Luke 16:15). Furthermore, most Christians are familiar with the mark preventing them from buying or selling, but none seem to be able to comprehend that God's elect are prohibited from engaging in fraudulent commercial transactions, and ALL transactions using fiat currencies are fraudulent. Debt is not an asset. Lending all money out at interest is slavery, and no one who has taken God's mark can willingly or even unwittingly engage themselves in slavery.

    1. 16 And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

      2 And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.

      3 Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed.

      4 I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.

      5 So he called every one of his lord's debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?

      6 And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty.

      7 Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore.

      8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.

      9 And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

      10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

      11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

    2. I love this quote! However, without any commentary, it isn't always clear to those who read it if the person posting it is agreeing with what I posted or not. Therefore, I will simply point out some pertinent facts. The unrighteous servant has no other alternative but to operate within the system of unrighteous Mammon. Why? Because it's a Given that he's unrighteous. The accusation is not just true, but demonstrably proven.

    3. God's elect are prohibited from engaging in fraudulent commercial transactions. ALL transactions using fiat currencies are fraudulent. No Christian may engage in any commercial transaction today because they are ALL transacted in fiat currencies. Christians who use fiat currency to conduct business run afoul of God's Law which prohibits such action. Therefore, most Christians deserve to be severely punished even though they might not be aware of what they are doing.

      Every time anyone goes to a grocery store, a hardware store, an auto dealer, a movie theater, a restaurant, or any other type of establishment engaging in commerce, and buys anything at all (whatever it might be), the transaction will be in a currency which both accept as a medium of exchange. Virtually 100% of the time that currency will be fiat. It would be nearly impossible to live in today's world without using some form of fiat currency.

      As to interest, Jesus told a parable in which a servant was given a certain amount of money to invest (loan out with the expectation of gain) and was chastised because he buried it when he could have deposited it with the banks and gained interest on it. To put it bluntly, Jesus called him a WICKED servant because there was no return on the investment. Nowhere does this passage state that loaning money at interest is evil and the servant would have been better off if he had done nothing more than taken the easiest way of making money--started an interest-bearing account.

    4. Under the Mosaic law which is what Jesus came to magnify (Isaiah 42:21) there is a clear distinction between a fellow Jew and a servant. You may not engage in usury with a brother, but Jesus claims that we are to treat our enemies as our brother. See the problem yet? Jesus isn't doing away with anything here. He's simply pointing out that if you treat your brother like a foreigner, slave, or enemy, you're a douche bag. Engaging in usury is not an act of charity, nor should it primarily be a money-making exercise. In the bible it is explicitly institutionalized by the God of Israel as an instrument of war to destroy their enemies.

      You're either treating others as subservient scum by charging them interest, or you're degrading and ultimately destroying yourself by paying it. The fiat system in place under the control of the banking cartels has quite successfully destroyed any and all honest economic activity and the chickens will soon come home to roost for those who have ignored the sound economic advice articulated in the Mosaic law as well as Jesus' invitation to enter into the kingdom of God which as everyone should know requires no money whatsoever. However, Jesus also explicitly notes that those who do have it will have to get rid of it because you can't bring it with you into the kingdom.

    5. You completely avoided the main point I tried to make, i.e., that it is virtually impossible to live today without using some form of fiat currency to buy and sell, conduct trade, engage in business, etc.

      I ask you point-blank. Do you consider yourself to be one of God's elect? Do you use any type of fiat currency in your daily life for anything? Keep in mind your assertion, as stated above.

      "God's elect are prohibited from engaging in fraudulent commercial transactions, and ALL transactions using fiat currencies are fraudulent."

      There are only four possible answers:
      1. I AM one of God's elect and I DO engage in commerce by using fiat currency. This position is contradictory and inconsistent with your statement.
      2. I AM one of God's elect and I DO NOT use fiat currency--for any reason at all, absolutely none. How do you make a living? What do you use to buy and sell? Gold? Silver? Barter? Bitcoin? Are you a hunter-gatherer who exists solely on what you can find free for the taking?
      3. I AM NOT one of God's elect and I DO NOT use fiat currency for any reason. In that case, you have consigned yourself to a lifetime of destitution and poverty and an eternity in Hell.
      4. I am NOT one of God's elect and I DO use fiat currency. If this is the case, then your argument is destroyed. You are no better than any other person who is also in this position, evil covenant-breakers all.

      Have I left out any other possible scenario? If yes, what? If no, then please tell me which you subscribe to.

      My guess is that you DO engage in your life's business using fiat currency as the means to transact your financial affairs of every sort, including buying food to put in your belly. If this is true, then you ought to rephrase your statement so that SOME transactions using fiat currency are, in fact, legitimate and are not prohibited by God's law.

    6. "...Jesus' invitation to enter into the kingdom of God which as everyone should know requires no money whatsoever." --Schnarkle

      I agree with this, as entering the kingdom of God does not require any payment with money. The kingdom is a heavenly, spiritual concept and membership in it cannot be bought with worldly, physical wealth. There is a cost, however. The price of entering the kingdom is submission to God's rule over the entire remainder of one's life.

      "However, Jesus also explicitly notes that those who do have it will have to get rid of it because you can't bring it with you into the kingdom." -- Schnarkle

      Please explain. What is your proof text? In the teachings of Jesus, where does it say that you MUST get rid of your money (implying any form of wealth) before you enter the kingdom? If you cannot bring your wealth into the kingdom, then you must enter it in a poverty-stricken state of destitution. Where does the Bible teach that?

    7. "'re a douche bag." -- Schnarkle

      Despicable. Surely you can express yourself in a more mature way.

    8. Roger, it is always interesting to me when someone uses the highest perch to scream "I am a hypocrite!"

      Clearly shnarkle has no answer to your questions because he cannot. He swims in mud, as we all do. Although, as you note, his point about interest is not nearly as "muddy" as he wishes it to be.

    9. Contrary to those who claim it is virtually impossible to live without using fiat currencies, I know a few people who have no problem doing without them. I myself spent over a decade living on the street with people who never had any money. I've lived in storage containers, boats, trees, and currently live off grid in a house that doesn't require me to pay property taxes. The library offers free internet and free access to their computers. I grow all of my own food, and trade with my neighbors. Whether I'm one of God's elect remains to be seen. Your pointless Ad Hominem notwithstanding, whether I am or not doesn't negate or refute what the texts plainly indicate. I don't use any type of fiat currency in my daily life. I drop seeds, tubers, and cuttings into holes in the ground made with a stick. I don't make a living. I am a hermit. I am precluded from interacting with society due to a weak heart. I cannot handle secondhand smoke. It causes my heart to fibrillate but could stop it just as easily. I am an outlaw because I cannot abide by the government's regulations without entering into their system. I am in no way suggesting that keeping God's law is a means of salvation, but simply pointing out that only "the doers of the law shall be justified" and engaging in what the bible explicitly defines as fraud is not in line with God's law. Your argument is with me, not with the content of my post.


    10. Roger, per your request for proof texts for entering into the kingdom without money: "for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth...Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on.23 The life is more than meat, and the body is more than raiment...O ye of little faith? 29 And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind.30 For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things.31 But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you.32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.33 Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth....And they all with one consent began to make excuse...whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he CANNOT be my disciple." - Luke 12:15,22;28-33;14:18,33
      Jesus is not suggesting that one needs to sell or give everything away to enter into the kingdom. He is pointing out that this is what happens when one enters into the kingdom because you no longer need your money anymore.

      I cannot honestly say that anyone requires much of anything from me, therefore there is no need that much be given to me. I grow more than enough food to feed a few dozen people, and if they should appear, I will share what I have planted which is planted far beyond my own property. I confess I do this for my own benefit as well as theirs. I have nothing to protect or defend except my own dignity. God's kingdom is one of abundance. Its value cannot be expressed in fiat currencies. The blessings I've been given are overwhelming yet incomprehensibly vast. All of God's gifts have been given freely, and what overflows can only be given away. God's gifts to me are poverty to a fallen and faithless world.

    11. Against my better judgement....

      Shnarkle, do you walk on city streets, use the sidewalk, consider in what manner your library receives its funds in order to provide you so-called free internet and computers?

      Are you continuously at the library that you can so immediately respond to my comments - never letting more than a few minutes pass - not just in these comments but also in your past history at this blog? Let's just say that is unbelievable. In other words, I don't believe you.

      You have enough food to feed a dozen people, yet you have nothing to defend. In the world you claim to live in, that is...let's just say, unbelievable. As in, I don't believe you.

      There is a word to describe someone who says things that are not believable - even, on the face of it, demonstrably false.

    12. "'re a douche bag." -- Schnarkle

      "Despicable. Surely you can express yourself in a more mature way." -Roger

      If you're suggesting that I'm directing that comment to you personally then you're taking it out of context and engaging in pointless Ad Hominem. I'm quoting God's prophet. In Isaiah 64:6 we read of ""we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags;" which in the Hebrew the phrase for filthy rags, ukabeged ehdim, literally means, “like as rags of menstruation.” Again, those who treat their brother as an enemy by charging them interest or subjecting themselves to being debt slaves are no better.

      The Christian claims they have faith in a resurrection that Christ himself openly points out will not save them if they don't believe or even know what Moses reveals (Luke 16:31), and yet they have no faith whatsoever in the providence of God, but must instead rely upon the only god they can believe in which is Mammon. One can't rely on both. They are mutually exclusive propositions according to Christ's own words(Mt. 6:24). Those who deny Christ's words deny Christ and those very words will judge them(John 12:48).

    13. Re:"Shnarkle, do you walk on city streets, use the sidewalk, consider in what manner your library receives its funds in order to provide you so-called free internet and computers?"

      I suppose you think you're asking a rhetorical question here, but whatever your point may be it isn't clear from what you're asking. Perhaps you believe I should bow down to Mammon for providing me with free internet, or the laptop I was given?

      Re:"Are you continuously at the library that you can so immediately respond to my comments - never letting more than a few minutes pass - not just in these comments but also in your past history at this blog? Let's just say that is unbelievable. In other words, I don't believe you."

      I haven't responded to any of your comments in quite a while so I have no idea what you're referring to.

      Re:"You have enough food to feed a dozen people, yet you have nothing to defend."

      Correct. I have probably over a thousand pounds of tubers alone in the ground that have been growing for well over a few years now and are only going to get bigger as time goes by. I doubt there are even a handful of people who would recognize them if they saw them. Two varieties of spinach growing in my yard produce an abundance of leaves which are poisonous if not cooked properly.

      Re:" I don't believe you."

      You have no arguments to refute what I've posted either. Needless to say, I don't care about your false beliefs or your baseless claims. The fact that both you and Roger are incapable of addressing what I've posted but are instead reduced to engaging in blatant and pointless Ad Hominem trolling is telling, and pathetic.

    14. The point of the questions is obvious, and would be to you if you were an honest disputant.

      Ad hominem is only a logical fallacy if it is fallacious. It is a perfectly appropriate logical tool when the ad hominem is true.

    15. Definition of Ad hominem from Wikipedia:

      Fallacious argumentative strategy that avoids genuine discussion of the topic by instead attacking the character, motive etc. of the person(s) associated with the argument

      Scharnkle, in this particular conversation, please point out where I (or Bionic Mosquito, for that matter) have attacked your character or motive concerning the argument.

    16. Roger, per your request: Here are BM's Ad Hominem:

      "There is a word to describe someone who says things that are not believable - even, on the face of it, demonstrably false."

      "The point of the questions is obvious, and would be to you if you were an honest disputant.

      Ad hominem is only a logical fallacy if it is fallacious. It is a perfectly appropriate logical tool when the ad hominem is true."

      Here are yours: " Do you use any type of fiat currency in your daily life for anything?"

      Ultimately, it makes no real difference to the validity of my argument. I could be damned to hell, and it doesn't refute my argument which is why it's a logical fallacy. You then go on to provide a number of possible scenarios which have absolutely nothing to do with the biblically proven claims presented but are only with regards to my eternal destiny which doesn't prove or disprove my claims. I can be the chief of sinners, a hypocrite of the highest order and it doesn't negate or refute any of the points I presented which neither you or BM ever bothered to address. That is why it is a logical fallacy. I can point out any number of established facts for your consideration which you may also know for a fact, but to then claim that I'm a known chronic liar doesn't then mean that these established facts are now false. Again, the Ad Hominem is a logical fallacy because it fails to address the claims, or argument presented, but instead focuses the attention on the person. It makes no difference whatsoever if any and all claims regarding my character are true or not as my character does not change or alter facts or the truth.