Here's How To Go To Heaven If You Get The "Mark" Chip

The problem with your whole scenario is that you are convince the mark is some kind of implant, and your entire "solution" is built around that assumption. There is no reason to think the mark is something buried under one's skin. It is a visible and recognizable mark on the person's right hand or forehead. Maybe you shouldn't take yourself beyond what the Bible clearly says, and the Holy Spirit certainly did not guide you to do so. Sticking to what scripture says is always the safest approach:

Revelation 13:16-17 16 He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17 so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

Revelation 14:9-12 9 A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, 10 he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name." 12 This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus.

These sections of scripture are so plain they need no explaining or even exegesis. They mean exactly what they say. The mark is something visible on the person's right hand or forehead. This visible mark immediately brands the person as a worshiper of the Beast. That is it's primary purpose. It is a mark of spiritual loyalty to the Beast. You can't buy or sell without this mark. Once you take this mark, you're done. There is no coming back from receiving it. Even if it was an RFD chip, cutting it out later won't save you. Since the angel specifically warns people not to take the mark, and what will happen to them if the do, we know some people will not take the mark, and die because they can't do business, or even eat. A Christian alive at the time will know what it is and refuse to take the mark.

It displays a lack of discernment to be pushing the RFD chip as the mark when you actually have no way of knowing exactly what it is and then also hawking a fake cure for it. It is also patently irresponsible to do so. Shades of Jim Bakker. Maybe you could go on his show and start selling a "Mark of the Beast Removal Kit" and share a cut with him.

'Wait, the most fearful curse in all of Scripture which warns against getting the Mark...and yet we don't know what it is?

Let's look again:

Revelation 13:15-17 15 He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16 He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17 so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. (Rev 13:15-17 NIV)

Feel free. Explain to me, and all of us here, how this is somehow symbolic? The language is plain. When something in Revelation is symbolic, we are told so ahead of time. No marker exists for these passages. So, please, share with us the depth of your biblical knowledge that tells us this mark is symbolic . . .

The very sentence in the book of Revelation would disagree with your statement:

"The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place."

FYI, The literalist futurist to view is unquestionably correct. Everything works perfectly everything fits perfectly, there are no errors or omissions, all guesswork is removed, all covenants are fulfilled prophecies are resolved.

You don't get it and a lot of people are in the same boat with you. And believe me that is a very scary place to be.

You have got to be kidding. The Jesuit Futurist view is so full of inconsistencies, it's incredible; perhaps the most glaring is that it insists on making literal that which Jesus PLAINLY declares is symbolic IN THE VERY FIRST VERSE OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION.

Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit Futurism are two flawed 16th century papal eschatological interpretations which were fabricated by Jesuits Luiz Alcazar and Francisco Ribera respectively in order to deflect the accusations which claimed the Antichrist was in Rome - aka "Protestant Historicist" teachings of the Protestant Reformers - away from the Papacy and to either the past (Jesuit Preterism's 1st century Antichrist) or the future (Jesuit Futurism's "last seven years of tribulation" Antichrist, which misguided Darby later expanded to include a mythological "secret rapture") and BOTH were rejected by the great Protestant Reformers for the SAME reasons I can provide you here.

Time and time again, I hear people extolling the virtues of Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit Futurism while possessing an almost non-existent understanding of Protestant Historicism, as if the entire Protestant world and the many heroes who died fighting the blasphemous errors of the papacy were all somehow barking up the wrong tree...it's a case of global, ecclesiastical "Stockholm Syndrome", where "Protestants" defend to the death those who are going to rob them of their religious freedom very very soon. SMH

You have got to be kidding. The Jesuit Futurist view is so full of inconsistencies, it's incredible; perhaps the most glaring is that it insists on making literal that which Jesus PLAINLY declares is symbolic IN THE VERY FIRST VERSE OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION.

Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit Futurism are two flawed 16th century papal eschatological interpretations which were fabricated by Jesuits Luiz Alcazar and Francisco Ribera respectively in order to deflect the accusations which claimed the Antichrist was in Rome - aka "Protestant Historicist" teachings of the Protestant Reformers - away from the Papacy and to either the past (Jesuit Preterism's 1st century Antichrist) or the future (Jesuit Futurism's "last seven years of tribulation" Antichrist, which misguided Darby later expanded to include a mythological "secret rapture") and BOTH were rejected by the great Protestant Reformers for the SAME reasons I can provide you here.

Time and time again, I hear people extolling the virtues of Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit Futurism while possessing an almost non-existent understanding of Protestant Historicism, as if the entire Protestant world and the many heroes who died fighting the blasphemous errors of the papacy were all somehow barking up the wrong tree...it's a case of global, ecclesiastical "Stockholm Syndrome", where "Protestants" defend to the death those who are going to rob them of their religious freedom very very soon. SMH

Ribera was an Augustinian amillennialist as well. Nice try though.

Here is some futurism for you to ponder....
https://biblehub.com/nkjv/isaiah/2.htm

Francisco Ribera was a JESUIT who, as a JESUIT, was commissioned by the Pope to come up with an alternative explanation of eschatology that would exonerate the papacy from the accusations of the Protestant Reformers that the papacy is the prophesied Antichrist of prophecy. He was the first to suggest that the Antichrist of Scripture would arise at the end of time, IN DIRECT OPPOSITION to every single Early Church Father who had anything to say on the subject, who all taught the Antichrist was to arise on the heels of the fall of the Roman Empire, which fell LOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNGGGGGG ago in the 5th century....so please learn some church history before you scoff at the facts.

BTW, I'll enlighten you with a quote from the great 18th century Spurgeon: "It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is, NO SANE MAN OUGHT TO RAISE THE QUESTION. If it be not the popery in the church of Rome, there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name."

This was the UNIVERSAL belief of Protestantism of that time: https://www.challies.com/articles/a-cloud-of-witnesses/

I'd prefer to slice and dice Futurist nonsense point by point. At which point do you wish to begin?

The word mark in Revelation is translated as a literal etching, engraving, or stamp. If it's literal then the way the average reader would understand it is as a physical thing. If it is some sort of immaterial or ideological mark then the writer most likely will confuse his audience because the word used would not suggest to the reader to look for a different interpretation than how the subject is presented.

Since the subject is a kind of warning, confusing the readers does nothing to help them avoid the mark. Therefore the most simplest and literal interpretation of the "mark" is likely the accurate one.

Believing Christians of this age are raptured and will never encounter that peculiar crisis.

By all means continue in your ignorance if that is your wish.

I'll continue in the Bible and factual, well grounded church history, and you'll continue in Jesuit falsehoods, and on Judgment Day, I will wake up in the first resurrection and hope to see you there, but since you defend the very Beast that will cause its Mark to fall upon all those who will be deceived, that is cause for great concern. Hope and pray that you and all other Jesuit Futurist believers in "Left Behind theology" come to your senses before it's too late.

"...and He sent and SIGNIFIED (symbolized) IT (the Revelation) by His angel unto His servant John..." Revelation 1:1 KJV

It's a shame I have to argue in favor of something that should be readily apparent to anyone reading the Book of Revelation with their eyes open: that the elements contained therein are in symbolism which interpretations are found right their in the Bible itself, according to Peter.

You have got to be kidding. The Jesuit Futurist view is so full of inconsistencies, it's incredible; perhaps the most glaring is that it insists on making literal that which Jesus PLAINLY declares is symbolic IN THE VERY FIRST VERSE OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION.

Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit Futurism are two flawed 16th century papal eschatological interpretations which were fabricated by Jesuits Luiz Alcazar and Francisco Ribera respectively in order to deflect the accusations which claimed the Antichrist was in Rome - aka "Protestant Historicist" teachings of the Protestant Reformers - away from the Papacy and to either the past (Jesuit Preterism's 1st century Antichrist) or the future (Jesuit Futurism's "last seven years of tribulation" Antichrist, which misguided Darby later expanded to include a mythological "secret rapture") and BOTH were rejected by the great Protestant Reformers for the SAME reasons I can provide you here.

Time and time again, I hear people extolling the virtues of Jesuit Preterism and Jesuit Futurism while possessing an almost non-existent understanding of Protestant Historicism, as if the entire Protestant world and the many heroes who died fighting the blasphemous errors of the papacy were all somehow barking up the wrong tree...it's a case of global, ecclesiastical "Stockholm Syndrome", where "Protestants" defend to the death those who are going to rob them of their religious freedom very very soon. SMH

Francisco Ribera was a JESUIT who, as a JESUIT, was commissioned by the Pope to come up with an alternative explanation of eschatology that would exonerate the papacy from the accusations of the Protestant Reformers that the papacy is the prophesied Antichrist of prophecy. He was the first to suggest that the Antichrist of Scripture would arise at the end of time, IN DIRECT OPPOSITION to every single Early Church Father who had anything to say on the subject, who all taught the Antichrist was to arise on the heels of the fall of the Roman Empire, which fell LOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNGGGGGG ago in the 5th century....so please learn some church history before you scoff at the facts.

BTW, I'll enlighten you with a quote from the great 18th century Spurgeon: "It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is, NO SANE MAN OUGHT TO RAISE THE QUESTION. If it be not the popery in the church of Rome, there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name."

This was the UNIVERSAL belief of Protestantism of that time: https://www.challies.com/articles/a-cloud-of-witnesses/

Your problem is that you stopped SHORT of that which totally obliterates your argument. KEEP READING:

"And He sent and SIGNIFIED IT..." which means Jesus delivered His revelation in SYMBOLISM...which makes the Mark a symbol.

Too late for what exactly?

Everybody who truly understands end time prophecy is fully aware of this, and also understands its significance......and its limitations. Furthermore it does not prevent literalist view in any way.