With so much speculation about the Mark of the Beast, I’ve come across differing opinions as to what this mark actually means and what it will be. Some of the most common views are that the mark is a computer chip, a physical mark, or a tattoo placed in either the hand or the forehead. However, does this viewpoint really coincide with what the Bible teaches? When one looks up the word used for “mark” in “Mark of the Beast” many feel that it must be a tattoo and argue that the Bible teaches and warns us against piercings. While it is indeed true that Christians should not tattoo themselves, the Mark of the Beast is more complicated than a tattoo. The following is evidence that suggests why the Mark of the Beast could not be a physical mark, though physical marks may or may not be used in support of the authentic Mark of the Beast.
Broadcast Date
Why is the cross so central to Paul’s message to the Galatians? Why does he write with such large letters? How does Paul conclude his main point to the Galatian church? What does it mean to be dead to the world and to be a new creation? Is the change to be inward or outward?
