The mark of the beast has been the focal point of more rhetoric, ridicule, argumentation, and speculation than possibly any other single item in the Bible. Christians and non-Christians alike have argued between each other and among themselves about its numerical nomenclature. But what does the text of Scripture say and not say?

The Tribulation Trademark: 666?The core issue of the tribulation is: Who has the right to rule – God or Satan? God will demonstrate that He has the right to rule. For the only time in history people will have a deadline for declaring their allegiance to the gospel. Throughout the past 2000 years, people have been at different stages in deciding for or against acceptance of the gospel. People accept or reject this message at various points of their lives: some in childhood, some as young adults, some at middle age or as seniors. On this occasion the process will be accelerated or forced because of the mark of the beast, so that all humanity will be consciously divided into two segments. The polarizing issue is the mark of the beast.

The Bible teaches that it will be the false prophet, who is related to false religion, who will head up the campaign of the mark of the beast (Rev. 13:11-18). Revelation 13:15 makes it clear that the key issue in all of this is “worship of the image of the beast.” The mark of the beast is simply a vehicle to force people to declare their allegiance- to the Antichrist or Jesus Christ. All people will be polarized into two camps. It will be impossible to take a position of neutrality or indecision on this matter. Scripture is very clear that those who do not receive the mark will be killed.

All classes of humanity will be forced to take sides: ” the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves” (Rev. 13:15). Dr. Robert Thomas notes that this language ” extends to all people of every civic rank, . . . all classes ranked according to wealth, . . . covers every cultural category, . . . The three expressions are a formula for universality.” [1]Scripture is very specific. The false prophet will require a ” mark” of loyalty and devotion to the beast and it will be ” on their right hand,” not the left, “or on their forehead” (Rev. 13:16).

Throughout the Bible the word ” mark” is employed. For example, it is used many times in Leviticus as a reference to a mark that renders the subject ceremonially unclean, usually related to leprosy. Interestingly, Ezekiel 9:4 uses ” mark” similarly to the way it is used in Revelation: ” And the Lord said to him, ‘ Go through the midst of the city, even through the midst of Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations which are being committed in its midst.’ ” Here the mark was one of preservation, similar to the way the blood on the doorposts spared those in the Exodus from the death angel. In Ezekiel, the mark is placed on the forehead, which anticipates Revelation’s use of the term. All seven instances of the word for ” mark” or ” sign,” charagma, in the Greek New Testament appear in Revelation and all refer to “the mark of the beast” (Rev. 13:16,17; 14:9,11; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4). Dr. Thomas explains how the word was used in ancient times:

The mark must be some sort of branding similar to that given soldiers, slaves, and temple devotees in John’s day. In Asia Minor, devotees of pagan religions delighted in the display of such a tattoo as an emblem of ownership by a certain god. In Egypt, Ptolemy Philopator I branded Jews, who submitted to registration, with an ivy leaf in recognition of their Dionysian worship (cf. 3 Macc. 2:29). This meaning resembles the long-time practice of carrying signs to advertise religious loyalties (cf. Isa. 44:5) and follows the habit of branding slaves with the name or special mark of their owners (cf. Gal. 6:17). Charagma (” Mark” ) was a term for the images or names of emperors on Roman coins, so it fittingly could apply to the beast’s emblem put on people. [2]

Some wonder why an exclusive term- ” mark” – is used to designate Antichrist’s mark. Antichrist’s mark appears to be a parody of the plan of God, especially God’s “sealing” of the 144,000 witnesses of Revelation 7. God’s seal of His witnesses most likely is invisible and for the purpose of protection from the Antichrist. On the other hand, Antichrist offers protection from the wrath of God- a promise he cannot deliver- and his mark is visible and external. Since those receiving the mark of the beast take it willingly, it must be a point of pride to have, in essence, Satan as one’s owner. Dr. Thomas says, ” It will be visible and the point of recognition for all in subjection to the beast.” [3]

The Treacherous Ticket

In addition to serving as a visible indicator of devotion to Antichrist, the mark will be one’s ticket required for commercial transaction during the last half of the tribulation (Rev. 13:17). This has been the dream of every tyrant down through history- to so totally control his subject that he alone decides who can buy or sell. Historian Sir William Ramsay notes that first century Roman Emperor ” Domitian carried the theory of Imperial Divinity and the encouragement of ‘ delation’ to the most extravagant point; . . . that in one way or another every Asian must stamp himself overtly and visibly as loyal, or be forthwith disqualified from participation in ordinary social life and trading.” [4] A future Antichrist will perfect such a practice with the aid of modern technology.

Many have tried down through history to mark certain groups of people for death. Yet, there have always been ways for a certain number to escape. As technology becomes more advanced, it seems that greater potential will exist to close up virtually every means of escape. Just such a picture is supported by the Greek word dunŽtai ” provides” (Rev. 13:17), which is used to convey an idea of what ” can” or ” cannot” be done. The Antichrist will not allow anyone to buy or sell without the mark, and the coming cashless society will be the means that he will use to enact such a policy. Control of the economy at the individual level through the mark fits hand and glove with the Biblical picture of Antichrist’s control of global commerce as outlined in Revelation 17 and 18.

The second half of verse 17 describes the mark as ” either the name of the beast or the number of his name.” Precisely this means that the ” number of the beast’s name is one and the same with the name, . . . The equivalence means that as a name, it is written in letters, but as a number, the name’s equivalent is in numbers.” [5] The Antichrist’s name will be expressed numerically as ” 666.”

Calculating the Number

The Apostle John at this point in the prophecy (Rev. 13:18) shifts from one who is recording what he sees to one who now advises his readers in how to interpret what has been reported. A reading of Revelation demonstrates clearly that the wicked will not understand, because of their rejection of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. In contrast, wisdom and understanding will be given to those during the tribulation as to who the Antichrist is, so that they will not take his mark. The Bible makes it clear that anyone taking the mark of the beast cannot be saved (Rev. 14:9,11; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4) and will spend eternity in the lake of fire. The fact that John provides wisdom and understanding to believers at this crucial point, relating to a matter of eternal importance, shows that God will provide the knowledge His people need to follow Him faithfully.

What does this wisdom and understanding allow the believer to do? The passage says he will be able to ” calculate.” Calculate what? He will be able to calculate the number of the beast.

The primary purpose for warning believers about the mark is to let them know that when it is in the form of numbers the ” name” of the beast will be 666. Thus, believers who are going through the sequence of events of the tribulation, when offered the number 666 for their forehead or right hand are to reject it, even if it means death. This also means that anything prior to this future time period is not the mark of the beast that is to be avoided.

Thus, Christians in our own day do not need to act superstitiously about the number. If our address, phone number, or zip code includes this number, we do not need to be afraid that some satanic or mystical power will impact us. On the other hand, we do recognize that many occultists and satanists are attracted to the number because of its relation to future evil. However, the number does not contain mystical powers. To believe that it does would mean that a believer has fallen prey to superstition. The Bible teaches that there is no basis for attaching any superstitious powers to the number 666.

Jumping the Gun

Many have tried to figure out the identity of the Antichrist through numerical calculations. Such approaches will always fail and should not be attempted. Phone books are full of names that might add up. The wisdom of ” counting the name” is not to be applied in our day, for that would be jumping the gun. Instead, it is to be applied by believers during the tribulation.

In 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul teaches that during the current church age the Antichrist is being restrained (v. 6). Antichrist will not be ” revealed” until ” his time.” The Holy Spirit’s selection of the word ” revealed” indicates that the identity of the Antichrist will be concealed until the time of his revelation at some point after the rapture. Thus, it is not possible to know before ” his time” the identity of the Antichrist. Revelation makes it clear that when the time comes the identity of the Antichrist will be clear to believers.

As noted above, Revelation makes it clear that every believer during the tribulation will know that to receive the mark of the beast means the rejection of Christ. This will be universally understood by Christians at that time. None of the suggestions of the past or any before the tribulation have merit.

Revelation 13:17,18 clearly says that the number 666 will be the mark proposed for the right hand or forehead. No one in history has even proposed such a number in anything like tribulation conditions, so past guesses as to his identity can be nullified on this basis.

The better part of wisdom is to be content that the identification is not yet available, but will be when the future false Christ ascends to his throne. The person to whom 666 applies must have been future to John’s time, because John clearly meant the number to be recognizable to someone. If it was not discernible to his generation and those immediately following him- and it was not- the generation to whom it will be discernible must have lain (and still lies) in the future. Past generations have provided many illustrations of this future personage, but all past candidates have proven inadequate as fulfillments. [6]

Technology and the Mark

Some have suggested that the mark of the beast will be the universal product code, a chip implanted under the skin, or an invisible mark requiring scanning technology to recognize it. Such applications do not align with what the Bible actually says. The mark of the beast- 666- is not cashless technology or biometrics. The Bible speaks precisely about what the mark will be. It will be:

• the Antichrist’s mark, identified with his person

• the actual number 666, not a representation

• a mark, like a tattoo

• visible to the naked eye

• on you, not in you

• recognized, not questioned

• voluntary, not involuntary, thus not given through deception

• used after the rapture, not before

• used in the second half of the tribulation

• needed to buy and sell

• universally received by non-Christians, but universally rejected by Christians

• show worship and allegiance to the Antichrist

• promoted by the false prophet

• the destiny of all receiving the mark will be eternal punishment in the lake of fire

Probably no other number in history or in Biblical studies has captivated the minds of both Christians and non-Christians as “666.” Even those who know nothing of the future plan of God as revealed in the Bible know there is significance to this number. Secular and religious writers, filmmakers, artists, and cultural critics allude to, portray, and expound upon it. It has been used and abused by evangelicals as well as others and has been the subject of much fruitless speculation. Too often sincere students of prophecy have tied the number to contemporary technology and its potential in an effort to demonstrate the relevance of their interpretation. Yet to do so is to put the “cart before the horse,” for prophecy and the Bible do not gain authority or legitimacy because of culture or technology.

ConclusionThe coming cashless society will be used by the Antichrist, but it will not be used as the identifying mark of 666. Whatever technology is available at the time of the Antichrist’s ascent will be used for evil purposes. It will be used by the Antichrist, in conjunction with the mark, to control the buying and selling (as mentioned in Revelation 13:17) and it is likely that chip implants, scan technology, and biometrics will be used to implement the Antichrist’s cashless society as a tool to enforce his policy that one cannot buy or sell without the mark. As with other developments in our day, we see many trends setting the stage that will facilitate the future career of the Antichrist. Maranatha!

In this final installment on the seventy weeks of Daniel, I want to deal with the history of the church’s interpretation of it. What has the church believed about this passage down through the years. One of the main reasons for spending time on this matter is that some have said that our view that sees a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel is a recent development in church history. Truth of the matter is that it is the oldest known view in church history. Read on and see.

Recent Development Charges

Over the last few years, I have come to expect outburst against all aspects of the literal interpretation of Scripture from preterists who believe that Bible prophecy is a think of the past. They come through in predicable fashion concerning this issue of the historical interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27.

Gary DeMar is perhaps the most strident on this issue when he says, “nearly all Bible scholars agree that the first sixty-nine weeks of Daniel’s prophecy refer to the time up to Jesus’ crucifixion, only dispensationalists believe that the entire seventieth week is yet to be fulfilled.” In a later edition of the same book, DeMar asserts concerning a non-gap view that it “has been the standard interpretation for centuries, except for minor differences in details. John Nelson Darby and other changed all this with their church-parenthesis hypothesis.” After the first sentence of DeMar’s statement, he footnotes a reference to an errant source on the matter, Philip Mauro, who declares the following: “Nor, so far as we are aware, was any other meaning ever put upon them until within recent years, and then only by those belonging to a particular ‘school’ of interpretation.” Of course, Mauro’s recent “school” is reference to those of us who see a future seventieth week in Daniel’s prophecy. Mauro certainly was not aware of what was taught in the early church, as we shall shortly see.

Preterist, Dr. Kenneth Gentry, speaking of his non-gap interpretation insists that “Conservative scholars widely agree on such an interpretation, which is virtually ‘universal among Christian exegetes’—excluding dispensationalists.” Later, Dr. Gentry continues his inaccurate statements by saying “that the early Father held to a non-eschatological interpretation of the Seventieth Week.” This is just not true, as shall be noted below. Now I will examine just what the early church did believe about the seventy weeks of Daniel.

Early Church Views

The main point for which I am looking into the early church view of Daniel’s seventy weeks prophecy is whether they held to a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years. Interestingly, an article of note was done on this subject, published in a Reformed Journal, which is the general theological orbit of Gary DeMar and Dr. Kenneth Gentry. The article was written by Louis E. Knowles and referenced errantly by Dr. Gentry when he said, “that the early Father held to a non-eschatological interpretation of the Seventieth Week.” Dr. Gentry’s statement is clearly in error when compared with the writings of the early church fathers.

The earliest extant writings of the church fathers reveal just the opposite of Dr. Gentry’s claim, with the exception of The Epistle of Barnabas (about a. d. 90-100), which presents a short and incomplete treatment on the subject. Knowles divides the early church (Barnabas through Augustine) into two interpretive groups, “the eschatological and the historical.” By eschatological, Knowles refers to those who took the seventieth week of Daniel as future prophecy leading up to Christ’s return. By historical, he means those who believe that Daniel’s final week has already been fulfilled. Knowles concludes that Barnabas”envisioned the completion of all the weeks before the development of the church.”

When Knowles deals with the next major contributors—Irenaeus (130-200) and his disciple Hippolytus (170-236)—he describes their views as “undoubtedly the forerunners of the modern dispensational interpreters of the Seventy Weeks.” Knowles draws the following conclusion about Irenaeus and Hippolytus:

. . . we may say that Irenaeus presented the seed of an idea that found its full growth in the writings of Hippolytus. In the works of these fathers, we can find most of the basic concepts of the modern futuristic view of the seventieth week of Daniel ix. That they were dependent to some extent upon earlier material is no doubt true. Certainly we can see the influence of pre-Christian Jewish exegesis at times, but, by and large, we must regard them as the founders of a school of interpretation, and in this lies their significance for the history of exegesis.
Thus, it is clear “that in Irenaeus and Hippolytus we have the originators of that method of interpretation that places the seventieth week of Daniel at the time of the consummation.”

Although, Irenaeus does not explicitly spell out a gap in his writings, there is no other way that he could have come up with his view of a future tribulation period of at least at least three and a half years. Irenaeus speaks of how “three years and six months constitute the half-week” in his section on the prophecy of Daniel 9. This is why Knowles says that in Irenaeus “we have the basic concept for a futuristic construction of the Seventy Weeks, viz., the position of the last week at the end of the age.” Hippolytus, Irenaeus’ pupil is even clearer.

Hippolytus is the first known person in the history of the church to write a commentary on any book of the Bible, and he wrote on Daniel. “Hippolytus give us the first attempt at detailed interpretation of the Seventy Weeks,” observes Knowles. “He is dependent, no doubt, upon Irenaeus for the foundational proposition that the last half-week of the seventy is to be connected with the Antichrist, but the detailed development is not found in Irenaeus.” In fact, Hippolytus refers to a gap or, in his words “division,” multiple times. Hippolytus says,

For when the threescore and two weeks are fulfilled, and Christ is come, and the Gospel is preached in every place, the times being then accomplished, there will remain only one week, the last, in which Elias will appear, and Enoch, and in the midst of it the abomination of desolation will be manifested, viz., Antichrist, announcing desolation to the world.
Le Roy Froom grudgingly admits that “Hippolytus . . . arbitrarily separates by a chronological gap from the preceding sixty-nine weeks, placing it just before the end of the world.” “Certainly Hippolytus’ interpretation does not have the refinements of the later development, but it is the direct ancestor of it,” concludes Knowles.

Other Views

There were a number of others in the early church, up till the time of Augustine (354-430), who spoke about the subject of the seventy weeks prophecy found in Daniel 9. Jerome (340–420) in his commentary on Daniel is reluctant to set forth his own interpretation of Daniel’s seventy weeks prophecy, “because it is unsafe to pass judgment upon the opinions of the great teachers of the Church and to set one above another.” So Jerome simply records the various views up till his time. The first view that Jerome cites is that of Africanus (160-240), who does not mention a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks, but does, like early gap proponents “definitely views this passage as eschatological and decidedly Messianic.” Thus, Africanus fits into the eschatological camp, making him closer to the futurist gap position, and not the historical.

Eusebius (270-340), the father of church history, teaches an historical view, but he places a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. Knowles explains:

In regards to the last week, we have some rather distinct views in Eusebius. We must recall that the last week does not follow immediately upon the sixty-ninth, but comes after the ‘indeterminate space of time’ in which the events of vs. 26 are being fulfilled. This last week, then, covers a period of seven years that extend from three and one-half years before the crucifixion to three and one-half years after it.

Knowles speaks of a writer named Hesychius whom Augustine refers to as an opponent of his historical fulfillment view. “Hesychius has questioned Augustine about the fulfillment of the Seventy Weeks, and seems to be an adherent of the futurist school of interpretation.” Thus, it is clear that even in the early fifth century there are still proponents of the eschatological and futurist schools of interpretation of Daniel’s seventieth week. “We have seen the formation of two definite schools of interpretation. . . .” notes Knowles. “All the later developments in Christian literature will be found to fit into one of these categories.”

Conclusion

In one sense it does not matter what others who have come before our current generation think on an issue, since in reality a matter rises or falls upon whether it squares with God’s Word. However, in another sense it does matter what others have thought down through church history, since if something is taught in the Bible then it may be legitimate to ask why others have not understood a particular teaching. While there are a number of doctrines that have gone well over a thousand years before members of Christ’s church have come to realize what was there in Scripture all along, the necessary gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel is not one of those late teachings. Why opponents of a future seventieth week of Daniel want to make matters worse for themselves by saying that we do not have ancient historical precedent is beyond me. It is obvious that our futurist view was found early and often throughout the early church, and only became scarce when premillennialism was banded from the medieval church as a result of the influence of Augustine and Jerome. “But the saints shall never possess an earthly kingdom,” declares Jerome, “but only a heavenly. Away, then, with the fable about a millennium!” With Jerome’s banishment of early premillennialism went the literal interpretation of prophecy. History would have to wait more than a thousand years for the revival of a literal interpretation of Bible prophecy and the literal approach to the seventieth week of Daniel. Maranatha!