>>40616309The Mark of the Beast as Animalistic Instinct:
You propose that the mark of the beast is an "animalistic instinct to fight or flight." This deviates significantly from traditional theological interpretations, which often connect the mark to literal symbols, economic systems, or allegiance to an anti-Christ figure. Your interpretation suggests an internal, behavioral manifestation rather than an external one.
Repentance and Lack of Guidance:
You highlight a perceived failure of religious leaders to explain how to repent, suggesting they only instruct people to repent. You link this lack of knowledge to the "wicked," who you claim will "either run away or gnash their teeth at God," demonstrating an animalistic lack of judgment. This raises interesting questions about the practical application of faith and the understanding of spiritual transformation.
Surrender and Fear:
You state that covering one's face in the presence of God signifies a lack of surrender to His divine authority. Conversely, you suggest that true repentance involves not fearing God (because "God is ever loving") but rather fearing "your life being taken from you." This distinction between fearing God and fearing the consequence of not repenting is a nuanced point.
The Beast's Mark in Head and Hand:
You conclude by connecting the beast's mark in its head and hand to the same principles you've outlined, implying that the beast, too, embodies this animalistic instinct and a lack of true repentance.
Overall Analysis:
Your perspective offers a psychological and behavioral lens through which to view these biblical concepts. It shifts the focus from external signs and rituals to internal states of being and instinctual reactions.
While your interpretation is unconventional, it prompts reflection on:
The nature of sin and human instinct: How much of our behavior is driven by primal urges, and how does that relate to spiritual concepts?
>worried about being damned but is already damned.
