Chalcedon Blog

Last Monday, I wrote a post entitled "Implantable Microchips: NOT a Conspiracy Theory Anymore," in which I highlighted the sustained campaign by Republican bureaucrats and private industry to implant every person's skin with an RFID chip. In order to create interest, I began the post with the following statement:

"It's getting more difficult these days to sustain the preterist view of eschatology (preterism contends that the virtually all of the 'last days' events took place no later than A.D. 70) when companies are pushing to place implantable microchips within the actual bodies of people. End-time prophecy teachers have long stated that microchipping may be the fulfillment of Revelation 13:16-17."

I made an error here in not providing more explanation regarding my meaning. I was not intending to dismiss the partial-preterist interpretation of the Mark of the Beast, nor endorse the incorrect views of end-times prophecy teachers. In fact, the post was not exegetical at all. It was an attempt at noting a very real dynamic in the American experience regardless of one's eschatological leanings.

Here's the point to the opening: last days prophecy teachers claim that implantable microchips will "mark" the fulfillment of Revelation 13:16-17, and that the identity of the Beast and his marking of the population is still future. Partial-preterist theologians argue that this is a misreading of the Greek term used for "on", and that the time statements of both Revelation and the other eschatological NT passages show that both the Beast and his mark were first century developments, i.e., they transpired before the A.D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem. But, why would I bring this up to begin with? I'm so glad you asked.

If the end-times prophecy teachers are incorrect--and they are--then partial-preterists tend to disregard the contemporary phenomena of RFID chips. The chips are not a fulfillment of Revelation 13:16-17--or, are they in another way?--and therefore, we should dismiss them as irrelevant. On the other hand, the reality of implantable microchips in our time will reinforce the mistaken teachings of men like Hal Lindsey. We cannot depend upon the Christian masses to look that closely at the Greek when the news is confirming their theological assumptions.

This is where the idealistic hermenuetic of R. J. Rushdoony comes in; and it's what I meant by alluding above that Revelation 13:16-17 may have more implications than the grammatic-historical approach of the partial-preterist allows. Regarding the Beast of Revelation, Rushdoony writes:

The beast, symbol of human government and empire, of anti-Christian states and cultures generally, represented the Roman Empire of St. John's day, and all other anti-Christian orders. The beast represents the totality of all such empires in the ancient world, and all to come. [Thy Kingdom Come, p.170]

This basic construct is helpful for Christians in producing a Scriptural critique of modern social, moral, and political developments. Because man's sinful drive is personified in the totalitarian state, we will always contend with beasts to some degree. The problem with partial-preterism as a hermeneutic is that it becomes so focused on the historical interpretation that it offers little to its constituency in terms of contemporary beasts. That's why it's difficult to find any partial-preterist writing about the growing police state--it's not a first-century phenomena, so it's not a Biblical concern to them hermeneutically.

So, I do not believe that the present push to implant every person with an RFID chip represents any eschatological revisionism on my part; nor is it in any way an endorsement of "last days madness." My point should be well-taken. We do need a more comprehensive hermeneutic by which we can provide a sustained criticism to modern "beasts" and their systems of control. The net effect of implantable microchips IS the same as the consequences offered in Revelation 13:17:

[N]o man may buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

When we transition out of paper money into a cashless society, a microchip becomes the simplest method of a "secure" society. As the video clips in my previous blog post state, microchips are being promoted as the best means to secure children from abduction and provide citizens with the best medical care. They're already discussing microchips as the surest means to currency as well. If that happens, it becomes very easy for the state to simply "shut off" your ability to operate financially.

In fact, that is a present reality without the microchips. Just look at the "mark" of ownership at the top of all U.S. currency:


The currency are Federal Reserve Notes. And these are not "notes" like a "love note from your wife." A note is a certificate of debt. It bespeaks of something owed. For example, you have a "note" on your house--meaning you owe a mortgage. Federal Reserve Notes represent dollars owed to the Federal Reserve plus interest.

Just try to buy, sell, or trade without either Federal Reserve currency or the credit the Federal Reserve provides. Is this not a de facto mark of the statist system? You cannot operate financially without their paper money or credit. This is a form of monetary control by private interests and enforced through the apparatus of the Federal government. As is often noted, the Federal Reserve is NOT a governmental department. It is a private central bank that has complete control of the creation of money and credit in the United States.

Do you want to see that monetary control INCREASED by moving from cash to digital currency functioning through RFID chips implanted in your skin? Do you trust the Federal Reserve and the U.S. government that much? That's the point. And Christians should have a great deal to say about this, but most partial-preterists say very little because they don't make the immediate connection to the idealistic concept of historical "beasts" and their attempts at totalitarian control.

This also does not mean I believe that any contemporary, or future, humanist system will ever prevail against the church. I believe in the victory of Christ in history. However, just like my partial-preterist colleagues are careful to resist the securalist in the culture war, so I deem it necessary to critique the totalitarian drive of the modern state. Their emphasis by no means indicates they are not optimistic about the success of the Gospel, and my emphasis should be not be miscontrued as a sinking into defeatism.

In short, conservative Christians must do more to criticize totalitarian police and surveillance controls as solutions to security. The result of these security measures is the loss of liberty for all Americans. If the Religious Right will unite in resistance to these controls, we just may see the kind of "Liberty Revolution" we're looking for. At present, some of the biggest supporters of the police state are conservative Christians. I pray this trend is reversed.