SA> Shirley Premsingh, a biblical researcher, says, "It speaks of the mark
SA> as not only a form of allegiance, but as something you conduct
SA> commerce with."

Interestingly enough, the Revelations passage about the mark of the beast,
usually translated as "ON the hand/wrist)" in today's translations, is
translated "IN the hand" in my dad's decades' old KJV Bible!

I've checked with a Greek scholar who says that, although ancient Greek was
very specific WRT to nouns, it was more lax with prepositions and both
"on" or
"in" are good translations.

Well & good, but what interests me is why, in a field that traditionally sticks
with even erroneous traditional renderings, why it should have changed this one
without even a footnote to call attention to the previous variant (as the NIV,
for one example, usually does elsewhere)

Could it be that, as the 20th century progressed, the technology for chip
implants started to become predictable, and if the BIBLE said
"IN" the hand, it
would scare a lot of people from taking the chips?
But, with every translation saying "ON" the hand, it can be cited
as proof that
it can't possibly be referring to a chip!

Your friend,
<+]::-{)}  (Cyberpope(the Bishop of ROM!))




... nfx v3.1                                                                 

--- EzyQwk V2.01b003 00F90260