I just thought is was ironic we were discussing this not long after I heard about the UN resolution. I guess I never thought of the internet as a human right. Even with resolution it would be hard for the to implement this is many countries.
I fully believe the internet will play a key role in buying and selling under the beast's system. It's necessary for banks to transact among themselves and with clients.
As far as the internet being provided for all, I don't think any country disallows the internet, but some of the Middle Eastern nations, especially Iran, restrict social networking to keep down negative comments about their country, or things unfavorable to Islam. Iran does not allow Facebook, Youtube, or even Wikipedia and foriegn news outlets are blocked from internet use despite anything the UN might pass.
--- In bible_prophecy-l@yaho..., Sandy Wagner <mswagner4@...> wrote:
> The United Nations did pass a ruling that everyone has the right to use the internet. Communist controled nations, like China, cannot keep their citizens from surfing the web.
> This internet might have some serious merit to the end times. It might be a stretch, but could be a possibility.
> To: bible_prophecy-l@yaho... > From: portents2@...
> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 21:30:54 -0700
> Subject: Re: [bible_prophecy-l] Mark update
> That's very interesting. I don't know if it was here on BP_L or on
> another forum, but a writer was making an argument (and I didn't
> really follow the logic of it) that the mark of the beast - 666 -
> could be translated as www and he concluded that this meant the
> internet itself was the mark and that eventually no one will be able
> to buy or sell who is not on the network. I'm not sure I buy that
> argument. The mark is, scripturally speaking, the name or the number
> of the beast, it's a very personal idea tied to a real person, not an
> abstract idea, like a computer network. Still, I had to give the guy
> credit for an interesting spin on the mark and far more compelling
> than other ideas that people have (social security numbers, barcodes,
> etc.) over the years.
> And to return this to your example of mobile payment systems, we have
> talked before about the infrastructure needed to implement the mark
> and whether the mark is really global in scope.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember you making the argument some
> time back that "all" doesn't' necessarily mean all in a global sense
> in the context of a truly universal system that covers all people
> since we recognize that the time required for the entire world to
> adopt the same standard would mean that it would take another century
> or more for the mark to be implemented. It would be enough for it to
> cover only the modern industrialized world because that would include
> the "world" of the focal point of prophecy, namely Israel. The rest of
> the world, those lawless places the still use cash or barter for goods
> and services, would be untouched by the mark just as they are passed
> by the use of debit cards or credit cards.
> Even though I was troubled by the fast and loose translation of "all"
> in this context as something other than the plain meaning of the word
> I accepted the basic idea. Like you, I've done a fair bit of
> traveling, both to parts of the world more advanced than the U.S. and
> less advanced. And to those of you shocked at the "more advanced"
> part, I'm speaking of technology. There are places in Europe that
> enjoy much higher bandwidth speeds than we do in the U.S. and where
> cards with imbedded chips are the norm, not the exception. Mobile
> commerce is much more advanced in Asia than it is in the states.
> One of the reasons the U.S. lags is, paradoxically, because our
> domestic market is so big. It's far easier to offer new and better
> technology in a small country or geographic region that it is in a
> large one. This is why we don't have credit cards with chips in them
> because it's expensive to roll out that technology in a large market.
> The same dilemma is evident now with near-field communication chips
> (NFC) that will allow us to pay for things by waiving our mobile
> devices at a reader. It costs money to install readers at every
> checkout counter and companies balk at paying for that when consumer
> demand for this service has not been demonstrated.
> And this is the problem with the "mark as technology" idea. If the
> mark is an imbedded chip (as many believe) or some other kind of
> technology, it will take time to develop the technology and then roll
> out hardware and software needed to support the technology. And even
> if we accept that this can be done in the advanced economies of the
> world, there will still be large areas of the world (primarily in
> Africa and Asia) where it will never happen, at least, not in our
> But, here's where it gets interesting. Those parts of the world that
> are still developing into industrial societies are in some cases,
> jumping right to post-industrial technology. There are parts of
> Africa, for example, that have never built-out standard landline phone
> service but they have decided to skip that and jump right to cellular
> service. The standard of living may be very low compared to Western
> standards, but they have cell phones.
> So, in this context, a mobile payment system that allows people to pay
> with their cell phones is very intriguing because it means that those
> parts of the world that I was willing to write off may yet be included
> in the mark system.
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Daniel <jayjeti@...> wrote:
> > I've wondered how in a cashless society, should one ever be implemented, how individuals could make transactions among themselves. Today I saw a commercial where a group were at a restaurant, and they had one bill that everyone needed to chip into to pay. One person paid the restaurant, and the others gave that person their part of the bill by pulling out their cell phones and sending money to his bank account. But one person pulls out his wallet and starts pulling cash out of it, and the others look at him like he's an idiot, and he looks embarrassed. The commercial says all you need is their e-mail address.
> > I don't have a video of the commercial, but here's something similiar.
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Uw5bMrZ3wU > >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA_L3Cc9VqI&feature=related > >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEurC8AUB2Y&feature=related > >
> > I wonder if some day people might need an implanted chip to work in concert with a cell phone so that someone oould not steal your cell phone and key information and empty your account.
> > Daniel
> > ------------------------------------
> > You are receiving this because you have subscribed to the Bible Prophecy
> > List. If you'd like to unsubscribe for any reason, send a blank e-mail to:
> > bible_prophecy-l-unsubscribe@yaho... > >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> Prophecy News
> http://prophecynews.blogspot.com/ >
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
You are receiving this because you have subscribed to the Bible Prophecy
List. If you'd like to unsubscribe for any reason, send a blank e-mail to: