U.S. sues company over miner's religious objection to handscan
A Pennsylvania mining company sued by the federal government on behalf of a worker who refused a biometric handscan because he believes in the Bible's mark of the beast prophecy, said on Thursday that it supports religious freedom.
The Equal Opportunity Employment Commission filed a lawsuit against Consul Energy Inc, stating that Beverly Butcher Jr. had worked at the company's coal mine in Mannington, West Virginia, for more than 35 years, until he was required to use a biometric hand scanner to track his hours.
Consul, with headquarters in Western Pennsylvania, was accused of discriminating against Butcher, who repeatedly told mining officials that using the scanner violated his Evangelical Christian beliefs, given his view of the relationship between hand-scanning technology and the mark of the beast in the New Testament's Book of Revelation, the lawsuit said....
Well, this might sound nonsensical following my question, but I personally believe what you said, but had forgotten until now (that's the nonsensical part). I remember thinking one time how impossible I thought it would be to be in public office and be a born again Christian for pretty much the same reasons you mentioned. 1) How can any politician hold his/her office for any length of time, all the while upholding their Christian values, duties, etc. 2) I believe that any truly born again Christian would have to hide their beliefs if they were to ever hope for a spot in government. Mentioning a belief in God would be one thing, but proclaiming that you are against homosexuality, abortion, gay unions, evolution, etc, etc, would be the death of any aspiring politician.
Christopher000 wrote: By the way, what's wrong with thinking or hoping that someone in office might be a born again Christian?
Well here are my divisive thoughts. If someone is born again, then that is something they canât or wouldnât want to hide from others. Now if our culture is primarily non-Christian, then how would they ever get elected? In my opinion, our culture truly hates and despises those that are truly born again. Can you imagine the political speeches of someone who is truly born again? Number two; when an executive level politician, Mayor, Governor, President, takes the oath of office, he/she swears unto God they will in some fashion uphold and support the laws of the land and the constitution. Now, the laws of the land say abortion is legal; homosexuality is legal and in many areas homosexual marriage is legal, among other things. So, how can a born again believer take an oath unto God to disobey God? Lastly, if they became born again while in office, then they would have to do executive decrees to stop the things I noted and then they would be booted out of office.
Our constitution has no religious litmus test; therefore it is "impossible", well maybe highly unlikely.
Yeah, that's me, the stupid noob=noobie=newbie. I think what scares people is the name, biometric...when it is really nothing but a glorified fingerprint of the hand which also measurs its charistics. Really no different than a fingerprint which could also be considered technology leading to the mark of the beast. Personal choice, of course, but to think you might be taking the mark, and being tricked into doing so?
By the way, what's wrong with thinking or hoping that someone in office might be a born again Christian?
Frank wrote: Hey Pilgrim! Of course you could be correct. I have always thought that the mark, whatever it is, will only be taken by those who "understand" what it means. In other words, I can't take the mark by accident and will understand that it means I will deny the true Messiah and embrace and worship the false one; the one that has promised to give me the worldly comforts that I desire. Re. 19 says those that have the mark will "worship" his image. Guess what group of people that call themselves Christian make and worship images. Don't bother, I already know that you know. Those that love the world and the traditions of men will be prime candidates.
People who call themselves Christian, yet make and worship images? Phew! That's a hard one, Frank. I'm not sure I can come up with an answer. Unless you mean the R....the R.....the... no, surely not. Not the R....., not again! Oh dear, Reality will be so upset. Why do they keep turning up in every thread? Maybe because they are mentioned so often in scripture, especially the Book of Revelation (which, in the Vaticanus ms is strangely missing).
John UK wrote: Could even be a lazer print on the bone, Frank. Prepare for the criminal element to start learning how to amputate hands. Phew, it better be on the forehead, eh?
Hey Pilgrim! Of course you could be correct. I have always thought that the mark, whatever it is, will only be taken by those who "understand" what it means. In other words, I can't take the mark by accident and will understand that it means I will deny the true Messiah and embrace and worship the false one; the one that has promised to give me the worldly comforts that I desire. Re. 19 says those that have the mark will "worship" his image. Guess what group of people that call themselves Christian make and worship images. Don't bother, I already know that you know. Those that love the world and the traditions of men will be prime candidates.
No self-respecting Pilgrim would ever do that.
Sorry for rambling, but when you get old that is what happens.
Prepare for the criminal element to start learning how to amputate hands. Phew, it better be on the forehead, eh?
I wonder what the people who were living around 1611 thought of modern translations? Well at least you appear to be a KJOnlyist who is not afraid to admit it. Most pretend they arenât when they are.
1. John Wycliffe (c. 1320-84) 2. Johannes Gutenberg (1396-1468) invented the printing press. The Gutenberg Bible was published in 1455. 3. William Tyndale (c. 1492-1536) 4. Miles Coverdale (1488-1569) 5. Thomas Matthew (c. 1500-1555) John Rogers, under the name Thomas Matthew, published his own version in 1537 6. . The Great Bible (1539) 7. The Geneva Bible (1560) 8. The Bishopâs Bible (1568) 9. The Rheims-Douai Version (1609-10) 10. King James (âAuthorizedâ) Version (1611)
Now I happen to agree with you that it will be some type of chip or implant, but a tattoo is also "in" the hand and you could say on the hand as well.
Modern versions of the Bible say that the mark of the beast will be on the forehead or hand. This leads people to believe it'll be a tattoo of some sort. That's wrong. Modern versions come from Vatican which, Roman Catholics. Revelation makes it clear that Catholics are the great whore of Bablyon. They've already got. people fooled on what the mark of the beast will be with their satanic counterfeit Bibles. The KJV, the only real Bible, says that the mark of the beast will be in the hand or in the forehead. It will be some type of implant. This ma has nothing to worry about because the body of Christ is still here. The rapture hasn't happened. With that said, he has the rights to refuse things. I'd make the same choice if I was in his place.
Biometric hand/finger scanners simply measure the dimensions, proportions, and characteristics, etc, if the hand. I don't think this gentleman had anything to be concerned about to begin with. I don't think it's really much different than taking a simple fingerprint, etc. Now, if they wanted to tatoo, inject a nano chip, or similar, we'd all take issue.