Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Is Cain's 999 Plan The Mark of the Beast or Pizza Promotional?

Herman Cain is proposing an overhaul of the American tax system that he calls the 999 Plan.  If this sounds like a pizza promotional, well, what do you expect from the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza?  Please hold the jokes about the whether the plan comes with extra toppings, garlic bread, and a large drink.  However, other people are a little more concerned about the potentially sinister numerical significance.  999 is considered by many to be a variant of 666, which has traditionally been called the "mark of the beast", at least according to conventional biblical translations of Revelation 13:18, which say, "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number [is] Six hundred threescore [and] six".  This is supposedly the number or seal used by the Antichrist to mark himself and all those who cooperate with him.

Interestingly, verse one of Revelation 13 also may apply to Cain, because it says, in part, "upon his head is the name of blasphemy". Well, Cain, as you will recall was the murderous brother of Abel, and the biblical Cain was given the Mark of Cain, as per Genesis 4:15.  The name Cain might therefore be considered blasphemous in itself, since it is the name of the first murderer who rebelled against Yahweh.

Of course, Herman Cain says it's just his flat tax rate proposal where each individual would pay 9% income tax, corporations would pay 9%, and there would be a 9% sales tax.  As the link above notes, this would absolutely wallop the poor, because he wants to make it so that everyone has to pay it and many poor people end up paying no income tax after deductions.  Furthermore, this 9% federal sales tax would be on top of the sales taxes charged by many states.  In fact there are also some cities that charge sales tax.  So people could end up being charged state, federal, and municipal sales tax on a purchase.  Naturally, wage earners on the bottom rungs would take the largest hit from this because they usually spend all of their incomes on necessities like food, gas, etc.

So even if Cain's 999 plan is not a satanic conspiracy, making Herman Cain the Antichrist, it would be extremely bad for anyone but the richest of the rich.  Cain has made it very clear, from day 1 that the super-rich are the only people he cares about.  That's why his 999 plan shields all investor income.  Jesus spoke of helping the poor.  Cain is the antithesis of Jesus in that he only cares about helping the rich.

Note:  I am NOT saying that I take Revelation 13:18 seriously, or that I believe that it is an authentic prophecy.  Many serious students of Christian theology have concluded that the 666 reference, which is alternately 616 in some of the oldest translations, was a likely reference to the Roman emperor Nero, who was well known for his persecution of the early Christian church.  Nero, if the tales of his actions were true, would fit the bill as an "Antichrist", in the sense of being anti-Christian, far better than many of the people who have been labeled possible antichrists over the intervening centuries and millennia since this prophecy has gone unfulfilled.

In modern times, people have come up with all kinds of fanciful conspiracy theories, claim that 666 shows up in barcodes, or that these digits will be embedded in chips which are implanted inside of people as an alternative to money.


  1. Jesus did not say the government is responsible for helping the poor. He intends for the church to help the poor and for you to give of yourself to help the poor. Living in a state or country that has more social programs does not fulfill your moral obligation to "be like Christ".

    Additionally, a careful study of the Word of God would reveal that welfare and other government handouts are actually contrary to the Word.

    II Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

    I Timothy 5:8, “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”

    There are needy that the bible does ask the church to support in various ways, and we are called to tithe to support those individuals.

    There's much more where this came from so keep reading the Word to learn more! note: read why God destroyed Sodom! :)


  2. I am quite aware of 2 Thesselonians 3:10, which is Paul's rule, not God's, and is completely contrary to many examples and teachings of Jesus himself. Paul admits in the verse that it is his rule, though he cannot possibly mean it to apply to all who cannot work, because this too would be utterly at odds with the teachings of Jesus and the actions of many of his followers. Jesus never once required labor from the poor as a requirement for feeding them or otherwise helping them, nor did he suggest that those who failed to perform the labor he required should be starved to death. Plenty of people cannot work and taking this teaching literally would say that the disabled should be starved as well. Trying to generalize this rule beyond the immediate circumstances and the environment for which it was written is therefore a false and naive exegesis. After all, does God require that people work in heaven? What about retired people or rich people who used to work but no longer do? According to a literal reading of Paul's rule, if they didn't work then they should not be allowed to eat, even if they wanted to pay for it.

    As far as 1 Tim 5:8, the NIV reads, "Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." You will note that this verse is contradictory to 2 Thess 3:10", because it requires you to care for relatives whether they work or not. Of course in the context of 1 Tim 5, he is simply stating that families have obligations to help each other, as part of putting christian charity into practice. Therefore, those who would disown their brothers, and we're all brothers, for being out of work, for example, are not true christians and the teaching of 2 Thess 3:10 is even more clearly shown to be false, when taken out of context, as a generalized principle.

    As far as your comment about Sodom, that's even more ironic, because most serious scholars think that the sin of Sodom was lack of charity and hospitality for strangers, and had nothing to do with homosexuality.