Christian Man Gets Payout for Refusing Mark of the Beast

A Christian man who was forced to retire after his company, Consol Energy/Consolidation Coal Co.’s mining operations, in Mannington, West Virginia, was awarded $150,000 in compensatory damages last Thursday by a federal jury.

The U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit on behalf of Beverly Butcher against Consol Energy after the company refused to accommodate him when he told them that submitting to a newly installed biometric hand-scanner that tracks employees’ time and attendance conflicted with his religious belief.

Butcher told his superiors in June 2012 that he couldn’t submit to the scan because he believes the technology has a connection to the “Mark of the Beast” and antichrist highlighted in the book of Revelation in the Bible. Consol Energy/Consolidation refused to exempt Butcher from the scanning, rejecting a manual alternative which they had granted to two employees who were missing fingers.

A letter written by the scanner’s vendor, Recognition Systems Inc., was given to Butcher. It expressed the vendor’s interpretation of chapter 13, verse 16 of the book of Revelation. The vendor pointed out that the “scripture references the Mark of the Beast only on the right hand and forehead; and suggests that persons with concerns about taking the Mark of the Beast ‘be enrolled’ with their left hand and palm facing up.”

Do you think the employee took it too far? What would you have done?

Source: http://www.christianpost.com/news/jury-awards-150k-to-evangelical-christian-fired-for-refusing-mark-of-the-beast-133038/

 

Drew Koehler

Founder and writer for Geeks Under Grace. Christian, Husband, Father, Sailor and Geek!

7 Comments

  1. Espeon Ninjacatcher on March 11, 2015 at 1:45 am

    I don’t think it’s The Mark but I’d just rather not get it…

  2. Drew Camp on January 27, 2015 at 8:01 am

    The picture on the title is kind of misleading.
    There is absolutely NO tattoo, implant, or any physical “mark” left by the scanner. It’s like a retinal scanner or fingerprint reader, but it looks at the specific geometry of someone’s hand. While it’s Butcher’s right to believe whatever he wants about the mark, this does seem kind of silly.

  3. Roxaus on January 27, 2015 at 5:30 am

    the really interesting debate here is what constitutes as violating someone ‘religious beliefs.’ In this example we see someone refusing to partake in an activity based on his interpretation of a certain segment of scripture, which was then countered with another interpretation. And while the position taken by this guy might be in-line with what popular Christian thought might be culturally, his interpretation is far from being agreed upon across the board by Christians, theologians and scholars alike.
    So was his claim legit? And if so, how far can any individual interpret scripture before it’s no longer ‘religious belief.’ Very difficult to draw a legal line in the sand there.

  4. Bryan Conard on January 27, 2015 at 4:55 am

    It may not be exactly “The Mark”, if you’re saying that it MUST be in the right hand or the head. However, where an object is doesn’t always change what an object is.

    It’s likely not The Mark, but if it isn’t, then obviously it is in the same league and probably could be a prototype or forerunner for it.

    I would be very uncomfortable with this situation and wouldn’t get one of those chips put in just because it’s too similar.

  5. Geoff on January 27, 2015 at 2:51 am

    I think it’s good to press back against this stuff. This company should not be able to require the implant of this technology anymore than it should be able to require workers get company loyalty tattoos. And while it’s hard for the beast to have a mark before the beast is revealed I think a reasonable Christian can have scruples against getting involved with a technology that I think a lot of Christians believe will be used for evil down the road.

  6. Charlotte on January 27, 2015 at 2:32 am

    I wholeheartedly agree with the employee as tattoing is a mark of the beast, and I feel disappointed his personal beliefs weren’t respected.

  7. Victoria Grace Howell on January 27, 2015 at 1:08 am

    I don’t think it’s the Mark of the Beast necessarily, but I don’t do stuff attached to or inside my body that I can’t take off. Too many sci-fi novels and I rather not take the chance considering a lot of stuff we thought was just sci-fi has come true like touch screens and cell phones. I’m not a conspiracy theorist or anything, but I would refuse it too.

Leave a Reply