that identity: one mechanism is that of differentiated keys, i.e. keys that are derived and different from a master differential identity key, allowing asserting identity without disclosing it. In that context, we would interpret the book 1984 as offering a rather compelling case for a strong differential identity system as a means to achieve effective privacy as opposed to suggesting a repulsive reaction to such a system.

The Book of Revelation tells a story of an apocalyptic “end of days.” Most interpretations suggest it is a story of the final battle of the forces of Satan, led by the Antichrist, against God and the “chosen elect.” We note that the book never actually mentions the designation of Antichrist. Rather, it makes reference to two great beasts that are generally viewed as allegorical references to Satan and to his emissary on the Earth called the Antichrist. Embedded within the book is a reference to the mark of the beast; an identifying marker metaphorically associated with the Antichrist and the followers of the Antichrist. From our perspective, Revelation, much like 1984, elicits a somewhat distorted view derived from popular misconceptions regarding the various facets of identity. The issue, relative to identification mechanisms, extends from Revelation 13:16-18:

While sometimes interpreted that the mark of the beast so indicated is intended to establish the identity of the followers of the Antichrist, we would note that it does so through a credential of authority, not through establishment of differential identity. In other words, the mark of the beast is an indicator of a specific set of people, not of the identification of individual people within that set. The distinction is profound. The purpose of the mark is the establishment of a stereotype persona that is the same for every person within the specific group; that is, those who have mistakenly followed the Antichrist. The mark in fact is an identity index derived from the Antichrist, not the differential identity of the individual person. Interestingly enough, Graves speaks to this point in direct reference to the establishment of the specific metaphor of the mark of the beast in The White Goddess. He suggests that the reference to the mark of the beast was a number derived from a titulus (an inscription) designating the identity of the Antichrist. He considers that the number 666 is represented by the Roman numerals: D.C.L.X.V.I., abbreviating DOMITIUS CAESAR LEGATOS XTI VIOLENTER INTERFECIT. The translation is that Domitius Caesar sacrilegiously killed the envoys of Christ, an interpretation keeping with at least one path of understanding of the Book of Revelation.

That school of interpretation of Revelation is called preterism. It suggests that the prophecies revealed in Revelation were actually fulfilled in the century following the crucifixion of Jesus. In other words, the references to the Antichrist were actually references to the Roman Emperors responsible for the persecution of the early Christians. Of course, this is not the only school of interpretation. Others suggest that the prophesies are yet unfulfilled. As we will consider in somewhat more detail in our last chapter, the metaphorical presentation of Revelation is such that many in virtually every generation of Christians for the last two millennia have found current relevance in the book. However, no matter the specific interpretations of the identity (specifically, the differential identity) of the Antichrist, the relevant scriptures indicate that the mark of the beast is a direct reference to the Antichrist’s differential identity or an identity index derived from that

Book available at Midori Press (regular)
Book available at Midori Press (signed)
Book available at Amazon (regular)