Yoav Tchelet
Still loading

The future of medical microchip implants and the dilemma from a medical, social, religious perspective

Some say that we will go down in history as the prequel to the home electricus.

More and more people are questioning whether or not there is a case to be made in terms of microchipping people for non-medical purposes.

It will comes as no surprise that this has raised a lot of eyebrows and concerns, both on medical, social and religious fronts. But think about it for a minute. In 1946, the University of Pennsylvania had the first ever computer, which filled a room. It very quickly became smaller because the transistors were used instead of vacuum tubes, and these were then replaced by microchips.

At the blink of an eye later, the desktop revolution started. Then we had the iPod and the iPhone, now we have the iPad. Research Gate poses an interesting question:

“What will be the next big ‘i’? Will it be the iplant? The internet-enabled microchip implant which renders all passwords obsolete?”

But since technology has brought us nothing – or almost nothing – but good, why would anybody think there is a problem with it? Let’s look at this from a medical, social and religious perspective.
The Medical Dilemma
The medical world is governed by ethics. In order for anything new to take place or to be developed, it must first be determined whether or not it is ethical. Using implanted devices, as we currently do to identify animals, is incredibly controversial and there is not agreement yet as to whether or not it is ethical. The Hansson Philosophy Unit states that:

“Whereas technological implants relieve us of some of the ethical problems connected with transplantation, other difficulties arise that are in need of careful analysis. A systematic approach to implant ethics is proposed.”

The Social Dilemma
We live in a world where people have lost faith in the government. Conspiracy theories are rife and suggesting implants in human beings is bound to start new theories. There is a concern that this is simply the government’s – or the Illuminat’is – way of controlling the population, leading to global domination in the ways predicted by George Orwell’s 1984. This is a significant concern, because it would stop people from choosing to have a medical microchip installed.

The Religious Dilemma
The religious dilemma is very complicated. There are a number of religions, such as the Jehova’s witnesses, who believe medical intervention goes against the will of God. These would not accept receiving a medical implant at any point. However, there is also an increasing number of religious people who believe medical implants are the “mark of the Beast”. In Revelations 13:16-18, it says that:

“He (The AntiChrist) forced everyone, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And no man can buy or sell, unless he had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”

There are many other examples of the “mark of the beast” in various scriptures that seem to point to the possibility that the idea of microchips was first described by John the Prophet some 2,000 years ago. Others, on the other hand, think that a microchip is not symbolic of the Devil at all, not even if they were all imprinted with the number 666. They feel that the microchip is just a smoke screen about what is really going on and turn to the scriptures not to find the warnings of the coming beast, but to find the actions they should take in order to avoid being taken in by the false prophet.

So what do you think about this?

Leave a Reply