Very good. I've often questioned the ideas of many prophecy teachers for similar reasons. It seems pretty clear in the New Testament that the church "body" is the temple of God now. It's part of the reason why I really question the idea that the "mark of the beast" is going to be some physical mark, chip, tattoo, whatever. It's always seemed to me that the mark was more of an internal mark that was a representation of loyalty. Those sealed by the Spirit are Loyal to Christ, those who "take the mark" are loyal to the beast.
It's interesting you say to question anyone who claims to have Jesus' authority. What do you think of the idea of the majority of the reformers: that the Pope of Rome is AntiChrist? The Pope does claim to have Jesus' authority as the "Vicar of Christ."
Good read sir. I'm enjoying the curmudgeon's bible series.
Thank you, @garthfreeman.
I believe you are absolutely correct that the "mark of the beast" is symbolic and spiritual, and that it is the counterpart to believers who are sealed by the Holy Spirit.
I don't believe anyone can wield Jesus' authority in the same sense that he does, and I have never believed that the Pope is a Christ substitute...
P.S. Hope to do a post on "antichrist" one day.