Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

666


  • Please log in to reply
363 replies to this topic

#1 Russell

Russell

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 13 December 2007 - 02:42 AM

:blush:

#2 Richie

Richie

    Chi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,355 posts

Posted 13 December 2007 - 05:40 AM

The number of the beast. Which is also the number of the man. What man? The only man in the context is the man child of chapter 12... the man who turned into a beast (hence all the allusions to Nebuchadnezzar in the context).

600 and 6 are the first and last letters of "Christ" and 60 looks like a serpent. Looks like Christ on the outside (man child) but is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Just like the second of the beasts in chapter 13 who had two horns like a lamb (looks like Christ) but spoke as a dragon.
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life." - Terry Pratchett.

#3 Russell

Russell

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 13 December 2007 - 08:52 PM

The number of the beast. Which is also the number of the man. What man? The only man in the context is the man child of chapter 12... the man who turned into a beast (hence all the allusions to Nebuchadnezzar in the context).

600 and 6 are the first and last letters of "Christ" and 60 looks like a serpent. Looks like Christ on the outside (man child) but is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Just like the second of the beasts in chapter 13 who had two horns like a lamb (looks like Christ) but spoke as a dragon.


Thanks Richie for those thoughts.

The reason for my question is that I have been asked (much to my surprise if you understand the circumstances) for my opinion. I would like to give John an intelligent answer.

I have long been sceptical of the approach that bases its argument on the numerical value of the letters making up the name of whatever "man of sin" is targeted. These are reasons for my caution:

1. There are many attributions that are possible. That is there are many words that can be made to add up to 666.
2. I have seen it done with Hebrew words. I have not seen any evidence that the numerical value of Hebrew letters was even invented by the 1st century.

It is better to look at the context of the chapter, and also to compare scripture with scripture.

It is reasonable to conclude that the beast of Rev 13 is a continuation of the series of beasts of Dan 7. These beasts represent the Roman empire and its predecessors.

Rev 13:18 This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.

Catholic Europe arose from the ruins of the Roman Empire, and was important in preserving a distorted form of Christianity, while suppressing true Christianity.

So identification of "the man" as the papacy is not unreasonable.

There are two other cases of 666 in scripture.

Ezr 2:13 The sons of Adonikam, 666. (this seems purely co-incidental)

1Ki 10:14 Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was 666 talents of gold,

This one is more interesting. Solomon was the son of David. Great promises were made. If Solomon were to be worthy then the results would have been great.

2Sa 7:14-15 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men, (15) but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you.

However Solomon's heart was turned by his wives, and their gods. And maybe also by his great riches?

They are my thoughts. I'll subject them to criticism and/or comment though before I pass them onto John.

#4 Richie

Richie

    Chi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,355 posts

Posted 13 December 2007 - 09:00 PM

Yes I think actually Revelation 13 quotes from the passage about Solomon. He was someone who promised great things and his kingdom was immense, but he fell into apostasy. A suitable type of the system in Revelation.
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life." - Terry Pratchett.

#5 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 13 December 2007 - 11:15 PM

The reason for my question is that I have been asked (much to my surprise if you understand the circumstances) for my opinion. I would like to give John an intelligent answer.

I have long been sceptical of the approach that bases its argument on the numerical value of the letters making up the name of whatever "man of sin" is targeted. These are reasons for my caution:

1. There are many attributions that are possible. That is there are many words that can be made to add up to 666.


But there aren't many which are relevant to the name of the fourth beast.

2. I have seen it done with Hebrew words. I have not seen any evidence that the numerical value of Hebrew letters was even invented by the 1st century.


Absolutely. Greek gematria of this kind is found in the 1st century.

It is better to look at the context of the chapter, and also to compare scripture with scripture.

It is reasonable to conclude that the beast of Rev 13 is a continuation of the series of beasts of Dan 7. These beasts represent the Roman empire and its predecessors.


Exactly. The number 666 is the number of the name of the beast. That is precisely why 'Lateinos' makes sense.

Rev 13:18 This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.


Actually 'it is the number of man' is more likely, but your connection with Solomon is still valid.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#6 Russell

Russell

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 14 December 2007 - 12:45 AM

The reason for my question is that I have been asked (much to my surprise if you understand the circumstances) for my opinion. I would like to give John an intelligent answer.

I have long been sceptical of the approach that bases its argument on the numerical value of the letters making up the name of whatever "man of sin" is targeted. These are reasons for my caution:

1. There are many attributions that are possible. That is there are many words that can be made to add up to 666.


But there aren't many which are relevant to the name of the fourth beast.

2. I have seen it done with Hebrew words. I have not seen any evidence that the numerical value of Hebrew letters was even invented by the 1st century.


Absolutely. Greek gematria of this kind is found in the 1st century.

It is better to look at the context of the chapter, and also to compare scripture with scripture.

It is reasonable to conclude that the beast of Rev 13 is a continuation of the series of beasts of Dan 7. These beasts represent the Roman empire and its predecessors.


Exactly. The number 666 is the number of the name of the beast. That is precisely why 'Lateinos' makes sense.

Rev 13:18 This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.


Actually 'it is the number of man' is more likely, but your connection with Solomon is still valid.



1. Lateinos may well be a valid interpretation. But to arrive at it I have to go through the context of the chapter mainly, with some support from the Solomon connection. Once this context is made then it is quite a reasonable idea.

2. I wasn't speaking of Greek. I was speaking of Hebrew. Perhaps it is a bit unfair of me but when someone says "666 has meaning in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew", and give some far-fetched Hebrew example then that has put me off a bit. But I suppose on reflection I should not allow wrong-headed stuff to prejudice me against a more level-headed interpretation. Sadly Bible interpretation seems to have more than its fair share of wrong-headed stuff.

#7 Russell

Russell

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 14 December 2007 - 03:12 AM

Thank you all.

I just needed to clarify in my mind what I mostly already knew.

#8 Russell

Russell

    Pi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 699 posts

Posted 14 December 2007 - 03:49 AM

Just to complete the story. Here is what I sent.

Hi John

The context of Rev 13 is about a beast. The beast has exactly the same characteristics as the beasts of Dan 7. I therefore conclude that the beast of Rev 13 is a continuation of the Roman empire, because 4th beast of Dan 7 is Rome.

Comparing scripture with scripture. 666 occurs in only 2 other contexts.

Ezr 2:13 The sons of Adonikam, 666. (this seems purely co-incidental)

1Ki 10:14 Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was 666 talents of gold,

This one is more interesting. Solomon was the son of David. Great promises were made. If Solomon had been worthy then the results would have been great.

2Sa 7:14-15 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men, (15) but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you.

However Solomon's heart was turned by his wives, and their gods. And maybe also by his great riches? He was someone who promised great things and his kingdom was immense, but he fell into apostasy. A suitable type of the system in Revelation. The Roman Catholic Church started as the true church, but apostacised. (Just because it happened to the RC church does NOT mean that it cannot happen to us too of course!)

So it seems reasonable in the context that the number of man 666 has a reference to Catholic Europe and to the papal power.

Therefore the use of Greek gematria as "Lateinos" is very likely the correct meaning out of a number of possible 666 attributions.

Does that answer your question, John?

Have a happy Christmas with the family,
Russell

#9 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 14 December 2007 - 01:17 PM

1. Lateinos may well be a valid interpretation. But to arrive at it I have to go through the context of the chapter mainly, with some support from the Solomon connection. Once this context is made then it is quite a reasonable idea.


Well that's just good exegesis. Of course you wouldn't consider any solution without first considering the context.

2. I wasn't speaking of Greek. I was speaking of Hebrew.


Yes I realise that. I was saying that although there's no evidence for 1st century Hebrew gematria being relevant, there is attestation for 1st century use of Greek gematria being relevant.

Perhaps it is a bit unfair of me but when someone says "666 has meaning in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew", and give some far-fetched Hebrew example then that has put me off a bit.


Not at all. It put me off as well.

But I suppose on reflection I should not allow wrong-headed stuff to prejudice me against a more level-headed interpretation. Sadly Bible interpretation seems to have more than its fair share of wrong-headed stuff.


I certainly agree.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#10 Danage

Danage

    Banned

  • On Vacation
  • PipPip
  • 293 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 06:53 PM

I believe that 666 refers to several ways of saying the Papacy is an Antichrist of sorts.

I'll just quote from my book:
"Vicarivs (V is the Latin equivalent of U) Filii Dei adds up to 666 (V=5, I=1, C=100, L=50, and D=500, thus 5+1+100+0+0+1+5 +0+1+50+1+1 +500+0+1 = 666).
Pope Gregory XVI (reigned 1831-1846) wore the Papal tiara during Easter Mass in 1845. Vicarius is on the top crown, Filii is on the middle crown and Dei is on the bottom-most crown.
The Pope also has other titles that add up to 666. Another Latin one to begin with: Dvx Cleri, Captain of the Clergy, adds up to 666 (500+5+10 (X=10) 100+50+0+0+1=666)
Another Latin one: Lvdovicvs, Vicar of the Court adds up to 666 (50+5+500+0+5+1+100+5+0=666).
Holy Light of G-d is rendered as Sancta Lvx Dei which adds up to 666 (0+0+0+100+0+0 +50+5+10 +500+0+1=666)
Rex Latinvs Sacerdos (King of the Roman Priests) is yet another title which adds up to 666 (0+0+10 +50+0+0+1+0+5+0 +0+0+100+0+0+0+500+0=666)
The previous Pope, John Paul II, had his name add up to 666. The name, as rendered in Latin is Ioanes Pavlvs Secvundo (1+0+0+0+0+0 +0+0+5+50+5+0 +0+0+100+5+0+500+0=666)
Now for the Greek ones. I Protera (tenth “first of two”) adds up to 666 (I=10, P=80, R=100, 0=70, T=300, E=5, 1=1, 10 +80+100+70+300+5+100+1=666)
Lateinous, the Latin-speaking man, equates to 666 (L=50, N=50, 0=70 and S=200, thus 30+1+300+5+10+50+70+200=666). Latin is the official language of the Roman catholic Church, the Vatican City and the Pope. The numbering was first proposed by Irenaeus.
He Latine Basileia (The Latin Kingdom) adds up to the number of the Beast (B=2, thus 0+8 +30+1+300+10+50+8 +2+1+200+10+30+5=666).
Italika Ekklesia (Italian Church) adds up to 666 (K=20, thus 10+300+1+30+10+20+1 +5+20+20+30+8+200+10+1=666)
Apostates also spells 666 in the Greek numerical system (O=70, S=6, thus 1+80+70+6+0+1+300+8+200=666)
Satan in the Greek tongue is spelt Teitan, which adds up to 666 (300+5+10+300+1+50=666).
Now for the Hebrew equivalents of 666. First off, Romiith (Roman Kingdom) spells 666 (R=200, O=6, M=40, I=10, T=400, thus 200+6+40+10+10+400+0=666)
A similar word to Romiith, Romiti (Roman Man), spells 666 (200+6+40+10+400+10=666)."

If this is not allowed, please forgive me, but I believe that Historicism is the correct way of interpreting Revelation, Daniel and Ezekiel 38-39.

Edited by Danage, 17 February 2008 - 06:59 PM.


#11 mdbarton

mdbarton

    Eta

  • Christadelphian
  • Pip
  • 75 posts

Posted 18 February 2008 - 12:07 PM

Could it have anything to do with Daniel 3, where Nebuchadnezzar sets up the golden image, 60 cubits x 6 cubits (I know it misses a 6)? Nebuchadnezzar seems to be trying to challenge the vision given him by God in Daniel 2, by extending the head of gold to the whole image, and then forcing all men to worship it. Nebuchadnezzar invents a false form of worship and compels all his subjects to worship the image. Of course, he is overcome by God working through Daniel's three friends.

Also, the 6th letter in Psalm 119 is VAU (Psalm 119:41-48). This is the closest in hebrew to W. WWW.
"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. 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."

Right, I'm off to Amazon to buy some stuff... Seriously, man worships self, more than God. That's how I, in my simple way, view this - I find some of these interpretations based on the numbers difficult to grasp.

#12 nsr

nsr

    Order of the Golden Pedant 2nd Class

  • Forum Manager
  • 6,354 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 02:32 PM

Is there any significance in the fact that 666 in Roman numerals is DCLXVI? (i.e. each different Roman numeral except M, followed by the next smallest one). I have no reason to think this is significant other than it's a bit of a coincidence.

I have also been considering the following:
- the judgements of Revelation are split into 3 sections (seals, trumpets vials)
- each section has 7 judgements, after which it is complete
- in sections 1 and 2 (seals and trumpets) the sixth trumpet produces (or is at least followed by) an earthquake, which I understand to symbolise a revolutionary shake-up of the political system
- the sixth vial is followed by the frog-like spirits promising lies to mankind
My point being that although in God's purpose, 7 are required to complete each sequence, man thinks salvation has come after 6. He sees the political shake-up or the lying spirits and thinks this is salvation, wrought by his own hands. Therefore the three 6s make 666, and it's all about man thinking he knows better than God and can save himself.

This is pretty much just speculation on my part, but I wanted to see what people thought. Feel free to tear it to shreds if it is complete nonsense :rolleyes:
"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect..." (Heb 12:22-23)

#13 Lectron

Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 04:09 PM

A non-CH perspective:



The number 666 occurs twice in the Old Testa­ment. One of the occurrences is the number of the descendants of Adonikam who returned from the Babylonian captivity. This usage can be excluded from our data, because the number of the descend­ants of Adonikam who returned from captivity is:
(a) 666 according to Ezra (103); but (b) 667 according to Nehemiah (104)

The other reference to 666 in the Old Testament is that which we need, and that to which reference is being made in the Apocalypse (105). It is (a) the annual income (b) of Solomon measured in c) talents of gold. The three factors are important. Elements of the numbers, of course, are associated with gold elsewhere, as for example, the measure­ments of the image that Nebuchadnezzar con­structed, the precursor of the image of the beast (106), but let us first examine (b) above. Solomon’s wealth was, of course, reckoned in many ways, for he satisfied the ‘prohibitions’ of Deuteronomy against kings who would get rich by ‘horse-trading’ (107).He accumulated silver, gold, horses and women. He was the arch-example of one who became rich by means of commercialism, trading between Kue (in Asia Minor) and Egypt. He was also the richest and most successful of Israel’s kings. In Asia Minor about 666 years before Christ, Gyges of Lydia in­vented coinage, as the precursor of modern money. The wealth of ‘golden Gyges’ was a byword for later generations. He was the ‘Gog’ on which Ezekiel’s prophecy of the final invasion of Israel is based (108). Now, money need no longer be weighed, as it had been. Instead, it could be counted. The world was signposted to accept money (as coinage) as a measuring rod of value. Further, the coins them­selves could be used to foster the myth of divinity of successive emperors. Of course, accounts were still to be written in measures of commodities such as oil and wheat, as in New Testament times, but money was destined to become a standard for measuring wealth in place of all other standards, and annual income was to be the basis for valuing people. Now the wheel has turned full circle. The value of a work-force may be expressed on accountants’ balance sheets by ‘discounting’ future potential in­come. Men are reduced to material terms by express­ing their worth in money as the capital value of their future annual income. Cost benefit analysts try to measure the inconvenience resulting from personal illness by translating it into money terms. Even though spiritual values cannot be bought or sold, there is a pseudo-scientific im­pression that everything in life can be translated into money, bought and sold. Nothing seems to be exempt. Goodwill, external­ities, public goods and services and mercy and benevolence are all valued in commercial terms, so that money takes the place of God, because it forms the basis of decision-making for so many. Those who previously consulted an oracle now resort to a cost-benefit calculation. The writer clearly speaks later of:”...victory over the beast, and the number of his name,” (110). Unless we believe that he regarded numbers as powerful (as in some magical sense) - we must con­clude that there is a warning that the number-system associated with 666 would itself be power­ful. Even Babylon’s number-system (which, incident­ally gave prominence to the numbers 60 and 6) does not satisfy the conditions perfectly, though it formed the basis of many magical formulae. If we disregard the confusing evidence obtain­able from gematria, and turn to the Old Testament for an interpretation of the number and of the reason why it is powerful, the data suggest the following:

1) It would be associated with buying and selling (86).
2) It would be associated with wealth obtainable by buying and selling.
3) It would be a means of human reckoning (a human number, or the number of man) (95) .
4) It would be associated with the beast of the earth, and therefore with the post-Christian period (95).
5) It would be a powerful means of decision-making (110).
6) It would be a means of using annual in­come to ‘value’ rich people (105).
7) It would also be associated with gold, and therefore with money which was originally coined from gold, and from electrum, an alloy of gold (105,106).
Monetary methods of decision-making (using such devices as cost-benefit analysis) satisfy all the conditions indicated by the data.

1) No one can buy or sell without money.
2) The methods adopted assume that all human values (even spiritual ones) can be translated into monetary benefits, and (without taking into account the effects of uncertainty of the values) attempt to express all values in the basest (materialistic) form of valuation.
3) Money-valuation has become the most typical means of human reckoning.
4) The rise of money as the measuring rod of value has been completed as a process in the post-Christian period, resulting
from that mercantilism which was contem­porary with renaissance, and with the reformation.
5) It utilizes a numerical means of decision-making and so is able to re­place the oracles and the numerological formulae of the ancient world.
6) It values ‘human assets’ in terms of annual income. People are ranked in terms of potential wealth.
7) It is materialistic and monetaristic in the fullest sense.
The interpretation that the number 666 repre­sents a mammon-based system of decision-making (such as those pseudo-scientific decision-making techniques of our age) thus satisfies all the conditions of the data. Further, this interpretation uniquely highlights the greatest dangers of our age, the danger of materialistic commercialism - of worshipping money in the fullest sense of the term, when the greatest things of all. are without money and without price (111).


(86) Revelation 13:17
(95) Revelation 13:18
(100) John 21:11 (101) 2 Samuel 3:39
(102) Luke 13:4
(103) Ezra 2:13
(104) Nehemiah 7:18
(105) 1 Kings 10:1
(106) Daniel 3:1 compare Daniel 3:5-6 with Revelation 13:15
(107) Deuteronomy 17:14-20 compare 1 Kings 10:28
(108) Bury: History of Greece (Macmillian) pp. 111-2, compare Ezekiel chs 38 & 39
(109) Luke 16:1-9 (110) Revelation 15:1-2
(110) Revelation 15:1-2
(111) Isaiah 55:1-2


Source

Edited by Lectron, 07 February 2009 - 06:03 PM.

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....


#14 nsr

nsr

    Order of the Golden Pedant 2nd Class

  • Forum Manager
  • 6,354 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 04:14 PM

I'm not sure how you would fit that into the historical framework of Revelation. Money existed and was a temptation long before Revelation was written. Paul wrote to Timothy that the love of money was a root of all kinds of evil.

May I ask what you understand by the beast(s) of Rev 13, and why 666 should be the "number of the beast"?
"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect..." (Heb 12:22-23)

#15 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 04:22 PM

Unless we believe that he regarded numbers as powerful (as in some magical sense) - we must con­clude that there is a warning that the number-system associated with 666 would itself be power­ful.


I don't understand the reasoning behind this conclusion.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#16 Huldah

Huldah

    Phi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,041 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 05:17 PM

See the diagram.

Attached Files


"Dear friends, if our conscience does not condemn us, we have confidence in the presence of God and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do the things that are pleasing to him. Now this is his commandment: that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he gave us the commandment. And the person who keeps his commandments resides in God, and God in him. Now by this we know that God resides in us: by the Spirit he has given us"
1 John 3.21-24

#17 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 05:33 PM

:rolleyes:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#18 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 05:36 PM

From the Website Huldah's image came from:

Notice the three "guard bars" (colored RED) at the beginning, middle and end. Now, notice the same bar pattern ("bar-space-bar" or "101") for the number 6 (colored BLUE).

By "looking" at the above barcode, the number "666" clearly, appears to be there. . .

But is it?

Is the number 666 TRUTHFULLY "hidden" in the UPC barcode?

Technically, no it is not.


Here's the "technical" truth. . .

The number 6 and the three guard bars are NOT the same. They do "appear" to be identical, but they are different.


Emphasis theirs. :rolleyes:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#19 Corky

Corky

    Pi

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 985 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 06:08 PM

I'm not sure how you would fit that into the historical framework of Revelation. Money existed and was a temptation long before Revelation was written. Paul wrote to Timothy that the love of money was a root of all kinds of evil.

May I ask what you understand by the beast(s) of Rev 13, and why 666 should be the "number of the beast"?


Wasn't it Nero who demanded that the Jews worship him as a god? There was something about his image on Roman money too, something about Roman money with his image on it being the only "legal tender" in the empire. could this be connected in some way to the Jewish war 66-70 AD?

#20 Lectron

Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 06:31 PM

Unless we believe that he regarded numbers as powerful (as in some magical sense) - we must con­clude that there is a warning that the number-system associated with 666 would itself be power­ful.


I don't understand the reasoning behind this conclusion.


The way I read it is that 'he' (the author of revelation) must surely wish us to receive the warning from the characterization of that system that is identified by the number (666), and not some mystical danger from the number itself.

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....


#21 Lectron

Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 06:45 PM

I'm not sure how you would fit that into the historical framework of Revelation. Money existed and was a temptation long before Revelation was written. Paul wrote to Timothy that the love of money was a root of all kinds of evil.


On the contrary, it is the beast that is prophecied. As for the number, the reader is expected to reason it from his own (1st century) perspective and the words of Jesus etc about being beware of Mammon, and the ultimate foolishness of the world's wisest man) - the appeal is to the wisdom of a true christian.

May I ask what you understand by the beast(s) of Rev 13, and why 666 should be the "number of the beast"?


Read the relevant chapter.

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....


#22 nsr

nsr

    Order of the Golden Pedant 2nd Class

  • Forum Manager
  • 6,354 posts

Posted 07 February 2009 - 10:27 PM

Thanks, I will...

OK, here are some brief thoughts:

You seem to be interpreting the Dragon, Beast and False Prophet as referring to opposition to God in particular time periods. Beasts in Scripture are used as a symbol of empires or kingdoms. How do you reconcile this with Daniel 7?

I don't think we can view the Dragon, Beast and False Prophet as a sort of anti-trinity to the Father, Son and HS. They are symbols, and they don't always refer to exactly the same entity each time they are mentioned. For example, the "earth beast" isn't even called "false prophet" until Rev 19/20 (from memory). The "dragon" of Rev 12 isn't referring to the same thing as the "dragon" in Rev 19/20. The symbol remains the same, but the entity identified by that symbol (fulfilling that role, if you like) isn't always the same. The "dragon" in Rev 12 is pagan Rome; the dragon in Rev 19/20 at Christ's return can't be pagan Rome because that no longer exists - but something else is now fulfilling the "dragon" role and being identified by that symbol.

In Rev 19/20 we also have the D, B and FP being destroyed. How do you understand that if (as I understand you to be saying) the Dragon and Beast are referring to time periods long past?

Why are you equating "antichrist" with the sea beast? Antichrist (as I understand it) is a form of false teaching, not a specific entity. I see no justification for "antichrist" being introduced here. This is an unjustified equivocation that the false churches make.

You can't have the sea beast as an amalgamation of the four beasts in Dan 7 immediately after the ministry of Christ, because one of Daniel's original 4 beasts (Rome) was still around, and its little horn hadn't grown yet.

You also appear to be suggesting that Revelation's vision includes things that happened in the past (such as Christ's ministry being the casting of the dragon out of heaven in Rev 12). Revelation is a vision of things to come in the future. And you appear to have the dragon referring to the entire pre-Christian period.

I keep saying "you" - are you actually the author of those pages, Lectron, or should I be saying "he/him"? Apologies if I am mistaken :rolleyes:
"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect..." (Heb 12:22-23)

#23 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 12:32 AM

Unless we believe that he regarded numbers as powerful (as in some magical sense) - we must con­clude that there is a warning that the number-system associated with 666 would itself be power­ful.


I don't understand the reasoning behind this conclusion.


The way I read it is that 'he' (the author of revelation) must surely wish us to receive the warning from the characterization of that system that is identified by the number (666), and not some mystical danger from the number itself.


The way I read it is that the author wants us to receive a warning about the system, and helps identify it using standard 1st century gematria. This has nothing to do with 'some mystical danger from the number itself'. How do you get 'there is a warning that the number-system associated with 666 would itself be power­ful'? Where is there any indication that there is a 'number-system associated with 666'?
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#24 Lectron

Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 01:33 AM

Unless we believe that he regarded numbers as powerful (as in some magical sense) - we must con­clude that there is a warning that the number-system associated with 666 would itself be power­ful.


I don't understand the reasoning behind this conclusion.


The way I read it is that 'he' (the author of revelation) must surely wish us to receive the warning from the characterization of that system that is identified by the number (666), and not some mystical danger from the number itself.


The way I read it is that the author wants us to receive a warning about the system, and helps identify it using standard 1st century gematria. This has nothing to do with 'some mystical danger from the number itself'. How do you get 'there is a warning that the number-system associated with 666 would itself be power­ful'? Where is there any indication that there is a 'number-system associated with 666'?


The author is not saying there is any power in the number!

There is little difference between us here, both of us agree that the reader's attention is drawn to the system or person rether than the number.
the difference lies between choosing to use gematria (turning a number into a name then using the name as a clue like "Lateinos" or "vicariusfilidei"), or choosing to use a scriptural construction for the cypher - leading to a mammon based system. Jesus specifically singles out the anti-divine nature of serving money.(Matt 6:24)

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....


#25 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 01:43 AM

The author is not saying there is any power in the number!


I agree. No one is saying this. Gematria is not kabbala.

There is little difference between us here, both of us agree that the reader's attention is drawn to the system or person rether than the number. the difference lies between choosing to use gematria (turning a number into a name then using the name as a clue like "Lateinos" or "vicariusfilidei"), or choosing to use a scriptural construction for the cypher - leading to a mammon based system.


If you had read my posts on this subject, you would know that I use a 'scriptural construction for the cypher', and that I use gematria collaboratively with the Scriptural data. It's difficult to avoid the reference to gematria here.

Jesus specifically singles out the anti-divine nature of serving money.(Matt 6:24)


That's not in dispute. What's in dispute is whether or not this number is being used as a highly encrypted way of saying 'Don't get too involved with money'. It's just too much work for such a simple point, especially given that other condemnations of idolatry in Revelation aren't encrypted at such depth. It's tough going even to associate Solomon's 666 talents of gold with 'mammon', given that this was God given wealth and there's no indication that Solomon worshipped it, or that he built a monetary system which enslaved people.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#26 lankysmith

lankysmith
  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 02:19 AM

it appears from the context that this system is contrary to God and His principles. note Revelation 13.16-17, small and great, rich and poor, slave and free are enslaved by this system to have an exsistence. that is quite contrary to the idea of been free in christ. the same idea also applies in the next chapter. the lamb stands on mount zion with the redeemed who have Gods name written in their foreheads.

whatever the number signifies it most definitely means something that is different to Gods way of life. to slaughter a qoute from an ex-president, if your not for God then you're against Him. to me the key feature of this system is the mark being in the hand - the actions of people, and/ or in their foreheads - the thoughts of people. as it is against God anything that does not do or think like Him is a part of this system in one way or another

#27 Lectron

Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 02:22 AM

Thanks, I will...

OK, here are some brief thoughts:

You seem to be interpreting the Dragon, Beast and False Prophet as referring to opposition to God in particular time periods. Beasts in Scripture are used as a symbol of empires or kingdoms. How do you reconcile this with Daniel 7?

Revelation uses symbology from Daniel and many other OT scriptures. It is not IMO Daniel part 2 or even a prophecy in the same style as Daniel. It is as much a devotional message as a prophetic one. It does not point out time sequences as in the 70 weeks or even as in the Olivet prophecy it is not a history forecast of the politics affecting the church or even of the church itself. It is rather a warning and an exhortation of the sort of spiritual forces that will be challenged and that will challenge the christian walk in ALL ages and in ALL lands both individually and collectively between the two advents.

I don't think we can view the Dragon, Beast and False Prophet as a sort of anti-trinity to the Father, Son and HS. They are symbols, and they don't always refer to exactly the same entity each time they are mentioned. For example, the "earth beast" isn't even called "false prophet" until Rev 19/20 (from memory). The "dragon" of Rev 12 isn't referring to the same thing as the "dragon" in Rev 19/20. The symbol remains the same, but the entity identified by that symbol (fulfilling that role, if you like) isn't always the same. The "dragon" in Rev 12 is pagan Rome; the dragon in Rev 19/20 at Christ's return can't be pagan Rome because that no longer exists - but something else is now fulfilling the "dragon" role and being identified by that symbol.

In Rev 19/20 we also have the D, B and FP being destroyed. How do you understand that if (as I understand you to be saying) the Dragon and Beast are referring to time periods long past?

They are not time periods, it is not a 'history' forecast

Why are you equating "antichrist" with the sea beast? Antichrist (as I understand it) is a form of false teaching, not a specific entity. I see no justification for "antichrist" being introduced here. This is an unjustified equivocation that the false churches make.

You can't have the sea beast as an amalgamation of the four beasts in Dan 7 immediately after the ministry of Christ, because one of Daniel's original 4 beasts (Rome) was still around, and its little horn hadn't grown yet.

Depends on your interpretation of Dan 2 & Dan 7 etc

You also appear to be suggesting that Revelation's vision includes things that happened in the past (such as Christ's ministry being the casting of the dragon out of heaven in Rev 12). Revelation is a vision of things to come in the future. And you appear to have the dragon referring to the entire pre-Christian period.

With the visions of Rev 6:12ff looking like the laststages of the conquest of the Land, and Rev11:15ff looking very much like the second advent, it would be difficult to present the apocalypse as continously moving forward in history after ch 3. Chapt 12 was discussed at legnth here.

I keep saying "you" - are you actually the author of those pages, Lectron, or should I be saying "he/him"? Apologies if I am mistaken :rolleyes:


He was my only brother (now asleep in Jesus).

For most of his life I strongly disagreed with him!!

Edited by Lectron, 08 February 2009 - 02:26 AM.

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....


#28 Lectron

Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 02:50 AM



Jesus specifically singles out the anti-divine nature of serving money.(Matt 6:24)


That's not in dispute. What's in dispute is whether or not this number is being used as a highly encrypted way of saying 'Don't get too involved with money'. It's just too much work for such a simple point, especially given that other condemnations of idolatry in Revelation aren't encrypted at such depth. It's tough going even to associate Solomon's 666 talents of gold with 'mammon', given that this was God given wealth and there's no indication that Solomon worshipped it, or that he built a monetary system which enslaved people.


Come, come, nobody has said "he built a monetary system" however, I would remind you that Solomon asked for wisdom rather than wealth. Then God blessed him with both! Yet he took this 'righteous mammon' and built a doomed empire with excessive building projects of stables for horses he should not have trusted in, and palaces and shrines for his 'wives' he should not have accumulated and which were his downfall, paid for out of the Royal exchequer and serviced by slave labour which was implicitly forbidden by God.
Yet Jesus, the 'greater than Solomon'points to the widow who puts in two mites as being of more value to God than the 100 gold coins of another giver.

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....


#29 Huldah

Huldah

    Phi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,041 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 10:31 AM

Dad, what were you doing up at 3:50AM :rolleyes:
"Dear friends, if our conscience does not condemn us, we have confidence in the presence of God and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do the things that are pleasing to him. Now this is his commandment: that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he gave us the commandment. And the person who keeps his commandments resides in God, and God in him. Now by this we know that God resides in us: by the Spirit he has given us"
1 John 3.21-24

#30 Lectron

Lectron

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 08 February 2009 - 10:37 AM



Jesus specifically singles out the anti-divine nature of serving money.(Matt 6:24)


That's not in dispute. What's in dispute is whether or not this number is being used as a highly encrypted way of saying 'Don't get too involved with money'.


This is a highly misrepresentative statement, it is drawing attention to the mis-use of money, not involvement. Wealth to Solomon was initially God given.
Even Jesus and the 12 were involved with it as much as their need - they even had an accountant tho' not a good one

It's just too much work for such a simple point


The solutions of Gematria are obtained by looking for solutions then 'discovering' the named clue. I wonder how many days were spent 'discovering' the various solutions to Gematria without the use of a computer? It is little different to the so called 'bible code'.

At least the scriptural method involves one solution and no other. Why even the adjunctive "here is wisdom" directs our thinking to the wisest man as he was at the temple completion and the visit of the queen of sheba.

....by grace you are saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast.
For we are
his
workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus to good works
....





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users