who is 666? my opinion

[cristian_gavrilescu]

18 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. (Revelation 13:18)
gematria is a calculation, a number from a name, a word, a phrase. every letter has a number allocated. the amount of all numbers is the number allocated to that word. if in latin alphabet, you allocate to the letter z, the number 1 and to next letters in inverse order of the alphabet, you allocate 2,3,4, etc, until 10, then 10,20,30, etc, until 100, then 100,200,300, etc, until last letter a, the word (name) hitler is 666. h=100, i=90, t=7, l=60, e=400, r=9. this is one of many possible gematries. in "real" gematria, the hebrew alphabet, nero is the only famous person with the number 666.
caesar neron = nron qsr = נרונ קסר
resh (ר) samekh (ס) qoph (ק) nun (נ) vav (ו) resh (ר) nun (נ)
200 + 60 + 100 + 50 + 6 + 200 + 50 = 666
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. (Revelation 17:8)
from this quote, we can understand the beast (666) will live two times. what similarities have hitler and nero? both they fought jews, both they killed themselves after they lost the war, both were the biggest killers in the history of humanity, nero killed paul and peter, in one word: 666. maybe God gave two chances to 666 to be a human, but he refused those.

[PinSeeker]

The idea of maturing and growth and knowledge in the Bible, is appealing to me.

Sometimes, one's idea of maturation and growth is quite backwards. For you, this is one of those times.

So, why in the world would I be interested in any author you recommend?

You're your own person. Suit yourself.

Seminaries and Bible Colleges are full of people just like your author. Their degrees mean nothing to me.

Ah, the strains of Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel echo through the years:

• "Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest..." (The Boxer, 1968)

Grace and peace to you, Quantrill. It seems you are sorely lacking in both. Regardless, grace and peace to you.

[Quantrill]

Sometimes, one's idea of maturation and growth is quite backwards. For you, this is one of those times.


You're your own person. Suit yourself.

Ah, the strains of Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel echo through the years:

• "Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest..." (The Boxer, 1968)

Grace and peace to you, Quantrill. It seems you are sorely lacking in both. Regardless, grace and peace to you.

See post #(38). Respond to my questions.

Quantrill

[PinSeeker]

See post #(38). Respond to my questions.

Um... is this a commandment? By what authority do you issue it? I'm kidding, here, Quantrill. Being facetious. I trust you can laugh a bit at yourself.

Anyway, from what I can see, all of your "questions" -- in quotes because at least seemingly, they're really rhetorical in nature -- boil down to, "by what authority?" And I would answer, by God's of course... His Word. And you would expect that to be my answer, I think, which is why I didn't answer. At any rate, God is my Authority; He hath said what He hath said, and it's all true (2 Timothy 3:16-17). But, as you probably well know, one of the things God tells us in His Word is to lean not on our own understanding (Proverbs 3:5), and frankly, you seem to be doing the opposite. As the old saying goes, a horse can be led to water, but he can't be made to drink... or something like that. So, again, do what you want; you're your own person.

Okay, I'm out, Quantrill. Grace and peace to you.

[Quantrill]

Again, (Revelation 13:18) is clear. 666 is the number of a man.

You say (Revelation) is a picture book. By what authority?

You say antichrist is a symbol. By what authority?

You say the system of antichrist is a symbol. By what authority?

What makes these a symbol? And what makes your interpretation of the symbol correct? After all, if they are just symbols, then I or anyone else can have an interpretation of what that symbol means.

For example: You say that the theme of (Revelation) is Jesus wins. Another says the theme of (Revelation) is God loves His people. Another says, the theme of (Revelation) is God is ominipotent. Another says, the theme of (Revelation) is don't do bad things. See how empty your "Jesus wins" is as the theme of (Revelation). That is kindergarten Bible.

Quantrill

@PinSeeker

These are my questions from post #(38).

You say your authority for what you believe is God. OK. Show me in Scripture where God has given you this interpretation. Show me where your authority is God. Show me where God has said what you have said.

Yeah...I've heard that before.

Quantrill

[Sojournerofthearth]

[Replying to PinSeeker in post #35]

PinSeeker wrote:
but Revelation is a picture book rather than a puzzle book

I don't think I understand what you're saying. I would say it is neither. The Bible isn't some puzzle one can eventually figure out by their own clever perception. And it isn't just a picture book of Aesop Fable style of proverbs and parables, given to guide you toward the best you that you can be. The Bible is to instruct mankind and to steer mankind toward righteousness, as defined by God, even in regard to prophecy. Most of mankind still follows their father, Adam, in deciding for himself, what is right and what is wrong. We took that right to ourselves, but from the beginning, it was not so.

The Bible interprets its own symbols with other examples given in the same book. As Peter says, no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. While I do agree that the Bible is multi-layered, and that prophecies are often dual and even tripled, the entire book is written for those upon whom the end of the age has come. It is not about the omnipotence of Satan, but that, as Satan is the ruler of this present world, God does hold continue to him back in certain times and in certain places, until eventually, there are times where He lets go of the restraints and allows Satan to bring things to a certain conclusion. His own people have been greatly protected from many of the cataclysmic atrocities that the rest of the world has suffered, where Satan has more free reign. I see that protection coming to a close in the fairly near future.

Soj

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to PinSeeker in post #35]

PinSeeker wrote:
but Revelation is a picture book rather than a puzzle book

I don't think I understand what you're saying. I would say it is neither.

Nah, you don't understand what I'm saying. Maybe if I say it this way:

Revelation, because of the fact that it is apocalyptic in genre, is not to be read like everything described therein is... some certain person or thing and we have to somehow figure it out. It is rather to be read in the same manner one would read a storybook. But of course it's not fiction... Okay, here:

Revelation is clear. We have to believe this, even if we don't get it, because John says at the outset (1:3) that everyone who reads it aloud will be blessed by it. So why do so many people have trouble with it? And why is it so controversial? Well, because they approach it from the wrong end. They start with some certain detail, ignoring the big picture, and try to figure out what that singular detail is all about... what it "stands for." Starting with a detail (or with details) and ignoring the big picture is asking for trouble, really. God is at the center of Revelation (Rev. 4-5). We must start with Him and with the contrasts between Him and His satanic opponents. Trying right away to puzzle out details is not the right way to approach Revelation. Becoming preoccupied by isolated details is not the way, Rather, we should become engrossed in the story. We should praise the Lord. We should cheer for the saints. We should detest the Beast. We should long for the final victory. This is how to read Revelation.

The Bible isn't some puzzle one can eventually figure out by their own clever perception.

Agreed. I feel it necessary to say here that I'm not talking about the Bible as a whole, here, but just John's Revelation. I say again that Revelation is John's account of his dream, a vision given him by the Lord, and it should be understood in the context of a dream and not stone cold reality. It's a dream, and everything described therein is symbolic of reality -- and as such has real, practical implications -- but it is not a literal description of reality itself.

...it isn't just a picture book of Aesop Fable style of proverbs and parables, given to guide you toward the best you that you can be.

Agreed. Not sure why you felt compelled to write that. Never have I suggested such a thing.

The Bible is to instruct mankind and to steer mankind toward righteousness, as defined by God, even in regard to prophecy.

Um, again, you seem to be making a general statement about the Bible, and not just Revelation itself, which is what I'm talking about. But, addressing you specific comment here, yes, right, but the Bible does so in many different ways. Surely you would agree that different parts of the Bible are to be read in different ways. It's all true, yes, but the Bible is not one monogamous literary genre.

The Bible interprets its own symbols with other examples given in the same book. As Peter says, no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

Yes, and often in other books of the Bible. God is His own arbiter. Of course.

While I do agree that the Bible is multi-layered, and that prophecies are often dual and even tripled, the entire book is written for those upon whom the end of the age has come.

I agree. But I would so that "those upon whom the end of the age has come" includes everyone since Pentecost and forward to Christ's return.

It is not about the omnipotence of Satan...

Yeah, well, Satan is not omnipotent, so of course not.

but that, as Satan is the ruler of this present world, God does hold continue to him back in certain times and in certain places, until eventually, there are times where He lets go of the restraints and allows Satan to bring things to a certain conclusion.

But God is in control. Not Satan.

His own people have been greatly protected from many of the cataclysmic atrocities that the rest of the world has suffered, where Satan has more free reign.

God causes the rain to fall on the just as well as the unjust. This seems like just stream-of-consciousness kind of stuff, to be frank.

I see that protection coming to a close in the fairly near future.

You may be right. But you may not be. "Near" to us and "near" to God are two very different things.

Grace and peace to you.

[Sojournerofthearth]

[Replying to PinSeeker in post #46]

PinSeeker wrote:
Agreed. I feel it necessary to say here that I'm not talking about the Bible as a whole, here, but just John's Revelation. I say again that Revelation is John's account of his dream, a vision given him by the Lord, and it should be understood in the context of a dream and not stone cold reality. It's a dream, and everything described therein is symbolic of reality -- and as such has real, practical implications -- but it is not a literal description of reality itself.

I never look at the Bible as individual books, but as a part of the sum total. Here a little, there a little, precept upon precept, line upon line. I know it is often dissected here as individual proverbs, tales and by authors and dates and whatever other criteria deemed to make it relevant or irrelevant, whatever is valid and invalid. But I see it as the work of God, done over time by those He called, a unified work of the explanation for the salvation of the people of God. It is not a work of any private interpretation, nor of the will of man, but of those holy men of God led by His Spirit for the edification of the saints, who look for a new heaven and a new earth.

Not that I'm correcting you. You can see it any way you like. But, isn't it odd how many times in the NT, we are admonished to all speak the same things. And look at us... no two alike.

Psa_133:1; Jer_32:39; Joh_17:23; Act_4:32; Rom_12:16, Rom_15:5-6; Rom_16:17; 1Co_11:18, 1Co_12:25; 2Co_13:11; Eph_4:1-7, Eph_4:31-32; Php_1:27, Php_2:1-4, Php_3:16; 1Th_5:13; Jas_3:13-18; 1Pe_3:8-9

Soj

[woodtick]

[Replying to cristian_gavrilescu in post #1]

[PinSeeker]

I never look at the Bible as individual books, but as a part of the sum total. Here a little, there a little, precept upon precept, line upon line. I know it is often dissected here as individual proverbs, tales and by authors and dates and whatever other criteria deemed to make it relevant or irrelevant, whatever is valid and invalid. But I see it as the work of God, done over time by those He called, a unified work of the explanation for the salvation of the people of God. It is not a work of any private interpretation, nor of the will of man, but of those holy men of God led by His Spirit for the edification of the saints, who look for a new heaven and a new earth.

Sure. Me, too. But Revelation is much of an entirely different literary genre as most all of the rest of the Bible. It should be read with an accordingly different frame of reference.

[Difflugia]

It's impossible for Nero to be the anti-Christ. Nero’s name doesn’t work in Greek and that's the language John wrote the Book of Revelation in and the language spoken in Asia Minor. So Preterist take Nero’s name and convert it to Hebrew, but it still doesn’t add up to 666! So they add Caesar to his name but it still doesn’t quite add up, so they rely on an abnormal spelling of the word Caesar that drops a Hebrew letter from the normal spelling. And then, what do you know! The letters add up to 666!

That's a somewhat slanted (dare I say, "biased?") view of the "Nero" interpretation.

First, Revelation was written in Greek, but John, author of the Revelation was much less proficient in Greek than John, author of the Gospel. R.H. Charles puts it this way in the first Revelation volume of the International Critical Commentary series:

The author of J^ap was a Palestinian Jew. He was a great spiritual genius, a man of profound insight and the widest sympathies. His intimate acquaintance with the Hebrew text of the O.T., of which his book contains multitudinous quotations based directly upon it, is best explained by this hypothesis. The fact also, that he thought in Hebrew and translated its idioms literally into Greek, points to Palestine as his original home. Though no doubt he used the Aramaic of his day, in a real sense Hebrew was his mother's tongue. His Greek also, which is unlike any Greek that was ever penned by mortal man, calls for the same hypothesis. No Greek document exhibits such a vast multitude of solecisms and unparalleled idiosyncrasies. Most writers on J^ap have been struck with the unbridled licence of his Greek constructions. But in reality there is no such licence. The Greek, though without a parallel elsewhere, proceeds according to certain rules of the author's own devising. Now this fact is a proof that our author never mastered Greek idiomatically—even the Greek of his own day.

The Oxford Bible Commentary p. 1298 explains the numerology:

This verse says that 'the number of the beast' is also 'the number of a person' and that both are 666. The Greek word used for beast (therion), transliterated into Hebrew letters, has the value 666, as does the name Nero(n) Caesar, written in Hebrew script. The implication is that Nero's very name reveals his true nature to the discerning. The verbal link with 17:9 suggests there is even more to the significance of the number. The number 666 has the unusual characteristic of being not only what the ancients called a triangular number (it is the sum of all the numbers up to 36), but also a doubly triangular number (36 is the sum of all the numbers up to 8). It is the eighth such number (in the series i, 6, 21, 55, 120, 231, 406, 666). So for those familiar with ancient numerology, Nero is also revealed to be 'the eighth', with a significance ch. 17 will develop.

Additionally, the presence or absence of the final nun in "Neron" makes the difference between 616 and 666. Several early manuscripts (Irenaeus was familiar with the two traditions) use 616 rather than 666, making it a bit more likely that Nero was intended.

Nero committed suicide in AD 68 by sticking a dagger in his throat.

There was another Christian tradition that Nero would return from the dead as the antichrist. It was based on the Sibylline Oracles (emphasis mine):

A matricidal man who every land
Shall overpower and over all things rule,
And see all things more wisely than all men;
And that for whose sake he himself was slain
Shall he seize forthwith. And he shall destroy
Many men and great tyrants and shall burn
All of them, as none other ever did,
And he shall raise up them that are afraid
For emulation's sake. And from the West
Much war shall come to men, and blood shall flow
Down hill till it becomes deep-eddying streams.