# Nero = 666 **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 21, 2004, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250 "2004-09-21T03:07:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Captain\_Gutgore\_Blooddrink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Captain\_Gutgore\_Blooddrink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Gutgore_Blooddrink)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/1 "2004-09-21T03:07:30Z")
What’s with all this Nero = 666 nonsense? I am perfectly OK with the fact Hebrew letters = numbers, therefore Caeser Nero = 666 (although I have not validated this as being true) But whether or not above is true, so? It seems like another one of those coincidences like the Lewis Carrol Jaberwocky thing ([http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a970307a.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a970307a.html)) What are the arguments that this find has any signifigance? I’m assuming there is probably a tie of the whole Rome burning thing to some fire & brimstone in Revelations. :dubious: , The MeatBeast ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/2 "2004-09-21T03:16:53Z")
_Asimov’s Guide to the Bible_: > [@](#): > > And yet Nero seems a poor candidate if the book [The Book of Revelation] were written in 95. He had been dead a quarter of a century and his death had brought no great change. Within the year Vespasian had come to the throne and he and his son Titus had given Rome a dozen years of good and humane government. > > At the time Revelation was being written, however, Domitian, Vespasian’s younger son, was on the throne and his persecution of the Christians was in high gear. It would be natural to refer elliptically to the living, persecuting emperror, and there is probably some way in which Domitian’s name and title could be so written as to add up to 666. It may be that he bore a nickname, commonly used by Christians, with a total numerical value of 666, a number which had its own mystic significance, for it fell short of the mystic perfection of 7 three times. For that reason 666 was the acme of imperfection and a suitable number with which to represent Antichrist. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/3 "2004-09-21T03:33:27Z")
From the Wikipedia ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number\_of\_the\_Beast\_(numerology)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast_%28numerology%29)): > [@](#): > > **References from the Bible** > > Revelation 13:17 states: > > “… no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or name of the beast, or the number of his name.” > The next verse tells us that the Number of the Beast is 666. In Revelation 14:9-12, the third angel warns of wrath and retribution to all those who bear this mark on their heads or hands. > > The original Greek does not literally render the phrase as six-six-six (three Greek words for six in a row) but six hundred and sixty six. > > **Theological interpretations** > > Versions of Christian eschatology which hold that that these prophecies refer to future events, typically hold that the Mark of the Beast is one way in which the antichrist will exercise power over the earth, during the period known as the Tribulation in the book of Revelation. Opinions as to what form it will take are varied. The literal interpretation is that it will be the number 666 imprinted on the skin, but conspiracy theorists imagine all sorts of devious possibilities tied in with recent technological developments. The notion that the mark is required for all commerce implies that the mark might actually be a special credit card… or that we might have to have our fingerprints scanned into a worldwide database in order to be recognized in business. Or the mark might be some kind of smart chip implanted into the body. > > The number 666, which supposedly represents the name of the Antichrist, is another source of controversy. There are various theories about the meaning of this verse, and there have been many attempts to show that a person is the Antichrist by relating his name to the number 666. > > One interpretation is simply that 666 represents humankind in general because of the special significance that the number has in the Bible. Six is known as an “imperfect number” because it is one short of seven, the “perfect number” (seven days in the week, seven tongues of flame, seven spiritual gifts…). So three (the number of the Trinity) sixes is seen as extremely imperfect. Therefore, 666 represents imperfect man, while 777 represents God. > > Another interpretation is that 666 is actually some kind of code based on the letters of someone’s name. This sparks great public interest since it seems to provide some way to identify the antichrist. Numerologists like to devise clever ways of assigning numbers to letters so that the letters of a name will add up to this symbolic number. Probably the best-known scheme has A=100, B=101, and so on. With this code, the name “HITLER” adds up to 666. While these ideas are intriguing, they usually require many odd preconditions (you have to start with 100, you cannot include the first name) and work in a few languages only (in Spanish, for example, “HITLER” adds up to 668.) See also Vicarius Filii Dei. > > For example, scholars who believe the Book of Revelation refers to real people and events argue that the number represents the value of Nero or Neron Caesar (נרון קסר, Nrwn Qsr\*) in Hebrew letters, which also have numerical values (note that Hebrew is written from right to left): > > ``` > r S q n w r n > 666 = 200 + 60 + 100 + 50 + 6 + 200 + 50 > > ``` > > Some early texts of the Book of Revelation use 616 instead, which would represent the alternative Hebrew spelling נרו קסר, Nrw Qsr: > > ``` > r S q w r n > 616 = 200 + 60 + 100 + 6 + 200 + 50 > > ``` > > \*Note: Hebrew נרון קסר, Nrwn Qsr = Greek Νερων Καισαρ, Nerôn Kaisar, though קסר, qSr, should strictly speaking be כסר, kSr. > In Roman numerals 666 represents all the numbers from 1 to 500 in descending order, namely D (500) + C (100) + L (50) + X (10) + V (5) + I (1), or DCLXVI. Robert Graves suggests in his study of pagan symbolism The White Goddess that this is an acronym for the Latin sentence Domitianus Caesar Legatos Xti Violenter Interfecit, or “The Emperor Domitian violently killed the envoys of Christ”. > > In an alternate style of greek notation for numerals, 6 + 60 + 600 can be expressed as digamma koppa kappa which when superposed into a monogram, form the graffito form of the labrys very common on roman walls of the time, which is interesting considering what some characterise as misogynist tendencies in Revelations. > > **There are a number of problems with taking the various literal and conspiratorial approaches to this verse.** > > The first problem is that the book of Revelation may not have been written to be interpreted literally but symbolically. In this sense, then, the “Mark of the Beast” is no more a literal mark on a person’s hand or forehead than the “beast from the sea” in 13:1 and the “beast from the earth” in 13.11 can be considered actual, bodily creatures. For many interpreters, it stands to reason that when a section of text is to be interpreted symbolically, then the reader must not suddenly decide to read a section in a literal sense. If the “beasts” are symbols of what was or what is to come, then it is also logical that the mark of the beast is itself symbolic and not a literal mark on a person’s hand or forehead. > > The second problem is that, in the verse that immediately follows - 14:1 - there is a description of the 144,000 who had the name of Jesus and the name of the Father written on their foreheads. Most mainstream Christian interpreters see the 144,000 as a non-literal number of people who represent all of God’s people - the church. Yet to many interpreters it seems strange to view the mark of the beast as a literal mark, since it logically means that the 144,000 in 14:1 would have a literal mark of Jesus and the Father upon their foreheads also. Many interpreters view both marks as being symbolic of a person’s commitment to either God or the Devil. > > The third problem is that, if the verse is to be understood in a literalistic sense, then the mark can only be effectual if it is placed upon the right hand or the forehead. If the mark is placed, for example, upon the left hand or the shoulder, then it is no longer considered the mark of the beast. > > The fourth problem is that, if the mark could be considered a microchip implant, then it no longer functions as a “mark” since it is invisible. The Greek word charagma (mark) denotes a stamp or an impression upon the skin - ie something that is visible to the naked eye and whose function depends upon this visibility. Within the Christian community there are many who argue that the word charagma is based on the word charax, which is said to mean “stick into,” or, “sharpen to a point” or palisade (fence); they could also say that charasso on which charax is derived also means “sharpen to a point.” This would support their notion that a microchip is “stuck into” a person’s skin. Such an argument, however, does not appear to be backed up by New Testament scholars. Ulrich Witkins, a contributor to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (vol 9, page 416), writes the following about charagma: > > (it) is an engraved, etched, branded or inscribed “mark” or “sign”. Closest to (its) original sense… is the earliest example in Soph. Phil., 267, where (it) denotes the bite of a snake. Elsewhere the term means “inscription”… or anything written…, and especially the impressed or branded “stamp” eg a brand to mark camels. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/4 "2004-09-21T03:45:51Z")
Plus, other sources have it as 616. Whatever that would mean. ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/5 "2004-09-21T15:43:03Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > Plus, other sources have it as 616. Whatever that would mean. Well, in themiddle of the post above yours … > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Some early texts of the Book of Revelation use 616 instead, which would represent the alternative Hebrew spelling נרו קסר, Nrw Qsr: > > r S q w r n > 616 = 200 + 60 + 100 + 6 + 200 + 50 Which seems suggestive that Nero’s name really is the source. Two different ways of transliterating his name into Hebrew give two different numeric totals-which are both found in different versions of Revelations. Seems like quite a coincidence if Nero wasn’t the Beast, doesn’t it? But then again, it looks like those were both alternate spellings … ---
**Author:** ![Dragwyr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dragwyr/32/2855_2.png) [@Dragwyr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dragwyr)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/6 "2004-09-21T16:41:36Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > Plus, other sources have it as 616. Whatever that would mean. Whew! That makes me glad the phone company changed our area code from 616 to 269 a copule years back. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/7 "2004-09-21T17:05:14Z")
Nitpick: The book is _Revelation_, no “s”. ---
**Author:** ![Dan\_Norder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4af34b/32.png) [@Dan\_Norder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dan_Norder)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/8 "2004-09-21T18:38:04Z")
For the love of Pete, **BrainGlutton** , can you just provide a freaking link? Wikipedia has very specific regulations on the use of their text, and simply posting it here doesn’t meet them. Copying and pasting text from Wikipedia into a bunch of threads isn’t any more helpful that providing a link. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Gutgore\_Blooddrink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Captain\_Gutgore\_Blooddrink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Gutgore_Blooddrink)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/9 "2004-09-21T23:21:36Z")
Thanks for all the info so far, guys. But I was really hoping for more of an insight of what signifigance these facts hold. So far the only one that really comes close is Walloons post quote from Asimov. Maybe the OP was a little misleading. I was more looking for the modern philosophy of the signifigance of Neron (if any) = 666. Are there any religious groups that take this seriously? ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/10 "2004-09-21T23:22:02Z")
> [@](#): > > The original Greek does not literally render the phrase as six-six-six (three Greek words for six in a row) but six hundred and sixty six. Now wait a minute, my biblio says “six hundred, threescore and six” _Snort_ ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2004, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/11 "2004-09-21T23:31:52Z")
> [@Filthy Beast of Meat and Hair](#): > > Maybe the OP was a little misleading. I was more looking for the modern philosophy of the signifigance of Neron (if any) = 666. Are there any religious groups that take this seriously? I doubt it. Nero is dead and the Apocalypse hasn’t come yet. Some do try to pin the Antichrist label on this or that contemporary figure (“Ronald Wilson Reagan” – 6 letters in each name!) but that’s been going on since the time of St. John. I read once that during the Reformation, Catholics found ways to get Martin Luther’s name to add up to 666 and Protestants returned the favor with regard to several popes. You could probably do it with almost any name if you were creative enough, choosing the numerical values of Roman, Greek, or Hebrew letters as convenient, and doing the right arithmetical operations on them. ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/12 "2004-09-22T22:00:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > You could probably do it with almost any name if you were creative enough, choosing the numerical values of Roman, Greek, or Hebrew letters as convenient, and doing the right arithmetical operations on them. [Nitpick]It’s pretty clearly cheating to do ‘choose the numerical values as convenient’ with Greek or Hebrew letters, all of which already have numbers assigned by the Greek and Hebrew number systems of the time of the Revelation. And it would be odd to do it with Roman letters in Latin, as the Roman number system also represented numbers with letters, although there were letters not used in the number system … To put it simply, if you are doing your _gematria_ on a Roman name in Latin, and you assign some number other than 50 to the letter L, you look pretty stupid. [/nitpick] ---
**Author:** ![633squadron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/6/ee59a6/32.png) [@633squadron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/633squadron)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/13 "2004-09-22T22:20:12Z")
> [@Filthy Beast of Meat and Hair](#): > > What’s with all this Nero = 666 nonsense? > > I am perfectly OK with the fact Hebrew letters = numbers, therefore Caeser Nero = 666 (although I have not validated this as being true) The idea is that 666 is supposed to be the name of a person who will bring the Apocalypse, or perhaps some attribute of that person. A recent book (The Bible Code) claims that the entire Hebrew Bible is a code; the hypothesis relies on numerology and a lot of computer power. I don’t believe any of it. I don’t believe in the message of Revelation, so I don’t worry about 666 or who (or what) it’s supposed to mean. But the “idea” is that 666 represents the Beast/Antichrist/person/thing that’s supposed to bring the end of the world. Convenient explanation for a time of turmoil, when ordinary people were longing for hope. I would like to add that prevailing Jewish thought (at least what I was taught) is that the Anointed One will come when humans have made a world suitable for him/her. For the same reason, we are supposed to follow the commandments and make ourselves holy so that G-d will dwell among us. It’s a positive lesson. No apocalypse required. BTW, in Hebrew, anointed one is moshiach. This yielded Messiah. In Greek, anointed one is christus. This yields, well… Why Anointed One? The Hebrew king was supposed to have holy oil poured over his head, a sort of holy make-over. Ancient warriors covered themselves in oil to make their skin shine in the sun. Final piece of ephemeris: British royalty are still literally anointed during their coronation. If QE2 doesn’t keel over soon, most of us will miss the kinging of Charley BigEars. ---
**Author:** ![SnakeSpirit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snakespirit/32/7271_2.png) [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/14 "2004-09-23T04:53:01Z")
> [@633squadron](#): > > The idea is that 666 is supposed to be the name of a person who will bring the Apocalypse, or perhaps some attribute of that person. A recent book (The Bible Code) claims that the entire Hebrew Bible is a code; the hypothesis relies on numerology and a lot of computer power. > > I don’t believe any of it. I don’t believe in the message of Revelation, so I don’t worry about 666 or who (or what) it’s supposed to mean. But the “idea” is that 666 represents the Beast/Antichrist/person/thing that’s supposed to bring the end of the world. Convenient explanation for a time of turmoil, when ordinary people were longing for hope. There is some controversy about the veracity of St. John the Divine. The popes said “Yea” but some biblical scholars said, “Rye Ergot poisoning!.” One of my favorite recreactions is taking biblical texts and comparing them to what I have chosen as my religious foundation: the synoptic gospels. There’s a lot of stuff that contradicts the synoptics, and some weird stuff that confirms them. It’s my ‘touch point,’ if you will. John is way out there in comparison. For quite a while I bought into the 666 stuff, and finally decided that this is one of those texts that perhaps should have remained ‘hidden,’ while stuff like the Qumrun community and Dead Sea Scrolls would be better replacements. Eventually the Truth will out, but trying to figure out when from contradictory biblical texts ain’t gonna tell us when. Sssssss (shit, how can you even trust what a snake says on this stuff anyway?) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/15 "2004-09-23T20:48:16Z")
> [@SCSimmons](#): > > [Nitpick]It’s pretty clearly cheating to do ‘choose the numerical values as convenient’ with Greek or Hebrew letters, all of which already have numbers assigned by the Greek and Hebrew number systems of the time of the Revelation. And it would be odd to do it with Roman letters in Latin, as the Roman number system also represented numbers with letters, although there were letters not used in the number system … To put it simply, if you are doing your _gematria_ on a Roman name in Latin, and you assign some number other than 50 to the letter L, you look pretty stupid. > [/nitpick] You think? Revelation doesn’t specify any particular system for calculating the NOTB. I might decide to let “C” represent 100, because that’s its traditional value as a Roman numeral; or 3, because it’s the third letter of the alphabet; or even 24, if I start at Z and count backwards. Or, if I can’t make a given name spelled in Roman letters add up to 666 no matter how hard I try, I might transliterate it into Greek or Hebrew – and any name or word miight be transliterated from one alphabet to another in several different ways – and repeat the process until I reach the desired result. And if I can’t get 666 by just adding up the values of the letters, I might decide to subtract or to multiply or treat one as an exponent of the other . . . ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/16 "2004-09-23T23:47:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > You think? Revelation doesn’t specify any particular system for calculating the NOTB. I might decide to let “C” represent 100, because that’s its traditional value as a Roman numeral; or 3, because it’s the third letter of the alphabet; or even 24, if I start at Z and count backwards. Or, if I can’t make a given name spelled in Roman letters add up to 666 no matter how hard I try, I might transliterate it into Greek or Hebrew – and any name or word miight be transliterated from one alphabet to another in several different ways – and repeat the process until I reach the desired result. And if I can’t get 666 by just adding up the values of the letters, I might decide to subtract or to multiply or treat one as an exponent of the other . . . I thought we were working under the (fairly logical) assumption that the writer had someone in particular in mind, and was using a simple code to obfuscate their identity in a milieux of extreme persecution of Christians. If he included a ‘key’, anybody reading it would know of whom he was speaking, including the ‘wrong’ people. But it needed to be simple and obvious enough that his intended readership could easily break the code. Given that Hebrew and Greek letters (and some Roman letters) have numeric values already assigned, using those values would be very natural. Also, the invention of the concept of arbitrary ciphers was far in the future. A writer of that era would have been using some variant of established rules of _gematria_. If we knew what all of those rules were, it would probably be a lot easier to decipher the Revelation; but it’s pretty obvious that St. John wasn’t assigning the number 24 to C by counting backwards from Z, since he neither used our A-Z alphabet nor had cultural exposure to the idea of making arbitrary assignments of numbers to letters … ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2004, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nero-666/265250/17 "2004-09-24T17:34:04Z")
> [@SCSimmons](#): > > I thought we were working under the (fairly logical) assumption that the writer had someone in particular in mind, and was using a simple code to obfuscate their identity in a milieux of extreme persecution of Christians. If he included a ‘key’, anybody reading it would know of whom he was speaking, including the ‘wrong’ people. But it needed to be simple and obvious enough that his intended readership could easily break the code. I understand that perfectly. I also understand that St. John was alluding to some figure of his own time, most likely Nero, maybe Domitian. I was trying to shed light on the thinking of the many persons of **later** centuries who have tried to identify this or that figure of their own time as the Beast, and who have been very creative in their attempts to come up with 666. Yes, that’s “cheating,” but if the Beast really means Nero or Domitian, the whole exercise is mistaken at the outset, isn’t it? Either you accept that Revelation is a set of prophecies about events in our own present or future (rather than in the time of the early Roman Empire), or you don’t.