“It caused everyone, small and great, rich and poor,
free man and slave, to have a mark put on his right
hand or his forehead, and no one was allowed to buy
or sell unless he bore this beast’s mark, either name
or number. (This calls for skill: let anyone who has
intelligence work out the number of the beast, for the
number represents a man’s name, and the numerical
value of its letters is six hundred and sixty-six.”
(Revelation 13-16 to 18)
I think that St John the Divine was more used to the
Roman numbering system than the Arabic. I think he was
describing the number ‘DCXLVI’. I am no Latin scholar,
but I do know that there are several puns and puzzles to
do with Latin numbers and abbreviations. The first
Christians used the sign of the fish as their symbol for
peace, beacause of the similarity between ‘Pax’
and ‘Pisces’. If I’ve got that wrong it’s because I’m
no Latin scholar, as I said.
So, is there a Latin scholar who would like to let us know
what significance the ‘DCXLVI’ might have? Might really be
an early form of the name of that Italian motorcycle
manufacturer Ducati? Or is it, as I suspect, a thinly-
veiled reference to the corrupt and despotic tyrant, Caligula. (As in D CaLIgVIa). Whichever, John’s text
clearly does not intend to represent the Devil.
I can’t help you with the Latin, but I’m curious about which version of the Bible you’re using (not for an sort of attack on your post, just for the sake of establishing a point of reference).
I hate to be pedantic (actually, I LOVE to be pedantic) but DCXLVI is only 646.
If you do a search for DCLXVI (666) on the internet, you come up with a whole load of sites by some rather scary people, but not a single guess at what those letters might be abbreviating.
My own guess (for what it’s worth) is that it stands for a Latin name with the initials D.C.L. and the number sisteen appended to it to signify ‘D.C.L. the sixteenth’.
Or, perhaps to pour a bucket of cold water over the debate, you could always go with the earlier translations of The Bible, in which 666 is the number of man (not `a’ man).
The explanation goes something like this: no matter how many times you repeat the number six, it will never equal seven, which is a holy number (e.g. the seventh day of the creation).
Back in Sunday school, I was taught that the early Christians used the fish as a symbol because the Greek word for ‘fish’, ‘ichthys’, was also an acronym for a Greek phrase meaning ‘Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior’.
My understanding of the “666” thing is that it is actually based on the Hebrew numbering system, also known as “Gematria.” In Hebrew, the letter of the alef-bet are also used as numbers, with the following correspondence:
The numerical value of the Hebrew spelling of “Caesar Nero” (“Neron Kaisar” in Hebrew), someone very devilish to the Christians of that era, equals 666.
Here we go…
The Greek system in use at the time (Ignore the Roman! Everyone in the Greek east did.) goes alpha=1, beta=2, gamma=3…on up to ten, then goes twenty, thirty, forty, fifty…up to hundred, then increases by hundreds. OK?
Rack up “Nero Caesar” in Greek letters. Add 'em up. You get…616, which appears as the Number in some early copies of the Revelation. It’s also bad Greek - Nero would be pronounced “Neron”. Tack that nu in there for fifty bonus points and the ultra-scary modern total of 666.
At the time John wrote (AD 79), there was a belief in “Nero Redivivus”, a fear of Nero somehow resurrecting and coming to power again. This would be a very blasphemous version of Christ’s resurrection, suitable for an anti-Christ. He would also have been the tenth emporer, and thus the tenth head of the Beast itself.
So not only is the anti-Christ dead, he was dead [bold]when the book was written[/bold]. So much for satanic power.
Not to quibble, but if I pull my New International Version, and the New American Standard (from http://unbound.biola.edu/, The Unbound Bible online) I don’t get the verse you quote.
That doesn’t contain the blatant reference to numerology. Which version are you using? I know both the Roman Emperor argument and the one Cecil gives in one of his books (the Popes being the Anti Christ, but I can’t find it online).
This is convincing. John was speaking/writing for a contemporary audience, and probably struggling to avoid a charge of sedition. Denouncing a dead hero of the empire would have cost him his liberty, if not his life. A bit wimpish for an evangelist perhaps?
Another correspondent, don Jaime, has produced the same analysis using the greek numbering system. Was this the same as the Hebrew system of the period, or has one of you got it wrong?
Aksherly, I picked it up from a posting in alt.christnet.demonology, which is where I posted a similar question. I should have lloked it up myself but we don’t seem to have a bible in the house, probably for the same reason I don’t go into churches. And that is because my clothes start to smoulder - It must have been something I said.
Bible: Vernacular for a manufacturer’s operating manual, specification or service guide. Like the original bible a collection of obsolete myths, misunderstandings and mistranslations.
(New Revised Devil’s Dictionary)
I found the quote in alt.christnet.demonology. I have no idea of which version of the bible it came from.
Isn’t it odd? There are so many versions of ‘The one true word’ and so many versions of the same stories in it. It’s no wonder that all these christians cannot seem to agree on anything, and spend all their time preparing to smite each other mightily.
Okay, just to keep down the amount of quibbling over what this verse says, here are the translations of Revelation 13:18 from the more popular English-language bibles:
“This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man’s number. His number is 666.”
– New International Version (NIV)
“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.”
– King James Version (KJV)
“Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.”
– New King James Version (NKJV)
“Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is [1] six hundred and sixty-six.”
One early manuscript reads 616
– New American Standard Bible (NASB)
“This calls for wisdom: let him who has understanding reckon the number of the beast, for it is a human number, its number is six hundred and sixty-six.”
– Revised Standard Version (RSV)
“Here is wisdom. He that has understanding let him count the number of the beast: for it is a man’s number; and its number [is] six hundred [and] sixty-six.”
– Darby Translation
“Here is the wisdom! He who is having the understanding, let him count the number of the beast, for the number of a man it is, and its number [is] 666.”
– Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)
“Here wisdom is needed. If a person understands, he should count the number of the beast. It is the number of a man’s name. Its number is six hundred and sixty-six.”
– Worldwide English (WE)
“This calls for wisdom. Whoever is intelligent can figure out the meaning of the number of the beast, because the number stands for a man’s name. Its number is 666.”
– Today’s English Version (TEV) (a.k.a. the Good News Bible)
When speculating on the number, it does not hurt to remember that it was written out, originally, as hexachósioi hexéchonta hex, not as a “numeral” using letters as numbers.
There is a lot of Hebrew and Aramaic tradition and style incorporated in Revelation, so tripling the use of 6 (meaning imperfect/sinful/evil/falling-short-of-the-divine-numeral-7), is consistent with the idea of simply describing the most evil person. (6 = evil, 66 = more evil, 666 = most evil.)
As to who may be the object of the symbolism, the most frequent and accepted speculation among scripture scholars is that it refers to Nero. (The Hebrew/Greek confusion arises from the fact that the easiest way to get to Nero’s name is to use the Greek counting letters to spell out the name the way that he was identified in Hebrew. This would be similar to making jokes about Saddam Hussein based on the English spelling and (mis)pronunciation of his name, regardless how it is spelled or pronounced in Arabic.) Nero as subject is reinforced by the above mentioned fears of Nero returning, undead, as Nero Redivivus.
Unfortunately, several other emperors’ names can be contorted to “spell out” 666 and the author, figuring his immediate audience would know who he was talking about, did not leave us a key.
As to the OP. I doubt that the Latin “numerals” spell out anything. (Not because they could not.) Greek was the language in which Revelation was written. Greek speaking Asia Minor was the locale where it was written. Speakers of Greek and/or Aramaic were the audience for the book. While Latin was the language of the conquerors, Greek was still the literary language of the age (as well as being the lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean at that time). I don’t believe that Latin usage played much of a part in any of the writings of Christian Scripture.
