My 666th post. Obviously, it must be evil.
But why? How did this number gain such ill-repute? Is it cited in the Bible as such?
I assume it has something to do with being less-than-perfect (i.e., 7 was considered a perfect number by some people).
Well, although I don’t have the answer. I know it has been posted before, so someone will step in with it. I just want to say congradulations.
I’ll get this started, and let the others follow.
In Revelations, in the Bible, is a passage that states, roughly, that the number of the beast is 666.
What’s the beast? Dunno. Why’s he bad? Dunno.
And now the obligatory jokes…
668 - the neighbor of the beast
333 - the number of the half-beast
etc…
Well, because Jesus hates you.
666 is the numeric value of ‘Nero Caesar’. Revelations was written during the first great Roman persecution of the church.
Some manuscripts say 616.
You had a good guess in your OP, Phobos. The reason that the number of the beast is 666 is probably because 6 is the “imperfect” number (falling short of the divine 7) and emphasizing it as 666 makes it three times as bad (6=bad, 66=worse, 666=worst).
One problem with such symbolism is that it relies on conveying Jewish numerology to a Hellenistic world through the Greek language. Nero (as the Greek KAISAR NERON, but using the Hebrew/Aramaic numeric values for the letters) allows us to get closest to putting a particular human’s name on “the beast,” but there are a few possibilities other than Nero, as well. (This makes since: if the symbolism was so glaring that any dutiful Roamn citizen could figure it out, it would be prima facie evidence that the author (or recipient) of the document was a traitor to the new cult of the Roman emperor.)
Rather than being a specific reference clearly aimed at a specific person, I suspect that the symbolism of “evil tripled” (6 and 6 and 6) was the intent and the application of names to the number came later.
“This makes sense, since”
also
“Roman citizen”
Perhaps 3x as an opposite of the Holy Trinity?
I wouldn’t say impossible, but I wouldn’t push the idea. Basically, repeating a name or adjective two or three times was similar to using comparative and superlative endings on words. Note the hymn/prayer Holy, Holy, Holy Lord and similar constructions. Aside from the ways you can play with this in music, it is basically another way of saying “Holiest Lord.” While there may be an “anti-trinitarian” aspect to 666, it certainly does not get any emphasis placed on it in Revelation. The number is mentioned once, almost in passing, and is not referred to again.
Verbal Kint: The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.
There is a variant of TNOTB - 616 instead of 666.
See here for some info.
Also see here for a papyrus fragment. You can see the “chi, iota, stigma[sic]” on the second complete line from the top - it looks like “X I C”. (“stigma” is a typo for “sigma”)
A couple of things about the 616 version (as shown, above).
The version containing the chi iota sigma (looks like XIC) is unique, as far as I know, in using the letters-as-numbers format. The vast majority of copies spell out hexachôsioi hexêchonta hex. The only major copy of Revelation that supports 616 is C (Gregory 04), the Codex Ephraemi Syri Rescriptus. That parchment majuscule dates from the late fifth century, was scraped clean in the 12th century to be written over by a treatise by the Syrian Church leader Ephraem, then examined to recover the original text by Tischendorf in the 19th century.
As noted in the links, Irenaeus had discovered a copy that said 616 and claimed it was an error as early as the 2d century.
The problem with deciding what number is correct by deciding what person it identifies is (IMNSHO) fruitless. There is no other verse in Revelation that clearly points back to 13:8 with an identification of a specific person. Since no person (using either number) can be clearly identified without some fudging (e.g., applying Hebrew numeric values to Greek letters or identifying the Hebrew spelling of a Roman (Latin) name transliterated to Greek or assigning some letters null values to keep them from interfering with the count, etc.) it is far more likely that the number was chosen for its pure numerological value, allowing the audience to identify it with whatever “beast” of an oppressor was threatening them at the time. (That seems to have been effective since just about every person hated by some Christian group in the last 200 years has been successfully identified with the number.)
669 = the beast having a good time.
Once, when I was in college, I had this weird anti-Catholic pamphlet slipped under my door. It took the words that appear on the Pope’s miter – which I don’t remember – and focused on all of the letters in those words which are also Roman numerals (counting U’s as V’s). Adding up all of those letters totaled 666. Quite a stretch.
:wally
You’re in the wrong forum, but congratulations anyway.
Hope you have 666 more.
If 6 is bad, 66 is worse, then why isn’t the worst number 6,666,666,666? Also, the Letters of Cute Purple Dinosaur (Barney) When the U’s are changed to V’s and the values of the Roman numerals added up, the total comes to 666. Thereby making Barney the devil.
Well, it would make Barney® the “Beast,” but it is not at all clear that “the Beast” and “the devil” are the same.
As noted, above, they weren’t going for a supremely large number to represent evil. Think in terms of comparative and superlative: good, better, best; bad, worse, worst; 6, 66, 666.
BTW, what does one do to slay the demon, Ritalin?