666...wrong number, all these years!

Hellion

Antediluvian Lurker
...for the devil sends the beast with wrath, because he knows the time is short. let him who hath understanding reckon the number of the beast, for it is a human number. its number, is 616...

... wait a minute ...


---------
Revelation! 666 is not the number of the beast (it's a devilish 616)
By Tom Anderson
01 May 2005


A newly discovered fragment of the oldest surviving copy of the New Testament indicates that, as far as the Antichrist goes, theologians, scholars, heavy metal groups, and television evangelists have got the wrong number. Instead of 666, it's actually the far less ominous 616.

The new fragment from the Book of Revelation, written in ancient Greek and dating from the late third century, is part of a hoard of previously unintelligible manuscripts discovered in historic dumps outside Oxyrhynchus in Egypt. Now a team of expert classicists, using new photographic techniques, are finally deciphering the original writing.

Professor David Parker, Professor of New Testament Textual Criticism and Paleography at the University of Birmingham, thinks that 616, although less memorable than 666, is the original. He said: "This is an example of gematria, where numbers are based on the numerical values of letters in people's names. Early Christians would use numbers to hide the identity of people who they were attacking: 616 refers to the Emperor Caligula."

The Book of Revelation is traditionally considered to be written by John, a disciple of Jesus; it identifies 666 as the mark of the Antichrist. In America, the fundamentalist Christian right often use the number in sermons about the coming Apocalypse.

They and satanists responded coolly to the new "Revelation". Peter Gilmore, High Priest of the Church of Satan, based in New York, said: "By using 666 we're using something that the Christians fear. Mind you, if they do switch to 616 being the number of the beast then we'll start using that."


[EDIT] Added the source:
I found it at http://www.wparanormal.com/, but the original source is "The Independent" News Page".
 
Shit, listening to the gabba hardcore song "The Beast" no longer bears any pleasure. Though that's nothing compared to how lame all those idiots who tattooed 666 on their bodies feel now.
 
Ratty said:
Shit, listening to the gabba hardcore song "The Beast" no longer bears any pleasure. Though that's nothing compared to how lame all those idiots who tattooed 666 on their bodies feel now.
Gabba hardcore?
Eyeech.
*shudders*
Listening to "The Number Of The Beast" by Iron Maiden won't be the same anymore. Oh wait, it will, because the song simply rocks.

But seriously, Gabba(Gabber actually, you silly Croat) Hardcore?
 
Lord Powerslave said:
They and satanists responded coolly to the new "Revelation". Peter Gilmore, High Priest of the Church of Satan, based in New York, said: "By using 666 we're using something that the Christians fear. Mind you, if they do switch to 616 being the number of the beast then we'll start using that."

When asked how they could spectacularly fuck up the symbolic name of their dark father, "As we all know, God is dead and Satan is busy planning to help his brother win a third term in the White House, so we couldn't get the direct information from anyone about this. Really, we're not all about fucking around with Christians. Honestly."

I can now just chuckle at how many numerology tables this just messed up, and cringe as they will now try to make the new number fit. See...if you move the number one over, flip the numbers upside-down and invert the numbers 1 and 9, then you will have 9-11, the day of the devil!

*Gasp!*
 
Sander said:
But seriously, Gabba(Gabber actually, you silly Croat) Hardcore?
You shouldn't be so quick to condemn the only cool thing Dutchieland ever gave the world.
 
Ratty said:
You shouldn't be so quick to condemn the only cool thing Dutchieland ever gave the world.

Hey! What about Snell's law, the Stieltjes integral, and Huygen's principle?

Edit: and the fucking Lorentz transformation!!!!!!!!!!
 
Ratty said:
You shouldn't be so quick to condemn the only cool thing Dutchieland ever gave the world.
Cool? Damn, Ratty, this is 2005. Lots of things are cool, but that's not one of them.
 
Fyu-jon!!! said:
Hey! What about Snell's law, the Stieltjes integral, and Huygen's principle?

Edit: and the fucking Lorentz transformation!!!!!!!!!!
*sigh* In the past twelve months, did you write a single post that wasn't nauseatingly nerdy?
 
Ratty said:
You shouldn't be so quick to condemn the only cool thing Dutchieland ever gave the world.

Don't forget that the Dutchies also gave us Brits a King and Queen. See, they're no all bad.:wink:
 
In fact 666 is the right number.
The ancient Christians,who were gathering in catacombs and whose symbol was the fish,used a special code to write.Some things can be translated,by using Hebrew language,and the correct translation of that 666 is Nero.
616 refers to the Emperor Caligula.
666 refers to Nero :arrow: the greatest enemies of Christianity were Nero and Diocletian
 
Well now, you've got me completely confused. Is the number 666 or 616? Or how bout this, it's all a buncha crap anyway. Who cares if the sign of the devil is 666, 616 or 90210.
 
The correct number is probably still 666. Even though the article mentions that the number 616 can be found in
A newly discovered fragment of the oldest surviving copy of the New Testament [...] written in ancient Greek and dating from the late third century [...]
this probably won't change a thing. The number 616 is more likely to be regarded as a scribal error.

Read the article at http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/manuscripts.html

The New Testament text we read in our English Bibles is based on the original Greek text. We know this text, albeit imperfectly, through a large number of ancient manuscripts. All these manuscripts are mere copies, and the great majority of them are copies of copies, yet ultimately they all derive from the originals. In the process of copying, however, scribal errors are bound to occur. There is not a single copy wholly free from mistakes. A science called textual criticism deals systematically with these mistakes to eliminate as many of them as possible. The most important tools for textual critics are the manuscripts themselves.

If 99% of those copies say that the number is 666, and one lousy copy says it is 616, then textual criticism will go for the number 666. And that's only fair.

Not that I give a rat's ass, anyway. :roll:
 
I don't have any sources to cite, but going from memory...

The number 666 refers to the Emperor Nero, who iniated a persecution that killed many Christians including Peter and Paul, how much more of a Beast can there be? Anyways, each letter in Hebrew actually equals a number, since they did not have seperate symbols for math. Translate Nero into Hebrew and add up the letters you get...616. Now, translate Neron and add up the letters you get... 666. I'm not certain which was more proper, but if you read the entire book of revelations you learn that 7 is a perfect number, and hence 6 is an imperfect number for not being 7 (don't ask). So, I'm sure 666 was given preference over 616 for that reason.

Either way, the anti-christ has come and gone and is remember pretty poorly whether you realize its him or not.
 
Ratty said:
You shouldn't be so quick to condemn the only cool thing Dutchieland ever gave the world.

Yeah, I'm sorry for that... it was never meant to leave the boundaries of my country... but alas, there were too many of them. We just couldn't hold them back. *Starts sobbing* Why, lord, WHY!!!
 
alec said:
The correct number is probably still 666. Even though the article mentions that the number 616 can be found in
A newly discovered fragment of the oldest surviving copy of the New Testament [...] written in ancient Greek and dating from the late third century [...]
this probably won't change a thing. The number 616 is more likely to be regarded as a scribal error.

Read the article at http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/manuscripts.html

Scribe errors, my ass. More like revisions to the bible by the church, as translation itself doesn't skew things apart like that. And Hebrew isn't that touchy like Arabic, where a speck of fly shit could alter the entire meaning of a sentence.

With the rest of the ommissions from the Bible and the other stockpiles of texts under the Vatican, I would put more faith into something that would be a handcopied original version, than the mass-produced version for the masses cooked up from the many years of church power. Remember, it was sacrilidge at the time of the originals to violate samizdat copies of the scripture. The church had little qualms about violating that during the times it was convenient to have commoners illiterate and stupid in order to gain power through many governments.

Now that they can't change the bible without public scrutiny, the recovery of old originals should be interesting to use to see to what level the church has altered the scripture to suit their little socio-political empire.
 
Back
Top