What do you think is the meaning behind the number 666?

[NathanH83]

Revelations 13

 

[Fritz Kobus]

It is a meaning that must have been clear to the people that the Book of Revelation was written to, so we need to view it from their time in history and their way of thinking.

 

[Andrew]

666/616 = Nero (the first major Christian persecutor)
The mark is allegiance to the system that is against Christian values and the Church, back then it was to the Imperial Cult.

New boss same as the old, is Christianity under a major assault in modern times? You bet it is.

 

[Spindle4]

Revelations 13

Add all the numbers 1 to 36 and BINGO.

 

[Andrew]

Add all the numbers 1 to 36 and BINGO.

Astrology comes from ancient Babylon so it's no mere coincidence that 666 is also associated with it's zodiac.

Apparently there were 3 rooms in each of the 12 houses of the zodiac which totaled 36 rooms, each room was said to have been occupied by a god, 36 gods in all, adding each cardinal room for every god equalled 666 and this sacred number the Babylonian mystic priest's gave to the one hidden god... this claim came from a SDA evangelical who's sources usually checked out but I never followed up with this claim. I believe the gamblers wheel also has 36 spots.

 

[Spindle4]

Astrology comes from ancient Babylon so it's no mere coincidence that 666 is also associated with it's zodiac.

Apparently there were 3 rooms in each of the 12 houses of the zodiac which totaled 36 rooms, each room was said to have been occupied by a god, 36 gods in all, adding each cardinal room for every god equalled 666 and this sacred number the Babylonian mystic priest's gave to the one hidden god... this claim came from a SDA evangelical who's sources usually checked out but I never followed up with this claim. I believe the gamblers wheel also has 36 spots.

Yes, many such examples exist
Rev 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate ( psēphizō) the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.

In ancient times anything that could be demonstrated by method was termed wisdom. Using fire to boil water and smelt ores was wisdom. Numerology was wisdom, and pebbles were used for calculations. Interesting how there is a link to gaining admission. (add+mission)

Strongs G5585
ψηφίζω
psēphizō
psay-fid'-zo
From G5586; to use pebbles in enumeration, that is, (genitive case) to compute: - count.
Total KJV occurrences: 2

Strongs G5586
ψῆφος
psēphos
psay'-fos
From the same as G5584; a pebble (as worn smooth by handling), that is, (by implication of use as a counter or ballot) a verdict (of acquittal) or ticket (of admission); a vote: - stone, voice.
Total KJV occurrences: 3

 

[Pedrito]

===================================================================================

Gematria is a term used to describe the use of letters to represent numbers.

It was common among the ancient cultures.

As an example, Roman numerals, which used to be employed to date older films, are second nature to us (or used to be).

===================================================================================

If we look at the gematria employed by the Romans, the Hebrews and the Greeks, something significant emerges.

===================================================================================

Years and years (and years…) ago, I investigated this matter in depth.

While I cannot remember the detail now, I found that in each language, there existed a word that pointed to something specific (the same specific thing), and that the gematria of each of those words totalled 666.

The specific thing was a Roman.

===================================================================================

The book of Revelation self-identifies as largely pertaining to future things.

The 666 appears to warn about a corrupt, powerful system that would emerge and persecute people who wanted to worship God in spirit and in truth. The parallel is driven home with much force by Revelation 2:20, for people who consider that the letters to the seven churches also have prophetic, historical implications. (Clarification available upon request.)

The readers of John’s day would have had no problem understanding his meaning.

===================================================================================

 

[Fritz Kobus]

The book of Revelation self-identifies as largely pertaining to future things.

Future to the people it was written to. Future things that the book says must happen soon, not 2000 years later:

1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;

1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

 

[Pedrito]

===================================================================================

Regarding thoughts expressed in Post #8:

1. I may need new glasses, but I don’t think I see mention of 2000 years anywhere in my Post #7.

2. That doesn’t mean that there are no references to a future, being then-distant in John’s time.

3. The “at hand” and “shortly” may refer to the beginning of a progressive fulfilment of prophecy.

4. If one can countenance the idea that the letters to the seven churches may be historically prophetic,
---- then Rev. 2:20 points with a high degree of accuracy, to an identifiable period of history pertaining to the Church of Rome.

===================================================================================

However, care must be taken in identifying the church of Philadelphia with either the initial Protestant movements that went cold, or with the subsequent “revival” period.

Both periods were characterised by mutual intolerance and persecution. And I would venture a guess that God is not happy with such things. Not at all.

===================================================================================

 

[Fritz Kobus]

===================================================================================

Regarding thoughts expressed in Post #8:

1. I may need new glasses, but I don’t think I see mention of 2000 years anywhere in my Post #7.

2. That doesn’t mean that there are no references to a future, being then-distant in John’s time.

3. The “at hand” and “shortly” may refer to the beginning of a progressive fulfilment of prophecy.

4. If one can countenance the idea that the letters to the seven churches may be historically prophetic,
---- then Rev. 2:20 points with a high degree of accuracy, to an identifiable period of history pertaining to the Church of Rome.

===================================================================================

However, care must be taken in identifying the church of Philadelphia with either the initial Protestant movements that went cold, or with the subsequent “revival” period.

Both periods were characterised by mutual intolerance and persecution. And I would venture a guess that God is not happy with such things. Not at all.

===================================================================================

1. You are absolutely right.
2. Well yes, the Book of Revelation does have some text nearer the end that applies to the last day, though most of it makes a lot more sense as fulfilled in the first century.
3. I can't think of any examples of a progressive fulfillment of a prophecy that was stated to be at hand or now.
4. Sorry, I am not comprehending this one. The Church of Rome being the Roman Catholic Church?
I would take the letters to the seven churches as just that letters to those seven churches, with application to any church any time in history but not specifically predictive of such as Protestant movements going cold.

 

[Pedrito]

===================================================================================

My apologies for being unclear.

In my younger years, I heard from a number of sources, that “The Church of Rome” was a term used by “Reformers” (think “Reformation”), to refer to the Roman Catholic Church.

I was unaware that that information had not survived the intervening years.

===================================================================================

Of course, the information itself could have been less than reliable.

When one is young, one tends to be trusting and to believe what one is told.

I have progressively learned since, that a lot of denominational belief and practice does not line up with the Holy Scripture upon which it is said to be based.

===================================================================================

 

[Fritz Kobus]

I have progressively learned since, that a lot of denominational belief and practice does not line up with the Holy Scripture upon which it is said to be based.

Agree. That is why it is very hard for me to find a church I can stand attending for very long. The plandemic really put the nail in the coffin as most churches went right along with the scam after there was plenty of time and evidence to show that it was indeed a scam.

 

[Pedrito]

===================================================================================

I fully understand the comment in Post #12: “That is why it is very hard for me to find a church I can stand attending for very long.”

An important question when evaluating the acceptability of a church or churches, could well be:
Which is easier – to add churches to a list of possibles based on the apparent scripturality of their major beliefs, or to eliminate churches from a list of possibles, based on the demonstrable unscripturality of identifiable teachings? In other words, would it be easier to identify the “last man standing?”

===================================================================================

The elimination process is actually not as hard as one might think.

For instance, accurately applied and balanced Scriptures have been requested over a number of years now, to support the following stated beliefs:

1. Predestination

Mention was made of “an entire forest” of Scripture statements (as opposed to “a couple sentences”) that support the idea of individual, irrevocable, and irresistible preselection by God of people for salvation.

2. A Loving God Sentences People Without Qualm To Eternal Suffering

[[Insertions added to 3rd party quote for clarity.]] “As far as I can tell, people who have taught” [[against]] “this” [[i.e. those who teach Annihilationism instead]] “have been uncomfortable with the idea that God could punish anyone in hell for eternity and still be a loving God. This is the way they reconcile this in their minds. nevermind that there are dozens of scriptures that contradict this.”

3. There Is An Individual Age Of Understanding/Responsibility/Etc.

This is a hallmark of “Evangelical” teaching. Young people are protected until they reach a certain age (never defined). After that, if they die without making a decision to accept Jesus (however expressed) , they will meet an eternal, sticky end.

Some “Baby Baptising” churches have the same (hidden) belief. Not those that claim that a baby baptised by an “acceptable” church has assured, permanent salvation. But those that teach that a baby must later on in life, personally acknowledge all the relevant aspects of the original baptismal ritual.

===================================================================================

Those are a few just for starters. Could that sort of approach be helpful? It definitely puts the cat among the pigeons.

The other trick is to know how to determine which of two presented sides of an argument is the true one. Or to realise that in some instances there is a third perspective that most people are too heavily conditioned to recognise.

===================================================================================

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Predestination is a tough one, and I probably need to study that one a lot. As long as predestination does not devolve into a OSAS teaching, I can probably handle it.

I kind of like the idea of last man standing, but in my case I may be the only one left standing.