Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,628
Members1,323
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
6 registered members (Karen Y, dedication, Nadi, 3 invisible),
3,156
guests, and 11
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36009
05/07/05 01:51 AM
05/07/05 01:51 AM
|
OP
Full Member
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 126
USA
|
|
The Independent
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.'
Is Satan up to his old tricks or do we have to change?
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36010
05/07/05 04:22 AM
05/07/05 04:22 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
The actual number was really much smaller. It was 3.14159265358979323846.
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36011
05/07/05 08:32 AM
05/07/05 08:32 AM
|
Active Member 2011
3500+ Member
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,965
Sweden
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36012
05/07/05 02:08 PM
05/07/05 02:08 PM
|
Charter Member Active Member 2014
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,019
Northern CA
|
|
Since God does not change I would say that Satan is up to his old tricks.
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36013
05/10/05 12:23 AM
05/10/05 12:23 AM
|
|
Ronnie,
Is the opening post of your's from some sort of article? If so, could you inform us the source of that article?
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36014
05/10/05 01:54 PM
05/10/05 01:54 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
It is interesting that in the only EGW reference we have on this number, she seems to refer to it as the number of the image beast.
“I saw all that ‘would not receive the mark of the Beast, and of his Image, in their foreheads or in their hands,’ could not buy or sell. I saw that the number (666) of the Image Beast was made up; and that it was the beast that changed the Sabbath, and the Image Beast had followed on after, and kept the Pope's, and not God's Sabbath. And all we were required to do, was to give up God's Sabbath, and keep the Pope's, and then we should have the mark of the Beast, and of his Image.” {Broadside3, April 7, 1847 par. 5}
Anyway, the true meaning of this number will only be known when the prophecy is fulfilled.
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36015
05/11/05 03:11 AM
05/11/05 03:11 AM
|
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,664
Plowing
|
|
3.14159265358979323846 is the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle, or pi
So Tom, mind if you share with the whole class about this Pi thing of yours...hmmmm?
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36016
05/11/05 05:52 AM
05/11/05 05:52 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
It was admittedly an obscure comment. Go ahead. I'm anxious to see if you got it.
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36017
05/11/05 08:11 AM
05/11/05 08:11 AM
|
Active Member 2011
3500+ Member
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,965
Sweden
|
|
But why 3.14159265358979323846? Why not 42 or 999 or...?
/Thomas
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36018
05/12/05 08:03 PM
05/12/05 08:03 PM
|
|
pi doesn't really have an end to the number.... it keeps going on & on & on....... now, whenever I did any math problems in school, I hated that number. You can never get an exact number by using pi because in order to use it, you need to shorten the decimal number. Some people use tenths, some use hundredths, etc. Any way you look at it, it is inaccurate.
When I saw Tom's comment, I almost laughed, because just about any math student I have ever known thinks of that number as "evil" hehe.
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36019
05/12/05 09:03 PM
05/12/05 09:03 PM
|
Active Member 2011
3500+ Member
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,965
Sweden
|
|
Oh, hehe, then I guess that I and maybe others have been caught hands deep down in the mythical cookie jar with not being mathematicians /Thomas
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36020
05/14/05 12:20 AM
05/14/05 12:20 AM
|
OP
Full Member
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 126
USA
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36021
05/16/05 06:18 AM
05/16/05 06:18 AM
|
|
God wouldn't allow His Word to contain such a glaring error for 99% of the Christian age. ( -- assuming that we even have 1% of the time left to go before the Lord returns...)
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36022
05/16/05 08:55 AM
05/16/05 08:55 AM
|
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,664
Plowing
|
|
John's so right: God is not so foolish or weak or cryptic to let such a major "typo" survive so long. It's just another example of papal mentality: "Oh look! Here's a great mystery hidden for ages. Let's ask some religious authority tell us what it means!"
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36023
05/17/05 05:56 AM
05/17/05 05:56 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Phil, you're last comment is what I had in mind with the Pi comment. It's silly to think 666 is really 616. It's as like that it's really Pi.
I misunderstood your post where I thought *you* were offering to explain my comment.
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36024
05/17/05 02:19 PM
05/17/05 02:19 PM
|
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,664
Plowing
|
|
Oh, I got ya, Tom. I was waiting to see how all this Pi stuff could be tied in to Windmill's topic about Pi.
I'm just about to finish a great Adventist classic, "The Fathers of the Catholic Church", written by Dr Waggoner in 1888, and find that this "great discovery of ancient/lost/miracle documents is an old papal game. I am surprised that more of it hasn't been pulled in this tabloid happy, sensationist's world.
But I suspect we will see more of it soon enough.
Adventists had best take the runners off of their rocking chairs and sit on all four solid legs of the Advent hope. Don't depend on the arm of flesh, whatever his degree may say.
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36025
05/17/05 10:43 PM
05/17/05 10:43 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Yes, and another one is current events. Every time there's a new pope, the end is near.
Lot's of non-issues to distract the mind. But what's the truth about God? There's a real topic for discussion!
|
|
|
Re: Revelation! 666 Is Not the Number of the Beast (It's a Devilish 616)
#36026
05/21/05 12:05 AM
05/21/05 12:05 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
Right Tom. The question is: Do we think that if we know the "number of the beast" that that will enable us not to receive his mark? Is that our safety? Or is our safety in having our Father's name written in our foreheads? What does that mean? How about this "number": "Our heavenly father's name".
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|