Talk:Number of the Beast (numerology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


This article doesn't really need references. It's claims are self evident. Take out your caculator and try them out. You'll see that they are accurate. --Pmcchesn 15:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The claims are self evident, I agree, but are they encyclopedic ? Or, more generally, do they really refer to the "number of the beast" ? It seems to me that they simply refer to the number 666, whatever meaning some people have attached to it. Actually, most of the "properties" of the number are already indicated in 666 (number), so I'll suggest to merge the two articles together. Schutz 11:09, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
All the information contained in this article is now in 666 (number); if noone disagrees, I'll make a redirect out of it. Schutz
666 (number) is a confusing page. The page in question is better organized and contains only the information relevant to its stated topic, whereas the 666 (number) is really just a listing of trivia without a unifying theme (aside from 666). Number of the Beast (numerology) is as "encyclopedic" as 666 (number) and certainly deals with a topic directly related to the perceived mystical aspects of the Number of the Beast. I see no reason to merge. Pmcchesn 18:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
How do prime numbers and their squares, the natural numbers between 1 and 36 and roman numbers relate to this beast your are talking about ? They are properties of the number 666 and nothing else and if the bible had not mentioned this number, they would exist in exactly the same way; the same is true of any other integer number. If you want to talk about the "perceived mystical aspects" of 666, then you have to cite sources which indicate why these mathematical properties are interesting from the mystical point of view, and not just "random" properties; otherwise, this is original research. The only "fact" that is linked with the beast stuff is the joke on the sine; but it is probably not worth having an article just for a joke like this. Schutz 19:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I understand your point about this article not really relating to the number's religious connotations, but I don’t think it represents original research. Its claims are readily verifiable and have been published before (see Furthermore, they are joked about commonly in the mathematical circles I have observed.
Number of the Beast (mathematical properties) might be a better title. However, while I do not personally believe in numerology, I do believe that people attach supernatural significance to the topics discussed in this article. But I'm not sure that I could find a reference demonstrating this. Perhaps we should mark the article for deletion and put the decision to a vote with three possible courses of action:
1) Keep the article and title intact.
2) Merge the article to 666 (number)
3) Change the title to Number of the Beast (mathematical properties)
What do you think? Pmcchesn 22:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Listing the article for deletion does not strike me as the best solution (since it is not one of the possible courses of action), but given that I don't see where else this could be discuted, I'd say: good idea, let's go for it. Can you do it, or do you want me to do it ? Schutz 08:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


I grew up in a remote mountain area in China. I started to learn Chinese abacus when I was a little child. My grandpa told me to add up the first 36 numbers. Number 666 is a way to check whether I did correct abacus additions.


I deleted the section called "JPII". None of it, including the section's title itself, makes much sense to me. Perhaps some additional explanation would make it more clear. However, I believe this article should deal only with the numerical properties of 666 and not be based on any cultural aspects. There other articles for that.