Jump to content

Talk:Number of the beast/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Solomon

wow, removed again. shows you understand absolutely nothing about the bible.

in fact, Solomon bears about 20 resemblences the the revelations passages. The number 6 is HEAVILY associated with him

revelations is metaphorical and draws from other books. If you you think 666 is a reference to an actual man or future event, you are sorely mistaken.

In fact, not only that, but you're reading the entire bible incorrectly. good luck in your future intellectual endeavours. 76.64.45.85 (talk) 20:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

If there's a reliable source drawing these comparisons, by all means add this back with citations. But if these resemblances are just part of your own personal theory, however intellectual, they simply do not belong in Wikipedia. --McGeddon (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Every serious scholar I've talked to (face to face) knows that the clues point directly to Solomon, Son of David not some contemporary person. A serious study will show this clearly, but Wikipedia is not the place to carry on research of this nature. I put the Old Testament references in, but they were removed with the reason "This is unrelated to Revelation 13:18 -- maybe add to 666 (number)#Other occurrences)". They have been part of that article for a long time and remain such. Every passage in the Book of Revelation relates to something in the Old Testament. But you don't want to spoil the ending for the whole world do you? Shhhhh! ...So.. see 666 (number) if you need to. • Q^#o • 19:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
If every serious scholar you've talked to knows this, then you should have no trouble providing an abundance of sources to support this idea. As long as we continue to lack sources, we can't do anything PER POLICY.Farsight001 (talk) 23:33, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Counter anecdotal evidence: In the different religion courses I've taken, the professor would start off with "there's a variety of interpretations" without explaining any, to "666 = Nero is the most accepted among academics" once that particular interpretation was raised. My southern Baptist minister grandfather at least understands the reasoning behind "666 = Nero Caesar." His views can be rather limited to American evangelical protestantism, but it's still quite aware of concepts that are fairly universal among Bible scholars. Other professors and ministers I've spoken with, even if they disagreed with Nero being the Beast, still acknowledge that the reasoning behind it was correct before attempting to further argue that the proper conclusion was that Nero's life was an echo or prophecy of some cosmic, past, present, or future Beast.
Now that that's out of the way, this is why we don't give a rat's ass about anecdotal claims of "every scholar I've talked with," because that's entirely dependent upon who you talk with and how willing they are to disagree with you -- which is why we stick with what mainstream academic sources say. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:48, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

37

the triangular number 36 should not be moved from the article as it was change a long time ago. a triangle 19+19+36=74 and then multiply by 9.

Extended WP:OR

Triangular numbers of Natural numbers of

isosceles triangle of sides a+b+c

Rightangle triangle

19=hypotenuse
18=adjacent
37=opposite
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10
18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
= = = = = = = = =
37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.7.157.23 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia does not use original research. See WP:No original research. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 24 July 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Calidum T|C 23:11, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Number of the Beast → Number of the beast – Lowercase beast (Requested Move) Jeffro77 (talk) 12:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

The recent renaming of the page by Lowellian from lowercase "beast" to uppercase "Beast" needs to be undone. There was no discussion for that move. All the Bible versions but one, and all the commentaries at the Revelation 13:18 link have lowercase "number of the beast". A personified "Beast" is only one of many interpretations, and should not be given undue weight as the preferred name.

Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number [is] Six hundred three score [and] six. (KJV)

Agreed. It should be lowercase. —Telpardec  TALK  10:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Comment. Regarding the nominator's criticism that there was "no discussion for that move": At the time I moved the article, I thought I was just doing basic common Wikipedia cleanup, matching the article title to the prose text, given that the first sentence of the article already started out with the uppercase form "The Number of the Beast..." (see [1]). Also, my move actually restored the article to its original name, as the article started out in uppercase form and remained there for many years, in fact, for much longer than it has been in lowercase form. That said, this issue is a more specific case of the general issue of whether to capitalize "beast" or not, for which I have now opened an article naming discussion at Talk:The beast (Revelation)/Talk:The Beast (Revelation). —Lowellian (reply) 08:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose Whether personified as a historical or mythological figure(s) or social movements; or conceptualized as a philosophical idea, political truth, or psychological facet; this instance of the word "beast" is a proper noun referring only the Beast of Revelation. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:46, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Just so it's clear, I only changed a generic section into a move request with the associated template. I am not the original nominator.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The 666 is king Solomon and his symbol is the hexagram which is on Israels flag making Israel the 666.

Revelation 13

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

18 Here is WISDOM. Let him that hath UNDERSTANDING count the number of the beast: for it is the NUMBER OF A MAN; and his number is Six hundred

threescore and six.

666 is mentioned 3 other times in the bible

Ezra 2:13

13 The children of Adonikam, six hundred sixty and six.

and

1 Kings 10:14

14 Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents of gold,

and then the same thing again in 2 chronicles.

2 Chronicles 9:

13 Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred and threescore and six talents of gold;

WISDOM and UNDERSTANDING of Solomon

1 Kings 3:12

12 Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a WISE and an UNDERSTANDING heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee.

1 Kings 4:29

God gave Solomon WISDOM and very great insight, and a breadth of understanding as measureless as the sand on the seashore. 30 Solomon's

WISDOM was greater than the WISDOM of all the men of the East, and greater than all the WISDOM of Egypt. 31 He was WISER THAN ANY OTHER MAN,

including Ethan the Ezrahite--wiser than Heman, Calcol and Darda, the sons of Mahol. And his fame spread to all the surrounding nations. 32 He

spoke three thousand proverbs and his songs numbered a thousand and five. 33 He described plant life, from the cedar of Lebanon to the hyssop

that grows out of walls. He also taught about animals and birds, reptiles and fish. 34 Men of all nations came to listen to Solomon's WISDOM,

sent by all the kings of the world, who had heard of his WISDOM.

So king Solomon is the 666 from ~1000 BC, he ruled ancient Israel on the same land as modern Israel/Palestine. In Islamic and jewish kabbalah tradition took the hexagram symbol as his sign to cast spells and do witchcraft when he went apostate in 1 kings 11 so it became known as the seal of Solomon. So 1900 years since the book of Revelation was written a kingdom arises on the same land as ancient Israel with the star of Solomon on its flag so the modern state of Israel is the kingdom the 2nd beast in Revelation 13 will rule. Christians; prepare to lose your head at the hand of the jews when the time comes because jewish people despise Jesus Christ and christians so logically they will force christians to renounce faith in Jesus or kill them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sellingstuff (talk • contribs) 00:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not use original research, especially antisemitic canards. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:59, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
@Sellingstuff, you claimed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Themainman69 that your 'source' for the above nonsense is youTube and the Bible. youTube does not constitute a reliable source per Wikipedia's standards, and nor do your personal interpretations of the Bible. The Bible makes no statement whatsoever that Solomon is in any way related to the 'number of the beast'. Anyone who has actually researched the subject should understand that the 'beast' was in reference to Nero.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes textbooks say Nero was the beast because his name in Aramaic = 666. Any name on earth can =666 if someone tries hard enough. Solomon is provably the 666. Anyone who has researched the subject thoroughly understands that. Sellingstuff (talk) 01:56, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Nope. The gematria was in reference to Nero, which is entirely supported by the context of the book. There is no valid reason whatsoever to equate entirely incidental references to '666'. Your theory is nothing but superstitious nonsense. In any case, you would need to present a reliable source.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Bill Gates

The ascii-sum of BILL and GATES is 663. But Bill Gates is actually called "Bill Gates III". Adding 3 to 663 and you'll get 666.

But I suppose some other famous persons also connects to the number. Fabben (talk) 17:21, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

See WP:No original research. Also, if you try hard enough, you can make up a connection between any name to 666. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Unix

Yes chmod 666 is a valid command in Unix/Linux/OSX however, it's not a particularly common permission to set. Googling shows no evidence that it's commonly referred to as the 'mode of the beast' - although I've no doubt someone's said it in jest. There are (of course) some religious sites that refer to this, but I haven't seen one that's not advert laden, or could be considered a Reliable Source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snori (talk • contribs) 20:50, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Examples Ireneaus and other Early Church Fathers considered

Used to be listed on this page, that they're gone now annoys me I only have like 4 memorized, Euanthas, Lateinos, Teitan and Lampetis.--JaredMithrandir (talk) 01:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

It was removed by me, here because it was not very scholarly, only had one reference, used a lot of BOLD names, etc. Raquel Baranow (talk) 04:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Number 666 and the Twelve Tribes of Israel

Dear editors, I ask you to examine the possibility of including information and quotation of my article "Number 666 and the Twelve Tribes of Israel" in your text to improve it and bring it up to date. The article can be found at the following address: http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/revista-biblica/68_3-4_191.pdf It was published in Spanish in "Revista Biblica" (Buenos Aires, Argentina); but it appears translated into English, Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese in that address. It contains new details and data on the issue. Thank you for your attention and analysis. Adylson Valdez. April/05/2016.187.57.120.191 (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

The section on Mohammad is dubious

Please read it and look at the sources, it's ALL dubious, old contradictory references, citing monks from the 15th Century. Many readers have removed it. Here's also a previous discussion supporting removal. Raquel Baranow (talk) 02:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

So you mean that the alleged identification 666 = Maometis didn't occur? If so, then you are right. But note Western Hostility to Islam: And Prophecies of Turkish Doom, Volume 201, page 11! Secondary source and everything!
If you mean that citing monks from the 15th century isn't OK, I disagree. The article does not claim that 666 = Muhammad, only that 15th century monks did so, however wrong it was. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 09:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I cleaned it up, made it more coherent, dif. Raquel Baranow (talk) 19:17, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

When does the mark of the beast start?

When does the mark of the beast start? Some people say that it started today what do you think? Killershark101 (talk) 01:30, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

This is not a general discussion forum, and Wikipedia does not care about user opinion. Also, the founder of Christianity admitted that no one knows or will know when the apocalypse will occur. Notable claims to the contrary are listed here. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:47, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Ian.thomson, thank you for remember us Wikipedia does not care about user opinion, but please, understand that NO ONE care about your opinion about "founder of Christianity admitted", you do not know if that phrase is real because for many academics and science Jesus have never existed, ot at least he does not exist as we know, and Bible is just a human book writen by politicians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.254.152.22 (talk) 18:07, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

List possible

I think it would be interesting to have a section or page on "things accused of being the mark/number of the beast." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucamilion (talk • contribs) 04:32, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

DCLXVI = 666

Per Isaac Asimov's History of the Bible (from memory) numerology was often used to obscure explicit references to Rome or Romans as a precaution against persecution. It seems logical, also parsimonious, that the number 666 was used to represent the Roman Numerals, DCLXVI = 666. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roylofquist (talk • contribs) 03:41, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia only neutrally summarizes professionally-published mainstream academic sources. Whatever a user believes to be logical or parsimonious is not used -- see WP:No original research.
Also, the Book of Revelation was written in Greek, not Latin. Furthermore the extant Hebrew manuscripts also give 616 instead of 666. This is already covered (with sources) in the relevant articles. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources do not have to be academic ones. But in this case the numerals used were the Greek numerals "χξϛʹ" (666) or "χιϛʹ" (616). The book was written in Koine Greek, not Latin. Dimadick (talk) 15:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)


In Roman numerals 666 would be written as DCLXVI, true, but so what? What is the significance of DCLXVI? Is that supposed to stand for somebody's name? John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 20:38, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

666 more natural than 667?

The text suggests that 667 MHz was chosen as a clock speed for the pentium 3 instead of the "more natural" 666. 2/3 of a gigahertz would be 666.6666(etc.)MHz which would round off to 667MHz so how would 666MHz be "more natural"? 667 seems much more logical in that context! John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 20:32, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

This claim currently has no source at all. But even if it were the case that the number were usually given as 667, it would need a source that states that it was given that number because of superstition regarding the number 666, rather than for other mundane reasons, such as rounding. The claim will be deleted in the near future if not suitably sourced.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:48, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Quirky Texas highway instance

Mile marker 666 on I-10, about 75 miles east of San Antonio, was so frequently stolen that the TxDOT simply replaced it with a striped black-and-yellow sign.[1] I figure a quirky story like this one belongs on this page, and I'd add it if it weren't for the people who's abuse led to a page lock! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:9c80:8bc:dd30:3fa8:4c13:ebf5 (talk) 07:02, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Roadside Mile Marker 666". www.texasescapes.com.

segments of the hands

Human hands and lungs have the segments of 2 and 3,for a total of 14.To find the angles I use 5,5,and 4. If I was measuring in a way of a triangle or base 10,3×7+2*8=37 and (21+16)×4=148 Therefore when I measure the angles they give me 0.4+0.4+0.68=1.48 20:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)199.119.233.152 (talk)

Yeah, that doesn't really have anything to do with this page. Please don't bother trying to explain how it does, because we do not use original research. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:25, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Muhammad

"Gematria has also been used with the word Maometis (Ancient Greek: Μαομέτις); which scholars[who?] have described as a dubiously obscure Latinisation of a Greek transliteration of the Arabic name Muhammad. In Quia Maior, the encyclical calling for the Fifth Crusade, Pope Innocent III identifies Muhammad with the beast of Revelation,[citation needed] although later popes did not.[citation needed] Euthymius Zygabenus and Zonaras wrote the name as "Maometh" and Cedrenus wrote the name "Mouchoumet" none of which is the "Maometis" in question. A leading exponent of the Maometis interpretation was Charles Walmesley, the Roman Catholic bishop of Rama.[40] Other proponents include Gilbert Genebrard, Francois Feuardent, and Rene Massuet, 16-17th-Century Catholic theologians.[41] Maometis in Greek numerals totals 666:"

This part about Muhammad is atrocious and not only has no citation for it's actual claims and the sentences that do have citations are just citations of people in history claiming Muhammad was "the beast"/Anti-Christ. This whole section should start with explaining the work of David Thom, and how he disproves the claim Μαομέτις (which adds to 666) is somehow related to the name Muhammad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Draicoon (talk • contribs) 16:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't have time but I made a start. Go ahead and edit it yourself. Doug Weller talk 16:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Kabbalah

I have removed the section about Kabbalah. The paragraph noted that the number has no specific significance in Kabbalah. A source that did mention 666' in the section made no connection with the 'number of the beast', but only a vaguely tangential implied significance of simply repeating 6 three times. Hence it is out of scope at this article.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion: be accurate with the fonts as much as possible

The article presents the number (in Greek letters) as χξϛ. However, the only representation in the texts with which I am familiar with is χξc (no top hook mark on the c) and without any overline. I have never seen a Greek manuscript with this font ϛ (back hook on bottom). What I have seen looks like a simple c (but no hook), and the stigma looks the same as a sigma at the end of a word. BTW, I don't know how to change fonts on Wikipedia. Is it possible? The c I want to use looks like the c in "Special characters" the blue editing selection heading, just a very simple, sans sherif c. -- But after posting I see that the c came out right. (PeacePeace (talk) 14:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC))

Article puts a line over Greek letter numbers. Is this an anachronism?

Do the ancient Greek manuscripts put lines over the Greek letter-numbers? If not, I suggest removing the overlines. Is this an anchronism for a later practice in writing Greek? Should we remove the overlines so that we see just χξc ?(PeacePeace (talk) 14:51, 5 July 2019 (UTC))

John of Patmos encoded Neron Kaisar (Greek) as "666", Nero Caesar (Latin) became "616" in Vulgate

John of Patmos encoded Neron Kaisar as "six hundred sixty-six (666)" by transliterating his name in Greek into Hebrew gematria. Nero Caesar in Latin was transliterated into "six hundred sixteen (616)" through Hebrew gematria. "616" appeared in the Latin Vulgate. 73.85.202.238 (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

"Tnotb" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tnotb. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 19:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

"06/06/06" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 06/06/06. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 19:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

60066

is it possible the number could be 600 with 66 instead of 600 added into 66?--Fruitloop11 (talk) 07:39, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

That's not how numbers work in Koine Greek (or Hebrew or Aramaic for that matter). In Greek numerals, χ is 600, ξ is 60, ϛ is 6, and you add the values in a string together. Thus, χξϛ is 600+60+6, or sixhundred-sixty-six. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

The stigma is written in the photo as c, without any bottom tail.

Fonts change over time. The papyrus pictured shows stigma (so far as I can tell) looking the same as sigma, like a c in English. I don't know why people are representing it with a tail on the bottom. Do you have a Greek manuscript that writes it with a tail on bottom before medieval times? It is strange that right under the photo of the manuscript where the stigma is a c, an editor has used a different font. (PeacePeace (talk) 06:02, 8 May 2020 (UTC))

that’s the way it is throughout this article, I reverted your edit Raquel Baranow (talk) 20:12, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Bergoglio, ASCII, 666

Acording to this article in the Italian newspaper Libero, using the values of the ASCII encoding, the surname Bergoglio adds up to 666: https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/articolo_blog/blog/andrea-cionci/23564642/apocalisse-san-giovanni-666-nome-anticristo-alfabeto-codice-ascii-simboli-computer-bergoglio-papa-francesco-profezie-matemat.html --87.16.63.231 (talk) 16:27, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

616 and L

I've noticed it being a relatively common interpretation that the difference between "666" and "616" is that the value of the name would be different depending on whether "L" was considered to have a value of 50 or not, similarly to Nero/Neron in Hebrew. Unsure however whether this interpretation is mainstream enough to have widespread reporting on it. 2001:56A:F95A:7F00:6095:63DB:3584:2AAD (talk) 19:16, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Never heard that before. I know that in Roman numerals, L always has a value of 50. But I'm not sure about the Latin manuscripts--whether they even used Roman numerals or just wrote it out in words. What's interesting though is that all of the Roman numerals added together make 666 if you don't count the M (which wasn't always standardized anyway). 2601:49:C301:D810:510A:7CCD:4E25:F05C (talk) 19:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Other interpretations

Apart from "Neron Caesar" and "Nero Caesar", another preterist interpretation is Caligula. His Latin name "Gaius Caesar" (Γάιος Καίσαρ), transcribed into Greek, adds up to 616. I don't have any sources though... all I know is that it works when you add the letters up.

Also, with regard to historicist, futurist, and symbolic interpretations... there are literally dozens more apart from "Maometis". I don't suggest we add them all here as that would probably do little more than clutter up the page, but shouldn't this at least be mentioned? (the fact that numerous other names have been proposed over the centuries) Or maybe make note of some of the more important ones. e.g. "Evanthas" (Ευανθασ=666), "Titan" (Τειταν=666), and "Latinus" (Λατεινοσ=666) should probably be mentioned since they're the earliest names proposed (by St. Irenaeus, second century A.D.).

Then some more biblical interpretations (not involving gematria) would link the number to Adonikam and Solomon who are both associated with 666 (see Ezra 2:13 for Adonikam and 2 Chronicles 9:13 for Solomon). 2601:49:C301:D810:510A:7CCD:4E25:F05C (talk) 21:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Number of the Beast (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Bizarre claim

A couple of editors (possibly the same editor) have persistently added a claim about JWs in part of Africa being accused of having a 'demonic' website because of the presence of 'www' in their website address. Aside from the unsuitability of a JW source making an unverifiable claim about "some churches" saying something about JWs, the presence of 'www' in website addresses is standard and not in anyway unique to JWs. Therefore, if there is any widespread belief that 'www' somehow represents 'the mark of the beast' (a fringe belief at best), this would require better sourcing and a more general place in the article.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I've heard of this one a few times before, though always second hand (because, well, good luck trying to get me to read a message over the internet without using world wide web). And the second hand account was as often as not "is this true?" as much as it was facepalming. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Hand and forehead

This article also covers the mark, but doesn't include the bit about "Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead," It would be good to add that to the greek vs english translation (since people claim all kinds of things are "the mark" despite not being in those locations (like COVID-19 vaccine microchips)) but I don't know the conventions for quoting different sources, etc. Also would be good to contrast with the mark of the lamb, which believers are *supposed* to get. — Omegatron (talk) 17:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Kaisar Neron (Greek) = 666 in Hebrew Gematria, Caesar Nero (Latin) = 616

I added this to the introduction... The Apostle John exiled on Patmos by the Romans, encoded his writing for his protection, the protection of the early Christians, and to sneak his writing past Roman guards who would destroy it. 'Kaisar Neron' in Greek transliterated into Hebrew gematria equals "six hundred sixty-six 666". 'Caesar Nero' in Latin equals "six hundred sixteen 616".[1] 2601:589:4800:9090:5419:AF47:A589:C41B (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

It isn't Nero. See below. The book was written after Nero's death and few details fit including the manner of the Beast's death. Plus the Hebrew spelling here is idiosyncratic.

Vicarius Filii Dei#Roman numerals

Some Christian denominations believe in the equation VICARIVS F'ILII DEI = 5+1+100+1+5+1+50+1+1+500+1 = 666. Although this information is just reffered in Vicarius Filii Dei#Roman numerals, it shall also be cited here.

The proposition is self-evident and it can be cited even if there are no sources supporting it directly. In the Roman Catholic Church the Exorcism against Satan and the Apostate Angels affirms:

Where the See of the Blessed Peter and the Chair of Truth have been set up for the light of the Gentiles, there they have placed the throne of the abomination of their wickedness, so that, the Pastor having been struck, they may also be able to scatter the flock.

— https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/b014rpExocrcism.htm ]

It prophetized the Chair of the Holy See would have been occupied by Satan. And such a concern comes accordingly to the intepretation of the Number of the Beast as the Latin sequence Vicarius Filii Dei.

Maybe the 666 has more than one interpretation, being a universal symbol that can be read in multple languages.

666 correspondences in the Bible.

I think there's too much focus on Nero in this article and not enough discussion on other theories surrounding the 666 of Revelation 13:18. For instance, there is no discussion about the 666 talents of Gold collected by King Solomon, and the symbolism of the number elsewhere than in 13:18. For instance, in my book "The Art and Practice of Gematria", I show that 666 first appears from a notariqon of Genesis 1:2, and the next time it shows up is in 1:26 (the creation of Man).

Genesis 1:2 with the reversal cipher: ו ה ת ו ו ע פ ת ו א מ ע פ ה = 666

Genesis 1:26: [אדם × ב × ב] + [הארץ + ובבהמה השמים ובעוף הים בדגת] - [הרמש הרמש - הארץ]

Ref: https://shematria.pythonanywhere.com/index?source=666

The two numbers are related by the fact that man is made in the image (and thus the number) of God. Also, John is writing an apocalypse which is the exact opposite of the creation story of Genesis 1-2, so he likely took it as a starting point for his model. If true, then the number of the beast would be a reference to all human beings.

This article also suffers from the exclusion of any mention of Aleister Crowley, who claimed the number of the beast as his own under the moniker of the "master Therion". To sum up - there's too much acceptance of one speculative theory in this article and it's not at all balanced. There are other theories from other authors that fit the evidence better, and they should be presented.

50.32.81.249 (talk) 04:06, 20 December 2021 (UTC) Bethsheba Ashe.

Should this article be careful not to introduce anachronism?

Is it not an error to speak of textual apparatuses having "666" or "616" in them, since the ancient papyri do not use the (uninvented yet) Arabic numberals? (FairNPOV (talk) 12:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)) Blocked sock. ButlerBlog (talk) 16:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

I would say it's fine; it's just a translation of the Greek numeral into a form that the modern reader can understand. It's similar to saying, for example, "In the Iliad, Hera asks Zeus: 'Majesty, son of Kronos, what sort of thing have you spoken?'", as we do in our Iliad article, when in fact the Iliad has no such text, since it's not written in English. CodeTalker (talk) 16:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
But does your rule apply to statements about textual apparatuses? (FairNPOV (talk) 18:18, 5 August 2021 (UTC)) Blocked sock. ButlerBlog (talk) 16:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Book of changes

In "I-Ching " (Book of changes), 666 represents the earth , number 0 (000 in the binary system). 999 represents number 7 (111 in the binary system.). I-Ching was a book of divinations. It seems to be a coincidence, however St.John mentions also number 7. Jestmoon(talk) 21:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Number(s) of the Beast

The "Number of the Beast" is given as 666 in most modern translations of Reveleation 13:18. This is clearly an anachronism as the Arabic numerals (0-9) were invented a number of centuries after Revcelation was written.

"The most common line of interpretation is that of gematria: in the ancient world, letters of the alphabet often substituted for numerals (our numerical system derives from the later Arabic mathematicians). Hence, each letter stood for a number." ~ https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-is-the-number-of-the-beast-666/

Various interpretations attempt to make correlations with Greek and Hebrew numerals with mixed success. Curiously none have been attempted with Roman numerals. Those are M=1000, D=500, C=100, L=50, X=10, V=5, I=1. If the verse in Revelation is read as "the Numbers of the Beast" then the Roman number DCLXVI = 666. The numbers of the beast, the Roman emperor, are Roman numerals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roylofquist (talk • contribs) 12:52, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Aleister Crowley

Has been called The Beast 666. It even states so right here, in his WP article.

He nevertheless used Satanic imagery, for instance by describing himself as "the Beast 666" and referring to the Whore of Babylon in his work, while in later life he sent "Antichristmas cards" to his friends. Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 13:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Is there a point? ButlerBlog (talk) 15:28, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Cleopatra = 666

The Italian-German linguist Francesco Carotta has arguments that Cleopatra is behind 666. https://carotta.de/subseite/texte/articula/Apokalypse_de.pdf 178.85.154.204 (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

We cannot use self published materials such as this as citations for Wikipedia. MrOllie (talk) 02:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
@178.85.154.204, please read WP:SPS. If and when this Cleopatra theory is published in reliable sources we can use it. Until then we cannot. Anyone can write anything at all in a self-published source, so self-published sources are not considered reliable for use in Wikipedia. CodeTalker (talk) 04:17, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

It isn't Nero

The opening section rather tritely suggests that 666 and 616 are Nero as if it is an easily settled matter. Here are some why it is probably not Nero:

  • Irenaeus says the vision occurred towards the end of Domitian's reign, i.e. after Nero had died.
  • Nero's name is not 666 in Greek (since the book claims to have been written in Patmos, this is probably the original language).
  • In Hebrew numerals, his name requires manipulation to render into 666 or 616 including idiosyncratic spellings of Caesar.
  • The manner of Nero's death does not fit with the book's suggestion.
  • He died before the destruction of the Temple.
  • He did not do anything which correlates well with the mark. Roman and Greek coinage was used in Judaea long before Nero, so even that does not apply.--— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:4c8:148c:60d4:1:2:4d51:109 (talk • contribs)
No, it actually very likely refers to Nero. See also Nero Redivivus legend.--Jeffro77 (talk) 09:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Is χξϛ/х҃ѯ҃с҃ a useful section heading

I've still no idea what it means Doug Weller talk 13:22, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Identical numbers

Who is it? There in the book of a prophet time has been given for the last days. And for his time he was a very righteous man praying three times a day and the Persian who wanted to see how he was praying. He interpreted the dreams of the king and he was highly regarded by heavenly being because of his understanding. They told him about the book of truth and that someone will be born and inherits a kingdom which will last forever and there shall be no end from his kingdom. In the prophesy They chose for his arrival time of 62 seven and 70 seven. In the middle of 62 and 70 is found 66 which 11×6=66 66×2=132 and 66×3=198 and 62+70=132, and it is 12×11=132 and 11×18=198. 

66÷11=6  132÷11=12  198÷11=18
I see a pattern that 6 is in the middle of 6 and 6 where 6+6=12, 6+6+6=18 and the result is 6 6 6. Why would someone chooses three indetical numbers.

11+6=17 11×6=66 199.7.156.133 (talk) 09:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

"prophet time" What does that mean? Dimadick (talk) 09:36, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

COVID-19 section as

@Doug Weller: I understand your reversion of this edit: [9] and I almost reverted it myself for the very same reason (well sourced). However, upon really looking at the edit and taking a deeper look at what the section is saying, I actually agree with the removal. The section is about "hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia" which is specifically about the fear of 666, not just the "mark of the beast". This COVID-19 stuff, while true that it exists, is about masks and vaccination as being the "mark of the beast"; but it's not really about 666, as all the other items in this section are. So I actually agree with @Upwinxp: on this point. I hope I explained that clearly and would ask that you revert back (I felt it better to discuss as there was more room for clarifying exactly "why", rather than just reverting on my disagreeance). ButlerBlog (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Done, but it looks as though it might be ok elsewhere. Doug Weller talk 18:38, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
@Butlerblog I've added it where I think it belongs. Doug Weller talk 13:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: Thanks Doug. I'm still of the mind that this particular piece doesn't fit this article at all on the basis of topic (i.e. "Number" vs "Mark") as well not fitting the section as not being a "fear of" but rather an "identification of". On the other hand, I'm sure there are plenty of editors who see it as related enough to include here. I'm fine on it for now. ButlerBlog (talk) 16:49, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
@Butlerblog surely as the article talk about "mark" a lot and has a section "Mark of the beast" it belongs in the article? I may still have put it in the wrong place. Doug Weller talk 16:55, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
As "Mark of the beast" is, in fact, a redirect to said subjection on this page, I think it properly relevant for that section, yes. 2001:56A:F1FA:1900:9E6B:FF:FE00:6596 (talk) 08:16, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
  1. ^ 'The Story of God', National Geographic, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JW42TnIE0Zs&t=10s
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Number_of_the_beast/Archive_7&oldid=1258389298"