What's new
Christian Community Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate fully in the fellowship here, including adding your own topics and posts, as well as connecting with other members through your own private inbox!

His Number is 666

Andy C

Well-known
The first prophecy in the Bible is in Genesis 3:15, "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." This is known as the protoevangelium - the first gospel. The verse introduces two elements that are the basis of Christianity—the curse on mankind because of Adam and Eve's sin and God’s provision for a Savior from sin, the Messiah (anointed one), the one who would take the curse upon Himself.

Of course, we know these prophetic words were given to Adam and Eve after their disobeying God's one and only restrictive commandment of not eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. For God had commanded Adam after He had placed him in the Garden of Eden, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eat thereof thou shalt surely die" (Genesis 2:16-17). We also know from Genesis 3 that the serpent (possessed by Satan) had lied and manipulated Eve into eating fruit from the tree. Eve, in turn, gave some to Adam, and he ate the forbidden fruit as well.

"The enmity - the hostility and hatred - of men and demons, between whom the warfare still continues, begins here. Evil angels and also wicked men are called serpents, and even a brood of vipers (Matthew 3:7), and they war against the people of God, the seed of the church, who are hated and persecuted by them, and so it has been ever since this affair in the Garden." {1}

Ultimately, however, the seed of the woman refers to Jesus Christ, who was born of a woman. And ultimately, the seed of the serpent (Satan) is the Antichrist (the beast), who will come at the end of the age. Satan's manipulations brought about the Lord's death through Judas, the Jewish Sanhedrin, and the Romans (although it was the Father's plan all along). Christ's death was considered (by God) only a "bruising of the heel" because He would be resurrected back to (eternal) life, whereas Satan and his offspring will spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, the second death.

The unholy trinity's (Satan, the Antichrist, and the false prophet) ultimate fate is found in Revelation 19 and 20. "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone" (Revelation 19:20). One thousand years (plus "a little season") later, Satan will join the beast and the false prophet in the Lake of Fire. "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night forever and ever" (Revelation 20:10).

 
There are some good questions and insights from the article:

“From the second century onward, Revelation 13:18 has been understood as a reference to the numerical value of the letters in the name of the Antichrist. Although the number 616 has some early support, Irenaeus’ testimony in favor of 666 has tremendous weight: not only is he the earliest writer to comment on the verse, but he specifically states that he consulted ancient manuscripts – ancient in the 180’s! – to confirm that they did indeed have the number 666.

Therefore, the reading “666” should confidently be regarded as the original text."

If the Textus Receptus is the correct text of Revelation 13:18, why did John use the three letters as numerals to represent the number 666 and not spell out the words (for other numbers) as he did elsewhere in Revelation and the other books that he wrote? One of the letters, the sixth letter of the Greek alphabet, stigma (previously known as digamma), was even obsolete at the time he wrote Revelation. Interestingly, the name stigma (στίγμα) is originally a common Greek noun meaning "a mark, dot, puncture," or generally "a sign," from the verb στίζω. By all rights, John should have spelled out the Greek word for "six" instead of using an obsolete letter as a numeral. Does that mean that the extant C.T. manuscripts are the correct texts of this verse (and the entire Book of Revelation) and not the Textus Receptus?”
 
There are some good questions and insights from the article:

“From the second century onward, Revelation 13:18 has been understood as a reference to the numerical value of the letters in the name of the Antichrist. Although the number 616 has some early support, Irenaeus’ testimony in favor of 666 has tremendous weight: not only is he the earliest writer to comment on the verse, but he specifically states that he consulted ancient manuscripts – ancient in the 180’s! – to confirm that they did indeed have the number 666.

Therefore, the reading “666” should confidently be regarded as the original text."

If the Textus Receptus is the correct text of Revelation 13:18, why did John use the three letters as numerals to represent the number 666 and not spell out the words (for other numbers) as he did elsewhere in Revelation and the other books that he wrote? One of the letters, the sixth letter of the Greek alphabet, stigma (previously known as digamma), was even obsolete at the time he wrote Revelation. Interestingly, the name stigma (στίγμα) is originally a common Greek noun meaning "a mark, dot, puncture," or generally "a sign," from the verb στίζω. By all rights, John should have spelled out the Greek word for "six" instead of using an obsolete letter as a numeral. Does that mean that the extant C.T. manuscripts are the correct texts of this verse (and the entire Book of Revelation) and not the Textus Receptus?”
Ken Johnson explained that once. I've always remembered it, but I have no clue in the ton of messages on his site where to find it.

anyway.... IF I'm remembering correctly and I don't always so take me with a grain of salt....

One of the earlier church fathers probably Irenaus as this article alludes to explained the problem because it was causing a stir in his day. It was a known transcription error introduced by accident - the name of the scribe I think was known, and it caused problems then down to today as some used it to focus in on as a possible alternate and possibly the real thing.

The actual reading should be 666 and the letter number thing is because letters in Hebrew as well as in Greek of that time were also numbers. So letters stood in as numerals. When John speaks of 200 million army in Rev. that number is from the Hebrew idiom myriads upon myriads which was a multiplication of numbers that comes out to 200 million but the idiom means an uncountable number.
 
Does that mean that the extant C.T. manuscripts are the correct texts of this verse (and the entire Book of Revelation) and not the Textus Receptus?”
Many scholars believe that the so-called Critical Text manuscripts are indeed the most accurate we possess. From a lay point of view I tend to agree. But I do want to interject that regardless of whether it's the Textus Receptus, Critical Text, or any other manuscript tradition, the Word of God is still accurately conveyed to us. After decades of study I can confidently state that no significant doctrine is affected by any differences. We can be confident that regardless of what translation (provided that it's a legitimate translation) we choose, we WILL find God's Word presented to us.
 
Back
Top