I was just studying the difference between 666, the number of the beast, in the Textus Receptus and in the UBS IV. The T.R. says the number is χξϚ (600, 60, 6). The UBS IV says the number is ἑξακόσιοι ἑξήκοντα ἕξ. Does the numbering in the UBS affect the way the beasts number can be calculated? How does this work, the number of his name adds up somehow to 666? So what combination of letters can add up this way? Let’s say “John” equals 666. Can another certain name with a different combination of numbers in it add up to 666 just as χξϚ does?
So if this is someone’s name, do you transliterate his name to Greek letters to calculate the number? How do you calculate the number?
If you’re interested in Greek notation for numerals, Smyth has a section about it. I don’t know of any difference between the two ways of writing down a number. But others might.
The point is that the Greeks used letters as numerals, A = 1, B = 2, Γ = 3, …, I = 10, K = 20, …, Ρ = 100, etc. You can see the rest if you check the link given by Joel. Then, you would combine these to make other numbers, for instance IB = 10 + 2 = 12, KA = 20 + 1 = 21, etc.
Now, since every letter in the alphabet can be assigned to a number, this creates an opportunity for number magic, as in this section of the bible. The probable interpretation is that by adding up the numbers represented by letters in any given name, you end up with a number. So the Beast would be someone whose letters would add up to 666.
For instance:
ΔΟΝ ΤΡΑΜΠ (Greek for Don Trump)
Δ + Ο + Ν + T + Ρ + Α + Μ + Π = 4 + 70 + 50 + 300 + 100 + 1 + 40 + 80 = 645, which is pretty close to 666, no? If only we could find a way to make up the missing 21…
In reality, it of course must refer to a personality in antiquity, but I don’t know who. There are probably plenty of theories around.
This Wikipedia article actually says that there’s a similar system in Aramaic and Hebrew, and that in both the number can be made to correspond to Caesar Nero. That doesn’t seem a bad theory to me at first glance, but I really don’t know.
The article talks about “Protestant scholars”. What on earth does that mean?
Ha, I actually have a faint recollection of that… But seriously, my issue with “Protestant scholars” is that
The epithet is irrelevant and ad hominem. An argument should be judged based on its merits, not according to who pronounced it. Should respectable Roman Catholics, Jews, Muslims and atheists be wary of what a “Protestant scholar” says?
Wikipedia has a policy against so called weasel words, such as “some scholars say”, “it has been said that”, “experts claim”, etc.
If “Protestant scholars” refers specifically to the founders (Luther, Calvin, etc.) or other pioneering Protestant theologians, I think the designation might be more appropriate (because these people basically defined Protestant theology), but in that case it should have been made more explicit.
The interpretation of Revelation is a real point of contention between Catholics and Protestants, due to the supposed anti-Pauline character of the letters to the churches. But whether the theologians are Catholic or Protestant, I don’t buy this (from the Wikipedia article):
Also “Nero Caesar” in the Hebrew alphabet is נרון קסר NRON QSR, which when used as numbers represent 50 200 6 50 100 60 200, which add to 666.
There is far too much special pleading going on here. 1) the name with title, and 2) translation to another language. All to avoid badmouthing a dead emperor? And Christians secretly got the message? No way. This is nearly Bible Code level stuff.
Maybe you’re right, I really don’t know. I agree the solution should almost as simple as possible. Nero was a person everybody knew and he was known to persecute Christians, but your arguments are good.
Still, maybe not every Christian was supposed to get the message – it’s supposed to be hidden knowledge!
Points of contention between different Christian denominations are not exactly my cup of tea, I assure you…
I found on Google books Richard Bauckham’s “Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation” which seems to have a very good chapter on this. Perhaps there is something here.
According to Bauckham: There are examples of gematria in 3 Baruch. 4:10 mentions 409,000 giants who perished in the flood (κατακλυσμός → Hebrew characters → 409,000). And 4:3-7 has a snake (δράκων → Hebrew characters → 360) that drinks water from the sea which is replenished by 360 rivers. In the Sibylline Oracles 1:324-330, the Son of God is 888 (Ἰησοῦς → 888). [I would love to find the Greek text for this.]
Nero Caesar as the solution was first suggested in 1831 by O. F. Fritsche, and again in 1836 by F. Benary, 1837 by F. Hitzig and E. Reuss. Many other solutions that aren’t as good have been suggested. Peake’s 1920 “The Revelation of John” covers many of them. Nero is one of the few that is a man’s name, as required by the verse. But apparently “the number of the beast,” “which is also a man’s number,” also works for beast (θήριον → Hebrew characters → 666).
Special pleading indeed (adding the name with the title, etc.)… I’m not visualizing the past-fulfillment of the antichrist persona; if the beast were Emperor Nero, he sure came and went without much difficulty for the majority of the world.
But seriously, my issue with “Protestant scholars” is that