666
Irenaeus, writing "Against Heresies" in the 2nd
century AD, refers to 666 in Revelation 13:18 as
having been written in words rather than a number:
"[this] leads us to conclude that the number of the
name of the beast, [if reckoned] according to the
Greek mode of calculation by the [value of] the
letters contained in it, will amount to six hundred
and sixty and six; that is, the number of tens shall
be equal to that of the hundreds, and the number of
hundreds equal to that of the units (for that number
which [expresses] the digit six being adhered to
throughout..."
So
Irenaeus argues, also based on the testimony of
those who knew the apostle John personally, that
the correct format of the number is not in numeral
form, as we know it now, but in words referring to
groups of hundreds and tens and ones.
P47,
the oldest extant papyrus containing 666 in
Revelation 13:18 is considered to back up this view:
Irenaeus goes on to
consider that the number 616 in place of 666 is an
error, writing:
"I do
not know how it is that some have erred following
the ordinary mode of speech, and have vitiated the
middle number in the name, deducting the amount of
fifty from it, so that instead of six decads they
will have it that there is but one."
616
This claimed errant number is evident in P115,
the oldest known fragment of papyrus containing the
number known as 616. Notably this papyrus contains
the word "or" before 616, written as an "n" with a
dot above it, suggesting that the number "600 and 60
and 6" may have appeared before "616" (XIC) in the
text:
Putting aside 666 and 616 for the moment, the word
"or" may have several meanings.
One possible meaning of "or" is that "600 and 60 and
6" and "616" are connected, that is, "or" is used in
the sense of connection rather than alternative.
In that context, the 600 and 60 and 6 may act to set
the scene for the number that follows it.
While Irenaeus held that 616 is an error, on the
contrary it may be that papyrus P115 is providing
information additional to 666 and there may be some
justification for deferring judgment on 616.
Gematria
The currently popular approach to 666 is to use
gematria, to substitute the letters in a person's name
with numbers to see if those numbers add up to 666.
The material above suggests that 666 is not valid
anyway but there are other difficulties with this
approach.
A name to which gematria is applied will result in a
single number. That is the only number for that name.
But it does not work in reverse. If we start from 666
and use gematria we will get many names that are a
possible match.
So gematria fails to narrow down our inquiry to just
one person. Instead we get a multitude of suspects,
none of whom can be conclusively shown to be the
antichrist.
There is another difficulty. The number 600 + 60 + 6
is first to describe a Beast and then, in addition, to
point to the antichrist's name. So to go directly to a
man's name without first identifying the Beast is also
the wrong way around.
Adding up the number
Coming back to Revelation 13:18, the original text of
the Apocalypse is Greek. However the number 600 and 60
and 6 may be read as cumulative, or put another way,
may result from adding up other numbers. One way to do
this may be to arrive at 600 by the addition of 500
and 100, to arrive at 60 by the addition of 50 and 10,
and to arrive at 6 by the addition of 5 and 1.
Adding up in this way to arrive at 600 and 60 and 6
points to the Roman number system of 1, 5, 10, 50, 100
and 500 as the context in which to understand the
second number written after the "or" in P115.
If we go wider than a preconception that 616 is a
Greek number and consider that 600 + 60 + 6 suggests a
Roman number, then P115 may give us the Roman numbers
X + I + C.
At face value, even without 600 + 60 + 6 preceding it,
XIC looks like a Roman Number in much the same way
that, in English, we might place a French word or a
German word within an English sentence simply because
it carries the meaning we desire.
An argument against this is the order in which X, I
and C appear. If this was to represent a number per se
then the order could matter. If we did treat it as a
number it might be confused with 10 + (100 - 1) and
result in 109. But the instruction is to add up the
number and in that case the task of addition is not
location dependent. Put another way, Roman numbers are
not place sensitive when added cumulatively. So there
is no difficulty adding them up in the order they
appear.
Interestingly, Irenaeus in the third century also
mixes his hundreds, tens and ones by referring to them
as tens, then hundreds, then ones.
The beast and the false prophet
The number in Revelation refers to two things. First
it refers to the beast and then it doubles to identify
the number of a man's name (but not his name, only the
number associated with it). So, to reiterate, it may
be argued that it is not to identify the antichrist
but primarily to identify the beast and, knowing that,
identify the man involved in the affairs of the beast.
Converting X + I + C into modern Arabic numbers as
above gives 10 and 1 and 100. So we have gone from
Greek, to Roman and then to Arabic.
Cumulatively this may be read as 101100. At face value
this is neither Greek, nor Roman, nor Arabic. It is
now Binary. This, then, points to the possibility of
the beast being related in some way to a computer.
If we consider
that the number is also related to a man's name
then a simple addition of the 1 + 0 + 1 + 1 + 0
+ 0 arrives at the number 3. This could then be
read as a regnal number.
Quoting Wikipedia, regnal numbers are ordinal
numbers used to distinguish among persons with
the same name who held the same office.
For example, King Charles III is distinguished
from earlier Charles I and II, William Henry
Gates III is distinguished from his father and
grandfather or, more abstractly, Rasputin is
distinguished from Stalin and Lenin (where n is
null) and so on. In this way the identity of the
antichrist has a lot fewer possibilities than
would be the case with gematria and narrows
further if binary is recognised as the nature of
the beast and the context of the interpretation.
Computer based
control systems
Edward L. Pothier, of the Physics Department of
Northeastern University, Boston wrote a piece in July
1991 on the subject of the Greek language used in
Revelation 13:18. He commented on the possibility of
666 pointing to a computer beast, saying in a footnote
that:
"[4].
Incidentally, some modern apocalyptic fanatics (or
"prophecy" students) who are most alarmed at the
number 666 and worry about large computer-based
control systems that the Beast will use should
perhaps worry about a hexadecimal based system (base
16) rather than the decimal based 666 number."
Again, like Irenaeus, there appears a reluctance to
consider something that does not fit with accepted or
conventional thinking. And there is no advantage in
labeling someone a "fanatic" simply because they do
not adhere to university theology. But at least there
is, on this occasion, a rare acknowledgement that such
an interpretation does exist, or had existed long
enough by the time of his writing in 1991 to be worthy
of commenting on, albeit cynically.
The notion of the beast as a computer or
internet-based entity might not be so easy to dismiss
as it's critics imagine. Perhaps deferred judgement
might be appropriate to see where this leads.
As to what such a beast might be, and who the false
prophet antichrist might be, there are many
possibilities but less so now as 5G, smart devices and
AI develop, often on the false pretext that they will
save the human race.
Posted 19th June 2023