In the Scripture regarding the mark of the anti-Christ, '666' was in greek?

  • Thread starter Thread starter m8g8
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

m8g8

Guest
Here is the video:

youtube.com/watch?v=GtquNNEO7Fw

This really upset me as my best friend is a Muslim, but was hoping I could receive some opinions from Catholics on this. If people agree with this, I’ll be so upset 😦 .

I hope you will watch the video before posting as I do not have much knowledge on the Scriptures will give an inaccurate explanation. I would normaly disregard these sort of things, but I have little knowledge of the original scripts so have no reason to disagree with this. Although it would be good to have insight, I will feel as if my heart has been broken if people with more knowledge on the Scripture believe this to be true!
 
If Islam was the “anti-Christ” then why do they have Christ as one of the most important and respected people in the Koran?

I am skeptical of this video.
 
In addition, “666” was a reference towards Emperor Nero, a truly cruel, insane Roman emperor that was a major persecutor of the Early Church.
 
presidentjlh said:
In addition, “666” was a reference towards Emperor Nero, a truly cruel, insane Roman emperor that was a major persecutor of the Early Church.
Click to expand...
I have also heard of this, but is it for certain? I read that it was just a theory.

Was the mark of the beast really written in Greek?
 
m8g8 said:
I have also heard of this, but is it for certain? I read that it was just a theory.

Was the mark of the beast really written in Greek?
Click to expand...
On your last question, I can’t say I know for sure, but as for the Nero thing, yeah it is indeed a theory, but it considered the most valid and likely theory of them all.
 
But if it was Nero, wouldn’t God have defeated the anit-Christ and then would have already given the Final Judgement?

Although to St. Faustina, Jesus said that God was delaying Judgement Day to give people more time to turn to God and repent.

This theory about the script meaning ‘The name of Allah’ in Arabic and the two swords being their symbol and that the wearers of it wore it the same way in which Revelations listed seems so realistic.

But so do all the other theories.
 
m8g8 said:
Here is the video:

youtube.com/watch?v=GtquNNEO7Fw

This really upset me as my best friend is a Muslim, but was hoping I could receive some opinions from Catholics on this. If people agree with this, I’ll be so upset 😦 .

I hope you will watch the video before posting as I do not have much knowledge on the Scriptures will give an inaccurate explanation. I would normally disregard these sort of things, but I have little knowledge of the original scripts so have no reason to disagree with this. Although it would be good to have insight, I will feel as if my heart has been broken if people with more knowledge on the Scripture believe this to be true!
Click to expand...
What he writes on the board makes sense I am afraid as that is Arabic but I know nothing of this original text nor have I ever laid eyes on it so there is no way for me to know if what he is claiming is true.

I really do not think this is true as I am sure that this would have been noticed and translated to mean that if it had any merit.
 
Well he cites his source, and therefore it can be verified or disproven. Codex Vaticanus.

Is it online anywhere?
 
A quick search on Walid Shoebat shows that he is not a reliable source at all he frequently contradicts himself and has been proven to lie on more then one occasion he seems to have made quite a bit of money from claiming to be a former terrorist and muslim and writing and giving presentations that are of a anti-muslim flavour.

I would disregard this as non-sense myself.
 
shannonfbc said:
A quick search on Walid Shoebat shows that he is not a reliable source at all he frequently contradicts himself and has been proven to lie on more then one occasion he seems to have made quite a bit of money from claiming to be a former terrorist and muslim and writing and giving presentations that are of a anti-muslim flavour.

I would disregard this as non-sense myself.
Click to expand...
I don’t care about people. I care about their arguments.

theseasonofreturn.com/files/QuickSiteImages/Chapter_13_-_The_Mark_of_the_Beast.pdf

The above shows a character by character comparison of the passage in question (page 204 on the pdf).

bible-researcher.com/codex-b.html

The above is the Codex Vaticanus (or part of it. Didn’t have time to confirm if it’s the entire manuscript)

I have to go to work now, but I expect a full analysis done by the time I get home. Get to it. Chop chop we’re burning daylight, or nightlight, depending on where you’re at.
 
NotCrazyDan said:
I don’t care about people. I care about their arguments.

theseasonofreturn.com/files/QuickSiteImages/Chapter_13_-_The_Mark_of_the_Beast.pdf

The above shows a character by character comparison of the passage in question (page 204 on the pdf).

bible-researcher.com/codex-b.html

The above is the Codex Vaticanus (or part of it. Didn’t have time to confirm if it’s the entire manuscript)
Click to expand...
Thanks!

It’s 8am now and I have had no sleep, but when I wake up I will read this and will summarise it as I go along for you (assuming that no-one else has read it before me).

It’s really difficult to find out the truth. Someone said that Satan wanted us to think it meant ‘666’ to disguise the truth, but what if he wants us to think it means ‘In the name of Allah’ in the hopes of spreading hatred…
 
NotCrazyDan said:
I don’t care about people. I care about their arguments.

theseasonofreturn.com/files/QuickSiteImages/Chapter_13_-_The_Mark_of_the_Beast.pdf

The above shows a character by character comparison of the passage in question (page 204 on the pdf).

bible-researcher.com/codex-b.html

The above is the Codex Vaticanus (or part of it. Didn’t have time to confirm if it’s the entire manuscript)

I have to go to work now, but I expect a full analysis done by the time I get home. Get to it. Chop chop we’re burning daylight, or nightlight, depending on where you’re at.
Click to expand...
LOL I will get right on it…

seriously though I will see what I can do with it though I must say I dont really believe him…
 
While the first link seems plausible I was unable to find the passage in question in the second link I will see if I can find it elsewhere but I am afraid my inability to read Greek at all will not really make for a good verification of the text.

Though I know find my self about to read all of revelations now to see what it means in this context.

I understand your saying you are more interested in the message then the man… I feel that the character and trustworthiness of the man are as important as the message so many people have taken scripture and twisted it to their own purpose in the past that it certainly makes sense to check the trustworthiness of the man. Anti-muslim videos, writings etc run rampant these days.
 
Everything in the first link does make sense. I consider Muhammad to be an anti-Christ as he denies Christ, but I don’t like the idea that my best friend isn’t worshipping God.

Would it be wrong to show him this? I will probably offend him, but if it’s true, I would like to ‘sow some seeds’ and then God can do the growing. Maybe I’m the one who is in the wrong for considering this.
 
Personal interpretation here along the mark, I believe it has something to do with being marked through technology, rather then just a number. Why it states it’s a human number, to me, makes it equate to something man can grasp because it’s man’s own creation that does it, and technology is all based upon raw numbers themselves, so human in that context. I also see in my lifetime, people went from having only a few gadgets and relying much less on technology, to now, not being able to live without it which also reinforces it, for it has dehumanized us to far many degrees. The anti-christ may not even be an actual person, it could be the state of mankind, his integration into things not of God, overriding God’s laws, as he is now, and the moral flow of a conscience gone astray, is in itself anti-God, or Anti-Christ by his other name here.
 
I’m still searching the net for a copy of Revelations from the Codex Vaticanus. Found almost every other NT book, but not that one!

(check it out here: scribd.com/doc/7654735/Codex-Vaticanus-NT)

Had a look at that first link at page 204 - I don’t read Arabic, but I read Greek. And that looks exactly like “Chi, Xi, Sigma” (Not “Stigma” as incorrectly quoted in the text) to me. Especially the “Xi” symbol - I don’t see how that can be mistaken for the other symbols to the right.

I’m going to keep looking for a version of the Codex Vaticanus to make up my own mind!

Just an off-topic interesting thought - a couple those Greek symbols are used in other contexts to denote names of God: Chi is the first letter of “Christ”, Sigma is the first letter of the Greek word for “Saviour”. Often this is shown as Ichthys (4 Greek words which indicate different names for Jesus) and is the Greek word for fish - one of the other reasons fish are associated with Christian symbology!

So maybe those 3 Greek symbols are not to represent numbers, but to represent a name, with the Chi like Christ, the Sigma like Saviour, and an intruding Xi symbol to mean something else - but something not of God.

Okay - that’s all my own ideas… Might be completely wrong!!!
 
Lightbee said:
Just an off-topic interesting thought - a couple those Greek symbols are used in other contexts to denote names of God: Chi is the first letter of “Christ”, Sigma is the first letter of the Greek word for “Saviour”. Often this is shown as Ichthys (4 Greek words which indicate different names for Jesus) and is the Greek word for fish - one of the other reasons fish are associated with Christian symbology!
Click to expand...
I didn’t think I was making much sense. So for those not familiar with what I’m talking about, check it out here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthys

Oh! And its 5 Greek words, not 4. My mistake!! Clearly I can’t add up properly tonight!
😊
 
Lightbee said:
I’m going to keep looking for a version of the Codex Vaticanus to make up my own mind!
Click to expand...
The Codex Vaticanus did not originally contain the Book of Revelation (and the Book of Hebrews). It wasn’t until the 15th through 16th centuries that the missing books were added to the Codex, presumably using the Codex Sinaiticus or Alexandrinus as a source.

In other words, the copy of the Book of Revelation from the Codex Vaticanus was not produced until the 15th-16th centuries. Whatever “arabic” was supposedly discovered must have been a gloss from that time, not from the Second Century.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Hi! Still searching for the Codex Vaticanus, but I found the Greek text of the Codex Sinaiticus. (Article about it here: telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5749555/Worlds-oldest-Bible-published-in-full-online.html)

The text of the verse in question is here:

codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?=Submit_Query&book=59&chapter=13&lid=en&side=r&verse=18&zoomSlider=0

Looking at that - the word for 666 is written out in full (as in “Six hundred and sixty-six”) in the Greek lettering that the rest of the book is written in. There is no example of the three Greek letters referred to. And although “Xi” is a major part of the word (the Greek word for six would be “Hex” as in “Hexagon”), I can’t see the “Chi” or “Sigma” symbols next to the “Xi” symbol.

Sounds like someone’s making things up to suit their own version of events!!
 
mardukm said:
The Codex Vaticanus did not originally contain the Book of Revelation (and the Book of Hebrews). It wasn’t until the 15th through 16th centuries that the missing books were added to the Codex, presumably using the Codex Sinaiticus or Alexandrinus as a source.
Click to expand...
Thanks Marduk!! I’m glad I found the Codex Sinaiticus then!

And that probably blows the theory put forward in the video wide apart!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top