Mark of the beast is 666?

[Montie_Claunch]

Could someone explain the symbolism (if there is any) behind the 666 of the Anit-Christ? Thanks and God bless.

 

[anawim]

Montie Claunch:

Could someone explain the symbolism (if there is any) behind the 666 of the Anit-Christ? Thanks and God bless.

666 is actually the mark of the beast, not the anti-Christ. The anti-Christ is mentioned twice in John’s epistles: 1 Jn. 2:22 & 2 Jn. 1:7. The number associated with the beast was part of John’s vision in Revelation (Rev. 13:18). The numbers assigned to letters would indicate Nero as a possibility for the beast.

 

[RyanL]

Source:
A: In many ancient languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic, the alphabet doubled for numbers. The most likely interpretation of the 666 reference is to the numeric value of the letters in the name of the Emperor Nero Caesar, who instituted the first sustained persecution of the Church in the first century and under whom both Peter and Paul were executed. Using this theory, here is how the 666 is derived: Nero Caesar in ancient Hebrew is NRW NQSR (there were no vowels in ancient Hebrew).

N=50;R=200;W=6;N=50;Q=100;S=60;R=200. The sum of the numeric values is 666.

Source:
a variant spelling of the name, NRW QSR, adds up to 616, which some manuscripts have in place of 666).

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Fidelis]

Montie Claunch:

Could someone explain the symbolism (if there is any) behind the 666 of the Anit-Christ? Thanks and God bless.

Everything you need to know:

The Beast in Revelation
By James Akin
catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9812chap.asp

 

[Montie_Claunch]

Are we 100% sure that it is Nero or is this just a Therory?

 

[sconea]

Montie…may I also recommend David Currie’s recently published book, Rapture: The End-Times Error That Leaves the Bible Behind,
for a thorough study and teaching on this very topic. It is excellent and you will most definitely get your questions answered. Available at amazon, published by Sophia Institute Press

God bless.

 

[K_C]

Source:
A: In many ancient languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic, the alphabet doubled for numbers. The most likely interpretation of the 666 reference is to the numeric value of the letters in the name of the Emperor Nero Caesar, who instituted the first sustained persecution of the Church in the first century and under whom both Peter and Paul were executed. Using this theory, here is how the 666 is derived: Nero Caesar in ancient Hebrew is NRW NQSR (there were no vowels in ancient Hebrew).

N=50;R=200;W=6;N=50;Q=100;S=60;R=200. The sum of the numeric values is 666.

RyanL

I find this suggestion rather surprising because it seems to be exactly the sort of thing practised in “numerology” today and, to my understanding, the Church CONDEMNS this belief. If this is so NOW, why would the Church credit such a method of interpretation THEN? (Since the Truth never changes over time.)

Furthermore, isn’t the “Beast” supposed to accompany Anti-Christ in the “end times”? Whenever Christ spoke of the end (of) time, He was referring to His Second Coming to earth…which we understand to be in the future. If the “Beast” WAS Nero, then the Apocalypse (and all it states) would have already taken place and Christ would now be reigning on earth as in heaven.

This confusion is further complicated in my mind whenever I recall how the apostles expected the “end” to occur within their own lifetimes…and Christ allowed them to be mistaken about this, as we see from our perspective of 2006 years hence. In short, it seems to me that the Church really has no “handle” on interpreting the timeline of these monumental events and we are left to individual interpretations by authors - Catholic or otherwise.

If someone can clarify this for all of us, please do so. It is well to recommend a book, but anyone having read that book should be able to explain these apparent contradictions in his/her own words.

 

[maryj]

K C:

I find this suggestion rather surprising because it seems to be exactly the sort of thing practised in “numerology” today and, to my understanding, the Church CONDEMNS this belief. If this is so NOW, why would the Church credit such a method of interpretation THEN? (Since the Truth never changes over time.)

Furthermore, isn’t the “Beast” supposed to accompany Anti-Christ in the “end times”? Whenever Christ spoke of the end (of) time, He was referring to His Second Coming to earth…which we understand to be in the future. If the “Beast” WAS Nero, then the Apocalypse (and all it states) would have already taken place and Christ would now be reigning on earth as in heaven.

This confusion is further complicated in my mind whenever I recall how the apostles expected the “end” to occur within their own lifetimes…and Christ allowed them to be mistaken about this, as we see from our perspective of 2006 years hence. In short, it seems to me that the Church really has no “handle” on interpreting the timeline of these monumental events and we are left to individual interpretations by authors - Catholic or otherwise.

If someone can clarify this for all of us, please do so. It is well to recommend a book, but anyone having read that book should be able to explain these apparent contradictions in his/her own words.

Just a thought… Christ does reign on earth, Christianity is proof of that isn’t it?

 

[spauline]

Fidelis:

Everything you need to know:

The Beast in Revelation
By James Akin
catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9812chap.asp

Well, James Akin’s article above does deal with one level of meaning for the beast, but clearly the symbolism *transcends *merely Nero and Rome. For example, there is a significant tradition in some Early Fathers that associates the beast of Revelation as “the entire company of infidels, persecutors, and enemies of the people of God, from the beginning until the end of the world.” (Douhay Rheims Footnotes). That’s really the problem with the NAB: it’s quite liberal, that’s why I prefer Douhay R or Channelor R footnotes to the NAB, as indicated above.

In that vein, the aforementioned tradition largely suggests an non-coincidental correlation between the seven days of Creation in Genesis (which are extended to eight in Catholic doctrine) and the seven heads of the Beast in Rev. 17, which likewise are extended to eight in the explanation. In this vein, the days of Creation each involve first darkness “evening came”], then light “morning followed”], which is largely the major pattern for salvation history: first sinful resistance “darkness”], then redemption “light”]. hence, in that vein, it is highly probable that the eight “kings” of the beast in Revelation 17: 8-11 are actually a metaphor for the eight primary stages of sinful resistance to God’s Plan, beginning with the Fall in the beginning all the way through to the Great Falling Away at the end of the world. I expand on a hypothesis of this on my blog here.

GB,
scott

 

[K_C]

maryj:

Just a thought… Christ does reign on earth, Christianity is proof of that isn’t it?

Of course. However, Christ DID foretell that He would come back to earth, riding on the clouds of heaven, for all mankind to see. Furthermore, scripture tells us that Christ’s kingdom will then be established in such a way that ALL will accept His reign. My discussion relates to the Second Coming of the Lord which in no way detracts from the current manner in which He reigns through His Church.

 

[K_C]

spauline:

Well, James Akin’s article above does deal with one level of meaning for the beast, but clearly the symbolism *transcends *merely Nero and Rome. For example, there is a significant tradition in some Early Fathers that associates the beast of Revelation as “the entire company of infidels, persecutors, and enemies of the people of God, from the beginning until the end of the world.” (Douhay Rheims Footnotes). That’s really the problem with the NAB: it’s quite liberal, that’s why I prefer Douhay R or Channelor R footnotes to the NAB, as indicated above.

In that vein, the aforementioned tradition largely suggests an non-coincidental correlation between the seven days of Creation in Genesis (which are extended to eight in Catholic doctrine) and the seven heads of the Beast in Rev. 17, which likewise are extended to eight in the explanation. In this vein, the days of Creation each involve first darkness “evening came”], then light “morning followed”], which is largely the major pattern for salvation history: first sinful resistance “darkness”], then redemption “light”]. hence, in that vein, it is highly probable that the eight “kings” of the beast in Revelation 17: 8-11 are actually a metaphor for the eight primary stages of sinful resistance to God’s Plan, beginning with the Fall in the beginning all the way through to the Great Falling Away at the end of the world. I expand on a hypothesis of this on my blog here.

GB,
scott

James Akin…any relation to Clay? Ha,ha. Just kidding. But, seriously though, what are his qualifications? As I mentioned earlier, it is so difficult to ascertain the CHURCH’S position on many such “cloudy” issues as this. Not all Catholic authors, honest and well-intentioned though they may be, always hold the same viewpoints or interpretations on such issues. So it is important to ask the author’s credentials and whether what is written is Church teaching or merely his own viewpoint.

I have also heard something of the “general evil” interpretation. However, when considering this, I get the uneasy feeling that those who choose this vague interpretation do so out of a desire to avoid the thought that the predictions regarding the Beast and AntiChrist may, in fact, refer to actual beings (in much the same way that the Protestant belief in the “rapture” removes* them* from this same fear.)

By the way, I also prefer the original Douay-Rheims and for the same reasons. However, I also use the Ignatius RSV as a cross-reference and for clarification of language.

You mention “a significant tradition in some Early Fathers” and say that this “tradition” extends the seven days of creation, as well as the seven heads of the beast, to eight each. I have never heard ot this “extension”. WHICH early Church Fathers and WHICH “tradition” do you mean? (As I recall, Revelation refers to TEN kingDOMS…although the “kings” may well be featured too…I must recheck that.)

I am not implying that this particular interpretation which you mention is wrong. I am merely saying that there are SEVERAL interpretations - all Catholic - and that this is very confusing to laymen struggling to discuss these obscure meanings with non-Catholics.

We believe that Christ established His Church in order that revealed Truth might be protected. One facet of His mandate was to interpret Holy Scripture for all the faithful and, thus, to avoid the myriad personal, conflicting interpretations so evident among our Protestant brothers. HOWEVER - it is sometimes SO difficult to feret out “official” Church interpretations…especially when Catholic authors (qualified or no) differ in their own.

Personally, I FEEL that, although the more general idea of “all sinners” being symbolized by “the beast” may be equally true, there will also be a VISIBLE manifestation of “the beast” during the reign of AntiChrist…who is yet to appear. (Some have held that the Beast will actually be a computer system, capable of tracking all human beings by means of a microchip implanted in the “hand or forehead”. This implantation is already being done on a small scale, as reported in the news!) I also FEEL that the ever- increasing globalization movement is but the threshold of his reign. If you, or anyone, can provide a reason - supported by OFFICIAL CHURCH teaching - to utterly dismiss the concept of an embodied “beast” or AntiChrist, I - and many others - would be relieved to hear it!

 

[RyanL]

K C:

James Akin…what are his qualifications?

He’s the director of Apologetics at Catholic Answers. You can read some of his bio here.

As I mentioned earlier, it is so difficult to ascertain the CHURCH’S position on many such “cloudy” issues as this. Not all Catholic authors, honest and well-intentioned though they may be, always hold the same viewpoints or interpretations on such issues.

True enough.

So it is important to ask the author’s credentials and whether what is written is Church teaching or merely his own viewpoint.

Jimmy Akin does a good job of researching the Church’s position, documenting it, and then telling us when he goes “off the map”.

… a desire to avoid the thought that the predictions regarding the Beast and AntiChrist may, in fact, refer to actual beings

The antichrist may well be a something, in ‘idea’ or ‘system’ which resides in men (and thus each would be ‘antichrist’), though no particular indivudual is the antichrist:

**675 **Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. (footnotes omitted)

That would appear to be the Church’s primary understanding of the above (though secondary understandings are possible):
JP2:

The dangers of a theological study which is divorced from life in the Spirit, and the harm caused by a pseudo-theological culture devoid of a genuine spirit of service to the mystery of the Redemption, are, in a sense, evoked by the solemn words of Saint John: “Every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist . . .”

Source.

cont’d…

 

[RyanL]

cont’d…
That said, there not a little Church support for Jimmy Akin’s position:

“I saw a beast emerge from the sea; it had seven heads and ten horns, with a coronet on each of its ten horns, and its heads were marked with blasphemous titles… For forty-two months the beast was allowed to mouth its boasts and blasphemies and do whatever it wanted” (Apoc

13.1,5). With these words the last book of the Bible, the Apocalypse of Saint John, describes nothing other than the greatest and most significant exponent of cultural policy of 1900 years ago: the Roman Empire. Apocalyptic images and expressions depict the most glaring contrast imaginable between Christianity and culture. According to Apoc 19.20, in the end the beast was not evangelized, but “thrown alive into the lake of burning sulphur”. Source.

cont’d…

 

[RyanL]

…cont’d
Finally, the notes in the NAB (not magisterial teaching, but a useful reference nonetheless) state the following:

8 18] Each of the letters of the alphabet in Hebrew as well as in Greek has a numerical value. Many possible combinations of letters will add up to 666, and many candidates have been nominated for this infamous number. The most likely is the emperor Caesar Nero (see the note on ⇒ Rev 13:3), the Greek form of whose name in Hebrew letters gives the required sum. (The Latin form of this name equals 616, which is the reading of a few manuscripts.) Nero personifies the emperors who viciously persecuted the church. It has also been observed that “6” represents imperfection, falling short of the perfect number “7,” and is represented here in a triple or superlative form.

Source.

cont’d… (stupid text limits)

 

[RyanL]

cont’d…

HOWEVER - it is sometimes SO difficult to feret out “official” Church interpretations…especially when Catholic authors (qualified or no) differ in their own.

If it gets too difficult, the Church will answer; in Her time. Be patient, and trust in Christ’s Church, for indeed He and His Church are one.

Personally, I FEEL that, although the more general idea of “all sinners” being symbolized by “the beast” may be equally true, there will also be a VISIBLE manifestation of “the beast” during the reign of AntiChrist…who is yet to appear.

The polyvalence of Revelations in particular does not rule this out. Nor does it rule out the possibility that the ‘antichrist’ (not mentioned in Revelations, BTW) is Nero, sinners/apostates in general, and finally a person.

Additional reading:
Jimmyakin.org [on '666'](http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/01/666.html), on '[616](http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/05/and_so_it_begin.html)', and finally the [ECF on the antichrist](http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0501frs.asp) (who largly support the 'individual person' notion of the antichrist, though typically with a temporal ruler twist).

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[K_C]

RyanL:

He’s the director of Apologetics at Catholic Answers. You can read some of his bio here.

True enough.

Jimmy Akin does a good job of researching the Church’s position, documenting it, and then telling us when he goes “off the map”.

Thanks for the “heads up” on Mr. Akin. I am certain he is very astute!

The antichrist may well be a something, in ‘idea’ or ‘system’ which resides in men (and thus each would be ‘antichrist’), though no particular indivudual is the antichrist:

Actually, JPII did not say here that "no particular individual IS the antiChrist, but acknowledged that The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah

That would appear to be the Church’s primary understanding of the above (though secondary understandings are possible):

“Every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist . . .”

Yes, I agree that the "spirit of the ‘world’ IS the spirit of antichrist!

cont’d…

 

[K_C]

RyanL:

cont’d…
That said, there not a little Church support for Jimmy Akin’s position:
Source.

cont’d…

Actually, upon using your source, I see that the position is that of Lulsdorff (?) - although Mr. Akin may well support it. However, when L. states that the interpretation refers unequivocally to Nero, it seems a rather bold assertion!

 

[K_C]

RyanL:

…cont’d
Finally, the notes in the NAB (not magisterial teaching, but a useful reference nonetheless) state the following:

Source.

cont’d… (stupid text limits)

AHA!..Numerology again! Some fancy guesswork there! However, I do agree that the reference is to a PERSON, as Revelations refers to “666” as the sign of “a MAN”!

 

[K_C]

RyanL:

cont’d…

If it gets too difficult, the Church will answer; in Her time. Be patient, and trust in Christ’s Church, for indeed He and His Church are one.

AMEN!

The polyvalence of Revelations in particular does not rule this out. Nor does it rule out the possibility that the ‘antichrist’ (not mentioned in Revelations, BTW) is Nero, sinners/apostates in general, and finally a person.

My feeling exactly. I am sure you know how many cross-references there are in the OT to Christ…a multiplicity of meanings and symbolisms. It seems fitting, somehow, that His nemesis would also be preceded by similar multiplicities of prefigures and meanings, does it not?

Additional reading:
Jimmyakin.org on ‘666’, on ‘616’, and finally the ECF on the antichrist (who largly support the ‘individual person’ notion of the antichrist, though typically with a temporal ruler twist).

Thanks for the helpful insights and references. I will follow up!

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[spauline]

Dear K C,

I haven’t sluffed you off, just haven’t had time to respond. I was up until 3 am last night trying to dig up the quotes from ECFs to support the beast/days of creation thing. I’ll get back when I get a chance!

GB,
scott