Comments on: Understanding 666 in context http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/ Searching for wit and wisdom in a wilderness of words... Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:51:30 +0000 hourly 1 By: ElShaddai Edwards http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/comment-page-1/#comment-461 ElShaddai Edwards Tue, 04 Dec 2007 10:33:49 +0000 http://heissufficient.net/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/#comment-461 Thanks for looking that up, Bryan. I have a copy of Gentry's book, but never got around to looking through the notes. I really ought to go and review his text again. Thanks for looking that up, Bryan. I have a copy of Gentry’s book, but never got around to looking through the notes. I really ought to go and review his text again.

]]> By: Bryan http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/comment-page-1/#comment-455 Bryan Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:41:11 +0000 http://heissufficient.net/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/#comment-455 Gentry in "Before Jerusalem Fell" discusses the 616 variant on pages 196-198, and 201-203. Interestingly on pg 197 He adds in footnote 18: "...Most patristic scholars believe this to be added by a hand other than Irenaeus's. See Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers... 1:558 n. 4." P.S. I'm sorry for all the comments on this post Gentry in “Before Jerusalem Fell” discusses the 616 variant on pages 196-198, and 201-203.

Interestingly on pg 197 He adds in footnote 18:
“…Most patristic scholars believe this to be added by a hand other than Irenaeus’s. See Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers… 1:558 n. 4.”

P.S. I’m sorry for all the comments on this post

]]> By: Bryan http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/comment-page-1/#comment-457 Bryan Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:28:48 +0000 http://heissufficient.net/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/#comment-457 Is there a citation for Ag Her. so I can read it in context? Is there a citation for Ag Her. so I can read it in context?

]]> By: Bryan http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/comment-page-1/#comment-456 Bryan Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:28:03 +0000 http://heissufficient.net/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/#comment-456 Hmm interesting. I will certainly see if I can find anything. Perhaps I will shoot Ken Gentry and email. Hmm interesting. I will certainly see if I can find anything. Perhaps I will shoot Ken Gentry and email.

]]> By: ElShaddai Edwards http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/comment-page-1/#comment-458 ElShaddai Edwards Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:01:34 +0000 http://heissufficient.net/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/#comment-458 In my earlier post on <a href="http://heissufficient.net/2007/08/16/john-the-chronicler-and-the-number-of-the-beast/" rel="nofollow">666 in 1 Chronicles</a>, this comment was made: <blockquote>If you will check Ireaneus’ work "Against Heresies" you wil find that he sites the "616" variant as being the work of heretics who were modifying the text of Revelations for their own purposes. Although this variant was known it was generally ignored until the first edition of the RSV introduced it into a footnote. Your overall presentation is good, but it’s risky to rest the arguement on a historicly disputed variant. Particularly one with such early counter testimony.</blockquote> It would be good for any new post on 666/616 to speak to this objection, if possible. In my earlier post on 666 in 1 Chronicles, this comment was made:

If you will check Ireaneus’ work “Against Heresies” you wil find that he sites the “616″ variant as being the work of heretics who were modifying the text of Revelations for their own purposes.
Although this variant was known it was generally ignored until the first edition of the RSV introduced it into a footnote.
Your overall presentation is good, but it’s risky to rest the arguement on a historicly disputed variant.
Particularly one with such early counter testimony.

It would be good for any new post on 666/616 to speak to this objection, if possible.

]]> By: Bryan http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/comment-page-1/#comment-459 Bryan Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:54:54 +0000 http://heissufficient.net/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/#comment-459 I will talking specifically about 666/616 in a later post :) I will talking specifically about 666/616 in a later post :)

]]> By: Steve http://heissufficient.com/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/comment-page-1/#comment-460 Steve Tue, 04 Dec 2007 03:55:04 +0000 http://heissufficient.net/2007/12/03/understanding-666-in-context/#comment-460 Perhaps the best evidence that Nero may have been the referent for 666 is in a rare textual variant; as Chilton describes: <blockquote>The form Neron Kesar (1) is the linguistically "correct" Hebrew form, (2) is the form found in the Talmud and other rabbinical writings, and (3) was used by Hebrews in the first century, as archaeological evidence has shown. As F. W. Farrar observed, "the Jewish Christian would have tried the name as he thought of the name-that is in Hebrew letters. And the moment he did this the secret stood revealed. No Jew ever thought of Nero except as ‘Neron Kesar,’ and this gives at once . . . 666" (The Early Days of Christianity, Chicago and New York: Belford, Clarke& Co., 1882, p. 540). Of some related interest is the fact that if Nero’s name is written without the final n (i.e., the way it would occur to a Gentile to spell it in Hebrew), it yields the number 616 — which is exactly the variant reading in a few New Testament manuscripts. The most reasonable explanation for this variant is that it arose from the confusion over the final n.</blockquote> Perhaps the best evidence that Nero may have been the referent for 666 is in a rare textual variant; as Chilton describes:

The form Neron Kesar (1) is the linguistically “correct” Hebrew form, (2) is the form found in the Talmud and other rabbinical writings, and (3) was used by Hebrews in the first century, as archaeological evidence has shown. As F. W. Farrar observed, “the Jewish Christian would have tried the name as he thought of the name-that is in Hebrew letters. And the moment he did this the secret stood revealed. No Jew ever thought of Nero except as ‘Neron Kesar,’ and this gives at once . . . 666″ (The Early Days of Christianity, Chicago and New York: Belford, Clarke& Co., 1882, p. 540). Of some related interest is the fact that if Nero’s name is written without the final n (i.e., the way it would occur to a Gentile to spell it in Hebrew), it yields the number 616 — which is exactly the variant reading in a few New Testament manuscripts. The most reasonable explanation for this variant is that it arose from the confusion over the final n.

]]>