Forums | MacLife

Wonderful.

The next time the devil calls, use *69 to find out, once and for all, what his number really is.

Great. Now western Michigan will have to change its area code.

dinerfan wrote:

This line is a gem:

They and satanists responded coolly to the new "Revelation". Peter Gilmore, High Priest of the Church of Satan, based in New York, said: "By using 666 we're using something that the Christians fear. Mind you, if they do switch to 616 being the number of the beast then we'll start using that."

They should plan on a transition period to avoid confusing people, though. Nissan did this by also using the Toyota name on its cars and in its ads for a few years.

Satanism isn't a relgion - it's a bunch of people who enjoy pissing of christians? Who knew?

I object to calling the antichrist a beast. If he was an american citizen he could sue.

Note:  The article says Caligula, but Nero is generally considered to be the "beast."

Right, Dat's da one. Looks like someone needs to do more advertizing; my mindshare has slipped.

jondaris wrote:

This made me laugh. I kept thinking of all the people with 666 tattoos.

As did I.  I used to work with a girl that had one on her arm.  Heh.

You sign your name 919?

Jenny!

I'd be careful before coming to conclusions.

If I'm not mistaken - this is the same alleged new discovery - er, technique of viewing - that had many of the worlds top scholars quite confused when the news story broke because it was highly inacurate and flat out wrong - and they were wondering who the hell the journalist used as a source.

Also keep in mind that an older copy does not mean correct, it could be an incorrect branch that was dropped because it was incorrect, the Revelation of John is a first century document, this alleged discovery is from an alleged third century fragment - and the gnostics loved to tamper with text.

Being an apoxraphyl work, numbers had meanings - I'm curious as to what the signifigance of this change is.

Also keep in mind - it was not written as "6 6 6" or "six six six" - it was written as "six hundred and sixty six" (in greek) which is more difficult to accidentally copy from "six hundred and sixteen".

When a single copy differs from the majority of copy, even if it appears to be an older copy, it is usually considered incorrect, unless there is good reason to suspect it is not.

About Irenaeus

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08130b.htm

Information as to his life is scarce, and in some measure inexact. He was born in Proconsular Asia, or at least in some province bordering thereon, in the first half of the second century; the exact date is controverted, between the years 115 and 125, according to some, or, according to others, between 130 and 142. It is certain that, while still very young, Irenaeus had seen and heard the holy Bishop Polycarp (d. 155) at Smyrna.

So a church father from well before this fragment and very close to signature date (most scholars date it around 90 AD) refutes 616 as the number.

This fragment is thus probably the descendent of a modified Revelation of John, you can keep your 666 tatoos.

Last edited by resedit (2005-05-05 2:31 pm)