FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-19-2001, 04:18 PM   #21
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Thomas:
They also said no one is sure who wrote Revelations.
</font>
Well, there is debate, though I suspect some people think they're sure. The classical answer that John the apostle wrote it is not widely accepted any more, since there are significant stylistic differences between Revelation and the Gospel of John (which itself may or may not have been written by the apostle). Again I'm paraphrasing Ehrman's text.

--Muad'dib

[This message has been edited by Muad'dib (edited June 19, 2001).]
 
Old 06-19-2001, 05:01 PM   #22
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

The following manuscripts read 616:

C-Ephraemi Rescriptus (5th century Greek Uncial)

itz (8th century Old Latin)

mss.- according to Irenaeus

Tyconius (380 C.E.)

These are the only four that have the 616 reading according to the apparatus of my Greek New Testament(Aland, et.al. Third Edition-Corrected).
 
Old 06-19-2001, 05:49 PM   #23
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Thomas:
A biblical scholar I am not. But after actually "reading" the bible (as opposed to reciting) I am fascinated by how many different experts all put their on spin on it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tercel: Don't forget, these people have to do something to justify their pay. And something controversial if they want to make a name for themselves (either that or actually be a real expert - and that's just too hard for some).

Let me guess. The only real "experts" are those who agree with your conservative Christian views. Everyone else must be trying to be controversial to make a name for themselves, or atheists. I suppose well-supported arguments, based on available evidence and common sense, mean very little.

rodahi



[This message has been edited by rodahi (edited June 19, 2001).]
 
Old 06-19-2001, 08:33 PM   #24
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

not a theist, I believe you're using the United Bible Societies'(UBS) Greek New Testament(GNT), 3rd edition, right? Using Aland's name to describe this GNT is a little confusing because there is also a Nestle-Aland 27th edition of the Greek.

I'm using the UBS 4th ed. and I don't see the Old Latin it(z) supporting 616... However, it does list Codex Ephraemi (C), a Vulgate MS, some MSS according to Irenaeus, Caesarius, and Tyconius as supporting the reading 616.

One miniscule, 2344 (11th century), reads 665.

One Old Latin version, it(ar) (9th century) reads 646.

The vast majority of MSS read with the number 666. Bruce Metzger, in A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (companion to the UBS edition), mentions Irenaeus as saying that 666 is found "in all good and ancient copies," and is "attested by those who had themselves seen John face to face".

The numbers 666 and 616 seem to possibly refer to Neron or Nero Caesar as stated above. However possible this is, I see no reason to reject the fact that 666 is simply an imperfect number, each digit being one less that that of the perfect number 777. I find it interesting then that Jesus' number was more than perfect, 888. There is obviously a lot going for this explanation as well.

As an interesting aside, there are some papyri that I believe have just been published since these newest versions of the GNT (therefore not in the apparatus). One of these papyri, P115 (middle to late 3rd century), also contains the number 616 in Revelation 13:18.

If you are interested in seeing for yourself what 616 looks like in the actual P115 Papyrus manuscript, here is a picture of it.

Instructions for finding 616 in P115:
  • look at the top left papyrus fragment
  • find the 3rd line of writing down from the top of this fragment
  • look for letters that look like "XIC" with a line over the top (next to the jagged right edge)

Those letters are the greek letters Chi(X = 600), Iota (I = 10), and stigma (not sigma, C = 6), so "XIC" = "666".

Notice the letters in the second line immediately above "XIC" which also have a line over them. "ANOY" is an abbreviation for the Greek word "Anthropou", which means "man" (also part of Rev. 13:18). This abbreviation with a bar over the top is known as a Nomina Sacra. Numbers are also written with a bar over them, but they are not known as Nomina Sacra.

Ish


[This message has been edited by Ish (edited June 21, 2001).]
 
Old 06-20-2001, 08:42 AM   #25
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

668: Neighbor of the Beast
 
Old 06-20-2001, 11:20 AM   #26
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

867-530ni-ee-i-een: The number of Jenny...

(For those illiterate in 80's culture, this is from a pop song by Tommy Tutone)

[This message has been edited by Ish (edited June 20, 2001).]
 
Old 06-21-2001, 11:22 AM   #27
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">not a theist, I believe you're using the United Bible Societies'(UBS) Greek New Testament(GNT), 3rd edition, right? Using Nestle's name to describe this GNT is a little confusing because there is also a Nestle-Aland 27th edition of the Greek.

I'm using the UBS 4th ed. and I don't see the Old Latin it(z) supporting 616... However, it does list Codex Ephraemi (C), a Vulgate MS, some MSS according to Irenaeus, Caesarius, and Tyconius as supporting the reading 616. </font>
Yes it is the UBS version that I'm using.
Concerning it(z): I should have noted that a footnote in the apparatus of vid? which indicates "apparent support for a given reading in a manuscript whose state of preservation makes complete verification impossible."
 
Old 06-21-2001, 12:04 PM   #28
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

6-2 = 4
4+6 = 10
(4+6)-9 = 1
(6x2)+1 = 13
6-1 = 5
(6x3)+1 = 19
(6x2)-1 = 11
6-1 = 5
(6x2)+2 = 14
(6x2)+2 = 14
6-1 = 5
6-2 = 4
(16.666x6 and a bit)/4 = 25

D. James Kennedy!
 
Old 07-13-2001, 04:10 AM   #29
truthseekar
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Perth,W.A.,Aust
Posts: 22
Post

check this one out for what fits the anti christ(considering he will camaflage himself as the christ even to desieve the elect themselves.)

THE POPE IS THE VICAR OF THE SON OF GOD

One of the titles for the pontiff is the vicar of the Son of God.
Now considering Latin is the roman and Vatican language of the past lets reread this title in Latin:

Vicarious filius divinus

Now considering roman numerals are also from roman past, lets put roman numerals to this name and see what it adds up to????

VICAR of the SON of GOD
VICarIus filius DIVInus

V I C ar I us f I L I us D I V I nus
5+1+100 +1 +1+50+1 + 500 + 1+5 + 1
= 107 =52 = 507


= 666
rev 13-18
for he who has understanding ,LET HIM COUNT the number of the beast
The number of the beast is the NUMBER OF A MAN


[ July 13, 2001: Message edited by: truthseekar ]
truthseekar is offline  
Old 07-13-2001, 04:30 AM   #30
Boro Nut
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Middlesbrough, England
Posts: 3,909
Post

The number of the beast is +44(0)1991 358 647. I'm ashamed to say I went out with her.
Boro Nut is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:50 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.