Evidence for God from Science

Speaking of Emperors, It was brought to my attention that a cornerstone of the 1st century Rome as the beast theory was that Julius Caesar was the first emperor of Rome. I spent almost an entire day looking this up. I searched 6 websites, 3 religious based and 3 historical ones. Each Religious website placed Julius as emperor #1 and were using that to further their own agendas, usually the 1st century Rome=beast interpretation. I found no other Religious based sites mentioning Juilius Caesar for any other reason. I also noted that these sites gave no reasoning for their placing Julius as #1. They simply stated that he was
By stark contrast, each historical website excluded Julius Caesar from the list of emperors. Each one went in order as: Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus, Domitian. That ended the early empire of Rome and emperors after this time would be nominated and elected with the help of the senate. Julius Caesar was born in Rome in 100 BC. He was the Governor of Gaul from 58-49 BC, was appointed dictator for 10 years in 47 BC, lost power, then was appointed dictator again in Feburary 14, 44 BC. He was assasssinated in 15th of March 44 BC and deified 2 years later. When he was a ruler, Rome was a republic of city-states and territories. There were many Dictators before him and one after him, Octavius. The capital of the republic wasn't allways Rome either, but it was during his lifetime. The dictators acted very much like Emperors, but they were more different than similar. The dictators were basically representations of political parties and most had great military influence. Their main foe was the senate who was like british parliment is today. They made the rules, the dictators just tried to persuade them either by force (intimidation, killing off members and replacing them with supporters) or by money. There was allways a struggle between the senate and the dictator. When Julius won his dictatorship for the second time (by force) he didnt kill off his opponents in the senate which was unheard of before him. He was just and honorable and the people loved him. What he did differently during his rule from the other dictators was to spread the replublic empire far greater than any before him. Instead of being a mediterranean thing, it encompassed most of Eroupe as well. There seem to be 3 reasons people place Julius as the first Emperor. First would be his name, Ceasar, his family name that was adopted by his successive rulers in Rome and later became synonymous with "emperor". The second reason would be his permanently establishing Rome as the capitol of the republic. Finally, he got the senate to continually declare him dictator until they got sick of it and killed him off. In the End Julius Caesar exapnded the empire the most and cleaned up the corruption and bloodshed..at least for a while.
After Julius it was back to business as usual. More civil war, infighting, corruption and all that. Out of the mess came Octavius the adopted heir to Julius. He began his main political career as dictator in a divided republic. He was in the west and Antony was in the east. One of the greatest wars in Roman history breaks out and Octavius comes out the victor. Some time into his rule he made vast and important changes in Rome's political structure. Octavius gave up his dictatorship and divided many of his roles among the senate and claimed no aliance to any political party, but to the whole republic. He declared that all territories and people living in the republic would become Romans by law, not just occupied lands. He stabilized and locked down expansion and the borders. He was given the surname Augustus by the senate and titles that gave him power over the frontiers and another of "protector of the people" he became known as the "first citizen" and "father of our country". I could go on and on with the changes he made and the titles he recieved, but what is important is that Augustus Ceasar (his title from the senate and adopted father's last name) was historically Rome's official first and true Emperor.
Roman-empire.net
historyworld.net
forumromanum.org...check them out

Lastly the explanation given to me about the Harlot came up dissapointing in my research and testing. The harlot being the city of Jerusalem in the 1st century was the theory. The points given were true and indeed fit well, but I have new problems. With the literal interpretaion of the 7 hills as Rome, if the harlot is a city sitting on top of the 7 hills, wouldn't she be the city of Rome? It says she is the great city that has a kingdom over all the kings of the earth. Did Jerusalem ever have reign outside the borders of isreal/palestine? I know After Christ returns, the bride/woman/Jerusalem will have an everlasting global kingdom, but that wont fit if the harlot is destroyed by God's will before that. It says the ten kings and the wild beast will hate her and destroy her making it sound like they all reign together in one time. If she is Jerusalem, she was last destroyed in AD 70 by Titus under the emperor Vespasian, so who were the ten kings? Vespasian is emperor 9 and Titus becomes 10, but they were only 2 living at the same time and only one was emperor. It also says the ten kings give their kingdom over to the beast after the city falls. So Vespasian gives his kingdom (Rome) over to the beast (Rome)????? what? If it's the Holy Roman empire and papal system, then they are way too late and again, only one reigning at a time and how do they give their kingdom to a kingdom they are already a part of? It says the kings of the earth that fornicated with her will grieve at her destruction as will the traveling merchants of the earth, every ship captain, voyager, sailor or any one making a living by the sea. How many kings were sad at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70? One. Merchants and sailors sad about Jerusalem's fall, really?? not anymore than any other city that fell to Rome. Then the name, Babylon the Great and spiritually called Sodom and Egypt. These and Jerusalem were not the only idolaters and wicked cities of the world then or now. So was Athens, Rome, so is New Delhi, Shanghai, Tokyo, Las Vegas, New York....."Drunk on the Blood of the Holy ones and witnesses of Jesus" and again, many cities can fit this then and now. I'm just not satisfied with the Harlot being only old Jerusalem.

Katetblue wrote:

Canuckster1127 wrote:Great. Economics, Politics and Religion all in one sentence. Methinks this line of conversation might not end well .....

I know right?

Great points made by everyone. I have to take all the information posted here on Islam and study it more in depth.

I don't belong to any certain denomination anymore because some of the other beliefs taught in the mainstream Church I don't agree with at all. Like some of the theories on Israel, the rapture, and current end times theories.

Does anyone have any other ideas on what is meant by, or who is suppose to be the man of sin, son of perdition mentioned in <A class=lbsBibleRef href="http://biblia.com/bible/nasb95/Thessalonians%202.3" target=_blank lbsReference="Thessalonians 2.3|NASB">Thessalonians 2:3</A>? In this scripture it goes on to say that he will set himself up as God in the temple of God showing himself that he is God. I take that to mean the Pope since that is what he did. In Islam they didn't do that and still don't unless I am missing something. I am just curious of others opinions.

Are you my long lost twin!???? I just read the 2 thessalonians verse and want to share what came to light. I read verses 6-12 in my NWT Bible. what I read is that, at the time of this writing, someone (one person or many people, or supernatural being) were acting as a restraint for the revealing of the man of lawlessness. Once the restraint is out of the way, then he will be revealed and Jesus will shortly do away with him by the spirit in his words and presence, doing nothing in physical manifestation (IE Jesus doesnt punch, stab or shoot him) I also got that some of the actions or characteristics of the lawless one are already at work during that time, but are hard to distinguish. I read that the "falling away" must occur before he is revealed. I believe this began during the time of Jesus and has continually gotten worse up to today. Think about it, what began with the OT, Jesus and the apostles now has more religions, denominations, divisions and branches than any other belief system in the world. I dont think the man of lawlessness has come yet since I can't think of anyone in history who has done what he is said to do in as big a scale as he is supposed to do. I also find great importance in one little word "the" in verse 11. "And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie". He is talking about the non-believers who denied Christ and are not saved, that they will all believe THE lie, as in One lie that all non-believers fall for. Lets think of all the non believers around the world. Is there any one singular lie that they all believe right now?

secretfire6,

We may not agree on soul sleep (on another separate thread) but your post is what I was trying to get people to do – look and think for themselves into these matters. That is why I did not place every reference down in my post on Islam. So that readers will not just blindly take my word on it but instead look these matters over and see what they find.

I like your post written here as it demonstrates an honest mind inquiring into these matters as opposed to a closed one that seeks to force others how to think.

You brought up a good point about Octavius notice how (Your quoted here) how “He declared that all territories and people living in the republic would become Romans by law, not just occupied lands. He stabilized and locked down expansion and the borders. He was given the surname Augustus by the senate and titles that gave him power over the frontiers and another of "protector of the people" he became known as the "first citizen" and "father of our country". I could go on and on with the changes he made and the titles he received…”

Take this a bit further, what did several of the other Emperors did and how did they dispensed Roman law and what was allowed with conquered people. You’ll notice a trend that runs through all four empires mentioned in Daniel. I quoted Alexander the Great (Greek-Bronze) with one common trait and you pointed out another from Rome (Iron) that correlate yet neither lived up to it nor did their empires produced. Go back to Persia and Cyrus and his goals of Empire… Interesting…how four empires had the same themes so unlike other empires – that is what you look for. Next is moon god worship and planetary worship.

I could go into more on the individual myths on the moon god conflicts with head city/empire/deities but that would lose people. The motives for world dominion sound so noble, at first, but the practice is impossible for sinners to achieve. To get around this, men like to fashion for themselves as gods to dispense increasingly harsh rule to conform the lowly bricks in the same shape that they themselves refuse to conform too.

On another Note: Abram came from UR and UR’s deity was the moon god. Again the symbolism God uses is other worldly wise beyond measure. God calling us out of the kingdom of darkness into his kingdom of marvelous light captures this idea well. (1 Peter 2:9, Isaiah 9:2, Isaiah 60:1, 2,3, Luke 1:79c, Eph 5:8, 9, 10, 11c, Col 1:13, to name a few clues…)

Enjoy your search and I trust that the Lord will show you many things as you do!

Be Blest!
-
-
-

puritan lad wrote:

Gman wrote:

puritan lad wrote:Yikes!!!

This may be another subject, but the Bible clearly supports capitalism. In fact, of you are looking for a broader theme in the book of Revelation, Christ is waging war against any sort of statism.

The Bible supports socialism too...

No, it does not. It condemns any sort of fiat money, excessive taxation, and any form of civil judgment that favors rich or poor based on their status, possessions, or lack thereof. The Bible is fully supportive of free market economics without any statist intervention other than judging criminal activity.

Um.. I disagree with that.. Look at Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4:34-37. Although it's not socialism as we know it today, it was a form of socialism and yes there is some capitalism as well..

Thanks B.W.
A friend of mine in a Bible study group let me borrow a neat book on the 4 main views of Revelation (historist, preterist, futurist, spiritual) and I began reading it yesterday. I'm not looking to join or refute any of these groups as I just recently learned of their existance and greatly dislike any divisions among the church body. This book should help alot with all the annoying questions and points I've been bringing up here.
I understand what you are saying about how each new empire that conquered an old one adopted alot of its old beliefs and practices. God warned the Isrealites about doing this when they defeated an enemy, even to the point where they were to burn the crops and kill the animals. So it's logical to guess that the world's final empire will do all the same. Try to unite the world's people under one power, adopt a false religion from parts it conquers and horribly opress and persicute those who don't bend to its will. It's a cycle that has existed and been growing since the times of Egypt and maybe before. it will continue until a point where God says "enough is enough" and will seperate the righteous from the rebellious, get rid of the bad stuff and set up a new kingdom that will be right and true in all ways. Thats the basics I get about the end times so far.
As far as the soul after death, I used the word "asleep" because thats how it is described in the new testament. That combined with Revelations verses of"...the rest of the dead will not be resurrected until the thousand years have ended" and "....the sea gave up its dead and hades gave up its dead in them" (something like that) So there seems to be a span of time in between your physical death and one of the 2 resurrections where your soul is inactive. My main point was to question the notion that you go either directly to heaven or directly to hell upon your death. I'm not reading that it all happens instantly.

Talk to you all later

secretfire6 wrote:Thanks B.W. A friend of mine in a Bible study group let me borrow a neat book on the 4 main views of Revelation (historist, preterist, futurist, spiritual) and I began reading it yesterday. I'm not looking to join or refute any of these groups as I just recently learned of their existance and greatly dislike any divisions among the church body. This book should help alot with all the annoying questions and points I've been bringing up here.

I understand what you are saying about how each new empire that conquered an old one adopted alot of its old beliefs and practices. God warned the Isrealites about doing this when they defeated an enemy, even to the point where they were to burn the crops and kill the animals. So it's logical to guess that the world's final empire will do all the same. Try to unite the world's people under one power, adopt a false religion from parts it conquers and horribly opress and persicute those who don't bend to its will. It's a cycle that has existed and been growing since the times of Egypt and maybe before. it will continue until a point where God says "enough is enough" and will seperate the righteous from the rebellious, get rid of the bad stuff and set up a new kingdom that will be right and true in all ways. Thats the basics I get about the end times so far.

As far as the soul after death, I used the word "asleep" because thats how it is described in the new testament. That combined with Revelations verses of"...the rest of the dead will not be resurrected until the thousand years have ended" and "....the sea gave up its dead and hades gave up its dead in them" (something like that) So there seems to be a span of time in between your physical death and one of the 2 resurrections where your soul is inactive. My main point was to question the notion that you go either directly to heaven or directly to hell upon your death. I'm not reading that it all happens instantly.

Talk to you all later

Yes, it is good to review all these and glad to hear you are searching rather than cemented into anyone of these. There is truth is all but, in my opinion, each seems to not look into how each of the four empires share interrelated parts with each other. Babylonian, started it all. There were empires before this one but it was different in one area – Absolutism of idea. There is a Persian Absolutism, a Greek (Alexander) Absolutism, and Roman Absolutism. Each built off each other and contains different themes, but the themes were a lie. The second in common trait was the influence of planetary worship and the moon god and how these blended into the ideas of each empires theme (hallmarks).

For an example to themes - Look at the Alexander the Great Quote again:

All mortals should live like one, united, and peacefully working towards the common good. You should regard the whole world as your country, a country where the best govern, with common laws, and no racial distinctions. I do not separate people, as many narrow-minded others do. I am not interested in the origin or race of citizens; I only distinguish them on the basis of their virtue. For my part, I consider all, whether they be white or black, equal.

Alexander The Great

Look at Ezra 1:1, 2, 3, 4, 5-8 concerning Cyrus Mede/Persian Empire and what he did before Alexander. Mede/Persian two joined together – a confederation of sorts with a multicultural overtone to it.

Both were ruled by forms of Absolutism of one man ruler ship and delegating realms of the empire. Each Empire has a Hallmark associated with it and these interconnect like building blocks: All very interesting. There were empires before these like the Assyrian but these four part of the idol Daniel interpreted all shared new stages of absolutism along with forms of government-laws. The idea is absolutism – one control all – all people made to fit in order to be controlled. This is also shared by moon god worship as well.

The basic gist from the four in order are: You had one man rule, then the a confederation, then benevolent despotism to rule people in different areas of empire, divided into four parts, governed thru 4 handpicked governors. Then One Ruler and the pragmatism of Law - controled by one ruler, laws that controlled a governing body of elites in order to legitimatize the control of the one to rule.

Today, unlike anytime in history, we have these ideas coalesce – and we do, today, hear a call for a New World Order as well as Global Government from our very own news as well as people organismizing for this today. You also have the rise of the moon god worship in an evolved form called Islam which also seeks world dominion as well. Daniels interpretation of old Nebby’s dream of an Idol is forming feet – getting ready make this dream walk.

Just a bit more to ponder.
-
-
-

the Soviet Union was very much like the things you are describing and I've allways seen it as an empire. also, if you really really wanted to push the envelope, you could say that the sicle on the soviet flag was a hidden crecent moon. that might be pushing it though.

Please note

I can no longer navigate the forum due to some sort of technical issue - I can only enter from notifications and cannot navigate to Board Index or anywhere else after logging on and then I get bumped off the forum.

I am seeing if I can post - so this is a test

Any ideas what is causing this?

Incompatibility message appears from Internet explorer...
-
-
-

This came through fine B.W. I got your note on facebook and will reply there too. I don't see any issues on my end with the boards.

Just a personal viewpoint, I think that "Anti-Christ" needs to be seperated from "The Beast". I don't see scriptural evidence for an entity that is to come called "Anti-Christ" but I do see plenty about "The Beast out of the Sea" and "The False Prophet" all over Revelations, which could either be some entity that is to come (or I think, could be symbolic of the rise of atheism and movement away from God), or as Puritan Lad said, it could refer to Rome in the first century, when Christians were being persecuted. Either view seems plausible to me.

But "Anti-Christ" used in 1 John just seems to be a term for people who deny Christ, not the being called "The Beast" in Revelations.

Seraph wrote:Just a personal viewpoint, I think that "Anti-Christ" needs to be seperated from "The Beast". I don't see scriptural evidence for an entity that is to come called "Anti-Christ" but I do see plenty about "The Beast out of the Sea" and "The False Prophet" all over Revelations, which could either be some entity that is to come (or I think, could be symbolic of the rise of atheism and movement away from God), or as Puritan Lad said, it could refer to Rome in the first century, when Christians were being persecuted. Either view seems plausible to me.

But "Anti-Christ" used in 1 John just seems to be a term for people who deny Christ, not the being called "The Beast" in Revelations.

Good points - there is mentioned a Spirit of anti-christ in the NT that was at work then suggesting what Revelation 12 speaks about... concerning a system that makes war against the people of God.
-
-
-

Seraph wrote:Just a personal viewpoint, I think that "Anti-Christ" needs to be seperated from "The Beast". I don't see scriptural evidence for an entity that is to come called "Anti-Christ" but I do see plenty about "The Beast out of the Sea" and "The False Prophet" all over Revelations, which could either be some entity that is to come (or I think, could be symbolic of the rise of atheism and movement away from God), or as Puritan Lad said, it could refer to Rome in the first century, when Christians were being persecuted. Either view seems plausible to me.

But "Anti-Christ" used in 1 John just seems to be a term for people who deny Christ, not the being called "The Beast" in Revelations.

I would agree with that very much and I've allways detected a hint of seperation between the beast from the sea, having 7 heads, ten horns, ten diadems and having charicteristics of past Gentile empires (bear, leopard, lion) and the wild beast of the earth that has descriptions and actions sounding like a single person. I believe that the beast from the sea is the same as the 4th beast in Daniel's dream, which had its ten horns and contained parts of ancient Rome (Iron teeth) and ancient Greece (feet of bronze)

Also the term SEA is often used to describe the many Gentile nations and peoples...basically anyone who wasnt Jewish or hebrew. likewise, the term EARTH was used to refer to Isreal and her people. It would make sense for a leader who is said to decieve the entire world (including jews and christians) even among the elect, who is known as the anti-christ/false messiah, to rise out of the same land that the true messiah did. this is Satan's MO. He bakes up a big fat lie, sprinkles on a little bit of truth and feeds it to whoever is willing to eat.
On the new earth, after the final judgment, it is said that there will be no more SEA. I've read many official commentaries that take this as litterally meaning no more large bodies of salt water. I understand it as being the many varieties of peoples, religions, languages etc. In the final eternal kingdom we will all be one people, one kingdom, have one religion and speak one language, which is the way it was meant to be the whole time.
Yes, you're right, there have been many anti-christs in history and there are many among us now. So with this in mind and looking at how our world is now and what's going on in other countries, logic dictates that there are more to come. I believe Revelation is telling us about the final and worst of them all and whether we live to see it or not, the information in these prophesies is important for us and vital that we pass along correctly. So what is correct? Is Revelation a history lesson, a warning of the future or a guide for keeping strong in everyday life? Personally I think it's all of these.

secretfire6 wrote:

Seraph wrote:Just a personal viewpoint, I think that "Anti-Christ" needs to be seperated from "The Beast". I don't see scriptural evidence for an entity that is to come called "Anti-Christ" but I do see plenty about "The Beast out of the Sea" and "The False Prophet" all over Revelations, which could either be some entity that is to come (or I think, could be symbolic of the rise of atheism and movement away from God), or as Puritan Lad said, it could refer to Rome in the first century, when Christians were being persecuted. Either view seems plausible to me.

But "Anti-Christ" used in 1 John just seems to be a term for people who deny Christ, not the being called "The Beast" in Revelations.

I would agree with that very much and I've allways detected a hint of seperation between the beast from the sea, having 7 heads, ten horns, ten diadems and having charicteristics of past Gentile empires (bear, leopard, lion) and the wild beast of the earth that has descriptions and actions sounding like a single person. I believe that the beast from the sea is the same as the 4th beast in Daniel's dream, which had its ten horns and contained parts of ancient Rome (Iron teeth) and ancient Greece (feet of bronze)

Also the term SEA is often used to describe the many Gentile nations and peoples...basically anyone who wasnt Jewish or hebrew. likewise, the term EARTH was used to refer to Isreal and her people. It would make sense for a leader who is said to decieve the entire world (including jews and christians) even among the elect, who is known as the anti-christ/false messiah, to rise out of the same land that the true messiah did. this is Satan's MO. He bakes up a big fat lie, sprinkles on a little bit of truth and feeds it to whoever is willing to eat.
On the new earth, after the final judgment, it is said that there will be no more SEA. I've read many official commentaries that take this as litterally meaning no more large bodies of salt water. I understand it as being the many varieties of peoples, religions, languages etc. In the final eternal kingdom we will all be one people, one kingdom, have one religion and speak one language, which is the way it was meant to be the whole time.
Yes, you're right, there have been many anti-christs in history and there are many among us now. So with this in mind and looking at how our world is now and what's going on in other countries, logic dictates that there are more to come. I believe Revelation is telling us about the final and worst of them all and whether we live to see it or not, the information in these prophesies is important for us and vital that we pass along correctly. So what is correct? Is Revelation a history lesson, a warning of the future or a guide for keeping strong in everyday life? Personally I think it's all of these.

I like how you both are open to exploring these issues! Keep asking and seeking and discussing!
-
-
-

Ok so I have some new info. This is about the number 666 which many believe is a code for Emperor Nero. The first issue to deal with is whether it was coded with the Greek numeration process or the Hebrew numeration process. It appears that most of the early churches were trying to decode it with The Greek process, which is why its so much of a mystery since you cannot arrive at anything to do with Nero with this process. You can, however arrive at the word Roman as well as numerous other words, names and phrases. Since Revelation was written in Greek, sent to Greek churches and read by people who spoke mainly Greek, it is not suprising that their process was used. In order to arrive at the name Nero, the Hebrew numeration process must be used. It's arguable that a few of the members of the church that recieved John's writing knew Hebrew and Hebrew concepts.
So this is the result that may be Nero's name using the Hebrew numeration: NRWN QSR
I know what you're thinking, I thought the same thing. " how do you get Emperor Nero out of that?" well I guess you have to realize that its supposed to be the latin pronunciation of his name and title, which is Neron Kaiser. Still seems to be missing some letters doesn't it? Well, it's said that you have to remove vowels, like the Jews did with Y'weh and Y'shua except you remove them all.

My questions are, Why is there a "w" in there? if it's taking place of the "o" in Neron, hebrew and Greek both have letters and sounds for "o". I thought the vowels were supposed to be omitted anyway, so why is it there? why is there a "Q" in place of the "k"? Hebrew has a letter and sound for "k" and so does Greek. So far connecting 666 with Emperor Nero seems a bit forced. A hebrew numeration of a Latin pronounced name with the vowels taken out and 2 suspicious letter substitutions. When I couple that with the idea that the very people who recieved the code and were supposed to recognize it didn't connect it with Nero gives me cause to be wary of this conclusion. Also seeing that this number was a mark specifically mentioned as being on the forehead or right hand and that you couldnt interact with the money system without either having that mark, or knowing the name or the number of the name makes me wonder how Nero and only Nero would fit into that description during the time of the worst persecution of God's people...which consequently happened a fair time after Nero's death.
If you have any more info or ideas, please share

secretfire6 wrote:Ok so I have some new info. This is about the number 666 which many believe is a code for Emperor Nero. The first issue to deal with is whether it was coded with the Greek numeration process or the Hebrew numeration process. It appears that most of the early churches were trying to decode it with The Greek process, which is why its so much of a mystery since you cannot arrive at anything to do with Nero with this process. You can, however arrive at the word Roman as well as numerous other words, names and phrases. Since Revelation was written in Greek, sent to Greek churches and read by people who spoke mainly Greek, it is not suprising that their process was used. In order to arrive at the name Nero, the Hebrew numeration process must be used. It's arguable that a few of the members of the church that recieved John's writing knew Hebrew and Hebrew concepts.
So this is the result that may be Nero's name using the Hebrew numeration: NRWN QSR
I know what you're thinking, I thought the same thing. " how do you get Emperor Nero out of that?" well I guess you have to realize that its supposed to be the latin pronunciation of his name and title, which is Neron Kaiser. Still seems to be missing some letters doesn't it? Well, it's said that you have to remove vowels, like the Jews did with Y'weh and Y'shua except you remove them all.

My questions are, Why is there a "w" in there? if it's taking place of the "o" in Neron, hebrew and Greek both have letters and sounds for "o". I thought the vowels were supposed to be omitted anyway, so why is it there? why is there a "Q" in place of the "k"? Hebrew has a letter and sound for "k" and so does Greek. So far connecting 666 with Emperor Nero seems a bit forced. A hebrew numeration of a Latin pronounced name with the vowels taken out and 2 suspicious letter substitutions. When I couple that with the idea that the very people who recieved the code and were supposed to recognize it didn't connect it with Nero gives me cause to be wary of this conclusion. Also seeing that this number was a mark specifically mentioned as being on the forehead or right hand and that you couldnt interact with the money system without either having that mark, or knowing the name or the number of the name makes me wonder how Nero and only Nero would fit into that description during the time of the worst persecution of God's people...which consequently happened a fair time after Nero's death.
If you have any more info or ideas, please share

Very good points - I thought the samething about Nero but you did a far better job explaining it than I could!

In Jewish Gematria the numerical value of Vav-Vav-Vav (W+W+W) in Hebrew would be 6+6+6=18, therefore WWW=18 - 18 is equivalent to life... so a straight rendering each as 6 equal 18 does not line up.

Also it could or should rather be read, I think as, Mem 600, Samekh 60, Vav 6

But only in later years were the values 500, 600, 700 added after 100AD in so in Hebrew 666 would look like this when John wrote Revelation's Book as: 6+60+300+300 (Vav, Samekh, Shin, Shin) - ש ש ס ו=666

But Looking like this to us: Sh.Sh. S. W as Sh300 + Sh300 + S60 + W6 = 666 (ShShSW)

If we use the later version which added 600 (Mem) it would look like this as well: M600 + S60 + W6 = 666 (MSW)

So in any case, using Hebrew - Nero is not spelled out either

See this site too:

http://www.i18nguy.com/unicode/hebrew-numbers.html


If using the Greek letters of the NT - one must follow the same rules Hebrew uses. You need the Greek Letter representing 300 or 600, then 60, then 6.

The Older form using 300+300+60+6 would fit best to uncover it in Greek would be T, T, X, St

Or using the newer Hebrew letter model - Chi, X, St

Again Nero's name is not spelled out...

Look at these links too

http://carm.org/what-does-666-mean

http://www.jesus8880.com/chapters/gemat ... phabet.htm

http://www.askelm.com/secrets/sec108.htm

http://www.becomingone.org/greeknum.htm

http://www.ibiblio.org/koine/greek/less ... habet.html

Bottom line - whoever the Anti-Christ person is, this person can be identified in other ways besides some sort of numerical value of 666 used to spell out a specific name...
-
-
-

wow, very cool. so we should most likely be using the Greek way and may not acctually be looking for one man's name at all???? One of the links says that any human name can become 666 but using a miriad of techniques. If we are meant to use only the Greek numeration, is it more likely that we are indeed looking for a specific name or word? Very interesting