Pedants' Paradise

[french frank]

.

... your starter for iota :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_numerals

Papyrus 115 is of interest. I like the theory that it was 616 or 666 depending on how you chose to spell 'Nero'....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_115

.

I did read that but hoped for an abbreviated explanation as it didn't immediately leap out at me.

[french frank]

Reckoned by some to down to whether the Greek or Latin spelling of Nero is numeralised.

Ah, but I got as far as the critics who rejected the idea that the name Nero was involved (and even if it was, how exactly did it translate into 616 or 666?).

[vinteuil]

.

I did read that but hoped for an abbreviated explanation as it didn't immediately leap out at me.

... I thought the table there was pretty straightforward : chi = 600, ksi = sixty, iota = ten, sigma = six.





.

[vinteuil]

Ah, but I got as far as the critics who rejected the idea that the name Nero was involved (and even if it was, how exactly did it translate into 616 or 666?).

... wiki tells us :

"The Latin-script languages exhibit borrowing of gematria methods dating from the early Middle Ages after the use lapsed following the collapse of the Roman Empire in the 5th century. Many researchers connect the "Number of the Beast", referred to in the Book of Revelation of the New Testament, with Hebrew gematria as used by the early Christians. According to such interpretations, the number in question, six hundred sixty-six (666; see Revelation 13:18) was originally derived from the Latin name of the Roman emperor at the time, Nero Caesar, via the Greek, 'Neron Kaisar', and transliterated into Hebrew gematria. The result of this operation is six hundred sixty-six (50+200+6+50+100+60+200=666). (נרונ קסר Neron Qesar)."

[ article Gematria ]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gematria

and again :

"In Greek, Νερων, Nero, has the numerical value 50+5+100+800+50=1005, the same value as ιδιαν μητερα απεκτεινε (idian metera apekteine)—"He killed his own mother", (10+4+10+1+50) + (40+8+300+5+100+1) + (1+80+5+20+300+5+10+50+5). A famous example is 666 in the Biblical Book of Revelation (13:18): "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six" (The word rendered here "count", ψηφισάτω, psephisato, has the same "pebble" root as the word isopsephy). The Greek Neron Kaisar (Nero Caesar in Latin/English) when transliterated into Hebrew gematria = "six hundred sixty-six"."

[article Ipopsephy ]

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isopsephy

.

[french frank]

I'm looking for a trustworthy source

As in "Many researchers connect … '

[vinteuil]

I'm looking for a trustworthy source

As in "Many researchers connect … '

... it's more than a hundred years old; I'm sure there is much and much more recent scholarship -


Sanders, H. A. "The Number of the Beast in Revelation." Journal of Biblical Literature 37.1 (1918): 97.


.

[french frank]

For myself, I like a paper that tackles the question thus:

"When I indicated that the reading 616 is now found in an early manuscript, I did not mean to say that therefore it is more likely to be the reading that the author originally wrote. That is a different question… "

Yes, on this particular issue, I incline against any explanation which is conclusive. I have no preference as between 616 and 666, but I am interested in the thoughts of others, especially if they are weighing up all possibilities. They will do well if they finish by convincing me of one or the other There are too many puzzles on which the solution will not be known.

... it's more than a hundred years old; I'm sure there is much and much more recent scholarship -
Sanders, H. A. "The Number of the Beast in Revelation." Journal of Biblical Literature 37.1 (1918): 97.
.

jstor?

[vinteuil]

[/I]
Yes, on this particular issue, I incline against any explanation which is conclusive. I have no preference as between 616 and 666, but I am interested in the thoughts of others, especially if they are weighing up all possibilities. They will do well if they finish by convincing me of one or the other There are too many puzzles on which the solution will not be known.

... I agree. As "according to the transcription of the INTF [Institut für neutestamentliche Textforschung at the University of Münster, Westphalia] , a conjectured reading of the manuscript, due to the space left, is [χξϛ] η χιϛ (666 or 616), therefore not giving a definite number to the beast... " - line 3 of folio 8v :

http://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/community/vmr/api/transcript/get/?docID=10115&pageID=160&format=html

.

[french frank]

One thing I don't follow: why does the Greek (text) say, "Who has the wit/intelligence, let him/her/them calculate the number of the 'beast' (wild animal); for it is the number of humankind; and that number is 666/616."

Why do you need wit, intelligence, understanding or anything else to calculate it if he's just given the answer (whatever it is)?

I like 'calculate' for ψηφισάτω because calculus and ψῆφος both mean pebble (as used for counting).

And, from what I see there are two early manuscripts, one saying 666 and the other 616. P47 in Dublin dates from the 3rd c, possibly as early as P115, or possibly a few decades later.

... I agree. As "according to the transcription of the INTF [Institut für neutestamentliche Textforschung at the University of Münster, Westphalia] , a conjectured reading of the manuscript, due to the space left, is [χξϛ] η χιϛ (666 or 616), therefore not giving a definite number to the beast... " - line 3 of folio 8v :

http://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/community/vmr/api/transcript/get/?docID=10115&pageID=160&format=html

.

[french frank]

I'm putting this here instead of on the Breakfast thread as it seems a more appropriate place.

... are there any BC saints? - Apart from the anomalous St Michael etc - but I never understood how Angels could really be saints...

I have pursued this question and discover two related matters:

1) In languages other than English, the words for 'saint' have a slightly wider connotation, especially when comparing different religious traditions (Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox); it can refer to persons, including 'retrospectively' who are considered to have a significance ('reputation') for the Christian tradition. Old Testament prophets were sometimes considered saints, hence the church of San Moisè. Also, I suppose, (arch)angels - Michael and Gabriel.

2) In Britain, some of the early Celtic saints are completely unknown other than as a placename or dedication. The title seems to have been bestowed locally on early Christians, such as hermits, who were remembered as having lived holy lives.

3) Nevertheless, my source for this did sit up abruptly at the suggestion that an early Christian saint (and martyr) could have died in 259BC.

[vinteuil]

1) In languages other than English, the words for 'saint' have a slightly wider connotation, especially when comparing different religious traditions (Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox); it can refer to persons, including 'retrospectively' who are considered to have a significance ('reputation') for the Christian tradition. Old Testament prophets were sometimes considered saints, hence the church of San Moisè. Also, I suppose, (arch)angels - Michael and Gabriel.

.

... if I recall aright, a 'saint' is someone Holy Mother Church knows is in heaven - and who therefore can safely and efficaciously be prayed to. There are many in heaven, but of whose status Holy Mother Church is not sure - they too are saints, but coz the Church isn't quite sure - they can not be prayed in aid. If Christ spent his days between crucifixion and resurrection visiting the underworld to give those who had died before his arrival the opportunity to proclaim his terewth * , then they too will be in heaven and thus 'saints' - one assumes this wd include Elijah (who we know got there off his own bat) and good eggs such as Moses, Abraham, the better-regarded prophets, etc.

French Frank - wd you care to pass this by your brother to see if it bears any resemblance to current thinking???


* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrowing_of_Hell





.

[french frank]

French Frank - wd you care to pass this by your brother to see if it bears any resemblance to current thinking???

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrowing_of_Hell

Just spent 2½ hours with him, asking naive questions! He did actually mention Elijah/Elias who is considered a saint in some traditions. Something to do with the Litany of Saints (must check what that means, exactly)

I also interrogated him about the Book of Revelation on which he had knowledge of some (fairly) up-to-date scholarly thinking (he thought).

I am directed to read the Book of Daniel ('St Daniel' in the eastern Orthodox church) which shares much symbolism with the Book of Revelation.

History: As has been suggested already, the Revelations of John are considered to have been a series of coded messages - presumably to hide the meaning from the Roman authorities. The Roman Emperor (that is, the holder of the title) was called 'divi filius' - son of (the) god - and sōtēr, or saviour. So, as I understand it, when the 'son of god' died, he became a god and his successor to the title was the son. If 666 or 616 denoted Nero Caesar (and it doesn't really matter what the number is, just who it represents), then it needn't mean that Nero himself would return (as according to some interpretations) but that a successor would be in the same mould, Nero having been the first persecutor of Christians post 64.

I am also recommended to read Eusebius.

[Which I have now ordered ]

[LMcD]

I've heard 'in the ascendancy' quite a lot recently - should it not be 'in the ascendant'?

[vinteuil]

I've heard 'in the ascendancy' quite a lot recently - should it not be 'in the ascendant'?

... indeed so - 'in the ascendant' is one thing : 'the ascendancy' is something very specific and different -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Ascendancy

.

[french frank]

I've heard 'in the ascendancy' quite a lot recently - should it not be 'in the ascendant'?

OED ascendancy: ' The state or quality of being in the ascendant'

ascendant: 'Rising; moving or tending upwards'

ascendant: 'superiority, supremacy; = ascendancy n.'

in the ascendant 'supreme, dominant' - that surprises me!


So ascendant seems to have two meanings: 'going up' and 'being up'.

But I don't see 'in the ascendancy'.