Talk:Number of the beast/Archive 1

message: Good job, there, MarkSweep.  Isn't it pretty much the same as vandalism, to edit out something that belongs in the article, and replace it with some personal political attack?
Cbdorsett 14:07, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nice reversion 

message: Whoever is posting all of this stuff about dozenal, please cut it out. The number is most plainly not in gross and dozen.  
P.S. What is the Antichrist watch link doing there? I see no references to it in the page, so I removed it. « alerante ✆ ✉ » 12:03, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Base twelve nonsense 

message: You're not supposed to rewrite an essay next to an external link.  Therefore, I've changed the external links section so that it only links to the essays themselves and has a short phrase about the point of view for which the essays argue. --Idont Havaname 18:01, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The external links section is very messy. 

message: Someone added a link to RFID in the See also section. I added a link to a Google search that finds stories linking the two, but someone should probably create a story for the Speculation and trivia section out of it and move the link there. --IByte 20:31, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  666 and RFID? 

message: Considering that the vast majority of people who search for or link to Number of the Beast will be looking for the discussion of the actual number and its Biblical and other significance, probably a thousand times more often than anyone searching for "the number of the beast" will be looking for the album, the book, or the Digimon episode, why not move Number of the Beast (numerology) to Number of the Beast and move the current disambiguation page at Number of the Beast to Number of the Beast (disambiguation), with the disambiguation link at the top of Number of the Beast? The disambiguation page should only be the main page in cases where there's no way of picking a "main" article that is the most likely search target. In cases, like this, where not only is one possibility much more likely to be the intended target, but also where the most likely candidate is the direct inspiration for the names of the other possible targets, the article should be at Number of the Beast; (numerology) is only necessary when the article's name has more (or equally) famous significance, as in 23 (numerology). -Silence 22:44, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Why not "Number of the Beast (disambiguation)" for the disambig links?

message: ----
The number 666 has nothing to do with the devil/satan or hitler or anyone else that was mentioned. The number 666 has a true meaning much less dramatic. 666 was the number of christian(probally spelled wrong) people a roman emperor had slaughtered.
----
This page was severely vandalised on January 15, when the number 666 was changed to 616 throughout.  The alternative reading 616 has long been known, but is not generally regarded as the original reading.  Some patent nonsenses have resulted:  virtually all post-Biblical references are to 666, not 616, and should be stated as such, whatever your views on the original Biblical number.  In one place where this editor has changed the number, the result is a statement that 616 is an alternative reading to 616.
I have reverted the page to the version immediately before this change.  I apologize to any legitimate editors whose subsequent contributions have been lost.  Some of these will need to be re-entered.  However, I suggest that whoever recently added an edit along the lines of, "or a person (or being, or whatever) led by the antichrist." not reinsert it in the introductory paragraph the article, but put in a fuller exposition further down.
I have also inserted a clean-up call at the top of the page.  This is one of a number of religious topics which is the subject of controversy and any number of pet theories, many the product of non-mainstream groups or individuals.  These have a place in the article, as reflecting later Christian thought, but should not be represented as the one true position, even though proponents of these views consider them as such.
—Neil Copeland, January 18
----
Anyone care to explain to me why the external links to the images of "Sword figure" and "Image of the Beast which had the wound by a sword, and did live" point to the obscure website of marine subcontracter ARCHIRODON GROUP NV (i.e. http://212.122.250.98/h/beast.htm on http://212.122.250.98) ? 
What's that directory doing there? Talk about a conspiracy theory! ;-)
--VanPeel 04:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other

message: ...Since "beasts" such as oxen, horses and donkeys were used as machines in ancient times, one can infer “beast” in modern times meaning "machine" or "computer". Since computers were developed by English speaking people it is plausible that the numerical decoding should be via English, such that one interprets “leading the development” as “riding the head of the beast”.
this just looks stupid, and so do a lot of the other stuff on the page. yeah, just wanted to point that out.
:You're not a bible scholar, and will never be one. Don't make judements about what you have know idea about. 68.3.18.67 23:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the exact same paragraph I came in here to complain about. Priester 03:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  some of this looks dumb 

message: The name Ronald Wilson Reagan has six letters per name i.e. 666.
Eh. Could be. I still say fudge it to make it Bush. United States is 66 but we need another. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.47.15.38 (talk • contribs) .
: ‘George’ and ‘Walker’ have six letters each and ‘Bush’ has four, plus the two spaces. Thus, Bush is the Beast. (The words even start with the same letter!) —xyzzyn 17:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The show The Boondocks pointed out that... 

message: This article is very poorly written.  Pieces of it have hope but it doesn't look like anyone has taken very good care of it's growth and development.  As a result, solidly founded and long-held beliefs are intermingled and given equal weight with the most obscure speculative fantasy.  And some stuff just doesn't belong.  (E.g. Can someone please explain to me what a Jewish non-"number of the beast" interpretation of the number 666 as used in the Old Testament has to do with the "number of the beast" in the New Testament book of Revelation?)  It's really just dreadful.  I'd suggest a new section for "Novel Crackpot Theories" that we could just dump all the junk into.  As it stands, it looks like something that belongs in the uncylcopedia. --Economy1 17:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  REVISIONS URGENTLY NEEDED 

message: Do people really, honestly believe any of this nonsense about a number?  It's just a number.  Really.  I mean, come on,  have 6 letters in each of my names (first, middle, last); does that make me satan or the antichrist?  This article is amusing, however a lot of it is clearly fantasy, especially those comments about computers and such.  Computers are not evil, though they can be used in evil ways by evil people.  This whole article is rife with bias and PoV, IMHO.
:1. You don't sign your comments, do you? 2. It's about religion, something which you came here already with a bias AGAINST, so don't don't make any crap about "Ohh, it's got too much PoV.. oh what a bunch of ****tards...." 68.3.18.67 23:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Under "avoiding" the number, do we want to mention Nancy changing her street address to from 666 St. Cloud Road to 668?  Rklawton 06:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Reagans are already mentioned in Number of the Beast (occurrence), which looks like the right place. —xyzzyn 22:11, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reagan (again)

message: According to Box Office Mojo TC page, there were movies, like A Chorus Line, Failure to Launch, and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, either receiving, losing, or holding exactly 666 theaters in a week, more or less.
Examples: , , , , 
There's more in Yahoo, Google, and other search engines.
Can this subject be in "Speculation and Trivia" section or any other? Why or why not? —69.227.165.221 07:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie theatrical counts 

message: There are so many claims in this article that need verification outside wikipedia, I can't begin to start. Dominick (TALK) 14:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't help much but the article does have the  tag.  Monkeyman(talk) 00:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cruft 

message: I deleted a few lines about a reference in Ian Brown (ex-Stone Roses) lyrics. I believe that section of the topic refers only to mentions within the bible, and besides, it was poorly written. Katr67 01:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mentions outside the book of Revelation. 

message: Here are two quotations which I removed:
I think they are better suited for a page on Wikiquote. —xyzzyn 01:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the ‘Dr.’, because I didn’t see why it (or any other title) was important there and WP:1SP recommends not to use titles. Hillers is not the subject of the article and the credibility of his paper is better assessed by the quality of the journal in which it was published than by the author’s title. It’s not something about which I feel strongly in any way, though. —xyzzyn 10:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I replaced it to quell a one sided discussion on #wikipedia. I have no vested interest. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 10:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations 

message: I once read that there is some belief that the internet itself is the "mark of the beast" because '666' (somehow) translates to 'www' (ie. the acronym for world wide web), supported by the idea that no one will be able to buy sell, etc without the mark of the beast. As I cannot remember where on earth I read this I didn't want to add anything to the main article. Instead I thought I'd suggest it here to see if anyone recalls hearing of anything like this or knows of any sources. ~
:Obviously can't be, since the internet way predates www.  And why would "w" be 6?  Still, it's as likely as the rest of this nonsense. Dicklyon 23:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Internet

message: Since I’ve removed a lot of stuff, I’d like to give some reasons:
* All the modern-day examples of 666 should be in the main article, Number of the Beast (occurrence).
* The list of Rev. 13:18 quotes was unnecessary. Those are available elsewhere.
* The Jewish section was just another intrpretation, therefore tightened and moved.
* Several things have been unsourced for a long time. Removed per WP:V. Tag about lack of sources removed from the top.
This is not meant as a statement of personal opinion on any of the material. I do feel strongly about not having modern-day occurrences of the number in this article (because they are almost certainly redundant with respect to the other article); as for the unsourced things, adding them back with proper references might be a good idea. —xyzzyn 16:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of my edit 

message: Whether it is right or wrong can be decided by the reader, but we should at least include that the oldest written version of Revelations says 616 "xiς"
:It was included, but the age of that version wasn’t mentioned; thanks for pointing out that it was missing. I have, however, moved the discussion of that issue a bit further down, to the other versioning talk. —xyzzyn 20:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OLDEST Source says 616 

message: I remember learning in (Catholic) Theology class that John encoded Nero's name using Hebrew numberology to further hide the meaning.  Could someone explain why Nero would be encoded using Hebrew letters not Greek, and provide a source... besides of course my theology notes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.184.151.157 (talk • contribs) .
:Frankly, it wouldn’t matter how it’s encoded. I’m pretty sure that, after enough manipulation, you could even encode ‘Nero’ to ‘γραμμωτός κώδικας’ (Greek for ‘barcode’, according to Babelfish). Anyway, the explanation by Engels (see the notes section for a link), as I understand it, is that John was not Greek, but a Jew who lived in a Greek community (cf. Book of Revelation and John of Patmos for more on this, and other theories); although he knew enough of the language to write the book, he used the numerology with which he was familiar, instead of the one used in Greece. —xyzzyn 21:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Hebrew instead of Greek for coded Nero 

message: Someone named --xyzzyn has been censoring my theory about 666isMONEY from the article Number of the Beast at Wickipedia. I'm not sure what his agenda is but I'll bet he is a fundamentalist Christian bigot, who has his own theory published in the article. Here's the truth about the "mark" of the beast:
"No one buys or sells (BUYS OR SELLS) without the MONEY of the beast on/in mind or hand." Nero was the emperor at the time the book was written 70AD (see, Parables of the War at: www.book-of-revelation.com/abstract/marshal.html); the Jews revolted against Rome and coined their own money. Liddell & Scott, the editors of the Unabridged Greek-English Lexicon are wrong in assuming it is a "Mark" (not a tattoo = stigmata in Greek).
Jesus-Christ (if he existed) said, "You can't serve God & MONEY [mammon is an Aramaic word for money] ... but the Pharisees, who loved money (philarguron) heard all this and scoffed." Like you're scoffing too. (See Luke 16.)Jesus also told his disciples, like the Buddha did, to not carry and gold, silver, script or brass in their purse.Jesus also said, "Who's picture is on the $$$?" Caesar's!
I'll bet xyzzyn hides his theory in the page somewhere. Like, why do these people get their theory in and not me? Who the hell are they?!
* Keith Krell interprets the mark as a requirement for all commerce to mean that the mark might actually be an object with the function of a credit card.[13]
* Steven D. Miller proposes that the mark of the beast may refer to a social security number or card.[14]
* Terry Watkins supposes the mark to be a microchip or barcode in or on the human body.[15]What good are their references? My reference comes from the Unabridged Greek-English Lexicon by Lidell and Scott.
ADD: 
*Raquel Baranow says the context of buying & selling and Nero, whose picture is on the $$$ = 666 and the definition in the UNABRIDGED Greek-English Lexicon by Liddell & Scott shows that the word Χαραγμα mistranslated as "mark" should be MONEY. For more information see http://www.666ismoney.com/
You might have a point, but I don't think insulting other users by calling them Christian bigots with secret agendas is the right way to have your point heard. If it means that much to you to have it heard try publishing it elsewhere on the web. Freewebs.com will give you 50 Megs free and dot.tk will give you a free www.yourname.tk URL which will forward to whatever URL you provide.--Silverclodhopper 15:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mark" of the Beast is MONEY i.e., MONEY of the Beast 

message: Hey I like how the page looks... It could have more information on some aspects. I was thinking maybe there should be some more external links. What do you all think? 
People could have a link showing their groups(religious groups) opinion. Like the following link 666 Mark of the Beast. Or just have links that link to more information that isn't contained on this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alexme (talk • contribs) .
:Negative. See WP:EL; your website fails the prominence check and is ineligible under all other criteria. —xyzzyn 11:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Is it "and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." or "and its number is Six hundred threescore and six." ? If you know how to read greek, answer please. IMHO it is likely the first, but the second cannot be excluded. Faaaa 23:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to , it can be either one. Why is this important? —xyzzyn 00:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Because, between fun and serious, according revelation epilog, "if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Wood of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.". Faaaa 00:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? I meant, why is this important for this article? —xyzzyn 00:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  English Translation 

message: There is a theory rotating that the "666" represents 6 electrons, 6 neutrons, and 6 protons there composition of which carbon is. Suggesting this it can be supposed that it refers to organic material i.e. organic molecules which must contain carbon. Thinking this then it can be proposed that 666 represents any and all of the living which could be though of the "devil" or "evil" while things of "energy" or the "sprit" could be considered the only good.
I've just been thought Chemistry 30S in Canada and put this idea together...
Could someone clean it up for me please and add it to the main page...i'm a new member and can't add..
Thanks,
Stanley Nickarz (16 year old)
4:05:29 AM - August - 23 - 2006
:No. Please see WP:OR. —xyzzyn 12:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atom theory