• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Name Jesus = 666?

jimlintott said:

Is numerology idolatry?
Click to expand...
Yes, let he who is wise count the number of the beast ...


18 Here is wisdom. 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. ~ Revelation 13:18
Click to expand...
As much as I like to work with numbers I don't worship them, do you?
 
Donks said:

Hmm, lets get past the boring parts. I'll grant you that Jesus was fake, the antichrist, the devil, whatever you like. Proceed.
Click to expand...
No, "Many will come in my name (666) to lead many astray." ~ Matthew 24:1-5

Now, like I said, doesn't this sound like the Fundamentalists to you?
 
Donk:

Sorry, not directed at you.

Of course, Mt does not attest to 666.

This guy reminds me of a poster I admonished once that if he want to discuss a book, he needs to read the same book everyone else is reading.

--J.D.
 
More like a small boy playing in the bathroom when Mummy is not looking. . . .

--J.D.
 
1 At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?

2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,

3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. ~ Matthew 18:1-5
Click to expand...
Yes, in-a-sense, innocence might have something to do with it. ;)
 
Do you mean like a small child playing in a sandbox? Yes!
Click to expand...

Just when I had thought that you had completely lost any grip on reality you come through with a lucid remark.

Watch out for any surprises the neighbour's cat may have left.
 
jimlintott said:

Just when I had thought that you had completely lost any grip on reality you come through with a lucid remark.

Watch out for any surprises the neighbour's cat may have left.
Click to expand...
And just because your reality does not contain a perception of God, does not make mine any less real.
 
Tai Chi:

Your mummy sometime looks???!!
Click to expand...

Only when yours is unavailable. . . .

Iaccus:

And just because your reality does not contain a perception of God, does not make mine any less real.
Click to expand...

Would this be the one that is Non-Existent, Evil, Incompetent, Irrelevant, or Some Combination of 2-4?

--J.D.
 
Doctor X said:

Iaccus:

Would this be the one that is Non-Existent, Evil, Incompetent, Irrelevant, or Some Combination of 2-4?

--J.D.
Click to expand...
Yes, and why do you insist on limiting the choices?
 
Iacchus said:
Hey, did you know that The Name Jesus = 666? Sure it does. All you have to do is take the numerical value of the letters in His name and add them together (10 + 5 + 19 + 21 + 19), in which case you get 74 which, when multiplied by 9, you get 666!

Hmm, what could it possibly mean?
Click to expand...
Ah, clever :p
 
Numerology, based on modern English, modern spelling, modern alphabet sequence, plus primary school number equilibrism, is, IMHO, one of the most ridiculous beliefs on the planet.

The name Jesus is not even spelled that way, originally. And the symbolism put to numbers, like 666, is largely arbitrary.

Hans :rolleyes: :nope:
 
Yes, . . .
Click to expand...

Which choice?

. . . and why do you insist on limiting the choices?
Click to expand...

They are the only valid ones based on reality.

Should you wish to have more choices you must support them; you must Justify the Unjust Suffering.

--J.D.
 
Of course if you're so sure that it's one of the four, then why haven't you reduced it down to one? You do believe it's reducible don't you?
 
Of course if you're so sure that it's one of the four, . . .
Click to expand...

There are Five Possible Choices [PBUT--Ed.]. See above.

. . . then why haven't you reduced it down to one?
Click to expand...

The case does not exclude any of the choices. You are, of course, free to argue for one or more of the choices.

You do believe it's reducible don't you?
Click to expand...

What I believe is irrelevant.

Nevertheless, you have failed to address the question.

--J.D.
 
Doctor X said:


There are Five Possible Choices [PBUT--Ed.]. See above.
Click to expand...

Where have you been all this time? Anyway, it's good to have you back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom