Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
poliphilo: (Default)
[personal profile] poliphilo

Apparently it's 616 not 666

That's according to the earliest available text of the Book of Revelations. 

It just love it that so many opinionated people-  preachers, theologians, prophets, scholars, satanists et al- have been basing their pontifications on a scribal error.

Date: 2006-06-06 02:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] solar-diablo.livejournal.com
One response to this I saw was amusing. A local newspaper here interviewed a devout Southern Baptist and a Satanist about the possible 666-616 error. The Baptist refused to accept the information and said it was as likely to be the result of diabolical deception as anything else. The Satanist? "So what? If it turns out to be true we'll start using 616 to annoy the Christians."

Date: 2006-06-06 02:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com
I guess the Baptist was hooked on the infallibility of the King James bible. What a strange position to have to defend!

At least Satanists have a sense of humour.

Profile

poliphilo: (Default)
poliphilo

December 2025

S M T W T F S
  12 34 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28293031   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Page generated Dec. 28th, 2025 10:12 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios