The mystery of 666 Explained - Nero! {Ecumenical thread}

Apocalypse 13:16-18 is based on Ezekiel 8 and 9. The "mark" symbolized the spiritual condition of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The ones with the "mark" were in allegiance with God. However, in Apocalypse, the mark is reversed. That is to say, the mark was on those who were against God and had allegiance to the "beast."

John wrote that the number "is the number of a man's name; and his number is 666." This tells us that those who received the "mark" were actually in allegiance with a "man," an actually person of the first century. So, who was he? Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus! Better known as Nero Caesar.

John used a puzzle called gematria in which numbers are used to represent certain letters. John used this puzzle to reveal Nero without actually writing down his name. Remember, the early churches were being persecuted during this time—not only from the Jews, but also from the Romans. The numerical values of the Hebrew letters in Neron Kesar (Nero Caesar) are:

Nero Caesar fits the gematria code number "666." Using this code, his name would be rendered as "NRWN QSR." (NRWN QSR). The number values are:

which, when added together, equals 666. The fact that Nero fits the description of the "beast" is well documented. According to Suetonius, he murdered his parents, wife, brother, aunt, and many others close to him and of high station in Rome. He was a torturer, a homosexual rapist, and a sodomite. He even married two young boys and paraded them around as his wives. One of the boys, whose name was Sporus, was castrated by Nero. He was truly bestial in his character, depravity, and actions. He devised a kind of game: covered with the skin of some wild animal, he was let loose from a cage and attacked the private parts of men and women, who were bound at stakes. He also initiated the war against the Jews which led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD..

Nero’s persecution, which was initiated in A.D.64, was the first ever Roman assault on Christianity. Roman historian Tacitus (A.D. 56-117) spoke of Nero's "cruel nature" that "put to death so many innocent men." He records the scene in Rome when the persecution of Christians broke out: "And their death was aggravated with mockeries, insomuch that, wrapped in the hides of wild beasts, they were torn to pieces by dogs, or fastened to crosses to be set on fire, that when the darkness fell they might be burned to illuminate the night." Christians were crucified, beheaded, burnt alive, and used as torches to light the palace gardens. Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all comparison. St. John’s banishment to Patmos (where he wrote the book of Apocalypse) was itself a result of the great persecution of Nero. The apostle Paul was tortured and then beheaded by the evil Emperor Nero at Rome in A.D. 67. The apostle Peter, who was crucified upside down, was another victim of Nero, .

As Church father Eusebius notes: "Nero was the first of the emperors who showed himself an enemy of the divine religion." Sulpicius Severus concurs: "He first attempted to abolish the name of Christian." In his Annals, Roman historian Tacitus points to those who were persecuted as "those who . . . were vulgarly called Christians." Roman historian Suetonius concurs, for in a list of the few "positive" contributions of Nero as emperor, he includes the fact that Nero persecuted Christians: "During his reign many abuses were severely punished and put down, and no fewer new laws were made:. . . . Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition."

Noted church historian J. L. von Mosheim wrote of Nero's persecution: "Foremost in the rank of those emperors, on whom the church looks back with horror as her persecutors, stands Nero, a prince whose conduct towards the Christians admits of no palliation, but was to the last degree unprincipled and inhuman. The dreadful persecution which took place by order of this tyrant, commenced at Rome about the middle of November, in the year of our Lord 64. . . . This dreadful persecution ceased but with the death of Nero. The empire, it is well known, was not delivered from the tyranny of this monster until the year 68, when he put an end to his own life." (L. von Mosheim, Historical Commentaries, I:138,139).

His bestial cruelty is evidenced in the writings of the Roman historian Suetonius (A.D. 70-160), who speaks of Nero's "cruelty of disposition" evidencing itself at an early age. He documents Nero's evil and states: "neither discrimination or moderation [were employed] in putting to death whosoever he pleased on any pretext whatever." Suetonius notes that Nero "compelled four hundred senators and six hundred Roman knights, some of whom were well to do and of unblemished reputation, to fight in the arena."

Roman naturalist Pliny the Elder (A.D. 23-79) described Nero as "the destroyer of the human race" and "the poison of the world." Roman satirist Juvenal (A.D. 60-140) speaks of "Nero's cruel and bloody tyranny." Elsewhere, he calls Nero a "cruel tyrant."

Nero so affected the imagination that the pagan writer Apollinius of Tyana, a contemporary of Nero, specifically mentions that Nero was called a "beast": "In my travels, which have been wider than ever man yet accomplished, I have seen many, many wild beasts of Arabia and India; but this beast, that is commonly called a Tyrant, I know not how many heads it has, nor if it be crooked of claw, and armed with horrible fangs. . . . And of wild beasts you cannot say that they were ever known to eat their own mother, but Nero has gorged himself on this diet."

In Apocalypse 13:7, the Beast is said to "make war with the saints and to overcome them." Apocalypse 13:5 says that the beast would conduct such blasphemous warfare for a specific period of time: 42 months. The Neronic persecution was instituted in 64 AD and lasted until his death in June 68 AD, which is three and a half years, or 42 months! Nero fits the bill for the role of the beast!

Apocalypse 13:10 and 14 says the Beast not only slays by the sword, but ultimately is to die of a sword wound. Do you know how Nero died? According to Suetonius, he "drove a dagger into his throat, aided by Epaphroditus, his private secretary" (ch.49). Nero killed with the sword and was killed by the sword. That Nero did, in fact, kill by the sword is a well-attested fact. Paul, for example, is said to have died under Nero by decapitation by means of the sword. Tertullian credits "Nero's cruel sword" as providing the martyr's blood as seed for the church. He urges his Roman readers to "Consult your histories; you will there find that Nero was the first who assailed with the imperial sword the Christian sect."

Nero died in the middle of the war on June 8th, 68 AD, and Vespasian went back to Rome to fight to become the new emperor. During this time the Christians fled Jerusalem because they heeded the warning of Matthew 24:16; the Jews thought the respite was a sign from God of victory and they gathered in Jerusalem in great numbers. The Romans came back and destroyed the city.

Apocalypse 17:3 tells us that the beast is red. The red color may be indicative of the bloodshed caused by the beast. But Suetonius writes of the legend associated with Nero's ancestral parentage, which explains why he had a red beard, which was very unusual in those times.

Apocalypse 17:10 says, "And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space." The five "kings" were not ruling at the same time, for the text stated "five are fallen," meaning that five of those kings had come and gone. Then "one is," meaning the "king" who was ruling at the time Apocalypse was written. Here, in this verse, we have one of the clearest proofs for Nero being the beast. If we simply examine the list of Roman Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was. Flavius Josephus clearly points out that Julius Caesar was the first emperor of Rome, followed by Augustus; Tiberius; Caius (Caligula); Claudius; and the sixth emperor was…Nero (Antiquities, books 18 and 19), who assumed imperial power upon the death of the fifth emperor, Claudius, in October, A.D. 54. The matter is confirmed just a little later in the writings of Roman historians: Suetonius (Lives of the Twelve Caesars and Dio Cassius, Roman History 5). Nero reigned from 54AD to June of 68AD. John informs us that the seventh king was "not yet come." That would be Galba, who assumed power upon Nero's death in June, A.D. 68. But he was only to continue a "short space." As a matter of historical fact, his reign lasted but six months until January 15, A.D. 69.

What about the Beast's death-wound and his subsequent resurrection? Let us now consider John's revelation of the Beast arising from the dead (Apocalypse 13:3-4). At this point we need to reflect upon a most significant series of historical events of the A.D. 60s. First, with the death of Nero, the Roman Empire's founding family vanished from rule. Following the death of Nero was the extinction of the Julian line. Immediately, the Roman Empire was hurled into civil wars of horrible ferocity and dramatic proportions. These civil wars would strike everyone as being the very death throes of Rome, the Beast generically considered. Before the world's startled eyes, the seven-headed Beast (Rome) was toppling to its death as its sixth head (Nero) was mortally wounded with the sword.

Tacitus's detailed account of the ruin wreaked upon Rome almost equals in psychological horror, cultural devastation, and human carnage that which befell Jerusalem during the Jewish War, as recorded by Josephus and Tactius. The Roman civil wars were the first fruits of Nero's death. Josephus records that the destruction was so horrible, that the general Vespasian, "was not able to apply himself further in other wars when his native country was laid waste." Josephus agrees that during this time Rome was brought near to utter "ruin." He notes that "about this time it was that heavy calamities came about Rome on all sides." According to 4 Ezra 12:16-19, written around A.D. 100, the Empire was "in danger of falling": "In the midst of the time of that kingdom great struggles shall arise, and it shall be in danger of falling; nevertheless it shall not fall then, but shall regain its former power."

But what eventually occurred at the end of these death throes? Suetonius informs us that: "The empire, which for a long time had been unsettled and, as it were, drifting through the usurpation and violent death of three emperors, was at last taken in hand given stability by the Flavian family." Josephus sets forth this view of things when he writes: "So upon this confirmation of Vespasian's entire government, which was now settled, and upon the unexpected deliverance of the public affairs of the Romans from ruin, Vespasian turned his thoughts to what remained unsubdued in Judea." Thus, after a time of grievous civil wars, the Empire was revived by the ascending of Vespasian to the purple.

The point is not that Nero’s name is the primary identification of 666. The point is, instead, what the number meant to the seven churches. St. John’s Biblically informed readers will have already recognized many clear indications of the Beast’s identity. Nero arrived on the scene as the first great persecutor of the Church, the embodiment of the "666-ness" of the Empire, and – Lo and behold! – his very name spells out 666! It is significant that "all the earliest Christian writers on the Apocalypse, from Irenaeus down to Victorious of Pettau and Commodian in the fourth, and Andreas in the fifth, and St. Beatus in the eighth century, connect Nero, or some Roman emperor, with the Apocalyptic Beast ." There should be no reasonable doubt about this identification. St. John was writing to first-century Christians, warning them of things that were "shortly" to take place. They were engaged in the most crucial battle of history, against the Dragon and the evil Empire which he possessed. The purpose of the Apocalypse was to comfort the Church with the assurance that God was in control, so that even the awesome might of the Dragon and the Beast would not stand before the armies of Jesus Christ. Christ was wounded in His heel on Friday, the sixth day, the Day of the Beast – yet that is the day He crushed the Dragon’s head. At his most powerful, St. John says, the Beast is just a six, or a series of sixes; never a seven.

It is charged by some that Neron Kesar is merely a convenient "misspelling" of Nero’s name in Hebrew. This objection overlooks the fact that before the modern introduction of dictionaries the world was simply not as concerned as we are about uniformity in the spelling of names. Alternate spellings were common (e.g. "Joram" and "Jehoram" in the Old Testament), especially in the transliteration of words into a foreign tongue. But the allegation of misspelling is wholly wrong anyway. The form Neron Kesar is the linguistically "correct" Hebrew form, is the form found in the Talmud and other rabbinical writings, and was used by Hebrews in the first century, as archaeological evidence has shown. As F. W. Farrar observed, "the Jewish Christian would have tried the name as he thought of the name-that is in Hebrew letters. And the moment he did this the secret stood revealed. No Jew ever thought of Nero except as ‘Neron Kesar,’ and this gives at once . . . 666" (The Early Days of Christianity, Chicago and New York: Belford, Clarke& Co., 1882, p. 540). Of some related interest is the fact that if Nero’s name is written without the final "n" (i.e., the way it would occur to a Gentile to spell it in Hebrew), it yields the number 616 — which is exactly the variant reading in a few New Testament manuscripts. The most reasonable explanation for this variant is that it arose from the confusion over the final "n".

It may now be pointed out that in an Aramaic document from Murabba’at, dated to the "second year of the emperor Nero," the name is spelled ‘rsq nwrn’ as required by the theory (i.e., that 666 signifies Nero). The last two consonants of ‘rsq’ are damaged, but enough is preserved to show that no vowel-letter was written between the ‘q’ and ‘s’ (Apocalypse 13:18 and a Scroll from Murabba’at). The evidence can be seen by consulting the French work edited by P, Benoit, J. T. Milik, and R. DeVaux, Discoveries in the Judean Desert of Jordan II (Oxford, 1961), page 18, plate 29.

The Christians of the first century were under the military authority of Rome, a nation which openly proclaimed its rulers, the Caesars, to be divine. All those under the jurisdiction of Rome were required by law to publicly proclaim their allegiance to Caesar by burning a pinch of incense and declaring, "Caesar is Lord". Upon compliance with this law, the people were given a papyrus document called a "libellus", which they were required to present when either stopped by the Roman police or attempting to engage in commerce in the Roman marketplace, increasing the difficulty of "buying or selling" without this mark. This is the

essence of Scripture’s warnings to the early Christians against taking upon themselves the "mark of the beast".

I can not seem to find the verses in Scripture wherein Paul say not to keep Torah. Where Paul out right rejected circumcision. Did he not tell the circumcision Torah terrorists that Moses is read in the synagogue every sabbath? YES he did. Therefore the new converts would learn the instructions over time and it will be the circumcision of their hearts that will bring them into obedience as they learn.

What part of Messiah saying that his doctrine is not his but the doctrine of the One that sent him? What part of there was no other instruction book than Torah to read and teach from don't you understand? What part of YHVH saying He never changes is so hard to understand? Are traditions of man so important that they now supersede the Word of YHVH?

What man can or can't see of the supernatural is granted by God. The Wedding day of the Lamb to His people, His bride the church is referred in Apocalypse 19:7 7Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

this is after, as we have read in Dan 12:7, Rev 11:17-18 how God's rage against those who did not follow His old covenant is wrought.

the entire book of revelation talks of the end of Jerusalem -- refer to NoDRdee's post

Revelation chapter 11. The chapter begins with John being told to measure the temple (v. 1) and this temple is in “”the holy city”” (v.2). These are clear references to Jerusalem. This also helps in dating the book before the destruction of AD 70, when the temple was destroyed. Imagine John being told to measure something which his 1st century readers all understood was no longer in existence!
,bR>Chapter 11 continues with the story of the two witnesses of God, and their deaths at the hand of the beast, after which John records, “”And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which is mystically called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified”” (v. 8). First, in both Deuteronomy (32:28-33) and in Isaiah (1:10), God refers to the Jewish people, and Jerusalem in particular, as Sodom, and Ezekiel 23 links Israel to her harlotries in Egypt. So, there is precedent for John’s use of these names to describe what had once been the city of God. But if there is any doubt where this evil takes place, John clears it up with his reference to the city “”where also their Lord was crucified.”” Jesus was not crucified in Rome, or in Berlin, or in Moscow, or in Washington, D.C. Our Lord was crucified in Jerusalem, and this is the city God has prepared for destruction in the book of Revelation

Christ is in heaven NOW, ruling NOW.

Gensis 4:7 “If you do well, is there not acceptance? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should master it.” Footnote: 1 Sin (transgression of the law) was already then known, as we also read in 39:9 “... And how shall I do this great evil and sin against Elohim?”

The carnal mind does not master over sin. It is YHVH working through the circumcised heart who is the Master.

Dt 10:16 Therefore circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer

Dt 30:6 And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live

Jer 4:4 Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, And take away the foreskins of your hearts

Circumcision of the heart is not a new 1st century doctrine, it the doctrine of “OLD” that still stands to this day and never changes as YHVH changes “NOT”. He gave us the perfect Torah of Liberty and only a circumcised heart is able to overcome sin through the work of YHVH that extends from the heart. In Yah’s eyes, there are no Jews or gentiles, there is only the children of YHVH and the children of hasatan. His house rules or those of hasatan. Take your pick because YHVH doesn't force himself on anyone, he waits for them to come to Him.

Also I take notice the doctrine of Christendom that teaches all children are born sinful. The carnal mind is sinful but the heart is not born that way. That is why Messiah said in Mt 19:14 But Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”

We lost an infant in 1987 to SIDS, so what the doctrine of Christendom says is that infant daughter who had no discernment as to right and wrong died a sinner. How cruel and how unbiblical. It is not infants and young children who need to be baptized from sin, it is as the bible teaches, those whose carnal minds are learned to know the difference and to understand what it means to repent who are to be cleansed.

Where Paul out right rejected circumcision

Now do read the Bible -- Galatians 5:2-3 2Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
3For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

and 1 Cor 7:18 18Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

Please do read the Bible and realise that your statement Paul were Jewish who followed Messiah in the keeping and teaching of Torah is wrong -- he on the matter of circumcision taught against the Torah.

So do you not read or teach from any of the New Testament books

ABSOLUTELY! I study the 1st century writings along with the Torah and the Prophets every week. They are inseparable in the eyes of YHVH. In His eye they are but one book, Genesis to Revelation, no new, no old, all current and of great relevance. Matthew to Revelation is the testimony of Messiah and Genesis to Malachi contains the doctrine and the prophesy of a coming Messiah that would redeem the house of Israel and graft the 2 broken branches back into the one “Tree of Life”, the “One House of YHVH”.

Messiah told us that “The testimony of Messiah is the Spirit of prophesy”. Well, if one wants to really know him and understand his words then one must look to where that prophesy/witness/testimony began and then start from there, not in the back of the book. The prophesy/witness/testimony begins in Genesis 1:1 with the Alef-Tav(Alpha-Omega) and continues throughout. The only problem is that the Alef-Tav was never translated so we would know where Messiah appears as the spoken and written “Word” in Torah and the Prophets. I also find it interesting that so much of what is said int he 1st century writings is nothing but quotes from the Torah and Prophets. Sure there are obvious places where Messiah and the apostles tell us who they are quoting from, but there are too numerous to mention places where that fact has been kept concealed. That is concealed to ones who do not study the way YHVH instructs us to study.

This week's 1 century study brings us to the book of Matthew where once again, the hidden/untranslated Alef-Tav appears a a messenger of YHVH in the Torah portion of the study. As I said, the sections of the bible are inseparable and they are but one complete book and if one wishes to understand the later part of the book and who the players are, then one must begin “in the beginning” where it all began while also studying from HIS perspective and HIS language. Zeph 3:9 "For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the YHVH, to serve him with one consent."

Paul is not saying anything new, justification is not by works but it is works that bring the blessing of the covenant. That is the problem with extrapolating(taking out of context) verses and trying to give meaning to them regardless of the contet that the letter was written in. These are letters, they are not books as English tells us they are. One doesn't open a letter and begin reading in towards the end and in small bits in order to understand the context in which the letter was written. The letter to the Galatians was written to the dispersed house of Israel, not to pagan gentiles("goy"). Galatians was written to those who knew they were out of covenant and had been kept from returning due to the 18 Edicts of the house of Shammai who was in control of the temple at that time.

John 11:49 And one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, 50 nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation(Judah), 52 and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad

James(Jacob) 1:1 James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings

Eph 2:11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles(”goy”) in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens(”ger”= estranged) from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers(”goy”) from the covenants of promise ... 19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers(”goy”) and foreigners(”goy”), but fellow citizens(”ger”) with the saints and members of the household of God

Mt 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’

Mt 15:24 But He answered and said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

John 7:35 Then the Jews said among themselves, “Where does He intend to go that we shall not find Him? Does He intend to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks and teach the Greeks?

1 Peter:1 To the “pilgrims of the Dispersion”(”ger”) in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 elect(”bachiyr”=chosen like Moses) according to the foreknowledge of God the Father

Perhaps you misread my post, or I just wasn't clear. I was making the same point you are... that man's ordinances and definition of perfection is not the same as the Creator's, for the reasons I gave. Being perfect "in the eye's of God" - as this perfection is defined by men - is not the same as being perfect in the eyes of God.

David's heart was perfect in the eye's of God, because David pursued righteousness with all of his heart. He walked with God. David was not exactly perfect from man's perspective, though, because of some serious missteps. I mean, look at this particular "outrage":

2 Sam 6.16 And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.