Theistic definition of "coincidence."

St_Michael · March 9, 2018, 3:20am

From my Catholic book “Pope Fiction” - This demonstrates that the Popes name doesn’t add up to 666 in Latin.

Fiction 5

The pope is the beast spoken of in Revelation 13. Verse 1 says that he wears crowns and has “blasphemous names” written on his head. Verse 18 says that the numerical value of his name adds up to 666. The pope’s official title in Latin is Vicarius Filii Dei (Vicar Son of God). If you add that up using Roman numerals, you get 666. The pope’s tiara is emblazoned with this title, formed by diamonds and other jewels.boxes

I wasn’t very good at math in school, but even I can follow this argument and run the numbers well enough to show it’s bogus. (Besides, answering this question is apologetics at its most fun!) The charge that the pope is the beast of Revelation 13, because his title adds up to 666, is especially popular with Seventh-Day Adventists, but it’s also widely repeated in some Protestant circles.

Vicarius Filii Dei does have the mathematical value of 666 in Latin. Here’s how it works. Like many ancient languages, such as Greek and Hebrew, some Latin letters are also used for numbers: I = 1, V = 5, X = 10, L = 50, C = 100, D = 500 and M = 1000. The letter “u” is rendered as V and the letter “w,” which doesn’t exist in the Latin alphabet, would be rendered as VV. So this title would read in Latin as VICARIVS FILII DEI.

When calculating the value of a name or word, letters that don’t have a numerical value are ignored. For example, drop out the no-value letters in my name, PATRICK MADRID, and you come up with 2102 — 1 (i) + 100 © + 1000 (m) + 500 (d) + 1 (i) + 500 (d) = 2102. By the way, this is one reason why, as far as I know, no one has yet accused me of being in league with the anti-Christ. The numbers just don’t add up.

But in the case of VICARIVS FILII DEI, they do add up to 666. Isolate the numbers and this is what you get: 5 (v) + 1 (i) + 100 © + 1 (i) + 5 (V) + 1 (i) + 50 (L) + 1 (i) + 1 (i) + 500 (d) + 1 (i) = 666.

But there are problems with this. The first is that Vicarius Filii Dei, or “Vicar of the Son of God,” is not now, nor has it ever been, a title of the bishop of Rome. The second problem is that virtually no one, including many unsuspecting lay Catholics, knows that this papal “title” is a fabrication. To an untrained ear, it sounds enough like one of the pope’s real titles, Vicarius Christi (Vicar of Christ), to pass the test. Unfortunately for those who traffic in this particular piece of pope fiction, the real title, Vicarius Christi, adds up to only a measly 214, not the infernal 666. In fact, none of the pope’s official titles, such as Servus Servorum Dei (Servant of the Servants of God), Pontifex Maximus (Supreme Pontiff), or Successor Petri (Successor of Peter), will add up to 666. That’s why you never see any of them used by anti-Catholics.

If the person making this claim disputes these facts, ask him to furnish even one example of a papal decree, ecclesiastical letter, conciliar statement, or any other official Catholic document in which the pope calls himself or is referred to as the “Vicar of the Son of God.” He won’t be able to find one, because none exist. Vicarius Filii Dei has never been a title of the pope.

Michael · March 9, 2018, 3:20am

Certain Latin letters have numerical value (as do all Hebrew and Greek letters), and any name tranliterated into Latin (or Hebrew, or Greek) can be taken to have a numerical value.

So if a name adding up to 666 in Latin has nothing to do with Revelation 13:18, wouldn’t the fact that such a name adds up to that number be an extraneous circumstance, a coincidence, or a meaningless concurrence?

Take your pick, but wouldn’t it have to be a coincidence (in some since of the word) that the Latin version of Luther’s name added up to 666, if he wasn’t the anti-Christ?

And that Ronald Wilson Reagan (who I voted for) had six letters in each of his names (which, given our numbering system, could be taken to represent the one’s column, the tens column, and the hundreds column) if he wasn’t the anti-Christ?

Actually, it says a little more than that.

It says

biblehub.com/revelation/13-18.htm

I’m not sure what that means.

Maybe time will tell.

Acording to Saint Irenaeus, it reffers to “Latinos.”

For if there are many names found possessing this number, it will be asked which among them shall the coming man bear. It is not through a want of names containing the number of that name that I say this, but on account of the fear of God, and zeal for the truth: for the name Evanthas contains the required number, but I make no allegation regarding it. Then also Lateinos has the number six hundred and sixty-six; and it is a very probable [solution], this being the name of the last kingdom [of the four seen by Daniel]. For the LATINS are they who at present bear rule: I will not, however, make any boast over this [coincidence].Teitan too, the first syllable being written with the two Greek vowels e and i, among all the names which are found among us, is rather worthy of credit. For it has in itself the predicted number, and is composed of six letters, each syllable containing three letters; and [the word itself] is ancient, and removed from ordinary use; for among our kings we find none bearing this name Titan, nor have any of the idols which are worshipped in public among the Greeks and barbarians this appellation. Among many persons, too, this name is accounted divine, so that even the sun is termed Titan by those who do now possess [the rule].

(Saint Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, ch. 29).

And that could point to Nero, Domitian, Mussolini, or some future dictator of European descent.

Then, if their names add up to six hundred and sixty six in Latin, or Hebrew, or Greek it couldn’t be related to Revelation 13:18 as anything but an extraneous circumstance, conurrence, or “coincidence,” right?

But even if there were some other reason, the Revelation 13:18 concurrece would just be a “coincidence” (or extraneous circumstance), right?

Kinda irrelevant since the question here isn’t whether the Pope (or Luther) are anti-Christ, but whether the word “coincidence” can have any meaningful definition for a Theist.

I believe that it can.

Your co-religionists at “New Advant” used the word here.

But what if one of the pope’s titles did add up to 666? Would that coincidence prove the pope is the beast? Hardly. It would prove nothing because lots of names and titles add up to 666. By using a nifty little technique you can force a Seventh-Day Adventist to admit that the addition to 666 proves nothing, even when it’s a papal title that’s in question. Here’s how.

Have your son-in-law do the math, and he’ll be shocked to learn that the name of the woman who started Seventh-Day Adventism, Ellen Gould White, adds up to 666: Ellen=100, Gould=555, White=11. Ask him whether this “proves” that the foundress of his religion was the beast? If he says “No,” then the tallying of the name means nothing. If he says “Yes,” then what’s he doing belonging to a church founded by the beast? Either way his argument collapses. (Isn’t apologetics fun?)

newadvent.org/library/almanac_thisrock92.htm

But I thought you were arguing that it has no meaning for a Theist?

St_Michael · March 9, 2018, 3:20am

MIcheal read my post right before your last one from my book “Pope Fiction”. Even in Latin “Vicar of Christ” doesn’t add up to 666

Michael · March 9, 2018, 3:20am

No, but “vicar of the son of God” does add up to 666 in Latin, and I believe some popes have refered to themselves as such.

And the title was used in the Decretals of Constantine, which (forgery or not) was intrumental in strengthening papal claims in the West.

But all this is nothing more than a side issue here.

Are you saying that Luther, Ellen Gould White. and Ronald Wilson Reagan are anti-Christs because there’s a concurrence between the number 666, the beast of revelation, and their names?

And if not, this concurrence would be a extraneous circumstance (or “coincidence”) would it not?

St_Michael · March 9, 2018, 3:20am

Again from the holy teacher in my book “Pope Fiction”:

You said:

Again, 666 isn’t the only condition. The Beast is a man of exceeding cruelty, moral depravity, a persecutor of Christians, and demands to be worshipped as God along with many other things. That’s how he is identified. It fits Nero in 70 A.D. For His name also adds up to 666. Therefore, we can exclude these people as being the “Beast”. Their names add up to 666 for some other reason known only to God. Let’s turn to the good saint (Thomas Aquinas) once again:

There is a difference between universal and particular causes. A thing can escape the order of a particular cause; but not the order of a universal cause. For nothing escapes the order of a particular cause, except through the intervention and hindrance of some other particular cause; as, for instance, wood may be prevented from burning, by the action of water. Since then, all particular causes are included under the universal cause, it could not be that any effect should take place outside the range of that universal cause. So far then as an effect escapes the order of a particular cause, it is said to be casual or fortuitous in respect to that cause; but if we regard the universal cause, outside whose range no effect can happen, it is said to be foreseen. Thus, for instance, the meeting of two servants, although to them it appears a chance circumstance, has been fully foreseen by their master, who has purposely sent to meet at the one place, in such a way that the one knows not about the other.