How 666 can read "Usama" or be a ref. to st. Paul; backwards engineering the Apocalypse

As some have probably noticed, I've been researching the Number of the Beast lately, and quite a few things have surfaced in the process. Like....

==> If you write 666 according to the Mispar Gadol in Hebrew, you get Mem Final (600), Samek (60) and Vav (6), but since the Mem is final it marks the end of the word, so it's natural to read the numbers in the other direction, lowest number first, as in 6, 60 and 600: Vav, Samek, Mem (sofit or final) or Heb. וסם which reads USaMa. As in Usama bin Laden.

However, the use of sofit letters (like Mem final) was only used a brief period and was soon abandoned:

en.wikipedia.org...

The Hebrew numeric system operates on the additive principle in which the numeric values of the letters are added together to form the total. For example, 177 is represented as קעז which corresponds to 100 + 70 + 7 = 177.

Mathematically, this type of system requires 27 letters (1-9, 10-90, 100-900). In practice the last letter, tav (which has the value 400) is used in combination with itself and/or other letters from kof (100) onwards, to generate numbers from 500 and above. Alternatively, the 22-letter Hebrew numeral set is sometimes extended to 27 by using 5 sofit (final) forms of the Hebrew letters.[2]

[2] According to Gandz (p. 96), cited above, this use of the sofit letters was not widely accepted and soon abandoned.

So by using this more widely accepted system of using pairs of letters for the higher numbers, we get:

==>Tav-Resh (תר or 600) -- Samek (ס or 60) or Yod (י or 10) -- Vav (ו or 6)

==> Heb. תריו «TheRIoU» (616) which shows Gr. gen. θηρίου (Beast) transliterated into Hebrew or written with Hebrew letters.

==> Heb. תרסו «TaRSU» (666) is Heb. translitteration for Gr. gen. Ταρσου «Tarsou» 'of Tarsus'. Gen. of Gr. Ταρσός «Tarsus» the town where Saul Paulus was born.

the writing in the above picture is Hebrew?

OR?

a reply to: Utnapisjtim
You seem to have a strange obsession with the number of the beast.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Paleo-Hebrew didn't have a final form of any letter. Mem Final is Masoretic Hebrew.

I guess this is all assuming religion and the number of the beast are real to begin with?

a reply to: Sovan

No, actually it is Latin from Rev. 13:18 as it is shown in Minuscule GA 620, a 12th c. Greek/Latin Manuscript. Picture is just for illustration purposes. Sadly. Had it been a Hebrew manuscript of Revelation it would be a sensation greater than we could imagine. All these books were destroyed by the Romans. Earliest Tanakh is 1000 years old. Everything written in Hebrew at some point was sought up and destroyed by the Romans and the early Imperial Church. They would typically kill the owner and burn his corpse together with the books.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Paleo-Hebrew didn't have a final form of any letter. Mem Final is Masoretic Hebrew.

Thanks for clearing that out. Do you have a source for that? Only reference I found was to Gandz who said the sofit letters were used at some point as a way to write the last five decads (500-900) but soon abandoned.

==> What is extremely interesting here is that 616 then reads out TeRIoV which a transliteration of Gr. «Theriou» genitive of Therion and reads 'of the Beast' in Greek. This can hardly be a coincidence.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
I guess this is all assuming religion and the number of the beast are real to begin with?

No, not really. To me, we are talking about ancient texts and scriptural (in-) accuracy mostly. In this case trying to reconstruct a snippet of the Book of Revelation from Greek back to Hebrew. The original Hebrew was supposedly too much to handle for the establishments of both Greeks, Romans, Egyptians and Jews alike, so all traces of these mostly Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts are lost, at best we have a few charred remains of tiny fragments. Same goes for 616 vs. 666 in the remaining Greek NT corpus. The two most important pieces of evidence we have of Gr. 616 is a wee 3rd c. fragment severely damaged by fire, and an incomplete Alexandrian style NT MS called the Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus written on fine vellum sometime during the 4th century, but whitewashed (read: destroyed) at some point during the Middle Ages and recycled (hence the name re-scripted) to contain some theological treatises attested to one Ephraem (hence the name again). However, modern technology reveals the once beautiful Greek one-column uncial text underneath the re-scripted Ephraemi text.

Call it backward engineering.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Utnapisjtim
You seem to have a strange obsession with the number of the beast.

It's called research, and when you research a subject thoroughly, you stick to that subject for quite some time. In this case Revelation 13:18 and the name/number of the beast. Thus far I've found that:

1. Most likely Revelation was originally written in Hebrew sometime between 61 AD and 65 AD, most likely it had 616 where 666 is today
   
2. Number/name of the Beast was most likely intended to serve midrash teachings on organised forgery and editing and state censorship, as well as how valuable information gets lost in translation when translating a text from one language to another
   
3. In Hebrew 616 is written ת''ריו, voiced you get «TheRIoU», which sounds just like Gr. θηρίου lit. 'of the Beast'
   
4. Nearly all trace of religious documents and/or anything written in Hebrew from the first millennium AD is lost thanks to Rome's intense pogroms and timeless efforts to persecute anyone and anything vaguely critical to Roman authority
   
5. The early Graeco-Roman Church and the Jewish religious elite were just as bad, persecuting «heretics» and destroying any unauthorised manuscripts they might've found in their possessions
   
6. In the earliest days, even the translated and edited Greek manuscripts containing Revelation must have had a short life expectancy. «All» (hardly any Revelation MS older than 10th c. has survived) of the earliest evidence show crude, hastily written and highly compressed and encrypted shorthand copies of copies' copies
   
7. In the earliest Greek translations of Revelation the number/name of the beast was most likely written ΧΙϚ (616) lit. «Ch-ist» in an attempt at translating Heb. name/number ת''ריו correctly
   
8. Early on, more or less official Greek translations of Revelation were most likely edited to read ΧΞϚ (666) instead of ΧΙϚ (616), which was probably done by adding three horisontal streaks to change the middle Iota into a Corinthian Xi.
   
9. 616 vs. 666 was well known to early commenters, like Irenaeus who already by the 2nd century held 616 as inferior compared to 666
   
10. The Book with 7 Seals is most likely the original Revelation Manuscript, written in Hebrew, most likely stored in the Hagia Sophia in modern Istanbul, Turkey.
    

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Gematria is not a Biblical tradition. Maybe in the Kabalah, Zohar, or Talmud it is, but the only verse that vaguely resembles gematria is in Revelation, and its misunderstood. The name of the Beast is Adonikam, who had 666 descendants. The number of his name is the number of Adonikam's house. That isn't to say that the Adonikam of Ezra is the Beast, but that the Beast will use his name. It's a riddle, not gematira.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Paleo-Hebrew didn't have a final form of any letter. Mem Final is Masoretic Hebrew.

Thanks for clearing that out. Do you have a source for that? Only reference I found was to Gandz who said the sofit letters were used at some point as a way to write the last five decadshundreds (500-900) but soon abandoned.

...too late to edit. Edited and colour tagged

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Adonikam literally means "My Lord has Risen".

Paul preached that Jesus had risen from the dead. Paul proclaimed " My Lord has Risen" through his epistles, Paul used Jesus' name to spread his doctrine.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Indeed, but Apollyon and the Anti-christ both share the symbol of the Beast that Rises from the Abyss. Both OT and NT tell us that the Beast will stand in the temple proclaiming to be God....the god that is risen from the Abyss who had the fatal head wound and was healed, Adonikam.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Sounds like Jesus to me. Apparently Jesus went into "the abyss" after he died to preach to those in prison. He then rose from the abyss.

The Jesus that the church teaches is the beast of Revelation.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

There are two bloodlines: the Messianic from the woman, and the anti-messianic bloodline from Satan. This is why both Satan and Apollyon are both identified with the dragon in Revelation 12 and 13...they are father and son, just as both God the Father and Son are identified as YHWH.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. 

So there is enmity between the two bloodlines. One will try to replace the other. Christ vs Antichrist.

This is why Adonikam the Destroyer (Apollyon) looks so similar to Jesus the Savior (Christos). One is the true Messiah and the other is an impostor.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Also take careful notice in the names of these contending figures.

Jesus' Hebrew name was Yahoshua, meaning YHWH is our salvation.

The name Adonikam, as you astutely noticed, means god is risen.

It is true that Jesus died, went to the Abyss and rose three days later, but why? To defeat sin. Jesus rose for our salvation, but Adonikam will rise to decieve and destroy.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

That's what they have told you, but what has been happening to our planet since Jesus died? People have been deceived and the planet has been destroyed. Jesus is the beast who had a fatal wound (crucifixion) healed and who rose from the abyss after going down into hell. Adonikam is the one who proclaimed "My Lord has Risen", Adonikam is Paul, which is why 666 spells Tarsus in gematria as pointed out in the OP.

What does Tarsus stand for? "Dry up, parch" or "terrain", Jesus was the living water, Paul from Tarsus dried the living water and taught a worldly (terrain) doctrine instead of the spiritual one Jesus spoke of while alive.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Yes, the Jesus who spoke in the gospels, the one who taught love over sacrifice, is the true savior, he is within you. The Jesus that died for sins, the one that Paul preached, is the false Jesus, the beast whose wound was healed and rose from the abyss.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

That isn't what 'they' told me, its what I've discovered by letting the Bible interpret itself. Paul never went by the name Adonikam, he never issued a mark, he never stood in the temple proclaiming to be God.

You might impress the OP with your cut and paste theosophy, but it is not consistent with the Bible...as usual.

Jesus only indwells those who are washed with His blood. That was the sacrifice He made for us out of His love for His Father and us.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

No, Paul never went by the name Adonikam, but Jesus never went by the name Immanuel either.

Isaiah 66
3 But whoever sacrifices a bull is like one who kills a person, and whoever offers a lamb is like one who breaks a dog's neck; whoever makes a grain offering is like one who presents pig's blood, and whoever burns memorial incense is like one who worships an idol. They have chosen their own ways, and they delight in their abominations

Those who offer a lamb are offering an abomination according to God. Paul offered the theology of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb.

Revelation 17
5 The name written on her forehead was a mystery: babylon the great the mother of prostitutes and of the abominations of the earth.

The whore has a mystery written on her forehead and it is an abomination.

Ephesians 5
32 This is a profound mystery--but I am talking about Christ and the church.

Paul preaches a "profound mystery" about Christ and the church. His mystery is the mark on the forehead, it is the relationship between Christ and the church, a.k.a. the abomination of offering a sacrificial lamb.

The bible does not interpret itself, we've already discussed this. That's like telling a rock to describe itself. A book is no more alive than a rock. Only man can interpret the bible.

Maybe you weren't told by "them" but it's a bit ironic that what you have come to the conclusion of is what "they" teach everyone else as well.