Revelation 19- A major Key to understanding Revelations

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Revelation 13:18 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.

John warns us that to solve this puzzle takes shrewdness and cleverness! The Roman Emperor we know as Nero Caesar had two common spelling for his name in the first century. One form was Nero Kesar but the Hebrew spelling is Neron Kesar. This is important because some ancient MSS (handwritten manuscripts) instead of using the number 666 have the number 616. If you add up the letter values in Hebrew (that's why it takes shrewdness-most people did not know Hebrew) Neron Caesar (Neron Kaisar) adds up to 666. Neron Kaisar = Nrwn Q(K)sr in Hebrew which used no vowels, was the linguistically correct Hebrew form and is found in the Jewish Talmud, in the writings of the community at Qumran where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, and other rabbinical writings. No Jew would ever have thought of Nero except as rsq nwrn (Hebrew read left to right). But Nero Caesar (rsq nwr), the other spelling (alternate spellings were very common), adds up to 616, which is exactly the variant reading in a few New Testament Revelation manuscripts for the number of the Beast. Nero
Nero Caesar =
Nrwn Qsr = נַרינַ קֹםר

Nrwn
= 50+200+6+50 = 306

Qsr
= 100+60+200 = 360

306+360 = 666




ם = S = 60

ר = R = 200

קֹ = Q = 100


נַ = N = 50

י = W = 6
Factor in mat 24
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
There have been events greater than ad 70 already.
So no, historical model in no way fits.


Also, you would need the flying scorpions to be history, and hailstones of fire to be history.
As well as the world wide mark in the foreheads

Neither have Ever happened.
It is all future
 
I don't know what AOD is, there are many anti-Christs, and the Jews are the people of Jesus, and the Jews destroyed the Temple. If you read Josephus, and believe him, you will understand that the Jews were responsible for the destruction of the Temple. Even the translators of the KJV believed the Prince in Daniel 9:26 was Jesus.
from google:

The Roman Forces: The Roman army was led by the general Titus, who was the son of the Roman Emperor Vespasian. [1]
  • The Context: The destruction happened during the Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE), which was the decisive battle of the First Jewish Revolt (66–73 CE) against Roman rule. [1]
  • The Action: While the Jewish rebels fiercely defended the city and the temple complex, it was the Roman troops who breached the defenses, set the temple on fire, and completely razed both the building and the city. [1]
 
The Nero‑gematria argument collapses the text’s own guardrails, because John never tells you to translate the name into Hebrew, never tells you to use gematria, never tells you to pick a political figure, never tells you to switch alphabets, and never ties the number to Rome — he simply says “it is the number of a man” (Rev 13:18), meaning the number identifies a man, not that the man must be Nero; and the NT never uses gematria to identify anyone, never models gematria as a prophetic method, never instructs the church to decode names by letter‑values, and never treats variant spellings as prophetic clues, so the entire Nero‑616/666 construction is an external linguistic puzzle imported into the text, not drawn from the text.

Lack of evidence becomes proof? Do you have an answer for what the number of a man means?
 
Lack of evidence becomes proof? Do you have an answer for what the number of a man means?
“lack of evidence becomes proof” is exactly what John does not do — he tells you plainly what the number is: “it is the number of a man” (Rev 13:18), meaning the number identifies a man, not that the man must be guessed by historical reconstruction, gematria, or alphabet‑switching; and the only thing the text itself defines is that the number is his number, not a code system, not a dynasty, not a political era.
In Scripture, a “number of a man” is simply a numerical identifier tied to a person — like the census counts in Numbers, the tribal tallies, or the symbolic “six” that marks human incompleteness — and Revelation uses it the same way: the final beast‑figure will have a number that matches him when he appears, and the saints will recognize it because the text says “let him that hath understanding count the number” (Rev 13:18), meaning the understanding comes at the time of fulfillment, not by retrofitting ancient emperors.
So the answer is biblical and simple: the number is the identifier_of_the_final_man, not a puzzle to solve by looking backward.
 
Factor in mat 24
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
There have been events greater than ad 70 already.
So no, historical model in no way fits.


Also, you would need the flying scorpions to be history, and hailstones of fire to be history.
As well as the world wide mark in the foreheads

Neither have Ever happened.
It is all future

What does nbsp stand for?

You obviously haven't read Josephus. You are letting your own eschatology interpret scripture. What event for the Jew could be worse than eating your own child?
 
“lack of evidence becomes proof” is exactly what John does not do — he tells you plainly what the number is: “it is the number of a man” (Rev 13:18), meaning the number identifies a man, not that the man must be guessed by historical reconstruction, gematria, or alphabet‑switching; and the only thing the text itself defines is that the number is his number, not a code system, not a dynasty, not a political era.
In Scripture, a “number of a man” is simply a numerical identifier tied to a person — like the census counts in Numbers, the tribal tallies, or the symbolic “six” that marks human incompleteness — and Revelation uses it the same way: the final beast‑figure will have a number that matches him when he appears, and the saints will recognize it because the text says “let him that hath understanding count the number” (Rev 13:18), meaning the understanding comes at the time of fulfillment, not by retrofitting ancient emperors.
So the answer is biblical and simple: the number is the identifier_of_the_final_man, not a puzzle to solve by looking backward.

Are you saying gematria didn't exist and wasn't used by the Jews?
 
What does nbsp stand for?

You obviously haven't read Josephus. You are letting your own eschatology interpret scripture. What event for the Jew could be worse than eating your own child?
“nbsp” is not a Bible version — it’s just a formatting artifact meaning non‑breaking space, the same invisible spacing character used in HTML. It shows up when a digital text is copied or exported and the software inserts   to keep words from splitting. It has zero connection to translation, manuscript tradition, or any biblical wording.
 
Are you saying gematria didn't exist and wasn't used by the Jews?
No — I’m saying Scripture never uses gematria to identify anyone, even though Jews historically knew it and used it in other contexts.
 
“nbsp” is not a Bible version — it’s just a formatting artifact meaning non‑breaking space, the same invisible spacing character used in HTML. It shows up when a digital text is copied or exported and the software inserts   to keep words from splitting. It has zero connection to translation, manuscript tradition, or any biblical wording.
Thank you, there is a lot I don't know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OMC
from google:

The Roman Forces: The Roman army was led by the general Titus, who was the son of the Roman Emperor Vespasian. [1]
  • The Context: The destruction happened during the Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE), which was the decisive battle of the First Jewish Revolt (66–73 CE) against Roman rule. [1]
  • The Action: While the Jewish rebels fiercely defended the city and the temple complex, it was the Roman troops who breached the defenses, set the temple on fire, and completely razed both the building and the city. [1]
Titus was a general under orders from Caesar Nero, and it was the Jews who first set fires in the Temple.
 
In other words you have nothing to back up your racist claim that the Jews destroyed their own temple.

If you did you'd post your proof but you don't so you didn't.
I am currently looking in to that claim. Apparently when the Romans sacked Jerusalem and the temple, the Jewish resistance that was in the temple, Set fire to it so that the Romans could not take any spoils.
I haven't gotten to the bottom of it yet. But appears that it is perverted that the Jews set fire to the temple , with some kind of wicked anti Jewish motive.
 
Nothing more than speculation

Wars of the Jews Josephus Book 6

CHAPTER 3.

CONCERNING A STRATAGEM THAT WAS DEVISED BY THE JEWS, BY WHICH THEY BURNT MANY OF THE ROMANS; WITH ANOTHER DESCRIPTION OF THE TERRIBLE FAMINE THAT WAS IN THE CITY.


1. BUT now the seditious that were in the temple did every day openly endeavor to beat off the soldiers that were upon the banks, and on the twenty-seventh day of the forenamed month [Panemus or Tamuz] contrived such a stratagem as this: They filled that part of the western cloister (14) which was between the beams, and the roof under them, with dry materials, as also with bitumen and pitch, and then retired from that place, as though they were tired with the pains they had taken; at which procedure of theirs, many of the most inconsiderate among the Romans, who were carried away with violent passions, followed hard after them as they were retiring, and applied ladders to the cloister, and got up to it suddenly; but the prudent part of them, when they understood this unaccountable retreat of the Jews, stood still where they were before. However, the cloister was full of those that were gone up the ladders; at which time the Jews set it all on fire; and as the flame burst out every where on the sudden, the Romans that were out of the danger were seized with a very great consternation, as were those that were in the midst of the danger in the utmost distress.-----

2--------But the next day the Romans burnt down the northern cloister entirely, as far as the east cloister, whose common angle joined to the valley that was called Cedron, and was built over it; on which account the depth was frightful. And this was the state of the temple at that time.

5. This sad instance was quickly told to the Romans, some of whom could not believe it, and others pitied the distress which the Jews were under; but there were many of them who were hereby induced to a more bitter hatred than ordinary against our nation. But for Caesar, he excused himself before God as to this matter, and said that he had proposed peace and liberty to the Jews, as well as an oblivion of all their former insolent practices; but that they, instead of concord, had chosen sedition; instead of peace, war; and before satiety and abundance, a famine. That they had begun with their own hands to burn down that temple which we have preserved hitherto; and that therefore they deserved to eat such food as this was. That, however, this horrid action of eating an own child ought to be covered with the overthrow of their very country itself, and men ought not to leave such a city upon the habitable earth to be seen by the sun, wherein mothers are thus fed, although such food be fitter for the fathers than for the mothers to eat of, since it is they that continue still in a state of war against us, after they have undergone such miseries as these. And at the same time that he said this, he reflected on the desperate condition these men must be in; nor could he expect that such men could be recovered to sobriety of mind, after they had endured those very sufferings, for the avoiding whereof it only was probable they might have repented.
 
In other words you have nothing to back up your racist claim that the Jews destroyed their own temple.

If you did you'd post your proof but you don't so you didn't.

Book 6 chapter 4

1. -----But when Titus perceived that his endeavors to spare a foreign temple turned to the damage of his soldiers, and then be killed, he gave order to set the gates on fire.

2. In the mean time, there deserted to him Ananus, who came from Emmaus, the most bloody of all Simon's guards, and Archelaus, the son of Magadatus, they hoping to be still forgiven, because they left the Jews at a time when they were the conquerors. Titus objected this to these men, as a cunning trick of theirs; and as he had been informed of their other barbarities towards the Jews, he was going in all haste to have them both slain. He told them that they were only driven to this desertion because of the utmost distress they were in, and did not come away of their own good disposition; and that those did not deserve to be preserved, by whom their own city was already set on fire, out of which fire they now hurried themselves away.

3. But then, on the next day, Titus commanded part of his army to quench the fire-----.

------- Titus proposed to these that they should give him their advice what should be done about the holy house. Now some of these thought it would be the best way to act according to the rules of war, [and demolish it,] because the Jews would never leave off rebelling while that house was standing; at which house it was that they used to get all together. Others of them were of opinion, that in case the Jews would leave it, and none of them would lay their arms up in it, he might save it; but that in case they got upon it, and fought any more, he might burn it; because it must then be looked upon not as a holy house, but as a citadel; and that the impiety of burning it would then belong to those that forced this to be done, and not to them. But Titus said, that "although the Jews should get upon that holy house, and fight us thence, yet ought we not to revenge ourselves on things that are inanimate, instead of the men themselves;" and that he was not in any case for burning down so vast a work as that was, because this would be a mischief to the Romans themselves, as it would be an ornament to their government while it continued. So Fronto, and Alexander, and Cerealis grew bold upon that declaration, and agreed to the opinion of Titus. Then was this assembly dissolved, when Titus had given orders to the commanders that the rest of their forces should lie still; but that they should make use of such as were most courageous in this attack. So he commanded that the chosen men that were taken out of the cohorts should make their way through the ruins, and quench the fire.
 
Wars of the Jews Josephus Book 6

That's not the Word of God. Prove it from scripture. If scripture does not speak to it then the Lord did not see it fit to put it in His Word because it's a non issue to us now in the New Covenant.

Meaning, a lot of folks are wasting a lot of time thinking about things the Lord didn't speak on which makes those topics irrelevant.

That's another trick of the devil is to get people to focus on irrelevant things so they don't spend their time getting to know the Lord better and to be walking with Him.
 
That's not the Word of God. Prove it from scripture. If scripture does not speak to it then the Lord did not see it fit to put it in His Word because it's a non issue to us now in the New Covenant.

Meaning, a lot of folks are wasting a lot of time thinking about things the Lord didn't speak on which makes those topics irrelevant.

That's another trick of the devil is to get people to focus on irrelevant things so they don't spend their time getting to know the Lord better and to be walking with Him.

Jhn 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
 
Book 6 chapter 4

1. -----But when Titus perceived that his endeavors to spare a foreign temple turned to the damage of his soldiers, and then be killed, he gave order to set the gates on fire.

2. In the mean time, there deserted to him Ananus, who came from Emmaus, the most bloody of all Simon's guards, and Archelaus, the son of Magadatus, they hoping to be still forgiven, because they left the Jews at a time when they were the conquerors. Titus objected this to these men, as a cunning trick of theirs; and as he had been informed of their other barbarities towards the Jews, he was going in all haste to have them both slain. He told them that they were only driven to this desertion because of the utmost distress they were in, and did not come away of their own good disposition; and that those did not deserve to be preserved, by whom their own city was already set on fire, out of which fire they now hurried themselves away.

3. But then, on the next day, Titus commanded part of his army to quench the fire
-----.


------- Titus proposed to these that they should give him their advice what should be done about the holy house. Now some of these thought it would be the best way to act according to the rules of war, [and demolish it,] because the Jews would never leave off rebelling while that house was standing; at which house it was that they used to get all together. Others of them were of opinion, that in case the Jews would leave it, and none of them would lay their arms up in it, he might save it; but that in case they got upon it, and fought any more, he might burn it; because it must then be looked upon not as a holy house, but as a citadel; and that the impiety of burning it would then belong to those that forced this to be done, and not to them. But Titus said, that "although the Jews should get upon that holy house, and fight us thence, yet ought we not to revenge ourselves on things that are inanimate, instead of the men themselves;" and that he was not in any case for burning down so vast a work as that was, because this would be a mischief to the Romans themselves, as it would be an ornament to their government while it continued. So Fronto, and Alexander, and Cerealis grew bold upon that declaration, and agreed to the opinion of Titus. Then was this assembly dissolved, when Titus had given orders to the commanders that the rest of their forces should lie still; but that they should make use of such as were most courageous in this attack. So he commanded that the chosen men that were taken out of the cohorts should make their way through the ruins, and quench the fire.
Feom google:
"Apologetic Biases:
As a Jewish aristocrat writing under the patronage of the Roman imperial Flavian dynasty (Titus and Vespasian), his narratives are often shaped to defend his own actions during the First Jewish-Roman War and cast his Roman patrons in a favorable light."

Some of what you are quoting as fact, is most likely Baloney.
Josephus overly casts the Roman army as so noble.
Most likely the romans burned it all up.
Then had Josephus under duress to make the romans look like nobelmen.
That josephus account of events looks so fake.