THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST
by Salvatore Canto, Blog "MI-CHA-EL", May 18, 2014
I have always been intrigued by Revelation chapter 13, in which Saint John speaks of the two beasts, one of the sea, the Antichrist and the other of the Earth, the False Prophet. Especially those that are remarkable to me are the verses that go from 16 to 18, those that say:
"She made all, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, receive a mark on the right hand or on the forehead, and that no one could buy or sell, without having this mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number (number) of his name. Here is WISDOM! Let him who has INTELLIGENCE CALCULATE the number OF THE BEAST; he represents a man's name and that number is six hundred and sixty-six".
For some time now, I have been wondering how to interpret these words, especially those I have underlined (in capital letters). Clearly, we should know ancient Greek, which is why I hope that some expert will have the desire and patience to check to see if the hypotheses I make can somehow come close or not be totally incompatible with the meaning that emerges from the original text[which can be found in Annex I, or here].
The number of the beast? Yes, but to which of the two beasts is it referred?
I will start with the words "the number of the beast". What is he referring to? The Beast of the sea, who is the Antichrist or the Beast of the Earth, who is the false prophet? People have always thought that the "666" referred to the Antichrist, but in the text we speak of two Beasts and it is not clear to me whether this number can be attributed to the first or the second Beast. What if he was referring to the second Beast, that is, the false prophet? The text should be well analyzed and in Greek...
And the "Let him that has understanding calculate"?
First of all, if the "calculates" is a real verb, there is no doubt that the book of Revelation invites the reader, if he has "intelligence", to calculate it. And that should silence those who frown as soon as someone really tries to calculate that number, obviously from the name of some "suspect". The attempts made have always referred to the transformation of the letters of the name into numbers which were then added together. One of the easiest ways to do this is to match each letter to its place in the alphabetical list.
But several problems have arisen, two of the main ones being the following:
1. which language should be used? To Greek, the language in which the book of Revelation was written? to the language spoken by the'candidate'? to Latin, the official language of the Catholic Church? or to English, now the most widely spoken language in the world?
2. moreover, given that the average value of the position in an alphabet of 26 letters is about 13 [(1+26)/2=13.5], it obviously takes a lot of letters to reach the figure 666 ... so the surname is not enough, ... or else we have to invent more complicated calculations.
These two problems can be solved all at once...
Whether we are in the era of "artificial intelligence" or "computer", no one can deny it. And I wonder: could it not be that subtly, the words "intelligence" and "calculates" of the verse of Revelation, also called the Book of Revelation, could refer to our present "artificial intelligence" and our "computer" (which means "calculating machine")? Perhaps the prophetic book wants to tell us, (not without a touch of subtle but tragic and resigned irony?), that our time would be the one in which the number would be calculated and in which the False Prophet and the Antichrist would manifest themselves? And wouldn't this also suggest which "alphabet" to use for the calculation, i.e. an alphabet close to or born with the "computer"?
The ASCII code
On the Internet, some have already had the idea of using the ASCII code of computers for calculation.
The ASCII code consists of a table in which have been classified the symbols, numbers and letters to each of which corresponds a number in hexadecimal (number system in base 16, and not in base 10 as the decimal system - the one used in everyday life) so as to make the computer understand by providing this number the letter, number or symbol it designates. In practice, it is the translation into numbers, that the computer can understand, of our symbols, those used to communicate and form human language. Among other things, since it only considers letters, this code is independent of the language used. When this table was created, more or less at the beginning of the computer age (1961), each letter, number or symbol was placed in a list with an order established once and for all, so that each symbol corresponds to the (ordinal) number of its position in the list, forming a number written in decimal or hexadecimal. The table contains 128 symbols. The letters of the alphabet start from position 65, for the A, to which then corresponds the identification number, 65 in decimal (and'41' in hexadecimal). For example, the letter G is equivalent to the decimal number 71, just because it is on the table in position 71 Simple no?
[See Annex II]
I reproduce here for convenience the numerical decimal correspondences of the capital letters of the alphabet:
A = 65, B = 66, C = 67, D = 68, E = 69, F = 70, G = 71, H = 72, I = 73, J = 74, K = 75, L = 76, M = 77, N = 78, O = 79, P = 80, Q = 81, R = 82, S = 83, T = 84, U = 85 V = 86, P = 87 X = 88, Y = 89, Z = 90
Indeed, given that the letter numbers range from 65 to 90, the average is about 78 [(65+90)/2=77.5], and therefore 666 is easily accessible by adding the letters of a single name; in fact to "travel" around this result, since 666: 78 = 8,6[ndt: or if you want, 78 x 8,6=666, so the number of the eight or nine letter word formed with the "average letter" M or N is close to 666], so you need between 8 and 10 letters.
You can have fun calculating the number corresponding to names of possible candidates, chosen among public figures... for example OBAMA is too short, the total is 352 (O = 79, B = 66, A = 65, M = 77, A = 65), POUTINE idem, because it gives 400 (and HOLLAND... 583, SARZOZY 563)...
What about Bergoglio?
The idea comes spontaneously to calculate the number also for ecclesiastical public figures in the present or the past. What is the number that corresponds to Bergoglio? The name contains 9 letters and the calculation has already been done on the Network.
It is the discovery of this result that inspired me this article, because it is surprising.
The total amount, you can get it yourself, by taking your calculator:
(B) 66 + (E) 6 9 + (R) 82 + (G) 71 + (O) 79 + (G) + 71 (L) 76 + (I) + 73 (O) 79
How much is that? You're surprised too, aren't you?
At this stage, however, I would like to make a few necessary clarifications:
1. The result itself has no meaning, you have to take it with a twist, it could simply be a coincidence, because there are many words, combinations of 8, 9, 10 letters, that can give this total, so it can be just a singular (but surprising) coincidence;
No one can be sure that the method of calculation is the one described, it is only an algorithm hypothesis and nothing says that this is precisely what the Prophetic Book refers to: it would be reckless and presumptuous to say the opposite;
3. a person must be judged by the measures taken and the things he says, certainly not by the "translation" in number of his name;
4. for other characters too - (including Ratzinger, it is enough to make a small turn on the Network to notice it) - calculations were carried out and interpreted according to the taste of each one, claiming that they were the Antichrist or false prophets.
So we have to be very careful. But it is useless to deny it, those who claim that Bergoglio is, how to say... a problematic pope, after this discovery will have one more arrow to their bow...
- - -
(*) Additional details from Mi-cha-el
The calculation tells us that we must exclude both names of less than 8 letters, because they are too short to give 666, and those of more than 10 letters, because they are too long, giving a total greater than 666. Words with 8 letters give a result between 520 (= 65 x 8) and 720 (= 90 x 8), words with 9 letters a result between 585 (= 65 x 9) and 810 (= 90 x 9), and words with 10 between 650 and 900 (...).
I tried to use an Excel spreadsheet to calculate the "number" of the 199 cardinals (voters or not). Family names, I took them from the official Vatican website (names are written in capital letters for calculation). There were only 48 names of 8, 9, 10 letters and among them only BERGOGLIO and TURCOTTE gave as result 666 (thus, 2 cardinals out of 200, that is 1%).
Extrapolating (albeit with some caution, since I only considered a sample of 200 people), considering the random distribution of names, covering, among other things, all continents, we could say that, statistically, the probability that a name gives a result of 666 is about 1%...
- - -
... and my conclusion [of "Benoît-et-moi"] .:
This is undeniably disturbing, and those who shrug their shoulders lack curiosity, which is a redhibitory obstacle to the search for the truth.
Of an event that has a probability of 1%, one can say that it is "rare", or very unlikely..... but not impossible! After all, in the list of cardinals, they were two to realize it.
And then all the members of the Bergoglio family, and even all those who bear this name also have "666" as their number.
It becomes more interesting (and even more disturbing) if you "cross" the events. The total 666 alone may have no particular meaning (Revelation does not say that the number 666 characterizes only the Beast, but that it is that of the Beast). Crossed at the event that he belongs to the reigning pope he becomes much more extraordinary.
In reality, it's the crossing between a rather banal event (one arrives at a total of 666 by adding on the codes associated with the letters of a word: my readers only have to try to invent some with the ASCII table, it's very easy) and another clearly more exceptional one (the fact of being Pope: let's imagine that there were 265 popes in 2000 years!!) which makes the thing really very troubling....
An interesting exercise would be to take the list of Popes, under their patronymic ( fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_détaillée… ) and calculate their "number" (rather complicated exercise concerning the oldest Popes, whose names are not clear).
If I ever had the time, I would.
- - -
Annex I: Greek text
17. καὶ ἢ ἵνα μή τις δύνηται ἀγοράσαι εἰ ἢ πωλῆσαι εἰ μὴ ὁ ἔχων τὸ χάραγμα, τὸ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ αὐτοῦ.
18. ὧδε ἡ σοφία ἐστίν- ὁ ἔχων νοῦν ψηφισάτω τοῦ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τοῦ θηρίου, ἀριθμὸς γὰρ ἀνθρώπου ἐστίν- καὶ ὁ ἀριθμὸς αὐτοῦ ἑξακόσιοι ἑξήκοντα ἕξ ἕξ
Appendix II: The ASCII Table
Source : benoit-et-moi.fr/2014-II-1/actualites/666_2.html