Introduction

The most notorious number in the Bible occurs in Rev 13:18. In the NKJV this text reads as follows: “Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is a number of a man: His number is 666.”¹ Robert H. Mounce asserts that “No verse in Revelation has received more attention than this one with its cryptic reference to the number of the beast.”² But W. Gordon Campbell notes that the conundrum of the number of the beast, six hundred sixty-six,³ is “a puzzle that remains unresolved even after a long history of successive attempts at deciphering it.”⁴ Despite appearing to be but a benign puzzle, in 1994 Jürgen Roloff observed that “No other problem in Revelation has given rise to so many speculations as that of the meaning of this number.”⁵ Henry Barclay Swete decades earlier had laconically noted the fact that some interpretations of the number of the beast throughout history were “improbable” and “absurd,”⁶ and Desmond Ford is one who essentially agreed, starkly concluding that “Cataracts of nonsense have been written concerning the mystical number 666.”⁷

Since the time of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyon (died c. 202 CE), the first Christian with extant writings who attempted to interpret this number (Haer. 5.30.1), a seemingly unending plethora of solutions to the numeric conundrum has ensued, spanning the interpretive spectrum. Attempts to identify this number with various individuals have included identifying it with the Roman emperor Nero, the Roman Catholic pope, the Protestant reformer Martin Luther, the Islamic prophet Muhammad, king Louis XV of France, the Russian communist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, former president Ronald Wilson Reagan of the United States, former president Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union, and even Ellen White, one of the founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Unfortunately, in the contagious desire to provide a satisfactory solution to this numerical enigma, the exegetical basis for reaching such a solution has too often become secondary. It is not the purpose of this research paper to defend any specific interpretation or examine possible solutions to the interpretation of this number. Rather, the purpose of this study is to reexamine and further explore two key facets of the textual exegesis of Rev 13:18 that have been largely if not entirely absent from recent discussions concerning the meaning of the number within Seventh-day Adventism.

After summarizing key approaches to the interpretation of this mysterious number and outlining the significance of the number in Revelation, I will first survey how the earliest extant Greek manuscripts of Revelation visually represented the number of the beast, as well as what the most likely number is, since there are variants—some significant—to the number 666 in some Greek witnesses. Second, I will explore the use and meaning of the word yhfi,zw (“I count, calculate”) in biblical and extra- biblical literature. On the basis of this two-fold investigation, I will conclude the following: (1) that there is no textual basis or justification for focusing on the number six instead of the actual number represented in the text; (2) that it would have been impossible for John to have written or understood that the number of the beast was a “triple” of anything (e.g., a series of three sixes); (3) that all symbolic or theological meanings associated with either the numbers six or three are extraneous to the text and are probably more eisegetical than exegetical in nature; (4) that syntactical considerations do not insist or demand that the number of the beast symbolically or theologically refer to humanity as a whole or the number being a human number; and (5) that interpretation of the number of the beast makes the most sense from the standpoint of the Greek practice of psephy in referring to an individual human.

Key Approaches to Interpreting the Number of the Beast

Two basic approaches to the understanding this notorious number in the book of Revelation⁸ have dominated the interpretation of this verse.⁹ On the one hand, the most pervasive approach sees the number as the sum of a series of numbers, each of which is associated with a letter in Hebrew or Greek. Scholars call this technique gematria (typically with reference to Hebrew) and isopsephy or psephy (typically with reference to Greek).¹⁰ The most common interpretation here is one that concludes that the number refers to the Roman emperor Nero, where the Greek form of Nero’s Latin name is transliterated into Hebrew, and the numbers associated with those Hebrew letters add up to the sum of 666.¹¹

Despite its widespread acceptance, the Neronian interpretation of the number of the beast is only one of many of the “calculating” interpretations. In 1612 Andreas Helwig was apparently the first to conclude that the Latin letters in the title Vicarius Filii Dei (“Vicar of the Son of God”), used in association with the Roman Catholic bishop of Rome or pope, added up to six hundred sixty-six.¹² This title had first appeared in the 8th century in the forged Donation of Constantine, a document used to buttress the political claims of the pope from the 8th century into the 20th century.¹³ In relation to the Adventist movement and the emerging Seventh-day Adventist Church, discussions of the interpretation of Rev 13:18 indicate participants were cognizant of calculations via gematria,¹⁴ though J. M. Stephenson was one who objected to calculating the number via letters in 1853.¹⁵ The real turning point came in 1866 when Uriah Smith, editor of the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, wrote an article that supported the Vicarius Filii Dei interpretation and began its popularization among Seventh-day Adventists.¹⁶ He continued his support of it in his highly influential 1881 commentary on Daniel and Revelation, which was published in several editions and has been in print to this day.¹⁷ Since Seventh-day Adventists are Historicists in terms of apocalyptic interpretation,¹⁸ they have in essence subscribed to that interpretation first advocated within Seventh-day Adventism by Smith in 1866.¹⁹

Objections to the Vicarius Filii Dei interpretation within Seventh-day Adventism have arisen on occasion since Smith’s advocacy of it in the 19th century. The most notable was that of W. W. Prescott in the early part of the 20th century,²⁰ whose objections caused suspicions of heresy against him.²¹ After noting his objections and putting them aside for later study, a General Conference committee recommended “the interpretation should not be repeated.”²² But according to Gilbert M. Valentine, this conclusion was “apparently not widely known.”²³ Consequently, a stout presentation and defense of Smith’s Historicist approach to interpreting the number of the beast among Seventh-day Adventists has continued to the present.²⁴

On the other hand, the second major approach to interpreting this puzzling number focuses on or underscores the symbolic and/or theological meanings associated with the number 666 and its factor 6 (written thusly for visual recognition). Biblical exegetes outside the Seventh-day Adventist orbit originally advanced this approach to the interpretation of the beast’s number.²⁵ Here interpreters frequently throw doubt on, distance themselves away from, and even resist attempting numerical calculations,²⁶ while others oppose using any method that necessitates deciphering or decoding any kind of cryptogram in this verse.²⁷ Interpreters within this branch of interpretation often see 666 as having the triple repetition of the number 6.²⁸ Adherents of the symbolic interpretation of the number also typically see the number six as a code for imperfection or incompleteness or inadequacy of some sort,²⁹ typically related to it being one less than seven and thus never being able to reach that number’s perfection.³⁰ Alternatively, they sometimes view it as triply imperfect, never being able to reach the perfection of seven hundred seventy-seven, another number considered perfect.³¹ According to this interpretive trajectory, the repetition of the number six alludes to the creation story in which humans were created on the sixth day, and thus the number is seen as signifying humanity in general.³² Such symbolic interpretations, however, are complex and varied. Some suggest that since 666 constitutes a triple or threefold repetition of the number 6, the triplicate nature of the number constitutes a parody of the divine Trinity.³³ Others suggest that since 666 is a triangular number,³⁴ such a triangular number symbolizes opposition to God.³⁵

Since at least the 1970s, however, this second basic approach to interpreting the number six hundred sixty-six in Rev 13:18 has increased in prominence within Seventh-day Adventism.³⁶ While textual and theological issues have contributed to its increasing prominence within Adventism, it also appears to have developed in the thinking of some from a frustration and/or embarrassment over the historical and apologetic problems associated with the use and advocacy of the Latin Vicarius Filii Dei title.³⁷ By 1994 Carlos Olivares noted that the majority of the Seventh-day Adventist writers and scholars followed this particular approach to the interpretation of the number of the beast.³⁸

Following the lead of other interpreters, Seventh-day Adventist proponents of this approach to the interpretation of the number of the beast have also focused on the number 6, its apparently triple repetition in the number 666 (again, written for visual recognition here), and its symbolism and theological meaning (both for the numbers 6 and 666).³⁹ The reason for this, according to one commentator, is that John’s call to his audience “to calculate, using insight or wisdom, encourages us to look at the number six, scripturally and theologically, rather than mathematically or numerically.”⁴⁰ Mathematical calculations radically diminish or even disappear within such an approach.⁴¹ Thus, the number six is the representative number of humanity because humans were created on the sixth day and also because it is one less than the perfect number seven and thus represents imperfection.⁴² Moreover, the number 666, since it represents a triple failure to reach perfection as understood in the number seven, represents rebellion against God and a Satanic triad, triumvirate, or trinity of evil.⁴³

Significance of Revelation’s References to the Number of the Beast

Revelation 12 introduces John’s action-packed vision of the heavenly woman and the “great red dragon,” the latter further characterized as having seven heads, ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads (12:3). The dragon throws a third of the stars to the earth and threatens the heavenly woman figure who is about to give birth, waiting to devour her newborn son (12:3-4), but that fails when the child is snatched into heaven (12:5). The woman then escapes into the wilderness, where she is nourished and protected for 1,260 days (12:6; cf. the time frame of the “time, times, and half a time” in 12:14). John then sees the Michael and his angels engage in warfare against the dragon and his angels, and the dragon loses the battle and is thrown to the earth along with his angels (12:7-9). At this point John reveals that the dragon is none other than the ancient serpent, the Devil, and Satan (12:9). Realizing that he has been thrown to the earth, the dragon pursues the woman in the wilderness, attempting to sweep her away with a flood of water from his mouth (12:12-15). But the earth helps the woman by swallowing the watery flood, and the dragon then furiously goes off to attack the rest of the woman’s offspring who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus (12:16-17).

The visionary drama intensifies as Revelation 13 begins with the dragon now calling up his two allies: first, the beast from the sea (13:1-8), and then the beast from the land (13:11-18). The sea beast also has seven heads and ten horns, but instead of diadems on its heads it has them on its horns (13:1). The sea beast emerges from the sea with characteristics similar a lion, a bear, a leopard, and a monstrous beast—all creatures seen in vision by the prophet Daniel in Daniel 7:1-8, and the dragon then gives the sea beast his power, his throne, and great authority (13:2). The sea beast receives a mortal wound to one of its heads, but its deadly wound is healed and the whole earth follows this beast and worships it (13:3-4). It is this sea beast—not the land beast—that John describes as having a mark, a name, and a number (cf. 13:3, 11-14 and 15:2).⁴⁴ And that number is the cryptic six hundred and sixty- six.

While the 144,000 followers of God ultimately receive the seal of God on their foreheads as a sign of their loyalty to him (7:1-8), the followers of Satan, the dragon, receive the mark of the beast on their foreheads or on their right hands as a sign of their loyalty to this rebel against God (13:16). Since John implicitly describes the seal of God as being comprised of the name of the Lamb and the Lamb’s father in 14:1 since it is located on the foreheads of the 144,000 (cf. 7:1-8; 22:4), one would expect that the mark of the beast would be comprised of the name of the sea beast. John confirms this when he later speaks of those who worship the sea beast receiving the “mark of its name” (to. ca,ragma tou/ ovno,matoj auvtou/) in 14:11.

But John also notes that this name is associated with the number (o` avriqmo.j) of the monstrous sea beast who both blasphemes God and engages in warfare against God’s people for forty-two prophetic months (13:5-7); in other words, the number in some way represents the name and thus indicates the mark of the beast. John refers to this number five times in Revelation. First, he notes that no one is able to buy or sell except for “the one who has the mark, the name of the beast or the number of his name” (13:17: o` e;cwn to. ca,ragma to. o;noma tou/ qhri,ou h' to.n avriqmo.n tou/ ovno,matoj auvtou). Here the reference to the neuter accusative to. ca,ragma (“the mark”) is the direct object of the adjectival participle o` e;cwn (“the one who has”), while both the neuter accusative to. o;noma (“the name”) and the neuter accusative to.n avriqmo.n (“the number”) are in apposition to the earlier reference to the mark; this thus indicates that the mark is comprised of—or equivalent to—not only the name of the beast but also its number.<sup>45</sup> Second, John urges the one who has understanding to calculate the number of the beast (13:18a: _Wde h` sofi,a evsti,nÅ o` e;cwn nou/n yhfisa,tw to.n avriqmo.n tou/ qhri,ou). Third, the reason for making such a calculation is because the number is the number of a man or human (13:18b: avriqmo.j ga.r avnqrw,pou evsti,n). Fourth, this number is six hundred sixty-six (13:18c: kai. o` avriqmo.j auvtou/ e`xako,sioi e`xh,konta e[x). Finally, John later sees the ones who have overcome the beast, its image, and the number of its name standing on the heavenly sea of glass (15:2: Kai. ei=don w`j qa,lassan u`ali,nhn memigme,nhn puri. kai. tou.j nikw/ntaj evk tou/ qhri,ou kai. evk th/j eivko,noj auvtou/ kai. evk tou/ avriqmou/ tou/ ovno,matoj auvtou/ e`stw/taj evpi. th.n qa,lassan th.n u`ali,nhn e;contaj kiqa,raj tou/ qeou). While 13:17 indicates that both the name and the number are closely related to the mark, and while 14:11 indicates that the mark is closely associated with the name, it is this last reference to the number in 15:2 that indicates that the number is closely associated with the name.

The Textual Representation of the Number of the Beast

The number 666 is easily recognizable in the contemporary world that has any recognition of and/or appreciation for apocalyptic eschatology. Yet not all Greek manuscripts containing Rev 13:18 indicate that 666 is the number of the beast. What is the actual number of the beast? Furthermore, no matter what the number is, how do these ancient manuscripts visually represent the number? In English we can represent it either as a number written out (e.g., six hundred sixty-six) or as a numeric abbreviation of that written out number (e.g., 666). It is to these two questions that I now turn.

There are several Greek variants for the number of the beast in Rev 13:18, but only two need ultimately concern us. Most Greek manuscripts indicate that the number is six hundred sixty-six. A few significant ones, however, indicate that it is instead six hundred sixteen. The table below summarizes the information:

Table 1: Greek Textual Variants of the Number of the Beast⁴⁶

Variants 1-4 all identity the number of the beast as six hundred sixty-six. Although e`xh,konta and e[x are indeclinable numerical adjectives, e`xako,sioi (see also reading 5) is declinable (e`xako,siai, e`xako,sia), based on the gender of the word to which it supposedly refers (e`xako,sioi → avriqmo,j; e`xako,siai → ?; e`xako,sia → to. qhri,on), so the differences do not affect this study.⁴⁷

Ancient Greek at the time John wrote Revelation used successive letters of its twenty-four letter alphabet to represent numbers from 1 to 999—along with three more obsolete letters: ϛ (digamma, later known as stigma) to represent the number six, ϙ (qoppa) to represent the number 90, and ϡ (sampi) to represent the number 900.⁴⁸ Thus α represented the number 1, β represented the number 2, γ represented the number 3, and so forth. With this in mind, the number 45 would be represented by the abbreviation με (i.e., 40 [μ] + 5 [ε]). Thus, in Greek witnesses that contain the abbreviation cxϛ, the letters represent 600 [c] + 60 [x] + 6 [ϛ], or 666 (variant 4), while ciϛ is the abbreviation of 600 [c] + 10 [i] + 6 [ϛ], or 616 (variant 6, which is the numerical abbreviation of variant 5).

One can exclude the last two variants listed in the table above from further discussion, since they are attested by only one manuscript each. The current discussion boils down to a decision between the numbers 666 and 616. While most scholars and all modern translations clearly favor 666 because of its superior textual support,⁴⁹ the recent publication of î115 from Oxyrhynchus, containing Rev 13:18 with the numerical abbreviation 616 instead of 666 has refocused attention on this number.⁵⁰

It is important to note that the symbolic, theological understanding of the number of the beast potentially has ramifications for the recognition of the most original textual variant of this number. Renowned textual critic J. K. Elliott, for example, suggests that since the variant 666 is more “dramatic” than the variant 616 since it is a “threefold repetition of a number (6) that falls short of the perfect number, 7,” it could consequently be a “secondary improvement.”⁵¹ Note that his argumentation leads to the conclusion that 666 is perhaps not as original as 616 based on its purported theological symbolism.

Other recent voices also support the originality of 616 over 666 as the number of the beast. For example, David C. Parker, Professor of Digital Philology at the University of Birmingham in England and an influential textual critic, wrote an article in 2000 in which he indicated his preference for 666, but in a later footnote in the same article he indicated that he should have given more consideration to the variant 616.⁵² In a later blog entry in 2006 he underscored his revised preference, viewing 616 as a variant more ancient than 666.⁵³ Since 2011 Parker has been one of the six editors of future editions of the standard Greek New Testament.⁵⁴ Despite his support for the number 616, the consensus among textual critics today still clearly favors 666 as the number of the beast, but it is possible that that will change in the future.

Although we do not have John’s original version of Revelation, there are several reasons that favor the hypothesis that John wrote the numerical abbreviation cxϛ in 13:18 rather than e`xako,sioi e`xh,konta e[x.⁵⁵ First, the numerical abbreviation occurs in the most likely earliest extant Greek witness to a text of Revelation that includes 13:18, î47, dated between 200 and 300 CE (cf. the other numerical abbreviation, 616, found in î115 and dated between 250 and 350 CE).⁵⁶ Second, the majority of Greek manuscripts use the numerical abbreviation. Third, the simplicity of a numerical abbreviation fits more closely with the idea of a mark (ca,ragma [Rev 13:16, 17; 14:9, 11; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4]) being put on one’s right hand or forehead.⁵⁷

The implications arising from the visual representation of the number of the beast in Greek manuscripts are shattering to the interpretive conclusion that this number in 13:18 represents a series of three sixes. The number of the beast is not six repeated three times, but rather—and explicitly—six hundred sixty-six. But this is where translations of the number of the sea beast into Hindu-Arabic numerals (i.e., 666) have caused too many to read the text anachronistically: such numeric representations were neither known by nor even available for use to John, since they were not developed in India until around the early part of the 8th century CE. While the version of the numeral as written out in Greek longhand (i.e., e`xako,sioi e`xh,konta e[x) cannot represent three repetitions of anything, neither can the Greek numerical abbreviation cxϛ show a triple repetition of any Greek letter, for if this had been the case, it would have looked like ϛ ϛ ϛ (ϛϛϛ would be an impossibility), or, in translation, 6 6 6 (spaced out) or 6-6-6 (both clearly not 666). Consequently, the emphasis on the number three when discussing the number of the beast finds no possible foundation in the text and is thus eisegetical in nature. It is essential to underscore this point, since the emphasis on the number six occurring three times appears too frequently in discussions of the number of the beast.

Moreover, the number of the beast is a unified number, and John provides no indication that one should pull out one of its mathematical factors (i.e., six⁵⁸) and then focus on that number’s hypothesized symbolic or theological meaning. The number John presents is not six hundred, nor sixty, nor six, but rather six hundred sixty-six.⁵⁹ It is true that one’s analysis of the numbers of Revelation sometimes delves into such factorized meaning, but that factorization is most clearly determined from the immediate context.⁶⁰ For instance, the number of the sealed in Revelation is 144,000 (7:4), the number 144,000 is the same as 12 x 12 x 1,000, and 12 is an important number not only in Revelation but also elsewhere in the Bible. We know, however, that the 144,000 who are sealed are comprised of 12,000 from the twelve listed tribes (7:4-8), so one does not need to conjecture as to whether one or more of its factors are significant. In other words, contextual indicators help one decide whether to investigate the significance of a number’s factors. But in 13:18 John explicitly urges the audience to specifically “calculate the number of the beast”—not to calculate it, then factor it, and then derive the symbolic or theological meaning from one particular factor of it (i.e., six).

Deriving implicit symbolic or theological meaning from the numerous numbers represented in Revelation is, in any case, a potentially precarious exercise. The number six, for example, does not uniformly have a negative meaning in Revelation;⁶¹ it is the number of the wings the four living creatures in heaven have (4:8). Moreover, while discarding the difference between cardinal and ordinal numbers, even in the Old Testament the number six can have a positive meaning; for instance, humans were created on the sixth day (Gen 1:27-31), and there was nothing on that day associated with sin or evil, since God saw that all he created on the sixth day was “very good” (1:31).

On the other hand, one cannot absolutely view the supposedly “perfect” number seven in Revelation at the polar opposite theological end of the supposedly “evil” number six, since the evil dragon has seven heads and seven diadems (12:3), while the evil sea beast also has seven heads and seven diadems (13:1). Furthermore, some numbers found in positive—even heavenly—contexts in Revelation contain the supposedly “evil” factor six (e.g., the numbers twelve [12:1; 21:12, 14, 21; 22:2] and twenty-four [4:4, 10; 5:8; 11:16; 19:4]). Complicating things even more is the number forty-two (11:2; 13:5), which has both the numbers six and seven as factors; since it is the multiple of both the numbers six and seven, does it have an “evil” meaning, or does it have a “perfect” meaning? Even arguing that the larger context determines which factor one should focus on does not provide an ironclad methodology. For instance, though the number 1,260 in both its two occurrences in Revelation (11:3 and 12:6) exists in positive contexts describing the prophetic work of God’s two witnesses and the time in which God protects the woman from the dragon—the number 1,260 contains the factor six!

The Significance of yhfi,zw

There is a fourth reason to support the hypothesis that John was more likely to use the numerical abbreviation cxϛ than the written out, unabbreviated form e`xako,sioi e`xh,konta e[x in 13:18: John associates the number in this text with the verb yhfi,zw. The verb yhfi,zw has a semantic range which includes the practice of counting and making calculations.⁶² The only other time in the NT that one finds this verb is in Luke 14:28, where in a passage in which Jesus was discussing the costly nature of discipleship (14:23-33), he reminded his audience that if they were building a tower, they would first sit down and “estimate” (NRSV), “count” (ESV, KJV), or “calculate” (NASB, NLT) the cost. In Rev 13:18 the combination of the verb yhfi,zw and its immediately following direct object to.n avriqmo.n (“the number”) clearly refers to the action of counting or calculating a number.⁶³ As such, it would be more natural to use a numerical abbreviation in Rev 13:18 to identify the sum of such counting or calculations. Zachary J. Cole recently validated this observation when he wrote, “the abbreviated forms of numbers lend themselves more readily to isopsephistic connections than do longhand number-words.”⁶⁴

How would one accomplish such a count or calculation? By using the Greek letters that comprise a name (or, title⁶⁵). This practice has been variously called gematria, isopsephy, and psephy,⁶⁶ the latter two terms deriving from the Greek word yh/foj (“pebble” or “vote”⁶⁷) and related to the verb yhfi,zw. Because the term “gematria” is anachronistic to the time of John,⁶⁸ and because isopsephy (or, isopsepha or isopsephia) is a narrow division of the technique, referring to two names, concepts, or lines of poetry that when added up equal the same number, I prefer the use of the more general term “psephy” when referring to the broader technique.⁶⁹

Greek culture repeatedly utilized psephic calculations in graffiti and literary works.⁷⁰ From Pompeii one finds the following graffiti, filw/ h-j avriqmo.j fme , (“I love her whose number is 545”). Another example from Pompeii is the following graffiti: vAme,rimnoj evmnh,sqh `Armoni,aj th/j ivdi,aj k(u)ri,a(j) evp v avgaqw/| h-j o` avriqmo.j me , (or ale ,) tou/ kalou/ ovno,matoj (“Amerimnus thought upon his lady Harmonia for good. The number of her honorable name is 45 [or, because of issues of visual clarity, 1035].”⁷¹ In both cases, the names were cryptographically changed into their associated numeric sums. In 2003 two other similar examples of such graffiti were discovered in the city of Smyrna, one of the seven churches that John wrote to, and they date from the late first or early second century CE.⁷² And in extra-biblical Christian works, writers were using psephic calculations at least as early as between 70 and 135 CE, very close to the time of John.⁷³

It is clear that ancient writers also used the verb yhfi,zw in forming or describing psephic constructions. A few examples from non-biblical literature should suffice to demonstrate this. First, astrological fragments from the 6th – 5th centuries BCE, written under the name of Pythagoras, instruct the reader(s) to “calculate” (yhfi,sai) according to the “number” (to.n . . . avriqmo.n) of “the letters” (tw/n stoicei,wn) as well as to “calculate the name of (a) man and note the size of the number” (Yh,fison to. o;noma tou/ avndro.j kai. i;de th.n poso,thata tou/ avriqmou/).⁷⁴ Although the dating of these fragments is centuries before John, they provide a beginning point for a trajectory of usage and meaning germane to the terminology under discussion.

Second, the poet Strato (or, Straton) of Sardis (one of the seven churches to whom John wrote), writing around the end of the first century and beginning of the second century CE, wrote an obscene epigram on a taboo topic in which he noted that one day, as he was “calculating” (yhfi,zwn), he noticed that the two words had “the same number” (th.n auvth.n yh/fon)—1570.⁷⁵ While Strato’s conclusion refers specifically to an isopsephic calculation, the fact remains that Strato used the verb yhfi,zw to describe such a calculation.

Third, Irenaeus of Lyon described some of the beliefs of the Marcosians, followers of the heretic Marcus, in his work Against Heresies (circa 180 CE). There he noted that they added up (yhfi,zontej) the numerical values of sequential letters (stoicei,wn) of the alphabet (minus the sixth letter [ϛ]), they would arrive at the sum of thirty⁷⁶ (Haer. 1.16.2⁷⁷).

Fourth, in the Christian work Refutation of All Heresies, with a terminus post quem no earlier than 222 CE and a terminus ante quem not long after that date,⁷⁸ the author⁷⁹ refers to counting up or calculating numbers and names several times. For instance, he mentions that when one “calculates” (yhfi,zh|) the “names” (ovno,mata) and finds the same vowel letter (gra,mma) twice, he “counts” (yhfi,zei) it only once (4.14.12.1).⁸⁰ Also, when the letters omega (w) and eta (h) are found in a name (ovno,mati), the omega is not counted because the letters are considered to be equal in value; “thus the same is not counted (yhfi,zetai) twice” (4.14.14.4).⁸¹ He observes that “numerologists” think they can “analyze life through numbers and names (avriqmw/n kai. ovno,mata),” and he has observed them “spending their leisure in arithmetical gymnastics (yh,fw| gegumnasme,nouj)” (4.14.20.7).⁸²

Fifth, in Artemidorus’ encyclopedic work on dream interpretation known as the Onirocritica, written during the mid-second to early third centuries CE,⁸³ he refers to psephic calculations several times. For instance, he states: “And so, whichever numbers [avriqmw/n], when written out letter by letter [diV o[lwn tw/n gramma,twn], produce a sum [yh/fon] that is less than a hundred, it is necessary to write these and count them up [yhfi,zein] and to consider that they signify the numbers of years that the sum [yh/foj] reveals” (Onir. 2.63).⁸⁴ Then, speaking about the number 10, he starts his analysis by stating: “But ten possesses a twofold logic. For in fact, when it is written out letter by letter [diV o[lwn tw/n gramma,twn] and added up [yhfisqe,nta] on the basis of these alone, it signifies thirty” (Onir. 2.64).⁸⁵

And sixth, Anatolius of Laodicea, writer of mathematical works and one who may be the same as the third century Anatolius, a professor of Aristotelian philosophy in Alexandria who later became bishop of Laodicea (~ c. 283),⁸⁶ also described the practice of calculating the numerical values of words in his work Peri. deka,doj kai. tw/n evnto.j auvth/j avriqmw/n (known as Peri Dekados). In that work he wrote: eva.n yhfi,sh|j to. e[n evn gra,mmasin, eu`rhseij to.n kata. su,nqesin to.n ne , (“if you add up [calculate] the numerical values of the letters in e[n, you will discover the synthesis [sum] to be 55”).⁸⁷ Here the author is describing the psephic process in which he calculates (using the subjunctive of yhfi,zw) the sum of the individual numerical values of the Greek word for “one.”⁸⁸

Despite the fact that several of these preceding examples clearly postdate John’s Revelation by several centuries, the data demonstrate that authors over several centuries—from before and after John—used the verb yhfi,zw when describing psephic calculations. When one considers the fact that Rev 13:18 contains not only a reference to this very verb but also the noun avriqmo,j (“number”) as that verb’s direct object, and that John also clearly associates the number of the beast in 13:18 with the beast’s name in 15:2, one cannot help but conclude that psephic calculations are clearly under consideration.⁸⁹ Furthermore, Cole observes that the textual evidence of scribal activity in writing this number in Revelation forces one to “conclude that their abbreviated forms were simply pragmatic, not theological, in nature.”⁹⁰ This would again support the contention that psephic calculations were in view.

A calculated, psephic approach to interpreting the number of the beast in Rev 13:18 makes sense in light of parallel extra-biblical examples as previously described. Because such psephic transformations involving people typically involved one person’s name, this would lend support to the conclusion that the number of the beast is the number of a man or human being, as the Greek text appears to indicate (avriqmo.j ga.r avnqrw,pou evsti,n). If the word a;nqrw,poj here instead refers to a generic humanity (i.e., “the number of humanity,” or “a human number”), as many have often concluded, one finds it difficult to understand how humanity is related to the number 666, since the number in 13:18 is not 6 (the typical numerical referent with this interpretation). Daniel B. Wallace warned that— according to the syntactical observation known as Apollonius’ Corollary—the burden of proof is on those who translate a;nqrw,poj to refer to a man (as opposed to humanity in general) because such a translation is “the rarest of all [syntactical] possibilities.”⁹¹ It is important to understand that “rare” does not equate to “impossible.” In any case, such a conclusion is not compelling in light of the linguistic terminology and psephic background to the text under discussion.⁹² Furthermore, the syntactical observation relative to Apollonius’ Corollary posited by Wallace does not insist or demand that a;nqrw,poj be translated as “humanity” in 13:18 but rather only observes that, all things considered equal, translating it as “man” in this type of construction as one finds in 13:18 is less likely than other options. Such statistical observations are just that—observations, and not foregone conclusions.

Conclusions

The purpose of this essay has not been to provide support for or against any historical application of the interpretation of the number of the sea beast in Rev 13:18. Rather, the purpose of this essay has been to examine in an initial fashion two exegetical aspects of the text that have been largely if not entirely absent from discussions over the last several decades with regards to the text’s meaning within Seventh-day Adventism. As such, more research is necessary in order to confirm further the direction this research has taken.

This investigation has thus far resulted in several conclusions. First, in interpreting the number of the sea beast in Rev 13:18, there is no textual basis for focusing on the number six instead of six hundred sixty-six; John provides no clear clue that factorization of six hundred sixty-six should take place. Second, it would have been impossible for John to have written or understood that the number of the beast was a “triple” of anything, and thus reference to the number three or the adjective “triple” or any of their cognates associations is not germane to the text. Third, while theological interpretations of the number of the beast are not forbidden, all meanings derived from this text in association with either the numbers six or three (i.e., three sixes) are extraneous to the text and appear more eisegetical than exegetical in nature. Finally, interpretation of the number of the beast makes the most sense from the standpoint of the Greek literary and cryptographic practice of psephy, where calculations were made of the number equivalents of Greek letters in referring to an individual human.⁹³

Seventh-day Adventists believe that the age-long conflict between Christ and Satan will play out before Christ’s second coming according to the prophetic template found in Revelation 13. Satan will work with his two allies, the sea beast and the land beast, in an attempt to not only persecute but destroy those loyal to God. John lists the characteristics of the sea beast well before he mentions that it has a mark, name, and number. One is not to figure out the number of the beast in order to identify the beast. In other words, the number of the beast does not provide the primary identification of the sea beast; the reverse is true. While the number of the beast is not meant to be the defining element in identifying the sea beast, it should cohere with the interpretation of the sea beast as characterized in 13:1-8. As such, Seventh-day Adventists have both the duty to—and privilege of—understanding God’s prophetic messages in the Bible to the best of their ability, whether it means to learn—or to unlearn— what they have concluded thus far.