Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Revelation, written on Patmos after Nero?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Hi All,

I wonder, if John wrote the number 666 in code, as brother Bauscher explains, write nero in Hebrew letters, and the numbers make 666, why would John do that if he lived during a very calm emperor since Nero was dead for long (and the 'native' Romans hated Nero as well)

THanks for any thoughts!
This depends very much on the eschatological view one holds (preterist, futurist, historist or idealist). Although 666 can be associated with many people, I don't believe that John had Nero in mind. I don't think that 666 is referring to an individual but rather a system or a diety, an excellent book which explores this possibility is "Prophecy Code" by Jeffrey A. Manty. Note the verse says "the number of his name" I think that "number" in this verse is symbolic, as an individual has a name not a number. I believe that more likely it refers to the "movement" the beast belongs to or the diety he worships, or a characteristic of some sort, rather than his personal name, as too many personal names equal 666.

This 666 reading is one of the proofs that Revelation was originally written in Aramaic with square "Hebrew" (Asshuri) script, as gemamtria doesn't actually work properly in the Greek language. (There is also speculation whether 666 is the correct number, as there are Greek mss that have 616, and others that have 656, so it is doubtful that we can make any deffinate conclusions with the sources we presently have. Perhaps we'll make new discoveries in the near future, who knows?)

However this is just my opinion, and I haven't explored this issue indepth yet, while I accept the possibility that Revelation could've been written during Nero's reign (there are equally convincing arguments for a later date), it does not necessarily mean that John was writing about events that would happen in his day. In my opinion John simply recorded what he saw, nothing more, nothing less, and nothing else.
Shlama all,

I give you the following from my introduction to The Apocalypse -"Gilyana" , written by Isaac Newton- yes , The Isaac Newton, the guy that invented Calculus and formulated the laws of Physics, gravity, light, etc., etc.:
The Revelation
which came to John The Evangelist from God
in Patmos the island to which he was exiled by
Nero Caesar
The Date of Authorship
Sir Isaac Newton wrote the following concerning the date of the writing of Revelation. Isaac Newton, one of the greatest
scientists of all time, wrote voluminously on the subject of Bible prophecy, especially of the books of Daniel and Revelation:

Quote:???Irenaeus introduced an opinion that the Apocalypse was written in the time of Domitian; but then he also postponed the writing
of some others of the sacred books, and was to place the Apocalypse after them: he might perhaps have heard from his master
Polycarp that he had received this book from John about the time of Domitian???s death; or indeed John might himself at that time
have made a new publication of it, from whence Irenaeus might imagine it was then but newly written. Eusebius in his
Chronicle and Ecclesiastical History follows Irenaeus; but afterwards [a] in his Evangelical Demonstrations, he conjoins the
banishment of John into Patmos, with the deaths of Peter and Paul: and so do [b] Tertullian and Pseudo-Prochorus, as well as the
first author, whoever he was, of that very antient fable, that John was put by Nero into a vessel of hot oil, and coming out
unhurt, was banished by him into Patmos. Tho this story be no more than a fiction, yet was it founded on a tradition of the first
churches, that John was banished by him into Patmos in the days of Nero. Epiphanius represents the Gospel of John as written
in the same time of Domitian, and the Apocalypse even before that of Nero. [c] Arethas in the beginning of his Commentary
quotes the opinion of Irenaeus from Eusebius, but follows it not: for he afterwards affirms the Apocalypse was written before
the destruction of Jerusalem, and that former commentators had expounded the sixth seal of that destruction.
With the opinion of the first Commentators agrees the tradition of the Churches of Syria, preserved to this day in the title of the
Syriac Version of the Apocalypse, which title is this: The Revelation which was made to John the Evangelist by God in the
Island Patmos, into which he was banished by 0ero the Caesar. The same is confirmed by a story told by [d] Eusebius out of
Clemens Alexandrinus, and other antient authors, concerning a youth whom John some time after his return from Patmos
committed to the care of the Bishop of a certain city. The Bishop educated, instructed, and at length baptized him; but then
remitting of his care, the young man thereupon got into ill company, and began by degrees first to revel and grow vitious, then
to abuse and spoil those he met in the night; and at last grew so desperate, that his companions turning a band of high-way men,
made him their Captain: and, saith [e] Chrysostom, he continued their Captain a long time. At length John returning to that city,
and hearing what was done, rode to the thief; and, when he out of reverence to his old master fled, John rode after him, recalled
him, and restored him to the Church. This is a story of many years, and requires that John should have returned from Patmos
rather at the death of Nero than at that of Domitian; because between the death of Domitian and that of John there were but two
years and an half; and John in his old age was [f] so infirm as to be carried to Church, dying above 90 years old, and therefore
could not be then suppos???d able to ride after the thief.
This opinion is further supported by the allusions in the Apocalypse to the Temple and Altar, and
holy City, as then standing; and to the Gentiles, who were soon after to tread under foot the holy
City and outward court. ???Tis confirmed also by the style of the Apocalypse itself, which is fuller
of Hebraisms than his Gospel. For thence it may be gathered, that it was written when John was
newly come out of Judea, where he had been used to the Syriac tongue; and that he did not write
his Gospel, till by long converse with the Asiatick Greeks he had left off most of the Hebraisms. It
is confirmed also by the many false Apocalypses, as those of Peter, Paul, Thomas, Stephen, Elias
and Cerinthus, written in imitation of the true one. For as the many false Gospels, false Acts, and
false Epistles were occasioned by true ones; and the writing many false Apocalypses, and
ascribing them to Apostles and Prophets, argues that there was a true Apostolic one in great
request with the first Christians: so this true one may well be suppos???d to have been written early,
that there may be room in the Apostolic age for the writing of so many false ones afterwards, and
fathering them upon Peter, Paul, Thomas and others, who were dead before John. Caius, who was
contemporary with Tertullian, [g] tells us that Cerinthus wrote his Revelations as a great Apostle,
and pretended the visions were shewn him by angels, asserting a millennium of carnal pleasures at
Jerusalem after the resurrection; so that his Apocalypse was plainly written in imitation of John???s:
and yet he lived so early, that [h] he resisted the Apostles at Jerusalem in or before the first year of
Claudius, that is, 26 years before the death of Nero, and [i] died before John.???
- Sir Isaac Newton

Another very interesting date marker for the epistle is this: The city of Laodicea and its environs was completely destroyed by an earthquake in AD 66. It was not rebuilt
until the early second century, so in AD 95, there would have been no such prosperous community and church there as John described in Revelation 3. AD 95 is about 30 years too late for the book to have been written!
Nero reigned from AD 54 to AD 67. It was certainly written before the temple of Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70.


I have long believed this to be true even before someone told me why it was.

I saw one day while reading the Scriptures, that after being given the Revelation of Yeshua The Messiah on the Island of Patmos, The Apostle John could write these words in his Gospel...."In the beginning was The Word....

Because, If you notice that in the Vision John saw and wrote down what he had seen, Yeshua had something written on His thigh....

And it is well known that the Gospel of John was written after he was released from this exile and was then living in Ephesus being an elderly man.

John had been given a Revelation and it shows in his Gospel and letters....
Dear Thirdwoe,

You said: "Because, If you notice that in the Vision John saw and wrote down what he had seen, Yeshua had something written on His thigh...."

According to Charles Cutler Torrey in his book 'Our Translated Gospels', "thigh" and "Banner" (as in "His Banner") is only ONE letter different in Aramaic.

Cutler was an early Aramaic Primicist (spelling?).

That Greek insertion always bothered me. "Thigh" makes absolutely NO sense, whereas "Banner" makes perfect sense!

Shlama, Albion

Tacitus (14:27) simply notes that ???One of the famous cities of Asia, Laodicea, was that same year (66) overthrown by an earthquake, and, without any relief from us, recovered itself by its own resources???

So, the city was not abandoned, but rebuilt.
I don't consider the 'earthquake' that fatal that it would not have inhabitants for many years.
Shlama Akhi Distazo,

I have the following note in my interlinear translation at Rev. 3:14 -
Quote:An interesting note in Thayer???s Greek-English Lexicon under the entry for laodikeia -???Laodicea??? documents that
Laodicea , Colossae and Hierapois were destroyed by an earthquake in AD 66 . Laodicea was not rebuilt until 120 years later
by Marcus Aurelius. This little known fact is extensively documented by Bishop Lightfoot in His commentary on Colossians and
Philemon, pp 274-300. This says volumes about the date for The Book of Revelation, does it not ? It must have been written
before AD 66 , else there had been no Laodicea left to which John could write ! Tacitus , the Roman historian, wrote that
Laodicea ???without any relief from us,recovered itself from its own resources.???Tacitus wrote this in the early second century.
Another source says that Laodicea ??? lay in ruins for quite a period of time??? until the Roman emperor Hadrian, at the
beginning of the second century (reigned AD 117-138) revived it after he visited the place. ???It was almost totally rebuilt
during the reign (AD 188-217) of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (0icknamed Caracalla) .??? There was apparently no major
rebuilding of Laodicea before the second century and it is highly unlikely that this destruction should go unmentioned if a letter
to its church were written after AD 66 to a place in ruins and which furthermore boasts ,???I am rich and affluent and have
need of nothing??? (v. 17). It is amazing that modern Bible commentators seem to be completely ignorant of this historical
information, dating the writing of Revelation at AD 95- an absurdly late date.

Shlama Akhi Albion,

The Crawford Aramaic ms. at Rev. 19:16 reads:
"(The Name) ams (His thighs) htmje (over) le (His garment) yhwnam (on) le (to him) hl (& is) tyaw 16
(of lordship) atwrmd (& The Lord) armw (of kings) aklmd (The King) aklm (written) abytk

"He has on His garment over His thighs The Name written: The King of Kings and The Lord of Lordship."

Greek adds the word "and" before "over". The Name is written only on His garment, on each side, over His thigh. One side has,"King of Kings"; the other has, "Lord of Lordship -(Power)"

No manuscript in Aramaic or Greek has "banner", that I can find.


Yes Dave, sorry, that is what I was refering to by memory, I should have looked it up....

In the Vison John learned that Yeshua's name was The Word of God, or at least this was made clear to him...It may be that had something to do with the other Word of God or God the Word statments that follow in John's other and later writtings...Which of course were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The name written on his vesture at the thigh was King of King's, and Lord of Lord's...... and indeed He is. That would make better sence yes....
Shlama to all,

The futurist view has two varieties-PARTIAL-futurist view (from chapter 4, verse 1 onwards) and the FULL-futurist view of E. W. Bullinger and others.
The reading "on His thigh" is very interesting when you consider the ancient O. T. custom of placing the hand UNDER the thigh when making a solemn oath/covenant with an individual.
One of the many examples that E. W. Bullinger gives to show that a shift in dispensations has occurred is the fact that Paul's letters ALWAYS reads OUR Father and NEVER reads HIS Father while Revelation ALWAYS reads HIS Father and NEVER reads OUR Father. Another dispensational consideration is the repeated use of "SERVANTS" in Revelation while Paul insists in Galatians that "you are NO LONGER SERVANTS, BUT SONS." Also consider the fact that the entire book of Revelation is throughly saturated with "Jewish-ness". For instance, why would a Western Gentile pastor be the least bit concerned about "those who say they are Jews but are not, but are of the SYNAGOGUE of Satan."
However, I can definitely picture a synagogue "roshe" (head) turning beet-red and grinding his teeth in anguish upon finding this out. <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: --> Anyway.....don't wanna get too deep into theological stuff here...there are other forums for that. The thing I found out is that you just can't skim through E. W.'s books lightly to fully appreciate his views. You have to immerse yourself in them and check them out for yourself. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink --> But you can say that about a whole lot of studies of all kinds as well.

Shlama w'Burkate, Bro. Larry
Dispensationalism *cringe*. This aside E. W. Bullinger's scholarship is generally top notch.

Revelation 13:18.
The numerical value of STUR (Roman) and SoTOR (Greek) have the numerical value of 666


The Greek Seleucids used the title SoTOR.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

Rome was once known as Saturnalia, "the city of Saturn". In the Chaldean mysteries the Babylonian dictator Nimrod was deified as Saturn. His birthday was celebrated on December 25th or Saturnalia. In Chaldee, Saturn is spelt STUR which totals 666.

This appears to me to be the simplest explaination of the origin of 666 in Revelation 13:18

SP Silver
And Babylon is beying rebuilt. It might soon act.

One language, one government.
The USA might fall. Amaricas become one union, europe already is, the asian union, the african union,
and the soon to come 'world order' might rule them all.

This is babel, this is nimrud, because it's not human work, it's the one who owns the world currently. Matthew 4.

IF you want to know more about this conspiracy, look on youtube for freemasonry, and illuminati.
Shlama Akhi Stephen,

Rome was founded at the village, Alba Longa, 753 BC. Where do you get "Saturnalia" as its former name? Also ,Rev. 13 says that 666 is the number of a man. Saturn was no man, simply a mythical god.
Rev. 13:16 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.
Rome was named after Romulus. I don't think his name adds to 666.


Dear Rafa,

It's "NeroKaesar" translated backwards INTO HEBREW.

I do not know if the same would be true, if one used Syriac (Aramaic).

if you need a reference book, let me know. I believe that it was David Chilton, the Anglican Priest.

He doesn't believe in the Virgin Birth, and essential Beliefs to be a Christian/Messianic Believer.

He has researched Yeshua's life quite well (see his book 'Rabbi Jesus'), but he would be more like the early Elkkasites', instead of a real Believer, at least according to his book.

Shlama, Albion

Rafa Wrote:Guys, I heard somewhere that 666 adds up to HASATAN, check to see if it's true. I also know it adds up to NEROCAESAR, so it perhaps would be wise to search for somebody like that individual when contemplating who the Beast is. I read prince Charles is a direct descendant of Nero by the way (I don't really believe in that "Holy Roman Empire" thing though). So Revelation was not written in Patmos...that I didn't know.
Pages: 1 2 3