Comments on: The Number of the Beast http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/ Making Theology Accessible Sun, 21 Mar 2010 06:34:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Dan Wallace http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-465 Dan Wallace Sun, 22 Jul 2007 02:25:38 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-465 Great to hear from you, Anthony! Yeah, that was a great day. And by the way, thanks so much for putting up the CSNTM team on their way out of that unnamed eastern European country recently! They thoroughly enjoyed the time with you! Great to hear from you, Anthony! Yeah, that was a great day. And by the way, thanks so much for putting up the CSNTM team on their way out of that unnamed eastern European country recently! They thoroughly enjoyed the time with you!

]]> By: Anthony Forsyth http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-466 Anthony Forsyth Sun, 22 Jul 2007 01:09:18 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-466 I was with Dan in Oxford when we viewed this manuscript. As a pastor, I have less time to pursue my interest in TC than I would like as I consider it a lesser priority. My knowledge is woeful. Yet that day remains a highlight of my life and I 'm not sure I fully comprehend why. I'm not sure I'm particularly fussed whether 616 or 666 is the original reading, nor was I at the time. Yet to be there was a moment that deeply affected me. Amongst those Christians I regularly fellowship with, the concept of "Christian experience" is one that might not be so broad as to immediately bring to mind that which I experienced this particular day, yet it was a sobering experience that had huge impact on my life. And again, I'm not sure I fully understand why. No assistance to this discussion, I am aware of that. Just a few rambling thoughts as I found this blog. I was with Dan in Oxford when we viewed this manuscript.

As a pastor, I have less time to pursue my interest in TC than I would like as I consider it a lesser priority. My knowledge is woeful. Yet that day remains a highlight of my life and I ‘m not sure I fully comprehend why.

I’m not sure I’m particularly fussed whether 616 or 666 is the original reading, nor was I at the time. Yet to be there was a moment that deeply affected me.

Amongst those Christians I regularly fellowship with, the concept of “Christian experience” is one that might not be so broad as to immediately bring to mind that which I experienced this particular day, yet it was a sobering experience that had huge impact on my life. And again, I’m not sure I fully understand why.

No assistance to this discussion, I am aware of that. Just a few rambling thoughts as I found this blog.

]]> By: Yodas_Prodigy http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-464 Yodas_Prodigy Fri, 08 Jun 2007 00:40:26 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-464 Hello Dan, Glad to see your blog. We have a common friend via the internet in Maestroh, Jay Barker, or whatever handle he uses here. He has spoken most highly of you. Because of his influence, I purchased your Text Book on Greek. It may be a while before I get in to it since I am still going through Mounce's book. I have been on a quest to better understand eschatology. And, of course, I have read numerous authors from all sides of the issue. At this point, I have ruled out Dispensationalism completely. I know that is nearly anathema to the ears of many Professors at DTS and students too. Having said that, I would like your take on the so-called internal evidences for the pre 70 a.d. dating of the Book of Revelation. I believe whenever the tribulation happens, past or future, the Church will be there. As far as the 666 and 616, this seems to be huge evidence that is was speaking of Nero. I think Demar, Gentry, and Sproul make some good points. Blessings YP Hello Dan,

Glad to see your blog. We have a common friend via the internet in Maestroh,
Jay Barker, or whatever handle he uses here. He has spoken most highly of
you. Because of his influence, I purchased your Text Book on Greek.
It may be a while before I get in to it since I am still going through Mounce’s
book.

I have been on a quest to better understand eschatology. And, of course,
I have read numerous authors from all sides of the issue.

At this point, I have ruled out Dispensationalism completely. I know that is
nearly anathema to the ears of many Professors at DTS and students too.
Having said that, I would like your take on the so-called internal evidences
for the pre 70 a.d. dating of the Book of Revelation. I believe whenever
the tribulation happens, past or future, the Church will be there.

As far as the 666 and 616, this seems to be huge evidence that is was
speaking of Nero. I think Demar, Gentry, and Sproul make some good points.

Blessings

YP

]]> By: stevemoore http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-443 stevemoore Tue, 08 May 2007 13:50:25 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-443 Thanks James... I'll snack on them as I am able. -steve Thanks James… I’ll snack on them as I am able.

-steve

]]> By: James Snapp Jr http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-463 James Snapp Jr Tue, 08 May 2007 04:01:38 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-463 Greetings Steve Moore, I'm glad to read that your appetite for New Testament textual criticism is whetted. Allow me to put my brief introduction to the subject on the menu: http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/TCGoals.html . And for dessert, a summary of my approach to the textual criticism of the Gospels at http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/TextHistory.html . At http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/BasicTC.html you can find a variety of links related to NT textual criticism. Chew thoroughly before swallowing anything. Greetings Steve Moore,

I’m glad to read that your appetite for New Testament textual criticism is whetted.
Allow me to put my brief introduction to the subject on the menu:
http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/TCGoals.html .

And for dessert, a summary of my approach to the textual criticism of the Gospels at
http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/TextHistory.html .

At http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/BasicTC.html you can find a variety of
links related to NT textual criticism. Chew thoroughly before swallowing anything.

]]> By: stevemoore http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-462 stevemoore Mon, 07 May 2007 20:07:15 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-462 Dr Wallace, You're absolutely correct that I missed every one of the items you enumerated. But, gives me something to go and learn about too... whet's the proverbial appetite. ;^) A class on TC would be great, so I'll second Carrie's request. thanks, -steve Dr Wallace,

You’re absolutely correct that I missed every one of the items you enumerated. But, gives me something to go and learn about too… whet’s the proverbial appetite. ;^)

A class on TC would be great, so I’ll second Carrie’s request.

thanks,

-steve

]]> By: Dan Wallace http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-461 Dan Wallace Mon, 07 May 2007 19:13:27 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-461 Point well taken, Steve. I guess my sensitivity is to the issue that you are peering in at a conversation in which you have only partial knowledge. As James and I exchanged ideas, I kept wondering how many others had read Irenaeus's chapter on the number of the beast, how many understood Irenaeus's normal textual affinities, how many were even aware of the larger issues of external vs. internal evidence, how to weigh manuscripts, the nature of the early versions (translations into other languages) and the fact that all patristic writings need to be reconstructed since we don't have the originals. In other words, the reason I felt this discussion was not as helpful to most readers of RMM is that there was too much preunderstanding that they were missing. It would be like walking into a third-year language class when you were a beginning. Thus, Carrie has a point: perhaps a basic course on textual criticism is called for... Point well taken, Steve. I guess my sensitivity is to the issue that you are peering in at a conversation in which you have only partial knowledge. As James and I exchanged ideas, I kept wondering how many others had read Irenaeus’s chapter on the number of the beast, how many understood Irenaeus’s normal textual affinities, how many were even aware of the larger issues of external vs. internal evidence, how to weigh manuscripts, the nature of the early versions (translations into other languages) and the fact that all patristic writings need to be reconstructed since we don’t have the originals. In other words, the reason I felt this discussion was not as helpful to most readers of RMM is that there was too much preunderstanding that they were missing. It would be like walking into a third-year language class when you were a beginning. Thus, Carrie has a point: perhaps a basic course on textual criticism is called for…

]]> By: stevemoore http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-460 stevemoore Mon, 07 May 2007 19:05:45 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-460 Well, I sure don't understand all of what you both have been discussing here, nor do I have any critical thought to add to the conversation. However, I wouldn't go so far as to say that it hasnt been fruitful for the observers: I've learned a good bit about the # of the beast, textual criticism, Nero Redivivus, and how to have some respectful and yet critical conversation. If all of this was done offline or at the water cooler than what hope do us amateurs (as in not professional theologians/academics) have in gaining from the discourse? ;^) Thanks for sharing your thoughts and research here. -steve Well, I sure don’t understand all of what you both have been discussing here, nor do I have any critical thought to add to the conversation.

However, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it hasnt been fruitful for the observers: I’ve learned a good bit about the # of the beast, textual criticism, Nero Redivivus, and how to have some respectful and yet critical conversation.

If all of this was done offline or at the water cooler than what hope do us amateurs (as in not professional theologians/academics) have in gaining from the discourse? ;^) Thanks for sharing your thoughts and research here.

-steve

]]> By: James Snapp Jr http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-459 James Snapp Jr Mon, 07 May 2007 15:31:26 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-459 Dear Dr. Wallace, I too will wrap up here, unless someone else chimes in. I think this has been fruitful or at least nourishing. Regarding the idea that a statement of mine makes it appear that "the argument seems to be over before even getting outside of Irenaeus's statement," -- a careful reading of my statement should show otherwise; I explicitly included evidence other than Irenaeus's statement ("combined with the other witnesses for the '666' variant") as factors leading to adoption of the "666" reading. Thank you for the amicable discussion. Dear Dr. Wallace,

I too will wrap up here, unless someone else chimes in. I think this has been fruitful or at least nourishing. Regarding the idea that a statement of mine makes it appear that “the argument seems to be over before even getting outside of Irenaeus’s statement,” — a careful reading of my statement should show otherwise; I explicitly included evidence other than Irenaeus’s statement (“combined with the other witnesses for the ‘666′ variant”) as factors leading to adoption of the “666″ reading.

Thank you for the amicable discussion.

]]> By: Dan Wallace http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/04/the-number-of-the-beast/comment-page-1/#comment-444 Dan Wallace Mon, 07 May 2007 01:31:39 +0000 http://reclaimingthemind.org/devblog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/#comment-444 James, I really appreciate the first article you mentioned--very helpful! That's the kind of evidence that can, indeed, sway me to the other side. I will have to digest the primary data that are mentioned in there, but I am not prepared to make any kind of verdict on it yet. It seems, however, that our exchanges are probably not very fruitful or illuminating to other readers. And I want to be sensitive to them. If I can conclude with this comment, I would say that where you and I differ is in how open we are to various kinds of evidence and how much tension we can live with before we feel the need to come down to one position or another. You mentioned earlier in your latest post that "I’m not sure how you got the impression that I didn’t think that P115 makes a difference or that I don’t seriously take it into consideration. The '666' team still wins, but the score is closer with P115 in the game." If I may, allow me to quote the end of your same blog which seems to illustrate that you are not really giving P115 much weight at all: "[Irenaeus] appeals to older copies and older men’s testimony — excellent evidence which, combined with the other witnesses for the '666' variant, P115 and its allies have no chance of outweighing or overturning." The way you've stated this, the argument seems to be over before even getting outside of Irenaeus's statement. As much as I respect patristic evidence, I have to balance it off against all sorts of other evidence. I do not think it is helpful to close the door on what an apparently important papyrus says when the matter has not been fully investigated. This is where we seem to disagree. James, I really appreciate the first article you mentioned–very helpful! That’s the kind of evidence that can, indeed, sway me to the other side. I will have to digest the primary data that are mentioned in there, but I am not prepared to make any kind of verdict on it yet. It seems, however, that our exchanges are probably not very fruitful or illuminating to other readers. And I want to be sensitive to them. If I can conclude with this comment, I would say that where you and I differ is in how open we are to various kinds of evidence and how much tension we can live with before we feel the need to come down to one position or another.

You mentioned earlier in your latest post that “I’m not sure how you got the impression that I didn’t think that P115 makes a difference or that I don’t seriously take it into consideration. The ‘666′ team still wins, but the score is closer with P115 in the game.”

If I may, allow me to quote the end of your same blog which seems to illustrate that you are not really giving P115 much weight at all: “[Irenaeus] appeals to older copies and older men’s testimony — excellent evidence which, combined with the other witnesses for the ‘666′ variant, P115 and its allies have no chance of outweighing or overturning.” The way you’ve stated this, the argument seems to be over before even getting outside of Irenaeus’s statement. As much as I respect patristic evidence, I have to balance it off against all sorts of other evidence. I do not think it is helpful to close the door on what an apparently important papyrus says when the matter has not been fully investigated. This is where we seem to disagree.

]]>