Comments on: New Number for the Beast http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/ A Mormon Blog Mon, 28 May 2012 19:08:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: mike http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118838 Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:54:19 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118838 Well, it is certainly amazing the amount of time wasted discussing this topic. Wow! My goal is for myself and my family to make it to heaven, and point others toward Jesus along the way. This controversy about a number won’t change whether we make it to heaven, so……..

]]> By: Bill http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118800 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118800 I guess since I work at 666 Third Avenue, I can breathe a huge sigh of relief.

]]> By: Justin http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118801 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118801 I would note the following:

US Highway 491 can now be changed back to Highway 666. Rampant theft of street signs bearing the number 666 will no longer be a problem.

US Highway 616 will need to be changed.

Satanists aren’t bothered by the change, according to a news article I read: “Peter Gilmore, High Priest of the Church of Satan, based in New York, said: ‘By using 666 we’re using something that the Christians fear. Mind you, if they do switch to 616 being the number of the beast then we’ll start using that.’”

]]> By: john fowles http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118802 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118802 I read the news article announcing this and came away wondering why the new fragment is accorded more authority than the existing view of 666. Is it simply because it is an earlier fragment than the one from which we have 666? What about the already existing “minority” view of extant fragments that 616 is the number? If in the face of those, 666 was still regarded as authoritative, why should that change now just because a new fragment has been discovered that holds to this “minority” view? I assume that it is simply because this fragment is older. . . .

]]> By: Steve Evans http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118803 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118803 That’s what I like about the Church of Satan — always willing to keep up with the times. God bless those Satanists!

]]> By: Ronan http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118804 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118804 I remember hearing something about 616 being the numerical value of someone’s name: Nero?

Can anyone enlighten me here?

]]> By: Dave http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118805 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118805 Ronan, I think you’re teasing us, but if you really need a primer, go read the Wikipedia entry “Number of the Beast.” Don’t miss the Joke section at the end of the article.

]]> By: Scott http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118806 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118806 There goes my theroy about Ronald Wilson Reagan. (6 letters in each name- its true!)

]]> By: john fowles http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118807 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118807 Ronan, isn’t it Caligula?

]]> By: danithew http://bycommonconsent.com/2005/05/04/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118808 Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://centaur.nocdirect.com/~jbycommo/2005/05/new-number-for-the-beast/#comment-118808 Ronald W. Reagan
6 1 6

It still works! Egads!

]]>