Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'The Philosopher' started by Deathgrinder, Apr 21, 2005.
funny but what does this have to do with philosophical debate?
ratzinger/benedict is a big step backwards for the catholic church. the whole nazi thing is a little unfair; he was only 17 when the war ended and i don't believe he was even necessarily a willing participant, but he can't have walked away from it without some effects on his mind. that's really not as important as his reputation as a hard-line fasc--er, traditionalist, office as Grand Inquisitor, etc etc. it just reinforces the church's reputation as medieval.
"Medieval" only if you harbor strange ideas of time and modern liberalism as the only measure of (and the end of) "progress". I dont necessarily disagree with your sentiments, but I do find it funny that people are shocked that the catholic church is... *gasp* reinforcing the dictates of God as defined by the catholic church. What do you expect? For them to take advice from secular humanists and perceived leftists (who dont recognize or believe in the church anyway)? Do green party members confer with Papal authorities when they decide on doctrine? While im ardently against the catholic church and its mission, i respect the fact that they are willing to make a stand. I honestly dont understand the disappointment coming from people who are against the church anyway...
am i surprised? no, not in the least. and frankly, did i hold out much hope for a big change in the church? not really, and it doesn't really affect me so i don't care so much personally...more on the behalf of the people (aids victims, anyone?) who suffer as a result of church policies, and a concern for the increase of fundamentalist thought in the world. and the medieval comment was in reference to the perception of the church among non-believers, not necessarily a word i would use to define it...outmoded, reactionary, backward, perhaps
Well, if you write down his name (Benedict) in Greek, and sum up the numbers of each letter according to the greek arithmetic you will have a total of 666.
There are some Protestants that see the Pope as an anti-Christ figure.
...Thats hard to believe, even so I don't get what 666 is.
If anyone knows, how did it come to be?
666 is "The Mark of the Beast" and is supposed to be the name of someone just as Fourka said.
Let him who hath understanding reckon the number of the beast,
For it is a human number.
Its number is six hundred and sixty-six
(cue maiden riff)
First off, I'm Greek, so you will have to believe me that his name in greek is: ΒΕΝΕΔΙΚΤΟΣ (I hope you can see this, if not change the settings of your page so that you can see greek characters).
As for the greek arithmetic and numbers, you can search through google, but here is one link: http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Greek_numbers.html
(You will need to scroll down the page, till about the middle where the greek arithmetic is).
So, you have: Β=2, Ε=5, Ν=50, Ε=5, Δ=4, Ι=10, Κ=20, Τ=300, Ο=70, Σ=200
Sum them up and you have the number 666.
Some other greek people had mentioned this in another forum, and I still wonder why it's still not known to other people. I think it is a matter of time though.
Wow. Thats weird. Thanks. Also, I know its the mark of the beast, but why not 123 or something like that
I heard 666 stood for the roman emperor Nero Caesar, at least in the Book of Revelations anyway.
i *think* i recall something about the number 3 being considered a "perfect" number in ancient hebrew, and 6 being considered "imperfect", so 666 = three sixes = a "perfect imperfection"
i'm probably really wrong, but i seem to recall something like that
now that is just horrid!
Wo, that is scary.
He does actually look kind of evil. But otherwise I hardly know anything about him.