How do you calculate the name of antichrist 666?

Answer 1

This question has been answered under the question: "How will the Antichrist come to be?".

Briefly, the name of the Roman who will be the Antichrist has to be transliterated into Hebrew. Thus the Latin 'A' is alephin Hebrew, the Latin 'B' is beit, the Latin 'G' is gimel etc., The process continues for each letter of the respective alphabets. However, there is not an exact correspondence between the Latin and Hebrew alphabets with some overlaps or with letters that do not strictly correspond such as the Hebrew Tsadi (= Ts therefore either 'T' or 'S' in Latin, c.f., Hebrew Tsor becomes "Tyre" in English and "Sur" in French). In that exercise, the observer will need to exercise some judgement although without necessarily having to be an etymologist. Since Latin's alphabet essentially is derived from Hebrew and Phoenician precedents, the correspondence is very good overall. Each letter in Hebrew has a specific numerical value and was the only language in antiquity that did such a thing: e.g., aleph is 1, beit is 2 and gimel is 3.

The current best candidate for this title is a young child who is presently (2012) living with a prestigous 'Roman' family. His mother gave him a first name meaning "majesty", or a meaning to that effect. Some time later, the mother married a man who will presumably become her son's 'step-father' or 'father-in-law' as Joseph of Nazareth was to Jesus. In other words, neither Joseph nor this woman's new husband is the biological father of the child. In Antichrist's case, Satan is. However, there is no specific public information at hand as to this man either having formally adopted the child or intending to. The way marriages often are today, who knows what the near future holds. Furthermore, the surname of this woman's new husband means 'king of kings' if its apparent transliteration from ancient Middle Eastern languages is any guide. Thus the child's firstname and putative surname; assuming he adopts that surname, and assuming he does not change his first name by deed poll, which he might want to do after reading this; make up the phrase "Majesty - King of Kings". Transliterated into Hebrew, that name adds to 666.

Confirmation of this possibility will require some form of publicly available signature. However, the name itself will mean little unless surrounding circumstances concerning this young child (as at 2012) also fit the broad parameters that we expect to see of the Antichrist. For example, his supernatural or demonic powers, political aspirations, single status (spurns a marriage or interest in women) etc. Many young women in Israel have the lovely name Ronit. That adds to 666 but young Israeli women named Ronit obviously cannot qualify as the male (and sexist?) Roman Antichrist. This combination of meaning and fitting of the name to 666 is, statistically speaking, a very unusual phenomenon. Many names might engender a combination adding to 666 but would such combinations engender or yield an apparent meaning such as "Majesty - King of Kings" a uniquely appropriate appellation for Christ Himself? That's what makes this particular candidate rather interesting to say the least. Nevertheless, assuming the analysis is correct, this combination may simply be statistical coincidence. Therefore, at present, it would be unwise to yield further information on the subject for fear that an unscrupulous person might want to harm someone who is in fact an innocent child.

The comparitively limited or restricted account of Jesus' early life has befuddled scholars for generations. Many speculate that other documents provide a fuller biography. However, the restricted New Testament narrative on Jesus' early life, supplemented by some verses in the Old Testament (Tanaach), nevertheless provides a tight framework or template for the early life of the Antichrist. As the Book of Revelation itself says, the wise will be the ones to truly or really understand these things concerning the Antichrist - 666. So far, the information we have for this putative candidate for the antichrist child neatly fits the template set by Jesus' birth. We have heard quite a bit about the child's conception. We have a possible announcement of the birth via the Twin Towers incident that interestingly took place in the 9th month after the New Year's Eve (conception-night?) that brought in the new Millennium (December 31, 2000). That would explain quite a lot of questions raised by the 900 or so New York engineers and architects who are asking for a completely independent inquiry into how the Twin Towers and "Building 7" did actually implode into dust.

Hopefully, this will assist readers who are interested in this question in a couple of ways. Firstly, the Antichrist's Hebrew name-number has to be calculated but any such name must be considered in the context of the Biblically outlined careers of the Antichrist and the Christ he must attempte to counterfeit.