Easy riches in crypto currency, high flying stock, condo flipping, and dotcom stocks (i.e., 2017, 2013, 2005, 1999, respectively) will always have appeal, and there will never be a shortage of media shows discussing (in hindsight) the “success” stories of such “easy riches.” There will never be a shortage of paid salespeople promising more of the same.

David Bahnsen, The Case for Dividend Growth, 49.

If God be not the creator of substance ex nihilo, as well as the former of worlds and of things, he cannot be absolutely sovereign in his decrees or in his works of creation, providence or grace. On every hand he would be limited and conditioned by the self-existent qualities of pre-existent substance, and their endless consequences. But the Scriptures always represent God as the absolute sovereign and proprietor of all things. Rom. 11:36; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16; Reve. 3:11; Neh. 9:6.

A. A. Hodge, The Confession of Faith, 81-82.

The sovereign Creator is sovereign Savior.

God did not build a wide bridge part-way to heaven. No, in Jesus Christ he built a secure bridge all the way to heaven. Bless God that all ‘those whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified’ (Rom. 8:30). . . . If you would like to ‘make your calling and election sure’ (2 Pet. 1:10), then trust in Jesus Christ. Yield obedience to God’s Word (Rom. 11:33).

Chad Van Dixhoorn, Confessing the Faith, 58.

“Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?”

Job 2:10

shall we receive good ] That is, be patient in adversity, as we rejoice when he sendeth prosperity, and so to acknowledge him to be both merciful and just.

English Annotations (1645)

The object of all textual criticism is to recover so far as possible the actual words written by the writer. But in order to do this properly the critic has to explain how each successive deviation from the original came to be currently adopted, and frequently he finds the clue enabling him to do this in the history of some later period, which gives some reason for a textual variation. In these researches it sometimes happens that the discoveries of the textualist are of great value to the historian; for the corrupt reading of some important document often explains otherwise inexplicable phenomena in the history of ideas or the conduct of a controversy.

Kirsopp Lake, The Text of The New Testament, 1.

It must, however, be remembered that great caution is required in deciding whether a reading is certainly corrupt or only possibly so. And the [textual] critic has always to be ready to revise his judgment. He ought always to be suspicious of readings, but far more suspicious of his own conclusions.

Kirsopp Lake, The Text of The New Testament, 4-5.

FYI – Quickly drafted this and did not proofread, so it may contain some errors. Double check sources. Speculation and interpretations all over the place.

The beast out of the earth also has a number. Verse 18 says, “Here is wisdom.” Notice that it doesn’t say, “Here is a riddle for you to solve if you’re clever enough.” Many people have attempted to interpret the number of the beast, and their theories range from the pope’s phone number, to a special number on a computer, to the name of a particular man reduced to a number by a code. These ideas are simply ludicrous. John’s advice is clear. In speaking of wisdom, he says, “Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his numbers is Six hundred threescore and six” — that is, 666. In Scripture, the number six is often a symbol of fallen man, with all his sins and shortcomings. Hendriksen explains this succinctly: “Six is not seven, and never reaches seven. It always fails to attain to perfection; that is, it never becomes seven. Six means missing the mark, or failure. Seven means perfection or victory. Rejoice, O Church of God! The victory is on your side. The number of the beast is 666, that is, failure upon failure upon failure. It is the number of man, for the beast glories in man; and must fail.”

The number of the beast, then, is the number identifying those who do not fear God. The sixes of the beast fall far short of the sevens of the Holy Trinity. So those with the mark of the beast are ungodly. They refuse to worship God, preferring lies about Him rather than the truth, and going their own way into increasing ungodliness.

Do you have any spiritual insight, wisdom, or understanding about what is going on in this world and behind it? Have you seen what this world and its ideologies, institutions, and personalities add up to? They are marked with 666, the number of human failure. John wants us to be wise about the world in which we live, which is pervaded by the spirit of antichrist. This world can be so impressive and intimidating that we are afraid to call it what it is. But John says the world is doomed to fail.

2016 AD — Joel R. Beeke, Revelation (in the The Lectio Continua Expository Commentary on the New Testament), 368-369.

The indication of the person who is the Beast, is described in verse 18, 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.

God did not want to name him explicitly. He does not want everyone to know him. Yet He did not want him to remain completely unknown, but shows him to those to whom He reveals secret wisdom. The secrets of the LORD are with them that fear Him.

The Greeks calculated with their alphabet.  Their letters were also numbers. That means that one word can represent a certain matter, place, or person, as well as a number. This was the number 666. The Greek letters, which were used for this number, were also a number of man, spelling a human name. Shortly after the time of the apostles the number 666 translated to the name LATEINOZ [sic], the first king of the region where Rome is located. The land was called Latium after him. And the language they spoke was called the Latin language, as it is still called.

And so this number 666, which spells Lateinoz, leads as by the hand to Rome and in Rome to the pope, who established himself within the church. Then it was referred to as the Latin Church, to make a distinction with the Eastern Church, which was referred to as the Greek Church. Until today the service is still executed in Latin. The pope is still writing his bulls and decrees in the Latin language. This name and his number clearly show that the pope is the Antichrist …”

1700 AD — Wilhelmus à Brakel, Not to be Ignored: Rev. Wilhelmus à Brakel’s Commentary on Revelation, Loc. 4212.

The conjectures as to the interpretation of this number [666] have been endless. Quite commonly it is supposed to express the numerical value of the letters which compose the Hebrew name KRON KSR, or “Nero Kaisar.” It is quite as probable that no individual is designated, but that the figures are symbolic. The number six is one short of seven, which denotes perfection; six is therefore the symbol of imperfection and of sin. If we triple the figure six, or to the number six add six, multiplied by ten and by one hundred, there may be a “number” which represents the greatest conceivable embodiment of depravity and evil.

1936 AD — Charles R. Erdman, The Revelation of John, 106-107.

[W]e have next to discover the form of cryptogram used by the writer, and here I will quote my friend Professor J. A. Smith of Magdalen College, who, having had much experience in solving cryptograms, has sent me the following letter (Dec. 1910): “The solution of a cryptogram with no further clue than that the numerical values of the letters composing the answer should add up to 666 was almost indeterminate. I therefore suspected a restricting addition. Assuming that the digits, decades and hundreds must add up separately, I found the possible solution much narrowed. A very obvious one presented itself in

I.

τ [tau] = 300 | ν [nu] = 50 | ε [epsilon] = 5

τ [tau] = 300 | ι [iota] = 10 | α [alpha] = 1 = τειταν

The clue that the answer must be “the name of a man” suggested the end -οσ and -ασ.

II.

τ [tau] = 300 | ν [nu] = 50 | ε [epsilon] = 5

σ [sigma] = 200 | ι [iota] = 10 |α [alpha] = 1

λ [lambda = 30] + ο [omnicron = 70] = 100 = λατεινοσ

III.

σ [sigma] = 200 | ν [nu] = 50 | ε [epsilon] = 5 = ευανθασ

υ [upsilon] = 400| θ [theta =9] + α [alpha = 1] = 10 | α [alpha] = 1

“I thus seemed to have hit upon the method employed by Irenaeus or his authority. I next applied this to the number 888 in the Sibyl. Oracles, i. 328 (apud Swete, p. 176), and find it gives at once

σ [sigma] = 200 | ο [omnicron = 70 | η [eta] = 8

σ [sigma] = 200 | ι [iota] = 10

υ [upsilon] = 400 = Ἰησοῦς

“It then occurred to me to see if anything in the Apocalypse suggested this restriction, and I thought it might be contained in ψηφισατω — literally to calculate with numbers. It was, I believe, common to use an abacus in a way which practically amounted to using a decimal system. You will see that if no column can contain more respectively than 6, 60 and 600 the number of possible solutions is greatly restricted. τειταν and Ἰησοῦς are rigorous solutions: each of the others requires the license of once having a compound.

“As regards the Apocalypse itself, all this does not advance matters much. All, I think, I have shown is how Irenaeus got his solutions, and why he preferred τειταν, and that the method is found at least once elsewhere.”

We are now in a position to deal with the problem before us. The Beast and the man are identical. In other words, the Beast is for the time incarnated in a man. There is no isopsephism [adding up number values of letters in a word to form a single number] here, and all solutions which propose the name of a country or nation are thereby excluded. Next, if Professor Smith’s method is here valid, the name of teh man must be such that in three columns of hundreds, tens and units, the total must in each case be six. The solution favored by Irenaeus, i.e., τειταν, complies rigorously with the numerical postulates, and has recently been supported by Abbott (Notes on N.T. Criticism, 80 sq.). But τειταν is not a man’s name, though it is construed as referring to Titus or to the Flavian dynasty, or to the third Titus, i.e., Domitian. . . .

But this solution will not do. The references to “the man” in xiii. 3, 12, 14 could not be explained of Titus or Domitian. We are, therefore, thrown back on Nero redivivus — the independent proposal of four scholars, Holtzmann, Benary, Hitzig and Reuss. The solution is to be sought not in Greek but in Hebrew. Nero Caesar = [Neron Kaisar = Nrwn Q(K)sr in Hebrew] = 666. . . . This solution appears to satisfy every requirement.

1920 AD — R. H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John, 365-367.

In. v. 17, John indicates that the charagma (“mark”) is the name of the beast or the number of his name. He now reveals the number of the beast: “His number is 666.” The list of conjectures concerning the meaning of the number . . . is almost as long as the list of commentators on the book. . . . it is not difficult to understand why most commentators have understood John’s words “Let him calculate the number. . . . His number is 666” to be an invitation to the reader to play gematria and discover the identity of the beast. The interpretation is not new. Irenaeus (second century) mentions that many names of contemporary persons and entities were being offered in his day as solutions to this number mystery. Yet he cautioned against the practice and believed that the name of the Antichrist was deliberately concealed because he did not exist in John’s day. The name would be secret till the time of his future appearance in the world. Irenaeus expressly refutes the attempt of many to identify the name with any of the Roman emperors. He feels, however, that the gematria approach is John’s intended meaning but warns the church against endless speculations (Contra Haereses 29.30).

Irenaeus’s fear was not misplaced. Endless speculation is just what has happened in the history of the interpretation of v. 18, as Barclay has well documented it (“Great Themes,” pp. 295-296). . . .

Finally, how are we to understand 666? The best way is to follow Minear (I Saw a New Earth, ch. 5) and Newman (“Domitian Hypothesis,” pp. 133ff.) and return to one of the most ancient interpretations, that of Irenaeus. Irenaeus proposed (while still holding to a personal Antichrist) that the number indicates that the beast is the sum of “all apostate power,” a concentrate of six thousand years of unrighteousness, wickedness, deception, and false prophecy. . . .

The significance of the name of the beast is abundantly clear in Revelation (12:3; 13-6; 14:11; 17:3ff.). Wherever there is blasphemy, there the beast’s name is found. The number 666 is the heaping up of tehe number 6. Minear adds, “Because of its contrast with 7 we may be content with an interpretation which sees in 666 an allusion to incompleteness, to the demonic parody in the perfection of 7, to the deceptiveness of the almost-perfect, to the idolatrous blasphemy exemplified by false worshipers, or to the dramatic moment between the sixth and seventh items in a vision cycle (cf. seals, trumpets, bowls, and kings 17:10)” (I Saw a New Earth, p. 258). This interpretation of 666 as a symbolic number referring to the unholy trinity of evil or to the human imperfect imitation of God rather than a cipher of a name is not restricted to Minear. It has been held by a long line of conservative commentators [A.C. Gaebelein, J.A. Seiss, J.F. Walvoord, T.F. Torrance, L. Morris, J. Ellul, and others].

1981 AD — Alan F. Johnson, Revelation (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 12), 533-535.

It is a hard thing to find out this mark or name.

[John writes] It is not only known to me by revelation, but also may be found out by human wisdom, Let wise men therefore seek to find it out.

It is to be found in the numbers of the Greek letters of his general name: for men’s names in Greek contained numbers in the letters. They had not other figures, as we have, but counted by letters.

Saint John would not plainly set down the name, lest he should make the Roman emperors offended with the Christians; as Saint Paul doth not name him that letteth [“only he who now letteth will let”], 2 Thess. 2:6-7, yet such plain tokens are set down by both, that he, and antichrist his upholder, might be known when he cometh. The truth is, this is the name of the beast, not of the antichrist; and so a national name, describing the state where antichrist should rise and reign: and therefore though it is like to be comprehended in Greek letters, in which language John wrote; yet it is not likely to be a Greek word originally. Irenaeus and the ancients, take it for the word Lateinos, which, in Greek letters, maketh six hundred sixty and six: showing, that antichrist should be a Roman, or one of the Latin Church. Others suppose his power should begin in the year of Christ six hundred sixty and six. Others, that it should last so many years in teh height of it.

1645 AD — English Annotations.

Gallagher, Edmon L. and John D. Meade, eds. 2017. The Biblical Canon Lists from Early Christianity: Texts and Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Introduction (bold added)

“To contribute to [the study over details and contents of the Christian biblical canon], this book aims to present the evidence of the early Christian canon lists in an accessible form for the benefit of students and scholars” (xii).

Importance of Canon Lists

“More than most other types of data, the lists directly inform us the books considered canonical in early Christianity” (xiv).

“. . . this book is not a full canon history but a tool for such research” (xv).

“Citations prove to be a problematic criterion for determining which books someone would list as constituting the canon” (xvi).

“Like citations, manuscripts provide important data concerning the scriptural practices of early Christianity, but their contents are not equivalent to a canon list” (xvii).

“A chief importance of the canon lists resides, then, in their providing explicit statements on the canon” (xvii).

“The canon lists do not answer all our questions about which religious books early Christians considered important and worthy of reading, or how and why the biblical canon developed the way it did. But the lists are the best sources for telling us specifically which books early Christians considered canonical” (xviii).

Aim of this Book

“We have tried to include every Christian canon list from the fist four centuries, a terminus that corresponds generally to the period at which most scholars would say that the biblical canon had achieved a stable shape (or as close to it as it would achieve until the sixteenth century) . . . In departure from our general principle of including early Christian lists, we have chosen to incorporate two Jewish lists, those of Josephus (which is technically not even a list) and the Babylonian Talmud. Those familiar with discussion on the formation of the Old Testament will immediately realize that these two lists—the only Jewish lists before the turn of the second millennium CE – often prove crucial in scholarly treatments of the Jewish or Christian canons, so that this book would seem incomplete without them” (xix-xx).

Practical Benefits

See chart on xx-xxii. Easily compare Jewish / Protestant / Roman Catholic / Greek Orthodox biblical canons, also “attempts to present the biblical canons of these traditions in reliance on a significant Bible or canon list” (xx), e.g., for RC Council of Trent, 1546.

See “The Development of the Christian Biblical Canon” (1-56): “First, given the lack of institutional control over this matter, we might be surprised by the basic unity of the two dozen early canon lists collected in this volume.” And, “The lack of early official pronouncements on the canon means that the evidence for the development of the canon must be sought in disparate and contested locations, particularly the remains of manuscripts and scatter statements from various writers” (2).

See Appendix – “Antilegomena [meaning: writings with disputed reception] and the More Prominent Apocrypha” (261-284): “This appendix contains basic information regarding certain disputed writings, whether writings that eventually did become canonical (e.g., Ecclesiastes, Esther, Hebrews) or writings that did not (e.g., Epistle of Barnabas, the Apocalypse of Peter), or writings that became canonical for only some Christian traditions (e.g., Tobit, Jubilees)” (261)

Constantine was a heathen who was educated in the Christian religion. He accepted the Christian religion and professed it. He overthrew the heathen empire and exterminated all idolatrous religions. He implemented Christian governments all over, gave the order to build many temples, and did everything that a caretaker of the church would do. There are many stories about his virtues, and many of his excellent words and statements have been related. We use them to contradict those previously mentioned stories. It is enough for us that he was a son of the church and professed Christ. He also did much for the Name of Christ.

à Brakel, Wilhelmus. Not to be Ignored: Rev. Wilhelmus à Brakel’s Commentary on Revelation, Loc. 3581.

It is impossible to separate the history of the text from the general history of the Church. The local history of a district, the monasteries of the country, local heresies, and certainly local pronunciations and dialects with their variations at different times, all act on the text, and are influenced by it in turn. The perfect textual critic will have to be an expert palaeographer and and the possessor of a complete knowledge of all the bypaths of Church history.

KIRSOPP LAKE, THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, 4TH ED., REV., (NEW YORK: EDWIN S. GORHAM, 1908), 10.