I guess a good place to go from here is triangular figurate numbers, since people be demanding math and shizz
View attachment 47064
The reason ?
There are multiple reasons why we should. One would be that a formula for the generation of triangular figurate numbers has been found in texts on Computus
Computus, if you didn't know, is the calculation of the date of Easter, celebrating the supposed resurrection of Jesus
View attachment 47070
Computus - Wikipedia
One of the older texts on Computus containing the formula for the generation of triangular numbers is from the Irish monk, Dicuil
cf. Esposito,M. An unpublished astronomical treatise by the Irish monk Dicuil. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, XXXVI C. Dublin, 1907,
pages 378-446, specifically
From 814 and 816 Dicuil taught in one of the schools of Louis the Pious, ( Son of Charlemagne ), this is where he wrote his Computus
So, there's another obvious link between math and " divinity / divine things "
But I could think of a more obvious reason
Let's start with the list in Wikipedia which actually inaccurately reports the list of nomina sacra, and this is where you'll see the power of fact checking done properly
Wikipedia says that there are only 15 sacred names in New Testament manuscripts, it lists them as
God, Lord, Jesus, Christ, Son, Spirit, David, Cross, Mother, Father, Israel, Savior, Man, Jerusalem, and Heaven
Nomina sacra - Wikipedia.
Each of these is written in Greek manuscripts as short form ( You could think of them like abbreviations ) and each is written with the little " horn " notation ( tittle ) for divinity as explained earlier in the thread
This is according to the work of
Bruce Manning Metzger (February 9, 1914 – February 13, 2007) an American biblical scholar, Bible translator and textual critic who was a long time
professor at Princeton Theological Seminary and Bible editor who
served on the board of the American Bible Society and United Bible Societies.
He was a scholar of Greek, New Testament, and New Testament textual criticism, and wrote prolifically on these subjects.
Metzger was one of the most influential New Testament scholars of the 20th century
( That's according to wiki )
Makes Mr Metzger look rather educated, does it not ?
Let's fact check both wikipedia and it's source ( Metzger ) for accuracy
I'm going to use the largest online repository of New Testament manuscripts available online, since that's how I roll
This is known as the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
Home - CSNTM
Now, if Metzger's list is accurate, then manuscript p-47, which contains one of the oldest copies of Revelation 13:18, would have to been altered or falsified in a rather obvious way
Either that, or Metzger and wiki are wrong
Observe that the use of this notation for " divinity " is easily seen in the manuscripts
View attachment 47066
Now what you may be missing here is that fact that you are looking at a " divine " triangular figurate number ( For those wanting evidence of the association between math and divinity )
In specific, it's a " divine " triangular figurate ( Because it's written with the notation for divinity ) and it happens to have either been overlooked by Metzger ( Unlikely, that's evidence of sloppy work from a highly esteemed academic ), or it's been omitted for a reason
I'm going to say bias or general confusion
View attachment 47067
Can you guys read that ?
I'll walk everyone through it just to be sure we're all looking at the same thing
The first part is just the common nomen sacrum for the word " Christ " ( In Metzger's list )
Or, alternately, it says 600, 60
View attachment 47068
The next part, is either going to be stigma or digamma
Given that this text is dating to roughly 300ish, I'm going to say it's digamma, as stigma is a ligature of the Greek letters sigma (Σ) and tau (Τ) and dates to the Byzantine era
Interestingly though, as a word ( instead of a letter ), " stigma " is originally a common Greek noun meaning " a mark, dot, puncture", or generally "a sign", from the verb στίζω ("(I) puncture"); the related but distinct word
stigme (στιγμή) is the classical and post-classical word for "geometric point; punctuation mark "
This word is used one time in the New Testament
" From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the
marks (
stigma (στίγμα),of the Lord Jesus "
Galatians
Digamma was called
episēmon during the Byzantine era and is now known as
stigma after the Byzantine ligature combining σ-τ as ϛ
This would make the second part of the unlisted nomen sacrum the number 6
View attachment 47069
At first, one might be inclined to instead say this is a lunate sigma instead of a digamma, however, this would would be incorrect as the sum of the letters is 600 + 60 + 6 and not 600 + 60 + 200
Lunate sigma = 200, so this would make the unlisted nomen sacrum read as 860
In turn this would mean translators have gotten everything wrong when translating this verse, which says, infamously:
" 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 " ( 666 )
If it were a lunate sigma, it would say
" 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 two hundred " ( 860 )
Now since the unlisted nomen sacrum that Metzger conveniently left off his list coughbiascough is actually this verse, it means he left 666 off his little list of sacred names that's given on Wiki
I mean gosh ! Golly ! How could it be ?...........The nerve of the NT authors to write such an obvious lie !.........666 isn't sacred !!!!
.......except it is, and that's precisely how it's written, as a standard " sacred name " iow " divine "
No less a person that Jesus Christ was said to have uttered these words
" For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled "
.......yet a so-called authority on the Bible missed a rather obvious notation for divinity (
A tittle ) over a number that has been a central focus for so many
Sorry, but I call shenanigans, not to be a jerk er nuttin'
So there's a good demonstration of why we fact check things, in this case both Wikipedia and a well-respected academic were both incorrect
Since so many self-professed Bible experts I've encountered online over the years have bloviated at great length about the " little horn " of prophetic scriptures and attempt to use all sorts of eisegesis to connect the number 666 to the prophetic scriptures referring to the " little horn " ....., yet haven't even taken enough time to study how the text was actually written to see that a little " horn " is actually used
over the number 666 they are trying to connect something to in the first place....
....I call double shenanigans
There you have a cursory example of a " divine number " in the Bible, ( 666 ) an example of fact checking and why academics don't always know what they are talking about, and also some proper exegesis ( Reading a text as it's written )