Jesus spotted in Orlando

[Gan]

Orlando police officers stood guard around the Lake Eola amphitheater as Dr. Jose Luis De Jesus Miranda, 61, arrived in the city Saturday.

Miranda, who has been banned from three countries, told Local 6 News cameras and a cheering crowd that he was Jesus Christ reincarnated.

His followers believe that Miranda's life and his teachings replace those of Jesus of Nazareth, Local 6's Jamie Guirola said.

"They believe that Jesus is going to come from the sky," Juan Sanchez said. "But, that is not the way he is going to come."

"He is here?" Guirola said.

"He is here." Sanchez said.

Miranda said millions of people worldwide have tattooed their bodies with "666" in recognition that the second-coming of Christ has taken place, according to the report.

"I have it proudly on my hand," a believer old Local 6's Jamie Guirola. "It is easier when they shake my hand. It is easier for them to ask. I am very proud to show it is a sign of love."

A group of Christians protested the event, calling the following a cult. Police also removed two people from the amphitheater.

"We are just questioning their faith and their '666' tattoos," a protestor told Local 6. "We just want to learn more so we can relate more between being a Christian and believing in this and who the true Jesus is."

Miranda said he is known as God in at least 30 countries.

Local 6 reported that he was born in Puerto Rico and admits to being a recovering heroin addict. He also spent times in prison on drug and petty theft charges.

Miranda is the founder of the Miami-based Growing in Grace Ministry.

Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.

http://www.local6.com/news/13265407/detail.html

_______________________________________________

:lol:

[CrystalTears]

666? I thought that was the mark of the devil? WTF.

[Gan]

Latrin should be able to clear this all up. ;)

[CrystalTears]

That's what I'm afraid of.

[TheEschaton]

The '666' is supposed to be the mark of the Beast, the False Christ who misleads the people into following Him, so that the real Christ can descend from Heaven to bring about the end of the world.

[Skeeter]

I doubt that he has millions of followers.

[StrayRogue]

666? I thought that was the mark of the devil? WTF.

You mean 616.

[CrystalTears]

Same difference.

[StrayRogue]

Not really, as the actual Book of Revelations translation is 616.

666 was a mistake.

666 does have other mystical implications (being the total of all the numbers on a roulette wheel; wooo), but isn't inherently evil.

Why someone religious would tattoo them...I dunno. It's not like they're using the swastika or something, which has ancient and good connotations beyond the Nazi-fication of it in recent times.

[Gan]

I thought 777 was the holy number...?

[CrystalTears]

Got this explanation from one of the versions of the verse: http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/revelation/revelation13.htm#v17

Each of the letters of the alphabet in Hebrew as well as in Greek has a numerical value. Many possible combinations of letters will add up to 666, and many candidates have been nominated for this infamous number. The most likely is the emperor Caesar Nero (see the note on Rev 13:3 (http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/revelation/revelation13.htm#v3)), the Greek form of whose name in Hebrew letters gives the required sum. (The Latin form of this name equals 616, which is the reading of a few manuscripts.) Nero personifies the emperors who viciously persecuted the church. It has also been observed that "6" represents imperfection, falling short of the perfect number "7," and is represented here in a triple or superlative form.

[StrayRogue]

Well the well known quote is: "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".

This was proven to be a mistake in 2005, when a 1,700 year old papyrus was discovered and translated.

[CrystalTears]

You're nitpicking the detail. At this point in time, regardless of the findings, 666 is still regarded as the symbol for the anti-christ. Yes the true translation has been revealed, but it really won't change anything as far as the meaning goes. It's not the number that has power, it's what the number represents.

[Gan]

What??!?!?!!

You mean the 666 does not represent the 'beast' anymore?

First limbo goes away and now THIS?

This place is going to hell in a handbasket, I'll tell you.

[StrayRogue]

You're nitpicking the detail. At this point in time, regardless of the findings, 666 is still regarded as the symbol for the anti-christ. Yes the true translation has been revealed, but it really won't change anything as far as the meaning goes. It's not the number that has power, it's what the number represents.

Christian scholars wouldn't agree.

But then you could argue that the swastika is a Nazi symbol of hate and not the ancient design that it really is.

[CrystalTears]

Even though the swastika is now known to be associated with Nazi, Hindu and other Indian religions still use it, even when they live in the West. The Indian restaurant I frequent has that symbol all over the establishment.

Basically if someone holds a belief in something long enough, you telling them otherwise won't change their stance, no matter how much truth there may be.

[Gan]

Side note:

The wiki article on the swastica is pretty damn interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastica

[StrayRogue]

Good look finding an Indian/Chinese/Japanese establishment in Germany with the symbol over the door.

[Skeeter]

Basically if someone holds a belief in something long enough, you telling them otherwise won't change their stance, no matter how much truth there may be.

Hence the mute point vs. the correct moot point discussion from a few weeks ago.

[JDAX]

Well the well known quote is: "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".

This was proven to be a mistake in 2005, when a 1,700 year old papyrus was discovered and translated.

I don't quite think it's true that the number has been "proven" to be 616 instead of 666. What is true is that the earliest manuscript we have at present (the one which StrayRogue is citing, discovered in 2005) says "616." But note that the manuscript is 1700 years old, i.e., comes from roughly AD 300 (actually, I think it's closer to 400 AD). Much earlier manuscripts existed, and while we don't have actual possession of those, we do have possession of strong evidence suggesting that those even earlier manuscripts did in fact read "666" (and not "616"). Indeed, there is some reason to think that "616" is actually the typographical error here (i.e., some of the evidence suggests that "616" was a typographical error that occurred even before c. 300 AD).

(Before I mention the evidence, let me say that--though it's obvious that I'm on the side of "666" as the correct reading--my only real point in mentioning this is to say that the debate's still open. There's a nice blog discussion about this issue here, involving some people working in textual criticism: http://reclaimingthemind.org/blog/index.php/2007/04/29/the-number-of-the-beast/. In the comment section, you'll see two people debating the significance of the evidence. I side with the guy named "James Snapp Jr" there, but you'll see that he has an able opponent in "Dan Wallace." That'll hopefully provide as objective a view of the matter as possible.)

Here, for example, is one of the most well-known and documented early Christian writings there is (called "Against Heresies" or, in the original, Adversus Haereses), penned by the hand of St. Irenaeus. Irenaeus lived c. 115-202 AD, was one of the foremost early Christian writers, knew St. Polycarp (69-155 AD) who himself knew the Apostle John (i.e., the guy who wrote the book where the number occurs), etc. He says that the number in John's book (Revelations, or "Apocalypse") is 666 (and remember, he says this at a date earlier than the earliest manuscript we have in our possession), and then writes (with some emphasis added on my own): "Such, then, being the state of the case, and this number [666] being found in all the most approved and ancient copies, and those men who saw John [the Apostle] face to face bearing their testimony [to it] . . . [we] conclude that the number of the name of the beast, according to the Greek mode of calculation by the letters contained in it, will amount to six hundred and sixty and six . . . I do not know how it is that some have erred following the ordinary mode of speech, and have vitiated the middle number in the name, deducting the amount of fifty from it, so that instead of six decads they will have it that there is one. Others then received this reading without examination . . . These men, therefore, ought to learn, and go back to the true number of the name, that they be not reckoned among false prophets."

So here we have a well-known and documented witness, at a date earlier than the earliest manuscript we have (this writing was before the end of the 2nd century), who knew people who knew the very apostle who actually wrote the number, testifying that the number in all of the "approved and ancient copies" is 666, and testifying also that there are some erroneous copies going around being copied without examination. Since these allegedly erroneous copies were known before the year 300 (and the very error which they committed was that of writing the number as "616"), it's not unreasonable to think, particularly given Irenaeus' earlier witness and his closeness to those who knew the apostles, that the manuscript found in 2005 is one of those erroneous ones, and that the original number was 666. The finding of a manuscript from 300 AD with the number "616" is no counterevidence to Irenaeus' even earlier claim that "666" is the widely-attested actual number, and that "616" is a typographical error.

Sorry for my excess verbiage, but things like this intensely interest me.

[Stanley Burrell]

I thought 777 was the holy number...?

A bit holier than cluster of cherries, cluster of cherries, cluster of cherries, at least.

[Gan]

Cha ching!


Payoff time baby! (Is it raining cats and dogs outside or is that the waterfall of a nickle slot paying out?)

[Daniel]

JADX you obviously have a subpar American education.

Go read some history books.

/Strayrogue

[JDAX]

Maybe this is just to put my inexperience with this message board (and with online message boards in general) on display, but Daniel, I can't tell if you're being serious or not.

[Celephais]

Baptism by fire? New to online forums and posting in a religious thread on the PC? Yeesh...
http://www.kamikazemicrowave.com/andrew_ftp/pwnd/you%20gonna%20get%20raped.jpg

[JDAX]

I'll keep my guard up. ;) Maybe I shouldn't have said anything about my naivete in the first place!

(I'm not entirely new to online forums in general, but I am pretty new to them and am entirely new to posting here.)

[Sean of the Thread]

Christian scholars wouldn't agree.

But then you could argue that the swastika is a Nazi symbol of hate and not the ancient design that it really is.

Only idiots would argue that the swastika is a Nazi symbol of hate. At that point the conversation would be over anyways.

[StrayRogue]

Well, you can argue with Germany, where the symbol is pretty much illegal.

JDAX - Well I personally think a "number of the beast" is pretty retarded in the first place. But thats another discussion. For all we know both might be totally wrong. As you hit upon, we're only going off data that has been found so far. Just imagine all the "facts" and histories that will forever be skewed or simply remain forgotten forever.

I'll always be nitpicky about it, as thats the way I am. However I won't be writing to Iron Maiden telling them to change their song anytime soon.

[JDAX]

JDAX - Well I personally think a "number of the beast" is pretty retarded in the first place. But thats another discussion. For all we know both might be totally wrong. As you hit upon, we're only going off data that has been found so far. Just imagine all the "facts" and histories that will forever be skewed or simply remain forgotten forever.

Regarding the last part ("we . . . both might be totally wrong"), you're definitely right. In fact, even with respect to the very subject we're discussing, there may be some reason(s) for thinking that the number is neither 666 nor 616, but 665 (as you might be aware, that number has also been found on a few manuscripts). I think the reasons for holding that opinion are particularly weak compared to the 666/616 options (and I'm unaware of anyone who actually does hold that opinion), but it's still possible (I think) that someone could justifiably hold that opinion based on pieces of the available evidence.

And yes, unfortunately, the available evidence is (truistically) all that we have to go on in forming/justifying our respective views. Further, as is the case regarding nearly everything (if not in fact everything) we believe, our evidence is not entailing evidence, i.e., does not strictly entail that one view is right and that (therefore) the others are not. Thus is our unfortunate predicament. :)

Thanks for the response; unfortunately, I think we might've taken this thread on a bit of a tangent (if that matters), but, then again, I'm not quite as interested in talking about "Jesus of Orlando" anyway!

[Faent]

>>666 does have other mystical implications (being the total of all the numbers on a roulette wheel; wooo), but isn't inherently evil.

Implication: 616 is inherently evil. How, by the way, can the evilness "inhere" in the number? Is this to suggest that evilness is an intrinsic property of some numbers?

[Stanley Burrell]

42.

[Gan]

>>666 does have other mystical implications (being the total of all the numbers on a roulette wheel; wooo), but isn't inherently evil.

Implication: 616 is inherently evil. How, by the way, can the evilness "inhere" in the number? Is this to suggest that evilness is an intrinsic property of some numbers?

Like the number 13 ?

[Sean of the Thread]

Numbers make of the fabric of everything in the universe! What blasphemy to say they contain no mystical implications!

[Jayvn]

Does this mean we have to act busy now? I'm never going to cap before the rapture now... :(