No doubt many of us are aware of our SDA historical belief that the number "666" represents the Papacy.

For example, adding up the numbers (Roman numerals) of an alleged title of the Pope, Vicarius Filii Dei, equals 666 (if letters with no value are rendered 0 and the U is rendered V). This would be a basis for that belief.

The Scripture says--
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.." (Matt 7:7)

"We have many lessons to learn and many many to unlearn."(TM, p.30)

I have recently received a booklet called "A Word to the Little Flock" A reprint of the FIRST PUBLICATION of the SDA as jointly prepared in 1847 by its founders James White, Ellen G.White, Joseph Bates, from a sister in the faith who is an active researcher and Bible student who seeks Truth.

Published by Willis Printing Co. 724 19th St. Denver Colorado, published-- 1935

The introduction is from a W.S.Butterbaugh, M.D. who was a prominent physcian and member of the SDA organization back in the early 1900's.

The introduction begins as follows.

"The following twenty-four pages are an exact word-for-word reproduction from a photo-engraved copy of the original 1847 print, which contains certain words, phrases, clauses, sentences,and paragraphs omitted from "Experience and Views" and later from "Early Writings."The primary purpose of the republication of this tract is not so much to call attention to these omissions, as it is to create and to foster in the minds of all sincere Bible students more of a desire to seek after the great truths which were opened up and revealed in part in this the first vision given to Miss Ellen G. Harmon-- a mere school girl but seventeen years of age!...

The omission on page 19 of an entire paragraph on the subject of the "mark" and "number" of the image beast is the very work that impairs correct prophetical interpretation, to the unity of inspiration, undermines faith in its manifestations, provokes to controversy, leading successively to perplexity, confusion, bewilderment, incredulity, disbelief and apostasy, of which viscious progression there are numerous tragic instances in the history of Seventh-day Adventists...

Hence, the moral obligation to republish this tract , which has never heretofore been published by the denomination. It will assist all candid and honest Bible students within the church to arrive at a correct conclusion after further comparative study. The true light on this one question of the mark and number of the IMAGE BEAST was first given on pages 8, 9 and in the expunged paragraph, (p.19) and is nowhere else obtainable in early denominational exposition.

W.S. Butterbaugh, M.D.
1070 Acoma St.
Denver, Colorado
October 15, 1935

The following is very important, as it is the paragraph showing who the "666" represents. This was omitted from page 34 of Early Writings.

"I saw all that "would not receive the mark of the Beast, and of his Image, in their foreheads or in their hands," could not buy or sell. I saw that the number (666) of the Image Beast was made up; and that it was the beast that changed the Sabbath, and the Image Beast had followed on after, and kept the Pope's , and not God's Sabbath. And all we were required to do, was to give up God's Sabbath, and keep the Pope's and then we should have the mark of the Beast, and of his image."

W.S.Butterbaugh was a medical doctor living in Colorado who joined with Houteff and supported him in the early 1930's and onward -- his forward was simply to vindicate Houteff who based his ideas of 666 on this one passage.

What both he and Houteff do is use this very early publication (Word to Little Flock) that contained articles by James White, Joseph Bates and Ellen White, who were just beginning to understand the truths that were to shape Adventism -- and then they take a statement pitting that against what those very pioneers accepted and believed in the years following the publication.

This "Word to Little Flock" publication was published by Joseph Bates nearly a year before the first of the five Sabbath conferences convened, when the pioneers got together to in prayer and study out Biblical doctrines.

As J.N.Andrews wrote in his book--Three Messages of Revelation" page 109

The articles by EGW in "Word to Little Flock" were EGW's first attempts to put in writing what she had been shown.

However the sentences from page 8 and 9 in "Word to Little Flock" that reads "Michael is to stand up at the time that the last power in chap. 11, comes to his end, and none to help him. This power...is brought to view in Rev. 13:11-18. His number is 666." -- pp. 8, 9. were NOT written by EGW.
They were written by James White and he changed his views on that shortly after.

Also, all the parenthesis found in EGW’s article in that publication (reference texts and the number 666 on page 19) were ADDED by Joseph Bates when he published the tract. He, at the time believed there would be six hundred and sixty six apostate denominations. This belief was held by several in the very early years (1847)

Yet, that view was rejected very early in the pioneer’s lives.

When EGW published her first visions for distribution in her own books she never included the sentence (page 19) that was in her article.

Why do you think she left that sentence and it’s supposed implied idea, out of all her published books when she related the vision?
Could it be that this sentence, especially with the publishers insertion of (666) was confusing and caused people to think things that weren't clearly revealed to her yet? That maybe she didn't quite understand the full meaning of the vision herself at that point in writing, only was shown that the number could already be calculated?


In fact, from James White's writings we realize they DID NOT, in those early years, have a clear understanding as to what the "666" stood for -- if they had a clear "Thus says the Lord" would they have changed their position?

Yet, a few years after “Word to Little Flock” was written, we see a consensus amongst Adventist writers that 666 belongs to the first beast – the papacy.

In Great Controversy EGW tells us the "beast" that has the name with it's number is the Papacy.

I like the Vicarius Filii Dei and the Babylonian Amulet calculations of the number of the name of the man of the beast.

Ded-- W.S.Butterbaugh was a medical doctor living in Colorado who joined with Houteff and supported him in the early 1930's and onward -- his forward was simply to vindicate Houteff who based his ideas of 666 on this one passage.

It's amazing how she claims that Dr. Butterbaugh was acting ONLY to support Victor Houteff. Loving not the Truth but rather VTH. Isn't that great that she has the power to explain men's motives---

Now, let's see if she declares the motives Elder George Holt's testimony in writing in the early days--

"The 'beast' says Elder Geo. Holt, writing in the early days of the message, "having seven heads and ten horns is the one referred to: and I think the image, is the beast having 'two horns like a lamb,' that 'spake as a dragon.' His number is 666." (The Present Truth, vol. 1, no.8, March 1850)

Moreover, explain this--

"The Bible puts the number on the two-horned beast. Note that all the characteristics which pertain to the ten-horned beast are described in verses 1-10, and that all which pertain to the two-horned beast are described in verses 11-18. As the number closes the description of the two-horned beast, it cannot logically be applied to the ten-horned beast." (Sym. Code, vol. 8, no.1-12, p.18)

I already explained (not just on this thread but others as well) that back around 1847 there was the idea that 666 referred to the number of "oppostate" denominations in America, so Holt's 1850 statement simply shows he was one who believed something similar.

However, you won't find Seventh-day Adventists promoting that idea once the Seventh-day Adventist Church began in the early 1860's. Once Adventist doctrines were more fully studied and understood that belief was laid aside as not having validity.

Besides there is no "image beast" in Rev. 13.
So we ask what is meant by the "Image Beast?" It can't refer to the two horned beast, that beast isn't the image but it makes an image to another -the 1st beast. Thus the image (or likeness) is of the 1st beast which is the holder of the title and number. The logical conclusion is to view the expression "Image Beast," as the acceptance of the titles of the 1st beast.


The church, including EGW, were in agreement that the number 666 was the number of the man of sin -- the papal head.



The two horned beast (religious ecumenical apostate protestant Americans gaining political power) will force everyone to worship the beast (papal headship who claimed his authority over God's law was their change of God's covenant law --esp. the Sabbath)

The number is the trade mark of the name of the 1st beast and all who worship him, giving their allegiance to the man of sin, rather than to the Creator God, and help enforce the papal sign of authority will also receive his mark.

I will respond to Dedication's ideas later.

MM- I like the Vicarius Filii Dei and the Babylonian Amulet calculations of the number of the name of the man of the beast.

Before you jump on that false band wagon take a look at this. This name allocation of 666 is vague, widely applied, and even amazingly applied to our prophetess. Divinely showing I believe the fallacy of this thinking.

"Ironically, the name of Seventh-Day Adventistm’s “prophetess,” Ellen Gould White, adds up to 666 when adding up the Roman numerals using the same rules used for Vicarius Filii Dei (letters with no value are rendered 0, U is rendered V=5, in addition, W, which doesn’t exist in the Latin alphabet is rendered a double U, i.e. UU=VV, or V+V=10): E=0, L=50, L=50, E=0, N=0, G=0, O=0 U=V=5, L=50, D=500, W=V+V=5+5=10, H=0, I=1, T=0, E=0…all added up equals 666. That’s right. Ellen G. White’s name adds up to 666.

But, like the Papacy, this interpretation doesn’t fit the context of Revelation. Tons of names can add up to 666, which is why we must not ignore the context or purpose of the book." (Report by Ryan L. link here -- 666 usage )

I am not agreeing with his general belief (SDA is false religion ) just showing the fallacy of one of Satan's tricks.

"There are countless names that numerically compute to 666-it is not restricted to the Pope alone! XIUN, one of the names for the Sun-god in Greek, numerically added to 666.(Higgins, Anacapypsis, Vol. 2, p. 210) The Mythological bird of the Egyptians, Phoenicians, and many of the Indian tribes of North America, was the Phoenix, worshiped as the bright and morning star.

In Egypt it was the representation of the nocturnal symbol of the Sun-god Osiris.

In Greek transliteration, the Phoenix was spelled the FENEX, whose numerical value equaled 666. (Mythology of All Races, Vol. 12, p. 54.) An ancient Greek name for Satan was TEITAN, which equals 666 in its numerical values. Even the original Roman Numerals, IVXLCD, also equaled 666.

Astrologers commonly used 6, 36, and 666 for their divinations. "They invented magic charts. . . Like the roulette wheel, the charts were divided into 36 numbered divisions. There were 6 columns in all directions with the numbers 1 to 36 placed inside the entire chart. Any direction you add the columns, they add to 111.

There are six squares in each column and 6 times 11 equaling 666. If you add all the numbers from 1 to 36 they will also add to 666. . . .the number 666 was the summary number of the sun-god, because it was his sacred number as the Ruler of the Zodiac." (W. J. Sutton, The New Age Movement and the Illuminati 666, pp. 66, 67.) (Report from Mountain Dale DSDA, New York)

There is a big difference between calculating various individual names, which indeed can be widely applied, and calculating the papal assumed title. Those random individuals will simply not fit the many other characteristics attributed to the beast which has already been identified in verses 1–10 of Revelation 13. The number provides confirmatory evidence.

The beast is not just one individual -- it is a system with a successive line in position of "head man", who assumes this blasphemous title.

Not only that, but Revelation points us to inscriptions upon the head --
Rev. 13:1 upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
17:3 beast, full of names of blasphemy
17:5 upon her forehead [was] a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON

What is traditionally worn on the head of the pope?
A three tiered crown.

"Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions."

That triple crown was a direct usurpation attempt against Christ's realm and against Christ's call to true worship. of
"Worship Him that made heaven and earth and the fountains of water."

In most of the coronations of successive popes —
the tiara is placed on the candidate’s head with the words:
“Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns and know that thou art Father of princes and kings, Ruler of the world, Vicar of our Savior Jesus Christ.”*

And the title "Vicarius Filii Dei:" was inscribed with jewels in the papal triple crown.
A blasphemous crown claiming monarchy over heaven, earth, and

I was searching for something else on the Internet and came across a Godsloveandlaw moniker defending Houteff. Someone gets around. With the same message.


Regarding 666, one thing I came across, but have not found the Greek or Hebrew support for is: the first 6's are specified as 6 and 6 and the last 6 is as 60 giving 1260. Anyone hear anything like that before?

There appears to be two issues here.

1) What did the SDA know about the two-horned beast and 666, how did they know it and when?

2) What does the Bible say about it as a stand alone study?

I will submit to you the second issue is obviously more important than the first. As we are well aware both Ellen White and Victor Houteff said we are to measure all writings "to the Bible" not the other way around.

However it is important to know the first and to sort it out as best we can. Let's look at the first issue.

1) Dr. Butterbaugh, contrary to Dedication's slander, was a respected physician in his community and was living by his conscience which he actively pursued the Truth apparent to him, just as Elder Holt was doing in 1850. These are by no means just a handful, but rather a sizable following.

2) Elder Holt's view was accepted back then as evidenced by James White authorizing Elder Holt's view in "The Present Truth" (Vol. 1, no. 8, March 1850) Elder White was the sole editor of this publication from 1849 to 1850, which became the "Advent Review" later in 1850. Evidence - The Present Truth publication history

3) Dr. Butterbaugh , as he disclosed, made a original copy of a "photo-engraved" 1847 print "A Word to the little flock".

4) The original words as written in 1847 and compiled by Dr. Butterbaugh in the 1935 reprint are unaltered. An entire paragraph was omitted in "Experience and Views" and "Early Writings" (page 34) . Copy of EW , first compilation of 1882 -- EW -1882

5) We must ask the question -why was this paragraph omitted? Who did it and why?

******************************************************************

Now to address Dedications comments.

Ded- What both he and Houteff do is use this very early publication (Word to Little Flock) that contained articles by James White, Joseph Bates and Ellen White, who were just beginning to understand the truths that were to shape Adventism -- and then they take a statement pitting that against what those very pioneers accepted and believed in the years following the publication.

We've underlined an important mis-step by her. When God gives a vision and that person (prophet as in EGW case) gets it--they write it out. This is what EGW did in paragraph 19. God's does not say "Opps, I gave you a wrong vision, let's try again."

So while we know it was deleted, we must keep in mind her first vision and writing of it was God given. Not a mistake as some want to explain it away.

As far as what J.N Andrews believed, it was his private opinion and we cannot take it as Inspired any more than we can take any other pioneer's writings and ideas as Inspired. Thanks for that quote but it has historical value only. Also remember the quote used was from HIS book(J.N A) and was not approved specifically by EGW (as was James White's writing in co-partnership with EGW)

Ded- However the sentences from page 8 and 9 in "Word to Little Flock" that reads "Michael is to stand up at the time that the last power in chap. 11, comes to his end, and none to help him. This power...is brought to view in Rev. 13:11-18. His number is 666." -- pp. 8, 9. were NOT written by EGW.
They were written by James White and he changed his views on that shortly after.

Of course we know that James White wrote it but he was guided by EGW and obviously she approved it. Unless we are to take the postilion that EGW was left in the dark as to what she reviewed that he wrote. Which, ridiculously, you seem to imply.

Ded- Also, all the parenthesis found in EGW’s article in that publication (reference texts and the number 666 on page 19) were ADDED by Joseph Bates when he published the tract. He, at the time believed there would be six hundred and sixty six apostate denominations. This belief was held by several in the very early years (1847)

I am not interested in what Joesph Bates believed. Also the subject paragraph has no unusual parenthesis that makes it change the clear meaning.

Ded-Yet, that view was rejected very early in the pioneer’s lives.

Again you place man's private opinions as all important. Let's go by WHAT WAS WRITTEN by Inspiration, that's our main goal and course.

Ded- When EGW published her first visions for distribution in her own books she never included the sentence (page 19) that was in her article.

Why do you think she left that sentence and it’s supposed implied idea, out of all her published books when she related the vision?

That is your first good point. I admit it does not seem understandable that she would not include it later. I can only give my ideas. First, we must remember in the first compilation of EW 1882, she did add clarifications on page 85. She does not say anything about the paragraph that is missing.

What i suspect is that by 1882, this part of Revelation was quite studied privately among the brethren and thus when EW was made she deemed it better to let it alone as opposed to showing her original vision and causing wide spread confusion.

However as I said this ALL takes a back seat to the real deal--Scriptures. brother Houteff , as we shall see exposes powerful reasons why the two-horned beast cannot be anything but the USA and the "man" who does the wonders (666) is connected with the USA.

Next part we shall go into the Word and find out what really exists there.