666? As in the 6th day of the 6th month of the 6th year? Shouldn't that have happened in ... the year 6? No, wait. Revelation wasn't written until about the year 96, so there goes that theory.
I would say that it's all relative, but considering that the number has connotations deriving from one specific religious outlook, I suppose that one would have to consider the number only in relation to that specific outlook. Still (not to let a good bit of thinking go to waste), if the point of view is outside that outlook, the calendrical significance of 666 (for this discussion) fades to insignificance.
- calendars are adjustable and cultures have different ways of pigeonholing the position of earth in relation to the sun. Hindu, Aztec, traditional Japanese, tradional Thai, Muslim, Jewish
- the non-adjustable (or infinitely adjustable) calendar
Somehow, I think we'll get through 6 June 2006, just like we got through the 5th. In the event that we don't, there won't be anyone around to read today's blog entry. Will there? Your 'getting through' will be dependent, of course, on when your point-of-reference passes the start of the day ... depending on when you think the day starts.
It's all relative.
Here it is the 17th. Looks like we survived (again).
Posted by: Valerie | 17 June 2006 at 01:03 PM