317
3) It is to be observed, that the number is said to be that of one beast , not of many beasts : and that it is the number of the beast it- self, and not that of the name of the beast, which is proposed for computation. A number indeed is both assigned to the name of the beast repeatedly, and in ver. 18, only to the beast itself : and Rupertus Tuitiensis on Ap. p. 380, that I may not appear too minute in my inquiries, has seriously remarked, that the number of the beast is one thing, and the number of his name another ; and Potter , in his In- terpretation of the number 666, ch. 1, where he quotes many who agree with him, and this is proved by the very peculiarity of the expression. For there occurs, I. The beast ; II. His name ; III. The number of his name ; IV. The number of the beast : and the fourth ought no more to be confounded with the others, than the others ought to be confounded with one another. Since however no number of the name of the beast is indicated apart from the number of the beast, I will readily acknowledge, that the latter is to be investigated by means of the former. In the meantime the pro- phetic phraseology is to be precisely adhered to, and the peculiarity of the well-weighed expression is to be followed. It is not said that the number of the name of the beast is to be computed, but the number of the beast. Moreover the number both of the beast him- self and of one beast only , is a proof, that there is a number or mul- titude of accidents: for a number indeed of beasts would denote a number which was made up of the substances of many beasts taken together ; but the number of the beast is that which is made up of certain accidents of one beast taken together. And since this is the number of the accidents, those accidents are inherent in the beast himself : For as, if the days of the beast were spoken of, I should take those days for a certain duration of the beast himself : so the number of accidents of the beast ought to be looked for in the beast itself, and not outside of him.
4) Here we are commanded not only to number, but to compute. The word is a™, not dpid/^rjcdru, comp. ch. vii. 9. u The pe- culiar number of the beast,” says Cassiodorus , in his Complexiones on this passage, u is explained under a certain method of calcu- lation.” Now calculation and computation cannot be carried on in such a matter, except by taking in another number. Potter says, in accordance with reason, u Neither addition, nor subtraction, nor multiplication, nor division, can be carried on, unless two num- bers at least are given, so that a third number may be sought out, which must be either their sum, or the remainder, or the product,
318