Understanding the beginning of Revelations

KJS, 

There is precedent for the seal horses and riders in the book of Zechariah (Zech. 1:6, 6:2), which I would consider an Old Testament manifestation of what we see in the Revelation. When Jesus enters the throne room of God in Revelation chapter 4/5, as the Lamb that was slain, the Kingdom is handed over to Him. After His death and resurrection, He is now worthy to open the scroll by removing its seals. The horses and riders have always existed, but now they are released by Christ under the New Covenant, and proceed with their tasks under the authority of Christ who they are now subject to. 
I do not believe that the seals are tied to specific events or individuals. The horses and riders are spiritual entities who have influence over geopolitical events on earth. They influence people(s) on earth. Not unlike the angelic armies in Ezekiel, who had an earthly counterpart whom they had influence over; the Babylonians (see Ezekiel 9). The riders of these horses have held their positions since Christ assumed His throne. 

You said:

When you say that the cumulative effect diminishes the overall impact, what impact are you referring to? The idea that they are to be Horrific and separate events is not derived from scripture, that is something that you were taught along the way. However I would agree that they are horrible effects. Just ask those who watched their loved ones sent to concentration camps, who died of starvation and disease, whose sons and daughters were casualties of war. Pretty horrific events.

You misinterpret the passage to say that 1/4 of the earth's population is killed. rather the correct interpretation is that the last horse and its riders have authority over 1/4 of the earth, geographically to kill. They have a specific territory in which they operate over time. I actually did some research on this and if you look at where the majority of war, famine and death, etc.. has occurred in the world over the last 2000 years it has been concentrated as the OP said in and around the middle east, that quarter of the world. That is not to say that war, pestilence, famine etc... doesn't happen elsewhere and yes people all over the world die of these things. But this rider has a specific region he carries out his task in and the statistics would show that the majority of death from theses effects around the Mediterranean/ middle east.

delo63, welcome to the board!!

I think you and I agree on many things. I might even agree in part with you that elements of the fifth seal are historical, for instance, the idea that there are souls of the martyrs under the altar of incense. These souls would have been there throughout history. (I explain this more in my thread). But what is the actual effect of the removal of the seal?  something specific happens to these souls....they are given white robes and told to rest a bit longer until their number is completed, until additional people are killed as martyrs.

The question is, what is so significant about them receiving white robes? What are these robes? I have suggested (in my thread) that these robes are in fact the regenerated glorified body they receive upon their resurrection into the heavenly tabernacle.

The first four seals are all similar, constituting horses and riders and their effects in the earth, while the fifth and sixth seals are very different. The opening of the fifth seal is a complete break (no pun intended) from the first four,it shifts the reader's focus from events on earth to events in heaven, it introduces us to the idea that prophecy is about to be fulfilled.  A resurrection event is taking place, and these martyrs are basically told that their vindication will come as soon as their number is completed, which will be accomplished through the events that John goes on to describe.

I believe this is were you are misinterpreting the scripture.
Let's look at the Greek

autos: (to them) exousia: (power to act, authority) epi: (on, upon) fourth; tétartos ((figuratively) a part of the whole (totality, all four quarters) )
   gé: (the earth, land, inhabitants of a region.)    apokteinó or apoktennó: to kill ,put to death, kill; fig: abolish.

It appears -- you want to stop the text at the gé --- which primarily does mean land or earth -- but can mean inhabitants of a region based off the context.....

Then you STOP --- the very next word is the ACTION word -- the very word they were "given power to act upon" 

That Action word is   TO KILL  (also put to death, also abolish)

The authority (or the power to act) goes to the action being called out ---  it does not go to the thing that limits the authority (ie 1/4 of the inhabitants)

Or to put another way, the "1/4 of the inhabitants" is a limiting conditional upon the ACTION   --- the Action again is TO KILL -- but the limit says only 1/4 .....

The rest of the sentence refers back to the ACTION VERB --- or how that action verb will be done --- through SWORD / Famine / Viruses / Wild Animals .....


Unsure why you do not want to include the ACTION VERB --- since it connects both the authority to act -- with the how to act

=========================
Going back to Horsemen number three (and by the way I do not have a problem seeing these as a system rather than an individual)

NOWHERE in History has a standard meal cost a daily wage (and a sub-Standard Meal can feed three for a daily wage)

Horseman #1 -- Conqueror Horseman #2 --- WAR --- are so generically identified  (in other words not enough specific information) -- then I grant -- it is possible to see these being fulfilled by many various scenarios ......

However, #3 and #4 -- have some specific conditions to be met -- and they have not happen yet. 

Hi, kjs! I don't think rt meant the highlighted word as if adding it in quoting the Scripture, but rather as emphasizing the meaning she understands from it.

By your own admission it can mean geography. The action verb can apply to the region and its population. I am not the only one to hold this view, many commentaries see it this way. I am no Greek scholar, but I know people who are who also see it this way. I maintain that this is a proper interpretation. 


Concerning your claim that nowhere in history is there a record of a meal costing a days wage, I don't think you know your history very well. Take a look at this page, you will see that for a quart of barley in 301 BC the cost was about 6 denarius and 10 for a quart of wheat. The author writes :

also look here for more on famine and hyperinflation: 
www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-venezuela-inflation-0531-snap-htmlstory.html
www.cnn.com/2016/08/02/americas/venezuela-food-prices/index.html
articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-11-13/news/9104110945_1_bread-low-prices-price-increase
ourworldindata.org/famines/
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/the-worlds-hunger-problems-in-four-charts-a6690706.html
www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~palmer/Geradstetten/Report%20of%20the%20Famine%20and%20Hhe%20Hyper-Inflation%20of%201816%20and%201817.pdf

You go on to say



I do no such thing as "adding words" to scripture. It is a matter of interpretation, not adding or taking anything away. The word "people" or "inhabitants" doesn't appear there either. The geographical word used is "the earth" which can mean inhabitants  or the land itself. In this case it would mean that the authority granted concerns 1/4 of the land geographically. The action would pertain to the people that live there, people who live in the land that these entities have authority over. 

So I respectfully disagree with you.

Let's not have a gregt incident, shall we? Both interpretations are valid. Instead, just agree to disagree. Both work. We are NOT losing more members over an argument about the meaning of a Greek word.

KJS, you say:



Where does it say in the passage that it has to happen to the whole world at one time? You made the claim that "NOWHERE in History has a standard meal cost a daily wage", and I showed you that in fact it has happened throughout history. The links I provided are not an exhaustive list, there were many more I could have posted. There is nothing said in the passage that the effects cover the entire world or that it happens all at the same time. If there is, then please point me to it, because I am not seeing it there. 

I am confident in my theory, yes. But I would never go so far as to say dogmatically that I am 100% correct.  As I have said I am not a Greek scholar, and my understanding of the nuances of the language is pretty limited. and also as I have said I am not the only one to hold this view, many commentaries also claim this to be true. I have consulted with a friend who knows Greek very well  to ask him if what you say is correct. When I hear from him I will let you know what he says.