The Four Horsemen and the Rise of the Antichrist

[RandyK]

The riders are not said to be angels. Therefore, what they are should be inferred from the context. As I lamented, the new critical texts delete the words "and see". making it likely "come" is spoken to call these into existence.

But if the majority text is followed, John is in heaven and called to look to look down through a portal at what is happening on the earth.

I believe the majority text is far better than trusting the creations of scholars. Providence picked the best text, and made it the majority.

Another example of scholarly incompetence is saying John was on the beach with the Dragon like a tourist, both watching the beast rise from the sea. Like buddies they propose. But the immediate context says the Dragon went off to wage war against everyone like John. So, the reading "I stood" on the sand of the sea is the correct reading, not "he [the dragon] stood" on the sand of the sea in Rev. 13:1.

There are so many examples where scholars really display their incompetence and bias that it requires a suspension of common sense to believe their ecclectic versions of the bible---and they keep making new ones because there is lots of $$$ inspiring them.

To sum up, the plagues etc caused by the three riders after the white horse, aren't targeted punishments, they punish everyone the same which normally is considered wrong, hence evil.

Your cause seems to be a debate between the Majority Version and "eclectic versions?" To do that you would have to be a scholar and a linguist. And you don't seem to be that. Of course, your opinion is reasonable and noted, although I disagree with you--I think the "eclectic versions" are sincere efforts to get back closer to the original autographs.

Again, the riders on the 4 horsemen are, I think, angels, although I do accept your criticism that they are not explicitly identified as such. The Apocalypse is highly symbolic and subtle, because, I think, the Roman government would not tolerate anything more specific, as we Christians pit Christian truth against the world's "truth."

The riders are linked to the "living creatures," which join with angels around the throne giving glory to God. As such, I think they are just another order of angels among the billions. And I don't think "executing judgment" on God's behalf is necessarily an "evil thing."

The issues you raise I don't personally see as relevant to my own point of view. Whether "come and see" or just "see" is used, not much differnece in the sense is obvious to me. John's standing on the sea or the Dragon's standing on the sea doesn't strike me as of such importance that it alters the basic conflict being described between the Antichrist and the Church.

Noting John's position in heaven or not also does not seem the focus from my point of view. Obviously, this is an heavenly vision, meaning that it originates from heaven with God, John going there simply to have these things revealed to him from God.

Where he goes during the visions is unimportant--I would assume his physical body remained on the island. But your views are welcomed. I would just recommend remaining always open to the Lord and His possible corrections, if indeed we wish to grow in knowledge.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Your cause seems to be a debate between the Majority Version and "eclectic versions?" To do that you would have to be a scholar and a linguist. And you don't seem to be that. Of course, your opinion is reasonable and noted, although I disagree with you--I think the "eclectic versions" are sincere efforts to get back closer to the original autographs.

Again, the riders on the 4 horsemen are, I think, angels, although I do accept your criticism that they are not explicitly identified as such. The Apocalypse is highly symbolic and subtle, because, I think, the Roman government would not tolerate anything more specific, as we Christians pit Christian truth against the world's "truth."

The riders are linked to the "living creatures," which join with angels around the throne giving glory to God. As such, I think they are just another order of angels among the billions. And I don't think "executing judgment" on God's behalf is necessarily an "evil thing."

The issues you raise I don't personally see as relevant to my own point of view. Whether "come and see" or just "see" is used, not much differnece in the sense is obvious to me. John's standing on the sea or the Dragon's standing on the sea doesn't strike me as of such importance that it alters the basic conflict being described between the Antichrist and the Church.

Noting John's position in heaven or not also does not seem the focus from my point of view. Obviously, this is an heavenly vision, meaning that it originates from heaven with God, John going there simply to have these things revealed to him from God.

Where he goes during the visions is unimportant--I would assume his physical body remained on the island. But your views are welcomed. I would just recommend remaining always open to the Lord and His possible corrections, if indeed we wish to grow in knowledge.

We can agree to disagree on the symbolism. Interpreting it is very subjective. Neither of us can cite hard facts for our inferences. But I do recommend highly you revist the issue of textual criticism. Check this video out, its well done on the issue.

 

[RandyK]

We can agree to disagree on the symbolism. Interpreting it is very subjective. Neither of us can cite hard facts for our inferences. But I do recommend highly you revist the issue of textual criticism. Check this video out, its well done on the issue.

My older brother is heavily into textual criticism and has been for years. It's nothing new to me, although it is not my forte. I don't have enough space in my life to learn Greek and Hebrew, although I did take a course in Greek once, and made a small effort at learning some Hebrew. I do better with Spanish, but don't even do that very well. ;)

I tend to favor Alande's version of things.

But thanks anyway..... Have a nice Sunday!