Contra-Dispensationalism: The White Horse in Revelation 6
I don’t think I’ve detected any rampant Dispensationalism here at Mass Theology. However, here are some thoughts/observations on the White Horse in Revelation 6. As you can tell from my previous posts and this one – I sure do love inner-book word studies. They just seem to clear up so much bad theology.
In Revelation 6:2, when the Lamb who was slain unfastens the first of 7 seals, a white horse comes forth carrying a rider who holds a bow, but no arrows. This rider is given a crown and rides out as a conqueror to conquer. Dispensationalists often interpret this rider to be the anti-Christ – the eschatological one who will come and dupe the world into following him. He fools them by bringing peace (hence no arrows), and for 3.5 years is a peaceful chap until something snaps in him and he goes berserk in a cosmic sort of way.
Contrary to this popular interpretation, though, this figure in chapter 6 is hardly some eschatological anti-messiah. This figure really is the actual Messiah, Jesus Christ. He comes forth to conquer, but does not do so with violence – again, the lack of arrows in his bow.
This fact of the crucified, peacemaking Jesus being the figure represented as riding a white horse is supported by simple word studies in the passage. And here’s where I will spend the rest of my time.
First, the Gk. word for white (λευκὀς) only, only, only occurs in reference to Jesus, God, or the faithful followers of Jesus in John’s apocalypse. White is the color of righteous triumph, the color of those who have overcome, the color of the One who delivers the revelation of God. In fact, in 19:11, another (probably the same) white horse comes out with a rider on it who is explicitly shown to be Jesus – the One called Faithful and True. Now, John’s imagery is often difficult to interpret, but I seriously doubt he would put both Jesus and the anti-Christ on the same white horse (or even two horses that came from the same mother). This color is strictly reserved for the righteous and the Righteous One, not the world or Babylon.
Second, the crown this rider receives is the Gk. word (στέφανη) employed only, only, only in reference to the believers and Christ in Revelation. The Beast and other antagonists in Revelation sport a different crown altogether – a completely different Gk. word. The one time an antagonist does wear this righteous crown, Revelation says it is “like a στέφανη of gold” (ὥ στέφανοι χρυσοί ), not an actual στεφανόη. That is, this is a fake στέφανοη.
Third, the Gk. word for conquer (νικών) – from which we get the word “Nike” – is employed only, only, only in relation to Jesus and the saints who faithfully followed him. There are 2 exceptions to this in Revelation, but the overwhelming evidence points to the use I have mentioned here. Furthermore, in the previous chapter – the immediate context, that is – (5:5) the imagery directly pointed to Jesus being the conqueror. John expects his readers to still have that imagery in their mind when they come to this horse.
Fourth, I would look at the bow. Dispensationalists often say that the anti-Christ will conquer with peace, but unfortunately miss that Jesus has already conquered with peace. Jesus brings peace, not through a sword, not through military might, but through being the Lamb that was slain. They got the peace right – they just gave it to the wrong person.
Finally, offering an argument from silence, I would also note that the word “anti-Christ” not only never occurs in this passage, but never occurs outside the books of 2 & 3 John. And there the anti-Christ’s were among the people – they were not some eschatological figure waiting to deceive the world – the deception is occurring now!
Ok, more later, but for now, let me know what you think – especially you Dispensationalists out there in Mass Theology land. Why must this figure be the anti-Christ? In the end, I think the evidence I have provided here is overwhelming, but I’m up for someone making an attempt….(I say with a challenging wink and sly smile).
While this is certainly contra-Dispensationalist…I’d say you’re proposing a reading that goes against the grain of most critical scholarship I’m familiar with, which is always fun!
I’ve usually seen this figure as representative of the Parthian empire, whose bowmen and horseriders were reknown…especially considering how much they menaced Rome’s frontier. Then the next figure (red rider) takes away the Pax of rome, etc.
I’m curious about the significance of this bow. Do we have any material (Hebrew Bible, Wisdom Literature) that John could be working with here? This could provide an interesting study.
I’d say you have a case, in relation to the white horse in Rev. 19. The fact that there are exceptions to the usage of “nike” leaves some problems though, problems that would need to be addressed well for me to take that as evidence.
I don’t know, but I’d like to see where further study takes this.
i’m with Ham. you have to take into account that a cavalryman with a bow screams "Parthian warrior" to first century ANE Roman. But this isn’t at all inconsistent with the rest of the reading you’ve proposed.
Moreover, the concept of an antiChrist as an eschatological figure is nonbiblical. We have the 2 thess "man of lawlessness", but according to the Johanine epistles, the AntiChrist is already among us, and indeed, is more than one person.
Tom,
Well done. Question: would you say you lean more to an idealistic/spiritual reading of the Apocalypse of John the Seer? Ham and JR take a more preterist reading–but not the sort that has to date the book before AD 70 or their entire world falls apart.
And a note of clarification, four of the five occurrences of antichrist are in 1 John and the other one is 2 John.
Hm. I can’t qualify my reading as preterist as I don’t hold that the book is actually predicting anything. Rather, I read the work as an apocalypse, following J. J. Collins’ definition – it’s communicating truth (not just spiritual or allegorical either) through contemporary symbolism (to butcher his definition).
Thanks guys, you’ve got some good points here. And I agree, Matt, it is always interesting to go against good scholarship – but one must be wary as well. So, I looked it up and my view has pretty strong scholastic support ranging back to Irenaeus. However, much modern scholarship has abandoned the view I’m proposing here.
I purposely avoided scholastic interaction before I posted this. Sometimes I feel I rely too much on it before examining the text itself. So, the word study and thoughts derived from it are completely my own. Which may also explain why I didn’t come to the conclusion most contemporary scholars do.
So, I have confidence and trepidation. In the end, I was writing this as more of an exploratory piece, not necessarily something I’ve decided to come down on for the rest of my days. That, and I want to post it on my xanga page b/c I have a few Dispensationalist readers there – but before I do that, I wanted to get some good feedback.
Anyway, here are my thoughts regarding your comments:
I don’t see the Parthian warrior imagery as completely against my view (as JR noted). Though, certainly, it could be! Rather, if Christ appears as a threatening figure to the world order, would not this kind of imagery be perfect for such a message? That is, he appears as a threatening warrior who will conqueror. Even though his conquering is in a peaceful sense, he is still just as threatening.
Good question on the bow, Matt. Here’s a few things. I did a word study on that particular word. It is the same word as used after the flood in Genesis when a ‘bow’ appeared in the sky. Interestingly, though, John refers to a rainbow earlier in the Apocalypse and uses a different Gk. word. In addition to this, it also means bow – as weapon – in the LXX (specifically note Ps. 45). In the end, this is the only use of this word in Revelation (or in the NT for that matter). Any insight you’ve got?
Next, the parallels with Christ in Rev. 19 are difficult. Christ in Rev. 19 does not wear a stephanos, but many diadems. (This is a big deal as I emphasized the importance of stephanos in the post).
However, I have great difficulty abandoning consistent imagery in favor of inconsistent imagery. That is, the consistent imagery (over 14x’s in Rev.) is that the color white belongs only to the saints and Christ. Surely my view cannot be solely predicated on this, but it’s going to be difficult for me to pry myself away from this without a good argument -which, as you know, I’m always up for!
Finally (for now), the Parthian warrior. As I don’t think this has to be fatal to my view, do you all think it could be argued that Christ appears in this imagery in the subversive sense I mentioned earlier – the one who IS a threat to Rome b/c he conquerors, even with peace?
JR – do you think the book at least predicts (whatever that means) the final victory of God?
Thanks guys, good discussion. I love that this one is not only one we disagree on, but is also not so ‘life-and-death’ as some of the others that get out of hand on this page.
I’m heading to the HDS library here in an hour or two, I know of a few excellent resources to check while I’m there. I’ll get back to you.
JR,
I’m not placing you in the J.S. Russel camp where the text has to predict the fall of Jerusalem or it has no meaning. You look back to the contemporary culture to find the meaning of the symbols. It is similar to what Ray King did in his work Worthy is the Lamb. He was a kind of preterist, but viewed the book more like a commentary of John’s contemporary events.
Tom –
Sure, it predicts that. I guess. That doesn’t seem like that much of a revelation though. :)
Hank –
Noted. I just really don’t want to be lumped in with those guys. In my mind, there’s a huge hermeneutic break btw. my approach and that of Russel/Hannagraph/et. al. They assume that the book is predictive prophecy that must be fulfilled. In this way, they’re no different from the Dispensationalist approach to the book. I don’t think my approach is the same, as I look to the book’s historical/cultural context to provide a backdrop for the symbolic language to communicate non-predictive prophetic/apocalyptic truth.
Ham –
I love you.
[...] Fuerst at Theology for the Masses presents Contra-Dispensationalism: The White Horse in Revelation 6: Contrary to this popular interpretation, though, this figure in chapter 6 is hardly some [...]
Alas, I got behind and didn’t have time to look at the commentaries (notably David Aune’s amazing commentary in the World Biblical Commentary series, it’s three huge freakin volumes of goodness) I had intended. I’m at work now and don’t really have the resources available to me to do the kind of study I had hoped. :(
I’ll get to it though, I promise.
I’m with JR on the issue of prophecy in Revelation. I see John using the genre of apocalyptic literature and the tools it gives him to speak to theological, spiritual, political, and ethical truths to whomever would listen. His use of not only Hebrew scripture, but also the texts and rhetorics of the Greco-Roman world of his day are simply astounding.
Tom, the argument on “white” is actually a pretty darn good one. John is very deliberate in things like that. Though, I thought I read a source once that spoke of the Parthians often riding white horses…but that could just be my mind playing tricks on me.
I’ll be back with more tomorrow hopefully.
Ham – you’re right about the white horses and the Parthians. I still think, though, John’s intentionality is coming through here. Let me know what you get from Aune – he’s excellent.
I have read the WBC on Revelation and it is great, I really wish I had it. Aune does a great job of utilizing the first century culture to explain imagery. I have to personally say I don’t agree with him on his take of the mediatorial kingdom.
I’ve got Aune’s commentary. Get this:
Four cavaliers motif loosely based on Zech. 1:11-17 and the 4 colors are loosely based on Zech. 6:1-8. Origin doesn’t determine meaning (in my opinion, many obviously disagree), but it helps to see how John is using something established to further his own rhetoric.
In Ovid’s Metamorphisis, he depicts the legendary Minos as mounted on a white horse and as carrying a bow as wel as a spear (Metam. 8.25-36). In fact, there is a general history of "celestial cavalier" imagery in the Greco-Roman world (Dioscuri, Heron the Thracian cavalier god, Horus, or Mithras).
The greek of the phrase "and behold, a white horse and the one seated on it" is the exact same in Rev. 6:2 and 19:11. Interesting. The rider of 19:11 is quite certainly Jesus/The Messiah. Yet, the portrayal of the riders is very different in the two passages. One thing to notice is that the Lamb himself is opening the seals in this scenario, it seems to be narratively confusing for the Lamb to open a seal and then suddenly be a white horse and then open another seal (but Rev. plays around with narrative continuity all the time, so while it takes some work, you can get around this).
Aune points out that the Messiah isn’t expected until after the Messianic woes are completed. Yet, that still leaves room for this figure (esp. the horse) to represent the Gospel…and interesting suggestion. Oecemenius (10th c.) suggests this apparently (Comm. in Apoc. 6:2).
For the bow, interestingly…it’s not a Roman weapon, but it was used widely in Greece and others in the Near East…especially Parthia. I thought I was smart for a second in coming up with this on my own, but Aune also suggests that Apollo could be an intersting corollary considering Apollo shot arrows from heaven as divine punishment for the Greeks (first book of the Iliad, don’t have the specific reference handy).
Aune seems to fall on the side that this horseman just represents warfare, and that the following horses represent the "stereotypical evils of war: sword, famine, and plague."
So…I don’t know what to glean from all that, but I hope it provides some material for you to chew on. :)
Very nice, Matt. And you guessed what my objection would be to the mixed metaphor of lamb/horse-rider. The literature allows for such mixed metaphors – in fact, in the same context Jesus is both lion and lamb – so why not horse rider as well (wink…).
The use of ‘white’ and the exact same intro to 6:2 and 19:11 are pretty strong cases….but certainly not absolutely definitive.
Good info, bro.
I recently saw a DVD called “And then the End Shall Come” by Derek Prince…on the fourth DVD in the series he concluded that the white horse and rider represented Jesus and the gospel of the Kingdom…he also was talking about the scripture where Jesus told his disciples about wars and rumours of wars and earthquakes, but the end was not yet…then he said the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM SHALL BE PREACHED TO ALL THE WORLD…AND THEN THE END SHALL COME….(I am not near my bible at the moment so forgive if it not exactly word for word)…Derek Prince knew Greek very well and that was his interpretation…he also admitted the book of revelation was difficult to interepret and the Greek language was also not easy to get right at times…anyhow this white horse and rider has stirred me up recently…I was talking with a relative of mine and I was telling her of this DVD and she had had a dream several years ago of Jesus and the white horse army of which she was riding on one of the horses…as I was discussing the DVD something happened inside me and I felt as though something woke up inside of me…I believe the preaching of the full gospel of the kingdom, not the name it and claim it, or the prosperity messages we been hearing, nor the how to be a better person messages, but the message of the cross of Jesus, what it accomplished, and how we can appropriate the victory that Jesus won for us, how the carnal nature has to be put to the cross, how we can truly be reconciled to the Father thru Jesus the Son…it needs to be preached..our hope is not in this world or the things of this world…I pray the Holy Spirit will open up all our eyes to see the truth and get the right interpretation and understand this gospel of the Kingdom of heaven…God Bless your searching and may you find Him…I believe Jesus wants to come back soon…he was stirring me also about Solomon (who can represent the Kingdom)..how the first thing Solomon did was set things right…killed enemies and promoted the ones faithful to David…then he built the temple of God…then dedicated the temple 1Kings 8…the presence of God was so thick, the priests had to stop their ministering…the prayer Solomon prayed to God was so powerful when I read it the other day..I could barely read it..I read it with tears streaming down my face…this all goes together guys and I am very stirred because I want the heavenly, not the earthly…
I saw this and just thought I would add a few comments. God Bless
You know what has always facinated me about that statement in the Synoptics, about the gospel being preached before the return of the Son of Man in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:14 εἰς μαρτύριον πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν; Mark 13:10 εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη), was that Paul in Colossians 1:6, 23 says that the gospel has been preached in the whole world (Col. 1:6 ἐν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ; Col. 1:23 ἐν πάσῃ κτίσει). What does that mean? Was it as Paul says, or do Paul and Jesus have different ideas of how to define the whole world? I’m curious as to what others think about this.
I’m not a Christian by todays standards, my background is more hermetic in nature. I give this just as a point of reference to elucidate my observation. The colors red, white, and black are mentioned twice in the bible (listed together) in Zechariah 6 and famously in Revelation. To many these colors appear together by chance, or maybe these particular colors construe characteristics like purity or death. While I don’t disagree with either of these suggestions, I generally read things to have double and triple meanings, the colors listed fit perfectly into what alchemist have long described as, the order of the operation. These are seen as milestones when performing the operation to achieve the philosophers stone. The subject of the work goes from black, to white, and finally to red when perfection has been achieved. If you dig deeper, this is not the only place where the similarities appear. It’s completely fine if you find any of this absurd, this is just my observation on the matter. For what it’s worth, you can read everything from Jonah and the whale, to Jesus walking on water as an allegorical interpretation of processes in the alchemical realm.
I’m not a dispensationalist or preterist, or whatever other confusing words you can think of. I’m a Christian, and I firmly believe that the Bible can only be interpreted by using the Bible. It speaks for itself. We don’t need man-made traditions and thoughts to mess everything up. I’ve heard that just like in Genesis where Pharaoh had two dreams meaning the same thing, that Revelation does the same thing (coincidence, since they are the first and last books) with the seven seals and angels. Compare them and see, but keep in mind that some of them are a whole lot different, but may possibly be a description of the same event. It further elaborates on the subject. I don’t know anything for sure, but the fifth seal and fifth angel must be the same, and possibly the other seals and angels too:
6:9-10 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
14:18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
Both talk about judgement, and somebody is under the altar shouting out that they want the persecutors to pay for what they did (of course this is symbolic, since the saints always loved their persecutors and forgae them). It’s just a hunch, but it’s better than what man-made theories have to offer.
Thank you for your comments Doyle. I would just quibble with a few points.
First, I don’t think you can properly interpret the Bible in all cases with just the Bible. There are cultural symbols and contexts behind these texts which must be known if we are to understand them. (i.e. Baptism for the Dead in I Cor. 15, or the meaning of “image and likeness” in Genesis 1:26-28). While it is best to interpret the Bible with the Bible, it is not always sufficient to answer some of the questions we modern readers ask – for it assumes the answers instead of explicitly stating them.
Second, all theories are man-made. As are all interpretations. We are historically situated people within a given culture. Thus, all our thoughts are tainted by our situation. That doesn’t mean the Holy Spirit can speak truth to us, but it does mean that all interpretations are human in nature and are subject to fallibility.
Hope that doesn’t sound confrontational. I just wanted to raise some objections.
Tom
*edit*
That doesn’t mean the Holy Spirit “can’t” speak truth to us….”
Doyle,
I would add to Tom’s response that while I find your interpretation of the seal and bowl judgments interesting, I don’t find it compelling. The imagery of Revelation 6:9-10 speaks of martyrs crying out from under the altar for God to avenge them. Revelation 14:18 speaks of a voice calling to the angel commanding him to bring forth judgment. The language just doesn’t line up. But the connection that you made was interesting.
The rider on the white horse is hinted of in Isaiah 19. Furthermore, in the first instance in the Apocalypse, it is CHRIST through a victorious servant. Perhaps with more than one fulfillment (Constantine, then someone in the near future who defeats muslims at the helm of the Saints, as per the victory mentioned more than once in the Prophet Daniel). He isn’t said to be akin to the following horsemen. He precedes the later mention of satan overcoming in physical war (not spiritually) the Saints, just as mentioned in Daniel, before a long time of their enduring the little horn (the quran), before finally arising, when the Books of Judgement are opened in judgement of the blasphemies of boasts. In order for there to be Holy Ones for the satanic power to overcome, the Saints must first have a power they only wielded due to GOD’s intervention through Constantine. (They remain Saints the whole time of being a vanquished People, persevering a long time, surviving to strike islam just as suddenly as islam struck them.)
The Saints give a mortal wound to one head of the beast (islam), in the Crusades, which ends up not ending in the head’s death at all, to the astonishment of all the world. The world says shame on Denmark for those cartoons, and on the US for attacking a peaceful people, and on Christians for not honoring “the [false] prophet”, and on the Jews of Israel for wanting the islamic third holiest place for themselves!
The word “qeren”, Aramaic for “horn”, is used of something smaller than a king/man, but having a man’s/mohammad’s eyes, and possessing a mouth speaking great things against the Saints and agianst GOD. I could go on and on.
Later on in the Apocalypse, it is JESUS directly, and not merely in HIS instrument, on the white horse.
*against
Peter,
It sounds like, to me, what you’re saying is that since these images point to the Quran, Constantine, and Islam, NONE of John’s revelation would have meant anything to the people who originally read it – that is, neither John nor his readers could have understood these things b/c they did not know Constantine, Islam, or the Quran.
To me, this reading is anachronistic and laden with exegetical fallacies. If a reader concludes certain things that the writer and his audience could have never known, then the reader is wrong. This is terribly prevalent in Revelation studies, and it needs to stop.
That said, I may be wrong about this passage. But I will not abandon my position for one that pulls from outside…well, gosh, outside the Bible, the first century, even Rome (w/ Islam and Quran).
What I’d like to see is more exegetical reasons, from REv. 9, on why you think I’m wrong.
Just reading back over my previous comments and I think I sound gruff. Not trying to be….promise. Just passionate…that’s all :)
Revelations 6:1-2 refer to a sagittarian that received a revelation from Jesus Christ, thus the bow and the crown;
The New Knowledge that this person shares with those that are willing to understand is what constitutes the conquering..
Can a book conquer? The bible conquered literally billions of souls, thus your First Seal is agian a book written by a sagittarian that received a revelation from our savior’
But there’s no book mentioned…and there’s nothing in the text that suggests conquering with knowledge.
First Seal: White Horse
The white horse is mounted by a rider who “had a bow; and a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer” (Rev. 6:2). Some have confused this image with the one in Revelation 19, also a rider on a white horse. A quick comparison of chapters 6 and 19 reveals the two riders have little in common except that they ride white horses.
The white horse rider in chapter 6 is bent on conquest. The intent of the rider in chapter 19 is to exact divine and just retribution for sin. This rider is called “Faithful and True” and he judges and makes war with justice (19:11). He is called “the Word of God” and his name is “King of kings and Lord of Lords” (19:13, 16). The rider on the white horse in Revelation 19 is unmistakably Jesus, the triumphant Messiah coming to rule the world.
Who, then, is the rider of the white horse in Revelation 6? He is accompanied by three other mounted horses. Their riders portray destruction and death. The white horse and its rider should be interpreted in a consistent manner. It would not make sense for this rider to represent the conquering Christ who restores peace to earth.
In the expanded symbolic universe of Revelation, perhaps the white horse rider of chapter 6 represents false messiahs who claim to represent Jesus. They conquer others “in his name,” so to speak. We could say the image even refers to all saviors—religious or secular—who come in the name of peace and justice but bring war and tyranny.
Thus, the two riders on white horses serve as theological bookends for Revelation. The messiah figure in Revelation 6 is a fraudulent copy of Jesus Christ, the true messiah. When the white horse rider of Revelation 6 goes out to conquer, havoc and death result. When the Messiah on the white horse of chapter 19 goes out to conquer, he ushers in peace and salvation.
As Revelation can be thought of as a tale of two cities—Babylon the Great and the New Jerusalem—it is also a tale of two systems. There is a false system represented by its messiahs who think they can bring peace through conquest (as did the Roman Empire). But only Christ can bring in lasting peace and eternal life in the kingdom of God.
The four elements in the description of the rider on the white horse in Revelation 6 bear this out. He rides a white horse, holds a bow, is given a crown and goes out “as a conqueror bent on conquest” (6:2).
White is said to be the color of victory. Apparently, many victorious warriors rode white horses as an emblem of their triumph. The symbol has persisted. In the old cowboy movies, the hero was dressed in light clothing and often rode a white horse.
The bow is also a symbol of war and conquest. Some see here a reference to the feared Parthians. They were well known for their archery skills in battle. “A ‘Parthian shot’ still means a final, devastating blow, to which there is no possible answer” (William Barclay, The Daily Study Bible Series, “The Revelation of John,” volume 2, revised edition, p. 4).
The dreaded Parthians, on Rome’s eastern flank, were an undefeated enemy. In a failed invasion, the Roman armies were defeated in A. D. 62 by the Parthian general Vologeses in the Tigris river valley. The disaster must still have been remembered in the days when Revelation was written. The churches in the Roman province of Asia (to whom the book was written) must have been quite aware of the Parthians as bowmen riding white horses. Such a horseman could serve as an immediate metaphor of military power and conquest.
However, Revelation’s visions and content contain many dozens of allusions to the Old Testament. Here we also find the metaphor of the bow as a symbol of conquest (Psalm 46:9; Jeremiah 49:35; Ezekiel 39:3; Hosea 1:5).
The crown, which the rider of the white horse wears, is also a symbol of military conquest. The Greek word here is stephanos, which was the victor’s wreath, not the diadema, which meant a royal crown.
Thus, the white horse and his rider symbolize the spirit of conquest and militarism. Their meaning would differ from the red horse who more specifically stands for warfare. As we know, there is more to conquest than war alone. Economic power, propaganda, the use of religion, diplomacy and political shrewdness are also part of successful conquest.
Second Seal: Red Horse
The second horse’s meaning seems clear. It is a symbol of war, of slaughter and bloodshed. The red horse has a rider who takes “peace from the earth” and wields a “great sword.” In his wake, people “kill one another” (6:4).
The Greek word usually translated “slay” has a more ferocious meaning. “Slaughter” or “butcher” would bring out its nuanced meaning more forcefully. The horse rider has a great or huge sword, indicating the extent of the carnage he creates.
Third Seal: Black Horse
This rider represents hunger and famine. We can see this from the symbols accompanying him. The horse he rides is black, a color that describes a famine-racked body.
The black horse has a rider with “a pair of scales in his hand” (6:5). A scale would be used to measure and carefully dole out food. It could refer to bread being rationed by weight in a famine, or grain being measured by volume. We see this being done in the Old Testament. In the siege of Jerusalem, the people would “eat rationed food in anxiety and drink rationed water in despair” (Ezekiel 4:16). God told the Israelites they would suffer famine if they sinned and they would be forced to “dole out the bread by weight” (Leviticus 26:26).
A voice accompanies the vision of the black horse and its rider. It announces: “A quart of wheat for a day’s wages, and three quarts of barley for a day’s wages.” (6:6). The
expression “a day’s wages” is a translation of the Greek word denarius. The denarius was a Roman silver coin equal in value to the daily wage of a working man (Matthew 20:2).
Bible scholar Robert H. Mounce says the price of the wheat and barley as described in the vision appears to be ten to twelve times their normal cost in ancient times (The New International Commentary on the New Testament, “The Book of Revelation,” p. 155). Revelation describes a condition where basic goods are sold at greatly inflated prices. Thus, the black horse rider depicts times of deep scarcity or famine but not of starvation.
The English word “quart” translates choinix. Apparently, a choinix of wheat was the daily ration of one adult. Thus, in the conditions pictured by Revelation 6 the normal income for a working-class family would buy enough food for only one person. The less costly barley would feed three people for one day’s wages.
The voice also says, “Do not damage the oil and the wine!” (6:6). People are told to be careful not to harm precious foodstuffs. We should note that the warning sets limits to the destruction the black horse rider can cause.
Anciently, oil and wine were not luxuries. They were basic commodities or necessities of life. “Grain, new wine and oil” was a standard threesome describing the staples of life (Deuteronomy 7:13; 11:14; Hosea 2:8, 22; Haggai 1:11). Once again we see that the black horse describes dire want but not total famine.
There is an interesting case regarding the destruction of vineyards in Asia from emperor Domitian’s reign that may have formed the background to this verse. During his reign a shortage of grain and surplus of wine upset the economic equilibrium of Rome.
Domitian first ruled that no new vineyard should be planted. Then, he commanded that half the vineyards in Asia be cut down. This created a near revolt because the vineyards were a major source of income to the people of Asia. Domitian was forced to reverse himself. In fact, he later prosecuted those who had allowed their vineyards to go out of cultivation because of the fall in wine prices.
Tom:
As to your comments to Peter on December 15, 2008, when you say that Revelation to John’s readers would have meant nothing to the readers of his day, because they knew nothing of Islam, Constantine, etc. Well of course they wouldn’t have! Chapters 6-22 were supposed to be what is to come, something future to them.
i agree with u bro, the white horse has much to do with Christ and not the anti-christ. The identity of earth quakes and conquering and will conquer relates to one who wins now and ultimately contrary to the antichrist who only wins for a short time and is conquered. In my view this is being the first horse, is the sending of the spirit on pentecost wherein there was an earthquake and the proclamation of the gospel. THus, this identity of the rider is the conquest of the christ through his church in the world via the gospel as his bow and weapon for subduing his enemies. THus the rider is the church empowered by Christ, to overcome through the gospel.