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.

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.

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.

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.

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.