Contra-Dispensationalism: The White Horse in Revelation 6

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.