White Horse Of The Apocalypse II

Question

1. Is the rider on the white horse a person? Or, an impersonal power or agency?

Answer

I think it is a representation of Christ in the beginning of the day of judgment. I will enlarge later.

Question

 2. If the rider on the red, black, and pale horses are not persons (general view), is it reasonable to assume that the first rider is likewise not a person?

Answer

I used to incline to the view that if the red, black, and pale horse riders were not persons, but powers in operation, then likewise it seems reasonable to assume that the white horse rider is not a person but an executive  power. But, now, I see this as really no argument. Why must all the riders be alike in this respect? Why is it not plausible to think that the white horse rider could be a person though the other three are not? In fact, I can think of reasons why the first rider is to be understood as signifying a person while the other three would be mere personifications. But, again, I will enlarge upon this later.

But consider also that the only ones who can legitimately argue "as one (horse) so all," in respect to the person-hood of the four riders, are they who see the white horse as a symbolic personification of the progress of the power of the gospel. But, even among those who hold to this view, many acknowledge that this progress of the gospel in "conquering" sinners (to salvation) is all the same as Christ himself doing the conquering by the preaching of the gospel. So, really, it is only a minority who argue that all four riders must either be all persons or all impersonal agencies. Those holding to the white horse rider being Christ, and those holding to the white horse rider being Antichrist, likewise see this rider as a person and thus it is probably the majority view that sees the white horse rider as a person exercising some power towards earth and its inhabitants.

Question

3. If the white horse rider is a person, is it Christ (one view) or Antichrist (another view)?

Answer

I have struggled over this issue for many years. Sometimes I have leaned towards the view that the white horse rider was Antichrist. Today however I lean strongly towards the view that the rider is Christ. But, I will give the reasons for this view in upcoming posts. Further, there is a sense in which the rider may typify both. But, again, more on that later.

Question

4. What about the arguments of those who favor each of the several views?

Answer

The view that the white horse rider and his conquests represent Christ who, during the time between his two comings, goes forth conquering the hearts of sinners, through gospel preaching, has been held by many Christians over the centuries. The reasons why I reject this view are these:

1) So far as the preaching of the gospel "conquering" hearts we must say that it has conquered relatively few. Most people have since the beginning rejected God and the gospel of his Son. The text implies that the white horse rider continues to conquer with easy success. But this has not been the history of the effects of gospel preaching for the past 2000 years.

2) To make the white horse rider to refer to what has been taking place in gospel preaching (starting after Pentecost) places the opening of the first seal of the scroll prior to that starting point. That is totally out of context. The opening of the seven seals on the scroll (the scroll of redemption) pertains to the "day of the Lord," to the Lord's own second "Apocalypse," to the "day of his wrath," the "day of vengeance," etc. Therefore it is what the Lamb will do in inaugurating that day. The breaking of that first seal is the first planned event in bringing about redemption and judgment, for both sinful man and for "the whole creation." (Rom. 8)

Since therefore the first seal has not yet been broken on the scroll, the coming of this rider has not yet occurred. This fact makes untenable the view that says that the symbol of the white horse represents the success of gospel preaching in the world. The context deals with the second coming and with the work of Christ in judging and redeeming "the quick and the dead."

Question

5. Is it likely or unlikely that the white horse writer of 6:2 is the same as Rev. chpt. 19?

Answer

I think it is far more likely that the riders and horses are the same.

Question

6. If the same rider, why the differences in description?

Answer

We cannot focus only on the differences in the two descriptions, but must focus on the likenesses as well. Both are riding white horses and have crowns and weapons and both are victorious. We cannot logically say that the few differences in descriptions unquestionably means that the two riders are not the same. There are other possible reasons why the two descriptions are different. I will enlarge upon this later in this series. But consider this retort against the argument that affirms that the differences must cause us to believe that they are not the same person:

There are several visions and descriptions of the Lord Jesus Christ in the apocalyptic scenes. Not all these pictures are the same. But, who will argue that this proves that it is not the same person in this case?

Question

7. Do the differences show that the two white horse riders are not the same?

Answer

See above answer. We cannot assume that the differences mean that the two riders cannot be the same person. In upcoming posts we will look closely at the differences and give alternate explanations for why the descriptions are not exactly the same and yet show how nevertheless it is the same rider.

Question

8. Is it significant that the 6:2 rider has a "stephanos" crown rather than a "diadema" as in chpt. 19?

Answer

Yes, it is significant. But of what? Does the difference in the type of crown force us to interpret that to mean that the rider cannot possibly be the same person? That would be illogical. Such a difference does not prove that the riders are different persons. If I was seen in one picture with one hat on my head, and then seen in another picture with a different hat on my head, how would that prove that I was not the same person? Don't you see? But, I will give my thinking on why there is a difference in the kind of crown the rider wears at the opening of the first seal versus what crown he wears at the final opening in upcoming posts.

Question

9. Does this difference in the type of crown prove that the two writers cannot be the same?

Answer

See answer above. It would be a false inference to say that the difference in crowns proves that the riders cannot be the same.

Question

10. Is there significance in the fact that there is no quiver or arrows mentioned in 6:2?

Answer

The seeming absence of arrows, or quiver, or any other article in archery, and the absence of any other weapons, such as spear or sword, cannot be used as proof that the rider of 6:2 is not the same rider of chapter 19. There are other alternative reasons, as with the difference in crown type, why the weapons described in both visions are different. I will enlarge upon this in upcoming posts.