Revelation Part 5 - The Black Horse

Hello again and welcome back. I hope you are enjoying the journey as much as I am. It is now time to move to the black horse, Revelation 6:5-6. As you remember from the previous articles, we have already covered the white horse(antichrist) and the red horse (civil anarchy).

Before we begin, you may notice a couple of nuances in these verses that are slightly different than the other two. The first difference is in John’s response to the beast. For the first horse, he stated “and behold”, and here he states “and I beheld, and lo…”. I’m not certain that this difference is significant in any way, but the change is worthy of noting I felt. Second, this rider was not “given”anything. In the first two verses, one was given a crown and the other a sword. Third, you will see in this verse that the rider does not “do”anything. The first two riders went “conquering”and the other “took the peace”. Finally, in the black horse verses, we have the introduction of more information being announced – something that did not happen in earlier verses. The significance of these differences may not be totally clear now (and maybe even after we are done) but they highlight that this rider is different.

So let’s start by taking a look at the verses and breakdown some of the word use that John chose.

Rev 6:5 - And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast (face like a man)say, Come and see. And I beheld (eidō- to perceive, notice, discern, discover with the senses - different than the first two - behold), and lo (idou – same as behold) a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances (zygos – 1) yoke*5 2)scales*1) in his hand.

I highlight the word beast this time as this is the beast with a face like a man. We have no real explanation that there is a reason each beast announced a particular horse, but it did make me think deeply about it, since the point of everything is man’s relationship with God and God’s love for man. I don’t have any insights into this at this time, but I will continue to contemplate this going forward and if I find anything on this I will return and post more on it.

The next thing I highlighted in this verse was the change in “beheld” statement. In Rev 6:2 John used “I saw” and “behold”which means “see”. In Rev 6:5, John doesn’t use any type of “I saw” statement at all. This verse he uses “beheld” which means “to discern or perceive”, which is more in depth than just see. It is quickly followed by “lo”, which means “to see” and is the same Greek word as “behold”. So right now you are probably asking yourself, “Why did we just waste a paragraph on that?” And truthfully, I can’t answer you. I do know this. Everything has a purpose and God chooses his words wisely. So while I cannot confirm definitively that this is the reason, I do offer up what I took away from it is this. The white horse he saw, meaning it was evidently visible to him – the antichrist. The red horse just showed up on the scene, he did not “see” it coming –civil anarchy. This horse, he both perceives it, and sees it – he experiences it and it is visibly evident.

Next is the phrase “a pair of balances (scales).” The Greek word used here is ‘zygos’, which is used throughout the New Testament as the word ‘yoke’, which means something that binds things together, such as the yoke used to bind oxen or cows used in work. The only time it is used to denote‘balances’ or ‘scales’ is in this verse. And by scales you need to imagine the kind of weighing scales or balances that are used to weigh things such as gold or grain. The kind of scales that is used in the symbol we have for Lady Justice (more on this later – see image). The traditional logic on this is that they are scales, based on the text that follows (which we will dive into shortly) about the measure of wheat and barley. While I won’t completely challenge this traditional interpretation, I do offer this. In John’s time and in other references in the Bible, the yoke means this.

1) Definition of yoke: A harness, usually a wooden beam that joined two animals at the necks and allowed them to work together a plough or wagon.

2) Symbolic meaning of yoke: The burden of oppression, responsibility and hardship.

3) Spiritual meaning of yoke: The bondage and burden of sin.

I submit that the rider of the black horse could have actually been carrying a true ‘yoke’. Symbolizing that he was coming to either inflict or control the three items listed above. Meaning he would control agriculture, inflict oppression, and lastly, leaving no one the ability to place their sins on Jesus (as He stated in Matthew 11:28-30).

If we look at these in the traditional sense, that they are scales used for weighing, we can deduce the following about that symbolic meaning. Balances/Scales equal justice or equity. Balances alone indicate the law and rigid administration (which is our symbol of Lady Justice). When joined with the measure of food, they indicate scarcity – as in people needed to ration food. One last thing on the scales; this rider was not “given” the scales, as previous riders had been given things. He just appeared with them in his hand.

Rev 6:6 - And I heard a voice(phone – noise) in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure (choinix a dry measure as much as would support a man of moderate appetite for a day) of wheat for a penny(denarius – a day’s wages), and three measures of barley (barley not as healthy as wheat) for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil (elaion– olive oil used for lamps, anointing, and commerce) and the wine.

In this verse we now have the introduction to a different occurrence than in the other verses. Here another ‘voice’ is heard from amongst the four beasts. The text does not declare whose voice this actually is. We can assume it is not one of the beasts, as it is not declared it was as in all the previous references. We are not told either that if it is one the elders, thus the origin of the voice is unknown. Secondly, the question arises as to whom the voice is speaking? Is it speaking to the rider, or to the hearers of the message (us for instance)? I feel (there is that word that means “I don’t have proof”) that the voice is talking to us. None of the other riders were given any instructions or restrictions, and the message the voice delivers seems too complicated for a mere visual symbol.

Let us now look at what the voice declares. It states that “a measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny”. A measure is a ‘choinix’,which was the amount of food needed for a person to survive daily. Wheat was more nutritional than barley, and thus a day’s food needed for one person was either one measure of wheat or three measures of barley. A penny (denarius) was the equivalent of a day’s wages. So you can see that one person would have to work all day for just enough food himself – making it impossible to support a family. Note that this does not in any way indicate that there is a food shortage based on drought or diseased crops as is usually the source of famine. This indicates that the price of food is so high, that average people will find food scarce because they will not be able to afford to eat.

The final sentence declares “not to hurt the oil and wine”. This indicates a couple of things. First, if it is being declared to us, then that is telling us not to damage or destroy items that are not necessary for survival in some kind of rebellion or action against the cause of the scarcity. If it is being declared to the rider, then it is telling him to not to shorten or make scarce the finer things, or those things that luxuries.

Taking the above mentioned study, we can piece together the following. The black horse is bringing another trial/war against the people to conquer them in another fashion. The balances and scales can mean both justice and law, and can also mean scarcity of food as indicated by the wheat and barley based on their price. Oil and wine – finer things that do not contribute to or reduce famine will still be available for those with resources (money). Since scales can mean the law and administration it could be deduced that this ‘famine’ is built and orchestrated by the government (the antichrist’s one world government) to control the believers. We get further indication of this from Revelation 13:17.

Rev 13:17 – “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”

So what I have laid out is very close to the traditional view of the black horse as famine, with the twist that I feel this is the antichrist’s induced famine on the believers. As I was completing this study, I did happen upon some other symbolic references found in this verse that led me down another path that I’d like to share that puts the verse in completely new light. It again displays God’s power in his authorship that I have stated before that the messages he sends can transcend time (the past, present, and future interpretations of one verse). This goes to show that the same can be done on both a physical and spiritual level.

1) Olive (oil) – represents light, peace, and divine blessing. (The dove brought Noah an olive branch.)

2) Wine – represents doctrine. (Luke 5:3-7)

3) Bread – life and truth (John 6:35)

4) Famine – lack of spiritual nourishment (Amos 8:11)

So could it be that the black horse will bring about a shortage, or controlled access to the Truth and Life? Absolutely – the move towards one world religion would do such a thing. Be on your guard!

Next week is probably the most famous of the horses, the Pale Horse. See you then.

Revelation - Part 4 - the red horse

Hello and welcome back (or just welcome if this is your first blog read). The last article was the introduction to the white horse, and in that article I discussed my belief it was the antichrist and the beginning of his reign and the troubles that follow. Today’s article is around Revelation 6:3-4, the red horse. Here are the two verses for this article; the second one is broken down with some notes.

Rev 6:3 - And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.

Rev 6:4 - And there went out another horse that was red (pyros– color of fire, red): and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace (eirene – “the” peace – tranquility, security, Messiah’s peace) from the earth (ge– dirt), and that they should kill (sphazo – slay, slaughter, butcher)one another(allelon – one another, themselves): and there was given unto him a great(megas – big in size) sword (macharia – large knife, small sword).

Let us begin by looking at some of the more interesting word usages and definitions in the passage. Remember, not all of the notes on the word usage must have some great underlying meaning, it is just that I thought they were interesting and worthy of notation in my study.

First is the word “red”. The Greek word was actually “pyrros” and you may can tell that (pyro = fire) that it was the color of fire or a “fiery red”. Next of note is the word “peace”. What is interesting to note here is that in this passage it also contained the article “the”, so in effect it was actually written like this; “… to take thepeace from the earth…” At first look, that may not be such a significant note, but it struck me as a very important fact/clue. For me, the article “the”made it sound like a specific item or at least not a general term, thus leading me to ask the question; “which peace?” We’ll discuss some options on that later. Next was the word earth – the only reason I highlight this is that it was the specific word “ge” which means the actual land and dirt as opposed to the word “world” which includes a broader scope. I’ll address the next two together – “kill one another”. Since most people associate the red horse with the broad term “war”, this seems simple – the definition of the word kill here is “slay, slaughter, butcher”. That may be war, but it is a very one-sided war if it is. Follow that term by the “one another”, which can mean “themselves” and you get a very different picture. Say these two phrases one right after the other and then think about the visual connotations that pop into your head. “That people would kill one another…” or “That people would slay themselves…” The first definition looks like war and sounds like war, but the second one brings up a completely different image for me. The second one doesn’t sound like nation against nation, but more like neighbor against neighbor (civil unrest). Finally, we’ll look at the last two words; “great sword” (megas macharia). On the surface (or in English) this looks simple enough to understand. The definition for the Greek term “megas” is (as you guessed…) related to size (our word ‘mega’) so great would mean a large, grand, huge, mega, and so on. However, the term for sword used here is “macharia”,which means a “large knife or small sword”. Now, whether this contradiction in terms means anything, I do not know –I’m merely pointing it out here, and I will hopefully be able to circle back around to it at some later time for more deep study. (which there are a couple of items that popped up during the red horse I will need to circle back on – so don’t let me forget).

So there is a breakdown to the verse itself, now let’s look more closely at some of the specific emblems/symbols in the passage and what they may have meant.

Horse: War, conquest, strength. (Accelerated mode of message delivery transportation). (Job 39:19-25). This is the same for the white horse and the subsequent ones.

Red: War, fire, slaughter, slay, blood, terror. Red horses (at least this color of red) were not common – probably non-existent. So this symbol was definitely described to trigger the imagination.

Sword: War, weapon of destruction. The sword was more widely recognized as a symbol of war than other weapons of the time. While the bow is also a symbol, it was not the primary symbol. (Think of the movie Braveheart – the archers were not the primary war symbols. Swordsmen on horseback were the most feared).

It doesn’t take much to come to the conclusion that this rider symbolizes “war”. But I ask the question, what kind of war? Nation against nation? Kingdom against kingdom? How about man against man? If you look at Matthew 24:6-8, you will see that Jesus talks about wars between the nations and kingdoms, but he describes these as the birth pains of the end times. Then in Matthew 24:9 he states the following.

Matthew 24:9 - Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

This sounds like a direct attack on the believers – the saints. (note – the word “kill” here is different than in Rev 6:4. The kill here is defined as “by any means possible”). I think this is what the “slay themselves” means. Neighbor against neighbor as the Christians are persecuted for their beliefs. This may also be tied to the megas-macharia (big – small sword). It is not a “nuclear”weapon as many interpret the Red Horse Sword to be, it could very well be that it is small arms (hand to hand or other like means) that carry the power or numbers of some weapon of mass destruction.

So why would our otherwise very moral and pleasant neighbors (although not Christian) suddenly start to attack and persecute the believers?

“…and power was given to him that sat thereon to take (the) peace from the earth...”

Back to “the peace”. What is the peace that the red horse is going to remove? Is this the moral compass that God has planted in all humans – regardless of faith? Is this this peace of the Holy Spirit that Jesus gave upon his ascension? Is this the (false) peace the antichrist (white horse) created on his arrival?

So while I see the horse as “war”, I see it slightly different than many of the standard “war”definition. It is with all the above information that I believe the “Red Horse” is the breakdown of civil morality. Anarchy will reign over the earth with people killing each other and persecuting the Christians with extreme prejudice. It will be a war amongst the citizens to persecute the saints.

Well, I hope you are enjoying my journey through Revelation so far. Next week we move on to the black horse. Before we do, though, I must give you a sneak peek at something that entered into my study this week. That is the Rapture. While I was following the Spirit through the Bible this week, I believe I was taken to a place I had not been before. So I have decided that when I get done with the four horsemen, I’m going to do a deep dive on the “Rapture” and see where it leads me.

Take care, God bless, and see you next week.

Revelation - Part 3 - the white horse

Hello, glad you have come back for more.  I hope you are enjoying the journey so far, and if not hopefully now is the time you will begin to find a little more substance to the quest.  We now begin our look into chapter 6 – the opening of the seals and the introduction to the four horsemen (not the backfield from Notre Dame).  The first horseman we are going to discuss is the “White horse” of Revelation 6:1-2.

 Rev 6:1: And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, come and see. 

So to catch you up to where we are in the study (since I didn’t document Revelation 4 and 5), let me run through a quick summary of the verse above…

The Lamb is of course Jesus, the only one worthy to open the scroll of Him who sits on the throne in Heaven. Jesus takes the scroll and breaks one of the seven seals on the scroll.  One of the four beasts (or creatures – lion, ox, human, eagle) – actually it is the first of the four, the lion, calls out in a booming voice.

Let us now take a closer look at the wording of verse 1, before be dive into some of the debatable aspects.

Rev 6: 1 And I saw when the Lamb opened one (mia – adjective – only one) of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise (phone – voice – Rev 4:5) of thunder (bronte – akin to bremo root word which means ‘to roar’), one (heis – numeral – The first – (Lion)) of the four beasts saying, Come and see (NIV just says “Come”). 

Only one of the seals is broken, and it is not specified that this is the “First” seal or anything particular – it is the first one broken, but the word to describe it was just “one of”.  This is in contrast to “one of the four beast…” this word ‘one’ means ‘the first’.  We can assume it is the lion, but we don’t really know why or the significance of that.  It is interesting to note, this is the only horse that is introduced with the “voice of thunder”.  Next it is important that the interpretations of the ‘beast’ are actually ‘creature’ (zoon).  This is different than the references to beasts in other parts of Revelation (such as ‘thērion’ in Rev 11:7 which is “wild animal”).  Finally there is debate on the last sentence on whether the interpretation should be “come” or “come and see”.

If the words “and see” are omitted, then the phrasing is something like this. “Come! I looked and a white…”  This interpretation is the basis that many feel that the words were not spoken to John (to come and see), but that the words were spoken to the white horse and rider to come forth.  Depending on which version you follow, this may have a impact on the interpretation of how you may determine who the riders are.  The King James Version (KJV) uses, “Come and see.  And I saw…”  The New International Version (NIV) uses “Come. I looked…”  If it is only “come”, and this is summoning of the white horse and rider, then that seems to almost immediately eliminate the possibility that the rider is the Christ.  Why would Christ open the seal, then one of the four beast command Him to come?     All of these things can (and have been) debated to endless means (and scholars much more educated than I am have already done this – and many are still split on the decision).  So, here we have a translation conundrum at the onset of the some of the most difficult to translate portions of the Bible.  For me, to solve this in my own mind, I’m going with “Come and see.  And I saw…” This seems to fit the preceding chapters more closely where the dialog was between John and a heavenly being.  While this may not be the most convincing argument for that theory, I don’t feel it changes my direction or changes the meaning of the following passages by choosing either interpretation, therefore I choose that John was summoned to come and see what was to unfold.

Next is the debate as to what followed; did John read (or have read to him) the scroll (writing on both sides, Chapter 5), did he see a pictorial version of the white horse and rider on the scroll itself, did he see a vision of the white horse and rider. 

First, I do not see any indication that anything was read to him, or that he read anything.  He clearly states “I saw” on the first 5 seals and seals six and seven are described in a way that do not support just the reading of the scroll (despite the writing on both sides –which by the way, only Christ would be able to read or look in Chapter 5:3).  So it is with some certainty that it was not read.

Next, there is strong cases to be made that the items described were pictorial representations on the scroll itself (mainly the manner and worth of having a scroll to begin with – meaning, why a scroll if it contained nothing that would be used, only as a start point for the events).  Albert Barnes (Barnes Notes) adheres to this logic (which I do enjoy his logical breakdown of the text, conclusions, and supporting narratives).  However, I disagree.  I refer back to Chapter 5:3, “And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither look thereon.” And verse 4, “And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereupon.”  So it is clear that in Chapter 5, no man is going to look into the book, so how could John now suddenly be reading it or seeing the pictures contained in it. (I know, I know.  God can do whatever he wants and if he wanted John to be able to read the book he can allow it.  But he would have said so.  And he didn’t.)  John continues to refer to the things he sees as visions (which he clearly stated he was receiving earlier).  So I do not believe he is merely looking into the book or the scroll at pictures.

That leaves the final theory, that these were visions and the opening of the scrolls was a symbolic or metaphoric way of announcing these events that were unfolding in John’s vision.  This one makes the most sense to me, and flows smoothly with what has transpired up to this point.  John is brought up to see the wonder of heaven, where he describes what he saw (the throne, lights, and worship of God).  He describes the scroll as being unable to be opened, John weeps and then is informed that the Lamb can open the scroll.  Jesus appears and takes the scroll and opens the first seal, and then John sees the white horse and rider appear on the scene.

Rev 6:2:   And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

First let’s look at some key elements to the wording.

Rev 6:2   And I saw ( NIV says “I looked”), and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow (toxon – only occurrence in the NT – same word as “bow in the sky” for the covenant after the flood); and a crown (stephanos  - victors crown, different than Rev 19 – also used 18 times in NT – all references were when someone other than Christ – except when it was a crown of thorns – this is not the King of Kings crown) was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer (nikao – to overcome -overcome 24, conquer 2, prevail 1, get the victory 1). (NIV – “rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest”)

We start this verse with the same problem we ended verse one.  Here, the difference in the phrasing is “I looked” and “I saw”.  Again, you can chase this down many paths as to whether John was told to “Come and see, and I saw” or whether the beast commanded “Come. And John (I) looked.”  I don’t think either one will have much bearing on the direction you go with your study; so again, I’m sticking with “Come and see. And I saw…”

I’m skipping to the last few lines now (as we’ll cover the individual emblems in a moment) to where the crown was “given” and “he went forth conquering and to conquer”.  It is interesting to note that this “victor’s crown” was given before the rider went out conquering – not for a conquest he had already completed.

For the rest of the symbolic meanings, the interpreter has to place themselves in time and place of the writer to gather the most plausible meanings for the symbols at their root.

Horse:  War, conquest, strength. (Accelerated mode of message delivery transportation). (Job 39:19-25)

White:  generally means purity, prosperity, or innocence.   Hebrew used white to signify triumph or victory.  The significance of a white horse is that those were typically not used in battle (too key of target).  They were rode in marriage parades, by conquerors on the day of triumph.  White horses were also deemed by the poets of the time to be fleeter and quicker than other horses.

Bow: War and hunting.  The sword was the more common emblem of war, and bow the more common emblem of hunting.  Interesting to note that the Greek god, Apollo’s most notable symbol was the bow and arrow. (Rev 9:11).  It is interesting to note that there is no mention of “arrows” at all in this verse.  Some scholars overlook that fact completely, taking for granted the bow came with arrows.  Others make special note that the arrows were omitted, symbolizing that the rider was going to conquest without force, a “deceitful conquest”.

Crown: This type of crown was the kind normally given to a victor – emblematic of victory or conquest.  The notation “it was given unto him”.  This could indicate that he had not earned the crown – by either the victory had not occurred yet, or that he could not earn the victory without the “giver”.  We are not told who is the one that gives the crown.  However, we may infer later.  See the notes above about the crown and its particular use in the text.

It is important now to take a quick look at the Rev 19.  The rider and white horse in Rev 19 is clearly Jesus.  Rev 19 is the culmination of judgment, whereas Rev 6 is the beginning of judgment.  Reference to Jesus on a white horse in Rev 19 does not explicitly infer that it is Jesus on the white horse in Rev 6.  It more aptly lends itself to the revelation that the true victor has emerged, as opposed to the “false” victor in Rev 6.  Also note that in Rev 19 the word for crown is different and references  many crowns and this is the only reference to a crown with this word.

Some interpretations of the White Horse and Rider that you may find in your search on the internet or various commentaries. 1) Jesus 2) the Gospel 3) Righteousness 4) Pestilence 5) Conquering – Both Good and Evil 6) The antichrist.

Having taken all the above mentioned information into account, it is with that information that I make the following summation.

After Jesus takes the scroll (as only he can) he begins to open up the seals, one by one.  With each opening of a seal, a different aspect of what is to come is revealed to John.  The first four seals start to reveal the tribulations that are to be judged upon the earth.  The first seal is opened and John sees the white horse (symbol of strength and victory).  The rider is carrying a bow, which lends to war and hunting, but the rider bears no arrows which could indicate that the victory and conquest will be accomplished without force (deceit).  The rider is wearing a crown that has been given unto him, not one that he has earned of his own accord.  This rider is then to go forward into his conquest (or reign on the earth) (Rev 17:8 – go into perdition – begin destroying).  The rider of the white horse is the antichrist a false and deceitful Christ (the true Christ is the rider of Rev 19).  It is important to note that the Greek definition for “anti” can mean “instead of” – which is exactly what the antichrist is going to try and be for the world during the tribulation.  He is going to come “instead of” the real Christ and therefore fool many with his false signs and miracles.

The next thing to discuss whether these riders represent the past, present, or the future of events.  Albert Barnes (Barnes Notes) makes a compelling case that the descriptions of the four horses fit the Roman empire very well.  The White Horse is the reign up to Commodus, and so on.  I cannot even begin to dispute those claims, nor would I even attempt to.  What I can offer is this. If you visit Part2 of this series, I address my theory the answer to the above question is YES, all of the above.  God’s authorship is so designed that the truths of revelation can fit many events – it offers the most opportunity for the text to reach into the heart and soul of a person.  Having said that, I truly believe these events as described are definitely prophecy for the end times, and the reign of the antichrist begins with the white horse.

So there you have the white horse – the antichrist.  I’m now caught up – and Sunday’s lesson will be on Revelation 6:3-4 (the red horse).  I hope to have that article published much quicker than I had this one.  Later and thanks for reading…