Revelation 6:2 White horse

[iamlamad]

1 hour ago, Moby said:

Look I have had other men who said they had conversations with Jesus and He showed them great insights that turned out not to agree with the sum of Father's Word. Jesus warned us that there would be so much deceit in these last days that if possible the elect would fall for it:

Matthew 24:23-25  Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is the Christ(self proclaimed anointed of God), or, Here; believe it not.  (24)  For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.  (25)  Behold, I have told you beforehand.

You are trying to divide the first 5 verses of Revelation chapter 12 from the 6th verse to try and paint your narrative but anyone who reads this passage as a whole can clearly see that verse 6 is the conclusion of events spelled out in the first 5 verses:

Revelation 12:1-6  And a great sign was seen in heaven: a woman arrayed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars;  (2)  and she was with child; and she crieth out, travailing in birth, and in pain to be delivered.  (3)  And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold, a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his heads seven diadems.  (4)  And his tail draweth the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon standeth before the woman that is about to be delivered, that when she is delivered he may devour her child.  (5)  And she was delivered of a son, a man child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and unto his throne.  (6)  And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that there they may nourish her a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

The 1st clue Revelation 12:1-5 is not a history lesson is that Herod tried to kill Jesus but not the coming beast with 7 heads and 10 horns:

Revelation 13:1  and he stood upon the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy.

The 2nd clue Revelation 12:1-5 is not a history lesson is that the dragon has not yet used his tail to draw the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth!

The 3rd clue Revelation 12:1-5 is not a history lesson is that we as the church are all to be seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Ephesians 2:6  and raised us up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus:

John didn't need a history lesson as He already was taught special prophecies none of the other gospel writers penned such as this passage:

John 16:17-23  Some of his disciples therefore said one to another, What is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye behold me not; and again a little while, and ye shall see me: and, Because I go to the Father?  (18)  They said therefore, What is this that he saith, A little while? We know not what he saith.  (19)  Jesus perceived that they were desirous to ask him, and he said unto them, Do ye inquire among yourselves concerning this, that I said, A little while, and ye behold me not, and again a little while, and ye shall see me?  (20)  Verily, verily, I say unto you, that ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice: ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.  (21)  A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but when she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for the joy that a man is born into the world.  (22)  And ye therefore now have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no one taketh away from you.  (23)  And in that day ye shall ask me no question. Verily, verily, I say unto you, if ye shall ask anything of the Father, he will give it you in my name.

Jesus was very clearly prophesying of a future birth of a corporate body called the manchild and "they in verse 6 who would be caught up to heaven as the firstfruit of the last days who would nourish the coming exodus of a larger group of the church who begin fleeing the coming persecution by the beast:

Revelation 14:1-5  And I saw, and behold, the Lamb standing on the mount Zion, and with him a hundred and forty and four thousand, having his name, and the name of his Father, written on their foreheads.  (2)  And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and the voice which I heard was as the voice of harpers harping with their harps:  (3)  and they sing as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four living creatures and the elders: and no man could learn the song save the hundred and forty and four thousand, even they that had been purchased out of the earth.  (4)  These are they that were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they that follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were purchased from among men, to be the firstfruits unto God and unto the Lamb.  (5)  And in their mouth was found no lie: they are without blemish.

There is only ONE rapture/resurrection of ONE elect from the foundation of the world who are the ONE olive tree being ONE holy nation as Rob clearly proves here with hundreds of scripture that fits seamlessly into one truth:

https://sumofthyword.com/2016/10/04/the-rapture-of-the-church-is-after-the-tribulation/

Look I have had other men who said they had conversations with Jesus and He showed them great insights that turned out not to agree with the sum of Father's Word. Jesus warned us that there would be so much deceit in these last days that if possible the elect would fall for it:  No, that is not really true: Jesus was talking about the days of the Beast and False Prophet. Notice the word "Then"  I said you had a choice. Did you actually READ the words in red - Jesus' words? Did they FIT the scriptures in question? That is what you should be determining. Have you already made your choice: to ignore His words to me? The truth it, His words DID and DO fit the sun of God's word to us. (They would not agree with false theories here.)

You are trying to divide the first 5 verses of Revelation chapter 12 from the 6th verse to try and paint your narrative but anyone who reads this passage as a whole can clearly see that verse 6 is the conclusion of events spelled out in the first 5 verses:  No, you are mistaken again: I did not divide, JESUS and JOHN did that when it was written. 12:6 fits with chapter 11, in context. Verses 1-5 are totally OUTSIDE of John's chronology - about the time of Jesus' birth.  Jesus' words to me: "I chose to show John what the dragon did when I was a young child." Again, you can ignore His words or not: your choice. Commentary after commentary mentions Jesus and Herod trying to kill him. I suspect you will ignore them too. 

Jesus was very clearly prophesying of a future birth of a corporate body called the manchild  This is a theory. Does it fit the text? No!

A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.  (The constellation Virgo - to represent a virgin about to give birth. The Virgin of Israel)
2. She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. (The virgin was Mary, of Israel.)
3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. (The Devil)
4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. (When He was cast out of heaven, he took 1/3 of the angels with him. His goal here was to kill Jesus at birth or soon after. The problem for him - he did not know WHICH CHILD. )
5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.”And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. (SHE [the virgin] gave birth. He, (the male child) would rule the nations with an IRON scepter. He did what He was sent to do and then was caught up.)
6 The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days. (The "woman" is a subset if Israel from whom the Messiah came. She will flee into the wilderness and be supernaturally protected. She will NEED protection. The church will need no protection; they are caught out before God's wrath.)

People have tried in vain for years to make these verses something future. No one ever has because they were written as a parenthesis and from the past. It was way back when Satan was cast out of heaven that 1/3 of the angels followed him. It was 2000 years ago that Mary gave birth to the Messiah. If there was such a thing as "the later reign saints" that clean up this mess and usher in the Messiah, (there is no such thing) they would not come from a virgin! They would come from the Messiah. They would not be "her child." 

The 1st clue Revelation 12:1-5 is not a history lesson is that Herod tried to kill Jesus but not the coming beast with 7 heads and 10 horns:  This was about Herod, not the Beast. The devil was using Herod. The devil will use the Beast in the future. If you wish to make this passage future, will Satan deceive a SECOND 1/3 of the angels? 

The 2nd clue Revelation 12:1-5 is not a history lesson is that the dragon has not yet used his tail to draw the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth! No, that IS a clue it is history.  It happened before Adam was created. 

The 3rd clue Revelation 12:1-5 is not a history lesson is that we as the church are all to be seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: Yes, agreed: we are IN THE REALM OF THE SPIRIT raised to sit (in the realm of authority) in heavenly places. But the question is, WHO "rules with a rod of iron?" Note carefully, this is a quote from the SAME BOOK:

Rev. 19:15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron.

Jesus was very clearly prophesying of a future birth of a corporate body called the manchild  No, He was not. You are reading into the text what you want it to say: classic case of reading with preconceived glasses. You read what you WANT to read. 

  A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but when she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for the joy that a man is born into the world.

Instead of using imagination as to what this MIGHT mean - let's get the context. Jesus told them that he was leaving -  as in soon you won't see me, but later you will see me.  He was going to die. They would not see Him for a while. He said that they would weep and lament - be VERY sad, because He died and so then all the dreams they had of Him defeating Rome! But when they saw Him again their sorrow would turn into joy (That He rose from the dead and would be alive forevermore). 

Then, He gave an EXAMPLE of someone sad, but their sadness turning into Joy: a woman giving birth is very sad for the pain and effort of giving birth - but once the baby is out, she is filled with joy. This was only an EXAMPLE! The truth of the passage is that He would die - they wouldn't see Him - but then He would raise from the dead and they WOULD see Him, and they would be filled with Joy. (That is exactly what happened.) Therefore, you have pulled this verse OUT OF CONTEXT and made it say what your preconceptions WANTED it to say. 

"they in verse 6 who would be caught up to heaven as the firstfruit of the last days  Sorry, but you missed it here BIG TIME: the "firstfruits" go with the 144,000 where are JEWS and HEBREWS. (Not the church.)  THEY in verse 6 is those that fled FROM JUDEA according to the Word of God. So you missed it with BOTH groups. "They" are going to be mostly JEWS. 

There is only ONE rapture/resurrection of ONE elect from the foundation of the world who are the ONE olive tree being ONE holy nation as Rob clearly proves here with hundreds of scripture that fits seamlessly into one truth:  This is MYTH. If I were you, I would RUN from someone that suggests the rapture postrib. Paul's rapture is PREtrib. He is mistaken. 

There will be a resurrection / rapture according to 1 Thes. 4; and Paul is clear that it will happen BEFORE wrath...as in JUST before..as in the rapture sets off wrath or triggers wrath. WHERE does John begin God's wrath? At the 6th seal, before any part of the 70th week or "trib." Anyone with clear thinking and a determination not to change the word of God to fit a theory, knows that it will be impossible for the church to make it to heaven for the marriage and supper, if the rapture is posttrib. Did you just not notice that the marriage and supper are IN HEAVEN before Jesus descends? 

Your exegesis needs more time and study. 

[iamlamad]

On 8/30/2020 at 7:22 PM, Moby said:

We are not here to change each others mind. We are here to share scriptures that one another may not of considered before and let the Holy Spirit teach them the truth:

John 14:26  But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you.

You are free to believe what ever you want but the Christian who takes away from the meaning of the truth will be blotted out of the book of life:

Revelation 22:19  And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

I did not answer this part of your post. I learned LONG ago that it is not in my power to change anyone's mind. You are right in that respect. I HAVE shared scriptures, but it seems you ignored them. AT least I HOPE you took time to read. 

I even showed you how the Holy Spirit taught me! But you disregarded that too. You COULD Have tried to answer the questions Jesus spoke to me; but perhaps you were in too much of a hurry. 

By the way, NO ONE is taking away from what is written, or adding to it. I am UNDERSTANDING it. 

You probably NEVER NOTICED that When John looking into the throne room in chapter 2, and saw the Father on the throne but DID NOT see Jesus at the right hand of the father - when we have at least a dozen verses telling us that is where He should have been. Stephen SAW Him there. 

You probably ignored where John watched this search for one worthy to take the book and open the seals - but NO MAN was found. You could have wondered WHY - but apparently you did not. 

You must have just read over the Holy Spirit being there in the throne room, when we would expect in 95 AD that He would have been sent down. 

Jesus told me that until I could answer these three questions correctly, I would never understand that part of John's vision. I suspect that is where you are now. 

Edited September 1, 2020 by iamlamad

[Moby]

7 hours ago, iamlamad said:

I did not answer this part of your post. I learned LONG ago that it is not in my power to change anyone's mind. I are right in that respect. I HAVE shared scriptures, but it seems you ignored them. AT least I HOPE you took time to read. 

I even showed you how the Holy Spirit taught me! But you disregarded that too. You COULD Have tried to answer the questions Jesus spoke to me; but perhaps you were in too much of a hurry. 

By the way, NO ONE is taking away from what is written, or adding to it. I am UNDERSTANDING it. 

You probably NEVER NOTICED that When John looking into the throne room in chapter 2, and saw the Father on the throne but DID NOT see Jesus at the right hand of the father - when we have at least a dozen verses telling us that is where He should have been. Stephen SAW Him there. 

You probably ignored where John watched this search for one worthy to take the book and open the seals - but NO MAN was found. You could have wondered WHY - but apparently you did not. 

You must have just read over the Holy Spirit being there in the throne room, when we would expect in 95 AD that He would have been sent down. 

Jesus told me that until I could answer these three questions correctly, I would never understand that part of John's vision. I suspect that is where you are now. 

The Holy Spirit is in all places at all times:

Psalms 139:7-8  Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?  (8)  If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, thou art there.

You are stuck in the letter bro so I will kindly withdraw from this thread as I answered Charlie744 about the 1st seal which was my only intent within this thread. If you want to learn some truth on how our Father's message is understood please enter here:

https://sumofthyword.com/

[iamlamad]

23 minutes ago, Moby said:

The Holy Spirit is in all places at all times:

Psalms 139:7-8  Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?  (8)  If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, thou art there.

You are stuck in the letter bro so I will kindly withdraw from this thread as I answered Charlie744 about the 1st seal which was my only intent within this thread. If you want to learn some truth on how our Father's message is understood please enter here:

https://sumofthyword.com/

Yes, this is true, but He came to Jesus at baptism "without measure." However, at the same time was everywhere. You figure it out! 
John showed Him in the throne room in chapter 4 but later, when time had passed, arriving with Jesus ascension and then being immediately sent down. 

By the way, anyone that denies the trinity is someone to RUN FROM!

Have a nice day. 

Edited September 1, 2020 by iamlamad

[canada]

• Perhaps now, the thread will get back on topic of the "rider on the first white horse with crown and bow".
• It is amazing how threads get off track and into so many other subjects.

Edited September 1, 2020 by canada

[Moby]

8 hours ago, canada said:

• Perhaps now, the thread will get back on topic of the "rider on the first white horse with crown and bow".
• It is amazing how threads get off track and into so many other subjects.

Yes brother it amazes me as well how some men will hijack a thread because they need to promote their newly discovered doctrine based on a couple of verses! There are two men on this forum that keep pushing two raptures even though there is not a thread of truth to it. Father told us exactly how His message is discovered which includes understanding the white horse seal:

https://sumofthyword.com/

 

[Charlie744]

Sister, this is something I have never thought of... I have always heard of the 4 horses, but nevee associated the white horse with the RCC.

 I can now see the symbolism... 

Revelation is going to be very difficult... but so rewarding !!

 Thank you very much again and I will certainly seek this forum throughout this study... many bright and knowledgeable people here! Charlie 

[canada]

 

 

REVELATION’S TWO RIDERS, EACH ON A WHITE HORSE

 

There is no doubt that the rider on the white horse in Revelation 19:11 is Jesus Christ. 

 

There is some doubt as to who the rider is on the white horse in Rev 6:2.

 

Jesus as the rider on the white horse in chapter 19 possessed many crowns (Strongs1238 diadems) upon His head.  His vesture is dipped in blood, He is called The Word Of God and the armies in heaven followed Him upon white horses clothed in fine linen.  This is followed by comments about the beast, the false prophet, its miracles, the mark of the beast and the image of the beast.

 

We are told very little about the rider on the white horse in Rev 6:2.

 

“And I looked, and behold, a white horse.  He who sat on it had a bow; and a crown was given to him and he went out conquering and to conquer.

 

That is all the information we are given about this particular rider.

One can conquer spiritually as well as physically, and the Church of Rome was exceptionally strong in conquering through its brand of religion.

 

One commentator states that the crown given to this rider is not a symbol of legitimate sovereignty for then the word for crown would be diadema, as were the crowns Jesus possessed in chapter 19, but here the word is stephanos, a crown acquired by conquest, which he believes represents an antichrist riding forth on its white horse (indicating purity) to conquer the world by its religion.

 

Many claim that the bow is a weapon, but this conflicts with the Greek form given here (Strongs 5115 toxon) which is “simple fabric”.

 

The crown of this particular rider is Strongs 4735 stephanos which is

“to twine or wreathe”.  Here we have fabric and “to twine or wreathe”.

 

That is all we really know about this particular rider.

Anything beyond that would be sheer conjecture or speculation.

 

I believe in the inspiration of the original Word. 

IF the original inspired word (bow toxon) was “fabric” and not a “weapon” as claimed by many recognized scholars … then, those scholars are all wrong in their interpretation … dead wrong.

 

The following is my speculation. This rider is an imitation of Christ, an anti-christ … one claiming to be in the place of Christ, which is one Greek meaning of the word “anti”.

 

The papal “Triple Crown” claims its wearer holds the power in three places … heaven, on earth and in hell. 

 

This rider on the white horse of religion is in some way associated with ”cloth that is twined or wreathed”.

 

That is a perfect description of the papal … “Triple Crown”.

It is unlike any of the solid gold or silver crowns of Europe.

 

According to the New Educator Encyclopedia Vol 9 page 3575 and other sources, it is … “weaved of cloth of gold”.

 

Not only that, but it is claimed by some Rome watchers that at one time this “Triple Tiara” displayed the Latin phrase “Vicarius Filii Dei” on it and that phrase in Latin summed at … 666.

 

Just as the original six Latin letters I V X L C D  sum at 666

 

The “bow” (toxon) being a “weapon” … I think not.

 

 

 

[Charlie744]

Thank you very much! I certainly just looked at this verse so I have no opinion as yet, but one thing that might be something to consider is that Jesus would not go out to conquer... My initial thought is this group of 4 may represent the “deceiver - white horse / Little horn, and the results of his deception brings the other 3... Charlie 

[The_Truth_Seeker]

On 8/26/2020 at 6:47 PM, Charlie744 said:

Consequently, in Revelation 6:2, it reads-

“And I heard and I saw, and behold a white horse and he who sat on it had a bow and a crown was given to him and he went out victorious, both conquering and to conquer”.

I guess if I was going to tackle this verse, I would list out the specific characteristics, and try to ensure my interpretation includes all of them:

1) white horse- why a horse, why white,

2) who is “he” sitting on the horse,

3) this “he” had a bow- where is the arrow: was “he” not given one or did “he” already shoot it,

4) a crown was given to him - crown given after he had been sitting, what does the crown signify, is this his permission to go out.. who gave him the crown, 

5) he went out victorious- against who, is “he” a good or bad “he”, 

6) why two separate actions... both conquering and to conquer... seems that was his intended purpose or mission (was this “mission” a designed role or did “he” decide on his own to conquer,

7) are there any Scriptures that can identify these characteristics or identity

 

Let us try to look at this from a different angle, to see if it makes sense and add up.

If we look at things from a practical and functional side, what are horses for? A means of transport? Maybe the white horse represents a transport vehicle white in color or mostly white? And naturally, all vehicles need to have a driver.

Now I have looked into the word "bow" (greek word toxon) and some of the research has led me to conclude it could also relate to a "bow and arrow"  What is interesting is that the greek word "toxon" could also relate to a simple piece of fabric. The face mask what people wear, that is a simple piece of fabric, and yet at the same time if one looks at it, one can see a arc shape (like a bow)

In relation to the word "crown" what is interesting is the latin word for crown is corona, so that is quite interesting. In the context of authority to rule, would it not stand to reason a  crown can also represent some kind of authority figure with power ?

Now in the context of war, if you want to conquer, you cannot conquer with weapons that have no ammunition. In war a gun that fires blanks is useless. If one is going out to conquer, one needs a weapon and one needs ammunition for said weapon. The question is what kind of weapon, and what kind of ammunition is needed for said weapon.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2020 by The_Truth_Seeker