2. The Church's steadfast position

The Fathers who have interpreted the Apocalypse are not many. The text of the Book of  Revelation was not commented on as much as other books of the New Testament, because in many regions of the East there were reservations regarding its public use.

Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (2nd-3rd century AD)

He does not make any special interpretation of the 4 Horsemen of the Revelation. However, when he speaks extensively about the Antichrist in the 5th book of his "Against Heresies" he never identifies him as the first horseman of Revelation. On the contrary, the Antichrist appears later, after the apostasy, after the beast. This evidences that he did not consider the first horseman to be the Antichrist.

Saint Hippolytus of Rome (170 - 235 AD),

In his work "On Christ and Antichrist" (De Christo et Antichristo, PG 10 pp. 725-788), especially in chapters 49–67, he also analyzes the Antichrist at length, but does not connect him to the first horseman. If he believed something so important, it would be the most natural place to mention it.

Saint Victorinus of Petavius ​​(† ca. 303 AD),

He is the oldest complete commentator on the Revelation, and he writes clearly that the white horse is the preaching of the Gospel, the rider is Christ - or the victory of Christ, through the Church.

In the "Commentarius in Apocalypsin" (Commentary on the Apocalypse), the interpretation for the first horseman is found in Chapter 6 (Apoc. VI, 1–2), (PL 5, v. 317–344), when interpreting the first horseman with the bow, Saint Victorinus says that the words of the Holy Spirit, through the preachers, are like arrows that reach the human heart in order to defeat unbelief. The crown on the head is promised to the preachers by the Holy Spirit. As such, the white horse symbolizes the word of preaching - along with the Holy Spirit - sent into the world. It refers to the word of the Lord: "This Gospel will be preached in all the world as witness to all nations, and then the end will come" (Matt. 24, 14).

In brief, Victorinus interprets the first seal allegorically, as the commencement of the gospel preaching after the Ascension, with the power of the Holy Spirit Who defeats unbelief and leads towards the end times; and he continues, saying that the white horse is the preaching, the rider is Christ or the power of Christ, the bow is the word of God, and the crown implies victory.

Oikoumenios (6th century AD)

For many centuries, the author of the memoranda that circulated with the name "Oikoumenios" was considered to be Saint Oikoumenios, bishop of Trikki (Trikala) in Thessaly of Greece, who was placed in the 10th century, approximately around 990. However, more recent research has made a very important distinction.

The memorandum on the Apocalypse attributed to Oikoumenios is now dated by many experts as end of the 6th or the beginning of the 7th century. A modern study explicitly characterizes it as the oldest surviving Greek epistle on the Apocalypse and dates it to the 6th century. In fact, Hoskier, who published the Greek text in 1928, argued that the work should be placed at the beginning of the 7th century, not the 10th. (Interpretation of the Apocalypse of the godly Evangelist and Theologian John, PG 118, 643, cont’d in PG 119 columns 1–726).

Modern research has even suggested that the author of the Apocalypse memorandum was probably not the bishop of Trikki of Thessaly, but another Oikoumenios, probably from Asia Minor. The oldest identification as Oikoumenios of Trikki now has serious problems.

The author of the oldest surviving Greek memorandum on the Apocalypse, therefore, which is handed down under the name Oikoumenos and is now usually dated to the late 6th or early 7th century, also speaks of the white horse as symbolizing the Church, the Horseman as Christ, the bow that is the Gospel with its apostolic preaching, and the victory of the Church.

Saint Andrew of Caesarea (6th - 7th century)

He is the most important interpreter in the Orthodox Church. In his work "Interpretation of the Revelation" (PG 106, pp. 293–305 depending on the edition), he comments that the opening of the first seal signifies the Apostolic era.

The white horse and the one seated on it holding a bow symbolize the Apostles, who, as if drawing a bow, shoot the gospel message against the demons. With the salvific arrows of Christ they mortally wound the demons and lead those wounded by them to Christ.  And because they defeated the leader of deception (the devil) with the truth, they received a crown. They await with hope a second victory: the confession of the name of the Lord even if it demands a violent death (martyrdom). That is why it is written that “he went out conquering and to conquer” — the first victory is the Christianization of the nations, the second is the voluntary departure from the body - through persecution for the sake of this conversion.

He even gives an explicit explanation for the reason that specifically connects the first seal (and the white horse) to the era of the Apostles.

He first mentions other interpretations that were circulating: some explained the seals as successive stages of the incarnation of the Logos (birth, baptism, miracles, appearance before Pilate, Cross, burial and descent into Hades, etc.). However, Andrew rejects this approach and agrees with :

Saint Methodius

He said the following, verbatim:  "It is unnecessary to consider that Christ Himself is the one who was “born” here, given that the mystery of the Incarnation of the Logos had already been accomplished long before the Apocalypse was written. John speaks with authority on present and future things.

That is why Andrew interprets the opening of the first seal as the appearance and the era of the Apostles: the Apostles are they who, after the Ascension and Pentecost, embarked on evangelical preaching (like a bow that shoots arrows of salvation), to defeat the devil with the truth and receive the crown, with martyrdom in view."

In other words, his explanation is based on the time frame of Revelation: since the Incarnation had already taken place, the seals could not have been describing events of Christ’s earthly life but rather the history of the Church - which began with the Apostles - emphasizing that John speaks of present and future things after the already accomplished Incarnation of Christ.

In summary, the first horse is the Apostolic preaching that defeats the devil and leads to salvation, with martyrdom in view as well. The white horse signifies the purity of the Apostolic teaching. The rider is Christ, or the power of Christ acting on the Apostles, since according to the Christian faith, the Church is the Body of Christ, extending through the ages. The bow is the power of the evangelical preaching. The crown is the victory over demons and idolatry. In brief, it is a victorious image of Christ and His Body, the Church.

Saint Arethas of Caesarea (10th century)

He follows Andrew of Caesarea almost verbatim. (On the Revelation, PG 106, 588–589); he does not propose any other interpretation.

To this day, no holy Father of the Church is known to interpret the first horseman as the Antichrist, based on the surviving patristic sources.

This is particularly noteworthy, because the Fathers wrote extensively about the Antichrist. If they had even slightly considered that he is the one who appears in chapter 6 of Revelation, they would have mentioned it.

The unanimous line of the main Patristic commentators who interpret the relevant passage is that the white horse and its rider express the victorious march of Christ and the Gospel - through the Church - even if there are slight differences as to whether the rider symbolizes Christ directly or Christ acting through the Apostolic preaching.

(Note: This is something that - as we will see in a pursuant chapter - makes no difference at all to the function of the Church’s belief in the relationship between Christ as the Head, and the Church as His eternal Body.)

The Fathers identify the first Horseman with Christ because they relate many passages of Holy Scripture to each other. For example, Revelation 6 and Revelation 19, where in both chapters Christ arrives on a white horse. The symbolism is the same.

In Revelation, white almost always symbolizes holiness, victory, purity and heavenly glory. It NEVER symbolizes Satan.

The crown symbolizes victory. Christ is the Ultimate Victor.

The phrase: "He went out conquering and to conquer", recalls the words of Christ: "Be of good cheer! For I have overcome the world" (John 16:33).

We will see all this in detail in forthcoming chapters.

 

3. About the Protestant Misinterpretation

The idea that the first Horseman is supposedly the Antichrist and not Christ, begins to take shape much later, mainly with certain medieval, Western interpreters (not as the prevailing view), and eventually developed - especially after the 16th century in Protestant circles.

The modern popular version was formed mainly by John Nelson Darby, in the 19th century, and spread through the Scofield Reference Bible, which deeply influenced the evangelical world.

Let's see in more detail how this misbelief evolved over the centuries:

The Middle Ages

It is here that a broader variety begins to appear.

Certain Western commentators no longer identify the rider exclusively as Christ, but instead propose allegorical or historical references. However, the predominant identification of the first horseman as the Antichrist was not yet established. The medieval Western interpretation is much more complex than is often presented.

During the Middle Ages there was a greater variety of approaches (e.g. allegorical readings by commentators such as Veda or Joachim of Fiore), where the white horse was sometimes associated with true teaching and sometimes with the Church at war, but the idea that the first horseman was the Antichrist was never established anywhere.

The Reformation (16th century)

Here there is a major change, but not the one that many may imagine.

Most early Protestants (such as Luther and Calvin) did not write detailed commentaries on Revelation. Furthermore, Luther initially had reservations - even about the canonical status of the Book of Revelation - before eventually changing his position.

The Reformers’ main interpretive concern was not the first horseman but the Antichrist. In the context of the so-called Historicist interpretation, most  Reformers identified the Antichrist as the papal institution, and not as a future world leader.

This means the current Evangelical interpretation is not the original Protestant interpretation.

The Counter-Reformation (1590 AD)

Here we have one of the most important chapters regarding this story.

Francisco Ribera published an extensive commentary on the Apocalypse in 1590. His main purpose was to refute the Protestant identification of the Pope as the Antichrist.

He therefore moved most of the Apocalypse to the distant future and argued that the Antichrist would be an individual who would be appearing shortly before the Second Coming.

It should be noted, however, that Ribera was not the originator of the idea that the first horseman is the Antichrist. His contribution is mainly to the development of the futurist reading of the Apocalypse.

Ribera considered the first horseman to be either Christ or an illusion, but not the final Antichrist in the way that modern futurists understand it.

The 19th Century - The Actual Turn

Here is where the significant break occurred.

John Nelson Darby developed Dispensationalism.

Darby and the Plymouth Brethren had combined:

• a future Antichrist,

• a seven-year tribulation,

• a distinction between Israel and the Church,

• a specific chronological reading of Revelation.

Within this new hermeneutical scheme, the first horseman began to be systematically interpreted as the Antichrist because he appears before the pursuant disasters and is presented as a conqueror who deceives in a peaceful way - a false messiah who appears in a peaceful guise – with a crown and a bow without arrows – at the beginning of the Tribulation.

The Scofield Reference Bible (1909)

However, the major dissemination of this heresy was not primarily done by Darby. It was done by the Scofield Reference Bible.

The Scofield Reference Bible acted as the "catalyst" for mass dissemination, by incorporating Darby's views inside it as interspersed notes, making them de facto accepted by millions of Evangelicals as authoritative information. (image below)

These notes resulted in many of its interpretive choices being considered almost self-evident by many Evangelicals today.

20th century

In the 20th century, this misinterpretation became particularly popular in popular culture, thanks to best-selling authors such as Hal Lindsey ("The Late Great Planet Earth", 1970) and later through the "Left Behind" series of novels (Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins), cementing in a large part of Evangelicals the belief that this is the "traditional" or "self-evident" reading, while historically it is just a recent (19th century) innovation.

 

 

 

Translation:  K.N.