The rider on the white horse

[Abraxos]

Some claim that the rider on the white horse in Rev 19:11-16 is the same as the rider on the white horse in Rev 6:2.

But I would argue that's not the case because:
1. The rider in Rev 19 is introduced as a new concept, being described in much detail.
2. The description of his attire is different
- a singel crown in Rev 6 vs many crowns in Rev 19
- having a bow in Rev 6, but not in Rev 19

What would be the arguments for them still being the same, namely Jesus?

In regards to the crowns, the rider's crown in Rev. 6:2 is known as a Stephanos or victor’s crown, carrying deep biblical symbolism. It is handed only to those who overcome challenges through faith and perseverance, not to tyrants, deceivers, or impostors. In Scripture, this crown is associated with Christ, who declared, “I have overcome the world” (John 16:33), and with His faithful followers sharing in His victory (Rev 2:10; 1 Peter 5:4; 2 Timothy 4:8). It represents triumph through righteousness, endurance, and steadfast obedience, rather than through deceit or worldly power.

In contrast, the rider in Rev 19:12 wears many diadems, royal crowns symbolising ultimate kingship and sovereign rule. Unlike the Stephanos, which is a reward for overcoming, the diadema represents reigning authority and dominion. The multiplicity of crowns in Revelation 19 indicates complete sovereignty over all nations, which aligns with the imagery of universal judgment and consummated rule. This fundamental difference in crown imagery reveals two distinct versions of the crown: the first rider represents an overcomer, such as a winner of a race or a champion. At the same time, the other is a ruler or one of royal descent.

It is unlikely that the Rev 6:2 rider represents Christ Himself. Jesus is the one who opens the seals (Rev 6:1), and He has already conquered the world through His death and resurrection (John 16:33; Revelation 1:18). He does not need to overcome the world a second time, nor does He need a crown He alone bestows: “Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life” (Rev 2:10). Therefore, the rider is most likely a Christian, one who, like Christ, has overcome the world and is now called to act under His authority to advance God’s kingdom and fulfil His purposes on earth. (Acts 3:22)

That said, I cannot say with certainty who the Revelation 19 white horse rider is. While many identify Him as Christ, the text does not explicitly confirm this, leaving open the possibility that the rider could be a symbolic agent of divine judgment rather than Jesus Himself.

 

[AdB]

The word bow of the first seal is another translator guess. The word in Greek is not specific; it could be a cross, or something else signifying the spread of the gospel

I don't see any ambiguity regarding the meaning if the word τόξον only having meaning (based on Septuagin translation) as either a litteral bow, the rainbow or a metaphorical meaning of "strength"

 

[AdB]

nges through faith and perseverance, not to tyrants, deceivers, or impostors

What do you base rhis premise on?

That said, I cannot say with certainty who the Revelation 19 white horse rider is

I don't think we have to have any doubts about the identity of the rider in Rev 19

"and His name is The Word of God"

 

[Abraxos]

What do you base rhis premise on?

Biblically, the Stephanos is never associated with tyrants, deceivers, or impostors because of its Christological nature. It is part of the crown of thorns that Jesus bore in His suffering (Matthew 27:29; John 19:2,5). Though intended as mockery, it became a divine emblem of victory over sin, over death, and over the world (John 16:33). Christ, the true overcomer, wore the Stephanos first and now bestows it upon those who follow Him in faithful endurance (Revelation 2:10).

This is the reason why no Antichrist, pretender, or worldly power can obtain a Stephanos. It cannot be seized by force or deception; it belongs solely to Christ. The Stephanos is the crown promised to those who, like Christ, take up their cross and follow Him (Matthew 16:24; Luke 9:23), enduring faithfully to the end. Pretenders may walk in appearance, but the crown of life remains in Christ’s hand, bestowed only on those who bear His name and walk His path.

Spoiler: Stephanos and its relationship with faith and perseverance in Scripture:

• Revelation 2:10 - “Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.”

A promise for steadfast overcomers, not deceivers. This verse highlights that the Stephanos is awarded through perseverance, not through status or worldly power. Faithfulness under trial is the key condition for receiving this crown.

• 1 Peter 5:4 - “When the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.”

For faithful shepherds, not corrupt ones. This underscores that spiritual leaders are accountable to God for their stewardship. Only those who lead with integrity and humility will be granted this eternal blessing.

• 2 Timothy 4:8 - “There is laid up for me the crown of righteousness… for all who have loved His appearing.”

Reserved for those who endure in righteousness. The Stephanos here is explicitly linked to longing for Christ’s return. It emphasises that a life lived in expectation and alignment with God’s will is recognised in eternity.

• James 1:12 - “Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial… he will receive the crown of life.”

Explicitly tied to perseverance under testing. James makes it clear that trials are the proving ground for faith. Those who endure without compromising their devotion to God are rewarded with this victor’s crown.

• 1 Corinthians 9:25 - “Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable."

Paul reinforces that the Stephanos is earned through discipline, not seized by power. Just as an athlete trains and perseveres for victory, so too the faithful endure trials and remain steadfast to obtain their crown in Christ.

“A crown is due to a person on account of merit, and chiefly on account of perseverance in well-doing; for a crown is the reward of victory.” ~ Thomas Aquinas

By contrast, diadema signifies rulership or kingship; however, unlike the Stephanos, good or evil can obtain this crown. For example, evil rulers like the dragon and the beast (Rev. 12:3; 13:1), as well as most of human history, testify to this fact. The Stephanos marks one who has endured the furnace of affliction and been refined by the fires of trial, emerging pure, steadfast, and worthy of eternal glory; the diadema signifies rulership or royal authority, whether exercised in justice or in corruption.

This distinction shows the rider in Rev. 6:2 is neither Christ (who gives, not receives, the Stephanos) nor a deceiver, but a faithful overcomer sent under divine commission - who, like Christ, conquers by righteousness.

 

[AdB]

Though intended as mockery, it became a divine emblem of victory over sin, over death, and over the world

You correctly here state the stephanos BECAME an inportaint christian symbol, but read below what it originally stood for (from Strong's topical lexion) it's a "batch of honor", while the diadem is a "token of royalty"

Background in Israelite and Greco-Roman Culture
In the Hebrew Scriptures regal and priestly rulers wore crowns as visible tokens of consecration and authority (for example, the high priest’s “holy crown,” Exodus 29:6). In the Hellenistic and Roman worlds a woven wreath signified victory in athletic contests and military triumphs. By the first century these two streams merged: a crown could speak at once of royal dignity, civic honor, or competitive conquest. The New Testament writers draw on all three ideas when they employ στέφανος.

Christ’s Crown of Thorns—Suffering before Glory

Matthew 27:29, Mark 15:17, and John 19:2–5 describe soldiers twisting thorn branches into a crown and pressing it on Jesus’ head in cruel mockery. Unwittingly they proclaimed Him King. The thorn-crown reverses Eden’s curse (Genesis 3:18) and anticipates His exaltation: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain” (Revelation 5:12). The humiliation underscores a pattern found throughout Scripture—suffering first, glory afterward (Luke 24:26; 1 Peter 1:11).

The Athlete’s Crown and Spiritual Discipline

Paul borrows imagery from the Isthmian and Olympic games:
“Everyone who competes in the games trains with strict discipline. They do it for a crown that is perishable, but we do it for a crown that is imperishable.” (1 Corinthians 9:25)
Followers of Christ pursue holiness and self-control, not for fading laurel but for eternal reward. The comparison legitimizes strenuous effort in the Christian life while refusing any meritorious boast, because the prize is ultimately “the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:14).

 

[Abraxos]

You correctly here state the stephanos BECAME an inportaint christian symbol, but read below what it originally stood for (from Strong's topical lexion) it's a "batch of honor", while the diadem is a "token of royalty"

Background in Israelite and Greco-Roman Culture
In the Hebrew Scriptures regal and priestly rulers wore crowns as visible tokens of consecration and authority (for example, the high priest’s “holy crown,” Exodus 29:6). In the Hellenistic and Roman worlds a woven wreath signified victory in athletic contests and military triumphs. By the first century these two streams merged: a crown could speak at once of royal dignity, civic honor, or competitive conquest. The New Testament writers draw on all three ideas when they employ στέφανος.

Christ’s Crown of Thorns—Suffering before Glory

Matthew 27:29, Mark 15:17, and John 19:2–5 describe soldiers twisting thorn branches into a crown and pressing it on Jesus’ head in cruel mockery. Unwittingly they proclaimed Him King. The thorn-crown reverses Eden’s curse (Genesis 3:18) and anticipates His exaltation: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain” (Revelation 5:12). The humiliation underscores a pattern found throughout Scripture—suffering first, glory afterward (Luke 24:26; 1 Peter 1:11).

The Athlete’s Crown and Spiritual Discipline

Paul borrows imagery from the Isthmian and Olympic games:
“Everyone who competes in the games trains with strict discipline. They do it for a crown that is perishable, but we do it for a crown that is imperishable.” (1 Corinthians 9:25)
Followers of Christ pursue holiness and self-control, not for fading laurel but for eternal reward. The comparison legitimizes strenuous effort in the Christian life while refusing any meritorious boast, because the prize is ultimately “the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:14).

Yeah, now you're getting it. Basically, Stephanos, in its Christocentric understanding, is a crown of the overcomer just as Christ overcame the world. This means that this crown cannot be given to or seized by an Antichrist, a deceiver, a trickster or what-have-you, who has not carried their cross.

 

[AdB]

Yeah, now you're getting it. Basically, Stephanos, in its Christocentric understanding, is a crown of the overcomer just as Christ overcame the world. This means that this crown cannot be given to or seized by an Antichrist, a deceiver, a trickster or what-have-you, who has not carried their cross.

I fear you are not getting it... the word litterly is used for example for the olympics, not really a christian thing I would say.
That is is also used for expressing honor in a christian setting doesn't make the word unusable for un-christian settings.

 

[Abraxos]

I fear you are not getting it... the word litterly is used for example for the olympics, not really a christian thing I would say.
That is is also used for expressing honor in a christian setting doesn't make the word unusable for un-christian settings.

The Greeks crowned Stephanos in the Olympics, as Paul inferred in 1 Cor 9:25. A very Christian thing, I would say, because... You know, it's in the Bible?

Since the New Testament was written in Greek, the word ‘Stephanos’ carries a nuanced meaning of ‘crown’ that is often lost in English translations, and its full significance frequently escapes readers.

 

[Delvianna]

Yeah, now you're getting it. Basically, Stephanos, in its Christocentric understanding, is a crown of the overcomer just as Christ overcame the world. This means that this crown cannot be given to or seized by an Antichrist, a deceiver, a trickster or what-have-you, who has not carried their cross.

This is why I had the thought for a while that the first rider are the two witnesses. I do not believe the 2 witnesses are biblically historical literal people like Moses and Elijah because God has never recalled someone from the dead after completing their mission to just send them back into another mission. Instead, time and time again God calls those, then qualifies them. The 2 witnesses would then be overcomers who are sent at the start of the tribulation period to both judge the church and call the unsaved to God.

But then the argument is, there is only one rider. My only argument to that is that the rider is a concept because it was seen in a vision, for us to understand the meaning and shouldn't be interpreted as a 1:1 ratio. A lot of times with symbolism, 1 symbol could depict a bunch of people, like the harlot of babylon being the corrupted church. So the rider could depict both witnesses as a single unit of force, sent for the same mission.

 

[Abraxos]

This is why I had the thought for a while that the first rider are the two witnesses. I do not believe the 2 witnesses are biblically historical literal people like Moses and Elijah because God has never recalled someone from the dead after completing their mission to just send them back into another mission. Instead, time and time again God calls those, then qualifies them. The 2 witnesses would then be overcomers who are sent at the start of the tribulation period to both judge the church and call the unsaved to God.

But then the argument is, there is only one rider. My only argument to that is that the rider is a concept because it was seen in a vision, for us to understand the meaning and shouldn't be interpreted as a 1:1 ratio. A lot of times with symbolism, 1 symbol could depict a bunch of people, like the harlot of babylon being the corrupted church. So the rider could depict both witnesses as a single unit of force, sent for the same mission.

Another way to look at it is through the pattern of Elijah and his disciple Elisha, who asked him for a "double portion" of his spirit (2 Kings 2:9-10). Elisha didn’t simply want to imitate Elijah; he sought to carry forward his authority and ministry on earth in multiplied form. That is precisely what I see reflected in the two witnesses: they are given power, stand in God’s authority, and their testimony spans 42 months.

To further substantiate this train of thought, there is a curious event in Elisha’s early ministry that echoes Revelation 11’s symbolic language. In 2 Kings 2:23-24, Elisha was mocked by a group of 42 children, and in response, two she-bears come out of the forest and mauled and killed all 42 children. The parallels are striking in their symbolism:

• Two bears: A vivid image of judgment, mirroring the two witnesses, who likewise are agents of God’s retribution.
• Number 42: Appears both here and in Revelation 11 (42 months, 1,260 days).
• God’s servant mocked: Elisha was ridiculed with the sneer “Go on up!” - a taunt perhaps spiritually aimed at Elijah’s departure into heaven (2 Kings 2:11). In the same way, the two witnesses are scorned and mocked, their testimony despised until they too are vindicated in a heavenly ascension (Rev. 11:12).
• Judgment executed: The bears acted under Elisha’s prophetic authority; likewise, the two witnesses wield divine authority to strike the earth with plagues (Rev. 11:6).
• Prophetic warning: The bears’ attack stood as a solemn warning to all who mocked God’s messenger, just as the witnesses’ ministry confronts a rebellious world.

The connection becomes clearer when we see the White Horse rider as the end-time Elijah figure - God’s anointed overcomer. Just as in 2 Kings 2, when Elijah was “taken up” (2 Kings 2:11), his ministry did not vanish; it was transferred and multiplied in the two witnesses. They pick up the mantle and carry it forward.

This explains why the vision shows one rider initially but later introduces two witnesses: the rider is the Elijah-servant, and the witnesses are the Elisha-like continuation, a “double portion” of that mantle, carrying on the LORD’s work on earth. So, the vision of one rider and two witnesses isn't necessarily contradictory to warrant conceptualising it here; they are distinct yet connected in God's purpose. This may also explain why the two witnesses are portrayed in the likeness of the prophets of old, performing the same miracles as Elijah and Moses (Rev. 11:5-6).

 

[Delvianna]

Another way to look at it is through the pattern of Elijah and his disciple Elisha, who asked him for a "double portion" of his spirit (2 Kings 2:9-10). Elisha didn’t simply want to imitate Elijah; he sought to carry forward his authority and ministry on earth in multiplied form. That is precisely what I see reflected in the two witnesses: they are given power, stand in God’s authority, and their testimony spans 42 months.

To further substantiate this train of thought, there is a curious event in Elisha’s early ministry that echoes Revelation 11’s symbolic language. In 2 Kings 2:23-24, Elisha was mocked by a group of 42 children, and in response, two she-bears come out of the forest and mauled and killed all 42 children. The parallels are striking in their symbolism:

• Two bears: A vivid image of judgment, mirroring the two witnesses, who likewise are agents of God’s retribution.
• Number 42: Appears both here and in Revelation 11 (42 months, 1,260 days).
• God’s servant mocked: Elisha was ridiculed with the sneer “Go on up!” - a taunt perhaps spiritually aimed at Elijah’s departure into heaven (2 Kings 2:11). In the same way, the two witnesses are scorned and mocked, their testimony despised until they too are vindicated in a heavenly ascension (Rev. 11:12).
• Judgment executed: The bears acted under Elisha’s prophetic authority; likewise, the two witnesses wield divine authority to strike the earth with plagues (Rev. 11:6).
• Prophetic warning: The bears’ attack stood as a solemn warning to all who mocked God’s messenger, just as the witnesses’ ministry confronts a rebellious world.

The connection becomes clearer when we see the White Horse rider as the end-time Elijah figure - God’s anointed overcomer. Just as in 2 Kings 2, when Elijah was “taken up” (2 Kings 2:11), his ministry did not vanish; it was transferred and multiplied in the two witnesses. They pick up the mantle and carry it forward.

This explains why the vision shows one rider initially but later introduces two witnesses: the rider is the Elijah-servant, and the witnesses are the Elisha-like continuation, a “double portion” of that mantle, carrying on the LORD’s work on earth. So, the vision of one rider and two witnesses isn't necessarily contradictory to warrant conceptualising it here; they are distinct yet connected in God's purpose. This may also explain why the two witnesses are portrayed in the likeness of the prophets of old, performing the same miracles as Elijah and Moses (Rev. 11:5-6).

Very well thought out and I agree with a lot of it!! I also never even considered the mockery of "Go on up!" to essentially be telling Elisha to leave in the same manner as Elijah. That is very interesting and I'll be looking into that later, so thank you on that! I 100% agree with you that the power the 2 witnesses wield is in likeness to Moses and Elijah, which is why I understand why people think it would literally be them. But as you pointed out, Elisha led the same walk as Elijah and continued the mantel. This is why I believe that 1 of the two witnesses carries the same mantel as Elijah since we have the verse:
"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:" - Malachi 4:5

But the Israelite's understood that this was a mantel transfer which is why they considered John the Baptist to BE Elijah, and why the angel said he has the spirit of Elijah. This is why Jesus also said concerning John the Baptist:
"And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come." - Matthew 11:14

Which proves, it doesn't have to be the literal Elijah, like the historical figure.

Now back to the white rider: The only Issue I have concerning that it is in reference to 1 witness only, is because both witnesses have the same run days, 1260. Both also are killed, bodies in the streets for 3 days before being resurrected. That puts their death on the same day, which means their start day would also have to be the same. So if the white rider was Elijah to come only, that causes a symbolism issue concerning a 2nd witness. When God uses symbolism, he's very precise and I don't think he would use a symbol for 1 witness and ignore the other.

 

[Abraxos]

Very well thought out and I agree with a lot of it!! I also never even considered the mockery of "Go on up!" to essentially be telling Elisha to leave in the same manner as Elijah. That is very interesting and I'll be looking into that later, so thank you on that! I 100% agree with you that the power the 2 witnesses wield is in likeness to Moses and Elijah, which is why I understand why people think it would literally be them. But as you pointed out, Elisha led the same walk as Elijah and continued the mantel. This is why I believe that 1 of the two witnesses carries the same mantel as Elijah since we have the verse:
"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:" - Malachi 4:5

But the Israelite's understood that this was a mantel transfer which is why they considered John the Baptist to BE Elijah, and why the angel said he has the spirit of Elijah. This is why Jesus also said concerning John the Baptist:
"And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come." - Matthew 11:14

Which proves, it doesn't have to be the literal Elijah, like the historical figure.

Now back to the white rider: The only Issue I have concerning that it is in reference to 1 witness only, is because both witnesses have the same run days, 1260. Both also are killed, bodies in the streets for 3 days before being resurrected. That puts their death on the same day, which means their start day would also have to be the same. So if the white rider was Elijah to come only, that causes a symbolism issue concerning a 2nd witness. When God uses symbolism, he's very precise and I don't think he would use a symbol for 1 witness and ignore the other.

Thanks! I'm glad you agree lol
Also, it's worth noting that the 42 children were jeering at him with specific mockery, shouting, "Go on up, baldy!" Now, it is an odd utterance, but, after considering it, the two witnesses are clothed in sackcloth, which is symbolic that they're in a state of mourning. They are not adorned for glory like the white horse rider - they are in a dark place. This leads to the specific mockery "Go on up, baldy!" When a prophet puts on sackcloth, they also shave their head as an act of mourning and repentance. So, it's an interesting nuance to say the least.

I also see exactly what you’re saying about the 1,260-day timeline and God’s precision in symbolism. I'd offer this perspective: I view Revelation as unfolding in phases. The announcement and revealing of the White Horse rider initiates the end times, and it is a time of preparing the stage, establishing God’s authority, and initiating the restorative process.

The two witnesses appear much later, at a time when the Antichrist is about to emerge onto the world stage. Their mission is not to restore all things, but it seems to be a time of lamentation and dishing out judgment as they see fit.

Additional note: The white horse rider appears under many names throughout the Old Testament, reflecting his archetypal and typological role. I refer to him as Elijah because God specifically names this servant and his mission to restore all things (Malachi 3:1–5). He, like the two witnesses, is in the likeness of the prophets of old, but they're also their own person. So in that sense, the two witnesses are not necessarily one is Elijah and the other is Moses, but they're both Elijah and Moses. Hope that isn't too confusing.

 

[Delvianna]

They are not adorned for glory like the white horse rider

Remember, this is symbolism. You don't apply the same idea. While I see your point, the rules of symbolism conflict with it. While sackcloth is an outward appearance of an inner struggle, these 2 witnesses would have to be two overcomers in general (if you set aside the white rider for a moment) because we know that crowns are given to overcomers (Church of Philadelphia as an example). God wouldn't use people who haven't overcome or won't eventually overcome, because technically that would mean they wouldn't be his. You wouldn't have 2 unsaved people running around speaking for the Lord. So the symbolic reference of the rider being adorned for glory, would be their heavenly symbolic reference, while the sackcloth and ashes are earthly.

The two witnesses appear much later, at a time when the Antichrist is about to emerge onto the world stage.

Here is where we differ. I do not think Revelation is in chronological order. It seems to be in order by topic, rather than timeline. Those chapters like the 144,000 and the 2 witnesses are like inserts. Imagine John trying to write everything he sees that happens simultaneously, that would be really hard to do. So he writes about something, pauses, writes about another topic, and then continues in the timeline. To give you an example, the information about the beast which is the anti-christ isnt until chapter 13 which is after trumpet 7. Then you have the bowls, then you have the beast mentioned again, with mystery babylon and then the discussion about her fall but its bowl 7 that comes her judgement when she is given his full wrath. So it's like, Timeline- pause- timeline -pause -pause-backtrack to reference when the downfall occurred 3 chapters previous (so he could add information that was happening simultaneously for reference, if that makes sense). This is why I look at the information presented instead of where the literal chapters are listed. So I place them at the start, dying in the middle with an overlap of the antichrist in full authority where he then goes after and kills the church (based from Daniel).

both Elijah and Moses.

I'm curious why you expect a Moses mantel? His mantel doesn't fit in a scenario where you have two people who are judging both the church and the lost (hence the plagues IE: Judgements). While the abilities performed are reminiscent of Moses, actually a lot of what happened in Exodus was performed by Aaron. Water into blood, frogs, gnats and it was specifically Aarons staff that was turned into a snake as well as they both were involved in doing the boils plague.

But even if Revelation played out in stages like you presume, you still have the issue of the 1260 day run time for both prophets. They would have to start on the same day in order to die on the same day. Since God has a propensity for sending people out in 2's, that keeps with his nature. So the rider still can't be in reference to only 1 witness.

 

[Abraxos]

Remember, this is symbolism. You don't apply the same idea. While I see your point, the rules of symbolism conflict with it. While sackcloth is an outward appearance of an inner struggle, these 2 witnesses would have to be two overcomers in general (if you set aside the white rider for a moment) because we know that crowns are given to overcomers (Church of Philadelphia as an example). God wouldn't use people who haven't overcome or won't eventually overcome, because technically that would mean they wouldn't be his. You wouldn't have 2 unsaved people running around speaking for the Lord. So the symbolic reference of the rider being adorned for glory, would be their heavenly symbolic reference, while the sackcloth and ashes are earthly.

Ah, you assume I meant that the two witnesses were initially “unsaved” - I think the contrary - They are called “the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth” (Rev. 11:4), directly echoing Zechariah 4:14: “These are the two anointed ones who stand by the Lord of the whole earth” - Symbolically, the olive trees represent Spirit-empowered ministry, and the lampstands represent light-bearing testimony - so they are not only God’s anointed ones on earth, but also prophets, priests, kings, and light-bringers.

The mix-up is often assuming that overcomers do not endure suffering - their role on earth is one of grief and lamentation, much like Jeremiah, who ministered in sackcloth-like grief - Yet by faithfully completing their testimony, enduring persecution, and being raised up and vindicated by God Himself (Rev. 11:11-12), they exemplify true overcoming.

The Mantle and Role of the Two Witnesses

The mantle of Moses was that of a deliverer - he was called to free God’s people from bondage in Egypt, confronting both human rulers and spiritual powers, and leading the people toward the Promised Land. In Christian typology, this role is sometimes connected to the concept of a “second Exodus,” where God’s people are spiritually or eschatologically delivered from bondage, oppression, or apostasy. The end-times servant, like Moses, functions as an instrument of God’s deliverance - calling people out of spiritual captivity, confronting corrupt systems, and demonstrating God’s authority through both word and deed.

I think I should pre-empt and add that, typologically, the end-time servant is reflected in numerous figures throughout the Old Testament, not just Moses and Elijah. We have Jeremiah, the suffering servant in Isaiah’s songs, King David, the director of music in the Psalms, Joshua, Zerubbabel, and even mention of counsellors to assist him (more than two). While their contexts differ, their mantle is essentially the same — to bring God’s people back to Himself, proclaim His truth, and prepare the way for His restoration and kingdom purposes.

Viewing Revelation Topically vs Sequentially

I see Revelation in a similar way. I view it sequentially and parenthetically. Not necessarily chronologically, but only as a general reading.
The fall of Babylon is a good example of a parenthetical view; scripture says she falls twice. “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the Great.” This suggests that she falls once (and then, as you say, backtracks) and falls a final time at another significant time. Another example is Revelation 7, which I view as parenthetical, indicating what occurs during the events of Revelation 6.
However, the imagery of the two olive trees, two lampstands, and Elijah, as a lone servant called to restore all things (Mal. 4:5), may seem contradictory when viewed topically if one connects them. Yet, this presents no issue when considered biblically, typologically, sequentially, and even chronologically.

Typologically, the end-times relationship mirrors that of Elijah and Elisha in the Old Testament:

• Elijah → Elisha
• End-times Elijah → End-times Elisha (the double portion, represented by the two witnesses)

I think your last point is valuable when considering a literal perspective versus a typological one. God sometimes sends servants in pairs, but this is not a universal requirement. The two witnesses reflect the Spirit’s empowerment and God’s pattern of paired ministry. Yet, the White Horse rider represents the broader archetype of God’s authority and restoration, not a literal pairing.

 

[Delvianna]

Ah, you assume I meant that the two witnesses were initially “unsaved” - I think the contrary -

Technically everyone starts out unsaved though. Even David said:
Psalm 51:5 (NIV): "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

They are called “the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth”

Right! Which is symbolic of overcoming (olive trees and being apart of God's family Romans 11:17-24, Psalm 52:8) and being light bringers (sharing the gospel). But just because they are symbolically referenced that way doesn't mean that means they didn't start out unsaved, grew in Christ, overcame and are now viewed as such.
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.” - Romans 3:10-12

The mix-up is often assuming that overcomers do not endure suffering

I agree they will suffer. The world will hate them and they will eventually die. So I don't think their ministry, although effective to some extent, will lack suffering.

In Christian typology

I do agree with the idea of typology, but what you described for Moses is actually what is expected from Elijah. The Israelite's view Elijah as a protector and savior which is why they mocked Jesus thinking he was praying to have Elijah come save him. He saved them from theological error as he contended with the priests of Baal, and helped bring Israel back to God alone. But Moses introduces God in a way like never before (their first covenant with God, so thats not returning, that's initiating), pulls them out of slavery of hard work, leads them into the wilderness where they die there and only their children see the promise land. So you can't even say Moses's typology fits. Elijah's does, Moses does not.

So, based on your last section, you're saying that the 2 witnesses aren't literal people? Because they would have to be in order for them to die, bodies lying in the street for 3 days, gifts are given for their death after being killed by the anti-christ and their enemies fear when they are resurrected and brought up to heaven. That can't be symbolism, typology or anything else. In order for the White rider to fit your view, the two witnesses would have to be symbolic instead of literal since people always start out unsaved and full of sin and cannot represent something holy from the start. Your idea conflicts with itself.

There's also something else that needs to be mentioned, and that's the idea that the 2,3 and 4th rider are destruction. That leaves the first rider as the odd man out. They are all riders, they all have horses, they all have colors and yet in order for symbolism to be cohesive, 1 out of the 4 represents something different and the others, which also doesn't make sense. 1 rider represents righteousness, the rest represent destruction.

White rider with a crown ---> Crown being the same word for those who overcome, with a bow
Red, black and pale ----> Destruction

That gives the impression that the first rider would be something destructive in nature instead of protector if you ignore the crown and the color white for a minute. Also because of the verse:
"For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. "- 1 Thessalonians 5:3

Means that the first seal would have to be some type of judgement... While the only thing I can think of is the judgement from the 2 witnesses, that still goes back to our debate about the rider of you saying its 1 person. I just don't agree with this stance, it doesn't make any sense to me in a symbolic stance. I get your point about typology, but in typology we have literal people doing very real things and its not a vision. Because this is a vision, we cannot apply typology to it and must look at it symbolically or literally, there's no other way. Since the scrolls, seals, trumpets, bowls, little book, thunders, incense, smoke and other things John saw in heaven, all point to symbolism when he then explains what happens literally, it pushes the answer that the riders are symbolic of what they literally carry out.

Red ---> War (Blood)
Black ---> Famine (Black is symbolically seen as death, despair, mourning, absence of life and sustenance) So, lack of food = lack of sustenance
Pale ---> Actually the word used is like with a green tint, or ashen, which is the color of a corpse, which is why he's known as "death" and has a wider range of judgement

So that leaves the white rider. Judgement starts with the white rider (sudden destruction) and since the two witnesses bring judgement, they would have to be viewed both together, or the rider has to be seen as something different altogether.

 

[Abraxos]

Technically everyone starts out unsaved though. Even David said:
Psalm 51:5 (NIV): "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

Right! Which is symbolic of overcoming (olive trees and being apart of God's family Romans 11:17-24, Psalm 52:8) and being light bringers (sharing the gospel). But just because they are symbolically referenced that way doesn't mean that means they didn't start out unsaved, grew in Christ, overcame and are now viewed as such.
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.” - Romans 3:10-12

I agree they will suffer. The world will hate them and they will eventually die. So I don't think their ministry, although effective to some extent, will lack suffering.

The concept of “unsaved” is a later evangelical invention, emerging in 18th–19th century revivalist movements within English-speaking Protestantism (Methodist, Baptist, Holiness traditions). Neither “saved” nor “unsaved” exists in the Old Testament, and the biblical focus is not on human spiritual status but on God’s calling, purification, and empowerment of His chosen servants.

So, this term “unsaved”, which was coined by a denomination from the 1800s, creates a rigid binary that oversimplifies Scripture and overlooks the typology of servants like Joshua (Zech 3:3), Isaiah (Isa 6:5), and David (Ps 51:5), who are chosen by God before purification or sanctification.

Servants like Joshua, Isaiah, David, Moses, and Zerubbabel demonstrate that God calls and empowers imperfect humans, not only those already spiritually “perfected.”

This is probably why I don’t particularly follow the concept that God doesn’t use “unsaved” servants.

Is only Elijah, not Moses, the true typology of the End-Time Servant?

While I understand your emphasis on Elijah, I don’t think Moses’ typology can be dismissed so easily. In fact, the New Testament directly connects Moses to the end-times Elijah. Peter cites Moses’ own words in Acts 3:21-22:

"Whom Jesus must remain in heaven until the period of the restoration of all things, about which God spoke by the mouths of His holy prophets from ancient times. Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your brothers. You must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from their people.’"

This demonstrates that Moses’ pattern is not merely about initiating a covenant in the past, but also prophetically points to a future figure whom God Himself will raise up. This servant is typologically like Moses and, like Elijah, will play a role in restoring all things.

Are the Two Witnesses Literal or Symbolic?

I believe the two witnesses are indeed two literal people, but they are not disconnected from what came before them. They inherit what was passed onto them from the white horse rider, who himself embodies the fulfilment of all of God’s servants of the past. This is why in Revelation 11 the two witnesses display powers that are distinctly Mosaic and Elijah-like: shutting up the heavens (Elijah) and turning water to blood/striking the earth with plagues (Moses).

To use an analogy, think of Avatar: The Last Airbender. The Avatar is one person, but he carries within himself the likeness of every Avatar who came before him. Each new Avatar expresses that legacy in a fresh and unique way, but the continuity is unbroken. In the same way, the white horse rider is like the “Avatar” of God’s prophetic line, receiving the mantle of Moses, Elijah, and all who went before. The two witnesses then receive and embody that inheritance in their time, demonstrating those same divine powers as literal agents of God’s judgment.

Excuse the Avatar reference — I just find it’s a really clear way to illustrate the point. It’s actually a great show, though!

The Four Horsemen of Revelation

You’ve essentially arrived at the same conclusion I reached while studying the White Horse and its rider. If this rider represents the end-times servant, it follows that the other horses must operate within the same parameters of restoration rather than reckless destruction.

As new wine requires new wineskins, I approached this study with prayer, seeking a biblically consistent perspective beyond contemporary interpretations.

I expected this topic to come up eventually, so I’ve condensed my studies on the Four Horsemen into a more forum-friendly format. I invite you to explore the Four Horsemen in a new light — analysis and critique are welcome.

You can find it here: Riders of Renewal: How the Four Horsemen Begin the End Times

• White Horse → Victory
• Red Horse → Revolution
• Black Horse → Exposure
• Green Horse → Judgment