A preacher proclaimed from behind the pulpit that Revelation 19:11 depicting Christ on a white horse is most likely merely symbolic and not to be taken literally.
The evidence provided was that this particular expositor did not believe that there are horses in Heaven. Unless the speaker can provide irrefutable proof that they have been to Heaven, on what grounds do they have to make such an absolute categorical statement?
Granted, the horse is not likely one that has already trod this Earth before such as Trigger, Mr. Ed, or Flicka.
However, it could be a horse that hails entirely from the celestial realm.
If horses existing in Heaven are beyond credibility, why should we believe other passages regarding what is suppose to be the ultimate home of the Christian?
Perhaps the Pearly Gates aren't so pearly since a pearl is essentially ossified oyster spit.
If it is beyond the realm of possibility for a non-human or non-angelic life form to exist in the beatific realm, why should we believe that there is a tree that that bears seven kinds of fruit for the healing of the nations?
The point is made that often the Bible employs metaphorical language to connvey concepts that the human mind would not otherwise be able to grasp.
However, if the Savior riding into history on a white steed is not to be taken all that seriously, why should we accept promises of His return at all or claims that He entered into the world the first time through the womb of a holy virgin, or that He rose from the dead so that those that believe in Him might have eternal life.
Frederick Meekins is an independent theologian and social critic. Frederick holds a BS in Political Science/History, a MA in Apologetics/Christian Philosophy from Trinity Theological Seminary, and a PhD. in Christian Apologetics from Newburgh Theological Seminary.