Introduction

Shincheonji teaches that the visions of horses and riders in Scripture reveal a universal spiritual principle in which “spirit works through flesh.” According to their doctrine, whenever the Bible describes a rider and a horse together, the rider represents a spirit and the horse represents the physical body that spirit uses to carry out God’s work. To support this interpretation, they appeal to a collection of passages including Zechariah 6:5, Isaiah 31:3, James 3:3, 1 Corinthians 15:44, and Habakkuk 3:8,15. These texts are brought together to form the interpretive foundation for Shincheonji’s explanation of Revelation 6 and the Four Horsemen, where they claim that the “white horse” symbolizes the human flesh Jesus’ spirit uses at the time of fulfillment.

This approach creates a symbolic equation that becomes central to their theology: spirit equals rider and flesh equals horse. Shincheonji argues that this pattern governs the fulfillment of prophecy across Scripture and reaches its climax when Jesus’ spirit rides the flesh of the so-called Promised Pastor, Lee Manhee, at the end of the age. Before examining the doctrinal issues with this interpretation, it is necessary to understand the logic of the framework Shincheonji is constructing and how they attempt to derive it from the passages they cite.

Shincheonji’s Perspective

Shincheonji teaches that the visions of horses and riders in Scripture reveal a universal spiritual principle in which “spirit works through flesh.” According to their doctrine, whenever the Bible describes a rider and a horse together, the rider represents a spirit and the horse represents the physical body that spirit uses to carry out God’s work. To support this interpretation, they appeal to a collection of passages including Zechariah 6:5, Isaiah 31:3, James 3:3, 1 Corinthians 15:44, and Habakkuk 3:8,15. These texts are brought together to form the interpretive foundation for Shincheonji’s explanation of Revelation 6 and the Four Horsemen, where they claim that the “white horse” symbolizes the human flesh Jesus’ spirit uses at the time of fulfillment.

This approach creates a symbolic equation that becomes central to their theology: spirit equals rider and flesh equals horse. Shincheonji argues that this pattern governs the fulfillment of prophecy across Scripture and reaches its climax when Jesus’ spirit rides the flesh of the so-called Promised Pastor, Lee Manhee, at the end of the age. Before examining the doctrinal issues with this interpretation, it is necessary to understand the logic of the framework Shincheonji is constructing and how they attempt to derive it from the passages they cite.

Shincheonji would make the claim that the “riders and the horse” and spirit work through flesh. They would point to the following verses –

Zechariah 6:5; Isaiah 31:3; James 3:3; 1 Cor 15:44; Habakkuk 3 : 8, 15

Zachariah 6 – SCJ uses Zechariah 6 as the origin of their symbolic equation

Shincheonji’s Perspective

Shincheonji interprets Zechariah 6 as the foundation of their symbolic equation: rider represents spirit, and horse represents flesh. From this, they derive the principle that God’s revelation operates through “spirit working through flesh.”

Their reasoning follows a particular chain of thought. Because the text mentions both horses and spirits, they conclude that the horses serve as bodies for the spirits. They then connect Zechariah’s vision to Revelation 6, claiming that the repetition of horse imagery proves a consistent “spirit plus flesh” pattern. According to this interpretation, the “white horse” in Revelation 6 symbolizes “the flesh that Jesus’ spirit rides,” which they identify as Lee Manhee.

Doctrinal Issues

Shincheonji interprets Zechariah 6 as the foundation of their symbolic equation: rider represents spirit, and horse represents flesh. From this, they derive the principle that God’s revelation operates through “spirit working through flesh.”

Their reasoning follows a particular chain of thought. Because the text mentions both horses and spirits, they conclude that the horses serve as bodies for the spirits. They then connect Zechariah’s vision to Revelation 6, claiming that the repetition of horse imagery proves a consistent “spirit plus flesh” pattern. According to this interpretation, the “white horse” in Revelation 6 symbolizes “the flesh that Jesus’ spirit rides,” which they identify as Lee Manhee.

The Hebrew phrase in verse 5, אֵלֶּה אַרְבַּע רוּחוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם (’ēlleh arbaʿ rūḥōṯ haššāmayim), translates as “These are the four spirits (or winds) of heaven.” The demonstrative “these” (אֵלֶּה) directly points back to the horses described in the preceding verses, making it clear that the horses themselves are being identified.

There is no preposition such as “on,” “with,” or “in” that would suggest a relationship of riding or inhabiting. The construction uses an implied copula (“are”), which links the subject and predicate in a statement of identity rather than function or instrumentality. This grammatical structure indicates that the horses are the spirits, not vessels or instruments that the spirits operate through.

Zechariah 6 concludes a sequence of eight night visions (Zech 1–6) that center on God’s judgment and restoration following Israel’s exile. Each vision depicts heavenly forces carrying out God’s will on earth, emphasizing His sovereignty and active involvement in human affairs.

A clear parallel appears in Zechariah 1:8–10: “I saw a man riding on a red horse… These are they whom the Lord has sent to patrol the earth.” This earlier vision had already established the horses as heavenly messengers or spirits rather than human figures. The imagery in chapter 6 develops this concept further by presenting four chariots and multicolored horses symbolizing God’s universal rule and governance. The central theme is divine oversight and omniscient authority, not a symbolic teaching about spirit-body cooperation.

The four chariots and their colored horses correspond to the four directions of the earth (north, south, east, west).

They represent divine agents of judgment and peace going out from God’s presence.

We can see Zechariah’s “four spirits” corresponding to the “four winds” and the “four living beings” in other prophetic books, which are all heavenly agents, not human instruments.

Zechariah 6 highlights God’s sovereignty rather than the authority of any man. It portrays God as the one who directs all spiritual forces and carries out His will without relying on a human body as an intermediary. The vision underscores divine initiative and control, affirming that God alone governs the movements of heaven and earth.

When Revelation 6 later echoes this imagery with the four horses of divine judgment, the same pattern appears. The Lamb commands, the heavenly realm responds, and the resulting judgments unfold on earth. The scene depicts divine authority in action, not a partnership between spirit and flesh. There is no indication of “spirit through flesh” cooperation — only the sovereign command of God and its execution by His heavenly agents.

Conclusion

Shincheonji misinterprets the grammatical construction “these are” as implying cooperation (“these are used by”). This reading imposes a dualistic spirit-body framework that does not appear in the text and ignores the clear parallel in Zechariah 1:8–10, where the horses are revealed to be angelic beings, not humans.

The horses symbolize God’s spiritual forces — the four winds or spirits of heaven — carrying out His judgment and establishing peace across the earth. The passage affirms God’s sovereign control, not a system of spirit working through flesh.

Isaiah 31:3

“The Egyptians are man, and not God; and their horses are flesh, and not spirit. When the Lord stretches out his hand, the helper will stumble, and he who is helped will fall, and they will all perish together.” (ESV)

Shincheonji’s Perspective

Shincheonji treats this verse as a proof text for defining symbols. They claim that it reveals a fixed equation: “Horses represent flesh, not spirit.” From this, they build the argument that throughout Scripture, horses symbolize flesh and riders symbolize spirit. This leads them to assert that the horses in Revelation 6 and 19 represent the physical bodies, particularly the “Promised Pastor,” through which a divine spirit supposedly operates.

This approach functions as what they call a “dictionary move,” transforming a historical judgment oracle into a universal interpretive key. By doing so, they detach the passage from its original prophetic and historical setting and force it into a system meant to validate their doctrine of “spirit through flesh.”

Doctrinal Issues

To refute Shincheonji’s interpretation, it is essential to examine what Isaiah 31 actually teaches. The passage is not a symbolic key but a prophetic warning against Judah’s misplaced trust in human power. The people of Judah, fearing the Assyrian threat, turned to Egypt for help instead of relying on God’s protection. They sought security through political and military alliances, believing Egypt’s armies and horses could save them.

Isaiah rebukes this reliance on human strength by declaring that Egypt is “flesh, not spirit.” This phrase contrasts human power with divine power, emphasizing that human efforts cannot stand against God’s will. The focus is on faith and dependence, not on symbolism. Isaiah 31:3 therefore makes a theological point about the futility of trusting in human means rather than God, not a symbolic statement equating horses with flesh and riders with spirit.

In Isaiah 31, the prophet uses the Hebrew terms flesh (בָּשָׂר / basar) and spirit (רוּחַ / ruach) as metaphors that contrast human limitation with divine strength. Flesh represents mortal, finite human power, while spirit represents God’s eternal, limitless power. The message is clear: “Do not rely on Egypt’s horses, for they are merely human resources (‘flesh’). Instead, trust in the Lord, who is spirit — divine and all-powerful.”

Nothing in this verse suggests that a horse symbolizes “human flesh used by spirit.” The term “horse” is literal, referring to Egypt’s cavalry and military might. Isaiah’s point is theological, not symbolic: Judah’s faith should rest in God’s supernatural power rather than in human armies. The passage rebukes political reliance on Egypt, not the idea of “spirit through flesh.”

Isaiah 31 fits within a recurring biblical theme: human strength cannot bring salvation, but God’s Spirit can. This message appears throughout Scripture. Jeremiah 17:5 warns, “Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength.” Zechariah 4:6 proclaims, “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord.” Psalm 33:17 adds, “The war horse is a false hope for salvation.” Each passage underscores the same truth that reliance on human power leads to failure, while trust in God’s Spirit brings deliverance.

Isaiah 31:3 therefore is not a secret parable or symbolic key. It is a direct rebuke against Judah’s dependence on Egypt’s armies and horses instead of God’s protection. Shincheonji isolates this verse from its context, reverses its meaning, and turns it into a universal “symbol rule” that supports their apocalyptic doctrine of “spirit through flesh.”

If Shincheonji argues that “flesh and spirit” always form a symbolic pair, other biblical passages reveal what the phrase actually means and maintain consistency across Scripture.

In all these passages, “flesh” and “spirit” are moral and spiritual contrasts, not literal components like body and invisible entity. They describe two opposing natures—human versus divine—not a mechanical process of revelation or “spirit working through flesh.”

If God’s Spirit needs flesh to work, the New Testament already defines what that means:

The Spirit indwells the entire Church, not one man (1 Cor 3:16; Eph 1:22–23).

So Isaiah 31:3 doesn’t establish a “spirit-body partnership model.”
It warns against trusting human flesh instead of God’s Spirit — the exact opposite of what SCJ claims.

James 3:3

“If we put bits into the mouths of horses so that they obey us, we guide their whole bodies as well.” (ESV)

Shincheonji’s Perspective

Shincheonji interprets James 3:3 as a parabolic image of harmony and control between spirit and flesh. They claim, “The horse represents flesh, and the rider represents spirit. Just as the rider directs the horse, the spirit directs the flesh to accomplish its purpose. Therefore, when Jesus’ spirit rides the horse (the Promised Pastor), it perfectly fulfills God’s will.”

They construct a symbolic chain from several passages to support this view: Zechariah 6 equates horses with “the spirits of heaven,” Isaiah 31:3 declares that “horses are flesh, not spirit,” and James 3:3 describes horses obeying their riders. From these, they conclude, “Spirit rides and controls flesh to fulfill prophecy.” This reasoning is then personalized to their doctrine, presenting Lee Manhee as the obedient “horse” through whom Jesus’ spirit supposedly works to complete divine revelation.

Doctrinal Issues

James 3 has no connection to prophecy, spirit, or flesh. The passage focuses on self-control, particularly in speech, as a mark of spiritual maturity. James 3:1–12 forms one continuous moral lesson about how small things can exert great influence, emphasizing the need for disciplined words and conduct among believers.

In this context, James uses three analogies to illustrate control: a bit guiding a horse’s body, a rudder steering a large ship, and a small spark setting a forest ablaze. Each image points to discipline and self-mastery, not a relationship between spirit and flesh. The flow of the passage reinforces this: verse 2 highlights the goal of maturity (“If anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man”), verse 3 speaks of the bit guiding the horse, verse 4 of the rudder guiding the ship, and verse 5 draws the conclusion that the tongue, though small, wields great power. James 3:3–4 therefore serve as practical moral illustrations, not symbolic or prophetic codes.

James’s message is straightforward: just as a small bit can control a large horse, so a small part of the body — the tongue — can direct the course of a person’s entire life. The illustration is practical, not symbolic. There is no discussion of “spirit” and “flesh,” nor any hidden spiritual hierarchy implied. The “rider” is simply a person guiding an animal, used as an everyday example to make a moral point.

The only parallel James draws is about control and discipline. The focus is on mastering one’s speech as a mark of maturity in faith, not on revealing a “spirit and body” dynamic or heavenly pattern. The verse functions as an ethical metaphor within a broader exhortation on moral character, not as a prophetic code or key to understanding divine revelation.

This represents one of Shincheonji’s recurring interpretive errors: taking metaphors from moral or historical passages and reworking them into symbolic keys for decoding Revelation. By doing this, they disregard the original literary genre and authorial intent.

In James 3, the message is not “spirit through flesh,” but “Spirit over flesh.” The emphasis is on discipline and maturity that come from the Holy Spirit’s guidance, not on the loss of individuality or autonomy. The fruit of the Spirit produces self-control, showing that divine influence strengthens human responsibility rather than erasing it.

Romans 8:14 teaches, “Those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God,” showing that the Spirit leads, not possesses. Likewise, Galatians 5:25 says, “If we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit,” describing cooperative discipleship, not spiritual cohabitation or merger. The proper conclusion is that the Holy Spirit empowers believers to govern their own actions and words in accordance with God’s will, not to surrender their agency to any person claiming to embody divine possession.

1 Corinthians 15:44

“It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.” (ESV)

Shincheonji Perspective

Shincheonji teaches that there must always be a physical vessel for a spirit to operate through, claiming that “spirit must have flesh to work.” They argue that at the First Coming, God’s spirit worked through the flesh of Jesus, and at the Second Coming, Jesus’ spirit must again work through a human body — the so-called Promised Pastor. This teaching hinges on their reinterpretation of Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 15:44, where he contrasts a “natural body” with a “spiritual body.”

According to Shincheonji, a “natural body” means a person without spirit, while a “spiritual body” means a human body that is possessed or controlled by a divine spirit. They then apply this reading to claim that God’s revelation is always fulfilled through “spirit working through flesh.” In doing so, they turn Paul’s resurrection teaching into a framework for prophetic embodiment, redefining “spiritual body” to support their doctrine of spirit-body dualism and the alleged role of their leader as Christ’s physical vessel.

Doctrinal Issues

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul is defending the doctrine of the bodily resurrection of believers, not describing how God operates through people in the present. The chapter addresses questions raised by skeptics who doubted the possibility of resurrection: “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” (v.35). Paul responds with a clear and structured argument to show that resurrection involves transformation, not replacement or possession.

He uses the image of a seed to illustrate this change: “What you sow does not come to life unless it dies… God gives it a body as He has chosen” (vv.36–38). The seed and the new plant share identity yet differ in form, showing continuity and renewal rather than the entrance of one being into another. Paul’s focus is the transformation of mortal, perishable bodies into glorified, immortal ones through God’s power. The teaching concerns future resurrection hope, not a principle of “spirit working through flesh.”

What did Paul mean by “spiritual bodies”?

So, “spiritual body” does not mean “non-physical body,” nor does it mean “spirit using flesh.”
It means a real, glorified, imperishable body made alive by the Spirit at the resurrection.

In simpler terms, Paul is describing two conditions of the same person, not two separate entities.

Now: our bodies are physical, corruptible, and marked by weakness.
Then: at the resurrection, those same bodies will be glorified, incorruptible, and fully empowered by the Holy Spirit.

Paul’s point is about transformation, not dualism. The “natural body” and the “spiritual body” refer to the same individual before and after resurrection. It is one person renewed by God’s power, not a spirit inhabiting a separate human vessel.

Paul’s main message in 1 Corinthians 15 is that the resurrection transforms our mortal, perishable bodies into glorified, Spirit-empowered ones patterned after Christ’s own resurrected body. This is about renewal and victory over death, not divine embodiment or spiritual possession.

Supporting Verses:

• v.42–43 – “It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory.”
• v.49 – “Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.”
• v.53 – “This perishable body must put on the imperishable.”

Paul is clearly explaining the future resurrection and transformation of believers, not describing a process of revelation or cooperation between spirit and flesh. When Shincheonji isolates verse 44 (“It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body”) and uses it to teach that “spirit always works through flesh,” they remove the verse entirely from its context. Paul’s focus is the resurrection hope of believers, not a principle for prophetic fulfillment.

If 1 Corinthians 15:44 truly meant that “spirit needs flesh,” then by Shincheonji’s logic, Jesus’ own resurrected body would be inadequate for Him to act spiritually. They would have to claim that the risen Christ must possess another person’s body—namely, Lee Manhee—to continue His work. But this idea collapses when read in light of the following verses.

Verse 45 states, “The last Adam became a life-giving spirit,” and verse 47 adds, “The second man is from heaven.” These verses teach that Jesus Himself, in His resurrected and glorified state, is the life-giving Spirit. He does not require another human vessel to operate through. Instead, He imparts life directly to believers through the Holy Spirit. Paul’s argument affirms Christ’s sufficiency and divine power, not the need for a new “flesh” to fulfill God’s plan.

Jesus already has His spiritual body (resurrected, glorified).

He will not ride another “body” – He will return in His own.

Paul’s message in this verse is about resurrection and transformation, not divine embodiment or hierarchy.

Now: We live in perishable, natural bodies that are subject to weakness and decay.
At resurrection: We will be raised in imperishable, spiritual bodies, fully empowered and sustained by the Holy Spirit.
Christ: He is the firstfruits of this transformation (v.20), the model and guarantee of what believers will experience.
Believers: We will share in His resurrection glory and bear “the image of the man of heaven” (v.49).

The teaching celebrates hope, renewal, and eternal life in Christ. It does not describe a system where spirit must work through flesh but proclaims the victory of the resurrected body through the Spirit’s power.

Habakkuk 3:8, 15

“Was your wrath against the rivers, O LORD? Was your anger against the rivers, or your indignation against the sea, when you rode on your horses, on your chariot of salvation?”

“You trampled the sea with your horses, the surging of mighty waters.” (ESV)

Shincheonji’s Perspective

“God rides horses and uses chariots of salvation — this means He always works through physical bodies.

God’s spirit rides His chosen flesh to accomplish salvation. At the time of Revelation’s fulfillment, Jesus’ spirit rides the flesh of the Promised Pastor as His chariot of salvation.”

They use these verses to claim that “the principle of spirit working through flesh” is consistent from the Old Testament to Revelation.

So their reasoning chain goes like this:

Doctrinal Issues

Habakkuk 3 is a poetic theophany—a hymn celebrating God’s visible manifestation in judgment and salvation. The chapter is not a coded prophecy or a symbolic riddle but a worshipful description of God’s past and ongoing power.

The prophet uses vivid cosmic and natural imagery—mountains trembling, rivers raging, the sun and moon standing still—to portray the Lord’s majesty as He acts to deliver His people and judge their enemies. The passage functions as a song of awe and remembrance, recounting God’s mighty deeds rather than predicting a future event involving specific individuals. Its purpose is to inspire reverence, trust, and confidence in God’s sovereignty, not to provide a symbolic framework for interpreting later prophecies.

This phrase is a poetic anthropomorphism; it pictures God as a divine warrior riding forth to bring salvation and judgment. In the ancient world, kings and gods were often portrayed as riding chariots into battle. The prophet draws on that imagery to present God Himself as the true Warrior-King who fights for His people.

Therefore, “riding horses and chariots” represents God’s power and judgment in motion, not God inhabiting human bodies.

Supporting Parallels:

Thus, Habakkuk’s “horses and chariots” are poetic symbols of divine judgment and authority, not fleshly vessels used by God.

Habakkuk 3 is written in Hebrew parallelism, rich with metaphor and personification. The language is poetic, not cryptic or symbolic. For example, the prophet writes, “You split the earth with rivers” (v.9), “The mountains saw you and writhed” (v.10), and “The deep gave forth its voice” (v.10). These are vivid poetic exaggerations that describe God’s overwhelming power, not hidden parables to be decoded.

When verse 8 says, “You rode on your horses,” it conveys that God moves in judgment with unstoppable force, like a divine warrior advancing across the battlefield. The imagery presents a single, unified picture of God’s might and majesty. It is not intended to be divided into symbolic roles of “rider” and “horse.” The focus is entirely on God’s power in motion, not on a system of spirit and flesh.

Habakkuk’s vision presents a powerful picture of God’s sovereignty over creation, His judgment on the nations, and His deliverance of His people. The phrase “your chariot of salvation” symbolizes God’s power to save and His victorious intervention on behalf of His people. It is not a reference to a literal human body but a poetic image of divine triumph and deliverance.

Key Verse: Habakkuk 3:13 – “You went out for the salvation of your people, for the salvation of your anointed.” This verse summarizes the theme of the chapter: God Himself takes action to rescue His people and judge their enemies. The context depicts Yahweh moving directly in power and mercy, not through another person’s flesh. The entire passage celebrates God’s immediate and sovereign activity, affirming His role as the ultimate deliverer.

SCJ transforms a metaphor of divine victory into a parable of human embodiment — a complete shift in genre and meaning.

Both books use Old Testament “divine warrior” language to depict God’s judgment — but in Revelation, the one riding the white horse (Rev 19:11) is Christ Himself, not His “spirit in another body.”

Both symbolize God’s direct victory, not “spirit–flesh cooperation.”

Revelation 19:11-16

11 Then I saw heaven open, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war.

12 His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems…

13 He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God.

14 And the armies of heaven… were following him on white horses.

15-16 From his mouth comes a sharp sword… On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

Shincheonji’s Perspective

Shincheonji teaches that Revelation 19:11–16 fulfills what they call the “spirit-through-flesh” principle. They argue that at the First Coming, Jesus (the spirit) rode a donkey (the flesh), and at the Second Coming, His spirit now rides the white horse, which they claim represents the flesh of the Promised Pastor, Lee Manhee. In their system, the rider symbolizes the spirit of Jesus, the horse represents the human body used by that spirit, and the white color signifies purity and victory.

According to this interpretation, Jesus’ spirit supposedly operates through Lee Manhee to judge the world and bring spiritual conquest. Shincheonji presents this as the divine pattern of fulfillment: spirit working through flesh to complete God’s revelation. This view redefines the imagery of Revelation 19, transforming a vision of Christ’s direct return in glory into a metaphor for spiritual possession of a human intermediary.

Doctrinal Issue

Revelation 19 stands at the climax of the book’s judgment and redemption scenes. It comes directly after the fall of Babylon in chapter 18 and the marriage supper of the Lamb in 19:1–10, both of which prepare the way for the revelation of Christ as the victorious King. When heaven opens in verse 11, the focus is entirely on Christ Himself, returning in glory as the Divine Warrior-King.

Every detail of the passage exalts His person and authority. He rides forth on a white horse, His eyes are like blazing fire, He wears many crowns, and His name is called The Word of God (v.13). The armies of heaven follow Him, but no one else shares His titles or His role in judgment. The vision reveals the direct return of Christ, not a proxy or human representative acting on His behalf. The entire scene magnifies the glory, power, and supremacy of Jesus alone.

Revelation’s images are apocalyptic symbols, not allegorical correspondences.
The “rider + horse” functions as one composite symbol of Christ’s victorious return — just as the “Lamb” functions as a single image of His sacrificial kingship.

Breaking the image into “spirit + flesh” is a genre mistake — it treats apocalyptic vision like a parable with secret earthly referents.

In Scripture, white horses consistently appear in divine or heavenly contexts. In Zechariah 1 and 6, they represent angelic spirits who patrol the earth under God’s command. In Revelation 6, a white horse appears as part of the four horses of judgment. Finally, in Revelation 19, the white horse carries Christ Himself as He returns in victory.

The color white symbolizes purity, holiness, and triumph, not a human body or physical vessel on earth. The white horse in Revelation 19 serves as a visual expression of the royal majesty and victorious power of the returning Christ. It conveys His authority as the conquering King who judges righteously and establishes His reign, not a coded symbol for “spirit through flesh.”

If “horse = flesh,” then the logic of Revelation 19 collapses almost immediately. The armies of heaven in verse 14 also ride white horses—would that mean there are countless “fleshes” being used by spirits? Such an interpretation quickly loses coherence.

If the horse symbolizes flesh and the rider the spirit, then Christ’s robe dipped in blood would somehow belong to the “spirit,” while the “flesh” remains untouched. Likewise, calling the horse a physical body would imply that the King of kings and Lord of lords shares His divine authority with His “mount.” The symbolism falls apart as soon as it is made literal. Revelation’s imagery functions to exalt Christ’s victory and majesty, not to outline a metaphysical system of spirit inhabiting flesh.

Conclusion

Each of these passages belongs to a distinct biblical genre with its own purpose and context. Zechariah and Revelation use visionary imagery to communicate divine revelation through symbols. Isaiah delivers prophetic oracles addressing real historical situations. James offers wisdom exhortation focused on moral conduct and self-control. 1 Corinthians provides doctrinal teaching about resurrection and transformation. Habakkuk is a poetic hymn exalting God’s power and justice.

Shincheonji’s “horse = flesh” framework disregards these literary boundaries and fuses unrelated texts into a single allegorical code. By flattening prophetic, poetic, and instructional writings into one symbolic formula, they strip each passage of its historical and theological context. The result is a self-referential system where meaning depends entirely on the group’s interpretive authority, rather than on the text’s intended message within Scripture.