Examining an Ancient Pre-Trib Rapture Statement
by Thomas Ice
All the saints and elect of
God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are
taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion
which overwhelms the world because of our sins. -Pseudo-Ephraem
(c. 374-627)
Critics of pretribulationism sometimes state that belief in the
rapture is a doctrinal development of recent origin. They argue that the
doctrine of the rapture or any semblance of it was completely unknown before
the early 1800s and the writings of John Nelson Darby. One of the most vocal
and sensational critics of the rapture is Dave MacPherson,
who argues that, "during the first 18 centuries of the Christian era,
believers were never 'Rapture separaters' [sic]; they
never separated the minor Rapture aspect of the Second Coming of Christ from
the Second Coming itself."1
A second critic, John Bray,
also vehemently opposes a pretribulational rapture,
writing, "this teaching is not a RECOVERY of
truth once taught and then neglected. No, it never was taught-for 1800 years
nearly no one knew anything about such a scheme."2 More recently, pre-trib opponent Robert Van Kampen
proclaimed, "The pretribulational rapture
position with its dual parousias was unheard of in
church history prior to 1830."3 In our previous issue of Pre-Trib Perspectives, I noted that pre-wrath advocate Marvin
Rosenthal has also joined the chorus.4
Christian reconstructionists have also
consistently and almost universally condemned premillennialism
and pretribulationism, favoring instead, postmillen-nialism. One sample of their prolific and often vitri-olic opposition can be seen in Gary North's derisive
description of the rapture as "the Church's hoped-for Escape Hatch on the
world's sinking ship," which he, like MacPherson,
believes was invented in 1830.5
How to Find the Rapture
in History
Is pretribulationism
as theologically bankrupt as its critics profess, or are there answers to these
charges? If there are reasonable answers, then the burden of proof and
historical argumentation shifts back to the critics. Rapture critics must
acknowledge and interact with the historical and theological evidence.
Rapture critic William Bell
has formulated three criteria for establishing the validity of a historical
citation regarding the rapture. If any of his three criteria are met, then he
acknowledges it is "of crucial importance, if found, whether by direct
statement or clear inference." As will be seen, the Pseudo-Ephraem sermon meets not one, but two of his canons,
namely, "Any mention that Christ's second coming was to consist of more
than one phase, separated by an interval of years," and "any mention
that Christ was to remove the church from the earth before the tribulation
period."6
Pseudo-Ephraem's Rapture Statement
I vividly remember the
phone call at my office late one afternoon from Canadian prophecy teacher and
writer Grant Jeffrey.7 He told me that he had found an ancient pre-trib rapture statement. I said, "Let's hear it."
He read the following to me over the phone:
All the saints and elect of
God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are
taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which
overwhelms the world because of our sins.
I said that it sure sounds
like a pre-trib statement and began to fire at him
all the questions I have since received many times when telling others about
the statement from Pseudo-Ephraem's sermon On the
Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World.8 Grant's phone call
started me on journey through many of the substantial libraries throughout the
Washington, D.C. area in an effort to learn all I could about this historically
significant statement. The more information I acquired led me to conclude that
Grant is right to conclude that this is a pre-trib
rapture statement of antiquity.
Who is Pseudo-Ephraem?
The word "Pseudo"
(Greek for false) is a prefix attached by scholars to the name of a famous
historical person or book of the Bible when one writes using that name. Pseudo-Ephraem claims that his sermon was written by Ephraem of Nisibis (306-73),
considered to be the greatest figure in the history of the Syrian church. He
was well-known for his poetics, rejection of rationalism, and confrontations
with the heresies of Marcion, Mani, and the Arians.
As a poet, exegete, and theologian, his style was similar to that of the Jewish
midrashic and targumic
traditions and he favored a contemplative approach to spirituality. So popular
were his works that in the fifth and sixth centuries he was adopted by several
Christian communities as a spiritual father and role model. His many works,
some of doubtful authenticity, were soon translated from Syriac
into Greek, Armenian, and Latin.
It is not at all
unreasonable to expect that a prolific and prominent figure such as Ephraem would have writings ascribed to him. While there is little support for Ephraem
as the author of the Sermon on the End of the World, Caspari
and Alexander have demonstrated that Pseudo-Ephraem
was "heavily influenced by the genuine works of Ephraem."9
What is more difficult, though secondary to the main purpose of this article,
is determining the exact date, purpose, location of, and extent of subsequent
editorial changes to the sermon.10
Suggestions on the date of
the writing of the original sermon range from as early as Wilhelm Bousset's 373 date,11 to Caspari's estimation of sometime between 565 and 627.12
Paul Alexander, after reviewing all the argumentation, favors a date for the
final form similar to that suggested by Caspari,13 but Alexander also states
simply, "It will indeed not be easy to decide on the matter."14 All
are clear that it had to have been written before the advent of Islam.
Pseudo-Ephraem's Sermon
The sermon consists of just
under 1500 words, divided into ten sections and has
been preserved in four Latin manuscripts. Three of these date from the eighth
century and ascribe the sermon to Ephraem. A fourth
manuscript from the ninth century, claims not Ephraem,
but Isidore of Seville (d. 636) as author.15 Additionally,
there are subsequent Greek and Syriac versions of the
sermon which have raised questions regarding the language of the original
manuscript. On the basis of lexical analysis and study of the biblical
citations within the sermon with Latin, Greek, and Syriac
versions of the Bible, Alexander believed it most probable that the homily was
composed in Syriac, translated first into Greek, and
then into Latin from the Greek.16 Regardless of the original language, the
vocabulary and style of the extant copies are consistent with the writings of Ephraem and his era. It appears likely that the sermon was
written near the time of Ephraem and underwent slight
change during subsequent coping.
What is most significant
for present-day readers is the fact that the sermon was popular enough to be
translated into several languages fairly soon after its composition. The
significance of the sermon for us today is that it represents a prophetic view
of a pre-trib rapture within
the orthodox circles of its day.
The sermon is built around
the three themes of the title On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End
of the World and proceeds chronologically. The fact that the pre-trib statement occurs in section 2, while the antichrist
and tribulation are developed throughout the middle sections, followed by
Christ's second coming to the earth in the final section supports a pre-trib sequence. This characteristic of the sermon fits the
first criteria outlined by William Bell, namely "that Christ's second
coming was to consist of more than one phase, separated by an interval of
years." Thus, phase one is the rapture statement from section 2; the
interval of 3 1/2 years, 42 months, and 1,260 days, said to be the tribulation
in sections 7 and 8; the second phase of Christ's return is noted in section 10
and said to take place "when the three and a half years have been
completed."17
Why Pseudo-Ephraem's Statement is Pretribulational
After learning of Pseudo-Ephraem's rapture statement, I shared it with a number of
colleagues. My favorite approach was to simply read the statement, free of any
introductory remarks, and ask what they thought. Every person, whether pre-trib or not, concluded that it was some kind of pre-trib statement. A few thought it was a statement from such
pre-trib proponents like John Walvoord
orCharles Ryrie. Most noted the clear statement
concerning the removal of believers before thetribulation
as a reason for thinking the statement pre-trib. This
is
1) Section 2 of the sermon
begins with a statement about imminency: "We ought to understand
thoroughly therefore, my brothers, what is imminent [Latin "immineat"] or overhanging."18 This is similar to
the modern pre-trib view of imminency and considering
the subsequent rapture statements supports a pre-trib
scenario.
2) As I break down the
rapture statement, notice the following observations: "All the saints and
elect of God are gathered . . ." Gathered where? A later clause says they
"are taken to the Lord." Where is the Lord? Earlier in the paragraph
the sermon speaks of "the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw
us from the confusion. . ." Thus the movement is from the earth toward the
Lord who is apparently in heaven. Once again, in conformity
to a translation scenario found in the pre-trib
teaching.
The next phrase says that
the gathering takes place "prior to the tribulation that is to come. .
." so we see that the event is pretribulational
and the tribulation is future to the time in which Pseudo-Ephraem
wrote.
The purpose for the
gathering was so that they would not "see the confusion that is to
overwhelm the world because of their sins." Here we have the purpose of the
tribulation judgments stated and that was to be a time of judgment upon the
world because of their sin, thus, the church was to be taken out.
3) Finally, the Byzantine
scholar Paul Alexander clearly believed that Pseudo-Ephraem
was teaching what we call today a pre-trib rapture. According to Alexander, most Byzantine
apocalypses were concerned with how Christians would survive the time of severe
persecution by Antichrist. The normal approach given by other apocalyptic texts
was a shortening of the time to three and a half years, enabling the survival
of some Christians.19 Unlike those texts, this sermon has Christians being
removed from the time of tribulation. Alexander observed:
It is probably no accident
that Pseudo-Ephraem does not mention the shortening
of the time intervals for the Antichrist's persecution, for if prior to it the
Elect are 'taken to the Lord,' i.e., participate at least in some measure in
beatitude, there is no need for further mitigating action on their behalf. The
Gathering of the Elect according to Pseudo-Ephraem is
an alternative to the shortening of the time intervals.20
Conclusion
Regardless of what else the
writer of this sermon believed, he did believe that all believers would be
removed before the tribulation-a pre-trib rapture
view. Thus, we have seen that those who have said that there was no one before
1830 who taught the pre-trib rapture position will
have to revise their statements by well over 1,000 years. This statement does
not prove the pre-trib position, only the Bible can
do that, but it should change many people's historical views on the matter.
ENDNOTES
1 Dave MacPherson,
The Great Rapture Hoax (Fletcher, NC: New Puritan
Library, 1983), 15. For a refutation of MacPherson's
charges see Thomas D. Ice, "Why the Doctrine of the Pretribulational
Rapture Did Not Begin with Margaret Macdonald," Bibliotheca Sacra 147
(1990): 155-68.
2 John L. Bray, The Origin of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching
(Lakeland, FL.: John L. Bray Ministry, 1982), 31-32.
3 Robert Van Kampen, The Sign (Wheaton, IL.:
Crossway Books, 1992), 445.
4 Thomas Ice, "Is The
Pre-Trib Rapture A Satanic Deception?" Pre-Trib Perspectives (II:1; March
1995):1-3.
5 Gary North, Rapture
Fever: Why Dispensationalism is Paralyzed (Tyler, TX.: Institute for Christian
Economics, 1993), 105.
6 William E.
7 For more information on
the Pseudo-Ephraem statement see Grant R. Jeffrey,
Final Warning (Toronto: Frontier Research Publications, 1995). Forthcoming,
Timothy Demy and Thomas Ice, "The Rapture and an Early Medieval
Citation" Bibliotheca Sacra 152 (July 1995): 300-11. Grant R. Jeffrey,
"A Pretribulational Rapture Statement in the
Early Medieval Church" in Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy, ed., When the
Trumpet Sounds: Today's Foremost Authorities Speak Out on End-Time
Controversies (Eugene, Or: Harvest House, 1995).
8 Grant Jeffrey found the
statement in Paul J. Alexander, The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition, by
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), 2.10. The late Alexander
found the sermon in C. P. Caspari, ed. Briefe, Abhandlungen und Predigten aus den zwei letzten Jahrhunderten
des kirchlichen Altertums
und dem Anfang des Mittelaters, (Christiania, 1890), 208-20. This German work
also contains Caspari's commentary on the sermon on
pages 429-72.
9 Paul J. Alexander,
"The Diffusion of Byzantine Apocalypses in the Medieval West and the
Beginnings of Joachimism," in Prophecy and
Millenarianism: Essays in Honour of Marjorie Reeves,
ed. Ann Williams (Essex, U.K. : Longman, 1980), 59.
10 Paul J. Alexander,
"Medieval Apocalypses as Historical Sources," American Historical
Review 73 (1968): 1017. In this essay Alexander addresses in-depth the
historical difficulties facing the interpreter of such texts. To these
difficulties, issues of theological interpretation and concern must also be
added.
11 W. Bousset,
The Antichrist Legend, trans. A. H. Keane (London:
Hutchinson and Co., 1896), 33-41. An early date is also accepted by Andrew R.
Anderson, Alexander's Gate: Gog and Magog and the Enclosed Nations. Monographs
of the Mediaeval
12 Caspari, 437-42.
13 Alexander, Byzantine
Apocalyptic Tradition, 147. This leaves the possibility that the work may have
been altered or revised prior to the date of the extant manuscripts.
14 Ibid.,
145. Earlier, he writes: "All that is certain, is
as Caspari pointed out, that it must have been
written prior to Heraclius' victories over Sassanid Persia, for the author
talks repeatedly of wars between
15 Ibid.,
136-37. The only critical edition is Caspari's which
suffers a lack of objectivity in that he relied upon only two of the four
extant manuscripts.
16 Ibid.,
140-44.
17 Caspari, 219. English citations are taken from a translation of the sermon
provided by Cameron
Rhoades,
instructor of Latin at Tyndale Theological Seminary,
18 Ibid.,
210.
19
Alexander, 209.
20 Ibid., 210-11.
as of 12-2005