EARLIEST REF TO PRE-TRIB RAPTURE/REMOVAL AFTER NT: EPHRAEM'S SERMON

[Atwood]

Re: This Thread is to Discuss EARLIEST REF TO PRE-TRIB RAPTURE/REMOVAL

Inability to produce records of their doing so.

1) How does inability to produce records prove that pre-trib was not held? What percent record do we have of the POVs of men during 2000 years? Don't you wish to retract & say, "I don't know of such records"?

2) What is your proof that you have examined all the extant records? What percent of the Church Fathers have you examined for this?

3) What is your proof that there is an inabilty to produce records of a Pre-Trib position? Does your inability prove general inability?

4) How do you know that these late ancient to early medieval sermons attributed to Ephrem are not Pre-trib?

5) Do you maintain that these sermons are only 150 years old?

6) How badly do you want such records to be produced? How determined are you in advance to denying that they have pre-trib implications (before you even read them)?

 

[Atwood]

I am continuing to look for a Greek sermon attributed to Ephrem on this topic. I would not be surprised to find that an original was written in Greek (as opposed to Syriac), as I understand that Greek was the lingua franca of the eastern Roman empire.

 

[Atwood]

Chuck Missler says: (
Byzantine Text Discovery: Ephraem The Syrian - Chuck Missler - Koinonia House )

The translation of the sermon includes the following segment:[SUP]3[/SUP]

"For all the saints and Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."​

This text was originally a sermon called On the Last Times, the Anti-christ, and the End of the World. There are four existing Latin manuscripts
(the Parisinus,
the Augiensis,
the Barberini, and
the St. Gallen)
ascribed to St. Ephraem or to St. Isidore . Some scholars believe this text was written by some unknown writer in the sixth century and was derived from the original Ephraem.[SUP]4[/SUP]


The sermon describes the events of the last days, beginning with the rapture, the Great Tribulation of 3 1/2 years duration under the Antichrist's rule, followed by the Second Coming of Christ. In Ephraem's book The Book of the Cave of Treasures, written about 370 A.D., he expressed his belief that the 69th week of Daniel ended with the rejection and crucifixion of Jesus the Messiah.5

Footnotes: 3-5:

3. The English translation of the Latin text in C.P. Caspari's Briefe, Abhandlungen und Predigten aus den zwei letzten Jahrhunderten des kirchlichen Altertums und dem Anfang des Mittelater (Christiania, 1890, pp. 208-20) was provided by Cameron Rhoades, instructor of Latin at Tyndale Theological Seminary, Ft. Worth, TX.

4. For a complete discussion, see "The Rapture and Pseudo-Ephraem: An Early Medieval Citation", by Thomas D. Ice and Timothy J. Demy, to be published in Bibliotheca Sacra, July-September 1995.
Also, Grant Jeffrey, Rush to Judgment, Frontier Research Books, Toronto, Canada, 1995.

5. The Book of the Cave of Treasures, p. 235, as quoted by Grant Jeffrey in private correspondence.

 

[Elin]

Re: This Thread is to Discuss EARLIEST REF TO PRE-TRIB RAPTURE/REMOVAL

1) How does inability to produce records prove that pre-trib was not held? What percent record do we have of the POVs of men during 2000 years?
Don't you wish to retract & say, "I don't know of such records"?

Probably not, because one can find in writings, articles, commentaries, books, etc. what was being presented by Christians at the time.

A pre-tribulation rapture doesn't show up til about 150+ years ago in such writings.

2) What is your proof that you have
examined all the extant records? What percent of the Church Fathers have you examined for this?

Fortunately, that work is already done, I don't have to do it again myself.

3) What is your proof that there is an inabilty to produce records of a Pre-Trib position? Does your inability prove general inability?

4) How do you know that these late ancient to early medieval sermons attributed to Ephrem are not Pre-trib?

5) Do you maintain that these sermons are only 150 years old?

6) How badly do you want such records to be produced? How determined are you in advance to denying that they have pre-trib implications (before you even read them)?

Is Ephrem the only one that exists?
That doesn't really qualify as general presentation in the church, as does purgatory or the assumption of Mary.

 

[Elin]

No, the imminence of the Advent of the Wicked one is not removed by any exception.
We ought to understand what is imminent. Here we see that the advent of the Wicked one is imminent, as there is no prophesied event that must precede it.

Agreed.

But it also states that the rapture occurs before the man of lawlessness is revealed,
whereas Paul says the rapture occurs after that.

We ought to understand thoroughly therefore, my brothers,

what is imminent or overhanging. Already there have been hunger and plagues, violent movements of nations and signs, which have been predicted by the Lord, they have already been fulfilled (consummated), and there is not other which remains, except the advent of the wicked one in the completion of the Roman kingdom. . . .

But if the coming of the Wicked One is imminent, and if the elect must be gathered before that happens, how much more imminent is the Rapture?

I am reminded that the Man of Sin is hindered (2 Th 2), which makes sense as hindered by the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church. And that further reminds of how God's wrath on Sodom was hindered by Lot's presence -- Lot was removed first.

 

[Sophia]

Agreed.

But it also states that the rapture occurs before the man of lawlessness is revealed,
whereas Paul says the rapture occurs after that.

The issue is that the Ephraem sermon says "gathered", but does not give the mechanism of such a gathering. A pretrib rapture viewer inserts translation/rapture as the method of gathering. This is not actually implied by the text. It says "gathered before" the times, "to not see the confusion of those days". This does not mean taken by translation/rapture, but simply "gathered".

Death (natural preferred over violent by the Latin context) is the likely assumed method that the author is implying, as the author places resurrection at a later point rather than prior to or coinciding with the "gathering". I assume that this preacher knew the verse "the dead shall rise first".

 

[Elin]

The issue is that the Ephraem sermon says "gathered", but does not give the mechanism of such a gathering. A pretrib rapture viewer inserts translation/rapture as the method of gathering. This is not actually implied by the text. It says "gathered before" the times, "to not see the confusion of those days". This does not mean taken by translation/rapture, but simply "gathered".

Death (natural preferred over violent by the Latin context) is the likely assumed method that the author is implying, as the author places resurrection at a later point rather than prior to or coinciding with the "gathering". I assume that this preacher knew the verse "the dead shall rise first".

Thanks!

That was helpful.

 

[popeye]

The issue is that the Ephraem sermon says "gathered", but does not give the mechanism of such a gathering. A pretrib rapture viewer inserts translation/rapture as the method of gathering. This is not actually implied by the text. It says "gathered before" the times, "to not see the confusion of those days". This does not mean taken by translation/rapture, but simply "gathered".

Death (natural preferred over violent by the Latin context) is the likely assumed method that the author is implying, as the author places resurrection at a later point rather than prior to or coinciding with the "gathering". I assume that this preacher knew the verse "the dead shall rise first".

By your words he placed the event pretrib. Then you say he meant that the dead rise pretrib.
Looks like he read his bible with all the verses (the pretrib ones some ignore)

 

[Sophia]

I'm not saying that the author couldn't have believed in pretrib rapture,
but just that I don't think that pretrib rapture is necessarily and/or definitively implied. This is opinion, not fact.

 

[popeye]

Re: This Thread is to Discuss EARLIEST REF TO PRE-TRIB RAPTURE/REMOVAL

1) How does inability to produce records prove that pre-trib was not held? What percent record do we have of the POVs of men during 2000 years? Don't you wish to retract & say, "I don't know of such records"?

2) What is your proof that you have examined all the extant records? What percent of the Church Fathers have you examined for this?

3) What is your proof that there is an inabilty to produce records of a Pre-Trib position? Does your inability prove general inability?

4) How do you know that these late ancient to early medieval sermons attributed to Ephrem are not Pre-trib?

5) Do you maintain that these sermons are only 150 years old?

6) How badly do you want such records to be produced? How determined are you in advance to denying that they have pre-trib implications (before you even read them)?

1) How does inability to produce records prove that pre-trib was not held?[/QUOTE}

Bingo. They in essence make their stand on this silliness and mat 24. They rarely go to mat 24 anymore once they get their noses rubbed into WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS LOL

 

[Sophia]

By your words he placed the event pretrib. Then you say he meant that the dead rise pretrib.
Looks like he read his bible with all the verses (the pretrib ones some ignore)

Not sure you understood my post then.
Read through the sermon and find where the author places the resurrection.

 

[popeye]

I'm not saying that the author couldn't have believed in pretrib rapture,
but just that I don't think that pretrib rapture is necessarily and/or definitively implied. This is opinion, not fact.

It is a non issue.
Those "holding the ancients infallable" adherants are way,way off in that the early church was LOADED with error.
I never need any such silliness to defend pretrib. It is a cakewalk with the wedding ingrediant.

 

[popeye]

Not sure you understood my post then.
Read through the sermon and find where the author places the resurrection.

No doubt at the GWT judgement which is where Jesus places it.(they did not know any better)
It is the 2nd death.
Show me the 1st resurrection.

 

[Atwood]

Not sure you understood my post then.
Read through the sermon and find where the author places the resurrection.

Sophia, what is it in the sermon which leads you to conclude that the sermon speaks of one singular general resurrection, all at some one point in time?

As to finding death in the sermon as the gathering before the trib, where does the sermon speak of death being that gathering? What leads you to import the idea of death where it is not mentioned?

The Greek word is sunago for gather together.

I checked the huge LIddell & Scott Lexicon, and could not find any metaphorical usage for death. I can't see any justification for calling the gathering of a large body of the elect together as = death. Here is L & S on it (with references to literature removed for clarity):

συνάγω:—bring together, gather together:

I of persons, animals, etc., ἡ δὲ ξυνάγουσα γεραιὰς νηόν . . to the temple. . . ; ς. ἐς ὀλίγον crowd them into a narrow compass, . . .

2 bring together for deliberation or festivity,; νυνὶ . . συνάγουσι they are at dinner, . . .

3 in hostile sense, . . . , join battle, begin the battle-strife, etc., . . .

b match, pit two warriors one against the other, . . . : hence intr., ἐς μέςσον ς. engage in fight, . . . .

c collect or levy soldiers, . . . .; collect slaves for work, . . . .

4 bring together, join in one, unite, . . . : hence γάμους ς. contract marriages.

5 bring together, make friends of, reconcile,. . . ; bring persons together in works of fiction.
,
6 ς. ἑαυτόν collect oneself.

7 lead with one, receive, ς. εἰς τὸν οἶκον LXX 2 Ki. 11.27, cf. Jd. 19.15; ξένος ἤμην καὶ συνηγάγετέ με gave hospitality to . . , Ev.Matt. 25.35 :— Pass., Act.Ap. 11.26.

II of things, σύναγεν νεφέλας.

b of a historical writer, ς. τὰς πράξεις . . . ; συνηγμένος concise in speech, D.L. 4.33. jumble together, identify.

2 draw together, so as to make the extremities meet,. . .
; ς. τὰ τέρματα, of two rivers which gradually approach one another, Hdt. 4.52; ς. ἑαυτόν, of a snake, . . . .

b draw together, narrow, contract,. . . ; πρῴρην ς. bring it to a point, Id. 1.194; τὸν . . . . .
— Pass., . . .; συνῆκται ἡ κοιλία is pinched in, drawn in.

c . . . ; ς. τὰ βλέφαρα close the eyelids, ib. 38, Gal. 18(2).62 ; but ς. τὰ ὦτα prick the ears, of dogs, . . .

d metaph., ς. τινὰς ἐς κίνδυνον ἔσχατον App. Hann. 60 ; συνάγεσθαι to be straitened, afflicted, λιμῷ, σιτοδείᾳ,. . . ; συνάγεσθαι τοῖς Ξαρακτῆρσι to become pinched in its features,; but . . . τὴν γαστέρα pull the stomach together.

3 conclude from premisses, infer, prove,. . . : c. gen. abs., ς. ὥς τινος γενομένου form a conclusion of his having been . . . ; συνάγοντες λόγοι cogent arguments, . . . : also, sum up numbers,. . .
; also, obtain them by multiplication,. . . ; of division, give a quotient, Dioph. 2.9; of an integer, yield a fraction . . . ; of any calculation, yield a result, Id. 1.25, al. ( Pass. ).

4 Pass., συνάγεται τᾷ περιφορᾷ is carried along with it, . . .

5 bring about, τὸ τέλος τῆς νίκης . . . .

 

[Atwood]

Read through the sermon and find where the author
[ever connects a gathering together of the elect with death] . . . .

Here is BDAG on sunago:

συνάγω


1. to cause to come together, gather (in)
a. things: J 15:6.

Of fish of every kind, which the net gathers up when it is cast Mt 13:47.
Of the fragments of a ms. that is wearing out MPol 22:3a; . . . .
Of field crops (Ex 23:10; Lev 25:3; JosAs 1:3) Mt 25:24, 26;

W. indication of the destination εἴς τι
εἰς τὴν ἀποθήκην Mt 3:12; 6:26; 13:30; Lk 3:17. ποῦ 12:17.
ἐκεῖ vs. 18.
συνάγειν πάντα Lk 15:13 gather everything together, perh. with a commercial connotation turn everything into cash

—In imagery συνάγειν μετά τινος join with someone in gathering (opp. σκορπίζω, q.v. 1) Mt 12:30; Lk 11:23.
συνάγειν καρπὸν εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον J 4:36.
Of sheep, metaph. 10:16 P66.


b. of persons bring or call together, gather a number of persons
(Kyme 17 husband and wife)

πάντας οὓς εὗρον Mt 22:10.
πάντας τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς 2:4

(Appian, Bell. Civ. 4, 4 §15: in view of frightening signs
ἡ βουλὴ μάντεις συνῆγεν).

πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 2 Cl 17:4; (Is 66:18).

συνέδριον J 11:47.
τὸ πλῆθος Ac 15:30.

τὴν ἐκκλησίαν 14:27; . . . .

Foll. by εἰς to indicate the place
εἰς τὸν τόπον Rv 16:16

εἰς ἕν J 11:52
To indicate purpose
εἰς τὸν πόλεμον Rv 16:14; 20:8. Cp. 13:10 v.l. ἐπί τινα Mt 27:27.
ἵνα κἀμὲ συναγάγῃ ὁ κύριος Ἰ. Χρ. μετὰ τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν that the Lord Jesus Christ may gather me also with the chosen Martyrdom of Polycarp 22:3b; Epilogus Mosquensis—list 15b.

[This above one is interesting, but it is not in my Greek text of the Martyrdom of Polycarp. I have no idea when the Moscow Epilogue to the Martyrdom of Polycarp was written, nor does the phrase appear in my quote of it in my Apostolic Fathers. I searched my Greek library of texts in Accordance and this did not appear. This looks like the term may have been used in the EM as a reference to the death of an individual, but I have no idea what the context is.]

—Pass., either in the passive sense be gathered or brought together συναχθήσονται ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη Mt 25:32.

συναχθήτω σου ἡ ἐκκλησία ἀπὸ τῶν περάτων τῆς γῆς εἰς τὴν σὴν βασιλείαν D 9:4b;

or w. act. force gather, come together, assemble
Gen 29:8; . . . Mt 22:41; 27:17; Mk 2:2; Martyrdom of Polycarp 18:2; D 14:1; 16:2.

The subject can also be a collective word συνήχθη τὸ πρεσβυτέριον Lk 22:66;
ἡ πόλις Ac 13:44.

More closely defined: as to place εἴς τι Mt 26:3; Ac 4:5 v.l. εἰς τὸ δεῖπνον Rv 19:17. ἔν τινι: Ac 4:5, 31.
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ with the congregation 11:26.
ἐὰν ἦτε μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ συνηγμένοι ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ μου if you are gathered with me in my bosom 2 Cl 4:5 (a dominical saying, of unknown origin).

παρά τινι with someone Ac 21:18 D.
πρός τινα to or with someone Mt 13:2; 27:62; Mk 4:1; 6:30; 7:1.
πρὸς ἀλλήλους GPt 8:28.
ἐπί τινα with or around someone Mk 5:21;
against someone (Gen 34:30; Josh 10:6; Hos 10:10) Ac 4:27
(=κατά τινος vs. 26 after Ps 2:2).
ἐπὶ τὴν ζωήν into life 2 Cl 17:3.
ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό Mt 22:34; Ac 4:26 (Ps 2:2).
συναχθέντες ὁμοῦ GJs 9:1.
σύν τινι (Mi 2:12) 1 Cor 5:4.
συναχθέντες μετὰ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων Mt 28:12;
also of an individual pers.
συνήχθη Ἰησοῦς μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ J 18:2 .
W. an adv. of place
οὗ Mt 18:20; Ac 20:8;
ὅπου Mt 26:57; J 20:19 v.l.;
ἐκεῖ Mt 24:28; Lk 17:37 v.l.; J 18:2.
Foll. by inf. of purpose Ac 13:44; 15:6; 20:7; Rv 19:19.


2. to effect renewed relations, bring together, reconcile, ext. of 1 μαχομένους συναγαγών B 19:12.


3. to bring together with, lead or bring (to)
pass. πᾶσα γλῶσσα εἰς θεὸν συνήχθη
of Christianity as the one route to God for all IMg 10:3
(the prep. prob. functions here in an associative sense).


4. to extend a welcome to, invite/receive as a guest
(w. εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν or εἰς τὸν οἶκον added
Judg 19:18; 2 Km 11:27; Dt 22:2. S. also Gen 29:22
Mt 25:35, 38, 43.


5. intr. (Polyb. 11, 18, 4 = meet in hostile fashion])

to move to another position, advance, move
σύναγε ἔτι ἄνω move farther up Mt 20:28 D
(the prep. may function here in a deferential and associative sense ‘come along up higher’).


compare συναγωγή = synagogue (assembly place, they didn't meet there to die!)

 

[Atwood]

It is a non issue.
Those "holding the ancients infallable" adherants are way,way off in that the early church was LOADED with error.
I never need any such silliness to defend pretrib. It is a cakewalk with the wedding ingrediant.

I basically agree with you regarding such documents as we have, if we should call it "the early church," Popeye, except I might qualify it to say that what the RCC has preserved from antiquity may well not represent the real Church at all.

Yes, the same argument is made about justification by faith alone, where some may claim it never was held until Calvin. But at least when someone claims to me that there was no pre-trib POV before Darby, I can't help but get curious & want to check that one out.

I do believe in progressive illumination in the Church. As natural science has advanced, so has theology.

 

[Atwood]

The GREEK TEXT of the Sermon

I found what I think is the Greek text of this Sermon in a 19th century book by C(arl) P(aul) Caspiri: Briefe, Abhandlungen, und Predigten . . . .

https://archive.org/stream/briefeabhandlung00caspuoft#page/444/mode/1up

Unfortunately for me, the editor/author of the work which presents this sermon, wrote in German. I took 1 year of German years ago on university level. But I am hardly fluent in Deutch. But it looks to me like the text is based on at least 2 Greek mss, as there are parenthetical variations in the text indicated. And it looks to me like this editor presents the Greek text line by line or verse by verse, numbering each 1,2,3, etc., putting commentary after each line.

It will take some work to use this archive to present this Greek text as a whole, since one cannot copy & paste from the archive.org, so far as I know.

And it is unclear to me what the sources are for his Greek text. Perhaps I should shell out & pay to buy the book, as I think it is available as a used book somewhere. Or perhaps if I search more I will find that someone has presented it in a copy & paste form.

I doubt much that the original of Ephrem's sermon was in Latin, as I have been told that the common language of the Eastern Roman Empire was Greek and Ephrem was in Syria.

 

[Atwood]

Re: This Thread is to Discuss EARLIEST REF TO PRE-TRIB RAPTURE/REMOVAL

Probably not, because one can find in writings, articles, commentaries, books, etc. what was being presented by Christians at the time.

What percent of what Christians presented at the time is extant? Do we have even 100th of a percent of the messages spoken & written in the late ancient period or early medieval? Were not thousands of people delivering messages weekly? What are these writings, articles, commentaries, books etc that you refer to? How many of them have you gone through? How do you know they are representative?

A pre-tribulation rapture doesn't show up til about 150+ years ago in such writings.

What is your proof of that? What is your proof that we have even 1 percent left of what was written?

Fortunately, that work is already done, I don't have to do it again myself.

How do you know that the statement you made is true? When did you first hear of Ephrem?

[/quote]Is Ephrem the only one that exists?
That doesn't really qualify as general presentation in the church, as does purgatory or the assumption of Mary.[/QUOTE]

You made the dogmatic statement about non-occurrence. If you don't know if Ephrem is the only one, would you consider retracting & saying, "I am not acquainted with that POV having been expressed" ?

Assumption of Mary? Interestingly enough, there is a rather ancient document called the Dormition of Mary (aka Assumption of Mary) in which she is raptured (& before the tribulation!) And the word for her rapture is the same as in 2 Thes 2 where the departure must precede the revelation of the man of sin, apostasia. Apostasia is used for a rapture in the Dormition of Mary.


But we digress. The dogmatic statement that no one asserted a pre-trib rapture before 18th century is unprovable. So why not just admit it & say, "I haven't seen any such reference which I admit."

 

[Atwood]

The issue is that the Ephraem sermon says "gathered", but does not give the mechanism of such a gathering.

You are so right on that, Sophia. It is thus similar to John 14's coming of Christ. But can you come to any conclusions by examining the text?

For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.

Is it fair to conclude from that that the elect are taken away from the world? Or do you postulate that the Lord gathers the elect into some cave with Him on earth where they all hide out so they don't see? But wouldn't they feel things? Now if Heaven must receive the Lord Jesus until the coming back to sort out the earth, that indicates that the Lord will generally be in Heaven during the Tribulation. And thus if the elect are taken from the world to the Lord, that sounds like Heaven to me.

Death (natural preferred over violent by the Latin context) is the likely assumed method that the author is implying, as the author places resurrection at a later point rather than prior to or coinciding with the "gathering". I assume that this preacher knew the verse "the dead shall rise first".

So you are thinking that the sermonizer is saying that all Christians will suddenly die at the same time, a kind of anti-rapture. But then why didn't he say, "Die"? And you seem to imply that the spirits are all taken to the Lord then. But is this not a great eisegesis, reading in what is not there? How can you justify up & sticking death into a passage that does not speak of death? Can you establish that there was this concept of a general sudden death of believers and that this sudden death was called a "gathering together"? (sunago).

There is a gathering to a meeting in the air with the Lord in 1 Thes 4. If this "Ephrem" were teaching a general death of Christians as a way to avoid the tribulation, that would seem to make him a crackpot; but of course, there are crackpots.

IMHO, Ephrem's words are consistent with 1 Thes 4, and not with anything else Biblical (a general death to avoid the trib is not biblical). So if he is consistent with 1 Thes 4, why postulate some other crackpot eschatology & stick it on ol Ephrem?

 

[Atwood]

Agreed.

But it also states that the rapture occurs before the man of lawlessness is revealed,
whereas Paul says the rapture occurs after [sic] that.

No, Paul never says that the Rapture occurs after the revealing of the Man of Sin.
1 Thes 4 end = Rapture,
2 Thes 5 start = Day of the Lord, Tribulation.

2 Thes 2: The Day of the Lord can't come until there is an apostasia, a Temple, & the Man of Sin sits in the temple.

I think you are making the error of identifying "The Day of the Lord" with the Rapture. But the Bible never equates the DOTL with either the Rapture nor Christ's return. Check your concordance; the DOTL is a time of trouble when the Lord takes decisive & punitive action upon man.

The Day of the Lord comes some time after the Rapture. And it may be that apostasia = the Rapture in 2 Thes 2, a literal instead of a figurative departure, as in the Dormition of Mary, where she has an apostasia which is definitely a Rapture. Tischendorf presents the ancient document, the Dormition of Mary, which you may find with various titles, like the Ascension of the Blessed Virgin.