Journal: Conservative Theological Journal
Volume: CTJ 06:17 (Mar 2002)
Article: Posttribulationism’s Appeal To Antiquity, Part I
Author: Steven L. McAvoy

CTJ 6:17 (March 2002) p. 105

Posttribulationism’s Appeal To Antiquity, Part I

Steven L. McAvoy

Director, Institute for Biblical Studies
Portland, OR

Posttribulationists often appeal to history in support of their view. Traditionally, from the early church fathers on down to the nineteenth century, posttribulationism has been the predominant eschatological view of the church; and pretribulationism, “the new kid on the block.”1 One posttribulationist submits

that all of the evidence of history runs one way—in favor of Post-tribulationism. The witness of those Fathers who were nearest in time to the Apostles—who lived in the century immediately following them—is invariably against the Pre-tribulation teaching. The indication, consequently, is that the Apostles were Post-tribulationists.2

But this conclusion is more elaborate in its claim than it is in fact. If we want to know where the Apostles stood on the rapture we would surely want to look not at the patristic writings but at the New Testament itself. The Bible is our sole authority on what the Apostles thought and is not to be judged by the Fathers. It is much to be preferred that Paul tell us what Paul thought than for Barnabas to tell us what Paul thought.3 Besides, whether the

CTJ 6:17 (March 2002) p. 106

posttribulationism of the historical church “favors” posttribulationism and is “invariably against” pretrib teaching is open to question.

Ladd’s appeal is more discrete:

Let it be at once emphasized that we are not turning to the church fathers to find authority for either pre- or posttribulationism. The one authority is the word of God, and we are not confined in the strait-jacket of tradition… While tradition does not provide authority, it would nevertheless be difficult to suppose that God had left his people in ignorance of an essential truth for nineteen centuries.4

Now this seems more reasonable. Except that pretribs do not suppose that God left His people in ignorance for nineteen centuries. Rather, the church did either lose or suppress the truth. Would any student of history deny that the church did pervert and suppress the truth for centuries?5 Ladd goes on to argue from the church fathers on down to post-reformation times that posttribulationism was the predominant eschatological view of the church.6