The Crowned Elders - Glenn Conjurske
The Crowned Elders
by Glenn Conjurske
One of the strongest proofs of the pretribulation rapture of the church is found in the crowned elders in heaven in the fourth and fifth chapters of Revelation, immediately following “the things which are” in chapters 2 and 3. These elders are made to say, according to the King James Version,
“Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof, for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, and hast made us unto our God kings and priests, and we shall reign on the earth.” (Rev. 5:9-10).
Post-tribulationists, of course, have directed their strong batteries against these verses, perceiving how fatal they are to the post-tribulational system. Their most able advocate, Alexander Reese, quotes the verses as above, and then says,
“Certainly these words seem conclusive that here we have the redeemed. All this, however, is changed now. Both the R.V. and Amer. R.V., and every independent translation that has since appeared, have radically altered the reading and translation. The R.V. bids us read the song of the elders thus:—-
They sing a new song, saying, Worthy art thou to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou was slain, and didst purchase unto God with thy blood men of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation, and madest them to be unto our God a kingdom and priests; and they reign upon the earth.”
Thus I am forced at the outset to take up the question of the Greek text. I sincerely wish I could spare my readers this, but I cannot. The question is too important to be left alone, unless we are to be left to bow blindfolded before a few textual critics, who themselves have bowed blindfolded before a few ancient manuscripts. I take up the question willingly, therefore, and hope to lay it to rest—-for the matter is easily enough settled, where prejudice does not reign. I shall do my best to make the subject both intelligible and interesting to my English reader.
I make one preliminary observation before entering upon the subject. The first thing which strikes us in this quotation from the R.V. is the incompetence of these translators before whose ipse dixit we are asked to bow. They mistranslate the Greek aorist by a simple past (according to the infatuation which reigned then, and still does), and follow a Greek text which has little support—-and which involves them in the doctrinal falsity of the saints reigning before the judgement of the world.
But to the subject. Let me state at the outset that we are not dealing with one textual variation in this heavenly song, but three. Yet in each of them the evidence is so preponderating on one side as to leave no reason to doubt where the truth lies. The three variations are:
1.Some omit “us” in the phrase “redeemed us to God.”
2.Some read, “made them kings and priests,” opposed by others which read “made us kings and priests.”
3.Some read, “we shall reign,” opposed by others which read “they shall reign” (and some, “they reign,” the present tense differing from the future by the omission of the single letter “s” in the Greek).
Now, as said, in all of these three variants the textual evidence is preponderating on one side. Adhering to that proponderating evidence, we shall have this as the true text:
“Thou was slain, and hast redemed US to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, and hast made THEM unto our God kings and priests, and THEY shall reign on the earth.” And not only is this the text which is best supported, but it is the actual text of the great majority of the manuscripts (and versions) in existence. And observe, the text as it thus stands provides an ample and obvious reason for the existence of the other readings. The text is difficult as it stands—-yea, very difficult. “Thou hast redeemed US…, and made THEM…” invites change. The abrupt change from the first person (“us”) to the third person (“them”) almost cries aloud for alteration. That alteration has actually been made in many manuscripts—-but (naturally enough) it has been made in two different ways. Some have obviated the difficulty by dropping hJma'” (“us”) in verse 9 (thus reading as the R.V.). Others have disposed of the difficulty by changing aujtouV” (“them”) to hJma'” (“us”), and changing the person of the verb from third to first, in verse 10, (thus reading as the King James Version). And yet “redeemed us…, and made them…, and they shall reign” remains the actual reading of the majority of manuscripts and versions on the earth, comparatively few scribes having yielded to the temptation to alter it. We shall look at the actual evidence for the text shortly, but first this:
The rough and difficult construction caused by the abrupt change from the first to the third person is not unexampled in Scripture. Another example of exactly the same thing occurs in Zech. 12:10, where we read, “They shall look unto ME whom they have pierced, and shall mourn for HIM.” Moreover (and what is of extreme interest to our inquiry) the Hebrew text there has suffered from the same sort of correction as has the Greek text in Rev. 5:9-10. C. H. H. Wright says of this, “The reading yla, `unto me,’ is that of all the old versions and of the great majority of the MSS., and must be regarded as the original. The reading `unto him’ wyla is doubtless a correction, as de Rossi has abundantly shown, and a most natural one, too, on account of the following wylu.”
But to the evidence, for which I rely on Hoskier. For omitting “us” in verse 9 we have one manuscript and one version. Hoskier gives the evidence for the omission thus:
“—-hJma'” A (perd. inter duas columnas) et aeth [contra rell. omn.].”
And that is all the evidence there is. Interpreted for my English reader, Codex A (Alexandrinus) and the Æthiopic version alone omit “us” in verse 9, “contra rell. omn.”—-that is, “against all the rest” of the witnesses in the world. Codex A, of course, is not to be despised. It is one of the old uncial manuscripts to which the critics attach so much importance. For that we will not fault them, but the fact is, every one of these old uncials stand so often entirely alone, against all the other manuscripts in the world, (and of course, against each other), that they simply cannot be regarded when they stand alone, or almost so. Burgon well says on this point, “I am thoroughly convinced that no reading can be of real importance,—-I mean, has a chance of being true,—-which is witnessed to exclusively by a very few copies, whether uncial or cursive.” How much less, then, a reading which is witnessed by one manuscript only, as the omission of hJma'” is here.
But A is not the only old uncial which gives its testimony here. The celebrated Codex Sinaiticus (a) speaks also—-and speaks for the insertion of hJma'”—-speaks, that is, for the reading “thou hast redeemed us.” ‘Tis strange that the critics here desert a for A, (for they generally give the greater weight to a). But perhaps not so strange—-for in this place a stands with the great bulk of the cursive manuscripts, and with the Textus Receptus, while A stands against them. May I venture an opinion? If (as is more usual) A had stood with the common text, and a against it, the critics would have followed a, as they usually do. But regardless of that, the fact is, “us” in this verse has the support of almost every witness in the world, ancient and modern, uncial and cursive, versions and manuscripts, so that its absence from the various cirtical editions of the Greek New Testament can prove only one thing, namely, the prevailing infatuation which reigns in that field, and its determination to overturn the common Greek text. But the critics notwithstanding, I regard the reading “redeemed us” as established beyond question.
But on. The reading “made them kings and priests,” for “made us,” &c., is not so overwhelmingly supported as the former. Nevertheless, there are about four times as many manuscripts for “them” as there are for “us,” with aAB at their head. The versions, too, are generally for “them.” The support for “they shall reign” (rather than “we shall reign”) is just the same, being generally the same manuscripts as support “them” in the former clause. Though a substantial number of them read “reign” for “shall reign,” they all read “they.”
So much for the external textual evidence. If we consider the internal evidence, according to the canons of the critics, we shall come to the same result. One of those canons is to take the reading which accounts for the others. This so obviously applies here that nothing more need be said of it
—-except only to point out that the intermediate reading, “hast redeemed us…, and made us kings and priests, and they…” &c., is not wholly unknown, and apparently we have also one manuscript which reads “redeemed us…, and made them…, and we shall reign.” Another canon prescribes that we take the more difficult reading. This also applies here, and with a witness. There could be no temptation for a scribe to alter a smooth and easy reading into a rough and difficult one. On the other hand, there was too much temptation in this verse to ease the harshness of a very difficult construction. But here the critics have abandoned their own canons, as well as their favorite a, probably under the more compelling temptation to abandon the common Greek text.
To conclude: “redeemed us” in verse 9 is so overwhelmingly supported by the manuscripts and versions as to leave no room to question its authenticity, the critics to the contrary notwithstanding. “Them” and “they” in verse 10 are not so overwhelmingly supported, but still the evidence is so preponderant on their side that there is little reason to question them. But whatever we read in verse 10, the incontestible presence of “us” in verse 9 establishes it as a certainty that the crowned elders are redeemed men.
But proceeding on the opposite assumption, Alexander Reese makes this remarkable statement: “They seem never to have known the experience of conflict, sin, pardon and victory.” To which I reply, If they have never known conflict and victory, why are they then crowned? Reese labors to make these elders angels. But where are angels ever called elders? They are called angels about 200 times in the New Testament, but never once elders. He cites “principalities, powers,” etc., which no one doubts—-but this is not “elders.” He refers to “before his ancients gloriously” in Isaiah 24:23, identifying “ancients” and “elders,” but it is nothing to the purpose, for “his ancients” there are his resurrected saints, the same as the elders are here.
But further, we have a number of descriptions of angels in the Bible, and we never read of one who is crowned. The one like a son of man in 14:14 is not an angel, but Christ himself, the same as in 1:13—-as is held by nearly all expositors of all persuasions, including Matthew Henry, Matthew Poole, John Gill, S. T. Bloomfield, Christopher Wordsworth, Henry Alford, Joseph A. Seiss, Henry B. Swete, William Kelly, B. W. Newton, William R. Newell, Philip Mauro, and Albertus Pieters. Seiss, I suppose, expresses the opinion of all when he says on the passage, “No one else is here to be thought of but our blessed Lord Jesus.”
We repeat our question, then, Why are these elders crowned? These crowns are not those of the monarch (diavdhma, which is used only thrice in Scripture, of Christ, and of antichrist and his confederates), but of the victor. This is the stevfano”, the crown of victory, which is held before us in the New Testament as the reward to be given us in the day of Christ. To whom is the victors’ crown given, but to the victors, or overcomers?—-(for they are the same word in the Greek). So we read,
“And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible.”
(I Cor. 9:25).
“Blessed is the man that endureth temptation, for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.” (James 1:12).
And throughout the second and third chapters of Revelation (which without question concern the church) we have repeated promises to the overcomers. Among those promises we read, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” (Rev. 2:10). And the exhortation, “Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.” (Rev. 3:11).
Step back, then, and survey this scene. Chapters two and three of Revelation hold out numerous promises of future reward to the overcomers. In those chapters we see them laboring in the midst of poverty, temptation, toils, and persecutions. But suddenly the scene changes. John has given his testimony concerning“the things which are,” and he is called up to be shown “the things which shall be after these things.” (Rev. 1:19 & 4:1, Greek). He is rapt away to heaven, and who does he see there, but those same overcomers—-the redeemed from every kindred and tongue and people and nation—-WITH THE VICTORS’ CROWNS UPON THEIR HEADS! They have overcome, and have received their crowns.
The question immediately presents itself, when did they receive those crowns? To that question there can be but one answer: at the rapture of the church, at the coming of Christ.
Paul says, “For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a CROWN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me AT THAT DAY.” (II Tim. 4:6-8).
Peter says, “And WHEN THE CHIEF SHEPHERD SHALL APPEAR, ye shall receive a CROWN OF GLORY that fadeth not away.” (I Pet. 5:4).
Christ says, “And behold, I COME quickly, and my REWARD is WITH ME.” (Rev. 22:12).
There are myriads of redeemed men in heaven now, but NOT ONE OF THEM HAS RECEIVED HIS CROWN. Paul, in the passage just quoted, knew that he had finished his course, and that the time of his departure was at hand. He expected to depart immediately to be with Christ, BUT HE DID NOT EXPECT TO BE CROWNED. His crown he expected to receive “at that day”—-in the resurrection, at the return of Christ.
Now then, the presence of redeemed men, singing the praises of their redeemer in heaven, and in full possession of their promised crowns, is PROOF CONCLUSIVE that CHRIST HAS COME. The rapture of the church has taken place already, and that before one seal is opened of the tribulation judgements.
Glenn Conjurske