This post will explore what was written in the early writings of the believers of the first few centuries concerning the possibility of a Rapture. Most of the commentary by early, anti-nicean saints is inconclusive on the rapture question, but evidence does exist both for and against. The strongest evidence against a rapture might be the writings of Cyprian (200-258 AD) who seems to suggest pre-trib believers might face martyrdom at the hands of the son of perdition. The strongest evidence for a pre-trib rapture is from Ephraim the Syrian (4th century) who clearly teaches a pre-trib rapture. Overall, one might conclude that they had little insight more than we have today.

I'll summarize below, from an objective standpoint, what was said in...

In each case, I've provided links you can click on to go and read what they actually said in its full context, rather than just reading the quotes I'm providing. This will give you a chance to see for yourself the context that establishes what they were saying.

Non Biblical Evidence of Rapture via Tradition and Apocrypha

This list is mostly in chronologyical order. I'll make a distinction between writers who support the idea of a PRE-TRIB DELIVERANCE and a PRE-TRIB RAPTURE since there's more than one way God can deliver believers than rapturing them from the earth.

Ezra - (click here to read the book of Ezra) - Claims to be written circa 400 BC.

It's hard to have a middle ground opinion of Ezra. It claims to be written about 400 BC and foretells the death and atonement of the Messiah. So either Ezra was a prophet whose every word should be considered scripture or the whole book is a total fraud. It's not like other apocryphal books where you could come up with some middle ground opinion of saying it should be given weight, but not be authoritative. It's either a "Thus saith the Lord" the whole way or a forgery.

Some texts of Ezra says in chapter 5:1

"behold, the days shall come, that they which dwell upon earth shall be taken in a great number, and the way of truth shall be hidden, and the land shall be barren of faith

Other texts read...

"behold, the days shall come, that they which dwell upon earth shall be seized with great terror..."

Some would interpret the first translation as a "pre-trib deliverance" category. It does NOT say that a rapture will occur, though you could read that into the text. But the second translation may be more accurate.

Ezra says several things that are parallelled in the New Testament. For example...

4 Ezra 5:8 "There shall be a confusion also in many places, and the fire shall be oft sent out again, and the wild beasts shall change their places, and menstruous women shall bring forth monsters: "

which parallels..

Matt 24:19 "How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers!"

then...

4 Ezra 6:20 says "And when the world, that shall begin to vanish away, shall be finished, then will I shew these tokens: the books shall be opened before the firmament, and they shall see all together: " 

This parallels the use of open books in the Fall feasts, echoed in Revelation in at least one place...

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened...

though the timing is different. However, all of Revelation uses symbolism that's used in the Fall feasts of Yom Teruah and Yom Kippur. On these holidays, the following symbols are an important part of what goes on...

Ezra 9:3 says...

So when there shall appear in the world earthquakes, tumult of peoples, intrigues of nations, wavering of leaders, confusion of princes,

paralleling

Matthew 24:7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places.

Perhaps the best evidence to prove the validity would be if a reference could be found to its existance prior to the ministry of Messiah.

The book of Ezra was cannonized as scripture by the Council of Carthage (349-419), and has always been in the Catholic publications of the Scriptures and is considered cannon by the Eastern Orthodox Church. But it has been rejected by most Protestant traditions.

The Didache, circa 100-120 AD

Long considered an important writing, it talks of the second coming. But the language it uses seems to suggest it is drawing completely from the book of Ezra. On the last days, the Didache 16 says...

No writing other than Ezra mentions these three things in this order this close together. So the writers of the Didache must have considered Ezra to be scripture. Now one could use this an an argument to accept Ezra, or it could be used as an argument to reject the Didache, since the Didache accepted as cannon books not accepted as cannon by tradition and included in the Bible, depending on how you want to view this one. The Didache mentions nothing about a rapture or pre-trib deliverance of any kind.

The Shepherd of Hermes (100-150 AD)

says...

"Thou hast escaped a great tribulation because thou hast believed and at the sight of such a huge beast hast not doubted. "

This would be another pre-trib deliverance promise, that does not specifically say a rapture will happen. Of course, The Shepherd of Hermes also teaches than man cannot be forgiven of sins if he knows better when he commits them.

Irenaeus (120-200 AD)

Beginning with chapter XXV of Book V, Irenaeus talks a lot about the last days, the son of perdition, etc., but makes no mention of a rapture. There's no reason to suspect this omission to be significant, other than the length of time spent on discussing the topic.

Hippolytus (170-236 AD)

In his Treatise on the Christ and Antichrist , he comments extensively on the end times, but mentions nothing about a rapture. He places the "last trump" of Thessolonians at the Resurrection. In the last part of his writing, he emphasizes that he is drawing soley from scripture. This might suggest that Oral tradition on the topic was lost or debated by this point in history, and from him onward believers probably debated the interpretation of things and were interpretting scripture, rather than relying on a tradition tracing to the apostles.

Cyprian (200-258 AD)

I've heard some people distort the words of this writer to say he was suggesting Messiah would deliver us from the persecution of the son of perdition who will persecute believers in the last times. Far from it. In Letter 55, he talks about martyrdom in general, how some of the Macabees experienced it, the apostles experienced it, and then talks of the evil one to come - the son of perdition or anti-christ. Of martyrdom, he says...

Whatever our Lord and God taught, He also did, that the disciple might not be excused if he learns and does not.

Now Messiah suffered unto death, and here Cyprian is using Messiah as an example of how we should not faint when presented with the possibility of martyrdom. In his very next sentence, he then goes on to talk about the antichrist, saying...

Nor let any one of you, beloved brethren, be so terrified by the fear of future persecution, or the coming of the threatening Antichrist, as not to be found armed for all things by the evangelical exhortations and precepts, and by the heavenly warnings. Antichrist is coming, but above him comes Christ also. The enemy goeth about and rageth, but immediately the Lord follows to avenge our sufferings and our wounds. The adversary is enraged and threatens, but there is One who can deliver us from his hands. He is to be feared whose anger no one can escape, as He Himself forewarns, and says: "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both body and soul in hell."

Here, Cyprian is suggesting that present believers could face death at the hands of the son of perdition, but warns us not to shrink back and value eternal more important than temporary life. This would have been the perfect spot to mention a rapture, but instead, he suggests that his contemporaries, in his time, even himself, might face martyrdom at the hands of the anti-messiah. It would seem Cyprian did not believe or had not heard the doctrine of a rapture if he thought he might go through this himself. But if he was saying Messiah would rapture us from martyrdom by the antichrist, then there would have been no point in quoting "Fear not them which kill the body..."

Victorinus (circa 240 AD)

Victorinus falls into the category of supporting a "pre-trib deliverance" as well, though his wording is not so strong enough to conclude a Rapture. He interprets the "male child" of Rev 12 as Messiah (See http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf07-30.htm#P4725_1797718).

He comments on the book of Revelation and is interpretting it when he says...

these shall be in the last time, when the Church shall have gone out of the midst

which appears in his comments on Rev 15:1. This comment would be a pre-trib deliverance comment which would not be inconsistant with a pre-trib rapture philosophy.

Ephraim the Syrian (4th century)

Ephraim was from a part of the world where the Book of Revelation was not accepted as the cannon of scripture. It wasn't accepted as scripture by the Church of Syria until 508 AD. So the book of Revelation may or may not have been an influence on his thinking.

"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" (On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World, by Ephraem the Syrian, A.D. 373).

Now this is definitely talking about a pre-trib rapture. His original writing gives no clues on whether he was relying on previous works such as Ezra and interpretting Ezra in this manner, or an oral tradition handed down several hundred years.

Now could the answer be in tradition? Well, the book of Revelation draws from Jewish traditions that aren't recorded in earlier scripture. Tradition would be the perfect place to put the decoding of a "mystery" or "Sod", since putting it in the plain language of scripture would mean its not such a "mystery" anymore.