8

Michael, Moses and the Elders

1.      Michael the Archangel 

Former Adventist pastor J. Mark Martin claims, “The early Adventist pioneers taught the heresy called Arianism, which asserts that Jesus is not God the Son, the second Person of the Trinity. Those who believe this false doctrine teach that Jesus is an exalted angel. Those, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, who promote this heresy today, teach that Jesus is Michael the Archangel. This early Adventist heresy appeared in several books and articles published by the church.” ¹

Among those who taught this were James White, the husband of Ellen, and Uriah Smith, who wrote commentaries propagating the interpretations of Daniel and Revelation still accepted by Adventists today.

Since 1931, the Adventist church has officially embraced the doctrine of the Trinity, but the idea that Michael is Jesus is retained, since Mrs. White taught it. For instance, “Moses passed through death, but Michael came down and gave him life before his body had seen corruption. Satan tried to hold the body, claiming it as his; but Michael resurrected Moses and took him to heaven. Satan railed bitterly against God … but Christ did not rebuke His adversary …” ²

It appears however, that not all branches of the church stress this teaching. When John Surridge, an English Adventist spokesman, was asked if they taught that Michael is Jesus, he said, “I have to admit that this is not something that I have heard much about. However, having looked it up I can tell you that apparently the Church discussed this issue some forty years ago and concluded that the precise identification of Michael was not important enough to dwell on at length.” ³

Adventists today do not teach that Jesus is Michael, i.e. that he is an angel, but they do claim that Jesus appeared as Michael in the Old Testament.

We know that Jesus is not an angel, because he is, “as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son, today I have become your Father.’” (Heb 1: 4-5).

Many theologians teach, however, that the “angel of the LORD” who appears in several places in the Old Testament, is an appearance of Christ before his incarnation, as he is identical with the LORD (Gen 16: 11-13; Judges 13: 20-23) and accepts worship (Num 22: 31-32), which an angel does not do (Rev 22: 8-9). The same can be said of the “commander of the LORD’s army,” who appears to Joshua before the battle of Jericho (Josh 5: 13-15).

So Jesus did appear to people in the Old Testament. The question is, does Michael count as one of these appearances? Let us examine the verses which deal with Michael.

The Archangel Michael appears in the following verses: Daniel 10: 13; 10: 21, 12: 1; Jude 9; Revelation 12: 7.

The name Michael in Hebrew is míchá’él, which means “who is like God?” In the Greek text it is written Μιχαηλ. In the Old Testament, in this form, it is the name of 9 or 10 men (Numbers 13: 13; 1 Chron 5: 13, 5: 14; 6: 40; 7: 3; 8: 16; 12: 20; 27: 18; 2 Chron 21: 2-4; Ezra 8: 8), and in the form míchal it is the name of king Saul’s younger daughter (1 Sam 14: 49). These people cannot all have been appearances of Jesus Christ. It is not possible to draw conclusions from the meaning of the name.

Daniel 10: 13 reads, “But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me.” The part of the sentence which is significant for our study is as follows:

NIV, KJV and NASB: “Michael, one of the chief princes”

Compare with the Latin Vulgate and the Greek Septuagint -

Vulgate: Michael unus principum primorum

LXX: “Μιχαηλ είς των αρχοντων”

These all agree with the original Hebrew, which reads: míchá’él ’achad hassárím hár’íšóním – word for word: “Michael, one the princes the chiefs.”

The expression “the chief princes” is therefore in the plural, both the noun and the adjective, as Hebrew grammar demands, and Michael is one of these.

The meaning of the Hebrew word sar – pl. sárím is commander or prince. This may a human commander (2 Chron 25: 1), Jesus is the “prince of peace,” (Isaiah 9: 6), and it is probably God who is the “prince of princes” (Dan 8: 25). Several times in the book of Daniel, the word refers to angelic beings, e.g. “the prince of the Persian kingdom (Dan 10: 13, 20), “the prince of Greece” (10: 20). Michael would also be one of these angels.

The other verses in Daniel are as follows, “No-one supports me against them except Michael, your prince” (10: 21); “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise” (12: 1). Not much can be concluded from this. It may be Jesus who is the protector of the Jewish people, but in an apocalyptic text of this type, it could equally well be a chief angel. The resurrection, which soon follows in chapter 12, can naturally only be the work of Jesus, but it is not written in the text that Michael plays a role in this.

As a result, it can be said that there are verses in the book of Daniel which would support the claim that Michael is Jesus. I believe that the decider, however, is the fact that he is only one of a certain group, and this cannot be true of Jesus, as he is a unique being. The most likely conclusion based on the book of Daniel, therefore, is that Michael is not Jesus.

Michael’s name also occurs in the book of Revelation, also an apocalyptic work, and he is once again in a battle. “And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back.” (Rev 12: 7). This could equally well be a chief angel or a symbol of Jesus. No decision can be made on this basis.

The word “archangel” comes from the Greek (αρχαγγελος), and means “chief angel” or “angelic prince.” The following related words also may refer to spiritual beings: “αγγελος” (messenger – Mat 1: 20), “αρχη” (ruler – Rom 8: 38), “αρχων” (authority – in the New Testament, this generally means the human authorities, but cf. LXX translation of Dan 10: 13).

The word archangel only occurs twice in the Bible. It is difficult to determine the meaning of such a rare word on the basis of the Bible alone, but archangels were a well-know concept in intertestamental Jewish literature. More on this below.

Let us look at the verses first. “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.” (1 Thess 4: 16).  We know that at the sound of Jesus’ voice, the dead will be raised. “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice (that of the Son of man) and come out…” (John 5: 28-29). It is not certain, but I believe that the loud command, the voice of the archangel and the trumpet call are not one and the same thing, but three separate events. ⁴ If this is so, then the voice of the Son of man corresponds to the loud command, not the voice of the archangel. On the basis of this verse, it is very unlikely and certainly speculative to assert that the archangel is Jesus.

The final verse is Jude 9, “But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, ‘The Lord rebuke you!’”

The expression “did not dare” is ουκ ετολμησεν in Greek. According to the lexicon, the word τολμαω means dare, take courage, be brave enough, presume. In the negative, it occurs in the following verses: Matthew 22: 46; Mark 12: 34; Luke 20: 40; John 21: 12; Acts 5: 13, 7: 32; Romans 10: 18; 2 Corinthians 10: 12, and means that someone does not dare to do something because he is afraid. I do not believe that it can be claimed that there is anything Jesus would not dare to do.

It is true that the angel of the LORD uses the same words against Satan in Zechariah 1: 2, but why should this mean that he is the same person? It is not written that the angel of the LORD did not dare to speak to Satan.

To return to Jude. In the early church, the epistle of Jude was a disputed book for a long time ⁵, as he refers to apocryphal sources. For example: “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones, to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” (Jude 14-15). This prophecy is not to be found in the Old Testament, however, compare: “And behold! He comes with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgement upon all, and to destroy all the ungodly, and to convict all flesh of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him. (1 Enoch 1: 9).

Jude and his original readers must have been familiar with the first book of Enoch. According to most commentators, this is a pseudepigraphic book originating from the first century BC, and a lot can be learnt from it about the beliefs of Judaism at that time. The early Christians respected this book, and Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria quote from it. It was condemned and banned by the fourth century church fathers, however, and was therefore lost for a long time. In the early nineteenth century though, an Ethiopic translation was found in Alexandria, and this was translated into English and published in 1821. Since then, copies have also been found among the Dead Sea scrolls.

First Enoch is one of the popular intertestamental apocalyptic works, which are based on Daniel, but contain a much more elaborate angelology. Michael often turns up in these books, but he is not the only archangel: “And the angel Michael (one of the archangels) seized me by my right hand…” (1 Enoch 71: 2); “Such is the picture and sketch of every luminary which Uriel the archangel, who is their leader, showed unto me.” (1 Enoch 79: 6). In one place in the book, seven archangels are named: Uriel, Raphael (who occurs in the book of Tobit – e.g. “And the holy angel of the Lord, Raphael was sent to heal them both.” – Tobit 3: 25), Raguel, Michael, Saraquael, Gabriel and Remiel (1 Enoch 20: 1-8). In another place, four of them are standing round the throne of God: Michael, Raphael, Gabriel and Phanuel (1 Enoch 40: 8-10).

No attempt is made at this point to assert that all this conforms to reality, but just that when the first Christians heard the word archangel, they would have thought of a high-ranking angel, and not a unique being who is identical to the Son of God. In order to determine the meaning of a rare word, not only the etymology should be considered, but also the contemporary usage.

Several of the early church fathers assert that Jude, when he refers to the conflict of Michael and Satan over Moses, is quoting from another apocryphal book called the Testimony of Moses or the Assumption of Moses. For example, Origen writes, “In the book of Genesis, the serpent is described as having seduced Eve; regarding whom, in the work entitled The Assumption of Moses (a little treatise, of which the Apostle Jude makes mention in his Epistle), the archangel Michael, when disputing with the devil regarding the body of Moses, says that the serpent, being inspired by the devil, was the cause of Adam and Eve’s transgression.” ⁶

In connection with the fact that Jude quotes from literature of this sort, it should be noted that this does not mean he considered these books to be inspired, or that we should consider them as such. The Apostle Paul sometimes cites Greek poets to stress a certain point, i.e. Aratus (Acts 17: 28), Menander (1 Cor 15: 33), Epimenides (Titus 1: 12). “Such quotations in no way suggest that the quotations or the books from which they were taken are divinely inspired. It only means that the Biblical author found the quotations to be a helpful confirmation, clarification or illustration.” ⁷

It must also be said, that it is a general principle of Biblical interpretation, that an important doctrine should not be based on the details of a parable or illustration. In Jude 9, it is not the intention of the author to teach details on the death of Moses or the person of Michael, but to illustrate the attitude of the false teachers. Peter also deals with this subject in his second letter, and it is interesting to compare the two passages.

“Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings; yet even angels, though they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord. But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish.” (2 Peter 2: 10-12). 

“In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings. But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals – these are the very things that destroy them.” (Jude 8-10).

So Peter uses the angels as an illustration, whereas Jude uses Michael, but the point made is the same.

To summarise then, it is asserted here that Jesus Christ did not appear as the archangel Michael in the Old Testament, the main reasons being:

Biblical:

1. Michael is just one of the chief princes (archangels?), and

2. He did not dare to rebuke Satan.

Historical:

3. The word archangel would not have indicated a unique being for the first readers.

2.      Moses

Let us now turn to Moses. Mrs. White claims that Moses was raised from the dead by Jesus. See above ², and: “The angels buried Moses, but the Son of God soon came down and raised him from the dead and took him to heaven.” ⁸

First of all it must be said, that this is not written in the Bible. The death of Moses is described in Deuteronomy 34: 5-7: “And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no-one knows where his grave is. Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone.”

There is not the slightest hint in the Old Testament, that Moses’ body did not remain in that unknown grave. Indeed, God said to Joshua, “Moses my servant is dead. Now then, you and all these people, get ready…” (Joshua 1: 2). Jude 9 states that there was a conflict over Moses’ body, but it does not say what happened to it afterwards. So we can speculate, can’t we? And of course, everyone speculates according to his own theological ideas and prejudices.

What are the possibilities?              

1. Jude quotes an intertestamental Jewish legend, which is contained in an apocryphal book, as this is a good illustration of what he wants to say about the false teachers, but he does not wish to claim that this event really happened.
2. This event really did happen, in spite of the fact that it is written in an uninspired book, because it is in the Bible.

Both of these possibilities are acceptable. In the first case, the epistle of Jude is still regarded as inspired, but no teaching is built on the illustration. Let us assume, however, that the second case is correct.

It would be good to obtain and read the Assumption of Moses, as we would be informed what these celestial beings were arguing about, and what happened afterwards. Several of the Early Church Fathers refer to the book, but unfortunately, only the beginning has survived, which in apocalyptic fashion describes history in symbols from the time of Moses to the time of Herod, but the end, which would describe Moses’ death, has been lost. ⁹

So how can we speculate about Jude 9?       

A. Moses was resurrected and is bodily in heaven.

This is not a new theory. Augustine states, that Christians believe Enoch, Moses and Elijah are in heaven. ¹⁰ Unfortunately, he gives no details.

In a Catholic study, in which he tries to prove the assumption of Mary, Mischewski explains the cases of Enoch and Elijah, to show “such things happen.” Then he writes, “Jude gives us a hint about what may have happened to Moses after his death, and refers to the Assumption of Moses, in Jude 9. It seems fair to speculate that Moses was taken up to heaven bodily, given that at the Transfiguration, Moses appeared with Elijah, who we are told explicitly was assumed into heaven.” ¹¹ (My emphasis.) Mario Derksen, however, another Catholic, refutes the idea that Moses is bodily in heaven, on the basis that Jesus would only have resurrected him after his own resurrection. ¹² More on this later.

Faussett says this of Moses’ body, “Satan, as having the power of death, opposed the raising of it again, on the ground of Moses’ sin at Meribah, and his murder of the Egyptian. That Moses’ body was raised, appears from his presence with Elijah and Jesus (who were in the body) at the Transfiguration: the sample and earnest of the coming resurrection kingdom, to be ushered in by Michael’s standing up for God’s people. Thus in each dispensation a sample and pledge of the future resurrection was given: Enoch in the patriarchal dispensation, Moses in the Levitical, Elijah in the prophetical.” ¹³ It’s just that, this explanation does not work for Enoch and Elijah, as they were not raised from the dead, and nothing of this sort is written of Moses either.

It is more likely that at the transfiguration, Moses appears as the representative of the law, and Elijah of the prophets. Another thought, is that Moses represents those saints who have passed through death to enter the kingdom of God, and Elijah those who are alive and awaiting the rapture. ¹⁴

B. The angels buried Moses after his death.

Moses was alone when he died. According to Josephus, God hid his body from the Jews. ¹⁵ God sent Michael to bury him, but Satan wanted the Jews to find the body and make an idol of it, as they later did with the bronze serpent. Michael won the dispute, and together with the angels, buried the body. ^{13, 16} This is certainly in line with the Bible.

But if this is so, then why is the book called the Assumption of Moses? Probably referring to this book, Clement of Alexandria writes, “Therefore, Joshua the son of Nun saw Moses, when taken up to heaven, double: one Moses with the angels, and one on the mountains, honoured with burial in their ravines.” ¹⁷

Now let us speculate a little. Maybe the same thing happens here, as in another apocryphal work, the Apocalypse of Moses.

This book tells of the death of Adam and Eve. As death approaches, Adam is worried about how he will be received by God. The LORD sends Michael and the angels to sort things out. When the couple die, their spirits are taken up to heaven to await the resurrection, and their sons are shown by the angels how to bury the bodies.

So according to this theory, and in harmony with Jewish beliefs of that time, the following occurs at the end of the apocryphal book, the Assumption of Moses. Moses dies and the angels accompany his spirit to heaven. This is unusual, as most people would have descended to Sheol. Satan disputes with Michael, as he wants the body to be found, but he does not win the argument, and the angels bury him. How much this is in line with reality is, of course, another matter.

C. Moses body symbolises the Jewish people.

Faussett once again, “It is noteworthy that the same rebuke is recorded here as was used by the Angel of the LORD, or Jehovah the Second Person, in pleading for Joshua, the representative of the Jewish Church, against Satan, in Zech 3: 2; whence some have thought that also here ‘the body of Moses’ means the Jewish Church accused by Satan, before God, for its filthiness, on which ground he demands that divine justice should take its course against Israel, but is rebuked by the Lord who has “chosen Jerusalem.” Thus, as ‘the body of Christ’ is the Christian Church, so ‘the body of Moses’ is the Jewish Church.” ¹³

It really is very difficult to decide, as the material is insufficient and conflicting. Although the matter is not decided, let us pass on for a while. For the time being, a few important points are repeated:

1. It is written in the Bible that Moses died and was buried.
2. It is not written that he rose from the dead.
3. The verses used to support this can be explained in other ways.

3.      The Elders

Still on the theme of the resurrection, let us consider the elders. In Revelation 4, there are 24 elders seated round the throne of God. Many interpretations of these have been offered. According to Adventist doctrine, they are raptured or resurrected saints, including Enoch (Gen 5: 24 – “Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away”), Elijah (2 Kings 2: 11 – “suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.”) and Moses (based on Jude 9), as well as the following:

“The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.” (Mat 27: 52-53). This happened when Jesus died on the cross. The Bible says nothing more about them. Based on Ephesians 4: 8 (“When he ascended on high, he led captives in this train and gave gifts to men.”), they claim that when he ascended to heaven, Jesus took them with him. They would then be the first fruits of the resurrection, or the wave sheaf of Leviticus 23: 9-13.

See Mrs. White, “He enters into the presence of his Father. He points to his wounded head, the pierced side, the marred feet: He lifts his hands bearing the prints of the nails. He points to the tokens of his triumph; he presents to God the wave sheaf, those raised with him as representatives of that great multitude who shall come forth from the grave at his second coming.” ¹⁸ 

Let us consider the feast of firstfruits. “When you enter the land I am going to give you and you reap its harvest, bring to the priest a sheaf of the first grain you harvest. He is to wave the sheaf before the LORD so that it will be accepted on your behalf; the priest is to wave it on the day after the Sabbath.” (Lev 23: 10-11).

The Jewish festivals can all be interpreted as types of the different aspects of Jesus’ work (Col 2: 16-17; Heb 10: 1), e.g. the Passover is a type of Jesus’ death on the cross (Lev 23: 4-8; 1 Cor 5: 7).

The assertion is made here that the feast of firstfruits symbolises the resurrection of Jesus, and not that of the twenty four elders, for the following reasons:

1. Jesus died at the Passover, which fell on a Friday in that year (Mark 15: 42). The Bible says that these saints were raised at the same time as Jesus died, the veil of the temple was torn, and the centurion spoke (Mat 27: 50-54). This all happened on the Friday.
2. In Leviticus, firstfruits follows the Passover, and is held on the day after the Sabbath. On this day, the first day of the week, Jesus was raised from the dead (Mark 16: 9).
3. Paul specifically writes, that Jesus is the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep (1 Cor 15: 20). In this section, Paul argues that because Christ was raised, then the saints will also be raised. He uses the picture of the firstfruits only in reference to Christ. If these saints were part of the final resurrection, and they really were the firstfruits, then why are they not mentioned? He could strengthen his argument by using them to prove that there really is a resurrection.
4. Clement of Rome, who died in 100 AD, in his letter to the Corinthian church, writes, “Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord continually proves to us that there shall be a future resurrection, of which He has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the firstfruits by raising Him from the dead.” (Chapter 24). This indicates that the early church understood Jesus to be the firstfruits.
5. If the feast of firstfruits is not a symbol of Jesus’ resurrection, then there is no Jewish festival which points to this important event.

The Bible also teaches specifically that Jesus was the first to rise from the dead. On this, “But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor 15: 20).

“And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy” (Col 1: 18).

“Grace and peace to you… from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.” (Rev 1: 4-5).

“I am saying nothing beyond what the prophets and Moses said would happen – that the Christ would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to his own people and to the Gentiles” (Acts 26: 22-23).

Although there were people both in the Old Testament and in the New who were raised from the dead, Jesus Christ was the first representative of the final resurrection. And that he is still the only one, can be seen from the following order: “In Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come…” (1 Cor 15: 22-24).

Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven (Acts 1: 9). We are still awaiting his return, and therefore, up till now, Jesus is the only one who has been raised from the dead permanently. Before Jesus, it is not written of anyone, that they were raised from the dead and taken up to heaven.

With regard to Ephesians 4: 8, to quote Wesley, “Having ascended on high, he led captivity captive – He triumphed over all his enemies, Satan, sin, and death, which had before enslaved all the world: alluding to the custom of ancient conquerors, who led those they had conquered in chains after them. And, as they also used to give donatives to the people, at their return from victory, so he gave gifts to men – Both the ordinary and extraordinary gifts of the Spirit.” ¹⁹

“To lead captivity captive” was a well-known concept in the Roman world, and relates to the mocking of conquered foes, not the bringing home of liberated prisoners. Jesus’ triumphal procession is also referred to in Colossians 2: 15: “And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.”

In summary, therefore, the twenty four elders cannot be the firstfruits of the resurrection, and cannot be resurrected people who have been already taken up into heaven at all, because:

1. Jesus Christ is the firstfruits of the resurrection.
2. Jesus is the first, and at the moment the only one to have been permanently raised from the dead.
3. These facts exclude the possibility that before, together with, or after Christ up to the present day, anyone has been permanently raised and taken to heaven.

In a similar way, Moses cannot have been raised from the dead, because:

1. It is written that he died and was buried.
2. It is not written that he was raised from the dead.
3. Jesus was the first.

Incidentally, the assumption of Mary is also excluded by this argument!

Finally, I should just mention, briefly, the theories of several known commentators as to the identity of the elders. The following suggestions have been made:

1. One of the oldest theories is that these are the saints in heaven, waiting for the final state. There are 24, as they represent the 12 tribes of Israel plus the 12 apostles, and thus the whole church, or alternatively, the 24 priestly divisions (1 Chron 24: 1-19) (John Gill, Matthew Henry).
2. They are the saints in heaven after the (pretribulation) rapture (John Darby).
3. They are angelic beings (Johnson, Beasley-Murray, George E. Ladd).

I did not find any other commentary that mentioned the Adventist interpretation. Not to be dogmatic, but I prefer the third possibility, for the following reasons:

a)       The elders are of the same character as the four living creatures, who are angels. They surround the throne, and worship together with them (Rev 4: 4, 9-10). They sing the new song together (5: 8-9). This song praises God for the redemption of men, but the elders nowhere praise God for their own salvation. They do not belong with the redeemed, the martyrs or the 144,000.

b)       When the multitudes of angels honour the lamb, they are in concentric circles about the throne: angels, elders, and creatures (5: 11).

c)       When the redeemed praise God for salvation, the elders sing a different song together with the angels and the creatures (7: 9-12).

d)       One of the elders talks to John about the redeemed, but he is not one of them (7: 13-17).

e)       The elders and the creatures are among those who cannot learn the song of the redeemed (14: 3).

f)        Together with the four creatures, they offer incense, which represents the prayers of the saints (5: 8). This function is performed elsewhere by an angel (8: 3). 

Footnotes:  

1. J. Mark Martin, Seventh-day Adventism and the Writings of Ellen G. White, chapter 3, Internet
2. Ellen G. White, Early Writings, p. 164.
3. Interview with John Surridge Communications Director of the Seventh-Day Adventists, Reachout Trust, Internet. Incidentally, in the same interview he also states, “For most Seventh-day Adventists the identification of Azazel is an obscure side issue.” Maybe the English Adventists are going in the right direction!
4. E.g. Adam Clarke’s commentary. 
5. According to Eusebius’ (265-340) church history.
6. Origen, De Principiis, III. 2. 1.
7. D. W. Burdick és J. H. Skilton, NIV Study Bible, p. 1879. 
8. Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 659.
9. Encyclopaedia Britannica, article: Biblical literature.
10.  Augustine, Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, 24: 1-3.
11.  Dean Mischewski, The Assumption of Mary. He also uses Matthew 27: 52-53!
12.  Mario Derksen, Do Souls Sleep after Death?
13.  A. R. Faussett, Commentary on Jude.
14.  The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary, entry: Transfiguration.
15.  Josephus, Antiquities, 4: 8.
16.  Eg. commentaries by Calvin, Clarke, Wesley, Henry.
17.  Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromateis, VI, 15.
18.  Ellen G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 834.
19.  John Wesley, Commentary on Ephesians 4. Calvin and Clarke are similar.  

Bibiography:

Baldwin, J. G., Daniel – an Introduction and Commentary, IVP, 1978.

Ballenger, A. F., Cast out for the Cross of Christ, 1909 (Internet).

Barker, K. L. (ed.), The NIV Study Bible, Hodder and Stoughton, 1985.

Davidson, B., The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, Zondervan, 1970.

Gingrich, F. W., Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, Chicago, 1965.

Guthrie, D., et al. (ed.), The New Bible Commentary Revised, IVP, 1970.

Ladd, G. E., A Commentary on the Revelation of John, Eerdmans, 1972.

Martin, J. M., Seventh-day Adventism and the Writings of Ellen G. White

Martin, W., The Kingdom of the Cults, Bethany House, 1997.

Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, DBG, 1988.

Unger, M. F., The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary, Moody Press, 1988.

The NIV Triglot Old Testament, Zondervan, 1981.

9

Have they ceased?

On the gifts of the Holy Spirit

Introduction:

                In his article entitled, “The Other Major Blind Spot of Adventism” ¹, Joel Wolensky indicates that Charismatic-type renewal has occurred several times within the Adventist movement. In 1908, Mr. and Mrs. Mackin visited Ellen White, and told how they spoke in tongues, sang in the Spirit, prophesied and cast out demons. This happened after the Azusa Street revival, but there were also earlier occurrences.

                To quote Wolinsky ¹, “There have been other outbreaks of “Pentecostalism” in Adventism. Another such example is from Battle Creek, Michigan in the early 1890’s… And it was led by none other than A. T. Jones, E. J. Waggonner and W. W. Prescott! But wait a minute, are these not some of the same people who lead out in the so-called “Righteousness by Faith” event of 1888 that all SDA’s have heard so much about? Yes, they are the same people.”

                However, Mrs. White had a vision in which she condemned these practices, and the SDA’s have since opposed the Charismatic movement. (Interestingly enough, there are some Charismatic Adventists in Hungary, as well as Sabbatarian Pentecostals.) I should like to discuss the question of spiritual gifts in this article, taking a wider view than just dealing with Adventism.

                There are many churches and Christian movements in existence which claim to be Evangelical. Between them, as they teach dogmatics based only on the Bible, there is solid agreement on basic questions of theology, although there may be differences in matters which are more difficult to determine. The Evangelical camp is divided, however, in one certain area – on the matter of one of the aspects of the work of the Holy Spirit. Charismatic and Pentecostal denominations claim that the spiritual gifts described in 1 Corinthians 12-14 are still to be used in the churches, whereas many other churches hold to the Cessationist view – that God caused these to cease, or withdrew them, around the end of the first century. The practice of individual believers and churches is of course determined by their opinion in this regard, but the answer to the problem must not be sought primarily in practice or experience, but only in the Bible.

(For a continuation of this article, see posts on Gifts of the Holy Spirit)

Footnote:

1. Joel Wolensky, The Other Major Blind Spot of Adventism, Online

http://www.sabbath.com/sdanon/other.htm

 

Supplement:

Why I don’t believe in soul sleep

            Because of thoughts I have had recently, and disputes that have arisen, I feel the need to write on this subject again.

            I have dealt with this in connection with my studies on Adventism, but I should also like to include another version of soul sleep here, as well as that which they teach. I shall try to follow a logical pattern in building up the argument.

            What is soul sleep?

            Soul sleep refers to the teaching that between physical death and the final resurrection, man has no consciousness of his existence, because he, or what, if anything, remains of him, is “asleep.” There are in fact at least two sub-divisions of this concept.

            Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists and Christadelphians teach that man has no soul or spirit, but just has a body. On the basis of Genesis 2: 7 they claim that:

Body + Breath = Living soul

            This means that man is essentially no different from the animals, and when he dies he ceases to exist, as there is no part of him that can survive death.

            Another version of soul sleep does acknowledge that man has a spirit, but that this falls asleep when the body dies, and reawakens at the resurrection.

Problems with version 1

            The first version of this teaching is not accepted by mainline Christian denominations, and rightly so as it creates major problems for several significant doctrines.

Consequences of sin

Paul writes: “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins” (Eph 2: 1). The Ephesians were obviously not physically dead, but spiritually dead. As a consequence of sin, man is separated from God in his spirit, and can do nothing of himself to restore a relationship with God. Denial of the human spirit minimises the consequences of sin, so “making more of an effort” will perhaps alleviate the situation.

The new birth

Jesus said: “Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying you must be born again.” (Jn 3: 6-7). If man has no spirit, then there is nothing in him which can be born again. The new birth must consequently be redefined in a physical or intellectual way, thus robbing it of any real significance.

True worship

Jesus said: “God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship him in spirit and in truth” (Jn 4: 24). Following on from the previous point, if man has no spirit, there is no part of him which can have a relationship with God or approach him in worship. Paul says: “I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind” (1 Cor 14: 15), and also “The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.” (Rom 8: 16). If the human spirit is taken as breath, then these verses are meaningless.

The resurrection

Paul again: “We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him… For the Lord himself will come down from heaven… and the dead in Christ will rise first.” (1 Thess 4: 14,15). If man has no spirit which survives death, then nothing of him remains which can be raised from the dead. He dies, and his essential “ego”, i.e. his personality is extinguished; he has ceased to exist. Resurrection then must be redefined as recreation, or making a copy. This is perhaps the most serious problem with this theory, as denial of the human spirit logically leads to denial of the resurrection from the dead, which is a major Christian doctrine. Even the omnipotent God cannot do something which is logically or philosophically impossible, i.e. bring back something which has ceased to exist. There can therefore be no judgement following death (Heb 9: 27), the wicked are not called to account, and the righteous have no reward. Only the final generation of Christians, who experience the rapture, will receive eternal life. All the rest have already perished. This, however, means that God is unjust, and even a liar.

Christology 

Jesus said, “The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life – only to take it up again. … I have authority to lay it down, and authority to take it up again.” (John 10: 17,18.) Once again, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days. … the temple he had spoken of was his body.” (John 2: 19,21) If Jesus died just like any other man, then his personality was also blotted out, and his resurrection was also “re-creation.” In that case, Jesus would have to be regarded as a created being, which is foreign to the Bible. Furthermore, if he did not exist for three days, how could he raise himself from the dead, as he promised in the above verses?

For the above reasons, and by reason of the verses quoted, I consider the version of soul sleep which denies the existence of the immaterial human spirit to be illogical and, more importantly, unbiblical.

Problems with version 2

            In order to understand this version we must realise that when someone dies, there is a difference between what happens to the body and what happens to the spirit. Failure to make this distinction has led to confusion. One difference is, we can and do observe and experience what happens to the body at death, but as the spirit is invisible, we have to rely on the Scriptures for information regarding this.

Falling asleep and waking up are symbols of physical death and resurrection

In both Old and New Testaments, sleeping and waking are used as symbols or metaphors of death and resurrection. For instance: “Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt” (Dan 12: 2); “Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men.” (1 Thess 4: 13). These verses should be understood as referring to physical death seen from the point of view of those who are still living.

I believe this metaphor is used, for one thing because physical death resembles falling asleep, and for another, because for a Christian, death is only temporary as we will be raised from the dead. It indicates that death is not so final as it seems, as we await the resurrection from the dead. I do not believe we should make any assumptions about what happens to the soul on the basis of this figure of speech.

Sleep is a physical requirement

We know that natural sleep is a physical requirement. Physical beings we can observe in this world, both man and all kinds of animals, have need of regular sleep for healthy existence. Nothing we read in the Bible, however, gives any indication that any kind of spiritual beings have need of sleep, or are even capable of sleeping.

No sleeping spirits are ever encountered in the Bible

God is a spirit (Jn 4: 24) and he does not sleep: “He who watches over Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps” (Ps 121: 4 – also Jn 5: 17). Angels are also spiritual beings (Heb 1: 14), and certain of them worship God in heaven, “day and night without ceasing.” (Rev 4: 8). The conclusion may be drawn that they do not need to sleep.

The Bible also teaches that man also has a spirit (e.g. 1 Cor 2: 11), and this survives death (e.g. Mat 10: 28; 2 Cor 5: 8). Human spirits after death are very rarely encountered in the Bible, but in every instance where they are seen, they are always awake, never asleep. The following incidents may be cited:

The prophet Samuel appears to King Saul (1 Sam 28).

The spirits of the dead greet the king of Babylon when he too dies (Isaiah 14: 9-11).

Moses appears to Jesus on the mount of transfiguration (e.g. Mat 17: 3 – Elijah was translated, but Moses died).

The story of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16: 19-31).

The martyrs under the altar in heaven cry out to God (Rev 6: 9-11).

That is about all there is, and of course, reasons can be and have been found to dismiss all of these verses, but on the other hand, in contrast to these five instances of human spirits after death which are awake and communicating, there is not one single verse, either Old or New Testament, where sleeping spirits or souls are encountered.

It could be said that “sleeping” is figurative language, and the soul does not sleep like the body.

My answer would be that the Bible does not say the soul sleeps, even in figurative passages, so there is no need to accept it as any sort of language.

It could be said that God is capable of “putting the soul to sleep”, even if it is not normal for it to sleep, as He is omnipotent.

My answer would be that God is indeed capable of doing this, but we do not read anywhere in the Bible that He actually does it.

I therefore see no reason to postulate the existence of sleeping souls, information on which could only be obtained from the Scriptures, and yet the Bible having no knowledge of them.

Although this second variant of soul sleep does not cause such serious problems as the first version, for the above reasons, I consider it also to be unbiblical.

Conclusion

            Physical death and resurrection is referred to in the Scriptures using the metaphor of sleeping and waking. This tells us nothing of the state of the spirit. When the Christian dies, his spirit departs to be with Christ, who will then bring this spirit back to earth with him when he returns and it will be united with a new body in resurrection.

            The contrast between what happens to the body and the spirit is seen in the story of Stephen’s death: “While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.’ Then he fell on his knees and cried out, ‘Lord, do not hold this sin against them.’ When he had said this, he fell asleep.” (Acts 7: 59).

Dr Adrian Bury