Jump to content

The Very Devil


Recommended Posts

16. The Devil and the Body of Moses

 

Jude 9

Zechariah 3:2

 

“Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee”.

 

Those who would advance this Scripture in support of a conventional Devil doctrine need first to offer clarification of a number of difficulties which their use of these words necessarily involves — difficulties which it is just not permissible to take in one’s stride with a few tacit assumptions:

 

1. Where did Jude get his information from about an altercation between a good and a bad angel? There is no word about it in all the rest of the Bible.

 

2. And if it be answered that this was imparted to the writer by direct inspiration from heaven, where is the point in mentioning the episode, for it could have little or no force at all in the minds of Jude’s readers if they knew nothing about this except from this verse 9?

 

3. As though in anticipation of this difficulty, the dogmatic assertion is made that the words quoted are to be found in an early church writing called “The Assumption of Moses”. Agreed, there was such a book, known to modern scholars only in a handful of fragmentary passages quoted by other writers, and none of these including these words. However, before this chapter is concluded it will be made evident that the idea of a Michael versus Devil quarrel has actually evolved from a crude misunderstanding of the words of Jude 9. In other words, if there has been any borrowing done, this was from Jude and not by him. The available evidence will establish this.

 

4. Is it not incumbent on those who would misuse this passage to offer some plausible explanation why the Devil should be so concerned about having custody of the body of Moses? Isn’t the Devil supposed to be enthusiastic about the destruction of the souls of good men, and not their bodies?

 

5. And is it not pertinent to enquire: Why should not Michael the archangel rebuke the Devil? Why must this responsibility be left to the Almighty?

 

6. If indeed there were a squabble between Angel and Devil about the body of Moses, ought not this strange episode be shown to have special relevance to the context in Jude and to the argument which the apostle is putting together there? Ought not this mysterious passage to be much better understood by those who lean on it, before they can be allowed any degree of dogmatism concerning it?

 

But of course it is only fair to require also the same degree of understanding regarding these words, from those who reject totally any reference to a superhuman Devil.

 

This better insight can now be briefly advanced here. For yet more detail, the reader is recommended to consult “Seven Short Epistles”, pp. 266ff.

 

The key to this “mystery” lies in the words: “The Lord rebuke thee.” This is a direct quotation from Zechariah 3:2. At that place there is described a court case involving a collision between the Angel of the Lord and Satan, with the Lord Himself presiding as Judge. The correspondences with Jude 9 are plain and clear:

 

1. The angel

2. Satan

3. Contention

4. “The Lord rebuke thee”.

 

This parallel is not to be explained by invoking coincidence. But there is one highly important difference: Whereas Jude says “The body of Moses”, Zechariah has “Joshua the high priest”. The bridging of this apparently unbridgeable gap is actually a relatively simple matter — thus:

 

The Greek word for “body” (soma) is a double-meaning word of the kind which crops up in all languages. English and Hebrew both offer copious examples: consider “pen”, “ruler”, “bat”, “ball”, “dash” and so on; there are literally hundreds of them.

 

It needs to be recognized, then, that soma means not only “body” but also “slave or servant”, as in Revelation 18:13; Romans 6:6. What more appropriate than to refer to the high priest as the “servant” of Moses. The phrase applied to him better than to any other man in Israel. Thus a fifth point of contact is established between Jude 9 and Zechariah 3:2.

 

It is now possible to go further and demonstrate that the background to Zechariah 3:2 presents a marvellous resemblance to the difficult situation Jude was faced with centuries later. This aspect of the parallel between the two is worked out in detail in “Seven Short Epistles”, p. 266f.

 

One last point, to silence any carping criticism. Why should Jude say “Michael the archangel”, whereas Zechariah 3 was “the angel of the Lord”?

 

Answer Jude’s added detail is an easy inference from the fact that Zechariah 3 is concerned with the well-being of the people of Israel, and it is a fact readily established from the Old Testament (e.g. Dan. 12:1) that the angel specially responsible, under God, for the Chosen People was Michael, the archangel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17. “Him that had the power of death”

 

Hebrews 2:14

Exodus 12:4,23

 

“Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he (Jesus) also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.”

 

It is easy to argue from these words that the devil spoken of here is not the conventional Evil Spirit commonly believed in, for, if the sacrifice of Christ destroyed that Devil, how is it to be explained that, by any standards of judgement, the world today, now two thousand years older, is much more full of evil than it was in A.D.30?

 

The words that follow underline the conclusion: If that devil has been destroyed, why is it that great multitudes who “through fear of death are (still) subject to bondage” do not know the deliverance which verse 15 plainly declares?

 

So much for the ideas of centuries old orthodoxy!

 

Then, who or what is the devil spoken of here, and what was the great work which this verse 14 says was accomplished in the death of Christ?

 

It is not sufficient to say, rather glibly, that in his sacrifice Jesus destroyed sin-in-the-flesh. This was doubtless true for Jesus himself; but this passage goes on to glory in the deliverance of those who were (i.e. formerly) subject to bondage — with the plain implication that now that bondage is ended. But is it, as long as this mortality continues?

 

There is another way of seeing this verse which throws a flood of light on its phraseology.

 

Briefly, the suggestion is that this passage is a sustained allusion to the Passover which brought deliverance to Israel in the time of Moses. The figure of “Christ our Passover” is being worked out in one detail after another:

 

a. The Lord’s same “flesh and blood” is emphasized here to give prominence to the Passover meal — “flesh” — and the sprinkling of sacrificial blood on the sideposts and lintel of the door. The key phrase “through death” emphasizes the sacrifice of Christ as the true Passover Lamb.

 

b. Why are redeemed people called “children” here, except it be to recall “the children of Israel”?

 

c. The word “likewise” is not necessary here at all after the strong emphasis provided by “he also himself...'' But the Greek word strongly suggests the idea of “a next door neighbour” (Ex. 12:4) clearly with reference to the Passover commandment.

 

d. Verse 15 now shouts for a Passover reference, in everyone of its details: “And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” It is a picture of Israelite slaves saved from captivity and harsh treatment.

 

If the foregoing sequence makes a case, the inevitable question follows: Then who or what was the devil who had the power of death?

 

To this the easy Biblical answer is: the destroying angel who slew the firstborn in Egypt. Exodus 12:23 says: “The Lord (the protecting angel) will pass over (not, pass by, but hover over) the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you.”

 

And now another detail in the text harmonizes delightfully with this conclusion: the word translated “destroy” means, literally: “make useless, bring to nought.” By all means consider 2 Tim. 1:10; Gal. 3:17; 5:4; 2 Cor. 3:11-14 (“done away... abolished...done away in Christ”).

 

Thus, properly understood, this Hebrews passage is to be seen as presenting a vivid fulfilment in the deliverance Christ brings after the pattern of God’s saving of Israel from Egypt. And the devil Christ has brought to nought is the destroying angel, the angel of death, one of God’s angels of evil, whose authority over saints in Christ is now ended.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18. “Deliver us from the Evil One”

 

Matthew 6:13

1 John 2:13

Matthew 5:39

1 Corinthians 5:13

John 17:15

Galatians 1:3-5

 

This familiar petition of the Lord’s Prayer is translated in the above way in several modern versions. Two questions arise: (a) Is this reading correct? (b) If it is, does it necessarily imply reference to a superhuman Devil?

 

So far as the Greek goes, “evil” or “evil one” is equally correct. But New Testament usage, especially in the gospels, leans towards the first. Here are one or two examples:

 

1. In the preceding chapter, “But I say unto you...that ye resist not evil” (5:39). Clearly, here, Jesus forbad resistance to the evil man. It is inconceivable that he would urge no resistance to the great Spirit of Evil (if there be such). This consideration makes the modern translation highly unlikely.

 

2. Jesus prayed for his disciples: “Keep them from the evil” (Jn. 17:15). Reference to John 16:2-3 shews that Jesus had evil men in mind.

 

3. “I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one” (1 Jn. 2:13). This is a slanted translation, for the Greek is identical with the phrases just quoted: “...because ye have overcome evil (the world’s wicked- ness).” If indeed there is reference here to the Devil, how could John write this about those beginning, and not ending, their lives of Christian dedication?

 

4. “...Put away from among yourselves that wicked person” (1 Cor. 5:13). Again the Greek is the same: “the evil man” (see the whole chapter).

 

5. Galatians 1:3-5 is the most decisive and explanatory of all, for these verses contain no less than five clear allusions to the Lord’s Prayer; but here Paul’s equivalent to “deliver us from evil” is “deliver us from this present evil world”. It is hardly conceivable that this inspired apostle had badly misconstrued his Lord’s Prayer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19. “The Snare of the Devil”
 
1 Timothy 3:6,7
2 Timothy 2:25,26

In three places in his letters to Timothy, Paul uses “the devil” consistently for the world and its thinking, by contrast with the mind of Christ.
 
1. A bishop, or elder, must not be “a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil,” that is, provoke the censure of those who though themselves outside the church are quick to notice and condemn any hypocritical inconsistency in the life of a believer, and particularly of one who is prominent in the church.
 
2. The point is made again in the next verse, with a slightly different emphasis: “Moreover, he (the elder) must have a good report of them which are without (i.e. worldly people who know him), lest he fall into (their) reproach and the snare of the devil (the trap which a worldly environment constantly presents).”
 
3. In 2 Tim. 2:25,26 a similar warning is addressed to all believers: “In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves (the devil, once again, happy to criticize those in the Faith), if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; and that they (these critics) may (thus) recover themselves (NIV: come to their senses) from the snare of the devil (obsession with a worldly life) being (thus) taken captive by him (by Christ) unto his will.”
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20. “The devil and his angels”

 

Matthew 25:31-46

Luke 17:20ff

Revelation 12:7

Luke 10:14

Revelation 20:10

Matthew 7:22ff

 

In the vivid picture of the Last Judgment, as described by our Lord in Matthew 25:31-46, there are two verses which merit special attention in connection with this subject:

 

“And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal” (v.46). Naturally, the enthusiasts for the idea of an everlasting torment of fire for the unworthy read their favourite dogma into these words with a certain satisfaction. Yet the words mean no more than this — that the penalty described will be everlasting in its effects, an eternity of oblivion, not of torment. (Cp. Jude v.7).

 

But what of v.41?

 

“Then shall he say to them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.”

 

Again, allowance must be made for the figurative character of the language here. The entire passage is shot through with it; e.g. “I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink...etc;” nor is it possible to conceive of two vast congregations of people arranged strictly on the Lord’s right hand and left hand.

 

Then, it may well be asked, what meaning is to be derived from this verse 41 if it does not mean precisely what it says?

 

Here two possible answers present themselves.

 

In the first instance, it can be well argued that since these words about “the devil and his angels” are addressed to those whom the Lord rejects, this must be because these — the unworthy — are the devil and his angels.

 

So far, so good. But does this explanation go far enough? Should there not be forthcoming some reason why such strange and indeed unexpected language is employed?

 

Yes, to be sure! So the next step is to observe the remarkable correspondence between these details and certain verses in the Apocalypse:

 

There is the vivid picture, already considered, of a “war in heaven” between “Michael and his angels and the dragon (the devil) and his angels” (12:7); and, subsequently (20:10): “The devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone...and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”

 

Here it is necessary to agree that these similarities between Mt. 25:41 and Rev. 12:7; 20:10 are not accidental. There must be a link of meaning as well as of phrasing. And since the greater detail is unquestionably in the Revelation verses this must be held to be the original. But how, for obvious reasons, can this be regarded as possible?

 

An important consideration comes in here. There is much in the teaching of Jesus that is every bit as apocalyptic as any passage in Revelation. If in the days of his flesh, in his Olivet prophecy and in such other passages as Lk. 17:20ff; 10:14; Mt. 7:22ff, he could portray beforehand such ‘purple’ pictures of judgments long centuries ahead, it is utterly reasonable to believe that through his constant fellowship with his Father (see ‘Gospels”, p.143) he would have familiarity with the highly- coloured symbolism of Revelation, and would be able now and then to lift the corner of the curtain to hint at some of the cataclysmic transactions yet in store. Here, surely, is the obvious reason why Matthew 25:41 seems to anticipate some of the powerful symbolism of the Apocalypse.

 

This conclusion granted as seemly and reasonable, is it necessary to underline a reminder that in reading Revelation 12 and 20 literalism is not just unlikely but utterly impossible. In these two chapters how many verses can be taken with strict literality?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21. “Doctrines of devils”

 

1 Timothy 4:1

 

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.”

 

Other phrases here, besides the last, call for careful examination.

 

“The Spirit speaketh expressly” must mean either the Holy Spirit speaking through inspired Scriptures already written, or else communicated by an inspired prophet in the early church. The present tense: “speaketh”, points fairly decisively to the second alternative.

 

By contrast with this, “seducing spirits” can only mean false teachers claiming to speak with the authority of the Holy Spirit (as happens among Pentecostals today), whilst leading innocent souls astray through their self-confident lying claims. Is there any other explanation of the words which can compare with this for simplicity and lucidity?

 

“Doctrines of devils” is now readily seen as a parallel expression to the foregoing: “(false) doctrines taught by devils, that is, by enemies of the Faith.” See chapter 2 for similar instances.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22. “Unclean spirits” in the Apocalypse

 

Revelation 16:13-16

Revelation 13

Revelation 18:2

Joel 3:13,14

Revelation 12

Revelation 19,18

 

Two very sinister passages in Revelation (16:13,14; 18:2) employ this phraseology about end-time judgments against “Babylon”.

 

“Three unclean spirits like frogs...out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet...the spirits of devils (demons) working miracles...to gather them (the kings of the Land and of the whole earth) to the battle of that great day of God Almighty... And they (not, he) gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon” (16:13-16).

 

Those interpreters who would seize on the words “spirits... devils” here, and dogmatically interpret them as meaning minions of the Devil proclaim their own disqualification; for in a book which declares its own symbolic character and in a chapter which is so obviously packed with symbols and figures of speech, there is almost no room at all for dogmatism as to the interpretation. The man who declares that he knows what the details of this chapter mean also declares his own incompetence in Bible scholarship. And to lift a couple of phrases out of such a context as this in order to give them a strictly literal meaning is a practice which no sane interpreter will take seriously.

 

Having said this much, for present purposes it would be possible to leave the matter there. However, for the reader’s interest a few tentative suggestions may be appended here, but without the fairly copious supporting evidence which might be submitted:

 

a. Here are three evil movements in the Last Days originating from the enemies of Israel. The dragon, beast and false prophet come together (against Israel) in Revelation 12 and the two halves of 13. Note the reference to ‘the Hebrew tongue’ in 16:16, where the meaning is “a heap of sheaves in the valley of judgment”: see Joel 3:13,14).

 

b. In scores of passages, Old Testament and New Testament, the word “place” means a holy place, a temple, or altar. So perhaps 16:16 should steer attention to Jerusalem, the holy city of three false religions. Also “Babylon” (in ch.19, and ch.18 throughout) is the apocalyptic codeword not for the papacy but for a faithless Jerusalem (for copious evidence on this, see “Revelation”, HAW, ch.34).

 

c. Hence “Babylon the great...the habitation of demons etc.” describes the triumphant but short-lived conquest of Jerusalem in the Last Days, but most probably Jerusalem when it has come once again under the heel of the Muslims. This third “overturning” (see “Five Minutes to Twelve”, ch.8,9) already looms on the horizon. It will mean the fulfilment of an impressive array of Bible prophecies, most probably for 3½ years, during which time all this strong apocalyptic symbolism will find fulfilment on a frightening and bewildering scale.

 

The reader is reminded that these suggestions, although expressed here fairly positively, are tentative.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23. The “devil” who sowed tares
 
Matthew 13:19,39
Mark 4:15
 
In the parable of the tares, the enemy who sowed them among the wheat is called “the devil” (13:39). Similarly, in the parable of the sower, the birds of the air snatching away some of the seed are said to be “the wicked one” (13:19); and the parallel verse in Mark 4:15 has this: “Then Satan cometh immediately and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.”
 
Here are three equivalents: the devil, the wicked one, and Satan. But what Satan?
 
The parable of the tares is specially clear as a prophecy by Jesus of how the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom would be corrupted by the deliberate propagation of false teaching by intensely hostile Judaists who thought they were doing God service. This theme is worked out in detail in “Acts of the Apostles”, HAW, App.3.
 
Those who would believe the Satan here to be the superhuman rebel against the Almighty have an awkward question to answer Why did this Satan take so many centuries to get to work among God’s chosen people long before the preaching of the gospel by Jesus and his apostles? And if indeed there was such diabolic activity in more ancient days, why the conspiracy of silence about this in the Old Testament?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24. “Satan at his right hand”

 

Psalm 109:6

 

The normal idea of “Satan” meaning a human adversary (already copiously illustrated in chapter 4) is entirely sufficient to make sense of this verse.

 

The parallelism, such a common place feature of the psalms, points immediately to this meaning:

 

“Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand.”

 

Also, careful attention to the shape of the psalm soon reveals that verse 5 requires to be ended with: “saying:” introducing v.6-19 as the imprecations of David’s enemies, spoken malevolently against him. The marked change of pronouns from “they” (v.5) to “him” (v.6), and then back again from “him” (v.19) to “them” (v.20), is a plain intimation that the psalm is to be read in this fashion. For other examples of the need to supply “saying” in various other psalms, see “Psalms” (Geo. Booker) on this; and Ps. 2:6; 9:12; 22:7; 30:8; 39:3; 41:5; 52:6; 116:4; 132:2,11.

 

This approach also settles once and for all the problem of why a psalm of David should include such a venomous catalogue of blistering curses.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25. “The Man of Sin”
 
2 Thessalonians 2:3-12
 
In “Five Minutes to Twelve” (ch.12), the details of this remarkable prophecy are reviewed. There it is suggested that Paul was warning against a sinister Judaist movement which was cleverly infiltrating into the early ecclesias. The Man of Sin himself was the astute leader and organizer of this deleterious campaign.
 
There is also the likelihood of manifestation of a similar movement in the Last Days.
 
Then, what did Paul mean by his description of this Man of Sin as being “after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders”? The language implies that he was an echo or imitation of some evil power already known to Paul’s readers. He sits in the temple of God (v.4), that is, in the ecclesia.
 
Several other expressions in this prophecy provide hints as to the direction of the apostle’s thought: “With all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that are perishing...they received not the love of the truth...God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie” (v.10,11).
 
These phrases, and the more specific words about “the working of Satan” steer the minds of readers to the tragedy of the Garden of Eden and the fell work of the serpent. The Adversary against whom Paul was warning his converts was similar in all essential respects to the serpent of Genesis 3 — the same lie, the same deceit, the same encouragement to aspiring after a higher status before God; and the same judgment.
 
It is perhaps useful to note that 2 Corinthians 11:3 uses similar language about the same satan and the same vexatious problem troubling Paul.
_______
 
Quotations Index (included in attached .pdf)

 

HAWVeryDevil.pdf

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...