MOSES A FIGURE OF CHRIST by A. H. Vankirk

Seventh-Day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · March 11, 1880

FromThe Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Vol. 55, No. 11

MOSES A FIGURE OF CHRIST.

By A. H. Vankirk

BY A. H. VANKIRK.

“NEVERTHELESS death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of Him that was to come.” Rom. 5:14.

In this text several important points are made, and that contained in the phrase, “who is the figure of Him that was to come,” is not the least.

We first notice that death, in consequence of sin, held undisputed sway from Adam to Moses. Not that all men had died (Gen. 5:24; Heb. 11:5), but that all who had died were kept under its bonds during that interval.

In the second place, it is stated that death reigned “even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression,” showing that we do not suffer this death in consequence of individual sins. See 1 Cor. 15:22; Rom. 5:12–17. These statements, taken in connection with that of Rom. 5:13, “But sin is not imputed when there is no law,” show conclusively that the law imputing sin existed from Adam to Moses. Paul, in Rom. 7:7, shows that this law is God’s law of ten commandments. James (chap. 2:9–11), tells how this law should be regarded. We are forced to the conclusion that in all ages of the world, sin has been the transgression of one and the same law.

The third statement of the text,—“who is the figure of Him that was to come,” next claims our attention. How was Moses a figure of Him that was to come,—Christ? Not in that he led his people into the promised inheritance; for he died in Moab, and Joshua led them over Jordan into the land of Canaan. Not in that he suffered temptation without sin; for his death before entering the promised land was in consequence of sinning at Meribah.

There is one other point in which Moses could typify Christ, and that is by a resurrection; and when we carefully consider the context, comparing the statements with other Scripture declarations, all seems plain. In the transfiguration scene, Moses and Elias were both present. It is easy enough to account for Elias’s bodily presence on this occasion. It requires no stretch of credulity to believe that he who was taken to Heaven by “the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof,” was there in person. But how about Moses? Was he there really, tangibly, bodily? Some say, No. Well, why? The narrative speaks of his presence in the same familiar, matter-of-fact manner that it speaks of Elias’ being there. We can make nothing more, nothing less, of the statement itself. We must therefore look to other scriptures for an explanation. We thus find that man in death exercises no powers of mind (Ps. 146:1–4; Eccl. 9:5, 6; Job 14:21); and that the dead remain inactive and unconscious till the great Lifegiver comes to call them from their dusty repose. Job 14:12–15. Compare Job 17:15 with 1 John 3:1, 2.

We are told in the book of Jude of a dispute which occurred between Michael (Christ, 1 Thess. 4:16; John 5:25–28), the Archangel, and the devil, about the body of Moses. Now the devil has the power of death (Heb. 2:14), but Christ has the power of the resurrection of the dead. Here, then, properly, the dispute arises. Moses had fallen under the power of death, but Michael contests Satan’s right to hold him a prisoner; and as he has the keys that are yet to unlock all the cells of Satan’s great prison-house, why may he not have unlocked that of Moses? We think he did. Thus, and thus only, can we harmonize the testimony of the Scriptures.

The statement that Christ is the “first-fruits of them that slept” does not militate against such a conclusion; for we know that others arose from the dead prior to the resurrection of Christ. We do not understand that his resurrection is first in point of time, but that it is first in importance, and that by virtue of it all who ever have been raised or ever will be, have a resurrection.