What is the Third Angel’s Message?

The manuscript Armstrong wrote was more than 260 pages long. He called it, What is the Third Angel’s Message? By February 1929 Dugger had received its first few chapters. We are fortunate in that most of the original manuscript has survived.

8850

The original title for the United States and Britain in Prophecy. NB: the original pages of Armstrong’s manuscript were discovered among uncatalogued papers of the Herbert W. Armstrong Papers collection

“If you are wondering what all this early history of the beginnings of Israel has to do with the Sabbath, the Mark of the Beast, the call to “Come out of her, my people,” and the Third Angel’s Message, you will see, I am sure, before we are finished. The connection is very, very vital. (What Is the Third Angel’s Message?, p43).

8850

Armstrong viewed General Allenby’s capture of Jerusalem as “clinching proof that Ephraim today resides in the British Isles.” (What Is the Third Angel’s Message?, p120.)

8850

Chapter 21 concludes,

“We are ready to explain it, the true Third Angel’s Message — the last, final warning Message which God is going to shout to a complacent, tradition-loving, self-seeking world before the falling of the Seven Last Plagues and the re-opening of the final terrible War Tribulation which is destined to culminate in the Battle of Armageddon in the year 1936 — this true Third Angel’s Message is, after all, just one more last and final warning from Almighty God....

In these closing chapters, God has placed this final eleventh-hour warning in his word. And in these closing chapters we shall examine this very definite, specific, last-minute warning, just as the Bible has it, for this very present generation.” (What Is the Third Angel’s Message?, pp237–8)

8850

Correspondence that shed light on the development of the manuscript include those in the HWAP Catalogue column.

Many additional letters of Armstrong’s from 1929 deal with Anglo-Israelism and its relationship to the Third Angel’s Message

828, 829, 849, 850, 884, 931, 2559

The surviving manuscript shows evidence that it has been edited. Pages 1–19[a] have been typed on a different, obviously newer typewriter, than the rest of the manuscript. The book title for these pages is The Real Truth About Israel. Based on a comparison of the manuscript with other writings of Armstrong from the late 1920s, it is considered that the surviving first 19 pages represent a rewriting of the original text. Pages 19[b] onward have been typed on a much poorer quality typewriter. The themes of these pages are those with which Armstrong concerned himself in the late ‘20s. The title of the book for this older section is What is the Third Angel’s Message? The entire manuscript, as it now exists in its rewritten form, is document 8850 of the Herbert W. Armstrong Papers [HWAP] collection of the Worldwide Church of God.

In the Spring of 1927, The Bible Advocate published 2 articles about pyramidology. To learn more, Mr Armstrong wrote to its author in care of The Bible Advocate. The Advocate forwarded his letter to Reverend Lincoln McConnell, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Saint Petersburg, Florida.

Reverend Lincoln McConnell responded 3 June 1927:

“Yes, there are many strictly scientific proofs that The Great Pyramid is more than a mere tomb these days, and I advise you, if you want the REAL THING in the way of proof to send to the A.A. Beauchamp Pub. Co., 603 Boyston Street, Boston., Mass. and get Davidson’s great book on The Great Pyramid.... Then you will have plenty to occupy your time for months to come and will also have the most recent as well as the most scientific work ever written on the subject....

The most recent book on The Great Pyramid and a much easier one to read if you want this, is by “Discipulus,” and can be had of the same people.... Its special value lies in the fact that it connects Pyramid truth with “British”-Israel truth in a fine way.

I must say that if you really want to KNOW your Bible you will have to get the books on “Anglo-Israel”.... You will never know the real truth the BOOK is teaching without this key. This sounds radical perhaps, but you will see when you study it that it’s simple truth”

Mr Armstrong then wrote to the A.A. Beauchanp Publishing Co, 28 March 1928:

“Gentlemen:

I have heard that the most recent book on the Great Pyramids is one by “Discipulus,” published by you. I know nothing about this book, but if it is authoritative, giving accurate and reliable measurements of the interior passages as well as other measurements, I want it.

I have seen the works by Smyth, and have read The Miracle in Stone by Seiss. If this book is equally authoritative and dependable, but giving more recent data and information, you may send it to me at once, C.O.D.

What do you regard as the most authoritative and dependable book on the Anglo-Israel theory? I have seen many on this subject which I could not regard as at all reliable. One book which I have read, Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright, by Allen, appears to be more reliable than others I have seen.”

Beauchamp responded 5 April 1928 re “Discipulus” and the book was

“very good and up to date. Much of the information is based on a book by Davidson entitled The Great Pyramid: Its Divine Message. It...is one of the most remarkable and most interesting things that I ever read on the subject after Smyth’s great work....

I am sending you...a series of articles by Davidson.... They confirm in every respect the noble work done by Piazzi Smyth and for which he suffered scorn and ridicule.

You ask my opinion as to the most dependable book on the Israel theory? I have always thought myself that Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright was the best book.”

Armstrong wrote to the Runcorn’s about the subject (28 February 1928). In a lengthy letter to them he mentioned that he and his wife were nearly convinced of Anglo-Israelism’s truthfulness, but they had yet to make a final decision:

“In that case, the Sabbath, not being intended for the rest of the world, was not part of the Gospel of Christ, nor of the Apostles.”

But, unless they [Israel] accept, also the Sabbath, they are not recognized in the sight of God as of Israel, subject to those special and higher blessings — higher than salvation — an additional reward.

Now as my mind works on this subject, it appears thus: The theory is that England and the U.S. are descendants of Joseph. The Jews are the descendants of Judah, and possibly also of Benjamin and Levi. If we have them located, then where are the other eight tribes? Why, why not right here in the U.S., mixed, thru immigration and inter-marriage between different races? They would all be of the white race. We have married and intermarried with other white races, but not with Negroes, Japs, or Chinese, or Indians....

Now if my theory is worth anything, it is this: Salvation is for all the world who will come to Jesus and accept it, regardless of race. But the special blessings, many of which I believe are to pertain to the next world, promised Israel, are for that one blood race alone.”

20 April 1928 he wrote to Anddrew Dugger, telling him of his plans to write several manuscripts about both Anglo-Israelism and evolution. Dugger replied,

“Your manuscripts...will be read with pleasure”

To Beauchamp he wrote 4 May 1928:

“I wonder if there is not a real need, as well as a ready market, for a new book on the Anglo-Israel subject?... I have read very little, as yet, of the book by Discipulus. However, judging from what little I have had an opportunity to read, I do not believe this book as sound and authoritative as the one by Allen.

The book I have in mind would follow, in great measure, the line of thought and proof offered by Allen. I would endeavor to keep it as dependable and as sound in its arguments as Allen’s. But the ground covered by Allen would be covered in boiled-down form, condensed where possible... The book would be written, moreover, in an entirely different style...

If you believe there is a need and a market for such a book, and you would care to consider the possibility of undertaking to publish it, then I should like to go into the matter further and in more detail with you.”

Armstrong also told Beauchamp that he had an offer to publish his antievolution book (an apparent reference to his correspondence with A.N. Dugger):

“But [I] am afraid the publishing house in question is not equipped to turn out as up-to-date and attractive a job as I feel will be necessary.”

Beauchamp’s reply (9 May 1928):

“Your letter of May 4 at hand. In reply will say that I am quite sure that I would not be interested in publishing the book on evolution and as for the one on Israel I would not offer a great deal of encouragement. There have been three or four books on that subject brought out the last year, and I am now at work on the manuscript of one by the author of Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright, which I expect to publish some time during the fall.

Elder A.H. Stith informed him that S.S. Davison of Fairview, Oklahoma, had some Anglo-Israelite tracts written by Alfuc Davison that Armstrong could obtain by writing to him. The Davisons had been Church of God ministers for several generations. (Alfuc is probably Alpheus Davison.)

Armstrong wrote to S.S. Davison, 26 September 1928.

Davison’s response to Armstrong, if any, has not survived.

By January 1929 Armstrong had begun writing his manuscript. On January 1 he wrote Dugger to remind him of his project. He claimed that Anglo-Israelism, as he presented it, shed new light on a longstanding Church of God doctrine, the Third Angel’s Message.

Dugger replied 22 January 1929 that he would welcome any new information Armstrong could provide about the Message.

In 1928, Armstrong also believed in the Third Angel’s Message. He wrote:

“These men [the original apostles], carrying the FIRST Angel’s Message,

had the faith to perform miracles of healing. These miracles...greatly aided in winning lost souls to Christ....

Then, glance for a moment, at the men whom God raised up to carry the Second Angel’s Message out to the world. Luther, Calvin, Wesley. Men who were filled with this wonderful power. Men who were heard around the world! Men who shook the world with their message and won millions to the side of Protestantism, out of the darkness and spiritual chaos of Roman Catholicism.

Now let us look frankly to the results being achieved by those who claim to be carrying the Third and last Angel’s Message. The prophecy says this Third Angel’s Message shall go forth “with a LOUD shout.”...

The average man and woman today is not aware of the fact the Message has been going forth.... Most folks, it is true, are passively aware that there has been some agitation over the Saturday-Sunday question. But the question has not gotten actively into their consciousness....

The Third Message is no more unpopular than were the First and the Second. And we are blessed with facilities for spreading the message which never were so much as dreamed of in the days of the First and Second Messages. (Herbert W. Armstrong, “Have We Tarried for the Power to Carry the Third Angel’s Message?,” The Bible Advocate, 16 October 1928, p1)

In a letter to G.A. Hobbs written in 6 February 1929 he wrote:

 “I was made to see clearly that I have been given a commission to get this warning message out with the loud shout to the world.

… We simply reached the end of the rope about a week ago, and I decided the time had come to fast and pray until I received a definite answer from the Lord. I received it. Will explain how when I see you, but the answer was to go ahead with this work as hard as I can and trust the Lord to take care of us. All our immediate needs have been taken care of. In fact, we were out of wood, and it came to our front door from a most unexpected source even while I was yet praying for it. I was made to see clearly that I have been given a commission to get this warning message out with the loud shout to the world. The true, full message never has been carried at all, much less with the shout. I don’t see how I am to do it. The Lord will open the way, and I must simply trust him and look to him for guidance. The means will be provided and the way opened, I am sure.”

After receiving the first few chapters of Armstrong’s book, Dugger wrote to Armstrong 26 February 1929:

“I presume you think I am very neglectful of duty in not answering your letter before this, but it was a long while before your manuscript reached me on the Third Angel’s Message....

I feel that we are entering into a new era for the message and that it is going to take on new life. In fact the time for the message is now here which I have long contended it would be when the events of the last few weeks came to pass.”

To Lt. Col. Mackendrick (author of The Destiny of Britain and America), he wrote 4 March 1929:

“I am writing you for two reasons: I am going to point out what I believe to be a slight error in your argument.... and I feel that a great message based on this Israel truth has been revealed to me which must be powerfully broadcasted to the whole world without delay.”

A few weeks after writing Mackendrick, Armstrong informed Dugger (19 April 1929) that he was sending him ten more chapters of What Is the Third Angel’s Message? He promised that four more would soon follow. .

By July 1929 Dugger had finished reading most of Armstrong’s chapters. It was then that he wrote 28 July 1929:

“You surely are right …

There is a purpose in your having gone into this matter so deeply right at this time which it is not difficult for me to fully see through, and you will hear more from these truths and the light herein revealed later.”

Yet Armstrong concluded that Dugger would preach only those truths he found convenient. Undeterred, Armstrong continued to write. By early 1930 he began circulating the text of his book among those expressing an interest.

Armstrong to Mr. and Mrs. Gross, 18 January 1930

806

"Last summer [1928] while Bro. Stith [an elder from Idaho] was here in Oregon, I began to notice among Church of God people at Denver an under-current of feeling against me because I was originally baptized by a first-day preacher, and would not be baptized again by Bro. Sith,” he wrote

“Every possible pressure was brought to bear upon me to make me ‘dissatisfied with my former baptism,’ as it was put, and to be baptized all over again” (Herbert W. Armstrong to A.N. Dugger, 8 May, 1929, p. 1)

Apparently in response to these concerns, G.A. Hobbs, a leading member in Oregon wrote to Dugger in support of Mr. Armstrong's articles continuing. 

In response to Hobbs, Dugger wrote:

"I do not like the action of Brother Armstrong in going to a first­day Baptist minister to be baptized when he could have easily chosen one who was keeping all of God's commandments" (A.N. Dugger to G.A. Hobbs, 7 Feb., 1929).

"I did not feel that I agreed with these Adventists nearly as far as I did with the Baptist minister," Mr. Ann­ strong wrote. He commented that after he met several Seventh-day Adventist elders, he did not feel these were “true spiritual Christian men ... 

“While I disagreed with the Baptist man on a number of points of doctrine, I did feel that he was a sincere spiritual Christian man" (Herbert Armstrong to A.N. Dugger, page 3).

"'Now aside from doctrine, this Baptist minister appeared to be the most spiritual and the nearest to a sincere honest Christian of any I found in Portland ... Most of the things this Baptist minister is preaching in his  pulpit are doing good rather than harm. It isn't my conception of what preaching ought to be, but it was the best in Portland ... The man himself came nearer being qualified to administer the ordinance of baptism than any at the time available" (Ibid., page 4). 

In explaining his decision to Dugger, Mr. Armstrong emphasized that he “did not regard the minister as the important element in baptism." But he wanted a minister “whom God would regard as a duly ordained minister in his sight.”

"While I had not yet had any opportunty to get the Sabbath truth before him, I did get the truth about baptism before him, and he was willing to go along with me and be baptized at the time" (Ibid., page 5).

"Shall the minister or evangelist cause the candidate to disobey the command to be baptized, following every scriptural example of doing it immediately, in order to first go into the Sabbath question which usually requires a great deal of time before it can be made clear, or permit them to obey the baptism command at once, then teaching them to observe the commandment?... Shall we cause disobedience to one command in order to gain obedience to the other?" (Herbert W. Armstrong, "When Does One Become a Fit Subject for Water Baptism?," page 3).

"I feel I must baptize all who repent and accept Jesus in faith, at the very first opportunity, teaching doctrine afterward" (Herbert Armstrong, "Water Baptism: When Does One Become a Fit Subject for Baptism?" page 3).

Defending himself, Mr. Armstrong responded to the suggestion that he needed to be rebaptized. 

"Would you advise me to indulge in two baptisms, when our Bible says one baptism? Would you advise me to be buried with Christ unto death a second time? 

"If I, then and there, presented my body a living sacrifice, burying self, and the old self is already dead and buried, how would you advise me to go about burying again a thing that is already dead and buried?... And if I am already risen with Christ unto newness of life, and am trying as far as I am able to live the new life for Him, can I be so risen a second time without going back to the former state?" (Armstrong to Dugger, page 6).

In his letter to his parents we learn that the pastor at Hinson Memorial was Dr. Dean. He assures his parents that the baptismal tank at Hinson is "almost secluded from the congregation, except those in the balcony," and that the water was warm. 

"Dr. Dean, the preacher, is a very spiritual man, and an earnest fundamental Christian, who believes as you do on all important questions. I believe it [Hinson Memorial] is the nicest place you could go" (Armstrong to "Mother and Dad,"' 30 Aug., 1928, page 1).

To his grandparents (whom he called "Dear Folks"), his Uncle Walt and other relatives he wrote:

"If you do not honestly feel sure in your·own mind that God wants you to rest and keep holy the time between Friday and Saturday sunsets, it is not disobedience not to do it ... I now realize it has nothing to do with salvation ... Until you had taken that step [of baptism] I have felt you should not be bothered with the Sabbath question" (Armstrong to "Dear Folks," 30 Aug. 30, 1928,  page 12). 

"It would be better for all of you to see the church and hear Dr. Dean and see and know who is to baptize you in the evening ... You’ll like the church, their facilities for baptism, and the preacher, I am sure" (ibid.).

In a draft note to A. N. Dugger written on the back of preprinted stationery (“Survey of Laundry Conditions”), Mr. Armstrong says of the Sabbath question,

“In a word, Mr. Dugger, my present status on the question is just this: It now appears to me that the Bible says the Sabbath is abolished, ended, and done away. That, so far as Divine Command is concerned, there IS NO SABBATH.” Later in that same note he indicates he was already teaching that believers should keep the Sabbath when he writes,

We do it [i.e., keep the Sabbath] because we WANT to keep it, and not because we feel God COMMANDS us to keep it. But you see, Mr. Dugger, feeling as I do about it, now, I cannot write or speak to others on the question. And I am perplexed as to what should be my course regarding those present. I am merely keeping silent so far as they are concerned, and they do not know of my present perplexity. If I become finally convinced I have misled them, I shall most certainly make every effort within my power to undo what I have done.

Of course this does not need to prevent any usefulness I might have in reaching others with God’s message. Sabbath keeping, in ANY event, will not bring salvation. The Sabbath question is a minor one compared to the paramount question of salvation – yet I think it important, as it affects RETENTION of salvation.

Sooner or later, this question will be cleared up for me. The real truth will be revealed to me, whichever it is. I have prayed earnestly for it, and it is God’s promise that a prayer of that kind is going to be answered. Perhaps you can be a means of helping me get it cleared up. It seems to me the truth OUGHT to be on the side of the question I know you believe.

But, Mr. Dugger, even believing as I know you do, how would you answer one like my sister who said to me ‘I have prayed and prayed, earnestly, for the Lord to tell me if He wanted me to keep Saturday for the Sabbath, but I have never felt I should do it. If I have been converted, and come to Jesus and repented, and accepted Him as my Saviour, and tried earnestly to live according to everything He taught, and yet don’t keep Saturday for the Sabbath, when no one was ever commanded to keep that day but the Jews between Moses and Christ – I can’t feel I am wrong because I don’t do something Jesus never said to do, nor any of the Apostles!’ The New Testament, my sister reminded me, says that if we repent and ‘believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, you shall be saved.’ How would you answer her?

Trusting you will be able to help me, I am, Very sincerely,”

What appears to be a “working document” by Mr. Armstrong, from approximately the same period, says this:

“Paul said we are not under the law. I have studied this from every possible angle, and tried every possible interpretation. And I cannot persuade myself that the plain, obvious meaning Paul intended to give us by that statement was anything except that we are not under obligation to obey the Mosaic Law, including the Ten Commandments…. Paul’s writings, in other words, appear to confirm the idea that God’s Law means supreme love to God and equal love to one’s fellows, and not specifically the Ten Commandments at all. Paul’s writings seem to convincingly indicate that the Law of God, in effect BEFORE Sinai, was those Two Great Commandments, and not the Ten Commandments. In that case, until the Ten Commandments were given the Jews, there was no command to keep the Sabbath, and when the Ten Commandments went, at the Cross, the Sabbath obligation went again, and then there remained just what had existed before – the Two Great Commandments, which, themselves, give no thought or even suggestion of any Sabbath…. And so it goes. I am frankly undecided. The Bible does not clearly settle the question. Positive direct proof, I believe, is not given in Scripture…. Personally, I am in doubt, and while in doubt, shall continue to play safe by observing Saturday. But, being in doubt, I cannot set myself up as a teacher on the subject. The subject is simply bewildering.”