Floyd Parker, «The Terms "Angel" and "Spirit" in Acts 23,8», Vol. 84 (2003) 344-365
In any discussion of the Sadducees, there will always remain a certain amount of doubt due to the paucity of sources about them. Based on what data has survived, the older theory that the Sadducees rejected the extravagant beliefs about angels and spirits provides the most convincing solution to the problem of Acts 23,8. The Sadducees’ reasons for rejecting these views were twofold: 1) angels were integrated into the apocalyptic world view that they rejected; and 2) angels often served as God’s servants to administer predestination or providence. Thus, when Paul claimed that a heavenly being had appeared to him in a manner and with a message that appeared to be predestinarian in nature, the Sadducees were unwilling to entertain the idea that an angel or spirit had appeared to him. Certainly new theories will arise in an attempt to grapple with this issue, but to re-appropriate the words of Jesus in Luke 5,39, "the old is good enough".
Although the picture above is plausible in many respects, there are several difficulties with Zeitlin’s views. His attempt to link angels with providence, so that the Sadducees would have justification for rejecting belief in angelic activity, is unconvincing. Despite his citations of passages in which angels are appointed over Israel and the nations (Dan 10,13; 12,1), he was unable to link angels to the idea of providence or fate. His suggestion that the Sadducees believed that angels had been superseded by the prophets also fails, for it is largely an argument from silence25.
3. Sadducean Rejection of the Intermediate State
In a brief article in 1990, David Daube broke ranks with traditional interpretations of Acts 23,8 when he argued that "angel" and "spirit" were virtually synonymous terms describing the state of the righteous dead in the interim between death and the resurrection26. According to Daube, this passage indicates that the doctrinal matter with which the Sadducees took issue was the survival of the soul after death (Josephus, Ant. 18.1.4; BJ 2.164-165), not the existence of angels and spirits. Thus, in Acts 23, the Sadducees denied that the spirit (i.e., angel) of Jesus could have appeared to Saul on the road to Damascus and later in the temple (Acts 22,6-10; 17-21), because of their belief that the soul perished with the body at death. The Pharisees, on the other hand, affirmed both the survival of the soul and the resurrection, but could not bring themselves to acknowledge the appearance of the resurrected Jesus to Saul.
Daube’s argument hinges on his ability to prove that "angel" and "spirit" were synonyms describing the interim. Although Daube makes a good case for "spirit" serving as a description of humans during the interim27, he is unable to show that the term "angel" was also used to