Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[Rosenritter]

That's pure conjecture on your part....because it's the only thing that fits your "story".

Samuel saw Saul....who he recognized immediately, and said to Saul, "Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up?" Samuel understood what you do not. Only God can bring forth people like Samuel, Moses, and Elijah. Samuel knew quite well that God had brought him up, and when he saw Saul, he asked why it was he wanted to see him. It can't get any plainer than that.


To assume you know what Samuel "would have asked" is nonsense...and wishful thinking.

The fact is, Samuel was not "summoned", he was "brought up". The fact that he was brought up shocked the witch, so all your speculations are the worst case of grasping at straws I've ever seen.

1. Who did this "Samuel" say had disquieted him? He said "thou" which would be Saul or the witch, not God. If you wish to continue to voice disagreement, please quote the verse to support your story.

2. The scripture shows that the witch expressed surprise at ... the identity of Saul. Speculating that she was surprised at something else is, as the word suggests, speculation. Doubly so because you must speculate at what she was surprised at, and what meaning it would have.

Do you have anything new to offer for consideration?

 

[Rosenritter]

I remember hearing there were flying saucers in this world, but the government is hiding the evidence.

You can't possibly be serious with that list of speculations. Those are as bad as your witch of Endor ones.

I can see that reading for meaning and comprehension is not one of your strong suits. I didn't say those were my speculations. I said I had heard of logic that required those speculations, and that your latest assertions seemed to resemble that logical flow. The logic given was an example of circular reasoning (much like your own at times.)

 

[glorydaz]

1. Who did this "Samuel" say had disquieted him? He said "thou" which would be Saul or the witch, not God. If you wish to continue to voice disagreement, please quote the verse to support your story.

2. The scripture shows that the witch expressed surprise at ... the identity of Saul. Speculating that she was surprised at something else is, as the word suggests, speculation. Doubly so because you must speculate at what she was surprised at, and what meaning it would have.

Do you have anything new to offer for consideration?

Rather you speculate and must explain.

What caused her to be surprised at the identity of Saul? How did she know it was Saul?

Did Samuel identify Saul and say, "Hi Saul", so she suddenly realized it was Saul? :chuckle:

 

[glorydaz]

God said--

Jer 7:16 Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee.

You disagree with His word.

LA

No, I just read farther along in the book.

You should try it.

 

[glorydaz]

It sounds very much like you are employing some sort of assumption or similar logic like that above. You, who are not a witness to the events, and offer no scripture that would legitimately counter such a claim, claim that it is absurd to believe that they could happen.

I can see that reading for meaning and comprehension is not one of your strong suits. I didn't say those were my speculations. I said I had heard of logic that required those speculations, and that your latest assertions seemed to resemble that logical flow. The logic given was an example of circular reasoning (much like your own at times.)

Why do I see your speculations there? :think:

 

[Derf]

Not Samuel.

If God refused to speak to Saul through legitimate means (Samuel when alive), neither would he speak to him through illegitimate means (Dead Samuel).

God refused to let Samuel speak to Saul while he was alive. I find it hard to accept that in this desperate hour, after refusing to speak to him by dreams, Urim, and other prophets, God did give him a direct word from the Lord through an cursed methodology.

I think there are at a minimum two huge textual questions for the pro-Samuel crowd to answer, namely the significance of "Samuel's" rising up from the ground, and his declaration that Saul will be with him. As soon as one starts explaining these observations in terms of "realm of the dead," and alleged "OT perspective" on the afterlife, he leaves the text behind, and begins his own version of systematic theologizing.

The relevant texts are 1 Sam.15:35;19:18,22,24; and especially 1 Sam. 28:6 "And when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord did not answer him, either by dreams or by Urim or by prophets."

In other words, Saul sought for legitimate means to have God speak to him. He prayed, he went to worship, he sought the will of God through the intermediaries God had provided--priests and prophets. And God literally would not speak to him.

Did God permit Saul to know the truth, via the medium? Yes, though why Saul should have expected a speaker of unreliable pronouncements to give him insight only shows how far he had fallen.

God influenced Ahab through a "lying spirit" in the mouth of his false prophets. God can do what he likes.

God can speak through an donkey, but
1) people aren't typically trying to access secret knowledge through verbalizing animals,
2) there was no God given law against accessing the verbalized thoughts of animals, and
3) Balaam wasn't trying to get his donkey to talk to him.

There was Law against witchcraft. Ex.22:18; Lev.19:31; 20:27; Dt.18:10-11

Saul had harried mediums out of the land (1 Sam. 28:3,9), in accordance with the Law's prohibition. Saul knew these were agents of evil standing against God. But he somehow thinks one of these creatures will be able to compel Samuel's attendance?

If God wasn't going to speak through legitimate means to Saul, even though he sought them out (recall God even spoke truth to Ahab, when he sought out Micaiah), I don't believe that he gave Saul even a message of judgment through his ghostly prophet, summoned buy a medium.

A careful study leads me to think it was a demonic seance, and it was attended by a demon. But I don't think that anyone should have been inclined to believe the word of a demon, a medium, or any "spirit" message produced in that environment.

AMR

I'm surprised at your answer here, AMR, especially after your rather firm denial of the possibility of phenomenological language in the Joshua's long day account. As pointed out by [MENTION=2801]way 2 go[/MENTION], the narrative (not Saul, not the witch, and not the demon, but the narrative) would have to be considered untrustworthy for it not to be Samuel. 1 Sam 28:20

One thing that seems to be missing in this discussion is a recognition that the witch may not have done anything at all to bring up the thing represented as Samuel. The text doesn't say she did. Maybe that was why she was surprised--not necessarily because it wasn't a demon, but because she hadn't done her normal incantations.

Another interesting note is that the thing represented as Samuel seems to have needed additional, other-worldly help to come up. [1Sa 28:13 KJV] 13 And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth. As pointed out before, something surprised or worried her, and when Saul asked what it was, this is the statement she replied with. And a single demon answering the summons would be unlikely to need accompaniment. If it were a demon that she normally summoned, I can see how seeing "gods" (perhaps angels) coming up out of the earth would be a shock to her.

Finally, and I apologize for taking these out of order, just because God had not spoken to Saul when he sought him at other times, doesn't mean that He wouldn't answer this time, especially after Saul compounded his guilt by seeking out a medium.

Seems you might have, inadvertently I'm sure, left the text behind, and begun your own version of systematic theologizing.

Is it a problem that Samuel was brought up from the ground and that Saul would later be with him? I don't think so. Don't we all "rise" from the dead at the resurrection (1 Thess 4:16)? And certainly Saul and his sons would be in Sheol "with Samuel". That might easily just mean that they would be dead, or it could mean that they would be in Abraham's bosom, or even that Samuel would be in Abraham's bosom and Saul and sons (Jonathon excluded, likely) in the more wretched side of Hades like the rich man.

Maybe this passage SHOULD be informing our system.

 

[way 2 go]

I'm surprised at your answer here, AMR, especially after your rather firm denial of the possibility of phenomenological language in the Joshua's long day account. As pointed out by @way 2 go, the narrative (not Saul, not the witch, and not the demon, but the narrative) would have to be considered untrustworthy for it not to be Samuel. 1 Sam 28:20

whole post was well thought out . :thumb:

my favorite part was the 1st paragraph

" the narrative would have to be considered untrustworthy for it not to be Samuel. 1 Sam 28:20 "

 

[Bick]

Bick here. Yes, there are many verses in most English versions which speak of "everlasting" or "eternal" punishment, but they mistranslate words in the Hebrew (olam) and in Greek (aion/aionios) which by their usage cannot mean "unending." Please check this out with the most literal versions: Young's Literal or Rotherham's Emphasized.
let us also examine these verses:

John 1:29 "Behold the Lamb of God which taketh the sin of the world."

John 3:17 "God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saced."

1 Cor. 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."

Phil. 2:10-11 "..that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and kn earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

Col. 1:19-20 "For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through the blood of the cross."

See also 1 Tim. 2:3-4 "..God wills all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." KJV

1 Tim. 4:10.."God is the Savior of all men and especially of those who believe."

 

[way 2 go]

Bick here. Yes, there are many verses in most English versions which speak of "everlasting" or "eternal" punishment, but they mistranslate words in the Hebrew (olam) and in Greek (aion/aionios) which by their usage cannot mean "unending." Please check this out with the most literal versions: Young's Literal or Rotherham's Emphasized.
let us also examine these verses:

so you are trying to convince us the righteous do not inherit eternal life , I don't believe you.

Mat_25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

 

[way 2 go]

So they say at least. Prepare for a wave of mocking emoticons.

as requested :Shimei:

 

[Rosenritter]

Rather you speculate and must explain.

What caused her to be surprised at the identity of Saul? How did she know it was Saul?

Did Samuel identify Saul and say, "Hi Saul", so she suddenly realized it was Saul? :chuckle:

I imagine that the spirit she summoned told her that her visitor was the King of Israel. Now the witch is worried, but why is she worried? Because that same king was the one who ordered the witches to be slain from the land. The witch could see the apparition, and because of her sudden knowledge of "you are Saul" it also seems that she could hear the spirit, even when Saul couldn't.

1 Samuel 28:9-10 KJV
(9) And the woman said unto him, Behold, thou knowest what Saul hath done, how he hath cut off those that have familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land: wherefore then layest thou a snare for my life, to cause me to die?
(10) And Saul sware to her by the LORD, saying, As the LORD liveth, there shall no punishment happen to thee for this thing.

Look carefully at the text here: it doesn't say she is surprised at having brought up this spirit. You've been reading that into the text during this whole debate.


1 Samuel 28:12 KJV
(12) And when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with a loud voice: and the woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul.


It says that:
a) When she saw the spirit,
b) Then she cried with a loud voice, and said....
c) Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul.

The witch isn't worried about the power of the LORD, and it doesn't say she isn't scared of this spirit or surprised that it worked. She is upset enough to cry out with a loud voice, "THOU ART SAUL."

She has been tricked and based on her previous statement two verses down, she doesn't want to be executed by his bodyguard. We KNOW this because she says:

1) WHY HAST THOU DECEIVED ME (she has been tricked), and she previously said
2) WHEREFORE THEN LAYEST THOU A SNARE FOR MY LIFE, TO CAUSE ME TO DIE? (she doesn't want to die.)

That isn't speculation, that's exactly what the text says. Any other meaning has to be read into the text (eisegesis) rather than directly flowing from it.

 

[Rosenritter]

Why do I see your speculations there? :think:

Ah, if you meant my speculation that you may have had one or more assumptions similar to a Church of Christ background, that was speculation.

I related the story of the "There cannot be devils in this world because there is no Holy Spirit in the world to banish them" - because I had heard that from a Church of Christ seminary student.It sounded like pretty crazy logic when I heard it, thus I assumed that's what you meant by insane speculations. Plural, see, because those were speculations. Your use of plural when referring to my singular guess was what confused me.

 

[Rosenritter]

whole post was well thought out . :thumb:

my favorite part was the 1st paragraph

" the narrative would have to be considered untrustworthy for it not to be Samuel. 1 Sam 28:20 "

Derf's post was very well thought out (it sounds like he is able to discuss rationally) but that particular first part you mention needs more explanation. So asking Derf, Is it a matter of who wrote the narrative, since the witnesses were one witch, Saul (who died), and his bodyguard? Or is it an implication that the writer would have been beholden to have inserted "(which was not Samuel)" to avoid controversy?

 

[Rosenritter]

Bick here. Yes, there are many verses in most English versions which speak of "everlasting" or "eternal" punishment, but they mistranslate words in the Hebrew (olam) and in Greek (aion/aionios) which by their usage cannot mean "unending." Please check this out with the most literal versions: Young's Literal or Rotherham's Emphasized.
let us also examine these verses:

John 1:29 "Behold the Lamb of God which taketh the sin of the world."

John 3:17 "God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saced."

1 Cor. 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."

Phil. 2:10-11 "..that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and kn earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

Col. 1:19-20 "For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through the blood of the cross."

See also 1 Tim. 2:3-4 "..God wills all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." KJV

1 Tim. 4:10.."God is the Savior of all men and especially of those who believe."

I think you may be mistaking "everlasting" and "eternal" with their contextual application. For example,

Hebrews 5:9 KJV
(9) And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

Does that mean that Jesus has to keep saving and saving and saving and saving without end? If one attempted to apply the word "eternal" in the same way that some seek to apply it in "eternal punishment" then that's what it leads to. The "eternal punishing" interpretation requires confusing nouns with verbs.

Eternal salvation would be a state of being saved that lasts for ever, not an act of saving that never ends - the state of life.
Eternal punishment would be state of punishment that lasts for ever, not an act of punishing that never ends - the state of death.

 

[Rosenritter]

so you are trying to convince us the righteous do not inherit eternal life , I don't believe you.

Mat_25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

I think that you have misjudged Bick. I suspect that Bick may be of a universalist persuasion, that all men will eventually become righteous and inherit eternal life. Perhaps Bick will clarify.

 

[Rosenritter]

as requested :Shimei:

There's a couple cat moments that I've seen that I wish I had on video. Even better than that.

 

[Rosenritter]

I'm surprised at your answer here, AMR, especially after your rather firm denial of the possibility of phenomenological language in the Joshua's long day account. As pointed out by @way 2 go, the narrative (not Saul, not the witch, and not the demon, but the narrative) would have to be considered untrustworthy for it not to be Samuel. 1 Sam 28:20

I used the link and read the post about Joshua's Long Day. I agree with AMR that the sun stood still in Joshua's day. And now that you bring it up, this instance of Joshua actually provides another evidence that the spirit was not the real Samuel. It's right there in the text with Joshua.

Joshua 10:12-14 KJV
(12) Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
(13) And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
(14) And there was no day like that before it or after it, that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the LORD fought for Israel.

First, it states that this was a miracle of the LORD, and second, it said that this was the most unusual thing ever that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a man. Not happened before, shall not happen afterwards.

Now consider the instance of the witch. It does not say that this was a miracle of the LORD, and some people here have suggested that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a witch! Ah, but you say, perhaps the LORD decided of his own will coincidentally? That's not acceptable either, for look how Jesus answered the temptation of the devil? When he was hungry, and Satan told him to make bread, he refused to avoid any appearance of obeying the suggestion.

Is God going to even make it look like he is obeying the witch? The text of Samuel doesn't say that this is a miracle of the LORD. The spirit says that he was brought up by the seance, not by an act of the LORD.

1 Samuel 28:15 KJV
(15) And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am sore distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God is departed from me, and answereth me no more, neither by prophets, nor by dreams: therefore I have called thee, that thou mayest make known unto me what I shall do.

As for the integrity of the narrative, it tells us that the rebellion of Saul is as the sin of witchcraft, which was the reason Saul had the kingdom stripped from him, and also why God stopped talking to Saul. So when Saul engages in actual witchcraft, the narrative itself has already provided all the evidence we need to know that this isn't a prophet of God speaking to Saul. The integrity of the narrative itself demands that attempting to bypass God again is not going to bring him the real Samuel.

One thing that seems to be missing in this discussion is a recognition that the witch may not have done anything at all to bring up the thing represented as Samuel. The text doesn't say she did. Maybe that was why she was surprised--not necessarily because it wasn't a demon, but because she hadn't done her normal incantations.

It doesn't tell us what rituals the witch may have done, because the scripture has never been of the intent of telling us what these rituals are. Therefore what she did or didn't have to do remains speculation, and rightly so.

However, the text does not say she was surprised by anything other than the identity of her client, that is, the king of Israel, the executioner of witches, Saul himself.

1 Samuel 28:12 KJV
(12) And when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with a loud voice: and the woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul.

Saying that she was surprised by anything else would be speculation beyond what is given by the text.

 

[glorydaz]

I imagine that the spirit she summoned told her that her visitor was the King of Israel. Now the witch is worried, but why is she worried? Because that same king was the one who ordered the witches to be slain from the land. The witch could see the apparition, and because of her sudden knowledge of "you are Saul" it also seems that she could hear the spirit, even when Saul couldn't.


Look carefully at the text here: it doesn't say she is surprised at having brought up this spirit. You've been reading that into the text during this whole debate.

You "imagine" the "the spirit" "she summoned" "told her that her visitor was the King of Israel"?

Don't your read what you have written? It reads like the first draft of a Broadway play.

It doesn't say she summoned anything. Samuel says he was "brought up". The text never has Samuel speaking to the witch at all, much less giving her any information. Why you think it "seems" like she could hear Samuel amazes me...and that Saul couldn't amazes me even more.

Just read what is written and stop adding to the word of God.

That isn't speculation, that's exactly what the text says. Any other meaning has to be read into the text (eisegesis) rather than directly flowing from it.

:doh:

 

[glorydaz]

Ah, if you meant my speculation that you may have had one or more assumptions similar to a Church of Christ background, that was speculation.

I related the story of the "There cannot be devils in this world because there is no Holy Spirit in the world to banish them" - because I had heard that from a Church of Christ seminary student.It sounded like pretty crazy logic when I heard it, thus I assumed that's what you meant by insane speculations. Plural, see, because those were speculations. Your use of plural when referring to my singular guess was what confused me.

You haven't had a singular "guess" in your life, I'll wager.
You spend more time in the realm of speculation than Rod Serling. :chuckle:



Never underestimate our Lord's work on the cross, and don't give Satan and his minions more power than they have.

Col. 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

John 12:31
Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

Ephesians 2:2
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:​

 

[glorydaz]

Derf's post was very well thought out (it sounds like he is able to discuss rationally) but that particular first part you mention needs more explanation. So asking Derf, Is it a matter of who wrote the narrative, since the witnesses were one witch, Saul (who died), and his bodyguard? Or is it an implication that the writer would have been beholden to have inserted "(which was not Samuel)" to avoid controversy?

I wonder who witnessed what was written in Job? :think:

Adam and Eve? :shocked: