Interaction with Dead

FireDragon76 · Jun 23, 2015

It's not too rare an experience for people to believe that they have had some kind of contact with dead loved ones, in a dream or a vision. I see nothing wrong with believing in that possibility.

After my grandpa died, I saw him in one of my dreams, and he told me he was "just fine". The happened with one of my cats (in my dream his body was glowing with light). The interesting thing was both times came after I prayed to God (something I almost never did back then because I was semi-agnostic). I've heard that sort of thing is not rare.

However, I would say mediumistic communication with the dead is wrong. For all you know, it could be something demonic communicating through the medium.

Episcopal Bishop James Pike was notorious for his rejection of many Christian doctrines. His son died in a mysterious suicide and soon afterwards Pike started experiencing strange hauntings around him. He sought out mediums for years and they convinced him he was talking to his dead son. Eventually he abandoned Christian belief and ended up dying in the Negev desert after becoming fascinated with Gnosticism and wanting to retrace the steps of the "real Jesus". Coincidence?

cloudyday2 · Jun 24, 2015

FireDragon76 said:
It's not too rare an experience for people to believe that they have had some kind of contact with dead loved ones, in a dream or a vision. I see nothing wrong with believing in that possibility.

After my grandpa died, I saw him in one of my dreams, and he told me he was "just fine". The happened with one of my cats (in my dream his body was glowing with light). The interesting thing was both times came after I prayed to God (something I almost never did back then because I was semi-agnostic). I've heard that sort of thing is not rare.

That's great that you saw one of your cats.

When my previous cat died, I like to think that she helped me pick-out my current cat at the shelter. I told them to give me whichever cat had been there the longest, and I think I must have gotten the best cat they had.

FireDragon76 said:
Episcopal Bishop James Pike was notorious for his rejection of many Christian doctrines. His son died in a mysterious suicide and soon afterwards Pike started experiencing strange hauntings around him. He sought out mediums for years and they convinced him he was talking to his dead son. Eventually he abandoned Christian belief and ended up dying in the Negev desert after becoming fascinated with Gnosticism and wanting to retrace the steps of the "real Jesus". Coincidence?

It is sad how he died. Wikipedia said he and his wife drove a rental car into the desert, and the car got stuck. They didn't have any water or food - just 2 bottles of coke. This makes me think about times I have been driving through deserts without any water or survival gear.

Hakan101 · Jun 27, 2015

A prime example I can think of in the Bible where it shows calling up the dead was when Saul sought out the Witch of Endor to bring forth Samuel. Of course it wasn't actually him and God's law specifically says it was a great sin to use mediums, thus Saul ended up dying for doing that.

As Christians we are to look forward to the next life not cling to this one. Those who pass on never come back to this world, there's no precedent in the Bible to think otherwise. When Jesus brought out all the dead from Paradise, they were permitted to see their loved ones on earth for a short period of time, but then they had to ascend and there has never been any other event like that because now we just go from this world to the Third Heaven.

FireDragon76 · Jun 27, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
It is sad how he died. Wikipedia said he and his wife drove a rental car into the desert, and the car got stuck...

My point was fascination with the occult, especially mediumship, may have lead him to become estranged from the traditional means Christians have always had for hope, instead he put his hope in mediums, instead of seeking out an exorcist to rid himself of the paranormal activity surrounding him. His life further progressed into madness and alienation to the point he wanted to have an authentic experience of Jesus in the searing Negev desert, all alone (the same place Jesus probably faced temptations), instead of turning to the means that God has left us in the Church.

Having said that, it is not too rare for individuals to believe they have been contacted by their departed loved ones (indeed, there are early Christian writings that sometimes attest to this). I don't think its harmful in itself but no Christian is wise to seek out those sorts of experiences, and it is a case where such experiences should be approached with caution due to the high potential for trickery and delusion.

cloudyday2 · Jun 28, 2015

Hakan101 said:
A prime example I can think of in the Bible where it shows calling up the dead was when Saul sought out the Witch of Endor to bring forth Samuel. Of course it wasn't actually him and God's law specifically says it was a great sin to use mediums, thus Saul ended up dying for doing that.

Does the Bible say this wasn't really Samuel? Just curious how you derived this.

Hakan101 said:
As Christians we are to look forward to the next life not cling to this one. Those who pass on never come back to this world, there's no precedent in the Bible to think otherwise. When Jesus brought out all the dead from Paradise, they were permitted to see their loved ones on earth for a short period of time, but then they had to ascend and there has never been any other event like that because now we just go from this world to the Third Heaven.

Thanks, that's an interesting explanation for the gospel account of dead people walking around after the resurrection that I hadn't heard before.

I'm curious about this "Third Heaven" if you feel like going into more detail.

cloudyday2 · Jun 28, 2015

FireDragon76 said:
My point was fascination with the occult, especially mediumship, may have lead him to become estranged from the traditional means Christians have always had for hope, instead he put his hope in mediums, instead of seeking out an exorcist to rid himself of the paranormal activity surrounding him. His life further progressed into madness and alienation to the point he wanted to have an authentic experience of Jesus in the searing Negev desert, all alone (the same place Jesus probably faced temptations), instead of turning to the means that God has left us in the Church.

O.k. I don't know the details of Pike's beliefs.

FireDragon76 said:
Having said that, it is not too rare for individuals to believe they have been contacted by their departed loved ones (indeed, there are early Christian writings that sometimes attest to this). I don't think its harmful in itself but no Christian is wise to seek out those sorts of experiences, and it is a case where such experiences should be approached with caution due to the high potential for trickery and delusion.

Seems sensible.

Hakan101 · Jun 28, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
Does the Bible say this wasn't really Samuel? Just curious how you derived this.

The Bible doesn't directly say it but this can be determined from a number of things. The most obvious one I think is this woman was clearly not using the Holy Spirit to accomplish this. After all the contacting of familiar spirits through mediums or wizards was a strict abomination in God's eyes (I think Leviticus 20 states that). And really, who else but God could have power to bring back the dead? If evil forces can do that, this would be the only example in the Bible.

Second clue is this "Samuel" scared the bleep out of the medium. Why be scared of a spirit if it's something you've done many times before? She claimed she saw an "old man covered in a mantle", but it was Saul that "perceived it was Samuel", and also the woman "saw gods ascending out of the earth." I don't know about you, but that sounds a lot like demons to me. Whatever that was certainly was not normal human souls.

Third clue is God already decided he would speak no longer to Saul through dreams or prophets. So the real Samuel would have been just as silent as God. Therefore this is clearly an impersonator. Not to mention this spirit didn't give Saul any information that proves he really was Samuel.

I don't think I was clear in the previous post but I am saying that it was not Samuel, but in truth a demon impersonating Samuel.

cloudyday2 said:
Thanks, that's an interesting explanation for the gospel account of dead people walking around after the resurrection that I hadn't heard before.

I'm curious about this "Third Heaven" if you feel like going into more detail.

First heaven = the sky around us, atmosphere of earth basically.

Second heaven = the "cosmos", outer space with stars and planets, etc.

Third heaven = God's throne and holy realm, where angels dwell (doesn't mean they can't travel to earth as well) and where our souls go after death (now that Jesus died and rose).

cloudyday2 · Jun 29, 2015

Hakan101 said:
The Bible doesn't directly say it but this can be determined from a number of things. The most obvious one I think is this woman was clearly not using the Holy Spirit to accomplish this. After all the contacting of familiar spirits through mediums or wizards was a strict abomination in God's eyes (I think Leviticus 20 states that). And really, who else but God could have power to bring back the dead? If evil forces can do that, this would be the only example in the Bible.

Second clue is this "Samuel" scared the bleep out of the medium. Why be scared of a spirit if it's something you've done many times before? She claimed she saw an "old man covered in a mantle", but it was Saul that "perceived it was Samuel", and also the woman "saw gods ascending out of the earth." I don't know about you, but that sounds a lot like demons to me. Whatever that was certainly was not normal human souls.

Third clue is God already decided he would speak no longer to Saul through dreams or prophets. So the real Samuel would have been just as silent as God. Therefore this is clearly an impersonator. Not to mention this spirit didn't give Saul any information that proves he really was Samuel.

I don't think I was clear in the previous post but I am saying that it was not Samuel, but in truth a demon impersonating Samuel.

O.k. sounds reasonable.

Hakan101 said:
First heaven = the sky around us, atmosphere of earth basically.

Second heaven = the "cosmos", outer space with stars and planets, etc.

Third heaven = God's throne and holy realm, where angels dwell (doesn't mean they can't travel to earth as well) and where our souls go after death (now that Jesus died and rose).

Thanks, that explains. I have heard of "seventh heaven", so I wondered if that was the cosmology you were using.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Heavens

ViaCrucis · Jun 29, 2015

Hakan101 said:
The Bible doesn't directly say it but this can be determined from a number of things. The most obvious one I think is this woman was clearly not using the Holy Spirit to accomplish this. After all the contacting of familiar spirits through mediums or wizards was a strict abomination in God's eyes (I think Leviticus 20 states that). And really, who else but God could have power to bring back the dead? If evil forces can do that, this would be the only example in the Bible.

I think the problem here is assuming the medium did this herself, I would argue that she didn't. God did. Because mediums don't have the power to summon spirits, magick doesn't exist. She was legitimately terrified that her con-game seemed to "work".

Second clue is this "Samuel" scared the bleep out of the medium. Why be scared of a spirit if it's something you've done many times before?

I would say this is pretty good evidence that it was actually Samuel. Mediums don't have any powers, they can't communicate with the dead or summon spirits. The fact that something actually happened and it scared her witless seems like a solid point in favor of it actually being Samuel: Especially in conjunction with the fact that the text says it was Samuel and gives no indication it wasn't.

-CryptoLutheran

Hakan101 · Jun 29, 2015

ViaCrucis said:
I think the problem here is assuming the medium did this herself, I would argue that she didn't. God did. Because mediums don't have the power to summon spirits, magick doesn't exist. She was legitimately terrified that her con-game seemed to "work".

Leviticus 20:6 "And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people."

Holy cow. You are actually saying God not only went against His own word and spoke to Saul through His prophet after deciding to do that no more, but he even went against His written law and responded to Saul through a medium with a familiar spirit? Despite the fact His law states God will set his face against the soul who does that?

"Oh hey Saul! It's me, Samuel! I know God decided not to communicate with you anymore cause of all the transgressions you've done, but since you turned to an ungodly woman who commits abominations just to get a response, He figured He would give you one last talk. Even though you're now gonna die for doing this. He just thought it was the polite thing to do.

ViaCrucis said:
I would say this is pretty good evidence that it was actually Samuel. Mediums don't have any powers, they can't communicate with the dead or summon spirits. The fact that something actually happened and it scared her witless seems like a solid point in favor of it actually being Samuel: Especially in conjunction with the fact that the text says it was Samuel and gives no indication it wasn't.

-CryptoLutheran

The text says Saul perceived it was Samuel. And I just pointed out very legitimate indications is wasn't him in my previous post. And my mind is still reeling that you think God spoke to Saul through a bringer of familiar spirits.

FYI, I am not saying the woman had any power to summon people the dead. As I said before, it was a demon impersonating Samuel. That doesn't mean she has the power to summon demons either but as deceiving spirits they can play along with her act to convince people she is summoning the dead.

ViaCrucis · Jun 29, 2015

Hakan101 said:
Leviticus 20:6 "And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people."

Holy cow. You are actually saying God not only went against His own word and spoke to Saul through His prophet after deciding to do that no more, but he even went against His written law and responded to Saul through a medium with a familiar spirit? Despite the fact His law states God will set his face against the soul who does that?

Re-read what I said. I was very specific that the medium had no power to summon the dead, so no God did not use a medium to bring forth the dead, but He did use the situation for His purpose.

I don't believe there to be much reason to understand this episode other than by the plain reading of the text. The apparition of Samuel does not help Saul in anyway, but merely repeats the fact that God had turned away from Saul, that God was no longer with Saul, and Saul would lose the approaching battle; as such God hardly here goes against the fact that He would no longer counsel Saul--Saul was effectively shut off from God: and that is what the apparition reinforces.

-CryptoLutheran

Hakan101 · Jun 29, 2015

ViaCrucis said:
Re-read what I said. I was very specific that the medium had no power to summon the dead, so no God did not use a medium to bring forth the dead, but He did use the situation for His purpose.

Sorry, that self-contradictory answer doesn't hold water. You are saying Samuel came back from the dead. This spirit very clearly appeared at the request of Saul through this witch, who was known for doing this very thing which is evil in God's sight. You stated this woman doesn't have the power on her own, the only other conclusion to draw is that God summoned the dead through this woman, just as He used His prophets to perform miracles.

Or more plausibly, a demon appeared impersonating Samuel. God won't give Saul a response so he goes to an evil woman who speaks to the dead? Sounds like the perfect conduit for a demon to use. An old man covered in a mantle...that sounds pretty shady. The whole experience was shady which is why it should be questioned in the first place.

ViaCrucis said:
I don't believe there to be much reason to understand this episode other than by the plain reading of the text. The apparition of Samuel does not help Saul in anyway, but merely repeats the fact that God had turned away from Saul, that God was no longer with Saul, and Saul would lose the approaching battle; as such God hardly here goes against the fact that He would no longer counsel Saul--Saul was effectively shut off from God: and that is what the apparition reinforces.

-CryptoLutheran

The fact the apparition a) appears to Saul at all, and b) even talks to him at all, should be huge clues to you right there to question its authenticity. The true Samuel would have been just as silent as his God. Clue c) would be that the spirit gave no helpful information, just like you said. What helpful information could a demon give? The spirit offers no encouragement either, but repeats the fact God has turned away from Saul and is basically tells Saul he is in a hopeless situation. At no point did the spirit tell Saul to repent or cry out to God for forgiveness.

And think about it: if God was "using this situation for His purpose" (whatever that means), why would He go and bother Samuel's soul from rest just to give Saul some useless information? God doesn't need to use a passed on soul to do that. "Samuel" said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me?" Obviously if he was really Samuel, he would know that God was the one who "disturbed" him, not Saul. And he would know God was "doing it for His purpose."

"Saul was effectively shut off from God..." No, Saul was shut off from God, both through dreams and through prophets. And when he couldn't get answers from God he would get them from someone else instead. Instead of falling to his knees crying out to the Lord, Saul chose to seek a spiritualist, who does not invoke the Holy Spirit but evil spirits.

Seeking familiar spirits is evil to God so it makes no sense for Him to honor that act, plain and simple. You also haven't given any comments to the "gods ascending out of the earth" either, another weird occurrence considering the only person being summoned was Samuel.

cloudyday2 · Jun 29, 2015

Maybe looking at the beliefs of the Jewish religious authorities at the time the witch of Endor story was recorded will give some insights? For example, if you are a journalist recording a current event, you will assume certain knowledge from your readers. If you assume your readers share your belief that mediums are phonies, then you won't explicitly state that in the story you write. Of course the stories were recorded and then revised a few times over different time periods with different religious climates.

ViaCrucis · Jun 29, 2015

Hakan101 said:
You also haven't given any comments to the "gods ascending out of the earth" either, another weird occurrence considering the only person being summoned was Samuel.

One can translate it as "gods" here, but it's helpful to understand the very different ways the word is used and the nuances of meaning it can have. For example human rulers are called "gods" in Psalm 82, and in Exodus 7:1 God tells Moses that Moses shall be as "a god" to Pharaoh.

The medieval Jewish commentator Rashi interprets the use of "gods" here as referring to both Samuel and Moses. I'm not presenting Rashi as somehow the definitive (or a definitive) authority on the exegesis of the text: I merely find it interesting.

To put it simply, and without attempting to debate the issue more than I feel I ought to, I simply do not see there to be a good reason to interpret the text as meaning anything other than what it says. The text says the apparition was Samuel--and gives no indication to the contrary. I simply feel that trying to argue this away is really just playing gymnastics with the text.

-CryptoLutheran

cloudyday2 · Jun 30, 2015

Here is a very interesting link I found that discusses Samuel (by John Edgar McFadyen). The OT has always been my favorite, because it is somewhat like archaeology. I was not aware that the Septuagint might give additional clues.

Many of these undoubted difficulties are removed by the Septuagint[1] which omits xvii.12-31 ,41, 50, 55-xviii.5, and the question is raised whether the Septuagint omitted these verses to secure a more consistent narrative, or whether they were wanting, as seems more probable, in the Hebrew text from which the Greek was translated. In that case these verses, which give an idyllic turn (cf. ch. xvi.) to the story of David, may have been added after the Greek version was written, i.e, hardly earlier than 250 B.C., and a curious light would thus be shed upon the history of the text and on the freedom with which it was treated by later Jewish scholars.

http://biblehub.com/library/mcfadyen/introduction_to_the_old_testament/samuel.htm

Hakan101 · Jun 30, 2015

ViaCrucis said:
One can translate it as "gods" here, but it's helpful to understand the very different ways the word is used and the nuances of meaning it can have. For example human rulers are called "gods" in Psalm 82, and in Exodus 7:1 God tells Moses that Moses shall be as "a god" to Pharaoh.

The medieval Jewish commentator Rashi interprets the use of "gods" here as referring to both Samuel and Moses. I'm not presenting Rashi as somehow the definitive (or a definitive) authority on the exegesis of the text: I merely find it interesting.

To put it simply, and without attempting to debate the issue more than I feel I ought to, I simply do not see there to be a good reason to interpret the text as meaning anything other than what it says. The text says the apparition was Samuel--and gives no indication to the contrary. I simply feel that trying to argue this away is really just playing gymnastics with the text.

-CryptoLutheran

A cop out of an answer, I should have expected it. It is not just the text, but the context that must be taken into account when reading something. I have drawn my conclusion based on the context of God's Word that your interpretation does not align with, I haven't played gymnastics with anything. The context gives much indication to the contrary as I have already legitimately pointed out but you conveniently ignored.

Apparently you take everything you read at surface value and it never struck you as odd that an unholy witch brought one of God's own prophets from the dead, when there is no Scriptural precedent to believe this other than "Oh...well that's what the text says right here!"

cloudyday2 · Jun 30, 2015

@Hakan101, what's your opinion on dead loved ones aiding the living at critical junctures? People report these types of experiences, and many times they are positive - lives saved, etc. Are angels appearing in the form of dead loved ones? Are demons performing good deeds as part of some nefarious plot? Are people hallucinating and applying confirmation bias?

Hakan101 · Jun 30, 2015

cloudyday2 said:
@Hakan101, what's your opinion on dead loved ones aiding the living at critical junctures? People report these types of experiences, and many times they are positive - lives saved, etc. Are angels appearing in the form of dead loved ones? Are demons performing good deeds as part of some nefarious plot? Are people hallucinating and applying confirmation bias?

People always want to see amazing miracles and spectacles with their eyes. They also don't like accepting the finality of death, and inherently the finality of this world.

Dead people are totally finished with this life and when they pass away they never come back. It's on to the next stage of existence for them. We may think it's nice that they are still "around us" or "watching over us", but it doesn't fit in with Scripture. Why would the dead want to still be on this wretched world and not with Jesus in heaven? Jesus promised an end to their suffering, and that he would dry away every last tear. But if the dead can still visit or view this world now, I guess Jesus is still drying their tears today because they would be able to more plainly see what a horrible, suffering state this world (and their loved ones still on earth) is in. Some afterlife that would be.

Also we do have angels and demons that are assigned to us, one to lift us up in spirit and the other to destroy our faith, but they are fighting an unseen battle. Scripture shows us that it is possible for us to see them, but I don't think there is much Scriptural precedent for them to show themselves as much as some claim to see them. It has only happened during a select few important moments in biblical history. Personally I don't think we will see anything spectacular like that until Jesus' second coming.

There was a time when people were allowed to see amazing, blatant miracles of God's power, but most of us and especially today, we must faithe upon God's Word. Unlike the time periods in the Bible, we now have had complete access to the Word of God for a long time. We are very blessed because even though those people in the past got to see a few miracles, they could not have as great understanding of God and history as we do now.

cloudyday2 · Jun 30, 2015

Thanks, @Hakan101, that sounds reasonable to me.

Interaction with Dead

Well-Known Member

Generic Theist

Here I Am

Well-Known Member

Generic Theist

Generic Theist

Here I Am

Generic Theist

Confessional Lutheran

Here I Am

Confessional Lutheran

Here I Am

Generic Theist

Confessional Lutheran

Generic Theist

Here I Am

Generic Theist

Here I Am

Generic Theist

Similar threads