Why "Absent From The Body" Does NOT Support Immortal Soul Doctrine

Phoneman-777 said:

Good gravy, man, if Samuel had resurrected at some point in the past, he would've step out from the bushes and yelled, "Whaaassusssspppp!!!"

"Samuel" supernaturally appeared before them all - and the below evidence clearly points to supernatural demonic deception.

For those who are confused:
The only way Samuel could have appeared before Saul and the witch is if God had brought him back from the dead, because the dead don't know anything, see anything, remember anything, etc. However, the impression to anyone who doesn't know any better is that the witch brought him back from the dead, and the resulting awe and admiration toward her by them means God was the principle actor in allowing His glory to be shared with another, the satanic witch, something He says He will never do.

For those who know the truth:
Of course, "Samuel" wasn't Samuel for the aforementioned reasons - it was a demonic deception.

Click to expand...

One more time:

God does not operate from within our time-dependent existence. He can bring Samuel back for a short visit within Saul's temporal reality from a 'googolplex of years' into the afterlife or from 'immediately' upon dying and being raised again into glory —neither is impossible from God's economy.

Phoneman-777 said:

Of course I believe God can do anything - but no one in his right mind thinks God would be a party to satanic deception by secretly resurrecting Samuel at the same moment a satanic witch waves her magic wand and tells him "Hocus pocus presto chango, get your dead butt up here pronto".

Click to expand...

You keep assuming Satanic deception, as a basis for making your argument. The Bible mentions no such thing there. Of course no one is going to say God would be a party to Satanic deception! WHAT Satanic deception??? Your argument is circular.

And, like I said before, the witch certainly was not expecting the real thing to show up.

Not that this is worth a drawn-out argument, but lest you claim I concede defeat:

Phoneman-777 said:

If it was resurrected Samuel, God's choice to not reveal He'd done so offers satan an occasion to steal the credit by the witch telling Samuel, "Hocus pocus, presto chango, get your dead but up here pronto".

Click to expand...

If it was resurrected Samuel, God would probably say it was Samuel, which he did say.

Phoneman-777 said:

If it was a demon, then Scriptural harmony is preserved by not contradicting its plain testimony that the dead have nothing more to do with us in the land of the living.

Click to expand...

God can do, and does, as he wishes. Are you also going to argue against Matthew 17:3, where Jesus converses with Moses and Elijah, who appeared visibly to 3 of the disciples?

Phoneman-777 said:

Which makes more sense:

A) Witch shouts "Rise Samuel" - God whispers "get up Samuel" so satan appears to have divine power.
B) Witch shouts "Rise Samuel" - God does nothing, denying satan any opportunity to claim such power.\

Click to expand...

C) God says, "Samuel, you're not going to like this, since I have "closed off all channels of communication with Saul" as someone put it, but that witch at Endor is going to try to conjure a fake for Saul to talk to, and I want you to go scare the daylights out of the witch, and to tell Saul that whom I have rejected, I still reject, and he will not be getting any news from me."

Phoneman-777 said:

Are you going to argue with Scripture which says God closed off all channels of communication with Saul, the man who the man the man who slaughtered a entire town of prophets, tried to kill David, his own son, countless others?

Click to expand...

Are you still arguing with God's Word that says it was Samuel? And that Samuel told Saul the truth? And that Samuel did not play to Saul's 'felt needs', but instead filled him with terror?

Phoneman-777 said:

Scripture is clear the dead know nothing and have nothing else to do with anything that is done under this sun,

Click to expand...

This -Saul/witch/"Samuel" - is before Christ. Didn't Christ free Adam and Eve and the prophets from the tombs (I'll use the wrong term here)? So, doesn't that mean that a Christian dying has a different experience at death than a pre-Christian person? I'm just asking, not asserting.

ItsAdventageous said:

(staff edit)

Click to expand...

Mark Quayle said:
Are you still arguing with God's Word that says it was Samuel?

And you said, "The scripture doesn't say that."
So let's see:
Verse 12 "And when the woman saw Samuel..."
Verse 14 "...Saul realized it was Samuel..."
Verse 15 "Now Samuel said to Saul..."
Verse 16 “Why do you consult me,” asked Samuel, “...?"
Verse 20 "...because of the words of Samuel..."
—yep, pretty much looks to me like the Scripture DOES say that. The original doesn't mention "familiar spirits".

(Edit: BTW, Click the link. You will see something different than what is quoted.)

And you said, "The Holy Ghost, inspiring the Chronicler, said it was a "familiar spirit", "it", of which Saul "enquired", not the actual deceased prophet "Samuel"."
So, let's see: 1 Chronicles 10: "13 Saul died because he was unfaithful to the Lord; he did not keep the word of the Lord and even consulted a medium for guidance, 14 and did not inquire of the Lord" I don't see "familiar spirit" there either.

Whether it was Samuel himself, or just his spirit, standing there, is immaterial to me (haha, see what I did there?)


But to your point, God can do whatever he pleases, but notice the medium was surprised, and I think because it was Samuel, which made her think her goose was cooked.

Phoneman-777 said:

Verse by verse exposition in red of 2 Corinthians 5:1-8 KJV which explains why the Immortal Soul crowd's failure to recognize that Paul speaks of 3 options - not 2 - leads them to misquote and misunderstand verse 8, and wrongly conclude that the entire passage teaches the moment we cease to be alive down here, we're immediately alive in the presence of Jesus up there:

[1] For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
(We know if our mortal body returns to dust, God has reserved for us an immortal, resurrection body.)

[2] For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
(In our mortal body "clothes" we groan with desire to change into our resurrection body "clothes".)

[3] If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
(If our desire to change into our resurrection clothes is granted, we'll not be found naked without any clothes.)

BOTH CONTEXT AND COMMON SENSE MAKE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR
TO WHAT THIS "NAKED" STATE REFERS, AS SHOWN BELOW:

[4] For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.
(While in our mortal body, we groan with desire to be done with life's burdens - not by resting in peace in the grave, lying naked, unclothed, without a body, dead, awaiting the resurrection - but for the eternal rest our immortal, resurrection clothes provide.)

NOTE: THOSE WHO INSIST "NAKED" AND "UNCLOTHED" HERE REFER TO THE "SPIRITUAL NAKEDNESS" OF BEING UNSAVED, LOST, SEPARATED FROM GOD, YOU DON'T REALIZE THAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY CAUSING TO PAUL MAKE THE FOLLOWING STUPENDOUSLY ASININE STATEMENT:
"HEY GUYS, LIFE SUCKS IN THIS MORTAL BODY AND WE WANT RELIEF, BUT NOT THE RELIEF OF GETTING UNSAVED, LOST, SEPARATED FROM GOD...NO, WE WANT THE RELIEF THAT PUTTING ON OUR IMMORTAL, RESURRECTION CLOTHES PROVIDES."

A blind man can see the only way to remain contextually consistent, as well as demonstrate common sense, is to interpret "naked" and "unclothed" here as having nothing to do with being "spiritually lost" but as Paul plainly intended: the state of not wearing either a mortal or immortal body, resting in peace in the grave, lying naked, unclothed, without a body, dead, awaiting the resurrection.

[5] Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.
(The same God Who bought for us our resurrection clothes with the Gospel also gives us assurance by His Spirit.)

[6] Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
(We're always confident despite knowing while we're down here in our mortal body, we're not up there in our resurrection body.)

[7] (For we walk by faith, not by sight: )
(By faith we must walk the Path of the Just)

AND FINALLY WE COME TO WHY A CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF "NAKED" AND UNCLOTHED" IS SO CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO PROPERLY UNDERSTAND WHAT VERSE 8 ACTUALLY SAYS, AND TO SEE THAT IT PROVIDES NO SUPPORT FOR IMMORTAL SOUL DOCTRINE AT ALL:

[8] We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
(We're confident in our promised resurrection clothes, and our preferencial desire is to immediately strip off these mortal clothes, skip resting in peace in the grave, lying naked, unclothed, without a body, dead, awaiting the resurrection, and go on to be present with the Lord in our resurrection, immortal clothes we get resurrection morning.)
Paul knew he wouldn't put on his immortal, resurrection clothes at death, but he himself says when he will in verse 10 - "For we must all appear before the Judgment seat of Christ" - at the end of time "at the last trump" when "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" Paul says "this corruptible shall put on incorruption and this mortal shall put on immortality". "To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" is a misquote, distortion of Scripture. Upon such deception, sound Biblical doctrine needs no such reliance.

Click to expand...

Could you please explain your views on ecclesiastics 12:7 which says the body goes back to the dust of the Earth and the spirit returns to God who gave it.
thttps://biblehub.com/kjv/ecclesiastes/12-7.htm

And explain the definition of soul/spirit this is britannica's

Phoneman-777 said:

Then you claim God does the exact opposite of closing off all channels...Got it.

Click to expand...

You're the one who said he had closed off all channels. I was just playing to that. I'm not sure how literal your thinking is here; my mistake for misjudging you.

Phoneman-777 said:

Look, nobody believes that "Samuel" was the resurrected flesh and bone Samuel. Everyone believes it was some bodiless form of Samuel conjured up by the witch, so let's stop with the silly idea that "God resurrected Samuel".

Click to expand...

You're still getting me wrong there? You are taking this far too seriously. I never claimed it was flesh and bones. And no, your example below of resurrected Christ being flesh and bones doesn't prove anything about this. We are not him, and are not (as far as I know) resurrected to earthly bodies to later be glorified, but are raised incorruptible. Yes it is these same bodies, which in many cases are scattered all over the world, that will be resurrected, but changed.

Phoneman-777 said:

Saul couldn't even see him and had to be given a description. Is there any case in Scripture where a saint was resurrected and no one saw him? Jesus made it clear that resurrected bodies have "flesh and bones which ye see - I repeat - see Me have". Saul saw nothing.

Click to expand...

I never claimed it was flesh and bones. Answered above how Jesus' resurrection doesn't demonstrate that all resurrected bodies have flesh and bones as we have in this temporal existence.

Phoneman-777 said:

Again, the issue is, "The dead are spiritually alive in heaven as evidenced by 'Samuel' speaking to Saul at Endor".

Click to expand...

I don't think I ever tried to prove one way or the other by use of the story. The story works either way. I think it works better my way. It may even work better a third or fourth way I haven't thought of. My point is that the story doesn't necessarily mean that the dead are in some way, waiting for the resurrection, in some sort of time-passage scene.

Phoneman-777 said:

If you choose to believe that, your belief violates the rest of Scripture which says "the dead know not anything" and have no emotions, memory, wisdom, knowledge, sight, hearing, or voice.

Click to expand...

"The rest of Scripture" doesn't say that. Just some places do, haha. And you should take a good look at what kind of literature those places are that say that. "Hermeneutics 101", as the saying goes...

Phoneman-777 said:

Bible says God closed off all channels, so how can we argue God opened a channel through "Samuel"

Click to expand...

1 Samuel 28:6 says, "And when Saul inquired of the LORD, the LORD did not answer him, either by dreams or by Urim or by the prophets." I don't see, "God closed off all channels". Maybe you have a better verse or passage?

The point is, (as far as I know) God did not say that Saul would never hear anything anymore from him, as far as I know, but that he was cut off, rejected.

Phoneman-777 said:

I got tons of Scripture which says the dead don't have anything going on. They don't know anything, praise God, lay plans, accomplish anything, have anything to do with the land of the living, possess knowledge, wisdom, emotions, a memory or the ability to see and hear because their in "darkness" and "silence".

My friend, you got a couple verses which can be shown to not violate any of the above:

Rich Man and Lazarus can only be a parable
"Samuel" couldn't have been Samuel
Jesus nor the thief went to paradise that day - Jesus merely promised He'd reserve a place for him
"Souls under the altar" and "blood crying out" is merely God desiring to avenge unjust bloodshed
"preached to them that are dead" means the Gospel was preached to everyone since Genesis 3:15
"spirit of Jesus/spirits in prison" is God pleading through Noah to them in the "prisonhouse of sin"

Did I miss any, brother?

Click to expand...

The fact I believe the dead in Christ do indeed go immediately to be with the Lord upon dying, and that, perhaps even for them is in the eyes of God, and maybe from their new POV not a question of time or delay, but that they are 'immediately' (in our temporal language) raised incorruptible, doesn't make it true. Nor does the fact you believe otherwise make your assertion true. You haven't shown me how either POV is true nor how it is false.

—I agree The Rich Man and Lazarus is only a parable, and I don't use it for teaching concerning Heaven and Hell, except for the point of the story.
—You have not shown that 'Samuel' can't have been Samuel
—Luke 23:43 says 'Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”' and you are contradicting it.
—I agree that "Souls under the altar" and "blood crying out" is God desiring to avenge unjust bloodshed; the "merely" part, I don't think you can prove.
—Your argument: '"preached to them that are dead" means the Gospel was preached to everyone since Genesis 3:15 ' is so far mere assertion, but even if proven, does not necessarily imply that the dead in Christ don't go 'immediately' to heaven as bodily resurrected, from God's POV.
—By, "spirit of Jesus/spirits in prison", I assume you are referring to 1 Peter 3:19, 20: "After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits—to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water" from which it is so far mere assertion that God is pleading through Noah to them in the 'prisonhouse of sin' —not to mention that you have not shown how even that necessarily implies that the dead in Christ are not 'immediately' (in our temporal language) raised incorruptible to be with the Lord, from God's POV.

So, yeah, I'm thinking you're missing quite a bit. Just as one fr'instance: He is "God of the living" according to Christ. You also have not shown that the literary style of several references to the capabilities of souls that have died is not hermeneutically relevant to the doctrinal conclusions you have drawn from them (or am I mistaken that you were doing that? —I'm not going to bother to go research who it was.) Also, your take on
Ecclesiastics 12:7 brought up by @Sheila Davis is also, assertion without proof. Just saying; it is your POV —only your take.

Nevertheless, it was never my intention to prove to you what I think on this subject. It is you that continues pushing this back-and-forth. I'm not into a serious argument here.

Now, if you want to discuss the implication that the dead are incapable of doing anything alive, such as to "invite Jesus into their heart" —that we can seriously argue, as it is directly relevant to the Gospel of Christ and the meaning of the 'Grace' by which we are saved.