King Saul - heaven or hell??

[FreeGrace]

Sheol was the name of the"abode of the dead" which is often referred to as "the grave".
This is ancient Hebrew mythology...not Theology. IOW unrevealed theology.
Legacy was considered to be how a person lived forever amongst the living (at that time)[
Sheol was divided into two parts. One was full of their fathers and restful. The other area was not restful but tumultuous.

The Bible indicates 3 compartments in Sheol; Paradise, or Abraham's bosom (Lk 16:22), where believers went after death, torments, where unbelievers went after death, and a compartment for angels that "left their first abode" (Jude 6).

Jesus gave us a glimpse of Sheol in the story of a rich man and Lazarus.

The theology of a reward and afterlife wasn't known till Daniel wrote his book of prophecy.

Daniel is claimed to have been written about 605 BC. Moses wrote Genesis-Deut between 1450 and 1395 BC.

And the writer of Hebrews wrote this about Moses:
Heb 11:26
He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward.
NIV

Moses certainly knew about eternal rewards, and was looking ahead to his.

If your claim is correct, what did believers before Daniel think happened after they died?

If there is no afterlife, there is no need for a Messiah. I don't see how that squares with Scripture.

And the secret things of God belong to the Lord...

1 Sam 28:19 wasn't written in secret.

 

[FreeGrace]

The Saul/Witch/Samuel episode is a twisted parallel to that of Balak/Balaam/God. Somebody in crisis trying to appeal to God in the wrong way.

Why would anyone think that any Scripture is a "twisted parallel"? Is the event of Saul's conversation with Samuel to be dismissed?

 

[Jim Parker]

Why would anyone think that any Scripture is a "twisted parallel"? Is the event of Saul's conversation with Samuel to be dismissed?

You come to the most astounding conclusions!
May I ask, is English a second language for you? (Seriously)

 

[JohnDB]

The Bible indicates 3 compartments in Sheol; Paradise, or Abraham's bosom (Lk 16:22), where believers went after death, torments, where unbelievers went after death, and a compartment for angels that "left their first abode" (Jude 6).

Jesus gave us a glimpse of Sheol in the story of a rich man and Lazarus.


Daniel is claimed to have been written about 605 BC. Moses wrote Genesis-Deut between 1450 and 1395 BC.

And the writer of Hebrews wrote this about Moses:
Heb 11:26
He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward.
NIV

Moses certainly knew about eternal rewards, and was looking ahead to his.

If your claim is correct, what did believers before Daniel think happened after they died?

If there is no afterlife, there is no need for a Messiah. I don't see how that squares with Scripture.


1 Sam 28:19 wasn't written in secret.

First off you can't really use the New Testament to prove Old Covenant mythology that had been abandoned by the time of the New Testament. It's really incongruent.

Secondly I have loosely explained the Old Testament period of mythology that the Average person believed. Obviously you have never heard of this before as you not speaking of this correctly.
The Prophets spoke to people in a manner that they would understand...not in things they wouldn't. (So the message would be clear)

A person under the Old Covenant wasn't really interested in Heaven(as we think)...if a person followed the Law God would bless them with legacy and financially. Their focus was much more worldly possessions as a reward for being faithful than Heavenly rewards. No one lied...they just either didn't know or care to explain fully what was to be revealed at a later time.

Anthropology of the Ancient Near East is unique and complicated compared to modern day anthropology...
And is necessary for us to understand some of the finer points of scripture. Flat reading is not sufficient.

 

[smaller]

First off you can't really use the New Testament to prove Old Covenant mythology that had been abandoned by the time of the New Testament. It's really incongruent.

Whatever gave you that idea? Jesus said man will live by every Word of God. Matt. 4:4, Luke 4:4. I don't recall that Jesus wiped away the entire Old Testament whatsoever. An immense volume of of N.T. teaching comes straight out of the O.T. by Jesus and the Apostles citing O.T. scriptures hundreds of times by references direct and indirect.

Secondly I have loosely explained the Old Testament period of mythology that the Average person believed. Obviously you have never heard of this before as you not speaking of this correctly.
The Prophets spoke to people in a manner that they would understand...not in things they wouldn't. (So the message would be clear)

Wow. Again, no. The opposite is the case. Understandings were Divinely Purposefully Hidden. Deut. 29:4, Isa. 29:10, cited many times by Jesus and the Apostle Paul in particular. Among many similar statements in the O.T. Jesus specifically advises us of a thief of Word stealing from the heart. Mark 4:15.

A person under the Old Covenant wasn't really interested in Heaven(as we think)...if a person followed the Law God would bless them with legacy and financially. Their focus was much more worldly possessions as a reward for being faithful than Heavenly rewards. No one lied...they just either didn't know or care to explain fully what was to be revealed at a later time.

Whew! Where is this stuff coming from John? It's kind of out there if you ask me. No one lied? Seriously? No one considered heaven, eternal life? There is all sorts of lying intrigue in the O.T. And of course men of flesh have always considered their eternal fate, if any, by even our natural natures.

A lot of believers chuck the O.T. or minimize the O.T. for numerous reasons. None of which I find credible whatsoever.

 

[FreeGrace]

You come to the most astounding conclusions!
May I ask, is English a second language for you? (Seriously)

Why did you refer to the episode as a "twisted parallel"?

 

[FreeGrace]

First off you can't really use the New Testament to prove Old Covenant mythology that had been abandoned by the time of the New Testament. It's really incongruent.

Is this saying that the account of Saul visiting a medium and having a conversation was only a myth? What in the context would lead one to such a conclusion?

Secondly I have loosely explained the Old Testament period of mythology that the Average person believed. Obviously you have never heard of this before as you not speaking of this correctly.

Why would what the average person believed have anything related to God's Word? Who cares what the average person believed.

The Prophets spoke to people in a manner that they would understand...not in things they wouldn't. (So the message would be clear)

What wasn't clear about the account in 1 Sam 28? The "average person" was certainly familiar with mediums. That's why God banned them from Israel.

A person under the Old Covenant wasn't really interested in Heaven(as we think)...if a person followed the Law God would bless them with legacy and financially.

I have already refuted this idea. Heb 11:26 shows otherwise.

Their focus was much more worldly possessions as a reward for being faithful than Heavenly rewards.

Not Moses, who lived far before Daniel.

Anthropology of the Ancient Near East is unique and complicated compared to modern day anthropology...

I don't see any relevance to what Scripture says.

And is necessary for us to understand some of the finer points of scripture. Flat reading is not sufficient.

So the account between Saul and Samuel is not to be read at face value, is that it?

Such a view seems to suggest that OT believers had no idea about life after death, or where they would go after death. If there was no life after death, then there woud be no need for a Savior, would there.

 

[JohnDB]

Is this saying that the account of Saul visiting a medium and having a conversation was only a myth? What in the context would lead one to such a conclusion?


Why would what the average person believed have anything related to God's Word? Who cares what the average person believed.


What wasn't clear about the account in 1 Sam 28? The "average person" was certainly familiar with mediums. That's why God banned them from Israel.


I have already refuted this idea. Heb 11:26 shows otherwise.


Not Moses, who lived far before Daniel.


I don't see any relevance to what Scripture says.


So the account between Saul and Samuel is not to be read at face value, is that it?

Such a view seems to suggest that OT believers had no idea about life after death, or where they would go after death. If there was no life after death, then there woud be no need for a Savior, would there.

The story of Saul visiting a medium has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. That's a whole nother tamale.

Of course Jews wanted their Messiah. They believed in an earthly kingdom of great wealth and power that peace between God and man was going to bring when the Messiah ruled. They, as God's favorite, were going to help rule and be part of the ruling class of people.

Of course they were wrong. That is not what God had planned at all. In the same fashion many people believe in a rapture as shown in the "Left Behind" series it just isn't biblical nor realistic.

 

[JohnDB]

Whatever gave you that idea? Jesus said man will live by every Word of God. Matt. 4:4, Luke 4:4. I don't recall that Jesus wiped away the entire Old Testament whatsoever. An immense volume of of N.T. teaching comes straight out of the O.T. by Jesus and the Apostles citing O.T. scriptures hundreds of times by references direct and indirect.


Wow. Again, no. The opposite is the case. Understandings were Divinely Purposefully Hidden. Deut. 29:4, Isa. 29:10, cited many times by Jesus and the Apostle Paul in particular. Among many similar statements in the O.T. Jesus specifically advises us of a thief of Word stealing from the heart. Mark 4:15.


Whew! Where is this stuff coming from John? It's kind of out there if you ask me. No one lied? Seriously? No one considered heaven, eternal life? There is all sorts of lying intrigue in the O.T. And of course men of flesh have always considered their eternal fate, if any, by even our natural natures.

A lot of believers chuck the O.T. or minimize the O.T. for numerous reasons. None of which I find credible whatsoever.

The whole concept of Heaven and living with God face to face was unknown during the first Temple period. That Theology wasn't known until the second Temple period.
Until that time of Daniel the Jews held a Mythology about Sheol.
And upon occasion this mythology was referred to by Kings and prophets. After Daniel revealed that we rise after death to get a reward for being faithful the mythology was dropped by and large by most Jews. (Of course there were a few stubborn holdouts and theological idiots...they seem to exist in all time periods)
The Second Temple period's theology and mythology was really convoluted together. Ezra and (drawing a blank at the moment) were devout men who fought off syncretism...but it was a losing battle.
The interTestament period was when most of the syncretism occurred. Pharisees believed in Heaven but Sadducees didn't. Then they also had a lively debate along the same lines Calvinism/Arminianism does today.

Just like today the theology and mythology had been blended. Jesus answered most every theological question but hey, no one wants to hear how Jesus discounted their favorite pet theology.
And Jesus also revealed a more detailed look at life after death.
Up to this time it wasn't as revealed as what Jesus revealed...that man and God would live together...face to face.

 

[smaller]

The whole concept of Heaven and living with God face to face was unknown during the first Temple period. That Theology wasn't known until the second Temple period.

Guess it all depends on what people think they see therein. I try to pay attentions to every jot and tittle. You'll have to excuse my mild disdain when anyone tosses aside the narratives based on their own stories or theories because I don't buy those accounts, by the same narratives saying not to do so.

Until that time of Daniel the Jews held a Mythology about Sheol.

We might give heed to the fact that God Worked with the people of Israel. The people themselves are a lesser strata of the engagements.

And upon occasion this mythology was referred to by Kings and prophets. After Daniel revealed that we rise after death to get a reward for being faithful the mythology was dropped by and large by most Jews. (Of course there were a few stubborn holdouts and theological idiots...they seem to exist in all time periods)

And you know this how? We're really not treated to much in the way of false mythology from the masses in the Bible.

The O.T. IS a narrative about Gods Interactions with man. Not a mythology. If for example I considered the scriptures a mere story or a mere history or a even less a mere mythology of any kind it would not interest me much past the first reading.

The Second Temple period's theology and mythology was really convoluted together. Ezra and (drawing a blank at the moment) were devout men who fought off syncretism...but it was a losing battle.
The interTestament period was when most of the syncretism occurred. Pharisees believed in Heaven but Sadducees didn't. Then they also had a lively debate along the same lines Calvinism/Arminianism does today.

Jesus tells us exactly what all the scriptures are about. Him. John 5:39. But if we are not observant of or looking for Him therein, yes, a lot of false narratives arise from those kinds sights. You do understand that the Spirit of Christ was working therein do you not? The Word, Alive and Active?

Just like today the theology and mythology had been blended. Jesus answered most every theological question but hey, no one wants to hear how Jesus discounted their favorite pet theology.

I might venture the same sight. Depends on what people think they are trying to extract or devise.

And Jesus also revealed a more detailed look at life after death.
Up to this time it wasn't as revealed as what Jesus revealed...that man and God would live together...face to face.

I don't consider that the engagements therein do not have Divine Purposes, with any Word of God. They all have continual purposes and continual showings, applicable to all to this day and going forward as well. Such is the "Nature" of Gods Words. They are never tossed aside or chucked out the window based on our stories that attempt to do so. 1 Cor. 9:10, Col. 2:17, Heb. 10:1 etc.

You do understand that Jesus taught Paul revelation from the O.T? In Gal. 4 for example the law and the characters of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael are taught in a way that doesn't even appear on the surface narratives from therein, in the past. IF we are not engaged in the same ways, with Christ in our studies, we will not see "how and why" Paul got to where he got and even LESS so, how that applies to us today and even further less, how that might apply going forward.

 

[JohnDB]

Guess it all depends on what people think they see therein. I try to pay attentions to every jot and tittle. You'll have to excuse my mild disdain when anyone tosses aside the narratives based on their own stories or theories because I don't buy those accounts, by the same narratives saying not to do so.


We might give heed to the fact that God Worked with the people of Israel. The people themselves are a lesser strata of the engagements.


And you know this how? We're really not treated to much in the way of false mythology from the masses in the Bible.

The O.T. IS a narrative about Gods Interactions with man. Not a mythology. If for example I considered the scriptures a mere story or a mere history or a even less a mere mythology of any kind it would not interest me much past the first reading.



Jesus tells us exactly what all the scriptures are about. Him. John 5:39. But if we are not observant of or looking for Him therein, yes, a lot of false narratives arise from those kinds sights. You do understand that the Spirit of Christ was working therein do you not? The Word, Alive and Active?


I might venture the same sight. Depends on what people think they are trying to extract or devise.


I don't consider that the engagements therein do not have Divine Purposes, with any Word of God. They all have continual purposes and continual showings, applicable to all to this day and going forward as well. Such is the "Nature" of Gods Words. They are never tossed aside or chucked out the window based on our stories that attempt to do so. 1 Cor. 9:10, Col. 2:17, Heb. 10:1 etc.

You do understand that Jesus taught Paul revelation from the O.T? In Gal. 4 for example the law and the characters of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael are taught in a way that doesn't even appear on the surface narratives from therein, in the past. IF we are not engaged in the same ways, with Christ in our studies, we will not see "how and why" Paul got to where he got and even LESS so, how that applies to us today and even further less, how that might apply going forward.

You are really not understanding what I am saying in the least.

What I am saying is that the people of Israel held a belief in a Mythology that was inaccurate before Daniel told them otherwise.
That God didn't promote their Mythology but did use their ideas about it to speak to the people from time to time until the time of Daniel when it was started to be revealed to them.
Jesus revealed more fully details about Heaven than was ever revealed before.

Today we know exactly about the rewards of Heaven... much more so than Saul or David did at the time when they were kings.

 

[JLB]

The last verse in this segment indicates that it was Samuel. And the rest of the context shows that Samuel and Saul conversed.

Were you thinking that what appeared to Saul was an angel?

I agree.


However, how does this unique situation support OSAS?



JLB

 

[smaller]

You are really not understanding what I am saying in the least.

What I am saying is that the people of Israel held a belief in a Mythology that was inaccurate before Daniel told them otherwise.

If you are trying to say the Gospel didn't exist prior to Daniel I'd simply have to disagree. Gal. 3:8. The Bible Is Gospel, cover to cover.

That God didn't promote their Mythology but did use their ideas about it to speak to the people from time to time until the time of Daniel when it was started to be revealed to them.

Please note Paul's reference above.

Jesus revealed more fully details about Heaven than was ever revealed before.

I will concede that Grace and Truth came by Jesus. What that doesn't mean is that Grace and Truth is NOT in the O.T. as well. John 1:17.

We CAN view the narratives with more light because of His Light shed upon us. As noted from Paul in Gal. 4 for example. And I could fill pages upon pages with Gospel narratives from the O.T. Look sometime on how Paul broke down a single obscure O.T. law in 1 Cor. 9 and you might get a view of a different picture. And you might even ask yourself HOW Paul got that sight. I have. And I know how Paul got to that sight.

Today we know exactly about the rewards of Heaven... much more so than Saul or David did at the time when they were kings.

I think your sight to be quite odd myself. Perhaps a bit of disrespect for what is therein. It's far more interesting. Far more.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

He died in battle fighting the pagan enemies of Israel as was his job as king.

Which can signify that he never lost faith and trust in the Promise.

He was unfaithful, but he may not have been faithless. Like Moses, if Saul's disobedience was not the result of an abandonment of belief and trust in the Promise to Abraham, but simply the result of weakness, ignorance, or stupidity, then he went to the place of the righteous dead.

What we learn from Saul is not that a person can never lose their place in God. What we learn is that when you act like an idiot nobody can tell if you still have that place in God (thus the reason for this thread, and the multitudes before it). That is why the Bible exhorts us to be obedient children of God, so our calling and election can be shown to be real.

Nobody starts threads wondering if Daniel went to the righteous dead, or not. His life of obedience indicates the reality of his belief in the Promise. If he was disobedient, that could only indicate that he was unfaithful, and would not be sufficient in and of itself to indicate him being faithless. We can not judge the reason why someone is being unfaithful if they don't tell us why themselves.

 

[turnorburn]

Where is it written that Saul was ever a believer?

 

[JohnDB]

If you are trying to say the Gospel didn't exist prior to Daniel I'd simply have to disagree. Gal. 3:8. The Bible Is Gospel, cover to cover.

Totally and completely off the topic I was discussing. Unless you wish to discuss the topic I'm done.

 

[smaller]

Which can signify that he never lost faith and trust in the Promise.

Why do your positions always hang the Gospel on believers own backs? Is there some point to making believers and believer work alone, the sole focal and hinge point?

Whatever happened to Jesus Working IN us? Is Jesus, The God of all creation, ceased from His Working just because of us? I'm sorry if I can't buy that devoid of Jesus, controlling of Jesus, eliminating of Jesus by believers works or non works, narratives. It is almost an opposing sight of the Gospel to my ears.

What man in his right theological mind thinks they eliminate or control Jesus? To me that is an upside down Gospel.

Will God have His Way in and from His creations? Yes, in every way, He Will Have and He Will Extract His Sole Pleasures from His creations*. Rev. 4:12.

I have great difficulties with positions that put one foot of a believer on solid ground, and leave the other foot dangling over the potential of the eternal pits of hell in endless torture fire. To me such theological constructs are merely variations of the old Volcano god with an eternal fire bent at the bottom of the volcano. And all the blessed folk who don't get tossed in are happy they are not the hapless victims, but they can't look away from the show and they likewise can't stop coughing up the next victim, as long as it's NOT THEMSELVES.

Here is what Jesus came to do and to perform:

John 12:47
And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

Do your positions really think Jesus EVER stops from that working above? Do your positions prove Jesus ceases, leaves off from this Working of Him? I don't so.

The positions of the Gospel that say, OH, LOOK AT ME AND MY WORK are not impressive whatsoever. They are 'mancentric sights' not GodCentric/ChristCentric understandings whatsoever. I'd almost equate some Gospel forms to pagan tribal ritualism with modern twists. Today it's almost an every man, a tribe unto himself. Every man justifying himself and trying to kill the other guy. It's quite a sad sight, really. But I think that's part of Gods Work too. So, whatever. To each his own, or so they think.

Isaiah 46:10
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

 

[smaller]

Totally and completely off the topic I was discussing. Unless you wish to discuss the topic I'm done.

You inserted the special pleading narrative, not me. I just found it weird sight in light of alternative scriptural disclosures, duly noted from John 5:39 and Gal. 3:8 for minor examples of alternative sights.

 

[JohnDB]

You inserted the special pleading narrative, not me. I just found it weird sight in light of alternative scriptural disclosures, duly noted from John 5:39 and Gal. 3:8 for minor examples of alternative sights.

I was answering a question posed by FreeGrace or freewill ...(.can't remember)when you inserted yourself into the discussion.
And the question was about what they believed if they didn't believe in Heaven...and I answered it.

 

[FreeGrace]

The story of Saul visiting a medium has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. That's a whole nother tamale.

Well, my focus is on the OP of this thread, which IS about Saul conversing with Samuel and what was said.