- Jan 23, 2011
- 5,091
- 540
- Thread starter
- #21
I concede the point, that "tomorrow" is ambiguous. I appeal to the entire context for support.You have no evidence to prove that it was Satan except the fact that the outcome of what Samuel had said was 3 days off? So it must be from Satan? Yet the actual prophecy he spoke was fulfilled.
The word "tomorrow" used in 1 Sam. 28:19 is Machar 4279
Strong's Lexicon
machar: Tomorrow, in time to come, in the future
Original Word: מָחָר
Pronunciation: mah-khar'
Definition: Tomorrow, in time to come, in the future
Meaning: deferred, the morrow, tomorrow, hereafter
The word "tomorrow" used in this case indicates time to come rather than that very day. Your argument here is moot..
God forbade necromancy.
#1)When listing why a loving God would forbid the living from speaking to their departed loved ones, the most likely reason is "its impossible to speak to them but an evil spirit will pretend to be them, to deceive the living." Otherwise, a loving God would allow it.
#2) As the text repeats, God wasn't talking to Saul through His prophets it logically follows the "prophet" claiming to be "Samuel" is NOT one of God's prophets.
2a)This is confirmed by the medium identifying the apparition as an "Elohim", that is "a god." Samuel is not "a god", "Elohim." Therefore, the text rules out its Samuel speaking.
The prediction "tomorrow you will be with me" is ambiguous (as you pointed out), but the tenor of the context lends little weight to the idea this means "in the coming days" or "in the future" you will die. That interpretation seems to diminish "the prophecy." Imminency of God's judgment is the point.
Last edited: