Soul Sleep

[About the Son of God]

Have you considered that the Scripture is telling it from Saul's point of view? The Scriptures say Saul "perceived" that it was Samuel so the Scriptures continue to explain it from that point of view.

I considered this much: Saul clearly couldn't see Samuel himself up to the time he "perceived"; for if he had, he would not have asked her "what do you see"?

But I do notice that Saul asked her a question about what the spirit looked like -- eg: to verify the identity presumably so that the witch wouldn't deceive him.
And once she said Samuel had a "mantle", scripture (KJV) says Saul "perceived"...
but the actual Greek is "εγνω σαουλ οτι σαμουηλ ουτος"
"knew Saul because/that Samuel this"

In meaning the Greek says roughly: "and Saul knew because this [is] Samuel."
or "Saul knew because Samuel [does/showed/is] this"

The word 'this' could refer back to the mantle and age; but the word "knew" also means "to tangibly experience" or "be involved"; eg: Adam "knew" Eve ( sexual intercourse. ), etc.

Immediately after that word (know), scripture ceases to use the witch at all as an intermediary -- and the conversation becomes direct between Samuel and Saul.

I am aware of no place in scripture where 'knowing' means that the event didn't actually happen -- but was an inaccurate intellectual perception in lieu of actual knowledge.

I've only searched the Torah today as a quick recheck -- but I'm fairly certain to 'know' is not a wishful/optative word. ( Besides, Greek has a tense for that kind of uncertainty. )

So -- basically, we have to go beyond what scripture says and suppose the words in that passage are only to be taken in some kind of loose sense that isn't explicit.
eg: to avoid it being Samuel whom Saul "knew".

I would argue that it was not Samuel that the woman saw because she said, "I see gods". The word "gods" with a small "g" is used of demons.

But if that's the case, Saul ought to have reacted immediately to it being a fake; Certainly he knew that "Samuel" (singular) was not "gods" (plural) and therefore the witch had deceived him -- broken the oath -- and should have been executed; Saul certainly would be able to find another one to do the job instead.

But, even if we say Saul saw in the witch only what he wanted to because she said "gods" ... that's not very convincing...
Because elsewhere in scripture God says that Moses is to be a "god" to Aaron ; (Or, you are to be to Aaron in things which pertain to God.)

Consider -- witches, and foreigners commonly understood that the name "gods" refer to any ruling prince or king who is the likeness/sight/appearance/representative of God.

In older times, the Hebrew's too -- spoke in the same way.
In metaphor we have Psalm 82:6 "I have said (past tense) you are gods, but (now) like any prince you shall die." ; Or in simile: Genesis 3:15 and Genesis 3:22.

Hence, the witch's comment really shows how she understood the world -- and doesn't identify anything definitive about the character whom she saw except that they were in the ruling class, having power. She would also have called Saul, himself, a god -- and when David ascended the throne, the witch would likely say the same of him.

Or, again, Saul is an anointed on the behalf of God -- and Saul swore an oath to the witch, regarding her safety; The same type of potentially "bad" example is the Harlot (Rahab) who was at the entrance to the promised land, who deserved death according to Hebrew Law -- but whom was not a Hebrew, and received an oath from the spies -- Which she trusted.

Think about the violation aspect: Technically, the spies did what God forbade them to do -- by giving Rahab an oath to protect her and her families lives -- BUT:

With respect to Rahab -- Scripture now records that she is a woman of "Faith".
Just so, the witch -- here -- has received an oath, and is acting under the direction of Saul (God's anointed) rather than running away once she discovers who he is (Note: she discovers that by vision before Saul even requests Samuel. )

Nor do people who are on the "bad" side of God necessarily receive false visions; For even Pilate's wife had a vision in a dream, and tried to dissuade her husband from condemning Jesus to death. Her vision, too, was a true one.

To be sure: I don't take the passage as a full prooftext of the soul being *able* to be awake after death; but there is nothing in it which disproves the possibility.

Notice; Let's say she saw demons -- are demons not spirits?
If So, intrinsically -- spirits can be awake.

If the body has eyes, ears, and the like -- which can be turned off during surgery; so that we argue only the body makes for awareness -- then why is it that a spirit (or demon) without a body can know what goes on in the world at all?

If man receives from Jesus Christ a "spirit" to make him alive (my words are spirit and truth, the spirit gives life -- the flesh is useless -- etc.) then, it's intrinsically possible for it to be able to know things. (or again, God doesn't give us a spirit of "stupor" )

Another example:
If the following parenthetical is authentic (and it is in the very oldest manuscripts so there's good reason to believe it is, eg: See Tischendorfs copy from http://biblehub.com/text/2_corinthians/12-2.htm ) -- then we know that Paul doesn't indicate that separation of the spirit from the body automatically makes being awake impossible:

2Cori 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth ) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

So Paul who had inspiration and knowledge, was still uncertain whether or not his body entered heaven during the experience -- or whether it was only his spirit that did so.

It doesn't matter if it was or wasn't -- what matters is that Paul, with all of his knowledge of scripture, and his revelations from God -- was not able to rule out the possibility.