For churches that hold fall festivals in place of Halloween and allow people to dress as biblical characters, is it acceptable to dress as the medium in Endor or the ghost of Samuel?
Why would anyone want to come as either one, unless, of course, they had twisted parents who liked those particular characters? LOLFor churches that hold fall festivals in place of Halloween and allow people to dress as biblical characters, is it acceptable to dress as the medium in Endor or the ghost of Samuel?
That is a great idea. Or why not dress up as Herod and have worms coming out of your nose?For churches that hold fall festivals in place of Halloween and allow people to dress as biblical characters, is it acceptable to dress as the medium in Endor or the ghost of Samuel?
No, it means understanding that no one, not even the devil, has the power to call forth the soul of one who has departed, especially the soul of one resting in Abraham's Bosom...1) the thing I love about circular reasoning is, it's so circular.
2) The author didn't address the devil. He reported facts. The only way to read Samuel as being a demonic deception is eisegesis--reading your presuppositions into the text.
Of course. I say that the greatest proof that Satan is bound, as the Amillennialists (a misnomer) assert, is that Halloween is fun.For churches that hold fall festivals in place of Halloween and allow people to dress as biblical characters, is it acceptable to dress as the medium in Endor or the ghost of Samuel?
What ridiculousness. The text says it was Samuel.No, it means understanding that no one, not even the devil, has the power to call forth the soul of one who has departed, especially the soul of one resting in Abraham's Bosom...
...and understanding that God would never suffer his saints who have entered into rest to be thusly 'disquieted.'
Look at the words of 'Samuel,' "Why have YOU, disquieted me?'
Not, "Yahweh sent me."
The spirit, if it was Samuel indeed, was a liar.
The text in Genesis says it was the serpent.What ridiculousness. The text says it was Samuel.
Please tell me your vocation doesn’t involve the educating of youth in any capacity. We’re screwed if so. Your constant circular reasoning tricks would make you a nightmare to learn from.The text in Genesis says it was the serpent.
Lol. Witless Joe stirs .Please show proof of this assertion or move on, "Braying Ass."
Just lurk and learn.Please tell me your vocation doesn’t involve the educating of youth in any capacity. We’re screwed if so. Your constant circular reasoning tricks would make you a nightmare to learn from.
I do enjoy reading the exchanges between you and Ransom, but I’ll be honest, if I had to be a debate judge, I’d say he’s up in points.Just lurk and learn.![]()
No, it means understanding that no one, not even the devil, has the power to call forth the soul of one who has departed, especially the soul of one resting in Abraham's Bosom...
...and understanding that God would never suffer his saints who have entered into rest to be thusly 'disquieted.'
The spirit, if it was Samuel indeed, was a liar.
Natch. You're biased. That's okay.I do enjoy reading the exchanges between you and Ransom, but I’ll be honest, if I had to be a debate judge, I’d say he’s up in points.
Right. No one but God. That's understood. So, if Samuel was called forth, it had to be an act of God. Not of Saul, or of the witch, or of the devil.Wrong. Not "no one." God has the power to bring the dead to life.
Jesus did not appear concerned about "disquieting" Lazarus or any of the other persons whom he raised.
Well, he never identified himself as Samuel, so he didn't lie about that. Pray tell, what did this "liar" actually utter to Saul that wasn't absolutely true?
Right. No one but God. That's understood. So, if Samuel was called forth, it had to be an act of God. Not of Saul, or of the witch, or of the devil.
I only need one, but I have three. That Saul disquieted him at all.
That he was the soul of a departed man.
That Israel would be delivered to Philistines.
I’m just a lurker who calls it like I see it. Sorry, but every time I think you’ve pulled a nose ahead, he seems to end up making you look silly. Judging a debate is like gossamer, and one doesn’t dissect gossamer. (Seinfeld aficionado?)Natch. You're biased. That's okay.
Wrong again....typical of eKKKOf course. I say that the greatest proof that Satan is bound, as the Amillennialists (a misnomer) assert, is that Halloween is fun.
No, show proof it wasn't Samuel as the text states, or shut the devil up and move on. I have nothing personal against you...just your stupidity! Christian love has nothing to do with correcting unbiblical stances such as the ones you have.Lol. Witless Joe stirs .
(And you can betchyer donkey that was said in as much Christian love and devotion as he demonstrates.)
Let me get this straight...you want proof that the devil can't disturb the rest of God's saints.
Is that what you're asking?
He seems like an intelligent guy, I’m just not sure why he tries so hard to use that intelligence to disagree with Scriptures.No, show proof it wasn't Samuel as the text states, or shut the devil up and move on. I have nothing personal against you...just your stupidity! Christian love has nothing to do with correcting unbiblical stances such as the ones you have.
That God who would not respond through hallowed means, would through cursed means? Of course not. Question: Do you think necromancers really did communicate with the dead?Then you concede that it's plausible.
I'm not assuming anything, and no, as the debate judge will tell you, your notions don't enjoy defacto status. You aren't relieved of the obligation of cracking open the dictionary.You're assuming a certain connotation of the word translated "disquiet" that you have yet to support. So until you do so, dismissed.
Still a lie.Begging the question. Dismissed.
What Samuel actually said:
"The Lord will give the army of Israel also into the hand of the Philistines." (1 Sam. 28:19)