|
|
Post by rakovsky on Dec 4, 2019 10:42:56 GMT -8
Regarding the last part of Question 14, the New Testament has the idea that angels appear to people in dreams ("But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." ~ Matthew 1:20).
It looks like EOs, Church fathers, and Tradition have different opinions on whether the deceased can visit the living in dreams.
Elder Paisios of Mount Athos said:So here he is distinguishing between appearances in dreams by saints and by the devil appearing as a saint.
The book Dreaming in Byzantium and Beyond notes that emperor Basil dedicated the church that he built in the imperial palace, the "Nea Ekklesia" ("New Church") to Elijah, whom his mother saw in a dream.
Rev. Christopher Klitou, on "Ask an Orthodox Priest", writes:
One view or idea is that the deceased who appear in the dreams may be really other beings, like angels or demons.
In Dreams and Visions in the Early Middle Ages, Jesse Keskiaho writes:
On the page "Prayer and the Departed", addressing the issue of whether "those who have departed are conscious and involved with the affairs of heaven and earth", Dr. David Ford notes the story of Moses and Elijah appearing at the Transfiguration, and gives two cases of saints appearing in dreams:
Dr. Ford refers to the Martyrdom of Ignatius. Wikipedia refers to this text:Bible Study Tools' page on the text says:Philip Schaff is even more skeptical in his note on "Ignatius and His Epistles", which is in his footnotes to Eusebius' Church History:
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Dec 5, 2019 1:24:24 GMT -8
This gives some really good insight into haow different catholic denominations , and even opinions within denominations differ. Thanks.
I'll insert comments giving my views, which were admittedly shaped more by Southern Baptist teachings than by MJ. It is part of the old teachings that I've kept since Messianic research has taught me was correct. Like I said, we keep what is good in both Christianity and Judaism.
rakovsky Avatar
Dec 4, 2019 10:42:56 GMT -8 rakovsky said:
Regarding the last part of Question 14, the New Testament has the idea that angels appear to people in dreams ("But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." ~ Matthew 1:20).
It looks like EOs, Church fathers, and Tradition have different opinions on whether the deceased can visit the living in dreams. Interesting.
Elder Paisios of Mount Athos said:
Once in a while the devil may take the form of a human or of a saint and appear to someone in his sleep. Once he appeared in the form of Saint Arsenios to a sick man who was sleeping and told him,» I am Saint Arsenios; I have come to tell you that you will die. Do you hear me? You will die! «The man was frightened and horrified. A Saint never speaks to a sick person like that. And even if a sick person is about to die and a Saint appears to inform him about his death, he will do so gently and kindly: «God sees how much you are suffering here and this is why he has decided to take you out of this world. See that you prepare yourself. «He will never say, «Do you hear me? You will die!"
SOURCE: (LIFE AND GUIDANCE OF THE HOLY FATHERS
, Orthodoxy and Dreams
, 12/26/2016 )
So here he is distinguishing between appearances in dreams by saints and by the devil appearing as a saint.
The book Dreaming in Byzantium and Beyond notes that emperor Basil dedicated the church that he built in the imperial palace, the "Nea Ekklesia" ("New Church") to Elijah, whom his mother saw in a dream.
Rev. Christopher Klitou, on "Ask an Orthodox Priest", writes:
Dreams are not to be trusted. We do not know enough about the state of the soul when we are sleeping, -Much of Judaism teaches the sould departs while sleeping and returns on waking. My take would be the state of the soul while asleep is the same as it was the last time you were awake- but Holy Scripture is full of accounts of how God speaks to people through dreams. True, obviously and undeniably. ... Dreams therefore are used by God to reveal his will to us and many Saints have appeared in dreams to people. "Saints" are different. We believe that any saved person who dies is a saint. Saints are not angels, and have no power to return to us in dreams or otherwise. But demons are. If you saw a saint, or lost loved one, it was a demon. But demons can also use dreams to delude us. For example, someone might see in a dream that a friend or relative has departed. On waking the person is perplexed as to what the dream could mean. He phones the person only to discover that the person did indeed pass away at the very hour he saw the dream. You might ask "where is the deception" Demons often use the truth cunningly. The person who saw the dream will from now on believe that his dreams come true: he will trust his dreams leaving himself open to demonic deception. Absoluely true! And a really good explanation.
One view or idea is that the deceased who appear in the dreams may be really other beings, like angels or demons.
In Dreams and Visions in the Early Middle Ages, Jesse Keskiaho writes:
The early eighth-century hagiographer of St Sadalberga tells how an angel, in the form of abbot Waldebert, appeared thrice to the saint to tell her that the time of her death was approaching. That Waldebert did not appear in person, but an angel carried his likeness, is probably a reference to Augustine, who taught that neither the living nor the dead appeared in dreams personally, although he was not sure if this was also the case with saints.
On the page "Prayer and the Departed", addressing the issue of whether "those who have departed are conscious and involved with the affairs of heaven and earth", Dr. David Ford notes the story of Moses and Elijah appearing at the Transfiguration, They appeared on the command of Almighty God. Not even close to the same thing as a "saint" just appearing on their own. and gives two cases of saints appearing in dreams:
Perhaps the earliest testimony about such an event after the apostolic era is recorded in “The Martyrdom of Ignatius”. This is an eyewitness account concerning Saint Ignatius, the third bishop of Antioch, who was thrown to the lions by the Romans in about A.D. 110.1 The writers of this account relate: “Having ourselves been eyewitnesses of these things [his martyrdom] . . . we spent the whole night in tears within the house, and having entreated the Lord, with bended knees and much prayer . . . it came to pass, on our falling into a brief slumber, that some of us saw the blessed Ignatius suddenly standing by us and embracing us, while others beheld him again praying for us, and others still saw him dropping with sweat, as if he had just come from his great labor, and standing by the Lord. When, therefore, we had with great joy witnessed these things, and had compared our several visions together, we sang praise to God”.2 And they wrote or related their account, which was used to spread the lie that saints can come to us in dreams, and they are there to help. So not only they, but countless others are fooled into possibly accepting demons because they appeared in a dream as a saint.
A much more contemporary example of this kind of event comes from the twentieth century. Saint Nektarios, beloved bishop of Pentapolis, Egypt, and founder of the Holy Trinity Convent on the Greek island of Aegina, died on November 9, 1920, in a hospital in Athens. Since then he has appeared many times, either in dreams or visions, as he continues his ministry to his earthly flock, giving spiritual counsel, and being an instrument of God’s healing power. As Saint Nektarios’ biographer relates: “It has become well known that many Greek Orthodox Christians who were incurably ill, suffering, and close to death, have seen a live old monk wearing a cap appear to them. It does not matter who they are, or from where they are, for many times he has been seen in far away countries other than Greece. He always smiles softly and consoles them, assuring them that they will regain health, and not to fear, for God will not abandon them. He simply reminds them to have patience and faith. ‘And who are you, old man?’ many ask in a moment of astonishment. ‘I am the former bishop of Pentapolis, Nektarios of Aegina,’ the monk replies, and then vanishes”.3 Had his work with his earthly flock not been done, he'd not have been "sainted." That a "saint" is still ministering to people in dreams, and that they probably hold this opinion much higher than others should be a red flag.
Dr. Ford refers to the Martyrdom of Ignatius. Wikipedia refers to this text:
Although James Ussher regarded it as genuine, the authenticity of the account has been seriously questioned. If there is any genuine nucleus of the Martyrium, it has been so greatly expanded with interpolations that no part of it is without questions. Its most reliable manuscript is the 10th-century Codex Colbertinus (Paris), in which the Martyrium closes the collection.
Bible Study Tools' page on the text says:
But doubts have been started, by Daille and others, as to the date and authorship of this account. Some of these rest upon internal considerations, but the weightiest objection is found in the fact that no reference to this narrative is to be traced during the first six centuries of our era.(5) This is certainly a very suspicious circumstance, and may well give rise to some hesitation in ascribing the authorship to the immediate companions and friends of Ignatius. On the other hand, however, this account of the death of Ignatius is in perfect harmony with the particulars recounted by Eusebius and Chrysostom regarding him. Its comparative simplicity, too, is greatly in its favour. It makes no reference to the legends which by and by connected themselves with the name of Ignatius. As is well known, he came in course of time to be identified with the child whom Christ (Matthew 18: 2) set before His disciples as a pattern of humility.
Philip Schaff is even more skeptical in his note on "Ignatius and His Epistles", which is in his footnotes to Eusebius' Church History:
There are extant various Acts of the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius which contain detailed accounts of his death, but these belong to the fourth and subsequent centuries, are quite contradictory in their statements, and have been conclusively proved to be utterly unreliable and to furnish no trustworthy information on the subject in hand. From writers before Eusebius we have but four notices of Ignatius (Polycarp's Ep. ad Phil. 9, 13; Irenæus' Adv. Hær. V. 18. 3, quoted below; Origen, Prol. in Cant., and Hom. VI. in Luc.). These furnish us with very little information. If the notice in Polycarp's epistle be genuine (and though it has been widely attacked, there is no good reason to doubt it), it furnishes us with our earliest testimony to the martyrdom of a certain Ignatius and to the existence of epistles written by him. Irenæus does not name Ignatius, but he testifies to the existence of the Epistle to the Romans which bears his name, and to the martyrdom of the author of that epistle. What he said.
|
|
|
|
Post by rakovsky on Dec 5, 2019 10:38:37 GMT -8
This gives some really good insight into haow different catholic denominations , and even opinions within denominations differ. Thanks.
I'll insert comments giving my views, which were admittedly shaped more by Southern Baptist teachings than by MJ. It is part of the old teachings that I've kept since Messianic research has taught me was correct. Like I said, we keep what is good in both Christianity and Judaism.
rakovsky Avatar Dec 4, 2019 10:42:56 GMT -8 rakovsky said: Regarding the last part of Question 14, the New Testament has the idea that angels appear to people in dreams ("But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." ~ Matthew 1:20). It looks like EOs, Church fathers, and Tradition have different opinions on whether the deceased can visit the living in dreams. Interesting.
Elder Paisios of Mount Athos said: Once in a while the devil may take the form of a human or of a saint and appear to someone in his sleep. Once he appeared in the form of Saint Arsenios to a sick man who was sleeping and told him,» I am Saint Arsenios; I have come to tell you that you will die. Do you hear me? You will die! «The man was frightened and horrified. A Saint never speaks to a sick person like that. And even if a sick person is about to die and a Saint appears to inform him about his death, he will do so gently and kindly: «God sees how much you are suffering here and this is why he has decided to take you out of this world. See that you prepare yourself. «He will never say, «Do you hear me? You will die!" SOURCE: (LIFE AND GUIDANCE OF THE HOLY FATHERS , Orthodoxy and Dreams , 12/26/2016 ) So here he is distinguishing between appearances in dreams by saints and by the devil appearing as a saint. The book Dreaming in Byzantium and Beyond notes that emperor Basil dedicated the church that he built in the imperial palace, the "Nea Ekklesia" ("New Church") to Elijah, whom his mother saw in a dream. Rev. Christopher Klitou, on "Ask an Orthodox Priest", writes: Dreams are not to be trusted. We do not know enough about the state of the soul when we are sleeping, -Much of Judaism teaches the sould departs while sleeping and returns on waking. My take would be the state of the soul while asleep is the same as it was the last time you were awake- but Holy Scripture is full of accounts of how God speaks to people through dreams. True, obviously and undeniably. ... Dreams therefore are used by God to reveal his will to us and many Saints have appeared in dreams to people. "Saints" are different. We believe that any saved person who dies is a saint. Saints are not angels, and have no power to return to us in dreams or otherwise. But demons are. If you saw a saint, or lost loved one, it was a demon. But demons can also use dreams to delude us. For example, someone might see in a dream that a friend or relative has departed. On waking the person is perplexed as to what the dream could mean. He phones the person only to discover that the person did indeed pass away at the very hour he saw the dream. You might ask "where is the deception" Demons often use the truth cunningly. The person who saw the dream will from now on believe that his dreams come true: he will trust his dreams leaving himself open to demonic deception. Absoluely true! And a really good explanation.
One view or idea is that the deceased who appear in the dreams may be really other beings, like angels or demons. In Dreams and Visions in the Early Middle Ages, Jesse Keskiaho writes: The early eighth-century hagiographer of St Sadalberga tells how an angel, in the form of abbot Waldebert, appeared thrice to the saint to tell her that the time of her death was approaching. That Waldebert did not appear in person, but an angel carried his likeness, is probably a reference to Augustine, who taught that neither the living nor the dead appeared in dreams personally, although he was not sure if this was also the case with saints. On the page "Prayer and the Departed", addressing the issue of whether "those who have departed are conscious and involved with the affairs of heaven and earth", Dr. David Ford notes the story of Moses and Elijah appearing at the Transfiguration, They appeared on the command of Almighty God. Not even close to the same thing as a "saint" just appearing on their own. You referred to the catholic denominations. To clarify, the Orthodox Church is catholic in the same way that Protestants would say that they are, like how in the Nicene Creed, Christians say that they believe in "one holy catholic and apostolic church." Some Evangelicals ask whether a person is "CATHOLIC OR CHRISTIAN", but a Catholic or Protestant could answer "Both." Is a saved person the same as a holy person? I guess that the answer is Yes. The term saint in English is a way that holy is expressed in English. So in Psalm 16, David says, "Liqdoshim asher baaretz hemma, waderey kal hepsi bam, As for the saints/holy ones on the earth, all my delight is in them," the word saint is being used in the sense that the EO Church, Catholics, and Protestants use the term "saint". The reason I asked is because I wonder if God could have mercy on a person enough to save them from Hell, so that they are "saved", without the person necessarily being saintly or holy. For instance, maybe there are people who have the right faith, or at least enough of it not to go to hell, but don't do much good or bad. I guess as long as the person is not going to Hell, then they are going to Heaven, so the answer is Yes, they are holy. When EOs refer to someone specifically as a saint with a capital S, they are using it as a title. It's like when Lutherans and some other Protestants use the term, like calling their church St. Mark's, St. Peter's Lutheran, etc. It doesn't mean that they don't believe that other people without the S are not saints. We would agree that Elijah is holy and a saint, but I don't think we would all agree that Nebuchadnezzar is saved and therefore a saint. Christians might want to refer to St. Paul, but not feel comfortable talking about "St. Nebuchadnezzar". So there is a practical reason why they use the term Saint for some people. It is like referring to Yeshua HaMoshiah. It doesn't mean that there are other Moshiachs sent by God. The Bible calls Nebuchadnezzar a Moshiach. We refer to Yeshuah HaMoshiach as a special title. You wrote that Elijah appearing at the Transfiguration was different from saints appearing in dreams, because Elijah was appearing by God's power. But if holy people like Elijah (as he supposedly visited emperor Basil's mother) really do visit people in dreams, then it would be by God's power. For instance, when a holy person does something, like Elijah in Tanakh raised the youth, it is considered done by God's power. Based on Samuel's appearance to the woman (medium?), Gabriel in the dream, and Elijah at the Transfiguration, Biblically I think that it is possible. |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Dec 8, 2019 13:14:33 GMT -8
You referred to the catholic denominations. To clarify, the Orthodox Church is catholic in the same way that Protestants would say that they are, like how in the Nicene Creed, Christians say that they believe in "one holy catholic and apostolic church." Some Evangelicals ask whether a person is "CATHOLIC OR CHRISTIAN", but a Catholic or Protestant could answer "Both." That's true. A Messianic would more accurately answer "neither." Also you must distinguish between a "C" and a "c" in catholic.Is a saved person the same as a holy person? I guess that the answer is Yes. The term saint in English is a way that holy is expressed in English. They actually carry a bit different connotations. A "saint" is an individual who is "saved." But depending on who you talk to that can mean only one who passed in a "state of grace" or anyone who is in such a state, before or after their demise. Holy comes from the Hebrew "kadosh," which means set apart. When contextually spiritual, used about a person it means one set apart to God's purpose. Used about an object it means the same thing. A Netti Cup is set apart for ritually washing the hands, so it is kadosh. And we ar commanded to distinguish between the holy and the profane (common), so that cup is used only for that purpose. So in Psalm 16, David says, "Liqdoshim asher baaretz hemma, waderey kal hepsi bam, As for the saints/holy ones on the earth, all my delight is in them," the word saint is being used in the sense that the EO Church, Catholics, and Protestants use the term "saint". The reason I asked is because I wonder if God could have mercy on a person enough to save them from Hell, so that they are "saved", without the person necessarily being saintly or holy. Difficult area there. I've said many times I do not know where the line demarcating salvation is. But the farther you are from God in your daily walk, the more danger you are in of missing the mark altogether. We call this our halacha, our walk with the Lord. This is what  ultimately is; God's instructions for holy living- how we are to walk before Him. And the farther we are from this, the more we play with eternal fire. For instance, maybe there are people who have the right faith, or at least enough of it not to go to hell, but don't do much good or bad. I guess as long as the person is not going to Hell, then they are going to Heaven, so the answer is Yes, they are holy. The answer is faith without works is dead! They are known by their fruits. They intentionally break time and again, they are cut off. They are not set apart for God, but for worldly things, so no they are not holy, and probably not saved. When EOs refer to someone specifically as a saint with a capital S, they are using it as a title. It's like when Lutherans and some other Protestants use the term, like calling their church St. Mark's, St. Peter's Lutheran, etc. It doesn't mean that they don't believe that other people without the S are not saints. We would agree that Elijah is holy and a saint, but I don't think we would all agree that Nebuchadnezzar is saved and therefore a saint. Christians might want to refer to St. Paul, but not feel comfortable talking about "St. Nebuchadnezzar". So there is a practical reason why they use the term Saint for some people. It is like referring to Yeshua HaMoshiah. It doesn't mean that there are other Moshiachs sent by God. The Bible calls Nebuchadnezzar a Moshiach. We refer to Yeshuah HaMoshiach as a special title. Moshiach just means "anointed one." Kings and prophets were anointed. However HaMoshiach as it relates to Yeshua means anointed one of God. However "Synagogue St. Nebuchadnezzar" does have sort of a ring to it ... 
You wrote that Elijah appearing at the Transfiguration was different from saints appearing in dreams, because Elijah was appearing by God's power. But if holy people like Elijah (as he supposedly visited emperor Basil's mother) really do visit people in dreams, then it would be by God's power. For instance, when a holy person does something, like Elijah in Tanakh raised the youth, it is considered done by God's power. Yes, when a prophet raises a child it is obviously by God's power. But there is a problem with saying "Well, the prophet appeared to so and so in a dream." So and so could be full of crap, or lieing, or just mistaken. It's like those who come here wanting to be recognized as prophets themselves, and they say God appeared to them either in dreams r in person. OK, so their life is that "holy," that they are like Moses? Or Elijah? The mark of a prophet of God is 100% accuracy when speaking of the things of God. So far none of them have wanted to be held to that standard. What these dreamers have in common is either they want us to recognize some off the wall theology, or they want to be recognized as holy but don't want to do the work of reading and studying scripture. Based on Samuel's appearance to the woman (medium?), Gabriel in the dream, and Elijah at the Transfiguration, Biblically I think that it is possible. Elijah was there at God's command, so it is possible but only by God and for His reasons. The appearance of a dead person, even a prophet of God at the request of a medium is forbidden as witchcraft. And since God's prophets do not work for ha'satan, I think it highly more likely to be a demon posing as the prophet. How would a medium, condened already even gain access to God's side of eternity to summon anyone in the first place?
Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by rakovsky on Dec 10, 2019 12:53:35 GMT -8
Thanks for your answers. I think that for Question 4, there is no better answer than what I gave, and that Hezekiah piercing his hand on the reed is ambivalent as a prefigurement, since no one wrote about it as a prefigurement that I found online. So if it's a prefigurement, then few people have apparently noticed it. Even if I were to ask alot of people about it, there would not be much more light that they could throw on it. It reminds me of the issue of the potential prefigurements that we considered in the story of Jael and Sisera, and the story of Jotham's escape.
Alot of Biblical prefigurements look ambivalent - they show up as themes or motifs that later are used or seen as pointing to future events. It's kind of like dream interpretation. It's very circumstantial. Some of the symbols people would not have noticed unless it were pointed out to them. I think that the snake on the staff in the desert could be one such example. Probably some writers would have noticed it, but it would have been treated with significantly less emphasis, I think, if Ha-Moshiach hadn't pointed to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rakovsky on Dec 10, 2019 13:33:03 GMT -8
But the farther you are from God in your daily walk, the more danger you are in of missing the mark altogether. We call this our halacha, our walk with the Lord. This is what ultimately is; God's instructions for holy living- how we are to walk before Him. And the farther we are from this, the more we play with eternal fire. You wrote that Elijah appearing at the Transfiguration was different from saints appearing in dreams, because Elijah was appearing by God's power. But if holy people like Elijah (as he supposedly visited emperor Basil's mother) really do visit people in dreams, then it would be by God's power. For instance, when a holy person does something, like Elijah in Tanakh raised the youth, it is considered done by God's power. Yes, when a prophet raises a child it is obviously by God's power. But there is a problem with saying "Well, the prophet appeared to so and so in a dream." So and so could be full of crap, or lieing, or just mistaken. It's like those who come here wanting to be recognized as prophets themselves, and they say God appeared to them either in dreams r in person. OK, so their life is that "holy," that they are like Moses? Or Elijah? The mark of a prophet of God is 100% accuracy when speaking of the things of God. So far none of them have wanted to be held to that standard. What these dreamers have in common is either they want us to recognize some off the wall theology, or they want to be recognized as holy but don't want to do the work of reading and studying scripture. Based on Samuel's appearance to the woman (medium?), Gabriel in the dream, and Elijah at the Transfiguration, Biblically I think that it is possible. Elijah was there at God's command, so it is possible but only by God and for His reasons. The appearance of a dead person, even a prophet of God at the request of a medium is forbidden as witchcraft. And since God's prophets do not work for ha'satan, I think it highly more likely to be a demon posing as the prophet. How would a medium, condened already even gain access to God's side of eternity to summon anyone in the first place? That is a neat analogy that you brought up, Dan - Halakha as "walking". I looked it up, and this is the etymology for "Halakha". I feel more comfortable learning about Judaism with Messianics like yourself than with those who consider Yeshua to be a deceiver (Mesith). I feel like you also bring insights like this that would not come from normal Christian discussions. You asked, "It's like those who come here wanting to be recognized as prophets themselves, and they say God appeared to them either in dreams r in person. OK, so their life is that "holy," that they are like Moses? Or Elijah?" This is an issue that comes up in EOs' discussions about appearances or visions experienced by believers. There is often alot of reluctance about this kind of phenomenon. The EO Church wants to value the visions much more when they are experienced by holy people. In contrast, the EOs have alot of skepticism about claims of frequent miracles by people who don't seem particularly holy, and their lack of holiness is used to cast doubt on their miracle vision claims. You asked, "How would a medium, condened already even gain access to God's side of eternity to summon anyone in the first place?" You are asking a good question. I think that in the story of Samuel's appearance to the summoner, the Biblical writer presents Samuel as actually being the entity who appears, and the apparition as not just being a demon pretending to be Samuel. One reason is that the writer presents the entity as Samuel in a face value reading, calling him "Samuel" and not "the appearance of Samuel" or something like that: There are alot of other reasons why I think that the entity was actually Samuel. For one the writer says that, "Saul realized that it was Samuel", not "Saul believed that it was Samuel" or "Saul thought that it was Samuel". Another is that the entity reprimanded Saul for violating the rule against using mediums, which a demon would tend to be unlikely to do, as a demon would tend to prefer violation of the Law. Samuel's words seem to honor the Lord and the prophet Samuel's inspired prophecy on earth: “Why are you asking me, now that the Lord has turned away from you and has become your enemy? The Lord has done exactly as I prophesied!" Next, the apparition makes a prophecy of doom that comes true, which seems to imply the veracity of the apparition. At a later point in the Bible, I think that Jeremiah said that a prophet who prophecies doom for disobedience is reliable, even if the prophecy doesn't come true (since God can relent). To get back to your question of how a medium, condemned for practicing in violation of , could gain access to God's side of eternity to summon anyone, the Biblical writer could reply that God could grant the access if He so chose due to His omnipotence. Sure, mediums were in violation of , and you could expect that her work as a medium would not be a method for her to enter heaven herself, but these reasons don't mean that God could not choose to allow Samuel to appear to the medium in order to deliver a message condemning the use of mediums. I sense that the Biblical writer may have felt a sense of irony in God using the medium to give a message banning the use of mediums. The Biblical passage that banned mediums also banned augurers and divination. As I understand it, these are people using omens and other tricks to decipher predictions of the future. There is kind of a weird issue because sometimes it looks like believers in the OT and NT did use methods of divination like drawing lots, as well as some other methods, but I guess that the difference is that they were doing so in cooperation with God. But anyway, the point that I would like to make is that just because divination, augury, and mediums were banned doesn't mean that they couldn't work, just that they weren't allowed. So a person could illegally use casting objects or drawing lots for divination, and this may or may not work. Based on the story of Samuel and Saul, you could expect that such illegal methods done in conflict with God would either bring no result or bring a bad result (like in the story), but would not necessarily be ineffective (as in the story, where the result was effective but negative). |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Dec 10, 2019 15:31:16 GMT -8
That is a neat analogy that you brought up, Dan - Halakha as "walking". I looked it up, and this is the etymology for "Halakha". I feel more comfortable learning about Judaism with Messianics like yourself than with those who consider Yeshua to be a deceiver (Mesith). I feel like you also bring insights like this that would not come from normal Christian discussions. Normally, no. Christians would not even be aware of the concept, even though they borrowed the term from Judaism. (Not "halacha," but hey do talk about their "walk" with God). You have to be careful when using any terminology between Christianity, Judaism, and/or Messianic Judaism.
However nowdays Hebrew Roots has made inroads into many churches, mostly evangelical. So some of this is becoming more common knowledge. However there is so much absolute garbage in HR you must be careful. You asked, "It's like those who come here wanting to be recognized as prophets themselves, and they say God appeared to them either in dreams r in person. OK, so their life is that "holy," that they are like Moses? Or Elijah?" This is an issue that comes up in EOs' discussions about appearances or visions experienced by believers. There is often alot of reluctance about this kind of phenomenon. The EO Church wants to value the visions much more when they are experienced by holy people. In contrast, the EOs have alot of skepticism about claims of frequent miracles by people who don't seem particularly holy, and their lack of holiness is used to cast doubt on their miracle vision claims. As well you should! You asked, "How would a medium, condened already even gain access to God's side of eternity to summon anyone in the first place?" You are asking a good question. I think that in the story of Samuel's appearance to the summoner, the Biblical writer presents Samuel as actually being the entity who appears, and the apparition as not just being a demon pretending to be Samuel. One reason is that the writer presents the entity as Samuel in a face value reading, calling him "Samuel" and not "the appearance of Samuel" or something like that: You could be right about this. I won't go either way on it as an absolute. There are alot of other reasons why I think that the entity was actually Samuel. For one the writer says that, "Saul realized that it was Samuel", not "Saul believed that it was Samuel" or "Saul thought that it was Samuel". True. Another is that the entity reprimanded Saul for violating the rule against using mediums, which a demon would tend to be unlikely to do, as a demon would tend to prefer violation of the Law. Also true, although a demon immitating Saul might know to do this as a clever ruse. Samuel's words seem to honor the Lord and the prophet Samuel's inspired prophecy on earth: “Why are you asking me, now that the Lord has turned away from you and has become your enemy? The Lord has done exactly as I prophesied!" Demons are neither ignorant nor stupid. They kow what is going on in both the physical and spiritual realms. They would not hesitate to use any of it to obfuscate their deception. Next, the apparition makes a prophecy of doom that comes true, which seems to imply the veracity of the apparition. I'm guessing they could also predict his doom. In fact, there comes a point where we are turned over to demons if our conduct is bad enough. And Saul's was about the worst. When you seek out demons you yourself give them authority in your life. And if they are released to have absolute authority, they can determine the time and manner of your death. I'm not saying all this just to be argumentative, but rather to demonstrate that this is not cut and dried either way. The main point is don't go to a medium, or any other kind of witch or demoniac. At a later point in the Bible, I think that Jeremiah said that a prophet who prophecies doom for disobedience is reliable, even if the prophecy doesn't come true (since God can relent). That's a whole nuther animal. That speaks of a prophet of God, not of a medium or oher demonic source. To get back to your question of how a medium, condemned for practicing in violation of , could gain access to God's side of eternity to summon anyone, the Biblical writer could reply that God could grant the access if He so chose due to His omnipotence. I think it more likely He would have the prophet go in order to make a point. That's assuming He wanted to do that. Sure, mediums were in violation of , and you could expect that her work as a medium would not be a method for her to enter heaven herself, Yeah, I sort of expect that, true enough! but these reasons don't mean that God could not choose to allow Samuel to appear to the medium in order to deliver a message condemning the use of mediums. True too. I sense that the Biblical writer may have felt a sense of irony in God using the medium to give a message banning the use of mediums. Yeah, I get that too!
The Biblical passage that banned mediums also banned augurers and divination. As I understand it, these are people using omens and other tricks to decipher predictions of the future. There is kind of a weird issue because sometimes it looks like believers in the OT and NT did use methods of divination like drawing lots, as well as some other methods, but I guess that the difference is that they were doing so in cooperation with God. You'd have to give me specific instances, but I can think of times it was done. The Urim and Thurim, for example. But the difference is the priests were asking God, not diviners; and they were commissioned to do so. But anyway, the point that I would like to make is that just because divination, augury, and mediums were banned doesn't mean that they couldn't work, just that they weren't allowed. As I said, demons are neither ignorant nor stupid. Yes, what they do can actually work. Most who practice these things today are charlatans and wannabe's. But if you come across one that everyone is saying actually works, then run! Run away, unless you are called to deal with demons. Because that would in all likelihood be a real demoniac right there. So a person could illegally use casting objects or drawing lots for divination, and this may or may not work. Based on the story of Samuel and Saul, you could expect that such illegal methods done in conflict with God would either bring no result or bring a bad result (like in the story), but would not necessarily be ineffective (as in the story, where the result was effective but negative). It depends. I won't go into all the variables here, but you can in some cases get in too deep too fast. As a pastor friend of mine says, "sin will always take you farther than you ever wanted to go." And he's right. You start messing with the occult, and inadvertantly (or sometimes objectively) give the enemy control, any measure of control, and he will exploit it. He's been doing this for centuries. He was good when he started, and he's had lots of practice since. My advice, don't mess with it. |
|
|
|
Post by rakovsky on Dec 10, 2019 17:48:55 GMT -8
Also for Question 5 about why Josiah was surprised if he was pious, I think the answer is that in the Bible it says he was pious, but it doesn't specify that he knew what the said before the Book of the Law was discovered. When Josephus wrote about Josiah being law abiding, he was just summarizing Josiah's life, not specifically talking about the time when he was a youth before the book was found. I made a mistake above. Josephus says that Josiah was pious at 12 years old, urging people to give up idolatry, "following the laws", and he writes that when Josiah had been reigning 18 years, Josiah's priests discovered "Book of the Law". So Josephus had been writing about Josiah following the laws before the 19th year of his reign, but still he wasn't specific that Josiah had been following the whole consciously before the discovery of the Book of the Law. |
|
|
|
Post by rakovsky on Dec 17, 2019 16:50:00 GMT -8
Good job answering the questions in the thread, Dan.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Dec 17, 2019 21:10:50 GMT -8
Good job answering the questions in the thread, Dan.
Looking back one post, I see I didn't address one point (actually I think I did, but if not I'll address it now).
Mistakes happen. Since I started that pesky "I Found Out I Was Wrong" thread even I can't claim perfection! LOL, it is well on its way to being the most viewed thread on the forum!  All Jews, even the apostate ones would have known quite a lot about . It was part of the fabric of the national character! That he was pious speaks to his attitude as opposed to the apostates. To follow God's instructions is a choice. Now the more you want to follow the more you'd remember of it, and I'm sure he remembered a lot. But imagine his joy when he found a copy. He could do as it commanded and write two copies for himself: one to keep at home and one to take with him as a reference when traveling or on campaign! He could read the actual instructions and weigh the evidence when dispensing justice. He could read and meditate on the actual word, not just his memory. He could dig out the nuances, parse out the meanings and cross reference related texts. All these things a king should do:Proverbs 25:2 (ESV) It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out.
We are not always told that there were "laws" (instructions/teachings), nor how much someone knew of those "laws." It was so commonly understood the authors did not tell us. God would have given Adam a LOT of instruction in how to care for His Garden. And there would have been some instruction in walking with God. But for purposes of the story we only needed to know of one law- don't eat from THAT tree! However, how about the law against murder? God could not have punished Cain for murdering Able had He not at some point said "Thou shalt not commit murder!" (Book of Cain's Troubles, not yet discovered but now someone will write ... I mean, discover it!). So just because we were not told of them, we cannot assume they were not common knowledge of the time.
Dan C
P.S. Ask any time! As I said, makes me exercise the gray muscle, and that makes my ears wiggle! Impresses the grandkids and drives the dog nuts!  |
|
|
|
Post by rakovsky on Dec 20, 2019 20:27:43 GMT -8
We are not always told that there were "laws" (instructions/teachings), nor how much someone knew of those "laws." It was so commonly understood the authors did not tell us. God would have given Adam a LOT of instruction in how to care for His Garden. And there would have been some instruction in walking with God. But for purposes of the story we only needed to know of one law- don't eat from THAT tree! However, how about the law against murder? God could not have punished Cain for murdering Able had He not at some point said "Thou shalt not commit murder!" (Book of Cain's Troubles, not yet discovered but now someone will write ... I mean, discover it!). So just because we were not told of them, we cannot assume they were not common knowledge of the time.
Right, we can't assume that a person didn't have common knowledge of laws just because it wasn't mentioned. To answer your question about murder, I don't have much opinion on whether God made explicit at that point not to murder, but I expect that it was a moral rule that God expected Cain to at least recognize or sense. In his letter to the Romans, Paul said that the gentile pagans would be judged based on how they followed their conscience. In this thread in Question 14, Glaphyra had a dream wherein her deceased Jewish husband reproached her for marrying his brother. Scholars noted that such remarriage was a violation, but Glaphyra herself was a gentile, so Glaphyra would be violating a moral rule, rather than one imposed on her as if she were part of the covenant. |
|
- there are 70 faces to 
