More Dialog With Ebionite Lunatic on the Soul

“Actually I deliberately left that out because I didn’t see it as worth answering since elohim can mean more than just that.  I figured only if you brought it up would I answer it. ‘Elohim’ can refer to fallen angels, demons and also human magistrates. The witch was a pagan and pagans deified their rulers. So she could have been seeing spirits of human kings coming up which Samuel was among.”

>>>But Samuel was in no position of power on the earth at this time being dead which eliminates the magistrate meaning. Btw, Elohim can also refer to a prophet who is a singular man.

Exodus 4:16 And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God (elohim) . (KJV)

Exodus 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god(elohim) to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. (KJV)

But again, seeing Samuel was in no position of prophet at the time being dead, that meaning is eliminated as well.

“Also does it even actually say Samuel is one of the elohim? If you take it in the plural it doesn’t because it doesn’t make any sense to say “I see gods [plural]” and then answer “What is his [singular] form?” But I do not know if the Hebrew can be taken another way because the LXX has “What didst thou perceive?” instead of “What is his form?” So maybe this argument is not necessary, but it is something consider.”

>>>The plural Elohim is used of Moses, a singular man.

“But the immediate context does not mandate that gods be only speaking about fallen angels or demons.”

>>>Sure it does. A human being is a physical being. Humans do not come out of the ground unless it is by resurrection.

“You agree gods can refer to human magistrates. You also know that pagans deified them and so saw them as gods. John Gill commenting on 1Samuel 18:14 confirms Samuel to be a magistrate: “‘and she said, an old man cometh up, and he is covered with a mantle;’ such as either priests or judges wore, and Samuel did in his lifetime:”.

>>>I think you meant 1 Samuel 28:14. Samuel was dead sir! He was no magistrate. If the mantle has any significance it is:

Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

“And the immediate context says, the inspired text says it was Samuel. It does not only record the witch and Saul saying it was Samuel but the narration of the inspired text says it was Samuel.   There is also this interesting observation made by ‘The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges’ on 1Samuel 28:13 that should be taken into consideration: “gods] The Heb. word Elôhîm is plural, and when not applied to God Himself is generally to be so rendered. But it is evident from 1Sa_28:14 that only a single figure appeared. Elôhîm here denotes a supernatural, non-earthly being; or as Josephus paraphrases it, “one of god-like form.”

>>>That citation is agreeable to my position not yours. And I would add as before that Elohim is applied to Moses in Exo 4 and 7.

In concluding the Witch of Endor scene, Yahovah had denied Saul a word from his lips for Saul’s sins.

1 Sam. 28:6 When Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord did not answer him, either by dreams or by Urim or by prophets. 7 Then Saul said to his servants, “Seek for me a woman who is a medium, that I may go to her and inquire of her.” And his servants said to him, “Behold, there is a woman who is a medium at En-dor.”

This tells us the Samuel mentioned is not Prophesying by Yahovah.

Furthermore, if the Samuel mentioned had been in Heaven, the character of Samuel should have said: “Why have you brought me down?” not “Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?” (1 Sam 28:15).

Lastly, the Prophetic warning

therefore tomorrow you and your sons will be with me. 1 Sam 28:19

would mean that the wicked and the righteous share the same after-life, and this contradicts the Catholic eschatology.

“But I do not know the credence of this argument.   You also say that Irenaeus’ argument is baseless. But you do have to remember this is only from the perspective of your standard of what is and is not Scripture. Irenaeus and many early believers did not hold to your canon as the final authority. They believed in extra books of the Hebrews. Other extra books affirm that souls retain their form and knowledge when they die and separate from their bodies. So if you understand this then you will at least understand why Irenaeus would come to such a conclusion reading Luke 16. To him reading Luke 16 would have been just like reading, say, that chapter from 1Enoch (a book endorsed by the Bible) I showed before. Another extra book the Bible points to as a source of truth that has recently been found and published is the Book of Gad the Seer, and it affirms that the dead exist in a conscious state:   “[ The context is that David is dead and Solomon is now king.]”

>>>Could you reference the scripture that endorses the book of Enoch? William Whitaker maintained that the chronicles of Gad is Samuel and Kings. A Disputation, 301, 525

“Clearly this book endorses not only the doctrine that the dead exist in some state of consciousness after they die, but it also endorses speaking to your dead loved ones to pray to God for you and that God enables them to hear your request so that they can pray to God for you.”

>>>And yet the scripture says there is only one mediator between Yah and man. 1 Tim. 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Messiah Yeshua. I am intrigued at how similar Ebionite theology is to Romanism.

“If this is such dangerous pagan doctrine, why does the Bible point you to such a book for a source of truth?”

>>>Yes, Samuel and Kings are books of truth.

As for your appeal to Isa. 14 and Ezek. 31 and 32, Bacchiochi states,

“The Taunting Ode on the King of Babylon. The conclusion we have reached regarding sheol as the unconscious realm of the dead is challenged by those who appeal to two major passages that allegedly support the notion of conscious existence in sheol. The first passage is Isaiah 14:4-11, which is a taunting ode against the king of Babylon. The second is Ezekiel 31 and 32, which contain a parabolic dirge over the Pharoah of Egypt. On the basis of these passages, Robert Morey concludes: “Those in Sheol are pictured as conversing with each other and even making moral judgments on the lifestyle of new arrivals (Is 14:9-20; 44:23; Ez 32:21). They are thus conscious entities while in Sheol.”22 In view of the probative value attributed to these passages for conscious existence in sheol, we need to briefly examine each of them. The oracle in Isaiah 14 is a taunt song against the king of Babylon, in which the “shades” of the dead, mostly kings subdued by the conquering arms of Nebuchadnezzar, are personified in order to utter God’s doom upon the tyrannical king. When the king joins them in sheol, these departed monarchs are portrayed as “shades–rephaim” (a term to be examined shortly) rising up from the shadowy thrones to mock the fallen tyrant, saying: “You too have become as weak as we! You have become like us! Your pomp is brought down to Sheol, the sound of your harps; maggots are the bed beneath you, and worms are your covering” (Is 14:10-11). Here we have a graphic description of the corpse of the king in the grave being eaten up by maggots and worms; not of the soul enjoying the bliss of heaven or the torments of hell. The language of the passage fits, not the image of “departed spirits,” but the portrayal of buried dead. It is evident that if the kings were “departed spirits,’ in sheol, they would not be sitting on thrones. In this impressive parable, even the fir trees and the cedar of Lebanon are personified (Is 14:8) and utter a derisive taunt against the fallen tyrant. It is evident that all the characters of this parable, both personified trees and fallen monarchs, are fictitious. They serve not to reveal the conscious existence of souls in sheol, but to forecast in striking pictorial language God’s judgment upon Israel’s oppressor, and his final ignominious destiny in a dusty grave, to be eaten by worms. To interpret this parable as a literal description of the afterlife means to ignore the highly figurative, parabolic nature of the passage, which is simply designed to depict the doom of a self-exalting tyrant. Time and again in the course of this research, I have been surprised by the fact that even reputable scholars often ignore a fundamental hermeneutical principle that symbolic, parabolic language cannot and should not be interpreted literally. Parabolic Dirge over Pharaoh of Egypt. In Ezekiel 31 and 32, we find a parabolic dirge over the Pharoah of Egypt, very similar to the one in Isaiah over the King of Babylon. The same personification of nature is used to describe the overthrow of Pharaoh by the king of Babylon. “When it goes down to Sheol I will make the deep mourn for it, and restrain its river, and many waters shall be stopped; I will clothe Lebanon in gloom for it and all the trees of the field shall faint because of it” (Ez 31:15). The portrayal is highly figurative. The various rulers that in this life caused great terror, now lie in sheol, with “their graves round about them” (Ez 32:26). “They do not lie with the fallen mighty men of old who went down to Sheol with their weapons of war, whose swords were laid under their heads, and whose shields are upon their bones” (Ez 32:27). In this figurative language, the mighty are portrayed as buried in sheol with their swords as a pillow under their heads and their shields as a blanket over their bones. This is hardly a description of souls enjoying the bliss of paradise or the torment of hell. It is rather a figurative representation of the humiliation of the grave that awaits those who abuse their power in this life. In his book Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment, Robert A. Peterson, a Presbyterian scholar, acknowledges that “Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 31 and 32, chapters traditionally understood as referring to hell, make better sense if we take them as speaking of the tomb. The pictures of the king of Babylon with maggots and worms covering him (Is 14:11) and of Pharoah lying among the fallen warriors with their swords placed under their heads (Ez 32:27) speak not of hell but of the humiliation of the grave.”23 We conclude that sheol is not the place of punishment for the ungodly or the abode of spirits, but the realm of the dead—the silent, dusty, and dark place to which God told Adam he and his descendents must go: “dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Gen 3:19; KJV).”

—–

“Angels are spirit just as well as humans. Yet somehow in the end the Lake of Fire will be the judgment of fallen angels. How can fire affect these if they are immaterial spirits? This refutes your contention that there cannot be fire to burn an immaterial soul.”

>>>The lake of fire is not literal. You Chiliasts just can never grasp Revelation. In Rev. 20:14 we read, “14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.” This cannot be literal. Death is not a literal thing that can be thrown into a literal fire. It just symbolizes destruction.

“Why then cannot the Rich Man have a spirit tongue burning in a spirit fire asking for the spirit water?”

>>>Because he is said to be a man and the game you are playing with your head is so demented and sick I am hating you more every sentence I read.

“The manna fed to Israel is said to be the food of angels (Psalms 78:25). Preincarnate Messiah and his two angel companions became material and ate food that Abraham prepared for him when they visited him. Clearly most people are wrong in their understanding of what the spiritual realm is like. These types of arguments levied against our understanding of the soul can be used against the scriptural truths of angels and demons.”

>>>You failed to prove one wit of that.

“I suggest you also see the descriptions of heaven in Revelation which say heaven has burning lampstands and stuff like glass and precious stone and there are beast-like spirit beings with wings and eyes who talk.”

>>>If you cannot understand these are symbols you have no business having any public voice whatsoever. It is people like you that make me wish we still had an Inquisition.

“So yeah, if you only read the Irenaeus quote and don’t have all these things from all these various other sources in mind, it may appear that he is making baseless assumptions”

>>>Which he is, I proved it and refuted every single excuse you made for your pagan mysticism.

“from only Luke 16 and assuming it teaches what he thinks. But he was not merely having pagan glasses on and reading that into Luke 16.”

>>>Sure he was. The early church fathers were predominantly Neoplatonists.

“He was just reading it for what it said and having in mind all of the other things he read elsewhere in the Holy Writings”

>>>The fact you make so much from apocryphal writings while arbitrarily rejecting Jasher tells me just how baseless and arbitrary your position is. You reject Jasher, and accept the rest of the apocrypha based on total cherry picking.

“and also any Holy Oral Tradition he may have received. I can also refute that Luke 16 is speaking of the Resurrection of the Dead. It is not. The only option you have to explain away the text is to say it is some strange out of the norm parable of the Messiah.”

>>>I already mentioned clearly in the video that I take the passage to be a parable. The fact you mention this like you didn’t know I said it already in the video tells me you didn’t even watch the video. You just wanted to derail me for a few days on your rabbit trail. The full measure of my hatred for you is now full. Don’t bother commenting again on my blog or my youtube page.

This baseless doctrine you teach is the reason why my people are so willing to give up their country, allow their own genocide and do nothing about the fact that the inheritance of our fathers has been and is continuing to be stripped from us and in all likely-hood we are faced with a full blown invasion. They think nothing in this world matters, their country, their heritage, and their race because they are really and truly an immaterial entity trapped in their prison of a body and when they die they will be going up to the floaty place. In my new nation people like you will be considered traitors and domestic terrorists. You will have no right of assembly or of free speech. You are enemies of Man and of Elohim.

Matt. 7: 16 You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will know them by their fruits.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “More Dialog With Ebionite Lunatic on the Soul”

  1. For me, the main problem with eternal conscious torment is that Jesus did not suffer eternal conscious torment. Therefore, it denies Substitutionary Atonement. This is devastating. Agree/disagree?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s