The Psychic Medium from Endor Was a Fake

What about the prophet Samuel’s disembodied soul being conjured up by the Witch of Endor? (1 Samuel 28:3-25) Isn’t that a biblical example of a ghost? No, not even that story demonstrates a ghostly afterlife, because the medium of Endor was a fake.

Let me show you that the medium from Endor didn’t really raise the Prophet Samuel’s ghost from her “conjuring pit.” Bodiless spirits were the belief of pagan cults, not the faith of Israel. Look at this prohibition in Jewish law:

NIV Deuteronomy 18:10-11 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in {Or who makes his son or daughter pass through} the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.

The Hebrew word translated by the NIV as medium is bAa 'owb {pronounced obe}. ‘Owb can refer to the medium or to the pit used by the medium to conjure up underworld spirits. For example, look at this verse about the sacrilege of King Manasseh:

NET 2 Chronicles 33:6 He passed his sons through the fire in the Valley of Ben-Hinnom* and practiced divination, omen reading, and sorcery. He set up a pit** to conjure up underworld spirits and appointed magicians to supervise it. He did a great amount of evil before the LORD and angered him.

*Ben-Hinnom is a valley just to the south of Jerusalem. Idolatry and child sacrifice were committed there. The Valley of Hinnom, or Gehenna in the New Testament, was where the city’s sewage and garbage were burned day and night. Gehenna is one of three biblical terms sometimes translated as hell. The others are Sheol, Hades, and Tartarus. For definitions of hell, Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, and Tartarus see my blogs Hell Defined 1 and Hell Defined 2.

**Pit: It’s not known what these “conjuring pits” looked like, but you would do well, should you be interested, to explore the “sacred springs” at Delphi in Greece and at Didyma in Turkey, where prophetesses (oracles), intoxicated on the fumes from the springs, would “tell the future.” I suspect that the pagan Greek rituals were as elaborate as the huge temples that housed them. The rituals of mediums at local conjuring pits in the tiny kingdom of Israel were undoubtedly more humble affairs.

So ‘owb refers to both the magic pit and the medium who conjures with it. The so-called “Witch of Endor” is such a medium:

NET 1 Samuel 28:7 So Saul instructed his servants, "Find for me a woman who is a medium (‘owb – or one who divines with a ritual pit), so that I may go to her and inquire of her." His servants replied to him, "There is a woman who is a medium in Endor."

The Endor medium story is a bit long to include in its entirety, but select verses will help you see that while the woman seems (at first reading) to raise the dead prophet Samuel’s soul or shade or ghost from the underworld or Hades,* she’s a fraud.

[*For definitions of hell, Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, and Tartarus see my two-part blog entitled Hell Defined]

The disguised King Saul says to the woman, "Use your ritual pit to conjure up for me the one I tell you." (v. 8) But the woman expresses suspicion:

NET 1 Samuel 28:9 "Look, you are aware of what Saul has done; he has removed the mediums and magicians from the land. Why are you trapping me so you can put me to death?" (italics mine)

Could she be pretending not to know that the man before her is King Saul? Why couldn’t the king’s aid—who knew exactly where the illegal medium was—have tipped her off? You get brownie points for pleasing the king. If you supply a medium for the king, wouldn’t you want her to perform well, for your own sake? Besides, mediums weren’t fools. They made their livings fooling others. She could have seen through Saul’s disguise without any tips from an aid. By whatever means she identified her customer, I’m certain that she knows up front that the man is Saul. But—and this is important—she pretends not to know, for reasons I’ll explain in a sec.

A medium, one who uses a ritual pit to call up dead souls or shades, is an ‘owb in Hebrew. They were known tricksters and illusionists. So much so that when the Septuagint was first written—the Hebrew Bible translated into Greek in the 3rd Century B.C.—, what Greek word did they use for ‘owb? You’re not going to believe this. The Septuagint renders the Hebrew ‘owb (a medium who uses a conjuring pit) as engastrimuthos, which means ventriloquist! Why? Because that’s what an ‘owb did. The medium with the conjuring pit had to convince her customer that his dead relative or friend was present and speaking. Ventriloquism was part of the act. Mediums counted on being able to produce the illusion of a disembodied voice.

Isaiah discredits these mediums or necromancers as ventriloquists:

NKJ Isaiah 8:19 And when they say to you, "Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper* and mutter**," should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living?

* tsaphaph {tsaw-faf'} means to chirp, peep, chatter, or whisper

** hagah {haw-gaw'} means to moan, growl, make a sound, or mutter

Isaiah exposes mediumship as ventriloquism. The “voices of the dead” are really produced by practiced mediums’ vocalizations—whispering and mutterings, as he calls them. Mediums create the illusion of speaking with the dead. Isaiah chides people for consulting illusionists rather than God.

Back to Endor: Could the Medium of Endor be pretending not to know that the man before her is King Saul? If she knows, she certainly doesn’t let on that she knows. Not yet. In just a moment she can use what she’s deduced to her advantage, so she holds the card close to her vest. She hides that she’s seen through his disguise so that she can impress him with her “powers.” She is about to “divine” that the disguised man is really Saul. But how? That’s where “the ghost of Samuel” comes in.

The medium asks the man (Saul in disguise) why he’s trying to get her killed. But the man reassures her by swearing an oath to the Lord. "As surely as the LORD lives, you will not incur guilt in this matter." (v. 10) Now she’s ready to do business. Now she can play her card.

The medium asks the man, "Who is it that I should bring up for you?" He said, "Bring up for me Samuel." (v. 11) The show begins right here, folks. Watch closely or she may fool you too.

The medium does whatever mumbo-jumbo she usually does over the conjuring pit. Then when the fake medium “sees” (pretends to see) the shade of Samuel, it seems that Samuel tells her something that makes her scream. She’s screaming! Very dramatic. You can imagine Saul jumping out of his skin. Her plan? When she conjures Samuel’s ghost (supposedly), the ghost tells her a secret (supposedly), suddenly she screams in horror and shock (supposedly), then she plays her card by demanding of the disguised man: "Why have you deceived me? You are Saul!”

There it is. Give her an Oscar. She makes it seem like Samuel’s ghost had appeared to her and told her that the man in disguise was King Saul, though she knew it from the start. Bravo! Well played.

Saul was very impressed. He was probably thinking, Wow, she’s the real thing. How else could she have known who I am beneath this really cool disguise unless she really conjured Samuel and he revealed to her my true identity?

He was taken in by her first illusion—hook, line, and sinker. What happened next? The king said to her, "Don't be afraid. What have you seen?" (v. 12) The woman replied to Saul, "I have seen one like a god (or a spirit) coming up from the ground!" Don’t miss it, folks. Saul sees and hears nothing. She, the powerful medium, is the only one who supposedly hears and sees the dead prophet Samuel’s ghost. Saul doesn’t see or hear a blessed thing.

But the king’s hooked. Saul believes Samuel is there. He believes she sees and hears the prophet. Why? From Saul’s perspective, he was convinced that Samuel was there because he believed that Samuel revealed the disguised king’s true identity to the woman. (As I said before, likely someone told her the king was coming in a disguise, or maybe it was not such a great disguise. Something or someone tipped her off.) Her knowing his identity persuaded Saul that Samuel was present, and he believed that the medium could really hear and see the dead prophet’s ghost.

Saul asked the medium, "What about his appearance?" (v. 14) Do you see that this question confirms again that Saul can’t see Samuel? He asks her what Samuel looks like. Saul, seeing absolutely nothing, blindly trusts the medium to describe the dead prophet’s disembodied soul. She answered Saul: "An old man is coming up! He is wrapped in a robe!" Wow, what detail! (Pardon my sarcasm.) Don’t you think everybody knew that Samuel was an old man who wore a robe?

This “vision,” nevertheless, impresses Saul. Saul (portrayed as not too bright and easily fooled) feels that she has described Samuel perfectly, and that only someone who could really see him could have described him with such accuracy. Hebrew scholar James Orr agrees that the spirit of Samuel wasn’t really conjured:

“It is not to be credited that the saintly Samuel was actually summoned from his rest by the spells of a professional diviner. . . . [The] whole transaction was a piece of feigning on the part of the woman.” (citation)

Yet Saul throws himself on the ground prostrate before the medium and the supposed, invisible, silent ghost of the dead prophet Samuel. Saul is overcome. Worse, the king of Israel is bowing before a pagan “witch” rather than the Lord God.

In verse fifteen it says that “Samuel” asked Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" Well, what do you think? Did Samuel really speak this time? Was the spirit or disembodied soul or shade or ghost of the real dead prophet really there and was he really speaking? Of course not. Not before and not now. The medium is supplying the sights and sounds at this séance from the beginning. Only she sees him (or claims to). Only through her does “Samuel” speak (if at all). She’s providing Samuel’s voice, which leads us back to the Greek Bible’s name for her: ventriloquist.

“Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?” This is “Samuel’s” question to Saul provided by the ventriloquist. And it’s a great question because it places the blame for the illegal séance on Saul’s shoulders, not hers. She’s making sure that Saul takes one hundred percent responsibility by putting words of blame on the lips of Samuel’s specter: Saul, you disturbed me. Saul, you brought me up. Why did you do it? asks the ventriloquist on “Samuel’s” behalf. Thus she protects herself from blame.

Now the duped king spills all the beans. He blurts out all the information that the medium requires to continue the ruse: "I am very concerned. The Philistines are fighting against me and God has turned away from me. He does not answer me--not by the prophets nor by dreams. So I have called on you to tell me what I should do." (v. 15)

Now the medium is set. She almost certainly has news of the current events of her nation (Geographically, the battle is in her back yard. Check a Bible map.), its history, its enemies, the kings, the prophets, Saul’s previous relationship with Samuel, Samuel’s previous prophesies, and even how the prophet spoke. Add to that the specifics of what Saul wants to know, and she’s ready to drop the bomb. Again she speaks for “Samuel”:

16 . . . "Why are you asking me, now that the LORD has turned away from you and has become your enemy? 17 The LORD has done exactly as I prophesied. The LORD has torn the kingdom from your hand and has given it to your neighbor David. 18 Since you did not obey the LORD and did not carry out his fierce anger against the Amalekites, the LORD has done this thing to you today. 19 The LORD will hand you and Israel over to the Philistines. Tomorrow both you and your sons will be with me. The LORD will also hand the army of Israel over to the Philistines."

She says nothing that she couldn’t have surmised for herself given foreknowledge of the late Samuel’s public prophesies against Saul. All she does is repeat what Samuel himself said repeatedly while he was alive:

NIV 1 Samuel 15:17-23 Samuel said, . . . “The LORD anointed you (Saul) king over Israel. 18 And he sent you on a mission, saying, 'Go and completely destroy those wicked people, the Amalekites; make war on them until you have wiped them out.' 19 Why did you not obey the LORD? Why did you pounce on the plunder and do evil in the eyes of the LORD?” . . . Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has rejected you as king." (See also 1 Samuel 13:13-14)


NIV 1 Samuel 15:26-28 But Samuel said to him, ". . . You have rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD has rejected you as king over Israel!" 27 As Samuel turned to leave, Saul caught hold of the hem of his robe, and it tore. 28 Samuel said to him, "The LORD has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today and has given it to one of your neighbors-- to one better than you.”

Is it really surprising that the medium says almost word for word what Samuel had said to Saul repeatedly before? Either she’s familiar with Samuel’s public prophesies or, again, she’s used informants in preparation for the séance (knowing the king was coming) by getting information on what Saul wanted to know and what Samuel had prophesied.

All conniving and “sorcery” aside, it follows logically that if what Samuel prophesied is true, then there is no way Saul will defeat the Philistines in coming battle. And if Samuel said that David would be king, then it also follows that Saul must soon die. The Israelites are outnumbered by the Philistines, the war is going badly by his own admission, the disobedient King Saul is ripe for payback, and David stands ready in the wings. It doesn’t take ghosts and mediumship to predict this outcome. The writing was, as they say, on the wall.

Again, Hebrew scholar James Orr agrees:

“It required no great skill in a practiced diviner to forecast the general issue of the battle about to take place, and the disaster that would overtake Saul and his sons; while if the forecast had proved untrue, the narrative of the witch of En-dor would never have been written. Saul, in fact, was not slain, but killed himself. The incident, therefore, may best be ranked in the same category as the feats of modern mediumship.” (citation)

After the medium’s ventriloquism, Saul collapses, drained and terrified. So she shows him great hospitality, even killing her fatted calf and baking fresh bread. She pulled off the séance for the king, she secured her safety by passing full blame for the illegal séance to the king, and she entertained and rejuvenated the exhausted, fearful king. She covered all the bases; she’s one smart cookie.

And King Saul is both duped and doomed.

PORNEIA

Even for a guy who’s proud of sleeping with his step-mom, we should count out no one when it comes to salvation, nor should we be concerned that it’s too late when we die.

“Chloe’s people” (1 Corinthians 1:11) from Corinth went to Paul in prison with a list of problems in their church. Believe it or not, one of those problems was . . . well, you can read for yourself:

1 Corinthians 5:1-7 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans; for a man is living with his father's wife. ² And you are arrogant! Should you not rather have mourned, so that he who has done this would have been removed from among you? ³ For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present I have already pronounced judgment ⁴ in the name of the Lord Jesus on the man who has done such a thing. When you are assembled, and my spirit is present with the power of our Lord Jesus, ⁵ you are to hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. ⁶ Your boasting is not a good thing. Do you not know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? ⁷ Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch, as you really are unleavened. For our paschal (Passover) lamb, Christ, has been sacrificed. (italics mine)

Recall again that the word “saved” is used in three ways in the New Testament. One, it refers to the salvation of the world 2000 years ago on the cross. Two, it refers to our coming to knowledge of and trust in that salvation. And three, it refers to the completion of salvation on the last day.

In 1 Corinthians 5:5, Paul makes reference to “saved” in the third sense, the salvation coming in the general resurrection, the day of the Son of Man. Amazingly, Paul still holds out last-day hope for a man who is “fornicating” by “having” his father’s wife. The Greek word translated usually as “fornicating” is telling. It’s porneia {pronounced por-ni'-ah}, from which we get the English word pornography.

Porneia means illicit sexual intercourse; it’s a general word that refers to any extramarital, unlawful, or unnatural acts, including adultery and prostitution. In 1 Corinthians 5:1 Paul calls the behavior of this man with his stepmother porneia. English versions of the Bible translate it as “fornication,” “sin of the flesh,” “sexual immorality,” “whoredom,” and “lewdness.” Notice that Paul uses the word twice for emphasis. 

^ASV 1 Corinthians 5:1 It is actually reported that there is fornication (porneia) among you, and such fornication (porneia) as is not even among the Gentiles (pagans). . .

So this fellow, this church member in Corinth, is living with and sleeping with his stepmother. We have no details of this relationship. We don’t know their names. We only have the word “fornication” (2x) and the phrase “has his father’s wife.” He “has her” means having sex with her or living with her, probably both. 

Paul’s use of the term for fornication confirms that he is sleeping with her. I suppose the man in question could have actually married her if his father had died or divorced her, but if he had, Paul would have said so. And if he did marry her, likely Paul would have called it porneia anyway. I think Paul would have labeled this arrangement incestuous, and therefore illicit sexual intercourse, meaning porneia. Did his dad divorce her? Had his father died? Were his father and the step mom separated, or more disturbingly, were they still together? Paul doesn’t say. I think it likely that the man’s father is living and still married to the woman. Paul is obviously alarmed, however, not only by the behavior of this man and woman, but also by the church’s boasting about this matter! Apparently they were proud of it, perhaps because they thought that it demonstrated (or flaunted?) the breadth of their liberality. But Paul doesn’t celebrate it. He mourns it. And he gives the church advice on handling this distasteful state of affairs.

Paul advises the church that when they next assemble they should “turn him over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.” (No advice on what to do with the step mom.) What in the world does that mean? The New English Translation Notes call this verse one of the most difficult passages in the New Testament to interpret. But the most straightforward way to interpret this is that Paul is very concerned that the church has not mourned this immorality and removed the person or persons involved. His ruling advises that very thing. To turn him over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh is a poetic way of saying kick him out and let him keep on hanging himself if he so chooses. What these persons are doing is not the fruit of the Spirit or the kingdom. They are producing the fruit of Satan and his kingdom.

A friend told me of an incident in her parents’ church when the pastor had an affair with a married woman. The woman and her husband were both members of the congregation. The church officials met, and you’ll never guess their ruling concerning this adulterous affair. Are you ready for this? They kicked the woman’s husband out of the church! Sometimes church rulings are just ludicrous. 

I think Paul’s ruling, however, and his advice is straightforward and wise. But notice that he condemns the behavior without condemning the people involved. Far from condemning them, Paul holds out hope at two levels. The first hope is similar to Jesus’ hope that his parables will so infuriate a person who doesn’t understand them that they (the parables) might break through his hardheadedness and hardheartedness. I believe Paul hopes that by holding this man accountable for a sinful choice by kicking him out (notice that Paul never blames the woman), the man might reverse course and ask for readmittance to the congregation. If that were to happen, I feel certain that Paul would have ruled in favor of it. The second hope is that in the case of this illicit behavior continuing even after the man is confronted by and removed from the congregation, that he, as late as the last day itself, the day of the coming of the Son of Man, the day of resurrection and judgment, might yet be saved spiritually! Apparently Paul believes that the last day is not too late. Paul clearly believes concerning this man “that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” (1 Corinthians 5:5)

Not only was I taught that the last day is too late, but I was also taught that the moment of your physical death is too late. Paul certainly seems to believe otherwise, even for a man who does not hide his incestuous, illicit affair. If Paul didn’t write off this fellow, I think it’s safe to say that he never wrote anyone off. Yes, Paul wrote “I have already pronounced judgment.” (5:3) But by judgment he does not mean final condemnation. He means he has already decided or ruled on this “case,” just like a judge might do in his courtroom. Paul’s opinion was to be considered authoritative and final. He expected the church members at Corinth to abide by that ruling: Kick him out, but do so in hope for him. Never say never for anyone.

After she read the last paragraph, my friend Carrie Smith asked, “And why would we want to write people off?” She pointed back to parable characters like the older brother who resented grace given to his little brother in the Parable of the Prodigal Son(s), and the all-day workers who resented getting the same pay as the one-hour workers. “Why all the scorekeeping and resentment?” she asked. “I just don’t understand why we don’t want to share our ice cream with the rest of the world!”

For more on the Apostle Paul see my blogs Paul Never Converted to Christianity, Paul Didn't Go to Heaven, and The Soul Doesn't Leave the Body at Death.

A Guitar Hero Parable (or the Gospel According to Slash)

[Definition: Guitar Hero is a video game where you simulate playing lead guitar to popular rock songs. You use a guitar-shaped controller to press fret buttons that match scrolling dots on your TV screen. The more accurate you are at matching the scrolling dots by pressing the correct fret buttons at the correct time, the higher your score. The person with the highest score wins.]

A young man entered a Guitar Hero contest. The Grand Prize winner got to meet Slash, the famous lead guitarist for Guns ‘n Roses and Velvet Revolver.

He’d already beaten everybody in his family, church, and school, so he figured he had a chance to win and to meet his real life hero, Slash. He practiced like crazy. He got faster and more accurate. Finally, the day of the southeast regional contest came.

He didn’t want to appear cocky as he took the stage, but swagger and rock ‘n roll go hand in hand, so he couldn’t help it. He turned toward the giant screen, with his back to the audience, the opening Slash riffs from “Welcome to the Jungle” assaulting his senses, and our young man didn’t miss a single scroll-down dot or colored fret button on his little toy guitar.

He won. He was one of six finalists from across the country. The final in Los Angeles was to be broadcast live on MTV. The young man was pumped. They flew him to LA.

The night of the final arrived and he was scheduled to play last. He watched the other performers, and they were good. But not good enough, he thought. It wasn’t arrogance really. He just knew that if he did what he was capable of, he would likely win.

He was introduced to cheers from the audience. He strapped on the miniature fake guitar and when the song began, he matched the recording of Slash’s roaring solo note for note, scrolling dot for scrolling dot, fret button for fret button. He’d never performed so well.

He won. The master of ceremonies announced that the young man was to receive a real guitar designed and signed and presented personally by Slash himself. The tall rocker in black leather, dark sunglasses, and an explosion of long frizzy black hair, sauntered onto the stage to the screams of the audience. He had the young man’s new guitar in his hand.

Introductions were made. The young man shook Slash’s hand and said humbly to all, “Slash, you are my true guitar hero.” The audience approved.

Slash replied, “Kid, how many hours do you think you’ve spent learning Guitar Hero?”

“Thousands!”

“Really? Thousands?” Slash asked.

“Absolutely,” said the young man.

“Kid, if I were really your hero, you’d have spent those thousands of hours playing a real guitar, getting in a real band, and playing real music to real audiences. If I had inspired you to do that, you’d have been my guitar hero.”

Slash handed the young man one of the best and most expensive electric guitars ever made, one that Slash had designed himself, one that he had agreed to award to a video game contest winner.

The legend turned and walked off stage smiling, shaking his head, and muttering to himself. “Wonder how much the little faker will get for it on eBay?”

Abruptly, MTV cut to an exiting new Guitar Hero commercial promoting their latest version: “Guitar Hero VIII: Be the Real Thing.”

For those who have ears, let them hear.


If you like my parables, try these: Pews Stink (A Black and White Satire), What Color Is a Green Apple?, The Kingdom of Heaven is Like Gravity, and A Country Fried Parable (Or the Lynyrd Skynyrd Parable of the Kingdom of Heaven).

For Jesus' parables see The Absurd Parable of the Unforgiving Slave, The God Who Gambles, Parable of the Vine and Branches, The Crooked Manager, The Friend at Midnight, Heaven Is Like a Crazy Farmer, He Speaks Of . . ., Salted With Fire, Talking Sheep and Goats, Is Your Eye Evil?, Two Prodigals and Their Strange Father, The Lazarus Parable Is Not About the Afterlife,and Jesus Used Parables Like a Sieve.