How could Saul communicate with Samuel if necromancy is condemned in the Bible? Text Under Consideration “Then the woman said, ‘I see a spirit coming up out of the earth.’ ‘What does he look like?’ asked Saul. ‘An old man is coming up,’ she replied, ‘and he is wrapped in a robe.’ Then Saul knew that it was Samuel, and he bowed facedown in reverence” (1 Samuel 28:13-14). Biblical Prohibition of Necromancy “Do not turn to mediums or familiar spirits; do not seek them out, or you will be defiled by them” (Leviticus 19:31; cf. Leviticus 20:6, 27; Deuteronomy 18:9-14; Isaiah 8:19-20). These bans are absolute, grounded in God’s holiness and His exclusive right to disclose the unseen (Deuteronomy 29:29). Saul himself had once enforced the ban (1 Samuel 28:3). Historical and Cultural Context of Saul’s Action Archaeological texts from Ugarit (KTU 1.6 iv 1-8) and Mesopotamia describe ritual summoning of the dead, corroborating that such practices were common in the Late Bronze/Iron Age Levant. Saul’s consultation of a baʿalat-ʾôb (“mistress of a familiar spirit”) near Endor fits this milieu. His desperation—facing Philistine invasion, divine silence through prophets, dreams, and Urim (1 Samuel 28:5-6)—drove him to violate his own decree. What Did Saul See? Identity of the Apparition Three main views exist: a) Demonic impersonation; b) Psychological hallucination; c) Genuine appearance of Samuel by God’s special act. The narrative favors (c). The author repeatedly calls the figure “Samuel” (vv. 12, 14-16), and the prophecy delivered precisely matches Samuel’s earlier words (1 Samuel 15:28; cf. 28:17-19) and is fulfilled the next day (31:1-6). Evidence the Figure Was Truly Samuel • Textual consistency: The Masoretic Text, Dead Sea Scroll 4Q51 (4QSama, 2nd century BC), and the Septuagint all read “Samuel.” • The medium’s shock (28:12) implies an outcome she did not engineer, contrasting usual fraudulent séances. • The prophecy contains covenant-lawsuit language typical of Samuel, not of a deceiving spirit. • Saul’s immediate collapse (28:20) parallels his earlier reaction to authentic divine words (15:24). • New Testament precedent: Moses and Elijah physically appear with Jesus (Matthew 17:3), showing God can allow departed saints to manifest without validating occultism. Why God Permitted Samuel’s Appearance God remained sovereign even over Saul’s sin. As with Balaam (Numbers 22–24) or Satan requesting to sift Peter (Luke 22:31), the Lord can override evil intents to accomplish divine judgment and revelation. Samuel’s reappearance sealed Saul’s doom, fulfilled 1 Samuel 15:26, and demonstrated that “the word of the LORD stands forever” (Isaiah 40:8). Distinction Between Divine Revelation and Forbidden Magic Necromancy seeks knowledge or power independently of God; prophetic revelation is initiated and controlled by God. Saul initiated contact through forbidden means, but the content, authority, and efficacy of the message belonged wholly to Yahweh. The medium gained no power; instead she lost control of the séance, highlighting the futility of occult arts versus divine sovereignty. Theological Lessons from the Incident • God’s silence disciplines unrepentant hearts (Proverbs 1:24-28). • Breaking one command (consulting a medium) cannot bypass divine judgment. • Even genuine supernatural experiences must be tested against Scripture (Galatians 1:8). • The episode prefigures the finality of judgment after death (Hebrews 9:27); Samuel offers no hope, only verdict. Implications for the Doctrine of the Intermediate State Samuel’s conscious existence in Sheol affirms personal continuity after death. His upward trajectory (“coming up out of the earth”) aligns with OT cosmology of the righteous housed in Abraham’s “side” (Luke 16:22) awaiting Christ’s resurrection victory (Ephesians 4:8-10). The event refutes materialist annihilationism and supports a dualistic anthropology consistent with 2 Corinthians 5:8. Archaeological and Manuscript Corroboration • 4Q51 confirms the wording of 1 Samuel 28 centuries before Christ, underscoring textual reliability. • The excavated fortress at Gibeah (Tell el-Ful) matches Saul’s hometown context. • Endor’s location on the slope of Little Hermon fits the topography described, lending geographic realism. • Assyrian reliefs depicting kingly consultations with spirits parallel the biblical prohibition, showing Israel’s counter-cultural ethic. Pastoral and Apologetic Applications • Modern séances, Ouija boards, and psychic readings fall under the same condemnation; repentant faith in Christ is the sole avenue for spiritual guidance. • The account shows supernaturalism is real but must be interpreted through Scripture, guarding seekers from both gullibility and naturalistic dismissal. • Christ’s resurrection—attested by multiple independent early sources (1 Corinthians 15:3-7; Synoptics; Acts; late 1st-century creedal hymns)—offers the legitimate, victorious contact with the other side, contrasting Saul’s futile shortcut. Conclusion Saul violated God’s clear command; yet God overruled the séance, sending the real Samuel to pronounce judgment. The episode condemns necromancy, vindicates divine sovereignty, and illustrates that authentic revelation is God-initiated, never magician-controlled. Thus 1 Samuel 28 is not an endorsement of occult practice but a solemn warning that “to obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Samuel 15:22). |
    |