Jesus casts out an unclean spirit

23 And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,

24 Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.

25 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him.

26 And when the unclean spirit had torn him, and cried with a loud voice, he came out of him. (Mark 1:23-26)

One observation frequently made about this story is that the unclean spirits recognize Jesus, not having a veil over their memory. But if you notice, that knowledge doesn’t do any good.  The effect they have on the man they have possessed is to torment him, making him think he can have nothing to do with Jesus, as if Jesus is some different kind of person and that He has come to destroy all the wicked.  The man seems to have had an over-consciousness of his sins combined with despair, a view that he could expect no help from Jesus.

But once Jesus cast the unclean spirit out, the man knew Jesus could help him. Unclean spirits want to paralyze people with a sense of their unworthiness to keep them from getting the spiritual help they need.

Now, here’s a question – if the text had not labeled this man as having an unclean spirit, would we have been able to tell that was his problem? (Read through it, covering up the label, and see.) Could we have known from his words and behavior what his problem was?   I suspect this story is in the scriptures exactly so that we can learn to recognize and diagnose this problem.

Here’s another question—If we ever recognize this kind of spirit in ourselves, can we discern that and cast it out?  Because it must be cast out in order to exert the faith for salvation.

I think this story should help us learn discernment so we can recognize when we are under the influence of this kind of unclean spirit so we can escape. It is hard to escape that sort of thing if you think it is you instead of realizing it is a spiritual influence. Remember, it is not you.  Cast it out. Tell Satan where to get off.

How Jesus handles a question about His authority

27 ¶ And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders,

28 And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?

29 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.

30 The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me.

31 And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then did ye not believe him?

32 But if we shall say, Of men; they feared the people: for all men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed.

33 And they answered and said unto Jesus, We cannot tell. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things. (Mark 11:27-33)

Many commentators like to go into great depth about the trap laid for Jesus in their question. They also usually point to Jesus’s counter-question as a brilliant defense by which He puts them all in their place.

Yet something about it struck me as odd. I began to wonder what we are supposed to learn from this incident that can help us. Are we to learn that Jesus can unequivocally win arguments and devastate the opposition? Is winning the argument His goal?  Does this help us in our conversations about the gospel? 

It seems to me that when faced with a question about His authority, Jesus’s major goal would be persuading someone to recognize His power to redeem. The question in His mind would be, If I tell you, will you acknowledge my authority and allow me to save you? He might want to know if they were asking sincerely or out of bad faith. Because He wants to save everyone, He has to assume sincerity until they prove bad faith. 

He asks a question to learn from them. I see this incident as instance in which Christ demonstrated His meekness and lowliness of heart. He didn’t ask, “Why do you want to know?” He asked whether they thought John’s baptism was from heaven or of men. His question is meant to discern their level of sincerity and belief. He knew their ability to respond positively to a prophet in their day would determine their ability to respond to the Messiah. 

It is interesting that the reasoning of the chief priests, scribes, and elders was captured in the record in verses 31-32. (As an exercise, just try reading the account without that reasoning inserted, and you’ll see how it might have looked to everyone else who wasn’t privy to the motivation coloring the answer of those leaders.)

Their reasoning indicates that they thought His question was a trap. This was pure projection on their part. They thought Jesus was doing to them what they were trying to do to Him. If they had been sincere, they might have seen His question for what it really was. And I hardly think they’d want such a blatantly self-interested politically-obsessed thought process to get about, but someone overheard, and now it is memorialized for all time. 

Since they claimed they couldn’t tell whether John’s baptism was from heaven or men, Jesus knew then that they’d be similarly obtuse in public about Jesus’s authority. He probably said to Himself, I can’t do anything with people who ‘can’t tell,’ when it’s so obvious, so I guess I can’t tell them anything about my authority either because they won’t get it. And He wouldn’t push His authority on them; He wouldn’t want to condemn them so quickly. He’d want to give them more time in hopes that He could save them later.

One thing I learn from this incident is that Jesus chooses whether to answer a question based upon the receptiveness of the hearer. Even though those leaders thought they were saving face by refusing to commit, they actually disqualified themselves from receiving a real answer. Seeming wishy-washy or obtuse marked them as having spiritual problems, even if they concealed for a time that their problem was outright hostility. It is particularly sad that these were chief priests, scribes, and elders, men who should have been most spiritually mature and receptive.

Jesus’s test question is still a good one for today. How we respond to a modern prophet determines how receptive we’d be to Jesus Himself. If we ‘can’t tell’ if a modern prophet is from God, when his goodness has been demonstrated over years, then our ability to receive revelation is diminished. On the positive side, if we respond to the modern prophet and apostles, we will be receptive to revelation and receptive to Jesus Himself.

I also think that Jesus’s willingness to take time and ask questions of the questioner to gauge where they were at is a good pattern to follow in gospel conversations. If people ask us questions about the church or the gospel, maybe it would be wise to first take time to ask them questions about what experiences have brought them to us or what they believe so that we can better meet them where they are spiritually.

Warnings in the way the Nephites’ wickedness progressed

In these verses, Mormon chronicles the Nephites’ descent from great order to great lawlessness from the 27^th year to the 30^th year after the sign is given of Christ’s birth. It starts with pride, persecution, and inequality. Then we get this:

15 Now the cause of this iniquity of the people was this—Satan had great power, unto the stirring up of the people to do all manner of iniquity, and to the puffing them up with pride, tempting them to seek for power, and authority, and riches, and the vain things of the world.

16 And thus Satan did lead away the hearts of the people to do all manner of iniquity; therefore they had enjoyed peace but a few years.

17 And thus, in the commencement of the thirtieth year—the people having been delivered up for the space of a long time to be carried about by the temptations of the devil whithersoever he desired to carry them, and to do whatsoever iniquity he desired they should—and thus in the commencement of this, the thirtieth year, they were in a state of awful wickedness. (3 Nephi 6:15-17)

I notice there are three statements about what Satan does and how the people respond.

Satan stirred people up. It’s a very interesting image there of a pot of liquid that is stirred. It is as though people would be calm and content if left alone, but then Satan stirs them up to do iniquity, trying to convince them they are not happy as they are, that the need power, authority, riches, and vain things of the world.

Satan did lead away the hearts of the people. This idea of leading away hearts is another interesting image. It tells us that Satan managed to engage people’s affections and desires in the iniquity they were doing. That’s very troubling because emotions are very powerful. When one want to do iniquity and don’t want to do good, then doing good starts to feel very unpleasant, like one fights with oneself to do it, and it isn’t very enjoyable.

The people were delivered up…to be carried about by the temptations of the devil. This image of delivering people (like a package) and being carried about, almost like a baby, is pretty sickening. It makes it sound like the people have no choice in the matter, like something made them sin. But the reality is that they simply gave up the fight. They gave up fighting temptation and decided to do whatever they wanted, even though it broke the commandments. The reality was, it was actually what Satan wanted, so they essentially yielded their agency.

Now, sad as it is to read about this, I think it gives us some important warnings for our own lives. It tells us to be alert to notice when we are being stirred up or when our hearts are being led away toward evil or when it seems like we’re just being carried about without our choice. Half the battle is realizing we are in the predicament, discerning the devil’s machinations in our lives.

I’ve recently felt like I’m being stirred up with agitation, frustration, desperation, and anxiety. My head knows that I’m in a place where I’m being asked to grow in a number of different directions at once, that I have to exercise patience, that I have to buckle down and get to work. I’m in a place of stretching, but all the same, it is very difficult because of the strong emotions that are pulling me back and forth, this way and that. It makes it hard to concentrate.

The only way to make it through is to yield my heart to God, to resolve to do His will, no matter what my lying feelings shriek at me. I must trust that each day my righteous efforts will bring me closer to Him.

Diagnosing Problems with the Corrupted Trees in Jacob 5

In Zeno’s allegory of the olive trees that Jacob quotes, there comes a point when the Lord of the vineyard finds all the trees are corrupted and giving bad fruit. It is interesting to see his and his servant’s diagnosis of the problem.

First the servant tries to find the silver lining in the cloud:

And the servant said unto his master: Behold, because thou didst graft in the branches of the wild olive tree they have nourished the roots, that they are alive and they have not perished; wherefore thou beholdest that they are yet good. (Jacob 5:34)

The servant observes the roots are still good, but notice—it is a bit backward to think that the branches are nourishing the roots. It is supposed to be the other way around.

In verse 37, the Lord of the vineyard has a different take on it:

But behold, the wild branches have grown and have overrun the roots thereof; and because that the wild branches have overcome the roots thereof it hath brought forth much evil fruit; and because that it hath brought forth so much evil fruit thou beholdest that it beginneth to perish; and it will soon become ripened, that it may be cast into the fire, except we should do something for it to preserve it.

The Lord of the vineyard says the branches have overrun the roots and overcome them. (So the branches may have thought they were nourishing the roots, but they were overrunning them instead.)

Then the servant gets a brainwave in verse 48:

And it came to pass that the servant said unto his master: Is it not the loftiness of thy vineyard—have not the branches thereof overcome the roots which are good? And because the branches have overcome the roots thereof, behold they grew faster than the strength of the roots, taking strength unto themselves. Behold, I say, is not this the cause that the trees of thy vineyard have become corrupted?

Loftiness of the vineyard is a great way of describing pride. Also, I notice it says when the branches overcame the roots, they grew faster than the roots and took strength to themselves. This is what happens in individuals too. When a person with no authority gets a notion they can nourish the rest of the church, they are actually overrunning it. But they think the overrun means they are stronger and better than everyone else (taking strength to themselves) and corruption follows.

I think there’s a hint of what to look out for in ourselves. If we think we are growing faster or are spiritually stronger than others around us, we may have a problem with pride. (I had this issue some years ago. It makes me shudder to think about it. I am so grateful for the Lord's mercy that He brought me to recognize my error. Because of that experience, my blogging is more to benefit me than for anyone else because the writing I do helps me learn. If anyone else benefits, that is icing on the cake.)

If we have the problem of loftiness and pride, it might be good to open our ears and see what nourishment we are missing while we think we have the answer to everything. It might be good to just focus on the basic principles and practices of the gospel for a long while to make sure we are doing all we can.

There are a few more warnings I notice in this chapter that are part of the diagnoses of the corrupted trees.

In verse 40:

And the wild fruit of the last had overcome that part of the tree which brought forth good fruit, even that the branch had withered away and died.

We might easily apply this to the Nephite civilization and point to how the Lamanites eventually overcame the righteous Nephites. However, it is true in individual life as well. If we have both good fruit and bad fruit in our lives, the bad tends to take over. It’s invasive, so we need to remove the bad branches, otherwise the good branches will wither away.

In verse 46:

…the trees thereof have become corrupted, that they bring forth no good fruit…But, behold, they have become like unto the wild olive tree…

Without good fruit, the good olive tree is just like the wild olive tree. We can’t be like other people who don’t have the gospel. We have to be different. With good fruit.

A Police Officer's Experience of Spiritual Guidance

Every once in a while I run across an extraordinary story of how the Holy Ghost can guide and protect.  Stan Cronin’s story is one of these.  It’s a story of how he was guided by the Holy Ghost to where he could do some good as a Phoenix police officer and protected with specific instructions in such a way that he came through a very tricky situation, while if he had gone strictly according to his training he would most certainly have been killed.

Several features stick out to me about his story.

--He was in a habit of consistently praying for guidance as to where to go to do good.

--He was not afraid to look silly.

--He received specific promptings to do things contrary to his training, things that seemed risky and weird to him.  He anticipated becoming a statistic and a training case study of what not to do.  But he had the humility to follow these impressions, and he trusted the Lord had a good reason. 

--He had to deal not only with a potentially dangerous situation, but also with the tension of knowing he was going “off script” from standard operating procedures, yet he didn’t give up and dismiss additional impressions as they came.  He saw things through to the end, continuing to follow guidance from the Holy Ghost. 

We believe keeping the commandments will bring us safety and peace.  We know rules and standard operating procedures are very helpful for bringing order and much safety to our lives. A well-trained police officer with integrity would expected to hold to that line.  And yet, we see in the particular situation of this story, that would have gotten him killed. The only way he escaped was by following the Holy Ghost.

It strikes me that the above features can be applied in each of our lives too, no matter our field of labor.  We can cultivate a habit of praying for guidance to do good. We can practice humility and learn to trust promptings.  We can recognize the tension we might feel if we’re off-script when following the Spirit and choose to continue to trust to the end.

Is it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

D&C 50 was given because the elders did not understand the manifestations of different spirits that were abroad on the earth, which were not uncommon among the members, some of whom claimed to be receiving visions and revelations.

Gospeldoctrine.com pulls together a number of accounts of these kinds of manifestations, so we can know what the elders were up against.

12 Now, when a man reasoneth he is understood of man, because he reasoneth as a man; even so will I, the Lord, reason with you that you may understand.

13 Wherefore, I the Lord ask you this question—unto what were ye ordained?

14 To preach my gospel by the Spirit, even the Comforter which was sent forth to teach the truth.

15 And then received ye spirits which ye could not understand, and received them to be of God; and in this are ye justified?

16 Behold ye shall answer this question yourselves; nevertheless, I will be merciful unto you; he that is weak among you hereafter shall be made strong.

17 Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

18 And if it be by some other way it is not of God.

19 And again, he that receiveth the word of truth, doth he receive it by the Spirit of truth or some other way?

20 If it be some other way it is not of God.

21 Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth?

22 Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together.

23 And that which doth not edify is not of God, and is darkness. (D&C 50:12-23)

One of the great things these verses teach is that the elders must preach by the Spirit of truth, and the listeners must receive the preaching of the Spirit of truth. I notice there is a lot of repetition and emphasis on the word “preach” in these verses, which would be very helpful to the Saints. The manifestations they wondered about did not involve preaching, but instead involved strange movements, fits, and generally disorderly conduct. Thus, emphasizing preaching would eventually filter out the weird stuff people did.

(Today we focus a little more on the part about having the Spirit of truth, as opposed to perhaps the spirit of speculation or the spirit of contention and controversy or the spirit of emotionalism.)

When the church was restored, there were a lot of false ideas about how someone under the influence of the Spirit would act that were borrowed from other sects. People were familiar with what happened at big revival meetings and may have thought that they had to demonstrate some sort of odd or unusual behavior to prove they were converted or prove they were influenced by the Holy Ghost. And if they couldn’t identify for themselves what the Spirit really did, or if its influence was different from what they thought would happen, or if it didn’t help them prove their spirituality like they thought it should, their insecurity might tempt them to make something up or act odd as though that were the Spirit.

Emphasizing preaching by the Spirit and the necessity for edification helped the Saints know that only edifying demonstrations should be received as from God. Intelligence should be gained by both the preacher and the listener.

Blind leading the blind

I found myself drawn to this verse recently:

And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch? (Luke 6:39)

It is a very simple saying, yet I found myself wondering about how it was called a parable.  It has no explanation; it is as if we are meant to understand it immediately.

I asked myself the question, “What am I to do because of this parable?”

In order to decide that, I could see I would have to locate myself in it.  Am I the blind person leading, or am I the blind person being led?

No one likes to think of themselves as blind, and I am no exception, but I can’t deny that I look to leaders when I don’t know what to do, so of course those are times when I am blind.  But there are also times when I have to lead, and some of those times I don’t know what to do, so I am like a blind person leading blind people. (Or maybe my followers see and they are just bearing with me..)

I think one thing we can see is that the parable implies that blindness is an undesirable characteristic.  It is undesirable in leaders who want people to stay safe and want to help people return to God.  (If they can’t see the way themselves, how on earth can they help their followers be any better?  It is impossible.)  It is undesirable also in followers because even if they don’t have the vision to see the way themselves, they at least have to be able to see enough to tell whether they are following a good leader or not.

That’s when I realized that the verses coming after contain very helpful principles for people to use as they consider choosing the mortal leaders they will follow (because even as we desire to follow Christ, we also need mortal exemplars as well).  So I’m going to go through them in this post.

The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master. (Luke 6:40)

If you substitute “fully trained” in place of “perfect,” we can better see how this applies in our choices of people we choose to emulate.  We see that we can only become as good as those we follow, so if we choose low quality examples, we’re certainly not going to rise very high.  But if we choose good examples, then we rise higher.  And of course, if we commit to follow Christ, we will rise to His level someday.   

Or we can look at it in another way.  People may choose you as an example.  Think about how high someone might rise if they choose you.  How might your example limit someone’s development?  (It certainly suggests areas of improvement.)

Moving on..

41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye. (Luke 6: 41-42)

Suddenly we can see this bit about the mote and the beam in the eyes as continuing Jesus’s discussion about the process of deciding who to follow.  Naturally, when we look for leaders to follow, we’ll see faults as well.  But they may also be flaws that we perceive in others’ perspective.   (Who hasn’t found themselves criticizing others for not seeing things the “right” way?)

In this case, the lesson may be that finding fault with a good leader’s perspective is a sign we have terrible faults of our own to deal with, ones that drastically distort our perspective, such that we can’t recognize that they are what we need.  I’ve seen it true in my life when my sins distort my perspective.   In the small areas I have doubts, those doubts make me see people who act in faith and plunge into the unknown as unrealistic fool-hardy risk-takers, but really the fault lies in me.  If I tried to fix them, I would make a worse mess.  In the areas where I am reluctant to take initiative, that makes me look at people who push on their own volition as workaholics enslaved by their own drive, when in actuality I need more of that quality in my life, if I only knew how to get it.  To help me, someone would have to have been where I am and then found how to overcome it.

Again, the message of the mote and the beam parable is that our faults may get in the way of us picking good leaders, so we almost have to use our perception of others as a key that actually points to our own faults.  (Just as an example, I ran into some teachers who seemed pretty overbearing and that annoyed the heck out of me until I realized that my irritation indicated I was overbearing myself.  I’m still trying to work on that, and I have no idea how I’m doing, but I do know that I’ve been more patient with others’ overbearing-ness since that realization.)

Jesus’s next words continue the theme of principles we can use to pick out good leaders to follow, and we’re familiar with them, but they are worth a review.

43 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. (Luke 6:43-44)

Simply, judge by the fruits.  Good leaders should do good things, which lead to good fruits.  Good fruits are things like acting in faith, growing testimonies, repentance, growing and improving obedience, doing missionary work, diligence and industry, etc.  Corrupt fruits would be apathy, discouragement, doubt, fear, pride and complacency, rationalization and excuses, persecution, waning obedience, rebellion, hostility, self-righteousness, hypocrisy, pride, etc.

And finally,

A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. (Luke 6:45)

The kinds of things people say also can also act as a indication of the kind of leader/example they’d make.  The principle is that the mouth speaks far less than the heart holds, so a person speaking good things has much more of good in their heart, perhaps more than they can express in words.  Likewise, someone speaking evil has a heart full of the same. 

(As an aside, I’m sure you’ve noticed there are people out there who say things that are evil, which they try to make sound good.  What does this indicate about what goes on in their hearts?)

Considering that all this comes in the same chapter as the oft-heard words “Judge not that ye be not judged,” we need to realize these principles are not to be used to condemn others, but merely to help us decide whether we should follow someone’s example or not. 

So, to sum up, we are to choose mortal exemplars carefully, realizing the quality of the example we choose will dictate how high we will rise, and also take as our main example Christ.   We are to be aware that our faults may skew our judgment of  real leader quality, and we are to be observant of the quality of the fruits of their acts and of the spiritual quality of their words, whether to edify or destroy, knowing that these are unfailing signals of true or false prophets.

I love that Jesus was so plain and clear about this.  You can see in His words that He knew we needed lesser leaders and examples in addition to His ultimate perfect example, and He wanted us to know how to pick good ones so that we could progress and also help each other.  He wanted us to not be blind followers, but discerning and wise followers.  He wanted us to know how good followers would be considering our leadership and the examples we set.

Saul visits the medium in 1 Sam 28

-->

The story of Saul visiting the woman with the familiar spirit in 1 Sam 28 is a tragic one, but I recently had some insight into it that revealed to me a deeper message of hope that we can get from it.  I hope you will stick with me as we go through this story.

3 ¶Now Samuel was dead, and all Israel had lamented him, and buried him in Ramah, even in his own city. And Saul had put away those that had familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land.

4 And the Philistines gathered themselves together, and came and pitched in Shunem: and Saul gathered all Israel together, and they pitched in Gilboa.

5 And when Saul saw the host of the Philistines, he was afraid, and his heart greatly trembled. (1 Sam. 28:3-5)

The text wants us to have clear in our minds that the prophet Samuel has been dead and that Saul had already put away mediums and wizards out of the land.   I think we are also to remember that the Lord had commanded the people not to ever use those methods.

So the Philistines gather together against Israel and Saul gathers Israel’s armies and he is absolutely terrified.  He has no idea what to do.   Somehow he has no problem chasing after innocent people and slaughtering innocent priests and conducting manhunts, but real enemies make him shake in his boots.  (This shows us that the result of following wickedness and injustice is that a person loses the ability to face the real threats and carry out real responsibilities bravely.)

And when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets. (v6)

This is not a new condition; Saul got the divine silence back in 1 Sam. 14:37 and it doesn’t seem like he inquires since. 

So what does Saul do?  He decides he will try to force revelation by getting someone who has familiar spirits to call up Samuel the prophet.  Everyone should know that trying to force revelation is always a bad thing because it opens an individual up to evil influences who are only too glad to have an excuse to communicate and cause misery.

Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and inquire of her. And his servants said to him, Behold, there is a woman that hath a familiar spirit at En-dor. (v7)

Saul has already put away mediums and wizards as part of enforcing the Law of Moses, but now he hopes to consult them.  Very ironic.  (I hope we never get ourselves into a similar situation of wishing that we hadn’t kept the commandments in the past because it hinders us from sinning in the present.)  This is setting yet another very bad precedent and example for his servants.  It sends the message that there is one kind of official public morality and an opposite private morality when one is in a pinch.

Interesting that when he asks his servants to get him in touch with a medium, they already know exactly who to call and where to go.  How do they know?  Have they hidden this woman from him all these years?  Have they consulted her themselves?  Have they simply winked at her existence?  They register no protest against his request, which makes me wonder if they had lost their way spiritually as well.

8 And Saul disguised himself, and put on other raiment, and he went, and two men with him, and they came to the woman by night: and he said, I pray thee, divine unto me by the familiar spirit, and bring me him up, whom I shall name unto thee.

9 And the woman said unto him, Behold, thou knowest what Saul hath done, how he hath cut off those that have familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land: wherefore then layest thou a snare for my life, to cause me to die?

10 And Saul sware to her by the Lord, saying, As the Lord liveth, there shall no punishment happen to thee for this thing. (1 Sam. 28:8-10)

The woman also knows the rules against mediums and wizards and she fears entrapment.  It is another irony that this medium cites law to the person who enforced the law and who now wants to break the law.  She sounds really pious doing that, but as soon as she is promised that she won’t be punished for it, she does her thing.  I suppose this is how she has kept herself safe all this time, by citing the law, accusing of entrapment, and then extracting a promise of no punishment.

It is further ironic that Saul promises her safety with the oath “as the Lord liveth.”  I believe that is a classic instance of taking the Lord’s name in vain.

11 Then said the woman, Whom shall I bring up unto thee? And he said, Bring me up Samuel.

12 And when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with a loud voice: and the woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul.

13 And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth.

14 And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up; and he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself. (1 Samuel 28:11-14)

She’s asked to bring up Samuel the prophet, and presumably a spirit comes and it startles her.  Immediately when it comes, she blows Saul’s cover and reveals who he is.  I think this is meant to show that there is some spirit there that knows who Saul is and has told her.  This builds credibility with Saul, even as it scares the medium, who realizes she is now working for the very person who enforced those laws against spiritualism. 

It seems clear to me that this woman could commune with spirits, but they were evil spirits who hoped to deceive and destroy.  The institute manual has a very good point that it is contrary to the order of heaven for unrighteous people to have power to command righteous spirits to do their bidding, otherwise there would not be rest for the righteous after death, and they would be in a worse position than in life, in a sort of slavery to the wicked.

One of the things that confuses people about what this fake Samuel spirit says is that it sounds so close to the truth that it seems like it is truth.  But it’s not, in a number of very subtle ways.  The truth is twisted in so subtle a way that Saul in his tormented, fearful, guilt-ridden state would not have been able to discern it, and so for him it hits with all the force of truth.

The things the fake Samuel says are said in such a way as to discourage Saul from making any positive changes and to destroy hope, even with some very subtle flattery.

Let’s take these things apart, shall we?

15 ¶And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am sore distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God is departed from me, and answereth me no more, neither by prophets, nor by dreams: therefore I have called thee, that thou mayest make known unto me what I shall do.

16 Then said Samuel, Wherefore then dost thou ask of me, seeing the Lord is departed from thee, and is become thine enemy?

17 And the Lord hath done to him, as he spake by me: for the Lord hath rent the kingdom out of thine hand, and given it to thy neighbour, even to David:

18 Because thou obeyedst not the voice of the Lord, nor executedst his fierce wrath upon Amalek, therefore hath the Lord done this thing unto thee this day.

19 Moreover the Lord will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of the Philistines: and to morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me: the Lord also shall deliver the host of Israel into the hand of the Philistines. (1 Samuel 28:15-19)

“Wherefore then dost thou ask of me, seeing the Lord is departed from thee” (v16) – It isn’t the Lord who departed from Saul.  Saul departed from the Lord.  By saying the Lord departed from Saul, the evil spirit discourages Saul from repenting by making it seem like nothing he can do can change the Lord’s stance.

“And the Lord hath done to him, as he spake by me: for the Lord hath rent the kingdom out of thine hand, and given it to thy neighbour, even to David” (v17) – The subtlety of this lie is missed because we often think of what comes after, since David eventually does gain the kingdom.  But at that time of Saul’s inquiry, the evil spirit interpreted the current status quo as a full fulfillment of Samuel’s prophecy.  We think it is just another reiteration of the prophecy, but the evil spirit said it was already fulfilled.  But at that time, David didn’t have the kingdom.  It took seven more years after Saul’s death for David to finally be given the whole kingdom.  So the evil spirit lied.

This statement flattered Saul into thinking that David would gain no more than he had already got, but it also discouraged Saul by making it seem like the state of Israel was degenerating instead of improving.  David was still a wanderer in a foreign land, holding a single town Ziklag by Philistine sufferance.  And was that to be the state of Israel’s kingdom under David?  How tragic if it were so!

“Because thou obeyedst not the voice of the Lord, nor executedst his fierce wrath upon Amalek, therefore hath the Lord done this thing unto thee this day.” (v18) – At the time that Saul committed those sins nothing tormented him with the sense of what a mistake he had made, lest he should feel remorse and repent immediately.  Only now many years later his regret is inflamed about these sins in the distant past in a manner that will torment him rather than lead to repentance.   Also, there is no mention of the horrendous sins Saul committed afterwards—like killing the priests or seeking David’s life or consulting the medium or any other abuses of power he may have done that were not recorded—lest he begin to repent of those.  Evil spirits do not want us to be free from sin, and they will do what they can to distract us from repentance.

“Moreover the Lord will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of the Philistines: …the Lord also shall deliver the host of Israel into the hand of the Philistines.” (v19) – The fake Samuel says Israel will be delivered into the hands of the Philistines, but this contradicts the earlier statement that the kingdom has been given to David.  There is an attempt to cover this contradiction up and hide it with a statement that the Lord will also deliver the host (the army) of Israel into the hand of the Philistines.  Just the army that time. 

Does this really happen?  Many people think that it did.  However, a close reading of what happens in the battle following this chapter is that the Philistines fought Israel and Israel fled.  Many were slain, but Israel fled (see 1 Sam. 31:1), so the army was not captured as predicted.  They forsook the cities and the Philistines came and dwelt in them (see 1 Sam. 31:7), but that doesn’t mean Israel was fully beaten.  Also, David goes to Hebron in 1 Sam 2:1-3 and is king over Judah, so the area of Judah wasn’t in subjection to the Philistines.  Also, Abner makes Saul’s son Ish-bosheth king over Israel and they retain Gilead, the Ashurites, Jezreel, Ephraim, Benjamin, and all Israel (1 Sam. 2:8-9), so Saul’s family retains control over a significant portion of people and land, so things really didn’t happen as this evil spirit said.

“and to morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me” (v19) – We focus on the time frame of tomorrow, and the swiftness of Saul’s demise makes us think it was fulfilled, but there is no actual hint that it happened so soon.  I think instead we should focus on the other part, where Saul and his sons would be. 

Saul thinks it is Samuel speaking, so he gets the idea that he and his sons will be with Samuel when they die.  Saul would reason this way--Samuel was righteous, so if Samuel says we will be with him, then that makes it seem like I haven't been too bad after all.  BUT… then that contradicts the previous message that the Lord is angry at Saul’s disobedience and is punishing him.  This evil spirit is giving a contradictory message and if Saul grasped any of these principles, then he would be even more confused and in doubt.   (Also, don’t forget that not all of Saul’s sons die.  Ish-bosheth remains alive.)

In absolute terms, this was an evil spirit pronouncing judgment on a mortal, a task undoubtedly beyond his authority and capability.  Can anyone have confidence that when an evil spirit gives judgment the judgment will be just?  No.

So to sum up, what is this fake Samuel, this evil spirit doing?  He’s deliberately misdiagnosing Saul’s position with the Lord, neglecting his worst sins while dwelling on the mistakes of the distant past, misinterpreting prophecy, and confusing him with contradictory statements about the fate of Israel and the fate of Saul’s soul. 

Saul’s whole intent was to find out what to do, but the effect of everything told him by the evil spirit is to destroy all hope that anything can be done about it.  Saul is told he is powerless to stop any of it.

But was he really hopeless and powerless? 

If we believe that Saul was powerless to change anything about his admittedly terrible state, then we too fall for the persuasions of this evil spirit.

In order to resist, we must believe the opposite—that there was something Saul could have done, that his situation, terrible as it seemed, was still not hopeless and there still remained to him the possibility of redemption through Christ. 

WE MUST BELIEVE THAT.

And if there was hope for Saul, then there is still hope for everyone else. 

That, I sense, is the ultimate uplifting message of this terrible chapter.  This is why we need this chapter in the scriptures.  Knowing how God works, we can discern the devil even when he comes as an angel of light or masquerades as one with authority.  We can detect him and reject his message that there is no hope, and we can lay hold on redemption with our faith in Christ and hope that all is not lost.