Loading...I quote:
“You need to realize that death is nothing to us. Everything that is good and bad in our lives comes from the experiences of our senses. But death brings an end to our senses/experiences. And so having the right understanding – that death is nothing to us – makes our mortality enjoyable, not because we will live forever but because we don’t pointlessly long to live forever. For there are no terrors in life for the one who fully understands that there are no terrors in not living.
It is absurd for people who fear death — not because it is afflicting them now but because they expect it will be horrible when it comes. For this allegedly most awful thing – death — is actually nothing to us: when we exist, we are not dead, but when we are dead, we no longer exist. And so death is completely irrelevant – both to those who are living and to those who are dead. Those who are living are not experiencing it and those who are dead no longer exist.”
These are not my words – just my idiomatic translation of the words of the Greek philosopher Epicurus, in his letter to an unknown person named Menoecus (taken from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers). Epicurus has had a millenia-long bad reputation as a complete “hedonist.” But almost all his bad reputation is ill-deserved. He was a great philosopher with a view of life and how to live it that has a LOT to commend it. In fact, it is a view that many of us have today, based on scientific views that are analogous to those most of us share (VERY different as well, since he was living, well, 2300 years ago!).
Short story: Epicurus believed that
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
I can say that all living beings are biological programmed machines. Some of these beings have a very highly sophisticated “AI” biological technology.
Fear of death is a very clear code in the programming of all of these machines. So, it is natural for these biological beings to try to avoid death. Therefore, logic cannot really neutralize this programmatical code. So, regardless how convening Epicurus was, his logic cannot neutralize this code.
However, programmatical code could be neutralized by another programmatical codes. For example, the Vikings (according to my general reading) didn’t really regard “natural death” to be problematic because they “totally believed” in Valhalla (the afterlife paradise). So, for the Vikings, death was just a journey from a place to another better place.
Many communist rebels didn’t fear death at all, although they didn’t believe in the afterlife. But in their mindset, they thought that the things they were fighting for is fair and just for all mankind. Therefore, they were willing to give their life for it.
In a nutshell, fearing death is a programmatical code within us (and within all living beings), and to neutralize this fear then you need to trigger another sufficient programmatical codes.
As a volunteer for a local hospice, I came to realize that my fear is not of death, but rather of dying. I am not alone in this. I have educated myself on the dying process and it has taken away a lot of the mystery and dread it once held for me.
Why do we have immortal longings if there is no such thing as immortality?
My simple view is that each of us, ever since we’ve been conscious,have been alive and it is almost impossible for us to be conscious and imagine not being alive. It’s all we know. So we naturally think it will continue, since it’s never not continued.
I’d also say that many of us don’t have immortal longings, so it’s not universal. (Just as until 2000 years ago “everyone” knew there were lots of gods, but I don’t think it means there must have been lots of gods.)
Ever since I had surgery under total anaesthesia, when suddenly I was not, I’ve had some notion that that might be what death is like.disabledupes{2b51c9b7e21518a78160c095be898c51}disabledupes
Me too!
It is difficult to disagree or take offense to much of Epicurus’ views. After all, most people don’t live lifestyles that are harmful to themselves or others. I do think there are 21st Century cultural flaws that are in conflict with Epicurus’ views. Particularly, the idea that fulfilling richness can come from knowing what is good for you and what is meaningful is very difficult in our western world today. Today, the previous truths of science are open to interpretation. Nothing seems to be certain anymore, and for me it makes it difficult to know what is good for you and what is meaningful. The previous ages held that there are certain objective truths about science and decency that are not up for debate or redefinition. In short, I see Epicurus’s views as the hallmarks of a great bygone era. In our world today emotions trump fact, psychology trumps biology, being silenced is better than being heard, and all historical actions should been seen through the ethical and moral lens we have today. For Epicurus, nature worked a certain way. Sadly, he didn’t realize that in the 21st Century nature can work however we feel it should.
Epicurus seems to be in alignment with some of the Buddhist lines of thinking in regards to death being something to not dwell upon. Ecclesiastes has some similar harmony with Epicurus in the OT. It is wonderful to read all these thoughts from ancient history and realize how many of these ideas and concepts were shared and have endured over the millennias.
I seems to have a more nuanced and holistic understanding of the essence of human nature and existence, taking into account the triune nature of body, mind and soul or spirit. I believe that a person’s well-being, or the body if one prefer, should be seen in a broader context, considering its connection with the mind and spirit. This, very ancient concept is central to a number of religious, philosophical views, and alsopsychological discussions, including those of C.G. Jung. It believe that all aspects of the self must be acknowledged for true growth and development to take place and not only from the dimention Epicurus discuss it from.
I have no problem accepting a conscious life lived to the best of my ability and acknowledging that our physical world is made up of atoms. But I, as someone who takes a semi-evolutionary perspective, I see the mind’s role as an architect not only in the formation of thoughts, ideas and beliefs, but also in the ways we adapt and respond to our physical environment. I see it as an interplay between the mind (and perhaps even the soul) and biological evolution. This interplay, in my opinion, creates a more comprehensive understanding of human growth and potential, and influences the way our individual minds respond and relate to the ideas mentioned by Epicurus.
Thats why I can’t fully relate to Epicurus views and premises.
I try not to spend too much time thinking about it anymore, because I feel I’m beating a dead horse. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with beating a dead horse…the horse can no longer feel it.
I always like your comments. Interesting wit with unique application to the articles. Always gives me a chuckle.
Thank you!
Not only that, but, whenever you die, it won’t be during your lifetime, so why worry about it?
Now, THAT’S FUNNY!
I’m right here with you. In my efforts to understand the world I’ve realized that few people welcome my insights.
Thus, rather than contiming to beat a dead horse, I’m trying to find one I enjoy riding.
In my view your outlook on death depends on your outlook on life. If you relish life, death means and end to what you like. If you view life as miserable death would be a welcome reprieve.
Yup, that’s true for a lot of people. But Epicurus argues that even if it’s an end to what you like you don’t need to be upset about it. (He says a lot more than I give in my couple of quotations here)
I remember very well I had an overwhelming fear of death in my late teens and early twenties.
There is a great you tube that will make you glad you don’t live forever: Closer to Truth Julianne Baginni “Is Death Final” Everything is in constant flux and our memories disappear so who will you be in ten thousand or a million years? And it could be hell
But presumably you wouldn’t know it was hell without a memory?
I watched the video. Rather interesting to the extent that it really raises questions about our particular views on a certain subject.
I will make Epicurus my rabbi.
It’s uncanny how close to Judaism’s beliefs his understanding of death is.Jews mourn hard.No life celebrations”in Jewish mourning.Death is final.Extolling the blessings of this earthly unique life is key.Folklore is something else.Afterlife amulets,ghosts tales and mysticism abound.
It is common to say of a dead person “s/he went to *his/her world*”,affirming the idea that in dying,we return to our true world.Another (ornamental)expression is “the next world” of Shabbat and rest.
Understanding that “death won’t hurt” isn’t as helpful to me as understanding “non existence”,a state we’ve already experienced.Not knowing non-existence is fear’s main cause:fear of the unknown.
There are familiar “non-existence” states.
First, before we were born.It makes “going back”as truthful as believers saying”returning to one’s Maker/God”.
Second,the Patriarchs worshipped their ancestors.The biblical”to be gathered to one’s ancestors”reminds of our common destiny,a chain of continuity and belonging as an immortality of sorts.Our children will die too.
Third,each time I lost consciousness,I felt I rehearsed my own death.I take rehearsals very seriously.Most marveling is the undetectable passage into unconsciousness.A person who dies unknowingly in their sleep,is said to have had “a death of tzadikim/the righteous”.
Finally,thinking “non-being” as the normal state highlights Life as a miracle of coincidences.
Does that imply that there is no theory of the afterlife in Judaism? I know it’s not heavily emphasized as in Christianity, but what of Olam Ha Bah and Gan Eden?
I did mention “the next world (“Olam Ha’ba”)of Shabbat and rest above here.The idea is not that there is a “life” after death,but an eternal Shabbat and rest,a pious way to say “eternal rest”,as in Requiem Aeternam.Silence,peace,
nothingness.
“Gan Eden” is also not referring to a second life somewhere.There is no theory of “Hell” for example, which you would need as opposing a Garden of Eden.
Most importantly,before the beginning of human time,the first human pair (Adam and Eve)lived an idillic semi-conscious life in this Garden.The moment they trespassed by acquiring illicit moral knowledge only God and his Angels could have
,they were punished with earthly toil,pain and Death-they were immortal before,though they didn’t know one way or the other-a death not offering a chance of return to the Gan Eden.
I spent my entire Jewish life and education (all the way to end of high school,followed by 7 years in Israel)without even once hearing about Heaven or Hell ( even “go to hell” ,a frequent curse,is said as “go to Azazel”,the remote land where the scapegoat was sent to on Yom Kippur).
Jewish burials focus on our “mortal coil” exclusively .The other notion of Hell,Gehenom(the Biblical Gehena), signifies only infernal moments in one’s life, not after death.
If I may. . . . In the Tanakh (Jewish Scriptures), there is no suggestion of personal immortality or judgment after death except in Daniel, which was written 167-64 BCE. There are also some non-canonical texts from around that same time, such as Wisdom.
But starting in late Second Temple times, and especially in rabbinic times, we do see a growing belief in life after death – the ‘olam ha-bah (next world) is specifically about life after death. And the Gan Eden is a heavenly paradise. Read the “El mahlay rachamim” which is said at the graveside; it asks God to take the soul of the dead to gan eden. There is also a kind of hell as a place of temporary punishment, which according to one Talmudic source, can last no longer than 12 months (though it may seem like forever). The only “eternal punishment” is extinction, reserved for very few. This was the standard belief among Jews from Talmudic times to the Enlightenment.
All that said, Judaism does concentrate on this world, and outside of the more Orthodox, most modern Jews don’t spend much time thinking about what I just wrote above. The Reform movement even replaced “m’chaye maytim” (who revives the dead) with “m’chaye hakol” (who gives life to all) in the second blessing in the Amidah. If you were raised in the Reform branch, you may not have heard about any belief in the afterlife.
Stoicism is a useful philosophy too. Stoics valued virtue above all else, whereas Epicureans were more practical regarding virtue. Epicurus advised not to break the law because getting caught will hurt one’s happiness. But this poses a societal problem from at least 2 perspectives: 1) situations in which a person committing an injustice knows they will not be caught and may not see or understand how their relatively minor-seeming actions hurt others (“photocopy DrEhrman’s course text and give it to friends”), and 2) there are people who are *sociopaths* who do not feel bad by hurting other people or hurting the environment, particularly if it might be justified, because Epicurus taught “injustice is not an evil in itself.” These the folks most likely to cause harm. Everyone should be raised from early on that virtue is what matters. People being raised to adults should know there is an unseen eye on them potentially all-the-time… it might not be god, maybe a surveillance camera or an AI program or Google-Glass, and eventually you will be reconciled with your actions, and being virtuous should be a priority even if you think you might get away with it.
Epicurus simply went with the evidence and then drew reasonable conclusions.
Epicurus’ views on death are logical, for sure, but fearing death is not logical. That’s the problem.
That is so true Rick!
Epicurus was obviously extremely intelligent and excelled at abstract thought.
I was in a situation once decades ago when I was 100% certain I was about to die…there appeared no way out of the situation. None. What I remember is feeling no fear at all of death Just resigned to it.
I’ve been present when some of my older family members passed away (I’m an old man myself now) and they also did not appear to be in fear.
Its an odd duck…when people find out they have a terminal illness or even sometimes when they’re fit and healthy they sometimes fear death. And yet when they are finally at its doorstep they often lose that fear.
SC
Is it really death we fear or is it dying, that transitional period? There is a difference between peacefully dying in bed surrounded by loved ones and starving to death in a famine.
Anyone who has experienced a dreamless sleep knows what death itself will be like.
I agree with much of this, but can see how easily some of the points could be misused and misrepresented. For example, “Death is nothing to us” could easily be perverted to “Your death is nothing to me, either,” justifying all sorts of atrocities, or simply apathy towards others. Life is precious, and the lives of others are as precious as our own. I’m reading a book now that discusses some of the horrors instigated by religion and the belief that a theoretical afterlife is more important than life in this world. I realize that secular people can be cruel, too, but I wonder what the world would be like if everybody appreciated the value of our limited lifespans rather than listening to religious leaders who claim to speak for the gods on behalf of an uncertain heavenly reward. based on very questionable and variable dogma.
This post reminds me of a quote from Woody Allen: “I am not afraid of death; I just don’t want to be there when it happens.”
Epicureanism. I agree! No life after death. Even the soul dissipates. Further convinced recently reading The Triumph of Christianity by Bart Ehrman. p. 85, 188. I appreciate your long continuing research and writing. And your blog!
I tend also to be attracted to his philosophy as a way of living my life. My main interest is in cosmology, so anything that contributes to a better understanding of the universe and its origin is my cup of tea. For Epicurus, everything was either atoms or the void. Today we understand that atoms are not fundamental, and that the void isn’t truly a void in the sense of pure nothingness. Epicurus couldn’t have imagined how finely tuned the constants of nature are (especially the fine structure constant), but their values are what allow us to exist. If he had known what modern science has to say, I wonder if he would have favored the multiverse hypothesis, or whether he might have entertained the notion of a designer of some sort. What I’m sure he would have appreciated is that logic dictates that it had to be one or the other.
More recent research has shown that the fine-tuning argument is wrong. It turns out that varying many of the constants of nature still result in life friendly environments, contrary to what is in much of the literature. Some recent examples are the ratio of matter to antimatter: it can be a very large ratio (arxiv 1801.10059), the production of beryllium occurs over a wide range of the relevant parameter space (contrary to previous thinking) and there is no triple alpha fine-tuning problem (as Sabine Hossenfelder noted in her blog “Sorry, the universe wasn’t made for you”). Universes without stable deuterium are habitable (arxiv 1612.04741), dark energy can be orders of magnitude larger than it is (arxiv 1701.03949), and life can exist in universes with a substantially varying weak nuclear force (arxiv 1809.05128) or with no weak nuclear force at all (arxiv 1801.06081).
Varying, for example, the strength of the electric force and/or the masses of subatomic particles, the atoms in the periodic table get different chemical properties. But the number of chemical compounds is combinatorically huge, so it is just a different set of chemical compounds that reproduce in the way we identify with life.
I recommend a book by the physicist Victor J Stenger, “The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning.” He has often been called the Fifth Horseman of the New Atheists, but that’s wrong. The so-called New Atheists spent too many words on invective, Vic Stenger focused solely on established scientific principles and wrote for a wide audience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_J._Stenger
https://www.amazon.com/Fallacy-Fine-Tuning-Why-Universe-Designed-ebook/dp/B0051P27BY/ref=sr_1_1
I’ve read Victor Stenger, but it seems to me his argument is basically just another version of “shut up and calculate”, essentially just sweeping the problem under the rug and accepting the universe we live in as simply a brute fact. The real bee in the bonnet of those poo-pooing the fine tuning problem is the value of the fine structure constant – the “cosmological” constant. This above all the constants of physics demands an explanation.
*See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cT4zZIHR3s
Robert Kuhn is a good interviewer and Susskind does a good job of explaining why people naturally feel the universe is fine-tuned. He also describes several of ways physicists show we could exist in a pocket of a mega-verse that looks that way. I don’t see your point.
If you’ve read Victor Stenger, and especially if you’ve read his book “The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning,” then you should know that the fine structure constant and the cosmological constant are entirely different things.
I’m Greek and I regret to say I haven’t read Epicurus, but I do agree almost totally with what you’re citing. Actually, I’m not sure I’ve ever read something more close to my own worldview! (This means I better start reading him! 😂)
The only thing I sort of disagree with him is this: I think we don’t fear death just from a strictly personal perspective, but a good chunk of that fear has to do with the people that we love. I fear losing my mother or my wife or my dog, because I know life will be much poorer afterwards; there will be a great void left there, and the fear has a lot to do with how am I supposed to fill that void: I fear it will hurt me, because I won’t fill it. And, on the other hand, I fear for how these people will cope should they lose me – I know, a touch egotistical, but I think it’s a valid concern.
This is my second day reviewing this article, and when I came back to it, I came with the same conclusion as the point you are making here: Death is a problem for the loved ones left behind. As a pastor and a chaplain, I’ve seen this borne out time and time again beside the deathbed. I also believe that there is an additional factor to exacerbate the problem: dependency (whether emotional or material).
And yet billions of humans believe that they can cheat death by fantasizing that they have an invisible, immaterial, immortal soul that exists beyond the death of the body and floats free in some fantasized spiritual existence.
Of course, there’s not a shred of evidence for immortal souls and spiritual levels of existence. It’s all fantasized.
“Death is nothing to us” resonates also with those who no longer wish to live, such as , for example, clinically depressed people,for whom life, even just being awake, is unbearable.Death beacons at those times with an aura of redemption.
l’ve been there.Suicide was not an option. I had kids. But not existing was a dramatically desirable state. To neutralise the horror my mind was dealing me, I would meditate, on the floor, like those who mourn, pretending I was leaving the Earth, higher and higher, further and further,the Earth becoming smaller and smaller, me entering deep into space, until I became just a dot in that space, with darkness all around. The closest to not-being I could imagine whilst still-unfortunally for me then- conscious. I could stay there for a long time, with no other thoughts in my mind and without pain. Just a dot in space.
Perhaps those who inhabit the hell of depression, not knowing it can be conquered- talk about hell’s fire-or those who suffer as terminal patients or similarly tormented people,can look at death with similar Epicurean fortitude, as “Death is everything to them”.
It is so interesting the someone from around 270 BCE could be so insightful and progressive thinking. This thinking seems so advanced to be from 2300 years ago! Did many philosophers in ancient times believe and think this way?
It wasn’t as significant as Stoicism in the Roman world, but it had a significant following. The most famous expressoin of the view is in Lucretius, The Nature of Things.
This was very timely and constructive for me. Thank you. My wife died on Sunday.
I”m so very sorry to hear it. Please accept my sincere condolences.
I don’t fear death itself. I do have fears surrounding the dying parts, though. I do have an intense fear of pain as I’ve experienced quite a bit of it in my life. But death and the cessation of all pain, I hope I’ll welcome it.
I see a problem with this : “Everything that is good and bad in our lives comes from the experiences of our senses.” What about the inner life of the mind & the satisfaction or torment that it can bring? It seems odd that a philosopher might overlook this?
On the topic of Death though, he’s dead right! I often ponder the wisdom of Socrates : “It is not living that matters but living rightly.”, and “The unexamined life is not worth living.” which also ties into the life of the mind.
I would take this even a step further – to be unprepared for & fearful of what is THE great inevitability is both pathetic & stupid. Get your house in order & live with a clear conscience! Be careful not to waste the Present (where life actually happens) on such fears!
We fool ourselves by thinking the Ancients were merely primative & backwards. Modern humanity would do better by remembering their wisdom, much of which fed into the biblical record of course.
The mind is sometimes called a “sixth sense” and perhaps he would have thought about it that way.
That’s a little gem to find out. Thankyou very much!
The experience that really led me to doubt the existence of an afterlife was having general anesthesia. For that period of time, I was not a sentient being: no awareness, no dreams, no memories, no feelings. I’ve “been under” a half-dozen times, and in each instance, my nothingness has been the same. If chemicals can do that to me by temporarily turning off the self-aware part of my brain, why should I not suspect that death will do any less? Afterlife helps quell our brain’s difficulty in imagining its own non-existence, but the concept also satisfies our need for justice. But it can also lead to complacency, looking at life as an eternally long existence that all somehow works out. I look at other living things in nature; some thrive, some struggle, all have life spans. Why should we be different? Is there some set point in biological taxonomy where you get an everlasting element that has no physical properties? That seems like wishful thinking/irrational fear.
I had the same experience and drew the same conclusions.
This philosophy may be true, but, having just had my 77th birthday, I don’t find it very upbeat and wish there were more to it. Maybe, that is why humans have created so many more hopeful theologies and philosophies.
Yes, I think I once found it a bit depressing as well. But I have to say, since I’ve come to agree with it (well, about 30 years ago), I don’t find it downbeat at all and it drives me to relish life and my experiences of it even more. Epicurus was writing in large part to fear people from teh fear of death, knowing, as he did, that it caused so much emotional and psychological problems, and believing, as he did, that it was a fear that was both baseless and needless.
So much depends on what we learn in childhood, both intellectually and emotionally. I grew up in the deep south, raised by Southern Baptists. I was an intellectual child and excelled in school. Though I rejected fundamentalism, I could not imagine the universe with a God or an afterlife for humans.
I became an atheist only after deep trauma, first joining a cult that seemed to have the answers I wanted, then feeling like a betrayer as I left it. Going back to school and studying anthropology (and taking courses in philosophy) led to a much more realistic view of life and death.
I’ve met friends, especially in Los Angeles, who never really heard much about God and spiritual things at home, growing up clear-headed with a scientific outlook and a lot of love from their family. Those friends are always surprised that I struggled so much.
Somewhat Ecclesiastical I think.
Yes, it’s widely thought that the (pseudonymous) author of Ecclesiastes was strongly influenced by Epicurean philosophy.
“And so having the right understanding – that death is nothing to us”
If I disagree, am I heterodox? LOL
Yup, and even a flat-out heretic!
I suspect that fear of death may be a uniquely human phenomenon, because we are capable of abstract thought about past and future realities that can exist without us. Other sentient beings may have instinctive fears, and may want to avoid pain, but I doubt that they have any concept of their own death.
Hi Professor,
In 1 Corinthians 6:9 when Paul mentions arsenokoites and many said that Paul is referring back to Leviticus 18:22 which prohibits same sex act. So, even though the word arsenokoites can mean many things, doesn’t this implies same sex act, or how do scholars usually handle this? Did Paul really refers back to Leviticus?
Ah, it’s a much debated term. Paul appears to have invented it. I’ve posted on it before: maybe I’ll repost on it!
I find classic philosophy so appealing and yet so unworldly. It is an enormous assumption to believe the world is simply a material world. It also ignores human psychology and the mental life. To argue against being fearful is to acknowledge the fear is real. Our imaginations and emotional life are as real as atoms despite not being subject to scientific reductionism.
And despite my criticism of this sort of philosophy it is worth being held in a state of acceptable hypothesis to guide our choices in life. Acting to promote life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is a good way to live, perhaps the best way to live.
I suppose Epicurus would say that it’s an enormous assumption that the world and brains require something other than matter!
“Because we are atoms”
True true, but our impulses and chemical energy are photons, like the quote, “the photo knows no time.” There are basically no physicists that claim linear time exists.
I like Epicurius. Seek deep happiness from doing what aligns with your interior values. I just think it’s possible that there would be benevolent guidance outside spacetime, simply because humanity’s evolved descendants could exist there.
And I ask for proof, I seem to get extraordinary events. Fun, you say?
1. It felt not-secure that others don’t experience it, or don’t speak of experiencing it.
Better that II’ve now had experiences others confirm (four times, four different people).
The case against is, I’ve spent my life opening to align with possible benevolent guidance, and that proof wouldn’t just be a moment of unusual coincidence. Where’s my huuusband? A good neighb for littles? Security.
I felt better when I found the E Cayce readings and my birthdate etc corresponded to the unique entity that’s pretty photony (the author of gLuke’s sister.) She’s of the group that consciously entered the simulation to tell the people that got lost in the game, and want to know.
I watched a presentation on near death experiences conducted by four scholars at the University of Virginia Medical Center. Pretty compelling stuff. Is “Death nothing to us?” I don’t know.
If we get The Way right it adds to the weight of proof though, haha
Matthew 12:42
“The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it…”
Jesus just said the quiet part loud. An ARABIAN will judge the current generation. Mainstream scholarship believesthe Queen of Sheba/Saba was Southern Arabian.
Just like a Western Greek was queen of the Egyptians. And the ethnically Edomite king Herod the ‘Great. Most rulers were a different group than the people they ruled in the ancient world.
So, Neo-Pythagoreanism and Indian emissaries (thanks to Augustus) was big with the literati in the 1 C. And we have a
copy of a Nabataean (Arab) book, supposedly copied from earlier wisdom, that covers the transmigration of souls, too.
Could Jesus be referring to someone in the spirit and power of the Queen of Sheba?
•John the Baptist is in the spirit and power of Elijah
•Jesus is Adam (the alpha)
•Moses appears to Peter (how would he know what he looked like?) In Josephus, a Moses leads people to his artifacts on a mountain until Pilate intervenes.
My first guess is Phas‘el. Ḥārīṯat Rāḥem-ʿammeh’s daughter’ (Aretas’ daughter). Queen of Galilee, she may have had judging rights.
If we get The Way right it adds to the weight of proof though, haha
Matthew 12:42
“The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it…”
Jesus just said the quiet part loud. An ARABIAN will judge that current generation. Mainstream scholarship believes the Queen of Sheba/Saba was Southern Arabian.
Just like a Western Greek was queen of the Egyptians. And ethnically Edomite Herod the Great. Most rulers were a different group than the people they ruled in the ancient world.
So, Neo-Pythagoreanism and Indian emissaries (thanks to Augustus) were big with the literati, Nicolaus of Damascus meets one. And Nabataean Agriculture, supposedly copied from earlier wisdom, covers the transmigration of souls, too.
Could Jesus be referring to the spirit and power of the Queen of Sheba?
•John the Baptist is in the spirit and power of Elijah
•Jesus is Adam (the alpha)
•Moses appears to Peter (how would he know what he looked like?) In Josephus, a Moses leads people to his artifacts on a mountain until Pilate intervenes.
My first guess is Phas‘el. Ḥārīṯat Rāḥem-ʿammeh’s daughter’ (Aretas’ daughter). Queen of Galilee, she may have had judging rights.
Yay, Dr. Ehrman! I’ve come to the conclusion, in my later years, that the philosophy of Epicurus makes the most sense of all the religions and philosophies that I have studied and practiced. It makes me happy to know that you are interested in his teachings, as well.
I still have a great deal of trouble with the whole “death is nothing to us” concept, though. Believing in life after death for well over 50 years, it’s been hard to come to grips with the fact that I will die, and be no more. I’ve read a lot of articles and books by Epicureans, and none of them have really convinced me that there is nothing to fear. Intellectually I can agree that there will no longer be a “me” around to suffer, but emotionally I can’t get rid of the desire to continue on, somehow.
Yup, I get it. But Epicurus would ask whether it is hard to come to grips with the fact that before your physical body became alive you did not exist? If so, for him, then it’s no harder to believe that after your physical body ceases to be alive you will not exist. I’d agree, though, that the *desire* to live on is very human. Hey but as the Stones said, “You can’t always get what you wa-ant”…
“To be, or not to be: that is the question:
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there’s the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause”
Is it not the fear of the unknown (after death) that religions has exploited by giving us their answers to the after-life? It is not easy to deprogram oneself of those ideas we were indoctrinated with since we were born. The two most important people in my life, my parents, who passed away in their nineties, have not made any effort to return, even in my dreams, to inform me of the afterlife. So I feel pretty confident now that I am like a bright flame – when it is put out, where does it go? Ahh, non-existence!
Of course there is no reason to fear death because there will be no me to experience it or anything. But I don’t think that’s what we call the fear of death is all about. I think it results from the conclusion that precisely because there will no longer be a me, I’ll miss out on what comes from being a me (being alive). Things like the growth and development of my grandchildren, the possible discoveries that will cause paradigmatic changes in thought and technology, the subjects that I haven’t yet sufficiently studied. Things like that. I don’t want to miss out on them. It’s not that post death I’ll experience loss. It’s that i won’t be and experience what I value and love. Nevertheless, as I get older I experience some weariness of being.
Well, since my user name is Epikouros . . . I’d have to say that I totally agree.
When Stephen Colbert asked Keanu Reeves “What do you think happens when we die?” Reeves responded with an answer that was so good that it went viral on the Internet: “I know that the ones who love us will miss us.”
Many years ago I was struck by the similarity between the message of the Epicurus and that found in the book of Ecclesiastes. Did one of them influence the other?
Yes, it’s widely thought that the (pseudonymous) author of Ecclesiastes was strongly influenced by Epicurean philosophy.
The assumption of this entire thread is that a particular form of monism is the correct solution to the various mind body consciousness mysteries. In actuality, if that type of monism were true then both statements “death is nothing to us” and “what do you think” are completely wrong because there is no “us” and there is no “you” nor “me” that thinks. In that kind of monism there is only impersonal existence and there are no “selves”, similar to various Buddhist ideas. Under the hypothesis that the brain is all there is then there is no one “in there”; rather there is only impersonal electrical impulses being exchanged amongst brain cells. If the self does not exist, then there is no life before nor after death. Something that does not exist can neither live nor die.
Yes, that’s right. Epicurus had an entire cosmology/physics explicitly rooted in monism which he didn’t just assume but argued for at length. Unfortunately most of his own writings don’t survive, but you can see the system laid out in Lucretius on the Nature of Things, which is also designed to show why death is nothing to fear, but spends most of its time describing the physcial universe.
Sign me up! The comments I read, especially the Epicurious quote, reflect my current thinking. I have pondered on this for awhile, coming to the conclusion that there is no afterlife. Researching quantum mechanics, I became entangled with the thoughts about particles, waves, observers, quarks and things far beyond my understanding. When we disperse, where do all the particles go? What do they form next, if anything? When I die I’ll be dead, and all that I was will go on to “whatever’s next.” I really liked Geofff’s reply about being prepared for death. I have in situations where I thought I may die. (Icy road, slipping off road towards tree and just embracing the moment. Car finally swerved back onto road.) Years ago I wrote in my journal, “I am not afraid of death. It’s the dying.” When I go I want to go quick. I am always prepared for death.
Great comments.
Excellent post! I was astounded how “modern” the writings of Epicurus and Lucretius sounded when i first read them.
Slightly related to the topic of Epicurus and the Stoics, I know you’ve often said and written that 1st CE pagans in the Greco-Roman world were (as far as we can tell) generally just as “ethical” in everyday life as were Jews and early Christians of that time. However, I also recently heard you say that the ethics of Jesus are drastically different from that of the leading pagan philosophers of that time. I realize that most everyday pagans were probably not familiar with the Stoics or Epicureans, but can you elaborate on how Jesus’s ethical principles differ from those of the leading Pagan philosophers? Thank you.
Yeah, me too.
And, ah…. that’s precisely the topic of my next book. I’d say that most pagans may not have *read* the SToic and Epicurean philosophers, but were heavily influenced by their views. ONE difference I’ll name here: there is nothing in pagan moral discourse about helping strangers who are in serious need. Well, there are *some* things — usually saying there is no reason to do it and lots of reasons not to! That ain’t the view of Jesus!
You come from nothing. You’re going back to nothing. What have you lost?
Epikouros – individuals are a set of properties that continue to exist. If you expand that to mental properties, maybe it’s a type of immortality.
So, learned new stuff in the Chat about the Queen of the South in gMatthew:
Strabo, contemporary of Jesus, puts Nabataea and Saba/Sheba in the same sentence as two big Arabian kingdoms, just one is *south.*
Interestingly, Solomon meets the Queen of Sheba, and his *mom* is called daughter of Sheba! Bathsheba.
Arabian-Anatolian Queen of King David. Arabian-Anatolian Gebirah of King Solomon.
Anatolian explained: Daughter of Sheba has a Hittite dad with a noble ’El theophoric. Hittites trace to Anatolia, like Abraham and Nabonidus. Hittites just got to the land of Canaan earlier.
So Phas’el, the Arabian Queen of Galilee (could Antipas divorce her if he couldn’t find her?) could be in the spirit and power of the Queen of the South, as a set of mental properties.
On that marital alliance war, Salome’s territory is just minority Jewish, and they win battles there *before Galilee*
“all Herod’s army was destroyed by the treachery of some fugitives, who, though they were of the tetrarchy of Philip, joined with Aretas’s army” –
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/josephus/complete.ii.xix.v.html
Euangelion, and that’s why Jesus escapes to preach there.
“Death is an end but we are not quite sure about this end. For there are faculties of the psyche which are not fully confined to space and time.” — Carl Gustav Jung.
(I came across this in a blog about Jung before I wrote this post so thought I’d share)
“I don’t believe in an afterlife but if there is one i’ll be pleasantly surprised.” My friend Jordan
(Posting for fun but my friend did say this during a discussion)
Main point:
I’m a panic attack sufferer. I’ve lost count of the amount of horrible death attacks I’ve had. I’ve dramatically said goodbye to family members as the gurney with me on it rolled into the ER.
Then I’d come walking out of the ER, between 4 and 12 hours later, as if raised from the dead.
Imagine dying over and over again?
Yes I’m on medication for it but still, life has been a horror when panic struck so I thank Epicurus for his wisdom. It made me feel better for a while.
But I’ll return to hedging my bets and believe I’ll live on, panic free with many other former sufferers.
Amen.
IN high school a SF BAY Area monastery, we learned of 2 Epicurean thoughts: Extreme [hedonistic] & moderate [prudent]
Ha! Your classmates would be lousy Epicureans!
Just pondering whether the Apostle Paul was alluding to Epicurean philosophy or Isaiah (as per the reference to verse 22:13 in the NIV footnote) in 1 Corinthians 15:32 when he wrote: . . .If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”
I wish we knew for sure. But it certainly is Epicurean. But also like Eccesiastes. Which, as it turns out, is usually thought to have been influenced by epicurean philosophy.
Hi Dr. Ehrman,
Have you ever read The Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám? I think you’d enjoy it. It’s medieval Persian poetry that seems be a mix of Ecclesiastes, Epicurean thought, and agnosticism.
Its most famous English translation is that of Edward Fitzgerald, but I prefer the Peter Avery & John Heath-Stubbs translation.
Many moon ago.