Loading...In my previous post I explained how Jewish thinkers began to develop the idea of an afterlife when they devised the idea of a future resurrection of the dead, an apocalyptic event that explained how God would ultimately make right all that was wrong, rewarding those who had sided with him but punishing those who sided with evil. But how did that idea of a future *bodily* resurrection morph into the Christian teachings of heaven and hell? I try to explain that here in this post, once again as taken from my book Jesus Interrupted. The first two paragraphs are repeated from yesterday’s post, to provide a better context for what I say here.
****************************************************************************
Thus, eternal life, for Jesus, Paul, and the earliest Christians, was a life lived in the body, not above in heaven, but down here, where we are now. Paul emphasizes this point strenuously in the book of 1 Corinthians. The fact that Jesus’ body was raised from the dead shows what the future resurrection would involve. It would involve bodies being raised, physically, from the dead, and transformed into immortal bodies. Paul scoffed at his opponents in Corinth for thinking they had already experienced a spiritual resurrection, so that they were enjoying the full benefits of salvation now, in the spirit. The resurrection was physical, and since it was physical, it obviously had not happened yet. This world is still carrying on under the forces of evil, and it will not be until the end that it is all resolved and the followers of Jesus are vindicated, transformed, and given an eternal reward.
This is the view of the Apocalypse of John as well. After all the catastrophes that hit this planet at the end of time – catastrophes that the author revels in telling, in chapter after gory chapter — “a new heavens and a new earth” will appear. There will be a future resurrection of all who died; there will be a new, heavenly Jerusalem that descends from the sky to replace the old, corrupt, and now destroyed Jerusalem as the city of God. It will have gates of pearl and streets of gold. And that is where the saints will live forever, here on earth (see Revelation 21).
The Transformation of the Apocalyptic Vision
What happens when this expected end doesn’t happen? What happens when the apocalyptic scenario that Jesus expected to occur in “this generation” never comes? When Paul’s expectation that he will be alive at the second coming of Christ is radically disconfirmed by his own death? When the resurrection of the dead is delayed, interminably, making a mockery of the widespread belief that it will happen “soon”?
One thing that happens, of course, is that …
The Rest of this Post is for Members Only. If you don’t belong yet, you’d better join — or you’ll never know!!!
Bart, I’m sorry for having to bring this up yet again but there are not just two options: ‘spiritual resurrection without a body’ and ‘physical resurrection with a body’.
Yes, I agree, Paul did NOT believe in a bodiless resurrection where the soul/spirit would float to Heaven or what ever (like the Greek believed at the time and a lot of people still do today). BUT he DID believe in ‘the dead’ (their spirits/souls?) getting raised into ‘SPIRITUAL, HEAVENLY bodies’ (whatever that actually is supposed to mean).
So there would at least be 3 options:
1. a purely spiritual, bodiless resurrection (Greek)
2. a physical resurrection with a kind of reanimated/reassembled body (Maccabeans)
3. a resurrection that results in the resurrected ending up with ‘spiritual bodies’ (the earliest Christians and Paul)
Furthermore Paul makes a difference between those who are dead at the General Resurrection and those alive at that moment: the souls/spirits of the former will get called back from the realm of the dead and clothed with those ‘spiritual bodies’ so they’re not just souls or spirits or whatever while the latter will have their current ‘natural bodies’ changed into ‘spiritual bodies’ as well so that everyone will have the same kind of body in the end.
I’m not sure you can just dismiss this as nonsense …
Bart: so according to you there are only two options to choose from? ‘a spiritual, disembodied resurrection’ and ‘a physical resurrection that involves the corpse of the deceased’?
why is ‘a resurrection of the soul/spirit into a new, somehow embodied yet also spiritual, heavenly body’, which is different from the two earlier options, not a valid option? Yet it’s what Paul is referring to in his descriptions of a ‘resurrection’.
For Paul it is of utmost importance that this current body is the one that will be transformed. What God created he will redeem.
Bart: the current body of those alive during the Second Coming, yes! THOSE bodies will be changed, obviously, since they still exist. But ‘the dead’ will be immediately resurrected into those ‘new, spiritual, heavenly bodies’, which Paul clearly opposes to the current, natural, physical (‘made out of dust’) ones. Paul is quite explicit on this if one reads the text closely and with a neutral approach, ie not the traditionally taught ‘corpses will be reanimated’ approach.
I really love your books and I am thankful for them. But I’m a bit disappointed that you’re unwilling to at least question this deeply held assumption of yours to see if it’s really that well documented like you think it is …
You really shouldn’t think this is an *assumption* that I”ve never thought about or looked into! Realize what you’re saying (to a professional NT scholar!). You may be right, but that wouldn’t be because it’s something I’ve never thought about or questioned on my own.
Bart: but so WHY are you dismissing that option or explanation? Especially since you said that it’s not really known how people imagined the ‘realm of the dead’ and how ‘the dead’ would be ‘resurrected’?
So the idea of heaven and hell is the early Church Father’s answer to the cognitive dissonance associated with the disconfirmation of Jesus’ and Paul’s apocalypticism. It makes one wonder about all the numerous instances of latter day apocalyptic prophecy, like those discussed by Festinger et. al. in their seminal book “When Prophecy Fails”. Apparently, some of these more recent end-of-times prophets have not bought into the 90-degree rotation of the time axis that you speak of and continue to push the Biblical idea of the horizontal time axis that eventually leads to Armageddon. What a mess!
I think that’s not quite right–what happened was that Christianity stopped being an apocalyptic cult and became a worldly institution, with vested interests in its own survival and perpetuation. Jesus would have been horrified by this, I’ve little doubt, but it was a necessary step for his ideas to be promulgated across the world.
Christians never entirely gave up on the idea of the Kingdom of God, and of course there are always new Christian apocalyptic cults forming (and then, over time, becoming institutions themselves, if they last long enough). But we’re all shaped by the exigencies of our daily lives, and our beliefs tend to respond to that.
Christians have many different beliefs about the afterlife, and the end of the world. It’s oversimplifying things to say they all believe in heaven and hell now. And many people with no strong religious beliefs–including some who would say they were atheists–still invoke hell as a punishment for people they don’t like. It’s a hard idea to get rid of, unfortunately. I think sometimes we’re more concerned with the guilty (as we see it) being punished than the innocent being saved. If there’s no justice in this world, maybe there is in the next.
We don’t know, we can’t know, we shouldn’t pretend to know. But we do, all the time.
Best to live this life as if it’s the only one you get. Whether it is or not. But also good to at least consider the possibility that there might be a reckoning of some kind. Have your books in order for the audit.
When did the concept of “heaven” start to become distinct from “the sky?” The “heaven” discussed in the New Testament certainly seems to be a reference to the actual sky, with the depictions of the Son of Man coming on the clouds and the like. At what point did some Christians first begin to claim that the Heaven in which the afterlife resides is distinct from the heavens which hold the stars and planets?
That’s a great question. I don’t know the answer!
I’d assume the invention of the telescope had something to do with it, just like our increasing knowledge of what lies beneath the ground we walk on ended the notion that hell was located directly beneath us.
Or the simple fact that what is up at any moment in time is down 12 hours later, and only relative to the observer. This whole concept of “down” could not have been conceptualized by anyone other than “flat-earthers”. However, the argument over what kind of body to expect is all explained if a burial is referring to an actor setting over the horizon and a resurrection rising again over the opposite horizon.
Today I often hear many people use the parable of Lazarus and the rich man as a description of our modern day notions of heaven and hell (among other bible versus). Can you explain what Jesus or early Christians would have thought when they heard this and now it would differ from what we hear today I most evangelical/fundamentalist congregations?
It was commonly thought in some circles (e.g., already in Plato) that bad people experienced torment (thirst, in this case) in Hades; that seems to be what Luke 16 is picking up on. My sense is that most Christians today continue to have some vague sense of that (eternal fire and the like).
Then since Jesus (and/or early Christians) told that parable, doesn’t that indicate that they believed that, too? Also, doesn’t Jesus’s statement that: “I go to prepare a place for you,” and His words to the thief on the cross: “Today you will be with me in paradise,” indicate the same thing?
It would depend very much on whether these are sayings that go back to the historical Jesus himself. I tend to think not — but it takes a very long time to explain why. You might look at my book Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium.
The concept of the “process of reinterpretation” is quite helpful.
Are you suggesting that there was no concept of heaven or of immortal souls going to heaven in Jewish thinking prior to this Christian “reinterpretation”? What do Jews tend to believe about heaven today?
I wish we knew *more* about what most ancient Jews thought about such things. My sense is that there was a lot of diversity, then as now. I don’t konw what most Jews think today; those that I have had any contact with (in person or in writing) tend to be either agnostic or doubtful about a future existence after this life.
Bart, modern Jews today are divided between those who hold the traditional belief of existence after this life (all the Orthodox and some of the liberals) and those who were swayed by the rational notions of the Enlightenment (such as classic Reform Judaism) and denied existence after this life.
However, that too is shifting. See, for example, Does The Soul Survive by Rabbi Elie Spitz, a liberal attorney-turned-rabbi. What makes his book fascinating is that, true to his earlier training as an attorney, he is willing to accept only ‘the facts’. It is fascinating to read how, starting from a place of not accepting any notion of life after death, ‘the facts’ (rather than belief) lead him to reverse his position.
I too have undergone this transformation, moving from the simple belief of my Orthodox upbringing, to disbelief (‘it is all a control mechanism to keep the faithful in line’) to accepting the notion of life after this existence based on a personal journey similar to the one that Elie Spitz describes.
(Oh, and thank you so much for your research and writings, Bart. I think you ‘get’ the story of Jesus and early Christianity. What you write about them makes perfect sense to me, and it matches what the NT actually says. )
Uzi Weingarten
When is the first appearance (if any) in the Old Testament concerning what happens after death?Was there a development of Jewish thought about this, or was it consistently understood that the dead ended up in Sheol?
I suppose it depends on when you date the various books of the OT (there is no agreement on that!) and on whether metaphorical phrases involving descent to sheol (e.g., in the Psalms) are meant literally or not. Parts of the OT hold to a shadowy existence in Sheol; parts (Ecclesiastes and Job) think that this life is all there is; and the lastest writing, Daniel, seems to hold to the idea of a future resurrection of the dead.
Dr. Ehrman, what role do you think the Greco-Roman concepts of Elysium/Elysian Fields and Hades/Tartarus/Erebus played in tranforming the Judaic notion of a future Judgment and the parsing of humanity between Paradise (The Kingdom of God) and Hell (Gehenna/Gehinnom)? Many scholars (especially mythicists, I’ve noticed) like to draw parallels between between Jesus’ journey to and return from the “underworld” to Orpheus’ or Odysseus’ similar journey from “death” to “life”. Would it be fair to say that as the proto-Christians of the 1st and 2nd centuries began to feel uneasy about a long overdue End Times, they found a plausible reworking of their beliefs by uniting the Judaic concept of a future resurrection and judgment after death and the pagan concept of reward or punish after death in distinct, parallel realms to this one? Cognitive scientists have categorized several cognitive biases (e.g. Conservatism Bias, Sunk Cost Bias, Subjective Validation, and, esp., the Semmelweis Effect) where our natural human tendency is to actively deny that we have been mistaken this whole time and, instead, we will try to salvage our previous (mistaken) beliefs by rationalizing the new facts to fit our old beliefs.
Yes, I’m open to that view!
Rationalising stuff seems to be one of favourite pastimes of humans 😀
Yes, the doctrine of the immortality of the soul seems to creep in well after the original teachings of Jesus and Paul…. I’m wading through the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and I see saints and popes stepping forward to establish doctrine and tradition.
Horizontal dualism…rotated it on its axis. Terrific! Love it!
(Have not read your Jesus Interrupted book.)
Greetings Bart. Forgive me if I am a little slow, I really like to make sure I internalized the information correctly and ironed out ignorance and misunderstandings.
If I am correct, you are saying Christians started to believe in Heaven and Hell once they could no longer maintain that the revival is soon.
Heaven: From Kingdom of God on earth we move to heavenly realm above.
Hell: From (fill in the blanks) we move to chamber of fire and pain below.
What did they believe about punishment originally?
Also, it does appear to me that Jews had a belief in a firey place of pain and torment even before Christianity. I was listening to Rabbi Tovia Singer who was mentioning a fire 60 something times the degree of the fire on earth.
Finally, isn’t hell mentioned in all of the Gospels? Are you really saying Jesus Christ himself did not believe in hell?
The term in the Gospels is not “hell” but “Gehenna” — which was a pit outside of Jerusalem where they burned rubbish.
I suppose this was influenced to some degree by at least some Jews’ having previously believed that certain holy men were taken up into the heavens when they died?
I would assume so.
An amazing switch!
When Christians “realized that the kingdom of God never would come to this earth,” isn’t that an admission that Jesus was wrong, or at least that Christianity had evolved into something different than what Jesus was preaching? How do current evangelicals, who believe the Bible is the literal word of God, deal with this issue, that some current Christian beliefs (heaven and hell) represent a departure from what Jesus said in the Bible?
Some Christians think that such teachings are simply sensible developments from the earlier views; others think these *were* the earlier views.
I came from a oneness pentecostal church that believes the Bible is inerrant. They think that when Jesus used terms like “this generation,” he meant this Church Age (a time given to Gentiles for salvation). Anyone who has died up to this point is not in heaven or hell but *asleep* and will be physically resurrected when Jesus comes back, and only if you’re saved. Everyone else stays dead until the Final Judgement.
Really liking these past two posts. Keep ’em comin’ (if you don’t mind) 🙂
The Roman Catholic position is the immortality of the body and the soul. The dogma of the Assumption of Mary claims she, too, became immortal in body and soul.
I find it amusing that belief in the resurrection of the body means the body still functions physically. So, there must be toilet facility!?
In the song, “In heaven there is no beer; that’s why we drink it here.” This might imply no toilet facilities either!
The resurrection of the body creates problems, as well as waste!
So this transformation — or rotation — of early Christian thought became the basis for the modern concept of going to heaven and hell — and no place else? That’s a bit of a staggering realization, considering the impact that absolute belief in both ideas has had shaping world religions in the last 2,000 years or so.
It is amazing that the transformation was so easily accepted, but there is a lot of time between the death of Paul and the disciples and the writing of the Apocalypse of Peter. I am still amazed that the Jehovah’s might be the only sect in the world that holds onto the notion of an early paradise, and the embodiment of their dead bodies. My brother says it will be cool to see mom and dad again, and be able to talk to him. I’m not sure which of my two brothers is nuttier—that one or the one who thinks Christ is in charger of space ships that control the fate of the world. Which one do you think is nuttier?
I try not to rate religious views on the scale of nuttiness. 🙂
This is completely off the current topic (however I don’t think you’ve previously discussed this): But I see that PBS is starting a six-part series called “Ancient Roads from Christ to Constantine” (hosted by “…Jonathan Phillips, an author and distinguished history professor at Royal Holloway, University of London”).
The similarity to the title of one of your (excellent) courses for Great Courses caught my eye, so I was wondering:
Do you know anything about this? Or have any comments?
[Obviously I’ve not seen the series, but judging from synopses for the upcoming episodes I don’t see much reason to be optimistic.
For example, in the episode called “From apocalypse to heresies” we see we will “…[visit] the cave where John wrote the most enigmatic book of the New Testament, Revelation”
Likewise, from the description of the the episode “Constantine”:
“In the final episode, host Jonathan Phillips explains how Rome exerted its fullest effort to eradicate Christianity. The faith grew stronger as the empires and emperors weakened. It would be the conversion of one man – Constantine the Great – that would fully transform the fortunes of the Christian faith. ” ]
No, I’m afraid I don’t know about it. Sorry!
Very nice, clear explanation. What I, personally, find inreresting as someone raised as a Jehovah’s Witness is how Witnesses have gone back to the original, apocalyptic form of Christianity. They continually proclaim the imminent arrival of God’s Kingdom. They also like to think of themselves as adhering to the real, original teachings of Christ. Looks like, from a scholarly point of view, they really are more like Jesus than the established churches. Just don’t tell them they’re the most recent in a very long line of people making failed predictions about the coming of God’s kingdom.
Since eternal life for Paul was a life lived in the body, not above in heaven, but down here, where we are now which he emphasizes in the book of 1 Corinthians, how is this reconciled with Paul saying that we will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord forever in 1 Thess 4:17?
Was there to be a meeting in the clouds in the air and then come back to earth? Or did Paul have a change of mind? Or a different meaning?
Yeah, it’s hard to know. It appears that at some point, ,at least, he believed in some kind of interim existence in heaven prior to the resurrection.
Paul’s views and beliefs seem to change as he wrote to different churches.
Well that’s not surprising since Paul didn’t write half of “his” letters.
He is sharing with those that “can see” that his whole story plays out in the atmosphere. Be it not too far to imagine that they thought the moon actually touched down to earth upon occasion when looking laterally.
But Christians still have the remnant of Jesus returning. If you go to heaven or hell when you die, what’s the point of Jesus’ return? What reason do Christians give for the second coming? (Shouldn’t it be the third? The resurrection should have been the second.)
It’d suppose the logic is that if God created the physical world, and the physical body, he will redeem it as well; it can’t simply cease forever to exist.
A question: Do *Jews* today believe in any kind of afterlife? That thought had never occurred to me, since I learned the truth about the origins of Christians’ beliefs. Until then, I’d assumed Jews had always believed in “Heaven” and “Hell.”
I’m not sure what most Jews believe. My sense is that many (most?) are either agnostic or doubtful about a personal afterlife.
Since I was raised Jewish, I can answer this one. Modern Rabbinical Judaism (most likely) came from the ancient Pharisees (the same Pharisees mentioned in the NT), who themselves believed in the coming Messiah and the mass resurrection, same as Jesus. Indeed, that’s probably from whom Jesus got the concept. The ancient Essences who (most likely) are connected to the Dead Sea Scrolls also believed in the coming Messiah and mass resurrection of the dead. Indeed, is appears the only ancient Jewish sect that didn’t believe in the coming Messiah and mass resurrection were the Sadducees, who were themselves invested in the Temple cult. When the Temple was destroyed, the Sadducees, subsequently, had no raison d’etre, so they disappeared (though the Karaite Jews of today claim descent from them), and the messianic, mass resurrection belief became orthodox in Judaism. Until today, the coming Messiah and mass resurrection doctrine (which is not that far removed from Jesus’ beliefs) is still a part of Orthodox Judaism, while most liberal Jews don’t much concern themselves with the idea.
Because they didn’t believe in the resurrect they were – sad you see!
Off topic question: I hear some voices out there questioning the legitimacy of Codex Sinaiticus as a genuine early Christian artifact. Is there any fire to this smoke? Could it be a modern forgery (modern in the sense of post enlightenment)?
I”ve never heard this. But there is not doubt whatsoever that it is a mid-fourth century manuscript.
If Christians didn’t believe in a hell until some time later, what did they believe about Satan? Where did he dwell and what was his purpose? Did they think he would receive any type of punishment?
I’m not sure there was a single view, but there were some who thought Satan was present in this world as God’s personal enemy (with different theories about where he came from) and that he would be destroyed at the end (thus, e.g., the Book of Revelation, where he is thrown into the lake of eternal fire)
I had heard either through one of your lectures or books or perhaps an other author all together that in the 2nd century Rome had passed a law saying no new religion can be created, however old religions can be amended. Thus the early Christians connected to the Jewish religion. It went something like that. Am I just imagining having read this or perhaps someone told me this to me and it was a complete fabrication?
No, I don’t believe this is right.
Do you think Jesus and his followers believed in Satan and if so would they have considered him to be the same Satan in the Book of Job?
Yes, and probably.
But the satan mentioned in Job is one of the members of God’s divine council. Not the satan that people think of today, right?
Right!
Elaine Pagels wrote a book called ‘The origin of Satan’ which I found to be very good and informative. It talks about how people perceived the Devil through-out history and the Old and New Testaments.
Bart, has it occurred to you that someday in the future, maybe 500 or 1,000 years from now, that these prophecies may come true via technology and DNA/genetic research? Perhaps then it will be possible to resurrect everyone who ever lived, have them live forever, and have the destructive parts of human nature modified or changed for the better? Then these prophecies will become true in ways that the ancients could only describe as magical.
I don’t think the prophets were looing ahead to the 22nd century!
No, of course they weren’t. But even Jesus supposedly said no one except God knew when these things would happen. So the means and time frame may not be what they expected based on their very limited knowledge, but the prophetic outcome could ultimately be correct. After all, wasn’t the outcome what they were specifically predicting, not the technical how and when? It’s fun to think about.
And then we, as good Christians, can resurrect Hitler, make him live forever, and finally punish him for eternity 😉
I’ve been studying this subject for a while. Prophecies don’t have to be entirely accurate in order for them to be relevant. People who think that predictions should be 100% accurate really don’t understand how precognition works. Personally, I think Jesus was a clairvoyant (or psychic) who read people and was very good at it.
I also think precognition is part of our evolutionary process. http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/11/28/precognition-science-shows-how-our-body-reacts-to-events-up-to-10-seconds-before-they-happen/
Just something to think about!
What did Jesus believe would happen to evil people when the Kingdom of God came?
Either annihilated or punished: I’m not sure which.
Question primarily for Bart, but open to insights from other members.
In addition to the post above, I have read your Time article:
https://time.com/5822598/jesus-really-said-heaven-hell/
I understand that based on your research/ understanding, the concept of hell was not in Judaism/ old testament and for early christians.
I did a search and came across what appears to be mentions of hell in Matthew, Mark, Luke, Jude, and Revelation:
https://www.esv.org/Matthew+8:11%E2%80%9312;Mark+9:42%E2%80%9348;Luke+16:19%E2%80%9331;Jude+3%E2%80%9313;Revelation+20:11%E2%80%9315/
I am thinking this could be for the following reasons, but would love your definitive answer:
1. Is it because they speak of eternal fire but not torment?
2. is it because Jude and Revelation are later (and Jude we do not even believe to be written by said author)?
3. Or perhaps the answer lies in the mistranslation of the greek words.
Thank you, and please keep doing what you’re doing!