Toward the end of this post I will be asking for your opinions and ideas. So I hope you get that far!
Now that I have sent my manuscript on The Triumph of Christianity off to my editor, and before she gets back to me for revisions and edits, I am turning my thoughts to the next book. The reality is that I am not 100% certain what it will be. That still has to be worked out, negotiated, and approved by the publisher. I’m committed to Simon & Schuster for this next book, as well as Triumph (we originally negotiated a two-book deal), so that part is set. But in our contract deal, the next book was more or less called a “player to be named later.” Now it is time to figure out what it will be.
I do have a strong preference, and hope to sell the publisher on the idea. So far they are receptive. But we’ll see.
I started out with a vague idea, that has now evolved into a bona-fide concept. My original idea was that I was interested in exploring in a book where the Christian notion of hell as a place of eternal torment came from. In my head I was calling the book “The History of Hell.” The short story on the notion: the idea of hell did not come from the Old Testament, where there is little sense of eternal punishment for those opposed to God. The most common view in the Hebrew Bible is that everyone who dies goes to a place called “Sheol,” a kind of shadowy place for departed souls, good and wicked.
Some authors of the Hebrew Bible deny even that much of an afterlife. The books of Job and Ecclesiastes directly indicate that the end of life is the end of the story: no post-mortem existence.
The New Testament suggests a variety of ideas about punishment after death. Jesus speaks about people going to Gehenna – a reference to the refuse heap outside of Jerusalem where trash was burned. There was always a fire going. People who were opposed to God would go there, to the never ending fire. And so later in the book of Revelation we learn that everyone who will not inherit the eternal kingdom of God will be cast (along with the Devil and everything opposed to God) into the eternal “lake of fire.” It won’t be pleasant. For eternity.
On the other hand, Jesus speaks of people rejected from the kingdom being “cast into the outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.” That too is very bad. Here though it is not a place of awful light/fire but a realm of darkness.
My sense is that nowhere in the Bible is the common Christian view laid out, that a person dies and then their soul goes to heaven or hell. For the authorities of the Bible – Jesus, his followers, Paul, and the other NT writers who speak about such things – the afterlife was to be a physical event, in the body. The idea that the body and soul could somehow be separated is only rarely suggested in the Bible.
But Christians today think of heaven and hell as places that your soul, not your body, goes. At the same time, they think that there will be physical punishment. How can there be physical punishment without a physical entity (the body)? My sense is that people somehow think that the current body dies but then a person is given some other kind of corresponding body (looking like this one) (at which age?) for eternal rewards or punishments. But where did the idea of the soul leaving the body for reward or punishment come from?
That was what I was planning to deal with in my book. A few weeks ago I talked with my editor about it, and she was excited about the possibility. But she thought – and as soon as she mentioned it, I agreed – that a focus on hell is not only too negative but also too narrow. Why not make it about heaven and hell both, the entire afterlife? About where the idea of afterlife came from. Are there roots in other ancient thought? For example in ancient Greek and Roman philosophers and literary texts? In other religious traditions? Does it emerge from the popular imagination? Where and when and why?
And my editor suggested a better tentative title: “The Invention of the Afterlife.” I loved it. Still love it. I think this is what I want to do next.
I have started accumulating bibliography: books on the views of the afterlife in the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, and other religious traditions both ancient and modern. Books on Near Death Experiences (there are tons of these!) to start reflecting on how many modern people think about such things. And … well, books on other related things.
So here is what I would like from you: ideas! What would you most like a book like that to cover? What issues? What developments? What beliefs? What practices? What questions? What … ever? What would you be most interested in with a book like this? What would make you want to buy it? To read it? To refer it to others?
I’ve never posed this kind of question to readers of the blog before. But I’d be interested in your thoughts and ideas. So let me have them!
If you don’t belong to the blog yet, JOIN!!! You get 5-6 posts each and every week, chances to interact with me and with each other, and massive all around product and satisfaction. For very little money. And we take every dime and give it to charity. So JOIN!!!
Your book on hell is an obsession of mine and explores questions that have haunted me since I was a teen. I suppose you’re familiar with Alice K. Turner’s The History of Hell. She writes in her intro that she is exploring hell as someone who does not believe in eternal perdition or any variation thereof.
Yup, I know the book!
I should add that because of your mentioning Dale Allison, I read his book Night Comes, which has chapters on Near Death Experiences and two chapters on heaven and hell. It’s one of the most profound books I’ve ever read. Thanks for mentioning him a while back.
Another book to add to my list!
Some questions I find interesing is not only why the belief in heaven and hell started but also why continues to be held today. Fear? How are the early Christian view(s) related to the views of other before it (Egyptian, Greek, etc). What made the early christian views different? How did the views of the Christian church develop to today?
I wonder how belief in hell and heaven affected other Christian beliefs or how other Christian beliefs affected hell and heaven. I’ve wondered how Christianity would have developed if it did not hold to the beliefs of hell and heaven.
I particularly like the analysis of how it all came to be, how the Jewish Old Testament concepts morphed into the distinct notions of heaven and hell that many Christians have today. With specific examples of an evolving set of beliefs– The Evolution of the Ever After.
I suppose the scope could easily get out of hand and need to be bounded, but certainly with your expertise and background first emphasis would be on the evolution (pun intended) of afterlife beliefs from Old Testament and Christianity. You would probably include the beliefs of the cultures around Jews-Christians and how they were likely influenced by them. These would all easily be in your area.
Of big interest for completeness as you alluded to would be discussion of “human experiences” and how they could affect beliefs. You mentioned “near death experiences”, and certainly dreams and visions could cause people to think there is an afterlife. I’ve also read about such things as infra-sound and other things which can cause weird actual effects on people. Things such as frequency resonances around the size/wavelength of eyes which can cause the nerves to have fleeting false images (“I know something is in the room…”). Could places of historical oracles or “ghosts” actually be places of real effects caused by wind blowing through with unusual infra-sound vibrations (ever drive with one car window down and get odd sounds, open another to balance pressure and gone?) or other phenomena? You could probably write whole books on many of these. But at least addressing key ones or even pointing out that many things people claim to experience may actually be “real” per science, just not what they think it is. Again, probably far to big of a scope in detail, but useful to address for those that would reject your main theme by claiming “But I had this personal experience so I know…”.
I have been looking at times for a book on the development of hell in particular. Which of the resources you’ve gathered seems the most useful analysis of that question?
I haven’t read them all yet! So I’m not sure which will be most useful.
Alright, this is exciting! Sorry if this is lengthy. For me as a formal fundamental, evangelical, Bible-believing (not Bible literate, mind you, but believing) Christian, I have a perspective that I know I will share with many on this topic. Lets face it; the afterlife is CLEARLY a major topic and motivator for evangelical Christianity and also many other major religions. “Hellfire & Brimstone” sermons were quite the norm for me while growing up. I personally feel that the indoctrination into young children that they are bad, sinful people from the moment of conception who have an eternity of torture and punishment awaiting them if they aren’t saved is basically child abuse. So, hell is an extremely effective tool to “win souls”. Taking the time to spell out how this human invention came about, I believe, is paramount in helping people out of the guilty trap they have either been raised in or heard about. I think many evangelical Christians never stop to think that hell is not unique to their religion. That should raise questions immediately. Consider the fact that you have 1.5 billion Muslims in the world who profess Allah as God and that without believing in him and following the Quran, you are damned to hell (sound familiar)? Does it not strike Evangelicals as odd that they don’t lose a wink of sleep when they are told this? Why is that? It’s because, more than likely, they were not a product of Muslim geography when they were born. If they had been born in say, Tehran, they would be indoctrinated the same way. My point is that the idea of hell is an indoctrination that is not only man made, but one that is man made across the religious spectrum. Although the religions are all different, they all use eternal damnation as a strong motivator. I think if you can show effectively show that hell is man made (and dang near unbiblical…both because it is very shady in the bible and because its a part of other non biblical religions) you may get across to many people that may this “reality” they have been so convinced by, is no reality at all and that they can live incredibly free, moral lives with no condemnation for not following a specific religion that teaches them that hell awaits. Just as in your other books, if you can effectively (as you do) get across the HISTORICAL hell and the THEOLOGICAL hell, you will no doubt make great strides. All you have to do is change everything I said about torture into eternal bliss and I think you can explain heaven (more said about heaven than hell in ancient literature I’m sure?). Maybe use some of your research in Jesus Before the Gospels to show how memory and near death experiences of heaven and hell work in the mind would be great as well (think the book Heaven is For Real).
“Although the religions are all different, they all use eternal damnation as a strong motivator. ”
Neither Judaism nor Buddhism (among others) do this.
Love the title and can’t wait for this book!!
Having come from a Fundamentalist/Charismatic background, and having frequent interactions with that people group, I think that the idea of the afterlife is a “given and factual” inevitability while virtually no consideration is given to the actual history of the idea. Couple of things that I think would make this book interesting and worthy of purchase (as if any of your books “are not” worthy):
1- Going from Hebrew thought of a nebulous Sheol to Dante’s Inferno, why the need for the increased severity? Economic, political, societal…
2- How has the idea of the afterlife shaped modern Christianity?
3- How did the implementation of this idea get disseminated in the written history?
These are just a few that come off the top of my head.
An immediate thought: I *don’t* like the title “The Invention of the Afterlife” – because it *takes for granted* that there *really* is no such thing. Even among potential readers who agree – or can be convinced – that the *Christian concept* of the afterlife is an “invention,” there will be many who believe in some other form of survival (the most likely, reincarnation).
I’d like to see you delve more deeply into the subject, and deal with *all* known traditions about types of survival.
My response to the title was the same; it sounds like it’s going to be a polemic, or at least, it seems to presuppose that the afterlife does not exist. This may make it a turn-off for many (thinking in particular of the bookstore browser unfamiliar with Bart and his work.) Title-wise, I would lean more toward something like, “The Idea of the Afterlife: Its Origins, Development, and Evolution,” or, “The Afterlife: The Idea’s Origins, Development, and Evolution.”
I think it would intrigue at least as many prospective readers as it might put off. It would set them to wondering if it was invented and whether the author can make the case. I appreciated in Hyam Maccoby’s title, “The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity.”
I think the title is just fine, even presuming there could be an afterlife. I don’t know who first quipped it, but it’s no more confrontational than, “God created man in his own image, then man returned the favor.”
Personally, I see no possibility of life after the death of the body, in any sense that we would understand as life or individuality. But the profound sense of “I-ness” humans experience in self-awareness made it all but inevitable, in my opinion, that we would at some point invent the concept of the immortal soul.
But enough about what I think. What I should like to know, if you can search it out, is why Christianity and other religions conceived of a separate place for our disembodied souls to carry on their existence, whether Sheol, Hell, or Heaven. Could we not as well continue to float about invisibly in this world, appearing to our friends and loved ones as needed – like Jacob Marley? Related to this might be the question, why the Jesus of the canon spoke more about hell than heaven (a factoid I remember from my Bible classes at North Greenville College). Is this a smoking gun that suggests the afterlife was more about social control than eternal hope?
Thank you, Bart, for allowing your readers this chance to have input into your writing process!
The early jewish response to the “Christian” view of the after life. Since christians used jewish scripture there had to be a rift between the groups.
+1
Therevada Buddhism (and Mahayana too, although I know less about this) is big on re-incarnation and carrying forward good/bad deeds into the next life. Eventually, after many lives, one achieves Nirvana (the end of all one’s suffering; liberation; complete nothingness). It would be interesting if any of these ideas, perhaps transmitted through trade, had an influence on early Christianity. The Buddha (Gautama Sidhartha) is supposed to have live around 500 BC and the Pali canon began to be written down 200 to 300 years after that, so it is certainly possible from the timescale perspective. We also know that there had been trade between the sub-continent and the West, at least since Alexander’s time, and possible well before that.
But if reincarnation itself (minus the dogmas) is a *fact* – and there are good reasons for believing it is – the idea didn’t have to be “spread” in normal ways. Very few people have spontaneous memories of previous lives. But some do; so people in many parts of the world may have discussed their memories with others.
The Invention of the Afterlife – I think it is a wonderful idea and I would definitely interested in the book. What I would like to get out of this book is the various historical developments leading to the idea that there is an afterlife with perspectives from both western and eastern traditions. However, I would love to know why the psychological need to cling to these ideas. So, if possible, it would be best if you can examine the sociological impact of heaven and hell, and afterlife in shaping western civilization as in the vein of Dr. Harari’s “brief history of humankind”. Thanks again for all the wonderful posts.
It is certainly amusing that those Christians who base so much of their appeal on fear of hell, which doesn’t appear in the Bible, are the same ones who claim to be entirely Bible-based.
Also, one does not find the notion of the Fall or a figure named Satan who is the incarnation of evil in the Hebrew Bible.
A book on the afterlife will be your bestselling book to date. Just about every single person who has lived from the beginning of time has thought about it and has some kind of view on it. Who wouldn’t want to read the book! Even people who would not touch your other books would be tempted to purchase it.
The one thing I would like to see in your book would be an epilogue on your personal view of the matter.
Thanks for your other books and this blog. I really appreciate them.
I really like the idea of a book on the origins of hell when you first brought it up, and I really like the idea of expanding it to include heaven and afterlife in general. I just hope it doesn’t take too much away from the discussion on hell. Would it focus on the idea of “eternal conscious torment”, or also discuss ideas of universalism or annihilationism? What about Purgatory? I don’t think I would want too much of the book discussing those ideas as it might take away from the bigger purpose, but it would be interesting to hear a little bit on those too if you think you can fit it in.
Great idea for a book.
I would be particularly interested in the development of hell as an idea. I have heard theories of it coming from zoroastrianism and others that the modern day concept lies with Dante. Also curious where the concept of purgatory came from.
Your next two books sound very exciting.
I would love you to do at least a chapter on what the Ante Nicene Christians believed about the after life. You are probably already aware that they had very different views than modern Christians do.
They believed that the faithful did not go straight to heaven but rather resided in Abraham’s Bosom in the center of the earth (think of the rich man Lazarus) until the Resurrection of the dead at the end of time.
David Bercot has recorded a message on it that I found very interesting. It can be found here: http://www.scrollpublishing.com/cgi-bin/sc/ss_mb.cgi?storeid=*10aa1248a706bb410f4e&ss_parm=Afea52bec1d909cc8afa92dbeb3d14034
He has also edited a Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs that you may find a helpful point of reference for further reading. It can be purchased on his website or any online bookstore.
On your point about hell being a place of fire/light or darkness. I once heard a sermon that said that sulphur burns invisibly. So that hell truly will be a place of fire and darkness. Others spiritualize the fire and the darkness and suggest that these are figures of speech referring to the minds and consciences of the doomed.
I really like the general idea of addressing “Biblical” notions of the afterlife, from a historical context. Particularly Hell, Heaven, and The Satan. In fact, my friend and I were hopping you’d tackle this very idea!
He wrote a book review/blog post about “Biography of Satan: A Historical Exposition of the Devil and His Fiery Dominions” by Kersey Graves.There were some good ideas in it, and some that weren’t that great, so we both thought you’d be perfect for this sort of thing.
Hi Bart,
This sounds like and excellent book and one that also interests me greatly. In my talks with Fundamentalists I have discussed with them the beliefs of Judaism and how they are in conflict with Christian beliefs. For example, on a website, Judaism101.com, it teaches that Salvation (being pardoned for earthly sins so one can live in Heaven after death) is a foreign concept to Judaism:
“Salvation from What?
The concept of salvation from sin as it is understood in Christianity has no equivalent in Judaism.
Salvation from sin is unnecessary in Judaism, because Judaism does not believe that mankind is inherently evil or sinful or in need of Divine Intervention in order to escape eternal damnation. In fact, Judaism does not even believe in eternal damnation.
Judaism recognizes that people have sinful impulses, but Judaism also recognizes that people have an inclination to do good and to be good, and that people are able to choose whether to follow the evil inclination or the good inclination.
It is within our ability to be righteous. The Torah itself says, “The word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.” (Deut. 30:14). And if we miss the mark, when we fail to fulfill the good laws that G-d has provided for us, then we can obtain forgiveness through prayer, repentance and good deeds.
When the Torah speaks of G-d as our Salvation or our Redeemer, it is not speaking of salvation or redemption from sin; rather, it speaks of salvation from the very concrete, day-to-day problems that we face, such as redemption from slavery in Egypt, or salvation from our enemies in war.”
Fundamentalists have said that ancient Judaism always taught a theology that is consistent to Christian theology of where mankind has sinned and salvation via a blood sacrifice was needed to enter the afterlife. Therefore the above teaching from Judaism is not what the ancient Jews believed (I always find it funny that Christians seem to knew more about Judaism than Jews themselves) and is a new teaching from reformed Judaism. My question is, is the Christian view of Judaism accurate and did ancient Judaism teach a theology about how to get to the afterlife that is similar to Christian view or is the Christian view of salvation, heaven and hell their own creation?
I’ll be dealing with all this on the blog!
The Rabbinical Judaism of today believes these things, yes. But the Judaism of Jesus’ day was definitely more diverse, including, among others, Jewish groups who believed the “unrighteous” and the “wicked” would be damned to the eternal fire. The Dead Sea Scrolls show the Jewish Essenes believed this. On the other end of the spectrum, Jews such as the Sadducees didn’t even believe in life after death, let alone salvation and condemnation to Heaven and Hell, respectively.
In the small group Bible study I lead on Tuesday nights, the topic of Biblical interpretation came up. I mentioned the Wesleyan concept of the quadrilateral, specifically how church tradition we have learned as children has influenced how we read the BIble as adults. The afterlife is absolutely one of those concepts that people have had handed down to them, but it is not a significantly developed concept in the Bible itself. Does Milton and Dante influence our understanding of the afterlife more than the Bible?
Rob Bell in his book “Love Wins” tackled the question of what the Christian faith is to be about, at least as far as the Bible can support. He asserts that with the Bible the afterlife is not anywhere as significant as this life, and points out just how few verses in the Bible actually deal with Hell. What verses supposedly deal with Hell do not address what many people think they do (he also mentions Gehenna as the trash heap outside Jerusalem, Sheol, etc.).
For my part, I get frustrated that many of those who supposedly hold the Bible in the highest regard have so little respect for what it actually says in its original context. Why was Rob Bell’s book controversial? He is just doing some basic exegesis, noting how little is said about the topic of the afterlife, and suggesting that the church should be about addressing the “hells” people experience in this life. Why does the “New Perspective” on Paul get so much derogatory criticism from some folks today? These are efforts (by Rob Bell, N.T. Wright, E.P. Sanders,etc.) to read the Bible in its original context, and if the resulting messages do not align with later theological developments in the Christian tradition, then so be it. Perhaps it is time to reconsider certain Christian traditions of interpretation. But there are some who just don’t want to give up on their traditional readings of scripture.
A book addressing where our contemporary understandings of Heaven and Hell have come from and comparing them with what the Bible actually says can be of great value to a Christian like me. I am forever explaining to some folks where the idea of the rapture came from (John Nelson Darby) and how old the concept is (Nineteenth Century). Both obsessive end-times speculation and an over-emphasis on the afterlife have kept many Christians from doing justice, walking humbly, and helping widows and orphans in their distress.
Your proposed book would be very welcome to me and others like me who want the church to help people in the here-and-now, and not just sell them “fire insurance.”
The world needs more Christians like you, Lee. Well-said!
I would like to see an examination of the POLITICAL developments of the afterlife. Seems to me that the concept would have been expropriated by rulers who saw fusion with religion as both a way to achieve a stamp of divine legitimacy on their rule (i.e. Constantine’s victory at the Mulvian Bridge), and as a tool of societal control, as in “If you disobey your king I may not catch you or be able to make you pay but you will in the afterlife of torment.” This fusion of temporal and spiritual is at its apogee, of course, with the growth in power of the Catholic Church. So how did the concept evolve in the earliest years of Christianity to become both a religious AND political doctrine (The Divine Right of Kings)?
(ex-seminarian, VERY long ago)
I love the ideas so far…the one thing that fascinates me is the disconnect between the idea of an unbelievably harsh punishment, and the idea of a loving God. More specifically, how believers in a harsh afterlife are able to reconcile these two notions.
Even if the bible does not consistently teach this idea–I’ve never understood how so many Christians are not bothered by this apparent contradiction. When I was a Christian, this bothered me to no end.
It seems that those who believe in the existence of a harsh afterlife should be the most miserable people on the planet, because so many people, including some of their loved ones, probably are headed there. But they don’t seem to be miserable people. If hell were a physical place, and we could go there and see dead people in misery, we would also be in misery anticipating this outcome for the living. The fact that believers don’t seem to be miserable suggests to me that, in some way, they don’t fully believe in a harsh afterlife.
It also seems that a believer in a harsh afterlife would never even consider having children, for fear that they might end up in that afterlife. That also suggests that they in some way have their doubts…or that there’s some kind of cognitive dissonance reduction occurring.
I agree with your points. Believing in heaven and hell requires an ability to compartmentalize and be in denial about the unrelenting cruelty of hell.
Dr. Ehrman,
I love the idea of discussing the various themes of hell, Satan, demons and the afterlife and their origins. I would also like to see more work done on the Son of Man concept and how Persian religion played a role in the development of Christ’s sermons and his view of the end times. I personally believe that too much has been made of Roman and Greek influences while ignoring the first and more successful Persian Empire’s influence on the diaspora, the Pharisees, and the authors of Daniel and Enoch. I would also like to see you explore the idea that Jesus could easily have been perceived as the prophesied Zoroastrian savior. Thanks for the opportunity to make suggestions,
Joe
Here’s what I wrote for the Mailbag a few weeks ago on the subject of “Fear of Dying”:
flshrP September 20, 2016
Bart E wrote: “Now my view is that death is the end of the story. We didn’t exist with consciousness before we were born. And we won’t exist with consciousness after we die. We can’t have consciousness without a (physical, functioning) brain. And we can’t feel physical pain without a nervous system. We will have neither after we die.”
That’s what I think. In my case the trigger was the realization that there is no such thing as an immaterial, immortal human soul. So I reject the Platonic body-soul duality. The idea of such a soul is a legacy of primitive animistic thinking that confuses agency with process. Example: wind is a process that a mass of gas, i.e. the atmosphere, can perform in the presence of the Earth’s rotation and uneven solar heating. Primitive humans assigned agency to the wind process in the form of a wind god.
The human mind is a process that is performed by the human brain. And at death that process ceases as the brain begins to disintegrate. No brain, no mind. Ancient animistic thinking assigned an agent, the mythical human soul, to explain the brain process, i.e. the mind.
As Sean Carroll, Caltech physicist points out, our brains are built from atoms and, after nearly a century of experimental research, we know all the naturally-occurring forces (electromagnetism, gravity, strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force) that act on atoms and have any effect at all on our everyday life. An immaterial soul would need some type of force to animate (i.e. move) the atoms in our body. If that force existed, we would have already detected it in particle accelerator collisions. And we haven’t. Ergo, we have no evidence of an immaterial human soul at the smallest detectable level. Other forces undoubtedly exist in the natural world. But these forces are either too weak, too short range, and/or too short lived to affect the atoms in our body as we go through our everyday lives.
It’s very difficult for all of us to shake the belief in an immaterial, immortal human soul. That’s because all of us are ruled by our most primitive motivators–fear and greed. The great human fear is fear of non-existence after death. Human greed lusts for an everlasting afterlife of pleasurable rewards. That’s why religious belief has such a powerful hold over us. To the detriment of human society.
For your new book, before you get into the issue of the origin of the heaven and hell myths, I suggest you handle the issue of the origin of the myth of the immaterial, immortal human soul. If such a soul doesn’t exist, then, of course, the heaven/hell issue is moot. However, since so many individuals believe in such a soul, I think a discussion of the origin of this myth has a place in your new book.
I don’t believe in “hell,” any more than you do. Nor do I believe in “God.”
But it puzzles me that people arguing against “hell” never seem to think of this. *If* “God” existed, and was *omnipotent*, *of course* he’d be capable of making someone suffer eternally! *An omnipotent Being wouldn’t be bound by the laws of physics.*
So if we want to convince someone they *can’t* be tortured eternally, the only way to go about it is to make them see there’s no evidence for the existence of this “God.”
Great concept, but I think “The Birth of the Afterlife” is better than “The Invention of the Afterlife.” I also think it would be very interesting to deal with how the afterlife is differently conceived in our more modern variants of Christianity like Mormonism and the Witnesses. Also I think the modern concepts of time and infinity are interesting to consider in the context of discussing the afterlife.
A debate is occurring in many churches as to how to stop declining church membership. Regular church attendees are aging and not being replaced by millennials.
This is a actual case study of a large mega church. The elders fired the existing pastor which was preaching the traditional Pauline message of the cross .
The Choir And hymns were replaced with upbeat praise bands with five guitars and loud amps ( earplugs provided)
A Young pastor was hired wearing only black tee shirts and pants and he started preaching the public message of Jesus….,being a pacifist, loving your neighbor, social justice getting along w family and friends, To follow Jesus means you are dedicated to these issues.
He demeans those who only want a “ticket to heaven “.
After a couple of years the older members Who support the church with their money demanded that he be fired .
Now the church membership is continuing to decline as the older members die off.
As to the afterlife, I think most of the current people living in Developed countries are far removed from real mass deaths. We freak out when the media reports the stabbing death off a couple of people. If you live in the bubble protected society of the west you do not think of the afterlife until you are very close to death and medical options have been exhausted.
A radio preacher today used The fundamentalist line “you are only one breath away from death, so believe in Jesus and live forever “. I think most people reject that line of thinking because if they’re sick they will not believe in Jesus they will go to the doctor and expect to be healed . Death and the afterlife is not a pressing issue to most people today because it seems to be remote as life expectancies just keep increasing .
TheVoices of those facing genocide are not heard and we have no idea what they’re thinking Other than to survive one more day.
(1) Why is belief in afterlife common?
– hallucinations after death of loved ones
– need for purpose to pursue in life
– need for fairness
– cycles in seasons (births in spring, harvests, etc.)
It might be easier to ask why some cultures DIDN’T believe in an afterlife.
(2) What is the purpose of life? Buddhists might hope to be reincarnated into a life that is more conducive to attaining an end to rebirth. Gnostics believe whatever. Different Christians have different ideas about the purpose of life and judgment after death (faith vs. works).
(3) Sacrifices and burial rituals might give insights. Some apparently believed that burning a human or animal was a method of sending that soul to heaven via the smoke. Sacrifices to Poseidon were sometimes drowned in the sea. The Zoroastrians apparently believed that birds would transport the deceased person to heaven.
(4) The location of heaven and hell might be interesting. Greeks placed requests for magical aid at wells, because the water was coming from the spirit world located under the Earth. Mayans thought caves were sacred.
(5) Eastern Orthodox seems to have ideas that differ from other Christians. Cremation is not allowed. Some Orthodox believe that heaven and hell are the same location and the soul’s attitude makes the difference. Also there is the belief in saints. I believe there is also a stronger sense that the soul cannot exist without a physical body.
(6) The idea of stars representing angels and deceased. Apparently the some of the Arabian religions like the Sabians felt this way.
(7) Many Christians believe that pets do not go to heaven.
(8) Many Christians believe in soul sleep, so any vision of a deceased love one is considered a “familiar spirit”.
You’re omitting the fact that there’s hard *evidence* for reincarnation. See “Life Before Life,” by Jim B. Tucker. A stunning number of children have had past-life memories that can’t be satisfactorily explained in any other way.
I’m interested in whether Jesus really thought in terms of ‘everlasting’ and ‘eternal’ like we do. Does he think of the afterlife as lasting for ever? If so, are there places where he teaches the contradictory notion that it’s finite? John 17:3 seems to suggest a usage of the word ‘eternal’ that is different than how we think of it.
Yes, there are a number of places where the word(s) translated as “eternal” clearly does not mean eternal in the modern sense. I have read a number of discussions of the words olam and aion (+aionios, etc.) in the original languages in various places that suggest that this word as used often has more of a qualitative connotation than a quantitative one.
The one message you will never hear discussed or preached in the traditional church is who wrote The new testament and when was It written, and what language was it written. The issue that The disciples and the general population of Galilee in the first century could not read or write is never mentioned . The vast majority of church members assume that the disciple John just sat down and wrote the gospel of John in Greek a few years after Jesus died .
Anyone who questions this assumption will be branded as a heretic and asked to leave the church . Not very loving .
That’s a big issue with millennials.
Bart, as you know, an important world religion that has “Invented the Afterlife” is Islam. Consider interviewing Dr. Sam Harris, an atheist, and author of “The End of Faith — Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason” (2004). … I’m impressed by his knowledge of early Christianity and Islam. … Just a thought.
“Evolution of” sounds more inviting than “Invention of”. The use of “Invention” implies an answer or a (negative) stance on the physical (or metaphysical) existence of the subject rather than the evolving views of Jewish/Christian/other cultures on the subject. “Evolution” only implies change and feels more appropriate for the scope of the project as I understand if from reading your post.
I’ve always been interested in where exactly this heaven could be.
This may be outside of your state scope, but one thing I’d like to see is a critical examination of the idea that ancient pre-Christian religions didn’t have an afterlife. It seems to show up in ancient Egyptian religion, but seems heavily downplayed in Mesopotamian religions (an influence on Old Testament attitudes?).
“We” have found graves that are over 20,000 years old that, along with the bodies, have possessions and tolls or weapons in them–clear indications that those who buried the dead believed these things would be of use to the dead in some sort of next life.
The “invention” of the afterlife still has a negative sound to it. A Christian would hear that and feel like somebody calling them a deceiving child (read fabricate, concoct, dream up) instead of being seriously devoted to something they feel has been revealed by God as truth (read originate, design, pioneer). Maybe something like “Conceptions of the Afterlife”, or “Envisioning the afterlife: An historical investigation into the theological development of live after death”?
I am personally very interested in how Christianity came to accept the concept.
– Plato?
– Pharisees?
– The fact that the danged kingdom never came?
Does this get to the real meaning behind being “saved”? The Jews followed the law out of gratitude for the covenant. They had already received their end, so they did so as a response. But Christianity reversed it with the salvation thing–first I believe (and act accordingly), and then I’m given a reward in eternity. Did reading Matthew drive this?
How did Purgatory come into play?
I would also interested in the later development that I could be bad all my life, but convert on my deathbed and be saved.
Or is “believing” in the death and resurrection of Christ really simply mean “accepting” that Jesus did it for us? Is accepting then just really saying thank-you? Is the afterlife simply what gives us something to look forward to since the kingdom never seems to arrive? I get the basics of Romans, but your book idea might be what I need to bridge a very large gap.
I’d love a book that doesn’t neglect the basic OT influences, such as the motifs from the prophets about the day of wrath, God’s wrath/judgement as fire, or Is 66,24.
Its such a shame when a good NT study focuses so much on “pagan” influence that the most basic OT backgtound is neglected (or worse, overlooked).
I’d definitely read it. Regarding near death experiences: some surgeons, to address the claim by patients that when their heart stopped on the operating table, they rose up and floated around the room, have put an object on a high shelf in the operating room which could not be seen by someone standing on the floor. The next time someone said they floated above their body, they would be asked what was on the shelf. The only test results I’ve seen were ones where no one said they floated (so no one saw the object). But maybe addressing NDE would be expanding the topic too much – from past history to current tests.
I really want to know more about how well the various Christian afterlife models were received in the early Church by well read Jews, the diaspora, and Gentiles from about 33 to 200 CE or so. Particularly, plausible reasons for the exaltation of soul/spirit over limitations of flesh and matter. Perhaps how some, now heretical, Gnostic Christians saw the body as important enough to practice asceticism, while others (especially the poor minority) did not find the body important enough to neglect food offered to idols. Therefore, a lot of people eventually came to believe that perhaps the soul is so superior to the body that the “flesh” must be evil and Satanic, while the immaterial spirit is what connects us to God. Dale Martin touched on these issues in the open Yale courses. Sometimes ideas win out by social status majority, other times by yet more complicated means. Just shooting some ideas out there!
I am especially interested in “substance dualism” , where did the idea of a separate soul that would be punished or rewarded come from .In my sunday school days we never considered any kind of new body; it was always the soul that counted. However, I also find all the other aspects you mentioned fascinating and I’m ready to buy and read the book!
Dr. Ehrman, since I’m not a religious scholar per se, I can’t speak as an expert in the religious concepts of heaven and hell. But as a social scientist who is currently working on the evolution of morality, one of the topics I regularly tackle is the notion of Divine Justice. I see Divine Justice as the conceptual zenith of human social justice (cf. Hobbes’ Leviathan). That is, as we appeal for more and greater justice, as we go up the social hierachy (e.g. magistrate to lord to king to emperor and so on; also, cf. lower courts all the way up to the supreme court) we eventually move off the earthly plane out of practically necessity (for who can be higher than the ultimate human authority?) to an even “higher authority” to achieve “justice”. And that’s where the appeal to a god, or the supreme God of the universe takes over. God, quite literally, is the ultimate authority in the universe. And the concepts of heaven and hell emerge out of the concept of an ultimate universal authority. If there must be an ultimate arbiter of Justice (God), then there must be an ultimate reward and punishment meted out by the ultimate arbiter (heaven and hell). And that’s where the idea of Divine Justice comes from.
As for the evolution of the idea of the afterlife itself, well, that’s a very, very complex history (which I’m assuming you’re intending to distill for a general audience). The very idea of an afterlife dates far back even before recorded history. Even ancient Neanderthal’s used to bury their dead with objects, as if souls of the dead had a use for those objects. We see thousands of ancient tombs with objects that suggest the survivors believed the dead person’s soul is living on after physical death. The souls of ancient Egyptians were believed to partake in journeys and endeavers after death. And the ancient Greeks, of course, had a very detailed mythology of the soul’s experiences in the after. Odysseus travels to the underworld where he meets the souls of dead heroes. Orpheus travels to the underworld to save the soul of his Eurydice. And so on. In other words, by the time we get to the 1st century, the idea of souls surviving physical death is nothing new.
Except, it was relatively new to Judaism. It appears Jews didn’t begin to adopt the doctrine of life after death until after the Babylonian Exile. And at that point the afterlife became entangled with the Jewish ideas of the Messiah, the Messianic Age, the battle between the Righteous before God and the Wicked (i.e. Armageddon) and the mass resurrection of the dead for the final Judgment, reward and punishment. For ancient rationales for the soul and the afterlife, Plato’s argument for the soul, the afterlife and the judgment, are great, though flawed (if I weren’t an atheist I might have been convinced by it). I would recommend the Phaedo, the Phaedrus and the Gorgias.
As to current study into the evolution of the concept of the afterlife and Divine Justice, I can’t say I’ve seen much compelling research (which is why I’m doing my own research). But you might want to check out some of the work done by research into re-creating out-of-body experiences and the sense of a supernatural presence, such as Stanley Koren’s “God Helmut”. (Researchers have been unable to replicate Koren’s research, however). Also, the experiences induced within sensory deprivation tanks also seems to mimic that of profound spiritual experiences. All in all, the research for this sort of topic is still rather slim. If I could make one recommendation, if I were you I would contact the neuroscientist (and notorious “new atheist”) Sam Harris, who actually specializes in the neurological basis of spiritual experiences, and he could probably provide you an embarrassment of riches in this field.
This falls under whatever more than historical. Yet it is an articulation of the afterlife with particular reference to death before and after the Rapture. Several years ago while watching a television program hosted by a couple of Fundamentlists (I assume, nor do I remember whether they were specifically Baptist or of another formal denomination) I learned of their description of where souls go after death and then what will happen after Christ returns.
They provided a diagram to explain their belief. When a person dies the soul falls down this long oval shaped tube. At the end of the tube are two circles. One called Hades and the other called Hell. All souls are sent to Hades. When Christ returns he will decide who goes to Heaven and who goes to Hell. Hades will be emptied. Those destined for Heaven shoot back up the oval shaped tube to Heaven. Those destined for Hell shift over to the other circle representing Hell.
Two things intrigued me. One was the distinction between Hades and Hell. I figured that Hades was a parallel to a Catholic Purgatory. But I’d never heard the term Hades used this way nor of a Protestant form of Purgatory. The other was the diagram itself. Not an image I would associate with conservative Protestant theology.
I would be interested in the development of the
idea of the soul itself.
The threat and the fear of hell fire loomed large in the religious tradition that I grew up in. Even now as an adult, it fills me with a sense of dread. For this reason I would like to know the history of the development of this doctrine.
It would be interesting if you talked about the Celtic vision of the afterlife–which was somewhat comparable to the Hindu idea, in that they believe in reincarnation, but also quite distinct. They believed in the Otherworld, and you go there when you die no matter what kind of life you lived, or what kind of beliefs you had. You spend time there, before you are reincarnated in a new form. The Otherworld is a place of limitless possibilities, whereas the mortal world is very limited. It can be beautiful, or frightening, or just endlessly strange. All that is good or evil comes from it, all mystical power, all authority, even love. It exists alongside our reality, and you can reach it through various access points while still alive, or by sailing west over the ocean. Also, the border between the Otherworld and our world can grow thin at certain times of year–such as the feast of Samhain, or as we call it now, Halloween. All kinds of things, good and bad, can slip in and manifest themselves to us at that time. Trick or treat. 🙂
A fascinating subject, and a good idea to broaden the focus.
I am interested in how the ideas of the early church changed as it went from being predominantly Jewish to being predominantly gentile. How were Jewish apocalyptic concepts redefined into a gentile cultural framework? Specifically, how did the idea of the Kingdom of God (on earth) become the idea of Heaven (in an afterlife)?
Also I’m fascinated by the idea of the “Judgment”.
thanks and good luck!
Thanks for the opportunity for input. I would love to see – to read about – the “evolution” of belief in an afterlife. I’m thinking a chronology – a logical progression – of belief from Greek philosophers through the Jewish tradition, early Christianity (Jewish Christians and Pagan Christians, apocalyptic and non- apocalyptic) and on to the present day, with stops along the way to hear from key individuals who influenced the direction the evolution followed. Perhaps a review of what, if any, external (non-Christian) thought influenced the evolutionary path of Christian belief in an afterlife and how/why that happened. Did the Protestant Reformation affect the belief in an afterlife and if so, how/why? I suspect that in modern Christianity there is not one universal afterlife belief. There are probably nuanced differences between Catholic and Protestant afterlife beliefs (purgatory?) and even differences between different Protestant denominations. Also, since cultural backgrounds influence religious beliefs, there are no doubt differences between how Haitian Christians view afterlife vis-à-vis African Christians vis-à-vis North American Christians, for example. It would be interesting to learn how those variants developed. Wow! Quite a shopping list!
I think your editor is right on both accounts: including the concept of heaven in the book and using the suggested title because of its implication.
I am extremely fascinated with NDEs and have been reading about them for years. In fact, when I come across someone who has had an NDE, I find them on FB and friend them! The topic is massive and can really push people’s buttons both for and against their validity. Some things to consider for your book:
What exactly is a near death experience (NDE)?
Who was the first person we have on record as having a nde and what was the nature of the experience?
Do children have nde’s? Are they about the afterlife and are they associated with their parents’ beliefs? Who is the youngest person recorded to have a nde and what did it entail?
What studies have been conducted on nde’s? Is there any validity to them?
What causes nde’s?
How long do nde’s last?
Are there certain medical conditions (ex. cardiac arrest) that are associated with a nde more than others?
What’s the percentage of nde’s that are about the afterlife versus something else?
What’s the ratio of heavenly experiences compared to hellish-type experiences?
What do we know about group or shared nde’s?
Are nde’s primarily associated with the person’s religious background? In other words, will a Christian see Jesus during a nde and a Muslim see Allah? An atheist–nothing?
Alex Tsakiris has a website called Skeptico: http://skeptiko.com/about-alex-tsakiris/about-skeptiko/. He is very one-sided on the subject, but what might be valuable are his interviews. Anytime someone publishes a study, article, or writes a book about NDE or the afterlife, he tries his best to conduct an interview with the researcher/author. They can be watched as videos or read as transcripts.
Here are 3 major websites about the subject just to get an idea of how huge the topic is–
http://iands.org/home.html
http://www.nderf.org/
http://www.near-death.com/
Your brain might explode if I include more than what’s here.
I almost forgot: Has the concept of the afterlife changed in modern times? What is today’s general consensus about what the afterlife will be like? From what I’ve read about NDE’s, the idea of heaven and hell has evolved into something entirely different from what it used to be.
I admit I’ve never been particularly interested in NDEs – probably because (1) I accept the idea that consciousness can exist outside the body, don’t need to be convinced of that; and (2) I assume most of the content of NDEs is hallucinatory, based on what people expect or hope for. I “died” and had to be resuscitated twice, more than twenty years ago, and didn’t recall any NDEs. But I think we may have them and forget them, just like dreams.
Here’s what I want to tell you. Re Jim B. Tucker’s books on the *past-life memories* of children: most of the children don’t mention anything *between* lives, but some do. And they run the gamut! Some remember having been in “Heaven” and met “God.” But others remember just having “hung around” in their old neighborhoods, invisible to others. Observing their funerals…somehow choosing and following their future parents…all kinds of things! My guess is that these experiences are comparable to NDEs: mostly hallucinatory, but occasionally based on *real* observations by a disembodied consciousness.
I have a friend who said he distinctly remembers being in a war plane during WWII and being shot down. He said that he was always terrified of joining the military because of that *memory*. I’ve had my own experiences (not with reincarnation) that can’t be explained as well.
I used to teach severe/profound cognitively delayed boys, aged 9-22. A lot of them had feral-type behaviors that they were either born with or had resulted from neglectful, abusive parents. Some of the abuse was absolutely vile. What is the point in all that? It doesn’t make sense to me. Some of those boys rarely, if ever, experienced happiness or pleasure. They didn’t seem to have the capability for it. Some of them were continually miserable or in constant pain. That is a pointless existence…they had no idea what day it was, or the season of the year, or that they were on a planet called earth.
So, I do see that there’s more to our existence combined with a complete pointlessness to it. All in all, I’d say I’m bumfuzzled.
Wow! I love this book idea and the tentative title. The idea of heaven is “the” crucial idea that makes Christianity run. Without it, the church would die in a heartbeat. But this concept is never mentioned in the Old Testament so where did it come from? Clearly, it meets wishes we all have, but how did it get so entrenched in us with so little evidence? Do we think that Jesus actually said that He was going to prepare a place for us?
I’d have said the Kingdom of God is the crucial idea that makes Christianity run. Unfortunately some folks have literalized the author of the Gospel of Matthew’s name for it that was originally just meant to respect the divine name, and assumed it was all about Heaven rather than all about God’s reign in the here and now.
My guess as to how it got so entrenched is because it is a cheap way to evangelize. You don’t need to explain the what and how of following the will of God. All you need to get people to sign on was to convince them they don’t want a scary afterlife. It is a far more simple sales pitch. You still see it on tracts today.
For some with an ultra-high view of scripture, any teeny-tiny text counts as the inerrant, infallible, Ipsissima Verba of God, so for them, they can legitimately make a mountain out of a mole hill. You can really see this modus operandi in works like Bruce Wilkinson’s books “The Prayer of Jabez,” and “A Life God Rewards.” And since most of those who adhere to such views of the Bible have never been able to conceive of another worldview/perspective on the Bible, they are legitimately clueless as to how ridiculous it sounds to those who aren’t Fundamentalists. So if heaven is mentioned once, it is good enough for them.
A couple of weeks ago I was out backpacking with some friends — all middle-aged men; all Christian (most of them Catholic); all intelligent people. They know I’m an atheist (former Catholic). One night, to balance our typical good-old-boy banter, I asked what they thought heaven was like. I was surprised that they could not come up with more than a few words about it being some sort of mysterious condition, a condition that none of them described in desirable terms. I was expecting to hear some standard notions about eternal happiness, but … nothing. I pointed out that it was a fundamental idea in Christianity that heaven was a reward for good behavior on earth and, therefore, something highly valued. They had literally no response, which is rare in this bunch. When I tried to lighten the mood by asking if dogs go to heaven, they all enthusiastically said yes. So a topic you might explore in the book is how people envision heaven and whether that vision serves as motivation for leading a good life.
I have a suspicion that the concept of hell evolved from the desire to regulate the tribe. Partially because the behavior of some individuals created problems in the tribe, or perceived problems in the relationship between the tribes and their god(s) de jour. I am curious about the motivations behind the history.
This concept is central to Christianity – many other religions seem to focus on right living. That is, how one might strive to live with one’s fellow inmates on Planet Earth. Much of the Christian message is on the same theme. The focus on an afterlife is one of the major points of departure of Christianity from other traditions. You have pointed out a number of times, for example, that pagan beliefs did not include any notion of an afterlife. The cultural importance of the development of this belief, with scant Biblical support it would seem from your notes today, is hard to exaggerate.
For me, I think the aspect that I find most interesting about this widespread concept of an afterlife (for good or ill, of heaven or hell), is why the belief exists given the absence of evidence. There is none that anyone can put a finger on outside a basic hope that there is something beyond this vale of tears in which we exist. Hope is not evidence. Answering that question is worth a chapter or two. From there you can examine why so many Christians are apparently OK with the notions of eternal damnation for non-believers, when the majority of the human beings who have ever lived have never had the benefit of getting the message, or who have an extremely naive view of the tenets of the religion. I do know this issue motivated many a missionary over the centuries, but nonetheless the basic fact remains the case. Why would Christians believe a loving God would do this to his creation? Or, if there is some sort of special dispensation for ‘good pagans, good non-believers’ then why the need for Christianity at all? (C.S. Lewis struggled with this, I seem to recall, with some sort of resolution as I have sketched above in his final Narnia book.) All to say, it appears to me that a basic motivation for following Christian belief is fear of punishment. That is worth another chapter or two. What has that meant for our civilisation? Or, our habits of mind. Another chapter… Then the willingness to find heresy and to punish with truly hell on earth punishments in order to protect the ‘true faith’. How does that square with a loving God? And on it goes.
This will be an interesting endeavour if you go for it.
My prediction…this will out-sell all of your other books!
May you be a prophet!!
Bart,
It would also be interesting to compare different Christian groups’ interpretations of the afterlife (assuming they are different). What are the entrance criteria? What about non-Christians being admitted (perish the thought)? And what was limbo all about?!?!?!
If I didn’t like your idea for a second book so much, I was hoping your follow-up bestseller to ToC would be Evolution of Christianity. I would love to read your views of how you think Christianity might evolve over time (decades? centuries?) as more people gradually accept historical analysis and conclusions about the Bible and Jesus. Will many of the debates of the first three centuries be rekindled with a different orthodox outcome? Or will the number of adherents simply dwindle?
Love your books and the blog!
Your book should include the Pharisees and Sadducees views of the afterlife and a physical resurrection and how it affected Paul’s evangelism to the gentiles
I recall a sermon where the pastor said the major dispute between the two groups was that the Pharisees believed in the afterlife. So Paul being a Pharisee was was drawn to Jesus’ resurrection story and sold it with zeal to both Jews and gentiles.
Take my money now, I would buy this in a heartbeat.
Ideas!
1. Did Jesus mean the physical place Gehenna (outside Jerusalem) or was it a metaphor using Gehenna as an example?
2. Purgatory. What? Why?
3. Is Hell and Heaven derived from other religions. I read they came from Zoroastrianism when the Persians conquered the Jews.
4. Morality: Can one actually repent one’s sins on their deathbed and enter into heaven after a life of immorality?
5. Satan’s transformative role as official ‘tester of faith’ to enemy of heaven and humanity.
What about the “After Life” after we have become “un- Born Again” here on earth- like in the rest of our lives?
I understand that your main interest in Development of the New Testament . Hoever I also understand that your life experience and scholarship gives you exceptional insight into our innate capabilities for both good and evil.
I understand that I’m requesting moral input. What should we teach our children and grand-children? Please give direction to both believers and unbelievers in creating a more just and compassionate community and country and world. Use your preacher /teacher abilities and teach us how to think and to connect to thinking (not necessarily believing) communities. I am a have-been Mennonite who has been un-born-again at 77 years of age. I am with you when you say you have left the Church ‘kicking and screaming’. Me too. Love,
Walter Quiring
Since you’ve expanded the concept to include heaven as well as hell – which I think is a great idea – what about including at least a brief discussion on the idea of purgatory? Sort of a non-fiction answer to Dante’s Divine Comedy.
I don’t know if it would be helpful to you, Bart, but Ernst Becker’s The Denial of Death is a good place to start from a modern perspective. I love his use of the term “immortality project” to refer to the belief systems we use to reassure ourselves of our continued existence after death.
Yup, a classic. Thanks.
This book idea excites me a great deal! Perhaps an interesting angle to cover would be how views on the afterlife have affected the course of human history… Crusaders in search of immortal glory? Suicide bombers destined for a more bountiful afterlife? Reformed heathens living in fear of hell? In the words of John Lennon, “imagine there’s no heaven…” how might it affect the course of human history?
“About where the idea of afterlife came from. Are there roots in other ancient thought? For example in ancient Greek and Roman philosophers and literary texts?”
This particularly interests me. What were the popular beliefs about the afterlife at the time Christianity developed? What did people believe, or did they think there was any kind of afterlife? Certainly the Egyptians and others made sure their dead were well stocked up for what came next. There were thousands of years of religious beliefs before Christianity, so is there any basis there for the afterlife beliefs that developed in Christianity? Any pattern of evolution? I would buy a book that did a good job of delving into this/
Hi Bart, this might be related and something else to consider in your book, where does the notion of sacrifice come from, particularly the notion that something has to be killed in order to appease the gods? This concept seems rather
strange to modern man.
I would be interested in a study of why and when certain Jews began to believe in an afterlife, why others didn’t and some don’t to this day. With respect to early Christianity, I’d like to see how, when and why the idea that the Kingdom of God would be established on earth was abandoned (by most, but not all Christians) for the more abstract idea that heaven is a really cool place for reasons that are not entirely obvious, and what Greco-Roman influences, if any, facilitated this transformation in concept. I would also like to see how popular ideas about heaven and hell have developed through the centuries, and how they have been influenced by extra-biblical sources like Dante’s Divine Comedy, and even movies. My guess is that people are generally agreed on what they think hell is, but heaven seems a much more esoteric concept when you abandon the “kingdom of God on earth” version. It would be interesting (if not particularly scholastic) to see what heaven means to individuals on a personal basis today. My admittedly anecdotal experience is that most Christians think they know exactly where they are going, but are not nearly so sure about what actually awaits them on the other side of the bright light at the end of the tunnel.
I would like to see you discuss Omar Khayyam. He has a beautiful quatrain about how we ourselves are Heaven and Hell.
The visits to the afterlife in Homer’s Odyssey and Virgil’s Aenead. The fascination many people have with seances & ghosts. Dante’s Divine Comedy. People who say they have had out of body experiences when going through a near-death event. C.S. Lewis’ depiction of Heaven, Hell and Purgatory in The Great Divorce. The treatment of heaven and hell in the movie, What Dreams May Come.
Bart, I am an engineer. Worse than that, I am an old engineer. We old timers are hell bent, so to speak, on understanding everything structurally – top down. So I can’t think about afterlife or resurrection without first working out ‘what I am’. There is my starting point: What the Bible says about what it means to be a human being. It means I have to understand what are my soul, spirit, core, essence (the latter two being non-Biblical) and therefore what parts of my might survive brain death. So far as my corpse is concerned, I wonder what my physical body really comprises. Bones fossilise. When we dig up ancient remains, the bones are long gone, replaced with facsimiles made of a different material. All of the atoms and molecules have been replaced, so what would resurrection of the body really mean? I consider that a proper analysis of what happens when we die, from a Biblical perspective, and what happens at the later, physical resurrection needs to start with an explanation of what we are supposed to be.
I am also interested in the Sadducees of Jesus’ day, and their view that the Torah contained no evidence of the afterlife. How did Judaism become divided on this central topic.
To this day, Muslims are scared to death of suffering the wrath of Allah if its people commit apostasy, not in the next world, but in this one. They adhere to the idea that Allah will punish a people for turning away from Him, but He will give them political security, long life and prosperity if they don’t make him angry or jealous.
Just a few thoughts…
A great idea! But what you are posing is an anthropological idea. It has two parts. What happens to you after you die? And: what role to you play in the life of the living? It seems to me that the big distinction is between those who die, and play a role with the living; and those who do not. Catholic belief posits an active role for the dead ‘saints’ as intercessors. Māori tradition (I live in New Zealand) posits a constant active presence that require acknowledgement for the health of the living. It seems to me that protestant belief posits an end to engagement of the living and the dead at the point of death. New age influence seems to be undermining this belief.
By Jove prof, you are relentless! One manuscript done, ok, next.
Since you asked, I should like to know the stories behind the afterlife for other religions: Buddhism, Hinduism, Shinto, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism, Baha’i, Jainism, Pantheism, Panentheism, African (Zulu, Bushongo, Yoruba, Berber), Australian Aboriginal, Polynesian, American (Cherokee, Iroquois, Lakota, Pawnee, Inca, Aztec, Arawak), Paganism, Satanism, etc.
I’m interested in the stories of humanities’ view of an after-life–if any–and how and where it existed/persists.
Thanks
You wrote:
My sense is that people somehow think that the current body dies but then a person is given some other kind of corresponding body (looking like this one) (at which age?) for eternal rewards or punishments. But where did the idea of the soul leaving the body for reward or punishment come from?
This encapsulates a question of interest to me. What do people of various Christian denominations believe about the afterlife, and where did they get those beliefs? Do the beliefs of the laity differ from official church doctrine? It has been decades since I attended the Methodist Church, but I don’t recall discussing any theological/biblical foundation for a belief in heaven or hell. Whatever hazy ideas I had about the afterlife were not based on any language in the Bible. I suspect that many cafeteria Christians accept Heaven and reject Hell without knowing the official doctrine of their church.
Judges sometimes avoid harsh results mandated by the letter of the law. Lawyers call this “result-oriented jurisprudence.” The afterlife probably involves some result-oriented thinking – both by laypersons and theologians.
Sounds like a great idea. I was actually searching Google/Amazon the other day for a popularly-accessible book on the History/Origins of Hell and was surprised there wasn’t a good solid recent one already. And even better to go with “The Invention of the Afterlife.”
For what it’s worth, Jeffrey Kripal at Rice University has written the best material I’ve come across on making sense of Near Death Experiences — such as chapter nine in his “Comparing Religions” textbook.
Thanks for your ongoing good work. I look forward to Triumph as well as whatever you publish next.
How about the before life? Now that is a mystery there. Some believe they lived a life before this one. I thought the book “Life Before Life” was interesting because it is written by an MD. He details many of the studies of the Division of Personality Studies at the University of Virginia where they have studied thousands of cases where children have said they lived before. Surprisingly of the some 10,000 cases they set out to debunk and show they were fraud, 2500 of them they would say are verified.
So the question is – Does the Bible speak of or even hint at the existence of life before the one we are experiencing?
Teamwork again! It’s fun to think we get to be involved in something you are doing.
Questions & Answers About Heaven by Randy Alcorn summarizes what the Bible has to say about what we will be doing in heaven. You can google it.
As a believer, it’s exciting to think of becoming one of God’s helpers in providing whatever is good once we’ve joined Him in heaven. Of course, we can do that right here as opportunities arise but maybe it becomes a full-time occupation after we die. Then we might be all-powerful fairy godmother-types, providing spiritual sustenance and goodness knows what else.
So much seems providential to those of us open to such a possibility. Scott Peck in his Road Less Traveled refers to it as serendipity when good things happen just when needed to encourage and sustain us. To become a part of that after I die would make eternity not long enough. Then I would be involved in endless numbers of lives in the best possible way. Randy Alcorn’s Questions & Answers bases this whole idea on scripture. It beats thinking we’ll just be singing God’s praises for all eternity.
I really loved the first part of F. Scott Peck’s The Road Less Traveled.” Until he got to the subject of serendipity. Serendipity is something many of us have experienced. But then he went religious or spiritual on the reader and equated it with “grace.” That was intellectually inexcusable–to just, out of the blue, equate the two. I had troubled finishing the book after that.
I would like to read more of your research and commentary on one point you already referenced above, which is the more historical position: body and soul or a continuing bodily existence. And is one view more consistent with the overall beliefs of Christianity, for example is matter and therefore the body considered ‘holy’ and would that influence what is expected in (the invention of) the afterlife? Also, what else influenced such views, for example did the body/soul concept originate in Greek philosophy? Could also be interesting if you included the invention of purgatory and, my favorite, limbo. Would also be interesting to consider, in addition to early Christianity, medieval views and also look at our modern understanding of the universe and how that plays with these beliefs.
Definitely a book I’d buy, read and refer and would be a good companion piece to God’s Problem.
I just reread Jim B. Tucker’s “Life Before Life.” I really wish you’d read that! I think you’d be impressed by the scholarly approach taken by Tucker and his colleagues in studying children’s memories of past lives. They’re just as serious in their research as you are in yours, and they’re very conservative in drawing conclusions.
I’m sure your planned book will deal primarily with the origins of the Christian idea of “Heaven and Hell.” But it will be hard to discuss that without placing it within the context of *all* beliefs about what happens to the human consciousness after death…and whether it happens after one death, or *many* deaths.
By the way, I think you should also discuss the evolution of the Christian concepts of Purgatory and Limbo!
Don’t forget to mention pets in your book. For some reason, people love to wonder if their pets are going to heaven.
“But Christians today think of heaven and hell as places that your soul, not your body, goes. At the same time, they think that there will be physical punishment. How can there be physical punishment without a physical entity (the body)?”
Paul speaks of the resurrection body in I Corinthians 15 (ESV):
“42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; git is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”;5 the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall 6 also bear the image of the man of heaven.”
Evangelical Christian theology teaches that there will be a resurrection of the just and the unjust, and that both will receive a resurrection body. This is taught in the OT and NT. From Berkhof’s Systematic Theology:
“It is true that we find no clear statements respecting the resurrection of the dead before the time of the prophets, though Jesus found that it was already implied in Ex. 3:6; cf. Matt. 22:29–32, and the writer of Hebrews intimates that even the patriarchs looked forward to the resurrection of the dead, Heb. 11:10, 13–16, 19. Certainly evidences are not wanting that there was a belief in the resurrection long before the exile. It is implied in the passages that speak of a deliverance from sheol, Ps. 49:15; 73:24, 25; Prov. 23:14. It finds expression in the famous statement of Job, 19:25–27. Moreover, it is very clearly taught in Isa. 26:19 (a late passage, according to the critics), and in Dan. 12:2, and is probably implied also in Ezek. 37:1–14.”
Sorry to add another idea:
(9) There is the idea that spiritual energy from the deceased remains in the body parts and cherished possessions. For example people might believe that a saints bones or cane helps to heal. Also some people consume the bodies of loved ones, defeated enemies, etc. – possibly with the idea of perpetuating their spirit in the living.
I think I would thoroughly enjoy reading a book you’ve written on this subject in particular, as I’ve pondered this evolution for years now (and can’t get a satisfactory answer whenever I bring it up in conversation). For some reason, no one (lay people) seems to place any importance on the historical evolution of death and the afterlife, including Judeo-Christian customs, and yet it is of such enormous import for today’s Christians, but it’s taken for granted and not discussed I think. If the God of the Bible is never-changing, then how can the progression of the afterlife happen the way it does from cover to cover? And moreover, why aren’t more people interested in the differences? I think most people forget that Greek influence, via Alexander, was so ingrained into the customs of “Jesus-era” Jews, that they totally dismiss the idea that another culture could find ways to embed it’s customs and thought-processes into the Jewish culture; that if the Bible doesn’t talk too much about Greek influence, then it must not really be a factor at all.
I think you could start broadly about the human species’ earliest examples of burial practices. Then, look at Mediterranean cultures’ practices and/or other Near Eastern practices (Sumerians, Akkadians, Hittites, Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Phoenicians, etc.). Then close it up with the couple of centuries before and after the change from BCE to CE.
I’m very excited to see this out before long!
Hi Bart,
A Book about “The Invention of the Afterlife” would be interesting. On the top of my list wound be near death experiences and visions, what is the present science and since people believe they are so real could they have been the main reason stories of heaven and hell came about and were/are believed? Just how much did states of consciousness have to do with all this anyway? But could it only be possible to know ?
Beyond that,
I would be interested in knowing how far back and who believed in any kind of afterlife from the information that is now available. Also clarification of who and what types of heaven and hell were there? Soul? What kind of soul belief? With the body, ghostly? Were the books of the bible you mentioned the ONLY places an afterlife is mentioned? Was the afterlife always connected to punishment and/or good works? If not, when was the thought to have come about? Was punishment thought to be only physical? Were descendants to be punished?
Was a reason people believed in an afterlife due to the fear of the unknown or could there also be other reasons? Did any group or people benefit from others believing in an afterlife? How was the belief in an afterlife (if they had it) come about in other religions? Were the many virgins always waiting for young males? ☺️ Does it appear as though ancient, pre-bible stories were the nexus for the development of heaven/hell belief in religions? What were the descriptions of Heaven? Was heaven used to offer people what they believed they could not have in the context of their lives at the time?
Many thoughts from a small person ?not a small mind.
One thing that I think would be fascinating is covering a portion of the book from a psychological perspective. We need to understand not just what happened, but why it happened. Why would humans be compelled to invent an afterlife in the first place?
As I understand it, belief in some sort of afterlife is very widespread, though not universal. It’s also highly diverse and to cover every belief would be, I think, Too Much. Also outside your usual area of the New Testament.
So I’d suggest a slightly modified title: “The Invention of the Christian Afterlife.” That wouldn’t preclude an introductory chapter on the afterlife in other religions to establish some context, but would then move on to how Heaven and Hell got established in Christian belief.
Dr. Erhman, I do like the subject of your next book. I would suggest you include a subtitle, like ‘ in Jewish and Early Christianity’. With only the title I would expect a good deal of information about other religions and cults: Greek mythology as in the underworld (Tartaros), etc.
Oh you got me with “The History of Hell” ! Can I preorder? 🙂 I would like to understand better burial practices that reflected well Hell as well as Heaven. Have they changed and why? Has the concept of Hell changed over the decades? Why and How? I am excited too!!
You should add Christian to your title. I suspect you are only going to deal with Christian afterlife development.
In the run up to your Oct 21 debate with Dr. Robert Price, I found this excerpt from an article by Paul Davis in the Oct. 2016 issue of Freethought Today, published by the Freedom from Religion Foundation. “One of the greatest crimes in human history was the total destruction of the library at Alexandria in 391 CE, perpetrated by Christian fanatics. They destroyed absolutely priceless scrolls and documents that hid the truth about the pagan origin of their religion and its alleged founder. As many as 700,000 hand-written manuscripts were lost, and it is believed to have set back civilization at least 1,000 years.” … Bart, who were these alleged Christian fanatics, and could they have had knowledge that Jesus was the product of a myth? … Good luck in the debate!
Unfortunately, we don’t know how the library was destroyed. Few scholars any more think it was the work of Christian fanatics.
I think the obvious way may be the right way–a sort of great man approach, on the theory much read, enduring figures like Augustine and Thomas greatly influenced the thinking of others, including the the person in the pew.
Chapter 1–Jesus–consumed by the kingdom
But an eternity in the bad place for most?
Chapter 2–the kingdom brought to you by Jesus from above
Chapter 3–the horizontal to vertical shift, from general resurrection and a transformation of this world to a heaven above (a recurrent question:requirements for entrance to the good place, how many rejected, the bad place)
Chapter 4–Augustine
Chapter 5–Thomas
Chapter 6–Dante
Chapter 7–Luther and Calvin
Chapter 8–Modern times–Hobbes the materialist and Christian only of sorts
Chapter 9–Locke–who died in some way thinking heaven awaited
Chapter 10– Hume–the first great denier, but didn’t dare publish
Chapter 11–19th/late 18th century–the two most influential philosophers or theologians or preachers, one representative of the conservative tradition (Wesley?), the other of more skeptical believers
Chapter 12–Drop the great man approach, look at surveys of the American or Western public–tease out 4 or so widespread views (in America– immortality large-majority view, but for many, I suspect, in a weak-tea way
Great topic. Few things that come to mind: Would like to learn more about the major influence of Hellenization in the following centuries after Alexander’s death in the fourth century BCE; certainly Plato’s influence. And best show as Christine Hayes points out in her book, “What’s Divine About Divine Law”, the cognitive dissonance that Hellenization helped create in the West and how it has been grappling with it ever since. Also exploring passages written in this time like Dan 12:2-3 or 2 Macc 12:44-45, or anything that Philo may have wrote on an afterlife.. Assume that vindication, one of the four tenets of apocalyptic writings will be mentioned in your book.. How different is a post modern interpretation of an afterlife differ from what the historical Jesus would have thought in an apocalyptic sense, and how it may differ from Jesus’ idea of the near coming kingdom?. Can’t wait to read the book!
First, in honor of your birthday (and because my wife is out of town) I smoked one of those Patel Maduros you mentioned. If you do indeed have two of those a week then your constitution is far more robust than mine.
One thing I’d like to see (for the first time in an Ehrman book) would be (color) plates of some of the imaginative medieval art dedicated to Hell, with your historian’s perspective in captions. It’s a nice break and pictures always widen the audience (for better or worse.)
I’d also like to see included an evaluation of (the common perception, at least, of) the emphasis placed on the threat of hell during the dark ages when people could not read, could not read in their own tongue, or were prohibited from reading the Bible themselves.
Also, some comparative figure of the frequency of occurrence of mentions or descriptions of heaven versus hell in surviving writings (sermons, letters, apologetics, etc.) from various ages in western history (or just your sense of those maybe.)
Some examination of how “hell” at times became an expletive and a historian’s reactions when s/he notices mentions of heaven and hell (and related historical tropes/memes) seeping into pop culture, accurately or otherwise, might make neat side bars.
Ha! I’ve started limiting myself to about one every two weeks. Now that I’m over 60, well, I want to make the body last as long as possible! But I can’t (i.e., don’t want to) forego my indulgences altogether!
You could call it “What the Hell is Heaven?” No, seriously, this would be a very interesting subject. I’d be most interested about where Jesus and the New Testament authors got their afterlife concepts from. Most people I know assume it was from the Old Testament, but that’s not the case really (maybe a little bit in Dan 12 and a few other places). But more than that, how the early church understood the afterlife… like Origen’s universalism… I think the overview you gave is fairly solid… tracking the origins of it before Christianity, showing how the NT deals with it, and then I’d like to see how it was covered up to maybe Augustine (since he’s so heavily used by virtually all theologians after him… Catholic and Protestant).
My thoughts are to ask did the invention of an afterlife by the Jews take place in the Hellenistic period for much the same reason as Cosmic Duallism was adopted/adapted (perhaps from Persian Zoroastrianism) and Apocalypticism was invented and Satan was elevated to his *god of this world* status – namely that, probably owing to the fact that God doesn’t exist, classical Judaism wasn’t working in delivering to Jews their original concept of salvation, which was something about possession of the land, long (but not eternal) life and freedom from foreign oppression famine and disease, so that some new concept of salvation was necessary. And in creating it the Jews drew on Greek (Hades/Tartarus) ideas of an afterlife with a rewarding posthumous environment for good Jewish martyrs who resisted the reforms of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and a considerably less congenial environment for the bad ones who collaborated with the enemy, as in Daniel 12:2. Were the Jews influenced by the Greeks and Jesus, or his shadowy unknown biographers who originated the relevant NT passages, being a man/men of his/their time just went along with that and absorbed those influences?
Reading Daniel 12:2 again I note that the author goes for *shame and everlasting contempt* for the bad Jews. So the eternal punishment is more emotional than sensory. When was physical torture introduced?
From earliest times man feared the dark . Death= Dark
I’d love to hear you cover or expound on the subject that the idea of an afterlife originated from Greek philosophy, specifically that the soul was a ‘substance’ as taught by Plato.
Thanks for asking. I have heard a few theologians talk about how Greek philosophy mixed with, or some say ruined Christianity. I’ve never heard a good explanation of that, and I’ve asked a few of them and they’ve responded with only vague instructions to read something else, which I read and that doesn’t help. When I started reading this request from you, I immediately thought of that and hoped you could shed some light on it. It seems to me the progression from the OT to NT made sense in terms of increasing knowledge of history and political forces. To say who influenced the changes and the new ideas is too much for me to sort out.
To start, I think a book on this topic is a great idea. I am particularly interested in how this belief in an afterlife originated/evolved. Your other questions are interesting, but to me the most significant is where/how did this come from.
Chuck
Maybe about this Bart !
Tartarus…
Tartarus (/ˈtɑːrtərəs/; Greek: Τάρταρος Tartaros),[1] in ancient Greek mythology, is the deep abyss that is used as a dungeon of torment and suffering for the wicked and as the prison for the Titans.[2] As far below Hades as the earth is below the heavens,[2] Tartarus is the place where, according to Plato in Gorgias (c. 400 BC), souls were judged after death and where the wicked received divine punishment. Like other primal entities (such as the Earth, Night and Time), Tartarus was also considered to be a primordial force or deity
Book of Thomas the Contender
The savior answered and said, “Truly I tell you that he who will listen to your word and turn away his face or sneer at it or smirk at these things, truly I tell you that he will be handed over to the ruler above who rules over all the powers as their king, and he will turn that one around and cast him from heaven down to the abyss, and he will be imprisoned in a narrow dark place. Moreover, he can neither turn nor move on account of the great depth of Tartaros and the heavy bitterness of Hades that is steadfast […]
Bart you know what is ” WOE ” ?
“Woe the body that depends on the spirit ”
“Woe the spirit that depends of the body”
“Woe to the earth. And that depends on both”
I think it means “What a terrible thing”
“Woe” is the English version of the Hebrew “Oy!” or “Oy wey!” from the Bible. In Hebrew “Oy!” or “Oy wey!” (! אוי ויי) is an exclamation not unlike how we might reflexively shout “On no!” or “Watch out!”. The Prophets often used this exclamation as a preface to some dire admonition, such as, for example, Isaiah 3:11, where it is written in Hebrew “Oy, l’rash’a r’a!” (!אוי לרשע רע), which is usually translated as “Woe to the wicked!”, but in the English parlance means something like “Watch out, you evil malefactors!”
I would be very interested in an explanation of the n.f.f.n.s.n.c. outlook. Whence did it come and whither did it go? I think you should call your book “Life After Life”.
It comes from the Epicurean tradition. The Epicurean Roman poet Lucretius uses it.
Paul: 2 Cor 5:8 “We would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord”
Luke 23:43 “Today you will be with me in Paradise”
John: Revelation 2:7 “To him who overcomes, I will give to eat of the tree of life which is in
the midst of the Paradise of God”
There you have three independent sources. Probably others in the New Testament as well.
Also, if everybody just dies and that’s it there is no consequence for evil such as 9/11 terrorists, ISIS, Hitler, or the
unfairness of somebody that is born a cripple. With agnosticism, they have no hope and many will be miserably
unhappy. If they believe in the Good News of our Lord Jesus Christ many of them are able to better cope.
Just look at Joni Erickson Tada as an example of what I mean. She became crippled in an accident but
now has joy in Jesus and an international ministry. Would you tell her that she has a false hope?
For me it is a question of whether it is worth believing something because it provides hope, even if it is not true. There are other ways to find hope, but does one have to sacrifice truth for it? It’s a genuine question.
You say, “There you have three independent sources” as if these were authoritative or evidence or true witnessing. But, as far as we know, they are merely expressions of what they believed, not of what is true. It might be true that there are no consequences after death for the bad guys. It might be true that there is no reward, beyond this life, for the cripple. I agree with Bart that believing in what I have no reason to believe is true just in order to have hope is not worth it. It’s not part of my value system. I have found no good reason to believe the claims of the Christian message or in Satan or Hell or Heaven or that there is a need for salvation–that is, that we are fallen. I agree that faith does give some people hope but I do not believe that what they have faith in is true. I don’t care about having an afterlife. Both religious and secular Judaism have taught me that it is this life that matters and that, if am good and if God is truly a loving God, I’ll be in good standing with Him. Many of us atheists have no need to go around telling people of faith that their hope is false. But, if asked, I would answer honestly.
It would be good if it could start not with the 1st century but the 21st century. What do Christians believe now? How varied are their beliefs in the afterlife? Then go back and follow the trail from nothing to sheol to apocalypticism to heaven and hell etc. What did Paul believe? What did Jesus say about it in John compared to the synoptics? What did the gnostics believe? What did the Egyptians believe? How important was revelation in the evolution of the Christian view of the afterlife? What about purgatory? How did we end up with some people thinking hell is where Satan lives and is in control of? So many questions!
The idea is great. I’d love to read such a book. For me, two most important topics are:
– Jewish beliefs at the time of Jesus. What they were and how did they origin (for example, was this Persian or Greek influence or original thinking).
– Early church fathers. Did they believe in eternal torment for the damned? Who was to be damned? Maybe some of the fathers believed in a more universal form of salvation, in which there was still some hope for non-Christians?
Bart…I like the idea very much! Seems this concept is at the very crux of what religion is about; trying to make earthly life “fair”, and if not here, then finally somewhere else. Christopher Hitchens made some comments about this concept in several of his books, but CH admittedly didn’t have the religions scholarly background to address as fully as you might. Seems that both politics and religion attempt the impossible; make life fair. Can’t wait to read it; especially at 63 years old.
Personally, I like the idea in the Talmud espoused by the School of Shammai of a kind of Purgatory. I’m not sure if the idea can be reliably traced further back, but it may correspond to some sayings of Jesus, eg, Q 12,58-59 (‘not getting out till you have paid the last penny’).
The House of Shammai say, “[There will be] three groups on the Day of Judgment [when the dead will rise]: one comprised of the thoroughly righteous, one comprised of the thoroughly wicked, and one of middling [people].
“The thoroughly righteous immediately are inscribed and sealed for eternal life.
“The thoroughly wicked immediately are inscribed and sealed for Gehenna,
“as it is written [Dan. 12: 2]: ‘And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to eternal life and some to shame and everlasting contempt.’
“Middling [people] go down to Gehenna, scream [in prayer], and rise [again], “as it is written [Zec. 13: 9]: ‘And I will put this third into the fire and refine them as one refines silver and test them as gold is tested. They will call on my name, and I will answer them.’
Bavli Rosh HaShannah 16b-17a (Jacob Neusner)
Can this idea be traced back further than the Talmud?
Having thought about this, a couple of suggestions for themes to explore:
– The use of belief in Heaven and Hell as an instrument of social control and regulation. How did that develop over time?
– The relation of God to Hell in Christian belief. Obviously he at least permits its existence, but has there been any suggestion that he created it? How does this relate to theodicy?
I loved the proposed title at first, but a few people have brought up some good points. It could be seen as off-putting or offensive to both theists and non-theists, as in, anyone who believes there’s an afterlife. And that’s a lot of people.
Another thought … you can’t have Hell without the Devil. How did this entity evolve? And the story of the Christ being tempted by the Devil (any commentary)? When the Apocalyptic Jesus warned of tribulations, what “hell” was he speaking?
I was wondering … in Genesis it was the serpent that tempted Eve .. Did the serpent morph into “Devil” ?
And this might sound crazy but I also wondered from a literary perspective if the Mountain God type (“Burning Bush”) split off into a separate personality and become the Devil? I just don’t know.
“Christians today think of heaven and hell as places that your soul, not your body, goes. At the same time, they think that there will be physical punishment. How can there be physical punishment without a physical entity (the body)? My sense is that people somehow think that the current body dies but then a person is given some other kind of corresponding body (looking like this one) (at which age?) for eternal rewards or punishments.”
I think most people have no expectation of going to “hell.” They take for granted they’ll exist as they do in dreams – not thinking much about what sort of body they’re in, but certainly *existing*. And when they do think about bodies, they imagine they and their loved ones will have “improved” bodies, with the appearance of “optimum adulthood” (about age 30), but will nevertheless recognize one another immediately.
I probably should say “we” rather than “they”! Because even I – expecting reincarnation – hope something like that takes place *between* lives. Where I differ from Christians is that I think the experience would be temporary, and take place in a dimensional realm outside normal space/time – where we could briefly be united with loved ones even if they’d already reincarnated.
I suspect most Christians don’t let themselves think about what’s going to happen *after* they’ve had their loving reunions.
It would be interesting to read about the Buddhist’s view of afterlife; how and why the study of nirvana was invented and how it relates to the Christian belief of eternal life.
In those places where Jesus talks about hell, is there reason to think that those statements do not actually go back to him but are editorial additions?
Didn’t Jesus believe in the resurrection of the dead rather than heaven and hell?
Did the notion of hell come at least in part from a sort of “siege mentality” or dualism of early Christians, eg, condemning their enemies and persecutors to hell for being evil was one of the ways Christians got even and also convinced themselves that they were right?
If Jesus did actually/likely talk about hell, are there places where he actually/likely said something contrary to the existence of hell?
Was talk of hell more of a rhetorical device than intended to be a statement of fact?
I’d be interested in an exploration of the (Catholic) idea of a communion of saints, ie, that there is some kind of bond and continuity between the living and those in heaven.
How important were the preaching of and belief in heaven and hell in the Triumph of Christianity?
ok i have tried. sorry bart to waste your time with pointless blogs .. and your right GOD is not real.. any one who thinks so.. should be evaluated … your blog is about making money…. deleting my account..well won’t even waste my time … not even going to check if its on auto.. take care
I want to apologize and I was upset. Bart, your are doing great things with this blog and it melts my heart…
I will always believe.. I will always support your blog.. and you let me know if you ever need anything at all! I am here.
Warmest wishes for those effected by Hurricane Matthew…
I don’t like “Invention of the Afterlife” either … it’s not “sexy” enough … it’s a boring title but then what do I know?
Did the combination of the possibility of hell coupled with an omnipotent and perfectly good god create kind of a double bind in people? Superficially one wouldn’t expect a perfectly good god to send people to hell. But the “fact” that god does causes one to question god’s goodness. And questioning god’s goodness makes one even more of a sinner. This leads to more guilt and fear which leads to a sense of weakness and dependence. The weakness and dependence make it harder to see the contradiction in the combination of a good god and hell. The sense of weakness and dependence also makes it more difficult to make a rational judgement about the reality of heaven and hell.
Anyway, my question is whether this double bind (if that’s the right word) did an especially good job of playing to people’s fears so that belief in hell became more strongly rooted than it would without the double bind?
Related to the above, Christianity seems to have successfully marketed a belief in both the absolutely worst case scenario (hell) and the absolutely best case scenario (heaven). They are real possibilities for everyone and entirely dependent on whether one believes (and, in some versions, whether one does good deeds). Did the fact that the alternatives are so extreme somehow connect with people’s anxieties and hopes (and/or other emotions) and make people afraid to question their truth?
Apparently, the afterlife is a popular topic. I subscribed to this post the other day because I wanted to see what others thought about it. When I looked at my phone a minute ago, it said I had 70+ emails. I thought–oh no–I’ve been hacked! Nope. It’s this thread. Wow!
Another thought … wouldn’t you also have to explore “sin” given that is how Christians explain one goes to hell. How has the concept of “sin” evolved or changed/de-evolved? I’ve read some now crazy Old Testament actions which were then considered sins which in today’s age are laughable.
1. It would be interesting to explore how the common Christian beliefs about the afterlife and the soul/body dualism are not very Biblical. Contrast them with the actual Biblical views and reveal the Greco-Roman, Gnostic (or other) origins of the idea of dualism that came to be prominent in Christianity.
2. Reveal the variety of Biblical views of the afterlife (as you do with Biblical theodicies in God’s Problem) and how they contradict each other and cannot possibly be reconciled either literally or even conceptually/allegorically. And how we find very little consistency between Biblical authors on this topic, suggesting that they are inventing their concepts/pictures of afterlife as they go along.
3. Discuss how the Christian idea of the afterlife corresponded with philosophy/science at various historical stages, and how the Christian view of the afterlife and soul/body dualism increasingly made less sense as modern science developed, and whether today it can be reconciled with modern science at all. Discuss latest attempts by academically-minded Christians to move away from dualism and find some reconciliation with modern science and whether these attempts do any justice either to science or to traditional Christianity.
4. Discuss how the ideas of hell and heaven have evolved over time and why Christians of the past believed in literal hell below the earth and literal heaven above the sky and what Christians today understand by heaven and hell and where these places exist in the minds of modern Christians in light of science. Are they in a different dimension? Are they somewhere at the edge of the universe we can’t detect? Does modern science leave any place for these places at all, and if so, where could they possibly be located??
5. Discuss the routine life in heaven and hell as described by various Biblical authors and by Christians today. What do Biblical authors think would be happening there for eternity? What do Christians believe would be happening there? Are these places anyone actually want to belong to and live in? Do they leave any place for freedom of the will? Charity? Love? Sex? Alcohol? Sacrifice? Achievement? Self-actualization and personal growth? What is life and eternity without any of these concepts that make our earthly life so meaningful?
Hey, here’s my suggestion in the short-and-pithy title category!
“Life, Death, and…What?”
About contemporary belief in some sort of afterlife…
I read at a news website a while back that a study showed many young people who don’t believe in “God” do believe in an afterlife. There was no indication that they’d asked followup questions about what *type* of afterlife these young people expected.
But they posted the findings of the study in a “mental health” category! And they suggested it was a bad attitude held by millennials: thinking they were somehow “entitled,” expecting to “get something for nothing.” (Not acknowledging that *some* kind of afterlife might be a simple *fact*, like the Sun’s always rising in the East.)
I apologize but this is the longest post I’ve ever submitted. There are above some materialistic notions about mind that I felt needed to be addressed philosophically. Here goes:
Although I am an atheist and am completely put off by the dogmatism of certain Christians, I am also put off by the dogmatism of certain materialists. One blog-reader insists that “The human mind is a process that is performed by the human brain” and that “we have no evidence of an immaterial human soul at the smallest detectable level.” I’d like to see these dealt with in a book on the afterlife.
Of course the notion that all that is real is also empirically verifiable is not empirically verifiable. (I know it’s more complicated than that; philosophy is full of arguments attempting to refute the critics of A.J. Ayers’ empiricism.) But, in my view, the assumption that all that is real, at least theoretically, can be or will be empirically explained is just science being full of itself. Science has a territory to work in but then claims it all. Like the pompous doctor many of us know who thinks he’s an expert on everything. It seems to me that there are dimensions of reality that we have not yet even dreamed of and that only hubris insists that our tools and our future tools of empirical verification will be able to detect anything that’s “real” and that, if it cannot be scientifically detected, it is not real.
A Hindu teaching says that the body (and brain) is the vehicle of the soul. I always keep this in mind as some sort of possible model when I hear the materialist leap to conclusions about cause and effect when certain aspects of consciousness cease when this or that part of the brain is destroyed. If your “vehicle” gets a flat tire, you can’t go anywhere. If you suddenly can’t move forward in your vehicle, it doesn’t mean you don’t exist. It is at least theoretically possible that the soul or consciousness or whatever it might be must, at such a point, revert to or retract to its unembodied manifestation. Conversely, when a part of the brain is stimulated and the person has certain memories or visions or whatever or when it is detected that certain areas of the brain are active when certain states of consciousness are at work or awake, that is not proof this or that part of the brain causes or is these states of consciousness. Simultaneity does not imply causation.
I am agnostic about all this and am just saying that to assume at the outset that anything that is real is empirically verifiable and that the mind IS the brain is to get way ahead of ourselves and is not shown by the evidence. I don’t believe in Satan or Hell or Heaven or the need for salvation or in JC as a cure for the wages of sin. But I think we must be open to the possibility that there are dimensions of reality that we cannot assume will fit our current models.
The idea that what we call mind or consciousness is just the brain is a very abstract idea. The blog reader also says that it is “very difficult for all of us to shake the belief in an immaterial, immortal human soul. That’s because all of us are ruled by our most primitive motivators–fear and greed.” But it is more than that. It is very understandable that early humans believed in life after death because being awake and consciousness are not experienced as a brain process or any kind of material process. We experience it as something that might not cease when the body ceases to live. There are good reasons why we look at and talk about our bodies as though they are not our consciousness or mind.
Similarly, that the Earth goes around the Sun might be commonplace now but it is a very abstract idea. What we experience is the Sun coming up and going down. That’s where we must begin when we wonder how early humans could have believed that the Sun went around the earth. It is a good demonstration of how experience (including religious experience) is not the bottom line. And so, while we experience being conscious as a non-material phenomenon, we cannot take that as proof that it is. But no one who claims that mind is only material processes of the brain can account for how the brain comes up with awareness that is also aware of itself and even aware that it is aware that it’s aware. Hinduism calls that awareness “witness consciousness.” We witness our being conscious. And Hinduism asks Who is this we? Does science, does modern man really know?
I agree that science does not sufficiently explain our consciousness. How can we be aware of the universe and it not be aware of us? It created us, not the other way around. It controls us–we don’t control it. I don’t see how we can be more intelligent than what created us in the first place except through evolution. Who’s to say that we won’t evolve to a point where we can control everything about the universe including life and death? If we can do that, then we really will become gods…omg, ancient aliens! rofl!
Bart
That you have the cojones to tackle such a concept is remarkable and the wisdom to seek guidance fortunate for all, but take care that your verb doesn’t confine… “The INVENTION of the Afterlife” will be good for market but may exclude salient/determinate vectors (i.e. genetics and memeology) regarding our species’ observed tendency to believe in something/anything after death. Perhaps a prolog regarding such theories would/should ground your historical perspective.
Joel
BTW: This e-klunk can’t figure how to make a one-time contribution to your charities. Please advise.
Just click on DONATE on the homepage.
I can understand how belief in an afterlife could fade over time in a scientific civilization like ours. It’s more difficult to understand how belief in an afterlife could replace realism about death in a fairly advanced and sophisticated civilization like the Roman Empire. It seems like there must have been something going on in society that led to a surge of hope or created grave anxiety.
I have been thinking about that word “Invention”. It’s a benign word by itself, but put it with “of Afterlife” and the connotation will get some people fired up. Do you see all of us bloggers flipping the *hell* out over the word “Invention?” I’m convinced that word is actually *from* hell. Stay away from it!
Just kidding. Do whatever you want. I’ll buy it.
Why does the existence of an afterlife seem to depend on God’s existence? For many (including me) the existence of a happy afterlife must seem to be much more desirable than the mere existence of God. I suppose God is thought to be necessary to make an afterlife possible. Or God was already a given to which the idea of an afterlife had to accommodate itself.
It’s probably outside your scope but I’ve read that there’s a late 19th century/early 20th century British philosopher of some note (McTaggart?) who didn’t believe in God but did believe in an afterlife.
Interesting idea! I wonder if he thought people existed *before* they were born.
It has never seemed to me that it does. It seems to me there could be near-death experiences, an afterlife, angels, the Bible, and much else without there being a God. Maybe reality is more Jungian than biblically true.
McTaggart–a very interesting man. He believed in reincarnation didn’t he?
Bart, by no means am I a biblical scholar (my graduate degrees, and experience are in philosophy and history), but here are some ideas for books I would love to see in print. One would be a book about the Christian hijacking of the OT. I say this because it seems as though Christians (at least many Christians) have taken ownership of the Hebrew canon as though it directly applies to them. Maybe I’m simply ignorant about the matter, but this has been my experience growing up in the world of fundygelicalism. The other book would be about the ancient world and the myth of virgin births. The third would be a book on the practice of blood sacrifice, but particularly why the Children of Israel continued with it, in addition to a Priesthood.
I made a similar complaint to my rabbi/friend decades ago. His response was that Christians have had as much right to interpret the Tanakh as the Tamudists or anyone else. As for the ego and pride or neediness of one up-manship and Christian supersessionism, well, people are people and that sort of self-aggrandizement is what some people do for the sake of identity, filling existential black holes, bolstering low self-esteem, and being special in God’s eyes.
It seems to me this book will have to cover not only the Antiquity period but frankly the development and general adoption of ideas right up to the present day. A lot of research to do, I imagine!
And don’t forget Purgatory. Many general readers seem to believe this is another term for Hell or a Hell-like experience. Dante’s version is very different. Souls rejoice when they find themselves on the shore of Purgatory, because it is a guarantee of Heaven (eventually).
I would be interested in what the psychological effects of the differing views of the afterlife were (Sheol to Hades) and what psychological needs might have driven the development of new iterations of the afterlife. Most of those on this blog would probably agree that belief in heaven assuages fears of death or that a focus on hell can make embattled groups fell better about the future of their “enemies”. Are there signs in antiquity that different takes on the afterlife were used by ancient groups in similar ways?
Interesting question!
As part of the Heaven and Hell doctrine is the concept of Satan as a devil. It is not in the Old Testament but how did it begin to come about and appeared in the New Testament. Since God is so powerful, how can HE not destroy Satan long ago and instead allowed Satan to cause people to sin such that God had to send His son to redeem the sinners. Strange logic but lots of Christians believe in Satan.
I don’t where I got this idea but it would make sense to me that, for the most of their history, Jews (and probably many other ancient peoples) did not believe in an afterlife partly because they didn’t have as strong of a sense of individuality as developed later in history. Instead, people thought of themselves less as individuals and more as parts or members of their tribe/nation/ethnic group, etc. Therefore as long as their group survived and prospered, that was enough of an afterlife for them. And children and continuation of their line were an especially important aspects of this.
So I’d be interested in whether there is a correlation between a stronger sense of individuality and a greater interest in an afterlife.
Or, to put it another way, is there a correlation between alienation/anomie in society and interest in an afterlife?
Good question! I don’t know what I think about it yet.
The earliest burials we have from about 24,000 years ago, I think, include artifacts that suggest that those who buried the person thought they’d be useful to the buried in the next world. If humans have ever thought of themselves less as individuals and more as a piece of a group it was in these small bands and tribes of early humans. Yet, these groups seem to have believed in an afterlife.
This topic might be discussed in light of the larger context of early Christian views of death. I haven’t come across a good trade book on early Christian views of death. It seems to be a big theme. The book may include discussions around: Why did they think humans die in the first place in light of their view of God as creator (God created humans to die?!). How/why did the view of resurrection of the dead start? In their view, why did Jesus’ DEATH have be be part of God’s plan? And before that, the death of animals according to the requirements of the Torah. Why did Paul personify death in Romans? What did the early Christian martyrs say about death? How did the idea of death and afterlife develop over the course of early Christianity?
Surely the Egyptians invented the idea of the afterlife? As well as circumcision.
I don’t think there is any way to know.
There are independent cultures that have circumcision. It probably came to be as a tool to make sex easier, especially since humans are polygynious. Some uncircumcised men experience pain during sex. This probably means that it would have been more painful/difficult to go around and impregnate several women from the losing tribe if they all needed vast foreplay to make it painless for the male, unless they were circumcised.
I think that this book is a great idea. Probably the idea of an afterlife is the main reason why many people is still religious today. It would be very interesting to see how this idea developed.
Some things I’d like to know about for your next book:
Which idea came first–heaven or hell?
Which idea was written about more in antiquity?
Apostle Paul wrote about Judgement and everlasting destruction, but did he ever use the word, “hell?” I’m thinking he didn’t, so what did he mean by God’s wrath and destruction?
After rereading the post, I’m a little confused about the focus of the book. Your original idea was the Christian notion of hell. That was extended to include heaven. Then, it went further to include several other things, so I’m just wondering if the main focus is still on the Christian ideas of heaven and hell or is it a book that will be tackling the topic in a much broader sense? Considering the suggested title, I’m curious to know if the editor’s ideas are suggestions for a more broad-spectrum book?
Ah, these are some of the questions I’m asking myself now! I’ve had opinions over the years, but now I’m trying to find out what I really think based on a hard examination of all the available evidence.
When this post was made, I got sidetracked when you mentioned NDE, so I forgot the other things that would be interesting to know. I realize now that I only have a vague sense of the origins and ideas of heaven and hell from antiquity. I’d like to know more about Sheol, Gehenna, and Hades. I cannot sort out Gehenna, Hades, and hell in my mind. I’ve read that Gehenna is actually hell, but here you say it’s a place.
Jesus spoke about the Kingdom of God which I took to mean that the Davidic Line would be restored, but in other places, Jesus says that heaven and earth will pass away. This sounds like two competing concepts. I’d like to know, specifically, what were the NT authors thinking when they wrote about the Kingdom of God. When I used to attend church, heaven was synonymous with the Kingdom of God. Although, the former pastor always referred to it as a spiritual state of being because of the scripture that says the kingdom of God is within you.
When I was still a believer, I used to research end-times prophecy and the millennial reign of Christ all the time. I ran across some information about the reinstatement of animal sacrifices during Christ’s reign. As a believer, that disturbed me to no end and was one of the things that caused me to doubt the divine inspiration of the scriptures. I think it might be important to point out that heaven and/or the millennial reign of Christ is not always a description of happiness and perfection. Biblical heaven is flawed. How comfortable will some Christians be with that information? For me, it was detrimental to my faith. I’m not articulating that very well, but I suppose that’s why you’re the one writing the book and not me.
I don’t think I was very clear about my questions for the kingdom of God:
Did Jesus see it as a restoration of the Davidic Line?
Was the Kingdom of God considered heaven?
Is it a physical place or a spiritual state of being?
I don’t understand the scriptures referring to heaven and earth passing away. God’s kingdom appears before this happens? After this happens? Where did *that* idea come from– that heaven and earth must pass away?
Something interesting I happened upon by accident is the idea of a cold, frozen hell called Naraka. Maybe that’s where the phrase “when hell freezes over” came from! Ha!
My sense is that it was to be a genuine kingdom here on earth after the current world and all its evil forces are destroyed. But I have to work through, now, what I actually think he meant — something I haven’t thought rigorously about for about twenty years! (Though I’ve thought non-rigorously about it a lot!)
I’m going to start a thread on this soon…
Excellent
I’m a little late to the party on this post, but I feel this subject is so ripe for a critical treatment. The more I talk to people the more reveal to me that it is fear of Hell that keeps them practicing a religion they otherwise are highly skeptical of. I think any subject approached from an emotional, gut reaction-only point of view is begging for a rational counterpoint, and I can think of few writers who can offer that to as wide of an audience as you can, or with the authority and skill it deserves.
Yes, it’s very much that way in my world, the American South.
Here’s a question that I would like to find an answered in the book:
Many believe that Jesus died to save us from Hell and that Jesus died in vain if Hell does not exist. What did the disciples believe was the function of Jesus’ death and resurrection assuming the doctrine of Hell was developed later by other Christians.
It showed that the end was near and the Kingdom of God was soon to arrive.
Do we have any evidence that Gehenna was actually a trash dump? Seems like that notion has been challenged a lot recently. It was definitely known for a place to dispose of bodies after a judgement. Not so sure about the trash dump info though.
No, in fact the idea that it was a trash heap did not appear until the early thirteenth century CE (in a commentary on the book of Psalms written by Rabbi David Kimhi)
I’m also working on a book, ‘Hell is Not Real’. It’ll be explaining the hell passages from a Full Preterist point of view. Note we NEVER see the apostles nor Jesus EVER ask anyone if they know where they’re going in the afterlife. It was always about their soon coming judgement in ad70.