|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Nov 26, 2023 21:31:54 GMT
I think the idea is somewhat disturbing, not silly. I also think that it's a medieval concept (literally) that owes more to the Platonic thought of an "eternal soul" than what is explicitly taught in the Bible. The Hebrew concept of "soul" is not inherently eternal, as is demonstrable in the text for a few reasons. The accusation that "the threat of eternal hell" was used to manipulate people for centuries is not, I think, without merit.
I forget that you don't necessarily subscribe to the eternal conscious torment idea. I think the case for it in early Christianity and the New Testament is not nearly as strong as most modern Christians think. I also think it's a plausible interpretation of the (murky and vague) discussions of the afterlife in the NT.
A "plausible interpretation," but less so when you filter out Greek preconceptions and look at the text from a more Hebrew point of view. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Nov 26, 2023 21:32:11 GMT
To be fair, there are many, many other places to argue with people on the Internet now! But... better ones? |
|
|
|
Post by Running Deer on Nov 27, 2023 23:08:01 GMT
I forget that you don't necessarily subscribe to the eternal conscious torment idea. I think the case for it in early Christianity and the New Testament is not nearly as strong as most modern Christians think. I also think it's a plausible interpretation of the (murky and vague) discussions of the afterlife in the NT.
A "plausible interpretation," but less so when you filter out Greek preconceptions and look at the text from a more Hebrew point of view. I think you are right about earlier Jewish thought, which almost always presents death as the end of life, as in the Psalms and Ecclesiastes.
But by the time the NT is being written centuries later, I don't think you can easily filter out a "pure" Judaism from Greek "preconceptions". Greek thought had been heavily influencing Jewish thought for centuries.
Jews had spread around the Mediterranean Sea and had adopted Greek as their native language. The Tanakh had already been translated into Greek as the Septuagint. II Maccabees discusses praying for the dead, so that they could avoid judgment for their sins. The Phillippian Creed says that Jesus was in the Form of God. Philo, who wrote at the same time as the NT, fused Judaism and Platonism in a way that greatly foreshadowed Christianity's eventual fusion. St. John talks about Jesus as the Logos. The Apocalypse of Peter, written in the 100s, shows a graphic and disgusting tour of the tortures of Hell.
While I agree that a conscious afterlife is probably not the original Jewish religion, I can't agree that you can filter a pure and de-greeked Judaism from 1st century Judaism. And since you can't do that, it's probably not the best way to read the NT, either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Running Deer on Nov 27, 2023 23:08:20 GMT
To be fair, there are many, many other places to argue with people on the Internet now! But... better ones? No, but faster! |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Nov 28, 2023 0:31:28 GMT
A "plausible interpretation," but less so when you filter out Greek preconceptions and look at the text from a more Hebrew point of view. I think you are right about earlier Jewish thought, which almost always presents death as the end of life, as in the Psalms and Ecclesiastes.
But by the time the NT is being written centuries later, I don't think you can easily filter out a "pure" Judaism from Greek "preconceptions". Greek thought had been heavily influencing Jewish thought for centuries.
Jews had spread around the Mediterranean Sea and had adopted Greek as their native language. The Tanakh had already been translated into Greek as the Septuagint. II Maccabees discusses praying for the dead, so that they could avoid judgment for their sins. The Phillippian Creed says that Jesus was in the Form of God. Philo, who wrote at the same time as the NT, fused Judaism and Platonism in a way that greatly foreshadowed Christianity's eventual fusion. St. John talks about Jesus as the Logos. The Apocalypse of Peter, written in the 100s, shows a graphic and disgusting tour of the tortures of Hell.
While I agree that a conscious afterlife is probably not the original Jewish religion, I can't agree that you can filter a pure and de-greeked Judaism from 1st century Judaism. And since you can't do that, it's probably not the best way to read the NT, either.
And yet a relatively late biblical text says “only God is eternal.” The only biblical justification for an eternal soul (outside of the eternal life that is a gift from God) is the concept of “eternal punishment.” That could be “eternal experience” or “eternal consequence.” In my mind, “eternal consequence” makes more sense, especially in light of: 1. Jesus being “all in all.” That includes hell? 2. Hell being destroyed in the lake of fire (end of revelation). 3. The apparent necessity for a “tree of Life” in the Garden, the tree multiplied in the New Jerusalem. What purpose would this tree serve if the soul is already immortal? The only justification for eternal soul is eternal punishment, which, as a justification for an eternal soul is completely circular. |
|
