Where did Jesus get his teaching of the afterlife from?

[arcanum]

Now this question isn't a religious question so much as a cultural one. Where did Jesus get his idea of the afterlife from? He speaks of heaven and hell but many jews didn't even have a concept of an afterlife until the Babylonian captivity. The Sadducee's seem to be holdouts from the true ancient israelite religion who don't seem to believe in a soul or a resurrection of the dead. So did Jesus coming from the Galilee and not jerusalem have more foreign exposure (Greek, Persian, Babylonian) and therefore shape his idea's of the afterlife more so than his Jewish upbringing did?

 

[Godobeyer]

Now this question isn't a religious question so much as a cultural one. Where did Jesus get his idea of the afterlife from? He speaks of heaven and hell but many jews didn't even have a concept of an afterlife until the Babylonian captivity. The Sadducee's seem to be holdouts from the true ancient israelite religion who don't seem to believe in a soul or a resurrection of the dead. So did Jesus coming from the Galilee and not jerusalem have more foreign exposure (Greek, Persian, Babylonian) and therefore shape his idea's of the afterlife more so than his Jewish upbringing did?

heaven and hell is reward for the believers and disbelievers , God acuatly did not sent his messangers and books (law) for nothings.
if we suppose that God sent many Prophet and Messangers for nothing "for this life " we should had "no thing also in our mind"

 

[Bob Dixon]

He got it from Judaism and put it into parable form. True, Judaism didn't have much of an afterlife, but the point of the parables isn't the afterlife part; it's the actual message.

 

[arcanum]

He got it from Judaism and put it into parable form. True, Judaism didn't have much of an afterlife, but the point of the parables isn't the afterlife part; it's the actual message.

Without a belief in an afterlife the christian message is meaningless.

 

[arcanum]

It doesn't seem like a lot of Christians want to go there, but I'd really like like to hear from those who know in a scholarly rather than a religious way.

 

[Me Myself]

scholarly I don´t even think there is great certainty of Jesus´s historical exisence.

Leaving that aside, I think he spent some time in India in all that time he was missing, and there he heard about the lokas that are "heavenly" and "hellish". Then people for some reason confuse the fact that hell will always be there to the idea that people that got here can never get out.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Jesus got his ideas of the afterlife from Zoroastrianism. The Jews had no developed theology of the afterlife, and the Greek and Egyptian stories don't fit in with what Jesus taught. Zoroastrianism was the only other religion nearby at that time that taught on the concept of eternal punishment or reward after death.

 

[Pegg]

Now this question isn't a religious question so much as a cultural one. Where did Jesus get his idea of the afterlife from? He speaks of heaven and hell but many jews didn't even have a concept of an afterlife until the Babylonian captivity. The Sadducee's seem to be holdouts from the true ancient israelite religion who don't seem to believe in a soul or a resurrection of the dead. So did Jesus coming from the Galilee and not jerusalem have more foreign exposure (Greek, Persian, Babylonian) and therefore shape his idea's of the afterlife more so than his Jewish upbringing did?

He didnt speak of 'hell'... hell is an english word. That word is translated from the greek word Hades which is the equivalent of the hebrew word 'sheol'

both these words mean the 'grave' or the 'place for the dead' ... a concealed place in the ground, a tomb, the dust. So when Jesus spoke of sheol/hades/hell he was speaking of 'death' and the 'grave'

 

[Bob Dixon]

Without a belief in an afterlife the christian message is meaningless.

Christianity is supposed to be about worshipping God, afterlife or not. The worship of God is a reward within itself. Yes, there is an afterlife in Christianity; Jesus confirmed it. But we can't say anything about it, just like an unborn child cannot make statements about the world outside of the womb.

 

[arcanum]

He didnt speak of 'hell'... hell is an english word. That word is translated from the greek word Hades which is the equivalent of the hebrew word 'sheol'

both these words mean the 'grave' or the 'place for the dead' ... a concealed place in the ground, a tomb, the dust. So when Jesus spoke of sheol/hades/hell he was speaking of 'death' and the 'grave'

ok is a concept of hell in the Jehovah's witness belief system?

 

[Pegg]

ok is a concept of hell in the Jehovah's witness belief system?

no.

We take our belief from the hebrew scriptures. In there, sheol is the place that we go to when we die....sheol is the grave, the pit, the tomb.

Gen 3:19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.

Job 34:15 All flesh will expire together, And earthling man himself will return to the very dust


We believe that we return to dust and our only hope is in the resurrection. That is what Jesus believed in also...he taught about the resurrection and he showed that it meant to return to life in the flesh.

John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone that beholds the Son and exercises faith in him should have everlasting life, and I will resurrect him at the last day.

The jewish people in the first century still believed in the resurrection ... when Martha and Mary's brother died, they expressed a belief that their brother Lazarus would be resurrected:
John 11:24 Martha said to him: “I know he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.”
Jesus did resurrect Lazarus, he brought him back to life in the flesh...that is what resurrection means. So we dont believe we live on in spirit form after we die....we believe that we return to dust, we cease to exist until such time as God re-creates us and brings us back to life.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

no.

We take our belief from the hebrew scriptures. In there, sheol is the place that we go to when we die....sheol is the grave, the pit, the tomb.

Gen 3:19 In the sweat of your face you will eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.

Job 34:15 All flesh will expire together, And earthling man himself will return to the very dust


We believe that we return to dust and our only hope is in the resurrection. That is what Jesus believed in also...he taught about the resurrection and he showed that it meant to return to life in the flesh.

John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone that beholds the Son and exercises faith in him should have everlasting life, and I will resurrect him at the last day.

The jewish people in the first century still believed in the resurrection ... when Martha and Mary's brother died, they expressed a belief that their brother Lazarus would be resurrected:
John 11:24 Martha said to him: “I know he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.”
Jesus did resurrect Lazarus, he brought him back to life in the flesh...that is what resurrection means. So we dont believe we live on in spirit form after we die....we believe that we return to dust, we cease to exist until such time as God re-creates us and brings us back to life.

This raises a question in my mind. Didn't Jesus tell the thief on his right during the crucifixion, "today you will be with me in paradise?"

 

[Pegg]

This raises a question in my mind. Didn't Jesus tell the thief on his right during the crucifixion, "today you will be with me in paradise?"

yes he did, however, the greek language was not written with comma's. It is the english translators who inserted commas.

"Truly I tell you, Today you will be with me in paradise"
OR
"Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in paradise"

Notice how the comma completely changes the meaning of the sentences above. Our NWT bible puts the comma after 'today' because when Jesus died, he did not go to paradise that very day. The scriptures tell us that he went to 'sheol/hell' for 3 days first. Then he spent the next 40 days on earth teaching his disciples. Then he returned to heaven to be seated at Gods side.

So if Jesus did not go to paradise that same day that he died, then he could not have seen that man in paradise on that very same day. We have to take Jesus words to mean that in the future, that man would be resurrected into the paradise to come. And because we are not conscious when we die, then when that man is resurrected, it will seem to him that he had only just died and from his perspective, the day he died was the day he woke up in paradise.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

yes he did, however, the greek language was not written with comma's. It is the english translators who inserted commas.

"Truly I tell you, Today you will be with me in paradise"
OR
"Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in paradise"

Notice how the comma completely changes the meaning of the sentences above. Our NWT bible puts the comma after 'today' because when Jesus died, he did not go to paradise that very day. The scriptures tell us that he went to 'sheol/hell' for 3 days first. Then he spent the next 40 days on earth teaching his disciples. Then he returned to heaven to be seated at Gods side.

So if Jesus did not go to paradise that same day that he died, then he could not have seen that man in paradise on that very same day. We have to take Jesus words to mean that in the future, that man would be resurrected into the paradise to come. And because we are not conscious when we die, then when that man is resurrected, it will seem to him that he had only just died and from his perspective, the day he died was the day he woke up in paradise.

That's a really good point. That's interesting.

 

[Shermana]

Now this question isn't a religious question so much as a cultural one. Where did Jesus get his idea of the afterlife from? He speaks of heaven and hell but many jews didn't even have a concept of an afterlife until the Babylonian captivity. The Sadducee's seem to be holdouts from the true ancient israelite religion who don't seem to believe in a soul or a resurrection of the dead. So did Jesus coming from the Galilee and not jerusalem have more foreign exposure (Greek, Persian, Babylonian) and therefore shape his idea's of the afterlife more so than his Jewish upbringing did?

Can you please provide justification for the Bolded Claim? How can we prove that "many Jews" didn't have any idea about the afterlife until after the Captivity?

 

[Shermana]

We also have the ghost of Samuel being called by the Witch of Endor, and there's no implication that it was just a demon, and there is implication it truly was Saul's ghost.

 

[Pegg]

We also have the ghost of Samuel being called by the Witch of Endor, and there's no implication that it was just a demon, and there is implication it truly was Saul's ghost.

if it was really the ghost of the prophet Samuel, then that means that the scriptures about the dead are wrong. Solomons writings about the dead being 'conscious of nothing' are wrong.
When God told Adam he would return to the dust, he was wrong.
When the bible says that Jesus was dead for 3 days, they are wrong.
When the bible speaks of a resurrection, it is wrong.
And when the serpent told Eve that God was a liar and that she would positively not die, he was telling the truth.

by accepting the idea that we exist after we die, you might as well throw out the entire bible and your religion because none of it makes any sense.

 

[outhouse]

It doesn't seem like a lot of Christians want to go there, but I'd really like like to hear from those who know in a scholarly rather than a religious way.

The previous religions from Mesopotamia and Egypt and Canaan, it was handed down so to speak.

people migrated from all 3 of these places to be hebrews and they all had mythical afterlifes

 

[Shermana]

if it was really the ghost of the prophet Samuel, then that means that the scriptures about the dead are wrong. Solomons writings about the dead being 'conscious of nothing' are wrong.
When God told Adam he would return to the dust, he was wrong.
When the bible says that Jesus was dead for 3 days, they are wrong.
When the bible speaks of a resurrection, it is wrong.
And when the serpent told Eve that God was a liar and that she would positively not die, he was telling the truth.

by accepting the idea that we exist after we die, you might as well throw out the entire bible and your religion because none of it makes any sense.

The bodies return to dust obviously.

I'm assuming you reject the part where Peter says Jesus was in hell for those 3 days preaching to the fallen generation of the flood?

As for "Solomon's writings", the book of Ecclesiastes has long been considered questionable by even Jewish authorities, though it is a favorite book of mine. It can also be interpreted as "Their bodies have no consciousness", as their soul simply leaves them.

Ecclesiastes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canonicity

Both Judaism and Christianity accept Ecclesiastes as canonical. However, in the 1st century AD, literal interpretation of the work led to debate over whether it was to be included in the Jewish canon.[22] The House of Hillel and the House of Shammai debated its inclusion, with the Hillel school arguing for it.[23] Its inclusion was decided when Eleazar ben Azariah was made head of the assembly.
Based on the contents of the majority of the book, it has perplexed scholars as to why Ecclesiastes was included in the canon of the Hebrew Bible. While there is no hypothesis that is unanimously supported by scholarship, there have been many suggestions offered. One idea is that association with Solomon had lent enough credibility to the book that it was canonized. However, “the difficulty with this justification…is clear: similar pseudonymous attributions in other texts-texts that were more orthodox than Ecclesiastes-proved to be insufficient reason for those texts to be accepted as canonical.” [24] Another prominent explanation for the canonical status of Ecclesiastes is that the final words redeem the entire book. This view is supported by the discussions at Jamnia, and Rabbi Akiba’s utterances there, “Why did they not withdraw it? Because the beginning and the end of it consist of words of the law” (b. Sabb. 30b)[25] This hypothesis though also has flaws, because of the lack of canonical status for other books that more consistently interpret the laws of Judaism in an orthodox manner.

Either way, there wouldn't be need for a commandment to not Seance with the Dead if it wasn't possible to do so.

Additionally, when the Disciples meet a blind man, who they acknowledge was Blind from Birth, (yes blind from birth), they ask, after knowing he was Blind from birth, what sin he had committed, before being told he didn't commit any sin. Why would they ask what sin a person committed who was blind from birth? Because reincarnation was a common theme. Jesus basically says outright that John the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elijah.

As well the story of the Rich man and Lazarus is not called a 'Parable".

 

[Pegg]

The bodies return to dust obviously.

I'm assuming you reject the part where Peter says Jesus was in hell for those 3 days preaching to the fallen generation of the flood?

no not at all.... but we dont take the view that the 'spirits in prison' were the people of noahs day... they are the fallen angels who were put into 'tartarus'

2Peter 3:18...but being made alive in the spirit. 19 In this [state] also he went his way and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days

compare his words with what he had previously stated in chapter 2:
2:4 Certainly if God did not hold back from punishing the angels that sinned, but, by throwing them into Tar′ta‧rus, delivered them to pits of dense darkness to be reserved for judgment

This is the only occurrence of the word 'tartarus in the scriptures and its interesting to note that the ancient poem by Homer, the Iliad, uses the same word with reference to an underground prison containing the spirits, not of humans but of supernatural gods such as Cronus and the other Titans who had rebelled against Zeus (Jupiter).

Tartarus contains the likes of Satan and those other angels who rebelled with him. They are the ones who Jesus went and preached to....not to dead humans.

As for "Solomon's writings", the book of Ecclesiastes has long been considered questionable by even Jewish authorities, though it is a favorite book of mine. It can also be interpreted as "Their bodies have no consciousness", as their soul simply leaves them.

Ecclesiastes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i think you should go back and look at the original meanings of the words for the soul and spirit. The original meaning is the only thing we need to know. the Nephesh was the living body....that is the word translated as 'soul'

and the spirit is from the word 'ruach' which (in this context) means the breath of the life.

Either way, there wouldn't be need for a commandment to not Seance with the Dead if it wasn't possible to do so.

we can only seance with the demons...they are the only spirits that people communicate with and that is dangerous. Humans die and they no longer exist or have a conscience because they are dead. So anyone who thinks they are speaking to a dead relative are wrong....they are talking to the fallen angels.

Additionally, when the Disciples meet a blind man, who they acknowledge was Blind from Birth, (yes blind from birth), they ask, after knowing he was Blind from birth, what sin he had committed, before being told he didn't commit any sin. Why would they ask what sin a person committed who was blind from birth? Because reincarnation was a common theme. Jesus basically says outright that John the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elijah.

As well the story of the Rich man and Lazarus is not called a 'Parable".

all these accounts can be reconciled without the need for a belief in life after death. It simply doesnt exist.