Comment on Daily reminder that the good old days of the Empire weren't THAT good...
PugJesus@piefed.social 2 days agoNah. Jesus said the only path to eternal life is through Him. That implies that if you die a sinner, you go to Sheol and just burn up into nothing.
That directly contradicts numerous lines about a negative afterlife even in the Gospels alone. Unless “nothing” can weep and gnash their teeth, at which point “nothing” starts to sound an awful lot like “something”.
But since the Bible is polytheistic, I believe that when Jesus says Hades, he actually fucking means Hades. The Greek underworld, ruled over by the god of death. Which already had eternal torture for many thousands of years at that point.
That would have additional problems, both in that the New Testament was written at a point when Judaism had become aggressively monotheistic, not merely monolatrous, that Hades is not innately a place of punishment, and that traditional Greek religion was not thousands of years old at that point.
Anyway, the point is Christianity didn’t invent the eternal torture thing,
But it was a core piece of the faith and its holy texts, and, unlike previous religions, posits the existence of eternal torture to punish non-believers, not those who committed evil.
and actively rejected it in other places.
What.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 2 days ago
Matthew 25:46. The righteous go to heaven and live forever. The cruel suffer a punishment that is eternal and is not life. Id est: eternal nonexistence. That’s the rejection of the eternal torture narrative, which comes from Greek religion.
And yes, the Hellenic religion was a little under a thousand years old at that point. But the Mycenaean religion also featured an underworld presided over by a god of the dead (and, perhaps a goddess of the dead for even longer than that). In the Hellenic interpretation of this underworld, at least, everyone goes down under when they die, but one’s deeds in life and one’s funerary rites determine their place within the underworld. Those whose deeds in life violated the Hellenes’ most important moral values were tormented forever in Tartarus. Notable examples include Sisyphus and Tantalus.
PugJesus@piefed.social 2 days ago
That presumes that the opposite of life is nonexistence, whereas the widespread notion of an afterlife in the period and region posits that the opposite of life is death, not nonexistence. Furthermore, that, again, does not address the question of how “nothing” can weep and gnash its teeth; and, on top of that, is in direct contradiction to Your assertion of Hades as a destination for unbelievers.
That is not in any way supported by Biblical or historical scholarship. For that matter, Greek religion is very often, like Judaism, hazy on the question of an afterlife, and this is an issue often discussed by Greek philosophical musings of the period.
It’s extremely questionable to insist on an interpretation based on the exact terminology of “Hades” and then admit that “Tartarus” is the term for what You are describing.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 2 days ago
Tartarus is in Hades. Anyone who goes to Tartarus goes to Hades.
Anyway, riddle Me this: If the opposite of life is death and the afterlife, then how are Christians who go to heaven getting eternal life like Jesus said? No, in this specific context where Jesus is talking about moral deserts, he’s constructing heaven’s afterlife as a form of eternal life. So why is Jesus promising eternal life, if everyone gets eternal life anyway?
My interpretation is that Hades and Sheol are two different places. Jews go to Sheol, Greeks go to Hades. The rich man in the parable is a Greek so he goes to Hades, and since he was a prick, big man H puts him in Tartarus to be tortured, probably with some kind of ironic punishment. Maybe he gets the generic Tantalus package, since he loved food and wine so much. On the other hand, the Jews Jesus is talking to in Matthew 25 are gonna be going to either Heaven or Sheol, since they’re Jewish.
If they go to Sheol, then it gets really hot and maybe they gnash their teeth for a bit, and then they finish dying. Their bodies died on Earth, and then their spirit dies in Sheol. You know, good old ka and ba metaphysics. On the other hand, the ones who were nice to Jesus (and all poor people) go to Heaven and get their bodies restored forevermore up in Jesustown.
Jesus was a really nice guy, so I’d think he’d be a polytheist and respect other religions. On the other hand, being tortured in Tartarus really sucks, so I can see him trying to convert Greek sinners to save them from that bullshit. Unfortunately, his attempts to help the Greek sinners backfired, because now there are 1.4 billion Romans following a Jewish cult that says they’re going to be tortured forever if they don’t give the Vatican money.
PugJesus@piefed.social 2 days ago
Many Christian sects reconcile it by asserting resurrection and then heaven.
Most people would not regard eternal torture after death as a form of life.
Why do you say he’s a Greek? And again, this goes against the fact that Judaism at the time of the New Testament had been aggressively monotheist, not just monolatrous, for several hundred years. This also contradicts the fact that Jesus asserts that any man who does not follow him will suffer in the afterlife, not just Jews.
Is this the same Jesus who said that people who felt lust should tear out their own eyes? The same Jesus who asserts his followers must despise everyone except for him? The same Jesus who proclaimed to bring not peace, but a sword, and to fulfill the brutal Old Testament law?
Then it would be extremely curious that he spent all of his time preaching in Iudea if he sought to convert Greeks.
MediumGray@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
While I am by no means terribly well read on the subject it seems to me that at least part of the problem here is probably that the bible isn’t, and never really has been, internally consistent. So what exactly are it’s statements on the afterlife? It depends on which parts you want to cherry pick and how you want to interpret them. Of course some arguments are stronger than others and some have the backing of one orthodoxy or another at various points in time but there is no one unassailably correct answer (I suspect by design). That’s not to disagree with you though, just to interject that it’s all sort of nonesense.