Something I found on the internet about luke 16:19-31

[Clear]

POST ONE OF FOUR

Hi @Miken

Miken said : "Again you are using Talmudic references written up to a thousand years after the texts I referenced - Ecclesiastes." (post #80)

Firstly : Who cares about the date your scripture quote was written when your interpretation misrepresents Jewish interpretation?

Secondly, : If you care about the age of traditions, consider that the Talmudic traditions from Genesis are much older than yours. The issue is not the age of the original writing but rather the MEANING of the original writing and how the Jews interpreted the texts and what they believed concerning those old texts.

Thirdly : If you cared so much about dates, why would your ONLY quote regarding Jewish interpretation come from the middle ages (Rashi – 700 years LATER than the Talmud…).

Forthly : I might remind you that even your quote from Rashi was a fail since even Rashi speaks of “works” that the spirits of the dead are able to do. (i.e. “cognizant” works done by “cognizant spirits”). It is ironic that the only, single, solitary interpretive quote you offered to readers, itself undermines your theory.

If you are going to describe historical Jewish belief and their interpretation, you are going to have to pay attention to actual history. Why should readers pay attention to your theory if you have insufficient relevant data to support the theory you present? (Not one single interpretive quote supporting your theory…. Really?) You say you may have to refer to your “notes”. I suggest that you do so if you think it will help.



1) JEWISH INTERPRETATION OF JEWISH BELIEFS VERSUS MIKENS’ INTERPRETATION OF JEWISH BELIEFS

Your original claim was that the early Jews did not believe in cognizant spirits of dead in Sheol / Hades / world of spirits.
What you offered readers was your own belief and your own interpretation and then presented your personal interpretation to readers as “Jewish”.

What the actual Jewish literature concerning THEIR belief and THEIR interpretation shows is that your interpretation is a misrepresentation of their interpretation.



Miken claimed : “Neither was there a concept of personal resurrection as per Job.s lament in Job 14.” (post #80)

As we’ve already seen, Job 14 had to do with return from death to mortality, and not with going forward to resurrection.
I’ve also asked you if you have any scripture or any data that has to do with resurrection rather than returning from the dead? This feels like another “bait and switch”.

I’ve already asked you to explain why you interpret these texts as referring to resurrection from the dead (which is possible in this theology), rather than referring to a return to mortality (which is not normally possible).



2) RETURNING TO MORTALITY FROM SHEOL/HADES VERSUS MOVING FORWARD FROM SHEOL/HADES ON TO RESURRECTION

The concept of resurrection in early Jewish literature is NOT a return to mortality, but rather it is a progression forward to be clothed in an immortal body.

For example, Job 14:14 speaks both of resurrection AND cognizance when he says “For if a man should die, shall he live again having completed the days of his existence? I shall wait until I should exist again. Then you shall call, and I will hearken to you; but he works of your hands do not undo.” Job is waiting to “exist again” and the spirit must be cognizant in order to “hearken”.

When Job speaks of the resurrection and “living again”, he is not speaking of a return to mortality, but moving forward into immortality with the resurrection.



3) THE SPIRITS OF THE DEAD WERE TO BE CLOTHED WITH RESURRECTED BODIES THAT WERE DIFFERENT THAN MORTAL BODIES

And the body of the final resurrection is an immortal body that is different than that of a mortal body.

For example, speaking of the resurrected body, Daniel 12:2 says “And many of the ones sleeping in an embankment of earth shall awaken, these unto eternal life and these others unto scorning and for eternal shame. And the ones perceiving shall shine forth as the brightness of the firmament and of the many righteous as the stars into the eons and still….”

Mortal bodies did not “shine forth as the brightness of the firmament”. We are not speaking of a return from death to mortal bodies. Resurrection was not a return to mortal life.

Speaking of these bodies, the Judeo-Christians, who inherited much of their theology from Judaism, also inherited the Jewish belief in resurrection. The versions agree that the bodies which clothe the spirits in the resurrection are different than mortal bodies. The Old Testament epigraphs describe these beliefs.

For examples : Canto #1- Huvidagman - FROM THE PARTHIAN HYMN-CYCLES speak of the bodies of the resurrection saying : “ Heaviness and drooping do not exist in their bodies, and paralysis does not affect any of their limbs. Heavy sleep never overtakes their souls, and deceptive dreams and delusions are unknown among them. Hunger and anguish are not known in that land…. .Their walk is quicker by far than lightning. In the bodies they possess, there is no sickness..........All the bodies and appearances upon that land are radiant.

This theme continues in Old testament pseudoepigraphic literature. The apo Baruch speaks of the dead “who possessed intelligence in their life, and those who planted the root of wisdom in their hearts – their splendor will then be glorified by transformations, and the shape of their face will be changed into the light of their beauty so that they may acquire and receive the undying world which is promised to them (Baruch 2) 51:2-6;

This belief carried into the Judeo-Christian literature. “The Lord rose from the dead. He became as he used to be, but now his body was perfect. He did indeed possess flesh, but this flesh is true flesh. Our flesh is not true, but we possess only an image of the true.” The gospel of Phillip

In this model, the body of the resurrection was finer and more glorious than that of mortality. In fact, this belief underlies the concept that death would involve a higher state of being.

Thus Paul relates to the Corinthians that the tabernacles they would have in heaven was desireable. He says : “For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: 3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. 4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life. 2 Cor 5:1-4;

Similarly, James (in apo James) of old testament epigraphs has a similar attitude saying : “ I shall part from you. For a chariot of wind has taken me up, and from now on I shall strip myself in order that I may clothe myself.” The Apocryphon of James;

POST TWO OF FOUR FOLLOWS

 

[Clear]

POST TWO OF FOUR



4) THE TABERNACLES/BODIES THAT THEY WERE CLOTHED WITH IN THE RESURRECTION WERE BETTER THAN THE MORTAL TABERNACLES (BODIES).

For example, the Gospel of Phillip refers to this principle : “You say that the flesh will not rise....It is necessary to rise in this flesh, since everything exists in it. In this world those who put on garments are better than the garments. In the Kingdom of Heaven the garments are better than those who have put them on.” The gospel of Phillip;

Jewish Enoch describes these bodies as “Garments of Glory” when he says “ The righteous and elect ones shall rise from the earth and cease being of downcast face. They shall wear the garments of glory. 16 These garments of yours shall become the garments of life from the Lord of the Spirits. Neither shall your garments wear out, nor your glory come to an end before the Lord of the Spirits. 1st Enoch 44 62:15-

Syncretic Enoch describes these individuals as having bodies that would not become weary nor become sickened. “8 And all the righteous, who escape from the Lords great judgment, will be collected together into the great age. 9 And after that there will be among them neither weariness <nor sickness> nor affliction nor worry nor want nor debilitation nor night nor darkness. 2nd Enoch 65:6-10;



5) EXAMPLES FROM OLD TESTAMENT EPIGRAPHIC LITERATURE AS BELIEF IN THE RESURRECTION

It’s not only Job that says “…I shall wait until I should exist again. Then you shall call, and I will hearken to you; but the works of your hands do not undo…” But other prophets prophesied concerning the resurrection that they believed in.

While all those who die went to Hades/Sheol/World of spirits, Hosea speaks of the Lord when the Lord says : “From the hand (heb power) of Hades I shall rescue them, and from death I will ransom them. Where is your punishment O death. Where is your sting O Hades….” Hosea 13:14

It is Samuel that explains that “…The Lord puts to death and he makes alive, he leads down into Hades and leads up [from Hades]. 1 Sam 2:6

Not only does Isaiah prophesy that “…The dead shall rise up and the ones in the sepulchers shall be raised and the ones in the earth shall be glad for the dew by you is a cure to them but the land of the impious shall fall. (Isa 26:19), but the fulmination of this promise is the basis of the early Judeo-Christian decensus literature.

Ezekiel (whom you misinterpret according to the Jewish Talmud), even speaks of the resurrection and has a vision of a version of it in Ezekiel 37:1-6.

Ezekiel says that “…the hand of the Lord came upon me and the Lord led me by the spirit and put me in the midst of the plain and this was full of bones of humans. And he led me unto them, round about in a circuit. And behold, [there were] exceedingly many upon the face f the exceedingly dry plain. And he said to me. Son of man, shall these bones live? And I said O Lord you know this.

And he said to me, Prophesy over these bones and you shall say to them. O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus says the Lord to these bones. Behold I bring upon you a spirit of life. And I shall put upon you nerves and I will lead upon you flesh, and I shall stretch out upon you skin, and I will put my spirit in you; you shall live, and you shall know that I am the Lord.

The vision continues and Ezekiel sees in his vision, the bones were clothed in nerves and flesh and the wind came and life came into these bodies that “stood upon their feet”. “And the Lord spoke to me saying Son of Man, these bones are all the house of Israel.

Verse 12 goes on to read “Behold, I open your tombs and I shall lead you from out of your tombs…”

THIS is authentic Jewish literature and is so clear that readers ought to be able to make up their own mind whether this refers to the dead rising again to life with a body.

POST THREE OF FOUR FOLLOWS

 

[Clear]

POST THREE OF FOUR


5) THE SPIRITS OF INDIVIDUALS WHOSE BODIES WERE DESTROYED WOULD HAVE A HOPE IN THE FUTURE MESSIAH AND IN HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT OF HIS WORK

In a similar manner to the Prophet Ezekiel, Jewish Enoch also speaks of disintegrated bodies that “return and find hope in the day of the Elect one”. The prophet Enoch remarks “… And these measurements shall reveal all the secrets of the depths of the earth, those who have been destroyed in the desert, those who have been devoured by the wild beasts, and those who have been eaten by the fish of the sea. So that they all return and find hope in the day of the Elect One. . 1st Enoch 61:5-8;

Syncretic Enoch records the Lord saying to Adam : “…‘You are earth, and into the earth once again you will go, out of which I took you. And I will not destroy you, but I will send you away to what I took you from. Then I can take you once again at my second coming. ” 2nd Enoch 31:2-8, 32:1

This is not a mere collection of spirits, but an actual resurrection as the apo Adam and Eve literature relates the same literary tradition : “and God called Adam and said, “Adam, Adam.” And the body answered from the ground and said, “Here I am, Lord.” 2 And the Lord said to him, “I told you that you are dust and to dust you shall return. 3 Now I promise to you the resurrection; I shall raise you on the last day in the resurrection with every man of your seed.” Life of Adam and Eve (apocalypse) 41:1-3;

Not only is Adam promised an actual resurrection, but the spirit in Hades/Sheol/World of spirits is cognizant and communicative as he speaks to God from the Grave.

The vision of Ezekiel and the dry bones that resurrect was a very popular theme among the early Jews and Judeo-Christians. For example, the version of this resurrection of bodies in Sibylline Oracles literature is as follows :

“Then the heavenly one will give souls and breath and voice to the dead and bones fastened with all kinds of joinings....flesh and sinews and veins and skin about the flesh, and the former hairs. Bodies of humans, made solid in heavenly manner, breathing and set in motion, will be raised on a single day. … Moses, the great friend of the Most High, also will come, having put on flesh. Great Abraham himself will come, Isaac and Jacob, Joshua, Daniel and Elijah, Habbakuk and Jonah, and those whom the Hebrews killed.” Sibylline Oracles book two vs 221-230 & 241-248

The culmination of this tradition appears in the early Judeo-Christian decensus literature where it describes these prophets in Hades/Sheol/the World of spirits and how they were raised according to this Old Testament epigraphic literature and tradition.

Similar to the Talmudic example of how the spirit and Body act in concert, apo Ezekiel God says : ".So the Holy One, blessed be he, brings the spirit and placing it in the body, he also judges them as one. For it is said, ‘He will call to the heavens from above and to the earth, so he might judge his people.’ ‘He will call to the heavens from above’ – this to the spirit. ‘And the earth so he might judge his people’ –this to the body.” Apocryphon of Ezekiel Frag one, ch2 –

This is from another version of the example from (Babylonia Talmud, Sanhedrin 91a,b). There are multiple versions of this popular story and it’s tradition.

The prophet Ezra also speaks of the resurrection, saying “And after seven days the world, which is not yet awake, shall be roused, and that which is corruptible shall perish. And the earth shall give up those who are asleep in it; and the chambers shall give up the souls which have been committed to them. Fourth Book of Ezra 7:26 - 32;

From recension B, Ezra reads : “Then the souls are freed from the hands of Satan and soar down from the atmosphere. And they come and are united each with its body which had been returned to dust and which the sound of the trumpet had built and aroused and renewed” The Questions of Ezra (Recension B) vs 5-8 and 11-14;

The Prophet Baruch witness to this same tradition when he was taught by the Lord : “And he answered and said to me: “Listen Baruch, to this word and write down in the memory of your heart all that you shall learn. For the earth will surely give back the dead at that time; it receives them now in order to keep them, not changing anything in their form. But as it has received them so it will give them back. And as I have delivered them to it so it will raise them. The Apocalypse of Baruch (Baruch 2) 50:1-4; “

Speaking of the resurrection at the appointed time after the Messiah appears, the Prophet Baruch said : “1 And it will happen after these things when the time of the appearance of the Anointed One has been fulfilled and he returns with glory, that then all who sleep in hope of him will rise... ” The Apocalypse of Baruch (Baruch 2) 29:3-and 5 & Ch 30:1-5;

The Old Testament era Testament literature also confirms this belief among the Jews. Judah says to his Children regarding the Messiah : “This is the Shoot of God Most High; this is the fountain for the life of all humanity. Ch 25:1 And after this Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will be resurrected to life and I and my brothers will be chiefs (wielding) our scepter in Israel.” Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs - Judah 24:1-4 & 25:1;

The Martyrdom literature also confirms this same belief. Mart. Isaiah has Isaiah prophesy “… Michael, the chief of the holy angels, will open his grave on the third day, and that Beloved, sitting on their shoulders, will come forth and send out his twelve disciples, and they will teach all nations and every tongue the resurrection of the Beloved...” Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah . 3:15-18; .

Apo Adam literature is yet another witness from Old Testament epigraphs that reflect Jewish belief. The description of the vision is : “And there I saw Enoch and all who (were) with him, stripped of (their) robes of the flesh; and I saw them in their robes of above, and they were like the angels who stand there in great glory. …. 17 And then many of the righteous will ascend with him , whose spirits do not receive (their) robes until the Lord Christ ascends and they ascend with him. …. 3 Then all flesh from Adam up to that great day shall be raised, such as shall be the holy people; then to them shall be given every joy of Paradise and God shall be in their midst Life of Adam and Eve (Apocalypse) 13:2-6;

Another example from Apo A&E “…And the Lord turned and said to Adam, ‘… when you come out of Paradise, if you guard yourself from all evil, preferring death to it, at the time of the resurrection I will raise you again and then there shall be given to you from the tree of life, and you shall be immortal forever.’ Life of Adam and Eve (apocalypse) 28:1-4;


Pseudo-Philo describes this same belief as follows : “And I will bring the dead to life and raise up those who are sleeping from the earth. And hell will pay back its debt, and the place of perdition will return it’s deposit so that I may render to each according to his works and according to the fruits of his own devices, until I judge between soul and flesh. Pseudo-Philo 3:10;

“It is not good to dissolve the human frame; for we hope that the remains of the departed will soon come to the light (again); The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides 102-103;

Prayer #12 in the Hellenistic synagogal prayers reads : “And in time, having caused him to fall asleep for a while, you called (him) by an oath to a new birth; having dissolved the boundaries of death, you promised life by resurrection! vs 12:46-51, 61-62 (also similar found in AposCon 8.112.6-27)

The Old Testament, testament literature has multiple versions (I gave one from Test of patriarchs already), this one from Testament of Adam where God tells Adam : “… I am consigning you to death, and the maggot and the worm will eat your body.’3...But after a short time there will be mercy on you because you were created in my image, and I will not leave you to waste away in Sheol. …, I will raise up the body I received from you. Testament of Adam 3:1-4;

I suppose readers can tire of example upon example from the Old Testament epigraphs, but the point is that the literature is full of witnesses regarding this belief and tradition. For example, the Sibylline Oracles says : “But when everything is already dusty ashes and God puts to sleep the unspeakable fire, even as he kindled it, God himself will again fashion the bones and ashes of men and he will raise up mortals again as they were before.” Sibylline Oracles book 4vs 162-190;

POST FOUR OF FOUR FOLLOWS

 

[Clear]

POST FOUR OF FOUR


I almost forgot that the Dead Sea Scroll literature also witnesses to this early Jewish belief in resurrection.

4Q says : “…For your glory’s sake You have cleansed man from transgression, …. That bodies, covered with worms of the dead, might rise up from the dust to an eternal council; from a perverse spirit to your understanding. Frags. 10, 34, 42+ 4Q427 Frag. 3 Col. 19:10-14

An example from Jewish Haggadah reads : “Also, Adam’s prayer, to be given of the fruit of the Tree of Life, was turned aside, with the promise, however, that if he would lead a pious life, he would be given of the fruit on the day of resurrection, and he would then live forever. (The Punishment);

“Who shall shed this body from me and clothe me in a new body...?” III c Angad Roshnan - FROM THE PARTHIAN HYMN-CYCLES She Ship of God III c

“ I am clothed with a garment of light...and I am passed beyond the pain and anguish of bodies. . VIII Angad Roshnan FROM THE PARTHIAN HYMN-CYCLES - The Ship of God VIII p 325; “

Jewish Zohar reads : “let her be redeemed’ [Exod. 21:8], as it stands written: ‘He redeems his soul from going into the pit’ [Job 33:28]. This has the meaning that man is counseled to redeem his soul by his repentance. In truth, there is a twofold meaning in the words, ‘then he let her be redeemed,’ for they allude to a man’s own redemption of his soul by repentance, and after it, the redemption from Gehinnom by the Holy One, be blessed.” The Zohar - The Destiny of the Soul ;

It’s not only the Jews who believed in Ezekiels prophesy to the “dry bones” but the early Judeo-Christians also inherited this belief and the same interpretation from the Jews. For example , Apo Peter says : “On the day of the decision of the judgment of God, all the children of men from the east unto the west shall be gathered before my Father who ever lives, and he will command Hell to open its bars of steel and to give up all that is in it. And the beasts and the fowls shall he command to give back all flesh that they have devoured, since he desires that men should appear again; … on the day of judgment, and the word of God, and as all things came to pass when he created the world and commanded that all that is therein, and it was all done --so shall it be in the last days; for everything is possible with God and he says in the Scripture: “Son of man, prophesy upon the several bones, and say to the bones – bone unto bone in joints, sinews, nerves, flesh and skin and hair thereon.” And soul and spirit shall the great Uriel give at the command of God. For him God has appointed over the resurrection of the dead on the day of judgment. The apocalypse of Peter

Jewish Zohar describes the belief that the spirit will return to a body in the resurrection.

“…And when such a soul departs from this world, pure, bright, unblemished, the Holy One, be blessed, daily causes her to shine with a host of radiances and proclaims concerning her: ‘ Here is the soul of my son, such and such: let her be preserved for the body from which she has departed.’ The Zohar - The Destiny of the Soul


.


6) THE EARLY JUDEO-CHRISTIANS INHERITED THIS DOCTRINE FROM THE JEWS AS WELL

Just as the Early Christians inherited their old Testament Literature and other literature from the Jews, they also inherited the Jewish belief in resurrection and, especially in view of the resurrection of the Messiah Jesus, they firmly held onto to this traditional belief and their literature is yet more historical witness to the Judeo-Christian belief in the resurrection.

For example, the apostle Paul was a Jew and testifies that according to his understanding and belief, that there was to be a resurrection from the dead. For example, paul says : “14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: 15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. Acts 24:14-15; Thus, Paul witnesses that they "also allow that there shall be a resurrection of the dead..."

The other Judeo-Christians also believed in this Jewish doctrine as well and witness to it.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Acts 32

30 But God raised him from the dead: 31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people. Acts 13:30

And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power. Cor 6:14;

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 1 Cor 15:3-6;

12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised... 1 Cor 15:12-16;

35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? 36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: 38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. 39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. 40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. :41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. 42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 It is sown in dishonour; it 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…. 1 Cor 15:35-44;

20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: 21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. Phil 3:20-21;



7) THE EARLY APOSTOLIC ERA LITERATURE ALSO WITNESSES TO THIS SAME BELIEF

Clement, was a convert to Christianity and was taught the Christian beliefs by the Apostle Peter, a Jew. Clement quotes that God promises : “ “...I will remember a good day and will raise you from your graves” 1 Clement 50:4;

Ignatius also witnesses to this doctrine saying “who, moreover, really was raised from the dead when his Father raised him up, who–his Father, that is–in the same way will likewise also raise us up in Christ Jesus..” Ignatius to the Trallians 9:2;

There are other witnesses in the apostolic era literature and beyond, but I think that it is overkill to continue with examples.

The Ancient Prophets taught this doctrine, the early Jews believed this doctrine and themselves taught it, the Old Testament epigraphic literature witnesses that the Jews believed it, the Judeo-Christian literature carries the same witness to belief in this doctrine and the early Christian literature also witnesses to this belief, having continues to belief in the doctrine from the earliest literature and from their own movement.

The bottom line is that the literature has an undeniable amount of witnesses that the Jews believed in cognizant spirits of the dead and they believed that these spirits would, one day, resurrect.

In any case Miken, I hope your spiritual journey in this life is wonderful and insightful.

Clear
ειτωσεφιω

 

[Miken]

@Clear

You insist that because later Jewish writers applied their interpretations based on more evolved concepts to much earlier scriptures that this was necessarily the meaning the original authors intended.

The idea of a resurrection was unique to the Pharisees and their followers. The Sadducees and the Essenes did not believe in any such thing. Keep in mind that the Pharisees only came into being in the 2nd century BCE. [1] Sadducees did not believe there was an afterlife at all. [2] Essenes believed in a pleasant spiritual afterlife for the righteous but the body was permanently gone. [3] For the Essenes it was no Sheol, no resurrection, immediate reward for the righteous.

That the Sadducees did not believe in resurrection is even mention in the Gospels
Matthew 22:23 The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection

The belief system you describe is that of the Pharisees who were the ones who founded Rabbinic Judaism after the destruction of the Temple and developed it via the Talmud. [4]

Note that Pharisaic Rabbinic Judaism was considered by its constituents as the one and only form of Judaism there ever was.

“Orthodox Judaism does not accept the scholarly view that Rabbinic Judaism came into being in the post-Second Temple era. Rather, it sees the Judaism of this period as continuing organically from the religious and cultural heritage of the Israelites, stemming from the revelation at Sinai onwards.” [6]

It is any wonder that truly ancient scriptures should get interpreted according to Pharisaic views?

However, the My Jewish Learning site comments:

“Most Jewish ideas about the afterlife developed in post-biblical times.” [5]

Also:

“The Bible itself has very few references to life after death. Sheol, the bowels of the earth, is portrayed as the place of the dead, but in most instances Sheol seems to be more a metaphor for oblivion than an actual place where the dead “live” and retain consciousness

The notion of resurrection appears in two late biblical sources, Daniel 12 and Isaiah 25-26.” [5]

Although Judaism today generally goes along with the Talmudic views. There is still a considerable range of opinion about the details. Lots of discussion in [5]

We can see several versions of Jewish opinions being represented in the Christian scriptures concerning the nature of the afterlife.

In addition to the subject of this thread where there is reward and punishment immediately after death, there is also:

In the Pauline epistles, the dead sleep and resurrection is an awakening
1 Corinthians 15:6
1 Corinthians 15:18=20
1 Corinthians 15:51
Ephesians 5:14
1 Thessalonians 4:14-15

In Matthew’s story of the Sheep and the Goats it appears that neither the righteous nor the unrighteous are aware of their fate or receive their judgment until the Son of Man comes, i.e., the end of days.

John suggests that the dead are in their tombs, at least metaphorically, until the end of days.

John 5
28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of

Only Luke seems to favor what would be the Talmudic view, and interestingly that derives from the Book of the Watchers section of non-canonical 1 Enoch, which appears possibly in the 3rd century BCE.

In short, what you are claiming is the one and only possible interpretation of Job and Ecclesiastes is in fact retrofitting later thinking that arose quite a few centuries after those texts were written Furthermore that latter thinking presumes itself to be the only interpretations there ever were when that is plainly not the case.

 

[Goddess Kit]

Open interpretation is such a human complication.

If the author did not provide an appendix detailing what s/he meant, or is no longer alive to correct your fallacious interpretation, then isn't the debate of who's right rather pointless?

 

[Miken]

Not

Open interpretation is such a human complication.

If the author did not provide an appendix detailing what s/he meant, or is no longer alive to correct your fallacious interpretation, then isn't the debate of who's right rather pointless?

In that case, everyone should just throw out every piece of scripture because we can;t possibly know what it meant. I strongly disagree. Discovering what the various authors of scripture meant may take some doing, comparing different pieces and taking into account why a piece may have been written and how it all fits into the context of the times. Knowing at least something about the original language helps. But very importantly this must all be done with the intent of honest discovery and not to 'prove' a given ideological presumption.

If this is not your cup of tea, that is alright. But please do not tell others that it is an impossible task,

 

[Clear]

@Goddess Kit said : “Open interpretation is such a human complication. If the author did not provide an appendix detailing what s/he meant, or is no longer alive to correct your fallacious interpretation, then isn't the debate of who's right rather pointless? (post #86)


Hi Goddess,

Regarding interpretation in the face of lack of specific clarity of information
I agree with your point regarding interpretation as a human complication.
Jewish and Christian religionist read similar texts and come away with conflicting interpretations as to what it means. This is a major problem in Judeo-Christian religion.

I also agree that if the author(s) did not provide sufficiently clarity to their statements, then it is difficult to tell what the author(s) meant.
This is another major problem in Judeo-Christian religion. Sometimes the author(s) write down sufficient information so as to clarify what they meant by certain statements, sometimes not. History is sometimes a puzzle with a dearth of clear information.

Regarding the "point" of debate within a historical discussion.
I think the search for meaning is relative to the value of what one is searching for. If one is searching for information for where a ship with treasure sunk in order to retrieve the treasure, then information and meaning of historical data may be valuable.

I suspect religionists view the search for religious meaning somewhat similarly. The search for meaning and clarity leads to something they view as valuable. However, I would agree with you if you also point out that some of the things we debate about are of little value.

From a historians point of view, the concept of a future life / resurrection is a base principle the Christians elaborated from Jewish traditions and forms a touchstone for many of the references made in Christian literature. It's historical value lies in it's ability to help form a base model for understanding early Judeo-Christian religion. I admit that this may not be important to everyone.

I hope your own journey is wonderful and fruitful Goddess Kit.

Clear
ειδρειτωω

 

[Clear]

Hi @Miken

ORIGINAL AUTHORS ALWAYS KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT THEY MEANT THAN READERS FROM LATER GENERATIONS
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)

Miken said : "You insist that because later Jewish writers applied their interpretations based on more evolved concepts to much earlier scriptures that this was necessarily the meaning the original authors intended." (post #85)

You are confused in your assumption. Original authors themselves always know more about what they meant than anyone else.
This is why I criticized your attempt to place your personal interpretation onto the text of Job. It didn’t work.
This is also why your single and solitary quote from “Jewish Literature” that came from a single Jew in approx. 1000 a.d. did not work and your quote itself undermined your theory.

Thus far, you have provided readers with your own modern and personal interpretation of a couple of texts written thousands of years earlier. This did not support your theory.


THE THEORY THAT THE SADDUCEES DOCTRINE REPRESENTED ORTHODOX JUDAIC BELIEF REGARDING RESURRECTION
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)
Miken said : The idea of a resurrection was unique to the Pharisees and their followers. The Sadducees and the Essenes did not believe in any such thing. (post #85)

Why would you assume that the Sadducees or Essenes represent early orthodox Judaism?
Can you offer us any reason to believe a theory that the Sadducees were representative of “Judaism”?
Perhaps you can provide a quote or two from any Sadducee literature out side of the Christian quote? Any early Jewish data to support this theory for readers to examine?


A NEW THEORY THAT PHARISEES AND THEIR DOCTRINE IS THE SOURCE OF THE DOCTRINE OF RESURRECTION
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)
Miken said : "The belief system you describe is that of the Pharisees who were the ones who founded Rabbinic Judaism after the destruction of the Temple and developed it via the Talmud. (post #85)

This is yet another unusual theory to support your original theory.
Can you now provide us with actual data that supports this new and additional theory of yours that resurrection did not exist before the Pharisees agreed with the concept?

For examples
1) Job 14:14 speaks both of resurrection AND cognizance when he says “For if a man should die, shall he live again having completed the days of his existence? I shall wait until I should exist again. Then you shall call, and I will hearken to you; but he works of your hands do not undo.” Job is waiting to “exist again” and the spirit must be cognizant in order to “hearken”.

Does your theory feel the prophet Job in referring to resurrection was a “Pharisee” or a forerunner of Pharisaic Judaism?


2) When Daniel prophesies concerning the resurrection that “…many of the ones sleeping in an embankment of earth shall awaken, these unto eternal life and these others unto scorning and for eternal shame. And the ones perceiving shall shine forth as the brightness of the firmament and of the many righteous as the stars into the eons and still….” (Daniel 12:2)

Does this mean Daniel espoused a form of Pharisaism? Or that this prophet did not represent “authentic” Judaism?


3) Is the prophet Samuel teaching Jewish heresy by saying “…The Lord puts to death and he makes alive, he leads down into Hades and leads up [from Hades]. 1 Sam 2:6


4) What about Isaiah, when he says “…The dead shall rise up and the ones in the sepulchers shall be raised and the ones in the earth shall be glad for the dew by you is a cure to them but the land of the impious shall fall. (Isa 26:19).

How would Isaiah fit into your theory that his teaching represents the teaching of the Pharisees and not Judaism?


5) What about the prophet Ezekiel when he describes his vision of the Resurrection of the dry bones?

Ezekiel says that “…the hand of the Lord came upon me and the Lord led me by the spirit and put me in the midst of the plain and this was full of bones of humans. And he led me unto them, round about in a circuit. And behold, [there were] exceedingly many upon the face f the exceedingly dry plain. And he said to me. Son of man, shall these bones live? And I said O Lord you know this.

And he said to me, Prophesy over these bones and you shall say to them. O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus says the Lord to these bones. Behold I bring upon you a spirit of life. And I shall put upon you nerves and I will lead upon you flesh, and I shall stretch out upon you skin, and I will put my spirit in you; you shall live, and you shall know that I am the Lord.

The vision continues and Ezekiel sees in his vision, the bones were clothed in nerves and flesh and the wind came and life came into these bodies that “stood upon their feet”. “And the Lord spoke to me saying Son of Man, these bones are all the house of Israel.

Verse 12 goes on to read “Behold, I open your tombs and I shall lead you from out of your tombs…” (Ezekiel 37: 1-12)

Does this new theory of yours mean that the Prophet Ezekiel does not represent Judaism but instead represents a schizmatic teaching?

We haven't even begun to have you show all the early Jewish Old Testament Epigraphs witnessing to the doctrine of resurrection are somehow written by Pharisees.

This New theory of yours feels like it was invented to support your prior theory.



THERE ARE ALMOST ALWAYS A MULTITUDE OF POSSIBLE INTERPRETATIONS OF EARLY TEXTS BY LATER READERS
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)
Miken said : In short, what you are claiming is the one and only possible interpretation of Job and Ecclesiastes is in fact retrofitting later thinking that arose quite a few centuries after those texts were written Furthermore that latter thinking presumes itself to be the only interpretations there ever were when that is plainly not the case. (Post #85)


You are confused. I think there are many, many potential interpretations of Job and Ecclesiates. I simply provided many, many examples from Jewish Literature that describe a consistent, single Jewish interpretation regarding cognizance of spirits in Sheol / Hades / Spirit World and Jewish literature describing a consistent, single Jewish interpretation regarding Resurrection. This does not mean there are not other interpretations. It does not even mean the Jews were correct in their belief.

However, in the face of their own literature, in their own words, offering their own many witnesses as to what they believed, I think it will be hard for you to convince readers that the Jews did not believe what they themselves said they believed.


IF THERE IS NO DATA TO SUPPORT THE THEORY THAT JEWS DID NOT BELIEVE IN RESURRECTION, THEN THE THEORY IS DEAD
We’ve spent several posts on your theory. Do you actually have ANY data that you want to offer readers? If you do not have any data to support your own personal interpretations and theories, then I will consider the issue a dead horse and readers can make up their own minds with the data provided them.


In any case Miken, and whatever theories you come up with, I honestly hope your spiritual journey is wonderful and full of insights and joy.

Clear
ειδρτωτωω

 

[Miken]

Part 1 of 2

Hi @Miken

ORIGINAL AUTHORS ALWAYS KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT THEY MEANT THAN READERS FROM LATER GENERATIONS
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)

Miken said : "You insist that because later Jewish writers applied their interpretations based on more evolved concepts to much earlier scriptures that this was necessarily the meaning the original authors intended." (post #85)

You are confused in your assumption. Original authors themselves always know more about what they meant than anyone else.
This is why I criticized your attempt to place your personal interpretation onto the text of Job. It didn’t work

This is also why your single and solitary quote from “Jewish Literature” that came from a single Jew in approx. 1000 a.d. did not work and your quote itself undermined your theory.

Thus far, you have provided readers with your own modern and personal interpretation of a couple of texts written thousands of years earlier. This did not support your theory.

Authors write to convey meaning. If a verse or passage presents what seems to be a clear straightforward meaning that fits well with what seems to be the clear straightforward meaning of the overall context of the work, it is entirely reasonable to take the meaning at face value.

Ecclesiastes 9
1 But all this I laid to heart, examining it all, how the righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hand of God. Whether it is love or hate, man does not know; both are before him. 2 It is the same for all, since the same event happens to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice. As the good one is, so is the sinner, and he who swears is as he who shuns an oath. 3 This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that the same event happens to all. Also, the hearts of the children of man are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. 4 But he who is joined with all the living has hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion. 5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten. 6 Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun.

It does not matter what you do you are going to be dead in the end. You can be good, you can be bad, the end result is just death and no reward. And the dead know nothing. Dead is dead. The meaning is very clear and straightforward.

Rashi’s commentary on 9:5 bolded above

“For the living know that they will die: and perhaps their hearts will return on the day of death and they will repent of their ways, but after they die, they do not know anything, and they have no more reward for the actions that they do from their deaths and onwards, for whoever toils on the eve of the Sabbath will eat on the Sabbath.”

This does not say the dead perform actions after they are dead. It says that the dead can get no reward because they cannot act. Or is it possible to act while knowing nothing? Of course not. Toiling on the eve of the Sabbath (while alive) means that the righteous will receive a reward for what they do in life. But no one works on the Sabbath (after death).

This is made very clear in 9:10
Eccl. 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might, for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.

It is very clear what the author of Ecclesiastes wanted to be understood.

THE THEORY THAT THE SADDUCEES DOCTRINE REPRESENTED ORTHODOX JUDAIC BELIEF REGARDING RESURRECTION
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)
Miken said : The idea of a resurrection was unique to the Pharisees and their followers. The Sadducees and the Essenes did not believe in any such thing. (post #85)

Why would you assume that the Sadducees or Essenes represent early orthodox Judaism?
Can you offer us any reason to believe a theory that the Sadducees were representative of “Judaism”?
Perhaps you can provide a quote or two from any Sadducee literature out side of the Christian quote? Any early Jewish data to support this theory for readers to examine?

The two quotes above are not about the same subject. One is about the dead being dead, the other is about resurrection.

I made it very clear that there was a considerable range of opinion at that time. I never said that the Sadducees were representative of Judaism. I see that you did not bother reading what I had to say about the Essenes. They did not believe that the dead are just dead. But they did not believe in the resurrection either because they thought that at death the spirit is free of the body and the righteous enjoy a pleasant spiritual experience starting immediately. This is different from the Sadducees who did not believe in any kind of afterlife.

There is no Sadducee literature. They ceased to exist not long after the destruction of Jerusalem. Neither would they have been interested in teaching anything being focused on temporal matters.

The Jewish Encyclopedia has this to say about the Sadducees and the afterlife.

“(1) Representing the nobility, power, and wealth ("Ant." xviii. 1, § 4), they had centered their interests in political life, of which they were the chief rulers. Instead of sharing the 'Messianic hopes of the Pharisees, who committed the future into the hand of God, they took the people's destiny into their own hands, fighting or negotiating with the heathen nations just as they thought best, while having as their aim their own temporary welfare and worldly success. This is the meaning of what Josephus chooses to term their disbelief in fate and divine providence ("B. J." ii. 8, § 14; "Ant." xiii. 5 § 9).
(2) As the logical consequence of the preceding view, they would not accept the Pharisaic doctrine of the resurrection (Sanh. 90b; Mark xii. 12; Ber. ix. 5, "Minim"), which was a national rather than an individual hope. As to the immortality of the soul, they seem to have denied this as well (see Hippolytus, "Refutatio," ix. 29; "Ant." x. 11, § 7).”
SADDUCEES - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Ant. is Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews
B. J. is the Biography of Josephus.
Sanh. is Tractate Sanhedrin in the Talmud
Ber. is Tractate Beresheit in the Talmud

A NEW THEORY THAT PHARISEES AND THEIR DOCTRINE IS THE SOURCE OF THE DOCTRINE OF RESURRECTION
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)
Miken said : "The belief system you describe is that of the Pharisees who were the ones who founded Rabbinic Judaism after the destruction of the Temple and developed it via the Talmud. (post #85)

This is yet another unusual theory to support your original theory.
Can you now provide us with actual data that supports this new and additional theory of yours that resurrection did not exist before the Pharisees agreed with the concept?

I did not say that the idea of resurrection did not exist before the Pharisees. I said that the Pharisees appeared in the second half of the 2nd century BCE. I also said that the idea of resurrection appears in the Book of the Watchers section of 1 Enoch which date to the 3rd century BCE. Obviously the Pharisees did not invent the idea. Are you not bothering to read what I write (as I asked above concerning the Essenes) or are you deliberately misrepresenting what I say?

The belief system you describe, conscious dead, appears in 1 Enoch and in Luke. As I showed in my recent post, the idea of conscious dead does not appear in Matthew of John. Neither does it appear in the writings of Paul the Pharisee. It was not universal among Jews in the 1st century CE. What you quoted extensively is the Talmud which came out of Rabbinic Judaism, which is exactly what I said Post 85.

For examples
1) Job 14:14 speaks both of resurrection AND cognizance when he says “For if a man should die, shall he live again having completed the days of his existence? I shall wait until I should exist again. Then you shall call, and I will hearken to you; but he works of your hands do not undo.” Job is waiting to “exist again” and the spirit must be cognizant in order to “hearken”.

Does your theory feel the prophet Job was a “Pharisee” or a forerunner of Pharisaic Judaism?

Try looking a more of Job 14 and you will see that it says the opposite of what you want it to say.

Job 14
5 Since his days are determined,
and the number of his months is with you,
and you have appointed his limits that he cannot pass,
6 look away from him and leave him alone,
that he may enjoy, like a hired hand, his day.
7 “For there is hope for a tree,
if it be cut down, that it will sprout again,
and that its shoots will not cease.
8 Though its root grow old in the earth,
and its stump die in the soil,
9 yet at the scent of water it will bud
and put out branches like a young plant.
10 But a man dies and is laid low;
man breathes his last, and where is he?
11 As waters fail from a lake
and a river wastes away and dries up,
12 so a man lies down and rises not again;
till the heavens are no more he will not awake
or be roused out of his sleep.
13 Oh that you would hide me in Sheol,
that you would conceal me until your wrath be past,
that you would appoint me a set time, and remember me!
14 If a man dies, shall he live again?
All the days of my service I would wait,
till my renewal should come.
15 You would call, and I would answer you;
you would long for the work of your hands.
16 For then you would number my steps;
you would not keep watch over my sin;
17 my transgression would be sealed up in a bag,
and you would cover over my iniquity.
18 “But the mountain falls and crumbles away,
and the rock is removed from its place;
19 the waters wear away the stones;
the torrents wash away the soil of the earth;
so you destroy the hope of man.
20 You prevail forever against him, and he passes;
you change his countenance, and send him away.
21 His sons come to honor, and he does not know it;
they are brought low, and he perceives it not.

Vv 5-6 We see Job (who has been put through the wringer) bemoaning that God will not leave him alone even though a man just gets one life and that is it.

Vv 7-9 Trees can come back to life.

Vv 10-12 but man cannot. A man dies and does not get up again ever

Vv 13-17 Job wishes this were not so, that there would be more than just this life. Notice how Job’s desire is that his transgression would not be remembered. That is, no judgment at this hypothetical resurrection. Job is being punished for transgressions or so his friends are telling him.

Vv 18-21 But it is not to be. There is no resurrection. Dead is dead. Notice that Job agrees with Ecclesiastes. The dead know nothing.

 

[Miken]

Part 2 of 2

2) When Daniel prophesies concerning the resurrection that “…many of the ones sleeping in an embankment of earth shall awaken, these unto eternal life and these others unto scorning and for eternal shame. And the ones perceiving shall shine forth as the brightness of the firmament and of the many righteous as the stars into the eons and still….” (Daniel 12:2)

Does this mean Daniel espoused a form of Pharisaism? Or that this prophet did not represent “authentic” Judaism?

Daniel was written before the Pharisees existed. Daniel was written after the Book of the Watchers section of 1 Enoch. Ideas were changing but not for everyone. The Sadducees did not buy into resurrection or any kind of life after death. The Essenes did not need a resurrection because the righteous dead go directly into a spiritual life. I have said this before. Please pay attention.

3) Is the prophet Samuel teaching Jewish heresy by saying “…The Lord puts to death and he makes alive, he leads down into Hades and leads up [from Hades]. 1 Sam 2:6

Once again, try a little context.

1 Samuel 2
4 The bows of the mighty are broken,
but the feeble bind on strength.
5 Those who were full have hired themselves out for bread,
but those who were hungry have ceased to hunger.
The barren has borne seven,
but she who has many children is forlorn.
6 The Lord kills and brings to life;
he brings down to Sheol and raises up.
7 The Lord makes poor and makes rich;
he brings low and he exalts.

The mighty who are broken and the feeble who get strong are not the same people.
Those who get hungry and those who cease to hunger are not the same people
The barren who bear children and those who bore children who become barren are not the same people.
Those who are made poor and those who are made rich are not the same people.
Those brought low and those exalted are not the same people.

Why should those killed and those brought to life be the same people?
Why should those brought down to Sheol (dad) and those raised up be the same people?
Notice that it does not say raised up from Sheol, just raised up. Some people are brought down even to death. Others are raised up from their station in life.

This passage is about different people being treated different ways in the manner they deserve. It is not about resurrection.

4) What about Isaiah, when he says “…The dead shall rise up and the ones in the sepulchers shall be raised and the ones in the earth shall be glad for the dew by you is a cure to them but the land of the impious shall fall. (Isa 26:19).

How would Isaiah fit into your theory that his teaching represents the teaching of the Pharisees and not Judaism?

Again you are obsessed with the Pharisees. I never said the Pharisees originated the idea. Of resurrection. I said it already existed before then as can be seen in the Book of the Watchers and in Daniel. But it was not universally until after the Pharisees were the only Jewish intelligentsia left standing after the Jewish War.

I also quoted the My Jewish Learning site concerning Isaiah possibly being a resurrection reference, which was attributed to it being written later than much of the Jewish scriptures and incorporating new ideas. If one looks at Isaiah 26, it will be noted that this is about what is expected after God finally comes and punishes those oppressors. The rather hyperbolic language could also be viewed as a metaphor for national resurrection and not individual resurrection.

5) What about the prophet Ezekiel when he describes his vision of the Resurrection of the dry bones?

Ezekiel says that “…the hand of the Lord came upon me and the Lord led me by the spirit and put me in the midst of the plain and this was full of bones of humans. And he led me unto them, round about in a circuit. And behold, [there were] exceedingly many upon the face f the exceedingly dry plain. And he said to me. Son of man, shall these bones live? And I said O Lord you know this.

And he said to me, Prophesy over these bones and you shall say to them. O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus says the Lord to these bones. Behold I bring upon you a spirit of life. And I shall put upon you nerves and I will lead upon you flesh, and I shall stretch out upon you skin, and I will put my spirit in you; you shall live, and you shall know that I am the Lord.

The vision continues and Ezekiel sees in his vision, the bones were clothed in nerves and flesh and the wind came and life came into these bodies that “stood upon their feet”. “And the Lord spoke to me saying Son of Man, these bones are all the house of Israel.

Verse 12 goes on to read “Behold, I open your tombs and I shall lead you from out of your tombs…” (Ezekiel 37: 1-12)

Does this new theory of yours mean that the Prophet Ezekiel does not represent Judaism but instead represents a schizmatic teaching?

Ezekiel is most definitely referring to national resurrection. If you want it to be literal, then the bones of all the dead people will have to be in valley. This is clearly metaphorical. What is it a metaphor for?

Ezekiel 37
11 Then he said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. Behold, they say, ‘Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost; we are indeed cut off.’ 12 Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel. 13 And you shall know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people. 14 And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it, declares the Lord.”

Ezekiel is to go tell the people that God will provide national salvation. Since Ezekiel will be talking to living people obviously opening their graves and raising them is not to be taken literally. God will place them in their own land.

We haven't even begun to have you show all the early Jewish Old Testament Epigraphs witnessing to the doctrine of resurrection are somehow written by Pharisees.

This New theory of yours feels like it was invented to support your prior theory.

Again I never said the Pharisees invented the idea. I have said the exact opposite. I said that with the possible exception of Isaiah 26, there are no references to resurrection that hold water prior to 1 Enoch in the 3rd century BCE. There was clearly a continued belief that dead is dead period until the Jewish War wiped out the competition to the Pharisees.

THERE ARE ALMOST ALWAYS A MULTITUDE OF POSSIBLE INTERPRETATIONS OF EARLY TEXTS BY LATER READERS
Miken said : "My original contention was that the earliest Jewish concept was that the dead are dead. They are not aware." (post #67)
Miken said : In short, what you are claiming is the one and only possible interpretation of Job and Ecclesiastes is in fact retrofitting later thinking that arose quite a few centuries after those texts were written Furthermore that latter thinking presumes itself to be the only interpretations there ever were when that is plainly not the case. (Post #85)

You are confused. I think there are many, many potential interpretations of Job and Ecclesiates. I simply provided many, many examples from Jewish Literature that describe a consistent, single Jewish interpretation regarding cognizance of spirits in Sheol / Hades / Spirit World and Jewish literature describing a consistent, single Jewish interpretation regarding Resurrection. This does not mean there are not other interpretations. It does not even mean the Jews were correct in their belief.

However, in the face of their own literature, in their own words, offering their own many witnesses as to what they believed, I think it will be hard for you to convince readers that the Jews did not believe what they themselves said they believed.

As I said multiple times and you ignored is that only a single brand of Judaism existed after the Jewish War – the Pharisees. It is no surprise that there should be agreement on this point in Rabbinic Judaism. The interpretations all are slanted to maintaining a viewpoint that was only one of several that existed when there was still competition.

Are we to say that Christians are the preferred interpreters of the Gospels? In addition to the brouhaha in this thread about Luke 16, there are such ideas as:

In Matthew 5, even though Jesus says that Jewish Law will be in effect until heaven and earth pass away, he really only meant for a few months until his crucifixion.

In Matthew 5, even though Jesus goes on to describe what he meant by fulfilling the Law – teaching that observance of the letter of the Law is not sufficient, the spirit must be followed as well – this really meant that he fulfilled every one of the 613 mitzvot personally.

John and the Synoptic Gospels really agree on what day Jesus died because there were really two Passovers.

On the third day, after three days and three days and nights really all mean the same thing.

But because it is Christians saying this, they must be right about what the Gospel writers meant. Right?

IF THERE IS NO DATA TO SUPPORT THE THEORY THAT JEWS DID NOT BELIEVE IN RESURRECTION, THEN THE THEORY IS DEAD
We’ve spent several posts on your theory. Do you actually have ANY data that you want to offer readers. If you do not have any data to support your own personal interpretations and theories, then I will consider the issue a dead horse and readers can make up their own minds with the data provided them.

I have provided a great deal of evidence in prior posts and again in this post that the idea of the resurrection of the dead was not universally held by Jews until the resurrection-believing Pharisees were the only Jews left around. It is not my own personal interpretations and theories. It is documented reality.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I find at 1 Corinthians 15 that the chapter is addressed to: Jesus' brothers ' (Matthew 25:40 )
Thus, we are directed to specific persons in this chapter.
Verses 35-36 what is sown is Not made alive unless one dies first.
In other words, death comes before the gift of life ( aka resurrection).
This is further brought out about Jesus death at Romans 6:3-5.
God gives a body as He sees pleased to do so - 1 Corinthians 15:38
* There are 'physical bodies' ( terrestrial verse 40 ) physical resurrection for those who died before Jesus' died - John 3:13; Acts 2:34
* There are 'celestial bodies' or heavenly spirit bodies for Jesus' brothers'. People like those of Luke 22:28-30; Revelation 2:10; Daniel 7:18.
Those called to heavenly life put on immortality as Jesus has.
Those who have that first or earlier resurrection are as Jesus was resurrected in a spirit body ( verse 44 ) - Revelation 20:6
The ' natural' body ( verse 44) is the physical body people will have when they are resurrected back to live life on Earth.
Those called to eternal life on Earth are mortal as Adam was mortal.
They can only have everlasting life on Earth as originally offered to Adam before his downfall.
These can be part of the humble meek people who will inherit the Earth as Jesus promised from Psalms 37:9-11. (Proverbs 2:21-22)

find at 1 Corinthians 15 that the chapter is addressed to: Jesus' brothers ' (Matthew 25:40 )

( There's nothing in 1 Corinthians 15.
that mentioned anything about the brother of Jesus....and what exactly does Matthew 25:40 have to do with
1 Corinthians 15 ? )

Thus, we are directed to specific persons in this chapter.

( There is no where in 1 Corinthians 15
That we are directed to specify persons in chapter 15...where are you getting this all from? )

Verses 35-36 what is sown is Not made alive unless one dies first.
In other words, death comes before the gift of life ( aka resurrection).

( Have you any clue or idea who the dead represents? In 1 Corinthians 15:35-36)

This is further brought out about Jesus death at Romans 6:3-5.

(What exactly does Romans 6:3-5.
Have to do with 1 Corinthians 15.
When Romans 6:3-5..being a completely different subject...all your doing is taking things completely out of their context and trying to imply them to different things..which makes no sense at all)

God gives a body as He sees pleased to do so - 1 Corinthians 15:38
* There are 'physical bodies' ( terrestrial verse 40 ) physical resurrection for those who died before Jesus' died - John 3:13; Acts 2:34

( All Paul is showing in 1 Corinthians 15
That there's a difference between the flesh of animals and the flesh of human beings...the Celestial body being of heaven.....while the Terrestrial body being of earth....like the difference between a bird and fish...
So is with the flesh of animals and the flesh of human beings....two completely different flesh....So all your doing taking things completely out of their context.)


* There are 'celestial bodies' or heavenly spirit bodies for Jesus' brothers'. People like those of Luke 22:28-30; Revelation 2:10; Daniel 7:18.

( You know the heavenly bodies are also the stars..sun, moon... Other planets in our solar system which are considered heavenly bodies...so how does these fit into your equation....As Paul pointed out in 1 Corinthians 15:41--""There is one glory of the sun, and other glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars, for one star different from another"
So you have the Celestial bodies of the heaven..sun, moon, stars..
As Paul pointed that one star different from another star....so the flesh of animals are different from human flesh.)

Those called to heavenly life put on immortality as Jesus has.

( Would in so much care to explain exactly how the sun, moon, stars are called to immortality???...it seems your really taking things completely out of their context..)


Those who have that first or earlier resurrection are as Jesus was resurrected in a spirit body ( verse 44 ) - Revelation 20:6

( Well you really taken Verse 44 completely out of it's context..
In Verse 44, what is given a Natural body..of the earth..shall return back to the earth from where it was taken from..
The spirit that is within the body shall come out when the body of flesh dies.
Therefore is becomes a Spiritual body which is not of flesh and blood body.
As for Revelation 20:6, Had you back up to Verse 5--"The rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.....So how that the dead lived not again? The question here is...
Who are the dead in reference to?)

The ' natural' body ( verse 44) is the physical body people will have when they are resurrected back to live life on Earth.
Those called to eternal life on Earth are mortal as Adam was mortal.

( As for Verse 44, All Paul is showing is our body of flesh and blood is a natural body of the earth...and when the body of flesh and blood dies..the body of flesh and blood returns back to the earth from where it was taken from...then the Spirit that's inside of the Natural body...comes out a Spiritual body..that is not of flesh and blood of the earth..but the Celestial body of the heavenly)

They can only have everlasting life on Earth as originally offered to Adam before his downfall.

( There is no flesh and blood bodies on earth after Jesus Christ returns...everyone is changed from this body of flesh and blood to that of the Spirit)


( Okay..but at what point in time does the meek inherit the earth...when does this all take place according to what The Lord Jesus Christ given in his book of Revelation? )

These can be part of the humble meek people who will inherit the Earth as Jesus promised from Psalms 37:9-11. (Proverbs 2:21-22)[/QUOTE]

 

[LightofTruth]

Not


In that case, everyone should just throw out every piece of scripture because we can;t possibly know what it meant. I strongly disagree. Discovering what the various authors of scripture meant may take some doing, comparing different pieces and taking into account why a piece may have been written and how it all fits into the context of the times. Knowing at least something about the original language helps. But very importantly this must all be done with the intent of honest discovery and not to 'prove' a given ideological presumption.

If this is not your cup of tea, that is alright. But please do not tell others that it is an impossible task,

The KJV translators believed God breathed into Adam a ghost body into a mortal body. That's why they say a person "gave up the ghost" when he dies.

The problem for them is that Moses never taught such a thing. Nor does anyone else in Scripture.

Moses says that man is what was formed from the earth. And then God breathed into the man the breath of life and the man became a living soul.

Where does the Bible teach that God breathed into the man a ghost body? It doesn't!

Compare the translations:

Gen 25:8 Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people. (KJV)

Gen 25:8 Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people. (ESV)

Gen 25:8 and Abraham expires, and dies in a good old age, aged and satisfied, and is gathered to his people. (LSV)

Gen 25:8 Then Avraham breathed his last, and died in a good old age, a zaken, full of years; and was gathered to his people. (OJB)

Gen 25:8 and Abraham expireth, and dieth in a good old age, aged and satisfied, and is gathered unto his people. (YLT)

Gen 25:8 And Abraham passed away and died in a good old age, old and full of years. And he was gathered to his people. (ISV)

Gen 25:8 And Abraham expired and died in a good old age, aged and satisfied, and was gathered to his people.(LITV)


The word "expire" actually means to "breathe out" the last breath and die.

The same word rendered "gave up the ghost" in the KJV is also rendered "die". For example:

Gen 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Every living soul which had the breath of life would expire that breath and die.

Why didn't the KJV translators use "gave up the ghost" there in that passage? They used the word "die" instead of "gave up the ghost".

Could it be that the KJV translators didn't think that every creature under heaven has a ghost of themselves living within their mortal body?

So instead of simply saying "Abraham breathed his last breath and died" They say Abraham "gave up the ghost" as if Abraham had a ghost living inside himself.

That is an example of what makes a good Bible student as opposed to one who simply looks to "prove" his own ideas.

 

[Miken]

To understand the meaning of a scriptural passage in context, it is sometimes necessary to look at the original language.

וַיִּגְוַ֨ע וַיָּ֧מָת
and-died and-expired
Remember, read Hebrew right to left

וַיִּגְוַ֨ע (from גָּוַע gava) means to expire in the literal sense of breathing out, with the implication of this being the last breath. Breath and life are two closely related concepts in the Jewish scriptures. God breathed life into Adam. To breathe is to live. The spirit within a living person is being able to breathe. To stop breathing is to die. In the era in which the KJV was written, the word ‘ghost’ meant ‘spirit’, not something in a white sheet that goes Boo. Thus, the Holy Ghost is simply the Holy Spirit.

The KJV translation is technically correct but confusing to a modern audience and/or is taken to imply a spirit that survives death
Gen 25:8 Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died

The Chabad.org translation is more literal but possibly confusing if one does not understand the context of ‘expire’
Ber. 25:8 And Abraham expired and died

The ‘ghost’ of the KJV is simply the life that God breathes into a person, giving them life. When the person no longer breathes, there is no more life and the person is dead.

Original meaning in original context,

 

[LightofTruth]

To understand the meaning of a scriptural passage in context, it is sometimes necessary to look at the original language.

וַיִּגְוַ֨ע וַיָּ֧מָת
and-died and-expired
Remember, read Hebrew right to left

וַיִּגְוַ֨ע (from גָּוַע gava) means to expire in the literal sense of breathing out, with the implication of this being the last breath. Breath and life are two closely related concepts in the Jewish scriptures. God breathed life into Adam. To breathe is to live. The spirit within a living person is being able to breathe. To stop breathing is to die. In the era in which the KJV was written, the word ‘ghost’ meant ‘spirit’, not something in a white sheet that goes Boo. Thus, the Holy Ghost is simply the Holy Spirit.

The KJV translation is technically correct but confusing to a modern audience and/or is taken to imply a spirit that survives death
Gen 25:8 Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died

The Chabad.org translation is more literal but possibly confusing if one does not understand the context of ‘expire’
Ber. 25:8 And Abraham expired and died

The ‘ghost’ of the KJV is simply the life that God breathes into a person, giving them life. When the person no longer breathes, there is no more life and the person is dead.

Original meaning in original context,

Right,. the "ghost" is not a ghost of the person that lives on when the body dies. It is simply the vital principle of the life of souls. A soul is not a living soul unless it has the breath of life breathed into it.

When a living soul breathes its last breath the living soul is no longer living. And so the soul is said to be dead.

if souls die, then they are not immortal.

Just before Jesus died he said that he was committing his spirit to the Father(God).
That means that he was committing his life sustaining breath into the hands of the One who could give back that life to him.
Jesus was not giving up the ghost of himself that lived within his mortal body as so many believe who have been instructed by false teachers.

 

[Miken]

Right,. the "ghost" is not a ghost of the person that lives on when the body dies. It is simply the vital principle of the life of souls. A soul is not a living soul unless it has the breath of life breathed into it.

When a living soul breathes its last breath the living soul is no longer living. And so the soul is said to be dead.

if souls die, then they are not immortal.

Just before Jesus died he said that he was committing his spirit to the Father(God).
That means that he was committing his life sustaining breath into the hands of the One who could give back that life to him.
Jesus was not giving up the ghost of himself that lived within his mortal body as so many believe who have been instructed by false teachers.

In early Judaism, for example as seen in Genesis, there is no belief in an afterlife. Dead is dead. By the time of Jesus, the idea that the unrighteous, like the oppressors and their collaborators, should live a really good life and the righteous get screwed and then just die had evolved into a resurrection scenario where the bad guys get really punished and the good guys get really rewarded. The Gospels incorporate this newer idea that death is not the end. In Luke, the dead are aware. In Paul the dead are asleep. In both cases, there is something that persists after death.

 

[LightofTruth]

In early Judaism, for example as seen in Genesis, there is no belief in an afterlife. Dead is dead. By the time of Jesus, the idea that the unrighteous, like the oppressors and their collaborators, should live a really good life and the righteous get screwed and then just die had evolved into a resurrection scenario where the bad guys get really punished and the good guys get really rewarded. The Gospels incorporate this newer idea that death is not the end. In Luke, the dead are aware. In Paul the dead are asleep. In both cases, there is something that persists after death.

The God of the Bible is a God who makes covenant with people. A covenant is simply an agreement between two or more parties whereby the terms of that agreement must be met in order for both parties to satisfy the covenant.

In other words, if one party agrees to do certain things if the other party agrees to do certain things then you have a covenant.

God could say that He agrees to give life to those who agree to follow His commands.

But what does it mean to give life?

They were already alive. The life that God referred to when he made covenant with Israel was eternal life. It was a WAY of escaping the death that Adam brought to all mankind. The Jews could receive the promises of the covenant by obeying the commands of God. If the Jews fell short of their part of the deal then God did not have to satisfy His part either.
If God does not satisfy His part of the deal it means that the Jews are still under the death sentence as handed to Adam.
They don't receive eternal life as God promised on His end. that mean they die just like Adam died. "from dust you are to dust you return". Not just your body, but YOU!

That's why Jesus directed the Pharisees to listen to Moses instead of the teaching of the day. Which was Plato and Socrates.

 

[Miken]

The God of the Bible is a God who makes covenant with people. A covenant is simply an agreement between two or more parties whereby the terms of that agreement must be met in order for both parties to satisfy the covenant.

In other words, if one party agrees to do certain things if the other party agrees to do certain things then you have a covenant.

God could say that He agrees to give life to those who agree to follow His commands.

But what does it mean to give life?

They were already alive. The life that God referred to when he made covenant with Israel was eternal life. It was a WAY of escaping the death that Adam brought to all mankind. The Jews could receive the promises of the covenant by obeying the commands of God. If the Jews fell short of their part of the deal then God did not have to satisfy His part either.
If God does not satisfy His part of the deal it means that the Jews are still under the death sentence as handed to Adam.
They don't receive eternal life as God promised on His end. that mean they die just like Adam died. "from dust you are to dust you return". Not just your body, but YOU!

That's why Jesus directed the Pharisees to listen to Moses instead of the teaching of the day. Which was Plato and Socrates.

God did not promise life to the Jews is they kept the covenant. He promised an earthly reward to the nation of Israel, but not any sort of individual reward.

Exodus 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine;
6 and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’

Although the idea of reward and punishment in an after life appears as early as 1 Enoch in the 3rd century BCE, the use of the word ‘life’ to mean eternal life in the context of following Mosaic Law does not appear (AFIK) until Paul. In Romans, he tells the Jewish Christians that following the Law does not result in life but death.

OTOH Matthew, a Jewish Christian, tells the people to follow Mosaic Law but do not follow their self-serving and hypocritical ways.

Matthew 23
1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, 3 so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.
…
23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.

 

[Clear]

POST ONE OF THREE

Hi @Miken and other readers


ATTEMPTS TO JUSTIFY PRIORITIZING ONES OWN MODERN, PERSONAL INTERPRETATION OVER AN ANCIENT JEWISH INTERPRETATIONS

Miken says : “Authors write to convey meaning. If a verse or passage presents what seems to be a clear straightforward meaning that fits well with what seems to be the clear straightforward meaning of the overall context of the work, it is entirely reasonable to take the meaning at face value.” (post #90&91)

YOUR "face value" meaning is different than the "face value" meaning of early Jews. You have to allow them to have their own opinion about what THEY believed whether or not it is consistent with what YOU think THEY should believe.

Religionists have a multitude of various conflicting interpretations of scripture.
Why is YOUR personal interpretation of scripture to take priority over early Jewish interpretation as an indication of what early Jews believed?

The Jews interpreted their scriptures as proof of their belief in resurrection. Your interpretations are not theirs and your personal interpretations do not indicate what Early Jews believed.

To simply apply your modern interpretation and your modern belief to early Jews doesn’t work.


THE PRIOR MISTAKE OF APPLYING A MODERN, PERSONAL INTERPRETATION TO A TEXT INSTEAD OF ALLOWING THE EARLY JEWS THEIR OWN INTERPRETATION.
For example, you interpreted Eccl 9:5 to mean there was no cognizance of spirits.

The Jews tell us they interpreted this same scripture differently than you and demonstrated their belief that spirits of the dead WERE cognizant.


REPEATING THE SAME MISTAKE ALL OVER AGAIN
You are making the same mistake regarding the Jewish belief in resurrection.

You are applying your own interpretation to the early Jews and presenting your interpretation as their belief. This sort of bait and switch doesn’t work.

You MUST allow the Jews to have their own voice and their own beliefs and allow that they believed what they said they believed.

For example, Resurrection is one of the 13 pillars of Judaism Maimonides espoused as follows : “I believe by complete faith that there will be a resurrection of the dead at the time that will be pleasing before the Creator, blessed be His name, and the remembrance of Him will be exalted forever and for all eternity. “ Whether Maimonides is correct or not, we cannot logically deny that he believed in resurrection.


ONE CANNOT REPRESENT NORMATIVE JUDAISM BY PRESENTING EXCEPTIONS

It also doesn’t work to comment that the saducees (a temporary schism that left no significant literature behind) or the essenes (another schism) didn’t believe in resurrection and then represent that as normative Jewish belief.



USING DATA THAT UNDERMINES THE THEORY IT IS INTENDED TO SUPPORT
Your quotes consistently do not support your representation of Jewish belief. For example, you quote regarding the sadducees, that “they would not accept the Pharisaic doctrine of the resurrection (Sanh. 90b; Mark xii. 12; Ber. ix. 5, "Minim"), which was a national rather than an individual hope.” (Miken, in post #90&91)

The very sentence you quote tells us that resurrection was a “hope” of the Jews. While you admit from this quote that they hoped for a “national” rather than an individual resurrection. This type of resurrection is still a belief in resurrection.



DATA MINING FOR A SINGLE FAVORABLE QUOTE AMONG A SEA OF UNFAVORABLE QUOTES

As we saw, even the data mining for a quote of a single Jew from the middle ages (700 years later than the early Talmud) who, said that in his opinion the dead “have no more reward for the actions that they do from their deaths and onwards,” undermines your claim. While you interpret this quote mean “ It actually says that the dead can get no reward because they cannot act”. This interpretation represents your interpretation, but, as we’ve seen, it does not represent Jewish interpretation.

You consistently apply your personal, modern interpretation to the scriptures and then present that as evidence that the ancient Jews did not believe in resurrection. You must allow the Jews to have their own voice, their own interpretation and their own opinion. This is the data you have not provided.

While you quote Sanhedrin 90b regarding this belief in resurrection (which undermines your claim that they did not believe in resurrection), you could have also quoted the other many, many insistences that the Jews believed in a resurrection that literally surround the single quote you offer.

For examples (from Sanhedrin 90a and beyond) from the William Davidson Talmud.

MISHNA: All of the Jewish people, even sinners and those who are liable to be executed with a court-imposed death penalty, have a share in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “And your people also shall be all righteous, they shall inherit the land forever; the branch of My planting, the work of My hands, for My name to be glorified” (Isaiah 60:21). And these are the exceptions, the people who have no share in the World-to-Come, even when they fulfilled many mitzvot: One who says: There is no resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah, and one who says: The Torah did not originate from Heaven, …

GEMARA: And why is one punished to that extent for saying that there is no resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah? The Sages taught in a baraita: He denied the resurrection of the dead; therefore he will not have a share in the resurrection of the dead, as all measures dispensed by the Holy One, Blessed be He, to His people are dispensed measure for measure, i.e., the response is commensurate with the action.


§ Rabbi Yoḥanan says: From where is the resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah? It is derived from this verse, as it is stated with regard to teruma of the tithe: “And you shall give the teruma of the Lord to Aaron the priest” (Numbers 18:28). And does Aaron exist forever so that one can fulfill the mitzva by giving him the teruma of the tithe? But is it not so that Aaron did not enter Eretz Yisrael, the only place where the people would give him teruma? Rather, the verse teaches that Aaron is destined to live in the future and the Jewish people will give him teruma. From here it is derived that the resurrection of the dead is from the Torah.


§ It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Simai says: From where is resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated with regard to the Patriarchs: “I have also established My covenant with them to give to them the land of Canaan” (Exodus 6:4). The phrase: To give to you the land of Canaan, is not stated, as the meaning of the verse is not that God fulfilled the covenant with the Patriarchs when he gave the land of Canaan to the children of Israel; rather, it is stated: “To give to them the land of Canaan,” meaning to the Patriarchs themselves. From here is it derived that the resurrection of the dead is from the Torah, as in the future the Patriarchs will come to life and inherit the land.

The proof from the Prophets is as it is written: “Your dead shall live, my corpse shall arise. Awake and sing, you that dwell in the dust, for your dew is as the dew of vegetation, and the land shall cast out the dead” (Isaiah 26:19). The heretics said to him: But perhaps the prophecy was fulfilled with the dead that Ezekiel revived. No proof may be cited from that verse with regard to any future
resurrection.

POST TWO OF THREE FOLLOWS

 

[Clear]

POST TWO OF THREE

The proof from Writings is as it is written: “And your palate is like the best wine that glides down smoothly for my beloved, moving gently the lips of those that sleep” (Song of Songs 7:10), indicating that the dead will ultimately rise and speak. The heretics said to him: But perhaps merely their lips will move, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, as Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: Anyone in whose name a halakha is stated in this world, his lips move in the grave as if repeating the statement cited in his name, as it is stated: “Moving gently the lips of those that sleep.” No proof may be cited from that verse, as it is unrelated to resurrection.

This exchange continued until Rabban Gamliel stated to them this verse: “That your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, upon the land that the Lord took an oath to your forefathers to give them” (Deuteronomy 11:21). The phrase: To give you, is not stated; rather, it is stated: “To give them,” to the Patriarchs themselves, as in the future the Patriarchs will come to life and inherit the land. From here resurrection of the dead is derived from the Torah.

And there are those who say that it is from this following verse that he said to them his ultimate proof: “But you who cleave to the Lord your God every one of you is alive this day” (Deuteronomy 4:4). Wasn’t it obvious with regard to the children of Israel whom God was addressing, that “every one of you is alive this day”? Rather, the meaning of the verse is: Even on the day when everyone is dead you will live; just as today every one of you is alive, so too, in the World-to-Come every one of you will be alive.


The Romans asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya: From where is it derived that the Holy One, Blessed be He, revives the dead, and from where is it derived that He knows what is destined to be? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya said to them: Both of those matters are derived from this verse, as it is stated: “And the Lord said to Moses, Behold, you shall lie with your fathers and arise; this people will go astray” (Deuteronomy 31:16). This indicates that Moses will die and then arise from the dead and that the Holy One, Blessed be He, knows what the children of Israel are destined to do.

The Romans asked: But perhaps the verse should be divided in a different manner, and it should be read: “Behold, you shall lie with your fathers and this people will arise and go astray after the foreign gods of the land.” Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya said to them: Take at least a response to half of your question in your hands from that verse, that God knows what is destined to be. The Gemara comments: It was also stated on a similar note by an amora citing a tanna, as Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: From where is it derived that the Holy One, Blessed be He, revives the dead, and from where is it derived that He knows what is destined to be? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: “Behold, you shall lie with your fathers and arise.”

It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, says: With this following matter, I refuted the books of the Samaritans, as they would say that there is no source for the resurrection of the dead from the Torah. I said to them: You falsified your torah and you accomplished nothing, as you say there is no source for the resurrection of the dead from the Torah, and the Torah states: “That soul shall be excised; his iniquity shall be upon him” (Numbers 15:31). You interpret the phrase “that soul shall be excised” to mean that a sinner will be punished with death in this world. If so, with regard to the phrase “his iniquity shall be upon him,” for when is that destined to be? Is it not for the World-to-Come, i.e., the world as it will exist after the resurrection of the dead? Apparently, there is a World-to-Come and there is an allusion to it in the Torah.

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: And let Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, say to the Samaritans that both of those matters can be derived from the phrase “shall be excised [hikkaret tikkaret].” “Hikkaret” indicates that the sinner is excised from this world, and “tikkaret” indicates that the sinner is excised from the World-to-Come. Abaye answered: Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei, preferred not to cite proof from the compound verb, because the Samaritans would say: The Torah spoke in the language of people, and the compound verb is merely a stylistic flourish.

§ The Gemara relates: Queen Cleopatra asked Rabbi Meir a question. She said: I know that the dead will live, as it is written: “And may they blossom out of the city like grass of the earth” (Psalms 72:16). Just as grass grows, so too, the dead will come to life. But when they arise, will they arise naked or will they arise with their garments? Rabbi Meir said to her: It is derived a fortiori from wheat. If wheat, which is buried naked, meaning that the kernel is sown without the chaff, emerges with several garments of chaff, all the more so will the righteous, who are buried with their garments, arise with their garments.

The daughter of the emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Leave him, and I will respond to him with a parable. She said: There are two craftsmen in our city; one fashions vessels from water, and one fashions vessels from mortar. Which is more noteworthy? The emperor said to her: It is that craftsman that fashions vessels from water. His daughter said to him: If he fashions a vessel from the water, all the more so is it not clear that he can fashion vessels from mortar? By the same token, if God was able to create the world from water, He is certainly able to resurrect people from dust.

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught that resurrection of the dead a fortiori from glass vessels: If concerning glass vessels, which are fashioned by the breath of those of flesh and blood, who blow and form the vessels, and yet if they break they can be repaired, as they can be melted and subsequently blown again, then with regard to those of flesh and blood, whose souls are a product of the breath of the Holy One, Blessed be He, all the more so can God restore them to life.

The Gemara relates that a certain heretic said to Geviha ben Pesisa: Woe unto you, the wicked, as you say: The dead will come to life. The way of the world is that those who are alive die. How can you say that the dead will come to life? Geviha ben Pesisa said to him: Woe unto you, the wicked, as you say: The dead will not come to life. If those who were not in existence come to life, is it not reasonable all the more so that those who were once alive will come to life again?

Rava raises a contradiction. It is written: “I will kill and I will bring to life” (Deuteronomy 32:39), indicating that God is capable of reviving the dead. And it is written immediately afterward: “I wounded and I will heal,” which indicates that God will only heal the wounded. Rather, it should be understood: The Holy One, Blessed be He, is saying: What I kill, I bring to life, indicating that God revives the dead. And then what I wounded, I will heal.

§ The Sages taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “I will kill and I will bring to life.” One might have thought that it means that there will be death for one person and life for one other person, in the typical manner that the world operates. Therefore, the verse states: “I wounded and I will heal.” Just as wounding and healing take place in one person, so too, death and bringing back to life take place in one person. From here there is a response to those who say that there is no resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah.

It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir said: From where is resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: “Then Moses and the children of Israel will sing this song to the Lord” (Exodus 15:1). It is not stated: Sang, in the verse; rather, the term “they will sing” is stated, indicating that Moses will come back to life and sing the song in the future. From here it is proved that resurrection of the dead is derived from the Torah. On a similar note, you can say: “Then Joshua will build an altar to the Lord God of Israel on Mount Ebal” (Joshua 8:30). It is not stated: Built, in the verse; rather, the term “will build” is stated. From here, resurrection of the dead is derived from the Torah.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: From where is resurrection of the dead derived from the Torah? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated: “Happy are they who dwell in Your house; they will yet praise You, Selah” (Psalms 84:5). It is not stated: They praised you, in the verse; rather, the term “they will praise you” is stated. From here, resurrection of the dead is derived from the Torah. And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Anyone who recites song to God in this world is privileged and recites it in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “Happy are they who dwell in Your house; they will yet praise You, Selah.”



post three of three follows