Did Paul believe in an intermediate state (Sheol, Hades, Bosom of Abraham)?

[hedrick]

In 2nd Temple Judaism the common Jewish view was that the place of the dead, She'ol or in Greek Hades, was divided between two parts. Gan-Eden ("Garden of Eden") or "Paradise" (Greek Paradeisos, borrowed from an ancient Persian word pairidaeza meaning "an enclosed garden" or "a park"), also described as "Abraham's Bosom" in the parable in Luke's Gospel; this is the abode of the righteous dead, it is the place of the Patriarchs (e.g. Adam and Eve, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) and what we Christians would call the "Old Testament Saints". The other half being Ge-Hinnom ("Valley of Hinnom"), which is rendered into Greek as Gehenna; the abode or place of the wicked dead.

In 2nd Temple literature, specifically in the Book of Enoch, Gan-Eden/Paradise are said to be in the "Third Heaven". We see this same language used by St. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12, where the Apostle says he knew a man who was taken up into the third heaven (whether in or out of the body, Paul says he doesn't know) and there beheld the Paradise of God.

So is Paradise part of Hades "in the belly of the earth", or is Paradise "in the third heaven"? The answer, I believe, is both. Because the point isn't about location at all.

The general Christian consensus has, for the most part, been that when the Lord descended into Hades and let the captives free (The Harrowing of Hell), we are saying He went into the place of the righteous dead. Indeed traditional Christian Iconography depicts Christ trampling down the gates of Hades, lifting Adam and Eve out of their coffins, with the Old Testament Saints, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, etc standing alive to His right and to His left. And that by this has taken the Old Testament Saints into His company as He sits and reigns at the right hand of the Father in glory. And we, today, who have put our faith in the only-begotten Son, even though this mortal body should expire and be put to rest in the dust of the earth, I shall nevertheless remain alive in and with Christ my Lord who shall keep me with Him until the Day of His glorious return. And on that Glorious Day, shall my body be raised up--from mortality to immortality, from perishable to imperishable, sown in dishonor and raised in glory.

And then shall come to pass in perfect fullness and completeness all the ancient promises: new heavens and new earth, justice shall flow like a river, the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of God as waters cover the seas, the lion shall graze with ox, the leopard and the lamb shall recline together, the child shall play near the viper's den without fear, every sword shall be made a plowshare, every spear a pruning hook. Exchanging the ways of wars and violence for the ways of peace and love. No more death, no more sadness, no more wrong, no more strife. He shall wipe away every tear, and shall transform every mourning song into a song of gladness. We who were pounding the dirt with many tears in grief and confused frustration shall now lift heart and song to Lamb who is upon the Throne, for "the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever."

-CryptoLutheran

Right. But both Gehennon and paradise seem to have been used for final destinations. As with all of these things there is ambiguity about whether Luke was referring to a final state or an intermediate state.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Right. But both Gehennon and paradise seem to have been used for final destinations. As with all of these things there is ambiguity about whether Luke was referring to a final state or an intermediate state.

In a sense, final destination and the intermediate state seem to be tied together. I think this is why when the Eastern Churches speak of these as "foretaste" they use the right language. The righteous experience a foretaste of what is to come in the end in the Lord's presence; the wicked experience a foretaste of what is to come in the end in a very different way.

In a sense, I think it's a bit like Gehenna as both an intermediate state AND a final state. Intermediate in that it speaks of awaiting final judgment. But then I don't think Gehenna is a place, it's a way of describing to condition of the wicked in their unremitted wickedness; thus it is compared to the Valley of Hinnom where the wicked in ancient times sacrificed children to their false gods: God's judgment against the wicked shall be full, just as those in ancient times committed evil by burning the innocent; so shall God consume the wicked in the fire of Gehenna.

In the same way that Paradise isn't literally the Garden of Eden, but rather this language is used to describe the condition of the righteous--they have their rest in the garden of God. And in this there is the hopeful anticipation and expectation for the full renewal of all creation, in which God makes new heavens and new earth, in which we shall live and abide with God forever.

I'd say that, on these points, the Scriptures provide us with very broad brush strokes, and that those strokes are intended to present the over-arching larger picture, rather than narrowing in on details. It's an example of what the Apostle means when he says that we but now see through a glass dimly, "but then face to face", or when St. John writes in his epistle that when the Lord returns we don't know what exactly we shall be, but we know we shall "be like Him".

-CryptoLutheran

 

[NotreDame]

Sure, it's illogical for you. But we are not the same person.

Yes, if logical reasoning were as subjective as you infer, then you’d have a fantastic point. However, there does come a point where substantively the reasoning is objection flawed, and objectively tenuous, that one cannot hide behind your notion.

Your reasoning is flawed. How do you have knowledge today of what Paul 2,000 years ago didn’t know? That is an important question since an essential premise in your argument on your way to discounting what Paul said is Paul was uninformed. On the basis of your guessing Paul was uniformed, you then conclude Paul’s remarks can be rendered as misguided and mistaken.

So, you base your conclusion on the notion Paul wasn’t aware of an important part of information. Hence, he misspoke.

Yet, there’s no evidence Paul was indeed uninformed or misinformed. There’s no evidence to support your alleged statment of fact regarding Paul, that he didn’t know X, where X is what you say Paul didn’t know.

You are making up facts here to suit your personal world view.

Now, if the manner in which you’ve argued is logical, not illogical, then by all means inform me as to how and why your method of argument is logical.

 

[NotreDame]

Zactly.

Yes, your method of assuming facts, and casting that as logical, can properly have people ask why your illogical approach matters at all.

 

[NotreDame]

But Paul wouldn't know anything about death/sleep other than stories he had heard.
He's certainly no expert on it.

How do you know that? How do you have that specific factual knowledge of what Paul didn’t know?

I can just as easily claim he did know and he was an expert.

Yet, rationally, it isn’t enough to claim what someone did or didn’t know and then build upon that as if such a statement was factual.

You need to provide evidence for your alleged factual statment Paul lacked some specific knowledge. Otherwise, it is a baseless premise not worthy of any consideration it is true.

There is, however, an incongruous quality to your reasoning. Yes, dare I say hypocritical but accurate.

You refer to Paul’s writings, conveniently, when you think he says something supportive of your view.

Do we go to Heaven (or Hell) as soon as we die?

You refer to Corinthians and Thessalonians, both books composed by Paul, as support for your view.

So, your ostensible approach is listen to Paul when his writings support what I’ve said but where Paul makes a remark contrary, inconsistent, or contradictory to what I’ve said, Paul is misinformed or uninformed.

Do we go to Heaven (or Hell) as soon as we die?

Here, you refer to OT authors and Paul. Of course, this begs the question of whether the OT writers have the requisite knowledge you deem necessary to comment, a necessary knowledge you say Paul lacks except Paul is suddenly informed enough for you to rely upon in the Corinthian and Thessalonian verses you cite.

And that is what you seek to pawn off as logical? Really?

Your approach would certainly be a most beneficial method for me in the court room. With your method I can call a witness and illicit testimony that is beneficial to my case and suggest to the jury they merit listening to and believing, while at the same time inform the jury my same witness I’ve asked the jury to listen to and believe should not be listened to or believed when they make remarks detrimental to my case. That’s your approach. It’s illogical. It’s irrational.

At the same time, I can infer to the jury X is necessary knowledge for comment, declare arbitrarily my own witness lacks it when they make remarks contrary to my case, assume they have this knowledge when they opine favorably for my case, and assume my other witnesses (the authors of the OT books you cite to) have this requisite knowledge without establishing they do.

That is your approach and it’s logical to you? Rational?

 

[hedrick]

In a sense, final destination and the intermediate state seem to be tied together. I think this is why when the Eastern Churches speak of these as "foretaste" they use the right language. The righteous experience a foretaste of what is to come in the end in the Lord's presence; the wicked experience a foretaste of what is to come in the end in a very different way.

In a sense, I think it's a bit like Gehenna as both an intermediate state AND a final state. Intermediate in that it speaks of awaiting final judgment. But then I don't think Gehenna is a place, it's a way of describing to condition of the wicked in their unremitted wickedness; thus it is compared to the Valley of Hinnom where the wicked in ancient times sacrificed children to their false gods: God's judgment against the wicked shall be full, just as those in ancient times committed evil by burning the innocent; so shall God consume the wicked in the fire of Gehenna.

In the same way that Paradise isn't literally the Garden of Eden, but rather this language is used to describe the condition of the righteous--they have their rest in the garden of God. And in this there is the hopeful anticipation and expectation for the full renewal of all creation, in which God makes new heavens and new earth, in which we shall live and abide with God forever.

I'd say that, on these points, the Scriptures provide us with very broad brush strokes, and that those strokes are intended to present the over-arching larger picture, rather than narrowing in on details. It's an example of what the Apostle means when he says that we but now see through a glass dimly, "but then face to face", or when St. John writes in his epistle that when the Lord returns we don't know what exactly we shall be, but we know we shall "be like Him".

-CryptoLutheran

Except that often Hades was used for the intermediate state, as in Luke 16. Certainly many commentators do see paradise as a reference to the intermediate state, but I don’t think views or terminology are as consistent as you suggest.

 

[Der Alte]

That reminds me of a recently posted .pdf
In 1982, a Gallup survey indicated that approximately 8 million adults (now experts?) in the United States had had a near-death experience (a significantly large population from which to take accurate samples).8 The people sampled reported having some of the following eleven characteristics, eight of which appear to be unique to near-death experiences (in italics):
 out of body experience
 accurate visual perception (while out of body)
 accurate auditory perception (while out of body)
 feelings of peace and painlessness
 light phenomena (encounter with loving white light)
 life review
 being in another world
 encountering other beings
 tunnel experience
 precognition
Peace 60%
Bodily separation 37%
Darkness/tunnel 23%
Light/beings of light 16%
Inner setting/paradise 10%
https://magiscenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Science_Medicine_and_NDEs.pdf

Due to an operation at VA in '09 which went off course I experienced only the first four.

 out of body experience
 accurate visual perception (while out of body)
 accurate auditory perception (while out of body)
 feelings of peace and painlessness
​

 

[SkyWriting]

Yes, your method of assuming facts, and casting that as logical, can properly have people ask why your illogical approach matters at all.

Of course you can ask. How would I stop that?

 

[SkyWriting]

How do you know that? How do you have that specific factual knowledge of what Paul didn’t know?

He has none of the characteristics of an expert, nor the ability to make his knowledge clear that he did have. Supporting facts? The majority of disputes in the Christian community are over issues that he raises in his letters. Many denomination splits have resulted from his letters.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Except that often Hades was used for the intermediate state, as in Luke 16. Certainly many commentators do see paradise as a reference to the intermediate state, but I don’t think views or terminology are as consistent as you suggest.

I guess I wasn't trying to suggest a rigid terminology, so I am somewhat confused in the criticism (though I do appreciate it).

I am, for example, aware that St. Isaac the Syrian describes the final state of the wicked, as they experience the fire of God's love as the torment of remorse, it is Gehenna that they experience when Isaac speaks of hell. And I have read many Orthodox posters speak of Gehenna as specifically the final state of the wicked. I'm not disagreeing with that.

Though I do think that there's reason enough to see the intermediate state as Gehenna, without suggesting that the final state is also Gehenna; if only in a different, or qualitatively distinct way (namely, the intermediate state being a foretaste while the final state being the fullest expression of this reality).

I'm not suggesting anything rigid. So much as describing things, broadly.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[SkyWriting]

That is your approach and it’s logical to you? Rational?

Everybody already knows you are not awake when you are asleep.

36 Bible verses about Sleep, And Death

 

[Andrewn]

So is Paradise part of Hades "in the belly of the earth", or is Paradise "in the third heaven"? The answer, I believe, is both. Because the point isn't about location at all.

According to the 2nd book of Enoch, in the third heaven, Enoch sees both paradise represented as the Garden of Eden which is also guarded by angels and hell where bad men are tortured.

"The Second Book of Enoch, also written in the first century CE, describes the mystical ascent of the patriarch Enoch through a hierarchy of Ten Heavens. Enoch passes through the Garden of Eden in the Third Heaven on his way to meet the Lord face-to-face in the Tenth (chapter 22). Along the way he encounters vividly described populations of angels who torment wrongdoers; he sees homes, olive oil, and flowers.[16]"

Seven Heavens - Wikipedia

In the non-canonical Second Book of Enoch, Third Heaven is described as a location "between corruptibility and incorruptibility" containing the Tree of Life, "whereon the Lord rests, when he goes up into paradise." (chapter 8) Two springs in the Third Heaven, one of milk and the other of honey, along with two others of wine and oil, flow down into the Garden of Eden. (verse 6) In contrast with the common concept of Paradise, the Second Book of Enoch also describes it as "a very terrible place" for those who do wrong, with "all manner of tortures" inflicted by merciless angels on "those who dishonour God, who on earth practice sin against nature," including sodomites, sorcerers, enchanters, witches, the proud, thieves, liars and those guilty of various other transgressions. (chapter 10)

Third Heaven - Wikipedia

I think the Christian view is different. As I understand it, Abraham's bosom (Called Limbo in Catholicism), Sheol (the word Hades can refer particularly to this part or generally to all three), and Tartarus are "in the belly of the earth." But Paradise, to be distinguished from Abraham's bosom, is in the 3rd Heaven.

 

[Clare73]

I have a real problem with using Biblical passages to answer questions they weren't intended to answer. 2 Corinthians 5:8 doesn't give us a chronology. He would be going to be with Christ even if he slept for an extended period.

1 Cor 15 gives a chronology:

"For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being; 22 for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ."

Resurrection (except for Christ) occurs only at the end. But even that doesn't answer all questions, since the intermediate state isn't resurrection.

My reading is that Paul likely doesn't envision an intermediate state, but I don't think he either talks about it or rejects it explicitly.

Yes, Luke Luke 16:19-31 is obviously a parable, unless you think Father Abraham actually presides over the afterlife. Jesus is pretty clearly using the Jewish equivalent of St Peter at the Pearly Gates.

1 Peter 3:19 might imply an intermediate state, but I don't think anyone really knows what that's about. If may interpreters are right, the spirits referred to may well not even be human.

I don't think there's a clear description of just what happens, which is why all these arguments. Furthermore, there are alternatives that aren't commonly considered. E.g. if someone isn't conscious until the resurrection, then as far as he's concerned, it happens immediately after death. Indeed there is no reason that God is restricted to linear time.

Sounds like something fallen man's human rationale would do to a text to make it agree with his view.

Then Paul's argument can be translated thus:
"To live is Christ. . .but I would much rather be knocked out until the resurrection."

That is despicable nonsense.