Arguments Against Ezekiel's Valley Of Bones

2045 Words9 Pages

Throughout life, a person might have many thoughts and one thought that we could all potentially share is, what happens when we die? Very recently my eight year old niece has been thinking of death and has asked me that very question, in which I had no answer to. I noticed that every religion had different answers to that question and that I only knew that every religion has different traditions and rituals for burial, but not what happens once one is dead and buried. I was raised as a Jew and growing up Jewish, one would hear many stories about the religion. I find it very funny that most rabbis had many variations of stories and the only time I received the same story was if the rabbis were in the same family. Throughout Judaism, the topic …show more content…

In the “Valley of Bones”, the human is made when a pile of bones click together and make a skeleton and flesh begins to grow on it until it looks human. A person is a not lego set, you can not take a person apart and put him or her back together. If a person is blown up, he or she takes up a different amount of space than being one whole person at a different time. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, “...he had them executed and their bodies mutilated, because their beauty had entranced the Babylonian women, and that it was these youths whom Ezekiel called back to life.”, here it is clearly stated that the bodies were mutilated. The word mutilation is defined as the act of causing serious damage or disfiguration. When someone is disfigured he or she is not the same. It is hard to tell who that person is after a mutilation. So, how does one confirm the resurrection has brought back the same person to life? The only way one can actually do that is if they saw that person die and watch that body on a time continuum come back to life. When asked about if a person is the same from point A to point B we might ask ourselves, how do we know that? Some may say it is the idea of having the same body and physical attributes, some may say it is the same soul. According to Aristotle, resurrection would …show more content…

Maimonides idea of resurrection actually ties in the idea of body and soul, which makes it even more complicated. Maimonides claims that when a person dies their soul waits in one of two potential locations for their body to resurrected. The clean soul waits in Gan Eden, also known as the Garden of Eden, and the impure soul waits in Gehinnom, which I assume is like the jewish version of a purgatory. Once the soul is clean, it can be resurrected. This also proves the idea that everyone gets resurrected eventually. Maimonides also had the idea that when resurrection occurred the body was immortal. According to Aish.com’s summary of “The Thirteen Principles”, “Man is not a soul bound in a transient body. If that were the case, resurrection would have little significance other than representing the soul's return to its bodily prison.”, Maimonides is arguing that the soul is only significant for deciding where you end up in the after life, however, he claims that the body is the only thing essential for a resurrected. Also, Maimonides makes the claims that the body is immortal, this is summarized by Aish.com in, “The soul has always been understood to be immortal; it never dies. We comprehend the immortality of the human being, however, through the resurrection of the body. Resurrection signifies that man in his totality, body and soul, is immortal.”. The fact that he