For What It's Worth

Image by Freepik

The Myth of the Spirit World

(5 minute read)

Key Takeaways:

• Christian views of the afterlife didn’t appear fully formed—they evolved and expanded beyond earlier Hebrew ideas
• Jewish scriptures were reinterpreted and reshaped to support a developing Christian theology
• Concepts of heaven and hell echo themes already circulating in the Greco-Roman world
• Christianity intensified the stakes, framing eternal reward and punishment as the ultimate moral outcome

In The Emerging Christian Myths 4 we traced how early Christian beliefs about the afterlife developed from earlier Hebrew traditions and were reshaped through new interpretations of Jewish scriptures. As Christianity emerged, it increasingly emphasized detailed rewards and punishments, drawing on both Jewish texts and broader Greco-Roman cultural ideas. Over time, these evolving teachings were formalized into what became the Old and New Testaments, establishing a powerful and enduring vision of heaven, hell, and eternal destiny.

Borrowed Heavens and Invented Hells

It is crucial to recognize this: the afterlife is not a minor detail of religion—it is often its organizing principle. As many scholars have noted, a tradition’s understanding of what happens after death profoundly shapes its theology, ethics, and communal identity.¹ Religious systems do not typically unfold in tidy, logical steps. More often, they begin with a vision of the end and construct everything else around it.

Once that destination is imagined, the rest follows. Who is rewarded? Who is punished? Why do the wicked sometimes prosper and the righteous suffer? These tensions demand resolution, and the afterlife becomes the arena where cosmic justice is finally settled.

When reward or punishment beyond the grave becomes central, moral teaching is no longer merely guidance for living—it becomes qualification for a future outcome. Ethical rules function as criteria. In this way, the promised end does not simply conclude the story; it quietly dictates its terms from the beginning.

Over time, as ideas about the afterlife expanded, additional figures began to appear in the tradition—among them, angels. Notably, angels are absent from the earliest Jewish writings. When they do begin to appear, the shift in the narrative raises important questions. As we will see in one example, Genesis 19, the introduction of angels significantly reshapes how the story is understood.

Angels, Now Heard on High

Just as ideas about the afterlife developed over centuries, so too did ideas about angels. Christian understandings of angels draw on Jewish traditions, shaped in part by translation choices and by concepts that emerged within the broader Greco-Roman world.

After the Babylonian captivity, we begin to see clearer references to angels, or messengers, in the developing tradition. This period follows the exile that began in 597 BCE. It is not uncommon for communities shaped by hardship to adopt and adapt new ideas within their faith. It is therefore worth considering whether these developments reflect broader historical influences rather than mere coincidence. Such is the case with the Jewish people after their captivity.

Some theocentric readers seek to emphasize the continuity between Christianity and its Jewish roots. From this perspective, references to angels in Jewish scriptures are seen as supporting the later presence of angels in Christian texts.²

These assumptions rest, in part, on translation choices that project later meanings onto much earlier texts. They read passages written roughly 3,500 years ago through a modern understanding of “angels.” As we will see below, the figures described in Genesis 19 differ significantly from the familiar image of cherubs found in later tradition.

The anthropomorphic model approaches scripture from a different angle. It considers when the texts were written and the historical circumstances surrounding the communities that produced them, recognizing that such contexts shape the content of the writings. It also allows for the use of external sources that may support, clarify, or even challenge the scriptural accounts. The goal is to interpret the texts within the historical and cultural contexts in which they first emerged.

With these methodological differences in mind, we can now turn to a concrete example. Instead of reading later theological categories back into the text, we must ask what the earliest audience would have seen and understood. Genesis 18-19 brings this question into sharp focus: Who, exactly, visited Abraham and Lot?

A Tale of Two Cities: Who Visited Abraham and Lot?

Before examining the textual nuances more closely, it is helpful to step back and consider the broader narratives. The stories of Abraham and his nephew, Lot, in Genesis 18-19 provides an essential context for understanding how these figures are described and interpreted.

In Genesis 18, three “men” appear to Abraham by the oaks of Mamre. Abraham immediately extends extravagant hospitality—washing their feet, preparing a lavish meal, and standing attentively as they eat. Within the dialogue, one of the visitors speaks as YHWH, while the other two eventually depart toward Sodom.

In Genesis 19, two strangers arrive in Sodom and are welcomed into Lot’s home. That evening, the men of the city surround the house and demand that the visitors be brought out to them. Determined to protect his guests, Lot offers hospitality and refuge, even proposing to send out his daughters in their place.

However, before that can happen, the strangers intervene. Striking the mob with blindness they urge Lot to gather his family and flee, warning that the city’s corruption has brought imminent destruction. As Lot, his wife, and daughters escape, they are instructed not to look back; when Lot’s wife does so, she becomes a pillar of salt. The narrative closes with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the aftermath of Lot’s flight into the hills with his daughters.

The narratives creates a deliberate contrast: Abraham welcomes the strangers and receives promise and blessing; Sodom threatens the strangers and receives judgment. Read together, the two chapters form a unified account of divine visitation in human form, framed around the testing and violation of hospitality.

Genesis 19 is often remembered primarily for the fate of Lot’s wife, later framed as a cautionary tale about longing for a sinful past. Yet this traditional moral emphasis can obscure the narrative’s larger concerns. The central thrust of Lot’s story is the moral claim that violating hospitality invites swift judgment.³

This shift reflects not only theological development but also changing interpretive priorities. As a result, the story’s primary focus on hospitality—and the broader dynamics of divine encounter that connect Genesis 18 and 19—is often overlooked.

As the narrative unfolds, the mysterious visitors enter the story in an unexpectedly ordinary manner. They speak and act without spectacle or visible signs of otherworldly power. This understated portrayal stands in quiet contrast to the dramatic and overtly supernatural depictions of angels that emerge in later Christian tradition.

In Genesis 18, three “men” appear to Abraham, yet as the dialogue unfolds, one speaks explicitly as YHWH. The narrative moves seamlessly between the language of human visitors and divine presence, leaving the identity of the figures deliberately fluid. Only in the following chapter are two of the visitors labeled malʾāḵîm (“messengers”), suggesting that the distinction between God and intermediary is not yet rigidly defined.

That Abraham appears to converse with YHWH may seem striking to readers shaped by later theological frameworks. Yet in the wider context of the ancient Near East, stories of humans encountering or speaking with deities were not unusual. There is also substantial evidence that early Hebrew religion did not begin as strictly monotheistic⁴ in the way later traditions would define it. The earliest manuscripts seem to reflect a more complex theological landscape—one that was gradually reshaped as Israel’s religious and eschatological understanding developed.

Within the framework of Genesis 18-19, encounters with strangers can take on a deeper resonance, hinting that such moments may involve more than simple human interaction. At times, the narrative invites the possibility that one might be encountering divine beings.

If that sounds familiar, it should. In many Middle Eastern cultures, hospitality is still considered a sacred virtue, and kindness toward strangers carries deep moral weight. Such traditions reflect the lingering belief that a stranger might be more than they appear—perhaps even a divine presence in disguise.

Translation, Tradition, and the Making of Angels

For the theocentric, angelic beings stretch all the way back to Genesis. From this perspective, angels are understood to be a consistent and fully formed presence throughout the biblical narrative, appearing wherever the text describes divine encounter or intervention.

These broader questions about divine visitors come into sharper focus in Genesis 18-19. The narrative compels us to look closely at who, exactly, arrives in Sodom—and how later readers came to interpret them, at times like rewriting a map because they did not like where the road actually led.

In the Hebrew text of Genesis 19, the visitors to Lot are described as malʾāḵîm, a term that literally means “messengers.” While later Jewish and Christian tradition understands these figures as angels in a fully developed celestial sense, the original Hebrew term does not necessarily carry that later theological weight. In earlier Israelite religion, a malʾāḵ could simply denote a divine emissary or agent, without the elaborate angelology that emerged during the Second Temple period.

This episode also reflects a widespread ancient motif in which divine beings appear in human form to test human hospitality. In Greek tradition, for example, Zeus and Hermes visit mortals in disguise, rewarding generosity and punishing neglect. Similar narrative patterns appear across the ancient Near East, where gods frequently assume human form and interact directly with communities.

Genesis 18–19 participates in this broader literary world: the visitors arrive as “men,” hospitality is either extended or violently rejected, and judgment follows. While the theological framing is distinctly Israelite, the structure of the story aligns with a well-known ancient motif of disguised divine visitation and moral testing.

The gradual shift in terminology from “messengers” to “angels” is an important discussion and should not be avoided. It is understandable that those who hold to the inerrancy of Scripture may find this challenging, but acknowledging historical development does not undermine faith. Recognizing that a belief system can grow and adapt over time is not a weakness, but a sign of thoughtful reflection.

One possible explanation for the gradual shift is that it resulted from a mistranslation. At first glance, this may seem reasonable, especially considering how often mistranslations and their effects have influenced interpretation (such as the camel and the eye of the needle, not to mention the virgin birth).

Another possibility is that scribes and priests shaped the text in ways that reduced the emphasis on direct encounters with the divine. In doing so, they may have sought to highlight priestly mediation and ritual as central elements of communion with God. In this reading, the story of God directly meeting humanity gives way to the introduction of a go-between—a “holy emissary,” neither fully God nor part of the priesthood. Over time, this shift becomes embedded in the tradition.

In the earliest manuscripts, the visitors are described in terms that some scholars associate with a broader divine council or lesser deities, rather than clearly defined angels. In later manuscript traditions, however, these figures are more explicitly identified as angels. They look nothing like the fat cherubs of Renaissance art, nor are they the heralding angels celebrated in later Christian tradition.

Some literalists understand these visitors to be among the earliest angels mentioned in Scripture. In the narrative, they are first described as “messengers” and later referred to as “men.” They appear fully human—they eat, sleep, and travel on foot to Sodom, a journey of about forty miles. At this stage in the story, there is no clear indication that they possess or exercise divine power.

The narrative also suggests that they are perceived as physically desirable. The men who gather outside Lot’s house express a sexual interest in the two strangers, choosing them over Lot’s two virgin daughters.

The fully systematized celestial beings familiar to later Christian tradition were not present in early Israelite religion. In the Hebrew Bible, divine “messengers” often appear indistinguishable from God or human figures, leaving their status deliberately ambiguous. Only in the Second Temple period — and later through Christian theological development — were angels more clearly defined as distinct, hierarchical heavenly beings.

Perhaps the real scandal of Genesis 18–19 is not what it reveals about angels, but what it exposes about us. Our impulse to systematize, to retroactively impose celestial hierarchies and doctrinal clarity onto a text that resists them, says more about later theological anxieties than about the narrative itself.

Genesis 18-19 preserves a dangerous ambiguity: God walks, eats, speaks, and is mistaken for a man. Only later does tradition tidy up the scene with wings and halos.

If we allow the text to remain untamed, we are forced to confront a far more unsettling possibility — that ancient Israel’s God was not yet confined to heaven, and that the boundary between divine and human was once far less secure than we have been taught to believe.

Read Emerging Christian Myths 6

Resources

• Carol Newsom, Angels, Anchor Bible Dictionary, Doubleday, 1992
• Jonathan Kirsch, The Harlot By The Side Of The Road, Ballantine, 1997
• Samuel Meier, Angels, The Oxford Companion To The Bible, Oxford University Press, 1993

_¹ N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God — discusses how beliefs about resurrection and the afterlife shaped early Christian identity and practice. Alan F. Segal, Life After Death: A History of the Afterlife in the Religions of the West — traces how afterlife concepts develop and influence religious systems. Bart D. Ehrman, Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife — explores how evolving ideas of heaven and hell shaped Christian theology.

² It is worth noting here the work of David Chidester in Christianity: A Global History. In his chapter “Hierarchy,” he examines writings attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite, a convert of the Apostle Paul. They describe a carefully ordered structure of the heavens with three ranks of angelic beings. These are considered to be the earliest systematic treatment on the subject. Medieval Christian theologians regarded them as carrying authority comparable to that of the New Testament. Modern scholarship, however, generally identifies them as the work of a later sixth-century author writing under a pseudonym.

³ Yet the narrative treats Lot’s deeply troubling offer of his daughters with striking restraint, while later interpretation places disproportionate emphasis on the fate of Lot’s wife.

⁴ Mark S. Smith, “God,” Anchor Bible Dictionary, excellent summary of the developmental model of Israelite monotheism.