When we die do we go directly to heaven??

[BobRyan]

The fact that Paul is explaining his choices and his desires does not discriminate between the possibility that Paul was speaking "technically" or in a "third-party objective" sense (when he said it is better to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord) or phenomenologically.

Indeed - just as those who would say "I am ready to have get my bags packed and be on the beach".

Not the same thing as "TO BACK my bags IS TO BE on the beach" as some would try to bend the 2Cor 5:8 text.

But although all can easily see that point -- why do you suppose that the contrived wording "TO HAVE my bags packed IS TO BE on the beach" is used when it comes to people trying to make the case for "the living dead"?

"TO be absent from the body IS TO BE present with the Lord" is clearly what at least two people here believe -- why do you think that specific wording is so necessary to their views?

in Christ,

bob

 

[BobRyan]

1. And what is your point?

2. But I hear Paul saying, "Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord... We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. (2 Corinthians 5:6, 8)

3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see Paul saying,

a. To be home in the body is to be alive physically.

BOTH sides agree that while we are in this decaying tent - this earthly body we "groan" and desire to be in our eternal glorified bodies mentioned in 1Cor 15 given to us at the second coming - and also mentioned in 2Cor 5 as given to us at that time.

But some here like to imagine "to eternal immortal bodies" the one of 1Cor 15 given at the seond coming when we are glorified and then bend 2Cor 5 so that it says "TO BE absent IS TO BE present" so that they get an intermediate eternal body as soon as they die.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

But some here like to imagine "to eternal immortal bodies" the one of 1Cor 15 given at the seond coming when we are glorified and then bend 2Cor 5 so that it says "TO BE absent IS TO BE present" so that they get an intermediate eternal body as soon as they die.

in Christ,
Bob

No need to lie Bob. No one here as said that.

 

[BobRyan]

Though ad hominem is your standard - the point would "actually be addressed" by SHOWING that you are NOT arguing for two immortal bodies in what you have said of 1Cor 15 AND of 2Cor 5.

Until you actually respond - the point remains.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Andre]

1. Paul is using the ad hominem argument and following it to its logical conclusion here. But it is clearly not what he believes. You should no better than that. Look at v.12, "How do some among you you that there is no resurrection of the dead?"



2. Paul is using the ad hominem argument and therefore your point has missed the mark.

I am not sure what you mean here. Can you please clarify in what sense you are using the term "ad hominem" in relations to the passage in question? Are you saying that Paul does not really believe that people actually "sleep" what he writes in 1 Cor 15:6

"After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep."

if indeed you believe Paul does not believe that people "sleep" when they die. And do you also believe that Paul does not mean that people will be made alive only at the return of Christ as Paul writes later in 1 Cor 15:

"For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming"

I have never understood how the "we go directly to heaven when we die" camp reconciles this text with their view. To me, the idea that Paul is suggesting "being made alive" equals "getting a body" is utterly unworkable. If a person is already in heaven, enjoying the full flower of consciousness, thought, communication, and experience how is that they can be made alive from such a state - they are already alive on any reasonable construal of what it means to be alive.

3. There's a difference. Here Paul is using I, but in 2 Cor 5, he is using we.

4. You are working to hard to prove your point. I simple reading of the text will prove otherwise.

5. And you have made no attempts to deal with my argument about the JSOC in v.10 of 2 Cor.5.

The fact that Paul uses "we" in 2 Cor 5 in respect to his statement about being absent from the body and present with the Lord in no way undercuts a phenomenological reading. The reason is that the same experience will be had by all who go through this transition. Each of their experiences will be one where they "go directly to heaven" even if they factually sleep for many years in between as I believe Scripture teaches in a wide number of places.

The "simple reading" argument (your point 4) seems to not be workable. Clearly you do not apply the "simple reading" argument to Scripture such as "the mountains sing". So it cannot be deployed here without the appropriate argument as to why the "non-simple" reading - namely the phenomenological one - can be ruled out.

And re the JSOC - I think this text is not phenomenological. But lest ye argue that I am being inconsistent, I will point out the rather obvious fact that a claim that one statement is phenomenological in no way requires all the statements in its vicinity to also be such. If I say the following: "I would rather put my exhausted head on the pillow at midnight on Sunday and be with the crowing rooster and the rising sun on Monday at 8 AM" and then say "I will kick the dog on Monday morning", I am speaking entirely coherently. The first statement is a statement of my experience, the second one is an objective fact about the world.

 

[DHK]

Though ad hominem is your standard - the point would "actually be addressed" by SHOWING that you are NOT arguing for two immortal bodies in what you have said of 1Cor 15 AND of 2Cor 5.

Until you actually respond - the point remains.

in Christ,

Bob

No one said that Bob. It remains a lie.
To be absent from the body IS or (and) to be present with the Lord. That is the teaching. It says nothing there of a body. Read my quote from Gill. It explains it quilte well. As Gill points out: No one desires soul sleep. His desire was to be with the Lord, which he was expressing what would happen if he should die and exit this temporal body.

No one said that between this mortal body and the resurrection, at which time we receive a glorified body, that we would have another body. That is a lie that you are propagating, that you need to apoogize for.
Man is a spirit being. He is clothed with a temporary body now, and someday he will be clothed with a celestial body. But when he dies he will immediately go to heaven or hell and await the resurrection. He remains a spirit being as God created him--different than the animals who only have a soul. The spirits of the redeemed live on to this day in heaven singing praises to our God. That is where the apostles are, and all the other saints of God--without their resurrection bodies--without any bodies at all. We are spirit beings created in the image and likeness of God, and that has nothing to do with any physical likeness. We are not Mormons!!
Neither do we believe in any SDA purgatory.

 

[TCGreek]

I am not sure what you mean here. Can you please clarify in what sense you are using the term "ad hominem" in relations to the passage in question? Are you saying that Paul does not really believe that people actually "sleep" what he writes in 1 Cor 15:6

1. In another post, you referred to 1 Cor 15:18 to bolster your position. I simply said that Paul was assuming the position of those who objected to the resurrection of the dead and he was working out its conclusions. That is what v.18 is.

2. It is not what the Paul believes, but rather the outworking of his critics position.

"After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep."

3. "Fallen asleep is a euphemism for "death" (John 11:11-14). At the Rapture those who have fallen asleep will return with the Lord from heaven, where they go when they die (1 Thess. 4:13, 14).

if indeed you believe Paul does not believe that people "sleep" when they die. And do you also believe that Paul does not mean that people will be made alive only at the return of Christ as Paul writes later in 1 Cor 15:

"For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming"

4. Paul's use of "sleep" and your use of "sleep" do not correspond.

I have never understood how the "we go directly to heaven when we die" camp reconciles this text with their view. To me, the idea that Paul is suggesting "being made alive" equals "getting a body" is utterly unworkable. If a person is already in heaven, enjoying the full flower of consciousness, thought, communication, and experience how is that they can be made alive from such a state - they are already alive on any reasonable construal of what it means to be alive.

5. Do like me and all others of my persuasion, Just accept what the Bible says rather than trying to force it into some theological system.

The fact that Paul uses "we" in 2 Cor 5 in respect to his statement about being absent from the body and present with the Lord in no way undercuts a phenomenological reading. The reason is that the same experience will be had by all who go through this transition. Each of their experiences will be one where they "go directly to heaven" even if they factually sleep for many years in between as I believe Scripture teaches in a wide number of places.

6. Because a simple reading destroys your position, so you must appeal to something else.

The "simple reading" argument (your point 4) seems to not be workable. Clearly you do not apply the "simple reading" argument to Scripture such as "the mountains sing". So it cannot be deployed here without the appropriate argument as to why the "non-simple" reading - namely the phenomenological one - can be ruled out.

7. A simple reading works everytime. Where there are figurative expressions you treat them as such. It is that simple.

And re the JSOC - I think this text is not phenomenological. But lest ye argue that I am being inconsistent, I will point out the rather obvious fact that a claim that one statement is phenomenological in no way requires all the statements in its vicinity to also be such. If I say the following: "I would rather put my exhausted head on the pillow at midnight on Sunday and be with the crowing rooster and the rising sun on Monday at 8 AM" and then say "I will kick the dog on Monday morning", I am speaking entirely coherently. The first statement is a statement of my experience, the second one is an objective fact about the world.

8. The language is simple; there's no change of thought or tone by the apostle. Why then the sudden shift? Clearly, because it does not fit your theological grid.

 

[Andre]

Hello TCGreek (and others who believe we go straight to Heaven):

I have a very specific question about 1 Cor 15:22-23

"For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming"

Clearly the event of "being made alive" occurs at Jesus coming (his second coming). I assume that you will not contest this.

In precisely what sense are we to be "made alive" at that point in the future? Through wrapping an already fully conscious, fully communincating, fully thinking "soul / spirit" in a body? Does that sound truthful to the sense of what one normally thinks of when one is "made alive"? If, as you say, "A simple reading works everytime", then this statement of Paul's means what it says - we transition to a state of being "alive" occurs at the second coming of Jesus, not at death.

If you are going to argue that "being made alive" means to gird a fully sentient, conscious, thinking, and communicating spirit in a "flesh wrapper", I would counter that this sounds more like putting on a three-piece suit than being made alive. I would be inclined to respond with your own words in respect to your take on what it means to be made alive: "A simple reading destroys your position, so you must appeal to something else".

If we are going to apply your principle of always going with the plain apparent sense of a text, then I think you have a problem here if you argue that being made alive means to have a fully functioning spirit "enfleshed". This is like saying I am not fully awake until I put my clothes on. It is intuitively clear (to me anyway) that the essence of life lies in communication, awareness, consciousness, interaction, etc. If your view is correct, these characteristics are already present before Jesus' return.

If anything, a "spirit" that is not constrained by a body is even more alive than when that spirit gets inserted into a body.

 

[TCGreek]

Hello TCGreek (and others who believe we go straight to Heaven):

I have a very specific question about 1 Cor 15:22-23

"For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming"

Clearly the event of "being made alive" occurs at Jesus coming (his second coming). I assume that you will not contest this.

In precisely what sense are we to be "made alive" at that point in the future? Through wrapping an already fully conscious, fully communincating, fully thinking "soul / spirit" in a body? Does that sound truthful to the sense of what one normally thinks of when one is "made alive"? If, as you say, "A simple reading works everytime", then this statement of Paul's means what it says - we transition to a state of being "alive" occurs at the second coming of Jesus, not at death.

If you are going to argue that "being made alive" means to gird a fully sentient, conscious, thinking, and communicating spirit in a "flesh wrapper", I would counter that this sounds more like putting on a three-piece suit than being made alive. I would be inclined to respond with your own words in respect to your take on what it means to be made alive: "A simple reading destroys your position, so you must appeal to something else".

If we are going to apply your principle of always going with the plain apparent sense of a text, then I think you have a problem here if you argue that being made alive means to have a fully functioning spirit "enfleshed". This is like saying I am not fully awake until I put my clothes on. It is intuitively clear (to me anyway) that the essence of life lies in communication, awareness, consciousness, interaction, etc. If your view is correct, these characteristics are already present before Jesus' return.

If anything, a "spirit" that is not constrained by a body is even more alive than when that spirit gets inserted into a body.

1. All of what you have just said can be summed up in one word: Naturalistic.

2. I and many others who take the simple reading of the text believe that a miracle has to take place, where the natural body is raised a spiritual body.

3. It's a miracle, which I cannot begin to comprehend. But one thing I know for certain, when a believer dies he immediately goes to the Lord and at the coming of the Lord, the believer's spirit is reunited with a glorified body (2 Cor 5:6-8; 1Thess.4:13, 14; Phil 3:20, 21).

 

[BobRyan]

"ALL will be MADE ALIVE" 1Cor 15 is a reference to the fact that "God is NOT the God of the dead" Matt 22 and it is only when "THE DEAD in Christ RISE FIRST" that "ALL" who are Christs are "made alive".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

"ALL will be MADE ALIVE" 1Cor 15 clearly shows that "ALL" are not "alive now".

Some have coined the extra-biblical doctrine "the ALIVE in Christ" right where the Bible says " the DEAD in Christ" 1Thess 4.

The teaching of Paul in 1Thess 4 and 1Cor 15 refutes that doctrinal error.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

"ALL will be MADE ALIVE" 1Cor 15 is a reference to the fact that "God is NOT the God of the dead" Matt 22 and it is only when "THE DEAD in Christ RISE FIRST" that "ALL" who are Christs are "made alive".

in Christ,

Bob

Those that are "in Christ" never die. Thus, spiritually speaking, they don't have the necessity of being made alive. The verse that you refer to refers only to the body. But you take it out of context and try to make it mean something that it doesn't. A saved man doesn't die. This body may die. But my spirit will not die, and the Bible teaches thusly.

John 11:25-26 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

--Believest thou this, Bob. Apparently you do not believe what Jesus says. For Jesus declares that the one who believes shall never die, no never.
His body may die, but he will not.
Even if the resurrection is postponed he will not die.
He will be alive with Christ in heaven, as the thief on the cross now is. Or, did Jesus lie about that too?

God is the God of the living; not the God of the sleeping!! Your arguments only defeat your own words.

Revelation 5:8-10 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

The above is before the resurrection. It takes place now. It is what John saw in 98 A.D. It is before the Tribulation which doesn't take place until chapter six. This is what John saw, that was presently happening in heaven. He saw the redeemed in heaven, not all of them of course. And they were praising God. This can only point to those that had died, gone to Heaven, and are still awaiting their resurrection bodies--for the resurrection still hasn't taken place. Remember John was there too. Is it possible for John in his corruptible body to enter into a perfect and holy heaven?

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said
"ALL will be MADE ALIVE" 1Cor 15 clearly shows that "ALL" are not "alive now".

Some have coined the extra-biblical doctrine "the ALIVE in Christ" right where the Bible says " the DEAD in Christ" 1Thess 4.

The teaching of Paul in 1Thess 4 and 1Cor 15 refutes that doctrinal error.

Those that are "in Christ" never die. Thus, spiritually speaking, they don't have the necessity of being made alive. The verse that you refer to refers only to the body.

In 2Cor 5 we are told that THIS body is our "decaying tent" and that the immortal body of the resurrection (also described in 1Cor 15) is the new body that we get.

By contrast when you say "WE shall be made alive" and argue that it really should say "IT shall be made alive" you are arguing that the "decaying tent shall be made alive" right where Paul argues that we LEAVE this one and GET a NEW one and NOT that THIS old one comes back again.

Instead of THIS old tent coming back -- WE are getting a NEW body and NOT having THIS old body brought back again. What is brought back again is US - the "we" of 1Cor 15 is the PEOPLE the PERSON(s) not "the old decaying tent -- this old body".

This body may die. But my spirit will not die, and the Bible teaches thusly.

There is no "spirit will not die" no not in all of scripture.

There is no "THIS body may die but THIS body will be made alive again" no not in all of scripture.

in John 11 speaking of Lazarus the PERSON Christ said "Lazarus SLEEPS" and then quite plainly "Lazarus IS dead".


--Believest thou this, DHK?

"Apparently you do not believe what Jesus says." - as DHK said

Matt 22 - God is the God of the living; not the God of the dead - HENCE there MUST be "a resurrection" ELSE this statement can not be true "I am the God of Abraham" as spoken to Moses.

But those who bend and wrend the scriptue would argue "God is not the God of the dead SO the dead are not really dead even WITHOUT the resurrection" making it "NO proof at all of the resurrection"!

How sad.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Revelation 5:8-10 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

The above is before the resurrection. It takes place now. It is what John saw in 98 A.D. It is before the Tribulation which doesn't take place until chapter six. This is what John saw, that was presently happening in heaven. He saw the redeemed in heaven, not all of them of course. And they were praising God. This can only point to those that had died, gone to Heaven, and are still awaiting their resurrection bodies--for the resurrection still hasn't taken place. Remember John was there too. Is it possible for John in his corruptible body to enter into a perfect and holy heaven?

Rev 5 (NASB)
9 And they sang a new song: "You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.
10 You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth."

Rev 5 (NIV)
8And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. 9And they sang a new song:
"You are worthy to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
because you were slain,
and with your blood you purchased men for God
from every tribe and language and people and nation.
10You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God,
and they will reign on the earth."

Nevertheless we can see that some saints went to heaven with Christ - but not all saints are there.

Matt 27
52 The tombs were opened, and many [b]bodies of the saints who[/b] had fallen asleep[/b] were raised;
53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city[/b] and appeared to many.

So this allows at least some part of DHK's statement to be true as we find it

DHK

He saw the redeemed in heaven, not all of them of course. And they were praising God

 

[Andre]

1. All of what you have just said can be summed up in one word: Naturalistic.

I have no idea what the point is here. I provided an argument which can be summed up as follows: How can 1 Cor 15:22-23 be correct in its obvious claim that we will be made alive at Christ's return if some saints are already enjoying what any reasonable person would describe as a state of being fully alive in heaven. Your statement that what I have argued is "naturalistic" does not seem connected to the specifics of what I have argued.

2. I and many others who take the simple reading of the text believe that a miracle has to take place, where the natural body is raised a spiritual body.

3. It's a miracle, which I cannot begin to comprehend. But one thing I know for certain, when a believer dies he immediately goes to the Lord and at the coming of the Lord, the believer's spirit is reunited with a glorified body (2 Cor 5:6-8; 1Thess.4:13, 14; Phil 3:20, 21).

Your argument re 2 Cor 5 is obviously circular - it assumes an objective third-party reading of the text and ignores the possibility of a phenomenological reading.

You then do the "soul sleep" view a big favour by referring to 1 Thess 4:13-14, reproduced following:

"But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus"

This text powerfully supports the "dead sleep" position. It clearly refers to those who are asleep. Will you counter that "sleep" is a metaphor for death and expect the reader to accept that it describes a state where the very essence of the person, their consciousness bearing soul or spirit is in full flower of activity in heaven? "Sleep" seems a very odd metaphor indeed for Paul to have chosen if this is the case. The distinguishing characteristic of sleep is, of course, unconsciousness.

And it would make no sense for Paul to appeal to his readers to have "hope" for those who have already died if indeed those people are fully alive (even if not embodied) in a blissful state in Heaven. The only sensible reason why Paul would appeal to the reader to have hope on behalf of the dead is precisely because the dead are not yet alive - the hope expresses an expectation of something in the future. We do not hope for something for something that has already taken place.

I suppose that you will argue that the statement "God will bring those...." implies that they are brought in a state of full conscious existence. I will appeal to the force of the metaphor of "sleep" for death. The sentence is finished with characterizing those who he "brings back" as being "asleep in Jesus."

I think that one is abusing the term "metaphor" if one tries to argue that "sleep" is a metaphor for a state where conscious existence persists. If metaphors were that "loose", why not go whole hog and claim that "attending a party" is a metaphor for death. It seems more correct than the choice of "sleep" if indeed the believing dead are enjoying all the rich experiences of consciousness, thought, and awareness in a disembodied form in heaven.

Here is a definition of a metaphor: "A figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness between them".

If sleep is a metaphor for the picture of death where conscious activity persists in heaven - with interaction, communication, praising of God, conscious experience, etc - precisely in what does the "likeness" lie?

I wish to write more but will stop for now.

 

[TCGreek]

I have no idea what the point is here. I provided an argument which can be summed up as follows: How can 1 Cor 15:22-23 be correct in its obvious claim that we will be made alive at Christ's return if some saints are already enjoying what any reasonable person would describe as a state of being fully alive in heaven. Your statement that what I have argued is "naturalistic" does not seem connected to the specifics of what I have argued.


Your argument re 2 Cor 5 is obviously circular - it assumes an objective third-party reading of the text and ignores the possibility of a phenomenological reading.

1. Once again, a plain reading of the text you cannot allow, for it destroys your position.

You then do the "soul sleep" view a big favour by referring to 1 Thess 4:13-14, reproduced following:

"But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus"

This text powerfully supports the "dead sleep" position. It clearly refers to those who are asleep. Will you counter that "sleep" is a metaphor for death and expect the reader to accept that it describes a state where the very essence of the person, their consciousness bearing soul or spirit is in full flower of activity in heaven? "Sleep" seems a very odd metaphor indeed for Paul to have chosen if this is the case. The distinguishing characteristic of sleep is, of course, unconsciousness.

And it would make no sense for Paul to appeal to his readers to have "hope" for those who have already died if indeed those people are fully alive (even if not embodied) in a blissful state in Heaven. The only sensible reason why Paul would appeal to the reader to have hope on behalf of the dead is precisely because the dead are not yet alive - the hope expresses an expectation of something in the future. We do not hope for something for something that has already taken place.

I suppose that you will argue that the statement "God will bring those...." implies that they are brought in a state of full conscious existence. I will appeal to the force of the metaphor of "sleep" for death. The sentence is finished with characterizing those who he "brings back" as being "asleep in Jesus."

1. To say that "God will bring those" refers to "brought in a state of full conscious existence, you must be able to demonstrate from Scripture that the expression under consideration means exactly that.

2. In the mean time, it is an explanation you have forced upon the text.

I think that one is abusing the term "metaphor" if one tries to argue that "sleep" is a metaphor for a state where conscious existence persists. If metaphors were that "loose", why not go whole hog and claim that "attending a party" is a metaphor for death. It seems more correct than the choice of "sleep" if indeed the believing dead are enjoying all the rich experiences of consciousness, thought, and awareness in a disembodied form in heaven.

Here is a definition of a metaphor: "A figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness between them".

If sleep is a metaphor for the picture of death where conscious activity persists in heaven - with interaction, communication, praising of God, conscious experience, etc - precisely in what does the "likeness" lie?

I wish to write more but will stop for now.

2. You have made no attempt to deal with John 11:11-15, where the biblical writer tells us what "fallen asleep" means; he says without reservation that it means dead.

 

[Andre]

1. Once again, a plain reading of the text you cannot allow, for it destroys your position.

The plain reading argument works in favour of my position in respect to 1 Cor 15. The plain reading of being "made alive" involves bringing into existence from a state of non-existence such properties as consciousness, communication, interaction. And, on your view, these properties are already present in a person who is in Heaven. Yet Paul clearly states that we are made alive at the return of Christ. Your only "outs" here are to claim that we have to take a very much "non-plain" interpretation of what it means to be "made alive" or to argue that the "plain meaning" of "being made alive" involves wrapping an already fully conscious, interacting entity in a "flesh suit". Which is your choice? . If you choose the first, you have undercut your objection to my take on 2 Cor 5:8 - that I am deviating from a "plain reading". Do you dispute that you do not have to do this very thing in respect to 1 Cor 15:22-23? If you do the second, you claim that the "plain meaning" of "being made alive" is such that the process acts on a person who is fully alive already in heaven. Neither of these choices seem workable. Is there a third position for you to take in respect to 1 Cor 15:22-23?

2. You have made no attempt to deal with John 11:11-15, where the biblical writer tells us what "fallen asleep" means; he says without reservation that it means dead.

I have already agreed that "asleep" is a metaphor for death. The difference is that my version of the nature of the metaphor does not require me to have to explain the very curious fact of how a state characterised by unconconsciousness - namely sleep - can be likened to a state of fully conscious activity. That is what you need to do.

 

[DHK]

There is no "spirit will not die" no not in all of scripture.

There is no "THIS body may die but THIS body will be made alive again" no not in all of scripture.

in John 11 speaking of Lazarus the PERSON Christ said "Lazarus SLEEPS" and then quite plainly "Lazarus IS dead".

--Believest thou this, DHK?
Bob

I believe the Bible Bob. Do you? You have yet to answer a very simple Scripture.

John 11:25-26 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
--Jesus said that the believer would never die. He obviously refers to the spirit of the believer, for He, in his omniscience, knows that the Resurrection will not take place for thousands of years yet. Thus Martha's spirit would never die. He was saying: Do you believe Martha, that by believing on me you shall never die? The only way that would be possible is that if Martha went to heaven after her death and was with the Lord in her spirit until the time of the resurrection. This is the teaching of Christ. "Thou shalt never die. Believest thou this?" Apparently not Bob. You deny the Scriptures.

Jesus went to prepare a mansion for his disciples that where he was they could be also. When? thousands of years from that time? No; but as soon as they died, or met their martyrdom.

The believers at the resurrection would receive a celestial body. That is true. Soon Paul would die and go to be with the Lord. He says that. He tells Timothy that his departure is at hand. He would be in heaven soon. "Henceforth there is a crown laid up for me." When? Thousands of years from that time? No, it would be immediate. He would be with the Lord immediately. That is what he was teaching Timothy.

"It is appointed unto man once to die and after this the judgement."
When? Thousands of years after death? No. After death; immediately. That is the teaching of the author of the book of Hebrews (Heb.9:27).
It is heaven or hell; one or the other; depending on whether you have received Christ or not. It matters not if you have received your resurrection body.

Your definition of death is obscured by your cultish teaching and also by the modern day teaching of death twisted by medical science. Man looks at death in a secular way instead of how God looks at it, from a spiritual perspective. We must define death the same way that God defines. The Bible does not define death as when the heart stops beating or some lame-brain definition as such. Here is a Biblical definition of death.

James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Death is separation. When the body separates itself from the spirit it is dead. The body is dead but the spirit lives on for all eternity in one of two places: heaven or hell. The Bible consistently describes death as separation. When we speak of Biblical terms we must define them as the Bible defines them.
Physical death is a separation of the body from the spirit. The body will go back to dust from whence it came. The spirit will live on forever.

There is spiritual death.
Ephesians 2:1 You were made alive when you were dead in transgressions and sins, (WEB)
--They were dead (before salvation). Now they are alive. How is that so? Is this physical death? Obviously not for the resurrection had not taken place. It is spiritual death. They were separated from God by their sin. They were made alive by the Holy Spirit who regenerated their spirit when they were born again. They once were dead in sin; now they are alive in Christ.
Death never means annihilation. It never means sleep in the sense that you define it. Physical death means a separation of the body from the spirit (which lives forever). That physical death is sometimes described as sleep, sleep used as a synonym for that physical death.
In Eph. 2:1, it cannot be substituted in this way, for it is obviously spiritual death, separation from God by one's sin.

There is also eternal death, and finally the second death, both of which describe the spirit's existence in hell or the LOF for all eternity--separation from God for all eternity.
In all cases death is separation. You cannot force a modern day definition of death into the Bible. You must use Biblical definitions of words when Biblical definitions are given. Death is separation.

In all cases the spirit lives on forever and ever.

 

[TCGreek]

The plain reading argument works in favour of my position in respect to 1 Cor 15. The plain reading of being "made alive" involves bringing into existence from a state of non-existence such properties as consciousness, communication, interaction. And, on your view, these properties are already present in a person who is in Heaven. Yet Paul clearly states that we are made alive at the return of Christ. Your only "outs" here are to claim that we have to take a very much "non-plain" interpretation of what it means to be "made alive" or to argue that the "plain meaning" of "being made alive" involves wrapping an already fully conscious, interacting entity in a "flesh suit". Which is your choice? .

1. My choice is "made alive" is a reference to a mortal body that will become immortal.

If you choose the first, you have undercut your objection to my take on 2 Cor 5:8 - that I am deviating from a "plain reading". Do you dispute that you do not have to do this very thing in respect to 1 Cor 15:22-23? If you do the second, you claim that the "plain meaning" of "being made alive" is such that the process acts on a person who is fully alive already in heaven. Neither of these choices seem workable. Is there a third position for you to take in respect to 1 Cor 15:22-23?

2. That is if I went for your either/or.

I have already agreed that "asleep" is a metaphor for death. The difference is that my version of the nature of the metaphor does not require me to have to explain the very curious fact of how a state characterised by unconconsciousness - namely sleep - can be likened to a state of fully conscious activity. That is what you need to do.

3. Per Luke 16:19 both the rich and Lazarus were fully conscious after death, though this scene is before the cross and the resurrection.

 

[TCGreek]

I believe the Bible Bob. Do you? You have yet to answer a very simple Scripture.

John 11:25-26 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
--Jesus said that the believer would never die. He obviously refers to the spirit of the believer, for He, in his omniscience, knows that the Resurrection will not take place for thousands of years yet. Thus Martha's spirit would never die. He was saying: Do you believe Martha, that by believing on me you shall never die? The only way that would be possible is that if Martha went to heaven after her death and was with the Lord in her spirit until the time of the resurrection. This is the teaching of Christ. "Thou shalt never die. Believest thou this?" Apparently not Bob. You deny the Scriptures.

Jesus went to prepare a mansion for his disciples that where he was they could be also. When? thousands of years from that time? No; but as soon as they died, or met their martyrdom.

The believers at the resurrection would receive a celestial body. That is true. Soon Paul would die and go to be with the Lord. He says that. He tells Timothy that his departure is at hand. He would be in heaven soon. "Henceforth there is a crown laid up for me." When? Thousands of years from that time? No, it would be immediate. He would be with the Lord immediately. That is what he was teaching Timothy.

"It is appointed unto man once to die and after this the judgement."
When? Thousands of years after death? No. After death; immediately. That is the teaching of the author of the book of Hebrews (Heb.9:27).
It is heaven or hell; one or the other; depending on whether you have received Christ or not. It matters not if you have received your resurrection body.

Your definition of death is obscured by your cultish teaching and also by the modern day teaching of death twisted by medical science. Man looks at death in a secular way instead of how God looks at it, from a spiritual perspective. We must define death the same way that God defines. The Bible does not define death as when the heart stops beating or some lame-brain definition as such. Here is a Biblical definition of death.

James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Death is separation. When the body separates itself from the spirit it is dead. The body is dead but the spirit lives on for all eternity in one of two places: heaven or hell. The Bible consistently describes death as separation. When we speak of Biblical terms we must define them as the Bible defines them.
Physical death is a separation of the body from the spirit. The body will go back to dust from whence it came. The spirit will live on forever.

There is spiritual death.
Ephesians 2:1 You were made alive when you were dead in transgressions and sins, (WEB)
--They were dead (before salvation). Now they are alive. How is that so? Is this physical death? Obviously not for the resurrection had not taken place. It is spiritual death. They were separated from God by their sin. They were made alive by the Holy Spirit who regenerated their spirit when they were born again. They once were dead in sin; now they are alive in Christ.
Death never means annihilation. It never means sleep in the sense that you define it. Physical death means a separation of the body from the spirit (which lives forever). That physical death is sometimes described as sleep, sleep used as a synonym for that physical death.
In Eph. 2:1, it cannot be substituted in this way, for it is obviously spiritual death, separation from God by one's sin.

There is also eternal death, and finally the second death, both of which describe the spirit's existence in hell or the LOF for all eternity--separation from God for all eternity.
In all cases death is separation. You cannot force a modern day definition of death into the Bible. You must use Biblical definitions of words when Biblical definitions are given. Death is separation.

In all cases the spirit lives on forever and ever.

1. That this cannot be refuted is obvious from the scriptural data.

2. Scriptures would have to be seriously distorted to overthrow what is the result of a plain reading of Scripture.