Amen, sister! 
If the dead in Christ have already risen, then the resurrection is past, is it not? If not, what is the difference between the two statements?
I think many arguments and discussions here are hugely valuable. It’s delightful to learn and be sharpened by others who have enormous faith and knowledge of the word. But this thread has puzzled me for the very simple reason that I can’t for the life of me tease out how it has the minutest impact on how I should spend tomorrow, or my money, or my time. I can’t see how it helps to inform our actions or reveal God’s character. Maybe I’m wrong, and this is a pressing question - please tell me how so? As I’ve gotten older I’ve just gotten incredibly aware of how short the time is, and we should always, from a doctrinal perspective, ask “is the game worth the candle?”. I think we’re called to hold one another accountable, as Paul suggests in Titus 3, to be wary of disputes whose outcome doesn’t meet this minimal standard.
I’m not trying to be dismissive of people’s time. Quite the contrary, we should be steel sharpening steel, and one if the sharpest questions we can ask is: is this a good and meaningful expense of our time and effort as Gods servants. It’s not always a comfortable thing to ask, but it is a threshold question.
Agreement… finallly… j/k 
Thanks! 
Craig can clarify, but I believe that when he said the dead in Christ has already risen, he was speaking about those who came out of their graves after Jesus’ resurrection. Certainly that is not “all” of the dead, so doesn’t make the resurrection of the dead “past”… except for those who have already attained unto it, right?
So, if the dead are resurrected “every man in his own order”, as long as there are any who remain dead, the resurrection is not “past”, right?
Though you may not see it as the same “resurrection”, John speaks of someo who “have passed from death unto life”, while others “abide in death”.
1Jo 3:14 **We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. **
I think “that” is at the center of this whole argument over “soul sleep”… it begs the question(s)… who are “the dead” and “How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?”, right?
Agreed!
There are lots of online discussions that do not interest me in the least, though the they may cover what others see as important topics. The fact that I do not find them important doesn’t mean that they are not or should not be considered such by someone else, does it?
I find the topic of soul sleep quite intriguing, myself. Mostly because I think it is very important to understand that Jesus “is” THE RESURRECTION AND THE LIFE. I also don’t think we can understand “what” the resurrection of the dead is if we do not understand who “the dead” are.
That doesn’t mean that I want to spend night and day talking about it or spend hours upon hours making and replying to “book length” posts (as you can some of them in this thread have gotten). That’s why I left the thread for awhile, and really only came back because I was asked to… though I am trying to not get reinvolved in such lengthy posts this time, if I can help it.
I think it helps answer the question: “How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?” with something other than “thou fool”.
How can we even have hope for eternal life if we do not have hope in the resurrection of the dead?
Granted, one can hope in the resurrection even if they do not understand how the dead are raised up and with what body they come, but I don’t think it’s exactly pointless to discuss it or to want to understand it. Do you?
I agree, but it’s not up to me to decide what should or shouldn’t be important to someone else. It may be the case the importance of a particualr topic (to someone else) is hidden to me because there is something that I do not know… either about the topic itself or even the person to whom the topic is important. I know that this particular topic might be important to someone who has lost a loved one and what to know “where” they are or “what happened” to them when they died. May be important for other reasons, as well.
I don’t disagree, entirely. I think if we are spending hours and hours dicsussing a topic with the same person/people and not really getting anywhere, then it might be time to rethink the benefit of the conversation… though there may be other factors involved as well… like new participants or those who may be reading but not partipating directly, etc. It may be for those resason alone that I might answer a post to someone who I know what’s accept my answer but think an answer is warranted anyway, for others who might be reading.
But yeah, I think we also need to know when to say “enough is enough” and walk away.
The resurrection has only occurred in the past for those already risen, but for those who are still alive we look forward to the resurrection of the dead since we have not yet died. So it is as Jesus said to John, “I am who was, who is at present, and who is coming.”
There is quite a difference to those who say that resurrection is past (period), and that the resurrection is ongoing past, present and future. Paul rebuked those who said the resurrection was only a past event, meaning there is no hope for those who still live nor their children. Paul very well knew that our hope is only in the resurrection of the dead, therefore to say that it a past event, or does not exist, destroyed the entire faith principle of Paul’s theology.
But we have died… “in Adam”… in sin.
This is the problem (as I see it), that we connect “the resurrection of the dead” to that which is natural/seen. Therefore, we understand the resurrection of the dead as it pertains to a carnal truth, rather than a spiritual one. And even though most can see “the resurrection of the dead” after a spiritual application, they call the spiritual “metaphorical” or “symbolic” and still look to the natural application as “the truth”. That, to me, makes looking at those things which are not seen while we are comparing spiritual things with spiritual kind of pointless. Who cares if one can be considered resurrected from the dead “metaphorically”, if that’s not what the resurrection of the dead is? This to me makes the spiritual (that which is NOT SEEN) the “type” and that is impossible - for it is those things that ARE SEEN that given “as examples” of those things that are unseen/eternal. Right?
Amen! And we PASS from death unto life “at His appearing”. Right?
Again, this was “typified” in that which was seen when the Word was “made flesh” at “the end of the world/age”. This, to me, typifies the end of “the age” of A CHILD (who is "under the law, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, our schoolmaster to lead us TO CHRIST, who is “the end of the law”) and the adoption/placement OF SONS (redeemed from under the law, by the grace of God, through faith)… BY “the resurrection of the dead”.
AMEN!! But it is not just “past” and “future”, but IS,WAS and IS TO COME. We seems to ignore the “is”, even though when Paul speaks of the resurrection of the dead in 1 Cor 15 it is written in the perfect and present tenses.
1 Cor 15:13 But if there be (present tense) no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen (perfect tense): And if Christ be not risen (perfect tense), then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
It is not just about the fact that Jesus rose (past tense) from the dead… but that CHRIST “is risen”.
It is THE POWER ~of~ HIS RESURRECTION that Paul said he was striving to know.
That is how we “have part in the first resurrection”.
Paul said: “But now is CHRIST risen (perfect tense) from the dead, and become (second aorist tense, middle deponent/active voice) the FIRSTFRUITS of them that slept (perfect tense).”
He is talking about CHRIST, not Jesus.
Jesus said: “I AM” the resurrection and the life… those who believe HAVE PASSED from death unto life… and those who LIVE AND BELIEVE “shall never die”.
The flesh is not counted. God makes this clear from the very beginning. Cain (the first born, which typifies the first/natural/carnal man) IS NOT COUNTED in the generations of Adam “In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him.” It is never the first born that receives the blessing when it comes to the blessings of God, for it is “the second man” who is “the Lord from heaven” (THE IMAGE OF GOD).
This is why God gave Seth as “another seed instead of Abel” (whom Cain, the first born / natural man slew), just as “the church” (the body of Christ) is given “in Christ’s stead” to preach the gospel of our salvation. No?
We need to look to the Kingdom of God that is WITHIN, if we are to see “the coming of the Lord into His kingdom”. No?
And shall we not “rule and reign with Christ” as kings and priests in the Kingdom of God once we “enter in”? And do we not enter in “by faith”?
This, as I see it, is “the resurrection of the dead” and “eternal life”.
Wow, i have read most of these posts, some are a bit long and a lot of them are very interesting and eye opening. I can also see everyone’s point of view. Thing is, i am more confused then ever now. 
I truly don’t know what to believe now.
Do you think that maybe God didn’t make it clear on purpose? Maybe its just a mystery about what happens after we die, that’s why scripture is vague and sometimes “appear” to contradict and plus the translations vary along with interpretations and that’s why we all come up with different doctrines and theories. Plus we all seem to have different beliefs, like some of us are preterists, some are futurists, some believe in the rapture, some do not, and those that do, some are pre-trib, some are mid or post trib…and so on and so on. and so on…
I think all of our differences affect what we believe the scriptures are saying about what happens to us after death…and that is why we go in circles and never come to an agreement.
Wish i knew what happens, but frankly, i am clueless 
Yes.
Hello all…
I could make a few points of interest here. By the way, as to this issue, I am very uncertain, but I personally tend towards some form of conscious state in between physical death and physical resurrection, which does not necessarily require the specific existence of an immaterial soul apart from the body (since God can, at the point of death, recreate the conscious mind of the person in a new metaphysical sense, perhaps using a different set of physical principles), and could provide some sort of opportunity for post-mortem development and improvement. A few points, however, that I can make in general (some of which may support either side) are as follows:
**1) **Near Death Experiences - These occur and appear to show some form of immediate conscious state after death, although they are highly subjective in terms of content and it seems to me that their nature depends on the person. The majority, however, are positive (and often imply UR, and possibly inclusivism), and I would postulate that these states are permitted by God to achieve benefit for the individual, in the ultimate end, despite not necessarily being a ‘window’ into actual reality. However, it would be odd for such states to be seen to exist if in fact no such post-mortem conscious state before the ultimate resurrection actually exists.
**2) **In reality, even if the state of the dead is utterly unconscious and unaware, this period of time may, if our consciousness just stops and starts without having any time lapse imparted into it, appear to be nothing so that, to us, such a period of time would not appear to exist. This would mean that it would seem that the post-mortem state (of resurrection in this case) starts immediately.
**3) **A rather puzzling passage (which seems to me to support post-mortem salvation regardless) is 1 Peter 3:19-20a:
19 After being made alive, [Jesus] went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— 20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built
Now, this implies a conscious state after death, unless this verse is metaphorical; however, it is possible that this state only began when Jesus ‘descended’, and may have then ended. However, it does not really make sense to conclude that it ended after 3 days, because this seems unnecessary (and, if time were not enhanced, hurried)
Alternatively, it is possible that the time of the reality of the dead is completely different to our spacetime reality, potentially (!) with more than one time dimension (even though this is fairly inconceivable). In this, Jesus’ descent would be, perhaps, seen by each person at the point of death (due to some interesting form of time-travel, which may be possible for God, and with many time dimensions), although this is speculative.
Also, the very fact that Jesus preaches implies that He is conscious; this seems to imply that, at least after Jesus, since He had a human nature as well as God’s nature, others who die exist in a conscious state.
**4) **A verse implying immediate ‘paradise’ of some form is from Jesus: (Luke 23:42-43)
42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”
43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”
The word for today, semeron seems to imply, according to biblestudytools.com/lexicons … meron.html, “this (very) day)” or “what has happened today”, and hence imply something immediately after death, especially as Jesus would soon return to life, and so a reference to being with Him seems to imply something immediate (and not physically bodily, since Jesus remained without a physical body during His time of death).
However, it is possible that the ‘today’ is just in the person’s timeframe, referring to the perception that it will happen immediately since there will be no awareness in the meanwhile; this is supported by the reference to “come into your kingdom”, although Jesus may not be replying directly to this point (maybe He is giving the person something even better, and more immediate, than he was expecting), and, potentially, the coming counts as Jesus’ resurrection or ascension (although this is even more uncertain, and is not ‘today’).
Regardless, although uncertain, this at least hints on a conscious immediate post-mortem state.
**5) **However, the references to ‘sleep’ do imply a lack of consciousness, although they could also, since ‘sleep’ is used rather than nothingness, refer to a state in which consciousness (like dreams) could be experienced. In addition, ‘sleep’ may just be a metaphor for the death of a person’s body, and so not represent the state before resurrection.
Anyway, I am uncertain about the issue, although I would consider a conscious state at present. However, both situations have positive implications, regardless of which one is true: “Soul-sleep” means that a person does not have to have running knowledge of the problems on earth in the meanwhile, while consciousness gives extra opportunity for post-mortem salvation (although this could also happen after the end judgement).
However, since the exact nature of eschatology is very uncertain to me at the moment, this assertion is very tentative.
Best wishes to all, CC
Regardless of what happens, I think we can trust that it’ll be better than we’d every imagined, and perfectly in line with God’s action, in love and love alone. In addition, as for the not being clear, it is perfectly plausible that God, in love, has not chosen to yet reveal the truth on this manner, a decision that will ultimately be beneficial to all those who have been wondering, such as Caroleem.
That’s exactly where i am at on the issue.
I found this interesting what Martin Zender says about what happens after death.
Its several articles on 3 pages, read them all if you can.
martinzender.com/clanging_go … Issue7.pdf
Its basically along the lines of soul sleep. I am tending to believe in that direction now.
Already addressed this. Hymenaeus and Philetus believes the resurrection has already come and that the present and future generations have no hope in the Resurrection. I do not believe that, and rebuke such conclusion as Paul does.
The resurrection is what was, is, and is to come.
I use to believe that we sleep until later when we are reserrected, until I found this (Matt 22:32’I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ So he is the God of the living, not the dead.")
This is a very difficult subject.
Do you believe that we are Body/Soul/Spirit? Do you believe that we are Living Soul? Do you believe in a physical resurrection, that our new bodies are immortal dust?
I believe that we are body, soul and spirit and that when we die, our soul dies, our body rots and our spirit goes back to our Father. He made us spiritually in His image and we return to him in spirit. The parable of the prodigal son is a clue to my beliefs.
So you believe in immortal dust body resurrection?
What is immortal dust body resurrection, because I never heard of it. I dont know why you would ask me this as I already gave my answer bro?