Revelation is not scripture - especially, the last few chapters. Ignore all this ‘second death’ nonsense. Look at the needless confusion it causes. If you can’t ignore it, don’t call the mess that is left, ‘theology’ - it can’t be reconciled with scripture - you can try, but it can’t be done. There is no answer to that puzzle.
Meanwhile, I’m watching this crazy labyrinth you guys are building - it’s a house of cards. Men die, they come back to life at the resurrection. There’s your epiphany. A child can understand it.
Men die ONCE - just stick with scripture! God help us if we make the Gospel is so confusing that no one can understand it.
The penalty for sin is death, so even if “the wrath of God” is death, it is not physical death, as that is not the penalty for sin. Correct?
In which verse? If the penalty for sin is not physical death, then the resurrection of the dead has nothing to do with physical death either.
I used to believe in soul sleep, but I no longer do. I do not believe that “the resurrection of the dead” has anything to do with physically dead bodies in physical graves. One is not “disembdies” just because they died physically. The scriptures say that God gives it a body, as it pleases Him and to each seed it’s own body (the flesh profits nothing, the flesh returns to dust).
Indeed! I never understood how someone could look at a corpse and console themselves with the thought that the person is “in a better place now.” Perhaps in one’s imagination, but until the Lord raises them from the dead the only “place” they’re in is Sheol/Hades, where “there is no activity or thought or knowledge or wisdom.” Thank God for the resurrection.
We’ve talked about what must be the actual experience of the dead. They are not ‘waiting’. They go into nothingness and come out in what appears to be an instant TO THEM.
‘They’re in a better place…now.’ is only inaccurate if we can finish the sentence before the resurrection occurs.
Correct! For my views on “death” as the “penalty for sin,” see here:
Every verse in which death is referred to.
The fact that the penalty for sin is not physical death (at least, not as a universal principle; a premature death certainly could be a punishment for sin, though that’s beside the point) in no way means that the resurrection of the dead “has nothing to do with physical death.” The argument simply does not follow.
I don’t care much for the expression “soul sleep,” unless the word “soul” is meant to refer to the person in a holistic sense. I don’t understand the word “soul” (as used in Scripture) to ever denote some “part” of us that exists as a substantial or immaterial “something” that continues either in a conscious or an unconscious condition. And no, one is not “disembodied” when they die, because there is no “part” of our person that continues in a disembodied state. When Christ was dead, where was he? According to Scripture, he was where is body was (Matt 12:40; Acts 2:39, 13:29; 1 Cor 15:3-5; cf. John 11:17, 43-44). You’re also assuming (wrongly, I think) that the only alternative between your view is one in which the same bodies in which we die are raised again. But this is not the only option. I believe the dead will be given new bodies, and that the bodies of those who are still alive when Christ returns personally (John 14:2-3; Acts 1:9-11; 3:19-21; 1 Cor 15:22-23; Phil 3:20-21; 1 Thess 4:13-18; 1 John 3:2) will be “changed.” The immortal resurrection will not be the reanimation of the same bodies with which we die. But neither is it something that happens at (or immediately following) death.
Christ died ONCE and cannot die again. That’s the way the resurrection works for everyone. There’s one redemption from death and it’s an eternal redemption, as in permanent. If men want to find 100 deaths for men to undergo, men will still be redeemed from ALL of them. Christ won, death lost. Game over.
Let the dead invent more death - there must be some love of the enemy driving that invention. Christ DESTROYS death and some want to resurrect it. Their own confusion is their reward. Shame on them. It’s like clutching defeat out of the jaws of victory - they just can’t get enough of death.
When Christ took away the sins of world - men find ways to heap sin back on mankind. When Christ destroys death - men find ways to resurrect death and give it another existence. It’s the exact same mindset.
So ‘twice dead’, ‘thrice dead’, ‘deader than dead’, whatever you can come up with, I will show you that amongst the resurrected, ALL the resurrected, there is no death, it’s been destroyed, it has no dominion because it has no where to reside, hell is destroyed the moment it is empty. And death’s destruction is not a process - it’s gone with a WORD.
Perhaps, it’s because it feels so religious, but claiming that Christ threatens the resurrected with death - is laughable, if it weren’t so pathetically bizarre.
], that you would conceal me until your wrath is past, and that you would appoint me a set time, and remember me" (vv. 11-13). Here, Job reveals his understanding of where man is when he “breathes his last.” According to Job, he is in Sheol (i.e., the domain of death). Here, man is said to “sleep” in silence. It would appear from these verses that Job had no knowledge of a conscious existence for anyone immediately following death. Instead, Job’s hope for any kind of life after death was in a resurrection alone (cf. vv. 14-15).
Sharing a similar view regarding man’s state following death is Solomon, who declares, “The living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing. Their love and their hate and their envy have perished” (Eccl 9:5-6). He goes on to say (v.10), “There is no activity or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol.” That those who die lose all capacity to engage in any conscious, vital activity (of which worship was seen as the greatest) is also taught throughout the Psalms: “The dead do not praise the Lord, neither do any that go down into silence” (Ps. 115:17). “For in death there is no remembrance of you: in Sheol, who shall give you thanks?” (Ps. 6:5) “Shall the dust praise you? Shall it declare your truth?” (Ps. 30:9) “Will you show wonders to the dead? Shall the dead arise and praise thee? Shall your loving kindness be declared in Sheol, or your faithfulness in destruction? Are your wonders known in the darkness, or your righteousness in the land of forgetfulness?” (Ps. 88:10-12; cf. Isa. 38:18-19)
Now, if the dead in Sheol “know nothing,” and are no longer engaged in any activity or thought, then it follows that they are no longer able to consciously experience “judgment” (at least, as long as they remain dead they’re not!). While it’s remotely possible that a judgment following the resurrection may be in view, it’s unlikely that this is what the author had in mind. Had that been the case, it would have been more appropriate for him to have said, “And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after the resurrection, judgment…” Moreover, the preposition translated “after” (meta) suggests that the judgment in view so closely follows death in sequence as to be nearly accompanying it (as opposed to a judgment taking place after a long and indefinite span of time, and then only after the dead have first been raised). So to what then does the krisis after death refer? Well, as the word krisis can denote a decisive or critical event or action (as our English word “crisis” means), given the close association of this krisis with man’s death we may understand it to simply refer to the decisive event by which man’s death is given the appearance of finality and permanence. And what event is that? Answer: the decay and decomposition of the human body. This inevitable process is so closely associated with death in Scripture that God represents it as the event by which Adam’s life of pain and toil under the sun would come to an end: “By the sweat of your face you shall eat your bread,till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return” (Gen 3:19).
In the OT, both death and Sheol (the state of the dead) are commonly associated with the corruption and destruction that follows death when man begins to return to the elements from which he was made (see Job 26:6; 28:22; Ps. 16:10; 49:9-20; 88:11; Prov. 15:11; 27:20). Using typical Hebrew parallelism, Job speaks of going down to “the bars of Sheol” and “descending into the dust” as being equivalent (Job 17:16). Job also refers to the sleep of the dead as being “in the dust” (Job 7:21). Psalm 30:9 describes those who are in Sheol (here referred to as “the pit”) as being “dust.” And as his death was quickly approaching, David told a young Solomon that he (i.e., David) was about to “go the way of all the earth” (1 Kings 2:2; cf. Josh 23:14). The fact that we must inevitably return to the elements from which we were made is a sobering thought for those contemplating death, and serves as a solemn and humbling reminder of our human frailty and utter dependency on the One who both created and sustains us: “Put not your trust in princes, nor in a son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goes forth, he returns to the earth; in that very day his plans perish” (Ps. 146:3-4). Here the Psalmist fully explains the verse under consideration: “It is appointed for men to die once (“his breath goes forth”) and after that, judgment (“he returns to the earth”).”
Significantly, it is this otherwise inevitable event (i.e., the bodily decomposition that follows death) that we are specifically told didn’t happen to Christ after he died. In Acts 2:31, the apostle Peter declared to his Jewish brethren that David “foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption.” Similarly, Paul exclaimed in Acts 13:36-37, “For David, after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep and was laid with his fathers and saw corruption, but he whom God raised up did not see corruption.” Just based on the fact that it was prophesied that the Messiah’s flesh would not “see corruption,” it would appear that bodily decomposition and decay was not something that was looked upon as a desirable thing by the Hebrew people - and the fact that Jesus was spared from this fate was likely seen as further evidence that he was God’s Anointed one.
So how does all of this tie in with the verse that immediately follows the one under consideration? Verse 27 is often quoted as if v. 28 were completely disconnected from it. But together they form a complete sentence: “And AS it is appointed (or “allotted”) for men to die once, and after that judgment, SO Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.” But what is meant by Christ’s appearing “a second time?” First, the word here translated “appear” (optanomai optomai) need not refer to a literal, visible sight. That this is the case is evident from John 1:51, where Jesus tells Nathanael he would “see (optanomai optomai) heaven being opened, and the angels ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.” Similarly, in Matthew 26:64 (cf. Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69) it is unlikely that Jesus was telling the High Priest that he (i.e., the High Priest) would be looking out his window one day and see Jesus riding in on a cumulous cloud! Jesus is here referring to a vision from Daniel 7 concerning the Messiah, and the prophesied scene is set in Heaven’s throne room (thus, even if it did describe a literal scene, it’s not something people on earth could visibly observe). Second, the time at which this “appearance” of Christ was to take place likely corresponds to the “Day” that the original readers of this epistle (written circa AD 60-68) could, in their generation, “see drawing near” (Heb 10:25) - i.e., the overthrow of Jerusalem in AD 70. Thus, Christ’s appearing “a second time” would refer to his coming to establish the Messianic kingdom in the world before that first-century generation passed away (Matt 10:17-23; Matt. 16:27-28; Mark 8:38-9:1; Luke 21:20-32; cf. Luke 17:30-31). This was a promised kingdom which the believers to whom this epistle was addressed were apparently expecting to receive in their lifetime (Heb 12:25-29; 11:39-40; cf. 13:14). Moreover, we are told earlier in the epistle that the time in which they were living was “the last days” (Heb 1:2), as well as that Christ had appeared to put away sin “once for all at the end of the ages” (Heb 9:26) - which suggests that a new age (i.e., the age of the Messianic reign) was about to dawn at that time.
But what is the connection between v. 27 and v. 28? It is possible that the only point the author is making is simply that, just as certainly as man is appointed to die once and then return to the earth, so Christ would certainly appear a second time to “save those eagerly waiting for him” (understood in this way, the parallel being made would simply be between man’s one-time death and Christ’s one-time death). But I submit that there is more to it than a mere simple comparison. The terms here translated “as” (or “just as”) in v. 27 (kay hoson) can also be understood to mean “inasmuch as” (Jamieson, Fausset and Brown). The same expression occurs in Heb 3:3: “For this one has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as (kay hoson) he who built the house has more honor than the house.” Thus, understood in this sense, the expression would be pointing to the reason or occasion for which Christ appeared “a second time” to “save those who [were] eagerly waiting for him” - with that reason being the universally-known fact that “it is appointed for men to die once (his breath goes forth) and after that, judgment (he returns to the earth).”
It may initially appear strange to view this fact of human experience as being the reason for why Christ would “appear a second time.” But the larger context of Hebrews may help us appreciate what the author is saying. Back in chapter 2, we were told that the Messiah had to share in flesh and blood in order that, through death, he might “destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the slanderer, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery” (Heb 2:14-15). From these verses we may infer that the salvation that Christ appeared a second time to bring those who were eagerly waiting for him was a deliverance from the fear of death (a fear that was only confirmed and accentuated by what inevitably followed death - i.e., our return to the dust!). Those who were converted to faith in Christ after his ascension to Heaven did not get the opportunity see Jesus in his resurrected state; consequently, their faith in the fact that Jesus had indeed “abolished death and brought life and immortality to light” (2 Tim 1:10) was based solely on the testimony of others. But when Jesus’ prophetic words concerning the overthrow of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple came to pass before that generation passed away, it was viewed by the believers as Jesus himself appearing “a second time” to announce to the world his victory over death and the grave, and to proclaim his Lordship over both the living and the dead. In this way, Jesus’ coming at the end of the Jewish age was the ultimate source of hope and consolation for those who believed on him as the promised and risen Messiah, for it was (and continues to be for us today!!) a powerful and permanent reminder that death, the last enemy, will ultimately be destroyed.
Aaron, from what I see with regards to your picture, the statement “I’ve gleaned many insights over the years” doesn’t refer to very many years!
Jesus Christ is the resurrection and those who LIVE and believe SHALL NEVER DIE, because they have already PASSED from death unto life; they are already seated with Christ in heavenly places.
The author of a new book called The Lazarus Life (amazon.com/Lazarus-Life-Spir … 1434799956), Stephen Smith, preached at our church yesterday. I haven’t purchased or read the book yet, but he delivered a pretty powerful message (I didn’t agree with everything, but he made some good points). And as you may have guessed from the title of his book, he frequently mentioned the verse to which you referred in your last post. How do you understand Jesus’ declaration, “I am the resurrection and the life?”
Oops, seems you posted while I was still composing my post! But if there’s anything more you’d like to elaborate on regarding this verse, please do.
I have not read what you have linked (very little time right now) but I have read what you have written before. And, as I stated before, I don’t understand how it is you see the penalty for sin a spiritual death, yet still maintain that the resurrection of the dead is supposed to be applied naturally, rather than spiritually.
Paul speaks of both deaths in this chapter.
I stil maintain that it has nothing to do with the physically dead.
I believe that it does refer to the person in a holistic sense. A “soul” (nephesh) is “a breathing creature”; it is a living being. We “are” souls; we do not “have” souls. And “the soul that sinneth, it shall die” is not referring to physical death but the death that one suffers due to sin, while he is physically alive. So, then, “the soul that sinneth, it shall die” is not referring to physical death either. And it is “the dead” who are in need of “the resurrection of the dead”, is it not? And “the resurrection” IS JESUS CHRIST. No?
So then how are the dead raised up and with what body do they come?
Paul answered that question with “thou fool”. Why? It seems to me because it is to ask the question after a carnal (rather than a spiritual) understanding of who the dead are and how they are raised. How hard is it to understand “the resurrection of the dead” after a carnal truth, to see it only in relation to physical death?
We are told that it is not about being UNCLOTHED but about being CLOTHED UPON and having been clothed (with Christ) we know that if this earthly tabernacle were dissolved that WE HAVE an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
Jesus Christ IS THE RESURRECTION.
Look at His words to Martha at the resurrection of Lazarus. Martha knew that she would see her brother again. When? She said “in the resurrection at the last day”. What was Jesus’ response to that?
He said “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?
Then He called Lazarus out of the grave and loosed him from the bonds of death. Now take what was seen physically and apply it spiritually to “the body of this death” that Paul so desired to be redeemed from and what do you see?
If you see that the “death” that we suffered due to sin was not physical and know that if one died for all then were all dead and that we have all been baptized into the death of Jesus Christ, such that we shall also know the power of His resurrection (which is what Paul said we are to be striving to “know”), then can you not see that “the graves” that we are redeemed from are not physical graves? That those who “sleep in the dust” are not physically dead? That even those “in Hades” are not physically dead?
One is made “a living soul” (is “resurrected from the dead”) when God breaths “the breath of life” (His spirit) into them, making this “dead" soul (nephesh = “a breathing creature”) a “living" (chay) soul (nephesh) wherein death is swallowed up of life. No?
Sorry, I can’t look up the scriptures right now to address them.
I will have to come back to that later if you need me to.
I’m at work and don’t have the time to go look up all of those verse. But I am not assuming what you think I am.
I know some who believe that our physical bodies will be resurrected in order to be changed (made perfect/immortal) whether they believe in soul sleep or not; as such, I guess, that those who don’t believe in soul sleep believe that we do exist as “disembodied spirits” until our “physical resurrection” takes place and we “get our bodies back”.
I also know some who believe that it is only “the soul” (which “sleeps” insheol/hades until the time of the resurrection) that is redeemed from the grave and that, at the time, God gives it a new body.
I don’t believe either (though I have, in the past, believed both). That changes when I realized who “the dead” are and what (who) “the resurrection of the dead” is.
I’ll check that out and I did touch on “I am the resurrection and the life” in my other post. Not sure if you’ve read it yet. I can add more and I would also like to explain how I see it in relation to Christ’s words to the Sadducees as well, if you would be interested.
I have to run for now since I am at work. But I will try to check back later and add more. If not before I leave then when I get home this evening.
So what you’re saying now is that there is no resurrection other than people kinda dribbling in one at a time - in other words, an ongoing process but not an event. THE last day then becomes YOUR last day.
But Christ always talked about THE resurrection occurring on THE last day.
‘They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.’ 2Tim 2
Perhaps this will help you understand my position better: I believe that sometimes the word “death” is being employed figuratively, and other times it’s being employed literally. The context determines which is which.
While I certainly believe there are “figurative” resurrections described in Scripture (e.g., Ezek 37; Dan 12:2; John 5:25-29; Rom 6:5; 8:11; Eph 2:4-5; 5:14; Phil 3:10-11; Rev 20:4-6; etc.), I think it’s sloppy exegesis to “spiritualize” every reference to the resurrection when the context makes it abundantly clear that the resurrection in view is of the same, literal nature as the one Christ experienced after 3 days in the tomb (e.g., Matt 22:23-32; Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-38; Acts 4:2; 13:22-23, 28-37; 17:18, 32; 24: 15; 26:23; Rom 1:4; 8:20-25; 10:9; 14:9; 1Cor 6:13-14; 15:3-57; 2Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-14; 5:1-9; Eph 1:20; Phil 3:20-21; 1Thess 4:13-18; 2Tim 1:10; Heb 5:7; 7:15-16; 11:35; 1Pet 1:3-4; 3:21; 1John 3:2-3; etc.). Certainly we can derive figurative, spiritual meaning from Christ’s death and resurrection, but the fact remains that it was and always will be a literal resurrection. And the fact that Christ is said to be the “firstfruits of those who sleep” (1 Cor 15:20-23) at the very least means that the resurrection of “those who sleep” (i.e., those who are dead) will be like Christ’s.
Moreover, just because physical death is natural and was not introduced into the world as a result of sin doesn’t mean it’s not something from which we need to be saved. If the “death” from which Christ was raised on the third day is the same “death” that Paul says is the “last enemy” in 1 Cor 15:26, and the same “death” that is going to be “swallowed up in victory” when the “last trumpet” sounds (and I see nothing in the context that indicates otherwise), then literal death, even though not a consequence of sin, is still an enemy that needs to be “destroyed.”
I only ask for proof of this.
I’m not sure why, though. Did Christ’s resurrection have nothing to do with him being physically dead?
Agreed!
Whoa, let’s stop right there. The “death” in view in Ezekiel 18 is referring to physical death - i.e., a premature death. That is, the punishment that would be brought upon the guilty (for we are told “his blood shall be upon himself”) consisted of having one’s life cut short by God. In Eze 18:14, the literal rendering would be, “He shall be put to death.” In v. 27, those who “do what is right” are said to “preserve their life.” What life? Answer: their natural life.
Now, it is true that this general principle of being put to death because of sin is then applied to the “house of Israel” as a whole, making “death” a figure for national ruin (Eze 18:30-32; 37:1ff). But until then, it simply conveys the idea of a premature physical death for individuals (at least, for Israelites living under the Old Covenant).
Jesus “is” the resurrection only in a figurative sense, AHF. Not literally. The literal resurrection is an instantaneous event in which all who have died will be raised with the same kind of immortal body with which Christ was raised on the third day.
What you understand to be the “spiritual” meaning of the resurrection is, I believe, entirely foreign to the context of 1Cor 15, which so closely identifies the nature of the resurrection of mankind in general with that of Christ’s own resurrection as to make it virtually impossible to mistake what Paul’s talking about (that is, unless one is already convinced that the idea of a literal resurrection that is like Christ’s own resurrection is inherently “carnal” ).
Where in 2Cor 5 does Paul say that our being “clothed” after the destruction of our body means being “clothed with Christ?” And does this happen at each person’s death? I don’t think so; Paul says we are “clothed” with our “building from God” when “what is mortal” is “swallowed up by life.” And when is this? Answer: at the “last trumpet,” when “the perishable (the dead) puts on the imperishable and the mortal (those who are still alive at this time) puts on immortality” (1 Cor 15:50-54).
You’re confusing spiritual death and life with the literal resurrection of the dead, of which Christ is the firstfruits. In John 11 Jesus is affirming that he is not only the one who is going to raise the dead on the “last day” (John 6:39ff) (which is what it means for him to be “the resurrection”) he is also the one who gives “spiritual life” to those who are “dead in their sins” so that people may be “spiritually alive” for as long as they’re believing on him (which is what it means for him to be “the life”). But the fact that Christ is the source of “spiritual life” for all who believe does not negate the fact that he is also going to raise the dead at a yet-future time, and thereby abolish mankind’s “last enemy.”
I never said I believed that the literal resurrection of the dead has anything to do with literal graves. If you’re referring to John 5, I believe this resurrection is figurative, like that described in Ezekiel 37 and Dan 12. And yes, those in “Hades” are physically dead, for Hades is nothing more than the state of the dead. I think you’re oversimplifying Biblical concepts. Not all “death” and “resurrection” language is to be understood literally, but neither is it all to be understood figuratively. But you’re lumping it all together and, as a result, are unable to see how someone (such as myself) can possibly believe that all will be literally raised just like Christ was literally raised.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean by this. When God breathed into Adam and made him a “living soul,” Adam was not thereby raised from the dead. One cannot die who has not yet lived. Maybe I’m misunderstanding you here.
Again, Christ is not literally “the resurrection” any more than he is literally “the door of the sheep” (John 10:7). But just for fun, try replacing the expression “the resurrection of the dead” (or similar expressions) with “Jesus Christ” every time such expressions appear in Scripture, and let me know how that works out for ya.
Ran, I could be wrong (and please correct me if I am, atHisfeet! ), but judging from what I’ve read on her blog (mychurch.org/blog/205937/How … -they-come), I think she believes that “the resurrection of the dead” refers to the believer’s attaining to full spiritual maturity - i.e., when “Christ is formed in [us].” Maybe she thinks this happens to everyone after death; I’m not sure. But she doesn’t seem to believe that the resurrection of the dead has anything to do with physical death. A very interesting view, to say the least!
Well, people tend to spiritualize death to death. But dead is dead. And being separated from your body is death - real death - Christ was dead and if He had not re-united with His resurrected body, He (the Person, Christ) would still be dead.
Now, being a Trinitarian, I do think that Christ the God/man’s death was a little different - being God, He didn’t sleep, He didn’t become the essential non-being of the dead - since that, for Him, was ontologically impossible. He IS being. He IS life and death could not contain that life, so we are told.
Maybe that’s where people get fouled up and confused with Paul and everyone else in the Bible who say that death for all the rest of us not-Gods is the nothingness of non-being - i.e. a profound sleep…until the resurrection.
I see it as both an event and a process. The event would be the resurrection of Christ and the process would be that by which we, being found in Him, are awakened and pass from death unto life - ever man in his own order.
There is more to it than just “the last day”, though.
Yes, it It is called THE LAST DAY, but it is also called THE THIRD DAY and it is also called TODAY (all of which are ONE DAY to the Lord).
).