You have some good points there, Paidion. I agree with you that the soul is not some segregated part of our person. OT scriptures refer to the “soul” as more or less synonymous with the “life.” Living things don’t posses “souls;” they ARE souls. And the same word without differentiation is used to refer to animals as well as humans. Howsomever, God does point out that all souls are His and that at death, the soul returns to Him. And Jesus said, “All souls live unto Him.” He also said, “He that liveth and believeth on Me shall never die.” AND, “I give unto them (His sheep) eternal life and they shall never die.” That would seem to me to point to the soul as having an existence even apart from the body. (Unless He didn’t really mean “never,” but unless we can find good reason to suppose He didn’t (and I haven’t looked) then interpreting this according to our own theology sounds like “all” not really meaning “all.”)
Now scripture clearly teaches resurrection and redemption of our physical bodies, just as Christ was raised. Paul also says, that the body dies a physical body and is raised a spiritual body. But if Jesus’ resurrection body is included in that (which I see no cause to dispute), then that means the actual physical body becomes a spiritual body that functions more or less – more, in fact – as a physical body does. Jesus ate, could be touched, could manipulate physical objects, was recognizable to His friends (when He wanted to be), walked with His feet touching the ground, spoke in a normal voice . . . and of course there were those additional “super powers” of high-speed travel, walking through walls, rising up into the clouds, etc . . . not to mention rising from among the dead.
One could argue that the reason Paul said “if the dead are not raised we are of all men most miserable” was not because of the non-existence of the life once its body (host?) had died, but rather because Jesus’ resurrection was an absolute necessity for those He died for to enter into the LIFE He died to obtain for them. It was His death that freed us from the tyranny of sin, but His resurrection that allows us to live in newness of life – eternal (the God kind of) life.
Jesus has been raised – physically raised – and so of course He’s awake and extant. It’s possible we will not be awake betwixt our deaths and the resurrection. But as all souls return to God who gave them, I don’t believe the theory that says souls are non-extant for the period between death and resurrection. That doesn’t make sense to me. Paul’s euphemism regarding those who have “fallen asleep” works both ways. If we take it literally in order to “prove” soul sleep, we also have to apply the same standard to proposed non-existence. If we sleep, we do not cease to exist. Personally, I believe it IS an euphemism that tells us nothing – except perhaps (unless it’s literal) that this was the way Paul referred politely to death, just as we might say “so and so passed away this week.”
I call it “going home.” My dad went home about four years ago. I don’t speak of him in the past tense, because whether he’s conscious or sleeping, all souls return to God who gave them, and our Abba IS our home (and we are also His home). If his soul returned to God, then he still exists. Therefore it makes no more sense to say “I loved my father” (and make it past because of his death) than it would to use past tense merely because he had traveled to France for a month. If he is here I love him; if in France, I love him; and if he is with God then I love him still.
Anyway, my musings. And thanks, Paidion. It’s a great post, and it made me think. 
Blessings, Cindy