Soul Sleep

[tall73]

So according to your methodology of interpretation, Christ is a fruit, the first one. Metaphors excluded.

(forgive me)

a. If this were the only passage where the word sleep was used it might be taken as something else. But it is used over 20 times for death.

b. Other texts show that the sleep is not just a metaphor. How can the psalmist say that people go down to silence in death and do not praise the Lord? That is more than just the body.

c.The point here in this passage is clear from the larger context. Paul says without the ressurection we are HOPELESS because we would not have a resurrection. Now tell me, why would Paul care so much about the resurrection if the dead were in heaven without a body? Why would all be lost without it?

It wouldn't. But it is clear that Paul hinges everything on this because the resurrection was the hope of the Christian, not release from the body.

Please note this little section of the context:

1Co 15:16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised.
1Co 15:17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.
1Co 15:18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.
1Co 15:19 If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

The whole sense of the text is that Jesus' resurrection made ours possible, so don't worry about what happens to those who "fall asleep." 1 Thess. 4 addresses the same question.


As much as folks talk about resurgent gnosticism, this escape from the body idea shows gnostic tendencies.

d. I am sure you realize that the firstfruits was the part of the wavesheaf that Jesus fulfilled by His resurrection. So no, Jesus is not a fruit. But the rest of the passage, far from just supporting a metaphor for sleep shows that the whole Christian hope was in jeapardy without the resurrection.

 

[BalaamsAss51]

Luke 16:19-31-The story of the rich man and Lazarus

The view of disembodied souls living on after death was familiar to Jesus' audience as the hellenistic culture of the Greeks/Macedonians had long before been exported by Alexander the great throughout his empire. So Jesus referring to commonly known stories, while a bit confusing , might not be all that unusual.

If you disagree with this analysis, fair enough. Just give it a fair reading. I take the view of this text both because of the internal evidence, and because of the seemingly overwhelming evidence throughout the Bible that supports death being a sleep, as listed above.

The first argument in this regard is the context of the story. Earlier in chapter 16 we see Jesus telling the story of the dishonest steward. After this story Jesus directly addresses the love of money in the Pharisees:


He then gives two brief notes on different topics, then comes to this story. It seems to have an even harder hitting point about the use of wealth.

Here is the text.



As is often the case in Jesus' stories we have two contrasting figures here. The rich man, with all the things he could want, and the beggar who is hungry, has sores and even has dogs harassing him. Clearly the contrast in intentional, just as with the stories of the pharisee and the tax collector, and the widow and the judge.

Here the story is meant to show how our current life situation and actions effect our future life.



At this point I would like to point out some of the purely figurative elements in this story.

A. Father Abraham is in charge of the righteous dead. I think it goes without saying that we don't see this in any other passage. The closest we come are the passages that speak of going to rest with the fathers. But in these cases it is often clear that is in the grave.

B. Heaven and Hell are in plain view of each other. I am not sure we would teach that either. Some, simply on the basis of this text, have taken the idea that all the dead went to one place until Jesus died and rose, then the division was made with people in heaven. But since this is never stated in the Bible, I am not sure this is a terribly valid argument.

C. We have an apparently disembodied spirit, or some would have us believe he is, who is wanting water, just enough to cool his tongue. How would a spirit benefit from water? And how would cooling ones tongue help with such torment? It is clearly meant to stress the severity of the punishment.

D. Jesus earlier said:

Jesus seems to teach not that we suffer forever in hell, but that both the body and the soul are destroyed in hell. This is really a whole other topic, but an interesting one nonetheless. The words often translated as hell in the NT are often different, and some of them refer to a holding place for evil forces (Tarterus) , and others to fiery punishment (Gehenna), and destruction.

Here the term used is Hades, which often corresponds to the OT Sheol, or the grave, but here may be used in reference to the Greek underworld myth. The Greeks called Hades the place of the underworld. And there of course there were living people BOTH good and evil in corresponding locations.

In any case, for now it is sufficient to note that Jesus teaches both body and soul will be destroyed in hell. Either this is a disembodied spirit here with Lazarus, which doesn't fit Jesus' teaching, or perhaps, as the story reads, the angels carried the whole body there, which doesn't seem to fit the common notion of spirits being in hell.




This appears to be the main point of the story.

A. this life effects the next
B. a great gulf is fixed, you can't switch after you die. This life is where it is decided.



This last bit is fascinating. Here Jesus is making a direct swipe at the disbelieving pharisees. Not only is he accusing them of loving money, but He is saying they refuse to believe, and this belief will hurt their future life.

Notice he says they will not believe even if someone raises from the dead. Who was it in the story that was supposed to go back from the dead to warn them? Lazarus. A direct reference to what Jesus was in fact going to do, which illustrated the way death works quite clearly. (See my earlier post)

In fact, Jesus prophecy was true. When Lazarus, the real Lazarus, was raised from the dead, they did not believe:



While Jesus' story contains elements that relate to life immediately after death, they are clearly a part of a figurative story meant to relate a warning to the pharisees. He seems to be employing elements of Greek myth, which was known to his audience at the time.

In looking at the other texts that speak of death in the Bible I then understand this story to be simply meant to prove one point, not teach all kinds of facts about what happens at death.

Hello Tall73.

I think thou dost protest too much. The aside about Luke 16 was just to show that it would make no sense if the general take on those dead was that they were just sleeping and not aware of what was going on. "Explaining" the passage was not needed. This "soul sleep" stuff really seems to have you bugged, that soon rev guy too. I can appreciate that, I would not like haveing by beliefs questions either.

Pax

Pax

 

[ThreeAM]

There are many passages of Scripture that indicate that the soul of man remains conscious after death. However, you should be aware that the SDAs will attempt to explain away those passages in terms of a few others from the Old Testament that appear to speak of death as an end to consciousness. They will also seize on the word "sleep," which is used in terms of the deceased body and not of the soul....

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

[fwGod]

i hope you dont mind if i put in my 2cents regarding your post..?

Luke 16:19-31-The story of the rich man and Lazarus

The view of disembodied souls living on after death was familiar to Jesus' audience as the hellenistic culture of the Greeks/Macedonians had long before been exported by Alexander the great throughout his empire. So Jesus referring to commonly known stories, while a bit confusing , might not be all that unusual.

your not saying that the non jewish views is where Jesus got the parable, are you?

because if that is what your saying.. i disagree.

If you disagree with this analysis, fair enough. Just give it a fair reading. I take the view of this text both because of the internal evidence, and because of the seemingly overwhelming evidence throughout the Bible that supports death being a sleep, as listed above.

if they did then it was because that is what death looked like. as one who is but sleeping.

when Jesus was asked to come minister to a little girl. she had died. now, Jesus said that she was asleep.
the disciples thought he meant really just napping. but Jesus straightly said that she was dead.

why did Jesus bother to tell them plainly the difference? because its not hard to wake up a person who's just napping. but the miracle is that much greater when the dead person is arisen from the lower part of sheol back to the body.

the people of the old testiment were not given revelation concerning the after life. but only that they had one. however.. it now brings to mind the incident when king saul went to a woman to call up the dead prophet.

and the question arises.. who was the man who appeared to be the dead prophet?

i have my own ideas to explain it but perhaps not sufficiently so skip it for the time being.
unless you'd like to offer what you believe.

(snip)

As is often the case in Jesus' stories we have two contrasting figures here. The rich man, with all the things he could want, and the beggar who is hungry, has sores and even has dogs harassing him.

the dogs didnt harass him. they were the only ones who would even attempt to comfort him by licking his wounds.

i think that it pointed out that the rich man, by not offering any sumeritan help.. was worse than a dog.

(snip)

At this point I would like to point out some of the purely figurative elements in this story.

its my belief that abraham's role was every bit true. more scripture on that as the post progresses.

A. Father Abraham is in charge of the righteous dead.

you dont address why abraham was in charge of the righteous dead.. is it because you consider it useless fluff to the parable?

I think it goes without saying that we don't see this in any other passage.

is it so strange to consider that Jesus is in the parable revealing a mostly unknown fact concerning the afterlife?

The closest we come are the passages that speak of going to rest with the fathers. But in these cases it is often clear that is in the grave.

its clear that Jesus shows what goes on beyond the grave.

B. Heaven and Hell are in plain view of each other.

upper sheol is not heaven. it is what abraham said it was. a compartment above and separate from the lower part.

people were not allowed to go into heaven until after Jesus had been raised from the dead. it was then that he "lead captivity captive" eph4.. up into heaven. heb.12 refers to those there as "the spirits of just men made perfect." and Paul revealed that to those who die in Christ after his resurrection.. they go to be with the Lord, in heaven. phil.1:23

I am not sure we would teach that either. Some, simply on the basis of this text, have taken the idea that all the dead went to one place until Jesus died and rose, then the division was made with people in heaven. But since this is never stated in the Bible, I am not sure this is a terribly valid argument.

just did.

C. We have an apparently disembodied spirit, or some would have us believe he is, who is wanting water, just enough to cool his tongue. How would a spirit benefit from water? And how would cooling ones tongue help with such torment? It is clearly meant to stress the severity of the punishment.

through the parable i believe that Jesus was giving more revelation there that the torment, the thirst, the desire to get relief is so. whether we fully comprehend it or not.

and Jesus said of the rich man.. luke 16:9-20 "there was a certain man.." also stated luke14:16; 15:11; acts9:10; 18:7 certain indicates that these people are real. the poor man, and the rich man are real.

therefore the parable is revealing real events.

D. Jesus earlier said:

Jesus seems to teach not that we suffer forever in hell, but that both the body and the soul are destroyed in hell. This is really a whole other topic, but an interesting one nonetheless. The words often translated as hell in the NT are often different, and some of them refer to a holding place for evil forces (Tarterus) , and others to fiery punishment (Gehenna), and destruction.

Here the term used is Hades, which often corresponds to the OT Sheol, or the grave,

as i understand the word, the grave is 6 ft under. where the body is laid and covered with dirt. or put in a tomb.

sheol, a.k.a. 'abraham's bosom' by the perimeters Jesus gives shows that its much more than just someplace to put a dead body.

but here may be used in reference to the Greek underworld myth. The Greeks called Hades the place of the underworld. And there of course there were living people BOTH good and evil in corresponding locations.

i'll accept that.

In any case, for now it is sufficient to note that Jesus teaches both body and soul will be destroyed in hell. Either this is a disembodied spirit here with Lazarus, which doesn't fit Jesus' teaching,

perhaps the destroy part is held off for an as yet later time. and you are trying to mash them together.

or perhaps, as the story reads, the angels carried the whole body there, which doesn't seem to fit the common notion of spirits being in hell.

what is your understanding on this question.. was Jesus there body and soul in that place when he preached to those in upper sheol?

is anyone's body nowdays taken directly to heaven/or hell when the person dies?

(snip)

Notice he says they will not believe even if someone raises from the dead. Who was it in the story that was supposed to go back from the dead to warn them? Lazarus. A direct reference to what Jesus was in fact going to do, which illustrated the way death works quite clearly. (See my earlier post)

In fact, Jesus prophecy was true. When Lazarus, the real Lazarus, was raised from the dead, they did not believe:

how bout when Jesus Himself was resurrected? did the relatives of the rich man believe?

did the whole world at that time believe? how many people since his resurrection and up to today and up to the millienium.. will believe or not?

(snip)

In looking at the other texts that speak of death in the Bible I then understand this story to be simply meant to prove one point, not teach all kinds of facts about what happens at death.

then why did Jesus include them?

also.. do you then deliberately not address the scriptures that speak of after death from the epistles?
i can only think that its because it disproves many of your assumptions, or are they inexhaustive conclusions?

one big thing your not mentioning in all this is the other lazarus. the one that Jesus raised up who'd been dead for 4 days. the brother of the sisters, and close friend of the disciples and Jesus.

when he arose. dont you think that he would have told the curious people what he experienced while in sheol?
he can verify everything that Jesus said in the parable of the rich and poor man.

the little girl.. the boy from nain.. everyone whom Jesus raised up can testify to the truth of that parable.

and also all those others who were resurrected when Jesus arose. those who went out through the community appearing to the people.
they had some verifying to give as well.

 

[tall73]

i hope you dont mind if i put in my 2cents regarding your post..?

Not at all. Thanks for taking the time! I am currently writing a response. In the meantime, take a stab at the two texts I posted earlier...I Corinthians 15, and Acts 2.

We can both look at each others evidence.

 

[tall73]

i hope you dont mind if i put in my 2cents regarding your post..?

No problem at all

your not saying that the non jewish views is where Jesus got the parable, are you?

because if that is what your saying.. i disagree.

I am saying that Jesus was addressing a view of Hades that was around, yes.

if they did then it was because that is what death looked like. as one who is but sleeping.

when Jesus was asked to come minister to a little girl. she had died. now, Jesus said that she was asleep.
the disciples thought he meant really just napping. but Jesus straightly said that she was dead.

why did Jesus bother to tell them plainly the difference? because its not hard to wake up a person who's just napping. but the miracle is that much greater when the dead person is arisen from the lower part of sheol back to the body.

Except that He never said anything about the lower part of sheol. He just said she was dead. And that I agree with.

the people of the old testament were not given revelation concerning the after life. but only that they had one. however.. it now brings to mind the incident when king saul went to a woman to call up the dead prophet.

and the question arises.. who was the man who appeared to be the dead prophet?

A good question. I will post Saul and the witch of endor in a bit. The preview is that people were forbidden to consult those with familiar spirits for a reason.

Now as to whether nothing is said of the afterlife, or the state of those who are dead in the OT, is it that nothing is said, or that you can’t reconcile what is said?

the dogs didnt harass him. they were the only ones who would even attempt to comfort him by licking his wounds.

Yes, I think you may be right on that one.

its my belief that abraham's role was every bit true. more scripture on that as the post progresses.

Ok, but I didn't see other texts to back up Abraham's role.

you dont address why abraham was in charge of the righteous dead.. is it because you consider it useless fluff to the parable?

Not at all. I consider it Jesus using "father" Abraham becuase he is a key figure to the Jews. Abraham was the one they looked to, and took pride in being a son of. So when the man was on the other side of Abraham it set all his expectations on their head. They believed physical lineage was the key to being a son of Abraham. Jesus is showing otherwise. (Note the narratives on the son of your father the devil vs. being sons of Abraham. Also note John the Baptist saying do not think to say that you are sons of Abraham, for God can raise up from the stones sons for Abraham.

is it so strange to consider that Jesus is in the parable revealing a mostly unknown fact concerning the afterlife?

It is not strange, no. It is only strange when it doesn’t match up with other passages.

upper sheol is not heaven. it is what abraham said it was. a compartment above and separate from the lower part.

And again, this is the only place where you can give hard evidence that such a place would even exist.

people were not allowed to go into heaven until after Jesus had been raised from the dead. it was then that he "lead captivity captive" eph4.. up into heaven. heb.12 refers to those there as "the spirits of just men made perfect." and Paul revealed that to those who die in Christ after his resurrection.. they go to be with the Lord, in heaven. phil.1:23

• I will deal with Phil. After this as well.
• Ephesians 4 is a much debated topic. It could refer to those who were resurrected at Jesus’ crucifixion. It could refer to the notion that Jesus was the victor, as in ancient times, carrying his vanquished foes behind Him in His chariot (the usual meaning of captives, and more in line with the text and the culture). The emphasis in the passage is on the giving of gifts, primarily the Spiritual gifts.
• The reference in Hebrews 12 is a comparison between the OT covenant mountain, and the New Jerusalem Mount Zion. Just as the people assembled at the mountain, now these Christians are seen as gathered around that mountain before God and the angels. But let me ask, are the people he is writing to in heaven? No, but they are seen as assembled. So he is apparently using this much the same way as he does when he says “come boldly before the throne of grace.”

through the parable i believe that Jesus was giving more revelation there that the torment, the thirst, the desire to get relief is so. whether we fully comprehend it or not.

Actually, I don’t dispute that part of it. There will be torment, and fire and suffering at the final judgement in the lake of fire.

and Jesus said of the rich man.. luke 16:9-20 "there was a certain man.." also stated luke14:16; 15:11; acts9:10; 18:7 certain indicates that these people are real. the poor man, and the rich man are real.

And he also said there was a “certain widow” when it was clearly said to be a parable. So that phrase is really a precedent for a parable, than for reality.

as i understand the word, the grave is 6 ft under. where the body is laid and covered with dirt. or put in a tomb.

sheol, a.k.a. 'abraham's bosom' by the perimeters Jesus gives shows that its much more than just someplace to put a dead body.

In the Greek concept, which had become prevalent, yes. But not in the biblical concept of sheol. There was no place where people were mindful of God or anything else:

Psa 6:5 For in death there is no remembrance of you; in Sheol who will give you praise?

Ecc 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might, for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going. [/quote]

Psa 88:9 my eye grows dim through sorrow. Every day I call upon you, O LORD; I spread out my hands to you.
Psa 88:10 Do you work wonders for the dead? Do the departed rise up to praise you? Selah.
Psa 88:11 Is your steadfast love declared in the grave, or your faithfulness in Abaddon?
Psa 88:12 Are your wonders known in the darkness, or your righteousness in the land of forgetfulness?

Notice also the famous prophecy:

Psa 16:10 For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.

Corruption and sheol are tied together in the Hebrew parallelism. Jesus was not abandoned to the grave to see corruption.

perhaps the destroy part is held off for an as yet later time. and you are trying to mash them together.

It is a later time. I am simply showing that this does not fit all of Jesus’ own statements if it is taken literally. The lake of fire is at the end of time. However, it is both body and soul that Jesus says is destroyed.

Nor does the passage in Luke say anything about a spirit being tormented ,but says he was in hell.

what is your understanding on this question.. was Jesus there body and soul in that place when he preached to those in upper sheol?

I assume you are speaking of I Peter 3.

Any look at a decent commentary will note that interpretations vary on this text. There are several questions that any expositor must ask.

A. What is the relation of the story of the spirits in prison to Peter's main point....suffering, as Christ suffered.

B. who are the spirits?

C. What is the prison? How did they wind up there?

D. When did Jesus preach to them? How did Jesus preach to them? What did Jesus preach to them? Why did Jesus preach to them?

G. What does it mean for Jesus to be made alive by the Spirit?

H. How does this part of the passage relate to Peter's comments directly after this that speak of our actions in the body, etc?
These are all big questions. I don't know if the Bible actually answers all of them.

We have to look at the text phrase by phrase to see whether it is really saying that Jesus went to preach during His death.

For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit

First of all, we can say that Jesus was put to death, and buried, most everyone agrees on the basics of that statement.

But then what does it mean when it says that He was raised by the Spirit? The form is a dative. It could be instrumentality (by the Spirit). It could be in the Spirit. For that matter we are told that we will have a spiritual body at the resurrection, and Jesus’ body was not completely like ours after His resurrection.

through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20 who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built

Jesus went to preach....through the Spirit.


This is not too foreign an idea since Jesus told his disciples that he would not leave them as orphans, but would send the Spirit so that He could be where they were.

JN 14:15 "If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever-- 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me

What did He preach? Why ? Etc. we don't know.

to spirits in prison

Now one can assume that these were human spirits, but that doesn't necessarily follow. In fact, Peter makes mention of spirits in prison. And they are not human. We see a reference to them in Jesus' ministry as well.

2PE 2:4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment...

Here the word Tartarus is translated hell. We see mention of a similar place in Jesus' dealings with demons.

Luke 8: 28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out and fell at his feet, shouting at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, don't torture me!" 29 For Jesus had commanded the evil spirit to come out of the man. Many times it had seized him, and though he was chained hand and foot and kept under guard, he had broken his chains and had been driven by the demon into solitary places. Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" "Legion," he replied, because many demons had gone into him. 31 And they begged him repeatedly not to order them to go into the Abyss.

If Peter makes reference to spirits in prison that are not human, why do we assume these are when it other places speaks of sheol as a place of silence?

who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built

This brings up two issues:

1. Timing - did Jesus preach to them through the Spirit during that time? Through Noah? Later? After His resurrection? It is all unclear. And for that matter, it is unclear what Peter is talking about at all. However, I would submit that this was a nice segue into Peter's comparison with baptism. And the immediate context, connected as it is with the discussion of Jesus' death, could be taken to mean that He went soon after His death. But the timing issue is really all up in the air.

2. Who were these spirits? What happened around the time of Noah? We don't know that either. Although there is one speculative answer. And note, I said speculative...I don't say this as doctrine at all. There is a text that some people feel is speaking of spirits, that occurred around the time of the flood, and might be something that would call for judgment by God, just as he judged the earth with floods:

GE 6:1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

Now of course we have probably all heard varying takes on this one too, because it too is a difficult passage. But if we take them to be spirits, they could well be these, who were disobeying in the days before Noah's flood.

My point is, there is a lot of information that none of us know about this text. But what we do know is that

a. It speaks of Jesus death, and resurrection by the Spirit. He also preached by means of the Holy Spirit.

b. Peter's other reference to spirits in prison is in relation to evil angels. And given there are not direct statements in scripture about human spirits in prison, it seems like the safe way to interpret this unusual passage is that he is referring to the angels he mentioned at another time

is anyone's body nowdays taken directly to heaven/or hell when the person dies?

As you notice from the prophecy above, Jesus was in the grave, but was not abandoned to corruption.

And no, people’s bodies are not taken there, which is the point. They will be at the end of time though. Nowhere does it say in Revelation or anywhere else that it will be the SPIRIT in hell, but everything, body and spirit.

how bout when Jesus Himself was resurrected? did the relatives of the rich man believe?

The “relatives” were simply the Pharisees who did not believe Jesus though Moses testified of Him. And no, they tried to put the real Lazarus to death, and killed Jesus. Which was exactly Jesus’ point. A man being raised from the dead would not convince them.

did the whole world at that time believe? how many people since his resurrection and up to today and up to the millienium.. will believe or not?

I don’t follow you here.

then why did Jesus include them?

For the same reason Paul quoted poets of his day. Because the ideas were familiar to the people.

also.. do you then deliberately not address the scriptures that speak of after death from the epistles?
i can only think that its because it disproves many of your assumptions, or are they inexhaustive conclusions?

Post them and I will address them.

one big thing your not mentioning in all this is the other lazarus. the one that Jesus raised up who'd been dead for 4 days. the brother of the sisters, and close friend of the disciples and Jesus.

when he arose. dont you think that he would have told the curious people what he experienced while in sheol?

Yes! So why didn’t he? Perhaps there was nothing to tell.

he can verify everything that Jesus said in the parable of the rich and poor man.

he sure could….but he never did.

the little girl.. the boy from nain.. everyone whom Jesus raised up can testify to the truth of that parable.

yes, but none of them did. And they were all said to be sleeping. Maybe they actually were.

and also all those others who were resurrected when Jesus arose. those who went out through the community appearing to the people.
they had some verifying to give as well.

[FONT=&quot]Indeed….so why didn’t they? [/FONT]

 

[tall73]

After your response on Acts 2 and Corinthians, and any further discussion on this text I will address Philippians and the witch of endor. I have them written up already, but I don't want to rush through before we examine eveything already on the table.

 

[ThreeAM]

So according to your methodology of interpretation, Christ is a fruit, the first one. Metaphors excluded.

(forgive me)

Lev 23:10Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest:

11 And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.

1Cr 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, [and] become the firstfruits of them that slept.

1Cr 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Christ is the Firstfruits of the harvest/resurrection. He was represented in TYPE by the wave sheaf which was grain of the first in quality and first to be harvested. The wave sheaf was presented before the LORD before Israel could start or eat from the Harvest.

 

[tall73]

Lev 23:10Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest:

11 And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.

1Cr 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, [and] become the firstfruits of them that slept.

1Cr 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Christ is the Firstfruits of the harvest/resurrection. He was represented in TYPE by the wave sheaf which was grain of the first in quality and first to be harvested. The wave sheaf was presented before the LORD before Israel could start or eat from the Harvest.

Indeed

Before there was ever an Easter sunday, there was the wavesheaf sunday. Jesus fulfilled this just as He did the lamb element of the passover.

 

[holdon]

Here is a link to, in my opiinion, a very good article on the subject.

http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/darby/DOCTRINE/31011E.html

 

[tall73]

Here is a link to, in my opiinion, a very good article on the subject.

http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/darby/DOCTRINE/31011E.html

Holdon,

The problem that I see with his view is that it does not at all account for the fact that the resurrection, the redemption of our bodies, was the hope of the Christian. Notice Paul's statement in Romans 8:

Rom 8:18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.
Rom 8:19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God.
Rom 8:20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope
Rom 8:21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.
Rom 8:22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.
Rom 8:23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.
Rom 8:24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees?
Rom 8:25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

The hope of the Christian is not separation from the body, but redemption of the body.

Again Paul notes that the resurrected dead, and the living will both receive new, immortal bodies. There is no indication here of spirits reuniting:

1Co 15:52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.
1Co 15:53 For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.

Contrast this with the statement from your article below:

How a spirit enjoys Christ we cannot tell as to the manner of it, but there is no difficulty whatever. My spirit enjoys Christ now, in spite of the hindrance of the poor earthen vessel it is in, and though now we see Him not, yet rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory. It is not my body which enjoys Him now, but my soul spiritually, with the hindrance of the earthen vessel, and absent from Him, then without the hindrance of the earthen vessel, and present with Him.

The current body is of course flawed. But the point is that freedom from the body is not what the biblical hope is. The biblical hope was that our weak bodies would be changed to be like His glorious body.

If everyone rejoices to be free from the body, then why would there be a resurrection at all? why take back a body after all this joyous time of being free of it?

 

[Theophorus]

a. If this were the only passage where the word sleep was used it might be taken as something else. But it is used over 20 times for death.

b. Other texts show that the sleep is not just a metaphor. How can the psalmist say that people go down to silence in death and do not praise the Lord? That is more than just the body.

c.The point here in this passage is clear from the larger context. Paul says without the ressurection we are HOPELESS because we would not have a resurrection. Now tell me, why would Paul care so much about the resurrection if the dead were in heaven without a body? Why would all be lost without it?

It wouldn't. But it is clear that Paul hinges everything on this because the resurrection was the hope of the Christian, not release from the body.

Please note this little section of the context:



The whole sense of the text is that Jesus' resurrection made ours possible, so don't worry about what happens to those who "fall asleep." 1 Thess. 4 addresses the same question.


As much as folks talk about resurgent gnosticism, this escape from the body idea shows gnostic tendencies.

d. I am sure you realize that the firstfruits was the part of the wavesheaf that Jesus fulfilled by His resurrection. So no, Jesus is not a fruit. But the rest of the passage, far from just supporting a metaphor for sleep shows that the whole Christian hope was in jeapardy without the resurrection.

The context and purpose of this passage is controversial. But here Paul is addressing the gnostic or pagan belief that the body does not rise. That it is not neccessary. That God's purpose was already completed. That was one extreme of Christinianity. Soul sleep is another.

The deep spiritual meanings of firstfruits, fruit, death, sleep, soul, have been gradually revealed through the scriptures.

Consider these things. Christ is God and man. Man in every aspect. So, according to your very literal interpretation of 1 Cor 15, then Christ's "soul" slept in the earth for 3 days.

This would contradict the very words of Christ to the thief, this day you will be with me in paradise, and his statement at the moment of death, into thy hands, I commend my spirit.

Also how did Christ preach to the spirits in prison, how was the gospel preached to the dead?

Also let us remember Paul's view of death was, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

 

[holdon]

The problem that I see with his view is that it does not at all account for the fact that the resurrection, the redemption of our bodies, was the hope of the Christian.

No, it does that, see first 2 sentences of this paragraph:

"The intermediate state, then, is not glory (for that we must wait for the body. It is raised in glory, He shall change our vile bodies, and fashion them like His glorious body); but it is blessedness where no unholy evil is. It is being with Christ Himself, the source of joy ineffable. The hopes and "always confident" of Paul, of Stephen, were not disappointed, nor did the assurance given by the Lord to the thief fail of fulfilment. I ask if the bright hopes spoken of in 2 Corinthians 5, Philippians 1, in Acts 7, and the Lord's words to the thief, for any honest mind, can mean going fast asleep, and knowing nothing? When the Lord described the state of the rich man and Lazarus, did it mean that either the wicked or the just were asleep, and knowing nothing? I shall be told it is a figurative description. I admit it fully; but it is not a false one, and it is not a figure of men going to sleep and knowing nothing. But, further, if 2 Corinthians 5: 6-8 means being happy with Christ, it means being happy with Him when we die. Death is the subject spoken of, for the apostle had despaired of life (2 Cor. 1); and absent from the body, and present with the Lord, is not resurrection, it means leaving the body, not taking it; departing and being with Christ is not His coming and raising or changing us to be in glory. The apostle is speaking there again of death, remaining here, or leaving the world. It was dying which was gain; Phil. 1: 21. Life and death are in distinct contrast in verse 20, and then analuo is used for dying (v. 23), as is analusis; 2 Tim. 4: 6. The attempt to apply analuo or analusis to Christ's return, because it is used for breaking up from or leaving a festival, is a poor conceit, contradicting the express statements of the passage. The word means disuniting or destroying what is united, and so is used for death. Neither Philippians 1 nor 2 Timothy 4 leave a trace of doubt in the matter. The effort to pervert Luke 23: 43 and Philippians 1: 20-23 is only a proof that the force of the passage cannot be got over, and the character of the effort to set them aside betrays itself.

 

[tall73]

[FONT=&quot]

The context and purpose of this passage is controversial. But here Paul is addressing the gnostic or pagan belief that the body does not rise. That it is not neccessary. That God's purpose was already completed. That was one extreme of Christinianity. Soul sleep is another.

You are reading in a bit. Paul would not say they were without hope if they were in spiritual form with Christ. But he would if they were not, and the resurrection was THE hope.

The deep spiritual meanings of firstfruits, fruit, death, sleep, soul, have been gradually revealed through the scriptures.

If by that you mean to blatantly contradict each other, then I don't accept that.

Consider these things. Christ is God and man. Man in every aspect. So, according to your very literal interpretation of 1 Cor 15, then Christ's "soul" slept in the earth for 3 days.

Christ died and was in the grave. That is as literal as I can put it.

This would contradict the very words of Christ to the thief, this day you will be with me in paradise, and his statement at the moment of death, into thy hands, I commend my spirit.

Except He didn't say that. He said I TELL you this very day that you will be with me in paradise. And now you have to define what the Bible says paradise is.

First we should note that all agree that Jesus did not go to heaven right away. He says the Mary:

"Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father"

So if He meant He would be in paradise that day, it must be a different place than heaven.

In the OT we have many references to people going to their resting place, in fact a common resting place. Some apply this to the story of Luke 16, addressed above. But is the term paradise used of this place that they contend is where the dead are alive?

The only three references I have found to the underlying Greek word are the theif on the cross, the reference to the trees in the garden (Revelation 2:7) and Paul's reference to a man (which he later clarifies as himself) who was caught up to paradise in vision, or in the body, he wasn't sure. (2 Corinthians 12:4)

Now from these texts we note that:

a. one text deals with the abode of God and it was UP not down. This is the one where Paul relates being caught up

b. The tree text refers to this same abode of God, except that Revelation indicates that God will set up shop on the new earth. The new jerusalem descends from above.

c. In the above texts the term always applies to the abode of God, not as a resting place of all the dead.

If paradise is seen as with God, then why here would it be otherwise? If we simply take it as Jesus promising Him that He would be with Him in paradise with God, then it makes sense.

Also how did Christ preach to the spirits in prison, how was the gospel preached to the dead?

You have not at all demonstrated that the Spirits in prison are dead. Peter also speaks of angels in prison in his other epistle, in tartarus, and Jesus is asked by the demons not to send them to the abyss.

Moreover, while the timing of the offense of the parties is given ,the timing of the preaching is not . It says that He was raised by the Spirit by whom He also preached to...

Also let us remember Paul's view of death was, to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

Let's look at the whole text. It is parallel to the one mentioned in Phil, and is more in-depth, so it will help us understand both.

2CO 5:1 Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. 2 Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, 3 because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. 4 For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. 5 Now it is God who has made us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.

2CO 5:6 Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. 7 We live by faith, not by sight. 8 We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9 So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

Some notes:

a. Paul does not say that when our tent is gone we are free from the body. He says that when our tent is gone we will have an eternal HOUSE, a lasting structure, a replacement for the weak tent. This is a parallel to the new body talked about in Corinthians 15, and would be similar to Jesus' resurrection body. (see my earlier posts) It is a body without corruption.

b. He says that we meanwhile groan, longing to be clothed with the heavenly body so we won't be found NAKED. Now we see three states. 1. Tent 2. Heavenly building 3. Unclothed, or naked. The word "groaning" is rather instructive. It is not the only time Paul uses the phrase in regard to the body. Notice this passage in Romans:

RO 8:22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.

The hope is that God will soon end this earth that is groaning under the weight of sin, and we , and it will be redeemed. The "redemption of our body" is the hope they were saved in. But it is not yet. In fact, the text implies it is at Jesus coming at the restoration of all things.

Now, notice then that the state of being unclothed, is nakedness. Paul wants not to be dead...naked...but to be clothed with his heavenly body..the redemption of his body. He wants out of this dying old tent, and to see his hopes realized. If the naked state was being with Jesus, why would he not want that?

But he affirms that God has indeed prepared his body for him. So he is always confident.

c. in vs. 4 we see another parallel to his theology in I Corinthians 15. Verse 4 reads..."For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life."

Now let's plug in our definitions, and see if it works. For while we are in this (current body) we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be ( dead), but to be clothed with our (new heavenly body), so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.

Now when is the mortal swallowed up by life? I Corinthians makes this clear:

1CO 15:50 I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed-- 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."

Putting the texts from all of Paul's writings together that use similar language helps us to see that these three states are the same he has talked about before.
1. This life
2. Sleep in death
3. New body

d. verse 6-10 then returns to a discussion of the current situation:

2Co 5:6 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord,

We all agree on this part. That while we are here we are not physically present with the Lord.

2Co 5:7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.
2Co 5:8 Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.

Now, the key question is what he means here by away from the body and at home with the Lord. He already said that he didn't want to be found naked, but to be clothed with the new body. So he is not contradicting himself here. He apparently wants to be away from the current failing tent, where we are apart from God, and at home with the Lord in his heavenly body.

There is one other possibility here too ,but I have to go for an appointment, will get back to you.

[/FONT]

 

[Advent Christian]

Hello all;
BondmaidenOfChrist, has your question been cleared up any? If you notice you have asked a question which has caused much strife with in the body of Christ since the very start of Church. The ironic part is most of the time the “debates” are pointless and simply an attempt to disprove a belief instead of attempting to reach the truth. As I have stated before; If there is a doctrine which has 999 verses in the Word of God which support the theory when taken in context but there is 1 verse which also taken in context disagrees with the doctrine then either the doctrine is wrong or incomplete.
Let me start by saying as my screen name states I am an Advent Christian, that being said allow me please to see if I can assist with your original question. I am not going to list all the scriptures or the meanings of given words in Greek and or Latin because this only muddies the water, but much of this debate comes from this location. What I will attempt to do is outline an overview of how the “soul sleep” concept applies to my understanding after quite a bit of time investment.
First thing I would bring forth is we must remember all things are understood through a sinful nature so no understanding of man is totally correct.
Anyway, to my understanding of what God’s Word has to say concerning the soul of man at the time of his death I would go as follows
1- Time is lineal and doses not apply to the soul after death. Time is a limitation of man’s physical self not his soul. This is where the understanding of “eternal damnation” comes into play which in it’s self is a topic of great confusion between denominations and doctrines.
2- The state of the soul is called sleeping but a more understandable phrase may be waiting, but again this is looking at this through the murky waters of time.
3- The location of the soul according to scripture is in Sheol, either in the bosom of Abraham or in torment, where it resides until such time as the Lord will return and call forth His people. (Many will disagree and state Sheol no longer exists as occupied)
4- Upon the return of our Lord the believers will be called forth to be united with Him in His kingdom.
5- After a period of time (Commonly referred to as the 1000 year reign of Christ) the unsaved will also be called but to the Great White Throne of Judgment, and after facing a Holy God will be cast into the lake of fire which is the 2nd death. (Yes I believe it is scriptural that sin will be destroyed not placed in confinement but totally prevailed over and removed from all existance.)
I hope this helps in some small way and as always my love to all and May God Bless.

 

[ThreeAM]

The context and purpose of this passage is controversial. But here Paul is addressing the gnostic or pagan belief that the body does not rise. That it is not neccessary. That God's purpose was already completed. That was one extreme of Christinianity. Soul sleep is another.

The deep spiritual meanings of firstfruits, fruit, death, sleep, soul, have been gradually revealed through the scriptures.

Consider these things. Christ is God and man. Man in every aspect. So, according to your very literal interpretation of 1 Cor 15, then Christ's "soul" slept in the earth for 3 days.

This would contradict the very words of Christ to the thief, this day you will be with me in paradise, and his statement at the moment of death, into thy hands, I commend my spirit.

Did Christ go to paradise/heaven with the thief on the day of the crucifixion?

Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Where is paradise?


Rev 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Well we know the tree of life is in the middle of paradise

Rev 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

The tree of life is near the throne of God. So Christ promised the thief he would be in paradise with him. Did the thief and Christ go to paradise on the day of the crucifixion? On the day of the resurection Mary came to Christ but Christ would not let her touch him why?


John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.




Jhn 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Christ did not ascend to Paradise with the thief on the day of the crucifixion in fact Christ was not yet ascended when Mary first saw Him.

The problem is one of punctuation. The Bible was not written with punctuation. There is more than one way to punctuate the scriptures. The people who added verses and punctuation were not inspired. Christ was giving the thief assurance that he would be saved. Notice how it reads with the comma moved to the proper place. Christ did not ascend to his father in paradise until some time after he saw Mary.

Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee To day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Also how did Christ preach to the spirits in prison, how was the gospel preached to the dead?

....

See POST # 10 this thread for answers on this The Holy Sprit preaching to the spirits in prison in the time of Noah

 

[Theophorus]

See POST # 10 this thread for answers on this The Holy Sprit preaching to the spirits in prison in the time of Noah

I am overly aquainted with this view. Use to attend a church that taught this, but not soul sleep.

I do not buy it. It is a stretch and has never really been accepted by most theologians.

 

[Theophorus]

[FONT=&quot]

You are reading in a bit. Paul would not say they were without hope if they were in spiritual form with Christ. But he would if they were not, and the resurrection was THE hope.

If by that you mean to blatantly contradict each other, then I don't accept that.
[/FONT]

Such as the special resurrection of Moses? Then Christ is not the firstfruits. The first to wake up.

You cannot get around this issue. Either Moses was in another form in the transfiguration, or he was resurected before Christ. This is a major contradiction to 1 Cor 15.

 

[ThreeAM]

Such as the special resurrection of Moses? Then Christ is not the firstfruits. The first to wake up.

You cannot get around this issue. Either Moses was in another form in the transfiguration, or he was resurected before Christ. This is a major contradiction to 1 Cor 15.

Christ is the firstfruits for which the price of there resurection had already been paid for with His blood. Moses and Elijah represent two groups that will be saved. Elijah was translated without death. Moses was those who will be resurected. Notice that satan contested for Moses body be cause Christ has not died for Moses when Moses was resurected the price had not be yet paid. First fuits also means the highest quality of the Harvest. Christ is without doubt the highest quality of those to be resurrected. Moses was resurected on CREDIT for the future sheading of Christ's blood.

Jud 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

 

[ThreeAM]

I am overly aquainted with this view. Use to attend a church that taught this, but not soul sleep.

I do not buy it. It is a stretch and has never really been accepted by most theologians.

God's people have always been in the minority and always will be.

Mat 7:13-14Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.