Reconsidering "resurrection of the just & unjust" (take 2)

[Paidion]

It seems to me that the crucial statement that might be interpreted different ways is "in Christ". In Adam all die. It seems natural, to me, to take this as meaning that all who are in Adam will die. It seems just as natural to understand the phrase "in Christ, all shall be made alive" to mean that, just as all who are in Adam will die, so all who are in Christ will be made alive. That doesn't seem like a huge stretch to me.

It seems like it for me, for the two phrases are in parallel, and it would mean that the first all truly means "all people" but the second one would have a limited meaning. It doesn't work that way when phrases are parallel. Words contained in both phrases of a parallel structure must have the same meaning. Another example would be the use of "aionios" in Matthew 25:46 And these (who did not assist the needy) will go away into aionios punishment, but the righteous into aionios life.” If "aionios" means "everlasting" in one of the phrases, it also means "everlasting" in the other. On the other hand, if "aionios" merely means "lasting" in one of the phrases, it must mean "lasting" in the other.

And then in verse 23 Paul says,

"But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ's at His coming."

I think you quoted that in support of your thought that only those who are in Christ will be made alive. It might also be helpful to examine the verses which follow.
I have deliberately interchanged 24 and 25, for I thought perhaps Paul's thoughts came quickly as he became excited about future things, and that perhaps he was thinking ahead too fast. See if the following order makes more sense:

23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ.
25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power.
26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

It seems that this passage declares that this "being made alive" begins with the firstfruits (Christ, and perhaps those others who were raised to life at that time), secondly, those who belong to Christ at His coming, and thirdly those who come under His feet during the reign of Christ, after which He will deliver the Kingdom over to the Father.

So perhaps you are right. Perhaps there is nothing in this passage which declares that those outside of Christ will be raised. If so, then the problem remains.

Related perhaps to the problem is the statement made by John (Revelation) in which he saw that "the rest of the dead did not live until the thousand years were ended."

[look2jesus]

Paidion,

It seems like it for me, for the two phrases are in parallel, and it would mean that the first all truly means "all people" but the second one would have a limited meaning.

I agree that there is a parallelism here but my point is not that all doesn't mean the same thing in each case--I believe it does--but that the two lines are speaking of two different groups.

Consider these two phrases: All who are in Adam will die. All who are in Christ shall be made alive.

It seems as though you are arguing that the "all" from each statement must refer to the exact group of people because of the parallelism of the two statements. But this isn't true. The reason is because the parallel statement is contrasting two differing ideas. All, in one group, will die. All, in the other group, will be made alive. One group is "in Adam". The other group is "in Christ". Just as all who are in Adam will die, just so all who are in Christ will be made alive.

Though this is my understanding, I did allow that some might interpret the phrase, "in Christ, all shall be made alive" differently, assigning a meaning to "in Christ" other than "those who are in Christ", seeing the word "in" to mean something more along the lines of "through", in which case, your argument would be more fitting, I suppose.

Perhaps there is nothing in this passage which declares that those outside of Christ will be raised. If so, then the problem remains.

I believe you are correct. I think we must go elsewhere for the answer.

l2j

[RickC]

Greetings all,

Some time back I said I'd be back to this thread.
'Haven't made it till now, obviously.

Just to acknowledge that I've read the thread (when everyone posted).
My apologies to Ben, who took time to answer my questions.
What Mike wrote has led to my further studies, thanks Mike.
Also just to say I basically agree with what look2jesus wrote.
His(your) understanding of the 1 Cor 15 passage matches mine.

In any event, I've been studying "the resurrection" since I was here.
That, and eschatology in general.
========================

(As something of an aside) . . .
A year or so ago I found a blog by Andrew Perriman: http://www.postost.net/.
Andrew's approach is a "narrative-historical hermeneutic." This is essentially my style, so to speak, in reading and interpreting scripture. While I don't concur with some of Andrew's ideas, what I like about his angle on things is: he really tries to see how the text would have been originally understood -- and this, with the whole narrative of the Bible in mind. One of Andrew's working premises, as it were, is that when Constantine legalized Christianity and made it the state religion, that this was a fulfillment of scripture; Christ's "conquering the nations" so to speak. While this is interesting, I'm not so sure about this interpretation. Otherwise, Andrew writes interesting stuff on eschatology and The Kingdom.
==========================

I recall Steve (Gregg) saying in one of his lectures that, if serving Jesus was all there was to being a Christian, that if there wasn't an after-life, that Steve would be glad to do it. I know in my case, becoming a follower of the Lord essentially saved my (current) life! Thus, I can relate to what Steve was saying (though I didn't give an exact quote from him).
==========================

What I mean to relate in saying this (and getting back to the topic) is: There doesn't seem to be nearly as many verses that are actually about a, or the, final judgment as I once thought years ago. Many of them I now understand as possibly referring to things that happened during Jesus' earthly life or in the years to follow (as covered in Acts and up to 70AD, and even with Rev 20). I haven't become a full preterist, by any means. However, I frankly am unsure about certain texts that I once thought definitely referred to "the resurrection of the just and the unjust" at the end of time as we now know it. I'm seeing them as possibly, if not likely, referring to things that were to have happened to Israel during the NT Era time frame. Overall, I'm just not sure what to think. But it's great being a Christian, whether there's really an after-life or not, or whatever or however it may turn out to be!

Anyways, that's all I have for now.
Thanks for the replies!

[Singalphile]

Interesting. A lot that we don't know (and I'm not convinced that we're meant to).

Someone on another forum (rethinkinghell.com/forum) pointed out that our English phrase "from the dead" might not capture the meaning of the Greek as well as "out from among the dead".

The Greek preposition ek apparently more likely means "out from among", and it is most commonly used in that phrase. But the apo preposition is also used (at least once). Both prepositions are used back to back in Luke 16:30-31. "... if someone goes to them from [apo] the dead, they will repent! .... they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from [ek] the dead.

The point was that "raised/resurrected from [ek] the dead" always implies that some dead (people) are not raised at that time. I'm not really sure if there's much to make of it, if anything. Any thoughts?

I also found Mark 9:9-10 funny: "9 ... [Jesus] gave them orders not to relate to anyone what they had seen, until the Son of Man rose from the dead. 10 They seized upon that statement, discussing with one another what rising from [ek] the dead meant."

Thanks in advance.

[look2jesus]

Singalphile,

Someone on another forum (rethinkinghell.com/forum) pointed out that our English phrase "from the dead" might not capture the meaning of the Greek as well as "out from among the dead".

I participate at the rethinkinghell.com forum from time to time, myself. Can you direct me to the thread or post in which this was discussed? Thanks.

[Singalphile]

Singalphile,

Someone on another forum (rethinkinghell.com/forum) pointed out that our English phrase "from the dead" might not capture the meaning of the Greek as well as "out from among the dead".

I participate at the rethinkinghell.com forum from time to time, myself. Can you direct me to the thread or post in which this was discussed? Thanks.

Hello. Yes, the thread is here. It's short. The posts by "webb" are the ones you'll want to look for, starting just a few down from the first post. In post #2873, he links to a larger PDF document with some in depth Greek analysis (which I haven't actually reviewed closely). He's a scholarly chap, it seems.

[RickC]

Believe it or not, I've been following this/my thread.

Thanks for the link, Singalphile. I actually did a fair amount of study based from it (my default position on Hell has been Conditional Immortality for several years). Right now, however, I'm agnostic about it.

The link & "Webb" didn't really yield much for me. 'Somewhat difficult to follow. 'Made me think, though.

In any event, I joined a Facebook Group named "Bible Fulfilled Prophecy" which is primarily comprised of Full Preterists. I also keep up with what FPs post here.

Added to my study is a recently acquired copy of "The Parousia" by J.S. Russell. 'Got it new for $15 via a FP site (same book, just no foreword by R.C. Sproul). If anyone wants the link to order, ask.

Re: what Jesus meant (what Singalphile thought was funny & I do too). That text probably gives evidence, by way of deduction, that there were many views about "the end" -- even in Jesus' time. In my studies I've found such to be the case.

OK. I still have a LOT of stuff to study! If I find anything worth posting I'll be back.

Thanks for all lof the replies!