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

[RickC]

I'm reposting this (with slight amendments) from an earlier discussion that went off-topic.

I'm not inviting 'debates' about any of the the following:
Full-Preterism, Conditonalism, Universalism, the 'traditional view' of 'eternal conscious torment in Hell', or views of the millennium.

Please start a new thread if you want to debate any of the above. Thanks!
=============================================

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

Though Jesus, the Apostles, and/or NT authors taught that there will be a “resurrection of the just and the unjust”, I’m perplexed as to what the ‘resurrection of the unjust’ actually is. They will not participate in the resurrection to [eternal] life. The wages of sin, (their sins), is death. Please let me explain a bit more.

I do not hold that souls (meaning, “people”) are created immortal. Immortality is for those who seek it, and it is found by-being-in-Christ: “The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” In other words, I hold to Conditionalism (aka, Conditional Immortality), but still have unanswered questions.

The ‘default position’ of Conditionalism, as I’m guessing and have always supposed it to be, is that the unjust will, indeed, be [bodily] resurrected (back to life), only to be judged and utterly destroyed forever. Yet the Scriptures clearly say that the unjust will not be resurrected to life--(they will not inherit eternal life).
=====================

I’ve been considering key texts, as well as what Josephus said re: the Pharisees’ teaching about the resurrection. A passage from Josephus re: beliefs of Pharisees:

“they hold the belief that an immortal strength belongs to souls, and that there are beneath the earth punishments and rewards for those who in life devoted themselves to virtue or vileness, and that eternal imprisonment is appointed for the latter, but the possibility of returning to life for the former” -Josephus Ant. 18.1.3

The intriguing phrase (above) is “the possibility of returning to life for the former.” Leaving aside details of the Pharisees' beliefs, (which, they probably didn't agree on to begin with)–-according to Josephus, a majority of Pharisees taught that the unjust dead will not be [bodily] resurrected.

Paul was a Pharisee, believing in the “resurrection of the just and unjust”, and we Christians are in agreement with whatever Paul taught about these things. But, of course, neither Paul nor Jesus agreed with Pharisees across the board. And we have in the NT, the ‘true doctrine’ as taught by Jesus and the Apostles.

Q: In Paul’s writings, have you found an actual description of ‘the resurrection of the unjust’? It’s not in 1 Thess 4, nor 1 Cor 15…(is why I’m asking). Paul writes that the wicked will, indeed, be judged. But I can’t find their being [bodily] resurrected in Paul. He said he believed in the "resurrection of the just and the unjust" (Acts 24:15), but didn't describe any resurrection but that of [Jesus and] the saints (1 Cor 15, 1 Thess 4).

Is anyone tracking with me on this?
=======================

I'm also 'amillennial' (current 'default' position--but I question everything)....

Consider The Following -
Rev 20:12 (NKJV) And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books.

Qs: Are the ’standing dead’ still dead?
Is their 'standing', in any sense, a kind of 'resurrection' that isn't bodily?
Will the final judgment occur before anyone is [bodily] resurrected?
Do the unjust even get [bodily] resurrected?
OR, Is the “[bodily] resurrection to life” (eternal life) restricted only to those whose names are in the Book of Life?
========================

I realize that Revelation could (or even maybe should) be considered separately from Paul. Which is to say: Rev 20 might need a separate exegesis, for various reasons. Also, I've only obliquely mentioned the teachings of Jesus. This isn't to neglect His teaching at all! But since we affirm a 'unity' in what the Bible says, I chose the above texts in order to 'target' the main things I'm studying (they seem to best illustrate 'where I'm going' in this).

Thanks!

[RickC]

Q: In Paul’s writings, have you found an actual description of ‘the resurrection of the unjust’? It’s not in 1 Thess 4, nor 1 Cor 15…(is why I’m asking). Paul writes that the wicked will, indeed, be judged. But I can’t find their being [bodily] resurrected in Paul. He said he believed in the "resurrection of the just and the unjust" (Acts 24:15), but didn't describe any resurrection but that of [Jesus and] the saints (1 Cor 15, 1 Thess 4).

I haven't searched for any other passage but I can't imagine what else the resurrection of the unjust could mean? You think it could just mean being transported from prison to court but not being raised bodily?

Qs: Are the ’standing dead’ still dead?

My guess is not if death "gives them up".

Is their 'standing', in any sense, a kind of 'resurrection' that isn't bodily?

I figure it is literal, but do you need a body to stand? This is over my head.

Will the final judgment occur before anyone is [bodily] resurrected?

I thought of this verse... 2 Cor 5:10-11 "we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men.."

..but it could just mean receive, out of the body, the things done in the body?

Do the unjust even get [bodily] resurrected?

I always thought so since I first read the Bible but I don't know if it can be proved.

OR, Is the “[bodily] resurrection to life” (eternal life) restricted only to those whose names are in the Book of Life?

I think the words 'life' and 'eternal life' may be intended in a qualitative sense rather than a metaphysical sense. If so, life for the just would not necessarily imply disembodiment for the unjust.

Ben -

Thanks for that/(this) reply! I hope you don't mind I copied & pasted the above from the other thread. I have to go for now but will 'edit-in' a proper reply soon (in this post).

Thanks again

[mikew]

I am in agreement that it seems Paul has not mentioned resurrection of the wicked.

Paul maybe didn't discuss the idea of resurrection of the unjust because such a resurrection was addressed essentially in Jewish prophecies viz. Dan 12:1-2 (Rev 20 appears to have the goal, in part, of explaining how Dan 12:1-2 was to be fulfilled) albeit there would be no reason to prevent God from extending to all sorts of people the actions described in Dan 12.

Regarding your second question centered around Rev 20...

The 'standing' (anazao meaning revived life) is not the term 'resurrection' (anastasis, as in john 5:29). In fact the term 'resurrection' was not used with respect to the dead of verses 5 and 12. I think we get the best sense about Rev 20:5,12 from Dan 12:2. In Dan 12 the word is basically "awaking" so as to describe the people of Rev 20;5,12 as essentially sleeping during that 1000s years period.

We have to make a decision at this point. Is 'resurrection' used as a broad term to describe two (or more) concepts such as 'being awakened for judgment' and 'being raised to a physical body?' --OR-- is resurrection only speaking of being raised into a physical body? in which case we would figure that the resurrection of saints in Rev 20:4-5 got physical bodies and that the 'dead' were to receive physical bodies just to be cast into a lake of fire. (Of course this leaves the question whether there were people that would be saved after the 1000s years began... and are they raised as well?)

I think the decision logically goes in the first direction toward the idea that resurrection was used in a broad sense. This is based on interplay between John 5:28-29 and Dan 12:1-2,13 (LXX vesrion) and the odd use of anastasis between these two writings.

(I may not be able to explain this interplay sufficiently. but...
Jesus spoke of the resurrection (anastasis) of righteous and wicked (John 5:28-29) as an apparent quote or parallel of Dan 12:1-2 which spoke of the awakening (εξεγερθησονται,Strongs 1825) of the righteous and wicked. This basically means that Jesus (through John 5, at least) borrowed the word from Dan 12:13 meaning "stand" to describe the resurrection of John 5:28-29 instead of using the more logical word for awaken. )

[Jacob]

First, I think Revelation is giving us a word picture which isn't necessarily meant to be taken literally. Next, I'm going to go ahead and say at the outset that what I am about to say isn't biblical, its just how I picture this.

Right now our souls aren't something that can be seen, but Paul says when He comes, we will see him because we will be like him. I think our souls are in another dimension, obviously one we can't see, and when Jesus comes, he is going to unhide this other dimension and everyone will be awakened to this hidden life and their souls will be instantly exposed.

[darinhouston]

First, I think Revelation is giving us a word picture which isn't necessarily meant to be taken literally. Next, I'm going to go ahead and say at the outset that what I am about to say isn't biblical, its just how I picture this.

Right now our souls aren't something that can be seen, but Paul says when He comes, we will see him because we will be like him. I think our souls are in another dimension, obviously one we can't see, and when Jesus comes, he is going to unhide this other dimension and everyone will be awakened to this hidden life and their souls will be instantly exposed.

So, our bodies are sort of like Avatars?

[Jacob]

So, our bodies are sort of like Avatars?

I haven't thought it through, Its just the picture I got when I read 1 John 3:2-3

2Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears[a] we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. 3And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.

The Idea that we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. God is spirit, and we can't see spirit, but he is inside us. Thinking in terms of 2 dimentional objects, 2 figures on the same 2 dimentional plane can't see inside eachother, but a 3 dimentional person can see everything in the 2 dimentional one. For instance, if these 2 figures had eyes facing eachother, they would only see the other one as a line. If they walked around eachother, they could figure out that they are both round, but the arrow couldn't know that the other had a question mark inside and the question couldn't know that the other had an arrow. We know because we are on a different plane.

This isn't actually an idea I've even ever shared with anyone, but since I think it answers the question of the unrighteous being raised to life, I thought I would mention it.

[Paidion]

In Paul’s writings, have you found an actual description of ‘the resurrection of the unjust’? It’s not in 1 Thess 4, nor 1 Cor 15…(is why I’m asking).

What makes you think it is not in I Cor 15? Throughout his entire treatise in I Cor 15, Paul refers to resurrection in general; he doesn't state that he is speaking only of the resurrection of the just. Indeed, it seems to me that verse 22 specifies that he is stating that all people will be raised!

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

He did not write that "all in Christ shall be made alive" but "in Christ shall all be made alive" ...... just as "in Adam all die."

[darinhouston]

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

He did not write that "all in Christ shall be made alive" but "in Christ shall all be made alive" ...... just as "in Adam all die."

This has bothered me in different flavors off and on for a while -- there's a thread on it with Steve's input somewhere -- I'll try to find it. I think one could say that just all all who are "in Adam" die (notably, all human beings are "in" Adam) likewise, all who are "in Christ" live (notably, not all human beings). We are in Adam through our humanity, we are in Christ through our faith. A corollary would be how could Adam's act be more "perfect" (or complete) in that it affected all humanity than the act of Christ, which is said to have been "perfect."

[Paidion]

It is true that not all are "in Christ". But it is true that "In Christ shall all be made alive."

Is it not true that "In Adam all die"? Paul states in parallel, that "In Christ shall all be made alive."
Does not "all" mean "all people" in both cases?

With respect to Paul's statement, it doesn't matter that all people are in Adam , but not all people are in Christ.

Paul did NOT say, "As all who are in Adam die, so all who are in Christ shall be made alive." If he had said that, then it would be clear that those who are not in Christ shall not be made alive. But what Paul said was:

As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Since the first clause states that all die, so the second clause states that all shall be made alive. "In Christ", they will be made alive whether they are "in Christ" or not!

I think the idea is that because of Adam's act of sin, all people die, and because of Christ's act of righteousness, dying for sin although sinless, all people will be resurrected.

[look2jesus]

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. I think it possible, even likely perhaps, that Paul does have his attention on the saints and not on the lost in 1Cor. 15. Verse 20 states,

"But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep."

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."

These verses form the immediate context for the verse under discussion. But verse 23 seems to show no ambiguity whatsoever as far as who will be made alive at His coming--it is"those who are Christ's". So I think I'm leaning towards understanding the phrase in verse 22 as those who are "in Christ". I don't believe we're told here what the state of the resurrected lost will be.

A very similar problem, if you can call it that, is found in Romans 5:18, where Paul says,

"Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life."

One might infer from this that all men will be justified. But the previous verse says,

"For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ."

Though these verses only tangentially touch the subjects of death and resurrection (instead, condemnation and justification of life), the similarity I see with 1 Cor. 15 is that Paul does seem to qualify those who obtain "justification of life" by telling us, in the preceding verse, that it is those who "receive" the abundant grace and gift of righteousness who will obtain life. And, again, it seems that the fate of the lost has largely been ignored--Paul choosing rather to focus his attention on the saints.