According to Scripture all spirits return to God who gave them when our body dies.
Of believers. Unbelievers' spirits go... somewhere else, as I said. Jesus told the thief crucified on His right that he (the thief) would be with Him that day in paradise, and said nothing to the thief on His left. Two things I think we can take from that are 1.) that the thief on His left was not in paradise with Jesus (that day or any other since), and 2.) his spirit was went... somewhere else, but not with the Lord. As you know, RWB... or at least I hope you do... God is present everywhere. So what I would say, then, is, yes, all spirits return to God, but not all go to be with the Lord, when they physically die. You may see that as contradictory, but it's not.
Only those indwelt with the life-giving Spirit return to God alive.
Sure. Others remain dead in their sin. See above.
The spirits of those who die in unbelief also returns to God who gave it, but without the life-giving Spirit. I believe that's why they are depicted as "the dead" rather then living souls as John understands are alive in heaven after physical death, i.e. spirit souls.
Hm. I mean, I think we're close, here, RWB, but the spirit, the soul, still exists after the physical death, but may be in one place... :) ... with the Lord, or... the other. And 'alive' and 'dead'... Let's address that this way: Even now, in this life, I'm pretty sure you would agree that there are dead people ~ dead in their sin, so not alive in Christ ~ walking around among us even now. Right? So, after physical death, there are spirits who are alive in Christ (and actually with Him), and spirits who are dead (not alive in Christ or with Him). The latter spirits still exist. And return to God, in the sense that God is present everywhere. See above.
I don't believe the parable of Lazarus and the rich man are depictions of an intermediate state but is a depiction of the fate that awaits those who die in unbelief.
Well, I say both. Because, RWB, the rich man, even from the place he is, says, "Hey, go and warn them so that they might not come here and suffer as I am." So they have not yet died as the rich man has. Ergo, both.
Their fate, unlike Lazarus will not be pleasant and comforting, but instead be one of sorrow and great suffering. According to Scripture the intermediate state for those who die in unbelief is described as a place of silence and darkness where they know nothing.
Ahhhh, Ecclesiastes 9:5. Well, read Ecclesiastes 9:6, RWB. The writer there goes on to say, "they have no more share in all that is done under the sun." In this sense, they know nothing. But they are, as depicted by Jesus in Luke 16, very aware of what they could have had, what they were offered but chose not to partake of, and are in anguish because of it, so much so that they want to get the message to others to avoid the same fate they have come into. Now, this is a bit off the subject, but I do believe both the intermediate state and the second death for unbelievers to be a place of silence and darkness ~ no fellowship with anyone (much less Jesus), and devoid of light (and of course the One Who is Light). Frightening, to say the least. Jesus describes it as "outer darkness," and a place of "weeping and gnashing of teeth." Frightening indeed.
But those who physically die, spiritually alive through His Spirit does not belong to "the dead".
Yes, agree... I never said that... :)
So, after their body dies, they as living (spirit) souls depart from the body of death and ascend to heaven spiritually alive to wait for the completion of the Kingdom of God. Then these living (spirit) souls will return with Christ to be reunited with resurrected immortal & incorruptible bodies fit for life with Christ on the new earth.
Believers, yes. Unbelievers not so much; see above. But they will be resurrected along with believers and be reunited with their physical bodies, but their ultimate fate and destination will be... different. :) Opposite. Again, I would point out John 5;28-29.
Those who died in unbelief will also be physically resurrected when Christ returns.
Right. To the resurrection of judgment. I've said this a couple of times now. You agree. Great!
That's when they, as "the DEAD" shall be called to stand before the great white throne judgment to be judged according to what is written in the books and the book of life.
Well, all will be judged according to what they have done. Paul is very clear on that point in Romans 2:6,7, where he writes, "He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury." We see this in Revelation 20:11-15, but also in Matthew 7:21-13 and 25:31-46. All will be present at the final Judgment, and all will be judged. Only believers, however, will have an Advocate. :)
All of the dead will then be cast into the lake of fire that is the second death. Scripture depicts this lake as one of eternal suffering, as well as final/complete death.
Sure. But the second death is not annihilation. Annihilationism is a heresy.
I don't ordinarily engage in discussions regarding the eternal state for those who die in unbelief. It is to difficult for some to contemplate. Because the Bible has verses that seem to indicate eternal torment, but also the second death. Whether the second death is everlasting punishment or complete death, I do not know! I only know the final judgment that awaits those who die in unbelief will be unending and irreversible.
Understand. I mean, RWB, I would agree with the concepts of everlasting punishment and complete death, but I think I understand what you mean by "complete death," that it is analogous with annihilation and results in non-existence, and I would disagree, and emphatically so, with that.
How can it be my assumption if I cannot find anywhere in Scripture reference to a second resurrection?
But you can count to two, and you did acknowledge that the first resurrection is spiritual in nature, and the second of the two is physical, did you not? And I think you have to ask yourself why, in Resurrection 20, if there are not two resurrections, did John specifically describe the first resurrection as, well, the first resurrection? Why didn't he just say, "This is the resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the resurrection!"? But no, he specifically said in both verse 5 and 6, "This is the
first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the
first resurrection!" There is, implicitly, but unmistakably, a second resurrection (at least a second, and maybe more, but we know only a second...). And this first-and-second thing ~ really first and final ~ is prevalent regarding a number of things throughout Scripture, most notably the first and second Adam (Adam and Jesus).
I find only the first resurrection, which is the resurrection of Christ we must have part in before we physically die to overcome the second death. Scripture also speaks of the resurrection of ALL the bodies in the grave that shall be in an hour coming when the last trump sounds. Nowhere do I read of a "second" resurrection! Which makes sense, because if Scripture tells of a second resurrection those who speak of two physical resurrections one thousand years apart would be right. But they are not right because Scripture nowhere says there shall be a second physical resurrection.
I don't know why you keep hitting on this thing about two physical resurrections. We agree that there are not two physical resurrections. Why you feel like you have to keep making that point to me I have no idea. I have never suggested such.
It appears you agree that the only resurrections Scripture shows us is the first resurrection that is spiritual life from spiritual death, and in an hour coming a physical resurrection of ALL physical bodies from the graves.
Of course I do. My goodness. I'm glad you are finally acknowledging that. I never believed or propagated otherwise, RWB.
If Scripture called the physical resurrection the "second resurrection" how can we argue against the doctrine that teaches two separate physical resurrections separated by some amount of time?
Oh my. See above.
Continued...
