How Will Believers Be Present With The Lord?

The Church and Israel are two distinct groups with whom God has a divine plan. The church is a mystery, unrevealed in the Old Testament. This present mystery age intervenes within the program of God for Israel because of Israel’s rejection of the Messiah at His first advent. This mystery program must be completed before God can resume His program with Israel and bring it to completion. These considerations all arise from the literal method of interpretation. Other rapture views deny or weaken the dispensational distinction by placing the Church in the Tribulation which is otherwise noted as “the time of Jacob’s trouble [the Tribulation].”
I Thessalonians Paul’s first epistle to the Thessalonians has much to say about the issue at hand. The most popular passage, of course, is found in I Thessalonians 4:13-18. The event described here includes a return of Christ in the air (not to the earth as the Second Coming is described in Zechariah 14:1-5 and Revelation 19:11-21), a resurrection of the dead in Christ, a rapture of living believers, and a reunion with those who have died in Christ. Paul penned these verses in order to clarify a misunderstanding that the Thessalonians embraced concerning the relationship between the resurrection and the saints who were asleep in Christ to the rapture. The question is this: Does the death of a believer before the Lord comes cause him to lose all hope of sharing in the glorious reign of Christ? Paul’s answer is a reassuring affirmation that the living at the time of the rapture have no advantage over those believers who have died. Those who sleep will be raised to reign with those who remain. Both groups will share in the kingdom. If Paul and the Thessalonians were speaking of a rapture at the end of the Tribulation, it seems illogical that they would sorrow over believers who were fortunate enough to die and miss the horrible judgments that await these last years.

Paul anticipated, “to be absent from the body and present with the Lord.”? 2Cor 5:8. Does this say that to be absent from the body is to be immediately with the Lord? No. The time between death and the out-resurrection will seem, to those who die, to pass in an instant. For this reason Paul could covet death knowing that from his perspective the next thing He would know is being with Christ. In the context Paul speaks of three states: 1. Clothed in the body 2. Unclothed 3. Clothed with our Heavenly body. Paul did not want to be “unclothed” (dead) but clothed in the Heavenly body. When will we be clothed in our immortal body? Paul taught “that this mortal will “PUT ON (be clothed with) immortality” when the dead rise at the Second Coming (1Cor 51-55). How do the dead in Christ get to be present with the Lord? By the out-resurrection (1Thess 16-17). Indeed, the Apostle Paul was anticipating the return of Christ in his lifetime, as do we now. Now:
The rapture, which is pre-trib, is not technically a resurrection, for all, in the group, born again believers, are not dead, as some remain alive, therefore the word of God refers to this as an out-resurrection, as only some are resurrected, of that group! no rapture/gathering together mentioned in O.T./ Gospels/ Revelation, sure:
THE GENEVA BIBLE AND SIX PRIOR BIBLES BEFORE KING JAMES USED THE WORD " A DEPARTING" OR "DEPARTURE" INSTEAD OF A "FALLING AWAY" IN 2 THESSALONIANS 2:3.
Greek - "he apostasia" means THE Departure - from the circumference of a circle, directed outward, away from the circle.
NOTE "A DEPARTING"COMES FIRST, "AND THAT THAT MAN OF SIN WILL BE DISCLOSED". DON'T FORGET IT ALSO SAYS “NOW YOU KNOW WHAT WITH HOLDITH" AND "HE WHO LETS SHALL LET TILL HE BE TAKEN OUT OF THE WAY." WHAT OR WHO DO YOU BELIEVE WILL BE TAKEN OUT OF THE WAY? IT MAKES ALSO MAKES NO SENSE THAT PAUL WOULD TELL A VERY NEW AND SMALL CHURCH IN THESSALONIA, THAT A SIGN OF BEGINNING OF THE GREAT TRIBULATION WOULD BE A FALLING AWAY FROM THE CHURCH WHEN THEY DIDN'T EVEN HAVE MANY CHRISTIANS THERE TO FALL AWAY. ALSO HE WAS REFERRING TO SOMETHING HE HAD TOLD THEM ABOUT BEFORE. WHAT HAD HE PREVIOUSLY TOLD THEM? 1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words. IT SOUNDS MORE LIKE HE TOLD THEM ABOUT “A DEPARTING OR DEPARTURE” THEN A FALLING AWAY. AS A MATTER OF FACT PAUL DID NOT DESCRIBE “A GREAT FALLING AWAY” AT ALL AND ACTUALLY SAID IN 1TIMOTHY 4:1 THAT ONLY “SOME SHALL DEPART FROM THE FAITH” 1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; SO ALTHOUGH HE BELIEVED EVEN THEN, THE TIMES WERE EVIL, HE DID NOT EXPECT A GREAT FALLING AWAY OF BELIEVERS BUT THAT THE EVIL WOULD GET WORSE. 2Ti 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. AND TO THE CORINTHIANS PAUL SAID THIS: 1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 1Co 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
OTHER TRANSLATIONS THAT USED DEPARTING OR DEPARTURE. The first seven English translations of apostasia all rendered the noun as either " departure" or " departing." They are: the Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608).
Bible study to bless the saints of the "Body of Christ".
Be sure to look at all of the verses in this study.
The Body of Christ will not go through Israel’s tribulation. To begin with, Israel and the Body of Christ are not the same. Neither are God’s plans for them. God’s plan for Israel concerns Christ returning to earth in a spectacular event called the Revelation – to inaugurate His Kingdom in Jerusalem (Matt. 24-25; Rev. 19-20. This plan was “spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began” (Acts 3:21; see Luke 1:70). God’s plan for the Body of Christ is completely different. It concerns our heavenly inheritance, not an earthly kingdom. Jesus revealed this program to Paul only as a mystery “kept secret since the world began” (Rom. 16:25; see Eph. 3:3-9). In that it began as a mystery, it will likewise disappear in a mystery called the Rapture; an any moment event whereby Jesus returns for us in the air (1 Thess. 4:16-17), snatches us from earth, and takes us back to Heaven with Him as He promised (John 14:2-3) – when “the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” (Rom. 11:25). Then comes “the time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer. 30:7; see Dan. 12:1; Zeph. 1:15) – aka tribulation. The tribulation - as it is most commonly known (Moses: Deut. 4:30; Jesus: Matt. 24:21, 29; John: Rev. 7:14) - is part of God’s earthly program for Israel. It is also called “the time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer. 30:7; Dan. 12:1; Zeph. 1:15), Daniel’s Seventieth Week (Dan. 9:26-27), and “the hour of temptation” (Rev. 3:10. It has no bearing on the mystery Body of Christ, which will be gone before it begins. From the beginning it was prophesied to Israel (Deut. 4:30), and thus is primarily for Israel (Jer. 30-31; Dan. 12:1, Zeph. 1:15; Matt. 24:21, 29). Its purpose is to punish sin and sinners (Jer. 30-31; Zeph. 1; Joel; Rev. 6-19), and prepare earth and Israel for the Revelation of the Messiah and the Jewish (Millennial) Kingdom promised to David in perpetuity through Covenant (2 Sam. 7:8-16), and sealed with an oath (Psa. 89:3-4, 20-37; see Luke 1:31-33). While the prophets revealed the tribulation as a horrific but integral component in the Day of the Lord (Isa. 2:12, etc ), it was Daniel’s prophecy where its duration was revealed as the final week of seven years in his seventy week prophecy for Israel (Dan. 9:24-27; see Rev. 11:2-3; 12:14). To wit, while we can easily find Israel and the anti-Semitic Gentile nations on earth during “the time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer. 30:7; Dan. 12:1; Zeph. 1:15), the heavenly Body of Christ - which has been promised deliverance from this divine punishment (1 Thess. 1:10; 5:9; 2 Thess. 2:5-7;) - is conspicuously absent (Rev. 2-19). There isn’t a prophecy or a single verse anywhere in the Bible conclusively identifying the Body of Christ on earth during Israel’s tribulation without pulling from context and redefining the words “saints” and “elect” - which in Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, and Revelation specifically refer to Israel. In lieu of these factors and others we are convinced that the Body of Christ will not go through Israel’s tribulation!
 We know that death still has a sting, that the corruptible has not yet put on incorruption and that the mortal has not yet put on immortality.  But we also know that our enemy death will be destroyed and that the dead in Christ shall rise and we who are alive shall be changed and that we will meet  our lord in the air and forever be with him.  What a glorious day that will be!

INCARCERNATION! WHAT?

Jesus Christ: Incarnated or Created?

We now will examine the historical background of the development of what has become the cornerstone of Christian orthodoxy, the doctrine of the “Incarnation.” We will see that this doctrine arose neither in a vacuum, nor strictly from the text of Scripture. It was the result of the influence of certain beliefs and attitudes that prevailed in and around the Christian church after the first century. Pagan mythology, Gnostic views of redemption and human pre-existence, and the misunderstanding of Johannine language all contributed to the teaching that God Himself became a man, which is the essence of “Incarnational theology.”

Although the “Incarnation” is assumed to be a basic tenet of Christianity, the term is used nowhere in Scripture. This is even admitted by Trinitarian scholars: “Incarnation, in its full and proper sense, is not something directly presented in Scripture.” The doctrine of the Incarnation was actually formulated during the next several centuries. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church verifies this fact:

The doctrine, which took classical shape under the influence of the controversies of the 4th–5th centuries, was formally defined at the Council of Chalcedon of 451. It was largely molded by the diversity of tradition in the schools of Antioch and Alexandria…further refinements were added in the later Patristic and Medieval periods.

The reason the councils and synods took hundreds of years to develop the doctrine of Incarnation is that it is not stated in Scripture, and the verses used to support it can be explained without resorting to a doctrine that bears more similarity to pagan mythology than biblical truth. Teaching the Jews that God came down in the form of a man would have completely offended those living at the time of Christ and the Apostles, and greatly contradicted their understanding of the Messianic Scriptures. This doctrine is derived most prominently from the gospel of John, and in particular from the phrase in John 1:14 (KJV): “And the Word was made flesh….” But was “the Word” synonymous with “the Messiah” in Jewish understanding? Hardly. The Jews would have understood it to mean “plan” or “purpose,” that which was clearly and specifically declared in Genesis 3:15—a “seed” of a woman who would destroy the works of the Devil. This plan of God for the salvation of man finally “became flesh” in Jesus Christ. This verse is not establishing a doctrine of Incarnation contrary to all prophetic expectations, nor a teaching of pre-existence. It is a teaching of God’s great love in bringing into existence His plan to save mankind from their sin.

Before proceeding, we must define what is traditionally understood by the “incarnation” of Christ. Keep in mind that we strongly affirm the reality and necessity of the virgin birth of Christ as the only way he could have been born without the inherent sin of mankind that would have disqualified him from becoming the Lamb of God. But the traditional “formula which enshrines the Incarnation …is that in some sense God, without ceasing to be God, was made man.”

We will quote the New Bible Dictionary, a Trinitarian source, for a working definition and explanation of this doctrine:

It appears to mean that the divine Maker became one of His own creatures, which is a prima facie contradiction in theological terms. When the Word “became flesh,” His deity was not abandoned or reduced or contracted, nor did He cease to exercise the divine functions which had been His before…The Incarnation of the Son of God, then, was not a diminishing of deity, but an acquiring of manhood.

One wonders how a pre-existent “God the Son” can become a man without any “diminishing of deity,” or that he could live a “fully human” life without ceasing to exercise the divine functions he had been exercising since eternity began. Trinitarians say this is part of the “mystery” of the Incarnation. The New Bible Dictionary admits that the concept is not developed or discussed in the New Testament:

The only sense in which the New Testament writers ever attempt to explain the incarnation is by showing how it fits into God’s overall plan for redeeming mankind…This evangelical interest throws light on the otherwise puzzling fact that the New Testament nowhere reflects on the virgin birth of Jesus as witnessing to the conjunction of deity and manhood in His person—a line of thought much canvassed by later theology.

If the deity of Jesus was not at first clearly stated in words (and Acts gives no hint that it was), it was nevertheless part of the faith by which the first Christians lived and prayed…The theological formulation of belief in the Incarnation came later, but the belief itself, however incoherently expressed, was there in the Church from the beginning.

We disagree with the assertion that the doctrine of the Incarnation was “in the Church from the beginning.” Since the doctrine is clearly not in Scripture, how can it possibly be considered a part of “the Apostles’ Doctrine”? Because scholars admit that this doctrine is biblically tenuous, we must examine why Christian theologians of the third century and later became so preoccupied with establishing it as the cornerstone of a Trinitarian Christian faith. In doing so, we will see some of the changing assumptions and beliefs that led to the development of this doctrine. We must first establish the fact that the very process of turning from historical truth to mythology was clearly prophesied by the apostle Paul at the end of his life. This is amazing but not surprising, in light of the many times in Scripture that God has warned His people about being influenced by pagan culture.

 Creation, Not Incarnation
Jesus makes clear reference to two distinct categories in John 3:6 when he says that the “Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” Jesus clearly declared God to be “spirit” (John 4:24). Note that he did not say, “I am spirit,” or “God is flesh” or even “The Father is spirit.” By thus placing “God” in the category of “spirit,” when he himself is clearly a man of flesh and blood, Jesus effectively excluded any possibility that he was God. If God, being spirit, can incarnate Himself as a man, then the clear scriptural distinction between flesh and spirit disintegrates. But God the Creator, who is spirit, can create flesh, as He did in Genesis 1. His spirit brooded upon the face of the water, speaking into being things that had not existed before. These things were in “the flesh,” but were not He. They were His creation, but He stood apart from them and judged them to be very good.
Creation is the means by which God has brought things to pass outside of that which would occur naturally. He caused a human life to begin in the womb of Mary by an act of supernatural creation, not mystical incarnation (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). He waited for a willing woman to bear this child, a woman whose confession and testimony were befitting the honor bestowed upon her. In this way He brought into the world a human being who fulfilled the necessary conditions for becoming the Messiah. That was only the first hurdle. Then He had to work with the growing child to help him maintain his sinless condition until the time he could be anointed with holy spirit and thus be empowered to do the work to which he was called (Acts 10:38). Yes, God had to provide (by creation) the body that could be sacrificed, but Jesus had to obey Him flawlessly for his body to finally be the perfect sacrifice that it needed to be. Thus, God and Jesus each had a responsibility that the other could not perform, and upon which our redemption depended.
The assertion that Jesus was God in human flesh nullifies the absolute necessity of Christ’s obedience, because, as God, no temptation he faced would have been genuine. God cannot be tempted, because God cannot sin (James 1:13). It is also axiomatic that God can neither “obey” nor “disobey” Himself. Nor does He need to command Himself to do anything, for as God, the perfect moral being, He always acts in a timely and perfectly righteous manner. Another unsolvable problem caused by the “incarnation” is that it destroys the plan that God established of a First Adam and a Last Adam. Romans 5:12–19 clearly defines a critical, logical parallel between Adam and Jesus Christ in the context of the redemption of mankind. A major consequence of the doctrine that God became man is that it destroys this key parallel, for Adam is hardly comparable to an eternally pre-existent being. Rather, he was a created being made in the image of the One who created him, God. Adam was not “fully man and fully God,” “100 percent man and 100 percent God,” “co-equal with God the Father,” or “of the same substance as the Father.” Adam was a created, empowered being who chose to disobey a direct command of God, with dire consequences to himself and all mankind as a result.
Jesus Christ was also a created being, made a man in the same way that Adam was originally made, that is, a masterpiece of God’s creation, given dominion over Paradise and every creature He had made. Jesus could have no intrinsic advantage over Adam, or his qualification as Redeemer would be legally nullified. He was the Last Adam, not the first God–man. The differences between Adam and Jesus were circumstantial, not essential: Adam started tall with no navel; Jesus started short with a navel. Adam was created fully formed and fully able to comprehend the voice of God. Jesus had to learn from his parents. Adam did not have to suffer the indignity of a humble birth and be considered illegitimate, the son of common folk. Adam had only to dress and keep the garden and care for his wife. He had to keep from eating the fruit, or die and bring death to all his descendants. Jesus had to drink the cup of suffering and die so he could be raised to conquer death and make it possible for others to eat of the “fruit” of eternal life.
In a head-to-“Head” comparison, Adam had every advantage, yet Jesus overcame where Adam fell. He chose to obey God’s will, which was that he present himself as a perfect sacrifice for sin. For the legal requirements of redemption to be satisfied, whatever Adam was, Jesus Christ had to be. Scripture declares very clearly that Jesus was a created human being like Adam was. In fact, they were both the result of God’s direct creative activity.
As we have stated, the whole Bible is simply the story of two Adams. Except for the initial genetic perfection that they shared in common, the contrast between them is stark. Here is perhaps another way to summarize Romans 5:12–21:

 Two Adams

• Two created beings
• Two Sons of God
• Two men
• Two gardens
• Two temptations
• Two choices
• Two attitudes
• Two decisions
• Two results
• Two races

 Other Problems with the Doctrine of the “Incarnation”

Aside from its mythological character, what are other problems with the idea of God becoming a man? First of all, it is illogical and self-contradictory when we are true to the accurate biblical usages of words. The Bible explicitly states that “God is not a man…,” (Num. 23:19), which defines two distinct categories, God and man. In terms of logic, it could be stated in this way: If God is not a man, then if someone is a “man,” he cannot be “God.”
God’s holiness precludes Him from becoming anything other than what He is. Rubenstein points out the illogic of the assertion that “God can do anything.”
Athanasius [a bishop of Alexandria who spearheaded what became the orthodox Trinitarian position] says that God can do anything He chooses to do, and that He chose to turn Himself into a man for the sake of our salvation. Jesus Christ is not one of God’s creatures, he insists, but God Himself, incarnated in human form. These sound like clear statements, but, actually, they are hopelessly confused.
Can God do anything He chooses to do? Of course—except those things that are inconsistent with being God. Can He choose to be evil or ignorant? Could He be the Devil—or nothing at all?
Perfection cannot be improved upon or changed. He is not a pantheistic “god” who dwells in everything. He is holy, meaning that He stands apart from and above His creation, yet is intimately involved with it. Therefore, God cannot alter His essential nature, which by definition is perfect, and perfection cannot be improved upon. But even if He could, in doing so He would, by definition, no longer be “God.”
If Jesus Christ is “God in human flesh,” there are other scriptural casualties. First, it renders the pathos of Gethsemane virtually meaningless, when Jesus prayed three times for this cup to be removed from me (Luke 22:42). If he is “of the same substance” as the Father, and an eternally integral part of a “Godhead,” then his will is of necessity the same as “God’s.” If he struggled only in his “human side,” as Trinitarians argue, while accepting the assignment in his “divine side,” we are certainly left unimpressed by the difficulty he faced, compared to the way we face temptation without the benefit of a “divine” side that is sure to dominate.
If it were “God’s” will that Jesus should die, and Jesus is “God” in human flesh, then it was clearly also his will to die. Why then did Jesus wrestle so intensely with the assignment to sacrifice himself, finally surrendering and saying “…nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done“? If this struggle were between his divine and human natures, then why invoke God his Father in prayer in what was really an internal, almost schizophrenic, struggle?³³
In our considered opinion, attempting to artificially exalt Christ via theological manipulation results in the complete negation of the heroic character of this free act of his will. Unless he was really a man, “…in all points tempted like as we are…” (Heb. 4:15 – KJV), with real freedom to turn his back on the assignment, the value of his act as a magnanimous sacrifice (an emptying of his own will and desire) is virtually eliminated. If he were God, he could hardly deny himself or disobey his own directive. Seeing Jesus as an empowered human being who had to obey God like we do is the proper context and backdrop for appreciating his heroism. Seeing him as essentially God, endowed with a divine perspective of human events, results in a view that he was only going through the prearranged motions. In that case, his heroic commitment and example collide with his supposed “deity” and sink into a gray and uninspiring sea of inevitability.
Along with the demise of Christ’s heroism is the destruction of the logic of Philippians 2:8–11, and a diminishing of his exaltation based upon the merits of his obedience. Scripture here reveals that God highly exalted Jesus Christ in response to his humbling himself to be obedient unto death, even a death as humiliating and painful as crucifixion. If Christ were “co-eternal” and “pre-existent ” with “God the Father,” and if he already occupied the highest position in glory before the “incarnation,” then what is the significance of this special exaltation relative to his obedience unto death? Was he not simply returning to his former elevated station, one that could hardly be denied him since he willingly gave it up with the understanding that he would be able to return to it? If we are truly concerned about giving Christ his proper due and honoring him appropriately, does it not make more sense to place his accomplishments in a theological framework in which his heroism is more apparent rather than less?³⁴ Consider the power of James Moffatt’s translation of Isaiah 9:6 in this regard:

Isaiah 9:6
For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; the royal dignity he wears, and this the title that he bears—”A wonder of a counselor, a divine hero, a father for all time, a peaceful prince!”

Yet another casualty of the “Incarnation” is the significance of his Lordship. Acts 2:36 says that God made Jesus of Nazareth “both Lord and Christ.” If Jesus Christ were already “God,” then one cannot comprehend the granting of the title “Lord” to him as anything particularly notable, because he already had every right to the title and had already been exercising it in the Old Testament. Again we find that man-made theological attempts to exalt Christ beyond what is specifically revealed in Scripture result in a radical demeaning of the value of his obedience and accomplishments on our behalf. Man, however sincerely, cannot add to Jesus’ greatness by making him something that Scripture does not. In fact, any attempt to do so significantly subtracts from the greatness of the biblical message. When we let the Word of God speak for itself and allow every piece of the puzzle to fit together without squeezing it to fit our own traditions or preconceived notions, both God and His Son are glorified, reason is satisfied and the Christian Church is blessed as it builds upon a sound cornerstone.

Death; Life; Resurrection & Rapture(our gathering together unto him).

The Dead Will Get Up at the Rapture or 
One of the Resurrections

When a person dies, he goes to Sheol (the grave; the state of death) and returns to dust. Therefore, the Bible rightly directs our attention to the Rapture or resurrection, which is when people will be raised to life.

Job 19:25–27 (ESV)
(25) For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth.
(26) And after my skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God,
(27) whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another. My heart faints within me!

Job was excited about seeing God when he was in his new body, which would happen at the resurrection. He never spoke of being with God when he died.

Ezekiel 37:12–14 (ESV)
(12) Therefore prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And I will bring you into the land of Israel.
(13) And you shall know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people.
(14) And I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it, declares the Lord.”

Speaking of those Old Testament Jews who believed, these verses are loaded with truth. Chief among that truth is that the people would know the Lord was God when He opened their graves and raised them up. If people’s “immortal souls” went to heaven when they died, that would be the time they knew the Lord was God, not much later when their bodies were raised.

Matthew 22:23–32 (ESV)
(23) The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question,
(24) saying, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up children for his brother.’
(25) Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother.
(26) So too the second and third, down to the seventh.
(27) After them all, the woman died.
(28) In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her.”
(29) But Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.
(30) For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
(31) And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God:
(32) ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”

This powerful section of Scripture is also recorded in Mark 12:18–27 and Luke 20:27–38. The Sadducees did not believe in any form of life after death. They rightly understood Jesus’ message that the dead would get up “in the resurrection” so they asked whose wife the woman would be at that time. If Jesus believed that after a person died his soul lived on, this was the perfect place to say that one’s soul or spirit did not marry in heaven. Instead, because he knew dead people are dead until the resurrection, he said “in the resurrection” people will not marry.

Luke 14:14 (ESV)
and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”

If people went right to heaven or “hell” when they died, they would be repaid for their actions immediately after death. We are repaid after we rise from the dead, which is what Jesus taught.

John 11:21-26 (ESV)
(21) Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.
(22) But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you.”
(23) Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
(24) Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.”
(25) Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
(26) and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”

Even if Martha believed her brother was alive in a good place but still wanted him to be with her, she would have said she wanted him back from heaven. Instead, she clearly indicated she believed her brother was dead and would only live again “in the resurrection.”
The Bible has many accounts of people being raised from the dead. At no time did Elisha, Jesus, Peter, or Paul pray to God before raising the person to see if they would be willing to leave heaven and return to this fallen world where they would only have to die again someday. Furthermore, if the people who had died were in heaven, it certainly seems that they would have had something to say about what heaven was like when they returned. Even if they promised God they would not talk about heaven, it seems that someone would have asked them about it.

John 14:3 (ESV)
And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also.

Jesus told his disciples they would be with him when he came again not when they died.

Acts 4:1 and 2 (ESV)
(1) And as they were speaking to the people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the Sadducees came upon them,
(2) greatly annoyed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead.

The Apostles were not teaching that people went to be with Jesus when they died. If they had been, that is what the religious leaders would have been upset about. Instead, the Apostles were teaching the resurrection from the dead. Other verses confirm that the Apostles taught the resurrection (Acts 17:18 and 32, 24:15).

1 Corinthians 15:42, 51b and 52 (ESV)
(42) So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable.
(51b) …We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
(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.

It is very important to note that every believer is “raised imperishable” at the same time: “the last trumpet.” We do not have an imperishable immortal soul that lives with Jesus after we die. We become “imperishable” only when we are raised from the dead.

1 Thessalonians 4:13–17 (ESV)
(13) But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.
(14) For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.
(15) For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.
(16) For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.
(17) Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

If Paul wanted Christians not to grieve and knew that when people died their soul or spirit went to be with God, he would have said so here in order to help comfort people. Instead, he tells us that all the dead in Christ will rise at the Rapture when the Lord comes and comforts us by letting us know that even when a person dies he will rise again.

Titus 2:13 (ESV)
waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,

Our hope is the coming of the Lord because that is when the dead are raised and can be with Jesus.

Revelation 20:4 and 5 (ESV)
(4) Then I saw…the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus…. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
(5) The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection.

These verses separate the people who come to life in the first resurrection from those who do not. The souls of the righteous, meaning righteous people, come to life after the Battle of Armageddon (Rev. 19:11–21) and reign with Christ.

Revelation 20:11–13 (ESV)
(11) Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. (12) And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done.
(13) And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades [the grave] gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done.

These verses depict the Resurrection of the Unjust (Acts 24:15 – ESV), also called the Resurrection of Judgment (John 5:29 – ESV), and the Judgment that follows immediately afterward. At this future time, all the unjust people will get up and be judged. The souls of the wicked are not judged and thrown into Gehenna when the person dies.

Acts 2:29–32 and 34 (ESV)
(29) “Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.
(30) Being therefore a prophet…
(31) he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption.
(32) This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
(34) For David did not ascend into the heavens…

If David was in heaven, Peter should have said so. Instead, Peter said just the opposite, that David “…did not ascend into the heavens….” His point was not that Jesus was in heaven with a body and David was in heaven without one. His point was that David was dead and Jesus was not.