Soul Sleeping? What does scripture say happens to us when we die.

Look, I have never claimed to not be influenced by other teachings. I have just said I don't discard them simply because of their source. Yes, I have read most of what Armstrong wrote and agree with a lot and disagree with as about as much. The same goes for the SDA and the COG 7th-Day. I mainly fellowship with the last group mentioned.

Some hard held things I strongly fight over I feel directly taught by the HS. In my bio, I emphasized how the HS dealt with me on self defense. I doubt anyone will get anywhere arguing with me on that because of how strongly the HS presented it. Other things are not so strongly held.

The bottom line for me is I don't want to believe my errors plus someone else's errors just because I blindly followed them. It is time to inspect our traditional teachings and come to a God ordered truth. I take a hard stand on the Reformers because I see all the errors they bought into. Just look at the naming of their churches, and the veneration of certain saints. That rubs so wrong with everything I read in the Bible. If you don't see it, I feel for you. View attachment 213001

You don't even know what you are talking about. Reformed people DON'T venerate saints. If you can find anything in the Westminster Confession or the London Baptist Confession teaching veneration of saints, you show me the reference to it. Those confessions are the core confessions of most Reformed churches.

I have never heard a Reformed person indicate that there is a separate category of believers called "saints". All real believers are saints.

LOL

You must have Reformed people confused with Roman Catholics or something.

I find it hard to believe that someone who claims to be a knowledgeable Christian can accuse Reformed people of venerating saints. In fact, they were likely the ones who broke away from it.

Do yourself a favor and read some church history. You're not going to learn accurate history about the Reformation or Reformed theology from Internet sources.

I would also seriously advise you to reject Armstrong's teaching that you will become God at the resurrection. This is a blasphemous, Satanic lie. There are two reasons that I don't believe Armstrongites are Christian. One involves their teaching that they will become God, and all the distortions that involves. the other is their teaching that they are the true church.

COG7 actually withdrew Armstrong's ministerial credentials. He was too crazy even for them. I understand that they reject the Trinity. Apparently his British Israelism and insistence that believers need to keep annual festivals is why he was thrown out..mostly due to the contention part.

Thanks for admitting that you have studied other people, and derived some of your views from them. I don't think there's hardly anyone who doesn't consider others in the formation of their biblical positions. Young guys will deny it in self righteous vanity, though.

Soul do not go to sleep six feet under the soil. So that is simply another absurd doctrine based up misinterpreting the Bible.

What is soul sleep?
by Matt Slick
Soul sleep is the teaching that when a person dies that his soul "sleeps" until the time of the future resurrection. In this condition, the person is not aware or conscious. The Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh-day Adventists hold to this doctrine as do most conditionalists (those who say that the wicked are judged and don't exist anymore). But the Jehovah's Witnesses teach annihilation. This means that after death a person ceases to exist. At the future resurrection, they maintain that the soul is made again. Basically, it is a re-creation of the individual. The Seventh-day Adventists teach at the soul is simply inert and resides in the memory of God.

The primary verses used to support soul sleep are found in Ecclesiastes:

• Eccl. 9:5, For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything, nor have they any longer a reward, for their memory is forgotten."
• Eccl. 12:7, "then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it."

Ecclesiastes must be understood in the context of its own commentary, which says at the opening of the book, "The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. 2 “Vanity of vanities,” says the Preacher, “Vanity of vanities! All is vanity.” 3 What advantage does man have in all his work which he does under the sun?" (Eccl. 1:1-3). The writer is telling us how things are from the human perspective, from "under the sun." He is not telling us doctrinal statements about whether or not the soul continues after death. Besides, it's a mistake to use the Old Testament to interpret the New Testament. It is the New Testament that sheds light on the Old Testament.
In the New Testament we see Paul say in 2 Cor. 5:8, "we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord." Paul is clearly telling us that when he dies, he will go and be with the Lord. Furthermore, at the Transfiguration of Jesus (Matt. 17:1-8) we see Moses and Elijah who were alive. There was no soul sleep with them.
Luke 23:42–43 is the account of where Jesus was being crucified. Jesus speaks to the criminal on his right and says "Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." Jesus was saying that he and the criminal would be together in paradise. Some Respond to this and say that Jesus was emphasizing that he was speaking right then and there, "today." But, that position can only be held by those who presuppose a form of soul sleep. Of course, it was obvious that Jesus was speaking to him. But Jesus is saying to the criminal that he will be with Jesus in paradise today.
In addition when we look at the account of The Rich Man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31, we clearly see Jesus using the imagery of consciousness after death. If soul sleep is true, what was Jesus doing relating the account of two individuals who were both conscious after their death?
In Revelation 6:10 we see the account of people being conscious after death and asking God, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” This is before the resurrection. Here gain we have another account of consciousness after physical death.
Therefore, the doctrine of soul sleep is incorrect. The soul continues on after death in a conscious state. The wicked face the judgment of God, and the Christians will dwell in His presence.

By the way, making claims regarding the number of years someone has researched something, and their alleged independent verification, means nothing to me.

I've been a Christian for 35 years. I believed wrong teachings on this topic for the vast majority of those years. I am humble enough to acknowledge that.

Man, in his pridefulness and vanity, tends to think that he is the independent, impartial arbiter of truth. Once he has made his decision on some point of doctrine, he tends to hold onto that, and refuses to accept that he may be wrong.

This is because men are prideful. And, this doesn't seem to be limited to age. Younger men are very prideful, and so are older men.

I hope that God is able to correct my bad doctrine throughout all my life, and I am not blind to the fact that I could be wrong on some aspects.

And, this particular topic is one where I was wrong for many years.

But, telling me how many years you studied something isn't helpful. It is a claim to expert opinion that I do not acknowledge. I held the "soul sleep" view for 2/3 of my Christian life...I no longer hold it.

By denying it, I prove that I am able do divest myself of false beliefs despite the number of years I held the belief.

It is always fashionable in some circles to claim that you are the impartial arbiter of truth. Cult leaders make a habit of doing this. I actually consider church history in regards to a particular doctrine, and am hesitant to claim that I am in a position to pridefully correct church history.

This is not to say that church history is always correct, because I don't believe that. For instance, Roman Catholicism was wrong on justification by faith alone. However, I would always factor in my pridefulness before I challenged a doctrine that is well-established like the conscious disembodied state between death and the resurrection.

By the way, making claims regarding the number of years someone has researched something, and their alleged independent verification, means nothing to me.
LOL I was not trying to impress. I was stating a fact, but Good that makes us even. I think your claims are corrupted with false biblical interpretations. To bad though, you were once correct but have been draged into denying the reality of scripture. Please don't get me wrong because I am willing to change my doctrinal beliefs but you would need to prove that all of the research I have done on all of the scriptures I have quoted to prove the doctrinal belief of soul sleep as being biblically sound, as being wrong or come up with one single scripture that contradicts and proves me wrong. So far every one who has argued against soul sleep including you have failed to do so.
Eccl. 12:7, "then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it." I do not use this scripture to support soul sleep and most people misinterpret this verse completely. The word "Spirit" in this verse in the Hebrew means breath and has nothing to do with the soul. When we are born God breaths the spirit of the breath of life into our lungs and we take in our first breath of life. When we die the very last thing we do physically is to breath out our very last breath and that is when the spirit of the breath of life goes back to God where it came from.
Come up with a scripture and I will dissect it and we will see. Even in this post you have failed to quote a scripture that proves soul sleep is a false or correct doctrine.
I don't use the other verse you quoted from Ecc. either to prove soul sleep.

I just look at all the church names and that looks like veneration to me. And I'll have you to know I have read all of the "Confessions" and still see the Roman Catholic influence therein. I participate on another forum that is all Reformed and I know somewhat about it.

Soul do not go to sleep six feet under the soil. So that is simply another absurd doctrine based up misinterpreting the Bible.

You are correct. I never once said that the body goes to sleep six feet under the soil. I have always maintained and preached that the Soul is what goes to sleep and the soul doesn't go to sleep while still in the grave. The souls of the righteous under the shed blood of Christ go to the Bosom of Abraham and the wicked always go to a place of torment but the body stays in the grave and rots. Both places are located in Hades. One is called Gehenna and the other is called the Bosom of Abraham. The soul is not ever six feet the soil. Only the body is six feet under the soil. The soul always goes to Hades which is a combo of Geheena and the Bosom of Abraham. Scripture never tells us how deep the Bosom of Abraham is except that it is in the lower parts of the earth.

Eph 4:9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended FIRST into the lower PARTS OF THE EARTH?
So do you know how far under ground the Lower parts of the earth are??? OR are you calling Paul a liar or misguided when he stated that Christ first descended into the lower parts of the earth and BEFORE CHRIST ASCENDED???
Are you calling the Word of God a liar when it tells us that there is such a realm as a place of torment where the rich man was suffering horrible torment???
Are calling Christ a liar when He told us that Lazarus was in the Bosom of Abraham????
If Lazarus was in the Bosom of Abraham and the rich man was in a place of torment, what was in their graves six feet under???

1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
1Pe 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; This verse is telling us the BY THE QUICKENED SPIRIT Christ was able to go and preach to the spirits in prison. Which tells us that it wasn't His body that first descended it was His spirit!!!
His body was still in the tomb they put it in after He died.
Do you know anything about the "SPIRITS IN PRISON??? Do you know where the prison is located??? Is it six feet under or someplace else???

Maybe you should spend a little time researching the word Hell. You will find that the word Hell is actually translated from the Greek words Hades and Gehenna and the Prison is located is another realm in the lower parts of the earth called Tartarus. All 3 word sof which King James changed to the word HEll. But a little research would reveal the true meanins of each word translated to the word Hell.

Your prior research means nothing to me. My guess is you started with studying teachings from either the Seventh Day Adventists or Armstrongites. It would be interesting to know where you got your ideas from.

Ecclesiastes is that the Preacher, who is probably Solomon, is talking about life from a carnal perspective, without the eternal perspective. Using proof-texting from this book to prove your theories is not wise.

Regarding the Hebrew word for spirit (Ruach), you know, you really have to be shallow to claim that your exegesis is correct in this regard. For instance, the Holy Spirit is called Ruach Ha'Kodesh. Ruach CAN indicate breath or wind, but no one would claim that the Holy Spirit is merely God's breath. Even the Seventh Day Adventists don't believe that.

So, to claim there is no spirit related to man's nature which goes back to God is incorrect. Additionally, Ecclesiastes 3:21 indicates that there is a qualitative difference between man and beast, in that the spirit of a man goes upward, whereas the spirit of an animal does not. The Preacher is still not clear in his theology, as he is viewing things from an earthly perspective, but there is a hint of this.

And, Jesus himself gave his spirit to God at the moment of his death. Did he just give up his breath?

Anyways, claiming that man has no spirit is a pretty shallow claim, if you are basing it on the underlying Hebrew or Greek words, because the same exact words are used in regards to the Holy Spirit, and you would not claim that the Holy Spirit is just God's breath. In fact, if you claim God needs oxygen, which he must expire, that's even more shallow. It's reducing God to the human processes of respiration, as if he needs to breathe.

But, this is exactly what conditional moralists try to palm off as meaningful arguments.

And, to answer your claim about me having "the Truth" and going back into error...no, the reality is that Armstrongism and similar theologies such as the Seventh Day Adventists are not "the Truth" like they claim. They are individuals who think they stumbled onto the scene in the 1830's, and are a restoration of the true faith, which has not been taught since the Apostolic era. Somehow, they think that they are in a position to correct the rest of Christianity, who they feel has absorbed pagan philosophies and false teachings.
Never mind that their doctrine came from individuals who initially denied the fully deity of Christ and their prophetess was probably brain damaged due to a childhood incident where she was struck in the head with a rock. Armstrongism actually derived much of their doctrine from them. Their claim that they have "the Truth" is a false claim.

And, having been a part of a cult, I can tell anyone reading this that groups such as them claim to have "the Truth" and believe that outsiders do not. Adventists may acknowledge that others can be Christians but they believe they are the true faith and the true Church. Armstrongites are much worse.

By the way, my guess is that virtually no people who hold the "soul sleep" doctrine have a good understanding of Greek or Hebrew. They on't realize the implications of their claims. I know that the Armstrongite cult I belonged to....very few if any Greek scholars.

This is besides the fact that words have a domain of possible meanings. Just because "ruach" CAN mean breath or wind doesn't mean that it ALWAYS means this. This seems to be the claim that is being made by some mortalists because of their shallow understanding.

Spirit is invisible, like the wind, yet still powerful, and that is why ruach or pneuma is used to describe spirit. Like I have said, it is used in regards to the Holy Spirit, and no one with sound theology would describe Him as simply "wind" or "breath".

Holy Spirit (Hebrew) - Ruach Ha'Kodesh
Holy Spirit (Greek) - Hagio Pneuma

Kodesh and Hagio both mean "Holy". Ruach and Pneuma mean "breath", "wind", "spirit"
Ha' is simply an article distinguishig it as "the".

By the way, I have been fooled by shallow arguments like this in the past from supposedly credible sources of information. People who believe these sorts of arguments really need to do deeper research, and not simply read cultic literature. I would be willing to bet money this guy studied materials from SDAs or Armstrongites on this topic. In the case of Armstrong, I know for sure that his understanding on issues like this was full of error and propagandistic. His real intent was to discredit Christianity, and exalt his own religion.

Did I post the first line? I don't remember it.

Anyways, I realize this part is a view that some Christians hold. I don't agree with them about this dual compartment of Hades, but I can see where they derive their view of it.



To start with, I don't hold your view on this verse:

Ephesians 4:9-10 9 (In saying, “He ascended,” what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? 10 He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)
(ESV Strong's)

My position is that Jesus descended, in the sense of the Incarnation. It is not talking about a descent into Hades, but is talking about the Incarnation, where he "descended" to dwell with mankind as a human being and to atone for their sins. He then ascended, following the resurrection, to the throne of God.

And, please don't use rhetoric such as claiming that I am calling Jesus a liar. Obviously since I'm appealing to Scripture, I believe in sola Scriptura.

Regarding Lazarus and the Rich Man, the abode of Lazarus is viewed as being separated from the abode of the rich man by an impenetrable barrier. I believe that the spirit of the wicked is being held in conscious torment in some location called Hades, and Lazarus is in the presence of Christ in heaven. There's nothing in conflict with this view in the parable. There is an insurmountable barrier between them, and the wicked cannot affect those in heaven, in the presence of God.

You may ask me, what about this verse:

John 3:13 13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.
(ESV Strong's)

My position would be that "ascension" relates to being in a resurrection body, fully vindicated by God, as Christ was. The dead, who are in the presence of God now, are not fully complete yet. They are still lacking their resurrection body, to be given to them when they return with Jesus.



1 Peter 3:18-20 8 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, 19 in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, 20 because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
(ESV Strong's)

My position on these verses is that Noah preached to the individuals at Noah's time in the spirit of Christ, so in essence Christ preached to them and warned them of the disaster to come if they did not repent.

Here are some notes on this from a study Bible that I respect:

1 Peter 3:19 3:19–20a These difficult verses have been understood in three very different ways. Traditionally they have been used to support the idea that Jesus descended into hell on the Saturday between his crucifixion and resurrection—when his body was dead but his spirit remained alive (v. 18). At that time he preached either to the souls of people who were disobedient in the days of Noah or to fallen angels who had incited humans to such evil that God sent the flood at the time of Noah to destroy it (Gen 6:1–7). A second view is that the preincarnate Christ preached through Noah to the wicked generation destroyed by the flood. A third view is that Christ’s resurrection and ascension were the proclamation of victory over the most extreme powers of evil the earth has ever known, which these “imprisoned spirits” represent. With Jesus’ victory over death, their condemnation was sealed.
(NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible)



I doubt that King James changed the wording.

Hell can be translated three different ways in the Greek:

1. Hades - the grave, or the abode of the dead. It is comparable to Sheol in the Hebrew - a shadowy underworld
2. Gehenna - a place of fiery destruction, associate with the Valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, where trash was burned
3. Tartarus - the place where the evil angels were imprisoned.

The only time Tartarus is used, it is discussing the abode of evil angels.

Hades is used to refer to the place where the rich man was at, but it is used in reference to the grave in general.

In other words, while I see that Hades can be used in regards to the place the rich man was at, in terms of conscious existence, I don't see this idea that the righteous dead are in Hades in a conscious existence. Instead, they are in Paradise with Jesus, which is where the thief on the Cross went.

And, I believe that Hades can simply apply to the place where the body goes after death, which is in the ground or grave.

So, I am familiar with the underlying Greek words. I think the biggest disagreement we would have relates 1) to the state of the person who died in Christ, which I believe is a conscious existence in the presence of Christ in heaven and 2) the fact that Hades can refer simply to the body being in the ground. I agree the word can be used to describe the place where the Rich Man went, in terms of a place of fiery punishment preceding the Lake of Fire, but I believe you are limiting its' usage in a manner that is not reflective of Scripture.

I also acknowledge that your view has been taught in the past, concerning the twin compartments of Hades. I don't know too many people who claim the righteous dead are sleeping in Abraham's bosom, though. Do you think the rich man saw Lazarus asleep in Abraham's bosom? In other words, was Lazarus requesting that God wake him up from his nap to send him to his brothers?

Sorry but I have never set foot in a Seventh Day Adventist church. They did come knocking on my door once and when I finally got exasperated with them because they wouldn't take a hint I asked them if I gave them a quarter would they leave and they said yes. So I gave them a quarter and they left and I don't know who or what the Armstrongites are.
I use the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, The Thayer's Greek -English Lexicon, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. So I don't need to know one single thing about the Greek or Hebrew languages because the Strong's gives me a shallow interpretation of a word and the number I need to look up a word in the Thayer's and the BDB Lexicons and both the Thayer's and the BDB are the result of many scholars of the Greek and the Hebrew languages and Bible scholars. So the research has been done for me by lots reputable and educated people. Everything you wrote in this post is everything the three study tools I use tell me both with the Hebrew and Greek spelling and the English interpretations. I could take the time as you have done to spell out each word in the Greek and Hebrew but to most folks the spelling is useless.
The word in "Spirit" in Eccl. 12:7 is spelled "ruah" and does mean wind and Breath according to the Strong's which tells me all I need to know about that word "Spirit" in that verse without spending one single hour in a class to learn about that Hebrew language. The many authors of the study tools have all done the research and work for me.
So in spite of my challenge for you to come up with one single scripture that I can dissect to see what each word means in that verse you have once again failed to come up with a verse to prove soul sleep is a false doctrine and so has everyone else on this thread.
There have been a lot of verses quoted on this thread to prove that soul sleep is not biblical but after being dissected my belief that soul sleep is a correct conclusion to the many researched verses that talk about the dead as being in a state sleep, my stand is re-enforced. All I have gotten on this thread are opinions either from the folks quoting the verses or quoted from someone else's opinion. Which is why I never depend on any kind of commentary because it is nothing more then someone else's opinion. I also understand that one word can have more then one meaning or application which why I depend on the study tools I use to properly show me what the application is in a particular verse.

Soul-sleep is just another of the myriads of false teachings that have crept into the church by false teachers and those who carry those teachings forward. We are told in scripture that this would happen and it has and continues.

Sorry but in my opinion you are very much misguided.
In other words, was Lazarus requesting that God wake him up from his nap to send him to his brothers?
WOW ! Lazarus didn't make any request through out the whole parable. The rich man did who was definitely not asleep and suffering great torment. It is the soul that is tormented not the body. If Christ is our example then the soul looks like and feels like the body but is a glorified body just as scripture says. The rich mans could feel all of the pain as if it were his fleshly body but it was his souls. BUT the flesh stays in the grave and rots.

Sorry but in my opinion you are very much misguided.
In other words, was Lazarus requesting that God wake him up from his nap to send him to his brothers?
WOW ! Lazarus didn't make any request through out the whole parable. The rich man did who was definitely not asleep and suffering great torment. It is the soul that is tormented not the body. If Christ is our example then the soul looks like and feels like the body but is a glorified body just as scripture says. The rich mans could feel all of the pain as if it were his fleshly body but it was his souls. BUT the flesh stays in the grave and rots.

Jesus' Resurrection was physical
by Matt Slick

If Jesus' body had not risen, then He would not have feet and hands with the same holes of the nails of the crucifixion. Consider the following verses as further proof that His very body was raised:

• "When therefore it was evening, on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you." 20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced when they saw the Lord." (John 20:19-20).
• "And He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (Luke 24:38-39).

It is obvious that Jesus was raised in the same body in which He died--with the same holes in His hands and feet. We see that Jesus proclaimed He had flesh and bones. Does a "spirit body" consist of flesh and bones? Not at all.

1 Thessalonians 4:
[13] But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep...[14]...them...which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him...[18]...comfort one another with these words.

1. Paul never makes a distinction here regarding soul or body.

2. I would bet most professing believers do not comfort one another with these words without adding to them.

3. If believers upon death go immediately to be with the Lord Paul sure missed the perfect opportunity to teach how that happens in this portion of scripture where he plainly stated USE THESE WORDS.

Tabitha (a disciple) was brought back to life by Peter (Acts 9:40). I can’t fathom a situation where a believer has died, gone to heaven, experienced all the riches and joy of being in the presence of the Lord, only to be brought back to this present evil world (Galatians 1:4).

One need not join a cult to get this teaching. The Bible itself implies this.

OK..I obviously made a mistake..I was asking, did the rich man request that God wake Lazarus up from his sleep to send him to the rich man's brothers? I simply confused the two in my composition.

If I'm not mistaken you believe the righteous are asleep in Hades, as you conceive it, so Lazarus would be asleep in this scenario.

And, you are betraying a big issue here. You apparently don't believe that Jesus had a resurrection body. It sounds like you believe he was only a spirit after the resurrection, and this would be a false view that denies the bodily resurrection. It would be the "spirit resurrection" view of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Christians believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. In fact, to claim that Jesus didn't resurrect bodily is a false teaching involving a core Christian belief.

When Jesus was resurrected, his body was resurrected. It was no longer in the tomb. The body was then glorified, or changed in composition to reflect spiritual characteristics. It was still a material body, but it was changed in terms of its characteristics. It is no longer perishable, but is imperishable. It is no longer in disgrace, but it is in glory. It is not a "spirit body" but is glorified.

See, the reality here is you don't even believe basic Christian teaching. Basic Christian teaching is that Jesus was bodily resurrected, and this body was changed or glorified. It was still a material body, but it had different characteristics that are fit to inhabit the New Heavens and New Earth.

The fact that his body was no longer there is proof that the resurrection is bodily and not a spirit resurrection. Both Lazarus and the rich man had a body somewhere, so they are in a different situation than Jesus. Jesus' body was not in the tomb.

Regarding the composition of the rich man's body, I don't know about that. But, I know believers will have a glorified material body which they receive at the resurrection. At this point, they are a disembodied spirit in the presence of Christ.

And my position on this is basic Crhistianity. In fact, the bodily resurrection is a core Christian teaching.

When Jesus was resurrected, his body was resurrected. It was no longer in the tomb. The body was then glorified, or changed in composition to reflect spiritual characteristics. It was still a material body, but it was changed in terms of its characteristics. It is no longer perishable, but is imperishable. It is no longer in disgrace, but it is in glory. It is not a "spirit body" but is glorified.
Ok now we are coming to at least some kind of understanding. I agree.
See, the reality here is you don't even believe basic Christian teaching. Basic Christian teaching is that Jesus was bodily resurrected, and this body was changed or glorified. It was still a material body, but it had different characteristics that are fit to inhabit the New Heavens and New Earth.
No you are misunderstanding me. Just because I believe in soul sleep doesn't mean I don't believe in a material glorified body.
I do believe that it is the soul of the rich man and Lazarus that are in Hades. I never said that Lazarus wouldn't have a glorified body when they were raised from the grave. That would be contrary to scripture.
If I'm not mistaken you believe the righteous are asleep in Hades, as you conceive it, so Lazarus would be asleep in this scenario.
Yes that is exactly what I believe. Lazarus never says a single word through out the whole exchange between the rich man and Lazarus that the Lazarus in the parable and the Lazarus the Christ raised from the grave are one and the same Lazarus.
The fact that his body was no longer there is proof that the resurrection is bodily and not a spirit resurrection. Both Lazarus and the rich man had a body somewhere, so they are in a different situation than Jesus. Jesus' body was not in the tomb.
I agree. The body of Lazarus and the rich man were still in a tombs that were placed in after death. Rotting.

Regarding the death of the righteous, sleep always refers to the body and not the spirit