Thankyou. It is very encouraging to hear feedback like that, I greatly appreciate it.
The moment after I posted my above post I thought about the resurrection of the martyrs, which I had ignored in my brief post, which obviously splits things into multiple resurrections. But it still doesn't split it in the way you have proposed. The resurrections are:
1: Christ
2: Martyrs, to complete security from the second death ("This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power")
3: All mankind, to judgment. Those found in the Book to life (with the martyrs who are already there), those not found in the Book to the lake of fire - the second death.
However, you are proposing an additional resurrection of all, from the second death. That, I cannot see in scripture. Yes, I am aware of the passages about "every knee shall bow" etc, but these can be interpreted in several ways (including being entirely pre-second-death - bowing in surprise and even terror at the time of judgement but without changing the outcome of that judgement). So they are not evidence of a post-lake-of-fire resurrection. They can be read to be consistent with it, but are not in themselves evidence of it.
But I understand how you have got to this understanding. God is love, and this is an interpretation that appears to be consistent with his love nature. But that doesn't necessarily mean it is correct.
I agree with you regarding "their worm dieth not". I don't believe this particular phrase indicates eternal torment. I personally tend towards annihilationism, because if death and evil is to be abolished, how can evil people continue to exist in torment, a torment called "the second death"? That would mean that neither evil nor death had been abolished, as both continued to exist - and it is difficult to mentally reconcile with God's love. Like you, I don't think humans would last long in a lake of fire, it makes more sense as a fire of destruction. However, I am aware that various passages appear to contradict this in different ways (e.g. suggesting torment lasting for longer), so I'm not asserting it as fact, just saying that's the direction I tend towards in my thinking these days. I haven't got this all worked out.
But trimming it back to the basics, it just seems clearest to take the words "death" and "life" literally, not symbolic of something else. In other words, the wages of sin are truly "death", not eternal life in undesirable circumstances. And the gift of God that we seek is truly "eternal life", rather than eternal life being something we already have a guarantee of so do not need to be given, and we're just seeking better circumstances during that eternal life.
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 6:23
And I think that you have reached a similar view - but then you've added more complicating layers to it.
Your understanding appears to abolish eternal torment - but replace it with purgatory. The final destination of sinners becomes purgatory, a temporary torment, refining by fire until they too are resurrected again. That seems to me to be several layers of human reasoning formulating a hypothetical future that is palatable to the human mind, but is not directly from scripture. Just as the Catholic version of purgatory is not directly from scripture.
In your understanding, why should we follow Christ? What is the purpose of faith? Why should we reach the lost, if they will all be saved anyway? Is it so they avoid a temporary period of torment?
Personally, I think it's simpler to understand that we are to follow Christ to avoid "death", and to receive "eternal life".
Recall from an earlier post I made in this thread that the greek
aionion is transliterated as our english word
eonion. A transliteration is always closer in meaning than a translation because transliteration simply changes the letters of a word while retaining the meaning, wheras translation substitutes the (hopefully) closest possible word in the language being translated to.
In the case of
aionion, eonion and eternal mean two different things. Eonion is that which pertains to an eon, or the eons. An eon is a long but finite period of time, an age. Any time you see eternal in your NT you can substitute eonion and start making sense of things, or better yet pick a translation that already does it for you.
We live in "the current wicked eon". The millennium is the next eon. The new heavens and the new earth is the eon which follows the millennium. Eonion life is life in the next two eons. Eonion death or destruction is non-existance in one or both of the next two eons. I don't believe in any purgatory, death is always death.
Let's get to the real heart of this matter though.
Who is greater: Christ or Adam?
I think we can all agree that in Adam all (i.e. 100%) die. So, if in Christ, 50% are made alive, and 50% perish in whatever mode you have chosen, who is greater? Adam ate a piece of fruit, and his act is more effective in condemning the race than the Son of God giving up his life to reverse the condemnation.
What if 90% are made alive? Is Christ a successful savior? Considering that by some demographic estimates, Christianity pegs him as around a 5% successful savior, we might see that as "good enough" by human standards. Gosh darn it, Jesus tried, he really did. 90% is pretty good!
Let's look at this on a personal level.
What do you contribute to your resurrection? Does it
require faith to live again? Or does faith make you
aware of the already finished work?
If your 0.001% contribution of faith is what it takes to change your outcome from death to life, then in reality your 0.001% is greater than Christ’s 99.99% because without your 0.001%, Christ is not a successful savior.
You see, Christians don't have faith in Christ, they have faith in faith. They beleive their faith saves them, not Christ.
The real purpose of faith is that we take on Christ's faith.
Jesus had faith that his God and Father would raise him from the dead into life beyond the power of death. Jesus is the inaugurator and perfector of faith. Our faith is his faith.
You see, just like us, Jesus was born to die.
Jesus died for us, not instead of us, but
with us.
You will still die. If his death was a substitute for yours, then he failed.
But Jesus died alongside us, in fact literally alongside two sinners. One had faith, one did not. The one who had faith was saved
through that faith, even while he died. He had an assurance of things not seen. The other guy did not have an assurance of life. That doesn't mean he won't live again, just that he died ignorant of it. If you asked them both before their last breath if they were saved, one would say yes, and one would say no. And then they would both die. And yet Christ died for both of them.
With both of them.
3 days later Jesus opened his eyes to find himself no longer on a cross but laying down in a tomb. Can you imagine what he felt? His father had done it, he had brought him back to life.
At its simplest, our message to our fellow man is this:
"You are conciliated to God"
If they don't believe that message, it doesn't change the validity of that message. It is still true. Christ Jesus is a successful savior.
