"But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." - 1 Cor 15:20-23 KJV
I propose we look at the KJV first to observe meaning and from there gauge it against the Greek as needed (and from the Greek resolve any disputes).
Each does not imply more than two.
If I say: "A prize goes to
each person in the
locked room" it might be referring to a room with only one person in it. Each just specifies that the statement applies to every
element individually within a
set. The statement will be true in every case where we examine the elements individually. The number of elements in a set does not need to be known in order to use "each"
"Each" is functionally different than "all" or "both", which is why legaleeze makes a point to be very specific about phrasings with "each".
If I say "A prize will be given to everyone that wins", it could be the case that this means that one prize is shared by one team (one prize for one set). That phrase can
also mean "each" but we eliminate this ambiguity by stating "A prize will be given to each person that wins" (one prize for every one element).
KJV doesn't use the word "each" but I contend that "every man in his own order" is an "each" statement.
But now Christ is risen [HAS BEEN RAISED - PERFECT indicative]
"Christ is risen" does not mean the same thing as "Christ has been raised". There are contextual differences.
"Christ is risen" is present tense indicated that "Christ has been risen" but also includes the meaning that the status is presently true. An example in modern English where this sense of grammar was used was the Atomic bomb and the speech "I am become death", which is to convey the context that the speaker not only "became death" in a passing instant but that it is a continual state of present being.
Here is a contrast to illustrate the difference:
It is necessarily the case that Lazarus has been raised. It is not necessarily the case that Lazarus is risen (as he could have died again and returned to a state of being dead / not raised).
This sense also applies to "and become the firstfruits" which follows from "Christ is". If you remove the section that mentions "risen", the phrase is
"Christ is become the firstfruits" which present tense and shares the same sense as "Christ is risen" as something that has happened and continues to be a present status.
We see this phrasing elsewhere in KJV.
"The Lord is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation: he is my God, and I will prepare him an habitation; my father's God, and I will exalt him." - Exodus 15:2 KJV
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. [SHALL BE-FUTURE TENSE-made alive]
The "shall be" applies to "all" as a
set and not "shall be" to each
element of that set. It is not necessarily the case that none of have been made alive in Christ, but it is necessarily the case that "the completed set is alive" becomes a true statement at some point in the future.
SEQUENCE WORD ONLY with no time element attached to it... used in v.24a "THEN [sequentially then] the end" [NOT "THEN [immediately] the end," as the "Amill-teachings" suggest of this verse 24a]);
"Then" denotes sequence in this case, yes. KJV has "afterward"
I agree that it is not necessarily the case that the result is immediate. We see an example of this in Mark:
"For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear." - Mark 4:28 KJV
The compelling context is that this is talking about the natural process that an ear of corn grows from the ground. It would be unusual to interpret this as an instantaneous process. The reason it would be unusual is because it is a reference to something that is known to naturally happen over the course of time as opposed to instantaneously. We can use this on other topics, but if we don't have a point of reference to determine what is "usual" or "unusual" it is more difficult to discern which interpretation has the better fit.
That said, I disagree with your statement that "then" could not mean "immediately after". It is not necessarily the case that it couldn't be immediately after. It is a possible context therefore your statement that it "couldn't be immediately after" is invalid. And because we lack a context regarding what would be considered "usual" in this case, it would be difficult to make a case one way or the other without first looking through scripture for a exegetic to work from.
The question of sequence comes up in a different popular conversation about the Genesis 1 account of creation. If days are figurative in the same sense that Adam would "die in that day" that he ate the fruit, we see sequences of creation that lack a context of whether they were instantaneous creations or creations using natural processes:
Instantaneous:
"When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, Shew a miracle for you: then thou shalt say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and cast it before Pharaoh, and it shall become a serpent." - Exodus 7:9 KJV
Using natural processes / not instantaneous:
"Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb?" - Job 31:15
Based on the precedence of both types it follows that unless we can rule out instantaneous or non-instantaneous from the "afterward" sequence in 1 Cor 15:23, we should evaluate both interpretations further.
in his own ORDER / RANK (meaning, there is an ORDER / RANK to it... not that there remains ONLY ONE at one singular point in time)[SHALL BE-FUTURE TENSE-made alive]
"
But every man [resurrection from the dead] in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." - 1 Cor 15:23 KJV
First Christ is resurrected, then those in Christ at His coming. We can look at this as "The
set is complete at His coming."
We can look at what exactly this set is. We can also look at what is meant by "at his coming". I contend that "the firstfruits" is just a title given to Christ here that shows that Christ is the firstfruits offering for the atonement of sins. Therefore "firstfruits" is not in reference to a group of people in this case, just Christ.
"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." - 1 John 4:2-3 KJV
"And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." - 1 John 5:20 KJV
In 1 John 4, we see this grammar sense again stating that "Jesus Christ
is come in the flesh" meaning he came in flesh and is still in that state (albeit in heaven). The KJV never states "second coming" as a phrase (it talks about the second coming in other ways) so some of these contexts need to be considered. It is therefore reasonable to consider the position that 1 Cor 15's "they that are Christ's at his coming" in the KJV might not be referencing the second coming. It might just be referring to those that become Christ's at some time after His crucifixion and resurrection. And from that interpretation, this 1 Cor 15:20-23 passage doesn't speak to the timing of the resurrection (aside from the fact that it is after Christ's), but there are others passages that do... including the verses later on in the same chapter.
"Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 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. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory." - 1 Cor 15:50-54 KJV
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." - John 6:40 KJV
