True, all dead bodies go there.
And true, there are none of those activities for the dead body in the grave.
1. The Hebrew word is
sheol, and as we have already seen demonstrated (in Revelation) the bodily remains are claimed by all sorts of sources.
2. Contrary to your objection, Solomon is referring to the whole man (not mere bodily parts) as he refers to mental and spiritual aspects, including
knowledge and wisdom.
3. AMR stated that not all are claimed by
sheol but that some go immediately to heaven and others immediately to
sheol. That statement was not derived from scripture, but it is contradicted by scripture.
But, Solomon is speaking from the viewpoint of every man 'under the sun', that all is vanity/futility from that perspective.
"Under the sun" is used as a term of expansive inclusion, not of exclusion.
The Bible is a progressive revelation.
Ah, you mean that the Holy Spirit can either lie be be flat-out wrong? That's a common defense of false doctrine, that would take one passage out of context and then needs an excuse to deny the rest of scripture. However, Jesus said "the scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35) and we know that "all scripture" is given by inspiration of God.
2 Timothy 3:16 KJV
(16) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Every 'consciousness cessationist' that I've ever read or talked with goes immediately to Ecclesisastes as their final authority, are satisfied, and then... look no further.
If your loyalty lies with "conscious immortality" then It must
rankle that there are such plain scripture so easily found contradicting your chosen position. Of course someone would immediately go there. If someone were to say that God was not manifest in the flesh someone would also go straight to 1 Timothy 3:16, if someone were to say that Jesus was not born of a virgin then Matthew 1:23 becomes the first verse into play.
Then, they expect us 'mind/body dualists' to shut our mouths and also be satisfied with their 'annihilation/recreation' paradigm, when we've actually studied the rest of the Bible and have found that is teaches otherwise.
Pardon me, but I have difficulty believing that you have studied the rest of the bible and found that it teaches otherwise. Have you ever gone through the bible for the express purpose of noting when it speaks about death? Should you even bother, given that the typical defense is to declare the bulk majority of scripture as false or in error?
Genesis 3:3 KJV
(3) But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it,
lest ye die.
Genesis 3:19 KJV
(19)
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
Genesis 3:21 KJV
(21) Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
God introduces Adam and Eve to their choice in the garden: one choice leads to eternal life, the other to the knowledge of good and evil and ultimately death. From God's own word and by personal demonstration they can see what it means to die:
1) He plainly says that
they are dust,
2) It means that they shall return to the dust from whence they came
3) God slays animals for their skins and they now have a demonstration of death
I doubt you would even attempt to postulate that God did not understand the meaning of death, but there remains great difficulty if you were to say that God chose to deceive Adam and Eve about the results of one of those courses of action. God set before them two choices and explained the consequences. They know what life is because they are alive, and they know what death is from description and demonstration.
So where does this leave the doctrine of "incessant consciousness?" In Genesis it must decide that has been deceptive (and lied) and that the serpent spoke words reflective of the truth, for we do not truly die and we are not truly dust, and when we die we do not actually return to the dust, but "only our body goes to dust" and we "continue to live in a superior form." The doctrine that opposes God and sides with the serpent is Luciferian at its core and inception.
Ah, but perhaps Genesis is not inspired? Not of God? did God not understand what was going to happen (so it was not a lie) because no human had died yet? Because we have other prophets throughout the scripture that reaffirm that death is exactly what God said it was. You are no doubt familiar with these, as you have studied the whole scripture? How many times should the Bible have to repeat itself that it means what it said before you are willing to believe it? Once? Twice? What about five times? This is a foundational concept.