it is certain that Paul could have entertained no doubt concerning his

standing in grace and his acceptance in the Beloved, his hope like an anchor

was sure, and if he used words that express contingency and uncertainty, then

it is morally certain that he was not speaking of the hope of the believer.

In verse 14, he reveals that his uncertainty was related to a `prize', and

this attitude of mind he had already exhibited in relation to the same theme

in 1 Corinthians 9:24 to 10:13.  The `resurrection', therefore, that was the

object of the apostle's desires here in Philippians 3:11, for which he

suffered and was willing to endure, must

be something equivalent to `the first resurrection' of Revelation 20:4 -6, or

the `better resurrection' of Hebrews 11:35.  The words `first' and `better'

stand visible for all to read in the passages cited, but neither the A.V. nor

the R.V. use any such qualifying prefix in Philippians 3:11.  The A.V. reads:

`If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead'.

The R.V. reads:

`If by any means I may attain unto the resurrection from the dead',

but that is all the difference that there is between the two versions.  The

reader will by this time be desirous of consulting the original, and to this

we accordingly turn.  The Received Text reads ten exanastasin ton nekron `the

out -resurrection of or from the dead', the Critical Texts read ten

exanastasin ten ek nekron `the out -resurrection, that which is out from dead

ones'.  In order to appreciate the intention of the apostle here, it will be

necessary to review the teaching of the New Testament  on this great question

of resurrection.  Two sects divided the religious beliefs of Israel into

conflicting camps, the Sadducees and the Pharisees.  Of the Sadducees it is

written that they say `there is no resurrection' (Matt. 22:23).  When the

Saviour challenged the faith of Martha concerning the resurrection of her

brother Lazarus, she replied in the language of the common creed of the day,

`I know that he shall rise again ... at the last day' (John 11:24).  The

simplest statement concerning the resurrection is that given by the apostle

before Felix and the Sanhedrin, a belief which Israel and the believer could

share `and have hope towards God which they themselves also allow, that there

shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust' (Acts

24:15).  Here in the words anastasin nekron we have the most elementary form

in which the resurrection of the dead can be expressed, a form used by the

Pharisees, and by Paul, by the sister of Lazarus and by the common people,

for the Apocrypha, written long before Christ, contains the words anastasin

eis zoen `a resurrection unto life'.

It is, therefore, somewhat disconcerting to read in Mark 9:10 of the

disciples that they questioned one with another, `what the rising from the

dead should mean?' Are we to understand that the very disciples who had been

selected to witness the Transfiguration on the mountain, were not so mature

in their faith as an unconverted Pharisee? Did Martha outstrip the apostles

in this article of faith?  Once again, therefore, we must turn to the actual

words as recorded in the original before attempting a conclusion.  The words

that troubled the disciples were those used by the Lord when He said, `till

the Son of Man were risen from the dead', ek nekron anaste, `risen Out From

dead ones'.  It is the presence of this word ek that caused the questioning.

It was something additional to the common creed.  It was this resurrection ek

nekron that declared Christ to be the Son of God with power (Rom. 1:4).  The

first to rise out from the dead was Christ, as Paul testifies in Acts 26:23 :