The Berean Expositor
Volume 21 - Page 136 of 202
Index | Zoom
was now due, would make a bond between these two epistles which no objection or
argument could shake, these words being found in no epistles other than these two.
One pair we have omitted because they constitute the case in point:--
"The out-resurrection, that which is out from among the dead" (Phil. 3: 11).
"Saying that the resurrection is past already" (II Tim. 2: 18).
It was objected by one friend that, had the apostle intended a reference to Phil. 3: 11,
he would have said, " `the out-resurrection' is past already". We have already learned
that the resurrection of Christ Himself was an "out-resurrection" (Acts 26: 23), yet in
Phil. 3: 10 Paul does not feel under any necessity to say, "That I may know Him, and
the power of His out-resurrection", the simple, covering, term being quite sufficient, and
the same is true of the reference in II Tim. 2: 18.
Let us ask ourselves just what resurrection could have been taught by these false
teachers as having taken place already. Observe, they did not deny the resurrection, but
asserted that it had taken place already.  They could not have meant the personal
resurrection of the Lord, for it is most surely the foundation of our faith that His
resurrection is past already, blessed be God!  They must then have referred to the
resurrection of His people. But who? It might have been said that the resurrection of
those who had died had passed already, but how would that have ate as a gangrene, or
have overthrow the faith of some? There appears to be but one solution.
Hymenaeus and Philetus taught that because the Lord Jesus rose, and His people are
said to have been "raised with" Him (although, as we have shown, the epistles never use
anistemi, but always egeiro, when teaching this blessed fact), therefore resurrection is a
thing of the past with us; that at death we go immediately to glory, by reason of the fact
that we are already raised together with Him.
When one reads an article in which it is stated that the resurrection of I Cor. 15:, or
I Thess 4:, is, of course, not past but future, and this fact is contrasted with the
"out-resurrection" and the believer's intimate association with the resurrection of the
Lord; and when many have openly and plainly asserted that such is what they believe the
"out-resurrection" and being raised together with Christ mean, surely it is not only
kindly, but imperative, that Paul's warning should be sounded. Virtually such teaching is
saying that the resurrection is past already, and, seeing that it is in exact correspondence
with the "out-resurrection" teaching of Philippians, there is no room for doubt but that
this new error that is spoiling some of Christ's members, is as old as the times of Paul
himself. We omit names, and only those who have imbibed the doctrine we seek to
expose will know to whom reference is made. We are not attacking any child of God, but
we are seeking to defend the faith and protect those who have not sufficient means to test
the accuracy of many assertions put forward as being the teaching of the original.
We  believe, as our articles on The Hope and the Prize  show,  that  this
"out-resurrection" is a most sacred and unique thing. We have left the question as to
whether it is entered separately, one at a time,  collectively, some time before the