The Rich Man and Lazarus
-the intermediate state-
 

PAUL'S DESIRE IN PHILIPPIANS 1:23

Philippians 1:23, we have dealt with in Things to Come, February 1900, Volume 6, page 87; The Church Epistles, pages 157-8; and in Figures of Speech, pages 206, 415-6. We have there shown that the desire of the Apostle was not �to depart� himself, by dying; but his desire was for the return of Christ; the verb rendered �depart� being used elsewhere in the New Testament only in Luke 12:36, where it is rendered �return�: �when he shall return from the wedding.� May we not fairly ask, �Why are we not to translate it in the same way in Philippians 1:23?�

The preposition ana, again, when compounded with the verb luo, to loosen, means to loosen back again to the place from whence the original departure was made, not to set out to a new place; hence, analuo means to loosen back again or to return, and it is so rendered in the only other place where it occurs in the New Testament, Luke 12:36: �when he shall return from the wedding.� It does not mean to depart, in the sense of setting off from the place where one is, but to return to the place that one has left. The verb does not occur in the Greek translation of the Canonical books of the Old Testament, but it does occur in the Apocryphal books, which though of no authority in the establishment of doctrine, are invaluable as to the use and meaning of words. In these books, this word always means to return, and is generally so translated.

But there is another fact with regard to Philippians 1:23. The English verb depart occurs 130 times in the New Testament; and is used as the rendering of 22 different Greek words. But this one verb (analuo) occurs only twice, and is rendered depart only once; the other occurrence being rendered return, and used by the Lord Himself of His own return from heaven.

We must also further note that it is not the simple infinitive of the verb to return. It is a combination of three words: the preposition (eis) unto, and the definite article (to) the, with the aorist infinitive (analusai) to return; so that the verb must be translated as a noun -- �having a strong desire unto the return�; i.e. of Christ, as in Luke 12:36.

The Apostle's argument is that for himself, it would be better to die than to live. It would be a "gain", for it would release him from his bonds, and his imprisonment, and from all his trials. For them, it would be better that he should live on in the flesh. But the return of Christ would be better than either, both for them and for him.

The translation of the verse in light of this figure and the context compels us to observe the parenthesis (verse 23) by with the continuation of one subject is suspended by the insertion of another subject. The interruption occurs at the word "labour", and the resumption of it takes place after the word "better". Thus; "what is the fruit of my labour (yet...better) but to remain in the flesh," etc..The translation of the whole passage will therefore stand as follows:

But if live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour {yet, what I shall choose I wot not, for I am being pressed out of these two [i.e. living or dying (vs. 20, 21), by a third thing (v. 23), viz.], having a strong desire unto the return (i.e. of Christ), and to be with Christ, which is a far, far better thing�}, but to remain in the flesh is more needful for you (i.e., better than dying; but not better than Christ's return").

It is for the traditionalists to show how they deal with these facts. It is not sufficient to say they do not believe in this our understanding of these passages: they must show how they dispose of our evidence, and must produce their own support of their own conclusions.

Here we have four passages which seem to be opposed to those we have quoted from the Old Testament. Both cannot be true. We must either explain away the Old Testament passages, or we must see whether these four passages admit of other renderings, which remove their apparent opposition. We have suggested these other renderings, based on ample evidence; which, not only deprive them of such opposition, but show that their teaching is in exact accordance with those other passages.


The Rich Man and Lazarus>           <Absent from the Body - 1 Cor. 5:6.8