We can now return to Philippians 1:21 and in the light of Paul's own experience, we can read with understanding

his words `to die is gain'. Paul himself has told us in that parallel epistle, Hebrews, of others who deny themselves

of immediate blessing because they had something `better' in view. Abraham was willing to be a tent-dweller in the

land of promise - because he had the heavenly Jerusalem in view; `these all died in faith not having received the

promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they

were strangers, and pilgrims on the earth' (Heb. 11:13). `Others were tortured not accepting deliverance, that they

might obtain a better resurrection' (Heb. 11:35).

Paul also `counted all things but loss' and preferred to count as his `gain' the converts gathered to the name of

Christ that would indeed be `his crown of rejoicing' in that day. As Mrs. Cousins puts it in her poem on the life and

death of Rutherford :

`If but one soul from Anworth

Shall meet me on that strand,

My heaven will be two heavens

In Emmanuel's Land'.

It has been the blessed lot of those who serve with The Berean Expositor to receive little recognition for their

services in this life but what reward can be compared with that which awaits them in that day when the Lord makes

up His jewels, what crown so precious as that composed of fellow believers who have been brought into the light of

grace? Philippians is practical. Philippians is addressed to `servants' and it is fitting that these practical issues

should be brought into the light. This is the Lord's encouragement, beside which all else can be counted `loss'.

We now come to one of the most controversial passages in the epistles of Paul, namely Philippians 1:22-26. It is

appealed to by those who teach `sudden death, sudden glory'. It is the passage brought forward to prove a conscious

intermediate state, a state `far better' than living here in the flesh. It is on the other hand referred to by those who

believe that in death there is no remembrance, and the word translated `depart' is rendered by them `return', meaning

by that the second coming of Christ, `the return' of Christ being according to this teaching `far better' than either

living or dying.

We do not feel it necessary to make a digression here, and deal with the doctrine of the `intermediate state'. We

have on different occasions indicated the teaching of Scripture on this matter, believing the statements made therein,

namely, that those that are dead are sleeping, that at the resurrection they awake, and that the interval between the

two events (however long it may be by the time measurements of conscious beings using the light of day), is

unknown and unobserved, that `there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in the grave' (Heb. sheol,

LXX, Gk. hades, Eccles. 9:10).

We are more concerned with the interpretation put upon this passage by those who are doctrinally sound

regarding the state of death. These, in order, presumably, to rescue this passage from those who have used it to

further their teaching of a conscious intermediate state before resurrection, have taught that Paul was pressed `out of'

the two, i.e. of either living or dying, by the overwhelming importance of the return of Christ, which is admittedly

`far better' than either. This interpretation, however, we are convinced errs as much on one side of the truth, as the

interpretation which it opposes errs on the other. It has no specific bearing upon the immediate context or the

general scope of the epistle, and has no light to throw upon the `out resurrection' which awaits us in Philippians

Consequently there is nothing for it, but to recognize both the gravity of the task before us, the eminence of those

teachers from whom we differ, yet to recognize also the far greater importance of arriving at the meaning of the

apostle, and through him the meaning of the Spirit who inspired the passage.

We have already discovered the `scope' of the passage by discovering its `structure', and we shall now seek by

careful comparison and interpretation to present the meaning of the words employed.

First of all, we consider the scope of the passage. The structure of Philippians 1:21-26 has already been

presented but we feel it would be useful to repeat it here.