This video is turning out to be interesting. His explanation of Philippians 3:10-11 is disturbing:
Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
Php 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
He said that "resurrection" in verse 10 is different from verse 11, and indeed it is in the Greek:
10 = anastasis
11 = exanastasis
I'll leave it to you guys to watch his explanation.
Sorry everyone, it's bringing up a lot of questions for me.
I haven't watched the video, and from the sound of things - I doubt I will.
But as you can can see, the word in verse 11 is a compound word. There are different reasons it might have been chosen by the Holy Spirit. One could be
emphasis. Another could be
style. But the infallible rule of interpretation is that Scripture interprets itself. If whatever this man teaches does not resonate with the rest of the Scripture, then it should be discarded.
Especially, if it is based on a deep dive into the significance of a single word choice. Moisés Silva gives good commentary on this text:
The fact that this is the only attested occurrence of the compound ἐξανάστασις [exanastasis] has created more discussion than it probably deserves. The strong tendency in Hellenistic times to “strengthen” verbs in this way, plus the possibility that Paul may have, consciously or unconsciously, looked for stylistic variety (after using the simple form in v. 10), adequately account for its use. Meyer, who believes the two forms should not be distinguished, suggests that the compound “is to be explained solely from the more vividly imaginative view of the event which the apostle has before him” (i.e., ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς).
Moisés Silva, Philippians, 2nd ed., Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 169.
