Is it true that the Greek word anastasis always means a resurrection to spiritual life?

Answer: Our English word resurrection signifies to raise up again and it does not indicate whether the body or thing raised has any life.

For instance, Lazarus was raised by our Lord after having died, but not soon after he returned to the grave as all men do. His was not a resurrection in the fullest since of the word, but rather a resuscitation. He was raised (awoken from the sleep of death), but to the same condition as he had before his death. A resurrection is a full lifting up or restoration to life in its fullest since, in the case of the world in the millennial it will mean back to that original life which Adam had before he fell.

The Greek word anastasis translated resurrection seems to have a similar meaning – to raise up again. In scriptural use however it is understood to imply that the ones raised up have life since it is so stated sometimes, but that it always means a resurrection to spiritual life, is not true.

There shall be a resurrection (anastasis) both of the just and unjust – All shall live again, but to rise spiritual beings, immortal and etc., is promised only to those who have part in THE first resurrection. “Blessed and holy are all they that have part in the first [anastasis] resurrection; On such the second death hath no power.” The natural inference is that those who arise in subsequent resurrections, are not blessed and holy and that over these the second death has power.

In other words, the teaching is, that the first class are raised with such a life as cannot die, (immortal) while all others are raised to a life which can be forfeited.

In the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles the difference between these resurrections is clearly discernable as expressed in the Greek. (Our regular English version fails to show it properly.) Thus, Jesus says that in THE resurrection (i.e. the special resurrection) they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like unto the angels and etc. Paul knew that all would rise, but says, “If by any means I might attain unto THE resurrection” – the first – the prize. He knew that because Jesus had ransomed all, all must be released from death, but he knew also that to the realization of the “exceeding great and precious promises” of “being like Him,” and *“like unto the angels” – possessing “immortality” i.e. such a condition of life that he could not die any more, nor be hurt of the second death; all these, as well as the sitting in the throne depended upon his attaining the “first” – “THE resurrection.”

The following texts show that the word anastasis does not always mean raising to spiritual life.

Matt 22:23. “Scribes say that there is no (anastasis) resurrection.”

Luke 20:27. “Deny that there is any (anastasis) resurrection.” Luke 2:34.

“This child is set for the fall and (anastasis) rising again of many in Israel.”

Israel stumbled and fell as a nation as well as individually and is to rise again. They did not fall from being spiritual bodies nor are they to rise in that way. Again, Heb 11:35, “Women received their dead (anastasis) raised to life again.”

Were they raised to spiritual life or to natural?

The latter, certainly, Christ Jesus being the first born to the higher plane. We read further – “Others were tortured…that they might obtain a better (anastasis) resurrection.”

*Better than what, if anastasis means a giving of spiritual life? R92

---

Two points here which we believe need further clarification. *The first is in regards to the idea that angels are immortal, this may have been something held early by some of the brethren, however upon further insight (the light [of truth] shinning brighter and brighter unto the perfect day) we believe the common consciences now is that angels are mortal beings. We will attempt to elaborate more upon this point in a separate entry following this one.

*The second point is in regards to the last statement in this article and, the question concerning what “better resurrection” is that which the faithful of the past shall receive. First and foremost, it should be evident that they will not take part in the first resurrection viz., raised to immortality as these all live prior to Pentecost and prior to the begetting of the holy spirit.

So, the question is asked how is their resurrection said to be any better than the resurrection which the rest of mankind will receive?

The difference is that the faithful of the past having already been proven faithful, having past their test these will experience an instantaneous resurrection back to human perfection whereas the rest of mankind will  experience a gradual resurrection or rising up to perfection, step by step gradually throughout the millennial age or “times of restitution of all things” this through judgements viz., “the resurrection of judgement”, in which various trials, tests and etc., will be administered in order to help them regain that which was lost through the fall. The faithful of the past having already past their judgement will be set forth as “princes in all the earth” as examples to the rest of mankind as to what can be obtained if they should heed the instructions of the great prophet at that time, the Christ, Head and body joined.