Verse 11 is the last link in the chain that began at v. 8. Paul has counted everything loss for the sake of knowing Christ (v. 8), being found in him with a righteousness from God (v. 9), knowing him and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings (v. 10) — and now, at the end of that sequence, he writes not a claim but a hope: εἴ πως καταντήσω, “if somehow I may attain.”

Three things carry the weight of this half-verse.

1. The tentativeness is real and deliberate. εἴ πως is not a rhetorical flourish. Paul has just described his present participation in Christ’s death (συμμορφιζόμενος, v. 10, present tense) and now speaks of the future outcome in the language of hope rather than possession. Verse 12 immediately confirms the reading: “Not that I have already obtained.” Any rendering that firms this up (“so that I will attain”) collides with the next sentence.

2. ἐξανάστασις is a NT hapax — Paul has just used the ordinary word ἀνάστασις one verse earlier and now switches to a doubled compound, then reinforces it with ἐκ νεκρῶν. The repetition of the ἐκ-element three times over (ἐξ-, ἐκ) is unlikely to be accidental, though what exactly it signals is disputed.

3. The tentativeness is about Paul, not about God. The uncertainty attaches to the modality of his arrival, not to the reliability of the promise. Read against 1:6 (“he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion”) and 3:20-21 (“who will transform the body of our humiliation”), where Paul uses flat futures, the diffidence of 3:11 belongs to the runner’s self-assessment mid-course, not to the outcome’s security.

Built onobrien-nigtc · fee-nicnt · silva-becnt

εἰ + the enclitic indefinite adverb πως is a fixed Koine idiom expressing a purpose or hope entertained without confidence of achievement. It occurs four times in the NT, all in Acts and Paul: Acts 27:12 (“if somehow they might reach Phoenix and winter there”), Rom 1:10 (“if somehow now at last I may succeed in coming to you”), Rom 11:14 (“if somehow I may provoke my own people to jealousy and save some of them”), and here.

The distribution is instructive. In every case the speaker names a goal genuinely desired and genuinely uncertain of achievement — a sea voyage that may not be possible, a journey that may not be permitted, a missionary strategy that may not succeed. BDF classifies the construction as expressing “expectation” with a nuance of doubt; BDAG treats εἰ here as marking an indirect question after an implied verb of trying or hoping.

So the tone is neither doubt about God’s promise nor bare confidence. It is the register of a man who has just said he is being conformed to Christ’s death and who declines to speak of the sequel as an accomplished fact. Note the enclitic accent: πως, not interrogative πῶς. The Greek is “somehow, by some means,” not “how?”

Rendering “that by any means I may attain” is defensible; “in the hope that” overtranslates by naming the emotion the idiom only implies. Bare “so that” is excluded — it converts hope into purpose achieved.

Built onbdf · bdag · obrien-nigtc

καταντήσω — the verb is a compound of κατά + ἀντάω, and in Hellenistic usage it is primarily a verb of travel: to arrive at, reach, come down to a destination. Acts uses it nine times, almost all of Paul’s journeys reaching a named port or city (Acts 16:1; 18:19; 20:15; 21:7; 25:13; 27:12; 28:13). The papyri and inscriptions of the period use it the same way, and also in the derived legal sense of property “devolving upon” an heir.

Paul’s figurative uses are few but pointed: 1 Cor 10:11 (the ends of the ages have “arrived at” us), 1 Cor 14:36 (did the word of God “reach” you only?), Eph 4:13 (until we all “attain” to the unity of the faith).

The travel sense is live here. Paul has been running a course since v. 8 and will make the footrace explicit at vv. 13-14 (διώκω, βραβεῖον, σκοπός). καταντάω is the arrival at the end of the road. ‘Attain’ is the natural English but it abstracts slightly; ‘arrive at’ is retained in the literal tier to keep the journey visible.

Built onbdag · bdf · silva-becnt

ἐξανάστασιν is a NT hapax. The simple noun ἀνάστασις (‘a standing up,’ hence ‘resurrection’) stood one verse earlier in τῆς ἀναστάσεως αὐτοῦ (v. 10); here Paul reaches for the doubled compound and then adds ἐκ νεκρῶν on top of it.

Outside the NT the word is not rare, but it is rarely eschatological. In the LXX it appears at Gen 7:4 (of the ‘standing’ God will blot out) and 1 Esd 5:68 — not of resurrection. In classical and Hellenistic prose (Polybius, Plutarch, Josephus) it means a rising up, a removal, an emigration, or an insurrection. Its use as a resurrection-word is essentially Paul’s move here, built transparently from the components.

So the question is what the ἐξ- adds. Three positions:

1. Intensive/emphatic only. Koine piles up prefixes freely and many double compounds are semantically identical to their simplex (compare ἀπεκδέχομαι at 3:20 with ἐκδέχομαι). On this reading the ἐκ νεκρῶν is what supplies the content and the ἐξ- is stylistic reinforcement.

2. The out-from-among sense, doing real work. ἐξ + ἀνά + ἵστημι = a standing-up-out-from. Combined with the second ἐκ, the emphasis falls on emergence from among the corpses — the believer’s resurrection as a coming out of the realm of the dead, leaving others there.

3. A distinct eschatological event. Some read the doubled preposition as designating a resurrection of the righteous distinguished from a general resurrection (cf. Luke 20:35, οἱ καταξιωθέντες … τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῆς ἐκ νεκρῶν; Acts 4:2).

Built onbdag · muraoka-lxx · obrien-nigtc · fee-nicnt · silva-becnt

The second article (τὴν … τὴν) is the standard Greek device for turning a prepositional phrase into an attributive modifier: “the resurrection, the [one] out from [the] dead.” This is the same construction Paul used twice in v. 9 (τὴν ἐκ νόμου … τὴν ἐκ θεοῦ) and once in v. 10 (τῆς ἀναστάσεως αὐτοῦ has no article-repetition, but v. 9’s pattern is fresh in the ear). The repeated-article style is a marked feature of this whole paragraph and should be visible in the literal tier.

νεκρῶν is anarthrous. In the NT the formula ἐκ νεκρῶν is almost always without the article (Rom 4:24; 6:4; 1 Cor 15:12, 20; Gal 1:1), while ἀνάστασις τῶν νεκρῶν with the article is also standard (1 Cor 15:12-13, 21, 42). The distinction is idiomatic rather than semantic: after a preposition, definiteness is regularly left unmarked (BDF §254-55). English must supply ‘the dead’ or use a bare plural; brackets mark the supply in the wooden tier.

One small observation on Luke 20:35 and Acts 4:2: both use the identical phrase ἡ ἀνάστασις ἡ ἐκ νεκρῶν, with the repeated article and the simplex noun. That the same articular construction attaches to the ordinary noun elsewhere is one reason for caution about loading the ἐξ- compound here (see above).

Built onbdf · bdag · na28

NA28 prints τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν with no variant marked in the primary apparatus. The reading is supported by ℵ* A B (with 𝔓⁴⁶ supporting the substance) and is not in serious doubt.

A secondary variant is attested in part of the tradition: τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τῶν νεκρῶν (articular genitive, dropping ἐκ) in ℵ² D F G Ψ and the Majority text. This is the easier and commoner phrase — ἀνάστασις τῶν νεκρῶν is the standard NT formulation — and is a straightforward assimilation to that idiom. It also relieves the apparent redundancy of ἐξ- followed by ἐκ. Both of those features mark it as secondary: the harder reading, which preserves the doubled ἐκ-element, is original.

Metzger’s committee does not treat this at length, which is itself an indication of how settled it is. Note, though, that the variant is not doctrinally inert: dropping ἐκ removes one of the two prepositional elements on which the ‘out-from-among’ reading of ἐξανάστασις partly rests. Readers working from a Byzantine-based text will therefore have marginally less to argue from at this point — a small but concrete illustration of why the manuscript evidence has to be weighed rather than inherited.

Built onna28 · metzger-tc · obrien-nigtc

Does εἴ πως imply that Paul was uncertain of his own final salvation?

The evidence has to be laid out on both sides rather than resolved by preference.

Against reading it as soteriological doubt: the same Paul writes 1:6 (God “will bring to completion” the work he began), 1:21-23 (to die is gain; departing is “far better,” and to be with Christ is assumed), 3:20-21 (Christ “will transform the body of our humiliation”), and Rom 8:38-39. Every one of these is a flat future or a settled confidence. The εἴ πως idiom elsewhere in Paul (Rom 1:10; 11:14) attaches to contingencies of circumstance and human response, not to the security of God’s promise.

For taking the tentativeness seriously: Paul immediately follows with οὐχ ὅτι ἤδη ἔλαβον (v. 12) and ἐγὼ ἐμαυτὸν οὐ λογίζομαι κατειληφέναι (v. 13). Whatever else v. 11 is, it is not a claim to possession, and the paragraph’s whole force depends on the goal being still ahead and still pursued. Nor is the pursuit optional: διώκω (vv. 12, 14) is strenuous.

The translation’s job is to leave the seam visible. ‘If somehow I may attain’ preserves what Paul wrote; ‘so that I will attain’ and ‘in the hope of attaining’ each close the question in a different direction.

Built onobrien-nigtc · fee-nicnt · silva-becnt · bauckham-god-crucified

The Fathers read v. 11 almost unanimously as an expression of humility, and they read it against v. 12 rather than in isolation.

Chrysostom (Hom. in Phil. 11) is the fullest: he takes εἴ πως as the language of one who does not presume, and asks pointedly why Paul, of all people, should speak so — answering that if Paul says this, no one else may claim certainty of attainment as a possession already held. Chrysostom explicitly denies that the doubt concerns God’s willingness; it concerns whether Paul will finish as he has begun. He also notes the emphatic force of the compound noun without building a separate eschatological event on it.

Theodoret of Cyrus (Interp. Phil.) similarly glosses the phrase as spoken κατὰ ταπεινοφροσύνην, in humility, and connects it to the athletic imagery following.

Ambrosiaster, on the Latin si quo modo occurram ad resurrectionem quae est ex mortuis, takes the resurrection here as the resurrection of the just specifically, since all will rise but not all to life — an early instance of reading a qualitative distinction into the phrase, though on the strength of the wider NT rather than the ἐξ- prefix.

The patristic consensus is worth weight on the pastoral question precisely because these readers had no stake in later Protestant-Catholic debates about assurance: they heard the verse straightforwardly as apostolic modesty, not as a doctrine of uncertain salvation.

Built onobrien-nigtc · silva-becnt

Vulgate: si quo modo occurram ad resurrectionem quae est ex mortuis. Jerome’s si quo modo is a good match for εἴ πως, keeping both the conditional and the indefiniteness. occurram (‘I may meet, run up to’) is a lively choice for καταντήσω that preserves the motion; the Old Latin perveniam (‘arrive at’) is closer to the compound’s usual force. Note that Latin has no way to reproduce ἐξ-ανάστασις as a single word and renders it with the simplex resurrectionem plus the relative clause — the compound is simply lost, which is one reason the Western tradition made less of it.

Peshitta: renders with ܕܠܡܐ (‘perhaps, lest somehow’) plus the verb of arriving, and uses the ordinary Syriac noun for resurrection with the phrase ‘from among the dead.’ Like the Latin, it cannot render the doubled prefix and does not try; the ‘from among’ element survives in the prepositional phrase only.

The versional evidence is thus a caution in one direction: no early translator found in ἐξανάστασις a technical term requiring special handling. Whatever the prefix contributes, it was not perceived as lexically separable from ἀνάστασις by the earliest readers working in other languages.

Built onmetzger-tc · muraoka-lxx

The paragraph vv. 8-11 is a single Greek sentence of accumulating subordination — participles, purpose clauses, and now this trailing conditional. English cannot sustain it, and the verse divisions have already broken it. But the rendering should preserve the sense of a clause hanging off what precedes rather than a fresh assertion: hence the lowercase opening and the absence of any supplied subject or connective in the smooth line.

The register is not liturgical and should not be raised. It is a man’s account of his own position, ending in a half-step back. ‘If by any means I may attain unto’ is available for the liturgical tier but is too weighty for the reading text; ‘if somehow’ is the plainer and more accurate match to the enclitic πως.

Built onfee-nicnt · bdf