second_ in following it to the temple to be
presented to God, by the priest, in the presence of the people? No; it
was not to be carried to the temple, nor would the priest or the
people ever see the whole harvest thus dedicated to God. But it was
called "the _first_ of the ripe fruits," because it was offered to God
in the presence of the people as an evidence of the consecration of
the whole harvest throughout the nation. It was _first_ in
distinction, or _importance_ without any allusion whatever to _first_
in the order of time.

So "Christ was the _chosen_ of God, the _elect precious_, and the
_Son_ consecrated forevermore." He was "the chief among ten thousand"
and proved to be the Son of God with power by a resurrection from the
dead without seeing corruption. In this condition he was presented to
the people as an evidence of the resurrection and consecration of all
mankind. In this he was _first and last_--that is, the _principal_,
the _chief, the head_, and in _this_ he never _has had_, and never
_will have a second_ in the order of time. This is no evidence
therefore that he was the first one who ever rose to an immortal
existence. We have positive proof that Moses and Elias were raised
from the dead, an in a state of conscious existence for they conversed
with our Lord in the presence of three of his disciples. They appeared
in glory, and were two as real personages on the one part, as was our
Saviour on the other.

Acts xxvi. 23. _"That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the
first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light to the
people and to the Gentiles."_ This passage contains, perhaps, as
plausible an objection against my views as any that can be produced.
But this passage means, that Christ should be the _first_ who should
show light to the Jews and Gentiles through a resurrection from the
dead. The Greek word, here rendered "_should rise_," is _anastaseos_
from _anastasis_. It is a _substantive_, not a _verb_. Professor
Leusden, in his Latin Testament, renders it "_ex resurrectione
mortuorum"--by a resurrection from the dead_. The verb, _to raise, is
egeiro_, and is six times applied to the raising of Christ from the
dead in 1 Cor xv. _Anistemi_ also means _to rise_ and is applied to
raising the dead to life. But neither--anistemi nor egeiro_ are used
in the verse, but _anastaseos_--Consequently it cannot _literally_ be
rendered "_should rise_," but _resurrection_. Wakefield trans