Opening the library…

Search the Bible

On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian

Chapter 33

About this work

Author: Tertullian

Chapter XXXIII.—So Much for the Prophetic Scriptures. In the Gospels, Christ’s Parables, as Explained by Himself, Have a Clear Reference to the Resurrection of the Flesh.

This is evidence enough from the prophetic Scriptures. I

‹ Chapter 32 Chapter 34 ›

now

appeal

to

the

Gospels

.

But

here

also

I

must

first

meet

the

same

sophistry

as

advanced

by

those

who

contend

that

the

Lord

,

like

(

the

prophets

)

,

said

everything

in

the

way

of

allegory

,

because

it

is

written

:

“

All

these

things

spake

Jesus

in

parables

,

and

without

a

parable

spake

He

not

unto

them

,

”

that

is

,

to

the

Jews

.

Now

the

disciples

also

asked

Him

,

“

Why

speakest

Thou

in

parables

?

”

And

the

Lord

gave

them

this

answer

:

“

Therefore

I

speak

unto

them

in

parables

:

because

they

seeing

,

see

not

;

and

hearing

,

they

hear

not

,

according

to

the

prophecy

of

Esaias

.

”

But

since

it

was

to

the

Jews

that

He

spoke

in

parables

,

it

was

not

then

to

all

men

;

and

if

not

to

all

,

it

follows

that

it

was

not

always

and

in

all

things

parables

with

Him

,

but

only

in

certain

things

,

and

when

addressing

a

particular

class

.

But

He

addressed

a

particular

class

when

He

spoke

to

the

Jews

.

It

is

true

that

He

spoke

sometimes

even

to

the

disciples

in

parables

.

But

observe

how

the

Scripture

relates

such

a

fact

:

“

And

He

spake

a

parable

unto

them

.

”

It

follows

,

then

,

that

He

did

not

usually

address

them

in

parables

;

because

if

He

always

did

so

,

special

mention

would

not

be

made

of

His

resorting

to

this

mode

of

address

.

Besides

,

there

is

not

a

parable

which

you

will

not

find

to

be

either

explained

by

the

Lord

Himself

,

as

that

of

the

sower

,

(

which

He

interprets

)

of

the

management

of

the

word

of

God

;

or

else

cleared

by

a

preface

from

the

writer

of

the

Gospel

,

as

in

the

parable

of

the

arrogant

judge

and

the

importunate

widow

,

which

is

expressly

applied

to

earnestness

in

prayer

;

or

capable

of

being

spontaneously

understood

,

as

in

the

parable

of

the

fig

-

tree

,

which

was

spared

a

while

in

hopes

of

improvement

—

an

emblem

of

Jewish

sterility

.

Now

,

if

even

parables

obscure

not

the

light

of

the

gospel

,

how

unlikely

it

is

that

plain

sentences

and

declarations

,

which

have

an

unmistakeable

meaning

,

should

signify

any

other

thing

than

their

literal

sense

!

But

it

is

by

such

declarations

and

sentences

that

the

Lord

sets

forth

either

the

last

judgment

,

or

the

kingdom

,

or

the

resurrection

:

“

It

shall

be

more

tolerable

,

”

He

says

,

“

for

Tyre

and

Sidon

in

the

day

of

judgment

than

for

you

.

”

And

“

Tell

them

that

the

kingdom

of

God

is

at

hand

.

”

And

again

,

“

It

shall

be

recompensed

to

you

at

the

resurrection

of

the

just

.

”

Now

,

if

the

mention

of

these

events

(

I

mean

the

judgment

-

day

,

and

the

kingdom

of

God

,

and

the

resurrection

)

has

a

plain

and

absolute

sense

,

so

that

nothing

about

them

can

be

pressed

into

an

allegory

,

neither

should

those

statements

be

forced

into

parables

which

describe

the

arrangement

,

and

the

process

,

and

the

experience

of

the

kingdom

of

God

,

and

of

the

judgment

,

and

of

the

resurrection

.

On

the

contrary

,

things

which

are

destined

for

the

body

should

be

carefully

understood

in

a

bodily

sense

,

—

not

in

a

spiritual

sense

,

as

having

nothing

figurative

in

their

nature

.

This

is

the

reason

why

we

have

laid

it

down

as

a

preliminary

consideration

,

that

the

bodily

substance

both

of

the

soul

and

of

the

flesh

is

liable

to

the

recompense

,

which

will

have

to

be

awarded

in

return

for

the

co

-

operation

of

the

two

natures

,

that

so

the

corporeality

of

the

soul

may

not

exclude

the

bodily

nature

of

the

flesh

by

suggesting

a

recourse

to

figurative

descriptions

,

since

both

of

them

must

needs

be

regarded

as

destined

to

take

part

in

the

kingdom

,

and

the

judgment

,

and

the

resurrection

.

And

now

we

proceed

to

the

special

proof

of

this

proposition

,

that

the

bodily

character

of

the

flesh

is

indicated

by

our

Lord

whenever

He

mentions

the

resurrection

,

at

the

same

time

without

disparagement

to

the

corporeal

nature

of

the

soul

,

—

a

point

which

has

been

actually

admitted

but

by

a

few

.

Notes

1
Matt. xiii. 34.
2
Ver. 10.
3
Matt. xiii. 13; comp. Isa. vi. 9.
4
See Luke vi. 39; comp. with ver. 20, and other places, especially in this Gospel.
5
See Luke viii. 11.
6
See Luke xviii. 1.
7
Such cases of obvious meaning, which required no explanation, are referred to in Matt. xxi. 45 and Luke xx. 19.
8
Matt. xi. 22.
9
Matt. x. 7.
10
Luke xiv. 14.