Opening the library…

Search the Bible

On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian

Chapter 52

About this work

Author: Tertullian

Chapter LII.—From St. Paul’s Analogy of the Seed We Learn that the Body Which Died Will Rise Again, Garnished with the Appliances of Eternal Life.

Let us now see in what body he asserts that

‹ Chapter 51 Chapter 53 ›

the

dead

will

come

.

And

with

a

felicitous

sally

he

proceeds

at

once

to

illustrate

the

point

,

as

if

an

objector

had

plied

him

with

some

such

question

.

“

Thou

fool

,

”

says

he

,

“

that

which

thou

sowest

is

not

quickened

,

except

it

die

.

”

From

this

example

of

the

seed

it

is

then

evident

that

no

other

flesh

is

quickened

than

that

which

shall

have

undergone

death

,

and

therefore

all

the

rest

of

the

question

will

become

clear

enough

.

For

nothing

which

is

incompatible

with

the

idea

suggested

by

the

example

can

possibly

be

understood

;

nor

from

the

clause

which

follows

,

“

That

which

thou

sowest

,

thou

sowest

not

the

body

which

shall

be

,

”

are

you

permitted

to

suppose

that

in

the

resurrection

a

different

body

is

to

arise

from

that

which

is

sown

in

death

.

Otherwise

you

have

run

away

from

the

example

.

For

if

wheat

be

sown

and

dissolved

in

the

ground

,

barley

does

not

spring

up

.

Still

it

is

not

the

very

same

grain

in

kind

;

nor

is

its

nature

the

same

,

or

its

quality

and

form

.

Then

whence

comes

it

,

if

it

is

not

the

very

same

?

For

even

the

decay

is

a

proof

of

the

thing

itself

,

since

it

is

the

decay

of

the

actual

grain

.

Well

,

but

does

not

the

apostle

himself

suggest

in

what

sense

it

is

that

“

the

body

which

shall

be

”

is

not

the

body

which

is

sown

,

even

when

he

says

,

“

But

bare

grain

,

it

may

chance

of

wheat

,

or

of

some

other

grain

;

but

God

giveth

it

a

body

as

it

pleaseth

Him

?

”

Gives

it

of

course

to

the

grain

which

he

says

is

sown

bare

.

No

doubt

,

you

say

.

Then

the

grain

is

safe

enough

,

to

which

God

has

to

assign

a

body

.

But

how

safe

,

if

it

is

nowhere

in

existence

,

if

it

does

not

rise

again

if

it

rises

not

again

its

actual

self

?

If

it

rises

not

again

,

it

is

not

safe

;

and

if

it

is

not

even

safe

,

it

cannot

receive

a

body

from

God

.

But

there

is

every

possible

proof

that

it

is

safe

.

For

what

purpose

,

therefore

,

will

God

give

it

“

a

body

,

as

it

pleases

Him

,

”

even

when

it

already

has

its

own

“

bare

”

body

,

unless

it

be

that

in

its

resurrection

it

may

be

no

longer

bare

?

That

therefore

will

be

additional

matter

which

is

placed

over

the

bare

body

;

nor

is

that

at

all

destroyed

on

which

the

superimposed

matter

is

put

,

—

nay

,

it

is

increased

.

That

,

however

,

is

safe

which

receives

augmentation

.

The

truth

is

,

it

is

sown

the

barest

grain

,

without

a

husk

to

cover

it

,

without

a

spike

even

in

germ

,

without

the

protection

of

a

bearded

top

,

without

the

glory

of

a

stalk

.

It

rises

,

however

,

out

of

the

furrow

enriched

with

a

copious

crop

,

built

up

in

a

compact

fabric

,

constructed

in

a

beautiful

order

,

fortified

by

cultivation

,

and

clothed

around

on

every

side

.

These

are

the

circumstances

which

make

it

another

body

from

God

,

to

which

it

is

changed

not

by

abolition

,

but

by

amplification

.

And

to

every

seed

God

has

assigned

its

own

body

—

not

,

indeed

,

its

own

in

the

sense

of

its

primitive

body

—

in

order

that

what

it

acquires

from

God

extrinsically

may

also

at

last

be

accounted

its

own

.

Cleave

firmly

then

to

the

example

,

and

keep

it

well

in

view

,

as

a

mirror

of

what

happens

to

the

flesh

:

believe

that

the

very

same

flesh

which

was

once

sown

in

death

will

bear

fruit

in

resurrection

-

life

—

the

same

in

essence

,

only

more

full

and

perfect

;

not

another

,

although

reappearing

in

another

form

.

For

it

shall

receive

in

itself

the

grace

and

ornament

which

God

shall

please

to

spread

over

it

,

according

to

its

merits

.

Unquestionably

it

is

in

this

sense

that

he

says

,

“

All

flesh

is

not

the

same

flesh

;

”

meaning

not

to

deny

a

community

of

substance

,

but

a

parity

of

prerogative

,

—

reducing

the

body

to

a

difference

of

honour

,

not

of

nature

.

With

this

view

he

adds

,

in

a

figurative

sense

,

certain

examples

of

animals

and

heavenly

bodies

:

“

There

is

one

flesh

of

man

”

(

that

is

,

servants

of

God

,

but

really

human

)

,

“

another

flesh

of

beasts

”

(

that

is

,

the

heathen

,

of

whom

the

prophet

actually

says

,

“

Man

is

like

the

senseless

cattle

”

)

,

“

another

flesh

of

birds

”

(

that

is

,

the

martyrs

which

essay

to

mount

up

to

heaven

)

,

“

another

of

fishes

”

(

that

is

,

those

whom

the

water

of

baptism

has

submerged

)

.

In

like

manner

does

he

take

examples

from

the

heavenly

bodies

:

“

There

is

one

glory

of

the

sun

”

(

that

is

,

of

Christ

)

,

“

and

another

glory

of

the

moon

”

(

that

is

,

of

the

Church

)

,

“

and

another

glory

of

the

stars

”

(

in

other

words

,

of

the

seed

of

Abraham

)

.

“

For

one

star

differeth

from

another

star

in

glory

:

so

there

are

bodies

terrestrial

as

well

as

celestial

”

(

Jews

,

that

is

,

as

well

as

Christians

)

.

Now

,

if

this

language

is

not

to

be

construed

figuratively

,

it

was

absurd

enough

for

him

to

make

a

contrast

between

the

flesh

of

mules

and

kites

,

as

well

as

the

heavenly

bodies

and

human

bodies

;

for

they

admit

of

no

comparison

as

to

their

condition

,

nor

in

respect

of

their

attainment

of

a

resurrection

.

Then

at

last

,

having

conclusively

shown

by

his

examples

that

the

difference

was

one

of

glory

,

not

of

substance

,

he

adds

:

“

So

also

is

the

resurrection

of

the

dead

.

”

How

so

?

In

no

other

way

than

as

differing

in

glory

only

.

For

again

,

predicating

the

resurrection

of

the

same

substance

and

returning

once

more

to

(

his

comparison

of

)

the

grain

,

he

says

:

“

It

is

sown

in

corruption

,

it

is

raised

in

incorruption

;

it

is

sown

in

dishonour

,

it

is

raised

in

glory

;

it

is

sown

in

weakness

,

it

is

raised

in

power

;

it

is

sown

a

natural

body

,

it

is

raised

a

spiritual

body

.

”

Now

,

certainly

nothing

else

is

raised

than

that

which

is

sown

;

and

nothing

else

is

sown

than

that

which

decays

in

the

ground

;

and

it

is

nothing

else

than

the

flesh

which

is

decayed

in

the

ground

.

For

this

was

the

substance

which

God’s

decree

demolished

,

“

Earth

thou

art

,

and

to

earth

shalt

thou

return

;

”

because

it

was

taken

out

of

the

earth

.

And

it

was

from

this

circumstance

that

the

apostle

borrowed

his

phrase

of

the

flesh

being

“

sown

,

”

since

it

returns

to

the

ground

,

and

the

ground

is

the

grand

depository

for

seeds

which

are

meant

to

be

deposited

in

it

,

and

again

sought

out

of

it

.

And

therefore

he

confirms

the

passage

afresh

,

by

putting

on

it

the

impress

(

of

his

own

inspired

authority

)

,

saying

,

“

For

so

it

is

written

;

”

that

you

may

not

suppose

that

the

“

being

sown

”

means

anything

else

than

“

thou

shalt

return

to

the

ground

,

out

of

which

thou

wast

taken

;

”

nor

that

the

phrase

“

for

so

it

is

written

”

refers

to

any

other

thing

that

the

flesh

.

Notes

1
1 Cor. xv. 36.
2
Ver. 37.
3
An objection of the opponent.
4
Vers. 37, 38.
5
1 Cor. xv. 38.
6
Ver. 39.
7
Ps. xlix. 20, Sept.
8
1 Cor. xv. 39.
9
1 Cor. xv. 41.
10
Ver. 42.
11
Vers. 42–44.
12
Gen. iii. 19.
13
1 Cor. xv. 45.