Opening the library…

Search the Bible

On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian

Chapter 30

About this work

Author: Tertullian

Chapter XXX.—This Vision Interpreted by Tertullian of the Resurrection of the Bodies of the Dead. A Chronological Error of Our Author, Who Supposes that Ezekiel in His Ch. XXXI. Prophesied Before the Captivity.

I am well aware how they torture even this

‹ Chapter 29 Chapter 31 ›

prophecy

into

a

proof

of

the

allegorical

sense

,

on

the

ground

that

by

saying

,

“

These

bones

are

the

whole

house

of

Israel

,

”

He

made

them

a

figure

of

Israel

,

and

removed

them

from

their

proper

literal

condition

;

and

therefore

(

they

contend

)

that

there

is

here

a

figurative

,

not

a

true

prediction

of

the

resurrection

,

for

(

they

say

)

the

state

of

the

Jews

is

one

of

humiliation

,

in

a

certain

sense

dead

,

and

very

dry

,

and

dispersed

over

the

plain

of

the

world

.

Therefore

the

image

of

a

resurrection

is

allegorically

applied

to

their

state

,

since

it

has

to

be

gathered

together

,

and

recompacted

bone

to

bone

(

in

other

words

,

tribe

to

tribe

,

and

people

to

people

)

,

and

to

be

reincorporated

by

the

sinews

of

power

and

the

nerves

of

royalty

,

and

to

be

brought

out

as

it

were

from

sepulchres

,

that

is

to

say

,

from

the

most

miserable

and

degraded

abodes

of

captivity

,

and

to

breathe

afresh

in

the

way

of

a

restoration

,

and

to

live

thenceforward

in

their

own

land

of

Judæa

.

And

what

is

to

happen

after

all

this

?

They

will

die

,

no

doubt

.

And

what

will

there

be

after

death

?

No

resurrection

from

the

dead

,

of

course

,

since

there

is

nothing

of

the

sort

here

revealed

to

Ezekiel

.

Well

,

but

the

resurrection

is

elsewhere

foretold

:

so

that

there

will

be

one

even

in

this

case

,

and

they

are

rash

in

applying

this

passage

to

the

state

of

Jewish

affairs

;

or

even

if

it

do

indicate

a

different

recovery

from

the

resurrection

which

we

are

maintaining

,

what

matters

it

to

me

,

provided

there

be

also

a

resurrection

of

the

body

,

just

as

there

is

a

restoration

of

the

Jewish

state

?

In

fact

,

by

the

very

circumstance

that

the

recovery

of

the

Jewish

state

is

prefigured

by

the

reincorporation

and

reunion

of

bones

,

proof

is

offered

that

this

event

will

also

happen

to

the

bones

themselves

;

for

the

metaphor

could

not

have

been

formed

from

bones

,

if

the

same

thing

exactly

were

not

to

be

realized

in

them

also

.

Now

,

although

there

is

a

sketch

of

the

true

thing

in

its

image

,

the

image

itself

still

possesses

a

truth

of

its

own

:

it

must

needs

be

,

therefore

,

that

must

have

a

prior

existence

for

itself

,

which

is

used

figuratively

to

express

some

other

thing

.

Vacuity

is

not

a

consistent

basis

for

a

similitude

,

nor

does

nonentity

form

a

suitable

foundation

for

a

parable

.

It

will

therefore

be

right

to

believe

that

the

bones

are

destined

to

have

a

rehabiliment

of

flesh

and

breath

,

such

as

it

is

here

said

they

will

have

,

by

reason

indeed

of

which

their

renewed

state

could

alone

express

the

reformed

condition

of

Jewish

affairs

,

which

is

pretended

to

be

the

meaning

of

this

passage

.

It

is

,

however

,

more

characteristic

of

a

religious

spirit

to

maintain

the

truth

on

the

authority

of

a

literal

interpretation

,

such

as

is

required

by

the

sense

of

the

inspired

passage

.

Now

,

if

this

vision

had

reference

to

the

condition

of

the

Jews

,

as

soon

as

He

had

revealed

to

him

the

position

of

the

bones

,

He

would

at

once

have

added

,

“

These

bones

are

the

whole

house

of

Israel

,

”

and

so

forth

.

But

immediately

on

showing

the

bones

,

He

interrupts

the

scene

by

saying

somewhat

of

the

prospect

which

is

most

suited

to

bones

;

without

yet

naming

Israel

,

He

tries

the

prophet’s

own

faith

:

“

Son

of

man

,

can

these

bones

ever

live

?

”

so

that

he

makes

answer

:

“

O

Lord

,

Thou

knowest

.

”

Now

God

would

not

,

you

may

be

sure

,

have

tried

the

prophet’s

faith

on

a

point

which

was

never

to

be

a

real

one

,

of

which

Israel

should

never

hear

,

and

in

which

it

was

not

proper

to

repose

belief

.

Since

,

however

,

the

resurrection

of

the

dead

was

indeed

foretold

,

but

Israel

,

in

the

distrust

of

his

great

unbelief

,

was

offended

at

it

;

and

,

whilst

gazing

on

the

condition

of

the

crumbling

grave

,

despaired

of

a

resurrection

;

or

rather

,

did

not

direct

his

mind

mainly

to

it

,

but

to

his

own

harassing

circumstances

,

—

therefore

God

first

instructed

the

prophet

(

since

he

,

too

,

was

not

free

from

doubt

)

,

by

revealing

to

him

the

process

of

the

resurrection

,

with

a

view

to

his

earnest

setting

forth

of

the

same

.

He

then

charged

the

people

to

believe

what

He

had

revealed

to

the

prophet

,

telling

them

that

they

were

themselves

,

though

refusing

to

believe

their

resurrection

,

the

very

bones

which

were

destined

to

rise

again

.

Then

in

the

concluding

sentence

He

says

,

“

And

ye

shall

know

how

that

I

the

Lord

have

spoken

and

done

these

things

,

”

intending

of

course

to

do

that

of

which

He

had

spoken

;

but

certainly

not

meaning

to

do

that

which

He

had

spoken

of

,

if

His

design

had

been

to

do

something

different

from

what

He

had

said

.