1 Corinthians 15

1 Corinthians 15:1

Ambrosiaster: Paul is showing the Corinthians that if they have been led away from his teaching, especially from belief in the resurrection of the dead on which it is based, they will lose everything they have believed. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “I make known unto you, brethren,” saith he, “the gospel which I preached unto you.” Seest thou with what modesty he commences? Seest thou how from the beginning he points out that he is bringing in no new nor strange thing? For he who “maketh known” that which was already known but afterwards had fallen into oblivion, “maketh known” by recalling it into memory.

And when he called them “brethren,” even from hence he laid the foundation of no mean part of the proof of his assertions. For by no other cause became we “brethren,” but by the dispensation of Christ according to the flesh. And this is just the reason why he thus called them, at the same time soothing and courting them, and likewise reminding them of their innumerable blessings.

And what comes next again is demonstrative of the same. What then is this? “The gospel.” For the sum of the gospels hath its original hence, from God having become man and having been crucified and having risen again. This gospel also Gabriel preached to the Virgin, this also the prophets to the world, this also the apostles all of them.

“Which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand. By which also ye are saved, in what word I preached unto you; if ye hold it fast, except ye believed in vain.”

Seest thou how he calls themselves to be witnesses of the things spoken? And he saith not, “which ye heard,” but, “which ye received,” demanding it of them as a kind of deposit, and showing that not in word only, but also by deeds and signs and wonders they received it, and that they should hold it safe.

Next, because he was speaking of the things long past, he referred also to the present time, saying, “wherein also ye stand,” taking the vantage ground of them that disavowal might be out of their power, though they wished it never so much. And this is why at the beginning he said not, “I teach you,” but, “I make known unto you” what hath already been made manifest.

And how saith he that they who were so tossed with waves “stand?” He feigns ignorance to profit them; which also he doth in the case of the Galatians, but not in like manner. For inasmuch as he could not in that case affect ignorance, he frames his address in another way, saying, “I have confidence toward you in the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded.” He said not, “that ye were none otherwise minded,” because their fault was acknowledged and evident, but he answers for the future; and yet this too was uncertain; but it was to draw them to him more effectually. Here however he doth feign ignorance, saying, “wherein also ye stand.”

Then comes the advantage; “by which also ye are saved, in what words I preached it unto you.” “So then, this present exposition is for doctrine clearness and interpretation. For the doctrine itself ye need not,” saith he, “to learn, but to be reminded of it and corrected.” And these things he saith, leaving them no room to plunge into recklessness once for all.

But what is, “in what word I preached it unto you?” “After what manner did I say,” saith he, “that the resurrection takes place? For that there is a resurrection I would not say that ye doubt: but ye seek perhaps to obtain a clearer knowledge of that saying. This then will I provide for you: for indeed I am well assured that ye hold the doctrine.” Next, because he was directly affirming, “wherein also ye stand;” that he might not thereby make them more remiss, he alarms them again, saying, “If ye hold it fast, except ye believed in vain;” intimating that the stroke is on the chief head, and the contest for no common things but in behalf of the whole of the faith. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

1 Corinthians 15:2

Pelagius: The resurrection of the body is the whole point of our gospel message. Without it, all the works of prayer and fasting which we do are meaningless. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:3

Ambrose of Milan: The Son loses nothing when he bestows upon all, just as he also loses nothing when the Father receives the kingdom, nor does the Father suffer loss when he gives what is his own to the Son. — On the Holy Spirit 1.3.49

Ambrosiaster: The prophet Isaiah said: “He was led like a sheep to the slaughter” [Isaiah 53:7] and so on. Revelation [13:8] adds that he was slain from before the foundation of the world. And Deuteronomy [28:66] says: “You will see your life hanging before your eyes, yet you will not believe.” This is expressed in the future tense, to prevent the wicked from claiming that it does not apply to Christ. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Cyril of Alexandria: He made his life be an exchange for the life of all. One died for all, in order that we all might live to God sanctified and brought to life through his blood, justified as a gift by his grace. — LETTER 41.11

Cyril of Jerusalem: The iniquity of sinners was not as great as the justice of the One who died for them. The sins we committed were not as great as the justice he embodied, when he laid down his life for us. — Catechetical Lecture 13

Irenaeus: But who is it that has had fellowship with us in the matter of food? Whether is it he who is conceived of by them as the Christ above, who extended himself through Horos, and imparted a form to their mother; or is it He who is from the Virgin, Emmanuel, who did eat butter and honey, of whom the prophet declared, “He is also a man, and who shall know him?” He was likewise preached by Paul: “For I delivered,” he says, “unto you first of all, that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; and that He was buried, and rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures.” It is plain, then, that Paul knew no other Christ besides Him alone, who both suffered, and was buried, and rose again, who was also born, and whom he speaks of as man. — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 3

John Chrysostom: “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received.”

Neither here doth he say, “I said unto you,” nor, “I taught you,” but uses the same expression again, saying, “I delivered unto you that which also I received:” nor again here doth he say, “I was taught,” but, “I received:” establishing these two things; first, that one ought to introduce nothing from one’s self; next, that by demonstration from his deeds they were fully persuaded, not by bare words: and by degrees while he is rendering his argument credible, he refers the whole to Christ, and signifies that nothing was of man in these doctrines.

But what is this, “For I delivered unto you first of all?” for that is his word. “In the beginning, not now.” And thus saying he brings the time for a witness, and that it were the greatest disgrace for those who had so long time been persuaded now to change their minds: and not this only, but also that the doctrine is necessary. Wherefore also it was “delivered” among “the first,” and from the beginning straightway. And what didst thou so deliver? tell me. But this he doth not say straightway, but first, “I received.” And what didst thou receive? “That Christ died for our sins.” He said not immediately that there is a resurrection of our bodies, yet this very thing in truth he doth establish, but afar off and by other topics saying that “Christ died,” and laying before a kind of strong base and irrefragable foundation of the doctrine concerning the resurrection. For neither did he simply say that “Christ died;” although even this were sufficient to declare the resurrection, but with an addition, “Christ died for our sins.”

But first it is worth while to hear what those who are infected with the Manichaean doctrines say here, who are both enemies to the truth and war against their own salvation. What then do these allege? By death here, they say, Paul means nothing else than our being in sin; and by resurrection, our being delivered from our sins. Seest thou how nothing is weaker than error? And how it is taken by its own wings, and needs not the warfare from without, but by itself it is pierced through? Consider, for instance, these men, how they too have pierced themselves through by their own statements. Since if this be death, and Christ did not take a body, as ye suppose, and yet died, He was in sin according to you. For I indeed say that He took unto Himself a body and His death, I say, was that of the flesh; but thou denying this, wilt be compelled to affirm the other. But if He was in sin, how saith He, “Which of you convinceth Me of sin?” and “The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me?” and again, “Thus it becometh Us to fulfill all righteousness?” Nay, how did He at all die for sinners, if Himself were in sin? For he who dies for sinners ought himself to be without sin. Since if he himself also sin, how shall he die for other sinners? But if for others’ sins He died, He died being without sin: and if being without sin He died, He died not the death of sin; for how could He being without sin? but the death of the body. Wherefore also Paul did not simply say, “He died,” but added, “for our sins:” both forcing these heretics against their will to the confession of His bodily death, and signifying also by this that before death He was without sin: for he that dies for others’ sins, it followeth must himself be without sin.

Neither was he content with this, but added, “according to the Scriptures:” hereby both again making his argument credible, and intimating what kind of death he was speaking of: since it is the death of the body which the Scriptures everywhere proclaim. For, “they pierced My hands and My feet,” saith He, and, “they shall look on Him Whom they pierced.” And many other instances, too numerous to name all one by one, one may see in them stored up, setting forth His slaughter in the flesh and that He was slain for our sins. For, “for the sins of my people,” saith one, “is He come to death:” and, “the Lord delivered Him up for our sins:” and, “He was wounded for our transgressions.” But if thou dost not endure the Old Testament, hear John crying out and declaring both, as well His slaughter in the body as the cause of it: thus, “Behold,” saith he, “the Lamb of God, Who taketh away the sin of the world:” and Paul saying, “For Him Who knew no sin, He made to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him:” and again, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us:” and again, “having put off from himself principalities and powers, He made a show of them openly, triumphing over them;” and ten thousand other sayings to show what happened at His death in the body, and because of our sins. Yea, and Christ Himself saith, “for your sakes I sanctify Myself” and, “now the prince of this world hath been condemned;” showing that having no sin he was slain. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

Origen of Alexandria: After these points, Celsus proceeds to bring against the Gospel narrative a charge which is not to be lightly passed over, saying that “if Jesus desired to show that his power was really divine, he ought to have appeared to those who had ill-treated him, and to him who had condemned him, and to all men universally.” For it appears to us also to be true, according to the Gospel account, that He was not seen after His resurrection in the same manner as He used formerly to show Himself — publicly, and to all men. But it is recorded in the Acts, that “being seen during forty days,” He expounded to His disciples “the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.” [Acts 1:3] And in the Gospels it is not stated that He was always with them; but that on one occasion He appeared in their midst, after eight days, when the doors were shut [John 20:26], and on another in some similar fashion. And Paul also, in the concluding portions of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, in reference to His not having publicly appeared as He did in the period before He suffered, writes as follows: “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: after that He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain unto the present time, but some are fallen asleep. After that He was seen of James, then of all the apostles. And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.” [1 Corinthians 15:3-8] I am of opinion now that the statements in this passage contain some great and wonderful mysteries, which are beyond the grasp not merely of the great multitude of ordinary believers, but even of those who are far advanced (in Christian knowledge), and that in them the reason would be explained why He did not show Himself, after His resurrection from the dead, in the same manner as before that event. — Contra Celsum, Book II, Chapter 63

Tertullian: By ourselves the lower regions (of Hades) are not supposed to be a bare cavity, nor some subterranean sewer of the world, but a vast deep space in the interior of the earth, and a concealed recess in its very bowels; inasmuch as we read that Christ in His death spent three days in the heart of the earth, that is, in the secret inner recess which is hidden in the earth, and enclosed by the earth, and superimposed on the abysmal depths which lie still lower down. Now although Christ is God, yet, being also man, “He died according to the Scriptures,” and “according to the same Scriptures was buried. — A Treatise on the Soul

Tertullian: It was of Him, too, that he had said in a previous passage: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to the only God; " so that we might apply even the contrary qualities to the Son Himself-mortality, accessibility-of whom the apostle testifies that “He died according to the Scriptures,” and that “He was seen by himself last of all,” -by means, of course, of the light which was accessible, although it was not without imperilling his sight that he experienced that light. — Against Praxeas

Tertullian: For even the apostle, to his declaration-which he makes not without feeling the weight of it-that “Christ died,” immediately adds, “according to the Scriptures,” in order that he may alleviate the harshness of the statement by the authority of the Scriptures, and so remove offence from the reader. — Against Praxeas

Tertullian: For the Son, therefore, to die, amounted to His being forsaken by the Father. The Son, then, both dies and rises again, according to the Scriptures. It is the Son, too, who ascends to the heights of heaven, and also descends to the inner parts of the earth. — Against Praxeas

1 Corinthians 15:4

Hilary of Poitiers: Paul reminded us that we are to confess the manner of the death and resurrection not so much by literally naming these things but strictly according to the testimony of the Scriptures, so that our understanding of his death might be in accord with the apostles.… He did this in order that we might not become helpless or to be tossed about by the winds of useless disputes or hampered by the absurd subtleties of unsound opinions. — ON THE TRINITY 10.67

Pelagius: Hosea [6:2] says: “He will revive us after two days; he will raise us up on the third day.” — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:5

John Chrysostom: “And that He appeared to Cephas:” he names immediately the most credible of all. “Then to the twelve.”

Thus, since he had mentioned the proof from the Scriptures, he adds also that by the events, producing as witnesses of the resurrection, after the prophets, the apostles and other faithful men. Whereas if he meant that other resurrection, the deliverance from sin, it were idle for him to say, He appeared to such and such an one; for this is the argument of one who is establishing the resurrection of the body, not of one obscurely teaching deliverance from sins. Wherefore neither said he once for all, “He appeared,” although it were sufficient for him to do so, setting down the expression in common: but now both twice and thrice, and almost in each several case of them that had seen Him he employs it. For “He appeared,” saith he, “to Cephas, He appeared to above five hundred brethren, He appeared to me also.” Yet surely the Gospel saith the contrary, that He was seen of Mary first. But among men He was seen of him first who did most of all long to see Him.

But of what twelve apostles doth he here speak? For after He was received up, Matthias was taken into the number, not after the resurrection immediately. But it is likely that He appeared even after He was received up. At any rate, this our apostle himself after His ascension was both called, and saw Him. Therefore neither doth he set down the time, but simply and without defining recounts the appearance. For indeed it is probable that many took place; wherefore also John said, “This third time He was manifested.”

Therefore he appears to Peter first. For he that first confessed Him to be Christ was justly also counted worthy first to behold His resurrection. And not on this account alone doth He appear to him first, but also because he had denied Him, more abundantly to comfort him and to signify that he is not despaired of, before the rest He vouchsafed him even this sight and to him first entrusted His sheep. Therefore also He appeared to the women first. Because this sex was made inferior, therefore both in His birth and in His resurrection this first tastes of His grace. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

Oecumenius: Note that he does not say “to the eleven,” and neither does John (John 20:24), who writes that Thomas was “one of the twelve.” We should probably say that either he has included Matthias with the other apostles by anticipation or else that he is still thinking of Judas, even after his betrayal and hanging. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Origen of Alexandria: Evidently Matthias was chosen to replace Judas before Jesus ceased appearing to the disciples after his resurrection.. — COMMENTARY ON 1 CORINTHIANS 4.77

1 Corinthians 15:6

Ambrosiaster: This is not recorded in the Gospels, but Paul knew it independently of them. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Cyril of Jerusalem: “He appeared to Cephas; and after that to the twelve.” So if you disbelieve one witness, you have twelve witnesses. “Then he was seen by more than five hundred people at once”—if they disbelieve the twelve, then listen to the five hundred. “After that he was seen by James,” his own brother and the first overseer of this [Jerusalem] diocese. Since so noteworthy a bishop was privileged to see the risen Christ, along with the other disciples, do not disbelieve. But you may say that his brother was a biased witness. So then he continues: “He was seen by me.” But who am I? I am Paul, his enemy! “I was formerly a persecutor” but now preach the good news of the resurrection. — Catechetical Lecture 14:22

John Chrysostom: “Then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep.”

Some say that “above,” is above from heaven; that is, “not walking upon earth, but above and overhead He appeared to them:” adding, that it was Paul’s purpose to confirm, not the resurrection only, but also the ascension. Others say that the expression, “above five hundred,” means, “more than five hundred.”

“Of whom the greater part remain until now.” Thus, “though I relate events of old,” saith he, “yet have I living witnesses.” “But some are fallen asleep.” He said not, “are dead,” but, “are fallen asleep,” by this expression also again confirming the resurrection. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

Shepherd of Hermas: Those square white stones which fitted exactly into each other, are apostles, bishops, teachers, and deacons, who have lived in godly purity, and have acted as bishops and teachers and deacons chastely and reverently to the elect of God. Some of them have fallen asleep, and some still remain alive. And they have always agreed with each other, and been at peace among themselves, and listened to each other. — Shepherd of Hermas, Vision 3

1 Corinthians 15:7

Ambrose of Milan: By this he makes it clear that there are other apostles besides those eleven. — HOMILIES ON Numbers 27.11

Basil of Caesarea: We believe and confess that, rising on the third day from the dead, according to the Scriptures, he was seen by his holy disciples and others, as it is written. He ascended into heaven and sits on the right hand of the Father when he will come at the end of time to raise up all men and to render to each according to his works. — CONCERNING FAITH

John Chrysostom: “After that, He was seen of James.” I suppose, His brother. For the Lord is said to have Himself ordained him and made him Bishop in Jerusalem first. “Then to all the apostles.” For there were also other apostles, as the seventy. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

1 Corinthians 15:8

Ambrosiaster: By “untimely” Paul means that he was born again outside time, because he received his apostleship from Christ after the latter had ascended into heaven. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Ignatius of Antioch: Remember in your prayers the Church in Syria, which now has God for its shepherd, instead of me. Jesus Christ alone will oversee it, and your love [will also regard it]. But as for me, I am ashamed to be counted one of them; for indeed I am not worthy, as being the very last of them, and one born out of due time. But I have obtained mercy to be somebody, if I shall attain to God. My spirit salutes you, and the love of the Churches that have received me in the name of Jesus Christ, and not as a mere passer-by. For even those Churches which were not near to me in the way, I mean according to the flesh, have gone before me, city by city, [to meet me.] — Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans

Irenaeus ((Reporting Valentinian Views)): And that the Saviour appeared to her when she lay outside of the Pleroma as a kind of abortion, they affirm Paul to have declared in his Epistle to the Corinthians — Against Heresies Book I

John Chrysostom: “And last of all, as unto one born out of due time, he appeared to me also.”

This is rather an expression of modesty than any thing else. For not because he was the least, therefore did he appear to him after the rest. Since even if He did call him last, yet he appeared more illustrious than many which were before him, yea rather than all. And the five hundred brethren too were not surely better than James, because He appeared to them before him.

Why did He not appear to all at the same time? That He might first sow the seeds of faith. For he that saw Him first and was exactly and fully assured, told it unto the residue: then their report coming first placed the hearer in expectation of this great wonder, and made way before for the faith of sight. Therefore neither did He appear to all together, nor in the beginning to many, but to one alone first, and him the leader of the whole company and the most faithful: since indeed there was great need of a most faithful soul to be first to receive this sight. For those who saw him after others had seen him, and heard it from them, had in their testimony what contributed in no small degree to their own faith and tended to prepare their mind beforehand; but he who was first counted worthy to see Him, had need, as I have said, of great faith, not to be confounded by a sight so contrary to expectation.

But after Peter, He appears also to each at intervals, and at one time to fewer, at another to more, hereby making them witnesses and teachers of each other, and rendering His apostles trustworthy in all that they said.

What mean here his expressions of humility, or wherein are they seasonable? For if he wishes to show himself worthy of credit and to enrol himself among the witnesses of the resurrection, he is doing the contrary of what he wishes: since it were meet that he exalt himself and show that he was great, which in many places he doth, the occasion calling for it. Well, the very reason why he here also speaks modestly is his being about to do this. Not straightway, however, but with his own peculiar good sense: in that having first spoken modestly and heaped up against himself many charges, he then magnifies the things concerning himself. What may the reason be? That, when he comes to utter that great and lofty expression concerning himself, “I labored more abundantly than all,” his discourse may be rendered more acceptable, both hereby, and by its being spoken as a consequence of what went before and not as a leading topic. Therefore also writing to Timothy, and intending to say great things concerning himself, he first sets down his charges against himself. For so all persons, when speaking in high terms of others, speak out freely and with boldness: but he that is compelled to praise himself, and especially when he also calls himself to witness, is disconcerted and blushes. Therefore also this blessed man first declares his own misery, and then utters that lofty expression. This then he doth, partly to abate the offensiveness of speaking about himself, and partly that he might hereby recommend to their belief what he had to say afterwards. For he that truly states what things are discreditable to him and conceals none of them, such as that he persecuted the Church, that he laid waste the faith, doth hereby cause the things that are honorable to him also to be above suspicion.

And consider the exceeding greatness of his humility. For having said, “and last of all He appeared to me also,” he was not content with this: “For many that are last shall be first,” saith He, “and the first last.” Therefore he added, “as unto one born out of due time.” Neither did he stop here, but adds also his own judgment and with a reason.

But consider how he abounds in the expressions of humility. For so, “to me last of all He appeared,” saith he. Wherefore neither doth he with himself mention any other, and saith, “as of one born out of due time,” and that himself is “the least of the apostles,” and not even worthy of this appellation. And he was not content even with these, but that he might not seem in mere words to be humble-minded, he states both reasons and proofs: of his being “one born out of due time,” his seeing Jesus last; and of his being unworthy even of the name of an apostle, “his persecuting the Church.” For he that is simply humble-minded doeth not this: but he that also sets down the reasons utters all from a contrite mind. Wherefore also he elsewhere makes mention of these same things, saying, “And I thank him that enabled me; even Christ Jesus our Lord, for that He counted me faithful, appointing me to his service, though I was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

Theodoret of Cyrus: Paul compares himself here to an aborted fetus which is not even regarded by some as fully born. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 266

1 Corinthians 15:9

Ambrosiaster: Paul is least because he was the last in time, not because he was inferior in any way to the others. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: The Enemy is more completely vanquished in the case of a man over whom he holds fuller sway. — Confessions 8.4

Jerome: These words apply to those who complain: Why wasn’t I created such that I would be free from sin forever? Why was I fashioned such a vessel that I could not endure hard like metal instead of being fragile and easily broken whenever touched?… Let us blush and say what those say who have already obtained their rewards. Let us, who are sinners on earth and encased in this fragile and mortal body, say what we know the saints are saying in heaven. — Against the Pelagians 2.25

Jerome: If the apostle makes such a confession, how much more should the sinner? Scripture says: “The just man accuses himself when he begins to speak.” If the just man is prompt to accuse himself, how much more should the sinner be? — HOMILY 47 ON Psalms 135 (136)

John Chrysostom: He who endured imprisonment, wounds and beatings, who netted the world with epistles, who was called by a heavenly voice, humbled himself, saying, “I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle.” — ON REPENTANCE 5.27

John Chrysostom: “For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God.”

And he said not, of the twelve alone, but also of all the other apostles. And all these things he spake, both as one speaking modestly and because he was really so disposed as I said, making arrangements also beforehand for what was intended to be spoken and rendering it more acceptable. For had he come forward and said, “Ye ought to believe me that Christ rose from the dead; for I saw Him and of all I am the most worthy of credit, inasmuch as I have labored more,” the expression might have offended the hearers: but now by first dwelling on the humiliating topics and those which involve accusation, he both took off what might be grating in such a narrative, and prepared the way for their belief in his testimony.

On this account therefore neither doth he simply, as I said, declare himself to be the last and unworthy of the appellation of an apostle, but also states the reason, saying, “because I persecuted the Church.” And yet all those things were forgiven, but nevertheless he himself never forgot them, desiring to signify the greatness of God’s favor: wherefore also he goes on to say, “But by the grace of God I am what I am.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

1 Corinthians 15:10

Ambrosiaster: Paul says all this in order to show that despite his great sins and unworthiness, the grace of God was not given to him for nothing. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: Gladly and with the eyes of faith do all in the City of God look up to this great man, Paul, this athlete of Christ, who was anointed by Christ and instructed by him. With him he was nailed to the cross, and through him made glorious. This man was made a spectacle to the world, to angels and to men. He lawfully carried on a great conflict in the theater of this world and strained forward to the prize of his heavenly calling. — City of God 14.9

Augustine of Hippo: Paul did not labor in order to receive grace, but he received grace so that he might labor. — PROCEEDINGS OF PELAGIUS 14.36

Augustine of Hippo: How, then, is God’s commandment accomplished, even with difficulty, without his help, since if the Lord does not build, the builder is said to have labored in vain. — LETTER 186, FROM ALYPIUS AND AUGUSTINE TO PAULINUS

Basil of Caesarea: He who spends his time in softness and all laxity because of his luxurious living, who is clothed in purple and fine linen and feasting every day in splendid fashion and who flees the labors imposed by virtue has neither labored in this life nor will live in the future, but he will see life afar off, while being racked in the fire of the furnace. — UNTO THE END 19.5

Basil of Caesarea: This is the perfect and consummate glory in God: not to exult in one’s own righteousness, but recognizing oneself as lacking true righteousness, to be justified by faith in Christ alone. Paul gloried in despising his own righteousness. In seeking after the righteousness by faith which is of God through Christ, he sought only to know him and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable to his death, so as to attain to the resurrection from the dead.… It is God who grants efficacy to our labors. — ON HUMILITY 20

Irenaeus: Wherefore also Paul, since he was the apostle of the Gentiles, says, “I laboured more than they all.” — Against Heresies Book IV

John Chrysostom: You are familiar with Paul, who labored so much and erected so many trophies in combat with the devil. He physically marched throughout the known world. He orbited the earth, ocean, air—he circled the world as if he had wings. He was stoned, beaten and murdered. He suffered everything for the name of God, called from above by a heavenly voice.… We know, we understand, he said, the grace we have received, and it did not find me inattentive. — CONCERNING ALMSGIVING AND THE TEN VIRGINS 3.22

John Chrysostom: Did you see how he reaped the benefit of God’s liberality and then how abundantly he contributed his own share, by his zeal, his fervor, his faith, his courage, his patience, his lofty mind and his undaunted will? This is why he deserved a larger measure of help from above. — BAPTISMAL INSTRUCTIONS 4.10

John Chrysostom: “But by the grace of God I am what I am.”

Seest thou again another excess of humility? in that the defects he imputes to himself, but of the good deeds nothing; rather he refers all to God. Next, lest he might hereby render his hearer supine, he saith, “And His grace which was bestowed upon me was not found vain.” And this again with reserve: in that he said not, “I have displayed a diligence worthy of His grace,” but, “it was not found vain.”

“But I labored more abundantly than they all.” He said not, “I was honored,” but, “I labored;” and when he had perils and deaths to speak of, by the name of labor he again abates his expression.

Then again practicing his wonted humility, this also he speedily passes by and refers the whole to God, saying, “Yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.” What can be more admirable than such a soul? who having in so many ways depressed himself and uttered but one lofty word, not even this doth he call his own; on every side finding ways, both from the former things and from them that follow after, to contract this lofty expression, and that because it was of necessity that he came to it. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

1 Corinthians 15:11

Irenaeus: With regard to those (the Marcionites) who allege that Paul alone knew the truth, and that to him the mystery was manifested by revelation, let Paul himself convict them, when he says, that one and the same God wrought in Peter for the apostolate of the circumcision, and in himself for the Gentiles. Peter, therefore, was an apostle of that very God whose was also Paul; and Him whom Peter preached as God among those of the circumcision, and likewise the Son of God, did Paul [declare] also among the Gentiles. For our Lord never came to save Paul alone, nor is God so limited in means, that He should have but one apostle who knew the dispensation of His Son. And again, when Paul says, “How beautiful are the feet of those bringing glad tidings of good things, and preaching the Gospel of peace,” he shows clearly that it was not merely one, but there were many who used to preach the truth. And again, in the Epistle to the Corinthians, when he had recounted all those who had seen God after the resurrection, he says in continuation, “But whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed,” acknowledging as one and the same, the preaching of all those who saw God after the resurrection from the dead. — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 3

John Chrysostom: But wherefore did he utter at all that same lofty expression, “I labored more abundantly than they?” He saw that the occasion compelled him. For had he not said this, had he only depreciated himself, how could he with boldness call himself to witness, and number himself with the rest, and say, “Whether then it be I or they, so we preach.”

For the witness ought to be trustworthy, and a great man. But how he “labored more abundantly than they,” he indicated above, saying, “Have we no right to eat and to drink, as also the other Apostles?” And again, “to them that are without law as without law.” Thus, both where exactness was to be displayed, he overshot all: and where there was need to condescend, he displayed again the same great superiority.

But some cite his being sent to the Gentiles and his overrunning the larger part of the world. Whence it is evident that he enjoyed more grace. For if he labored more, the grace was also more: but he enjoyed more grace, because he displayed also more diligence. Seest thou how by those particulars whereby he contends and strives to throw into shade the things concerning himself, he is shown to be first of all? — Homily on 1 Corinthians 38

John Chrysostom: Having exalted the Apostles and abased himself, then again having exalted himself above them that he might make out an equality: (for he did effect an equality, when he showed that he had advantages over them as well as they over him,) and having thereby proved himself worthy of credit; neither so doth he dismiss them, but again ranks himself with them, pointing out their concord in Christ. Nevertheless he doth it not so as that he should seem to have been tacked on to them, but as himself also to appear in the same rank. For so it was profitable for the Gospel. Wherefore also he was equally earnest, on the one hand, that he might not seem to overlook them; on the other, that he might not be on account of the honor paid to them held cheap by those that were under his authority. Therefore he also now makes himself equal again, saying,

“Whether then it be I or they, so we preach.” “From whomsoever,” saith he, “ye choose to learn, learn; there is no difference between us.” And he said not, “if ye will not believe me, believe them;” but while he makes himself worthy of credit and saith that he is of himself sufficient, he affirms the same also of them by themselves. For the difference of persons took no effect, their authority being equal. And in the Epistle to the Galatians he doth this, taking them with him, not as also standing in need of them, but saying indeed that even himself was sufficient: “For they who were of repute imparted nothing to me:” nevertheless, even so I follow after agreement with them. “For they gave unto me,” saith he, “their right hands.” For if the credit of Paul were always to depend on others and to be confirmed by testimony from others, the disciples would hence have received infinite injury. It is not therefore to exalt himself that he doeth this, but fearing for the Gospel. Wherefore also he here saith, making himself equal, “Whether it be I or they, so we preach.”

Well did he say, “we preach,” indicating his great boldness of speech. For we speak not secretly, nor in a corner, but we utter a voice clearer than a trumpet. And he said not, “we preached,” but, “even now ‘so we preach.’” “And so ye believed.” Here he said not, “ye believe,” but, “ye believed.” Because they were shaken in mind, therefore he ran back to the former times, and proceeds to add the witness from themselves. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Tertullian: To be sure, an amender of that Gospel, which had been all topsy-turvy from the days of Tiberius to those of Antoninus, first presented himself in Marcion alone-so long looked for by Christ, who was all along regretting that he had been in so great a hurry to send out his apostles without the support of Marcion! But for all that, heresy, which is for ever mending the Gospels, and corrupting them in the act, is an affair of man’s audacity, not of God’s authority; and if Marcion be even a disciple, he is yet not “above his master; " if Marcion be an apostle, still as Paul says, “Whether it be I or they, so we preach; " if Marcion be a prophet, even “the spirits of the prophets will be subject to the prophets,” for they are not the authors of confusion, but of peace; or if Marcion be actually an angel, he must rather be designated “as anathema than as a preacher of the gospel,” because it is a strange gospel which he has preached. — Against Marcion Book IV

Tertullian: I am content with the fact that, between apostles, there is a common agreement in rules of faith and of discipline. For, “Whether (it be) I,” says (Paul), “or they, thus we preach.” Accordingly, it is material to the interest of the whole sacrament to believe nothing conceded by John, which has been taffy refused by Paul. — On Modesty

1 Corinthians 15:12

Ambrose of Milan: How grave an offense it is not to believe in the resurrection of the dead. If we do not rise again, Christ died in vain and did not rise again. For if he did not rise for us, he did not rise at all, because there is no reason why he should rise for himself. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.103

Augustine of Hippo: When the apostle says to the Corinthians, “How can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?” he shows plainly that not all of them were claiming this but that some were, and that it is clear they were not outside but among them… If we had not read in the same letter that “the testimony of Christ is confirmed in you so that nothing is wanting to you in any grace,” we might otherwise have concluded that all the Corinthians were carnalminded and sensual, not discerning the Spirit of God, “quarrelsome, envious, walking according to man.” Letter , To Vincent.

Irenaeus: It is plain, then, that Paul knew no other Christ besides Him alone, who both suffered, and was buried, and rose gain, who was also born, and whom he speaks of as man. For after remarking, “But if Christ be preached, that He rose from the dead” — Against Heresies Book III

John Chrysostom: “Now if Christ is preached that He hath been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?”

Seest thou how excellently he reasons, and proves the resurrection from the fact of Christ’s being raised, having first established the former in many ways? “For both the prophets spake of it,” saith he, “and the Lord Himself showed it by His appearing, and we preach, and ye believed;” weaving thus his fourfold testimony; the witness of the prophets, the witness of the issue of events, the witness of the apostles, the witness of the disciples; or rather a fivefold. For this very cause too itself implies the resurrection; viz. his dying for others’ sins. If therefore this hath been proved, it is evident that the other also follows, viz. that the other dead likewise are raised. And this is why, as concerning an admitted fact, he challenges and questions them, saying, “Now if Christ hath been raised, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?”

Hereby also again abating the boldness of the gainsayers: in that he said not, “how say, ye,” but, “how say some among you.” And neither doth he bring a charge against all nor declare openly the very persons whom he accuses, in order not to make them more reckless: neither on the other hand doth he conceal it wholly, that he may correct them. For this purpose accordingly, separating them from the multitude, he strips himself for the contest with them, by this both weakening and confounding them, and holding the rest in their conflicts with these firmer to the truth, nor suffering them to desert to those that were busy to destroy them: he being in fact prepared to adopt a vehement mode of speech.

Further, lest they should say, “this indeed is clear and evident unto all that Christ is raised, and none doubts it; this doth not however necessarily imply the other also, to wit, the resurrection of mankind:"-for the one was both before proclaimed and came to pass, and was testified of by his appearing; the fact, namely, of Christ’s resurrection: but the other is yet in hope, i.e., our own part:-see what he doeth; from the other side again he makes it out: which is a proof of great power. Thus, “why do some say,” saith he, “that there is no resurrection of the dead?” Of course then the former also in its turn is subverted by this, the fact, namely, that Christ is raised. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Julius Africanus: For who does not know that most holy word of the apostle also, who, when he was preaching and proclaiming the resurrection of our Saviour, and confidently affirming the truth, said with great fear, “If any say that Christ is not risen, and we assert and have believed this, and both hope for and preach that very thing, we are false witnesses of God, in alleging that He raised up Christ, whom He raised not up? " — Julius Africanus The Epistle to Aristides

Tertullian: Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, sets his mark on certain who denied and doubted the resurrection. This opinion was the especial property of the Sadducees. — The Prescription Against Heretics

Tertullian: I am content to illustrate this imperfection by the fact that even those whom he saves are found to possess but an imperfect salvation-that is, they are saved only so far as the soul is concerned, but lost in their body, which, according to him, does not rise again. — Against Marcion Book I

Tertullian: Ours is a better faith, which believes in a future Christ, than the heretic’s, which has none at all to believe in. Touching the resurrection of the dead, let us first inquire how some persons then denied it. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: and if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain, because ye are yet in your sins, and they which have fallen asleep in Christ are perished.” Now, what is the point which he evidently labours hard to make us believe throughout this passage? The resurrection of the dead, you say, which was denied: he certainly wished it to be believed on the strength of the example which he adduced-the Lord’s resurrection. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:13

Ignatius of Antioch: And that our bodies are to rise again, He shows when He says, “Verily I say unto you, that the hour cometh, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live.” And [says] the apostle, “For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.” And that we must live soberly and righteously, he [shows when he] says again, “Be not deceived: neither adulterers, nor effeminate persons, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor fornicators, nor revilers, nor drunkards, nor thieves, can inherit the kingdom of God.” And again, “If the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised; our preaching therefore is vain, and your faith is also vain: ye are yet in your sins. Then they also that are fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. If the dead rise not, let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.” But if such be our condition and feelings, wherein shall we differ from asses and dogs, who have no care about the future, but think only of eating, and of indulging such appetites as follow after eating? For they are unacquainted with any intelligence moving within them. — Epistle of Pseudo-Ignatius to the Tarsians

Irenaeus: But now Christ has risen from the dead, the first-fruits of those that sleep; for as by man — Against Heresies Book V

John Chrysostom: “But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised.”

Seest thou Paul’s energy, and his spirit for the combat, so invincible? how not only from what is evident he demonstrates what is doubted, but also from what is doubted, endeavors to demonstrate to gainsayers the former evident proposition? Not because what had already taken place required demonstration, but that he might signify this to be equally worthy of belief with that.

“And what kind of consequence is this?” saith one. “For if Christ be not raised, that then neither should others be raised, doth follow: but that if others be not raised, neither should Christ be raised, what reason can there be in this?” Since then this doth not appear to be very reasonable, see how he works it out wisely, scattering his seeds beforehand from the beginning, even from the very groundwork of the Gospel: as, that “having died for our sins,” He was raised; and that He is “the first-fruits of them that slept.” For the first-fruits-of what can He be the first-fruits, except of them that are raised? And how can He be first-fruits, if they rise not of whom He is first-fruits? How then are they not raised?

Again, if they be not raised, wherefore was Christ raised? Wherefore came He? Wherefore did He take upon Him flesh, if he were not about to raise flesh again? For He stood not in need of it Himself but for our sakes. But these things he afterwards set down as he goes on; for the present he saith, “If the dead be not raised, neither hath Christ been raised,” as though that were connected with this. For had He not intended to raise Himself, He would not have wrought that other work. Seest thou by degrees the whole economy overthrown by those words of theirs and by their unbelief in the resurrection? But as yet he saith nothing of the incarnation, but of the resurrection. For not His having become incarnate, but His having died, took away death; since while He had flesh, the tyranny of death still had dominion. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Pelagius: The one depends on the other. Either you believe both, or you believe neither. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

Severian of Gabala: Christ died and rose again for nothing if we are not to rise again as well. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Tertullian: Moreover, they even show themselves to be false witnesses of God, because they testified that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise. And we remain in our sins still. And those who have slept in Christ have perished; destined, forsooth, to rise again, but peradventure in a phantom state, just like Christ. — Against Marcion Book III

1 Corinthians 15:14

John Chrysostom: “And if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preaching vain, your faith also is vain.”

Although what followed in due course would have been, “but if Christ be not risen, ye fight against things evident, and against so many prophets, and the truth of facts;” nevertheless he states what is much more fearful to them: “then is our preaching vain, your faith also is vain.” For he wishes to shake thoroughly their mind: “we have lost all,” saith he, “all is over, if He be not risen.” Seest thou how great is the mystery of the oeconomy? As thus: if after death He could not rise again, neither is sin loosed nor death taken away nor the curse removed. Yea, and not only have we preached in vain, but ye also have believed in vain. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Pelagius: Some heretics claim that there is a resurrection of the soul but not of the body, though this makes no sense. How can there be a resurrection of something which has not fallen into the ground and died? — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

Theodore of Mopsuestia: Forgiveness of sins comes through the resurrection. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

1 Corinthians 15:15

Augustine of Hippo: If a lie directed against the temporal life of another is detestable, how much more so is one prejudicial to his eternal life. Such is every lie voiced in the teaching of religion. On that account, the apostle terms it false witness if anyone lies about Christ, even in what might seem to pertain to his praise. — On Lying 13

John Chrysostom: And not hereby alone doth he show the impiety of these evil doctrines, but he further contends earnestly against them, saying,

“Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God: because we witnessed of Him that He raised up Christ; whom He raised not up, if so be that the dead are not raised.”

But if this be absurd, (for it is a charge against God and a calumny,) and He raised Him not, as ye say, not only this, but other absurdities too will follow. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Pelagius: Our preaching would not just be pointless, it would be downright false, if this were the case. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:16

John Chrysostom: And again he establishes it all, and takes it up again, saying,

“For if the dead are not raised, neither hath Christ been raised.”

For had He not intended to do this, He would not have come into the world. And he names not this, but the end, to wit, His resurrection; through it drawing all things. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Pelagius: In other words, if you accept that Christ rose from the dead, believe that we shall rise again also. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:17

Cyril of Jerusalem: If the cross is an illusion, the resurrection is an illusion also, and “if Christ has not risen, we are still in our sins.” If the cross is an illusion, the ascension is also an illusion, and everything, finally, becomes unsubstantial. — Catechetical Lecture 13

John Chrysostom: “And if Christ hath not been raised, your faith is vain.”

With whatever is clear and confessed, he keeps on surrounding the resurrection of Christ, by means of the stronger point making even that which seems to be weak and doubtful, strong and clear.

“Ye are yet in your sins.” For if He was not raised, neither did He die; and if He died not, neither did He take away sin: His death being the taking away of sin. “For behold,” saith one, “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” But how “taketh away?” By His death. Wherefore also he called him a Lamb, as one slain. But if He rose not again, neither was He slain: and if He was not slain, neither was sin taken away: and if it was not taken away, ye are in it: and if ye are in it, we have preached in vain: and if we have preached in vain, ye have believed in vain that ye were reconciled. And besides, death remains immortal, if He did not arise. For if He too was holden of death and loosed not its pains, how released He all others, being as yet Himself holden of it? — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Pelagius: If Christ lied about his resurrection, then he lied about his claim to forgive our sins also. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:18

Ambrosiaster: Paul says this because the Corinthians will not want to listen to the false prophets once they realize that if they do so their dead, whom they love, will be taken from them. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ have perished.”

“And why speak I of you,” saith he, “when all those also are perished, who have done all and are no longer subject to the uncertainty of the future?” But by the expression, “in Christ,” he means either “in the faith,” or “they who died for His sake, who endured many perils, many miseries, who walked in the narrow way.”

Where are those foul-mouthed Manichees who say that by the resurrection here means the liberation from sin? For these compact and continuous syllogisms, holding as they do also conversely, indicate nothing of what they say, but what we affirm. It is true, “rising again” is spoken of one who has fallen: and this is why he keeps on explaining, and saith not only that He was raised, but adds this also, “from the dead.” And the Corinthians too doubted not of the forgiveness of sins, but of the resurrection of bodies.

But what necessity is there at all, that except mankind be not without sin, neither should Christ Himself be so? Whereas, if He were not to raise men up, it were natural to say, “wherefore came He and took our flesh and rose again?” But on our supposition not so. Yea, and whether men sin or do not sin, there is ever with God an impossibility of sinning, and what happens to us reaches not to Him, nor doth one case answer to the other by way of conversion, as in the matter of the resurrection of the body. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Pelagius: Paul has the martyrs in mind above all. They would have lost their lives in vain if there was no other life to look forward to. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:19

Ambrose of Milan: Paul says this, not because to hope in Christ is miserable but because Christ has prepared another life for those who hope in him. For this life is liable to sin. The life above is reserved for our reward. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.124

Ambrosiaster: It is clear that we hope in Christ both for this life and for the next one. Christ does not abandon his servants but gives them grace, and in the future they will dwell in eternal glory. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most pitiable.”

What sayest thou, O Paul? How “in this life only have we hope,” if our bodies be not raised, the soul abiding and being immortal? Because even if the soul abide, even if it be infinitely immortal, as indeed it is, without the flesh it shall not receive those hidden good things, as neither truly shall it be punished. For all things shall be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ, “that every one may receive the things done in the body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.” Therefore he saith, “if in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most pitiable.” For if the body rise not again, the soul abides uncrowned without that blessedness which is in heaven. And if this be so, we shall enjoy nothing then at all: and if nothing then, in the present life is our recompense. “What then in this respect can be more wretched than we?” saith he.

But these things he said, as well to confirm them in the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, as to persuade them concerning that immortal life, in order that they might not suppose that all our concerns end with the present world. For having sufficiently established what he purposed by the former arguments, and having said, “if the dead are not raised, neither hath Christ been raised; but if Christ were not raised, we have perished, and we are yet in our sins;” again he also subjoins this, thoroughly demolishing their arrogance. For so when he intends to introduce any of the necessary doctrines, he first shakes thoroughly their hardness of heart by fear: which accordingly he did here, having both above scattered those seeds, and made them anxious, as those who had fallen from all: and now again after another manner, and so as they should most severely feel it, doing this same thing and saying, “‘we are of all men most pitiable,’ if after so great conflicts and deaths and those innumerable evils, we are to fall from so great blessings, and our happiness is limited by the present life.” For in fact all depends on the resurrection. So that even hence it is evident that his discourse was not of a resurrection from sins, but of bodies, and of the life present and to come. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius: For if our souls are mortal, if virtue is about to have no existence after the dissolution of the body, why do we avoid the goods assigned to us, as though we were ungrateful or unworthy of enjoying the divine gifts? For, that we may enjoy these blessings, we must live in wickedness and impiety, because virtue, that is, justice, is followed by poverty. Therefore he is not of sound mind, who, without having any greater hope set before him, prefers labours, and tortures, and miseries, to those goods which others enjoy in life. But if virtue is to be taken up, as is most rightly said by these, because it is evident that man is born to it, it ought to contain some greater hope, which may apply a great and illustrious solace for the ills and labours which it is the part of virtue to endure. — The Divine Institutes Book 6

Maximus of Turin: Therefore Christ is not to be hoped in for this life only, in which the bad can do more than the good, in which those who are more evil are happier, and those who lead a more criminal life live more prosperously. — SERMON 96.1

Tertullian: What archangel’s voice, (I wonder), what trump of God is now heard, except it be, forsooth, in the entertainments of the heretics? For, allowing that the word of the gospel may be called “the trump of God,” since it was still calling men, yet they must at that time either be dead as to the body, that they may be able to rise again; and then how are they alive? Or else caught up into the clouds; and how then are they here? “Most miserable,” no doubt, as the apostle declared them, are they “who in this life only” shall be found to have hope: they will have to be excluded while they are with premature haste seizing that which is promised after this life; erring concerning the truth, no less than Phygellus and Hermogenes. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:20

Ambrosiaster: Paul says this in order to get at the false prophets who claimed that Christ was never born and thus cannot have died. The resurrection from the dead proves that Christ was a man and therefore able to merit by his righteousness the resurrection of the dead. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Clement of Rome: Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord continually proves to us that there shall be a future resurrection, of which He has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the first-fruits by raising Him from the dead. Let us contemplate, beloved, the resurrection which is at all times taking place. Day and night declare to us a resurrection. The night sinks to sleep, and the day arises; the day [again] departs, and the night comes on. Let us behold the fruits [of the earth], how the sowing of grain takes place. The sower [Luke 8:5] goes forth, and casts it into the ground, and the seed being thus scattered, though dry and naked when it fell upon the earth, is gradually dissolved. Then out of its dissolution the mighty power of the providence of the Lord raises it up again, and from one seed many arise and bring forth fruit. — Letter to the Corinthians (Clement)

Cyril of Alexandria: For the sake of all he tasted death. Although by nature he was life and was himself the resurrection, he surrendered his own body to death. By his ineffable power he trampled upon death in his own flesh that he might become the firstborn from the dead and the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep.… Even if the resurrection of the dead may be said to be through a man, the man we know it is through is the Word begotten of God. The power of death has been destroyed through him. — LETTER 17.11

Cyril of Alexandria: The Word does not suffer insofar as he is viewed as God by nature. Yet the sufferings of his flesh were according to the economy of the dispensation. For in what way would he be “the firstborn of every creature, through whom have come to be principalities and powers, thrones and dominations, in whom all things hold together,” and in what way would he become the “firstborn of the dead” and the “first fruits of those who have fallen asleep,” unless the Word, being God, made his own the body born to suffer? — LETTER 50.14

Hippolytus of Rome: He calls Him, then, “the first-fruits of them that sleep,” as the “first-begotten of the dead.” For He, having risen, and being desirous to show that that same (body) had been raised which had also died, when His disciples were in doubt, called Thomas to Him, and said, “Reach hither; handle me, and see: for a spirit hath not bone and flesh, as ye see me have.” — Fragments - Dogmatic and Historical

Irenaeus: For the Lord, having been born “the First-begotten of the dead,” and receiving into His bosom the ancient fathers, has regenerated them into the life of God, He having been made Himself the beginning of those that live, as Adam became the beginning of those who die. Wherefore also Luke, commencing the genealogy with the Lord, carried it back to Adam, indicating that it was He who regenerated them into the Gospel of life, and not they Him. And thus also it was that the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith. — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 3

John Chrysostom: “But now hath Christ been raised from the dead, the first-fruits of them that are asleep.”

Having signified how great mischiefs are bred from not believing the resurrection, he takes up the discourse again, and says, “But now hath Christ been raised from the dead;” continually adding, “from the dead,” so as to stop the mouths of the heretics. “The first-fruits of them that slept.” But if their first-fruits, then themselves also, must needs rise again. Whereas if he were speaking of the resurrection from sins, and none is without sin;-for even Paul saith, “I know nothing against myself, yet am I not hereby justified;"-how shall there be any who rise again, according to you? Seest thou that his discourse was of bodies? And that he might make it worthy of credit, he continually brings forward Christ who rose again in the flesh.

Next he also assigns a reason. For, as I said, when one asserts but does not state the reason, his discourse is not easily received by the multitude. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Pelagius: If the head has risen, then the rest of the body will follow in due course. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:21

Ambrose of Milan: Man arose because man died. Man was raised up again, but it was God who raised him. Then he was man according to the flesh. Now God is all in all. Now we no longer know Christ according to the flesh, but we have the grace of his flesh. We know him as the first fruits of those who rest, the firstborn of the dead. Unquestionably the first fruits are of the same species and nature as the rest of the fruits.… Therefore, as the first fruits of death were in Adam, so also the first fruits of the resurrection are in Christ. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.91

Athanasius of Alexandria: For by the sacrifice of his own body he both put an end to the law which was against us and made a new beginning of life for us, by the hope of resurrection which he has given us. For since from man it was that death prevailed over men, for this cause conversely, by the Word of God being made man has come about the destruction of death and the resurrection of life. — On the Incarnation of the Word 10

Basil of Caesarea: If the sojourn of the Lord in the flesh did not take place, the Redeemer did not pay to death the price for us. He did not by his own power destroy the dominion of death. If that which is subject to death were one thing and that which was assumed by the Lord another, then death would not have ceased performing its own works, nor would the sufferings of the God-bearing flesh have been our gain. He would not have destroyed sin in the flesh. We who had died in Adam would not have been made alive in Christ. — LETTER 261, TO THE CITIZENS OF SOZOPOLIS

Cyril of Alexandria: He tasted death on behalf of every man in his flesh, which was able to suffer without him ceasing to be life. Accordingly, even though it is stated that he suffered in his flesh, he did not receive the suffering in the nature of his divinity but in his flesh which was receptive to suffering. — LETTER 55.34

John Chrysostom: “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.”

But if by a man, doubtless by one having a body. And observe his thoughtfulness, how on another ground also he makes his argument inevitable. As thus: “he that is defeated,” saith he, “must in his own person also renew the conflict, the nature which was cast down must itself also gain the victory. For so the reproach was wiped away.”

But let us see what kind of death he is speaking of. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Tertullian: Now that falls down which returns to the ground; and that rises again which falls down. “Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection.” Here in the word man, who consists of bodily sub stance, as we have often shown already, is presented to me the body of Christ. — Against Marcion Book V

1 Corinthians 15:22

Ambrosiaster: Adam died because he sinned, and so Christ, who was without sin, overcame death, in that death comes from sin. Everyone, the righteous and the unrighteous alike, dies in Adam, and everyone, believers and unbelievers alike, will also be raised in Christ. But the unbelievers will be handed over for punishment, even though they appear to have been raised from the dead, because they will receive their bodies back again in order to suffer eternal punishment for their unbelief. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: This does not mean that all who die in Adam will be members of Christ, since the majority will be punished in eternity by a second death. The apostle uses the word all in both clauses because as no one dies in a natural body except in Adam, so no one is made to live again in a spiritual body, except in Christ. — City of God 13.23

Augustine of Hippo: Man indeed brought death to himself and to the Son of Man. But the Son of Man, by dying and rising again, brought life to man. — LETTER 140, TO HONORATUS 9

Augustine of Hippo: No human enters into death except through Adam and no one into eternal life except through Christ. This is the meaning of that repeated phrase all, because as all men belong to Adam through their first or carnal birth, so all men who belong to Christ come to the second or spiritual birth. Therefore he says “all” in both places because as all who die die only in Adam, so all who will be made alive will not be made alive except in Christ. — LETTER 167, To Jerome 21

Augustine of Hippo: Notice how he emphasizes “one” and “one,” that is Adam and Christ, the former for condemnation, the latter for justification.… Obviously he is speaking of the resurrection of the just where there is life eternal, not of the resurrection of the wicked where there will be eternal death. Those who “shall be made alive” are contrasted with the others who will be damned. — LETTER 157, TO HILARIUS

Augustine of Hippo: We commonly say that all enter a certain house through one door, not because all humanity enters that house but because no one enters except through that door. It is in this sense that as all die in Adam so do all those who live live in Christ.… Aside from the one Mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, there is no other name under heaven whereby we must be saved. — AGAINST JULIAN 24

Irenaeus: He might acquire for himself hearers void of faith, affecting to be esteemed a teacher, and endeavouring from time to time to employ sayings of this kind often . n Adam, that breath of life which proceeded from God, having been united to what had been fashioned, animated the man, and manifested him as a being endowed with reason; so also, in — Against Heresies Book V

John Chrysostom: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”

What then? tell me; did all die in Adam the death of sin? How then was Noah righteous in his generation? and how Abraham? and how Job? and how all the rest? And what, I pray? shall all be made alive in Christ? Where then are those who are led away into hell fire? Thus, if this be said of the body, the doctrine stands: but if of righteousness and sin, it doth so no longer.

Further, lest, on hearing that the making alive is common to all, thou shouldest also suppose that sinners are saved, he adds, — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Methodius of Olympus: Adam, should “all be made alive.”. he was changed into the nature of the latter, himself being neither the tree of life nor that of corruption; but having been shown forth as mortal, from his participation in and presence with corruption, and, again, as incorrupt and immortal by connection with and participation in life; as Paul also taught, saying, “Corruption shall not inherit in corruption, nor death life”. But if any one were to think that the earthy image is the flesh itself, but the heavenly image some other spiritual body besides the flesh; let him first consider that Christ, the heavenly man, when He appeared, bore the same form of limbs and the same image of flesh as ours, through which also He, who was not man, became man, that “as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” — Methodius Discourse III. Thaleia

Severian of Gabala: Strictly speaking, not everyone has died. Enoch and Elijah, for example, never did. Some will be found alive at the second coming of the Savior. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Tertullian: If Adam is a type of Christ then Adam’s sleep is a symbol of the death of Christ, and by the wound in the side of Christ was typified the church, the true mother of all the living. — ON THE SOUL 43.10

Tertullian: (This he says) in order, on the one hand, to distinguish the two authors-Adam of death, Christ of resurrection; and, on the other hand, to make the resurrection operate on the same substance as the death, by comparing the authors themselves under the designation man. For if “as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,” their vivification in Christ must be in the flesh, since it is in the flesh that arises their death in Adam. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Blush, O flesh, who hast “put on” Christ! Suffice it thee once for all to marry, whereto “from the beginning” thou wast created, whereto by “the end” thou art being recalled! Return at least to the former Adam, if to the last thou canst not! Once for all did he taste of the tree; once for all felt concupiscence; once for all veiled his shame; once for all blushed in the presence of God; once for all concealed his guilty hue; once for all was exiled from the paradise of holiness; once for all thenceforward married. If you were “in him,” you have your norm; if you have passed over “into Christ,” you will be bound to be (yet) better. — On Monogamy

1 Corinthians 15:23

Ambrose of Milan: The fruit of divine mercy is common to all, but the order of merit differs. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.92

Origen of Alexandria: Although all are contained within the one faith and washed in the one baptism, the process of maturing in faith is not the same for all, but rather “each one in his own order.” — HOMILIES ON Genesis 2

1 Corinthians 15:24

Augustine of Hippo: They that have done well will go to live with the angels of God; they that have done evil, to be tormented with the devil and his angels. And the form of a servant will pass away. For to this end He had manifested Himself, that He might execute judgment. After the judgment, He shall go hence, will lead with Him the body of which He is the head, and deliver up the kingdom of God. Then will openly be seen that form of God which could not be seen by the wicked, to whose vision the form of a servant must be shown. — Tractates on John 19

Basil of Caesarea: For us the end for which we do all things and toward which we hasten is the blessed life in the world to come. — HOMILY 19 ON Psalms 48

Cassiodorus: The faithful deserve to be at his right hand. They will judge in company with the Lord. They will pass into eternal peace and joy, so that they are rightly said to be exalted, for through the Lord’s wondrous devotion they attain contemplation of the Lord himself. — EXPLANATION OF THE Psalms 14

John Chrysostom: “Then cometh the end.”

For when these shall have risen again, all things shall have an end, not as now when after Christ’s resurrection things abide yet in suspense. Wherefore he added, “at His coming,” that thou mayest learn that he is speaking of that time, “when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God even the Father; when He shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power.”

Here, give heed to me carefully, and see that no part escape you of what I say. For our contest is with enemies: wherefore we first must practice the reductio ad absurdum which also Paul often doeth. Since in this way shall we find what they say most easy of detection. Let us ask them then first, what is the meaning of the saying, “When he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father?” For if we take this just as it stands and not in a sense becoming Deity, He will not after this retain it. For he that hath delivered up to another, ceases any longer to retain a thing himself. And not only will there be this absurdity, but that also the other person who receives it will be found not to be possessor of it before he hath so received it. Therefore according to them, neither was the Father a King before, governing our affairs: nor will it seem that the Son after these things will be a King. How then, first of all, concerning the Father doth the Son Himself say, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work:” and of Him Daniel, “That His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, which shall not pass away?” Seest thou how many absurdities are produced, and repugnant to the Scriptures, when one takes the thing spoken after the manner of men?

But what “rule,” then doth he here say, that Christ “putteth down?” That of the angels? Far from it. That of the faithful? Neither is it this. What rule then? That of the devils, concerning which he saith, “Our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness:” For now it is not as yet “put down” perfectly, they working in many places, but then shall they cease. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Origen of Alexandria: When Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, then those living beings, because they have before this been made part of Christ’s kingdom, shall also be delivered up along with the whole of that kingdom to the rule of the Father, so that, when “God shall be all in all,” they also, since they are a part of all, may have God even in themselves, as he is in all things. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 1.8

Tertullian: But it remains so firm and stable in its own state, notwithstanding the introduction into it of the Trinity, that the Son actually has to restore it entire to the Father; even as the apostle says in his epistle, concerning the very end of all: “When He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; for He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet; " following of course the words of the Psalm: “Sit Thou on my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. — Against Praxeas

1 Corinthians 15:25

Augustine of Hippo: He reigns forever. However, in respect to the war waged under him against the devil, this conflict will obviously continue “until he has put all his enemies under his feet.” But afterward there will be no conflict, since we shall enjoy an everlasting peace. — QUESTIONS 69.8

Augustine of Hippo: It is necessary for Christ’s kingdom to be manifested to such a degree until all his enemies confess that he does reign.… That is, the apostle says, it is necessary for him to make his reign so clearly evident until his enemies dare not at all deny that Christ reigns. — QUESTIONS 69.5

Cyril of Jerusalem: Some say that when his enemies have been put under his feet, he will no longer be king, a bad and stupid thing to say. For if he is king before he has finally defeated his enemies, must he not be all the more king when he has completely mastered them? — Catechetical Lecture 15:29

Cyril of Jerusalem: This body shall be raised but not in its present weakness. It shall be raised the very same body, but by putting aside corruption it shall be transformed, just as iron becomes fire when combined with fire, as the Lord who raises us knows. This body therefore shall rise, but it will not abide in its present condition, but as an eternal body. No longer will it, as now, need nourishment for life nor stairs for its ascent. It will become spiritual, a marvelous thing, beggaring description. — Catechetical Lecture 18

Gregory of Nazianzus: “He must reign” till such and such a time … and “be received by heaven until the time of restitution” and have the seat at the right hand until the overthrow of his enemies. But after this? Must he cease to be king or be removed from heaven? Why, who shall make him cease, or for what cause? What a bold and very anarchical interpreter you are, and yet you have heard that of his kingdom there shall be no end. Your mistake arises from not understanding that “until” is not always exclusive of what comes after but asserts up to that time, without denying what comes after it. To take a single instance, how else would you understand “Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world”? Does it mean that he will no longer be so afterward? — THEOLOGICAL ORATION 30.4

Jerome: Will the Lord rule only until he has put all his enemies under his feet? Will he then stop ruling? Obviously it is only then that he will really begin to rule in the full sense of the word! — AGAINST HELVIDIUS 6

John Chrysostom: “For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet.”

Again from hence also another absurdity is produced, unless we take this also in a way becoming Deity. For the expression “until,” is one of end and limitation: but in reference to God, this does not exist.

And this manner of speech one might find also in the Old Testament; as when it is said, “But the word of the Lord abideth for ever;” and, “Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail.” Now these and such-like things the Prophet saith, when he is telling of things which a long space of time must achieve and which must by all means come to pass; casting out the fearfulness of the duller sort of hearers.

But that the expression, “until,” spoken of God, and “unto,” do not signify an end, hear what one saith: “From everlasting unto everlasting Thou art God:” and again, “I am, I am,” and “Even to your old age I am He.”

Since then he referred all to Him, the “abolishing rule and authority,” the perfecting of His kingdom, (I mean the salvation of the faithful, the peace of the world, the taking away of evils, for this is to perfect His kingdom,) the putting an end to death; and he said not, “the Father by Him,” but, “Himself shall put down, and Himself shall put under His feet,” and he no where mentioned Him that begat Him; he was afraid afterward, lest on this account among some of the more irrational persons, either the Son might seem to be greater than the Father, or to be a certain distinct principle, unbegotten. And therefore, gently guarding himself, he qualifies the magnitude of his expressions, saying, “for He put all things in subjection under His feet,” again referring to the Father these high achievements; not as though the Son were without power. For how could He be, of whom he testified so great things before, and referred to Him all that was said? But it was for the reason which I mentioned, and that he might show all things to be common to Father and Son which were done in our behalf. For that Himself alone was sufficient to “put all things in subjection under Him,” hear again Paul saying, “Who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation that it may be conformed to the body of His glory, according to the working whereby He is able even to subject all things unto Himself.”

For “do not,” saith he, “because thou hast heard that He will abolish all rule, and authority and power,” to wit, the devil, and the bands of demons, (many as there are,) and the multitudes of unbelievers, and the tyranny of death, and all evils: do not thou fear as though His strength was exhausted. For until He shall have done all these things, “He must reign;” not saying this, that after He hath brought it to pass He doth not reign; but establishing this other, that even if it be not now, undoubtedly it will be. For His kingdom is not cut off: yea, He rules and prevails and abides until He shall have set to right all things. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Justin Martyr: And that God the Father of all would bring Christ to heaven after He had raised Him from the dead, and would keep Him there until He has subdued His enemies the devils, and until the number of those who are foreknown by Him as good and virtuous is complete, on whose account He has still delayed the consummation-hear what was said by the prophet David. These are his words: “The Lord said unto My Lord, Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. The Lord shall send to Thee the rod of power out of Jerusalem; and rule Thou in the midst of Thine enemies. With Thee is the government in the day of Thy power, in the beauties of Thy saints: from the womb of morning have I begotten Thee.” — The First Apology, Chapter XLV

Oecumenius: The principalities and powers will be abolished and will be left powerless. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Papias of Hierapolis: The presbyters, the disciples of the apostles, say that this is the gradation and arrangement of those who are saved, and that they advance through steps of this nature; and that, moreover, they ascend through the Spirit to the Son, and through the Son to the Father; and that in due time the Son will yield up His work to the Father, even as it is said by the apostle, “For He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.”

Tertullian: For the resurrection of the body will receive all the better proof, in proportion as I shall succeed in showing that Christ belongs to that God who is believed to have provided this resurrection of the flesh in His dispensation. When he says, “For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet,” we can see at once from this statement that he speaks of a God of vengeance, and therefore of Him who made the following promise to Christ: “Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: And thus, the statement which occurs in about the middle of this Psalm, “His enemies shall lick the dust” (of course, as having been, (to use the apostle’s phrase, ) “put under His feet” ), will bear upon the very object which I had in view, when I both introduced the Psalm, and insisted on my opinion of its sense,-namely, that I might demonstrate both the glory of His kingdom and the subjection of His enemies in pursuance of the Creator’s own plans, with the view of laying down this conclusion, that none but He can be believed to be the Christ of the Creator. — Against Marcion Book V

Theodoret of Cyrus: The final victory will be the fulfillment, not the end, of Christ’s reign. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 270

1 Corinthians 15:26

Augustine of Hippo: It is one thing to fight well, which is the case now when the struggle of death is resisted. It is something else not to have an adversary, which will be the case when death “our last enemy” is destroyed. — On Continence 3.6

Augustine of Hippo: The new life begins now by faith and is carried on by hope, but then will come the time when death shall be swallowed up in victory, when that “enemy, death, shall be destroyed last,” when we shall be changed and become like the angels.… We have now mastered fear by faith, but then we shall have the mastery in love by vision. — LETTER 55, To Janarius

Augustine of Hippo: In this house God’s people shall everlastingly dwell with their God and in their God, and God with his people and in his people, God filling his people, his people filled with God, so that “God may be all in all”—the very same God being their prize in peace who was their strength in battle. — City of God 17.12

Irenaeus: Now Adam had been conquered, all life having been taken away from him: wherefore, when the foe was conquered in his turn, Adam received new life; and the last enemy, death, is destroyed, — Against Heresies Book III

Jerome: As the psalmist pleads that God be glorified in the borders of his enemies, so do we. When they have ceased to be enemies, then you, O Lord, will be exalted among them. — HOMILY 3 ON Psalms 7

John Chrysostom: “The last enemy that shall be abolished is death.”

How the last? After all, after the devil, after all the other things. For so in the beginning also death came in last; the counsel of the devil having come first, and our disobedience, and then death. Virtually then indeed it is even now abolished: but actually, at that time.

For this cause indeed doth he set death last, that from the victory over the rest this also might be easily admitted by the unbeliever. For when He destroys the devil who brought in death, much more will He put an end to His work.

But if bodies do not rise again, how are these things true? For the worst enemy of all, death, remains, having wrought whatever he listed. “Nay,” saith one, “for they shall sin no more.” And what of that? For he is not discoursing here of the death of the soul, but of that of the body? How then is he “put down?” For victory is this, the winning of those things which have been carried off and detained. But if men’s bodies are to be detained in the earth, it follows that the tyranny of death remains, these bodies for their part being holden, and there being no other body for him to be vanquished in. But if this which Paul spake of, ensue, as undoubtedly it will ensue, God’s victory will appear, and that a glorious one, in His being able to raise again the bodies which were holden thereby. Since an enemy too is then vanquished, when a man takes the spoils, not when he suffers them to remain in the other’s possession: but unless one venture to take what is his, how can we say that he is vanquished? After this manner of victory doth Christ Himself say in the Gospels that He hath been victorious, thus speaking, “When he shall bind the strong man, then shall he also spoil his goods.” Since if this were not so, it would not be at all a manifest victory. For as in the death of the soul, “he that hath died is justified from sin;” (and yet we cannot say that this is a victory, for he is not the victor who adds no more to his wickedness, but he who hath done away the former captivity of his passions;) just so in this instance also, I should not call death’s being stayed from feeding on the bodies of men a splendid victory, but rather that the bodies heretofore holden by him should be snatched away from him.

But if they should still be contentious and should say that these things were spoken of the soul’s death, how is this “destroyed last?” since in the case of each one at his Baptism it hath been destroyed perfectly. If however thou speakest of the body, the expression is admissible; I mean, such a saying as that it will be “last destroyed.”

But if any should doubt why discoursing of the resurrection, he did not bring forward the bodies which rose again in the time of our Lord, our answer might be the following: that this could not be alleged in behalf of the resurrection. For to point out those who after rising died again, suited not one employed in proving that death is entirely destroyed. Yea, this is the very reason why he said that he is “destroyed last,” that thou mightest never more suspect his rising again. For when sin is taken away, much more shall death cease: it being out of all reason when the fountain is dried up, that the stream flowing from it should still subsist; and when the root is annihilated, that the fruit should remain. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Origen of Alexandria: For the destruction of the last enemy must be understood in this way: not that its substance which was made by God shall perish, but that the hostile purpose and will which proceeded not from God but from itself will come to an end. It will be destroyed, therefore, not in the sense of ceasing to exist but of being no longer an enemy and no longer death.… We must not think, however, that it will happen all of a sudden, but gradually and by degrees, during the lapse of infinite and immeasurable ages, seeing that the improvement and correction will be realized slowly and separately in each individual person. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.6.5

Tertullian: Now he says in a previous passage (of our Epistle to the Corinthians), that “the last enemy to be destroyed is death.” In this way, then, it is that corruption shall not inherit incorruption; in other words, death shall not continue. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:27

Basil of Caesarea: He makes your subjection his own, and because of your struggle against virtue, he calls himself subjected.… He calls himself naked, if any of you are naked.… When one is in prison, he said that he himself was the one imprisoned. For he himself took up our infirmities and bore the burden of our ills. And one of our infirmities is insubordination, and this he also bore. Therefore, even the adversities which happen to us the Lord makes his own, taking upon himself our sufferings because of his fellowship with us. — AN APOLOGY TO THE CAESAREANS, LETTER 8

Hilary of Poitiers: Hence the first step in the mystery is that all things have been made subject to him, and then he himself becomes subject to the One who subjects all things to himself. Just as we subject ourselves to the glory of his reigning body, the Lord himself in the same mystery subjects himself in the glory of his body to the One who subjects all things to himself. We are made subject to the glory of his body in order that we may possess the glory with which he reigns in the body, because we shall be conformable to his body. — ON THE TRINITY 11.36

Irenaeus: And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” — Fragments of Papias

John Chrysostom: “For He hath put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He saith, All things are put in subjection, it is manifest that He is excepted who did subject all things unto Him.”

“And when all things have been subjected unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subjected unto Him that did subject all things unto Him.”

And yet before he said not that it was the Father who “put things under Him,” but He Himself who “abolishes.” For “when He shall have abolished,” saith he, “all rule and authority:” and again, “for He must reign until He hath put all His enemies under His feet.” How then doth he here say, “the Father?”

And not only is there this apparent perplexity, but also that he is afraid with a very unaccountable fear, and uses a correction, saying, “He is excepted, who did subject all things unto Him,” as though some would suspect, whether the Father might Himself not be subject unto the Son; than which what can be more irrational? nevertheless, he fears this.

How then is it? for in truth there are many questions following one upon another. Well, give me then your earnest attention; since in fact it is necessary for us first to speak of the scope of Paul and his mind, which one may find everywhere shining forth, and then to subjoin our solution: this being itself an ingredient in our solution.

What then is Paul’s mind, and what is his custom? He speaks in one way when he discourses of the Godhead alone, and in another when he falls into the argument of the economy. Thus having once taken hold of our Lord’s Flesh, he freely thereafter uses all the sayings that humiliate Him; without fear as though that were able to bear all such expressions. Let us see therefore here also, whether his discourse is of the simple Godhead, or whether in view of the incarnation he asserts of Him those things which he saith: or rather let us first point out where he did this of which I have spoken.

Then also he uses a correction, saying, “But when He saith, all things are put in subjection, it is evident that He is excepted who did subject all things unto Him,” testifying even thence no small glory to the Only-Begotten. For if He were less and much inferior, this fear would never have been entertained by him. Neither is he content with this, but also adds another thing, as follows. I say, lest any should doubtingly ask, “And what if the Father hath not been ‘put under Him?’ this doth not at all hinder the Son from being the more mighty;” fearing this impious supposition, because that expression was not sufficient to point out this also, he added, going very much beyond it, “But when all things have been subjected unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subjected;” showing His great concord with the Father, and that He is the principle of all other good things and the first Cause, who hath begotten One so great in power and in achievements.

And that thou mayest learn that this is the reason of the things spoken, I would ask thee this question: Doth an additional “subjection” at that time befal the Son? And how can this be other than impious and unworthy of God? For the greatest subjection and obedience is this, that He who is God took the form of a servant. How then will He be “subjected?” Seest thou, that to take away the impious notion, he used this expression? and this too in a suitable though reserved sense? For he becomes a Son and a divine Person, so He obeys; not humanly, but as one acting freely and having all authority. Otherwise how is he co-enthroned? How, “as the Father raiseth up, even so He, whom He will?” How are “all things that the Father hath His,” and all that He hath, the Father’s? For these phrases indicate to us an authority exactly measured by that of Him that begat Him.

But what is this, “When He shall deliver up the kingdom?” The Scripture acknowledges two kingdoms of God, the one by appropriation, the other by creation. Thus, He is King over all, both Greeks and Jews and devils and His adversaries, in respect of His creation: but He is King of the faithful and willing and subject, in respect of His making them His own. This is the kingdom which is said also to have a beginning. For concerning this He saith also in the second Psalm, “Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance.” Touching this also, He Himself said to His disciples, “All authority hath been given unto Me by My father,” referring all to Him that begat Him, not as though of Himself He were not sufficient, but to signify that He is a Son, and not unbegotten. This kingdom then He doth “deliver up,” i.e., “bring to a right end.”

“What then,” saith one, “can be the reason why He spake nothing of the Spirit?” Because of Him he was not discoursing now, nor doth he confound all things together. Since also where he saith, “There is one God the Father, and one Lord Jesus,” undoubtedly not as allowing the Spirit to be inferior, is he therefore silent, but because for the time it was not urgent, he so expressed himself. For he is wont also to make mention of the Father only, yet we must not therefore cast out the Son: he is wont to speak also of the Son and of the Spirit only, yet not for this are we to deny the Father.

But what is, “that God may be all in all?” That all things may be dependent upon Him, that none may suppose two authorities without a beginning, nor another kingdom separated off; that nothing may exist independent of him. For when the enemies shall be lying under the feet of the Son, and He having them cast under His feet be at no variance with His Father, but at concord with Him in entire perfection, then He shall Himself “be all in all.”

But some say that he spake this to declare the removal of wickedness, as though all would yield thenceforth and none would resist nor do iniquity. For when there is no sin, it is evident that “God shall be all in all.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 39

Oecumenius: Paul is writing to converted Greeks, because the Greeks worshiped Zeus, who revolted against his own father in order to seize his kingdom. He was concerned lest they should imagine something similar in the case of Christ and his Father. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Origen of Alexandria: Christ the Lord himself will instruct those who are able to receive him in his character of wisdom, after their preliminary training in his holy virtues, and will reign with them until such time as he subjects them to the Father who subjected all things to him. When they have been rendered capable of receiving God, then God will be to them “all in all.” — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.6.9

Papias of Hierapolis: And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.”

Tertullian: “When, however, all things shall be subdued to Him, (with the exception of Him who did put all things under Him, ) then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” We thus see that the Son is no obstacle to the Monarchy, although it is now administered by the Son; because with the Son it is still in its own state, and with its own state will be restored to the Father by the Son. — Against Praxeas

Theodoret of Cyrus: The Arians and the Eunomians love to play with this and the next verse, claiming that it proves that Christ is not God. But here they are confusing two different things. The apostle is not speaking about Christ in his divinity but about his humanity, since the whole discussion is about the resurrection of the flesh. It is in his humanity that he will be subject, because all humanity is subject to the divine. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 271-72

1 Corinthians 15:28

Ambrosiaster: The subjection of Christ to the Father means that every creature will learn that he is subject to Christ, who in turn is subject to the Father, and will thus confess that there is only one God. But Christ’s subjection to the Father is not the same thing as our subjection to the Son, because our subjection is one of dependence and not the union of equals. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: If the Son is equal, how is the Father greater? For the Lord himself says: “because the Father is greater than I.” However, the rule of Catholic faith is this: when the Scriptures say of the Son that he is less than the Father, the Scriptures mean in respect to the assumption of humanity. But when the Scriptures point out that he is equal, they are understood in respect to his deity. — QUESTIONS 69.1

Augustine of Hippo: The vision itself is face to face, which is promised to the just as their supreme reward. This will come to pass when he shall deliver the kingdom to God the Father. There, he wants it understood, will also be the vision of his own form, when the whole creation, together with that form in which the Son of God has been made the Son of Man, has been made subject to God. According to this form, the Son himself will be made subject to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all. — ON THE TRINITY 1.12.28

Augustine of Hippo: God will be the consummation of all our desiring—the object of our unending vision, of our unlessening love, of our unwearying praise. And in this gift of vision, the response of love, this paean of praise, all alike will share, as all will share in everlasting life. — City of God 22.30

Augustine of Hippo: Even if there is no chance of manumission, slaves are now to make their slavery a kind of freedom by serving with love and loyalty, free from fear and feigning, until injustice becomes a thing of the past and every human sovereignty and power is done away with, so that God may be all in all. — City of God 6.15

Augustine of Hippo: The allusion here is to the transformation of the saints when they pass from the old shadows of time into the new lights of eternity. — City of God 20.22

Augustine of Hippo: In heaven we shall not experience need, and on that account we shall be happy. We shall be filled, but it will be with God. He will be for us all those things which we here look upon as being of great value. — EASTER SERMON 255.8

Gaius Marius Victorinus: Therefore God is also Being, both existing and substance, although he is above all that because he is the Father of all. We should not be afraid to use the word substance of God, because when words are lacking to describe the highest realities, it is not inappropriate for us to take terms borrowed from what we do know and understand and use them in this special sense. — AGAINST ARIUS 2.2.2

Gregory of Nazianzus: As the Son subjects all to the Father, so does the Father to the Son, the one by his work, the other by his good pleasure. — THEOLOGICAL ORATION 30.5

Gregory of Nazianzus: “God will be all in all” at the time of restoration—“God,” not “the Father.” The Son will not revert to disappear completely in the Father, like a torch temporarily withdrawn from a great flame and then joined up again with it—Sabellians must not wrest this text. No, God will be “all in all” when we are no longer what we are now, a multiplicity of impulses and emotions, with little or nothing of God in us, but are fully like God, with room for God and God alone. This is the “maturity” toward which we speed. — THEOLOGICAL ORATION 30.7

Ignatius of Antioch: And that He Himself is not God over all, and the Father, but His Son, He [shows when He] says, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God.” And again, “When all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall He also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” Wherefore it is one [Person] who put all things under, and who is all in all, and another [Person] to whom they were subdued, who also Himself, along with all other things, becomes subject [to the former]. — Epistle of Pseudo-Ignatius to the Tarsians

Jerome: God will be all things in all, so that there will not be only wisdom in Solomon, meekness of soul in David, zeal in Elias and Phineas, faith in Abraham, perfect love in Peter… zeal of preaching in the chosen vessel [Paul], and two or three virtues each in others. But God will be completely in all. The whole number of the saints will be glorified in the whole choir of virtues, and God will be all things to all. — Against the Pelagians 1.18

Oecumenius: The things of the Son belong to God as Father, and everything which the Son can do is attributed to the Father, for he who begot him outside time is the source of the Son’s power. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Origen of Alexandria: As long as I am not subjected to the Father, neither is he said to be “subjected” to the Father. Not that he himself is in need of subjection before the Father, but for me, in whom he has not yet completed his work, he is said not to be subjected, for “we are the body of Christ and members in part.”. — HOMILIES ON Leviticus 7.4

Origen of Alexandria: But the heretics, not understanding (I cannot tell why) the apostle’s meaning contained in these words, deprecate using the term subjection in regard to the Son.… Such men do not understand that the subjection of Christ to the Father reveals the blessedness of our perfection and announces the crowning glory of the work undertaken by him. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.5.7

Origen of Alexandria: God will be all things in each person in such a way that everything which the reasoning mind can feel or understand or think will be all God. When purified from all the dregs of its vices and utterly cleared from every cloud of wickedness, the mind will no longer be conscious of anything besides or other than God. That mind will think of God and see God and hold God. God will be the mode and measure of its every movement. In this way God will be all in all. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.6.3

Origen of Alexandria: When “he shall have completed” his “work” and brought his whole creation to the height of perfection, then he is said to be “subjected” in these whom he subjected to the Father. In these “he finished the work that God had given him that God may be all in all.” — HOMILIES ON Leviticus 7.6

1 Corinthians 15:29

Ambrosiaster: It seems that some people were at that time being baptized for the dead because they were afraid that someone who was not baptized would either not rise at all or else rise merely in order to be condemned. — Commentary on Paul’s Epistles, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 81.175

Clement of Alexandria ((quoting the teachings of Theodotus the Gnostic from AD 170)): And when the Apostle said, “Else what shall they do who are baptised for the dead?”… For, he says, the angels of whom we are portions were baptised for us. But we are dead, who are deadened by this existence, but the males are alive who did not participate in this existence.

“If the dead rise not why, then, are we baptised?” Therefore we are raised up “equal to angels,” and restored to unity with the males, member for member. Now they say “those who are baptised for us, the dead,” are the angels who are baptised for us, in order that when we, too, have the Name, we may not be hindered and kept back by the Limit and the Cross from entering the Pleroma. Wherefore, at the laying on of hands they say at the end, “for the angelic redemption” that is, for the one which the angels also have, in order that the person who has received the redemption may, be baptised in the same Name in which his angel had been baptised before him. Now the angels were baptised in the beginning, in the redemption of the Name which descended upon Jesus in the dove and redeemed him. And redemption was necessary even for Jesus, in order that, approaching through Wisdom, he might not be detained by the Notion of the Deficiency in which he was inserted, as Theodotus says. — Excerpta ex Theodoto, Section 22

Council of Carthage of 419: …neither the Eucharist nor Baptism should be given to the bodies of the dead. [Greek version adds: “For it is written: ‘Take, Eat,’ but the bodies of the dead can neither ’tak’ nor ’eat’.”] — Canon 18

Didymus the Blind: The Marcionites baptize the living on behalf of dead unbelievers, not knowing that baptism saves only the person who receives it. — Pauline Commentary From the Greek Church: Collected and Edited Catena Writings, page 8 - original source unclear

Epiphanius of Salamis: In turn this Cerinthus, fool and teacher of fools that he is, ventures to maintain that Christ has suffered and been crucified but has not risen yet, but he will rise when the general resurrection of the dead comes.

Now this position of theirs is untenable, both the words and the ideas. And so, in astonishment at those who did not believe in the coming resurrection of the dead, the apostle said, ‘If the dead rise not, then is Christ not raised;’ [1 Corinthians 15:16] ‘Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die’ [1 Corinthians 15:32] and, ‘Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners.’ [1 Corinthians 15:33]

Again, he likewise gives their refutation to those who say that Christ is not risen yet by saying, ‘If Christ be not raised, our preaching is vain and our faith is vain. And we also are found false witnesses against God, because we testified against God that he raised up Christ, if so be that he raised him not up.’ [1 Corinthians 15:14-15] For in Corinth too certain persons arose to say there is no resurrection of the dead, as though it was apostolic preaching that Christ was not risen yet and the dead are not raised (at all).

For their school reached its height in this country, I mean Asia, and in Galatia as well. And in these countries I also heard of a tradition which said that when some of their people died too soon, without baptism, others would be baptized for them in their names, so that they would not be punished for rising unbaptized at the resurrection and become the subjects of the authority that made the world.

And the tradition I heard of says that this is why the same holy apostle said, ‘If the dead rise not at all, why are they baptized for them?’ [1 Corinthians 15:29] But others explain the text satisfactorily by saying that, as long as they are catechumens, the dying are allowed baptism before they die because of this hope, showing that the person who has died will also rise, and therefore needs the forgiveness of his sins through baptism.

Some of these people have preached that Christ is not risen yet, but will rise together with everyone; others, that the dead will not rise at all.

Hence the apostle has come forward and given the refutation of both these groups and the rest of the sects at once on the subject of resurrection. And in the testimonies that he gave in full he produced the sure proof of the resurrection, salvation and hope of the dead

6:8 by saying, ‘This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality,’ [1 Corinthians 15:33] and again, ‘Christ is risen, the first fruits of them that slept.’ [1 Corinthians 15:20] This was to refute both kinds of sects at once and truly impart the unsullied doctrine of his teaching to anyone who wanted to know God’s truth and saving doctrine. — The Panarion, Part 28. Epiphanius Against the Cerinthians, Section 6

John Calvin: “Else what shall they do” He resumes his enumeration of the absurdities, which follow from the error under which the Corinthians labored. He had set himself in the outset to do this, but he introduced instruction and consolation, by means of which he interrupted in some degree the thread of his discourse. To this he now returns. In the first place he brings forward this objection — that the baptism which those received who are already regarded as dead, will be of no avail if there is no resurrection. Before expounding this passage, it is of importance to set aside the common exposition, which rests upon the authority of the ancients, and is received with almost universal consent. Chrysostom, therefore, and Ambrose, who are followed by others, are of opinion that the Corinthians were accustomed, when any one had been deprived of baptism by sudden death, to substitute some living person in the place of the deceased — to be baptized at his grave. They at the same time do not deny that this custom was corrupt, and full of superstition, but they say that Paul, for the purpose of confuting the Corinthians, was contented with this single fact, that while they denied that there was a resurrection, they in the mean time declared in this way that they believed in it. For my part, however, I cannot by any means be persuaded to believe this, for it is not to be credited, that those who denied that there was a resurrection had, along with others, made use of a custom of this sort. Paul then would have had immediately this reply made to him: “Why do you trouble us with that old wives’ superstition, which you do not yourself approve of?” Farther, if they had made use of it, they might very readily have replied: “If this has been hitherto practiced by us through mistake, rather let the mistake be corrected, than that it should have weight attached to it for proving a point of such importance.”

Granting, however, that the argument was conclusive, can we suppose that, if such a corruption as this had prevailed among the Corinthians, the Apostle, after reproving almost all their faults, would have been silent as to this one? He has censured above some practices that are not of so great moment. He has not scrupled to give directions as to women’s having the head covered, and other things of that nature. Their corrupt administration of the Supper he has not merely reproved, but has inveighed against it with the greatest keenness. Would he in the meantime have uttered not a single word in reference to such a base profanation of baptism, which was a much more grievous fault? He has inveighed with great vehemence against those who, by frequenting the banquets of the Gentiles, silently countenanced their superstitions. Would he have suffered this horrible superstition of the Gentiles to be openly carried on in the Church itself under the name of sacred baptism? But granting that he might have been silent, what shall we say when he expressly makes mention of it? Is it, I pray you, a likely thing that the Apostle would bring forward in the shape of an argument a sacrilege by which baptism was polluted, and converted into a mere magical abuse, and yet not say even one word in condemnation of the fault? When he is treating of matters that are not of the highest importance, he introduces nevertheless this parenthesis, that he “speaks as a man”. (Romans 3:5; Romans 6:19; Galatians 3:15.) Would not this have been a more befitting and suitable place for such a parenthesis? Now from his making mention of such a thing without any word of reproof, who would not understand it to be a thing that was allowed? For my part, I assuredly understand him to speak here of the right use of baptism, and not of an abuse of it of that nature.

Let us now inquire as to the meaning. At one time I was of opinion, that Paul here pointed out the universal design of baptism, for the advantage of baptism is not confined to this life; but on considering the words afterwards with greater care, I perceived that Paul here points out something peculiar. For he does not speak of all when he says, “What shall they do, who are baptized?” etc. Besides, I am not fond of interpretations, that are more ingenious than solid. What then? I say, that those are “baptized for dead”, who are looked upon as already dead, and who have altogether despaired of life; and in this way the particle ὑπέρ will have the force of the Latin “pro”, as when we say, “habere pro derelicto”; — “to reckon as abandoned” This signification is not a forced one. Or if you would prefer another signification, to be “baptized for the dead” will mean — to be baptized so as to profit the dead — not the living, Now it is well known, that from the very commencement of the Church, those who had, while yet catechumens, fallen into disease, if their life was manifestly in danger, were accustomed to ask baptism, that they might not leave this world before they had made a profession of Christianity; and this, in order that they might carry with them the seal of their salvation.

It appears from the writings of the Fathers, that as to this matter, also, there crept in afterwards a superstition, for they inveigh against those who delayed baptism till the time of their death, that, being once for all purged from all their sins, they might in this state meet the judgment of God. A gross error truly, which proceeded partly from great ignorance, and partly from hypocrisy! Paul, however, here simply mentions a custom that was sacred, and in accordance with the Divine institution — that if a catechumen, who had already in his heart embraced the Christian faith, saw that death was impending over him, he asked baptism, partly for his own consolation, and partly with a view to the edification of his brethren. For it is no small consolation to carry the token of his salvation sealed in his body. There is also an edification, not to be lost sight of — that of making a confession of his faith. They were, then, baptized for the dead, inasmuch as it could not be of any service to them in this world, and the very occasion of their asking baptism was that they despaired of life. We now see that it is not without good reason that Paul asks, what they would do if there remained no hope after death? This passage shows us, too, that those impostors who had disturbed the faith of the Corinthians, had contrived a figurative resurrection, making the farthest goal of believers to be in this world, His repeating it a second time, “Why are they also baptized for the dead?” gives it greater emphasis: “Not only are those baptized who think that they are to live longer, but those too who have death before their eyes; and that, in order that they may in death reap the fruit of their baptism.” — Commentary on Corinthians - Volume 2, on 1 Corinthians 15:29-34

John Chrysostom: He takes in hand again another topic, establishing what he said at one time from what God doeth, and at another from the very things which they practice. And this also is no small plea for the defence of any cause when a man brings forward the gainsayers themselves as witnessing by their own actions what he affirms. What then is that which he means? Or will ye that I should first mention how they who are infected with the Marcionite heresy pervert this expression? And I know indeed that I shall excite much laughter; nevertheless, even on this account most of all I will mention it that you may the more completely avoid this disease: viz., when any Catechumen departs among them, having concealed the living man under the couch of the dead, they approach the corpse and talk with him, and ask him if he wishes to receive baptism; then when he makes no answer, he that is concealed underneath saith in his stead that of course he should wish to be baptized; and so they baptize him instead of the departed, like men jesting upon the stage. So great power hath the devil over the souls of careless sinners. Then being called to account, they allege this expression, saying that even the Apostle hath said, “They who are baptized for the dead.” Seest thou their extreme ridiculousness? Is it meet then to answer these things? I trow not; unless it were necessary to discourse with madmen of what they in their frenzy utter. But that none of the more exceedingly simple folk may be led captive, one must needs submit to answer even these men. As thus, if this was Paul’s meaning wherefore did God threaten him that is not baptized? For it is impossible that any should not be baptized henceforth, this being once devised: and besides, the fault no longer lies with the dead, but with the living. But to whom spake he, “Unless ye eat My flesh, and drink My Blood, ye have no life in yourselves?” To the living, or to the dead, tell me? And again, “Unless a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” For if this be permitted, and there be no need of the mind of the receiver nor of his assent while he lives, what hinders both Greeks and Jews thus to become believers, other men after their decease doing these things in their stead?

But not to prolong fruitless toil in cutting asunder their petty spiders’ webs, come let us unfold unto you the force of this expression. What then is Paul speaking of?

But first I wish to remind you who are initiated of the response, which on that evening they who introduce you to the mysteries bid you make; and then I will also explain the saying of Paul: so this likewise will be clearer to you; we after all the other things adding this which Paul now saith. And I desire indeed expressly to utter it, but I dare not on account of the uninitiated; for these add a difficulty to our exposition, compelling us either not to speak clearly or to declare unto them the ineffable mysteries. Nevertheless, as I may be able, I will speak as through a veil.

As thus: after the enunciation of those mystical and fearful words, and the awful rules of the doctrines which have come down from heaven, this also we add at the end when we are about to baptize, bidding them say, “I believe in the resurrection of the dead,” and upon this faith we are baptized. For after we have confessed this together with the rest, then at last are we let down into the fountain of those sacred streams. This therefore Paul recalling to their minds said, “if there be no resurrection, why art thou then baptized for the dead?” i.e., the dead bodies. For in fact with a view to this art thou baptized, the resurrection of thy dead body, believing that it no longer remains dead. And thou indeed in the words makest mention of a resurrection of the dead; but the priest, as in a kind of image, signifies to thee by very deed the things which thou hast believed and confessed in words. When without a sign thou believest, then he gives thee the sign also; when thou hast done thine own part, then also doth God fully assure thee. How and in what manner? By the water. For the being baptized and immersed and then emerging, is a symbol of the descent into Hades and return thence. Wherefore also Paul calls baptism a burial, saying, “Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death.” By this he makes that also which is to come credible, I mean, the resurrection of our bodies. For the blotting out sins is a much greater thing than the raising up of a body. And this Christ declaring, said, “For whether is easier to say, Thy sins are forgiven, or to say, Take up thy bed, and walk?” “The former is the more difficult,” saith He, “but since ye disbelieve it as being hidden, and make the easier instead of the more difficult the demonstration of my power, neither will I refuse to afford you this proof.” Then saith He to the paralytic, “Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thy house.”

“And how is this difficult,” saith one, “when it is possible to kings also and rulers? For they too forgive adulterers and homicides.” Thou art jesting, O man, who sayest these things. For to forgive sins with God only is possible. But rulers and kings, whether it is adulterers whom they forgive or homicides, release them indeed from the present punishment; but their sin they do not purge out. Though they should advance to offices them that have been forgiven, though they should invest them with the purple itself, though they should set the diadem upon their heads, yet so they would only make them kings, but could not free them from their sin. It being God alone who doeth this; which accordingly in the Layer of Regeneration He will bring to pass. For His grace touches the very soul, and thence plucks up the sin by the root. Here is the reason why he that hath been forgiven by the king may be seen with his soul yet impure, but the soul of the baptized no longer so, but purer than the very sun-beams, and such as it was originally formed, nay rather much better than that. For it is blessed with a Spirit, on every side enkindling it and making its holiness intense. And as when thou art recasting iron or gold thou makest it pure and new once more, just so the Holy Ghost also, recasting the soul in baptism as in a furnace and consuming its sins, causes it to glisten with more purity than all purest gold.

Further, the credibility of the resurrection of our bodies he signifies to thee again from what follows: viz., that since sin brought in death, now that the root is dried up, one must not after that doubt of the destruction of the fruit. Therefore having first mentioned “the forgiveness of sins,” thou dost next confess also “the resurrection of the dead;” the one guides thee as by hand on to the other.

Yet again, because the term Resurrection is not sufficient to indicate the whole: for many after rising have again departed, as those in the Old Testament, as Lazarus, as they at the time of the crucifixion: one is bid to say, “and the life everlasting,” that none may any longer have a notion of death after that resurrection.

These words therefore Paul recalling to their minds, saith, “What shall they do which are baptized for the dead?” “For if there be no resurrection,” saith he, “these words are but scenery. If there be no resurrection, how persuade we them to believe things which we do not bestow?” Just as if a person bidding another to deliver a document to the effect that he had received so much, should never give the sum named therein, yet after the subscription should demand of him the specified monies. What then will remain for the subscriber to do, now that he hath made himself responsible, without having received what he admitted he had received? This then he here saith of those who are baptized also. “What shall they do which are baptized,” saith he, “having subscribed to the resurrection of dead bodies, and not receiving it, but suffering fraud? And what need was there at all of this confession, if the fact did not follow?” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 40

Tertullian: For if “as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,” [1 Corinthians 15:22] their vivification in Christ must be in the flesh, since it is in the flesh that arises their death in Adam. “But every man in his own order,” because of course it will be also every man in his own body. For the order will be arranged severally, on account of the individual merits. Now, as the merits must be ascribed to the body, it must needs follow that the order also should be arranged in respect of the bodies, that it may be in relation to their merits. But inasmuch as “some are also baptized for the dead,” [1 Corinthians 15:29] we will see whether there be a good reason for this. Now it is certain that they adopted this (practice) with such a presumption as made them suppose that the vicarious baptism (in question) would be beneficial to the flesh of another in anticipation of the resurrection; for unless it were a bodily resurrection, there would be no pledge secured by this process of a corporeal baptism. “Why are they then baptized for the dead,” he asks, unless the bodies rise again which are thus baptized? For it is not the soul which is sanctified by the baptismal bath: its sanctification comes from the “answer.” [1 Peter 3:21] — On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Chapter 48

Tertullian: Let us now return to the resurrection, to the defense of which against heretics of all sorts we have given indeed sufficient attention in another work of ours. But we will not be wanting (in some defense of the doctrine) even here, in consideration of such persons as are ignorant of that little treatise. “What,” asks he, “shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not?” [1 Corinthians 15:29] Now, never mind that practice, (whatever it may have been.) The Februarian lustrations will perhaps answer him (quite as well), by praying for the dead. Do not then suppose that the apostle here indicates some new god as the author and advocate of this (baptism for the dead. His only aim in alluding to it was) that he might all the more firmly insist upon the resurrection of the body, in proportion as they who were vainly baptized for the dead resorted to the practice from their belief of such a resurrection. We have the apostle in another passage defining “but one baptism.” [Ephesians 4:5] To be “baptized for the dead” therefore means, in fact, to be baptized for the body; for, as we have shown, it is the body which becomes dead. What, then, shall they do who are baptized for the body, [Ephesians 4:5] if the body rises not again? We stand, then, on firm ground (when we say) that the next question which the apostle has discussed equally relates to the body. But “some man will say, ‘How are the dead raised up? With what body do they come?’” [1 Corinthians 15:35] Having established the doctrine of the resurrection which was denied, it was natural to discuss what would be the sort of body (in the resurrection), of which no one had an idea. — Against Marcion, Book V, Chapter 10

Tertullian: But we will not be wanting (in some defence of the doctrine) even here, in consideration of such persons as are ignorant of that little treatise. “What,” asks he, “shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not? " Now, never mind that practice, (whatever it may have been. — Against Marcion Book V

1 Corinthians 15:30

Ambrosiaster: The theme here is that unless there is such a fact as the resurrection of the dead, all this is pointless. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Didymus the Blind: If the soul is not immortal, if the body does not rise from the dead, there would be no point taking risks on behalf of the faith. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

John Chrysostom: “Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour? I protest by that glorying in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.”

See again whence he endeavors to establish the doctrine, from his own suffrage: or rather not from his only, but from that also of the other apostles. And this too is no small thing; that the teachers whom you produce were full of vehement conviction and signified the same not by words only, but also by very deeds. Therefore, you see, he doth not say simply, “we are persuaded,” for this alone was not sufficient to persuade them, but he also furnishes the proof by facts; as if he should say, “in words to confess these things haply seems to you no marvel; but if we should also produce unto you the voice which deeds send forth, what can ye have to say against that? Hear ye then, how by our perils also day by day we confess these things?” And he said not “I,” but “we,” taking along with him all the apostles together, and thereby at once speaking modestly and adding credibility to his discourse.

For what can ye have to say? that we are deceiving you when we preach these things, and that our doctrines come of vain-glory? Nay, our perils suffer you not to pass such a sentence. For who would choose to be in continual jeopardy to no purpose and with no effect? Wherefore also he said, “Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour?” For if one should even choose it through vain-glory, such his choice will be but for once and again, not all his life long, like ours. For we have assigned our whole life to this purpose.

“I protest by that glorying in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily:” by glorying here, meaning their advancement. Thus since he had intimated that his perils were many, lest he might seem to say this by way of lamentation, “far from grieving,” saith he, “I even glory in suffering this for your sake.” And doubly, he saith, he takes delight in it, both as being in jeopardy for their sakes and as beholding their proficiency. Then doing what is usual with him, because he had uttered great things, he refers both to Christ.

But how doth he “die daily?” by his readiness and preparation for that event. And wherefore saith he these words? Again by these also to establish the doctrine of the resurrection. “For who would choose,” saith he, “to undergo so many deaths, if there be no resurrection nor life after this? Yea, if they who believe in the resurrection would scarcely put themselves in jeopardy for it except they were very noble of heart: much more would not the unbeliever (so he speaks) choose to undergo so many deaths and so terrible.” Thus, see by degrees how very high he mounts up. He had said, “we stand in jeopardy,” he added, “every hour,” then, “daily,” then, “I not only ‘stand in jeopardy,’” saith he, but “I even ‘die:’” he concludes accordingly by pointing out also what kind of deaths they were. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 40

Tertullian: “And why,” he inquires, “stand we in jeopardy every hour? " -meaning, of course, through the flesh. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:31

Cyprian: That we receive more as the reward of our suffering than what we endure here in the suffering itself, The blessed Apostle Paul proves; who by the divine condescension, being caught up into the third heaven and into paradise, testifies that he heard unspeakable words, who boasts that he saw Jesus Christ by the faith of sight, who professes that which he both learnt and saw with the greater truth of consciousness, and says: “The sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the coming glory which shall be revealed in us.” Who, then, does not with all his powers labour to attain to such a glory that he may become the friend of God, that he may at once rejoice with Christ, that after earthly tortures and punishments he may receive divine rewards? If to soldiers of this world it is glorious to return in triumph to their country when the foe is vanquished, how much more excellent and greater is the glory, when the devil is overcome, to return in triumph to paradise, and to bring back victorious trophies to that place whence Adam was ejected as a sinner, after casting down him who formerly had cast him down; to offer to God the most acceptable gift-an uncorrupted faith, and an unyielding virtue of mind, an illustrious praise of devotion; to accompany Him when He shall come to receive vengeance from His enemies, to stand at His side when He shall sit to judge, to become co-heir of Christ, to be made equal to the angels; with the patriarchs, with the apostles. with the prophets, to rejoice in the possession of the heavenly kingdom! Such thoughts as these, what persecution can conquer, what tortures can overcome? The brave and stedfast mind, founded in religious meditations, endures; and the spirit abides unmoved against all the terrors of the devil and the threats of the world, when it is strengthened by the sure and solid faith of things to come. In persecutions, earth is shut up, but heaven is opened; Antichrist is threatening, but Christ is protecting; death is brought in, but immortality follows; the world is taken away from him that is slain, but paradise is set forth to him restored; the life of time is extinguished, but the life of eternity is realized. What a dignity it is, and what a security, to go gladly from hence, to depart gloriously in the midst of afflictions and tribulations; in a moment to close the eyes with which men and the world are looked upon, and at once to open them to look upon God and Christ! Of such a blessed departure how great is the swiftness! You shall be suddenly taken away from earth, to be placed in the heavenly kingdoms. It behoves us to embrace these things in our mind and consideration, to meditate on these things day and night. If persecution should fall upon such a soldier of God, his virtue, prompt for battle, will not be able tO be overcome. Or if his call should come to him before, his faith shall not be without reward, seeing it was prepared for martyrdom; without loss of time, the reward is rendered by the judgment of God. In persecution, the warfare,-in peace, the purity of conscience, is crowned. — Treatise XI Exhortation to Martyrdom Addressed to Fortunatus

Theodoret of Cyrus: Here Paul outlines both the magnitude of the problems he faces and the greatness of God’s providential care for him. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 275

1 Corinthians 15:32

Ambrose of Milan: If all hope of the resurrection is lost, let us eat and drink and lose not the enjoyment of the things present, for we have none to come.… The Epicureans say they are followers of pleasure because death means nothing to them, because that which is dissolved has no feeling, and that which has no feeling means nothing to us. Thus they show that they are living only carnally, not spiritually. They do not discharge the duty of the soul but only of the flesh. They think that all life’s duty is ended with the separation of the soul and body. — LETTER 59

Apostolic Constitutions: For there are some widows which esteem gain their business… heaping up to themselves plenty of money, and lend at bitter usury, and are only solicitous about mammon, whose bag is their god; who prefer eating and drinking before all virtue, saying, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die;” [1 Corinthians 15:32] who esteem these things as if they were durable and not perishing things. For she that uses herself to nothing but talking of money, worships mammon instead of God — that is, is a servant to gain, but cannot be pleasing to God, nor resigned to His worship; not being able to intercede with Him continuously on account that her mind and disposition run after money: for “where the treasure is, there will the heart be also.” [Matthew 6:21] — Apostolic Constitutions (Book III), Section 1, VII

Clement of Alexandria: Accordingly to the Corinthians (for this is not the only instance), while discoursing on the resurrection of the dead, he makes use of a tragic Iambic line, when he said, “What advantageth it me if the dead are not raised? Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners.” — The Stromata Book 1

Clement of Alexandria: But not to-morrow in truth, but already, are these dead to God; burying their dead, that is, sinking themselves down to death. — The Instructor Book 3

Ignatius of Antioch: From Syria even unto Rome I fight with beasts, both by land and sea, both by night and day, being bound to ten leopards, I mean a band of soldiers, who, even when they receive benefits, show themselves all the worse. But I am the more instructed by their injuries [to act as a disciple of Christ]; “yet am I not thereby justified.” May I enjoy the wild beasts that are prepared for me; and I pray they may be found eager to rush upon me, which also I will entice to devour me speedily, and not deal with me as with some, whom, out of fear, they have not touched. But if they be unwilling to assail me, I will compel them to do so. Pardon me [in this]: I know what is for my benefit. Now I begin to be a disciple. And let no one, of things visible or invisible, envy me that I should attain to Jesus Christ. Let fire and the cross; let the crowds of wild beasts; let tearings, breakings, and dislocations of bones; let cutting off of members; let shatterings of the whole body; and let all the dreadful torments of the devil come upon me: only let me attain to Jesus Christ. — Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans

John Chrysostom: “If after the manner of men I fought with beasts at Ephesus, what doth it profit me?”

What is, “if after the manner of men?” “As far as pertains to men I fought with beasts: for what if God snatched me out of those dangers? So that I am he who ought most to be in care about these things; I, who endure so great dangers and have not yet received any return. For if no time of recompense is at hand, but our reward is shut up in this present world, ours is the greater loss. For ye have believed without jeopardy, but we are slaughtered every day.”

But all these things he said, not because he had no advantage even in the very suffering, but on account of the weakness of the many, and to establish them in the doctrine of the resurrection: not because he himself was running for hire; for it was a sufficient recompense to him to do that which was pleasing to God. So that when he adds, “If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most pitiable,” it is there again for their sakes, that he might by the fear of this misery overthrow their unbelief of the resurrection. And in condescension to their weakness, he thus speaks. Since in truth, the great reward is to please Christ at all times: and apart from the recompense, it is a very great requital to be in jeopardy for His sake.

“If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink for to-morrow we die.”

This word, be sure, is spoken in mockery: wherefore neither did he bring it forward of himself, but summoned the prophet of loftiest sound, Isaiah, who discoursing of certain insensible and reprobate persons made use of these words, “Who slay oxen and kill sheep to eat flesh and drink wine; who say, Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. These things are revealed to the ears of the Lord of Hosts, and this iniquity shall not be forgiven you, till ye die.” Now if then they were deprived of pardon who spake thus, much more in the time of Grace. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 40

Pope Anterus: He feeds on cruelties; he is punished by abstinence; he hates fasts, and his ministers preach, to that effect, as he declares them to be superfluous, having no hope of the future, and echoing that sentence of the apostle, in which he says, “Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall, die.”

Tertullian: But even if the apostle had abruptly thrown out the sentence that flesh and blood must be excluded from the kingdom of God, without any previous intimation, of his meaning, would it not have been equally our duty to interpret these two substances as the old man abandoned to mere flesh and blood-in other words, to eating and drinking, one feature of which would be to speak against the faith of the resurrection: “Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.” Now, when the apostle parenthetically inserted this, he censured flesh and blood because of their enjoyment in eating and drinking. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: A third saying let them add, “Let us eat, and drink, and marry, for to-morrow we shall die; " not reflecting that the “woe” (denounced) “on such as are with child, and are giving suck,” will fall far more heavily and bitterly in the “universal shaking” of the entire world than it did in the devastation of one fraction of Judaea. — On Monogamy

Tertullian: “Well, who on earth and in the flesh is faultless? “What “martyr” (continues to be) an inhabitant of the world supplicating? pence in hand? subject to physician and usurer? Suppose, now, (your “martyr”) beneath the glaive, with head already steadily poised; suppose him on the cross, with body already outstretched; suppose him at the stake, with the lion already let loose; suppose him on the axle, with the fire already heaped; in the very certainty, I say, and possession of martyrdom: who permits man to condone (offences) which are to be reserved for God, by whom those (offences) have been condemned without discharge, which not even apostles (so far as I know)-martyrs withal themselves-have judged condonable? In short, Paul had already “fought with beasts at Ephesus,” when he decreed “destruction” to the incestuous person. Let it suffice to the martyr to have purged his own sins: it is the part of ingratitude or of pride to lavish upon others also what one has obtained at a high price. — On Modesty

Tertullian: If the prophets were pleasing to such, my (prophets) they were not. Why, then, do not you constantly preach, “Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall die? " just as we do not hesitate manfully to command, “Let us fast, brethren and sisters, lest to-morrow perchance we die. — On Fasting

1 Corinthians 15:33

Cyprian: But for the rest, let our most beloved brethren firmly decline, and avoid the words and conversations of those whose word creeps onwards like a cancer; as the apostle says, “Evil communications corrupt good manners.” And again: “A man that is an heretic, after one admonition, reject: knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.” And the Holy Spirit speaks by Solomon, saying, “A perverse man carrieth perdition in his mouth; and in his lips he hideth a fire.” Also again, he warneth us, and says, “Hedge in thy ears with thorns, and hearken not to a wicked tongue.” And again: “A wicked doer giveth heed to the tongue of the unjust; but a righteous man does not listen to lying lips.” And although I know that our brotherhood there, assuredly fortified by your foresight, and besides sufficiently cautious by their own vigilance, cannot be taken nor deceived by the poisons of heretics, and that the teachings and precepts of God prevail with them only in proportion as the fear of God is in them; yet, even although needlessly, either my solicitude or my love persuaded me to write these things to you, that no commerce should be entered into with such; that no banquets nor conferences be entertained with the wicked; but that we should be as much separated from them, as they are deserters from the Church; because it is written, “If he shall neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.” And the blessed apostle not only warns, but also commands us to withdraw from such. “We command you,” he says, “in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.” There can be no fellowship between faith and I faithlessness. He who is not with Christ, who is an adversary of Christ, who is hostile to His unity and peace, cannot be associated with us. If they come with prayers and atonements, let them be heard; if they heap together curses and threats, let them be rejected. I bid you, dearest brother, ever heartily farewell. — Epistle LIV

Cyprian: Yet let not the excessive and headlong faithlessness of many move or disturb us, but rather strengthen our faith in the truthfulness which has foretold the matter. As some have become such, because these things were predicted beforehand, so let other brethren beware of matters of a like kind, because these also were predicted beforehand, even as the Lord instructs us, and says, “But take ye heed: behold, I have told you all things.” Avoid, I beseech you, brethren, men of this kind, and drive away from your side and from your ears, as if it were the contagion of death, their mischievous conversation; as it is written, “Hedge thine ears about with thorns, and refuse to hear a wicked tongue.” And again, “Evil communications corrupt good manners.” The Lord teaches and warns us to depart from such. He saith, “They are blind leaders of the blind; and if the blind lead the blind, they shall both fall into the ditch.” Such a one is to be turned away from and avoided, whosoever he may be, that is separated from the Church. Such a one is perverted and sins, and is condemned of his own self. Does he think that he has Christ, who acts in opposition to Christ’s priests, who separates himself from the company of His clergy and people? He bears arms against the Church, he contends against God’s appointment. An enemy of the altar, a rebel against Christ’s sacrifice, for the faith faithless, for religion profane, a disobedient servant, an impious son, a hostile brother, despising the bishops, and forsaking God’s priests, he dares to set up another altar, to make another prayer with unauthorized words, to profane the truth of the Lord’s offering by false sacrifices, and not to know that he who strives against the appointment of God, is punished on account of the daring of his temerity by divine visitation. — Treatise I. On the Unity of the Church

Cyprian: That we are to live with the good, but to avoid the evil. In Solomon, in the Proverbs: “Bring not the impious man into the habitation of the righteous.” Also in the same, in Ecclesiasticus: “Let righteous men be thy guests.” And again: “The faithful friend is a medicine of life and of immortality.” Also in the same place: “Be thou far from the man who has the power to slay, and thou shalt not suspect fear.” Also in the same place, : “Blessed is he who findeth a true friend, and who speaketh righteousness to the listening ear.” Also in the same place: “Hedge thine ears with thorns, and hear not a wicked tongue.” Also in the seventeenth Psalm: “With the righteous Thou shalt be justified; and with the innocent man Thou shalt be innocent; and with the froward man Thou shalt be froward.” Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: “Evil communications corrupt good dispositions.” — Treatise XII. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews

Desert Fathers: A brother questioned Poemen and said, ‘How should a monk live in his cell?’ He said, ‘To stay in the cell is this: externally, to work with the hands, eat once a day, keep silence and meditate and, internally, to make progress by remembering your sins wherever you may be, and keeping the hours of prayer, and keeping a watch on the secret thoughts of the heart. If it is time to stop working with the hands, begin to pray and finish your work later in tranquillity. The aim of all this is to be with those who are good and to avoid the company of the wicked.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Fabian of Rome: And the apostle says, “Evil communications corrupt good manners.”

Jerome: You despise gold; someone else loves it. You spurn wealth; he eagerly pursues it. You love silence, weakness and privacy. He takes delight in talking and effrontery in the public square, and streets, and apothecary shops.… Do not remain under the same roof with him. Do not rely on your past continence. You cannot be holier than David or wiser than Solomon.… If in the course of your clerical duty you have to visit a widow or a virgin, never enter the house alone. Let your companions be persons who will not disgrace you.… You must not sit alone with a woman secretly and without witnesses. If she has anything confidential to disclose, she is sure to have some nurse or housekeeper, some virgin, some widow, some married woman. She cannot be so friendless as to have none except you to whom she can venture to confide her secrets. — Letter 52

John Chrysostom: “Be not deceived: evil company doth corrupt good manners.”

Then that he might not make his discourse too rough, he dwells not long upon his “reductio ad absurdum,” but again turns his discourse to exhortation, saying, “Be not deceived: evil company doth corrupt good manners.”

And this he said, both to rebuke them as without understanding, (for here he by a charitable expression, calls “good” that which is easily deceived,) and also, as far as he could, to make some allowance to them for the past with a view to their return, and to remove from them and transfer to others the greater part of his charges, and so by this way also to allure them to repentance. Which he doth likewise in the Epistle to the Galatians, saying, “But he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 40

Origen of Alexandria: We see quiet and respectable men who, when they have become associated with turbulent and shameless people, have their good manners corrupted by evil conversations. They are turned into men of the same sort as those who are steeped in every kind of witness. This sometimes happens to men of mature age, who prove that they have lived more chastely in youth than when advanced years had granted them the opportunity of a freer life. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.1.5

Tertullian: Follow companies and conversations worthy of God, mindful of that short verse, sanctified by the apostle’s quotation of it, “Ill interviews good morals do corrupt.” Talkative, idle, winebibbing, curious tent-fellows, do the very greatest hurt to the purpose of widow-hood. — To His Wife Book I

1 Corinthians 15:34

Clement of Alexandria: “Be sober as is right, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God,” that is, those who sin. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual powers.” — The Stromata Book 3

Didymus the Blind: The wise are on the lookout for wrongdoing and have awakened from the sleep of ignorance. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

John Chrysostom: “Awake up righteously and sin not.”

As if he were speaking to drunkards and madmen. For suddenly to cast every thing out of their hands, was the part of drunkards and madmen, in not seeing any longer what they saw nor believing what they had before confessed. But what is, “righteously?” with a view to what is profitable and useful. For it is possible to awake up unrighteously, when a man is thoroughly roused up to the injury of his own soul. And well did he add, “sin not,” implying that hence were the sins of their unbelief. And in many places he covertly signifies this, that a corrupt life is the parent of evil doctrines; as when he saith, “The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, which some reaching after, have been led astray from the faith.” Yea, and many of those who are conscious of wickedness and would fain not pay its penalty are by this fear damaged also in their faith concerning the resurrection: even as they who do very virtuously desire even daily to behold it.

“For some have no knowledge of God; I speak this to move you to shame.”

See how again he transfers his accusations to others. For he said not, “Ye have no knowledge,” but, “some have no knowledge.” Because disbelieving the resurrection is the temper of one not fully aware that the power of God is irresistable and sufficient for all things. For if out of the things which are not He made the things that are, much more will He be able to raise again those which have been dissolved.

And because he had touched them to the quick and exceedingly mocked them, accusing them of gluttony, of folly, of madness; mitigating those expressions, he saith, “I speak to move you to shame,” that is, to set upright, to bring back, to make you better, by this shame of yours. For he feared lest if he cut too deep, he should cause them to start away. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 40

1 Corinthians 15:35

Ambrose of Milan: Some may wonder how decayed bodies can become sound again, scattered members brought together, and destroyed parts restored. Yet no one seems to wonder how seeds softened and broken by the dampness and weight of the earth grow and become green again. Such seeds, of course, are rotted and dissolved by contact with the earth. But when the generative moisture of the soil imparts life to the buried and hidden seeds by a kind of life-giving heat, they receive the animating force of the growing plant. Then gradually, nature raises from stalk the tender life called the growing ear, and, like a careful mother, wraps it in a sheath as a protection against its being nipped at this immature stage by the frost or scorched by the sun when the kernels are emerging, as it were, from early infancy. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.55

CS Lewis: The second class of miracles, on this view, foretell what God has not yet done, but will do, universally. He raised one man (the man who was Himself) from the dead because He will one day raise all men from the dead. Perhaps not only men, for there are hints in the New Testament that all creation will eventually be rescued from decay, restored to shape and subserve the splendour of re-made humanity. The Transfiguration and the walking on the water are glimpses of the beauty and the effortless power over all matter which will belong to men when they are really waked by God. Now resurrection certainly involves “reversal” of natural process in the sense that it involves a series of changes moving in the opposite direction to those we see. At death, matter which has been organic, falls back gradually into the inorganic, to be finally scattered and used perhaps in other organisms. Resurrection would be the reverse process. It would not of course mean the restoration to each personality of those very atoms, numerically the same, which had made its first or “natural” body. There would not be enough to go round, for one thing; and for another, the unity of the body even in this life was consistent with a slow but perplexed change of its actual ingredients. But it certainly does mean matter of some kind rushing towards organism as now we see it rushing away. It means, in fact, playing backwards a film we have already seen played forwards. In that sense it is a reversal of Nature. But, of course, it is a further question whether reversal in this sense is necessarily contradiction. Do we know that the film cannot be played backwards?

Well, in one sense, it is precisely the teaching of modern physics that the film never works backwards. For modern physics, as you have heard before, the universe is “running down.” Disorganization and chance is continually increasing. There will come a time, not infinitely remote, when it will be wholly run down or wholly disorganized, and science knows of no possible return from that state. There must have been a time, not infinitely remote, in the past when it was wound up, though science knows of no winding-up process. The point is that for our ancestors the universe was a picture: for modern physics it is a story. If the universe is a picture these things either appear in that picture or not; and if they don’t, since it is an infinite picture, one may suspect that they are contrary to the nature of things. But a story is a different matter; specially if it is an incomplete story. And the story told by modern physics might be told briefly in the words “Humpty Dumpty was falling.” That is, it proclaims itself an incomplete story. There must have been a time before he fell, when he was sitting on the wall; there must be a time after he had reached the ground. It is quite true that science knows of no horses and men who can put him together again once he has reached the ground and broken. But then she also knows of no means by which he could originally have been put on the wall. You wouldn’t expect her to. All science rests on observation: all our observations are taken during Humpty Dumpty’s fall, because we were born after he lost his seat on the wall and shall be extinct long before he reaches the ground. But to assume from observations taken while the clock is running down that the unimaginable winding-up which must have preceded this process cannot occur when the process is over is the merest dogmatism. From the very nature of the case the laws of degradation and disorganization which we find in matter at present, cannot be the ultimate and eternal nature of things. If they were, there would have been nothing to degrade and disorganize. Humpty Dumpty can’t fall off a wall that never existed. — Miracles, from God in the Dock

John Chrysostom: Gentle and lowly as the apostle is to a great degree every where, he here adopts a style rather pungent, because of the impiety of the gainsayers. He is not however content with this, but he also employs reasons and examples, subduing thereby even the very contentious. And above he saith, “Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead;” but here he solves an objection brought in by the Gentiles. And see how again he abates the vehemence of his censure; in that he said not, “but perhaps ye will say,” but he set down the objector indefinitely, in order that, although employing his impetuous style with all freedom, he might not too severely wound his hearers. And he states two difficulties, one touching the manner of the resurrection, the other, the kind of bodies. For of both they on their part made a question, saying, “How is that which hath been dissolved raised up?” and, “with what manner of body do they come?” But what means, “with what manner of body?” It is as if they had said, “with this which hath been wasted, which hath perished, or with some other?”

Then, to point out that the objects of their enquiry are not questionable but admitted points, he at once meets them more sharply, saying, “Thou foolish one, that which thou thyself sowest is not quickened, except it die.” Which we also are wont to do in the case of those who gainsay things acknowledged.

And wherefore did he not at once appeal to the power of God? Because he is discoursing with unbelievers. For when his discourse is addressed to believers, he hath not much need of reasons. Wherefore having said elsewhere, “He shall change the body of your humiliation, that it may be fashioned like to the body of his glory,” and having indicated somewhat more than the resurrection, he stated no analogies, but instead of any demonstration, brought forward the power of God, going on to say, “according to the working whereby He is able to subject all things to Himself.” But here he also urges reasons. That is, having established it from the Scriptures, he adds also in what comes after, these things over and above, with an eye to them who do not obey the Scriptures; and he saith, “O foolish one, that which Thou sowest:” i.e., “from thyself thou hast the proof of these things, by what thou doest every day, and doubtest thou yet? Therefore do I call thee foolish because of the things daily done by thine own self thou art ignorant, and being thyself an artificer of a resurrection, thou doubtest concerning God.” Wherefore very emphatically he said, “what Thou sowest,” thou who art mortal and perishing.

And see how he uses expressions appropriate to the purpose he had in view: thus, “it is not quickened,” saith he, “except it die.” Leaving, you see, the terms appropriate to seed, as that “it buds,” and “grows,” and “is dissolved,” he adopts those which correspond to our flesh, viz. “it is quickened,” and, “except it die;” which do not properly belong to seeds, but to bodies.

And he said not, “after it is dead it lives,” but, which is a greater thing, “therefore it lives, because it dies.” Seest thou, what I am always observing, that he continually gives their argument the contrary turn? Thus what they made a sure sign of our not rising again, the same he makes a demonstration of our rising. For they said, “the body rises not again, because it is dead.” What then doth he, retorting their argument, say? “Nay, but unless it died, it could not rise again: and therefore it rises again, because it died.” For as Christ more clearly signifies this very thing, in the words, “Except a grain of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth by itself alone: but if it die, it beareth much fruit:” thence also Paul, drawing this example, said not, “it doth not live,” but, “is not quickened;” again assuming the power of God and showing that not the nature of the ground, but God Himself, brings it all to pass.

And what can be the reason that he did not bring that forward, which was more akin to the subject: I mean, the seed of mankind? (For our generation too begins from a sort of decay, even as that of the corn.) Because it was not of equal force, but the latter was a more complete instance: for he wants a case of something that perished entirely, whereas this was but a part; wherefore he rather alleges the other. Besides, that proceeds from a living body and falls into a living womb; but here it is no flesh, but the earth into which the seed is cast, and into the same it is dissolved, like the body which is dead. Wherefore on this account too the example was more appropriate. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Pelagius: Everything wrong with our bodies in this life will be healed in the resurrection. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

1 Corinthians 15:36

Ambrose of Milan: We must not doubt what is more in accord with nature than against it. For it is as natural that all things living should rise again as it is unnatural that they should perish. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.57

Cyprian: That no one should be made sad by death; since in living is labour and peril, in dying peace and the certainty of resurrection. In Genesis: “Then said the Lord to Adam, Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of that tree of which alone I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat, cursed shall be the ground in all thy works; in sadness and groaning shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life: thorns and thistles shall it cast forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field in the sweat of thy brow. Thou shall eat thy bread until thou return unto the earth from which also thou wast taken; because earth thou art, and to earth thou shall go.” Also in the same place: “And Enoch pleased God, and was not found afterwards: because God translated him.” And in Isaiah: “All flesh is grass, and all the glory of it as the flower of grass. The grass withered, and the flower hath fallen away; but the word of the Lord abideth for ever.” In Ezekiel: “They say, Our bones are become dry, our hope hath perished: we have expired. Therefore prophesy, and say, Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I open your monuments, and I will bring you forth from your monuments, and I will bring you into the land of Israel; and I will put my Spirit upon you, and ye shall live; and I will place you into your land: and ye shall know that I the Lord have spoken, and will do it, saith the Lord.” Also in the Wisdom of Solomon: “He was taken away, lest wickedness should change his understanding; for his soul was pleasing to God.” Also in the eighty-third Psalm: “How beloved are thy dwellings, Thou Lord of hosts? My soul desires and hastes to the courts of God.” And in the Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians: “But we would not that you should be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who sleep, that ye sorrow not as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also them which have fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.” Also in the first Epistle to the Corinthians: “Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened except it have first died.” And again: “Star differeth from star in glory: so also the resurrection. The body is sown in corruption, it rises without corruption; it is sown in ignominy, it rises again in glory; it is sown in weakness, it rises again in power; it is sown an animal body, it rises again a spiritual body.” And again: “For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality. But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the word that is written, Death is absorbed Into striving. Where, O death, is thy sting? Where, O death, is thy striving? " Also in the Gospel according to John: “Father, I will that those whom Thou hast given me be with me where I shall be, and may see my glory which Thou hast given me before the foundation of the world.” Also according to Luke: “Now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, O Lord, according to the word; for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation.” Also according to John: “If ye loved me, ye would rejoice because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.” — Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews

Irenaeus: For he declares, “That which thou sowest cannot be quickened, unless first it die.” — Against Heresies Book V

Marcus Minucius Felix: The sun sinks down and arises, the stars pass away and return, the flowers die and revive again, after their win-try decay the shrubs resume their leaves, seeds do not flourish again. unless they are rotted:

Tertullian: 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. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:37

Ambrosiaster: If a seed dies and comes back again with so much additional benefit to the human race, why is it incredible that a human body should rise again, by the power of God, with an equally improved substance? — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “And he who soweth, soweth not that body that shall be.”

For the things before spoken meet the question, “how they are raised;” but this, the doubt, “with what manner of body they come.” But what is, “thou sowest not that body which shall be?” Not an entire ear of corn, nor new grain. For here his discourse no longer regards the resurrection, but the manner of the resurrection, what is the kind of body which shall rise again; as whether it be of the same kind, or better and more glorious. And he takes both from the same analogy, intimating that it will be much better.

But the heretics, considering none of these things, dart in upon us and say, “one body falls and another body rises again. How then is there a resurrection? For the resurrection is of that which was fallen. But where is that wonderful and surprising trophy over death, if one body fall and another rise again? For he will no longer appear to have given back that which he took captive. And how can the alleged analogy suit the things before mentioned?” Why, it is not one substance that is sown, and another that is raised, but the same substance improved. Else neither will Christ have resumed the same body when He became the first-fruits of them that rise again: but according to you He threw aside the former body, although it had not sinned, and took another. Whence then is that other? For this body was from the Virgin, but that, whence was it? Seest thou to what absurdity the argument hath come round? For wherefore shows He the very prints of the nails? Was it not to prove that it is that same body which was crucified, and the same again that rose from the dead? And what means also His type of Jonah? For surely it was not one Jonah that was swallowed up and another that was cast out upon dry land. And why did He also say, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up?” For that which was destroyed, the same clearly He raised again. Wherefore also the Evangelist added, that “He spake of the temple of His body.”

What is that then which he saith, “Thou sowest not the body that shall be?” i.e. not the ear of corn: for it is the same, and not the same; the same, because the substance is the same; but not the same, because this is more excellent, the substance remaining the same but its beauty becoming greater, and the same body rising up new. Since if this were not so, there were no need of a resurrection, I mean if it were not to rise again improved. For why did He at all pull down His house, except He were about to build it more glorious?

This now, you see, he said to them who think that it is utter corruption. Next, that none again might suspect from this place that another body is spoken of, he qualifies the dark saying, and himself interprets what he had spoken, not allowing the hearer to turn his thoughts from hence in any other direction. What need is there then of our reasonings? Hear himself speaking, and explaining the phrase, “Thou sowest not the body that shall be.” For he straightway adds, “but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other kind;” i.e., it is not the body that shall be; not so clothed, for instance; not having a stalk and beard, but “a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other kind.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Origen of Alexandria: The power which exists in a grain of wheat refashions and restores the grain, after its corruption and death, into a body with stalk and ear. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 2.10.3

Tertullian: Indeed, since he proposes as his examples “wheat grain, or some other grain, to which God giveth a body, such as it hath pleased Him; " since also he says, that “to every seed is its own body; " that, consequently, “there is one kind of flesh of men, whilst there is another of beasts, and (another) of birds; that there are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial; and that there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars” -does he not therefore intimate that there is to be a resurrection of the flesh or body, which he illustrates by fleshly and corporeal samples? Does he not also guarantee that the resurrection shall be accomplished by that God from whom proceed all the (creatures which have served him for) examples? “So also,” says he, “is the resurrection of the dead. — Against Marcion Book V

1 Corinthians 15:38

Augustine of Hippo: He did not say God “gave” or “ordered” but God “gives,” that you may know how the Creator applies the effective power of his wisdom to the creation of things which come into existence daily at their appointed times. — LETTER 205

Gregory of Nyssa: It seems to me that here Paul is refuting those who ignore the particular standards of nature and assess the divine power in the light of their own strength. They think that God can do only as much as man can comprehend. They think that what is beyond us also exceeds the power of God. — ON THE SOUL AND THE RESURRECTION

John Chrysostom: “But God giveth it a body even as it pleased Him.”

“Yes,” saith one, “but in that case it is the work of nature.” Of what nature, tell me? For in that case likewise God surely doeth the whole; not nature, nor the earth, nor the rain. Wherefore also he making these things manifest, leaves out both earth and rain, atmosphere, sun, and hands of husbandmen, and subjoins, “God giveth it a body as it pleased Him.” Do not thou therefore curiously inquire, nor busy thyself with the how and in what manner, when thou hearest of the power and will of God.

“And to each seed a body of its own.” Where then is the alien matter which they speak of? For He giveth to each “his own.” So that when he saith, “Thou sowest not that which shall be,” he saith not this, that one substance is raised up instead of another, but that it is improved, that it is more glorious. For “to each of the seeds,” saith he, “a body of its own.”

From hence in what follows, he introducing also the difference of the resurrection which shall then be. For do not suppose, because grain is sown and all come up ears of corn, that therefore there is also in the resurrection an equality of honor. For in the first place, neither in seeds is there only one rank, but some are more valuable, and some inferior. Wherefore also he added, “to each seed a body of its own.”

However, he is not content with this, but seeks another difference greater and more manifest. For that thou mayest not, when hearing, as I said, that all rise again, suppose that all enjoy the same reward; he laid before even in the preceding verses the seeds of this thought, saying, “But each in his own order.” But he brings it out here also more clearly. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Tertullian: Indeed, since he proposes as his examples “wheat grain, or some other grain, to which God giveth a body, such as it hath pleased Him; " since also he says, that “to every seed is its own body; " that, consequently, “there is one kind of flesh of men, whilst there is another of beasts, and (another) of birds; that there are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial; and that there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars” -does he not therefore intimate that there is to be a resurrection of the flesh or body, which he illustrates by fleshly and corporeal samples? Does he not also guarantee that the resurrection shall be accomplished by that God from whom proceed all the (creatures which have served him for) examples? “So also,” says he, “is the resurrection of the dead. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: 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. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:39

Ambrosiaster: Let the Sophists explain this if they can! All the philosophers of this world are unwilling to submit their minds to the law of God in order to believe in him. Instead they confound one another with diverse and mutually contradictory theories, none of which can be proved. God, on the other hand, does not argue. Instead, he demonstrates his power by raising Christ from the dead. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: Whatever bodily or seminal causes may play a part in reproduction, by the intermingling of the two sexes, or in animals, or even by the influence of angels, and whatever longings or emotions of the mother may affect the features or the hue while the fetus is soft and pliable, nevertheless every nature as such, however affected by circumstances, is created wholly by the supreme God. It is the hidden and penetrating power of God’s irresistible presence that gives being to every creature that can be said to be, whatever its genus and species may be. For without his creative act, a nature would not only not be in this or that genus. It simply could not have being at all. — City of God 12.26

John Chrysostom: “All flesh is not the same flesh.” For why speak I, saith he, in respect of seeds? In respect of bodies let us agitate this point, concerning which we are discoursing now. Wherefore also he addeth, and saith,

“But there is one flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of birds, and another of fishes.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Tertullian: Indeed, since he proposes as his examples “wheat grain, or some other grain, to which God giveth a body, such as it hath pleased Him; " since also he says, that “to every seed is its own body; " that, consequently, “there is one kind of flesh of men, whilst there is another of beasts, and (another) of birds; that there are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial; and that there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars” -does he not therefore intimate that there is to be a resurrection of the flesh or body, which he illustrates by fleshly and corporeal samples? Does he not also guarantee that the resurrection shall be accomplished by that God from whom proceed all the (creatures which have served him for) examples? “So also,” says he, “is the resurrection of the dead. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: 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). — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Theodore of Mopsuestia: In the resurrection a better body is constructed, one which is no longer flesh and blood as such but which is an immortal and indestructible living being. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

1 Corinthians 15:40

Augustine of Hippo: If any man does not believe that common flesh can be changed into a nature of this sort, he is to be convinced toward faith by gradual steps. If you ask them whether earth can be changed into water, that will not seem to him incredible because there is no great distance between these two elements. Again if you ask whether water can be changed into air, he will agree that that is not absurd because these two elements are close neighbors. — On Faith and the Creed 10.24

Augustine of Hippo: Porphyry says: “You praise the body to me without good reasons. No matter what kind of body it is, you must escape from it if you wish to be happy.” Philosophers say this, but they are wrong. They are raving.… I read your books where you say that the world is animated, that the heavens, the earth, the seas, all the huge bodies which exist, all the immense elements of all times, this whole universal body which consists of all these elements—all this, you say, is a vast living thing and has its own soul. But you claim that it does not have the senses of the body because outside of it there is nothing which can be perceived. Nevertheless you say it has intelligence, and that it leads to God, and that the soul of the world is called Jupiter.… You claim that the same world is eternal, that it will always exist, that it will not have an end. If then the world is eternal and remains without any end, if this world is a living thing and if its soul is always held in the world, then as a matter of fact, must we then flee every kind of body? — EASTER SERMON 241.7

John Chrysostom: “There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.”

“There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.”

And what means he by these expressions? Wherefore from the resurrection of the body did he throw himself into the discourse of the stars and the sun? He did not throw himself out, neither did he break off from his purpose; far from it: but he still keeps to it. For whereas he had established the doctrine concerning the resurrection, he intimates in what follows that great will be then the difference of glory, though there be but one resurrection. And for the present he divides the whole into two: into “bodies celestial,” and “bodies terrestrial.” For that the bodies are raised again, he signified by the corn: but that they are not all in the same glory, he signifies by this. For as the disbelief of the resurrection makes men supine, so again it makes them indolent to think that all are vouchsafed the same reward. Wherefore he corrects both. And the one in the preceding verses he had completed; but this he begins now. And having made two ranks, of the righteous and of sinners, these same two he subdivides again into many parts, signifying that neither righteous nor sinners shall obtain the same; neither righteous men, all of them, alike with other righteous, nor sinners with other sinners.

Now he makes, you see, first, one separation between righteous and sinners, where he says, “bodies celestial, and bodies terrestrial:” by the “terrestrial” intimating the latter, and by the “celestial,” the former. Then farther he introduces a difference of sinners from sinners, saying, “All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one flesh of fishes, another of birds, and another of beasts.” And yet all are bodies; but some are in more, and some in lesser vileness. And that in their manner of living too, and in their very constitution.

And having said this, he ascends again to the heaven, saying, “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon.” For as in the earthly bodies there is a difference, so also in the heavenly; and that difference no ordinary one, but reaching even to the uttermost: there being not only a difference between sun and moon, and stars, but also between stars and stars. For what though they be all in the heaven? yet some have a larger, others a less share of glory. What do we learn from hence? That although they be all in God’s kingdom, all shall not enjoy the same reward; and though all sinners be in hell, all shall not endure the same punishment. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Origen of Alexandria: Even among earthly bodies there are no small differences. Take the human race, for example. Some are Greeks and some are barbarians, and among the barbarians, some are wilder than others. Some have higher laws. Some lower ones, and some follow savage customs which are not laws at all. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 2.9.3

Pelagius: If God could make the sun, moon and stars, what problem will he have in making new bodies for us? — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 15

Tertullian: In like manner, those also who after Him are heavenly, are understood to have this celestial quality predicated of them not from their present nature, but from their future glory; because in a preceding sentence, which originated this distinction respecting difference of dignity, there was shown to be “one glory in celestial bodies, and another in terrestrial ones,” -“one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for even one star differeth from another star in glory, " although not in substance. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:41

Augustine of Hippo: In the body the eyes are held in high esteem. But they would be less esteemed if they were all alone or if there were no other members of seemingly less worth. In the heavens the sun outshines the moon but does not scorn it, and “star differs from star in glory” but is never measuring itself through pride. — THE EXCELLENCE OF WIDOWHOOD 6.8

Clement of Alexandria: Conformably, therefore, there are various abodes, according to the worth of those who have believed. To the point Solomon says, “For there shall be given to him the choice grace of faith, and a more pleasant lot in the temple of the Lord.” For the comparative shows that there are lower parts in the temple of God, which is the whole Church. And the superlative remains to be conceived, where the Lord is. These chosen abodes, which are three, are indicated by the numbers in the Gospel-the thirty, the sixty, the hundred. — The Stromata Book 6

Dionysius of Alexandria: Who can allow that the perfect concord subsisting among the celestial bodies derives its harmony from instruments destitute both of concord and harmony? Or, again, if there is but one and the same substance in all things, and if there is the same incorruptible nature in all—the only elements of difference being, as they aver, size and figure—how comes it that there are some bodies divine and perfect, and eternal, as they would phrase it, or lasting, as some one may prefer to express it; and among these some that are visible and others that are invisible—the visible including such as sun, and moon, and stars, and earth, and water; and the invisible including gods, and demons, and spirits? … But who, then, is the sagacious discriminator, that brings certain atoms into collocation, and separates others; and marshals some in such wise as to form the sun, and others in such a way as to originate the moon, and adapts all in natural fitness, and in accordance with the proper constitution of each star? For surely neither would those solar atoms, with their peculiar size and kind, and with their special mode of collocation, ever have reduced themselves so as to effect the production of a moon; nor, on the other hand, would the conjunctions of these lunar atoms ever have developed into a sun. And as certainly neither would Arcturus, resplendent as he is, ever boast his having the atoms possessed by Lucifer, nor would the Pleiades glory in being constituted of those of Orion. For well has Paul expressed the distinction when he says: “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.” — Containing Various Sections of the Works

Fulgentius of Ruspe: The diversity of corporeal natures demonstrates that each one of them is not what it is because of what it could always have had all by itself. Rather it is what it is because of what it has received from the plan and working of the one omnipotent, unchangeable and all-wise Creator. If any corporeal creature whatsoever were of one and the same nature as the holy Trinity, which is the one God, it would not exist in any place locally, nor would it ever undergo change because of passage of time, nor would it move from one place to another, nor would it be circumscribed by the fact of its mass. — TO PETER ON THE FAITH 26-27

Irenaeus: Whence, then, comes the passion of the youngest Aeon, if the light of the Father is that from which all other lights have been formed, and which is by nature impassible? And how can one Aeon be spoken of as either younger or older among themselves, since there is but one light in the entire Pleroma? And if any one calls them stars, they will all nevertheless appear to participate in the same nature. For if “one star differs from another star in glory” — Against Heresies Book II

Jerome: The members of the one church are different. Just as the sun has its own brilliance, and the moon also tempers the darkness of the night. And the five other stars called the wandering stars traverse the sky, differing both in their courses and in their brilliance. There are other countless stars that we see shining in the firmament. The brilliance of each of these is different, and yet each and every star is perfect, according to its own standard, to the degree that, in comparison with a greater star, it lacks perfection.… So the eye cannot say to the hand: “I do not need your help.” — Against the Pelagians 1.16

Methodius of Olympus: Let no one suppose that all the remaining company of those who have believed are condemned, thinking that we who are virgins alone shall be led on to attain the promises, not understanding that there shall be tribes and families and orders, according to the analogy of the faith of each. And this Paul, too, sets forth, saying, — Methodius Discourse VII. Procilla

Tertullian: Therefore “one star differeth from another star in glory.” If, again, Christ in His advent from heaven “shall change the body of our humiliation, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body,” it follows that this body of ours shall rise again, which is now in a state of humiliation in its sufferings and according to the law of mortality drops into the ground. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: “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. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Well now, if He had put forth faith to suffer martyrdoms not for the contest’s sake, but for its own benefit, ought it not to have had some store of hope, for the increase of which it might restrain desire of its own, and check its wish in order that it might strive to mount up, seeing they also who discharge earthly functions are eager for promotion? Or how will there be many mansions in our Father’s house, if not to accord with a diversity of deserts? How will one star also differ from another star in glory, unless in virtue of disparity in their rays? But further, if, on that account, some increase of brightness also was appropriate to loftiness of faith, that gain ought to have been of some such sort as would cost great effort, poignant suffering, torture, death. — Scorpiace

1 Corinthians 15:42

Augustine of Hippo: In due time I yielded to better and more enlightened minds, or rather, to truth itself, as I heard in the words of the apostle the groaning of the saints in their battle against carnal concupiscence. Although the saints are spiritually minded, they are still carnal in the corruptible body which remains a weight upon the soul. They will, however, be spiritual also in body when the body sown animal will rise spiritual. They are still prisoners under the wall of sin, in as much as they are subject to stimulation by desires to which they do not consent. Thus I came to understand this matter as did Hilary, Gregory, Ambrose, and other holy and renowned teachers of the church, who saw that the apostle, by his own words, fought strenuously the same battle against carnal concupiscences he did not wish to have yet in fact did have. — AGAINST JULIAN 70

Didymus the Blind: Just as the rational soul is not good or bad in itself but is capable of becoming either of these, so our body is neither perishable nor imperishable by nature but acquires these immanent, essential qualities in due course. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Irenaeus: We must therefore conclude that it is in reference to the flesh that death is mentioned; which [flesh], after the soul’s departure, becomes breathless and inanimate, and is decomposed gradually into the earth from which it was taken. This, then, is what is mortal. And it is this of which he also says, “He shall also quicken your mortal bodies.” And therefore in reference to it he says, in the first [Epistle] to the Corinthians: “So also is the resurrection of the dead: it is sown in corruption, it rises in incorruption.” For he declares, “That which thou sowest cannot be quickened, unless first it die.” — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 5

John Chrysostom: “So also is the resurrection of the dead.”

“So,” How? with considerable difference. Then leaving this doctrine as sufficiently proved, he again comes to the proof itself of the resurrection and the manner of it, saying,

“It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.” And observe his consideration. As in the case of seeds, he used the term proper to bodies, saying, “it is not quickened, except it die:” so in the case of bodies, the expression belonging to seeds, saying, “it is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.” He said not, “is produced,” that thou mightest not think it a work of the earth, but is “raised.” And by sowing here, he means not our generation in the womb, but the burial in the earth of our dead bodies, their dissolution, their ashes. Wherefore having said, “it is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Methodius of Olympus: But the corruptible and mortal putting on in corruption and immortality, what else is this, but that which is sown in corruption rising in in corruption?

Tertullian: Indeed, since he proposes as his examples “wheat grain, or some other grain, to which God giveth a body, such as it hath pleased Him; " since also he says, that “to every seed is its own body; " that, consequently, “there is one kind of flesh of men, whilst there is another of beasts, and (another) of birds; that there are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial; and that there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars” -does he not therefore intimate that there is to be a resurrection of the flesh or body, which he illustrates by fleshly and corporeal samples? Does he not also guarantee that the resurrection shall be accomplished by that God from whom proceed all the (creatures which have served him for) examples? “So also,” says he, “is the resurrection of the dead.” How? Just as the grain, which is sown a body, springs up a body. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: This sowing of the body he called the dissolving thereof in the ground, “because it is sown in corruption,” (but “is raised) to honour and power.” Now, just as in the case of the grain, so here: to Him will belong the work in the revival of the body, who ordered the process in the dissolution thereof. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: Else let them show that the soul was sown after death; in a word, that it underwent death,-that is, was demolished, dismembered, dissolved in the ground, nothing of which was ever decreed against it by God: let them display to our view its corruptibility and dishonour (as well as) its weakness, that it may also accrue to it to rise again in incorruption, and in glory, and in power. Now in the ease of Lazarus, (which we may take as) the palmary instance of a resurrection, the flesh lay prostrate in weakness, the flesh was almost putrid in the dishonour of its decay, the flesh stank in corruption, and yet it was as flesh that Lazarus rose again-with his soul, no doubt. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:43

Ambrosiaster: The body is sown in dishonor because it is placed in a coffin where it rots and is eaten by worms. But when it rises again, it will do so in glory, and all trace of this dishonor will vanish. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: We will still be bodies, so vivified by the spirit, however, as to retain the substance of the flesh without suffering the accidents of sluggishness and mortality. — City of God 13.22

Didymus the Blind: When the body formed by the copulation of male and female is sown, dishonor and weakness will be in it because it is the body of a perishing soul and shares its characteristics. But when it rises again by the power of God, it appears as a spiritual body, having imperishability, power and honor. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Irenaeus: But what is that which, like a grain of wheat, is sown in the earth and decays, unless it be the bodies which are laid in the earth, into which seeds are also cast? And for this reason he said, “It is sown in dishonour, it rises in glory.”. For what is more ignoble than dead flesh? Or, on the other hand, what is more glorious than the same when it arises and partakes of in corruption? “It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power: " — Against Heresies Book V

John Chrysostom: “It is sown in dishonor.” For what is more unsightly than a corpse in dissolution? “It is raised in glory.”

“It is sown in weakness.” For before thirty days the whole is gone, and the flesh cannot keep itself together nor hold out for one day. “It is raised in power.” For there shall nothing prevail against it for all the future.

Here is why he stood in need of those former analogies, lest many on hearing of these things, that they are “raised in incorruption and glory and power,” might suppose that there is no difference among those who rise again. For all indeed rise again, both in power and in incorruption; and in this glory of their incorruption yet are not all in the same state of honor and safety. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

1 Corinthians 15:44

Ambrose of Milan: You are sown as are all other things. Why, then, do you wonder whether you will rise again like the rest? You believe the seed because you see it. You do not believe the rising again because you do not see it. “Blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed.” Yet, before the proper season arrives, not even the seed is believed. For not every season is suitable for seeds to grow. Wheat is sown at one time and comes up at another time. At one time the vine is grafted. At another shoots begin to grow, foliage becomes luxuriant, and grapes take form. At one time, the olive tree is planted. At another, as though heavy with child and burdened with a progeny of berries, it is bent low in the abundance of its own fruit. But before the proper time arrives for each, production is restricted. Neither the tree nor the plant has the time of bearing within its own power. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.60

Augustine of Hippo: As the Spirit, when it serves the flesh, is not improperly said to be carnal, so the flesh, when it serves the spirit, will rightly be called spiritual—not because changed into spirit, as some suppose who misinterpret the text, “What is sown a natural body rises a spiritual body,” but because it will be so subject to the spirit that, with a marvelous pliancy of perfect obedience, it will accept the infallible law of its indissoluble immortality, putting aside every feeling of fatigue, every shadow of suffering, every sign of slowing down. This “spiritual body” will not only be better than any body on earth in perfect health but will surpass even that of Adam or Eve before their sin. — City of God 13.20

Irenaeus: How is it possible, therefore, that that seed should be after images of the angels, seeing it has obtained a form after the likeness of men? Why, again, since it was of a spiritual nature, had it any need of descending into flesh? For what is carnal stands in need of that which is spiritual, if indeed it is to be saved, that in it it may be sanctified and cleared from all impurity, and that what is mortal may be swallowed up by immortality;. in its own weakness certainly, because since it is earth it goes to earth; but — Against Heresies Book II

John Chrysostom: “It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.”

What sayest thou? Is not “this” body spiritual? It is indeed spiritual, but that will be much more so. For now oftentimes both the abundant grace of the Holy Ghost flies away on men’s committing great sins; and again, the Spirit continuing present, the life of the flesh depends on the soul: and the result in such a case is a void, without the Spirit. But in that day not so: rather he abides continually in the flesh of the righteous, and the victory shall be His, the natural soul also being present.

For either it was some such thing which he intimated by saying, “a spiritual body,” or that it shall be lighter and more subtle and such as even to be wafted upon air; or rather he meant both these. And if thou disbelieve the doctrine, behold the heavenly bodies which are so glorious and (for this time) so durable, and abide in undecaying tranquillity; and believe thou from hence, that God can also make these corruptible bodies incorruptible and much more excellent than those which are visible. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Macrina the Younger: The seed does not germinate unless it is dissolved in the earth, rarefied and made for us, so that it is mixed with the moisture nearby and dust changes into root and sprout, and it does not stop there but changes into a stalk with sections in between which are surrounded by chains, as it were, so as to be able to hold the grain in an upright position.… Thus the apostle says that the mystery of the resurrection is presignified before us in the miracles performed in the seeds. The divine power in its surpassing excellence not only gives back to see but adds many great and more wonderful features with which nature is magnificently adorned. — [THE TEACHING OF MACRINA] ON THE SOUL AND THE RESURRECTION

Oecumenius: Christ had a spiritual body, because he had received the full presence of the Holy Spirit when the dove rested on him. So the Lord had the power of the Paraclete in his humanity in a way distinguishable from his divinity, since he was himself the Spirit. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Origen of Alexandria: In regard to our bodily nature we must understand that there is not one body which we now use in lowliness and corruption and weakness and a different one which we are to use hereafter in incorruption and power and glory. Rather this same body, having cast off the weaknesses of its present existence, will be transformed into a thing of glory and made spiritual, with the result that what was a vessel of dishonor shall itself be purified and become a vessel of honor and a habitation of blessedness. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.6.6

Origen of Alexandria: The quality of a spiritual body is something such as will make a fitting habitation not only for all saints and perfected souls but also for that “whole creation” which is to be “delivered from the bondage of corruption.” — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 3.6.4

Origen of Alexandria: It is from the natural body that the power and grace of the resurrection calls forth the spiritual body, when it changes it from dishonor to glory. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 2.10.1

Pseudo-Clement: For a severe judgment will those teachers receive “who teach, but do not,” [Matthew 23:3] and those who take upon them the name of Christ falsely, and say: We teach the truth, and yet go wandering about idly, and exalt themselves, and make their boast in the mind of the flesh. [Colossians 2:18] These, moreover, are like “the blind man who leads the blind man, and they both fall into the ditch.” [Matthew 15:14] And they will receive judgment, because in their talkativeness and their frivolous teaching they teach natural wisdom and the “frivolous error of the plausible words of the wisdom of men,” “according to the will of the prince of the dominion of the air, and of the spirit which works in those men who will not obey, according to the training of this world, and not according to the doctrine of Christ.” — Two Epistles on Virginity

Tatian the Assyrian: Not pervading matter, but the Maker of material spirits. The sun and moon were made for us: how, then, can I adore my own servants? How can I speak of stocks and stones as gods? For the Spirit that pervades matter

Tertullian: If, however, you remove the body from the resurrection which you submitted to the dissolution, what becomes of the diversity in the issue? Likewise, “although it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.” Now, although the natural principle of life and the spirit have each a body proper to itself, so that the “natural body” may fairly be taken to signify the soul, and “the spiritual body” the spirit, yet that is no reason for supposing the apostle to say that the soul is to become spirit in the resurrection, but that the body (which, as being born along with the soul, and as retaining its life by means of the soul, admits of being called animal (or natural ) will became spiritual, since it rises through the Spirit to an eternal life. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: And thus, too, the same flesh must be understood in a preceding passage: “That which is sown is the natural body, and that which rises again is the spiritual body; because that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural: since the first Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam a quickening spirit.” It is all about man, and all about the flesh because about man. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:45

Augustine of Hippo: The first man, Adam, was made into a living soul … but of all the animals it was said: “Let the earth bring forth the living creatures.” We understand, then, that the natural body is said to be like the other animals because of the dissolution and corruption of death. It is daily renewed by food, and when the bond of life is broken it is dissolved. But the spiritual body which is now with the Spirit is immortal. — LETTER 205, TO CONSENTIUS

Irenaeus: For there had been a necessity that, in the first place, a human being should be fashioned, and that what was fashioned should receive the soul; afterwards that it should thus receive the communion of the Spirit. Wherefore also “the first Adam was made” by the Lord “a living soul, the second Adam a quickening spirit.” As, then, he who was made a living soul forfeited life when he turned aside to what was evil, so, on the other hand, the same individual, when he reverts to what is good, and receives the quickening Spirit, shall find life. — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 5

John Chrysostom: “So also it is written, the first man Adam became a living soul: the last Adam became a life-giving Spirit.”

And yet the one indeed is written, but the other not written. How then said He, “it is written?” He modified the expression according to the issue of events: as he is wont continually to do: and indeed as it is the way of every prophet. For so Jerusalem, the prophet said, should be “called a city of righteousness;” yet it was not so called. What then? Did the prophet speak false? By no means. For he is speaking of the issue of events. And that Christ too should be called Immanuel; yet was he not so called. But the facts utter this voice; so also here, “the last Adam became a life-giving Spirit.”

And these things he said that thou mayest learn that the signs and pledges both of the present life and of that which is to come have already come upon us; to wit, of the present life, Adam, and of the life to come, Christ. For since he sets down the better things as matters of hope, he signifies that their beginning hath already come to pass, and their root and their fountain been brought to light. But if the root and the fountain be evident to all, there is no need to doubt of the fruits. Wherefore he saith, “The last Adam became a life-giving Spirit.” And elsewhere too, He “shall quicken your mortal bodies through His Spirit that dwelleth in you.” It is the Spirit’s work then to quicken.

Further, lest any should say, “why are the worse things the elder? and why hath the one sort, to wit, the natural, come to pass not merely as far as the first-fruits, but altogether; the other as far as the first-fruits only?"-he signifies that the principles also of each were so ordered. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Tertullian: For to this effect he just before remarked of Christ Himself: “The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.” Our heretic, however, in the excess of his folly, being unwilling that the statement should remain in this shape, altered “last Adam” into “last Lord; " because he feared, of course, that if he allowed the Lord to be the last (or second) Adam, we should contend that Christ, being the second Adam, must needs belong to that God who owned also the first Adam. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: That, however, which we have reserved for a concluding argument, will now stand as a plea for all, and for the apostle himself, who in very deed would have to be charged with extreme indiscretion, if he had so abruptly, as some will have it, and as they say, blindfold, and so indiscriminately, and so unconditionally, excluded from the kingdom of God, and indeed from the court of heaven itself, all flesh and blood whatsoever; since Jesus is still sitting there at the right hand of the Father, man, yet God-the last Adam, yet the primary Word-flesh and blood, yet purer than ours-who “shall descend in like manner as He ascended into heaven” the same both in substance and form, as the angels affirmed, so as even to be recognised by those who pierced Him. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: 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. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Now the apostle, by severally adducing this order in Adam and in Christ, fairly distinguishes between the two states, in the very essentials of their difference. And when he calls Christ “the last Adam,” you may from this circumstance discover how strenuously he labours to establish throughout his teaching the resurrection of the flesh, not of the soul. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Victorinus of Pettau: And thus in the sixth Psalm for the eighth day, David asks the Lord that He would not rebuke him in His anger, nor judge him in His fury; for this is indeed the eighth day of that future judgment, which will pass beyond the order of the sevenfold arrangement. Jesus also, the son of Nave, the successor of Moses, himSelf broke the Sabbath-day; for on the Sabbath-day he commanded the children of Israel to go round the walls of the city of Jericho with trumpets, and declare war against the aliens. Matthias also, prince of Judah, broke the Sabbath; for he slew the prefect of Antiochus the king of Syria on the Sabbath, and subdued the foreigners by pursuing them. And in Matthew we read, that it is written Isaiah also and the rest of his colleagues broke the Sabbath -that that true and just Sabbath should be observed in the seventh millenary of years. Wherefore to those seven days the Lord attributed to each a thousand years; for thus went the warning: “In Thine eyes, O Lord, a thousand years are as one day.” Therefore in the eyes of the Lord each thousand of years is ordained, for I find that the Lord’s eyes are seven. Wherefore, as I have narrated, that true Sabbath will be in the seventh millenary of years, when Christ with His elect shall reign. Moreover, the seven heavens agree with those days; for thus we are warned: “By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the powers of them by the spirit of His mouth.” There are seven spirits. Their names are the spirits which abode on the Christ of God, as was intimated in Isaiah the prophet: “And there rests upon Him the spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of wisdom and of piety, and the spirit of God’s fear hath filled Him.” Therefore the highest heaven is the heaven of wisdom; the second, of understanding; the third, of counsel; the fourth, of might; the fifth, of knowledge; the sixth, of piety; the seventh, of God’s fear. From this, therefore, the thunders bellow, the lightnings are kindled, the fires are heaped together; fiery darts appear, stars gleam, the anxiety caused by the dreadful comet is aroused. Sometimes it happens that the sun and moon approach one another, and cause those more than frightful appearances, radiating with light in the field of their aspect. But the author of the whole creation is Jesus. His name is the Word; for thus His Father says: “My heart hath emitted a good word.” John the evangelist thus says: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made that was made.” Therefore, first, was made the creation; secondly, man, the lord of the human race, as says the apostle. Therefore this Word, when it made light, is called Wisdom; when it made the sky, Understanding; when it made land and sea, Counsel; when it made sun and moon and other bright things, Power; when it calls forth land and sea, Knowledge; when it formed man, Piety; when it blesses and sanctifies man, it has the name of God’s fear. — Victorinus On the Creation of the World

1 Corinthians 15:46

Augustine of Hippo: First comes the clay that is only fit to be thrown away, with which we must begin but in which we need not remain. Afterward comes what is fit for us, that into which we can be gradually molded and in which, when molded, we may remain. — City of God 15.1

Augustine of Hippo: The spiritual body is understood as a body so subject to spirit that it may be suited to its celestial habitation, all earthly weakness and corruption and being changed and converted into celestial purity and stability. — On Faith and the Creed 6.13

Gregory the Dialogist: What then is designated by John except the Synagogue, what by Peter except the Church? Nor should it seem strange that the Synagogue is said to be signified by the younger and the Church by the elder, because even if the Synagogue is prior to the Church of the Gentiles in the worship of God, nevertheless the multitude of the Gentiles is prior to the Synagogue in the practice of the world, as Paul attests when he says: “Because what is spiritual is not first, but what is natural.” Therefore by the elder Peter is signified the Church of the Gentiles, but by the younger John the Synagogue of the Jews. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 22

Irenaeus: For the breath of life, which also rendered man an animated being, is one thing, and the vivifying Spirit another, which also caused him to become spiritual. And for this reason Isaiah said, “Thus saith the Lord, who made heaven and established it, who founded the earth and the things therein, and gave breath to the people upon it, and Spirit to those walking upon it;” thus telling us that breath is indeed given in common to all people upon earth, but that the Spirit is theirs alone who tread down earthly desires. And therefore Isaiah himself, distinguishing the things already mentioned, again exclaims, “For the Spirit shall go forth from Me, and I have made every breath.” Thus does he attribute the Spirit as peculiar to God which in the last times He pours forth upon the human race by the adoption of sons; but [he shows] that breath was common throughout the creation, and points it out as something created. Now what has been made is a different thing from him who makes it. The breath, then, is temporal, but the Spirit eternal. The breath, too, increases [in strength] for a short period, and continues for a certain time; after that it takes its departure, leaving its former abode destitute of breath. But when the Spirit pervades the man within and without, inasmuch as it continues there, it never leaves him. “But that is not first which is spiritual,” says the apostle, speaking this as if with reference to us human beings; “but that is first which is animal, afterwards that which is spiritual,” in accordance with reason. — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 5

John Chrysostom: “For that is not first,” saith he, “which is spiritual, but that which is natural, then that which is spiritual.”

And he saith not, why, but is content with the ordinance of God, having the evidence from the facts testifying to that most excellent oeconomy of God, and implying that our state is always going forward to the better; at the same time by this also adding credibility to his argument. For if the lesser have come to pass, much more ought we to expect the better. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 41

Tertullian: First of all there comes the (natural) soul, that is to say, the breath, to the people that are on the earth,-in other words, to those who act carnally in the flesh; then afterwards comes the Spirit to those who walk thereon,-that is, who subdue the works of the flesh; because the apostle also says, that “that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, (or in possession of the natural soul, ) and afterward that which is spiritual.” For, inasmuch as Adam straightway predicted that “great mystery of Christ and the church,” when he said, “This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they two shall become one flesh,” he experienced the influence of the Spirit. — A Treatise on the Soul

Tertullian: In short, since it is not the soul, but the flesh which is “sown in corruption,” when it turns to decay in the ground, it follows that (after such dissolution) the soul is no longer the natural body, but the flesh, which was the natural body, (is the subject of the future change), forasmuch as of a natural body it is made a spiritual body, as he says further down, “That was not first which is spiritual.” For to this effect he just before remarked of Christ Himself: “The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: Accordingly the apostle goes on to say: “Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual,” as in the case of the two Adams. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: This figure of corporeal healing sang of a spiritual healing, according to the rule by which things carnal are always antecedent as figurative of things spiritual. — On Baptism

Tertullian: But again: if the beginning passes on to the end (as Alpha to Omega), as the end passes back to the beginning (as Omega to Alpha), and thus our origin is transferred to Christ, the animal to the spiritual-inasmuch as “(that was) not first which is spiritual, but (that) which (is) animal; then what (is) spiritual,” -let us, in like manner (as before), see whether you owe this very (same) thing to this second origin also: whether the last Adam also meet you in the selfsame form as the first; since the last Adam (that is, Christ) was entirely unwedded, as was even the first Adam before his exile. — On Monogamy

1 Corinthians 15:47

Ambrose of Milan: The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening Spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural, and afterwards that which is spiritual; and then he adds, The first man is of the earth, earthy, the second man is from heaven, heavenly. Rightly therefore is man the last, being as it were the consummation of the whole work, the cause of the world, for whose sake all things were made; the habitant, as it were, of all the elements, he lives among beasts, swims with fishes, soars above birds, converses with Angels, dwells upon the earth, and has his warfare in heaven, ploughs the sea, feeds upon air, tills the soil, is a voyager over the deep, a fisher in the floods, a fowler in the air, in heaven an heir even joint-heir with Christ. — Letter 43, To Horontianus

Augustine of Hippo: First comes in the natural body such as Adam was the first man to possess. Had he not sinned, he would never have died. Such a body we too possess, except that its nature as a result of sin has become so changed for the worse that it is now faced with inexorable death. Such a body Christ also deigned to assume for our sakes, not indeed by necessity but in virtue of his power. Afterward, however, comes the spiritual body such as that which Christ, our head, was the first to have been, but which we, his members, will have at the final resurrection of the dead. — City of God 13.23

Irenaeus: As it has been clearly demonstrated that the Word, who existed in the beginning with God, by whom all things were made, who was also always present with mankind, was in these last days, according to the time appointed by the Father, united to His own workmanship, inasmuch as He became a man liable to suffering, [it follows] that every objection is set aside of those who say, “If our Lord was born at that time, Christ had therefore no previous existence.” For I have shown that the Son of God did not then begin to exist, being with the Father from the beginning; but when He became incarnate, and was made man, He commenced afresh the long line of human beings, and furnished us, in a brief, comprehensive manner, with salvation; so that what we had lost in Adam-namely, to be according to the image and likeness of God-that we might recover in Christ Jesus. — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 3

John Chrysostom: Having said that “the natural was first,” and “the spiritual afterward,” he again states another difference, speaking of “the earthy” and “the heavenly.” For the first difference was between the present life and that which is to come: but this between that before grace and that after grace. And he stated it with a view to the most excellent way of life, saying, (for to hinder men, as I said, from such confidence in the resurrection as would make them neglectful of their practice and of perfection, from this topic also again he renders them anxious and exhorts to virtue, saying,) “The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven:” calling the whole by the name of “man,” and naming the one from the better, and the other from the worst part. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Tertullian: In like manner (the heretic) will be refuted also with the word “man: " “The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.” Now, since the first was a man, how can there be a second, unless he is a man also? Or, else, if the second is “Lord,” was the first “Lord” also? It is, however, quite enough for me, that in his Gospel he admits the Son of man to be both Christ and Man; so that he will not be able to deny Him (in this passage), in the “Adam” and the “man” (of the apostle). — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: We read in so many words: “The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.” This passage, however, has nothing to do with any difference of substance; it only contrasts with the once “earthy” substance of the flesh of the first man, Adam, the “heavenly” substance of the spirit of the second man, Christ. — On the Flesh of Christ

Tertullian: He says: “The first man is of the earth, earthy”-that is, made of dust, that is, Adam; “the second man is from heaven” -that is, the Word of God, which is Christ, in no other way, however, man (although “from heaven “), than as being Himself flesh and soul, just as a human being is, just as Adam was. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Theodoret of Cyrus: Paul is referring here to the second coming of Christ. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 279

1 Corinthians 15:48

Augustine of Hippo: If you do not like the Christian faith, say so. But you will not find another Christian faith. There is one man unto life; there is one unto death. The one is only man; the other is God and man. Through the one the world was made the enemy of God. Through the other those chosen from the world are reconciled to God. For “As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” Therefore even as we have borne the image of the earthly, let us also bear the image of the heavenly. Whoever tries to undermine these foundations of the Christian faith will himself be destroyed, but they will remain firm. — AGAINST JULIAN 4

Augustine of Hippo: The Lord who was heavenly became earthly that he might make heavenly those who were earthly. From immortal he became mortal by taking the form of a servant, not by changing the nature of the Lord, that he might make immortal those who were mortal by imparting the grace of the Lord, not by retaining the offense of the servant. — LETTER 205, TO CONSENTIUS

Hilary of Poitiers: The first man was made from the slime of the earth. The second man came from heaven. By using the word man, he taught the birth of this man from the virgin, who in fulfilling her function as a mother acted in accordance with the nature of her sex in the conception and birth of the man. And when he asserted that the second man was from heaven, he testified that his origin was from the appearance of the Holy Spirit who came upon the virgin. Thus precisely while he was a man, he was also from heaven. The birth of this man was from the virgin. The conception was from the Spirit. — ON THE TRINITY 10

Irenaeus: Paul, too, very plainly set forth the material, animal, and spiritual, saying in one place, “As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; “. The flesh, therefore, when destitute of the Spirit of God, is dead, not having life, and cannot possess the kingdom of God: — Against Heresies Book I

John Chrysostom: “As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy:” so shall they perish and have an end. “As is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly:” so shall they abide immortal and glorious.

What then? Did not This Man too die? He died indeed, but received no injury therefrom, yea rather by this He put an end to death. Seest thou how on this part of his subject also, he makes use of death to establish the doctrine of the resurrection? “For having, as I said before, the beginning and the head,” so he speaks, “doubt not of the whole body.”

Moreover also he frames hereby his advice concerning the best way of living, proposing standards of a lofty and severe life and of that which is not such, and bringing forward the principles of both these, of the one Christ, but of the other Adam. Therefore neither did he simply say, “of the earth,” but “earthy,” i.e., “gross, nailed down to things present:” and again with respect to Christ the reverse, “the Lord from heaven.”

But if any should say, “therefore the Lord hath not a body because He is said to be ‘from heaven,’” although what is said before is enough to stop their mouths: yet nothing hinders our silencing them from this consideration also: viz. what is, “the Lord from heaven?” Doth he speak of His nature, or His most perfect life? It is I suppose evident to every one that he speaks of His life. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Maximus of Turin: Adam is formed from mire by the hands of God. Christ is formed in the womb by the Spirit of God. — SERMON 50.2

Origen of Alexandria: If you remain in what is of the earth, you will be turned away in the end. You must be changed yourself, you must be converted, you must be made “heavenly.” — HOMILIES ON Genesis 9

Tertullian: “As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.” Such (does he mean), in substance; or first of all in training, and afterwards in the dignity and worth which that training aimed at acquiring? Not in substance, however, by any means will the earthy and the heavenly be separated, designated as they have been by the apostle once for all, as men. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:49

Ambrosiaster: This means that just as we have borne the corruptible body of the earthly Adam, so we shall in the future bear an incorruptible body, like that of the resurrected Christ. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: Therefore, given that our nature sinned in paradise, we are now formed through a mortal begetting by the same divine providence, not according to heaven but according to earth—not according to the Spirit but according to the flesh. We have all become one mass of clay, a mass of sin. Since therefore we have forfeited our reward through sinning, and since, in the absence of God’s mercy, we as sinners deserve nothing other than eternal damnation, who then does the man from this mass think he is that he is able to question God and say: “Why have you made me this way?” If you want to know these things, do not be clay, but become a son of God through the mercy of him who has given to those believing in his name the power to become sons of God, although he has not so given, as you might want, to those desiring to know divine things before they believe. — QUESTIONS 68.3

Cyril of Jerusalem: They are also a “heaven” “bearing the likeness of the heavenly man,” since God is dwelling in them and mingling with them. — MYSTAGOGICAL LECTURES 5.11

Irenaeus: And on this account he (the apostle) declares, “As we have borne the image of him who is of the earth, we shall also bear the image of Him who is from heaven.”. Since, therefore, in that passage he recounts those works of the flesh which are without the Spirit, which bring death — Against Heresies Book V

John Chrysostom: “As we have borne the image of the earthy,” i.e., as we have done evil, “let us also bear the image of the heavenly,” i.e., let us practise all goodness.

But besides this, I would fain ask thee, is it of nature that it is said, “he that is of the earth, earthy,” and, “the Lord from heaven?” “Yea,” saith one. What then? Was Adam only “earthy,” or had he also another kind of substance congenial with heavenly and incorporeal beings, which the Scripture calls “soul,” and “spirit?” Every one sees that he had this also. Therefore neither was the Lord from above only although He is said to be “from heaven,” but He had also assumed our flesh. But Paul’s meaning is such as this: “as we have borne the image of the earthy,” i.e., evil deeds, “let us also bear the image of the heavenly,” the manner of life which is in the heavens. Whereas if he were speaking of nature, the thing needed not exhortation nor advice. So that hence also it is evident that the expression relates to our manner of life.

Wherefore also he introduces the saying in the manner of advice and calls it an “image,” here too again showing that he is speaking of conduct, not of nature. For therefore are we become earthy, because we have done evil: not because we were originally formed “earthy,” but because we sinned. For sin came first, and then death and then the sentence, “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” Then also entered in the swarm of the passions. For it is not simply the being born “of earth” that makes a man “earthy,” (since the Lord also was of this mass and lump,) but the doing earthly things, even as also he is made “heavenly” by performing things meet for heaven. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Methodius of Olympus: -for the soul is not corruptible or mortal; but this which is mortal and corrupting is of flesh,-in order that, “as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly? “. For, “as we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.” — Methodius From the Discourse on the Resurrection

Origen of Alexandria: You bore at that time “the image of the earthly.” But now since these things have been heard, having been cleansed from the whole earthly mass and weight by the Word of God, make the “image of the heavenly” shine brightly in you. — HOMILIES ON Genesis 13.4

Tertullian: Therefore, when exhorting them to cherish the hope of heaven, he says: “As we have borne the image of the earthy, so let us also bear the image of the heavenly,” -language which relates not to any condition of resurrection life, but to the rule of the present time. — Against Marcion Book V

1 Corinthians 15:50

Ambrosiaster: By “flesh” Paul means disobedience, and by “blood” he means an evil and wicked life. Not only will neither of these things inherit eternal life; both must be put under control in this life. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: There will then be such a common accord between flesh and Spirit—the Spirit quickening the servant flesh without any need of sustenance from it. There will be no further conflict within ourselves. And just as there will be no more external enemies to bear with, so neither shall we have to bear with ourselves as enemies within. — Enchiridion 23.91

Clement of Alexandria: “For flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither doth corruption inherit in corruption.”. “Hoc autem dico, fratres, quod caro et sangnis regnum Dei non possunt possidere, neque corruptio possidet in corruptionem.” — The Stromata Book 2

Irenaeus: And they assert that this very great error prevailed among his disciples, that they imagined he had risen in a mundane body, not knowing that “flesh. Among the other . But if they cast out the Spirit, and remain in their former condition, desirous of being of the flesh rather than of the Spirit, then it is very justly said with regard to men of this stamp, “That flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God; “. Then, again, as the wild olive, if it be not grafted in, remains useless to its lord because of its woody quality, and is cut down as a tree bearing no fruit, and cast into the fire; so also man, if he does not receive through faith the engrafting of the Spirit, remains in his old condition, and being — Against Heresies Book I

Isaac of Nineveh: By “incorruption” he means the knowledge of that other world, and by “corruption” and “flesh and blood” he designates the corrupting passions of both the soul and the body, the realm of whose motions is in the “mind of the flesh.” … And by the “kingdom of God” he means the lofty, noetic theoria of the blessed intuitions of that eternal effulgence, into which the holy soul is permitted to enter only by means of the incorruptible intuitions that are exalted above corruption, flesh and blood. — ASCETICAL HOMILIES 5

Jerome: Let us by no means scorn the flesh, but let us reject its works. Let us not despise the body that will reign in heaven with Christ. “Flesh and blood can obtain no part in the kingdom of God.” This does not refer to flesh and blood as such but to the works of the flesh.

John Chrysostom: “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.”

Seest thou how he explains himself again, relieving us of the trouble? which he often doth: for by flesh he here denotes men’s evil deeds, which he hath done also elsewhere; as when he saith, “But ye are not in the flesh:” and again, “So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.” So that when he saith, “Now this I say,” he means nothing else than this: “therefore said I these things that thou mayest learn that evil deeds conduct not to a kingdom.” Thus from the resurrection he straightway introduced also the doctrine of the kingdom also; wherefore also he adds, “neither doth corruption inherit incorruption,” i.e., neither shall wickedness inherit that glory and the enjoyment of the things incorruptible. For in many other places he calls wickedness by this name, saying, “He that soweth to the flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption.” Now if he were speaking of the body and not of evil doing, he would not have said “corruption.” For he nowhere calls the body “corruption,” since neither is it corruption, but a thing corruptible: wherefore proceeding to discourse also of it, he calls it not “corruption,” but “corruptible,” saying, “for this corruptible must put on incorruption.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Methodius of Olympus: For He truly was made man, and died, and not in mere appearance, but that He might truly be shown to be the first begotten from the dead, changing the earthy into the heavenly, and the mortal into the immortal. When, then, Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God”. “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit in corruption.”. a man not far removed either from the times or from the virtues of the apostles, says that that which is mortal is inherited, but that life inherits; and that flesh dies, but that the kingdom of heaven lives. When then, Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven” — Methodius From the Discourse on the Resurrection

Novatian: This does not mean that the substance of our flesh was condemned. On the contrary, only the guilt of the flesh is censured, the guilt which was caused by humanity’s deliberate and rash rebellion against the claims of divine law. — ON THE TRINITY 10

Severian of Gabala: Heretics get really mixed up about this. Paul did not say that flesh and blood would not rise from the dead but that they cannot inherit the kingdom of God. What this means is that the earthly flesh and blood which we now have is perishable, but it will be clothed with immortality, and in that state we shall enter the kingdom. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Tertullian: For what are this next words? “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” He means the works of the flesh and blood, which, in his Epistle to the Galatians, deprive men of the kingdom of God. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: Now if, on the contrary, there is to be no flesh, how then shall it put on incorruption and immortality? Having then become something else by its change, it will obtain the kingdom of God, no longer the (old) flesh and blood, but the body which God shall have given it. Rightly then does the apostle declare, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; " for this (honour) does he ascribe to the changed condition which ensues on the resurrection. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: When also he (in a later passage) enjoins us “to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of flesh and blood” (since this substance enters not the kingdom of Gods ); when, again, he “espouses the church as a chaste virgin to Christ,” a spouse to a spouse in very deed, an image cannot be combined and compared with what is opposed to the real nature the thing (with which it is compared). — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: The apostle, however, himself here comes to our aid; for, while explaining in what sense he would not have us “live in the flesh,” although in the flesh-even by not living in the works of the flesh -he shows that when he wrote the words, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” it was not with the view of condemning the substance (of the flesh), but the works thereof; and because it is possible for these not to be committed by us whilst we are still in the flesh, they will therefore be properly chargeable, not on the substance of the flesh, but on its conduct. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: But “flesh and blood,” you say, “cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” We are quite aware that this too is written; but although our opponents place it in the front of the battle, we have intentionally reserved the objection until now, in order that we may in our last assault overthrow it, after we have removed out of the way all the questions which are auxiliary to it. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Since, therefore, he makes the image both of the earthy and the heavenly consist of moral conduct-the one to be abjured, and the other to be pursued-and then consistently adds, “For this I say” (on account, that is, of what I have already said, because the conjunction “for” connects what follows with the preceding words) “that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” -he means the flesh and blood to be understood in no other sense than the before-mentioned “image of the earthy; “and since this is reckoned to consist in “the old conversation,” which old conversation receives not the kingdom of God, therefore flesh and blood, by not receiving the kingdom of God, are reduced to the life of the old conversation. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Now, when it is clearly stated what the condition is to which the resurrection does not lead, it is understood what that is to which it does lead; and, therefore, whilst it is in consideration of men’s merits that a difference is made in their resurrection by their conduct in the flesh, and not by the substance thereof, it is evident even from this, that flesh and blood are excluded from the kingdom of God in respect of their sin, not of their substance; and although in respect of their natural condition they will rise again for the judgment, because they rise not for the kingdom. Again, I will say, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; " and justly (does the apostle declare this of them, considered) alone and in themselves, in order to show that the Spirit is still needed (to qualify them) for the kingdom. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Otherwise, if they say that you are not in Christ, let them also say that Christ is not in heaven, since they have denied you heaven. Likewise “neither shall corruption,” says he, “inherit incorruption. This he says, not that you may take flesh and blood to be corruption, for they are themselves rather the subjects of corruption,-I mean through death, since death does not so much corrupt, as actually consume, our flesh and blood. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: I believe (He does so) for fear the heads of some should be seen! And oh that in “that day” of Christian exultation, I, most miserable (as I am), may elevate my head, even though below (the level of) your heels! I shall (then) see whether you will rise with (your) ceruse and rouge and saffron, and in all that parade of headgear: whether it will be women thus tricked out whom the angels carry up to meet Christ in the air If these (decorations) are now good, and of God, they will then also present themselves to the rising bodies, and will recognise their several places. But nothing can rise except flesh and spirit sole and pure. Whatever, therefore, does not rise in (the form of) spirit and flesh is condemned, because it is not of God. — On the Apparel of Women Book II

1 Corinthians 15:51

Augustine of Hippo: The pious people will be raised as they transform the remnants of the “old man” that cling to them into the “new man.” The impious people who have kept the “old man” from the beginning to the end will be raised in order to be precipitated into the second death. Those who read diligently can make out the divisions of the ages. They have no horror of tares or chaff. — ON TRUE RELIGION 27.50

Cassiodorus: Anyone who is not changed in this world cannot experience change in the next. — EXPLANATION OF THE Psalms 20

Cassiodorus: The radiance of the saints refers to when they will gleam at the resurrection like the angels of God. They will be so cleansed and radiant that they can gaze on the Majesty with the heart’s eyes. They cannot gaze on that Light unless they are changed for the better. In Paul’s words: “We shall all rise again, but we shall not all be changed.” — EXPLANATION OF THE Psalms 3

Jerome: You ask in what sense it was said, and how it should be read in the first letter of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians: “We shall all indeed rise again, but we shall not all be changed” (1 Corinthians 15:5). Or according to some examples: “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all indeed be changed,” for both are found in Greek manuscripts. Concerning this, Theodore Heracleotes, who was from the city once called Perinthus, spoke in the Apostle’s little commentaries: “We shall all indeed not sleep, but we shall all be changed.” For Enoch and Elijah, having overcome the necessity of death, were translated from earthly conversation to heavenly kingdoms as they were in their bodies. Thus, also, the holy ones who are to be found in their bodies on the day of consummation and judgment, together with the other saints who are to rise again from the dead, shall be caught up in the clouds to meet Christ in the air, and shall not die; and they shall ever be with the Lord, the bitter necessity of death overcome. Hence the Apostle says: “In fact, we will not all sleep, but all will be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.” For there will be such a quick resurrection of the dead, that living people who are present at the time of the consummation in their own bodies, will not be able to anticipate the dead who rise again from the underworld. For Paul, plainly interpreting the matter, says: “For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will rise incorruptible, and we will be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Corinthians 15:52), that it may be able to remain permanently in either punishment or in the kingdom of heaven.

Bishop Diodorus of Tarsus, passing over this chapter, briefly noted in the following: in that which is written, ‘And the dead shall rise incorruptible. And we shall be changed.’ ‘If,’ he says, ’the dead shall rise incorruptible, it is beyond doubt that they too shall have been changed for the better: what was the need to say, ‘And we shall be changed’? Did he wish to imply that incorruption is common to all, but change is peculiar to the just? since they follow not only incorruption and immortality, but also glory.

Apollinarius, though in different words, asserts the same as Theodore: that some will not die, but will be taken from this present life into the future, so that with changed and glorified bodies, they may be with Christ. This we now believe regarding Enoch and Elijah.

Didymus walks the opposite way, not in steps, but in words, departing from the opinion of Origen. Behold, I speak a mystery to you: We shall all indeed sleep, but we will not all be changed. He spoke thus: “If the resurrection needed no interpreter, nor were it obscure in concept, Paul would not have said after much he spoke of resurrection, ‘Behold, I speak a mystery to you: We shall all indeed sleep,’ that is, die, ‘but we will not all be changed,’ except the holy alone.” I know that in some codices it is written: Not everyone will sleep, but everyone will be changed. But it must be considered whether that which is premised, everyone will be changed, can be reconciled with what follows: The dead will rise incorruptible, and we will be changed. For if everyone will be changed, and this is common to all, it was pointless to say, and we will be changed. Therefore, it should be read as follows: All indeed will sleep, but not all will be changed. For if in Adam all die, and in death there is sleep; therefore, we will all sleep or die. But sleep, according to the idiom of the Scriptures, refers to those who have died in the hope of future resurrection. Everyone who sleeps will certainly wake up, unless sudden death has overtaken him and death has been associated with sleep. And when all have slept according to the law of nature, only the saints will be changed for the better both in body and soul, so that the resurrection of all may be incorruptible; but the glory and transformation will belong exclusively to the saints. And what follows in Greek, ‘in an atom, in a twinkling, or in a flicker of an eye’ (for both are read) and our interpreters have translated it, ‘in a moment and in a sudden,’ or, in the movement of the eye: Didymus explained it in the same way: ‘Together with the resurrection of everyone, they will be snatched up to meet Christ: but those whom death has dissolved, which the present speech indicates.’ For when He speaks of the resurrection of all, at a certain moment in time, in the twinkling of an eye or in a moment, He excludes all the fables of the first and second resurrection, so that some will be believed to be resurrected first, and others last. — Letter 119

John Chrysostom: “Behold, I tell you a mystery.”

It is something awful and ineffable and which all know not, which he is about to speak of: which also indicates the greatness of the honor he confers on them; I mean, his speaking mysteries to them. But what is this?

“We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.” He means as follows: “we shall not all die, ‘but we shall all be changed,’” even those who die not. For they too are mortal. “Do not thou therefore because thou diest, on this account fear,” saith he, “as if thou shouldest not rise again: for there are, there are some who shall even escape this, and yet this suffices them not for that resurrection, but even those bodies which die not must be changed and be transformed into incorruption.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Tertullian: But how shall it be changed, if it shall have no real existence? If, however, this is only said of those who shall be found in the flesh at the advent of God, and who shall have to be changed,” what shall they do who will rise first? They will have no substance from which to undergo a change. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: For when he adds, “This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality,” this will assuredly be that house from heaven, with which we so earnestly desire to be clothed upon, whilst groaning in this our present body,-meaning, of course, over this flesh in which we shall be surprised at last; because he says that we are burdened whilst in this tabernacle, which we do not wish indeed to be stripped of, but rather to be in it clothed over, in such a way that mortality may be swallowed up of life, that is, by putting on over us whilst we are transformed that vestiture which is from heaven. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Theodoret of Cyrus: Paul calls this a mystery because it is not clear to everyone but is believed only by the beloved. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 280

1 Corinthians 15:52

Ambrose of Milan: He who has not believed will be forsaken, and by his disbelief he will bring upon himself his own condemnation. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.76

Ambrosiaster: The last trumpet is the one which is sounded when the battle is over. After a thousand years, when the antichrist has been destroyed and the Savior has reigned, Satan will be released from his prison in order to lead astray the nations of Gog and Magog, who are demons, in order that they might attack the fortresses of the saints. They will fail, and when they are defeated they will suffer the same fate as the antichrist and the false prophet. It is then that the last trumpet will sound the final victory. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: The glance of our eye does not reach nearer objects more quickly and distant ones more slowly. Rather it reaches both with equal speed. Similarly when, as the apostle says, the resurrection of the dead is effected in the twinkling of the eye, it is as easy for the omnipotence of God and his awe-inspiring authority to raise the recently dead as those long since fallen into decay. To some minds, these things are hard to accept because they are outside their experience, yet the whole universe is full of wonders which seem to us hardly worth noticing or examining, not because they are easily penetrated by our reason but because we are accustomed to seeing them. But I, and those who join me and are striving to understand the “invisible things of God by the things that are made,” wonder neither more nor less at the fact that in one tiny seed all that we praise in the tree lies folded away. — LETTER 102, TO DEOGRATIAS

Augustine of Hippo: With the utterance of that cry and the resurrection of the dead, all comfort of human praise shall be taken away. There will be no doubt that the judgment is now present and at hand. Then there will be no time to argue about that one, or to judge of another, or to do a favor or offer support to another. — LETTER 140, TO HONORATUS 34

Augustine of Hippo: By “trumpet” he wants us to understand some very clear and prominent sign, which he elsewhere calls the voice of the archangel and the trumpet of God [1 Thessalonians 4:16]. — LETTER 34

Augustine of Hippo: It is as easy for God to raise the recently dead as those long since fallen into decay. — LETTER 102, TO DEOGRATIAS

Gregory of Nazianzus: Why am I so earthly in my thoughts? I shall await the voice of the archangel, the last trumpet, the transformation of heaven, the change of earth, the freedom of the elements, the renewal of the universe. Then I shall see my brother Caesarius himself, no longer in exile, no longer being buried, no longer mourned, no longer pitied, but splendid, glorious, sublime, such as you were often seen in a dream, dearest and most loving of brothers, whether my desire or truth itself represented you. — ON HIS BROTHER CAESARIUS 21

Gregory of Nyssa: At her death prayed: “O Lord, you have freed us from the fear of death. You have made the end of life here the beginning of a true life for us. You give rest to our bodies in sleep, and you awaken us again with the last trumpet. The dust from which you fashioned us with your hands you give back to the dust of the earth for safe keeping, and you who have relinquished it will recall it after reshaping with incorruptibility and grace our mortal and graceless substance.” … As she said this, she made the sign of the cross upon her eyes and mouth and heart, and little by little, as the fever dried up her tongue, she was no longer able to speak clearly. Her voice gave out and only from the trembling of her lips and motion of her hands did we know that she was continuing to pray. Then the evening came on and the lamp was brought in… When she had completed the thanksgiving and indicated that the prayer was over by making the sign of the cross, she breathed a deep breath and with the prayer her life came to an end. The Life of St. .

Hippolytus of Rome: For at that time the trumpet shall sound, and awake those that sleep from the lowest parts of the earth, righteous and sinners alike. And every kindred, and tongue, and nation, and tribe shall be raised in the twinkling of an eye; and they shall stand upon the face of the earth, waiting for the coming of the righteous and terrible Judge, in fear and trembling unutterable. For the river of fire shall come forth in fury like an angry sea, and shall burn up mountains and hills, and shall make the sea vanish, and shall dissolve the atmosphere with its heat like wax. The stars of heaven shall fall, the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood. The heaven shall be rolled together like a scroll: the whole earth shall be burnt up by reason of the deeds done in it, which men did corruptly, in fornications, in adulteries, and in lies and uncleanness, and in idolatries, and in murders, and in battles. For there shall be the new heaven and the new earth. — Dubious and Spurious Pieces

Irenaeus: As, therefore, those who were healed were made whole in those members which had in times past been afflicted; and the dead rose in the identical bodies, their limbs and bodies receiving health, and that life which was granted by the Lord, who prefigures eternal things by temporal, and shows that it is He who is Himself able to extend both healing and life to His handiwork, that His words concerning its [future] resurrection may also be believed; so also at the end, when the Lord utters His voice “by the last trumpet,” the dead shall be raised, as He Himself declares: “The hour shall come, in which all the dead which are in the tombs shall hear the voice of the Son of man, and shall come forth; those that have done good to the resurrection of life, and those that have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.” — Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 5

Jerome: Then at the sound of the trumpet the earth and its people shall tremble, but you shall rejoice. The world shall lament and groan when the Lord comes to judge it. The tribes of the earth shall smite the breast. Once mighty kings shall shiver in their nakedness. Then shall Jupiter, with all his progeny, indeed be shown aflame, and Plato with his disciples will be marked a fool. Aristotle’s argument shall be of no avail. You may be a poor man and country bred, but then you shall exult and laugh and say: behold the crucified, my God! Behold my Judge! — Letter 14.11

Macrina the Younger ((as quoted by GREGORY OF NYSSA, AD 395)): At her death Macrina prayed: “O Lord, you have freed us from the fear of death. You have made the end of life here the beginning of a true life for us. You give rest to our bodies in sleep, and you awaken us again with the last trumpet. The dust from which you fashioned us with your hands you give back to the dust of the earth for safe keeping, and you who have relinquished it will recall it after reshaping with incorruptibility and grace our mortal and graceless substance.” … As she said this, she made the sign of the cross upon her eyes and mouth and heart, and little by little, as the fever dried up her tongue, she was no longer able to speak clearly. Her voice gave out and only from the trembling of her lips and motion of her hands did we know that she was continuing to pray. Then the evening came on and the lamp was brought in.… When she had completed the thanksgiving and indicated that the prayer was over by making the sign of the cross, she breathed a deep breath and with the prayer her life came to an end. — THE LIFE OF ST. MACRINA

Severian of Gabala: In saying this Paul is showing that the heretics who say that there is a resurrection of the soul but not of the flesh are wrong. These people blaspheme concerning the divine dispensation, thinking that Christ did not really rise again in his flesh but only appeared to do so. But if it was not real flesh, what do words like “died,” “was buried” and “rose again” mean? If all this did not really happen, does it mean that we shall not really die either? — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Tertullian: Well, then, what difference is there between heathens and Christians, if the same prison awaits them all when dead? How, indeed, shall the soul mount up to heaven, where Christ is already sitting at the Father’s right hand, when as yet the archangel’s trumpet has not been heard by the command of God, -when as yet those whom the coming of the Lord is to find on the earth, have not been caught up into the air to meet Him at His coming, in company with the dead in Christ, who shall be the first to arise? To no one is heaven opened; the earth is still safe for him, I would not say it is shut against him. — A Treatise on the Soul

Tertullian: “For the dead shall be raised incorruptible,” even those who had been corruptible when their bodies fell into decay; “and we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye. For this corruptible”-and as he spake, the apostle seemingly pointed to his own flesh-“must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: He here says expressly, what he touched but lightly in his first epistle, where he wrote: ) “The dead shall be raised Incorruptible (meaning those who had undergone mortality), “and we shall be changed” (whom God shall find to be yet in the flesh). Both those shall be raised incorruptible, because they shall regain their body-and that a renewed one, from which shall come their incorruptibility; and these also shall, in the crisis of the last moment, and from their instantaneous death, whilst encountering the oppressions of anti-christ, undergo a change, obtaining therein not so much a divestiture of body as “a clothing upon” with the vesture which is from heaven. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: This power and this unstinted grace of His He has already sufficiently guaranteed in Christ; and has displayed Himself to us (in Him) not only as the restorer of the flesh, but as the repairer of its breaches. And so the apostle says: “The dead shall be raised incorruptible” (or unimpaired). But how so, unless they become entire, who have wasted away either in the loss of their health, or in the long decrepitude of the grave? For when he propounds the two clauses, that “this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality, " he does not repeat the same statement, but sets forth a distinction. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Under the arms of prayer guard we the standard of our General; await we in prayer the angel’s trump. The angels, likewise, all pray; every creature prays; cattle and wild beasts pray and bend their knees; and when they issue from their layers and lairs, they look up heavenward with no idle mouth, making their breath vibrate after their own manner. — On Prayer

1 Corinthians 15:53

Ambrose of Milan: The blossom of the resurrection is immortality and incorruption. What is richer than everlasting rest? What is a source of greater gain and satisfaction than perpetual security? Here is the manifold fruit, the harvest, whereby man’s nature grows more vigorous and productive after death. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.54

Augustine of Hippo: People are amazed that God, who made all things from nothing, makes a heavenly body from human flesh. When he was in the flesh, did not the Lord make wine from water? Is it anything so much more wonderful if he makes a heavenly body from human flesh?… Is he who was able to make you when you did not exist not able to make over what you once were? — SERMONS FOR THE FEAST OF ASCENSION 264.6

Clement of Alexandria: For, lo, this mortal shall put on immortality; when the insatiableness of desire, which rushes into licentiousness, being trained to self-restraint, and made free from the love of corruption, shall consign the man to everlasting chastity. — The Instructor Book 2

Cyprian: That no one should be made sad by death; since in living is labour and peril, in dying peace and the certainty of resurrection. In Genesis: “Then said the Lord to Adam, Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of that tree of which alone I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat, cursed shall be the ground in all thy works; in sadness and groaning shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life: thorns and thistles shall it cast forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field in the sweat of thy brow. Thou shall eat thy bread until thou return unto the earth from which also thou wast taken; because earth thou art, and to earth thou shall go.” Also in the same place: “And Enoch pleased God, and was not found afterwards: because God translated him.” And in Isaiah: “All flesh is grass, and all the glory of it as the flower of grass. The grass withered, and the flower hath fallen away; but the word of the Lord abideth for ever.” In Ezekiel: “They say, Our bones are become dry, our hope hath perished: we have expired. Therefore prophesy, and say, Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I open your monuments, and I will bring you forth from your monuments, and I will bring you into the land of Israel; and I will put my Spirit upon you, and ye shall live; and I will place you into your land: and ye shall know that I the Lord have spoken, and will do it, saith the Lord.” Also in the Wisdom of Solomon: “He was taken away, lest wickedness should change his understanding; for his soul was pleasing to God.” Also in the eighty-third Psalm: “How beloved are thy dwellings, Thou Lord of hosts? My soul desires and hastes to the courts of God.” And in the Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians: “But we would not that you should be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who sleep, that ye sorrow not as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also them which have fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.” Also in the first Epistle to the Corinthians: “Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened except it have first died.” And again: “Star differeth from star in glory: so also the resurrection. The body is sown in corruption, it rises without corruption; it is sown in ignominy, it rises again in glory; it is sown in weakness, it rises again in power; it is sown an animal body, it rises again a spiritual body.” And again: “For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality. But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the word that is written, Death is absorbed Into striving. Where, O death, is thy sting? Where, O death, is thy striving? " Also in the Gospel according to John: “Father, I will that those whom Thou hast given me be with me where I shall be, and may see my glory which Thou hast given me before the foundation of the world.” Also according to Luke: “Now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, O Lord, according to the word; for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation.” Also according to John: “If ye loved me, ye would rejoice because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.” — Treatise XII. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews.

Cyril of Jerusalem: While the identical body is raised up, it will be transformed by the putting on of incorruption, as iron exposed to fire is made incandescent. This occurs in a manner known only to the Lord who raises the dead. — Catechetical Lecture 8:18

Fulgentius of Ruspe: The masculine and feminine sexes will remain just as their bodies were created. Their glory will vary according to the diversity of their good works. For all the bodies of both men and women, all that will exist in that kingdom will be glorious. — TO PETER ON THE FAITH 237

Irenaeus: Contains all things, and then, through the wisdom of God, serves for the use of men, and having received the Word of God, becomes the Eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ; so also our bodies, being nourished by it, and deposited in the earth, and suffering decomposition there, shall rise at their appointed time, the Word of God granting them resurrection to the glory of God, even the Father, who freely gives to this mortal immortality, and to this corruptible in corruption. And for this reason, he says, “This mortal must put on immortality, and this corruptible must put on in corruption.”. So, when this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying which is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O death, where is thy victory? “. For what sensible thing can they say, if they endeavour to interpret otherwise this which he writes: “For this corruptible must put on in corruption, and this mortal put on immortality; " — Against Heresies Book V

Jerome: Just as before the Lord suffered his passion, when he was transformed and glorified on the mountain, he certainly had the same body that he had had down below, although of a different glory, so also after the resurrection, his body was of the same nature as it had been before the passion but of a higher state of glory and in more majestic appearance. — HOMILY 61 ON Psalms 15

John Chrysostom: What has been mortal will be clad in immortality. After the resurrection of our bodies he promised to grant us enjoyment of the kingdom, life with the saints, enjoyment for all eternity, and those ineffable good things “which eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor have they been imagined by the human heart.”. — HOMILIES ON Genesis 36.15

John Chrysostom: “For this corruptible must put on incorruption.”

Thus lest any, hearing that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” should suppose that our bodies do not rise again; he adds, “this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.” Now the body is “corruptible,” the body is “mortal:” so that the body indeed remains, for it is the body which is put on; but its mortality and corruption vanish away, when immortality and incorruption come upon it. Do not thou therefore question hereafter how it shall live an endless life, now that thou hast heard of its becoming incorruptible. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Methodius of Olympus: Therefore the apostle answers thus, “For this corruptible must put on in corruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.”. And therefore the apostle answers, “This corruptible must put on in corruption, and this mortal immortality.” — Methodius From the Discourse on the Resurrection

Tertullian: For this corruptible”-and as he spake, the apostle seemingly pointed to his own flesh-“must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.” in order, indeed, that it may be rendered a fit substance for the kingdom of God. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: So that whilst these shall put on over their (changed) body this, heavenly raiment, the dead also shall for their part recover their body, over which they too have a supervesture to put on, even the incorruption of heaven; because of these it was that he said: “This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.” The one put on this (heavenly) apparel, when they recover their bodies; the others put it on as a supervesture, when they indeed hardly lose them (in the suddenness of their change). — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: But inasmuch as “this corruptible (that is, the flesh) must put on incorruption, and this mortal (that is, the blood) must put on immortality,” by the change which is to follow the resurrection, it will, for the best of reasons, happen that flesh and blood, after that change and investiture, will become able to inherit the kingdom of God-but not without the resurrection. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Thus, because of the apostle’s expression, “that mortality may be swallowed up of life " -in reference to the flesh-they wrest the word swallowed up into the sense of the actual destruction of the flesh; as if we might not speak of ourselves as swallowing bile, or swallowing grief, meaning that we conceal and hide it, and keep it within ourselves. The truth is, when it is written, “This mortal must put on immortality,” it is explained in what sense it is that “mortality is swallowed up of life “-even whilst, clothed with immortality, it is hidden and concealed, and contained within it, not as consumed, and destroyed, and lost. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Death is incapable of immortality, but not so mortality. Besides, as it is written that “this mortal must put on immortality,” how is this possible when it is swallowed up of life? But how is it swallowed up of life, (in the sense of destroyed by it) when it is actually received, and restored, and included in it? For the rest, it is only just and right that death should be swallowed up in utter destruction, since it does itself devour with this same intent. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: But how so, unless they become entire, who have wasted away either in the loss of their health, or in the long decrepitude of the grave? For when he propounds the two clauses, that “this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality, " he does not repeat the same statement, but sets forth a distinction. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: But behold how persistently they still accumulate their cavils against the flesh, especially against its identity, deriving their arguments even from the functions of our limbs; on the one hand saying that these ought to continue permanently pursuing their labours and enjoyments, as appendages to the same corporeal frame; and on the other hand contending that, inasmuch as the functions of the limbs shall one day come to an end, the bodily frame itself must be destroyed, its permanence without its limbs being deemed to be as inconceivable, as that of the limbs themselves without their functions! What, they ask, will then be the use of the cavity of our mouth, and its rows of teeth, and the passage of the throat, and the branch-way of the stomach, and the gulf of the belly, and the entangled tissue of the bowels, when there shall no longer be room for eating and drinking? What more will there be for these members to take in, masticate, swallow, secrete, digest, eject? Of what avail will be our very hands, and feet, and all our labouring limbs, when even all care about food shall cease? What purpose can be served by loins, conscious of seminal secretions, and all the other organs of generation, in the two sexes, and the laboratories of embryos, and the fountains of the breast, when concubinage, and pregnancy, and infant nurture shall cease? In short, what will be the use of the entire body, when the entire body shall become useless? In reply to all this, we have then already settled the principle that the dispensation of the future state ought not to be compared with that of the present world, and that in the interval between them a change will take place; and we now add the remark, that these functions of our bodily limbs will continue to supply the needs of this life up to the moment when life itself shall pass away from time to eternity, as the natural body gives place to the spiritual, until “this mortal puts on immorality, and this corruptible puts on incorruption: " so that when life shall itself become freed from all wants, our limbs shall then be freed also from their services, and therefore will be no longer wanted. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Here is a veritable eternity, in the (perennial) youth of your head! Here we have an “incorruptibility” to “put on,” with a view to the new house of the Lord which the divine monarchy promises! Well do you speed toward the Lord; well do you hasten to be quit of this most iniquitous world, to whom it is unsightly to approach (your own) end! — On the Apparel of Women Book II

Tertullian: To us continence has been pointed out by the Lord of salvation as an instrument for attaining eternity, and as a testimony of (our) faith; as a commendation of this flesh of ours, which is to be sustained for the “garment of immortality,” which is one day to supervene; for enduring, in fine, the will of God. — To His Wife Book I

Victorinus of Pettau: “And He had in His right hand seven stars.” He said that in His right hand He had seven stars, because the Holy Spirit of sevenfold agency was given into His power by the Father. As Peter exclaimed to the Jews: “Being at the right hand of God exalted, He hath shed forth this Spirit received from the Father, which ye both see and hear.” Moreover, John the Baptist had also anticipated this, by saying to his disciples: “For God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto Him. The Father,” says he, “loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hands.” Those seven stars are the seven churches, which he names in his addresses by name, old calls them to whom he wrote epistles. Not that they are themselves the only, or even the principal churches; but what he says to one, he says to all. For they are in no respect different, that on that ground any one should prefer them to the larger number of similar small ones. In the whole world Paul taught that all the churches are arranged by sevens, that they are called seven, and that the Catholic Church is one. And first of all, indeed, that he himself also might maintain the type of seven churches, he did not exceed that number. But he wrote to the Romans, to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Thessalonians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians; afterwards he wrote to individual persons, so as not to exceed the number of seven churches. And abridging in a short space his announcement, he thus says to Timothy: “That thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the Church of the living God.” We read also that this typical number is announced by the Holy Spirit by the month of Isaiah: “Of seven women which took hold of one man.” The one man is Christ, not born of seed; but the seven women are seven churches, receiving His bread, and clothed with his apparel, who ask that their reproach should be taken away, only that His name should be called upon them. The bread is the Holy Spirit, which nourishes to eternal life, promised to them, that is, by faith. And His garments wherewith they desire to be clothed are the glory of immortality, of which Paul the apostle says: “For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on mortality.” Moreover, they ask that their reproach may be taken away-that is, that they may be cleansed from their sins: for the reproach is the original sin which is taken away in baptism, and they begin to be called Christian men, which is, “Let thy name be called upon us.” Therefore in these seven churches, of one Catholic Church are believers, because it is one in seven by the quality of faith and election. Whether writing to them who labour in the world, and live of the frugality of their labours, and are patient, and when they see certain men in the Church wasters, and pernicious, they hear them, lest there should become dissension, he yet admonishes them by love, that in what respects their faith is deficient they should repent; or to those who dwell in cruel places among persecutors, that they should continue faithful; or to those who, under the pretext of mercy, do unlawful sins in the Church, and make them manifest to be done by others; or to those that are at ease in the Church; or to those who are negligent, and Christians only in name; or to those who are meekly instructed, that they may bravely persevere in faith; or to those who study the Scriptures, and labour to know the mysteries of their announcement, and are unwilling to do God’s work that is mercy and love: to all he urges penitence, to all he declares judgment. — Victorinus Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John

1 Corinthians 15:54

Athanasius of Alexandria: For man is by nature afraid of death and of the dissolution of the body. But there is this most startling fact, that he who has put on the faith of the cross despises even what is naturally fearful and for Christ’s sake is not afraid of death. — On the Incarnation of the Word 28

Augustine of Hippo: Were our heretics capable of grasping this one truth, they would surrender their pride and become reconciled and would never again worship God anywhere but in the church. — THE WAY OF LIFE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 30.64

Augustine of Hippo: Where is death? Seek it in Christ, for it exists no longer. It did exist, and now death is dead. O Life, O Death of death! Be of good heart, death will die in us also. What has taken place in our Head will also take place in his members. Death will die in us also. But when? At the end of the world, at the resurrection of the dead in which we believe and about which we have no doubt.… These are words given to those who triumph, that you may have something to think about, something to sing about in your heart, something to hope for in your heart, something to seek with faith and good works. — EASTER SERMON 233.4

Augustine of Hippo: The apostle Paul seems to have directly pointed his finger at the flesh when he wrote: “this corruptible must put on incorruption.” When he says this, he as good as points with his finger. That which is visible can be pointed at in this way. The soul cannot be pointed at, though it can be called corruptible, because it is corrupted by moral biases. — On Faith and the Creed 10.22

Augustine of Hippo: There are many desires of the sick which health takes away. In just the same way as physical health undercuts those desires, so immortality does remove all other desires because immortality is our health. — EASTER SERMON 55.8

Augustine of Hippo: Then not only shall we not obey any enticement of sin, but there will be no such enticements of the kind we are commanded not to obey. — LETTER 196, TO ASELLICUS

Augustine of Hippo: Because of the necessary activities of this life, health is not to be despised until “this mortal shall put on immortality.” This is the true and perfect and unending health which is not refreshed by corruptible pleasure when it fails through earthly weakness but is maintained by heavenly strength and made young by eternal incorruptibility. — LETTER 130, To Proba

Cyprian: That one ought to make confession while he is in the flesh. In the fifth Psalm: “But in the grave who will confess unto Thee? " Also in the twenty-ninth Psalm: “Shall the dust make confession to Thee? " Also elsewhere that confession is to be made: “I would rather have the repentance of the sinner than his death.” Also in Jeremiah: “Thus saith the Lord, Shall not he that falleth arise? or shall not he that is turned away be converted? " — Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews

Irenaeus: F God took place in these last times, that is, in the end, rather than in the beginning . Therefore, when man has been liberated, “what is written shall come to pass, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death sting? " — Against Heresies Book III

John Chrysostom: “But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.”

Thus, since he was speaking of great and secret things, he again takes prophecy to confirm his word. “Death is swallowed up in victory:” i.e., utterly; not so much as a fragment of it remains nor a hope of returning, incorruption having consumed corruption. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Methodius of Olympus: For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were possessed by the body, it would happen that the life would be consumed by corruption. But now the life possesses what is dying, in order that “death may be swallowed up in victory” — Methodius From the Discourse on the Resurrection

Tertullian: O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin “-here is the corruption; “and the strength of sin is the law” -that other law, no doubt, which he has described “in his members as warring against the law of his mind,” -meaning, of course, the actual power of sinning against his will. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

1 Corinthians 15:55

Ambrosiaster: “Death” here refers to the devil, who is being insulted. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: Because human nature was subjected to an enemy as the just desert of sin, man must first be rescued from his power, that he might find him. Then if his life in this flesh is prolonged, he is assisted in the conflict that he may overcome the enemy. And finally the victor will be beatified, that he may reign, and at the very end he will ask: “Death, where is thy devouring?”. — AGAINST JULIAN 20.65

Augustine of Hippo: I think that “death” in this passage refers to a carnal habit which resists the good will through a delighting in temporal pleasures. — QUESTIONS 70

Clement of Alexandria: For He by His own passion rescued us from offences, and sins, and such like thorns; and having destroyed the devil, deservedly said in triumph, “O Death, where is thy sting?” — The Instructor Book 2

Cyril of Jerusalem: For since the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise partook of the same (Hebrews 2.14), that having been made partakers of His presence in the flesh we might be made partakers also of His Divine grace: thus Jesus was baptized, that thereby we again by our participation might receive both salvation and honour. According to Job, there was in the waters the dragon that draws up the Jordan into his mouth (Job 40.23). Since, Therefore, it was necessary to break the heads of the dragon in pieces (Psalms 74.14), He went down and bound the strong one in the waters, that we might receive power to tread upon serpents and scorpions (Luke 10.19). The beast was great and terrible. No fishing- vessel was able to carry one scale of his tail (Job 40.26): destruction ran before him (Job 41.13), ravaging all that met him. The Life encountered him, that the mouth of Death might henceforth be stopped, and all we that are saved might say, O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory [1 Corinthians 15.55]? The sting of death is drowned by Baptism. - “Catechetical Lectures 3, Chapter 11.”

John Chrysostom: “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?”

Seest thou his noble soul? how even as one who is offering sacrifices for victory, having become inspired and seeing already things future as things past, he leaps and tramples upon death fallen at his feet, and shouts a cry of triumph over its head where it lies, exclaiming mightily and saying, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” It is clean gone, it is perished, it is utterly vanished away, and in vain hast thou done all those former things. For He not only disarmed death and vanquished it, but even destroyed it, and made it quite cease from being. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

1 Corinthians 15:56

Augustine of Hippo: Nothing could be truer. For a prohibition always increases an illicit desire so long as the love of and joy in holiness is too weak to conquer the inclination to sin. So without the aid of divine grace it is impossible for man to love and delight in sanctity. — City of God 13.5

Augustine of Hippo: The prohibition increased the concupiscence. It rendered it unconquered. So transgression was added, which did not exist without the law, although there was sin.… It is not to be wondered at that human infirmity has added the strength even from a good law to evil, since in the fulfilling of that very law it trusted in its own strength. — On Continence 7

Augustine of Hippo: Indeed, by sinning we slip down into death. For where the law forbids, we sin more seriously than if we were not forbidden by the law. However, when grace is added, we then fulfill without difficulty and most willingly that very thing which the law had oppressively commanded. We are no longer slaves of the law through fear but friends through love and slaves of the righteousness which was the very source of the law’s promulgation. Accordingly the law of sin and death, that is, the law imposed upon sinning and dying men, merely commands that we do not covet. Nonetheless, we do covet. However, the law of the spirit of life—the law which belongs to grace and sets us free from the law of sin and death—causes us not to covet. It causes us to fulfill the commands of law. — QUESTIONS 66

Augustine of Hippo: Why, if the law is good, is it the power of sin? Because sin wrought death by that which is good, that it might become exceedingly sinful, that is, might acquire greater powers by becoming also transgression. Why, if the law is good, are we “dead to the law by the body of Christ”? Because we are dead to the law’s condemnation, being set free from the disposition which the law condemned and punishes.… So the same precept, which is law to those who fear it, is grace to those who love it. — TO SIMPLICIAN—ON VARIOUS QUESTIONS 1.17

Cyril of Jerusalem: Baptism destroys the sting of death. For you descend into the water laden with your sins. But the invocation of grace causes your soul to receive this seal, and after that it does not lead you to be swallowed up by the dread dragon. You go down “deadly indeed in sin,” and you come up “alive unto righteousness.” — Catechetical Lecture 3:11-12

Fulgentius of Ruspe: By that sting, the human race first wounded itself unto death in such a way that he made death also pass to and through his offspring. — LETTER 35, TO SCARILA

John Chrysostom: “Now the sting of death is sin; and the power of sin is the law.”

Seest thou how the discourse is of the death of the body? therefore also of the resurrection of the body. For if these bodies do not rise again, how is death “swallowed up?” And not this only, but how is “the law the power of sin?” For that “sin” indeed is “the sting of death,” and more bitter than it, and by it hath its power, is evident; but how is “the law also the power” thereof? Because without the law sin was weak, being practised indeed, but not able so entirely to condemn: since although the evil took place, it was not so clearly pointed out. So that it was no small change which the law brought in, first causing us to know sin better, and then enhancing the punishment. And if meaning to check sin it did but develop it more fearfully, this is no charge against the physician, but against the abuse of the remedy. Since even the presence of Christ made the Jews’ burden heavier, yet must we not therefore blame it, but while we the more admire it, we must hate them the more, for having been injured by things which ought to have profited them? Yea, to show that it was not the law of itself which gives strength to sin, Christ Himself fulfilled it all and was without sin.

But I would have thee consider how from this topic also he confirms the resurrection. For if this were the cause of death, viz. our committing sin, and if Christ came and took away sin, and delivered us from it through baptism, and together with sin put an end also to the law in the transgression of which sin consists, why doubtest thou any more of the resurrection? For whence, after all this, is death to prevail? Through the law? Nay, it is done away. Through sin? Nay, it is clean destroyed. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Theodore of Mopsuestia: By “law” here Paul simply means either what inheres in the flesh or what is added to it. His point is that sin is taken away along with death and that the law ceases to exist once we have become immortal and are governed by the grace of the Spirit. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

1 Corinthians 15:57

Ambrosiaster: Christ did not win the victory for himself but for our benefit. For when he became a man, he remained God, and by overcoming the devil, he who never sinned gained the victory for us, who were bound in death because of sin. The death of Christ defeated the devil, who was forced to surrender all those who had died because of sin. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: The crown could not have been given to one who was worthy of it, unless grace had been given to him when still unworthy. — PROCEEDINGS OF PELAGIUS 35

John Chrysostom: “But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

For the trophy He Himself erected, but the crowns He hath caused us also to partake of. And this not of debt, but of mere mercy. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

1 Corinthians 15:58

Ambrosiaster: Those who persevere in a life of faith and good works have the assurance that they will be accepted by God and receive their reward and that they will not be led astray by wicked arguments. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Fabian of Rome: We exhort you also, according to the word of the apostle, to be “stedfast and immoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord; forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not vain in the Lord.”

John Chrysostom: “Wherefore, brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable.”

Just and seasonable is this exhortation after all that had gone before. For nothing so disquiets as the thought that we are buffeted without cause or profit.

“Always abounding in the work of the Lord:” i.e., in the pure life. And he said not, “working that which is good,” but “abounding;” that we might do it abundantly, and might overpass the lists.

“Knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.”

What sayest thou? Labor again? But followed by crowns, and those above the heavens. For that former labor on man’s expulsion from paradise, was the punishment of his transgressions; but this is the ground of the rewards to come. So that it cannot in fact be labor, both on this account and by reason of the great help which it receives from above: which is the cause of his adding also, “in the Lord.” For the purpose of the former was that we might suffer punishment; but of this, that we might obtain the good things to come. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 42

Tertullian: Besides, he who bids us shine as sons of light, does not bid us hide away out of sight as sons of darkness. He commands us to stand stedfast, certainly not to act an opposite. — On Flight in Persecution