1 Corinthians 15:37Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

But the heretics, understanding none of this, object and say: one body dies and another body rises. What kind of resurrection is this? Rising pertains to what has fallen. Where is that wondrous and glorious victory over death, if one thing falls and another rises? Then it will no longer be clear that death has returned what it held captive.

How, then, does the comparison fit the subject? It is not one substance that is sown and another that grows, but the same substance in a better form. Otherwise Christ too, who was the firstfruits of those who rise, did not rise in the same body. According to you, He left one body, though it was without any sin, and took another. From where did He take the other? The first was from the Virgin. But where was this one from? Do you see to what absurdities this opinion leads?

Why also did He show the wounds of the nails? Was it not to prove that this very body had been nailed to the cross and that the same body rose? And what does the type of Jonah mean? Without doubt, it was not one Jonah who was swallowed and another who was cast out onto the land.

Again, why did Christ say, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (Jn 2:19)? He surely raised the very temple that had been destroyed. Therefore the Evangelist added, "He was speaking of the temple of His body" (Jn 2:21).

What, then, do the words mean: "you do not sow the body that is to be"? They mean, not the ear of grain. For it is the same and not the same. It is the same because it is of one substance with the seed. It is not the same because it is better. The substance remained the same, but greater beauty appeared, and it rose in a new form.

If this were not so, there would be no need for resurrection if the body could not rise better. Why destroy a house if one does not build it better? The Apostle said this against those who think that the body decays. Then, lest anyone think that another body results from this, he resolves the perplexity and himself explains what he has said. He does not allow the hearer to draw any improper conclusion.

What need, then, is there for our words? Listen to how he himself speaks and explains what "you do not sow the body that is to be" means. He immediately adds, "but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain." "Not the body that is to be" means not clothed in this way, not having stalk and ears, "but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. But God gives it a body as He wills" (1 Cor 15:37-38).

Yes, you will say, but here nature acts. What nature, tell me? Here too God accomplishes everything, not nature, not earth, and not rain. Therefore the Apostle, without mentioning earth, rain, air, sun, or the farmer's hands, says, "But God gives it a body as He wills." Do not investigate or pry into how and in what manner, when you hear that this is the work of God's power and will.

"And to each seed its own body." Where, then, is a foreign body? He gives its own. Therefore, when the Apostle says, "you do not sow the body that is to be," he does not assert that another substance will rise instead of one. Rather, it will rise in a better and more glorious form. "And to each seed its own body."

From this he finally draws also the distinction of bodies at the future resurrection. From the fact that wheat is sown and ears all spring from it, do not conclude that in the resurrection bodies will be equal in honor. Even from seeds there come ears that are not of the same dignity, but some are better and others worse. Therefore the Apostle adds, "and to each seed its own body." Yet not content with this, he expresses another distinction, greater and clearer.

As I said, lest you hear that all will rise and think that all will also receive one honor, he had already sown the seeds of his thought earlier, saying, "each in his own order" (1 Cor 15:23).

It is not entirely the same, because what was sown was not an ear, that is, not with the stalk, but a naked grain. Yet it is not entirely different either, because this ear is not from another grain, but from this naked one.

He does not use expressions belonging to seeds, such as sprouting, growing, rotting, or decaying. Rather, he introduces words corresponding to our flesh: 'It is not made alive unless it dies,' which is proper not to seeds, but to bodies.

And he did not say, 'It will live after it dies,' but something stronger: that it lives because it dies. The very thing from which others drew a conclusion against the resurrection, he turns into proof of the resurrection.

In a similar way Christ clearly shows the same thing when He says, 'Unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit' (Jn 12:24)."

Then, explaining the inner meaning of this comparison, St. John Chrysostom says, "We sow a naked grain. From it afterward a new ear with new wheat is born again.

The question is how this ear relates to the grain that was sown. It is the same as it, and not the same. It is the same because it is of one essence with the grain. It is not the same because it is better.

The essence remained the same, but greater beauty appeared, and it rose in a new form. So also the future body will be the same, but will appear in a more perfect form."

The Apostle answers further what exactly will be better in our future body.

Therefore, when the Apostle says, "You do not sow the body that shall be," he does not affirm that one being will rise instead of another. The same will rise, but in a better and more glorious form.

Theodoret also pursues the same thought here: "As wheat is born from wheat, lentils from lentils, and from each species the same species, so also our bodies will rise the very same, but with greater power, incorruption, and immortality."