1 Corinthians 15:38Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

But what kind of resurrection is this? Rising belongs to that which has fallen. Where then 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 restored what it held captive.

How, then, does this comparison fit the matter? It is not one substance that is sown and another that grows. The same substance grows, but in a better form.

Otherwise Christ also, the firstfruits of those who rise, did not rise in the same body. According to you, He left one body behind, though it was without any sin, and took another. Where did He get another? That one was from the Virgin. Whence, then, was this other?

Do you see to what absurdities such an opinion leads? Why also did He show the wounds of the nails? Was it not to prove that this very body was nailed to the Cross, and that the same body rose?

And what does the type of Jonah mean? Surely one Jonah was not swallowed and another cast out upon the land. Again, why did Christ say, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19)? He certainly raised the very temple that had been destroyed. Therefore the Evangelist added, “But He spoke of the temple of His body” (Jn 2:21).

What, then, do the words mean: “You sow not the body that shall be”? They mean, not the ear. 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 remains the same, but greater beauty appears. It rises in a new form.

If this were not so, there would be no need of resurrection. If the body could not rise better, why destroy the house, unless it is to be built better? The Apostle said this against those who think that the body perishes.

Then, lest anyone suppose that another body arises from this, he resolves the difficulty. He explains his own words, and does not allow the hearer to draw any unfitting conclusion.

Why then are we speaking? Listen to how he himself speaks and explains what “you sow not the body that shall be” means. He immediately adds, “but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain.”

“Not the body that shall be” means not clothed in that way, not having stalk and ears. It is “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 say, but here nature acts. What nature, tell me? Here too God accomplishes all, not nature, not the earth, and not the rain. Therefore the Apostle mentions neither earth, nor rain, nor air, nor sun, nor the farmer’s hands. He 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 sow not the body that shall be,” he does not affirm that one substance will rise instead of another. He means that it will rise in a better and more glorious form. “And to each seed its own body.”

From this he finally draws the distinction among bodies at the future resurrection. Since wheat is sown and all the ears spring from it, do not conclude that bodies at the resurrection will be of equal honor.

Even from seeds, ears do not arise with the same dignity. Some are better, and others worse. Therefore the Apostle adds, “And to each seed its own body.”

Yet he is not satisfied with this. He sets forth another distinction, greater and clearer. As I said, when you hear that all will rise, you must not think that all will receive one honor. He had already sown the seeds of this thought, saying, “Each in his own order” (1 Cor 15:23).

He brings forward words proper to our flesh: 'unless it dies, it is not made alive,' which belongs not to seeds, but to bodies. He did not say, 'it will live after it dies,' but something stronger: it lives because it dies. What others drew as an argument against the resurrection, he turns into proof of the resurrection. In the same way Christ also clearly shows this 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 bare grain. From it afterward there is born again a new ear with new wheat. The question is how this ear stands in relation to the seed 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 comeliness appeared, and it arose in a new form. So also the future body will be the same, but it will appear in a more perfect form." What exactly will be better in our future body is answered by the Apostle further on.

A perplexity may arise: in the rebirth of plants from seed, nature acts. How will it act in the rebirth of the body, when up to now it has shown no trace of such action? To this one must say that the word "nature" is an empty word. The will of God laid down the laws. The will of God desires them to act. They act and produce what God wills them to produce. What is usually attributed to nature belongs to God.

If God now acts in the rebirth of plants, on what basis can one doubt that He can act in the same way in the rebirth of dead human bodies? No one can say that He has not shown instances of this before now. And if He does not show it in all, it is because not all bodies have yet been sown, and because the spring has not yet come in which it is fitting for them to be reborn and rise to new life.

Saint Chrysostom says the following about the objection that nature acts in plants: "What nature, tell me? Here too God accomplishes everything, not nature, not earth, not rain. Therefore the Apostle, without mentioning earth, rain, air, sun, or the farmer's hands, says, 'God gives it a body.' 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."

Saint Chrysostom also remarks here that certain heretics, not understanding well the meaning of the Apostle's words, "you do not sow the body that is to be," came to the conclusion that one body dies and another body rises, and began to teach this. He says to them: what kind of resurrection will that be? It is a new creation, not a resurrection, whereas bodies will rise.

Here are his words: "But what kind of resurrection is this? Resurrection pertains to what has died. Where is that wondrous and glorious victory over death, if one thing dies and another rises? Then it will not be evident that death returns what it held captive. No. It is not one substance that is sown and another that grows, but the same grows in a better form.

"Otherwise Christ too, being the firstfruits of those who rise, did not rise in the same body. According to you, He left one body in the tomb, though it was without any sin, and took another when He rose. From where did He take the other? That one was from the Virgin. But this one, from where? Do you see to what absurdities this opinion leads?

"Also, why 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 this very 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 does 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)."