Chapter XXXII.—Even Unburied Bodies Will Be Raised Again. Whatever Befalls Them God Will Restore Them Again. Jonah’s Case Quoted in Illustration of God’s Power.

But, that you may not suppose that it is merely those bodies which are consigned to tombs whose resurrection is foretold, you have it declared in Scripture: “And I will command the fishes of the sea, and they shall cast up the bones which they have devoured; and I will bring joint to joint, and bone to bone.” You will ask, Will then the fishes and other animals and carnivorous birds be raised again, in order that they may vomit up what they have consumed, on the ground of your reading in the law of Moses, that blood is required of even all the beasts? Certainly not. But the beasts and the fishes are mentioned in relation to the restoration of flesh and blood, in order the more emphatically to express the resurrection of such bodies as have even been devoured, when redress is said to be demanded of their very devourers. Now I apprehend that in the case of Jonah we have a fair proof of this divine power, when he comes forth from the fish’s belly uninjured in both his natures—his flesh and his soul. No doubt the bowels of the whale would have had abundant time during three days for consuming and digesting Jonah’s flesh, quite as effectually as a coffin, or a tomb, or the gradual decay of some quiet and concealed grave; only that he wanted to prefigure even those beasts (which symbolize) especially the men who are wildly opposed to the Christian name, or the angels of iniquity, of whom blood will be required by the full exaction of an avenging judgment. Where, then, is the man who, being more disposed to learn than to assume, more careful to believe than to dispute, and more scrupulous of the wisdom of God than wantonly bent on his own, when he hears of a divine purpose respecting sinews and skin, and nerves and bones, will forthwith devise some different application of these words, as if all that is said of the substances in question were not naturally intended for man? For either there is here no reference to the destiny of man—in the gracious provision of the kingdom (of heaven), in the severity of the judgment-day, in all the incidents of the resurrection; or else, if there is any reference to his destiny, the destination must necessarily be made in reference to those substances of which the man is composed, for whom the destiny is reserved. Another question I have also to ask of these very adroit transformers of bones and sinews, and nerves and sepulchres: Why, when anything is declared of the soul, do they not interpret the soul to be something else, and transfer it to another signification?—since, whenever any distinct statement is made of a bodily substance, they will obstinately prefer taking any other sense whatever, rather than that which the name indicates. If things which pertain to the body are figurative, why are not those which pertain to the soul figurative also?  Since, however, things which belong to the soul have nothing allegorical in them, neither therefore have those which belong to the body. For man is as much body as he is soul; so that it is impossible for one of these natures to admit a figurative sense, and the other to exclude it.

CAPUT XXXII.

Sed ne solummodo eorum corporum resurrectio videatur praedicari, quae sepulcris demandantur, habes scriptum (Apoc. III): Et mandabo piscibus 0840A maris, et eructabunt ossa quae sunt comesta, et faciam compaginem ad compaginem, et os ad os. Ergo, inquis, et pisces resuscitabuntur, et caeterae bestiae et alites carnivorae, ut revomant quos comederunt: quia et apud Moysen legis, exquiri sanguinem de omnibus bestiis? Non utique. Sed idcirco nominantur bestiae et pisces in redhibitionem carnis et sanguinis, quo magis exprimatur resurrectio etiam devoratorum corporum, cum de ipsis devoratoribus exactio edicitur. Puto autem hujus quoque divinae potestatis documentum idoneum Jonam, cum incorruptus utraque substantia, carne atque anima , de alvo piscis evolvitur . Et utique triduo concoquendae carni viscera ceti tam suffecissent, quam capulum, quam sepulcrum, 0840B quam senium requietae atque reconditae alicujus sepulturae: salvo eo, quod et bestias, feros in christianum vel maxime nomen homines, vel ipsos etiam iniquitatis angelos figuravit, de quibus sanguis exigetur per ultionem pensandam. Quis ergo discendi magis adfinis, quam praesumendi; et credendi diligentior, quam contendendi; et divinae potius sapientiae religiosus, quam suae libidinosus, audiens aliquid a Deo destinatum in carnes, et cutes, et nervos, et ossa, aliud quid haec commentabitur, quasi non in hominem destinetur, quod in istas substantias praedicatur? Aut enim nihil in hominem destinatur, non liberalitas regni, non severitas judicii, non quodcumque est resurrectio aut si in hominem destinatur, necesse est in eas substantias 0840C destinetur, ex quibus homo structus est, in quem destinatur. Illud etiam de argutissimis istis demutatoribus ossium, et carnium, et nervorum, et sepulcrorum requiro cur si quando in animam quid pronuntiatur, nihil aliud animam interpretantur, nec transfigurant eam in alterius rei argumentum; cum vero in aliquam speciem corporalem quid edicitur, omnia potius asseverant, quam quod nominatur? 0841A Si corporalia parabolae, ergo et animalia; si non et animalia, ergo nec corporalia. Tam enim corpus homo, quam et anima, ut non possit altera species admittere aenigmata, altera excludere.