BIG IDEA:
UNDERSTANDING OUR FUTURE RESURRECTION BODY —
TWO AREAS OF ANALOGY AND TWO AREAS OF CONTRAST
INTRODUCTION:
Anthony Thiselton: This section resumes a second refutatio, which supplements the refutatio of vv. 12-19. In the first refutatio Paul showed the unacceptable consequences of denying the very notion of resurrection and thereby also denying the resurrection of Christ. Here he exposes claims that the future resurrection of the “body” is unintelligible and unbelievable as indefensible and untenable.
Mark Taylor: In 15:35 the argument shifts from the fact of the resurrection to the nature of the resurrection body. Although bodily resurrection has been the issue all along, the term “body” appears for the first time in this chapter and becomes the dominant focus of 15:35–49. The unit opens with two questions in the style of the Greek diatribe, a method of argumentation that employs a hypothetical opponent in order to address a real scenario: But someone may ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” Paul answers the questions by way of the Genesis creation narrative on the analogy of the seed (15:36–38) and the different kinds of earthly and heavenly bodies (15:39–44a), which prepares the way for another use of the Adam/Christ typology (cf. 15:22) that sets up the contrast between the natural body and the spiritual body (15:44b–49). The future resurrection body of believers is likened to the resurrection body of Jesus, the second man from heaven (15:49). The analogies draw from ordinary experience and do not attempt to prove bodily resurrection but rather offer a way to understand how bodily resurrection is possible. Regarding the allusion to the Genesis account in this unit, Ciampa and Rosner observe that in the study of the beginning of creation we find keys to eschatology. “It is understood that in many ways the last things will be like the first things, only better.”
Gordon Fee: This section, therefore, is absolutely crucial to the argument of this entire passage (from 15:1), since it responds to the real issue that led to their denial of the resurrection. At the same time, it is crucial to the entire letter. The key issue has to do with being pneumatikos (“people of the Spirit”). The Corinthians were apparently convinced that, by the gift of the Spirit, and especially the manifestation of tongues, they had already entered into the spiritual, “heavenly” existence that is to be. Only the body, to be sloughed off at death, lies between them and their ultimate spirituality. Thus they have tended to deny the body in the present, and have no use for it in the future. Not so, says Paul. As with Christ, so with us. This corruptible must put on incorruption; only then does the End come. At stake is the biblical doctrine of creation. According to Scripture, God created the material order and pronounced it good. But in the fall it also came under the curse. In Paul’s view, therefore, the material order must also experience the effects of redemption in Christ, and that involves the physical body as well. Since in its present expression it is under the curse, it must be transformed; and that happens at the Eschaton, so that beginning and end meet in Christ Jesus. . .
In our present earthly existence the body simply is, neither to be admired (or lavishly adorned) nor denigrated (as less than truly “spiritual”). Since it serves as the present vehicle of our life on this planet, one should properly care for it as the gift that it is; but “care” should not also lead to adoration, just as it should not lead to contempt.
Paul Gardner: Main Idea: At the resurrection, the natural body in the image of Adam will give way to a spiritual body in the image of Christ. That body is appropriate for the eternal realm of existence.
The Resurrection Body: Continuity and Discontinuity (15:35–49)
1. Two Questions about the Resurrection Body (15:35)
2. The Sowing of a Seed Illustrates the Answer to the Questions (15:36–44)
a. The Seed Dies in Becoming a Plant (15:36–37)
b. God Determines the Body Each Seed Will Become (15:38)
c. Different Bodies Exist for Different Settings (15:39–41)
d. Application: A Natural Body That Dies Is Raised a Spiritual Body (15:42–44)
3. Adam and Christ Compared (15:45–49)
a. Adam Was from This Earth, Christ Is from Heaven (15:45–47)
b. Christians, Presently in Adam’s Image, Will Bear Christ’s Image When Raised (15:48–49)
Daniel Akin: No Body Like This Body
Main Idea: Like the Savior, every saint will be physically raised in a supernatural body impervious to sin and death forever.
I. Paul Receives a Puzzled Interrogation concerning the Resurrection (15:35).
II. Paul Gives Practical Illustrations of the Resurrection (15:36-41).
A. The agricultural world (15:36-38)
B. The animal world (15:39)
C. The astronomical world (15:40-41)
III. Paul Provides Pertinent Information about the Resurrection (15:42-49).
A. The promise of the transformation (15:42-46)
B. The perfection of the transformation (15:47-49)
David Garland: The argument begins with the question of an objector. Paul delineates various principles before presenting the solution that explains how the resurrection of the dead is possible:
- A skeptical question setting up the issue of how bodily resurrection is possible (15:35)
- The principle of change from the example of botanical processes (15:36–38)
- The principle of different types of bodies and glories from the example of terrestrial bodies and celestial glories (15:39–41)
- The radical difference between the risen body and its earthly counterpart (15:42–44a)
- The explanation of how the polarity between the earthly and heavenly will be bridged through Christ (15:44b–49)
(:35-36A) TWO MOCKING QUESTIONS REGARDING THE RESURRECTION BODY
A. #1 – How is the Resurrection of the Body Even Possible?
“But someone will say, ‘How are the dead raised?’”
Daniel Akin: Paul shifts from dealing with the necessity of the resurrection body (that is, since Jesus was raised from the dead one should not doubt that we will be raised from the dead) to the nature of the resurrection body. He is dealing with two specific questions: “How are the dead raised? What kind of body will they have?” Some people in the church were questioning not just the possibility but the pattern of the resurrection.
B. #2 – What will the Resurrection Body Look Like?
“And with what kind of body do they come?”
C. Mockers Labeled as Fools
“You fools!”
Richard Hays: This word of stern rebuke introduces a section in which Paul turns the tables on the Corinthians, suggesting that they, not he, are the ones guilty of crude literalism. Paul insists that the concept of “resurrection of the dead” should not be naively understood to refer to the resuscitation of corpses; rather, the concept of resurrection necessarily entails transformation into a new and glorious state.
Ray Stedman: For twenty centuries now the skeptics of all ages have asked these same questions. Of course, they amplify them by imposing various obstacles they see. They say, for instance, “We can understand, perhaps, that a body that has been carefully embalmed and placed in a grave might possibly be brought back to life, but what about those that have been destroyed? What about all the people that have been cremated?” . . .
These questions always arise when unbelief faces this question of the resurrection of the dead. “How can it be?” That is what some of these Corinthians were asking. The clear implication was, “It cannot be; it is impossible.” The Greeks, of course, were teaching that it was a good thing, an advantage, to lose the body. The body was a prison-house, they taught, where we are limited and restricted. The Oriental religions, on the other hand, were teaching that many bodies were needed in a process of salvation, that you return to earth many times. Their question would be, “Which body is raised from the dead? Is it the ‘cow’ body you once had, or the ‘gorilla’ body you may have had, or the one you are walking around in now?” Reincarnation would, for them, pose an entirely different question concerning the resurrection of the body.
I. (:36B-37) ANALOGY OF PLANTING –
TWO MAJOR CORRECTIONS REGARDING THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE PRESENT BODY AND THE FUTURE RESURRECTION BODY BASED ON THE ANALOGY OF SOWING
A. The Seed Planted Must First Die
“That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies”
David Garland: Paul’s first example argues by analogy from the known world of seeds to the unknown world of the resurrection (Bonneau 1993: 79). The illustration contains three points (Asher 2000: 79):
- The seed is not made alive unless it dies.
- The seed planted is not the body that will come up from the ground.
- God effects the transition between the seed and the plant.
The resurrection remains a mystery, but its mystery does not tell against its reality (Findlay 1910: 934). The same mystery shrouds the germination of seeds.
B. The Seed Planted is Only a Microcosm of the Different Product that will Result
“and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be,
but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of something else.”
Ray Pritchard: Paul uses the analogy of the seed to correct two common errors:
1) That the resurrection body will be identical to the one that was buried.
2) That the resurrection body will be completely unrelated to the original.
Ray Stedman: Nature teaches us two obvious lessons.
First: Death is a necessary part of the process. Far from being an obstacle to resurrection, death is essential to it. You can put that in the form of an axiom: Nothing that has never died shall ever be raised from the dead. Obviously if it is going to be raised from the dead it has to die. Therefore, death is not an obstacle to resurrection. It is an ingredient of it and necessary to it. To balk at the fact that people die and the body loses its ability to function and its form and consistency as a body, ought never to be any hindrance to believing that life will emerge from it. The body must die just as the seed must die.
The second lesson that nature teaches us is this: The body that emerges from the seed that dies is different from the one that was planted. Put a grain of wheat or a kernel of corn into the ground and what comes up? Another grain of wheat or another kernel? No! What comes up is a green stem which does not look at all like what you put into the ground. Nevertheless it is tied to it; it is continuous from it; it has an identity with it. There is an undeniable tie with that which you put into the ground, and yet it is not the same; it is the “same” without being similar. Now, if you had never seen that process before, would you have believed it if somebody had said that that is what would happen? You would have looked at him as though he were mad and said, “How can that be?” because you can put almost anything else into the ground and that will not happen. It is one of those miracles that is so familiar to us that we miss the miraculous part of it. But Paul says it happens so frequently there should therefore be no struggle with believing in the resurrection of the dead.
Steve Zeisler: Here Paul is testifying to the fact that although humans are planted in the ground when they die, they will be raised very different beings indeed. Bodies may be burned or suffer decay, but what was planted will not be the same as what will be raised. Yet there is continuity, however. The one who was buried will be the one who will be raised. Wheat seed will produce wheat. What you are right now, everything you are becoming inside, all of the changes which God is making in your character, will be there upon your resurrection. You will be raised, but not with the same body. In the resurrection, you will be gloriously different.
Doug Goins: But there is a continuity, and that’s the point of verse 38: “…To each of the seeds a body of its own.” The seed changes radically, but it does continue the same life form. A wheat seed doesn’t turn into a barley plant, and a kernel of corn doesn’t turn into flax. The identity of the seed continues into the full-grown plant. In Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances in his resurrection body, none of his disciples and followers recognized him until he chose to reveal himself to them. But once he told them who he was, they did recognize him. They saw the wound in his side and the nail prints in his hands. They knew his face. The promise for us is that we will have some kind of continuity of our personhood, our personality, our unique individuality, after death.
II. (:38-41) ANALOGY OF CREATION –
GOD GRANTS EACH TYPE OF CREATION ITS OWN DISTINCTIVE QUALITY AND ITS OWN UNIQUE GLORY
A. (:38-39) God Grants Each Type of Flesh its Own Distinctive Quality
- The Creator Makes Everything Unique
a. Nature of each body determined by God – a Sovereign Gift
“But God gives it a body just as He wished”
Mark Taylor: No one unfamiliar with agriculture could ever imagine the utter difference between the seed planted in the ground and the glorious plant that emerges, each distinct to its own seed. For the believer, the fullness of life lies not on this side of the grave but in the glorious age to come. Resurrection entails new creation. The key point is that God gives to each seed its own body as he has determined (15:38). The implication is that God will also give to each believer a resurrection body as he has determined. The language of God’s determination echoes Paul’s explanation of God’s sovereign placement of the members of the body in 12:18. Thiselton rightly calls attention to the themes of God’s sovereignty and grace conveyed by 15:38. It is God who determines the kind of body we will have, and it is God who gives.
b. Independence of each individual body
“and to each of the seeds a body of its own”
c. Uniqueness of each type of flesh
“All flesh is not the same flesh”
Look at the implications for the erroneous theory of evolution
- Four Examples of Different Types of Flesh
a. Men – “but there is one flesh of men”
b. Animals – “and another flesh of beasts”
c. Birds – “and another flesh of birds”
d. Fish – “and another of fish”
Steve Zeisler: Think for a moment about the animal world, says Paul. Take earthworms, for instance. They are uniquely adapted to their environment. Humans could not survive in the same circumstances. We cannot ingest what worms eat; such a diet would not be suitable for us. In the same way, polar bears are uniquely adapted to their environment. They can swim and hunt in the frigid waters of the Antarctic. Humans, of course, would die if they tried that. Fish also are uniquely adapted to the water. They have gills, not lungs like humans have. From this, Paul concludes that when we are raised, we are going to be given bodies quite unlike the bodies which we now have which enable us to survive on earth, but rather we will have bodies uniquely fitted for heaven very different environment. Christians should expect this. God creates bodies to fit their environment.
Ray Stedman: . . . this difference is a result of the inner difference of nature, or personality, that these beings have. It says, “to each kind of seed its own body.” In other words there is a correspondence between what the body looks like and what the being inside is like. That is why animals have various natures. For this reason, animals are used in Scripture as symbols of corresponding qualities about human beings — wolves are always ferocious and dangerous, sheep are always helpless and needing protection, and pigs are always dirty. All these qualities are there because God wants to demonstrate to us truth about ourselves that we see reflected in the natural world.
Doug Goins: I remember a Broadway musical in which there is a love song. The lady sings, “Fish gotta swim, and birds gotta fly, and I gotta love one man till I die.” Each one uniquely fulfills the purpose for which it was created. Fish are created to swim in the seas, birds to fly, and human beings to know love relationships with other human beings. Fish don’t fall in love. Fish swim in the ocean. And we are created to love another human being, but we are not created to flap our arms and fly around like an bird. The sun generates tremendous light and energy in our solar system. The moon is just a rock that reflects the light of the sun toward the earth. And all this variety and diversity in the worlds of biology and astronomy is a marvelous hint of the same diversity of resurrection glory in our heavenly bodies.
Anthony Thiselton: The whole issue hinges upon God’s infinite resourcefulness, demonstrated already in God’s resourcefulness as Creator. God has already shown that he created organisms, entities, and modes of being appropriate for every kind of condition or environment: animals for earth, fish for rivers and the sea, birds for the sky, planets or flaming gases for space, stars of different magnitudes for different places within the galaxy and the universe (vv. 39-41). Using “flesh” to denote here substances-used-in creation, Paul declares, All flesh is not the same flesh (v. 39a). Human flesh differs from that of animals; and we can extrapolate through to the sun, moon, and stars, each of which has a different splendor, each a glory of its own: star differs from star in splendor (v. 41b). So God will not be caught by some design problem relating to the resurrection.
Paul Gardner: Paul grounds his example solidly in the creation story of Genesis 1:11–12 where God created vegetation and trees and plants, and the passage speaks of each plant bringing forth seed “which is their seed, each according to its kind” (ESV). Even the differentiation where a seed will only produce its particular kind of plant is part of God’s creative purposes. The future lies with God, and he will see to it that the seed of the human who has died will be brought to life in the form and physical body appropriate to the realm or environment in which it will then be living. (There is nothing wrong with using the word “physical” at this point, for Paul is dealing with a real resurrection of substance that is in continuity with the physical body that has died, but which has a different “flesh” or outward form. There is nothing in anything that Paul says that would lead us to believe physicality as such has gone; in fact, this very use of the word “flesh” militates against this.)
B. (:40-41) God Grants Each Type of Creation its Own Unique Glory
- Distinction in Type and Glory Between Heavenly and Earthly Bodies = Two Major Divisions
“There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies,
but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another.”
Paul Gardner: The word “glory,” however, means more than simply splendor and light. The comments on this word in 1 Corinthians 11:7 are useful here as well. There it was noted that any “glory” attached to a person was derived first from the “glory” attached to God. With God the word points to all that is uniquely true about him. It no doubt involves his brightness and existence as “light.” God is revealed in a “pillar of fire” in the exodus, the “cloud” that surrounds him seems to be there to protect humankind from death, and it is understood even from the blinding that happened to Paul as he saw Christ in his “glory” on the Damascus road. When it is applied to men and women, as in 11:7, we suggested that “glory” was to be understood in close relationship with being in God’s image and so reflecting glory back to him as the worship of their lives (cf. 2 Cor 4:6). “Glory” therefore becomes that which sums up the person as God created them. Glory is that which belongs to the person and, in this case by extension, the created entity that reflects his, her, or its creator.
- Distinction in Glory Among the Unique Heavenly Bodies
a. Sun – “There is one glory of the sun”
b. Moon – “and another glory of the moon”
c. Unique Stars – “and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.”
Robert Grosheide: Among the celestial bodies themselves also there is a difference of glory. Not only between the sun, the moon and the stars, but also between the various stars. This goes to prove that though there may be equality between the one body and the other, yet there is a great variety because of a difference in quality and in glory.
Robert Gundry: The fact that many ancient people thought of the sun, moon, and stars as personal beings with shining bodies helped Paul’s analogy at this point. And just as in 15:35–38 Paul supplemented a stress on variety with a stress on individuality for a forthcoming distinction between those who are still living on the day of resurrection and those who’ve died, so too here—and for the same purpose—he notes differences in glory from star to star, though all the stars fall into the same category over against the sun and the moon.
SUMMARY AND TRANSITION: Resurrection Body is Unique in Type and Glory
“So also is the resurrection of the dead.”
III. (:42-44A) CONTRAST OF INNATE QUALITIES –
FOUR DISTINCTIONS HIGHLIGHTING THE SUPERIORITY OF THE RESURRECTION BODY
David Garland: Corinthians have trouble conceiving of the resurrection of the dead because they know the terrestrial body to be
- Susceptible to corruption—the condition of fallen creation (Rom. 8:21; Gal. 6:8; Col. 2:22; see also 2 Bar. 44:9)
- Dishonored—the condition of being subject to shame and shameful treatment (1 Cor. 4:11–13; 2 Cor. 6:8)
- Weak—the condition of being embodied in something that is subject to physical infirmities and deformities (2 Cor. 12:9–10) and that wastes away (2 Cor. 4:16)
A. #1 Indestructible — Perishable vs Imperishable – Permanent, not Transitory
“It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body.”
B. #2 Triumphant — Dishonor vs Glory
“it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory”
Doug Goins: This contrast addresses value or potential. We know that as sinful men and women we are dishonorable. At the fall our potential for pleasing, serving, and glorifying God was drastically reduced. Genesis tells us we were created in the image of God, designed to reflect his glory and perfection, created to honor him. But we know that sin is at work in us now. Even though we’ve been redeemed from the penalty of sin by Jesus Christ, we still struggle with fleshly patterns of sinful rebellion. Even the most faithful follower of Jesus Christ knows that his body, his intellect, his emotions, and his will are in a sense dishonorable or imperfect or incomplete. We live in a fallen, flawed world, and we reflect that fallenness. But we will one day be raised in glory, to use Paul’s phrase. When we get to heaven we won’t be sinful anymore.
David Prior: Paul does not mean that there is no honour or power in our physical bodies, but that the very greatest honour and power inherent in these bodies could not begin to cope with life in the kingdom of God in all its fullness. The fundamental reason for this is their bondage to decay (42). There is no way in which this corruption can be halted; it can only be buried.
C. #3 Transformed — Weakness vs Power
“it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power”
Daniel Akin: The idea of “sown in weakness, raised in power” (v. 43) means our current bodies are limited by time, space, sickness, and breakdown, but our new bodies will be freed from the shackles of fallen humanity. They will no longer be limited by time, space, or material substance. Such bodies will be filled with the power that can only come from the God who raised them.
D. #4 Transcendent — Natural vs Spiritual (transcending material existence)
“it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body”
John MacArthur: Focusing directly on the resurrection body, Paul gives 4 sets of contrasts to show how the new body will differ from the present ones (cf. v. 54; Php 3:20, 21):
1) no more sickness and death (“perishable”)
2) no more shame because of sin (“dishonor”)
3) no more frailty in temptation (“weakness”)
4) no more limits to the time/space sphere (“natural”)
Doug Goins:
1) Durability
2) Value or Potential
3) Abilities
4) Sphere of existence
Bruce Goettsche:
Paul tells us about some of the differences between the physical and spiritual bodies.
- the earthly body wears out (decay, corruption, ruin). . . the heavenly body will not
- the earthly body knows embarrassment and all kinds of sinful desires . . .the heavenly body will know glory
- the earthly body is limited and weak held captive by the forces of the world such as disease and aging . . . the heavenly power will know power and strength.
- the earthly body is natural (or anchored to nature)….the heavenly body is spiritual
Richard Hays: Our mortal bodies embody the psyche (“soul”), the animating force of our present existence, but the resurrection body will embody the divinely given pneuma (“spirit”). It is to be a “spiritual body” not in the sense that it is somehow made out of spirit and vapors, but in the sense that it is determined by the spirit and gives the spirit form and local habitation
IV. (:44B-49) CONTRAST OF PROTOTYPES –
JUST AS OUR PHYSICAL BODY IS PATTERNED AFTER ADAM SO OUR RESURRECTION BODY WILL BE PATTERNED AFTER CHRIST
Andrew Noselli: The analogy of Adam and Christ proves that resurrecting the corpses of believers is certain. The natural body connects to Adam, the covenantal head of all humans, and the supernatural spiritual body connects to Christ, the covenantal head of the new creation. Adam was merely living, but Christ is life-giving because he will raise all those who belong to him.
A. (:44B) Certainty of the Resurrection Body –
Reality of the Existence of both the Natural and Spiritual Body
“If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.”
B. (:45-47) Case for the Superiority of Christ as the Prototype of the Resurrection Body — Three Distinctions Between Adam and Christ
- Supreme Distinction – Self Sufficient, Self Existent Life-Giving Spirit
“So also it is written, ‘The first man, Adam, became a living soul.’
The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.”
Psalm 36:9 “For with You is the fountain of life; in Your light we see light.”
Mark Taylor: The phrase “life-giving spirit,” on the other hand, describes the risen Christ, the last Adam, in his transformed state and corresponds to the description of the resurrection body as “spiritual.” As with the term “spiritual,” “spirit” does not mean “immaterial” but rather designates that which is the opposite of and belongs to a different order than the “natural.” The modifier “life-giving” is a participle form of the verb meaning “to bring to life” that appears in 15:22 and 36. In other words, just as the natural body came to all humans through Adam so also Christ became in resurrection a life-giving spirit (pneuma), that is, the source of life to all who are “in him.” The first Adam received life. The last Adam imparts life. Just as humans have a natural body after the pattern of Adam so also Christ is representative of all who will be raised and given a spiritual body. The framework of Paul’s argument is representative, soteriological, and eschatological.
Gordon Fee: Although some subtleties are at work here, from these observations one may draw the following conclusions about Paul’s intent.
First, the reason for the citation lies with his desire to demonstrate the reality of the resurrection body on the basis of the prior Adam-Christ analogy. The use of psychē to describe Adam gives Paul a biblical base for the distinctions he wants to make between the two kinds of sōma and at the same time allows him to connect that with what he had said previously (vv. 21–22).
Second, as the further explanation (vv. 47–48) makes clear, the overriding urgency in this passage is to show in an analogical way that the two kinds of bodies “sown” and “raised” (v. 44) are already represented in the two archetyphal “Adams.” The first Adam, who became a “living psychē,” was thereby given a psychikos body at creation, a body subject to decay and death. This Adam, who brought death into the world (vv. 21–22), thus became the representative man for all who bear his psychikos likeness. The last Adam, on the other hand, whose “spiritual (glorified) body” was given at his resurrection, not only became the representative Man for all who will bear his pneumatikos likeness, but he is himself the source of the pneumatikos life as well as the pneumatikos body.
Therefore, third, the shift from “living” with regard to Adam (he is merely life-receiving) to “life-giving” seems to have a double entendre with regard to Christ. In his resurrection whereby he assumed his “supernatural body,” Christ also became the giver of life to all who will ever follow after. Paul’s point seems to be that one can assume full pneumatikos existence only as Christ did, by resurrection, which includes a pneumatikos body. The concern of line 2, therefore, is not christological, as though Christ and the Spirit were somehow now interchangeable terms for Paul. The concern is soteriological-eschatological; the language has been dictated both by the Genesis text and the concern to demonstrate that Christ is the foundation of believers’ receiving a “spiritual body.” To make any further theological deductions from such analogies is to do the apostle a grave injustice.
Part of Paul’s point in all of this seems to be to deny, on the basis of Christ’s resurrection, that they are completed people of the Spirit now. They, too, must await the resurrection (or transformation, v. 52) before their “spirituality” is complete, since, as with Christ, it must include a somatic expression. This is the point he will pick up with the second use of this text and the Adam-Christ analogy to follow (vv. 47–49); but before that he takes a final swipe at their misguided, overspiritualized eschatology.
- Sequence — Order of Appearance on Earth
“However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual.”
Bob Deffinbaugh: True spirituality in the present is our identification with our Lord’s earthly body. We must identify with Him in His weakness, in His dishonor, in His death, and (partly) in His resurrection. This is why Paul speaks of his ministry in terms of dishonor and weakness. This is the calling of the Christian: to identify in body, soul, and spirit with the Lord in His earthly coming, in His rejection, weakness, shame and death. Spirituality cannot be separated from what we do in and with our bodies.
Ray Stedman: The Mormon church teaches that we were once spirit beings who then came to earth and became men, but this verse flatly contradicts that. It is not the spiritual which is first, it is the physical.
We came into existence on a physical level, but designed by God, beyond that, is the spiritual. That is next, and death is but a stop in that process, and necessary to it. So now we are in a state of transition, as Paul goes on to describe,
- Source
“The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven.”
C. (:48-49) Consistency in Matching the Prototype –
Two Very Different Prototypes – But in each case they establish the Pattern
- Adam is the Prototype for all Earthly Bodies
“As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy”
“Just as we have borne the image of the earthy”
- Christ is the Prototype for all Resurrection Bodies
“and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly”
“we will also bear the image of the heavenly”