Add parallel Print Page Options

42 So houtōs also kai is the ho resurrection anastasis of the ho dead nekros. The body is sown speirō in en a perishable phthora state , it is raised egeirō imperishable aphtharsia. 43 It is sown speirō in en humiliation atimia, it is raised egeirō in en glory doxa; it is sown speirō in en weakness astheneia, it is raised egeirō in en power dynamis; 44 it is sown speirō a natural psychikos body sōma, it is raised egeirō a spiritual pneumatikos body sōma. If ei there is eimi a natural psychikos body sōma, there is eimi also kai a spiritual pneumatikos body. 45 So houtōs also kai it is written graphō, “ The ho first prōtos man anthrōpos, Adam Adam, became ginomai a living zaō soul psychē.” The ho last eschatos Adam Adam became a life-giving zōiopoieō spirit pneuma. 46 However alla, the ho spiritual pneumatikos did not ou come first prōton, but alla the ho natural psychikos, then epeita the ho spiritual pneumatikos. 47 The ho first prōtos man anthrōpos was of ek the earth , made of dust choikos; the ho second deuteros man anthrōpos is of ek heaven ouranos. 48 As was hoios the ho man of dust choikos, so toioutos also kai are those ho who are of dust choikos; and kai as hoios is the ho man of heaven epouranios, so toioutos also kai are those ho who are of heaven epouranios. 49 And kai even as kathōs we have borne phoreō the ho image eikōn of the ho man of dust choikos, let us also kai bear phoreō the ho likeness eikōn of the ho man of heaven epouranios

50 Now de this houtos I declare phēmi, brothers adelphos, that hoti flesh sarx and kai blood haima cannot ou inherit klēronomeō the kingdom basileia of God theos, nor oude does klēronomeō the ho perishable phthora inherit klēronomeō the ho imperishable aphtharsia.

Read full chapter

42 It is the same with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable.[a] 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living person”;[b] the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man is from the earth, made of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 Like the one made of dust, so too are those made of dust, and like the one from heaven, so too those who are heavenly. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, let us also bear[c] the image of the man of heaven.

50 Now this is what I am saying, brothers and sisters:[d] Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.

Read full chapter

Footnotes

  1. 1 Corinthians 15:42 tn Grk “it is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.” The “it” refers to the body, as v. 44 shows.
  2. 1 Corinthians 15:45 tn Grk “living soul”; a quotation from Gen 2:7.
  3. 1 Corinthians 15:49 tc ‡ A few significant witnesses have the future indicative φορέσομεν (phoresomen, “we will bear”; B I 6 630 1881 al sa) instead of the aorist subjunctive φορέσωμεν (phoresōmen, “let us bear”; P46 א A C D F G Ψ 075 0243 33 1739 M latt bo). If the original reading is the future tense, then “we will bear” would be a guarantee that believers would be like Jesus (and unlike Adam) in the resurrection. If the aorist subjunctive is original, then “let us bear” would be a command to show forth the image of Jesus, i.e., to live as citizens of the kingdom that believers will one day inherit. The future indicative is not widespread geographically. At the same time, it fits the context well: Not only are there indicatives in this section (especially vv. 42-49), but the conjunction καί (kai) introducing the comparative καθώς (kathōs) seems best to connect to the preceding by furthering the same argument (what is, not what ought to be). For this reason, though, the future indicative could be a reading thus motivated by an early scribe. In light of the extremely weighty evidence for the aorist subjunctive, it is probably best to regard the aorist subjunctive as autographic. This connects well with v. 50, for there Paul makes a pronouncement that seems to presuppose some sort of exhortation. G. D. Fee (First Corinthians [NICNT], 795) argues for the originality of the subjunctive, stating that “it is nearly impossible to account for anyone’s having changed a clearly understandable future to the hortatory subjunctive so early and so often that it made its way into every textual history as the predominant reading.” The subjunctive makes a great deal of sense in view of the occasion of 1 Corinthians. Paul wrote to combat an over-realized eschatology in which some of the Corinthians evidently believed they were experiencing all the benefits of the resurrection body in the present, and thus that their behavior did not matter. If the subjunctive is the correct reading, it seems Paul makes two points: (1) that the resurrection is a bodily one, as distinct from an out-of-body experience, and (2) that one’s behavior in the interim does make a difference (see 15:32-34, 58).
  4. 1 Corinthians 15:50 tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.