Tertullian · a new plain-English translation from the original language
[1] But look — to pile the dispute even higher against the flesh, and against this same flesh above all, they argue also from the functions of its members, claiming either that these too must endure along with their operations and their fruits, as things written into that same corpulence, or else — since it is agreed that the members' functions are due to cease — that they will erase the corpulence as well, on the ground, presumably, that its persistence cannot be credited apart from members, since members cannot be credited apart from functions. [2] For what use then, they ask, will there be for this cave of mouth and station of teeth, this slide of the gullet, this crossroads of the stomach, this whirlpool of the belly, this tangled length of the intestines, once there is no place left for eating and drinking? What use for the members that admit, work over, roll down, divide, digest, and expel such things, what use for the hands themselves and the feet and every laboring limb, once the very concern for sustenance has ceased? [3] What use for the kidneys, accomplices of the seed, and the rest of the genital parts of both sexes, and the stables of conception and the fountains of the breasts, once intercourse and childbearing and nursing are gone? And finally, what use for the whole body, since the whole of it will plainly stand idle? [4] To this we have already laid down beforehand that the arrangements of the future must not be confused with those of the present, since a transformation will then intervene; and now we build further: that these functions of the members answer to the necessities of this present life only until this very life itself is carried over from temporality into eternity — just as the animal body passes into the spiritual, while this mortal thing puts on immortality and this corruptible thing puts on incorruption. [5] And when life itself is then set free from its necessities, the members too will be freed from their functions — but that does not mean they will cease to be necessary: for even though released from duties, they are held for judgment, so that each may give account, through the body, of what he has done. [6] For God's tribunal demands the man whole; and he cannot be whole without members, since it is of these, not of their functions, but of their very substances, that he consists — unless perhaps you will also declare a ship 'whole' without a keel, without prow, without stern, without the soundness of its entire frame! [7] And yet we have often seen a ship, scattered by a storm or rotted through with decay, have all its parts recovered and repaired, and still glory in the very name of 'restored' — shall we then quibble over God's craftsmanship, God's will, God's right to do the same? [8] Further: if a rich and generous owner, to indulge his own affection or his own glory, undertakes only to restore the ship — will you, on that ground, deny that its original framework was necessary to him, on the plea that it will thereafter stand idle, since it is only the ship's soundness, not its operation, that such an owner cares about? [9] So then it is enough to learn only this: whether God, in destining man for salvation, destined the flesh for it too, or whether he wills the same flesh to exist all over again. And you must not conclude, from the future idleness of the members, that it cannot exist again: for a thing can exist again and still lie idle. But it cannot be said to lie idle if it does not exist at all. Whereas if it does exist, it can also be something other than idle: for nothing will lie idle before God.