Tertullian · a new plain-English translation from the original language
[1] I know how they try to shake this prophecy too into an allegorical argument, on the grounds that, by declaring "this multitude of bones stands for the entire household of Israel," he has turned them into a figure of Israel and lifted them out of their own literal condition, so that the preaching of the resurrection becomes figurative rather than real: for, so they claim, the condition of the Jewish nation is here somehow being pictured as lifeless, withered, and strewn across the world's expanse; [2] and so the image of rising again is being applied to that national condition as an allegory, since it is to be drawn back together and bone rejoined to bone — that is, clan matched to clan and kin to kin — and re-embodied with the flesh of resources and the sinews of a kingdom, and so drawn out of tombs, that is, out of the most miserable and squalid quarters of captivity, and made to breathe again under the label of relief, living thereafter once more in its native land of Judea. And after that, what? [3] Death, no doubt, awaits them. And after death, what then? No rising again, I should suppose, unless this very passage revealed to Ezekiel supplies it. Yet resurrection is proclaimed elsewhere too: so this same rising will come to pass, however rashly they twist the text to confine it to the fortunes of Jewish affairs alone — or, should the resurrection we are defending prove to be a different one, that matters nothing to me, so long as bodies rise again just as Jewish fortunes are said to. [4] Finally, by the very fact that the revival of Jewish standing is pictured in terms of the re-embodying and re-animating of bones, this itself proves that the same thing will happen to bones: for no figure could be built out of bones unless that very thing were going to happen to bones. [5] For even if the fiction lies in the image's likeness to the truth, the image itself is true to its own nature: a thing must first be true of itself before it can be made a figure for something else. A likeness cannot be drawn from an empty thing; a parable cannot fit something that is nothing. [6] So it must be believed that a revivifying and rebreathing of bones — of the very kind spoken of — will indeed occur, one from which the reshaping of Jewish fortunes, as pictured, could be expressed. [7] But it is more devout that the truth be defended on its own authority and plain sense, as the meaning of the divine statement demands. For if this vision had regard to Jewish affairs, he would have added at once, upon revealing the state of the bones, "this multitude of bones stands for the entire household of Israel," and so forth. [8] But instead, once the bones are shown, he first speaks about their own hope before Israel is even named, and tests the prophet's faith: "Son of man, can these dry bones come to life?" — so that he too might answer, "Lord, you alone know." God would surely not have tested the prophet's faith about a matter that was not going to happen, that Israel would never have heard of, that ought not to be believed. [9] But since the resurrection of the dead was indeed being proclaimed, and Israel, distrustful through its unbelief, was scandalized, and, looking at the aspect of an aging burial-ground, despaired of resurrection — or rather did not fix its mind on that at all but on its own circumstances — for that reason God, by revealing the order of the resurrection, first built up the prophet himself, who shared that doubt, into steadfast conviction, and then bid the multitude give credence to what had been disclosed to that prophet, declaring that they themselves were the very bones that were to rise, they who did not believe they would rise. [10] Finally, in the closing words, "And you shall know," he says, "that I the Lord have spoken and have done it" — meaning, surely, that he was going to do exactly what he had said, for he would not be doing what he said if he were going to do it otherwise than he said.