The interpretation timeline
1 Corinthians 15:50 Douay-Rheims

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God: neither shall corruption possess incorruption.

A.D. 202 – 1871 14 witnesses 18 excerpts

Patristic

before A.D. 750
202
A.D.
Irenaeus Patristic
c. A.D. 130–202
“When his disciples saw that he had risen, they did not recognise him-no, not even Jesus himself, by whom he rose again from the dead. And they assert that this very great error prevailed among his disciples, that they imagined he had risen in a mundane body, not knowing that "flesh and blood do not attain to the kingdom of God."”
Source
“Among the other [truths] proclaimed by the apostle, there is also this one, "That flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." This is [the passage] which is adduced by all the heretics in support of their folly, with an attempt to annoy us, and to point out that the handiwork of God is not saved. They do not take this fact into consideration, that there are three things out of which, as I have shown, the complete man is composed-flesh, soul, and spirit. One of these does indeed preserve and fashion [the man]-this is the spirit; while as to another it is united and formed-that is the flesh; then [comes] that which is between these two-that is the soul, which sometimes indeed, when it follows the spirit, is raised up by it, but sometimes it sympathizes with the flesh, and falls into carnal lusts. Those then, as many as they be, who have not that which saves and forms [us] into life [eternal], shall be, and shall be called, [mere] flesh and blood; for these are they who have not the Spirit of God in themselves. Wherefore men of this stamp are spoken of by the Lord as "dead;" for, says He, "Let the dead bury their dead," because they have not the Spirit which quickens man. This truth, therefore, [he declares], in order that we may not reject the engrafting of the Spirit while pampering the flesh. "But thou, being a wild olive-tree," he says, "hast been grafted into the good olive-tree, and been made a partaker of the fatness of the olive-tree." As, therefore, when the wild olive has been engrafted, if it remain in its former condition, viz., a wild olive, it is "cut off, and cast into the fire;" but if it takes kindly to the graft, and is changed into the good olive-tree, it becomes a fruit-bearing olive, planted, as it were, in a king's park (paradiso): so likewise men, if they do truly progress by faith towards better things, and receive the Spirit of God, and bring forth the fruit thereof, shall be spiritual, as being planted in the paradise of God. But if they cast out the Spirit, and remain in their former condition, desirous of being of the flesh rather than of the Spirit, then it is very justly said with regard to men of this stamp, "That flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God;" just as if any one were to say that the wild olive is not received into the paradise of God. Admirably therefore does the apostle exhibit our nature, and God's universal appointment, in his discourse about flesh and blood and the wild olive. For as the good olive, if neglected for a certain time, if left to grow wild and to run to wood, does itself become a wild olive; or again, if the wild olive be carefully tended and grafted, it naturally reverts to its former fruit-bearing condition: so men also, when they become careless, and bring forth for fruit the lusts of the flesh like woody produce, are rendered, by their own fault, unfruitful in righteousness. For when men sleep, the enemy sows the material of tares; and for this cause did the Lord command His disciples to be on the watch. And again, those persons who are not bringing forth the fruits of righteousness, and are, as it were, covered over and lost among brambles, if they use diligence, and receive the word of God as a graft, arrive at the pristine nature of man-that which was created after the image and likeness of God. But as the engrafted wild olive does not certainly lose the substance of its wood, but changes the quality of its fruit, and receives another name, being now not a wild olive, but a fruit-bearing olive, and is called so; so also, when man is grafted in by faith and receives the Spirit of God, he certainly does not lose the substance of flesh, but changes the quality of the fruit [brought forth, i.e., ] of his works, and receives another name, showing that he has become changed for the better, being now not [mere] flesh and blood, but a spiritual man, and is called such. Then, again, as the wild olive, if it be not grafted in, remains useless to its lord because of its woody quality, and is cut down as a tree bearing no fruit, and cast into the fire; so also man, if he does not receive through faith the engrafting of the Spirit, remains in his old condition, and being [mere] flesh and blood, he cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Rightly therefore does the apostle declare, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;" and, "Those who are in the flesh cannot please God:" not repudiating [by these words] the substance of flesh, but showing that into it the Spirit must be infused.”
Source
215
A.D.
c. A.D. 150–215
“And the apostle says, "For ye are not any longer in the flesh, but in the Spirit." And again he says, "Though in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh." "For flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." "Lo, ye shall die like men," the Spirit has said, confuting us. We must then exercise ourselves in taking care about those things which fall under the power of the passions, fleeing like those who are truly philosophers such articles of food as excite lust, and dissolute licentiousness in chambering and luxury; and the sensations that tend to luxury, which are a solid reward to others, must no longer be so to us. For God's greatest gift is self-restraint.”
Source
220
A.D.
Tertullian Patristic
c. A.D. 150–220
“For what are this next words? "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." He means the works of the flesh and blood, which, in his Epistle to the Galatians, deprive men of the kingdom of God. Now if, on the contrary, there is to be no flesh, how then shall it put on incorruption and immortality? Having then become something else by its change, it will obtain the kingdom of God, no longer the (old) flesh and blood, but the body which God shall have given it. Rightly then does the apostle declare, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; " for this (honour) does he ascribe to the changed condition which ensues on the resurrection. When also he (in a later passage) enjoins us "to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of flesh and blood" (since this substance enters not the kingdom of Gods ); when, again, he "espouses the church as a chaste virgin to Christ," a spouse to a spouse in very deed, an image cannot be combined and compared with what is opposed to the real nature the thing (with which it is compared). The apostle, however, himself here comes to our aid; for, while explaining in what sense he would not have us "live in the flesh," although in the flesh-even by not living in the works of the flesh -he shows that when he wrote the words, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," it was not with the view of condemning the substance (of the flesh), but the works thereof; and because it is possible for these not to be committed by us whilst we are still in the flesh, they will therefore be properly chargeable, not on the substance of the flesh, but on its conduct.”
Source
“But "flesh and blood," you say, "cannot inherit the kingdom of God." We are quite aware that this too is written; but although our opponents place it in the front of the battle, we have intentionally reserved the objection until now, in order that we may in our last assault overthrow it, after we have removed out of the way all the questions which are auxiliary to it. Since, therefore, he makes the image both of the earthy and the heavenly consist of moral conduct-the one to be abjured, and the other to be pursued-and then consistently adds, "For this I say" (on account, that is, of what I have already said, because the conjunction "for" connects what follows with the preceding words) "that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," -he means the flesh and blood to be understood in no other sense than the before-mentioned "image of the earthy; "and since this is reckoned to consist in "the old conversation," which old conversation receives not the kingdom of God, therefore flesh and blood, by not receiving the kingdom of God, are reduced to the life of the old conversation. Now, when it is clearly stated what the condition is to which the resurrection does not lead, it is understood what that is to which it does lead; and, therefore, whilst it is in consideration of men's merits that a difference is made in their resurrection by their conduct in the flesh, and not by the substance thereof, it is evident even from this, that flesh and blood are excluded from the kingdom of God in respect of their sin, not of their substance; and although in respect of their natural condition they will rise again for the judgment, because they rise not for the kingdom. Again, I will say, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; " and justly (does the apostle declare this of them, considered) alone and in themselves, in order to show that the Spirit is still needed (to qualify them) for the kingdom. Otherwise, if they say that you are not in Christ, let them also say that Christ is not in heaven, since they have denied you heaven. Likewise "neither shall corruption," says he, "inherit incorruption. This he says, not that you may take flesh and blood to be corruption, for they are themselves rather the subjects of corruption,-I mean through death, since death does not so much corrupt, as actually consume, our flesh and blood.”
Source
“I believe (He does so) for fear the heads of some should be seen! And oh that in "that day" of Christian exultation, I, most miserable (as I am), may elevate my head, even though below (the level of) your heels! I shall (then) see whether you will rise with (your) ceruse and rouge and saffron, and in all that parade of headgear: whether it will be women thus tricked out whom the angels carry up to meet Christ in the air If these (decorations) are now good, and of God, they will then also present themselves to the rising bodies, and will recognise their several places. But nothing can rise except flesh and spirit sole and pure. Whatever, therefore, does not rise in (the form of) spirit and flesh is condemned, because it is not of God.”
Source
258
A.D.
Novatian Patristic
c. A.D. 220–258
“This does not mean that the substance of our flesh was condemned. On the contrary, only the guilt of the flesh is censured, the guilt which was caused by humanity's deliberate and rash rebellion against the claims of divine law.”
311
A.D.
c. A.D. 260–311
“For He truly was made man, and died, and not in mere appearance, but that He might truly be shown to be the first begotten from the dead, changing the earthy into the heavenly, and the mortal into the immortal. When, then, Paul says that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit in corruption.". a man not far removed either from the times or from the virtues of the apostles, says that that which is mortal is inherited, but that life inherits; and that flesh dies, but that the kingdom of heaven lives. When then, Paul says that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven"”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“"Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." Seest thou how he explains himself again, relieving us of the trouble? which he often doth: for by flesh he here denotes men's evil deeds, which he hath done also elsewhere; as when he saith, "But ye are not in the flesh:" and again, "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." So that when he saith, "Now this I say," he means nothing else than this: "therefore said I these things that thou mayest learn that evil deeds conduct not to a kingdom." Thus from the resurrection he straightway introduced also the doctrine of the kingdom also; wherefore also he adds, "neither doth corruption inherit incorruption," i.e., neither shall wickedness inherit that glory and the enjoyment of the things incorruptible. For in many other places he calls wickedness by this name, saying, "He that soweth to the flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption." Now if he were speaking of the body and not of evil doing, he would not have said "corruption." For he nowhere calls the body "corruption," since neither is it corruption, but a thing corruptible: wherefore proceeding to discourse also of it, he calls it not "corruption," but "corruptible," saying, "for this corruptible must put on incorruption."”
Source
430
A.D.
Augustine of Hippo Patristic
A.D. 354–430
“There will then be such a common accord between flesh and Spirit—the Spirit quickening the servant flesh without any need of sustenance from it. There will be no further conflict within ourselves. And just as there will be no more external enemies to bear with, so neither shall we have to bear with ourselves as enemies within.”
Source
523
A.D.
c. A.D. 450–523
“"Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven," the blessed Paul teacheth us, or as a man might say, "So long as the motions of a man are established by flesh and blood he is unable to inherit the spiritual knowledge of Christ," which, as in a parable, he calleth the kingdom of heaven; and although this verse hath other meanings in respect of other passions, yet as regardeth the matter which is under discussion we may suitably apply it with this meaning. For the true kingdom is the knowledge which erreth not, and doubteth not, but seeth everything in its proper place distinctly, as well as things which are above nature, according to the capacity which is given unto created beings; and he whose life is established by means of motions of flesh and blood is unable to become the heir of this knowledge, and if it happen that he receive it by the tradition of words, he heareth the words from others, and it is not that knowledge which itself hath revealed itself in his soul, for this knowledge is beyond words, and beyond appellations and names.”
Source
date
unknown
c. A.D. 550
“For this the Apostle shows when he says: Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; here by the word flesh meaning mortality, and by blood mutability. He declared therefore that it is impossible for one who is mortal or mutable to inherit the kingdom of heaven. He subjoins immediately: Neither doth corruption inherit incorruption—and he repeated this, by way of showing that nothing that is corrupt can go up and enter there, for harm rather than any advantage would result. For just as we, who are far away from the sun, have not the power, should we direct our eyes to his disc, to continue doing so, but would be injured and blinded rather than profited, so would it fare with any one if, while still mortal or mutable or corruptible, he should seek to overstep the boundaries, and approach the way which leads to the kingdom of heaven, while still far off therefrom.”
Source
“Do not think that, in examples, the things compared are in all points similar, for, this I say unto you, that it is impossible for us being mortal and mutable (for it is this he means by blood and flesh), to inherit the kingdom of heaven, unless we first rise from the dead incorruptible and immortal and immutable.”

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1272
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“Here the Apostle shows by argument the difference of quality between dying bodies and rising bodies, which he had shown above by examples. Concerning this he does two things. For first he sets forth what he intends to prove; second he proves what he has set forth, at the place, as it is written, etc. He says therefore first: I said that what is sown animal shall rise spiritual, and, that this is true, namely that there is some spiritual body, I show, because if there is an animal body, there is also a spiritual one. And the Apostle does not intend to argue from this to his proposition, but he supposes this, intending to prove that very thing which he says, if there is a body, etc. Ecclus. XXXIII, 15: consider all the works of the Most High, two and two, one against one. As it is written, etc. Here he proves the proposition. His proof is this: there are two principles of the human race; one according to the life of nature, namely Adam, the other according to the life of grace, namely Christ; but animality is derived into all men from the first principle, namely Adam; therefore it is clear that much more from the second principle, namely Christ, spirituality will be derived into all men. Of this argument, first, he proves the first diversity of the principles, second the middle, namely the determination of the likeness from each of the principles, at the place, such as the earthy, etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First he shows the difference of the principles; second the order of the principles to one another, at the place, but that is not first which is spiritual, etc.; third he assigns the order of the argument, at the place, the first, etc. He sets down, therefore, first, the condition of the first principle according to the life of nature, taking the authority of Gen. II, 7. Whence he says, as it is written: the first man Adam was made, by God, into a living soul, namely with animal life, such as the soul can give, when, namely, the Lord breathed into his face the breath of life, Gen. II, 7. For the human form is called both soul and spirit. For insofar as it is directed to the care of the body, namely by vegetating, nourishing and generating, thus it is called soul; but insofar as it is directed to knowledge, namely by understanding, willing and the like, thus it is called spirit. Whence when he says the first man Adam was made into a living soul, the Apostle here means the life by which the soul serves about the body, not the Holy Spirit, as some imagine, because of the fact that it precedes and he breathed into his face the breath of life, saying this is the Holy Spirit. Second he sets down the condition of the second principle, saying but the last Adam, that is, Christ. And he is called last, because Adam brought in one state, namely of guilt, but Christ that of glory and life. Whence since after this state no other follows in this life, therefore he is called last. Is. LIII, 2 f.: we have desired him despised and the last of men. And elsewhere, namely Apoc. I, 17: I am the first and the last. And elsewhere: I am alpha and omega, etc. But he says Adam, because he was made from the nature of Adam into a living spirit. And from this, the conditions of the principles having been seen, their diversity appears, because the first man was made into a soul, the last into a spirit. But the former into a living soul only, the latter however into a living and life-giving spirit. The reason of which is: because, just as Adam obtained the perfection of his being through the soul, so also Christ obtained the perfection of his being, insofar as he is man, through the Holy Spirit. And therefore since the soul cannot give life except to its own body, therefore Adam was made into a soul, not life-giving, but only living; but Christ was made into a living and life-giving spirit, and therefore Christ had the power of giving life. Jn. I, 16: of his fullness, etc., and Jn. X, 10: I have come that they may have life and have it more abundantly. And in the creed: and in the Holy Spirit, the giver of life. But lest someone should say: if Christ was made into a life-giving spirit, why is he called last? Therefore, consequently, when he says but that is not first, etc., he shows the order of the principles. For we see in nature that in one and the same thing, the imperfect is prior to the perfect. Whence since spirituality stands to animality as the perfect to the imperfect, therefore in human nature the spiritual, which is perfect, ought not to be first, but, that order may be preserved, the imperfect ought to be first, namely that which is animal, then the perfect, namely that which is spiritual. Above ch. XIII, 10: when that which is perfect has come, etc. As Augustine says, a sign of this is that firstborn sons of old were accustomed to be animal, as Cain was born before Abel, Ishmael before Isaac, and Esau before Jacob. He assigns the reason of the said diversity, saying the first man, etc., as if he were to say: truly the first man was made into a living soul, because from the earth, Gen. II, 7: the Lord formed man from the slime of the earth, and therefore he is said to be earthy, that is, animal; the second man, namely Christ, was made into a life-giving spirit, because from heaven; because the divine nature which was united to this nature, is from heaven. And therefore he ought to be heavenly, that is, he ought to have such perfection as befits one coming from heaven, namely spiritual perfection. Jn. III, 31: he who comes from heaven is above all. But he says the first man is from the earth, according to the manner of speaking, by which things are said to be of that from which the first part is in their coming to be, just as a knife is said to be of iron because the first part from which the knife comes is iron. And because the first part from which Adam was made, is earth, therefore he is said to be from the earth. The second man is said to be from heaven, not because he brought his body from heaven, since he took it from the earth, namely from the body of the blessed virgin, but because the divinity (which is united to human nature) came from heaven, which was prior to the body of Christ. Thus, therefore, the diversity of the principles is clear, which was the major proposition of the principal argument. Consequently when he says such as the earthy, etc., he shows the derivation of the likeness of these principles from each, and first in common, second he divides it through its parts, at the place, therefore as we have borne, etc. He says therefore such as the earthy, etc., as if he were to say: the first man, because he was earthy and mortal, therefore it was derived that all should be both earthy and mortal. Above the same v. 22: and as in Adam all die. Zach. XIII, 5: Adam is my example, etc. But because the second man was heavenly, that is, spiritual and immortal, therefore we shall all be both immortal and spiritual. Rom. VI, 5: but we have been made complanted in the likeness, etc. Therefore as we have borne, etc. Here he concludes how in particular we ought to be conformed to the man, namely the heavenly one. Now we can be conformed to the heavenly one in two ways, namely in the life of grace and of glory, and one is the way to the other: because without the life of grace one does not arrive at the life of glory. And therefore he says as we have borne, etc., that is, as long as we were sinners, in us was the likeness of Adam. II Reg. VII, 19: this is the law of Adam, Lord God, etc. That therefore we may be able to be heavenly, that is, to arrive at the life of glory, let us bear the image of the heavenly one, through the life of grace. Col. III, 9 f.: putting off the old man, put on the new man, namely Christ. Rom. VIII, 29: whom he foreknew and predestined to be conformed, etc. Thus therefore we ought to be conformed to the heavenly one in the life of grace, because otherwise we shall not arrive at the life of glory. And this is what he says but this I say, brothers, as if he were to say: unless you live, namely the life of grace, you will not be able to arrive at the kingdom of God, namely the life of glory, because flesh and blood shall not possess the kingdom of God. This indeed is not to be understood, as certain heretics say, that flesh and blood will not rise according to substance, but that the whole body will be turned either into spirit, or into air: which is heretical and false; for the Apostle says that he will conform our body to the body of his glory. Whence since Christ after the resurrection had flesh and blood, as is said Lk. last: handle and see, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones, etc., it is clear that we too in the resurrection shall have flesh and blood. Flesh and blood is not to be understood, that is, the substance of flesh and blood, shall not possess the kingdom of God, but flesh and blood, that is, those giving effort to flesh and blood, namely men given over to vices and pleasures, shall not possess the kingdom of God. And thus flesh is taken, that is, man living carnally, Rom. VIII, 9: but you are not in the flesh, etc. Or: flesh and blood, that is, the works of flesh and blood shall not possess the kingdom of God, which is against the Jews and Saracens, who imagine that after the resurrection they will have wives, rivers of honey and milk. Or: flesh and blood, that is, the corruption of flesh and blood, shall not possess the kingdom of God, that is, after the resurrection, the body will not be subjected to the corruption of flesh and blood, according to which man lives. Whence, and according to this, he adds neither shall corruption possess incorruption, that is, neither shall the corruption of mortality, which is expressed here by the name of flesh, possess incorruption, that is, the incorruptible kingdom of God, because we shall rise in glory. Rom. VIII, 21: the creature itself shall be freed from the bondage of corruption, etc.”

Reformation

c. 1500 – 1650
1637
A.D.
1567–1637
“Now this I say, brethren , that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. (1.) Origen and Euthymius explain this as follows, that in heaven the blessed will not have a body of flesh but an etherial body. But thi^is a manifest error, and opposed to ver. 53, as we shall see. (2.) Theophylact and Ambrose say that the flesh, or the works of the THE GENERAL RESURRECTION 397 flesh, will not inherit the kingdom of God. But (i.) The natural meaning is that natural and corruptible flesh and blood, such as the earthly Adam had and such as we have in this life, will not inherit the kingdom of God. What the Apostle, in vers. 46, 47, called natural and earthly, he here calls flesh and blood. He merely wishes to point out that in heaven the body will not be as here, natural and earthly, but spiritual and heavenly, in the sense that I have explained (ver. 47). This is why he adds, “neither doth corruption,” *.*., corruptible flesh, “ inherit incorruption.” Cf. Theodoret, Theophylact, Ambrose. (2.) The Apostle leaves it to be collected from t{iese words that in heaven there will be no carnal and animal life, consisting in the use of food and generation of children, such as the Jews and Mahometans look for at the resurrection. (3.) He implies that those who are striving for the kingdom of God ought not to live after the flesh, but after the Spirit of Christ, that so they may bear the image, not of the earthly and carnal Adam, but of the heavenly and spiritual Christ ; then they will merit to reign with Christ, and to live a life of bliss in heaven. “ Flesh ”often stands for the corruption of the flesh. Cf. Augustine { Ep . 146 ad Consentium)”
Source

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“For this corruptible must put on incorruption,.... The apostle returns to what he had before asserted, concerning the necessity of an alteration in the qualities of bodies, in order to the enjoyment of the heavenly state; showing, that the selfsame body the saints now have, for he seems to point with his finger to his own, and which are incorruptible ones, shall and must be clothed with incorruption: and this mortal must put on immortality; the body that now is mortal, must become immortal; it must put off its rags of mortality, and be clothed with the shining robes of immortality; and which must be done, either by first dying, and then rising from the dead; or by undergoing alive a quick and sudden change, which will at once remove all corruption and mortality; see: "He answered and said unto me, These be they that have put off the mortal clothing, and put on the immortal, and have confessed the name of God: now are they crowned, and receive palms.'' (2 Esdras 2:45)”
Source
1832
A.D.
Adam Clarke Methodist
1762–1832
“Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom - This is a Hebrew periphrasis for man, and man in his present state of infirmity and decay. Man, in his present state, cannot inherit the kingdom of God; his nature is not suited to that place; he could not, in his present weak state, endure an exceeding great and eternal weight of glory. Therefore, it is necessary that he should die, or be changed; that he should have a celestial body suited to the celestial state. The apostle is certainly not speaking of flesh and blood in a moral sense, to signify corruption of mind and heart; but in a natural sense; as such, flesh and blood cannot inherit glory, for the reasons already assigned.”
Source
1871
A.D.
1871
“(See on Co1 15:37; Co1 15:39). "Flesh and blood" of the same animal and corruptible nature as our present (Co1 15:44) animal-souled bodies, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Therefore the believer acquiesces gladly in the unrepealed sentence of the holy law, which appoints the death of the present body as the necessary preliminary to the resurrection body of glory. Hence he "dies daily" to the flesh and to the world, as the necessary condition to his regeneration here and hereafter (Joh 3:6; Gal 2:20). As the being born of the flesh constitutes a child of Adam, so the being born of the Spirit constitutes a child of God. cannot--Not merely is the change of body possible, but it is necessary. The spirit extracted from the dregs of wine does not so much differ from them, as the glorified man does from the mortal man [BENGEL] of mere animal flesh and blood (Gal 1:16). The resurrection body will be still a body though spiritual, and substantially retaining the personal identity; as is proved by Luk 24:39; Joh 20:27, compared with Phi 3:21. the kingdom of God--which is not at all merely animal, but altogether spiritual. Corruption doth not inherit, though it is the way to, incorruption (Co1 15:36, Co1 15:52-53).”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.