And there came to him some of the Sadducees, who deny that there is any resurrection: and they asked him,
προσελθοντες δε τινες των σαδδουκαιων οι αντιλεγοντες αναστασιν μη ειναι επηρωτησαν αυτον
11 Church Fathers comment on this verse
The Sadducees lacked faith in the teaching of the resurrection, resting on a fragile basis. Their assumption that there would be physical existence following the resurrection was, consequently, misguided. Thus, they mock the concept of resurrection as absurd and conjure a genuinely foolish tale.
Ignorance often pairs with foolishness, leading individuals to give undue weight to their own flawed notions. Those afflicted by this condition tend to inflate their self-importance, believing they possess an indisputable understanding. They appear to overlook the wisdom of Solomon, who cautions, ‘Be not wise in your own eyes,’ which encourages reliance on a higher discernment, and echoes the sentiment that ‘Wisdom untried goes astray.’ We may not necessarily hold a correct view of every doctrine we claim to believe; rather, we might stray from the truth and fall into beliefs that are not beneficial for us. It is essential that we, with a fair and open mind, reject emotional biases and pursue the truth earnestly.
However, the misguided Sadducees did not regard such reflections with much seriousness. This Jewish sect had specific beliefs about the resurrection of the dead, as clarified by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles: ‘For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection of either angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess all things.’
The Sadducees, who deny the existence of resurrection (Matt. 22: 23), are referred to as Sadducees, meaning 'righteous'. They assert that they do not worship God for the sake of rewards and view resurrection as a form of compensation. According to their own claims, they express a genuine love for God that is unselfish.
If someone has a brother who passes away... (Luke 20:28). By posing this question, the Sadducees, the most shrewd faction of the Jewish people, sought to test the Lord. In this instance, their misinterpretation is decisively countered, and the issue of marital fidelity, which they themselves introduced, is intriguingly used against them. In their example, the woman is essentially forced to marry, against her own desires, so that her brother might fulfill the duty to provide offspring for her deceased sibling (see Deuteronomy 25:5-10). This illustrates that the letter can bring death (2 Cor. 3:6), acting as a facilitator of vices, while only the Spirit can genuinely teach the meaning of chastity.
Consider whether the woman with seven husbands could symbolize a synagogue. Jesus pointed out to the Samaritan woman that she had had five husbands (John 4:18), as the Samaritans adhered only to the five books of Moses. In contrast, the Jewish people acknowledged not just the Pentateuch but also the Book of Joshua and the Book of Judges. This woman would be unable to reunite with any of her husbands in the resurrection, for she has distorted the spiritual commandment with her earthly mindset. The Old Testament mandate does not merely pertain to a biological brother restoring his deceased brother's lineage but refers to the Brother who takes the essence of God-pleasing wisdom from the dead Jewish nation to Himself as His bride and regenerates the seed through the apostles. They remained in the womb of the synagogue as unborn children of a deceased people, but through the grace of God, they were blessed with new life.
The synagogue often appears adorned, symbolizing a matrimony since it is the mother of believers. However, at times, she is forsaken (cf. Is. 50:1; Jer. 3:1) because she is also the mother of those who do not believe. To her, the earthly law has met its end so that the spiritual law may prevail. If the holy people of God cherish the seven books of the law with a spousal affection, and adhere to them as though they were wedded commands, they will receive communion with the Bridegroom in the Resurrection, enriched with divine gifts and unburdened by earthly entanglements.
In this section of the Gospel according to Matthew, one should seek a comprehensive understanding of the text.
The news of the Pharisees’ disgrace quickly reached the scribes, who were always abundant in the temple. For the Sadducees, this appeared to be an opportune moment to showcase their own strength and to diminish the pride of the Pharisees, their enduring adversaries, by challenging Jesus Christ. They may have hoped to ascertain whether Jesus, deeply wronged by the Pharisees, would lean towards their teachings or perhaps show an inclination towards Sadducee beliefs; if so, this might have prompted them to transform their animosity into favor or at least pause their opposition. This expectation might have stemmed from the observation that, while Jesus regularly reproached the Pharisees, He criticized the Sadducees less frequently.
Regardless of the Sadducees’ intentions, their challenge no longer posed a personal threat to Jesus; they aimed to contend through intellectual means alone. The debate centered on a topic that was perpetually contested between the Pharisees and the Sadducees—the resurrection of the dead. Jesus consistently and openly proclaimed the immortality of the human soul and the inevitability of resurrection for all the deceased. To counter this profound truth, the Sadducees presented their most formidable objections, which they likely believed were insurmountable in their arguments against the Pharisees. Thus, as individuals with no hidden, malicious intentions towards Jesus, they approached the discussion directly.
When the Pharisees were left speechless by His response, the Sadducees from the same Sanhedrin, delighted by their embarrassment, quickly posed a question to Him about the teaching of the resurrection of the dead, which they had dismissed due to the absurd conclusions they believed would follow. Just as He had done in His pronouncements against the Pharisees, the Lord addressed the fundamental error of their beliefs. They cited the case of a woman who had been married to seven brothers according to the law of marriage. The Lord made it clear to the Sadducees that their misunderstanding arose from two key issues: (1) their lack of comprehension of the Scriptures, and (2) their failure to grasp the limitless power of God.
Had they properly understood at least those texts they accept—not merely in their literal sense but also in their intended significance—they would have recognized the essential link between the religious truths within them and the belief in the everlasting existence of the individual. Furthermore, had they acknowledged God's omnipotence, they would not conclude that human existence would merely mirror the present life, but rather affirm that God is capable of bestowing upon human existence a transformed and glorified state. He then revealed that the life to come must align with the existence of the celestial beings. To support this notion, He referred to the familiar phrases found in the writings of Moses, describing God as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It poses a profound question: how could God maintain such an intimate relationship with these significant figures, conferring upon them such profound worth and dignity that He would be known as their God, if they were merely fleeting entities and not destined for eternity?
The Gospel narratives do not clearly indicate that the Sadducees collaborated with the Pharisees in this instance. It is possible that the Sadducees, witnessing the embarrassment caused to the Pharisees by Christ, found delight in it and aimed for Him to also mock the Pharisees' beliefs regarding the resurrection of the dead. This belief held that all Israelites would be raised to life in the holy land upon the Messiah's arrival. The response of Jesus was certainly well-received by the scribes, as noted in Luke 39, and simultaneously, the defeat of the Sadducees by His answer bolstered the Pharisees, as illustrated in Matthew 34.
The Sadducees contended that the law of levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-6), which permits a woman to have multiple husbands throughout her life, makes the Pharisees' concept of resurrection life implausible. Hence, they suggested that one must regard this law as unreasonable or deny the existence of resurrection. Since the divinely established law cannot be deemed unreasonable, it would imply that there is no resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees' objection stemmed from a materialistic understanding of life after resurrection. In response, Jesus pointed out that they, along with the Pharisees, do not understand the Scriptures, asserting that after the resurrection, individuals “neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 30). Because the Sadducees' challenge was rooted in the belief that a decayed mortal body cannot rise, the Lord declared that they are unaware of “the power of God” and demonstrated through Scripture (Exodus 3:6) that life exists beyond death, affirming that there will indeed be a resurrection of the dead.
Jesus’ response to the Sadducees regarding resurrection and eternal life was imminent. After the debate about the tax imposed by Caesar concluded, the Herodians and the deceitful disciples of the Pharisees left in disgrace. In accordance with their prior arrangements, some Sadducees approached Jesus. This group, a sect within Judaism, denied the existence of resurrection and the concept of everlasting life. They generally exhibited a lack of enthusiasm for spiritual matters, yet this did not inhibit their roles as priests and even high priests.
The Sadducees, deriving their name from the Hebrew word for justice, "tzedakah," or possibly from Sadok, a rabbi who lived around 260 years before Christ and was a student of Antigonus, comprised mainly of priests in their early formation. Antigonus taught that one should serve God selflessly, without the expectation of reward or out of fear of punishment after death. However, Sadok misinterpreted this teaching, concluding that there were no rewards for the pious or penalties for the wicked and that human existence ended with physical death, thus denying resurrection and an afterlife. The Sadducees believed that human choices dictated earthly matters, independent of divine sovereignty.
Held chiefly by those in positions of priestly authority, the Sadducees acknowledged the Hebrew Scriptures solely because adherence to rites yielded them significant worldly advantages. For instance, the family of Annas established a facility on the Mount of Olives for breeding and selling sacrificial doves. By exploiting their authority, the high priests of this lineage increased the instances where dove sacrifices were compulsory and sold a pair of doves for a gold denarius. These hypocrites, driven by lascivious desires and greed, viewed religion merely as a vehicle for financial gain, although they endeavored to mask their true intentions.
The primary associates of Christ had previously been the Pharisees. The other influential group, the Sadducees, representing the affluent social class and religious leaders, had largely remained uninvolved in the events surrounding Christ, treating Him with the disdain often reserved for the less informed Galileans. However, as the Galilean Teacher’s teachings began to resonate throughout Jerusalem, and following reports of the remarkable insights He had shared with the Pharisees, the Sadducees resolved to investigate this preacher further and challenge Him on His understanding of the law and Jewish theology. To achieve this, they formulated a particularly intricate question that addressed their overt skepticism regarding the resurrection and the afterlife.
The narrative provided by Luke concerning the inquiry posed by the Sadducees and the Lord's response mirrors closely that of the first two Evangelists, albeit with some variations in phrasing. This can be compared to Matthew 22:23-33 and Mark 12:18-27. Luke's account reflects a similarity in content, with certain terms in the answer substituted with alternatives of related meaning. In this context, it's mentioned that "Moses showed when he called," indicating that he indeed proclaimed the words of Jehovah as communicated to him at the Tabernacle, where God identifies Himself as the deity of the patriarchs of the Jewish nation. Moses received the laws you adhere to following a divine revelation, designating God as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
The phrase "Some of the scribes" likely does not refer to Sadducees, who would scarcely allow themselves to publicly commend the Lord for His astute reply. Instead, it is plausible that these individuals were Pharisees, who, despite having conspired against the Lord alongside the Sadducees, may have found satisfaction in witnessing their rivals brought to disgrace, as noted in Matthew 22:34 ff. Mark records that a scribe who questioned the Lord subsequently recognized the wisdom in His rebuttal to the Sadducees (Mark 12:23) and later voiced his approval (Mark 12:32).
It is possible that this particular scribe, alongside others who shared this perspective, approached the Lord after His response to the Sadducees, affirming, "Master, thou hast said well." The Lord’s adept use of Scripture to delineate the truth of the resurrection of the dead was so compelling that even His opponents honored Him on that occasion (Luke 20:40-44).
Furthermore, the Lord’s inquiry concerning the Messiah—regarding whose son He is—appears in an identical fashion in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark; see Matthew 22:41-46 and Mark 12:35-37. The phrase "They dared not ask Him" indicates that after the Sadducees were silenced, a scribe approached Him to inquire about the greatest commandment in the law (Matthew 22:35-40, Mark 12:28-34). Both Matthew and Mark note that subsequent to this discussion, no one dared to pose another question. Although Luke omits the dialogue concerning the greatest commandment, his assertion that they did not question the Lord stems from His own initiative to inquire about the identity of the Messiah, placing this dialogue right after His response regarding the resurrection.
The query "How then is He Son unto him?" is recorded, but Luke does not comment on the reaction of His audience to the Lord's question. This gap is filled by Matthew and Mark, with Matthew indicating that no one could respond to Him, and Mark asserting that the crowd was captivated by His teachings.
Passages read together with this verse.
Greek text, 12 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS