And the seven all took her in like manner and did not leave issue. Last of all the woman also died.
και ελαβον αυτην οι επτα και ουκ αφηκαν σπερμα εσχατη παντων απεθανεν και η γυνη
6 Church Fathers comment on this verse
In their dishonesty, these individuals create a narrative designed to undermine the truth of the Resurrection. They fabricate a story about events that never transpired and are impossible. Their claim that seven husbands had the same wife sequentially is a tactic they devised to ridicule the concept of the Resurrection even further.
When the Pharisees were rendered speechless by this response, the Sadducees, part of the same Sanhedrin, took pleasure in their embarrassment and quickly posed a question regarding the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, a belief they had dismissed due to the absurd implications they perceived. Just as the Lord had expressed His condemnation towards the Pharisees, He addressed the Sadducees by challenging the very foundation of their argument. They cited the case of a woman who had been married to seven brothers according to human law. The Lord demonstrated to the Sadducees that their misunderstanding was rooted in two key failures: first, they did not grasp the Scriptures, and second, they did not comprehend the all-powerful nature of God.
Had they interpreted the texts they accepted—not just their literal meaning but also their intended spirit—they would have recognized the essential link between the faith detailed in those writings and the belief in the eternal existence of humanity. Moreover, if they had appreciated God’s omnipotence, they would not imagine that human life after death mirrors the current existence in its forms and relations; rather, they would acknowledge that God could bestow upon humanity a transformed and glorified existence. The nature of this future life would align with that of the divine beings. To support this idea, He referred to the frequent declarations found in the writings of Moses, specifically the acknowledgment of God as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. How could God have such an intimate relationship with these revered individuals, bestowing upon them immense significance and dignity by being known as their God, if they were merely ephemeral beings without eternal purpose?
The collaboration between the Sadducees and the Pharisees is not clearly indicated in the Gospel narratives. It is possible that, observing how Jesus Christ had embarrassed the Pharisees and taking pleasure in it, they desired that He would also mock the Pharisees' faith in the resurrection of the dead. This belief entailed the notion that, upon the arrival of the Messiah, all Israelites would rise again and dwell in the holy land. At the very least, Jesus’ response delighted the scribes (Luke 39), and the Sadducees’ defeat through His answer fortified the Pharisees (Matthew 34).
The Sadducees held that due to the law of marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-6), which permits a woman to have multiple husbands during her lifetime, the concept of life after resurrection (as understood by the Pharisees) was implausible. Consequently, they felt it necessary to either deem this law unreasonable or reject the possibility of resurrection altogether; since the law instituted by God could not be seen as flawed, they concluded that it affirmed the absence of resurrection from the dead.
Their objection sprang from what they perceived as the Pharisees’ overly physical conception of life following resurrection. In response, Jesus Christ declared that both the Sadducees and the Pharisees “do not know the Scriptures,” and He clarifies their misunderstanding by stating that after resurrection “they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 30). Since the Sadducees’ argument relied on the belief that a decayed body could not rise, the Lord pointed out that they were unaware of “the power of God,” and He evidenced from the Scriptures (Exodus 3:6) that life continues beyond the grave, affirming the promise of resurrection for the dead.
The Sadducees engaged in a continual debate with the Pharisees regarding the resurrection of the dead. They sought to demonstrate that the writings of Moses do not affirm the immortality of souls and that certain Jewish laws contradict the doctrine of resurrection. One such law pertains to a childless widow, who, upon her husband's death, is required to marry his brother to ensure her deceased husband's lineage continues. In reference to this Mosaic law, they posed a scenario: "There were seven brothers; the eldest married but died without children. The second brother married her, also died childless, followed by the third, fourth, and so on, until all seven brothers had died without leaving any offspring. Finally, the woman herself died.
If a resurrection of the dead were to occur, whose wife would this woman be in the resurrection, considering she had seven husbands? It would be absurd for her to be the wife of all or of none. Such a revered and divinely inspired lawgiver as Moses would not permit absurdities in his statutes. Therefore, according to Moses' teachings, one must conclude that resurrection does not exist."
The primary followers of Christ thus far had been the Pharisees. The alternative influential faction, the Sadducees, comprised the affluent and high-ranking leaders, who had largely remained uninvolved in the ongoing discourse and had treated Christ with the disdain typically reserved for those they viewed as simple-minded Galileans. However, with the Galilean Teacher gaining widespread recognition throughout Jerusalem and having captivated the Pharisees with His remarkable teachings, the Sadducees resolved to engage with Him and challenge His understanding of the law and Jewish doctrine. They crafted a particularly intricate inquiry centered on a topic where they openly displayed their skepticism: the afterlife and resurrection.
For their illustration, they selected a hypothetical scenario from rabbinic debate involving a woman who married seven brothers sequentially, each of whom died without children, seeking to determine which one she would join in resurrection. This scenario, though fictional, was plausible given the stipulations of the law, which mandated that a brother must marry his deceased sibling's widow to carry on his family line, recognizing the firstborn from this union as the deceased's child. The Sadducees, who lacked faith in the afterlife and resurrection— assuming that Jesus held similar views to the Pharisees who opposed them— anticipated deriving enjoyment from confounding Him with their perplexing question, thereby mocking both Him and the doctrine of resurrection itself. While some rabbis entertained more elevated notions regarding the afterlife, the majority clung to straightforward, even crude interpretations. They believed resurrection involved a return not only to physical form but also to previous desires and inclinations; the resurrected would partake in eating, drinking, and marriage, even rising in the same attire worn in life, retaining their identifiable attributes and imperfections, so people could recognize them. Even the Sadducees' posed question found parallels among the Rabbis, who suggested that "a woman who has been married to two husbands in this world will be given to the first in the world to come." With these earthly and sensual concepts guiding them, coupled with their outright denial of resurrection—a doctrine they believed was absent from the Mosaic Pentateuch that they accepted—they approached the Savior with their inquiry.
Mark's narrative of how the Lord confronted the Sadducees regarding the resurrection closely mirrors that of Matthew (see Matt. 23:23-32, etc.). In this account, Mark echoes Matthew's wording nearly verbatim (refer to Matt. 23:23-32). The phrase "By these things ye are led astray" carries a more forceful tone than in the Gospel of Matthew, effectively highlighting the superficiality and folly of the Sadducees' grasp of profound, divinely inspired truths. Are you truly misled by this trivial arrogance and ignorance, which you mistake for deep insight? And so forth.
Greek text, 12 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS