And last of all the woman died also.
υστερον δε παντων απεθανεν και η γυνη
8 Church Fathers comment on this verse
Individuals who rejected the notion of the resurrection of the dead and asserted that the soul ceases to exist alongside the body created an imaginative narrative to highlight the misconceptions of those who uphold the belief in the resurrection. It is possible that events of this nature have indeed occurred within their time.
Seven are presented to complicate the inquiry further. The Sadducees aimed to challenge Him by questioning whether He would assert the existence of one or seven, suggesting that if marriages were to occur again, there would inevitably be the birth and upbringing of children, the acquisition of property, afflictions, conflicts, sickness, and death—essentially all the trials we experience in this earthly existence, implying that the afterlife would not differ from our present reality. If it remains unchanged, what then is the purpose of the resurrection? Thus, they concluded, resurrection cannot exist. But who then is Christ?
(The wife symbolizes human nature, while the seven brothers represent the divine laws bestowed upon her throughout time to cultivate the fruits of righteousness; despite her interactions with them as if they were husbands, she bore no true fruit from any. The initial law was given to Adam in the garden, the second was given to him outside the garden as a consequence of sin, the third to Noah concerning the ark, the fourth to Abraham about circumcision, the fifth regarding the sacrifice of Isaac, the sixth to Moses, and the seventh through the prophets. Malevolent spirits, urging the rejection of resurrection, cunningly pose questions through various thoughts: if the dead are to rise again, which of these seven laws will govern human nature? Whichever we choose, they would argue that it indicates life would again be devoid of true purpose, burdened by the same afflictions as before. However, the genuine and redemptive message of godliness quiets such falsehoods, affirming that after resurrection, a new life awaits. Whether one accepts the notion of seven thousand years of the current world or the seven epochs of human existence, one will grasp the intent correctly. She will not belong to any of them after resurrection, for then all will cease, and she will be aligned with a new and eternal age, the eighth.)
When the Pharisees were rendered speechless by this response, the Sadducees from the same Sanhedrin, delighted by the Pharisees' embarrassment, quickly brought forth a question regarding the doctrine of resurrection, which they had dismissed due to the absurd conclusions they believed followed from it. Just as the Lord had condemned the Pharisees, He addressed their misconceptions, uprooting the very foundation of their false beliefs. They referenced the case of a woman who had been married to seven brothers under the law of levirate marriage. The Lord demonstrated to the Sadducees that their error arose from (1) a lack of understanding of the Scriptures and (2) a failure to recognize the power of God.
Had they fully comprehended even the texts they accepted—not just their literal meaning but also their deeper spiritual implications—they would have seen the essential relationship between the faith conveyed in those writings and the belief in the eternal existence of the individual. Moreover, if they grasped the omnipotent nature of God, they would not limit the future existence of humanity to a mere replica of the present state, but would acknowledge that God can bestow upon human existence a transformed and glorified essence. He explained that the future life will align with that of the higher, spiritual beings. To support this notion, He referenced the frequent declarations in the writings of Moses regarding God as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. How could God establish such a profound bond with these individuals, granting them such significance and dignity that He identifies as their God, if they were merely temporary beings rather than destined for eternal life?
The collaboration of the Sadducees with the Pharisees in this instance is not explicitly shown in the Gospel narratives. It is possible that, upon witnessing Jesus Christ's effective rebuke of the Pharisees, they found joy in it and sought to accompany Him in mocking the Pharisees’ conviction in the resurrection of the dead. The Pharisees believed that with the arrival of the Messiah, all Israelites would rise again to dwell in the holy land. Jesus’ response seemed to please the scribes (Luke 39), while the Sadducees' embarrassment brought encouragement to the Pharisees (Matthew 34).
The Sadducees argued that, according to the law of levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-6), whereby a woman can marry several husbands in her lifetime, the resurrection life envisioned by the Pharisees appears implausible. Thus, one must either deem this law unreasonable or deny the possibility of resurrection. However, as the law is divinely instituted, it cannot be deemed unreasonable; therefore, they believe it implies that resurrection does not occur. Their objection stemmed from the Pharisees’ crude and materialistic understanding of life after resurrection. In response, Jesus indicates that both the Sadducees and Pharisees “do not know the Scriptures,” clarifying that in the resurrection, “they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 30). Since their challenge was rooted in the belief that a decayed body cannot rise again, Christ asserts that the Sadducees do not understand “the power of God” and cites Scripture (Exodus 3:6) to demonstrate that life extends beyond the grave, supporting the reality of resurrection.
Citing the Mosaic law, they posed the following scenario: “There were seven brothers; the first married a woman but passed away without leaving any children. His brother then took her as his wife, but he too died childless. The third brother married her, and this continued with all seven brothers, each of them dying without heirs. Eventually, the woman herself died. Therefore, in the event of a resurrection, to which of these brothers will she belong as a wife? After all, she had seven husbands! It would be inconceivable for her to be recognized as the wife of all or none, a notion that seems illogical. Such a revered and divinely inspired figure as Moses would not permit such contradictions within his statutes. Thus, based on Moses’ teachings, it follows that there is no resurrection of the dead.”
The primary followers of Christ had been the Pharisees, while the other prominent group, the Sadducees, comprised the affluent social classes and religious leaders. This latter faction had largely remained uninvolved in the matters surrounding Christ and had treated Him with the disdain typical of their views towards the less educated Galileans. However, as the teachings of the Galilean Rabbi gained traction throughout Jerusalem, and they witnessed the remarkable replies that had impressed the Pharisees, the Sadducees resolved to explore His insights further and challenge Him on His understanding of the law and Jewish theology.
To achieve this, they crafted a challenging, hypothetical question that revolved around a subject in which they openly expressed skepticism—the concepts of eternal life and resurrection. They drew upon rabbinic argumentation for their example, presenting a case of a woman who married seven brothers in succession, each of whom died without leaving children, and inquired as to which of them she would be joined to in the resurrection. This scenario, though speculative, was grounded in the law, which mandated that if a husband died childless, his brother was obligated to marry his widow to ensure the continuation of his lineage. The firstborn son from this union would legally be regarded as the son of the deceased. The Sadducees, who themselves did not believe in the resurrection and assumed that Jesus shared similar views as the Pharisees—the very group they sought to confound—looked forward to the opportunity to embarrass Him and mock the doctrine of resurrection with their intricate questions. Some rabbis possessed more refined beliefs regarding the afterlife, but the majority clung to rather crude perceptions. They imagined resurrection as a restoration not only to one’s original body but also to former appetites and desires; resurrected individuals would eat, drink, marry, and would be restored in the same attire as in life, retaining their physical characteristics and imperfections so that they would be recognizable. Even the question posed by the Sadducees had previously been addressed by the Rabbis with the belief that “a woman who has been married to two husbands in this world will be given to the first in the world to come.” Thus, bringing their crude, sensual ideas, and their outright denial of resurrection—which they contended was absent from the Mosaic law—they approached the Savior with their inquiry.
The Sadducees approached the Savior with a bizarre tale, not immediately discussing the resurrection but instead presenting an unusual scenario meant to confuse Him and challenge both the belief in resurrection and the understanding of it as taught by Him. They referenced the case of seven brothers, all married to the same woman, drawing on the teachings of Moses to support their narrative, though I believe their story was entirely fabricated. The logic of their account falters; if the first two husbands died, the third would be disinclined to marry her, knowing the fate of his predecessors. Following this reasoning, it is likely that the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh brothers wouldn't have dared to take her as their wife either, fearing the same tragic outcome.
Such apprehensions were common among the Jews. The Sadducees fabricated a situation where one woman had seven spouses in order to mock the resurrection doctrine even further, believing this would leave the Savior with no response. Through their appeal to Mosaic law, they sought to imply that the concept of resurrection clashed with this divinely inspired law, which they viewed as a standard for faith.
Numerous temptations of this nature were laid out for Him, yet the Lord, in His boundless wisdom, overcame them with a spirit of love and compassion. Following the dismissal of the Pharisees, fresh challengers approached Jesus Christ—the Sadducees, albeit with less malevolence. They consistently stood against the superstitious fervor of the Pharisees, who denied the immortality of souls and proclaimed the absence of resurrection, angels, or spirits (Acts 23:8). Taking advantage of their rivals' disgrace and hoping to elevate themselves in the public's view, they boldly posed to the Divine Teacher a question that served as a central argument against the immortality of souls and the resurrection of the dead in their confrontations with the Pharisees.
The Pharisees, holding a corporeal perspective of the afterlife similar to the current existence, found themselves unable to answer this query. Indeed, at first glance, a particularly meticulous scribe might find the reasoning of the Sadducees compelling, although, as St. John Chrysostom notes, it was founded upon “some fable, an unprecedented incident.” By referencing the Mosaic Law regarding levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-10; Genesis 38:8), the Sadducees aimed to grant their fabricated scenario an appearance of credibility and to bestow an illusion of strength upon their conclusion. Like the Pharisees, they initiated their dialogue with the Lord with the outward expressions of respect: “Teacher, Moses wrote unto us, saying, If any brother die, and leave his wife, but leave no children, let his brother understand his wife, and raise up seed to his brother. There are seven brethren; and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed. And the second took her, and died, neither left he any seed: and the third likewise; and the seven had her, and left no seed: and last of all the woman died also. In the resurrection, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife.” The Pharisees could have replied that the woman would remain the wife of her first husband after the resurrection; however, this resolution would not address all the complexities of the dilemma, leaving the claims of the other legitimate husbands unresolved. The Sadducees likely believed that the Savior endorsed the Pharisaical view of immortality, thus anticipating that their dilemma would present Him with significant difficulty. In their estimation, He would face one of two options: either to permit polygamy, which would contradict the Law of Moses, or to deny the resurrection of the dead—and they were confident of their impending victory.
Greek text, 6 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS