corner graphic   Hi,    
ver. 2.0.20.01.22
Finding the new version too difficult to understand? Go to classic.studylight.org/

Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary

Matthew 22:23

On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him,

Adam Clarke Commentary

The same day - Malice is ever active; let it be defeated ever so often, it returns to the charge. Jesus and his Gospel give no quarter to vice; the vicious will give no quarter to him or it.

The Sadducees - For an account of these see on Matthew 16:1; (note).


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.

Bibliography
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "The Adam Clarke Commentary". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/matthew-22.html. 1832.

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible

On that day there came to him Sadducees, they that say that there is no resurrection: and they asked him ...

The Sadducees were the sophisticated materialists of their day, relatively few in number, but holding most of the important offices of the Jewish system. They despised spiritual things, especially anything bordering on the supernatural, and were thoroughly detested and hated by the Pharisees who made common cause with them only in opposition to Christ. They too had a question for Jesus.


Copyright Statement
James Burton Coffman Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.

Bibliography
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bcc/matthew-22.html. Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

These understanding that the former had not succeeded, came with a knotty question, with which they had often puzzled the Pharisees, and hoped they should nonplus Christ with it, showing the absurdity of the doctrine of the resurrection, an article which they denied; as it follows,

which say, that there is no resurrection of the dead: they denied that there were angels and spirits, and the immortality of the soul; they affirmed, that the soul died with the body, and that there was no future state: the rise of this sect, and of these notions of their's, was this, as the Jews relateF23Abot R. Nathan, c. 5. fol. 3. 1. .

"Antigonus, a man of Socho, used to say, be not as servants, that serve their master on account of receiving a reward, but be as servants that serve their master, not on account of receiving a reward; and let the fear of heaven (God) be upon you, so that your reward may be double in the world to come: this man had two disciples, who altered his words, and taught the disciples, and the disciples their disciples, and they stood and narrowly examined them, and said, what did our fathers see, to say this thing? Is it possible, that a labourer should work all day, and not take his reward at evening? But if our fathers had known that there is another world, and that there is תהיית המתים, "a resurrection of the dead", they would not have said thus: they stood and separated from the law, and of them there were two parties, the Sadducees and Baithusites; the Sadducees on account of Sadoc, and the Baithusites on account of Baithus.'

The Syriac version reads, "and they said" and the Ethiopic version also, "saying, there is no resurrection of the dead"; taking the sense to be, that they at this time declared their sense of this doctrine, and according to a settled notion of their's, affirmed before Christ, that there was no such thing; that never any was raised from the dead, nor never will; and they were desirous of entering into a controversy with him about it:

and asked him; put the following question to him, in order to expose the weakness and absurdity of such a doctrine.


Copyright Statement
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernised and adapted for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rightes Reserved, Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855

Bibliography
Gill, John. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/matthew-22.html. 1999.

Geneva Study Bible

6 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,

(6) Christ affirms the resurrection of the flesh, as opposed to the Sadducees.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/gsb/matthew-22.html. 1599-1645.

John Lightfoot's Commentary on the Gospels

23. The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,

[The Sadducees, who say that there is no resurrection.] "The Sadducees cavil, and say, The cloud faileth and passeth away; so he that goeth down to the grave doth not return." Just after the same rate of arguing as they use that deny infant baptism; because, forsooth, in the law there is no express mention of the resurrection. Above, we suspected that the Sadducees were Herodians, that is to say, courtiers: but these here mentioned were of a more inferior sort.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Lightfoot, John. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "John Lightfoot Commentary on the Gospels". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jlc/matthew-22.html. 1675.

People's New Testament

The same day came the Sadducees. See note on Matthew 3:7. They were materialists.

Who say there is no resurrection. They denied the immortality of the soul. See Acts 23:8.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website.
Original work done by Ernie Stefanik. First published online in 1996 at The Restoration Movement Pages.

Bibliography
Johnson, Barton W. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "People's New Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pnt/matthew-22.html. 1891.

Wesley's Explanatory Notes

The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,

Mark 12:18.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website.

Bibliography
Wesley, John. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wen/matthew-22.html. 1765.

The Fourfold Gospel

On that day there came to him Sadducees1, they that say that there is no resurrection: and they asked him,
    JEWISH RULERS SEEK TO ENSNARE JESUS. (Court of the Temple. Tuesday, April 4, A.D. 30.) B. SADDUCEES ASK ABOUT THE RESURRECTION. Matthew 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-39

  1. Sadducees. See Luke 20:27-39.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that is available on the Christian Classics Ethereal Library Website. These files were made available by Mr. Ernie Stefanik. First published online in 1996 at The Restoration Movement Pages.

Bibliography
J. W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "The Fourfold Gospel". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tfg/matthew-22.html. Standard Publishing Company, Cincinnati, Ohio. 1914.

Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

Matthew 22:23.The same day came to him the Sadducees. We see here how Satan brings together all the ungodly, who in other respects differ widely from each other, to attack the truth of God. For, though deadly strife existed between these two sects, (66) yet they conspire together against Christ; so that the Pharisees are not displeased to have their own doctrine attacked in the person of Christ. Thus in the present day, we see all the forces of Satan, though in other respects they are opposed to each other, rising on every hand against Christ. And so fierce is the hatred with which the Papists burn against the Gospel, that they willingly support Epicureans, Libertines, and other monsters of that description, provided that they can avail themselves of their aid for accomplishing its destruction. In short, we see that they come out of various camps to make an attack on Christ; and that this was done, because all of them alike hated the light of sound doctrine. Now the Sadducees propose a question to Christ, that by the appearance of absurdity they may either lead him to take part in their error, or, if he disagree with them, that they may hold him up to disgrace and ridicule among an uneducated and ignorant multitude. It is no doubt possible, that they had been formerly accustomed to employ this sophistry for harassing the Pharisees, but now they attempt to take Christ in the same snare.

Who say that there is no resurrection. How the sect of the Sadducees originated we have explained under another passage. Luke assures us that they denied not only the final resurrection of the body, but also the immortality of the soul, (Acts 23:8.) And, indeed, if we consider properly the doctrine of Scripture, the life of the soul, apart from the hope of the resurrection, will be a mere dream; for God does not declare that, immediately after the death of the body, souls live, — as if their glory and happiness were already enjoyed by them in perfections — but delays the expectation of them till the last day. I readily acknowledge that the philosophers, who were ignorant of the resurrection of the body, have many discussions about the immortal essence of the soul; but they talk so foolishly about the state of the future life that their opinions have no weight. But since the Scriptures inform us that the spiritual life depends on the hope of the resurrection, and that souls, when separated from the bodies, look forward to it, whoever destroys the resurrection deprives souls also of their immortality.

Now this enables us to perceive the dreadful confusion of the Jewish Church, that their rulers (67) in religious matters took away the expectation of a future life, so that, after the death of the body, men differed in no respect from brute beasts. They did not indeed deny that our lives ought to be holy and righteous, and were not so profane as to consider the worship of God to be superfluous; on the contrary, they maintained that God is the Judge of the world, and that the affairs of men are directed by His providence. But as the reward of the godly, and likewise the punishment due to the wicked, were limited by them to the present life, even though there had been truth in their assertion, that every man is now treated impartially according to his merit, (68) yet it was excessively absurd to restrict the promises of God within such narrow limits. Now experience plainly shows that they were chargeable with the grossest stupidity, since it is manifest that the reward which is laid up for the good is left incomplete till another life, and likewise that the punishment of the wicked is not wholly inflicted in this world.

In short, it is impossible to conceive any thing more absurd than this dream, that men formed after the image of God are extinguished by death like the beasts. But how disgraceful and monstrous was it that while, among the profane and blind idolaters of all nations, some notion, at least, of a future life still lingered, among the Jews, the peculiar people of God, this seed of piety was destroyed. I do not mention that, when they saw that the holy fathers earnestly aspired to the heavenly life, and that the covenant which God had made with them was spiritual and eternal, they must have been worse than stupid who remained blind in the midst of such clear light. But, first, this was the just reward of those who had split the Church of God into sects; and, secondly, in this manner the Lord avenged the wicked contempt of His doctrine.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.

Bibliography
Calvin, John. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cal/matthew-22.html. 1840-57.

John Trapp Complete Commentary

23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,

Ver. 23. The same day came to him the Sadducees] Vulpium capita possunt esse aversa, quorum tamen caudae in face eadem coeunt. Heretics may differ as much from one another, as they all do from the truth. Both Pharisees and Sadducees can conspire against Christ, though they cannot consent among themselves. These Sadducees were a brutish sect and sort of Jews, that held many monstrous opinions. Some of them are set down, Acts 23:8. Various others more gross may be read of in Josephus, who also tells us that they were but few of them, yet of the chief among the people. (Ant. 18, 2; B. J. 2, 7.) And no wonder, for even at this day atheists and epicures are rife; and among the great ones especially, who either think or could wish at least, there would be no resurrection, &c.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Trapp, John. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". John Trapp Complete Commentary. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/matthew-22.html. 1865-1868.

Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible

Matthew 22:23. The same day came to him the Sadducees It is generally known that Sadoc, the master of this sect, and from whom the Sadducees took their name, thought that God was not to be served from mercenary principles; that is to say, as he crudely explained it, from the hope of reward, or fear of punishment. His followers interpreted this as an implicit denial of a future state, and so imbibed that pernicious notion of the utter destruction of the soul at death;—equally uncomfortable and absurd. The story which they mention here seems to have been a kind of common-place objection, as we meet with it in the old Jewish writers. Some are of opinion, that by the resurrection which the Sadducees denied, is to be understood the resurrection of the body; others contend, that it signifies simply the existence of men in a future state: properly speaking, however, the two notions coincide, for as the Sadducees denied the immateriality of the soul, a future state, according to their conceptions of it, could mean no thing else but the resurrection of the body; and their denying the resurrection of the body, was the same thing with their denying a future state. Farther, as they had no idea of spirit, they were obliged to make use of terms relative to the body, when they spoke of a future life. Hence came the familiar use of the word resurrection in their disputes, to denote a future state simply; and this sense is notmore unusual than the meaning which they affixed to the worddead, when they made it to signify persons annihilated, or who have no existence at all. See Luke 20:38. Our Lord's reasoning in behalf of a future state, placed in this view, is clear and conclusive. See Drusius, and Lightfoot on the place.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Coke, Thomas. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tcc/matthew-22.html. 1801-1803.

Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Our blessed Saviour having put the Pharisees and Herodians to silence, next the Sadducees encounter him. This sect denied the immortality of the soul, and the resurrection of the body, and as an objection against both, they propound a question to our Saviour, of a woman that had seven brethren successively to her husbands; they demand, Whose wife of the seven this woman shall be at the resurrection? As if they had said, "If there be a resurrection of bodies, surely their will be a resurrection of relations too, and the other world will be like this, in which men will marry as they do here. And if so, whose wife of the seven shall this woman be, they all having and equal claim to her?

Now our Saviour for resolving of this question, 1. Shews the different state of men in this world, and in the other world. The children of this world, says Christ, marry, and are given in marriage, but in the resurrection they do neither. As if our Lord had said, "After men have lived a time in this world, they die, and therefore marriage is necessary to maintain a succession of mankind; but in the other world, men shall become immortal, and live forever; and then the reason of marriage will wholly cease. For when men can die no more, there will be no need of any new supplies of mankind."

2. Our Saviour having got clear of the Sadducees objection, by taking away the ground and foundation of it, he produceth an argument for a proof of the soul's immortality, and body's resurrection. Thus, "Those to whom Almighty God pronounced himself a God are alive; but God pronounced himself a God to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, many hundred years after their bodies were dead; therefore their souls are yet alive, federally alive unto God; their covenant relation lives still, otherwise God could not be their God; for he is not God of the dead but of the living. If one relation fails, the other necessarily fails with it; if God be their God, then certainly they are in being, for God is not the God of the dead; that is, of those that are utterly perished.

Therefore it must needs be, that although their bodies be naturally dead, yet do their souls still live, and their bodies shall also live again at the resurrection of the just.

From the whole, Note, 1. That there is no opinion so absurd, no error so monstrous, that having had a mother, will die for the lack of a nurse. The beastly opinion of the mortality of the soul, and the annihilation of the body, finds Sadducees to profess and propagate it.

Note, 2. The certainty of another life after this, in which men shall be eternally happy or intolerable miserable, according as they behave themselves here; though some men live like beasts, they shall not die like them, nor shall their last end be like theirs.

Note, 3. That glorified saints in the morning of the resurrection, shall be like unto the glorious angels; not like them in essence and nature, but like them in their properties and qualities, in holiness and purity, in immortality and incorruptibility, and in their manner of living; they shall no more stand in need of meat or drink, than the angels do; but shall live the same heavenly, immortal, and incorruptible life, that the angels live.

Note, 4. That all those that are in covenant with God, whose God the Lord is, their souls do immediately pass into glory, and their bodies, at the resurrection, shall be sharers in the same happiness with their souls. If God be just, the soul must live, and the body must rise: for good men must be rewarded, and wicked men punished: God will most certainly, some time or other, plentifully reward the righteous, and punish the evil-doers; but this being not always done in this life, the justice of God requires it to be done in the next.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Burkitt, William. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wbc/matthew-22.html. 1700-1703.

Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary

23. λέγ.] In Luke, οἱ ἀντιλέγ. = οἵτινες λέγουσιν Mark. Here, the art. being absent, we must understand that they came, saying that there was no resurrection: i.e. either, in pursuance of their well-known denial of that doctrine,—or, which is more probable, actually saying, maintaining it against our Lord: viz., in shape and manner following.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Alford, Henry. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hac/matthew-22.html. 1863-1878.

Heinrich Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament

Matthew 22:23. Comp. Mark 12:18 ff.; Luke 20:27 ff.; Matthew condenses.

οὶ λέγοντες μὴ εἶναι ἀνάστ.] who assert, etc., serving to account for the question which follows. On the necessity of the article, inasmuch as the Sadducees do not say to Jesus that there is no resurrection, but because their regular confiteor is here quoted, comp. Kühner ad Xen. ii. 7. 13; Mark 12:18 : οἵτινες λέγουσι.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". Heinrich Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hmc/matthew-22.html. 1832.

Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament

Matthew 22:23. σαδδουκαῖοι, Sadducees) Towards the close of His earthly career all rise together against Jesus. The Sadducees are seldom mentioned by the Evangelists; on that day not even the Sadducees remained quiescent.— ἀνάστασιν, resurrection) It is clear that this article of faith was well known at that time, from the Evangelist not having added the words, “of the dead.” And the adversaries of this article contravene it in various degrees, some by denying(962) altogether the immortality of the soul, others, its being joined again to its former body. And there may also have been a variety of error among the Sadducees themselves.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Bengel, Johann Albrecht. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jab/matthew-22.html. 1897.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible

See Poole on "Matthew 22:28".


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Poole, Matthew, "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mpc/matthew-22.html. 1685.

Justin Edwards' Family Bible New Testament

No resurrection; of the body after death. They denied any existence of the soul after death, and consequently any reunion of soul and body in a future resurrection.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Edwards, Justin. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Family Bible New Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/fam/matthew-22.html. American Tract Society. 1851.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges

23. Σαδδουκαῖοι. See note ch. Matthew 3:7. This is the only direct contact of the Sadducees with Jesus.

λέγοντες. ‘Then came Sadducees saying,’ i.e. with their argument that, &c. For the omission of article before λέγοντες see Crit. Notes supra; its absence before Σαδδουκαῖοι implies that they did not come as a class. Cp. οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, Matthew 22:15.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
"Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cgt/matthew-22.html. 1896.

Whedon's Commentary on the Bible

ENCOUNTER WITH THE SADDUCEES, Matthew 22:23-33. (See note preceding Matthew 22:14.)

23. Say that there is no resurrection — And their intention is to show from Moses, that the doctrine of the resurrection involves an inexplicable difficulty.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Whedon's Commentary on the Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/matthew-22.html. 1874-1909.

Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible

‘On that day there came to him Sadducees, those who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him,’

Note the emphasis that it was ‘on the same day’. Thus the Pharisees, the Herodians and the Sadducees all approached Him to test Him on that day. All were out to bring Him down. We know little about the Sadducees for everything written about them was written by their opponents and therefore unreliable. But Matthew tells us that they did not believe in the resurrection. Josephus amplifies that by saying that they did not believe in the survival of either the soul or the body. It would seem that they also laid great emphasis on the Law of Moses (which was natural to a priestly party), although also recognising the prophets suitably interpreted. They did not believe in angels or spirits. Their emphasis was on the cult. The question that they approached Him with concerned the resurrection, and was probably a standard question with which they tripped up their opponents. It was based on the law of levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-10). Under that law if a man died childless his brother (or kinsman) was required to take his wife and produce children who would inherit the dead man’s name, and his property. It was certainly practised early on for we have examples in Genesis 38:8 and in Ruth 1:11-13; Ruth 4:1-22 (the Greek rendering of Genesis 38:8 is reflected in Matthew’ treatment of the subject), but we do not know how much it was actually practised in the time of Jesus. However, being in the Law it was certainly possible for it to be practised, and there is no reason to doubt that it was, especially if the wife was especially attractive or the inheritance large.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Pett, Peter. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible ". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/matthew-22.html. 2013.

Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable

The Pharisees believed in resurrection from the dead ( Isaiah 26:19; Daniel 12:2). The Sadducees did not because they did not find it explicitly taught in the Pentateuch. They believed that both the material and the immaterial parts of man perish at death (cf. Acts 23:8). [Note: Josephus, Antiquities of . . ., 18:1:3-4; idem, The Wars . . ., 2:8:14.] There was much diverse opinion concerning death and the afterlife in Jesus" day. [Note: Cf. G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism.]


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Constable, Thomas. DD. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Expository Notes of Dr. Thomas Constable". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dcc/matthew-22.html. 2012.

Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Matthew 22:23-33. THE ASSAULT OF THE SADDUCEES.

Matthew 22:23. Sadducees. See note on chap. Matthew 3:5.

Saying, the correct reading points to what was said at that time.

There is no resurrection. Comp. Acts 23:8, where their views are shown to include a denial of the immortality of the soul as well as of the resurrection of the body. They correspond to the Skeptics and Epicureans among the Greek philosophers.

And they asked him. A scoffing question, in ridicule of the doctrine and of Christ Himself. This sneering spirit is prominent in Sadducees of every age. Afterwards they became earnest enough. It is possible they hoped for an answer that might show sympathy with them. Errorists often think that opposition to their opponents is agreement with them. But truth must always oppose two contrary errors. In this case first the Pharisees, then their antagonists the Sadducees.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Schaff, Philip. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/matthew-22.html. 1879-90.

The Expositor's Greek Testament

Matthew 22:23. προσῆλθον, approached, but with different intent, aiming at amusement rather than deadly mischief. Jesus was of no party, and the butt of all the parties.— λέγοντες, with οἱ, introduces the creed of the Sadducees; without it, what they said to Jesus. They came and said: We do not believe in the resurrection, and we will prove to you its absurdity. This is probably Mt.’s meaning. He would not think it necessary to explain the tenets of the Sadducees to Jewish readers.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Nicol, W. Robertson, M.A., L.L.D. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". The Expositor's Greek Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/egt/matthew-22.html. 1897-1910.

Joseph Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments

Matthew 22:23. The same day came to him the Sadducees — Concerning whose doctrines and conduct see note on Matthew 3:7; which say, there is no resurrection — Nor indeed any future life at all, as the word αναστασις, here rendered resurrection, is considered by many learned men as signifying; their doctrine being, that when the body dies the soul dies with it, and that there is no state of rewards or punishments after death, and no judgment to come. “The word αναστασις,” says Dr. Campbell, “is indeed the common term by which the resurrection, properly so called, is denominated in the New Testament; yet this is neither the only nor the primitive import of it. When applied to the dead, the word denotes properly no more than a renewal of life to them, in whatever manner this happens. The Pharisees themselves did not universally mean by this term the reunion of soul and body, as is evident from the account which the Jewish historian gives of their doctrine, as well as from some passages in the gospels. To say, therefore, in English, that they deny the resurrection, is to give a very defective account of their sentiments on this topic, for they denied the existence of angels and all separate spirits; in which they went much further than [many of] the pagans, who, though they denied what Christians call the resurrection of the body, yet acknowledged a state after death wherein the souls of the deceased exist, and receive the reward or punishment of their actions.” The doctor therefore renders the clause, Who say there is no future life, which version, he observes, not only gives a juster representation of the Sadducean hypothesis, but is the only version which makes our Lord’s argument appear pertinent, and levelled against the doctrine which he wanted to refute. In the common version they are said to deny the resurrection: that is, that the soul and the body of man shall hereafter be reunited; and our Lord brings an argument from the Pentateuch to prove — What? Not that they shall be reunited, (to this it has not even the most distant relation,) but that the soul subsists after the body is dissolved. This many would have admitted, who denied the resurrection; yet so evidently did his argument strike at the root of the scheme of the Sadducees, that they were silenced by it, and, to the conviction of the hearers, confuted. Now this could not have happened, if the fundamental error of the Sadducees had been barely the denial of the resurrection of the body, and not the denial of the immortality of the soul, or of its actual subsistence after death. If possible, the words, Luke 20:38, παντες αυτω ζωσιν, all live to him: (namely, the patriarchs and all the faithful dead,) make it still more evident that our Lord considered this, namely, the proving that the soul still continued to live after a person’s natural death, was all that was incumbent on one who would confute the Sadducees. Now if this was the subversion of Sadducism, Sadducism must have consisted in denying that the soul continues to live after the body dies. Certainly our Lord’s answer here, and much of St. Paul’s reasoning, 1 Corinthians 15., proceeds on the supposition of such a denial. Thus, 2 Maccabees 12:42-44, the author proves that Judas believed a resurrection, from his offering sacrifices for the souls of the slain, which shows that by a resurrection he meant a future state.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Benson, Joseph. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". Joseph Benson's Commentary. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rbc/matthew-22.html. 1857.

E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes

The same day = On (Greek. en. App-104.) that same day.

the Sadducees. No Article. See App-120.

is no resurrection = is not a resurrection.

no. Greek. me. Denying subjectively not the fact, but asserting their disbelief of the fact.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Bullinger, Ethelbert William. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "E.W. Bullinger's Companion bible Notes". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bul/matthew-22.html. 1909-1922.

The Bible Study New Testament

Some Sadducees came to Jesus. See note on Matthew 3:7. They are the ones. This was their identifying belief—that the dead will not rise. See Acts 23:7-9.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.

Bibliography
Ice, Rhoderick D. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "The Bible Study New Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ice/matthew-22.html. College Press, Joplin, MO. 1974.

Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
same
Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40
the Sadducees
3:7; 16:6; Acts 4:1; 5:17; 23:6-8
which
1 Corinthians 15:12-14; 2 Timothy 2:18

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Torrey, R. A. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". "The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tsk/matthew-22.html.

E.M. Zerr's Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament

See at Matthew 16:12 for more complete details on the doctrine of the Sadducees. The same day was the day the Herodians failed in their attempt to entrap Jesus, and the Sad-ducees thought they would try it. It is a proper argument to confront a man with an actual inconsistency that comes from his teaching, for whenever a man is inconsistent he is bound to be wrong, but the Sadducees either- misunderstood or wilfully misrepresented the Lord"s position concerning the resurrection. He did not teach that men would resume their earth life after they came from the grave. Neither did he teach that the resurrected righteous (and they are the only ones being considered here) could engage in such a manner of life even if they desired.


Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.

Bibliography
Zerr, E.M. "Commentary on Matthew 22:23". E.M. Zerr's Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/znt/matthew-22.html. 1952.

Lectionary Calendar
Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020
the Second Week after Epiphany
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
To report dead links, typos, or html errors or suggestions about making these resources more useful use our convenient contact form
Powered by Lightspeed Technology