Otium Sanctum

The twentieth chapter of Luke shows Jesus in a series of controversies with different groups associated with the Temple and the Law. It is within the context created by these controversies that the discussion with the Sadducees is situated.

Who are the Sadducees? We know so little about the Sadducees, and whatever we know about them comes from sources that are inimical to them. A WikiPedia article describes them thus:

While little or none of their own writings have been preserved, the Sadducees seem to have indeed been a priestly group, associated with the leadership of the Temple in Jerusalem. Possibly, Sadducees represent the aristocratic clan of the Hasmonean high priests, who replaced the previous high priestly lineage that had allowed the Syrian Emperor Antiochus IV Epiphanes to desecrate the Temple of Jerusalem with idolatrous sacrifices and to martyr monotheistic Jews. The Jewish holiday of Hanukkah celebrates the ousting of the Syrian forces, the rededication of the Temple, and the installment of the new Hasmonean priestly line. The Hasmoneans ruled as "priest-kings", claiming both titles high priest and king simultaneously, and like other aristocracies across the Hellenistic world became increasingly influenced by Hellenistic syncretism and Greek philosophies: presumably Stoicism, and apparently Epicureanism if the Talmudic tradition criticizing the anti-Torah philosophy of the "Apikorsus" (i.e., Epicurus) refers to the Hasmonean clan qua Sadducees. Like Epicureans, Sadducees rejected the existence of an afterlife, thus denied the Pharisaic doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead.

...

Most of what is known about the Sadducees comes from Josephus, who wrote that they were a quarrelsome group whose followers were wealthy and powerful, and that he considered them boorish in social interactions (see Josephus's Wars of the Jews, Book II, Chapter VIII, Paragraph 14). We know something of them from discussions in the Talmud (mainly the Jerusalem), the core work of rabbinic Judaism, which is based on the teachings of Pharisaic Judaism.
[WikiPedia:Sadducees]

The gospels don't mention the Sadducees much; Matthew mentions them in association with the Pharisees (Mt. 3:7;16:1.6.11.12;22:34). Mark mentions them once in a text parallel to the one in discussion (Mk. 12:18||Mt. 22:23) In Luke-Acts we find them mentioned quite a few times:

In Luke 20:27 (the text we are discussing), they appear with a question on the resurrection. One of the characteristics of the Sadducee's interpretation of the Law is their literal understanding of it. And it is perhaps due to this "literal" understanding that they don't believe in the resurrection as the Pharisees would. In Acts 23:6.7.8, we find Paul of Tarsus making use of the theological differences between Pharisees and Sadducees in his defense. In Acts 4.1 and 5:17, they appear as a power group in the Temple. Luke describes them as close associates of the high priest (cf. Acts 5:17) and hostile to the nascent Church.

The controversy between the Sadducees and Jesus in Luke 20:27-38 is on the resurrection. The episode can be described in an outline as follows:

• v. 27 -- Introduction
• vv. 28-33 -- A Quiz on the Resurrection: An absurdity based on levirate marriage
• vv. 34-38 -- Jesus' Answer
  • vv. 34-36 -- The example is flawed: those who will resurrect have no need of marriage
  • vv. 37-38 -- The basis of the Resurrection: God is not the God of the dead but of the living

The Objection of the Sadducees and Jesus' Answer. In Luke 20, the Sadduccees that question Jesus about the resurrection follow the group of the scribes, elders and chief priests whom Jesus has foiled on two previous occassions. Hostility towards Jesus has deepened (cf. v. 20). The question on the resurrection in this growing atmosphere of hostility already points to the approaching death of Jesus.

The question that the Sadducees raise is a reductio ad absurdum. To reduce a claim to absurdity is the same as proving it false since truth cannot be absurd. The case of the woman who marries seven men is drawn from Jewish literature (cf. Tobit's Sarah in Tob. 3:. While a woman marrying seven men is an extreme possibility, it is made absurd by the question about the woman's final status as wife: "On the resurrection, who will be the husband of the woman"?

The response of Jesus goes in two directions. First, he demolishes the assumption of the Sadducees; second he presents the basis for the belief in the Resurrection.

Marriage and the Resurrection. Jesus' first argument sets the record straight as it were about the relationship between marriage and the resurrection. Marriage properly belongs to the temporal order where human beings procreate and have children. In the resurrected life of the just, such a situation is non-existent and therefore marriage becomes irrelevant. Jesus' compares the resurrected ones to angels not because they suddenly become pure spirits and aeviternal beings but because the latter do not marry. The phrase "children of God" is a translation of "beney elohim" and is best taken in parallel with "angels".

God of the Living. Jesus' second argument is on the basis of belief in the Resurrection. Here, he quotes from the Law (cf. Ex. 3:2.6.15-16): Moses called God the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The argument is that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob could not have a God unless they are alive; and God does not allow his friends to die (cf. Ps. 16:10). Thus, Jesus assertion to cap the argument: "He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all are alive to him" (v. 38).

In Context. It would be wrong to suppose that in this passage from Luke (and in its parallels) is to be found the basis for the Christian conviction regarding the Resurrection. The basis of the Christians' hope in the resurrection is not a story but an event: the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. The function of the story is to be understood within the series of controversies that allude to and prepare for the arrest, passion, death and resurrection of Jesus. A brief summary of Luke 20 illustrates this:

It should be noted that except for the Sadducees all those groups involved in the controversies have been mentioned by Jesus as those who will reject him and put him to death (cf. Luke 9:22). The Sadducees, as already mentioned, are among the powergroups in the Temple and closely associated with the high priest. While they may not have been "chief priests", we know that they were associated with the priesthood. Second, the controversies themselves while illustrating how animosity towards Jesus begins to mount, also allude to some elements in the arrest, passion, death and resurrection of Jesus.

The controversy in vv. 1-19 ends with the hint of an accussation towards the three groups mentioned in 9:22. They are the caretakers who will put to death the son of the vineyard's owner. It is an accussation that they understood. The episode alludes to the trial of Jesus in the Sanhedrin; here, all three are again mentioned (cf. Luke 22:66)

The controversy in vv. 20-26 was meant as a trap for Jesus; a wrong answer from him would have warranted arrest and his denunciation to the governor. The issue of disloyalty to Caesar will be one of the charges against Jesus (Luke 23:2): he will be accused of saying that taxes should not be paid to the Roman Emperor. And it is the representative of the Roman Emperor, the Procurator of Judea, who will hand Jesus over to the executioners despite knowing that the charges against him are not valid.

We have already mentioned that the controversy in vv. 27-38 allude to Jesus' own resurrection. Seeing the pattern in the above controversies, it is not difficult to see that the controversy about the Resurrection should be followed up by one that alludes to Jesus' glorification. In vv. 41-44, it is Jesus who initiates the controversy against the Scribes (the Pharisees?) who have praised him for giving an agreeable answer to the question of the Sadducees. His question to them is about the Messiah and is based on Psalm 110. Since David called the Messiah "Lord" (110:1), then the Messiah cannot be his Son. The answer is based on Ps. 110:3: "In holy splendor ... I (the Lord) begot you (David's Lord)". In other words, the Messiah is God's Son. In a subsequent verse (Psalm 110:7) mention is made of the Messiah "who drinks from the brook by the wayside and afterwards holds high the head" (Ps. 110:7). It is a reference to suffering (drinking by the wayside) and subsequent glorification (lift high the head).

Trial, condemnation, death, resurrection and glorification. The controversies prepare the reader for the fulfillment of Jesus' prediction about his death at the hands of the chief priests, elders and scribes. Within this series, Jesus' pronouncement regarding the resurrection not only shows that the Sadducees were wrong but also shows his faith in the One who will not allow His beloved to die. "He is the God of the living, not of the dead".