ACC ~ Matthew 22 v23 - 33

OVERVIEW:

Take away the necessity of death and the usefulness of being born will be found superfluous. Take away the utility of being born and the reason for marriage is explained. The power of present action is in the hope of the future. One who plows does so in order to reap. It is difficult in this world to serve the sanctity of justice if one is deprived of the hope of the resurrection. Take away this hope and the entire practice of piety is undermined (INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW). To say uncritically that God is the God of the dead is to consign the life of God to those who have no life (JEROME). He is not the God of those who are not, who are utterly blotted out, and are to rise no more. He did not say “I was” but “I am.” He is the God of those that are, those who live (CHRYSOSTOM). As we have seen in previous debates, Jesus takes a proposition from an empty extended hand of a deceiver, searches out its reasons and then presents plausible arguments and answers to it, even though the original question may be absurd. We do well to follow Christ in his argumentation clearly and in good order. In the case of discoursing with the Sadducees, and because of their ignorance in knowing even themselves, he first proposed a rational argument by analogy and then argued according to the authority of Scripture. So today we may use both arguments from reason and the authority of Scripture in our conversations with those who would twist the truth (INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW).

22:23 | The Sadducees Come to Test Jesus

THE SAME DAY THE SADDUCEES CAME

INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW: On what day? On the day when the Pharisees returned, the Sadducees acquiesced. The Sadducees then returned, and in turn the Pharisees withdrew. So it was one opponent and then another through many days of struggle. They accosted him frequently so that one or the other might be able to best him, or if they were not able to put him down squarely, they might instead subvert others’ judgment of him. So they frequented his company. Among the more numerous enemy is found the stronger warrior. While they were not able to put him down simply by words, they all surrounded him. They could not overcome him by strength; they sought to turn everyone against him, with the multitude following. HOMILY 42. [1]

[1] PG 56:868.

DISTINGUISHING PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES

JEROME: There were two heresies among the Jews: one of the Pharisees and the other of the Sadducees. The Pharisees preferred tradition and the observance of the law, which two things they referred to as “divine service.” They preferred them over justice. The Sadducees, however, were thought to be just and punished themselves because they were not. Hence the two parties were thought by the people to be quite different. The Sadducees denied everything about the resurrection. As we find in the Acts of the Apostles, they were opposed to the believers and confessors of the resurrection of the body and soul. [1] These are the two houses about which Isaiah clearly teaches [2] that because they had climbed high they would surely be knocked down on the ground. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.22.23. [3]

[1] Acts 23:8.

[2] Cf. Is 8:14.

[3] CCL 77:204-5.

THEY SAY THERE IS NO RESURRECTION

INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW: He introduced the heresy of the Sadducees, who said that there was no resurrection of the dead. Of all the propositions to be justly made, he demolished this one. For in everything and in every act, whether corporal or spiritual, the power of action is the hope of future reward. For he who plows does so in order to reap. He who fights does so in order to win. For when it becomes so difficult in this world to serve the sanctity of justice, who would be content to put out such effort against themselves every single day, unless he aspired to the hope of the resurrection? Take away the hope of the resurrection and the entire practice of religion is undermined. For didn’t the Sadducees believe that there was marriage after death? There is not. For how could they believe that there was marriage after death when they denied the resurrection? But in defense of their own error they thought that they themselves had found an even more acute reason, speaking this way among themselves: For so it is not possible that she who was the wife of seven men could be the wife of only one or the common wife of all. Thus they thought it not possible that there is a resurrection of the dead. HOMILY 42. [1]

[1] PG 56:869.

22:24-28 | The Law of Levirate Marriage and the Resurrection

TO WHICH OF THE SEVEN WILL SHE BE WIFE?

CHRYSOSTOM: Watch him answering these like a deft teacher. For though they deceitfully came to him, yet their question was one of ignorance. Therefore he does not say to them, “You hypocrites.”

To avoid censure for the fact that the seven brothers had one wife, they refer to Moses’ authority. However, I believe that their whole story was just a fiction. For the third would not have taken her when he saw the two bridegrooms dead, or if the third, yet not the fourth or the fifth; and if even these, much more the sixth or the seventh would not have come to the woman but have shrunk from her. For such is the custom of the Jews. If they now still have this resistance, how much more did they have it then? They often avoided marrying under these circumstances, even when the law was constraining them. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 70.2. [1]

[1] PG 58:657; NPNF 1 10:428.

22:29 | Knowing Neither Scripture nor God’s Power

YOU ERR

CHRYSOSTOM: What does Christ say? He replies to both, as taking his stand not against their words but their purpose. On every occasion he revealed the secrets of their hearts, at one time exposing them, at another time leaving the refutation of them that question him to their conscience. See, at any rate here, how he proves both points, as well that there will be a resurrection. And it will not be such a resurrection as they suspect.

For what does he say? “You err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.” For since they put forward Moses and the law as if they knew them, he shows that this question is that of men ignorant of the Scriptures. They tempted him because they did not know the Scriptures as they should and because they were also ignorant of the power of God.

“For what marvel then is it,” he says, “if you tempt me? I am as yet unknown to you. You do not even know the power of God, although you appear to have had much experience. Yet neither from common sense or from the Scriptures have you become acquainted with it.” Even common sense causes us to know this: that to God all things are possible. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 70.2. [1]

[1] PG 58:657-58; NPNF 1 10:428.

YOU ARE WRONG

JEROME: On account of these things, they erred since they did not know the Scriptures. Because they were ignorant of the Scriptures, they denied the power of God, that is, Christ, who is the power of God and the wisdom of God. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.22.29. [1]

[1] CCL 77:205.

22:30 | No Marriage in the Resurrection

THEY ARE LIKE ANGELS

ORIGEN: Our Savior does not explain the meaning of the passage from Moses’ law, rejecting them as unworthy of the knowledge of such a great mystery. He only represents matters in the simplest way as he speaks and teaches from the divine Scriptures concerning the resurrection of the dead. He teaches that there is no marriage in heaven but that those who are risen from the dead are like the angels in heaven. And, just as the angels in heaven neither marry nor are given in marriage, so he says it is with those who are risen from the dead. But I think he means that only those who are considered worthy of the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage as the angels in heaven. Furthermore, their “humble” bodies are changed to become like the bodies of the angels, ethereal and brilliant. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 17.30. [1]

[1] GCS 40:670-71.

THEY NEITHER MARRY NOR ARE GIVEN IN MARRIAGE

INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW: Idiots! They thought that this world was like the next. In this world because we die, so there too we die since we are born. Hence we take wives, since in dying this life is made less, but in being born it is increased. Therefore remove the necessity of death and the usefulness of being born will be found superfluous. Remove the utility of being born and the reason for marriage is explained. For this world is of the flesh; that one, of spirits. As the soul in this world is a pilgrim, so the flesh in that world is extraneous. In this world, the soul is subject to the flesh, that is, to human passions, where in the other world, the flesh is subject to the spirit. A particular thing is always stronger in its own country and it overcomes. So if the soul, powerful as it is, can be closed up in this infirm world and so be subdued by the grip of the body, so that nothing by its own efforts is able to grow or increase spiritually in its own nature, then how much more so in that world will our weak and vile flesh become worthy of our spiritual dignity and nothing be able to grow physically or to increase according to its own nature? HOMILY 42. [1]

[1] PG 56:869.

22:31 | The Resurrection of the Dead

THE CHASTE LIFE IS OUTSIDE OUR NATURE

INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW: He has spoken about fasting, almsgiving and certain other spiritual works. Yet we have heard nothing so far about the likeness of the angels. But in speaking of intercourse between men and women, he says, “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like angels in heaven.” Why? The work of reproduction is characteristically a fleshly act that we share in common with animals. Just as all carnal powers have affinity with the animals, so also do all spiritual powers have affinity with the angels. This is preeminently so for chastity, an especially angelic practice. For through this characteristic alone, the chaste are distinctively like the angels, and their nature is overcome with virtues. For the same reason he says, “Neither do they marry nor are they given in marriage but are like the angels of God in heaven.” For when we marry, because animals have this in common with us, we profess ourselves to be animals. So when we live chastely, because it is outside of our nature, we escape the nature of the flesh and we become coequals with the angels. HOMILY 42. [1]

[1] PG 56:869-70.

22:32 | God of the Living, Not of the Dead

I AM GOD OF THE LIVING

CHRYSOSTOM: It is again by Moses that he stops their mouths. It is they who had brought forward Moses. Jesus says, “And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead but of the living.” He is not the God of those who are not, who are utterly blotted out and rise no more. He did not say “I was” but “I am.” I am the God of those that are, those who live. Adam lived on the day he ate of the tree, then died in the sentence. Even though the progeny of Adam died, they live in the promise of the resurrection. How then does he say elsewhere, “That he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living”? [1] But this is not contrary to that. For here he speaks of the dead, who are also themselves to live. Furthermore, “I am the God of Abraham” is another thing from “That he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.” He knew of another death too, concerning which he says, “Let the dead bury their dead.” [2]

“And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at his teaching.” Yet not even here did he persuade the Sadducees. They go away defeated, while the crowd, with less vested interests, reaps the benefit. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 70.3. [3]

[1] Rom 14:9.

[2] Mt 8:22; Lk 9:60.

[3] PG 58:658; NPNF 1 10:429.

THE ETERNITY OF SOULS

JEROME: Further, he quotes Moses to explain the eternity of souls: “I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob,” and immediately he adds, “For he is not the God of the dead but of the living.” Thereby he shows that souls live after death. To say that God is the God of the dead is to consign the life of God to those who have no life. The nature of the resurrection and how it is the resurrection of both the good and the evil is pursued by the apostle Paul more fully in the last part of his first epistle to the Corinthians. [1] COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.22.32. [2]

[1] 1 Cor 15:1-58.

[2] CCL 77:207.

22:33 | The Crowd Astonished at His Teaching

THEY WERE ASTONISHED

INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW: For if Abraham and Isaac and Jacob might forever perish through death, [1] then God never could be spoken of as their God, the God of those who were no more. As we have seen in previous debates, Jesus takes a proposition from an empty extended hand of a deceiver and then searches out its reasons, and then he presents plausible arguments and answers to it, however absurd it may be. We do well to follow Christ in his ways of presenting arguments clearly and in good order.

In this case Jesus, in discoursing with the Sadducees and because of their ignorance in knowing even themselves, proposed first a rational argument by analogy, saying, “For in the resurrection, they do not marry, nor do they take wives, but they will be like the angels of God in heaven.” Then he argues according to the authority of Scripture, saying “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.”

So today we may use both arguments from reason and the authority of Scripture in our conversations with those who would twist the truth. However, from whatever source a proposition is put to partners in dialogue, first we outline our argument and then give our authority for it. We are seeking to persuade our hearers by our arguments and then confirm it with legitimate authority. However, our purpose is not merely to convince deceivers but to teach true seekers. Among those prone to deception, even if they understand an argument, they are less likely to consent to it. Yet for people seeking the truth honestly, it suffices only to explain our reasons, so they can understand a proposition, learn it and not deny it. On account of this, the true seekers may come to faith because of the arguments they have heard. HOMILY 42. [2]

[1] That is, if their death had been absolute and final, without the survival of the soul and the expectation of a future resurrection.

[2] PG 56:871.