 Some thoughts on today's scripture

o At the moment of death, life is changed, not ended. In Jesus’

strong affirmation of eternal life, it is clear that new intimacies and
joys will replace those of this life. In the new life, all live face to
face and, in that relationship, all are bound together.
o St Catherine of Siena wrote: ‘I have made a Bridge of my Word, of
my only-begotten Son, and this is the truth. I have given you the
Bridge of my Son, in order that, passing across the tempestuous
sea of this life, you may not be drowned.’ Lord, bring me safely
home.

Resume Prayer
 Resume Pray er

Some thoughts on today's scripture

o By answering the exaggerated story of the Sadducees, who did
not believe in the resurrection, Jesus points out that the
resurrected state is a new creation where we are sharing in the
divine life of God. It is different from our present life but a
continuation nonetheless of our personalities, as moulded by our
present life.
o To believe in your own personal resurrection is a wonderful gift in
this life. It gives meaning to all that makes up your life. It is
expressed also in our prayers that we offer for the repose of the
souls of all those who have gone before us, which gets great
emphasis during this month of November.

Resume Prayer
 Resume Pray er

Some thoughts on today's scripture

o At the doorway of death life is changed, not ended. Jesus himself
uses the image of the great banquet where all our yearnings are
finally fulfilled and we become fully alive.
o When we fear that we have “lost” loved ones we must believe that
they are not lost. The relationship continues. Spend some time
communing with someone you love who has gone before you.

Resume Prayer
 Resume Pray er

Some thoughts on today's scripture

o Jesus was being hassled by a trick question from someone who
denies the resurrection of the dead.
o How would I deal with this situation?
 o Do I hear Jesus' strong affirmation of eternal life? How am I
moved by it?
o Jesus is facing a trick question. The Sadducees wanted scorned
the idea of rising from the dead. Jesus lifts them from the human
tangles in which their theology has trapped them, to a cosmic
vision. 'He is God not of the dead but of the living, for to him all
are alive.' We are part of that cosmos that transcends space and
time, and embraces not merely Abraham, Isaac and Jacob but my
parents and all my ancestors to the beginning of creation. In the
resurrection we will share the eternal Now of God.
o It may be that the conundrum of the Sadducees was offered more
to confound Jesus than to seek illumination. I think of how the
discussion that engages me is for my good or how much is less
than helpful to my journey in faith.
o I pray with compassion for all those whose reason and
intelligence is missing the humility to accept the truths that faith
uncovers, I give thanks for the intuitions and insights that have
been given to me.

3) Reflection
• The Gospel today gives us the discussion of the Sadducees with Jesus on faith in the
resurrection.
• Luke 20, 27: The ideology of the Sadducees. The Gospel today begins with the following
affirmation: “The Sadducees affirm that there is no resurrection”. The Sadducees were an
elite type of aristocrat. They were conservative, insisting on a literal interpretation of the
Law, and were invested in Roman rule and order. They did not accept faith in the
resurrection. At that time, this faith was beginning to be valued by both the Pharisees and
by ordinary people. This motivated people to resist the dominion of the Romans and of the
priests, elders, and the Sadducees for whom the Messianic Kingdom was already present
in the status quo. The Saducees were typically well off and content with the way things
were at the time. They wanted religion to remain immutable like God himself. To ridicule
faith in the resurrection, they created fictitious cases in which faith in the
resurrection seemed absurd.
• Luke 20, 28-33: The fictitious case of the woman who married seven times. According
to the law of the time, if the husband died without leaving any children, his brother had to
marry the widow of the deceased man. This was done in case someone died without any
descendants. In such cases, the dead man’s property would go to another family (Dt 25, 5-
6). The Sadducees invented the story of a woman who buried seven husbands, brothers
among themselves, and then she herself also died without children. And they asked Jesus:
“This woman then, in the resurrection, whose wife will she be? Because the seven of them
had her as wife”. This was invented in order to show that faith in the resurrection creates
absurd situations, and exemplifies the literal interpretation the Saducees gave to the Law..
• Luke 20, 34-38: The response of Jesus which leaves no doubts. The response of Jesus
displays the irritation of one who cannot bear pretense or deceit. Jesus cannot bear
hypocrisy on the part of the elite which manipulates and ridicules faith in God to legitimize
and defend its own interests. The response contains two parts. (a) you understand nothing
of the resurrection: “The children of this world take wives and husbands, but those who are
judged worthy of a place in the other world and in the resurrection from the dead, do not
marry, because they can no longer die, for they are the same as the angels, and being
children of the resurrection, they are children of God” (vv. 34-36). Jesus explains that the
condition of persons after death will be totally different from the current condition. After
death, there will be no marriages and all will be like angels in heaven. (b) The Sadducees
imagined life in Heaven the same as life on earth. You understand nothing about God:
“That the dead will rise, Moses has also showed this in regard to the bush, when he calls
the Lord: the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. God is not God of
the dead, but of the living, because all live in him”. The disciples are attentive and learn!
Those who are on the side of the Sadducees find themselves on the opposite side of God.
• Luke 20, 39-40: The reaction of others before the response of Jesus. “Then some of the
scribes said: “Master you have spoken well. And they no longer dared to ask Him any more
questions”. It is possible that some of these scribes were Pharisees, because the Pharisees
believed in the resurrection (cf. Ac 23, 6). Either way, Jesus reduced his opponents to
silence.
4) Personal questions
• Today, how do the groups which have power imitate the Sadducees and prepare traps in
order to prevent changes in the world and in the Church?
• Do you believe in the resurrection? When you say that you believe in the resurrection, do
you think about something of the past, of the present or of the future? Have you ever had
an experience of resurrection in your life?
5) Concluding prayer
This I believe: I shall see the goodness of Yahweh,
in the land of the living.
Put your hope in Yahweh, be strong, let your heart be bold,
put your hope in Yahweh. (Ps 27,13-14)

2. Meditatio
a) Key for the Reading:
• Context
We can say that the passage proposed to us for our reflection forms a central part of the
text which goes from Luke 20:20 to 22:4, and deals with the discussions with the chief
priests of the people. Already in the beginning of chapter 20, Luke presents us with some
conflicts which arose between Jesus, the priests, and the scribes (vv. 1-19). Here Jesus finds
Himself facing some conflict with the philosophical school of the Sadducees, who have
taken their name from Zadok, the priest of David (2 Sam 8: 17). They accepted as revelation
only the writings of Moses (v. 28), denying the gradual development of biblical revelation.
In this sense one can better understand the expression “Moses prescribed for us” repeated
by the Sadducees in this malicious debate which they use it as a trap to get Jesus and “to
catch Him in a fault” (see: 20:2; 20:20). This philosophical school disappeared with the
destruction of the temple.
• The law of the levirate
The Sadducees precisely deny the resurrection from the dead because, according to them,
this object of faith did not form part of the revelation handed down to them from Moses.
The same thing can be said concerning faith in the existence of angels. In Israel, faith in
the resurrection of the dead appears in the book of Daniel written in the year 605 – 530
B.C. (Dan 12:2-3). We also find it in 2 Macc 7:9,11,14,23. In order to ridicule the faith in
the resurrection of the dead, the Sadducees quote the legal prescription of Moses on the
levirate (Deut 25:5) concerning the ancient traditions of the Semitic peoples (including the
Hebrews), according to which, the brother or a close relative of a married man who died
without sons, had to marry the widow, in order: a) to assure to the deceased descendants
(the sons would have been legally considered sons of the deceased man), and b) a husband
to the woman, because women depended on the man for their livelihood. Cases of this type
are recalled in the Old Testament in the Books of Genesis and Ruth.
In the Book of Genesis (38:6-26) it is said how “Judah took a wife, whose name was
Tamar, for his first born son Er. But, Er, the first born of Judah, offended the Lord and the
Lord killed him. Then Judah tells Onan, “Take your brother’s wife, and do your duty as
her brother-in-law to maintain your brother’s line” (Gen 38:6-8). But Onan was also
punished by God and he died (Gen 38:10), because Onan, knowing that the line would not
count as his, spilt his seed on the ground every time he slept with his brother’s wife, to
avoid providing offspring for his brother” (Gen 38:9). Judah, seeing this, sent Tamar to her
father’s house so as not to give her his third son, Shelah, as a husband (Gen 38:10-11).
Tamar then, disguising herself as a prostitute or a harlot, slept with Judah himself and
conceived twins. Judah, on discovering the truth, defended Tamar, recognizing “She was
right and I was wrong” (Gen 38:26).
In the book of Ruth the same story is told about Ruth herself, Ruth the Moabitess, who
remained a widow after having married one of the sons of Elimelech. Together with her
mother-in-law Naomi, Ruth was obliged to beg for survival and to gather in the fields the
ears of corn which fell from the sheaves behind the reapers, up to the time when she married
Boaz, a relative of her deceased husband.
The case proposed to Jesus by the Sadducees reminds us the story of Tobias the son of
Tobit who married Sarah the daughter of Raguel, the widow of seven husbands, all killed
by Asmodeus, the demon of lust, at the moment that they slept together. Tobias has the
right to marry her because she belonged to his tribe. (Tobit 7:9).
Jesus makes the Sadducees notice that the purpose of marriage is procreation, and therefore
it is necessary for the future of the human species, since none of the “sons of this world”
(v. 34) is eternal. But “those who are judged worthy of a place in the other world” (v. 35)
neither take husband nor wife in so far as they can no longer die” (v. 35-36). They live in
God: “they are the same as the angels and, being children of the resurrection, are sons of
God” (v. 36). Both in the Old and in the New Testament, the angels are called sons of God
(see for example, Gen 6:2; Ps 29:1; Lk 10:6; 16:8). These words of Jesus remind us also of
St. Paul’s letter to the Romans, where it is written that Jesus is the Son because of His
Resurrection, He is the first risen from the dead and, par excellence, is Son of the
Resurrection (Rom 1:4). Here we can also quote the texts of St. Paul on the resurrection of
the dead as an event of salvation of a spiritual nature (1 Cor 15:35-50).
• I am: The God of the Living
Jesus goes on to confirm the reality of the resurrection by quoting another passage taken
from Exodus, this time from the account of the revelation of God to Moses in the burning
bush. The Sadducees make evident their point of view by quoting Moses. Jesus, at the same
time, refutes their argument by quoting Moses as well: “That the dead resurrect has also
been shown by Moses regarding the bush, when he calls the Lord: the God of Abraham,
God of Isaac and God of Jacob” (v. 37). In Exodus we find that the Lord reveals Himself
to Moses with these words: “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of
Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (Ex 3:6). The Lord then continues to reveal to Moses the
divine name: “I AM” (Ex 3:14). The Hebrew word ehjej (also transliterated as ehyeh), from
the root Hei-Yod-Hei, used for the divine name in Exodus 3:14, means I am he who is; I
am the existing One. The root may also mean life, existence. And this is why Jesus can
conclude, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (v. 38). In the same verse
Jesus specifies that “all live for Him [God]”. This can also mean “all live in Him”.
Reflecting on Jesus’ death, in the letter to the Romans, Paul writes, “For by dying, He is
dead to sin once and for all, and now the life that He lives is life with God. In the same
way, you must see yourselves as being dead to sin but alive for God in Jesus Christ” (Rom
6:10).
We can say that Jesus, once more, makes the Sadducees see that God’s fidelity, whether
for His people, or for the individual, is not based on the existence of a political kingdom
(in the case of God’s fidelity to His people), nor on having prosperity and descendants in
this life. The hope of the true believer does not reside in the things of this world, but in the
Living God. This is why the disciples of Jesus are called to live as children of the
resurrection, that is, sons of life in God, as their Master and Lord, “having been regenerated
not from any perishable seed but from imperishable seed, that is, of the living and enduring
Word of God” (1 Pet 1:23).
b) Questions to help in the reflection
* What has struck you most in this Gospel? Some word? Which particular attitude?
* Try to reread the Gospel text in the context of the other biblical texts quoted in the key
to the reading.
* How do you interpret the conflict which arose between the chief priests of the people
and the Sadducees with Jesus?
* Stop and think on how Jesus confronted the conflict. What do you learn from His
behavior?
* What do you think is the central point in the discussion?
* What does the resurrection from the dead mean for you?
* Do you feel like a son or daughter of the resurrection?
* What does it mean for you to live the resurrection beginning now at the present
moment?
3. Oratio
Inspired by Psalm 17
We will be filled, Lord, by contemplating Your Face
Listen, Yahweh, to an upright cause,
pay attention to my cry,
lend an ear to my prayer,
my lips free from deceit.
My steps never stray from the paths You lay down,
from Your tracks; so my feet never stumble.
I call upon You, God, for You answer me;
turn Your ear to me, hear what I say.
Shelter me in the shadow of Your wings.
That I in my uprightness will see Your face,
and when I awake I shall be filled with the vision of You.
4. Contemplatio
From the mystical diary of
Sister Maria Evangelista of the Most Holy Trinity, O.Carm.
This earthly life is also filled with love, with gifts of “truth”, hidden gifts and at the same
time, revealed by the sign… I feel an immense gratitude for every human value. To live in
communion with creation, in friendship with the brothers, in openness toward the work of
God and the work of mankind, in a continuous experience of the gifts of life, even if in the
midst of suffering, even is simply only human, it is a continuous grace, a continuous gift.

Biblical Commentary
(Bible study)
Luke 20:27-38
EXEGESIS:

LUKE 19:28 – 20-47. CONTROVERSIES IN JERUSALEM

Jesus set his face to go to Jerusalem in 9:51, and finally arrives there in 19:28-40. He
weeps over Jerusalem (19:41-44), cleanses the temple (19:45-46), and teaches in the
temple while the chief priests, scribes and leaders of the people look for a way to kill
him (19:47-48).

Religious authorities ask Jesus three questions:

• First, the chief priests, scribes and elders ask, “Tell us: by what authority do you do
these things? Or who is giving you this authority?” (20:2).

• Second, the chief priests and scribes (or their spies—see 20:20) ask, “Is it lawful for us
to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” (20:22).

• Finally, in our Gospel lesson for today, the Sadducees ask, “Therefore in the
resurrection whose wife of them will she be? For the seven had her as a wife” (20:33).

None of these questions are honest inquiries for information. All three are attempts to
ensnare Jesus—to compromise his authority.

Chapter 20 closes with Jesus asking a question of “them”—whether Sadducees in

particular or religious authorities in general is unclear (20:41-44). Jesus then denounces
the scribes for their pride and avarice (20:45-47). It is interesting to note that it was the
scribes who commended Jesus for his answer to the Sadducees only a few verses
earlier (20:39). Most likely these scribes were Pharisees who opposed the Sadducees.
They commended Jesus, not because they approved of him, but because of his besting
of their opponents, the Sadducees.

LUKE 20:27-33. WHOSE WIFE WILL SHE BE?

27Some of the Sadducees came to him, those who deny that there is a
resurrection (Greek: anastasin). 28They asked him, “Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if
a man’s brother dies having a wife, and he is childless, his brother should take the wife,
and raise up (Greek: exanastese—related to the word anastasin in v. 27) children for his
brother. 29There were therefore seven brothers. The first took a wife, and died
childless. 30The second took her as wife, and he died childless. 31The third took her,
and likewise the seven all left no children, and died. 32Afterward the woman also
died. 33Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them will she be? For the seven had
her as a wife.”

The original version of this story is found in the Gospel of Mark (12:18-27), the first of
the four Gospels to be written and one of Luke’s primary sources for his Gospel. See
also Matthew 22:23-33.
“Some of the Sadducees came to him, those who deny that there is a
resurrection (anastasin)“ (v. 27). We tend to lump Sadducees and Pharisees together
as opponents of Jesus, but the two groups are quite different:

• Sadducees get their name from the priest, Zadok (see 2 Samuel 15 ff.). They are
members and supporters of the high-priestly family (Nolland, 964), and tend to be
wealthy and politically well connected. They accept only the Torah as authoritative
scripture, giving the writings of the prophets a lower place in their system and rejecting
oral tradition altogether. They reject the idea of resurrection, because it is not found in
the Torah. They emphasize free will instead of determinism. Interestingly, scholars
agree that Sadducees do not believe in angels, but angels are found in the Torah
(Genesis 16:7; 21:17; 22:11, etc.). I don’t profess to understand why they don’t believe
in angels.

• Pharisees are more religious and less political. They accept both Torah and Prophets
as authoritative scripture, and rely heavily on oral tradition to understand scripture. They
believe in resurrection, a concept not fully developed in the Old Testament and not
mentioned in the Torah.

“who deny that there is a resurrection” (v. 27b). The Sadducees accept only the
Torah as scripture. They refuse to believe in the resurrection because the Torah does
not explicitly teach it.

In early parts of the Old Testament, people assumed that they would live on through
their children—i.e., God’s promise to Jacob that his seed would be like the dust of the
earth (Genesis 28:14).As time passed, the Jewish people developed a belief in
resurrection, in part, because they believed that God would vindicate good men and
women who died without having enjoying the fruits of their goodness. The word
resurrection does not appear in the Old Testament, but the beginnings of the concept
are found in Job 19:26; Psalm 16:10; 49:15; Isaiah 25:8; 26:16-19; Daniel 12:2; and
Hosea 13:14. Ezekiel 37 tells of dry bones rising to life, but the image is that of the
Jewish nation rather than individuals. The idea of resurrection is further developed in
the apocrypha (see 2 Maccabees 7).

Christians often fail to distinguish between resurrection (God raises a person from the
dead after a period of time) and immortality (life continues after death with no lapse of
time), so it is worth considering the following three beliefs:

(1) Resurrection
(2) The Greek understanding of immortality and
(3) The Biblical understanding of immorality

(1) RESURRECTION: The Christian belief in resurrection is rooted in the resurrection of

Jesus, and is an essential belief of the Christian faith. The New Testament teaches that
Jesus was raised from the dead (Matthew 28:6; Mark 16:6: Luke 24:5; John 20:1-18)
and that those who believe in Christ will be raised like him in a general resurrection at
the end of time (Romans 8:11; 1 Corinthians 6:14; 15:12-57; 2 Corinthians 4:14; etc.).
Belief in the resurrection is an essential tenet of the Christian faith. Paul says, “If Christ
has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith also is in vain” (1
Corinthians 15:14).

(2) THE GREEK UNDERSTANDING OF IMMORTALITY: The Greeks, led by Plato,

held to a dualistic system that considered the spirit to be good but physical things, such
as the human body, to be bad. They could never accept the resurrection of the physical
body, because the ideal, from their perspective, was a spirit freed from the physical
body. The Greek understanding of immortality, then, is incompatible with the Christian
understanding of resurrection, where body and soul are bound together.

(3) THE BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING OF IMMORTALITY: While the resurrection is the

central tenet of the Christian faith, the New Testament also speaks of immortality. In the
New Testament, immortality and resurrection intertwine in a “now” (immortality) and
“future” (resurrection) relationship.

The “now” dimension (immortality) is portrayed in various New Testament verses:

• For instance, Jesus gives a “now” dimension to the phrase, eternal life (which we
usually categorize as “future”) in his high priestly prayer: “This is eternal life, that they
should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ” (John 17:3).
That prayer is very “now” oriented, and it seems clear that Jesus is saying that eternal
life is a matter of relationship with the Father—something that will be fully realized only
in the future, but that has its beginnings in our lives now.

• In his classic resurrection chapter that is almost totally future-oriented, Paul speaks of
immortality: “For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on
immortality. But when this corruptible will have put on incorruption, and this mortal will
have put on immortality, then what is written will happen: ‘Death is swallowed up in
victory'” (1 Corinthians 15:53-54).

• Jesus incorporates both the “now” and the “future” dimensions in a single sentence
when he says, “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life (“now”), and I
will raise him up at the last day” (“future”) (John 6:54) (Myers, 520).

• In our Gospel lesson for this week, Jesus gives us a “now” perspective when he
says, “Now he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all are alive to him” (v. 38;
see comments below on that verse).

Paul speaks of this as a mystery (1 Corinthians 15:51), and it is, indeed mysterious. I
must admit that my understanding is very tentative. With that disclaimer, I will suggest
that immortality and eternal life begin at our baptism when we are “united with (Christ) in
the likeness of his death” (Romans 6:5)—but their promise will be fully realized only in
the general resurrection at the end of time when we will be “united with him in the
likeness of his resurrection” (Romans 6:5).

“Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them will she be? For the seven had
her as a wife”(v. 33). The levirate marriage law (Deuteronomy 25:5-6) requires a man
whose brother dies without children to marry the wife of the deceased brother to enable
the woman to bear children. The firstborn child of that union is to bear the name of the
deceased brother so that his lineage might continue. This law also benefits the widow,
whose circumstances would be considerably diminished without a husband.

The Sadducees address Jesus as Teacher, but only to set him up—asking a trick
question designed to stump rather than to enlighten—attempting to embarrass Jesus—
to undercut his authority as a teacher—and to demonstrate that there can be no
resurrection. They invite Jesus into the no-win territory between the no-resurrection
Sadducees and the resurrection Pharisees—a place where he is bound to alienate half
the crowd. If he says that all seven brothers will be the woman’s husbands, he will
alienate everyone. People can imagine a man having seven wives, but not a woman
having seven husbands.
The Sadducees pose their question “by a pun on resurrection. In verse
27 anastasis (resurrection) is used to identify the Sadducees. It appears again in verse
28 as the duty of the brother (exanastese: raise up a child)” (Henrich, 444).

LUKE 20:34-36. THOSE WHO ARE WORTHY OF THE

RESURRECTION
34Jesus said to them, “The children of this age marry, and are given in marriage. 35But
those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the
dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage. 36For they can’t die any more, for they
are like the angels, and are children of God, being children of the resurrection.”

“The children of this age marry, and are given in marriage. But those who are
considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead,
neither marry, nor are given in marriage” (vv. 34-35). Jesus first highlights the fact
that the question asked by the Sadducees considers resurrection as an extension of life
as we know it. He then outlines the radical discontinuity between earthly life (“this age”)
and resurrection life (“that age”). Sexual procreation is necessary to sustain the human
race in “this age”—a world where people die. It is not necessary in “that age” where
people are like angels—no longer subject to death.

It is natural that we should ask questions about resurrection life, but we should not
expect to understand it fully while living in “this age”. The book of Revelation, for
instance, uses familiar language (gates of pearl and streets of gold) to help us visualize
something completely beyond our experience. Such language can serve only as a
metaphor to help us appreciate the wonders of a kingdom that we are not yet able fully
to understand. Trying to explain resurrection life to an earthbound person is rather like
trying to explain the color red to a person who was born blind and has never seen
colors.

In his comments to the Sadducees, Jesus does not address other needs, such as sex
and companionship, which are met by marriage in this life. Presumably, barriers that
separate person from person will evaporate in that sin-free environment, and needs for
intimacy will be met in a broad range of relationships—the primary one being with God.
Again we are speaking of things beyond our ability to understand or fully appreciate.

Frankly for most people the thought of life without marriage and sex does not seem very
attractive. The gain of a face-to-face relationship with God does not seem to
compensate for the loss of marriage and sex. We should expect, however, that
resurrection life will be full of joys that we are not fully equipped to understand, just as a
small child is not equipped to understand the pleasures of the marriage bed. What
seems yucky at age six can seem just fine at age twenty-six. Just so, we are not
equipped fully to understand the joys of “that age”, but should expect them to be far
different and far more enjoyable than our “this age” joys—more enjoyable than our “this
age” experience allows us to imagine.

“For they can’t die any more, for they are like the angels” (v. 36a). The Sadducees
don’t believe in angels, which is surely why Jesus mentions them here.

“and are children of God, being children of the resurrection” (v. 36b). Paul deals
with resurrection life in 1 Corinthians 15:35-58. His language is full of poetic imagery
that gives us a glimpse of that which we cannot really see and helps us to understand a
bit of that which we cannot really know while bound to this earth. “It is sown in
corruption; it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is
sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual
body. There is a natural body and there is also a spiritual body” (15:42-44). Beautiful
imagery, but far from a detailed, scientific description! Paul goes on to say that the
resurrection life is a mystery (v. 51), something that can be understood in this life only
by divine revelation. Two chapters earlier, Paul said, “For now we see in a mirror, dimly,
but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I will know fully, even as I was also
fully known” (1 Corinthians 13:12). A wonderful description of mystery!

LUKE 20:37-38. HE IS GOD NOT OF THE DEAD, BUT OF THE LIVING

37“But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the
Lord ‘The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ 38Now he is not
the God of the dead, but of the living, for all are alive to him.”

“But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the
Lord ‘The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (v. 37).
Sadducees accept only the Torah as authoritative, so Jesus argues from the Torah—
Exodus 3:6, 15. At the time of Moses’ encounter with God, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
were long-since dead, but God spoke of his relationship with them in the present tense
as if they were still living.

“Now he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all are alive to him” (v.
38). “In what sense are Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob alive? Did Jesus (and Luke) mean
that their ‘souls’ were with God, i.e., they were immortal? Or did he mean that although
they were not presently alive they would be on the day of resurrection and that because
of God’s covenant with the patriarchs a resurrection was necessary? …For both Jesus
and Luke the resurrection of the dead was clearly a future event (14:14; Acts 23:6;
24:15, 21). Nevertheless in some way they believed that the patriarchs were alive at the
present time. Jesus and Luke believed both in a conscious life immediately after death
(cf. 16:19-31; 23:39-43) as well as a final day of resurrection” (Stein, 500).

“for all are alive to him” (v. 38). The covenant-relationship, in which God blesses the
patriarchs, is still in force.

With regard to the present-immortality vs. future-resurrection dichotomy, the New

Testament clearly emphasizes future resurrection. However, this verse sounds as if the
patriarchs are alive now, even though they have not yet experienced resurrection.

Josephus notes that Pharisees hold that life continues after death for both good and
bad people. They believe that the good will be rewarded and the bad will be punished
(Fitzmyer, 1302). It is clear that belief in immortality has a place in Jewish thought—and
that the distinction between present-immortality and future-resurrection is somewhat
blurred.

LUKE 20:39-40. A PAT ON THE BACK BY THE SCRIBES

39Some of the scribes answered, “Teacher, you speak well.” 40They didn’t dare to ask
him any more questions.

These verses are not included in the lectionary, but are a fitting conclusion to the
Gospel lesson and add only seconds to the reading. They emphasize a central point of
this story—that Jesus speaks with authority (see 20:2).

These are probably scribes of the Pharisees who believe in resurrection, but they might
also be the scribes who had tried to trap Jesus with the first two questions (20:2, 22).

SCRIPTURE QUOTATIONS are from the World English Bible (WEB), a public domain (no copyright)
modern English translation of the Holy Bible. The World English Bible is based on the American
Standard Version (ASV) of the Bible, the Biblia Hebraica Stutgartensa Old Testament, and the
Greek Majority Text New Testament. The ASV, which is also in the public domain due to expired
copyrights, was a very good translation, but included many archaic words (hast, shineth, etc.), which
the WEB has updated.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Barclay, William, The Daily Study Bible, The Gospel of Luke (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew
Press, 1953)

Bock, Darrell L., The IVP New Testament Commentary Series: Luke, Vol. 3 (Downers
Grove, Illinois, Intervarsity Press, 1994)

Cousar, Charles B.; Gaventa, Beverly R.; McCann, J. Clinton; and Newsome, James
D., Texts for Preaching: A Lectionary Commentary Based on the NRSV–Year
C (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994)

Craddock, Fred B., Interpretation: Luke (Louisville: John Knox Press,(1990)

Craddock, Fred B.; Hayes, John H.; Holliday, Carl R.; and Tucker, Gene M., Preaching
Through the Christian Year, C (Valley Forge: Trinity Press, 1994)

Culpepper, R. Alan, The New Interpreter’s Bible, Volume IX. (Nashville: Abingdon ,
1995)

Edwards, O.C. Jr. and Taylor, Gardner C., Proclamation 2: Pentecost 3, Series
C (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980)

Evans, Craig A., New International Biblical Commentary: Luke (Peabody, MA,
Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1990)

Fitzmyer, Joseph A., S.J., The Anchor Bible: The Gospel According to Luke X-
XXIV) (New York: Doubleday, 1985)

Gilmour, S. MacLean & Scherer, Paul, The Interpreter’s Bible, Volume 8. (Nashville:
Abingdon , 1952)

Green, Joel B., The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel
of Luke (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997)

Henrich, Sarah, in Van Harn, Roger (ed.), The Lectionary Commentary: Theological
Exegesis for Sunday’s Text. The Third Readings: The Gospels (Grand Rapids: William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2001)

Holladay, William L., Proclamation 6: Pentecost 3, Series C

Johnson, Luke Timothy, Sacra Pagina: The Gospel of Luke (Collegeville: Liturgical
Press, 1991)

Nickle, Keith F., Preaching the Gospel of Luke (Louisville: Westminster John Knox,
2000)

Nolland, John, Word : Luke 18:35—24:53, Vol. 35C (Dallas: Word Books, 1993)
Ringe, Sharon H., Westminster Bible Companion, Luke (Louisville: Westminster John
Knox Press)

Sloyan, Gerard S. and Kee, Howard Clark, Proclamation: Pentecost 3, Series

C (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974)

Soards, Marion; Dozeman, Thomas; and McCabe, Kendall, Preaching the Revised
Common Lectionary, Year C: After Pentecost (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994)

Stein, Robert H., The New American Commentary: Luke (Nashville: Broadman Press,
1992)

Tannehill, Robert C., Abingdon New Testament Commentaries: Luke (Nashville:

Abingdon, 1996)