Exactly how did Christ win the resurrection argument in Matthew 22

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Mat 22:23-33 the Sadducees try and trap Jesus with counter-resurrection logic and Jesus proves them wrong. As Christians we believe there will be a resurrection

"34 But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered themselves together. " NASB

34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. KJV

So then just how did Christ "win the argument" in Matthew 22? In that chapter the Pharisees admit that "Jesus put them to silence" -- put the Sadducees to silence meaning that they had nothing to counter-with.... they had no counter argument left to them and thus before all the onlookers they were forced to be "silent" having no answer available.

How is that?

What was the "irrefutable logic" that Christ used that the Sadducees found so silencing??

On this and many other Christian discussion boards you will occasionally find someone who merely "quotes themselves" as if that "proves" something to the opposing side.. and as we all know.. that never does.

Sometimes Jesus would contrast his position by saying "you say this.. but I say something else" -- but that is not the solution given in Matthew 22. In Matthew 22 he points to scripture and essentially says "there look at that we both agree with 'A' and we both agree with 'B' and that means you have a problem".

What exactly was the logic that He used? How did He "put them to silence"

==================

BTW for the sake of focus for this thread we are talking specifically about this --

Suppose as stated in the text Christ is actually debating the topic of the resurrection of the dead -- the future resurrection of the saints -- and actually did put the Sadducees to silence on that very topic... not some other subject.

Matt 22: 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."

As someone has already posted
Luke 20:37) Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
 
Last edited:

EastCoastRemnant

I Must Decrease That He May Increase
Supporter
Dec 8, 2010
7,665
1,505
Nova Scotia
✟188,109.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Consider this... the Sadducee's and Pharisee's were "silent" many times after encountering Jesus because they did not want to stir up the crowd gathered who were digging this new teacher, or in other cases, light was penetrating their hardened hearts to which they temporarily were convicted... and silenced. In Matthew 15 we see the Pharisee's and scribes ask Jesus a question and the narrative doesn't record a rebuttal. Again in chapter 19 of the gospel of Matthew the leaders ask Jesus some pointed questions trying to trick him and their rebuttal is silent also. Jesus' teachings were inspired through the Holy Ghost and not by Athenian logic...
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
"34 But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered themselves together. " NASB

34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. KJV

So then just how did Christ "win the argument" in Matthew 22? In that chapter the Pharisees admit that "Jesus put them to silence" -- put the Sadducees to silence meaning that they had nothing to counter-with.... they had no counter argument left to them and thus before all the onlookers they were forced to be "silent" having no answer available.

How is that?

What was the "irrefutable logic" that Christ used that the Sadducees found so silencing??

On this and many other Christian discussion boards you will occasionally find someone who merely "quotes themselves" as if that "proves" something to the opposing side.. and as we all know.. that never does.

Sometimes Jesus would contrast his position by saying "you say this.. but I say something else" -- but that is not the solution given in Matthew 22. In Matthew 22 he points to scripture and essentially says "there look at that we both agree with 'A' and we both agree with 'B' and that means you have a problem".

What exactly was the logic that He used? How did He "put them to silence"
Jesus reply is:
"You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 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."

Mark and Luke have similar versions as well. Perhaps the discussion went further than this but it seems this final point Jesus made about God being the God of the living won the argument.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Jesus reply is:
"You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 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."

Mark and Luke have similar versions as well. Perhaps the discussion went further than this but it seems this final point Jesus made about God being the God of the living won the argument.

How?

Recall that the Sadducees were not in the business of "taking Jesus' word for it".

Jesus makes two irrefutable statements.

1. 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?
2. He is not God of the dead, but of the living.

The first statement is God speaking to Moses while Abraham , Isaac and Jacob are dead.
The second statement is simply an agreed upon position where BOTH sides agree to it.

And the "proof" or the "solution" (in fact the "only solution" and thus "inescapable") is "the future resurrection" according to the text

. 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."

how does that logic "only get solved by future resurrection" such that even the Sadducees have no answer counter argument -- the future resurrection being the only solution.

================================

one option open for Sadducees at the time with all their various beliefs... might be this... "God sees the future". That position does not require that they "just accept anything Jesus says" -- and as we all know - even after Matt 22 , they remain bitter enemies of Jesus.


Romans 4
17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1213
Upvote 0

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
79
Southern Ga.
✟157,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
"34 But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered themselves together. " NASB

34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. KJV

So then just how did Christ "win the argument" in Matthew 22? In that chapter the Pharisees admit that "Jesus put them to silence" -- put the Sadducees to silence meaning that they had nothing to counter-with.... they had no counter argument left to them and thus before all the onlookers they were forced to be "silent" having no answer available.

How is that?

What was the "irrefutable logic" that Christ used that the Sadducees found so silencing??

On this and many other Christian discussion boards you will occasionally find someone who merely "quotes themselves" as if that "proves" something to the opposing side.. and as we all know.. that never does.

Sometimes Jesus would contrast his position by saying "you say this.. but I say something else" -- but that is not the solution given in Matthew 22. In Matthew 22 he points to scripture and essentially says "there look at that we both agree with 'A' and we both agree with 'B' and that means you have a problem".

What exactly was the logic that He used? How did He "put them to silence"
.
This might help some.
The following verses shed more light upon the words and understanding of His reference in Exodus which Jesus spoke.

Exo. 3:6
Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.

Acts 7:31,32
31) When Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold it, the voice of the Lord came unto him,
32) Saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold.

Luke 20:3339
33) Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.
34) And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
35) But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36) Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
37) Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
38) For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
39) Then certain of the scribes answering said, Master, thou hast well said.
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
How?

Recall that the Sadducees were not in the business of "taking Jesus' word for it".

Jesus makes to irrefutable statements.

1. 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?
2. He is not God of the dead, but of the living.

The first statement is God speaking to Moses while Abraham , Isaac and Jacob are dead.
The second statement is simply an agreed upon position where BOTH sides agree to it.

And the "proof" or the "solution" (in fact the "only solution" and thus "inescapable") is "the future resurrection" according to the text

. 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."

how does that logic "only get solved by future resurrection" such that even the Sadducees have no answer counter argument -- the future resurrection being the only solution.

Jesus counters their trap with a trap of his own. The Sadducees would not deny the language used in Exodus which would have been the same language that was quoted all the time; this is "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob". It's a cheat way of defending the resurrection because it forced the Sadducees to back down. The Sadducees had to agree with "I am the God of..." and not "I was the God of..." Jesus gave them something they could not argue and had they argued it would just make them look ridiculous and discredit them. Jesus doesn't want to enter in their mindless banter and traps and he just retorts back in way that doesn't exactly answer the problem but it stops the conversation.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Jesus counters their trap with a trap of his own. The Sadducees would not deny the language used in Exodus which would have been the same language that was quoted all the time; this is "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob". It's a cheat way of defending the resurrection because it forced the Sadducees to back down. The Sadducees had to agree with "I am the God of..." and not "I was the God of..." Jesus gave them something they could not argue

It is true that the statement is in Exodus and they could not deny it.
It is true that it was spoken to Moses while Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were dead.

But how does it prove a future resurrection?

he just retorts back in way that doesn't exactly answer the problem but it stops the conversation.

So your idea is that Jesus said something of the form "but regarding the resurrection of the dead.... here is an argument that fails to do that"???


Jesus said -- . 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."

Your proposal is to leave the Sadducees with "even if your argument is true - it does not prove the resurrection of the dead"???

And the Pharisees who debated the resurrection of the dead would view that as "silencing" the Sadducees on that much-debated-topic?? Why wouldn't they be more inclined to conclude "see He could not prove that doctrine to them any better than we"?? If your suggestion is correct.

==========================================

Ok then another proposal for you--

Suppose as stated in the text, Christ is actually debating the topic of the resurrection of the dead -- the future resurrection of the saints -- and actually did put the Sadducees to silence on that very topic... not some other subject.

And that the Pharisees who often debated them on that very doctrine -- concluded that they had no way out (which is interesting since neither Pharisees nor Sadducees were about to "take Christ's say-so" for anything. )
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
But how does it prove a future resurrection?

this thread itself has given far more conclusive verses that promote the resurrection and apocryphal writings that detail the perspective very clearly but Sadducees demanded proof from the law of Moses so Jesus chose something they could not deny.

The Sadducees didn't believe in spirits or angels yet Jesus immediately opens with an argument about angels. They also don't believe in any rewards or penalties after death and saw death as entering into Sheol where all must pass through. The OT itself is very ambiguous on this topic and supports dominantly an indiscriminate place of the dead not a place for the faithful and another place for the unfaithful. But Jesus is saying there is life after death that God values by using the words of God that he is still the God of those who are thought dead.

I think two things are happening, he affirms God continued and progressive purpose after death for the faithful, which the Sadducees would reject and then can lead to the resurrection. Jesus I think also plays into the crowd using the same tactics the Sadducees have against Jesus. They were trying to trap him so Jesus answer them with a trap which if they denied they would be rejected by the crowd and if they affirmed they would look like they affirm the resurrection so instead he silenced them.

But this brings up another point. Jesus affirms there are angels which again is not a well developed topic in the OT but goes into detail in apocryphal writings. I know the words "angel" appears but this is a lot like the greek word and it means a messenger of God. Do Jesus indirectly draw on these apocryphal writings even though he uses Moses to affirm his position? How does Jesus prove in the existence of angels?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Daniel Marsh
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
this thread itself has given far more conclusive verses that promote the resurrection and apocryphal writings that detail the perspective very clearly but Sadducees demanded proof from the law of Moses so Jesus chose something they could not deny.

Agreed -- He has to make the case without relying on "I win this debate because I say so".. all such arguments with them would fall flat - and the Pharisees would see nothing particularly "remarkable" in pursuing such an uncompelling solution.

The Sadducees didn't believe in spirits or angels yet Jesus immediately opens with an argument about angels.

True. But He can do that in that case because he is responding to a puzzle that THEY hand HIM.. Their argument being that they have constructed a puzzle so "AIRTIGHT" that he can't reason his way out of it and affirm the resurrection. He shows that they missed an elephant sized hole in the argument.

He is not convincing them that his view is right in that case - just that it has a "solution" just when they thought they had Him.

They also don't believe in any rewards or penalties after death and saw death as entering into Sheol where all must pass through.

True -- but in Matt 22 Jesus turns the tables... He hands THEM "the puzzle" and essentially argues that it is THEY who cannot find an escape for it other then his stated solution "the future resurrection".


But Jesus is saying there is life after death that God values by using the words of God that he is still the God of those who are thought dead.

Which is not at all the point He says He is trying to prove.

And if he switched to that point - he would have defeated his entire stated purpose of proving the resurrection since he would be "creating an escape" -- an exit that did not require a future resurrection to satisfy the puzzle he hands them.

Clearly Sadducees were not about to leap off that cliff "on their own" since they had no incentive at all to make up an argument about "alive while dead" or any such thing. And even the Pharisees knew this was not an option of Sadducees.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
But this brings up another point. Jesus affirms there are angels which again is not a well developed topic in the OT but goes into detail in apocryphal writings. I know the words "angel" appears but this is a lot like the greek word and it means a messenger of God. Do Jesus indirectly draw on these apocryphal writings even though he uses Moses to affirm his position? How does Jesus prove in the existence of angels?

Jesus said the "solution" to the puzzle they had Him (in His model) was that just as Angels are not beings created with the bio-capacity to procreate and have families etc -- so the saints in heaven would have some sort of similar restriction.

Jesus does not have to "prove Angels" to do this -- all he needs is to show that in his doctrinal framework there is an answer to the puzzle they hand Him.
 
Upvote 0

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
79
Southern Ga.
✟157,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Jesus said the "solution" to the puzzle they had Him (in His model) was that just as Angels are not beings created with the bio-capacity to procreate and have families etc -- so the saints in heaven would have some sort of similar restriction.

Jesus does not have to "prove Angels" to do this -- all he needs is to show that in his doctrinal framework there is an answer to the puzzle they hand Him.
.
Heaven is not the world, the beings in Heaven are all Spiritual, what would be the purpose of Procreating Spiritual children?

The act of Procreation was for the populating of the earth, Heaven is not the same, Heaven is the reward, Earth is the test.

So you, want to fill Heaven with beings who have not been tested, and have no faith in Christ as Savior, why not just call them Angels?

What would be the purpose for the redeemed to get married and have children in Heaven?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
.
Joh. 11:25
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

Is that the argument that the Sadducees fully accepted and could not refute?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
.
Heaven is not the world, the beings in Heaven are all Spiritual, what would be the purpose of Procreating Spiritual children?

The Sadducees did not buy any of that.

And if they did -- then the "puzzle" Christ was handing the Sadducees did nothing at all to force them to accept the doctrine on future resurrection.
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Jesus said the "solution" to the puzzle they had Him (in His model) was that just as Angels are not beings created with the bio-capacity to procreate and have families etc -- so the saints in heaven would have some sort of similar restriction.

Jesus does not have to "prove Angels" to do this -- all he needs is to show that in his doctrinal framework there is an answer to the puzzle they hand Him.

He is not required to prove angels of course but he brings up the subject to the Sadducees who don't believe in angels. It's seems to me odd and in terms of an argument not the best tactic however I believe he was playing to the crowds not to the Sadducees. This is also why the Sadducees back down with Jesus logic about God being God of the living because he traps them in public with public scrutiny. The Sadducees didn't have the odds in their favour and knew they had to back down otherwise the crowds would reject them.
 
Upvote 0

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
79
Southern Ga.
✟157,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Is that the argument that the Sadducees fully accepted and could not refute?
.
It really doesn't matter what they accepted or rejected, what happened is, they Rejected their Messiah and had Him Crucified, and Salvation was then given to the Gentiles, it doesn't matter a wit, how He shut them down, they were silenced period.
 
Upvote 0

Standing Up

On and on
Sep 3, 2008
25,360
2,757
Around about
✟58,735.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
-snip-
BTW for the sake of focus for this thread we are talking specifically about this --

Suppose as stated in the text Christ is actually debating the topic of the resurrection of the dead -- the future resurrection of the saints -- and actually did put the Sadducees to silence on that very topic... not some other subject.

Matt 22: 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."

As someone has already posted
Luke 20:37) Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.

Christ quoted God's word back to the Sadducees. They denied the resurrection (life after death), but He corrected them with words they believed were God's words. They had to either shut up or repent.

Ex. 3:6 3:6 Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.

Christ said recorded at Mt. 22:34, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

The key that quieted them is that God of the living isn't about a future resurrection, as if the dead were asleep in the grave, which the Sadducees could basically agree with because who knows, but rather that they were alive. God of the living, as in Abraham lives, where the verb lives is in the present tense.

PS. The idea of life after death isn't to answer any question about where or how one might live after death.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,507
Georgia
✟899,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Christ quoted God's word back to the Sadducees. They denied the resurrection (life after death), but He corrected them with words they believed were God's words. They had to either shut up or repent.

In John 11 - Lazarus dies. When Jesus goes to Mary to comfort her about Lazarus living again - she reports the teaching of Jesus that the saints come to life at the 2nd coming.. Paul says 1 Thess 4 that at that event "the dead in Christ rise first"... John says in Rev 20 that it is "the first resurrection".

the Sadducees denied both the resurrection AND the idea of "life-after-death as in the living dead etc" -

Jesus specifically points to "the resurrection" as the point being proven. His explicit doctrine named -- is what people on both sides.. deny most.

Here is the elephant in the living room. The Sadducees railed against Christ's doctrine of the future resurrection -- and yet Christians today in many cases join in denying Christ's proof of that doctrine by arguing that even though He said He was proving His doctrine with an irrefutable argument -- yet in fact He did not prove it but rather proved some other doctrine that would totally undermine the point He was making about the future resurrection.

And that of course ... is nonsense.

.
The key that quieted them is that God of the living isn't about a future resurrection, .

That is KEY to the solution popular today. The wild claim that Jesus in fact DID NOT prove what He stated He was proving.

But that poorly thought out knee-jerk solution fails right out of the gate in Matthew 22 because the Sadducees start off with the problem of the woman with 7 husbands and last of all she dies -- then ask about that future resurrection... asking whose wife she would be in that future resurrection.

Jesus responds that in that future resurrection they will be like the Angels neither marrying nor giving in marriage.

It is all the same subject - of the future resurrection.

This is irrefutable.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0