Matthew 22:23
in Matthew 22That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus and questioned Him.
BSB
The same verse in ASV and KJV ▾
ASV
On that day there came to him Sadducees, they that say that there is no resurrection: and they asked him,
KJV
The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
⋯
This verse in Matthew 22
Commentary
22 notes on this verseI say nothing of the Jewish heretics who before the coming of Christ destroyed the law delivered to them: of Dositheus, the leader of the Samaritans who rejected the prophets: of the Sadducees who sprang from his root and denied even the resurrection of the flesh: of the Pharisees who separated themselves from the Jews on account of certain superfluous observances, and took their name from the fact of their dissent: of the Herodians who accepted Herod as the Christ.
This site's exposition
the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection
on Matthew 22:23-25
The same day came the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, a party distinct from the Pharisees precisely on this point, accepting only the five books of Moses as final authority and reading no bodily resurrection there. Their case is built from Moses' own levirate law in Deuteronomy 25:5, a brother marrying his dead brother's childless widow to raise up seed, and they stretch it into an absurdity, seven brethren married in succession to one woman. The question is designed as a trap for anyone who teaches resurrection, since a shared wife in the age to come was assumed by their own framing to be a problem with no clean answer.
The record, by era
The Church Fathers5 voices
Now it is not one of the prophets merely who predicted the advent of Christ. But although the Samaritans and Sadducees, who receive the books of Moses alone, would say that there were contained in them predictions regarding Christ, yet certainly not in Jerusalem, which is not even mentioned in the times of Moses, was the prophecy uttered.
They who are so anxious to shake that belief in the resurrection which was firmly settled before the appearance of our modern Sadducees, as even to deny that the expectation thereof has any relation whatever to the flesh, have great cause for besetting the flesh of Christ also with doubtful questions, as if it either had no existence at all, or possessed a nature altogether different from human flesh.
Their specious inquiry concerned the flesh, whether or not it would be subject to marriage after the resurrection; and they assumed the case of a woman who had married seven brothers, so that it was a doubtful point to which of them she should be restored. Now, let the purport both of the question and the answer be kept steadily in view, and the discussion is settled at once.
Therefore no solicitude arising from carnal jealousy will, in the day of the resurrection, even in the case of her whom they chose to represent as having been married to seven brothers successively, wound any one of her so many husbands; nor is any (husband) awaiting her to put her to confusion. The question raised by the Sadducees has yielded to the Lord's sentence.
If, then, forasmuch as there is in the law a precept that a man is to take in marriage the wife of his brother if he have died without children, for the purpose of raising up seed to his brother; and this may happen repeatedly to the same person, according to that crafty question of the Sadducees; men for that reason think that frequency of marriage is permitted in other cases as well: it will be their duty to understand first the reason of the precept itself; and thus they will come to know that that reason, now ceasing, is among those parts of the law which have been cancelled.
15 more voices on this verse
The Church Fathers6 voices
(Verse 23) On that day the Sadducees approached him, who say that there is no resurrection. There were two sects among the Jews: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The Pharisees prioritized the righteousness of traditions and observances, which they call 'second law', and this is why they were referred to as 'separated' from the people. However, the Sadducees, who are referred to as 'just', claimed for themselves what they were not: while the former believed in the resurrection of the body and soul and confessed angels and spirits, the Sadducees denied all of these (according to the Acts of the Apostles). These are two houses, of which Isaiah teaches more clearly that they are causes of offense in the stumbling block (Isaiah 8).
As soon as the Pharisees were gone, came the Sadducees; perhaps with like intent, for there was a strife among them who should be the first to seize Him. Or if by argument they should not be able to overcome Him, they might at least by perseverance wear out His understanding. For the Devil finding himself unable to crush utterly the religion of God, brought in the sect of the Sadducees denying the resurrection of the dead, thus breaking down all purpose of a righteous life, for who is there would endure a daily struggle against himself, unless he looked to the hope of the resurrection? But the Sadducees thought they had now discovered a most convincing argument in favour of their error.
A commentator
John ChrysostomHomily on the Gospel of Matthew 70 · Written in the 5th century.
proposed
What then? did they believe? By no means, but they "left Him, and went their way;" and after them, "came to Him the Sadducees." O folly! When the others had been put to silence, these made the attack, when they ought to have been the more backward. But such is the nature of rashness, shameless, and importunate, and attempting things impossible. Therefore the evangelist also, amazed at their folly, signified this very thing, by saying, "On that day came to Him." On that day. On what day? In which He had convicted their craftiness, and put them to shame. But who are these? A sect of the Jews different from the Pharisees, and much worse than they, who said, "that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit." For these were some of a grosser sort, and eager after the things of the body. For there were many sects even amongst the Jews. Wherefore Paul also saith, "I am a Pharisee, of the strictest sect amongst us." And they say nothing indeed directly about a resurrection; but they feign a story, and make up a case, which, as I suppose, never so much as had an existence; thinking to drive Him to perplexity, and desiring to overthrow both things, both the existence of a resurrection, and of such a resurrection.
A commentator
John ChrysostomHomily on the Gospel of Matthew 70 · Written in the 5th century.
proposed
When they heard these things, their mouths were stopped, and they "marvelled" at His wisdom. Ought they not then to have believed, ought they not to have been amazed. For indeed, He gave them proof of His Godhead, by revealing the secrets of their hearts, and with gentleness did He silence them.
There were two sects among the Jews, the Pharisees and the Sadducees; the Pharisees pretended to the righteousness of traditions and observances, whence they were called by the people 'separate.' The Sadducees (the word is interpreted 'righteous') also passed themselves for what they were not; and whereas the first believed the resurrection of body and soul, and confessed both Angel and spirit, these, according to the Acts of the Apostles, denied them all, as it is here also said, Who say that there is no resurrection. (Acts 23:8.)
They not only denied the resurrection of the body, but took away the immortality of the soul.
The Medieval Church4 voices
(Mor. xiv. 55.) But there are who observing that the spirit is loosed from the body, that the flesh is turned to corruption, that the corruption is reduced to dust, and that the dust again is resolved into the elements, so as to be unseen by human eyes, despair of the possibility of a resurrection, and while they look upon the dry bones, doubt that they can be clothed with flesh, and be quickened anew to life.
That day. Here the second question is presented, and he does three things. First, the question is presented; secondly, the response; thirdly, the effect. The second is at but Jesus answering, etc.; the third at and the multitudes hearing it were in admiration. Concerning the …
For of Judaism's heretics I am silent - Dositheus the Samaritan, I mean, who was the first who had the hardihood to repudiate the prophets, on the ground that they had not spoken under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Of the Sadducees I am silent, …
When the mouths of the Pharisees and the Herodians had been shut, again the Sadducees put Him to the test. Their heresy was this: they believed neither in a resurrection of the dead, nor in the existence of an immaterial spirit, nor in angels, and …
The Puritans and the Awakening1 voice
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 relate (w).
The Nineteenth Century4 voices
A commentator
Albert Barnes1798–1870
Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments (1832-1869)
Conversation of Jesus with the Sadducees respecting the resurrection - See also Mar 12:18-27; Luk 20:27-38. Mat 22:23 The same day came the Sadducees - For an account of the Sadducees, see the notes at Mat 3:7. No resurrection - The word “resurrection” usually means the raising up the “body” to life after it is dead, Joh 11:24; Joh 5:29; 1Co 15:22. But the Sadducees not only denied this, but also a future state, and the separate existence of the soul after death altogether, as well as the existence of angels and spirits, Act 23:
This passage describes a conversation between our Lord Jesus Christ and the Sadducees. These unhappy men, who said that there was “no resurrection” attempted, like the Pharisees and Herodians, to perplex our Lord with hard questions. Like them, they hoped “to entangle him in his talk” and to injure his reputation among the people. Like them, they were completely baffled. Let us observe in the first place, that absurd skeptical objections to Bible truths are ancient things.
This passage describes a conversation between our Lord Jesus Christ and the Sadducees. These unhappy men, who said that there was “no resurrection” attempted, like the Pharisees and Herodians, to perplex our Lord with hard questions. Like them, they hoped “to entangle him in his talk” and to injure his reputation among the people. Like them, they were completely baffled. Let us observe in the first place, that absurd skeptical objections to Bible truths are ancient things. The Sadducees wished to show the absurdity of the doctrine of the resurrection and the life to come; they therefore came to our Lord with a story which was probably invented for the occasion. They told him that a certain woman had married seven brothers in succession, who had all died and left no children. They then asked, “whose wife” this woman would be in the next world, when all rose again. The object of the question was plain and transparent. They meant, in reality, to bring the whole doctrine of a resurrection into contempt; they meant to insinuate that there must needs be confusion, and strife and unseemly disorder if after death men and women were to live again. It must never surprise us if we meet with like objections against the doctrines of Scripture, and especially against those doctrines which concern another world. There never probably will be wanting unreasonable men who will intrude into things unseen and make imaginary difficulties their excuse for unbelief. Supposed cases are one of the favorite strongholds in which an unbelieving mind loves to entrench itself. Such a mind will often set up a shadow of its own imagining, and fight with it as if it was a truth; such a mind will often refuse to look at the overwhelming mass of plain evidence by which Christianity is supported, and will fasten down on some one single difficulty which it fancies is unanswerable.
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 Mat 16:1 (note).
How the passage was read
On Matthew 22:23-46On Matthew 22:23-46
The Sadducees' riddle, the greatest commandment, and David's son
The Sadducees, the priestly party that denied the resurrection of the dead (Acts 23:8), build their riddle on levirate marriage: the Torah's command that a man marry his brother's childless widow (Deuteronomy 25:5-10, the law behind Ruth; the Mishnah's tractate Yevamot regulates its cases). Seven brothers, one widow: “in the resurrection whose wife shall she be?” Jesus answers them from the Torah alone, the canon they granted: “I AM the God of Abraham” (Exodus 3:6), the living God of living men. Note where the parties stand: the Pharisees affirmed the resurrection so strongly that the Mishnah excludes from the world to come anyone who says the resurrection is not from the Torah (Sanhedrin 10:1). On this doctrine the Pharisaic tradition and Christian confession stand together against the Sadducees.
The lawyer's question that follows, “which is the great commandment?”, belongs to a genuine rabbinic genre: the search for a kelal gadol, a great governing principle. Hillel, asked to teach the whole Torah while a challenger stood on one foot, answered “what is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow; that is the whole Torah, the rest is commentary; go and learn” (Shabbat 31a); Rabbi Akiva later called “love your neighbor as yourself” the all-embracing principle of the Torah (Sifra on Leviticus 19:18). Jesus' first answer IS the Shema, the confession every observant Jew prays morning and evening (Deuteronomy 6:4-5), joined to Leviticus 19:18. The materials are the tradition's own; what is His alone is the authority with which He joins and ranks them, and the counter-question He then asks from Psalm 110: whose son is the Messiah?
This section is reception history: how the passage was read and kept in the Jewish tradition. Where a reading parts from an essential of the Christian faith, the section says so at that point.
Sources: Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1 (the resurrection as core doctrine) · Shabbat 31a (Babylonian Talmud, Hillel on one foot) · Sifra, Kedoshim 4:12 (Akiva's great principle) · Mishnah Yevamot 1:1 (the levirate tractate)
The words behind it
14 Greek wordsEvery Greek word of this verse in the order it stands, with what it means and the door to its own study. The last column counts the times a word stands in the whole Bible: the rarer the word, the more the places it appears belong together.
| Greek | Sound | Meaning | Word study | In the Bible |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ἐν | en | On | G1722 → | 2738 times |
| ἐκείνῃ | ekeine | that [very] | G1565 → | 260 times |
| τῇ | tea | <the> | G3588 → | 19766 times |
| ἡμέρᾳ | hemera | day | G2250 → | 389 times |
| προσῆλθον | proselthon | came | G4334 → | 86 times |
| αὐτῷ | auto | to Him | G846 → | 5565 times |
| Σαδδουκαῖοι | saddoukaioi | Sadducees | G4523 → | 14 times |
| λέγοντες | legontes | saying | G3004 → | 1325 times |
| μὴ | me | not | G3361 → | 1066 times |
| εἶναι | einai | being | G1511 → | 123 times |
| ἀνάστασιν | anastasin | a resurrection | G386 → | 42 times |
| καὶ | kai | and | G2532 → | 9120 times |
| ἐπηρώτησαν | eperotesan | they questioned | G1905 → | 56 times |
| αὐτὸν | auton | Him | G846 → | 5565 times |
ἘνOn
enG1722 →2738 times
ἐκείνῃthat [very]
ekeineG1565 →260 times
τῇ<the>
teaG3588 →19766 times
ἡμέρᾳday
hemeraG2250 →389 times
προσῆλθονcame
proselthonG4334 →86 times
αὐτῷto Him
autoG846 →5565 times
ΣαδδουκαῖοιSadducees
saddoukaioiG4523 →14 times
λέγοντεςsaying
legontesG3004 →1325 times
μὴnot
meG3361 →1066 times
εἶναιbeing
einaiG1511 →123 times
ἀνάστασινa resurrection
anastasinG386 →42 times
καὶand
kaiG2532 →9120 times
ἐπηρώτησανthey questioned
eperotesanG1905 →56 times
αὐτὸνHim
autonG846 →5565 times
A shaded row is a word that stands 400 times or fewer in the Bible.
The walk
8 stopsEach card is a verse this one points to, and under it the verses that one points to in turn. Where several paths arrive at the same place, that place is listed first: the text keeps returning to it.
Through
Acts 4:1While Peter and John were speaking to the people, the priests and the captain of the temple guard and the Sadducees came up to them,
it leads to
- Luke 22:4
And Judas went to discuss with the chief priests and temple officers how he might betray Jesus to them.
- Acts 6:12
So they stirred up the people, elders, and scribes and confronted Stephen. They seized him and brought him before the Sanhedrin,
- Acts 23:6–9
Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. It is because of my hope in…
- Luke 22:4
Through
Matthew 3:7But when John saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his place of baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?
it leads to
- Matthew 12:34
You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks.
- Romans 5:9
Therefore, since we have now been justified by His blood, how much more shall we be saved from wrath through Him!
- Matthew 23:33
You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape the sentence of hell?
- 1 Thessalonians 1:10
and to await His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead—Jesus our deliverer from the coming wrath.
- Matthew 23:13–28
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let in those who wish to enter.
- Matthew 12:34
Where this verse is studied
About Matthew

This page draws on 20 works. Open the list of works
This page draws on Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible; Albert Barnes, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments (1832-1869); Gregory the Dialogist, Catena Aurea by Aquinas; J.C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: Matthew; Jerome, The Dialogue Against the Luciferians, Section 23; Jerome, Commentary on Matthew; Jerome, Catena Aurea by Aquinas; John Chrysostom, Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70; John Gill, Exposition of the New Testament (1746-1748); John Lightfoot, Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae on Matthew; Origen of Alexandria, Against Celsus, Book 1; Origen of Alexandria, Catena Aurea by Aquinas; Pseudo-Chrysostom, Catena Aurea by Aquinas; Pseudo-Tertullian, Against all Heresies 1.1; Tertullian, On the Flesh of Christ; Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh; Tertullian, To His Wife Book I; Tertullian, On Monogamy; Theophylact of Ohrid, Commentary on Matthew and Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Matthew.
