TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Mark 12:18–27. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
The Sadducees, who were the deists of that age, here attack our Lord Jesus, it should seem, not as the scribes, and Pharisees, and chief-priests, with any malicious design upon his person; they were not bigots and persecutors, but sceptics and infidels, and their design was upon his doctrine, to hinder the spreading of that: they denied that there was any resurrection, and world of spirits, any state of rewards and punishments on the other side of death: now those great and fundamental truths which they denied, Christ had made it his business to establish and prove, and had carried the notion of them much further that ever it was before carried; and therefore they set themselves to perplex his doctrine.
I.See here the method they take to entangle it; they quote the ancient law, by which, if a man died without issue, his brother was obliged to marry his widow, Mar 12:19. They suppose a case to happen that, according to that law, seven brothers were, successively, the husbands of one woman, Mar 12:20. Probably, these Sadducees, according to their wonted profaneness, intended hereby to ridicule that law, and so to bring the whole frame of the Mosaic institution into contempt, as absurd and inconvenient in the practice of it. Those who deny divine truths, commonly set themselves to disparage divine laws and ordinances. But this was only by the by; their design was to expose the doctrine of the resurrection; for they suppose that if there be a future state, it must be such a one as this, and then the doctrine, they think, is clogged either with this invincible absurdity, that a woman in that state must have seven husbands, or else with this insolvable difficulty, whose wife must she be. See with what subtlety these heretics undermine the truth; they do not deny it, nor say, There can be no resurrection; nay, they do not seem to doubt of it, nor say, If there be a resurrection, whose wife shall she be? as the devil to Christ, If thou be the Son of God. But, as though these beasts of the field were more subtle than the serpent himself, they pretend to own the truth, as if they were not Sadducees, no not they; who said that they denied the resurrection? They take it for granted that there is a resurrection, and would be thought to desire instruction concerning it, when really they are designing to give a fatal stab, and think that they shall do it. Note, It is the common artifice of heretics and Sadducees to perplex and entangle the truth, which they have not the impudence to deny.
II.See here the method Christ takes to clear and establish this truth, which they attempted to darken, and give a shock to.
This was a matter of moment, and therefore Christ does not pass it over lightly, but enlarges upon it, that, if they should not be reclaimed, yet others might be confirmed.
1.He charges the Sadducees with error, and charges that upon their ignorance. They who banter the doctrine of the resurrection as some do in our age, would be thought the only knowing men, because the only free thinkers, when really they are the fools in Israel, and the most enslaved and, prejudiced thinkers in the world. Do ye not therefore err? Ye cannot but be sensible of it yourselves, and that the cause of your error is,
(1.)Because ye do not know the scriptures. Not but that the Sadducees had read the scriptures, and perhaps were ready in them; yet they might be truly said not to know the scriptures, because they did not know the sense and meaning of them, but put false constructions upon them; or they did not receive the scriptures as the word of God, but set up their own corrupt reasonings in opposition to the scripture, and would believe nothing but what they could see. Note, A right knowledge of the scripture, as the fountain whence all revealed religion now flows, and the foundation on which it is built, is the best preservative against error. Keep the truth, the scripture-truth, and it shall keep thee.
(2.)Because ye know not the power of God. They could not but know that God is almighty, but they would not apply that doctrine to this matter, but gave up the truth to the objections of the impossibility of it, which would all have been answered, if they had but stuck to the doctrine of God's omnipotence, to which nothing is impossible. This therefore which God hath spoken once, we are concerned to hear twice, to hear and believe, to hear and apply - that power belongs to God, Psa 62:11; Rom 4:19-21. The same power that made soul and body and preserved them while they were together, can preserve the body safe, and the soul active, when they are parted, and can unite them together again; for behold, the Lord's arm is not shortened. The power of God, seen in the return of the spring (Psa 104:30), in the reviving of the corn (Joh 12:24), in the restoring of an abject people to their prosperity (Eze 37:12-14), in the raising of so many to life, miraculously, both in the Old Testament and in the New, and especially in the resurrection of Christ (Eph 1:19, Eph 1:20), are all earnests of our resurrection by the same power (Phi 3:21); according to the mighty working whereby he is able to subdue all things to himself.
2.He sets aside all the force of their objection, by setting the doctrine of the future state in a true light (Mar 12:25); When they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage. It is a folly to ask, Whose wife shall she be of the seven? For the relation between husband and wife, though instituted in the earthly paradise, will not be known in the heavenly one. Turks and infidels expect sensual pleasures in their fools' paradise, but Christians know better things - that flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God (Co1 15:50); and expect better things - even a full satisfaction in God's love and likeness (Psa 17:15); they are as the angels of God in heaven, and we know that they have neither wives nor children. It is no wonder if we confound ourselves with endless absurdities, when we measure our ideas of the world of spirits by the affairs of this world of sense.
III.He builds the doctrine of the future state, and of the blessedness of the righteous in that state, upon the covenant of God with Abraham, which God was pleased to own, being after Abraham's death, Mar 12:26, Mar 12:27. He appeals to the scriptures; Have ye not read in the book of Moses? We have some advantage in dealing with those that have read the scriptures, though many that have read them, wrest them, as these Sadducees did, to their own destruction. Now that which he refers them to is, what God says to Moses at the bush, I am the God of Abraham; not only, I was so, but I am so; I am the portion and happiness of Abraham, a God all-sufficient to him. Note, It is absurd to think that God's relation to Abraham should be continued, and thus solemnly recognised, if Abraham was annihilated, or that the living God should be the portion and happiness of a man that is dead, and must be for ever so; and therefore you must conclude,
1.That Abraham's soul exists and acts as a state of separation from the body.
2.That therefore, some time or other, the body must rise again; for there is such an innate inclination in a human soul towards its body, as would make a total and everlasting separation inconsistent with the ease and repose, much more with the bliss and joy of those souls that have the Lord for their God. Upon the whole matter, he concludes, Ye therefore do greatly err. Those that deny the resurrection, greatly err, and ought to be told so.
Historical interpretation
Eleven Centuries of Reception
9 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
But in a mystical sense: what can this woman, leaving no seed of seven brothers, and last of all dying, mean except the Jewish synagogue, deserted by the seven-fold Spirit, which filled those seven patriarchs, who did not leave to her the seed of Abraham, that is, Jesus Christ? For although a Son was born to them, nevertheless He was given to us Gentiles. This woman was dead to Christ, nor shall she be joined in the resurrection to any patriarch of the seven; for by the number seven is meant the whole company of the faithful. Thus it is said contrariwise by Isaiah, Seven women shall take hold of one man; (Is. 4:1) that is, the seven Churches, which the Lord loves, reproves, and chastises, adore Him with one faith. Wherefore it goes on: And Jesus answering, said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, not knowing the Scripture, neither the power of God?
Thus then they do not understand the Scripture, in that in the resurrection, men shall be as the Angels of God, that is, no man there dies, no one is born, no infant is there, no old man.
But 1 say, in the bush, in which is an image of you; for in it the fire was kindled, but it did not consume its thorns; so my words set you on fire, but do not burn off your thorns, which have grown under the curse.
But when He says, The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; by naming God thrice, He implied the Trinity. But when He says, He is not the God of the dead, by naming again the One God, he implies One Substance. But they live who make good the portion, which they had chosen; and they are dead, who have lost what they had made good. Ye therefore do greatly err.
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.
They put to him the strongest case they could to impair his credibility. They fashioned a contorted argument to pursue the question which they had initiated. Their deceptive inquiry concerned the flesh, whether or not it would be subject to marriage after the resurrection. They assumed the case of a woman who had married seven brothers, so as to make it doubtful as to which of them she should be restored. Now, let the gist both of the question and the answer be kept steadily in view, and the discussion is settled at once in this way: The Sadducees indeed denied the resurrection, while the Lord affirmed it. In affirming it, he reproached them as being both ignorant of the Scriptures—which declare the resurrection—and disbelieving of the power of God as able to raise the dead. He then spoke without ambiguity of the dead being raised.
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.
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.
The Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him. There were two sects among the Jews, one of the Pharisees and the other of the Sadducees. The Pharisees, who preferred justice of traditions and observances which they called "deuterosis," were commonly known as separated from the people. But the Sadducees, whose name means "just," also claimed what they were not. The former believed in the resurrection of both body and soul, and admitted angels and spirits; the latter, following the Acts of the Apostles, denied everything.
(ubi sup.) And fitly do they frame such a fable in order to prove the madness of those who assert the resurrection of the body. Such a thing however might really have happened at some time or other among them.
(ubi sup.) We must here consider that the Latin custom does not answer to the Greek idiom. For properly 1different words are used for the marriage of men, and that of women; but here we may simply understand that, marry is meant of men, and given in marriage of women.
(ubi sup.) Or else; because after proving that the soul remained after death, (for God could not be God of those who did not exist at all,) the resurrection of the body also might be inferred as a consequence, since it had done good and evil with the soul.
A certain heretical sect of the Jews called Sadducees denied the resurrection, and said that there was neither angel nor spirit. These then coming to Jesus, craftily proposed to Him a certain tale, in order to show that no resurrection should take place, or had taken place; and therefore there is added, And they asked him, saying, Master. And in this tale they lay down that seven men had married one woman, in order to make men draw back from belief in the resurrection.
As if He had said, Ye understand not what sort of a resurrection the Scriptures announce; for ye believe that there will be a restoration of our bodies, such as they are now, but it shall not be so. Thus then ye know not the Scriptures; neither again do ye know the power of God; for ye consider it as a difficult thing, saying, How can the limbs, which have been scattered, be united together and joined to the soul? But this in respect of the Divine power is as nothing. There follows: For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven; as if He had said, There will be a certain heavenly and angelic restoration to life, when there shall be no more decay, and we shall remain unchanged; and for this reason marriage shall cease. For marriage now exists on account of our decay, that we may be carried on by succession of our race, and not fail; but then we shall be as the Angels, who need no succession by marriage, and never come to an end.
In another way also they are deceived, not understanding the Scriptures; for if they had understood them, they should also have understood how by the Scriptures the resurrection of the dead may be proved; wherefore He adds, And as touching the dead, that they rise, have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
But I say, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. As if He had said, The God of the living, wherefore He adds, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; for He did not say, I have been, but I am, as if they had been present. But some one perhaps will say, that God spake this only of the soul of Abraham, not of his body; to which I answer, that Abraham implies both, that is, soul and body, so that He also is the God of the body, and the body lives with God, that is, in God's ordinance.
(non occ.) After that our Lord has prudently escaped the crafty temptation of the Pharisees, it is shown how He also confounds the Sadducees, who tempt Him; wherefore it is said: Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection.
(non occ.) That is, because they contradicted the Scriptures, and derogated from the power of God.
Continue studying Mark 12:18 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Mark 12:18 introduces a pivotal encounter between Jesus and the Sadducees, a prominent and influential Jewish sect in Jerusalem. This verse sets the stage for a significant theological debate, highlighting the Sadducees' defining denial of the resurrection of the dead. Their approach to Jesus, characterized by a challenging question, underscores the ongoing tension between Jesus' teachings and the established religious authorities of his time, particularly concerning fundamental beliefs about the afterlife and divine power.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is situated within a series of confrontations Jesus experiences with various Jewish religious factions in Jerusalem during the final week before his crucifixion. Following a successful parry against the Pharisees and Herodians regarding the legitimacy of paying taxes to Caesar in Mark 12:13-17, Jesus is now approached by the Sadducees. Mark's narrative consistently portrays these encounters as attempts by the religious elite to trap Jesus in his words or discredit his authority before the people. The Sadducees' specific question, detailed in Mark 12:19-23, is a hypothetical scenario designed to expose what they perceive as the logical absurdity of a resurrection, particularly concerning levirate marriage. Jesus' subsequent response, found in Mark 12:24-27, directly refutes their premise and affirms the reality of the resurrection, drawing upon the very Torah they claimed as their sole authority.
Historical & Cultural Context
The Sadducees were one of the three major Jewish sects during the Second Temple period, alongside the Pharisees and the Essenes. Unlike the Pharisees, who were primarily lay scholars and teachers, the Sadducees were largely drawn from the aristocratic, priestly families who controlled the Temple and its rituals. Their theological distinctives included a strict adherence to the written Torah (the Pentateuch) as the only authoritative scripture, rejecting the oral traditions upheld by the Pharisees. Crucially, they denied the existence of a resurrection, angels, or spirits, as explicitly stated in Acts 23:8. Their worldview was largely materialistic and focused on this life, making the concept of an afterlife or resurrection a point of contention. Geographically, their power base was Jerusalem, centered around the Temple, which made their confrontation with Jesus in the Temple courts particularly significant. Their opposition to Jesus stemmed not only from his teachings but also from his challenge to their established authority and interpretation of the Law.
Key Themes
Mark 12:18 contributes to several overarching themes within the Gospel. Firstly, it highlights the theological opposition Jesus faced from the various Jewish leadership groups. Each group, with their distinct doctrines and agendas, sought to undermine Jesus, revealing the deep divisions within Judaism of the time. Secondly, the verse underscores the centrality of the resurrection as a foundational theological concept. The Sadducees' denial of it sets up a crucial debate that allows Jesus to articulate a profound truth about God's power and the nature of eternal life. This theme foreshadows the ultimate reality of Jesus' own resurrection, which would become the cornerstone of Christian faith as articulated in 1 Corinthians 15. Finally, it subtly introduces the theme of divine authority and interpretation of scripture, as Jesus, in his response, demonstrates a deeper, more accurate understanding of the Law than even those who claimed to be its guardians.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This term refers to a specific Jewish sect, likely derived from Zadok, the high priest during the time of David and Solomon. As the primary priestly aristocracy, they held significant power in Jerusalem and within the Temple system. Their defining theological characteristic, explicitly stated in this verse, was their rejection of the resurrection, distinguishing them sharply from the Pharisees and from Jesus' own teaching.
Literally meaning "a standing up again" or "a rising up," this term refers to the concept of the dead being raised to new life. For the Sadducees, this was a foreign concept, not explicitly detailed in the Pentateuch, which they considered their sole authoritative scripture. For Jesus and later for the early church, the resurrection (specifically Christ's) became the cornerstone of hope and salvation.
This verb signifies to "ask for," "inquire," or "question." It implies a deliberate and often challenging interrogation, rather than a simple request for information. In this context, it highlights the Sadducees' intent to trap Jesus with a complex, hypothetical scenario, believing they could expose a flaw in the belief in resurrection.
Verse Breakdown
"Then come unto him the Sadducees"
This phrase indicates a direct approach by this specific religious group to Jesus. The timing, "Then," places it immediately after Jesus' successful engagement with other hostile groups, suggesting a continuous stream of challenges to his authority and teaching in Jerusalem. The Sadducees, given their influential position, were likely seeking to assert their theological dominance and undermine Jesus' growing popularity.
"which say there is no resurrection"
This is a crucial parenthetical clause that immediately informs the reader of the Sadducees' defining theological position. It clarifies their motivation for approaching Jesus and sets the stage for the ensuing debate. Their denial of the resurrection was a fundamental tenet that separated them from the Pharisees and from the eschatological hopes common among many Jews, including Jesus' followers.
"and they asked him, saying,"
This final clause confirms their intention to engage Jesus in a verbal challenge. The use of "saying" (Greek: légō) indicates that their question was not a casual inquiry but a formal, perhaps even prepared, statement or interrogation, designed to elicit a response that they could then use against him. It highlights their adversarial stance and the intellectual nature of the impending confrontation.
Literary Devices
The verse primarily employs Direct Statement and Characterization. The direct statement "which say there is no resurrection" serves as a concise and immediate Characterization of the Sadducees, defining them by their most significant theological divergence. This direct characterization is crucial for the reader to understand the context and stakes of the subsequent dialogue. It quickly establishes the ideological conflict that will unfold, setting up the dramatic tension between Jesus' teachings and the Sadducees' rigid, limited worldview. The verse also implicitly uses Foreshadowing, as the mention of "no resurrection" immediately signals that the ensuing debate will center on this profound theological truth, which is central to Jesus' own identity and mission.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Mark 12:18, by introducing the Sadducees' denial of the resurrection, immediately draws the reader into one of the most fundamental theological debates of Jesus' ministry and indeed, of all time. It highlights the stark contrast between a worldview limited to earthly existence and one that embraces God's power to transcend death and bring forth new life. The Sadducees' error stemmed not merely from a different interpretation of scripture, but from a profound misunderstanding of God's omnipotence and faithfulness. Their intellectual pride led them to reject a truth that was, in fact, implicitly present in the very texts they claimed to uphold. This encounter serves as a powerful reminder that true faith requires not just intellectual assent to certain texts, but a humble recognition of God's boundless power and His unfolding redemptive plan.
Reflection and Application
The confrontation with the Sadducees in Mark 12:18 and the subsequent verses offers profound lessons for contemporary believers. It challenges us to examine the foundations of our own faith, ensuring that our understanding of God is not limited by human reason or preconceived notions, but is expansive enough to encompass His infinite power and wisdom. The Sadducees, despite their scholarly approach to the Torah, failed to grasp the full implications of God's character and promises, particularly concerning life beyond death. This serves as a cautionary tale against intellectual arrogance and the danger of reducing God to our own finite comprehension. For us, the reality of the resurrection is not merely a theological concept but the very bedrock of our hope, transforming our perspective on suffering, death, and eternal purpose. It calls us to live with an eternal perspective, knowing that our present struggles are temporary and that a glorious future awaits those who are in Christ. It also encourages us to engage with skepticism and doubt, not with fear, but with the confident truth of God's Word, just as Jesus did.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What was the primary difference between the Sadducees and the Pharisees?
The primary difference lay in their theological beliefs and their interpretation of scripture. The Sadducees, largely from the priestly aristocracy, accepted only the written Torah (the first five books of Moses) as authoritative scripture and denied the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels, and spirits. In contrast, the Pharisees, a more popular lay movement, accepted both the written Torah and a vast body of oral tradition as authoritative, and they firmly believed in the resurrection, angels, and spirits, as highlighted in Acts 23:8. Their differing views on the afterlife and the scope of divine revelation led to frequent theological disputes.
Why did the Sadducees approach Jesus with this question about the resurrection?
The Sadducees approached Jesus with this question primarily to trap him and discredit his authority. Given their rejection of the resurrection, they likely saw Jesus' teachings as aligned with the Pharisaic belief in an afterlife, which they considered illogical and unscriptural according to their narrow interpretation of the Torah. Their hypothetical scenario about a woman married to seven brothers (as detailed in Mark 12:19-23) was designed to expose what they perceived as the absurdities of resurrection belief, particularly concerning social structures like marriage. They hoped to force Jesus into a theological corner, thereby undermining his credibility before the crowds and other religious leaders.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Mark 12:18, though seemingly a simple introduction to a debate, profoundly points to Christ as the ultimate fulfillment of the resurrection hope. The Sadducees' denial of resurrection, rooted in a limited view of God's power and a narrow interpretation of scripture, stands in stark contrast to the very essence of Jesus' identity and mission. He is not merely a teacher who speaks about resurrection; He is the Resurrection and the Life, as He declares in John 11:25. His own triumphant victory over death, detailed in Mark 16:6 and affirmed throughout the New Testament, utterly shatters the Sadducees' skepticism and validates the very truth they denied. Moreover, Christ's resurrection is not an isolated event but the firstfruits of a greater harvest, guaranteeing the future resurrection of all who believe in Him (1 Corinthians 15:20-23). Thus, this encounter, which begins with a challenge to the concept of resurrection, ultimately serves to highlight the indispensable role of Jesus Christ as the one who embodies and secures eternal life for all humanity, transforming a theological debate into the very foundation of Christian hope.