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
Five Centuries of Reception
4 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.
(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 12:21 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 12:21 continues the Sadducees' elaborate hypothetical scenario presented to Jesus, aiming to discredit the doctrine of resurrection. This verse specifically details the fate of the second and third brothers in their contrived story, who, like the first, marry the same woman in succession and die without leaving offspring, thereby intensifying the perceived dilemma regarding the woman's marital status in the afterlife.
Context
Literary Context
Mark 12:21 is an integral part of a pivotal confrontation between Jesus and the Sadducees, meticulously recorded in Mark 12:18-27. This passage immediately follows Jesus' encounters with the Pharisees and Herodians regarding taxes, and the scribes regarding the greatest commandment, highlighting a series of challenges to His authority and teaching. The Sadducees' question, centered on a woman married sequentially to seven brothers, is designed as a logical trap, building to an absurd conclusion if resurrection were true. This verse, by continuing the list of deceased brothers, amplifies the complexity of their hypothetical, setting the stage for Jesus' profound and paradigm-shifting answer about the nature of the resurrected life.
Historical & Cultural Context
The Sadducees were a prominent Jewish sect during the Second Temple period, primarily composed of aristocratic priests and wealthy landowners. Distinct from the Pharisees, they accepted only the written Torah (the Pentateuch) as authoritative scripture and vehemently denied the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels, and the immortality of the soul. Their challenge to Jesus was rooted in their literalistic interpretation of the Mosaic Law, specifically the Levirate marriage law found in Deuteronomy 25:5-6. This law mandated that if a man died childless, his brother should marry the widow to "raise up offspring for his brother," ensuring the family line and inheritance continued. The Sadducees' hypothetical, involving seven brothers, was an exaggerated application of this law, intended to expose what they perceived as an inherent contradiction between the Law and the concept of resurrection.
Key Themes
This verse, by extending the Sadducees' narrative, contributes to several significant themes within the broader passage. Firstly, it underscores The Sadducees' Challenge to Resurrection, showcasing their attempt to use a seemingly unresolvable earthly dilemma to invalidate a core tenet of Jewish eschatology. Their question reveals a fundamental Misunderstanding of God's Power and the Nature of the Afterlife, as they project human limitations and societal structures onto divine realities. The repetition of brothers dying without issue also serves to Amplify the Perceived Absurdity of their scenario, thereby intensifying the dramatic tension and preparing the audience for Jesus' subsequent, divinely inspired wisdom. Jesus' response in Mark 12:24-27 directly addresses their error, revealing their ignorance of both the scriptures and the power of God.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This word, derived from the comparative of "two," signifies the ordinal position in a sequence. In Mark 12:21, it precisely marks the progression of the Sadducees' hypothetical, indicating the next brother in line to marry the widow after the first has died. Its use emphasizes the sequential nature of the tragedy within their contrived scenario, building the cumulative effect of the seven brothers.
This verb, meaning "to die off," refers to the cessation of physical life. In this context, it highlights the repeated and tragic demise of each brother, central to the Sadducees' argument. The consistent outcome of death without offspring is the linchpin of their "problem," as it necessitates the next brother's marriage under the Levirate law, thereby escalating the perceived marital complication in the resurrection.
Literally "something sown," this term implies offspring or progeny. The phrase "neither left he any seed" is crucial, as it directly references the condition that triggers the Levirate marriage law in Deuteronomy 25:5. The repeated failure to produce offspring is the driving force behind the Sadducees' escalating hypothetical, making the woman a widow multiple times over and intensifying the "problem" they present to Jesus regarding her status in the resurrection.
Verse Breakdown
"And the second took her, and died,"
This clause continues the narrative established in the preceding verse, where the first brother married the woman and died childless. Here, the "second" brother fulfills the Levirate duty by marrying the widow. The immediate mention of his death underscores the tragic and repetitive nature of the Sadducees' hypothetical, quickly moving the story forward to set up their intended dilemma.
"neither left he any seed:"
This phrase is critical, as it reiterates the specific condition that necessitates the continuation of the Levirate marriage chain. Just like the first brother, the second brother also dies without producing an heir. This detail is essential for the Sadducees' argument, as it justifies the subsequent marriages and builds the cumulative "problem" of the woman having been married to multiple men.
"and the third likewise."
This concise statement efficiently advances the narrative, indicating that the third brother followed the same pattern as the first two. He also married the widow and, implicitly, died without leaving any offspring, mirroring the identical fate of his predecessors. The use of "likewise" (Greek, hōsaútōs') signals the continuation of the pattern, emphasizing the escalating number of brothers involved in this childless sequence, which is central to the Sadducees' attempt to create an unresolvable dilemma for Jesus regarding the resurrection.
Literary Devices
Mark 12:21, as part of the Sadducees' larger question, effectively employs several literary devices to achieve its rhetorical purpose. The primary device is the Hypothetical Scenario, as the Sadducees construct an elaborate, albeit fictional, situation to challenge Jesus. Within this scenario, Repetition is evident in the recurring pattern of brothers marrying the same woman and dying childless, which serves to build the cumulative effect and emphasize the perceived absurdity of the situation if marriage were to continue in the afterlife. Furthermore, the entire account, particularly the involvement of seven brothers, utilizes Exaggeration or Hyperbole. While the Levirate law was real, a scenario involving seven successive childless deaths is highly improbable, designed to push the boundaries of the law to an extreme and highlight what the Sadducees believed was a logical flaw in the doctrine of resurrection.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Mark 12:21, in its continuation of the Sadducees' flawed hypothetical, highlights a crucial theological point: the danger of limiting God's power and the realities of the afterlife to human understanding and earthly conventions. The Sadducees, bound by their literalistic interpretation of the Law and their denial of resurrection, could not conceive of an existence beyond the physical and procreative aspects of marriage. Their question, epitomized by the escalating dilemma in this verse, reveals a profound misunderstanding of the nature of resurrected life, which Jesus corrects by stating that in the resurrection, people "neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven" (Mark 12:25). This passage thus serves as a powerful reminder that God's future kingdom transcends our present earthly paradigms, operating on a different, divinely ordained order.
Reflection and Application
The Sadducees' question in Mark 12:21 and its context offer profound lessons for contemporary believers. It challenges us to examine our own preconceptions about God's nature and the future. Are we, like the Sadducees, inadvertently limiting God's power by projecting our earthly experiences and logical frameworks onto divine realities? This passage encourages us to cultivate a faith that trusts in God's boundless power and wisdom, even when His ways transcend our full comprehension. It reminds us that the resurrected life will be fundamentally different, marked by a transformed existence that moves beyond the structures and needs of our current world. Rather than getting entangled in speculative dilemmas about the afterlife, we are called to focus on the revealed truths of Scripture concerning God's sovereignty, the promise of resurrection, and the eternal hope found in Him. Our hope is not in the continuation of earthly arrangements but in the glorious new creation God is bringing forth.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did the Sadducees present such an extreme hypothetical scenario to Jesus?
The Sadducees crafted this extreme scenario involving seven brothers to expose what they believed was a logical absurdity in the doctrine of the resurrection. Since they only accepted the Pentateuch and denied the resurrection, they used the Levirate marriage law (Deuteronomy 25:5-6) as a legal precedent. By escalating the situation to seven brothers, they aimed to create an insurmountable problem: if there was a resurrection and marriage continued, to which of the seven brothers would the woman be married? Their goal was not to seek truth but to publicly discredit Jesus and the concept of resurrection, which was a core belief of the Pharisees and early Christians.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While Mark 12:21 itself describes a human dilemma, its significance is fully realized in Jesus' response, which profoundly reorients our understanding of life, death, and the future through a Christ-centered lens. The Sadducees' question, rooted in their denial of resurrection, highlights humanity's inherent struggle to grasp existence beyond the grave. Jesus, however, is not merely a teacher of resurrection but the very embodiment of it. He declares, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live" (John 11:25). His own resurrection from the dead, foretold and accomplished, utterly demolishes the Sadducees' earthly logic and provides the ultimate answer to their hypothetical. In Christ, the future is not a mere continuation of earthly arrangements but a glorious transformation. The "new creation" (2 Corinthians 5:17) in Him transcends the limitations of sin and death, including the need for procreation to continue a lineage. Jesus' victory over death means that in the resurrection, believers will experience a glorified existence, "like angels in heaven" (Mark 12:25), not bound by earthly institutions but fully consumed by the eternal relationship with God, made possible through His atoning work and triumphant resurrection.