TRV
Translation
King James Version
¶ The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
Complete Jewish Bible
That same day, some Tz'dukim came to him. They are the ones who say there is no such thing as resurrection, so they put to him a sh'eilah:
Berean Standard Bible
That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus and questioned Him.
American Standard Version
On that day there came to him Sadducees, they that say that there is no resurrection: and they asked him,
World English Bible Messianic
On that day Sadducees (those who say that there is no resurrection) came to him. They asked him,
Geneva Bible (1599)
The same day the Sadduces came to him (which say that there is no resurrection) and asked him,
Young's Literal Translation
In that day there came near to him Sadducees, who are saying there is not a rising again, and they questioned him, saying,
See on the biblical-era map
In the KJVVerse 23,896 of 31,102
Study This Verse
Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers . Public domain.
Copy as
Pseudo-Tertullian
Against all Heresies 1.1
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, who, springing from the root of this error, had the hardihood to adjoin to this heresy the denial likewise of the resurrection of the flesh.
TertullianAD 220
On Monogamy
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.
TertullianAD 220
On the Flesh of Christ
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.
TertullianAD 220
To His Wife Book I
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.
TertullianAD 220
On the Resurrection of the 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.
Origen of AlexandriaAD 253
Contra Celsum, Book I, Chapter 49
But although the Samaritans and Sadducees, who receive the books of Moses alone, would say that there were contained in them predictions regarding Christ...
Origen of Alexandria (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 253
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
They not only denied the resurrection of the body, but took away the immortality of the soul.
Hilary of Poitiers (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 367
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
It had been enough to have cut off this opinion of the Sadducees of sensual enjoyment, that where the function ceased, the empty pleasure of the body accompanying it ceased also; but He adds, But are as the Angels of God in heaven.
The same cavil that the Sadducees here offer respecting marriage is renewed by many who ask in what form the female sex shall rise again. But what the authority of Scripture leads us to think concerning the Angels, so must we suppose that it will be with women in the resurrection of our species.
It should be further considered, that this was said to Moses at a time when those holy Patriarchs had gone to their rest. They therefore of whom He was the God were in being; for they could have had nothing, if they had not been in being; for in the nature of things that, of which somewhat else is, must have itself a being; so they who have a God must themselves be alive, since God is eternal, and it is not possible that that which is dead should have that which is eternal. How then shall it be affirmed that those do not, and shall not hereafter, exist, of whom Eternity itself has said that He is?
John Chrysostom (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 407
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
The disciples of the Pharisees with the Herodians being thus confuted, the Sadducees next offer themselves, whereas the overthrow of those before them ought to have kept them back. But presumption is shameless, stubborn, and ready to attempt things impossible. So the Evangelist, wondering at their folly, expresses this, saying, The same day came to him the Sadducees.
(non occ.) For because death to the Jews, who did all things for the present life, seemed an unmixed evil, Moses ordered that the wife of one who died without sons should be given to his brother, that a son might be born to the dead man by his brother, and his name should not perish, which was some alleviation of death. And none other but a brother or relation was commanded to take the wife of the dead; otherwise the child born would not have been considered the son of the dead; and also because a stranger could have no concern in establishing the house of him that was dead, as a brother whose kindred obliged him thereto.
Which is an apt reply to their question. For their reason for judging that there would be no resurrection, was that they supposed that their condition when risen would be the same; this reason then He removes by showing that their condition would be altered.
And because they had put forward Moses in their question, He confutes them by Moses, adding, But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read.
How then is it said in another place, Whether we live or die, we are the Lord's. (Rom. 14:8.) This which is said here differs from that. The dead are the Lord's, those, that is, who are to live again, not those who have disappeared for ever, and shall not rise again.
John ChrysostomAD 407
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70
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.
JeromeAD 420
COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.22.23
There were two heresies among the Jews: one of the Pharisees and the other of the Sadducees. The Pharisees preferred tradition and the observance of the law, which two things they referred to as “divine service.” They preferred them over justice. The Sadducees, however, were thought to be just and punished themselves because they were not. Hence the two parties were thought by the people to be quite different. The Sadducees denied everything about the resurrection. As we find in the Acts of the Apostles, they were opposed to the believers and confessors of the resurrection of the body and soul. These are the two houses about which Isaiah clearly teaches that because they had climbed high they would surely be knocked down on the ground.
Jerome (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 420
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
They who ought to have believed did but wonder at His great wisdom, that their craft had found no means for ensnaring Him: whence it follows, When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left Him, and went their way, carrying away their unbelief and wonder together.
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.)
As they disbelieved the resurrection of the body, and supposed that the soul perished with the body, they accordingly invent a fable to display the fondness of the belief of a resurrection. Thus they put forward a base fiction to overthrow the verity of the resurrection, and conclude with asking, in the resurrection whose shall she be? Though it might be that such an instance might really occur in their nation.
They therefore err because they know not the Scriptures; and because they know not the power of God.
In these words the Latin language cannot follow the Greek idiom. For the Latin word 'nubere' is correctly said only of the woman. But we must take it so as to understand marry of men, to be given in marriage of women.
This that is added, But areas the Angels of God in heaven, is an assurance that our conversation in heaven shall be spiritual.
For none could say of a stone and a tree or inanimate things, that they shall not marry nor be given in marriage, but of such things only as having capacity for marriage, shall yet in a sort not marry.
In proof of the resurrection there were many plainer passages which He might have cited; among others that of Isaiah, The dead shall be raised; they that are in the tombs shall rise again: (Is. 26:19. juxta LXX.) and in another place, Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake. (Dan. 12:2.) It is enquired therefore why the Lord should have chosen this testimony which seems ambiguous, and not sufficiently belonging to the truth of the resurrection; and as if by this He had proved the point adds, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. We have said above that the Sadducees confessed neither Angel, nor spirit, nor resurrection of the body, and taught also the death of the soul. But they also received only the five books of Moses, rejecting the Prophets. It would have been foolish therefore to have brought forward testimonies whose authority they did not admit. To prove the immortality of souls therefore, He brings forward an instance out of Moses, I am the God of Abraham, &c. and then straight subjoins, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; so that having established that souls abide after death, (forasmuch as God could not be the God of those who had no existence any where,) there might fitly come in the resurrection of bodies which had together with their souls done good or evil.
JeromeAD 420
Commentary on Matthew
(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).
JeromeAD 420
The Dialogue Against the Luciferians, Section 23
I 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.
JeromeAD 420
Commentary on Matthew
He could have used other far clearer examples to prove the truth of the resurrection. For example...[Isaiah 26:19, Daniel 12:2]...people ask why the Lord wanted to bring forth this testimony for himself: "I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob." This passage seems ambiguous and not sufficiently to the point about the truth of the resurrection…Above we said that the Sadducees, who confessed neither angel nor spirit nor the resurrection of bodies, also preached the destruction of souls. They received only the five books of Moses and rejected the predictions of the prophets. It would have been foolish, then, to bring forth testimonies [from the prophets], whose authority the Sadducees did not follow. Further, in order to prove the eternity of souls from the writings of Moses, he offers the citation: "I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob." [Exodus 3:6] Then he immediately adds: "He is the God not of the dead but of the living." Thus, when he proved that souls continue after death—for were they not subsisting at all, it could not be the case that God would be their God—the resurrection of bodies was introduced by way of logical inference...
Pseudo-Chrysostom (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 500
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
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.
Wisely does He first convict them of folly, in that they did not read; and afterwards of ignorance, in that they did not know God. For of diligence in reading springs knowledge of God, but ignorance is the offspring of neglect.
Or, when He says, In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, He referred to what He had said, Ye know not the power of God; but when the proceeded, I am the God of Abraham, &c. to that Ye know not the Scriptures. And thus ought we to do; to cavillers first to set forth Scripture authority on any question, and then to show the grounds of reason; but to those who ask out of ignorance to show first the reason, and then the authority. For cavillers ought to be refuted, enquirers taught. To these then who put their question in ignorance, the first shows the reason, saying, In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage.
In this life that we may die, therefore are we born; and we marry to the end that that which death consumes, birth may replenish; therefore where the law of death is taken away, the cause of birth is taken away likewise.
It should be noted, that when He spoke of fasting, alms, and other spiritual virtues, He did not bring in the comparison of Angels, but only here where He speaks of the ceasing of marriage. For as all acts of the flesh are animal acts, but this of lust especially so; so all the virtues are angelic acts, but especially chastity, by which our nature is bound to the other virtues.
And see how the assault of the Jews against Christ becomes more faint. Their first challenge was in a threatening tone, By what authority doest thou these things, to oppose which firmness of spirit was needed. Their second was with guile, to meet which was needed wisdom. This last was with ignorant presumption which is easier to cope with than the others. For he that thinks he knows somewhat, when he knows nothing, is an easy conquest for one who has understanding. Thus the attacks of an enemy are vehement at first, but if one endure them with a courageous spirit, he will find them more feeble. And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 532
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
(de Divin. Nom. i.) For then when we shall be incorruptible and immortal, by the visible presence of God Himself we shall be filled with most chaste contemplations, and shall share the gift of light to the understanding in our impassible and immaterial soul after the fashion of the exalted souls in heaven; on which account it is said that we shall be equal to the Angels.
Remigius of Rheims (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 533
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
Not the Sadducees but the multitudes were astonished. This is daily done in the Church; when by Divine inspiration the adversaries of the Church are overcome, the multitude of the faithful rejoice.
Gregory the Dialogist (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 604
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
(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.
Rabanus Maurus (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 856
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
These things which are spoken concerning the conditions of the resurrection He spoke in answer to their enquiry, but of the resurrection itself He replies aptly against their unbelief.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as
Continue studying Matthew 22:23 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
Matthew 22:23 introduces a pivotal encounter between Jesus and the Sadducees, a prominent Jewish religious and political faction. This verse concisely sets the stage for a profound theological debate, highlighting the Sadducees' fundamental rejection of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, a belief central to the emerging Christian faith and a point of significant contention within first-century Judaism. Their approach to Jesus was not merely an academic inquiry but a calculated attempt to challenge His authority and discredit His teachings by presenting a seemingly unanswerable dilemma rooted in their denial of future life.
CONTEXT
Literary Context: This verse is situated within a highly confrontational section of Matthew's Gospel, specifically during Jesus's final week of ministry in Jerusalem, often referred to as Passion Week. Immediately preceding this encounter, Jesus deftly silenced the Pharisees and Herodians who attempted to trap Him with a question about paying taxes to Caesar, demonstrating His divine wisdom and authority (Matthew 22:15-22). The arrival of the Sadducees directly after this incident underscores the continuous and multi-faceted opposition Jesus faced from various Jewish religious leaders, each group seeking to undermine His credibility through their distinct theological or political lenses. This rapid succession of challenges highlights the escalating tension and the deliberate attempts to corner Jesus before His crucifixion.
Historical & Cultural Context: The Sadducees were a powerful, aristocratic, and priestly party within first-century Judaism, largely associated with the Temple establishment and the wealthy elite. Unlike the Pharisees, who believed in the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels, and spirits, the Sadducees adhered strictly to the written Law of Moses (the Pentateuch) and rejected any doctrines not explicitly found there, particularly oral traditions. Their denial of the resurrection stemmed from their interpretation of the Torah, believing that the soul ceased to exist at death and that there was no afterlife or future judgment beyond earthly consequences. This theological stance placed them in direct opposition to the burgeoning belief in resurrection among other Jewish groups and, crucially, to Jesus's own teachings, which consistently affirmed a future life and divine judgment, as seen in passages like Matthew 16:27. Their position was deeply intertwined with their socio-political power, as denying the resurrection removed the threat of a future reckoning, allowing them to maintain their comfortable status quo.
Key Themes: Matthew 22:23 introduces several key themes that permeate this section of Matthew's Gospel and the broader New Testament. Firstly, it highlights the theme of Theological Opposition, showcasing the diverse and persistent challenges Jesus faced from established religious authorities. Each group, from the Pharisees to the Sadducees, represented a distinct theological or political agenda, yet all shared a common goal: to discredit Jesus. Secondly, the verse explicitly introduces the theme of Disbelief in Resurrection, which forms the core of the Sadducees' challenge. Their denial of an afterlife and future resurrection was a foundational tenet of their theology, contrasting sharply with Jesus's teachings and the broader eschatological hopes of many Jews. This theological clash sets the stage for Jesus's powerful and definitive teaching on the resurrection, which not only refutes the Sadducees' premise but also affirms the continuity of life beyond the grave and God's power over death, a truth profoundly articulated by Jesus in John 11:25-26. Finally, the verse subtly touches upon the theme of Divine Authority, as the Sadducees' questioning of Jesus is ultimately a challenge to His authority to teach on matters of ultimate truth.
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
Matthew 22:23 primarily employs Exposition and Characterization. The verse serves an expository function by directly informing the reader about the Sadducees' core theological tenet: their denial of the resurrection. This direct statement sets the premise for the ensuing debate without relying on indirect hints or narrative unfolding. Through this exposition, the verse also engages in Characterization, succinctly defining the Sadducees not just by their identity but by their defining theological position. This immediate characterization of their disbelief in the resurrection is crucial because it frames their subsequent question and highlights the fundamental theological chasm between them and Jesus. The concise nature of the verse, immediately following a previous confrontation, also contributes to a sense of Rapid Succession or Pacing, indicating the relentless and varied opposition Jesus faced.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Matthew 22:23 serves as a stark reminder of the foundational importance of the resurrection doctrine within biblical theology. The Sadducees' denial of an afterlife and future resurrection fundamentally misunderstands God's power and His covenant faithfulness. Their limited view, confined to the Mosaic Law as they interpreted it, fails to grasp the broader sweep of God's redemptive plan that culminates in the triumph over death. This encounter highlights that true faith embraces the full revelation of God, including His power to bring life from death, a truth that is not merely an abstract concept but the very hope of humanity. The Sadducees' error was not just intellectual but spiritual, stemming from a lack of understanding of both the Scriptures and the power of God, as Jesus later points out in Matthew 22:29.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Matthew 22:23, though brief, offers profound lessons for contemporary believers. The Sadducees' intellectual arrogance and their selective acceptance of Scripture led them to deny a core truth about God's power and His future plans. For us, this serves as a powerful caution against allowing our preconceived notions, intellectual biases, or worldly comfort to dictate our understanding of God's Word. Do we, like the Sadducees, limit God's power or dismiss truths that challenge our logic or comfort? This passage calls us to humble ourselves before the entirety of God's revelation, trusting in His omnipotence and His promises, even when they seem counter-intuitive or beyond our full comprehension. Our hope is anchored not in what we can logically deduce, but in the God who raises the dead.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Who were the Sadducees, and why did they deny the resurrection?
Answer: The Sadducees were a prominent Jewish religious and political party in the time of Jesus, primarily composed of the wealthy aristocracy and priestly families associated with the Temple in Jerusalem. They distinguished themselves from other Jewish groups, like the Pharisees, by their strict adherence solely to the written Law of Moses (the Pentateuch) and their rejection of oral traditions. Their denial of the resurrection, as well as the existence of angels and spirits, stemmed from their belief that these doctrines were not explicitly taught in the Torah. They interpreted the Law to mean that all divine retribution and reward occurred in this life, thus negating the need for an afterlife or future resurrection. This theological stance was deeply intertwined with their desire to maintain the status quo and their political power, as a belief in future judgment could threaten their comfortable position. Jesus directly addresses their error in Matthew 22:29, stating they erred because they knew neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Matthew 22:23, by highlighting the Sadducees' denial of the resurrection, powerfully sets the stage for the ultimate Christ-centered fulfillment of this doctrine. While the Sadducees could not conceive of a future bodily resurrection, Jesus Himself would become the living embodiment and ultimate proof of this truth. His own resurrection from the dead, just days after this encounter, shattered the Sadducees' theological framework and validated every word He spoke about life beyond the grave. As Paul emphatically declares in 1 Corinthians 15:20, Christ is the "firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep," meaning His resurrection guarantees the future resurrection of all believers. The Sadducees' question about marriage in the afterlife (posed in subsequent verses) is rendered moot by the new reality inaugurated by Christ's triumph over death, where life is transformed, not merely continued (as seen in Luke 20:34-36). Thus, Matthew 22:23, though describing a moment of theological opposition, inadvertently points to the very heart of the Gospel: the Risen Christ, who is "the resurrection and the life" (John 11:25), offering eternal hope to all who believe.