
Luke 20:27-33 “Some of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus with a question. ‘Teacher,’ they said, ‘Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first one married a woman and died childless. The second and then the third married her, and in the same way the seven died, leaving no children. Finally, the woman died too. Now then, at the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?’”
The Sadducees believed that they had come up with a scenario that made the idea of a resurrection and an afterlife nonsensical. Part of the welfare system provided by the Law of Moses required an unmarried brother to marry his brother’s widow if his brother died. This provided support for the widow, it provided an heir for that branch of the family, and it made sure that the land stayed in the family.
It also raised a problem in the afterlife in the minds of the Sadducees. Who would be married to whom? It wouldn’t be right for all these people to be married to each other. Marriage is between one man and one woman. None of the men in their story had a greater claim on the relationship. No children had been born. Polygamy wasn’t an acceptable option. It seemed better to the Sadducees not to believe in life after death at all.
Modern day Sadducees aren’t hard to find. The halls of academia are full of them, sometimes even the halls of religious academia. The objections may not be the same, but the basis for them is. They object to logical problems with the resurrection as they see it. Maybe you have even entertained some of these skeptical objections in your own mind.
There is a scene in the movie The Lion King in which the father, Mustafa, teaches his son, Simba, how “the great circle of life” works: “You must respect all the creatures, from the crawling ant to the leaping antelope,” Mustafa says. “But dad, don’t we eat the antelope?” Simba asks. “When we die, our bodies become the grass,” Mustafa explains, “and the antelope eat the grass. And so, we are all connected in the great circle of life.”
We too might think, “If I die and my body returns to the dust, those dust particles go to feed worms and plants. Then as part of the food chain part of me may later end up in other animals or plants, which in turn end up on another person’s plate. Atoms and molecules that once made up my body then become part of another person’s body. How will God raise our bodies if part of what was once me now belongs to someone else?” If we let our reason and logic get away with us, then the resurrection may not seem sensible.
Jesus, however, offers a sensible solution. “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage.” The Sadducees understood the way that things work in this world. Marriage belongs to this life. But it is a leap of logic to assume our marriages follow us into the life to come. Where is that written? Just because we have seen or experienced something doesn’t give us the right to assume things always work that way.
But that is exactly what our sinful reason tends to do. We presume to judge God’s promises right or wrong, true or false, based upon our personal experiences or observation. We draw sweeping, universal conclusions based on the tiny slice of knowledge we have. Is it fair to assume that the God who made everything and still keeps it going is somehow limited to doing things the same all the time? Doesn’t he have the right to arrange things in heaven or on earth the way that he wants? Doesn’t he have the ability to solve all the discrepancies we think we find with his word? If we believe that God is all powerful, it is sensible for us to believe he has the ability to raise the dead. And he will.







