Not every question requires an answer. Sometimes the hope is that there will be no answer. Questioning can be "posturing," that is, taking a position rather than soliciting information. By the questions raised, information is given as well as asked. Often playing to the audience of listeners or bystanders, questions are intended to manipulate others while vindicating the posture of the speaker. One needs only to listen to a congressional hearing or a political debate to watch masters of an art most of us practice. Isn't it so!
Watching a televised presidential news conference recently, one could not be sure whether the President of the United States was answering reporters' questions or dodging interrogatory missiles. Not at a loss for words, the president did a creditable job of bobbing, weaving, dancing and counter jabbing.
Like a skilled prizefighter, dancing and bobbing, Jesus has been ducking hostile questions, weaving through discussions, and jabbing back with knockout punches throughout this 20th chapter of Luke's gospel. Three times thus far in this chapter, hostile questions have been raised, sometimes as open challenges and sometimes with feigned sincerity. Each time Jesus has turned these combative questions to his advantage.
A Procession Of Opposition
First come the chief priests, the scribes and the elders. This is no mere visit of the temple guard; Jesus is confronted by the highest temple authorities as he teaches. The scribes and elders were members of the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem. Every Jewish community had its "Council of Elders" which interpreted the law and measured out punishment appropriate to the offenses of the law. But the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem was the "Supreme Court" of all first-century Jewry. The scribes were "a class of professional exponents and teachers of the law." During the exile when the people were cut off from the temple and its worship, the scribes came into their own. They, too, were members of the Sanhedrin. Jesus' challenge by the Sanhedrin is Luke's last recorded occasion of Jesus' teaching in the temple.
Together the chief priests, scribes and elders were the official "guardians of orthodoxy." Their questions of Jesus were obvious and direct. They asked, "Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who is it that gave you the authority?" Before they asked, they knew the answer to both questions or they supposed that they did. Together, they represented the highest religious authority in Jerusalem and in all first-century Jewry. They knew they had not granted him the authority to teach. They were not expecting an answer. They were posturing themselves for the censoring of his activity.
It would appear at first that they had succeeded. Surely Jesus would be defensive, for the official authority to teach was theirs alone to give or to withhold.
Quickly Jesus answers with his own question: "Was the baptism of John from heaven or from men?" He did nothing other than apply their question to John's teaching. If they said it was from heaven, he would then ask why they did not believe and follow John. If they answered that it was from men, then the people might well riot. They could only answer, "We do not know." Quickly Jesus countered: "Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things."
Jesus follows this encounter with the Parable of the Wicked Tenants, a parable the scribes and chief priests understood clearly. They were angered and would have arrested him. But again they feared the reaction of the people.
Then came a new strategy. Spies were sent, posing as interested followers and sympathizers to the gospel. Again the question was for the purpose of posturing, not for gathering information. They asked, "Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar or not?" Again Jesus dodges their attack. "Show me a coin. Whose image is on it?" "Caesar's," they answer. "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." In spite of themselves, they were impressed!
Always the issue was entrapment. Had he said that taxes ought not to be paid, he could be reported to the Roman authorities as a teacher of rebellion. If he suggested accommodation with Rome, he would lose many who longed for the vindication and restoration of Israel's hope and prestige. They raised the questions, but Jesus refused to let their assumptions define the issues.
Resurrection - Absurdity Or Reality?
Now come the Sadducees! They were the party of the high priests and were, themselves, from the priestly and aristoc_esermonsratic families. Josephus reports that they have the confidence of the well-to-do only, and no following among the people. Their teaching has reached but few people, yet these are men of highest esteem.
Representing the high priests, the Sadducees were "ultra-orthodox." They accepted the first five books - the books of Moses - as the only authoritative Scriptures. These books, known as the Pentateuch, had been directed toward a nation of shepherds and nomads. People in Jesus' day lived in an increasingly urbanized Israel. Updating Jewish teaching and piety was primarily the work of the Pharisees. Their different views of Scripture, which books were included and their interpretation, brought great differences between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. One of these differences was the doctrine of the resurrection, one that began growing in popularity during the inter-testamental period and was held by many in Jesus' day, including the Pharisees. About the Sadducee's belief, Josephus writes: "As for the persistence of the soul, penalties in death's abode, and rewards, they do away with them ... the souls perish along with the bodies."
Now, for a fourth time in this chapter, Jesus is faced with a question. A favorite topic of the Sadducees, their hypothetical story about the eschatological implications of a doctrine of resurrection - given Moses' instruction about Levirate marriage - appears to have no rational answers. For example consider the question: "At the resurrection, whose wife will she be?" For the seven [brothers] had her as wife." They rejected the doctrine because it is nowhere supported in the Pentateuch as they read it. Debating from its implications instead of its merits, they sought to reduce the hope of the resurrection to an absurdity. As the Pharisees had been unable to answer convincingly in the past, they were certain Jesus would have no answer either.
Resurrection - A Living Hope From A God Of The Living
They were wrong again - twice wrong!
Contrary to what most believe, good answers do not begin at the conclusion of a sound debate. Good answers and accurate truths become possible at the very beginning of the debate, at the moment when the definitions and assumptions are established.
The answer to the hypothetical question of the Sadducees was not to be found in a more cunning conclusion. It was to be found in a careful examination of the assumptions upon which the story was built. In these, the Sadducees assumed too much and too little.
They Assumed Too Much
They assumed too much when they assumed that "resurrection" was a belief in "immortality." That is to say that life has no ending. It goes on forever! "To believe in resurrection is not to say we are immortal." To teach a doctrine of "resurrection" affirms that we are mortal, the price of sin is death. We shall all die.
The Sadducees assumed otherwise. The problem with their argument was not in its conclusion, but rather in its beginning! They assumed that "resurrection" meant life would continue unchanged - as it always had - forever. "On the other side," or "in the new age," we would simply pick up where we had left off in our relationships, responsibilities, and all such. Two things must be observed:
1. Resurrection means that we are "raised again" from the dead. Death is real, not imagined. If we were still living, we would not expect to be "raised."
2. While the Bible is replete in assurances that relationships continue to be functional and faithful in our loving and caring, it is a different body and a different life, as the resurrection narratives clearly suggest and Paul describes.
Our human mortality makes marriage an "order of God's creation" tending to the necessity for the production of the family and of human life. But it is an order of this creation and not of the next. Since there is no more death, there is no needed arrangement for our human sexuality to preserve the race, to express intimacy, or to create new life. Much we do not know about the "new age," much we do know. It will be a time marked with all the blessings and joys of being together in the presence of our Lord. It will be entirely different from what we now know. It will not be a continuation of "business as usual."
Simply put, the question is not Plato's question: "If a man died, is he still alive?" The question is Job's question: "If a man die, shall he rise again?" The answer is Jesus' answer: "The path of glory leads from the grave."
And They Assumed Too Little
The Sadducees assumed far too little about the power, the grace, and the faithfulness of God.
In reply, Jesus refers neither to his coming ordeal and resurrection, nor to the miracles performed that dealt with the issues of life and death. Instead, he carries the Sadducees back into the heart of their treasured Pentateuch, to Exodus 3 and the story of Moses and the burning bush. Here, God is referred to as the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Further, Jesus draws upon the ancient Jewish theological conviction that the dead are separated from God, which is what makes death so terrifying. At the time of Exodus 3, the patriarchs were long ago dead. But for God to remain their God, they must be living, or at least they are going to be living again.
Setting aside the exegetical technique of a first-century rabbi, Jesus now moves beyond the point of the Sadducees' misunderstanding of the Scriptures to note that they have misunderstood and underestimated the power of God. "All live to God." The power that allows God to create life in the first place gives him the power to raise it up. "All live to him" is to say that no one, living or dead, is beyond the power of God. Paul writes forthrightly in Romans 8:38-39: "For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come ... will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Truth begins in any good debate not with the cunningness of the conclusions, but in the care with which the assumptions and definitions are drawn at the beginning. The Sadducees assumed too much and too little. Though their logic was unassailable, their conclusion was absurd. The absurdity rested not in the doctrine of the resurrection, but in the careless assumptions with which they had begun their consideration. Though logically sound, given their assumptions, they, nevertheless, missed the point entirely.
They assumed far too little about God. They believed that all God was able to do was what they had observed him doing in the past. This attitude is not without merit when we hold so strongly to a doctrine of God's self-revelation, but it becomes almost demonic when it denies God's creativity and his longing for our redemption.
Teacher, You Have Spoken Well
Incredible, isn't it? The chief priests, scribes, elders and Sadducees have on four occasions sought to prove the Christ an imposter, a false teacher of the Jews. They have challenged his authority to teach, and sought to entrap him in treason either to the Jewish hope or to the Roman occupation. They have presented him with an old argument about resurrection that had confounded the scribes and Pharisees for centuries. Those who sought to "catch him" find themselves marveling at his answers. They had intended to "prove" some things about Jesus. They had not expected to learn anything by their carefully crafted questions. Finally, some of the scribes, the "professional lawyers," exclaim: "Teacher, you have spoken well." We agree!
There is but one point yet to be made, and it is this. While the Sadducees made two crucial mistakes because they understood neither the Scriptures nor God, it is important for us to understand that the entire lesson is about God, his power and our faith in his promises.
1. Eternal Life Flows From God Alone - There is no encouragement here for a doctrine of human immortality. Death is real for us, biblically and existentially. There is no eternal life without God. There is no eternal hope in the Scriptures except that which flows from the love, power and faithfulness of God. If we are to live eternally, then it is God who must raise us. The dead are dead. They cannot pull themselves up. Only God!
2. What We Believe About God is Crucial - We cannot ever begin a discussion of eternal life based upon its logic or its "proofs." Such a discussion always begins with God and our trust of his word. There is no question that the God of creation, who created us in the first place, can raise us up if he wants to. The hope of resurrection is always rooted in our trust of God.
3. Since "Nothing Can Separate Us ... from the love of God," there is no one, living or dead, beyond the reach of his power tO redeem and raise up. There is no grave out of God's reach. In just the same fashion, there is no living person - no matter what that person's alienation or sin may be - who is beyond the reach of God's power to redeem. And that's the best news yet. "He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; for all live to him."
Paul, writing to the Christians at Thessalonica in the first century, provides for this good news a fitting benediction:
Now may our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God our Father, who loved us and gave us eternal comfort and good hope through grace, comfort your hearts and establish them in every good work and deed (2 Thessalonians 2:13-3:5).