A Question About the Resurrection

The Sadducees, whom Luke explicitly identifies as denying resurrection, construct a reductio ad absurdum from the institution of levirate marriage in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Seven brothers successively marry the same woman and die childless; the question asks whose wife she will be 'in the resurrection.' Their argument assumes that resurrection life simply reproduces present social structures, allowing the marital arrangement to generate an apparent contradiction.

Jesus challenges that premise by distinguishing 'the sons of this age' from those deemed worthy to attain 'that age and the resurrection from the dead.' In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage and cannot die anymore, being 'equal to angels' and 'sons of God.' The adjective isangeloi does not mean that resurrected humans become angels, but that they share the angels' deathless condition. Scholars debate whether Jesus' language addresses all resurrection or specifically the resurrection of the righteous, since Luke speaks of those 'considered worthy' to attain it.

Jesus then argues from Exodus 3:6, a text within the Torah particularly appropriate in debate with Sadducees. God's self-identification as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob implies, in Jesus' argument, an enduring relationship between God and the patriarchs: 'He is not God of the dead, but of the living.' The conclusion is theological rather than grammatical in a narrow sense. Some scribes approve the answer, and Luke concludes that the opponents no longer dare question Jesus.

Luke 20 is set almost entirely within the Jerusalem temple and develops the confrontation introduced by Jesus' temple action in 19:45-48. A sequence of disputes pits Jesus against chief priests, scribes, elders, agents sent to trap him, and Sadducees. The controversies move from the source of Jesus' authority to Israel's response to God's messengers, obligations to Caesar, resurrection, messianic identity, and the public conduct of the scribes. Throughout, Luke portrays Jesus as answering hostile questions while also turning the questions back upon his opponents.

The chapter advances the passion narrative by clarifying why the Jerusalem leadership seeks Jesus' death while being constrained by popular support for him. The parable of the vineyard interprets the coming rejection of the 'beloved son' within the history of rejected prophetic messengers, while the later debates establish Jesus' authority as an interpreter of Scripture. The final warning against scribal ostentation and exploitation prepares for the contrast with the widow in 21:1-4 and intensifies Luke's criticism of religious status detached from justice.