Mark 12:18

Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(18-27) Then come unto him the Sadducees.—See Notes on Matthew 22:15-22.

Benson Commentary

Mark 12:18-20. These verses are explained in the notes on Matthew 22:23-33. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living — That is, (if the argument be proposed at length,) since the character of his being the God of any persons, plainly intimates a relation to them, not as dead, but as living; and since he cannot be said to be at present their God at all, if they are utterly dead; nor to be the God of human persons, such as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, consisting of souls and bodies, if their bodies were to abide in everlasting death; there must needs be a future state of blessedness, and a resurrection of the body, to share with the soul in it.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

12:18-27 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. Christ put aside the objection of the Sadducees, who were the scoffing infidels of that day, by setting the doctrine of the future state in a true light. The relation between husband and wife, though appointed in the earthly paradise, will not be known in the heavenly one. It is no wonder if we confuse ourselves with foolish errors, when we form our ideas of the world of spirits by the affairs of this world of sense. It is absurd to think that the living God should be the portion and happiness of a man if he is for ever dead; and therefore it is certain that Abraham's soul exists and acts, though now for a time separate from the body. Those that deny the resurrection greatly err, and ought to be told so. Let us seek to pass through this dying world, with a joyful hope of eternal happiness, and of a glorious resurrection.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

See this passage fully explained in the notes at Matthew 22:23-33.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

18. Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection—"neither angel nor spirit" (Ac 23:7). They were the materialists of the day. See on [1484]Ac 23:6.

and they asked him, saying—as follows:

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Ver. 18. See Poole on "Mark 12:13"

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Then came unto him the Sadducees,.... The same day, immediately after he had silenced the Pharisees and Herodians: these were a set of men distinct from the former, in some of their sentiments, especially in their religions ones, and particularly in the following:

which say there is no resurrection: of the dead, in a literal sense, either general or particular; See Gill on Matthew 22:23;

and they asked him, saying; as in the next verse.

Geneva Study Bible

{3} Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,

(3) The resurrection of the body is confirmed, opposed to the foolish ignorance and malice of the Sadducees.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

Mark 12:18-27.[149] See on Matthew 22:23-33, who narrates more briefly and smoothly. Comp. Luke 20:27-40.

ἐπηρώτων] Imperfect, as at Mark 12:17.

Mark 12:19. ὅτι is recitative, and ἵνα is the imperative to be explained by the volo that lies at the root of the expression (see on 2 Corinthians 8:7; Ephesians 5:33). Comp. on ὅτι before the imperative, Plat. Crit. p. 50 C: ἴσως ἂν εἴποιεν (the laws), ὅτι … μὴ θαύμαζε τὰ λεγόμενα.

The ἐπιγαμβρεύσει, which Matthew has here, is a later annexation to the original text of the law. Anger, Diss. II. p. 32, takes another view (in favour of Matthew).

Mark 12:20. ἑπτά] emphatically prefixed, and introduced in a vivid way without οὖν.

Mark 12:21. καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτός] and also not he.

καὶ ὁ τρίτος ὡσαύτ.] namely, he took her and died without children; comp. what has gone before.

Mark 12:23. ὅταν ἀναστῶσι] when they shall have risen, not an epexegesis of ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει: but the discourse goes from the general to the particular, so that the seven brothers and the woman is the subject of ἀναστῶσι.

Mark 12:24. διὰ τοῦτο] does not point back to what has gone before (“ipse sermo vester prodit errorem vestrum,” Bengel), which must have been expressed, but forward to the participle which follows: do ye not err on this account, because ye do not understand? See Maetzner, ad Antiph. p. 219; Bornemann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1843, p. 137 f.; Winer, p. 146 f. [E. T. 201 f.].

Mark 12:25. ὅταν … ἀναστῶσιν] generally, not as at Mark 12:23.

γαμίζονται] The form γαμίσκω (Arist. Pol. vii. 14. 4) is not indeed to be read here (see the critical remarks), but neither is it, with Fritzsche, altogether to be banished out of the N. T. It is beyond doubt genuine in Luke 20:34 f.

Mark 12:26. ὅτι ἐγείρονται] that they, namely, etc.; this is the conclusion to be proved—the doctrinal position denied by the interrogators.

ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου] belongs to what has preceded (in opposition to Beza) as a more precise specification of ἐν τῷ βιβλ. M.: at the (well-known) thorn-bush, i.e. there, where it is spoken of, Exodus 3:6. See on quotations of a similar kind, Jablonsky, Bibl. Hebr. praef. § 37; Fritzsche, ad Romans 11:2. Polybius, Theophrastus, and others have βάτος as masculine. It usually occurs as feminine (Luke 20:37; Deuteronomy 33:16), but at Exodus 3:2-4, likewise as masculine.

Mark 12:27. According to the amended text (see the critical remarks): He is not God of dead men, but of living! Much ye err!

[149] Hitzig, Joh. Mark. p. 219 ff., places the Pericope of the adulteress, John 7:53 ff., after ver. 17, wherein Holtzmann, p. 92 ff., comparing it with Luke 21:37 f., so far follows him as to assume that it had stood in the primitive-Mark, and had been omitted by all the three Synoptists. Hilgenfeld (in his Zeitschr. 1863, p. 317) continues to attribute it to John. It probably belonged originally to one of the sources of Luke that are unknown to us.

Expositor's Greek Testament

Mark 12:18-27. The resurrection question (Matthew 22:23-33, Luke 20:27-30).

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

18–27. The Question of the Sadducees Respecting the Resurrection

18. the Sadducees] Hitherto the Sadducees, “few, rich, and dignified,” had stood aloof, and affected to ignore the disciples of the despised “Prophet of Nazareth.”

Pulpit Commentary

Verses 18-23. - And there come unto him Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection. Josephus states that in the time of Judas Maceabaeus there were three sects of the Jews, differing amongst themselves, namely, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes. The Hebrew word Zadoc, from which the Sadducees derive their name, means "just." or" righteous." These Sadducees accepted the Pentateuch, and probably more than the Pentateuch; but they rejected any oral tradition. They were known in the time of our Lord as denying those doctrines which connect us more immediately with another world, such as the existence of spirits and of angels, and the resurrection of the body. They altogether denied fate, affirming that all things are in our own power. They heard Christ preach the resurrection, and by means of it persuade men to repentance and a holy life. They therefore proposed to him a question which appeared to them to be fatal to the doctrine of a future state and a resurrection. The case supposed is that of seven brethren, who, in compliance with the Law of Moses, one after another, as each died in succession, took the same woman to wife. It is probable that such a case may actually have occurred; at any rate, it was a possible case. And the question founded upon it by the Sadducees was this - Whose wife would she be of them in the resurrection? Here, then, they hoped to entangle him, and to show that the doctrine of the resurrection was absurd. For if our Lord should say that in the resurrection she would be the wife of one only, the other brethren would have been excited to envy and continual strife. Nor could he have said that she would be common to the seven brothers. Such were the absurdities which, as they intimated, would flow out of his doctrine of the resurrection, if it could be proved. But our Lord scatters to the winds all this foolish reasoning, by adding one clause omitted by them, and overlooked by men of mere earthly minds, namely, that in the world to come this widow would be the wife of none of the seven brethren. Mark 12:18

Vincent's Word Studies

Who (οἵτινες)

This pronoun marks the Sadducees as a class: of that party characterized by their denial of the resurrection.

Asked (ἐπηρώτων)

Stronger. They questioned.