Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 22:28
Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
Verse 28. Whose wife shall she be of the seven?] The rabbins have said, That if a woman have two husbands in this world, she shall have the first only restored to her in the world to come. Sohar. Genes. fol. 24. The question put by these bad men is well suited to the mouth of a libertine. Those who live without God in the world have no other god than the world; and those who have not that happiness which comes from the enjoyment of God have no other pleasure than that which comes from the gratification of sensual appetites. The stream cannot rise higher than the spring: these men, and their younger brethren, atheists, deists, and libertines of all sorts, can form no idea of heaven as a place of blessedness, unless they can hope to find in it the gratification of their sensual desires. On this very ground Mohammed built his paradise.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Therefore in the resurrection,…. As asserted by the Pharisees and by Christ, supposing that there will be such a thing, though not granting it; for these men denied it, wherefore the Ethiopic version reads it hypothetically, “if therefore the dead will be raised”; upon such a supposition,
whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her, or were married to her. By putting this question, they thought to have got some advantage against Christ, and in favour of their notion; they hoped, either that he would give into their way of thinking, and relinquish the doctrine of the resurrection upon this, and join with them against the Pharisees, and so there would be no need of an answer to the question; or they judged, that if he returned an answer, it would be either that he did not know whose wife she should be, and then they would traduce him among the common people, as weak and ignorant; or should he say, that she would be the wife of one of them only, naming which of them, or of them all, or of none of them, they fancied that such absurd consequences would follow on each of these, as would expose the doctrine of the resurrection to ridicule and contempt; but they missed their aim, and were sadly disappointed by Christ’s answer and reasonings which follow.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
“In the resurrection therefore whose wife shall she be of the seven? For they all had her.”
So the question now was as to whose wife she would be in the resurrection, for she had been married to all and had had sexual relations with them all. Whichever one was selected they would have had arguments which would have demonstrated why that suggestion was wrong, for each one married the wife of the one above so as to produce an heir for that one, and to perpetuate his name. It was a question that had never failed to bamboozle their opponents.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 22:28 . Founding upon this alleged incident (which was undoubtedly a silly invention got up for the occasion, Chrysostom), as being one strictly in accordance with the law, the Sadducees now endeavour to make it appear that the doctrine of the resurrection a doctrine which, for the purpose of being able to deny it, they choose to apprehend in a gross material sense is irreconcilable with the law ; while, by their fancied acuteness, they try to involve Jesus Himself in the dilemma of having to give an answer either disadvantageous to the law or favourable to their doctrine.
] Predicate.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
28. ] is the predicate.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 22:28 . , introducing the puzzling question based on the case stated. either subject = whose will the woman be? or better, the article being wanting, predicate = whose wife will she be? Cf. Luke, where is used twice. . ., all had her, and therefore (such is the implied thought) all had equal rights. Very clever puzzle, but not insuperably difficult even for Talmudists cherishing materialistic ideas of the resurrection life, who gave the first husband the prior claim (Schttgen).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
28.] is the predicate.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 22:28. , whose) She will, say they, be the wife either of all or of one: but none of them has a superior claim to the rest. Jesus answers (Mat 22:30) she will be the wife of none. The Pharisees also had divided and opposed those things which are Csars, and those which are Gods: He who is the Truth, affirms both in His reply to them: to the Sadducees He denies both. Earthly wisdom frequently precipitates itself into absurdity from an imperfect enumeration, even in an easy matter, of parts, not one of which escapes heavenly wisdom.- , …, not knowing, etc.) This twofold ignorance is the mother of almost all errors. The resurrection of the dead rests on the power of God: and the belief in the resurrection rests on the Scriptures. Jesus refutes their first and fundamental error ( ): which they did not suppose themselves to labour under at all. He first answers the argument by which they opposed the truth: then He proves the truth itself.- , the Scriptures) which clearly look to a future life; see Mat 22:31-32. The Sadducees did not understand Moses: they did not receive the prophets who explain Moses.- , the power of God) The power of God will make man equal to the angels; see Mat 22:30. To be ignorant of God and His perfections is the fountain of error; see 1Co 15:34 [Rom 4:17, E. B.]
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Mat 22:28. In the resurrection, i.e., in the state after the resurrection.
Whose wife shall she be of the seven? The point of the entangling question is now evident. They had quoted the law of Moses and then given an example of obedience to it, to prove the absurdity of the doctrine of the resurrection. Our Lord at once rebukes and denies their false assumption, in regard to human relations in the future state.