In Luke 20, Jesus is confronted by Pharisees and Sadducees, all of whom try to entrap him with clever questions designed to make him choose a position opposite of their own, so that they could be justified in bringing about his death. After the scribes and chief priests fail to trap Jesus on a question of taxation, the Sadducees pursue their pet doctrine of the denial of a resurrection:
27 Some of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came up and questioned Him: 28 “Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother has a wife, and dies childless, his brother should take the wife and produce offspring for his brother. 29 Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife and died without children. 30 Also the second 31 and the third took her. In the same way, all seven died and left no children. 32 Finally, the woman died too. 33 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife will the woman be? For all seven had married her.”
34 Jesus told them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are counted worthy to take part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. 36 For they cannot die anymore, because they are like angels and are sons of God, since they are sons of the resurrection. 37 Moses even indicated [in the passage] about the burning bush that the dead are raised, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. 38 He is not God of the dead but of the living, because all are living to Him.” (Luke 27-38, HCSB)
First, the reference to “sons” in verse 34: the REB translates this as “The men and woman of this world marry”, choosing to eliminate the “are given in marriage” by understanding that as a reference to women (same in v.35). In either translation, both men and women are being discussed, there is no gender-specific application here, so v.36 should be understood as “children of God”, not just sons (male).
As with many scripture passages, there is an implied meaning here that is not explicitly written down. Those “who are counted worthy” or “judged worthy” (REB) are the elect, the saved, those who are raised to live in Christ in the Kingdom. According to Jesus, there will not be marriage after the resurrection. Why? Because death has been defeated and “they cannot die anymore.” So then, what aspect of marriage, in our current age, defeats death in such a manner that eternal life would make marriage unnecessary?
Children.
The propagation of children defeats death by continuing on human bloodlines and the memories of our ancestors. If we cannot die after being resurrected, then there is no need to propagate children as the means of continuing humanity past our graves. If we have eternal life after the resurrection and Jesus says that marriage is not part of that life, then we may conclude that the purpose of marriage in this life is to have children. Through children we defeat death in the flesh, in this age.
What else defeats (or will defeat) death? Christ.
20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also comes through a man. 22 For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruits; afterward, at His coming, the people of Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when He abolishes all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He puts all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy to be abolished is death. (1 Corinthians 15:20-26, HCSB)
Note that Christ has been resurrected but has not yet abolished death. The firstfruit is not the complete harvest. So then, how will Christ complete the harvest and fully defeat death? Might I suggest the same answer? That is, through children. The children that are the result of the marriage of the Lamb and the Church. I do not mean individual flesh and blood Christians, but the growth of the Church overall. The thriving communities of Christians must reach into the very corners of the earth.
Certainly that is consistent with God’s first commandment to humanity:
God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every creature that crawls on the earth.” (Genesis 1:28, HCSB, emphasis mine)
Now remember that this commandment was given in Eden, which suggests that an Edenic pattern of life was to expand and fill the earth. Now, with the advent of sin and the cross of Christ, physical Eden has been replaced by the spiritual Church. The Church is to be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth so that the Holy Spirit can subdue it. The Church precedes the work of the Holy Spirit, just as the disciples preceded Christ on the way to Jerusalem:
1 After this, the Lord appointed [...] others, and He sent them ahead of Him [...] to every town and place where He Himself was about to go. 2 He told them: “The harvest is abundant, but the workers are few. Therefore, pray to the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into His harvest.” (Luke 10:1-2, HCSB, emphasis mine)
When the reign of death has been finally defeated by the triumph of the spiritual children of the Lamb and Church through the Holy Spirit, then Christ will hand over the kingdom to God the Father and his millennial reign will be completed.
As I’m sure you expected, I have a few thoughts on this
First, remember that the point of levirate marriage was not to gain a spouse but to produce children — “marriage” itself could hardly have been the brunt of their discussion, so what we seem to have here is modest, oblique discussion of family-making, which as the Roman Catholics rightly point out, is the purpose of all marriage. In order to understand Jesus’ answer to the Sadducees, you have to understand the purpose of levirate marriage within the context of the Covenant as Jesus and the Sadducees did. The Covenant’s purpose for levirate marriage was to perpetuate the race of Israelites: marriage and childbearing were integral to the continuation of ethnic Israel; Jesus’ shocking revelation to the Sadducees was that the coming Kingdom of God in “the next age” was not under an Israel-centric Torah that mandated levirate marriage. Jesus’ response corrected the Jewish leaders’ misconception about the next age, in which the children of the promise were not natural children. A Christian is not born naturally: a child born to Christian parents is not born a Christian. Like the angels, our spirits do not “marry” and produce offspring.
Now as far as your discussion of the defeat of Death:
It is implied here that sin would not function without power; its power was to be vanquished with the abolition of the Law. This passage yields the following syllogism:
1) Sin’s ability to kill (“the sting of death is sin”) would be removed at the time of the Resurrection (“Death is swallowed up”).
2) The Law was what empowered sin to kill (“the power of sin is the Law”).
3) The Law is no longer in effect.
4) Therefore, the removal of sin’s ability to kill, the swallowing up of Death in victory, and the Resurrection of 1 Cor. 15 have passed.
How can it be said that Death as defined by Paul has not been conquered? This is an airtight syllogism, provided that we agree that number 3 is correct. The definition of “sin” as “transgression against the Law” instead of simply “any wicked act” is made explicit in Romans 6-7.
Verse 57 implies with its present tense (lit., “is giving us the victory”) that victory was already somewhat realized in Paul’s day. It would be fully realized when the Resurrection occurred and Death was “swallowed up”, which would result in the defeat of Death and the elimination of its sting.
The question has to be asked: does the Law, the sting of Death, remain in effect today? If not, it is a sign that the reign of Death, the last enemy, has been destroyed.
Of course, you’ve read all this before, and so it must somehow not have been compelling to you. But maybe it will be for someone else.
Ha! I suspected you’d be the first to weigh in… please don’t think I don’t find the argument compelling – I’m just still in the process of examining my amillennialism against full preterism. Sometimes I have to be hit over the head seven different ways before a new idea sinks in (much to chagrin of my wife!)…
I do have a couple of questions for you now:
[1] What is not clear to me in your syllogism is “what is Death?” I read it as, if the Law is no longer in effect, then sin is powerless and therefore death has no sting. Sin and death still exist, but their power has been neutralized or even neutered.
And [2], if the Law is no longer in effect, then what is the post-Law definition of sin?
Let me quote Romans 7:4-11. It is really a tragedy of biblical exegesis that Christians have not construed this passage and its terminology with 1 Cor 15.
The Law was a hard task-master because it gave recognition of sin without supplying the ability to obey by it. The giving of the Spirit was the answer to all this! Paul and the Christians in era in which the Old was passing away were given the firstfruits of the Spirit (Ro 8:23), but still looked forward to the time in which the Law and its adherents who were persecuting them would be removed and their faith vindicated.
The “Death” referred to in 1 Cor is the same thing Adam received, namely separation from God (not physical expiration). This continues as the result of sin, which also continues, but is removed from the equation for the believer. This separation from God kept the Old Covenant believers from communion with God; that’s why they languished in Sheol until Christ’s perfect sacrifice was put into effect with the Resurrection of the Dead.
Does this answer your questions?
Does this answer your questions?
I think so, thank you for the thoughtful response. However, I just want to clarify if you’re saying that sin exists in the Christian’s life, but ultimately has no power, or that sin no longer exists once we are in Christ, e.g. we are incapable of sinning.
Sin definitely still exists, but is powerless over the Spirit-led Christian who serves “in newness of the Spirit”. Glad to clarify this!