There is a resurrection of the dead: Jesus' proof by contradiction

[tonychanyt]

Matthew 22:

23The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question,

Let proposition R1 = there is resurrection.

The Sadducees do not believe in the resurrection. They believe ¬R1.

24b “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother.’ 25 Now, there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no offspring left his wife to his brother. 26 So too the second and third, down to the seventh. 27 After them all, the woman died. 28 In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her.”

Yet, their question assumed the resurrection.

Were the Sadducees being sarcastic?

No. In modern logic terminology, they attempted a proof by contradiction by assuming the negation or opposite of what they were trying to prove.

Assume R1.

Whose wife will she be, for they all had her?

According to their logic, there was no answer to this question. Therefore, the assumption R1 is false.

They thought that was the end of Proof. However, technically speaking, their proof did not supply a formal contradiction. They only supplied a question that they could not answer.

Now, it is Jesus' turn. Jesus also uses proof by contradiction (aka indirect proof):

31 as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: 32‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”

Jesus believes R1.

Using proof by contradiction. Jesus assumed ¬R1.

But then, in Exodus 3:

6 And he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.”

The LORD is the God of Abraham.

Abraham is dead.

The LORD is the God of the dead = D1.

But in reality, Matthew 22:

32 I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”

Let proposition L1 = The LORD is the God of the living.

D1 = ¬L1.

Jesus has found a formal contradiction!

Therefore, the opposite of the assumption is true: There is a resurrection of the dead.

End of Proof.

Both the Sadducees and Jesus used the method of proof by contradiction. Because of their differences in beliefs, their initial assumptions were opposite to each other. The Sadducees should have supplied a formal contradiction to complete their proof. Jesus, on the other hand, did.

See also Paul's proof.

 

[BobRyan]

Matthew 22:


Let proposition R1 = there is resurrection.

The Sadducees do not believe in the resurrection. They believe ¬R1.


Yet, their question assumed the resurrection.

Were the Sadducees being sarcastic?

No they were doing what everyone does in a good debate they take the other side to show its error with an argument of the form "fine - let's take your claim of a future resurrection - we can show one easy example of how unworkable such a thing would be. So obvious everyone here will agree with us that your view has a problem"

No. In modern logic terminology, they attempted a proof by contradiction by assuming the negation or opposite of what they were trying to prove.

Assume R1.

Whose wife will she be, for they all had her?

According to their logic, there was no answer to this question. Therefore, the assumption R1 is false.

Exactly

Jesus believes R1.

Using proof by contradiction. Jesus assumed ¬R1.

But then, in Exodus 3:


The LORD is the God of Abraham.

Abraham is dead.

The LORD is the God of the dead = D1.

No Jesus' says in essence

1. We both agree that God is not the God of the dead
2. We both agree that God tells Moses He is the God of Abraham -- at a time when Abraham was dead
3. The only solution is that God is going to raise Abraham in the future and is calling those things that are not - as though they were

Both Christ and the Sadducees agreed to all three statements about God.

1, 2 they agree on completely
3 - the Sadducees and Christ both agree God can see the future and calls things in the future as though they are.

Even those watching this debate agreed that "Christ had put the Sadducees to silence" with His irrefutable "proof of future resurrection" - they could not answer it.

Matt 22:
29 But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, since you do not understand the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 31 But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” 33 When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.

34 But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. 35 And one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him: 36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?”


As for Christ's view on "the dead" -- John 11 "Lazarus is dead" -- "Our friend Lazarus sleeps - I go that I may wake him"
And Paul would consider Abraham to be among the "dead in Christ" where "the dead in Christ rise first, then we who remain will be caught up together with them in the air" 1 Thess 4:13-18