The interpretation timeline
Matthew 22:32 Douay-Rheims

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

A.D. 253 – 1849 7 witnesses

Patristic

before A.D. 750
253
A.D.
Origen Patristic
c. A.D. 184–253
“God moreover is He who says, I am that I am; (Ex. 3:14.) so that it is impossible that He should be called the God of those who are not. And see that He said not, I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. But in another place He said thus, The God of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee. (Exod. 7:16.) For they who in comparison of other men are most perfect before God, have God entirely in them, wherefore He is not said to be their God in common, but of each in particular. As when we say, That farm is theirs, we shew that each of them does not own the whole of it; but when we say, That farm is his, we mean that he is owner of the whole of it. When then it is said, The God of the Hebrews, this shews their imperfection, that each of them has some small portion in God. But it is said, The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, because each one of these possessed God entirely. And it is to the no small honour of the Patriarehs that they lived to God.”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“How then is it said in another place, Whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. (Rom. 14:8.) This which is said here differs from that. The dead are the Lord’s, those, that is, who are to live again, not those who have disappeared for ever, and shall not rise again.”
420
A.D.
Jerome Patristic
c. A.D. 347–420
“In proof of the resurrection there were many plainer passages which He might have cited; among others that of Isaiah, The dead shall be raised; they that are in the tombs shall rise again: (Is. 26:19. juxta LXX.) and in another place, Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake. (Dan. 12:2.) It is enquired therefore why the Lord should have chosen this testimony which seems ambiguous, and not sufficiently belonging to the truth of the resurrection; and as if by this He had proved the point adds, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. We have said above that the Sadducees confessed neither Angel, nor spirit, nor resurrection of the body, and taught also the death of the soul. But they also received only the five books of Moses, rejecting the Prophets. It would have been foolish therefore to have brought forward testimonies whose authority they did not admit. To prove the immortality of souls therefore, He brings forward an instance out of Moses, I am the God of Abraham, &c. and then straight subjoins, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; so that having established that souls abide after death, (forasmuch as God could not be the God of those who had no existence any where,) there might fitly come in the resurrection of bodies which had together with their souls done good or evil.”
Source
430
A.D.
Augustine of Hippo Patristic
A.D. 354–430
“(in Joan. Tr. xi. 8.) God is therefore called in particular The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, because in these three are expressed all the modes of begetting the sons of God. For God begets most times of a good preacher a good son, and of a bad preacher a bad son. This is signified in Abraham, who of a free woman had a believing son, and of a bondslave an unbelieving son. Sometimes indeed of a good preacher He begets both good and bad sons, which is signified in Isaac, who of the same free woman begot one good and the other bad. And sometimes He begets good sons both of good and bad preachers; which is signified in Jacob, who begot good sons both of free women and of bondmaids.”
Source

Scholastic

c. 1100 – 1500
1256
A.D.
Thomas Aquinas Catholic
1225–1274
“In that day. Here the second interrogation is set down, and he does three things. First the interrogation is set down; second, the response; third, the effect. The second is at "But Jesus answering," etc.; the third at "And the crowds hearing him were astonished." Concerning the first, first is set down the disposition and condition of the questioners; second, the interrogation. He says therefore, "in that day." And why "in that day"? Not without reason, because when they saw those others confounded, these approached him not without presumption. But, according to Chrysostom, they had agreed among themselves that they would catch him in speech, and each wanted the honor of the victory: therefore, when those others had been confounded, these wished to come forward; Job 19:12: "his robbers came, and made themselves a way through me." For there were two sects: the Pharisees, that is, the divided, and the Sadducees, that is, the just. And these erred in their teachings, because they did not accept the prophets, nor did they believe in the resurrection. Likewise they believed that when the body died the whole man perished: and this is what is meant by "who say there is no resurrection." There follows the interrogation. And first he sets down the law; second, the case; third, the question. They say therefore, and they questioned him, saying: "Master, Moses said: If a man dies having no son," and so on, Deuteronomy 25:5f. What was the cause of this law? The people were carnal. Hence they sought nothing but temporal things. That law therefore made this promise. For it is manifest that man cannot endure in himself, and so it is a consolation to him that he should remain in his like, namely in a son; and nature desires this, that what cannot be preserved in itself should be preserved in its like. Hence it happened that someone might die without a son, and so Moses provided for this case by this law, that his brother should have his wife. Nor was some stranger appointed, who would have no concern for him; likewise he would not have as much care for the house and family as a brother would: and this is what is meant by "and should raise up seed to his brother," that is, should beget a son who might have that man's inheritance. The law having been set down, they set down the case: "There were with us seven brethren; and the first, having married a wife, died, and having no seed, left his wife to his brother," and so on. It could be that such a case actually happened, or that they themselves fabricated it. Yet according to Augustine, by the seven brothers wicked men are signified, who die in the seven ages without fruit. The Apostle, Romans 6:21: "What fruit have you (or did you have) in those things of which you are now ashamed?" That woman is worldly conversation; Psalm 101:27: "They shall perish, but you shall remain, and all of them shall grow old like a garment." Hence they ask: all died, and all had her: "whose wife shall she be at the resurrection?" since she could not belong to all? This opinion is not good, and it is contrary to the Pharisees, because they believed that the resurrection would be with respect to this life, so that each would have back his own wife and his own possessions, and so on. Hence they say, "whose wife shall she be?" Because she cannot be the wife of all. This opinion is refuted in Job 7:10: "he shall not return to his house any more." Hence he will not rise again to the same manner of living. There follows the response. And first he shows the error and its cause; second he intimates the truth. Hence he says, "Jesus answering said: You err," that is, you hold an erroneous opinion; Wisdom 2:21: "these things they thought, and were deceived: for their own malice blinded them." And what is the cause of the error? "Not knowing the Scriptures." Hence they did not meditate on the commandments of God; Psalm 118:100: "I have had understanding above ancients: because I have sought your commandments." Hence whoever meditates on the commandments of God can avoid errors; hence John 5:39: "Search the Scriptures." But these men did not search them, and therefore they erred, as some do who understand badly. Likewise, some, not knowing the power of God, wish to measure the power of God according to lower things; to the Romans 1:20: "the invisible things of God, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made." "In the resurrection they shall neither marry, nor be given in marriage." He makes clear his proposition. And because he had said two things, namely that they did not know the Scriptures, nor the power of God, he first declares that they were ignorant of the power of God; second, that they were ignorant of the Scriptures. And since he mentioned the Scriptures first, why is this declared second? Chrysostom answers, because when someone disputes with one who errs out of malice, he ought first to allege authority; but when disputing with one who errs out of ignorance, he ought first to set forth reason, and afterward authority. Thus the Lord does. First he sets forth reason; hence he says, "in the resurrection they shall neither marry, nor be given in marriage." The first, according to the letter, is true. "Neither shall they marry," etc., because then it will not be necessary as it is now. Jerome: "marry" is taken one way according to the Latin, another way according to the Greek, because properly, according to the Latin, "to marry" belongs to women: hence it is said to be a neuter passive; but according to the Greek, men "marry," that is, take wives, women "are married," they do not "marry." Therefore he says, "they shall not marry" — men; nor "be given in marriage" — women. For since marriage exists for the procreation of offspring, so that man, who cannot be preserved in himself, may be preserved in his like, therefore, since the resurrection will be unto immortality, then marriages will not be necessary. Therefore these men erred, and were ignorant of the power of God. "But they are as the angels in heaven." That state is the state of reward, and the end of this life. Job 14:14: "Do you think that man that is dead will live again? All the days in which I am now in warfare, I expect until my change come"; and that change was the reward. That life will be one of intellects made resplendent. But why will they be like the angels? Because they will be free from passions; because now man has his intellect bound to the senses, and in this the angels exceed him, but then it will be purified, and therefore they will be like the angels: 2 Kings 14:17: "for as an angel of the Lord, so is also my lord the king, that he is not moved with blessing nor with cursing." Hence those who have their soul lifted up above the passions are like the angels. But the passions which make men most beastlike are the passions of venery, which are exercised through marriage; therefore then they shall neither marry nor be given in marriage. Likewise some have said that not all shall rise again, but only men. But Augustine destroys this, saying that sex will rise again; for sex is not preserved in man alone. He takes away this opinion when he says, "neither shall they marry, nor be given in marriage." From this it is given to be understood that both sexes shall rise, but neither shall marry nor be given in marriage. "But concerning the resurrection of the dead," and so on. After he has shown that they were ignorant of the power of God, here he shows that they were ignorant of the Scriptures. Hence: "Have you not read that which was spoken by the Lord, saying to you: I am the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob?" This is written in Exodus 3:6. But Jerome asks: since there are other authorities more expressly concerning the resurrection, as is found in Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 33 and Daniel 12, why did he set down this one, which is ambiguous? He answers that they did not accept the prophets, but only the five books of Moses. And how does this serve the purpose? He says, "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." God is said to be the God of certain persons in the sense that they worship him. These men therefore worship him. But to worship God does not belong to the dead, but to the living. Therefore Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob live; but not according to the body: therefore according to the soul. But of what avail is this to the resurrection? It is of avail, because these men said that the soul does not exist; but he shows that the soul remains: and if the soul remains, then the resurrection follows too, because the soul is naturally inclined toward the body. But what does it mean when he says that he is not the God of the dead? This is true with respect to the body. Yet he is also the God of the dead, because they live according to the spirit; Romans 14:8: "whether we live, or whether we die, we are the Lord's." Likewise this is against the heretics who condemn the fathers of the Old Testament, because here he says that they live according to the soul. Likewise he speaks in the singular, because among the other nations each people had its own god. "Hear, O Israel: the Lord your God is one," Deuteronomy 6:4. There follows the effect, because they marveled: "and the crowds hearing it were astonished at his teaching." Psalm 118:129: "your testimonies, O Lord, are wonderful," and so on.”

Post-Reformation

c. 1650 – 1900
1771
A.D.
John Gill Reformed
1697–1771
“Then one of them, which was a lawyer,.... Or that was "learned", or "skilful in the law", as the Syriac and Persic versions, and Munster's Hebrew Gospel read. The Ethiopic version calls him, "a Scribe of the city", of the city of Jerusalem; but I do not meet with any such particular officer, or any such office peculiar to a single man any where: mention is made of "the Scribes of the people" in Mat 2:4 and this man was one of them, one that interpreted the law to the people, either in the schools, or in the synagogues, or both; and Mark expressly calls him a "Scribe": and so the Arabic version renders the word here; and from hence it may be concluded that the lawyers and Scribes were the same sort of persons. This man was by sect a Pharisee, and by his office a Scribe; or interpreter of the law, and suitable to his office and character, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying: he put a difficult and knotty question to him, and thereby making a trial of his knowledge and understanding of the law; and laying a snare for him, to entrap him if he could, and expose him to the people, as a very ignorant man: and delivered it in the following form.”
Source
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“He is not the God of the dead. Jesus Christ here proves the resurrection of the body by the immortality of the soul; because in effect these two tenets are inseparable. The soul being immortal, ought necessarily to be one day reunited to the body, to receive therein the recompense or punishment which it has merited in this same body, when it was clothed with it. — By this text St. Jerome refutes the heretic Vigilantius, and in him many of modern date, who to diminish the honour Catholics pay to the saints, call them designedly dead men. But the Almighty is not the God of the dead; of consequence these patriarchs, dead as they are in our eyes as to their bodies, are still alive in the eyes of God as to their souls, which he has created immortal, and which he will undoubtedly have the power of reuniting to their bodies. — The Sadducees were a profane sect, who denied the resurrection of the body, and the existence of angels and spirits, and any future state in another world: (see Acts xxiii. 8.) nor did they receive any books but the five books of Moses. Christ therefore, from a passage Exodus iii. 15, shewed them that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, had still a being; because God, 200 years after the death of the last, said thus to Moses, I am the God of Abraham, &c. He did not say, (as St. Chrysostom takes notice) I was the God of Abraham, &c. Therefore these souls had a being: for the Lord would not call himself the God of those who were not at all: no one calling himself lord or king of those who are no more. (Witham)”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.