And the multitudes hearing it, were in admiration at his doctrine.

“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.”

“Master, which is the great commandment in the law? He calls him "master, Rabbi, or doctor", as the Sadducees had in Mat 22:24 either because he was usually so called by his disciples, and by the generality of the people; or merely in complaisance to engage his attention to him, and his question: and might hereby suggest, that should he return a proper and satisfactory answer to it he should be his master. The question is not which of the laws was the greatest, the oral, or the written law: the Jews give the preference to the law delivered by word of mouth; they prefer the traditions of the elders before the written law of Moses; See Gill on Mat 15:2; but the question was about the written law of Moses; and not merely about the decalogue, or whether the commands of the first table were greater than those of the second, as was generally thought; or whether the affirmative precepts were not more to be regarded than negative ones, which was their commonly received opinion; but about the whole body of the law, moral and ceremonial, delivered by Moses: and not whether the ceremonial law was to be preferred to the moral, which they usually did; but what particular command there was in the whole law, which was greater than the rest: for as there were some commands that were light, and others that were weighty, a distinction often used by them (m), and to which Christ alludes in Mat 23:23. It was moved that it might be said which was the greatest and weightiest of them all. Some thought the commandment of the sabbath was the greatest: hence they say (n), that he that keeps the sabbath is as if he kept the whole law: yea, they make the observance of the three meals, or feasts, which, according to the traditions of the elders, they were obliged to eat on the sabbath, to be at least one of the greatest of them, "These three meals (says one of their writers (o)) are a great matter, for it is one , "of the great commandments in the law". Which is the very phraseology used in this question. Others give the preference to circumcision, on which they bestow the greatest encomiums, and, among the rest (p), say, it drives away the sabbath, or that is obliged to give place unto it. Others (q) say of the "phylacteries", that the holiness of them is the greatest of all, and the command to be arrayed with them all the day, is more excellent than all others; and even of the fringe upon the borders of their garments, others observe (r), that a man that is guilty of that command, is guilty of all others, and that single precept is equal to all the rest. In this multiplicity of opinions, Christ's is desired on this subject, though with no good intention, (m) Pirke Abot, c. 2. sect. 1. & c. 4. sect. 2. (n) Zohar in Exod. fol. 37. 1. (o) Tzeror Hammor, fol. 3. 3. (p) Misn. Nedarim, c. 3. sect. 11. (q) Maimon. Hilch. Tephillin, c. 4. sect. 25, 26. (r) T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 43. 2.”

“And see how the assault of the Jews against Christ becomes more faint. Their first challenge was in a threatening tone, By what authority doest thou these things, to oppose which firmness of spirit was needed. Their second was with guile, to meet which was needed wisdom. This last was with ignorant presumption which is easier to cope with than the others. For he that thinks he knows somewhat, when he knows nothing, is an easy conquest for one who has understanding. Thus the attacks of an enemy are vehement at first, but if one endure them with a courageous spirit, he will find them more feeble. And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.”