<p>22:30 <em>For in the resurrection</em>- Why does the Lord speak of the Kingdom of God as &ldquo;the resurrection&rdquo;? Perhaps it is to pave the way for His teaching that &ldquo;all live unto Him&rdquo;, in the sense that here He is likewise raising the idea that time will have a different dimension then. The joy and freshness of resurrection will last eternally. The Kingdom will be as it were an eternal moment of resurrection, an eternal now, with no fading thrill but an &ldquo;everlasting joy upon our heads&rdquo; that will not fade and morph with familiarity and the passage of time.</p><p><em>They neither marry nor are given in marriage</em>- Note the present tenses. They are more striking in Lk. 20:36: &ldquo;Neither&nbsp;<em>can they die</em>&hellip; they&nbsp;<em>are</em>&nbsp;equal unto the Angels: and&nbsp;<em>are</em>&nbsp;the children of God, being the children of the resurrection&rdquo;. Greek tenses, unlike Hebrew tenses, are precise. We would expect &lsquo;They shall not die&hellip; shall be equal&hellip; shall be&hellip;&rsquo;. But the present tenses are striking. The Lord is building up to His point that the question about marriage is inappropriate because God is outside of our kind of time; He sees the believers in Him as even now immortal, a point made more strongly in John&rsquo;s Gospel. This is not the same as having an immortal soul, nor does it imply conscious survival of death. Rather is it a reflection of how God from His perspective outside of time sees His children. Jn. 3:3-5 makes the same point, that we are born again of water and spirit even in this life, and thereby are living the life eternal. But that is from God&rsquo;s standpoint outside of time as we experience it. Lk. 20:37 says that Moses &ldquo;calls&rdquo; present tense God &ldquo;the God of Abraham&hellip;&rdquo;. Not only does this imply a living word which speaks to us today, but again the point is made throughout the passage that God is outside of time. This choice of tenses in this passage is purposeful, for elsewhere we read of how Moses said or commanded things in the past tense (e.g. Mt. 8:4 &ldquo;things which Moses commanded&rdquo;, &ldquo;Moses wrote&rdquo;, Lk. 20:28; &ldquo;Moses gave you&hellip;&rdquo;, Jn. 6:32).</p><p><em>But are like the angels in heaven</em>- The Sadducees denied their existence (Acts 23:8). The Lord&rsquo;s teaching that Angels do not marry was surely additionally an attack on the Jewish myths becoming popular at the time concerning the supposed marriage of Heavenly Angels with the daughters of men in Gen. 6. These myths are deconstructed in Jude and 2 Peter, but the Lord here is also correcting them. We marvel at how apparently &lsquo;off the cuff&rsquo; He could speak in such a multi-faceted and profound way, addressing various issues simultaneously. Although His intellectual and spiritual ability was doubtless capable of such instant responses, I prefer to imagine the Lord reflecting deeply upon God&rsquo;s word and preparing His ideas throughout the years of spiritual mindedness that preceded His ministry.</p><p>Lk. 20:36 adds that we shall be as &ldquo;the children of God&rdquo;, thereby answering the Sadducees idea that it is a human duty to have children and thereby continue the race, for therein do we have our &lsquo;resurrection&rsquo;. Again the Lord is lifting the whole question to a far higher level. Luke adds that the Lord first said that &ldquo;the children of this world marry&hellip;&rdquo;. The Sadducees were assuming that the Kingdom of God would be a kind of continuation of this present life, just with eternity of nature. Whilst there are similarities and aspects of continuity between who we are and who we shall eternally be, we are mistaken in imagining the future Kingdom of God as some kind of ideal earthly situation, a tropical paradise holiday, which shall last eternally. This is the same mistake as thinking that we shall eternally be doing what &ldquo;the children of&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;world&rdquo; currently do. Instead of criticizing and exposing the faults in the argument presented, the Lord makes the point that the Kingdom of God will not be about marriage nor about casuistic arguments about the definition of marriage- the very arguments which have occupied the minds of far too many of His children. Paul uses the same logic in reasoning that arguments about food are irrelevant because the Kingdom of God will not be about such behaviour, but about love, peace and joy (Rom. 14:17). Paul, like the Lord here, could have exposed the fallacies of exposition being engaged with, but instead reasons on a higher level- that seeing we shall not be arguing about such things eternally, let us not do it now.</p>