Luke 20 30

Luke 20:30 kjv

And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.

Luke 20:30 nkjv

And the second took her as wife, and he died childless.

Luke 20:30 niv

The second

Luke 20:30 esv

And the second

Luke 20:30 nlt

So the second brother married the widow, but he also died.

Luke 20 verses

Luke 20 30 Meaning

Luke 20:30 continues the Sadducees' hypothetical scenario concerning a woman and multiple brothers who married her in succession. This verse specifically states that the second brother, having taken her as his wife according to the law of levirate marriage, also died without having any children. This repeated pattern of marriage and childless death is crucial for setting up the Sadducees' complex question to Jesus about the nature of resurrection.

Luke 20 30 Context

Luke 20:30 is embedded within a direct challenge from the Sadducees to Jesus during his final week in Jerusalem. Following encounters where Jesus' authority was questioned (20:1-8) and His teachings on the Kingdom illustrated by the parable of the wicked tenants (20:9-19) and taxes to Caesar (20:20-26), the Sadducees present their unique argument. As a Jewish sect, they were characterized by their strict adherence to the Pentateuch (the first five books of Moses) and, crucially, their rejection of the resurrection of the dead, angels, and spirits—beliefs commonly held by the Pharisees and central to Jesus' own teaching. Their elaborate scenario, rooted in the levirate marriage law (Deut 25:5-10), attempts to expose what they perceive as the logical absurdity of resurrection. By recounting how the first brother died childless (20:28), and now the second (20:30), they meticulously build their case that climaxes with the question of whose wife the woman would be in the resurrection (20:33), aiming to discredit the very concept.

Luke 20 30 Word Analysis

• And (Καὶ, kai): A simple conjunction, connecting this event to the previous one, showing a continuation of the same scenario.
• the second (ὁ δεύτερος, ho deuteros): An ordinal numeral, marking the progression in the series of seven brothers mentioned. It emphasizes the repetition of the Sadducees' constructed dilemma.
• took her (ἔλαβεν αὐτήν, elaben autēn):
  • took (ἔλαβεν, elaben): From the verb lambano, meaning to take, receive, or grasp. In this context, it signifies "took her in marriage," specifically referring to the fulfilling of the levirate duty to marry a deceased brother's wife. This was a legal and social obligation under Jewish law.
  • her (αὐτήν, autēn): The woman who was first married to the eldest brother. The focus is on her repeated marriages.
• and he died (καὶ οὗτος ἀπέθανεν, kai houtos apethanen):
  • and he (καὶ οὗτος, kai houtos): Literally "and this one." "He" refers to the second brother, reiterating the individual's role in the progression.
  • died (ἀπέθανεν, apethanen): From the verb apothnesko, meaning to die, expire, perish. This crucial word indicates the unchanging, unfortunate outcome for each successive brother in the Sadducees' scenario.
• childless (ἄτεκνος, ateknes):
  • This is a compound word formed from the negative prefix a- (without) and teknon (child, offspring). It literally means "without child" or "childless."
  • Its significance is paramount as the entire purpose of the levirate marriage law (Deut 25:5) was precisely to prevent a brother from dying "childless," by ensuring the deceased's name and lineage continued through an heir fathered by his surviving brother. The Sadducees highlight this repeated "childless" state to show the persistent failure of the law to achieve its aim in their hypothetical, creating a marital entanglement if the dead were to rise. The repeated failure to produce offspring is the linchpin of their objection to the resurrection.

Luke 20 30 Bonus section

• The Sadducees' argument against resurrection highlights a common human tendency: to imagine heaven and eternal life merely as an extension or amplified version of earthly existence, rather than a transformed reality. Jesus' answer fundamentally corrects this limited perspective.
• The detail of "childless" (ἄτεκνος) is key because if any of the brothers had produced children, the levirate obligation would have ceased, rendering the subsequent marriages unnecessary under the law and undermining the Sadducees' carefully crafted chain of events.
• This exchange between Jesus and the Sadducees not only affirms the reality of the resurrection but also offers profound insight into the nature of the resurrected life—a state freed from the limitations, mortality, and reproductive necessities of our current existence. It reveals a future that is qualitative, not just quantitative, different from present life.
• The Sadducees' question was not a genuine search for truth about the resurrection but a rhetorical trap designed to discredit Jesus and the notion of an afterlife. Jesus' masterful answer exposed their lack of understanding of both the power of God and the Scriptures (Mt 22:29).

Luke 20 30 Commentary

Luke 20:30, while a simple declaration, is critical to understanding the Sadducees' cunning argument against the resurrection. This verse functions as the second step in their elaborately constructed, multi-marriage dilemma based on the levirate law. By stating that the second brother also died childless, just like the first, the Sadducees methodically escalate the hypothetical problem. Their premise is that if there is a resurrection, and if marital relationships (governed by earthly laws like levirate marriage) persist into it, then this woman would have an irresolvable dilemma regarding her seven deceased husbands.

The Sadducees were rationalists who only accepted the written Torah, finding no explicit teaching about the resurrection there. Their question was a direct polemic, intended to ridicule the idea of an afterlife where earthly concerns like marriage and progeny—which were so vital to Mosaic Law for continuity and inheritance—would create an unmanageable mess. They projected earthly laws and their limitations onto a future, divine reality. Jesus, in His response (Luke 20:34-36), precisely overturns their flawed premise by explaining that the resurrected state transcends these mortal relationships, making their convoluted scenario irrelevant. He clarifies that marriage, as we know it, is a temporary arrangement for the "sons of this age," whereas those "worthy to attain to that age" are like angels, no longer needing to procreate or adhere to earthly marital structures because death no longer holds sway over them.