DHK --
God is not the God of the dead; but of the living." He is not he God of the spiritually dead, but rather the spiritually alive. It was Abraham that was and is alive spiritually as opposed to Abimilech or Pharaoh that were dead spiritually.
DHK-you are so defensive you refuse to see what EVEN the Sadducees could see in Christ's argument of Matt 22. That should tell you something.
You yourself "claim" that you think the Sadducees THINK Abraham is ALIVE and well while dead but they don't think that he will be resurrected.
So "in your view" how does Christ "make the iron clad case for the resurrection" in Matt 22 to a group that "believes as you claim above"?
The fact is "it ONLY works ONE way" if you are going to argue FOR the iron clad case of the resurrection.
The idea you seek to insert into the doctrines of the Sadducees (which all scholars agree they DID NOT hold to a spirit active in death) - can not work IN the argument and is not supported as a belief that the Sadducees ever had.
DHK said --
Abrahahm's spirit lived on in Paradise as witnessed by Lazarus and the rich man. Pharaoh's spirit lived and continues to live on
Excellent speculation about man's spirit - notice that Luke tells us in Acts 23 that the Sadducees did not BELIEVE that man has a spirit that is active after death.
Try using exegesis IN Matt 22 to make your case. Show how Christ's argument for the resurrection is SO compelling that EVEN the Pharisees observe that it totally shut the Sadducees down.
Show how it works USING what the Bible TELLS us the Sadducees believed. (NO spirit) Acts 23.8.
DHK --
Abraham will be resurrurected in the resurrection of the just.
True - but why would the Sadducees be "Forced" to that inclusion in the debate? What is the "logic" that leads them to the iron clad conclusion that the ONLY way God could say to Moses " I AM the God of Abraham" is for there to be a FUTURE resurrection of Abraham?
You simply turn a blind eye to the argument IN the text so far - why?
Why no exegesis?
DHK -
The Saduccess did not believe in the spirit or the resurrection.
Yes - correct - yes! A brief moment of clarity!! Now work with that - SHOW how your view works FOR THEM in thier mindset HOW is Christ locking them into the innescapable conclusion that the Resurrection is the ONLY way to solve the puzzle.
Show it.
I have shown it. Now it is your turn to come up with a workable alternative that will accomodate your speculation on what happens in death.
DHK
Jesus made a case for them both. There is a spirit that lives on. There is a body that will be resurrceted.
Again - you turn a blind eye to the "debate" in Matt 22.
How can you engage in debate so frequently and then "pretend" you don't understand the very "Basics" in a debate with someone that "doesn't agree with you"??
This is Amazing!! DHK. How can you keep pretending not to "get it"?
Imagine you and 3 Angels mom debating a point where she actually did NOT agree with you. Just "try to imagine that for a minute".
Imagine that the subject was "the Trinity". Just try to imagine it - be objective just for a second here.
Imagine that your "compelling proof" is in the form "Kelly there is God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit".
THEN imagine that I or someone else that had been in debate with Kelly on the subject of the Trinity saw YOUR argument above and said "WOW! That is amazing. Kelly had NO way out of that. It was iron clad. Innescapable. Compelling."
That would be a Joke!! There is nothing "Compelling" in it - it would be total nonesense to someone that did not already agree with you. A useless debate tactic.
But in Matt 22 - Christ is COMPELLING - His argument is brilliant it leaves the Sadducees with N

THER OPTION using their OWN doctrines - they were forced to conclude the Resurrection as they only "SOLUTION" to the problem.
But when you insert your own bias into the text - you leave the Sadducees with NO PROBLEM to solve.
You claim that they ALREADY think Abraham is alive in spirit EVEN though God's Word says they did not believe in a spirit AT ALL.
Basically you have offerred nothing but the tactic of "repeating your beliefs" in Matt22. You have completely avoided SHOWING IN the text - a debate position used by Christ to compell His opponents. EVEN the Pharisees recognized the brilliance of Christ's argument against their old opponents. They THEMSELVES had been trying to convince the Sadducees on this point but could not come up with the iron clad argument.
Christ comes up with it - brilliantly - you miss the entire discussion??!! Just because it does not serve your POV - you must pretend to miss what EVEN the Sadducees "got" (as much as it hurt THEIR doctrinal preferences).
Amazing! Just amazing!!
How can anyone then look back on the stubborn jews and claim that we are any better today?!!
In Christ,
Bob