The argument from Exodus 3 that Jesus uses to refute the Sadducees is normally taken this way:
If God says that he is (present tense) the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,
And if God is the God of the living,
Then Abe, Zac and Jake must be living.
And if God is the God of the living,
Then Abe, Zac and Jake must be living.
This is fair enough, even if it feels to put a lot of weight on the present tense! After all it could just mean, I am the God who was the God of Abe etc.
But I was thinking today that it could be taken slightly differently:
If God was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob when they were alive,
And if to be their God was to be faithful to his covenant with them (what this phrase 'the God of Abe, Zac and Jake' normally alludes to),
And God's covenant faithfulness ensures life to his people,
Then Abe, Zac and Jake must look forward to life from their covenant God.
What do you think?And if to be their God was to be faithful to his covenant with them (what this phrase 'the God of Abe, Zac and Jake' normally alludes to),
And God's covenant faithfulness ensures life to his people,
Then Abe, Zac and Jake must look forward to life from their covenant God.