On The Offensive

The Sadducees’ Question About the Resurrection

Luke chapter 20, we'll be looking particularly at verses 39 to 44. I will start reading from our passage last week in verse 27 for context. When you have that, go ahead and stand for the reading of God's Word.

There came to him some Sadducees, those who deny that there is a resurrection, and they asked him a question, saying, Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies having a wife but no children, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother.

Now there were seven brothers, first took a wife and died without children, and the second and the third took her, and likewise all seven left no children and died. Afterward, the woman also died, and the resurrection therefore, whose wife will the woman be?

For the seven had her as wife. And Jesus said to them, the sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.

For they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.

Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him. And some of the scribes answered, Teacher, you have spoken well, for they no longer dared to ask him any question. But he said to them, how can they say that the Christ is David's son?

For David himself says in the book of Psalms, The Lord says to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool. David thus calls him Lord. So how is he his son?

Amen.

You may be seated.

Christ’s Authority, His Kingdom, and the Need to Contend

Dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for your word. We ask that it would guide us today, that we would see the authority of Jesus Christ, it would shape our lives, that we would submit to him as we ought, that we would appreciate him as we ought, having joy in his kingdom.

Pray that you would equip us likewise to contend with every worldly philosophy that would oppose Jesus Christ. In his name we pray.

Amen.

So in this chapter, we have repeatedly seen Jesus' authority questioned in different ways. Initially, people had asked him directly about his authority, and he refused to answer because of the insincerity of their question and their unwillingness to answer a similar question.

Then he goes on to be asked about whether or not people should pay their taxes to Caesar. They're asking him as one who has come into the city as a king about the nature of his kingdom, and his kingdom transcends the kingdoms of this world.

So you should pay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. You should give to God what belongs to God. And then the Sadducees ask him about the resurrection. This is not unrelated. Once again, they are challenging him, but they also challenging the nature of his kingdom.

And he explains that his kingdom is not one that is like the kingdom of this world. When it is fully manifest, there will be different qualities to it than what you see in this world. And now at this point, people cease to challenge him and question him because they realize they cannot succeed in doing so.

So they want peace with him, at least a superficial kind of peace. And what is Jesus' response to all this, to their silence? Oh good, they are no longer going to bother me. No, he presses in on the offensive.

He responds with a question and challenges them. When they are done challenging him, he challenges them. What we should gather from this passage, as with each preceding week in this chapter, what we should gather is not only the doctrine that Christ is giving us of his lordship and the nature of his kingdom, but also we should understand the nature of opposition to Christ that you will face, and also how to respond to that opposition.

So those three things, the doctrine that Christ is explicitly teaching on, the nature of the opposition, and then how we should respond to this. And in this context, that has to do with the fact that Christ is Lord and his kingdom transcends.

Christ is Lord, that people will want peace, a false kind of peace, and third, that Christ wants conflict in the sense that he has come not to bring peace but a sword, and that he will press that all the way until the end, until he has subdued every last opponent.

That might be a surprising statement to you that Christ wants conflict, but that is what he has repeatedly said, that he did not come to bring peace,.

But a sword.

Now, once you understand the nature of his kingdom, that it transcends the kingdoms of this world, then you understand the nature of that sword. The nature of that sword is to bring people's minds in submission to him as Lord.

David Calls the Messiah Lord

Our passage begins in verse 39. I know the ESV breaks this down so that 39 and 40 belong to the preceding passage, but you see that it is the scribe's silence that ends up prompting Jesus' question to them, so it seems right to consider this as part of this next passage.

The scribes, like Jesus, believe in the resurrection. Jesus has answered the Sadducees' opposition to the resurrection well. They are impressed by this. They're also impressed by the fact that he has responded to all their challenges.

They know that they cannot oppose him and have any sort of success in argument, but they also realize that he could be a valuable ally in other ways, so they offer him this false kind of peace. They say that he has answered well.

They no longer dare to ask him any question, and what does Jesus do in response? He asks them a question, what he said to them, but he said to them, how can they say that the Christ is David's son? So he asks this question about the Messiah, about the Christ being David's son.

They believe that the Messiah is going to come from the line of David, and he is asking them about the nature of that Messiah. Do they truly understand this Messiah? They understand the context of what's happening.

He's coming in as king. He is claiming that title for himself, that he is the son of David. Do they even understand what this means? Consider that they have been anticipating the wrong sorts of things.

They've even asked him, should people pay taxes to Caesar, thinking that this is going to expose him, because certainly he is just a king, like the kings of the world. He is going to be a king, even in the same way that David was a king.

He is going to show to them that he is a king, in a sense that is even greater than the way that David is a king. How can they say that the Christ is David's son? When he says they say, you know, he's appealing to this anonymous third-party plural.

Speaking of basically the authority of the scribes, you all say this. This is the scholarly answer that the Christ is David's son, which is correct. How can they say this? For David himself says in the book of Psalms, the Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.

So he challenges their understanding of David with a passage from David. This is exactly what Jesus had done in the previous passage, if you remember. The Sadducees talked about the law of Moses and how the law of Moses necessitates there can't be a resurrection and their understanding of the rules around leverage marriage.

And he responds to their false understanding of Moses by taking them to the text of Moses and saying even in the passage, the initial revelatory passage with the burning bush indicates that there must be a resurrection.

So he says, you've given me a false understanding of Moses. I'm going to respond with Moses. And now he's saying you misunderstand what the son of David is supposed to be. You misunderstand David. Let me take you to David.

So he goes and he takes them to this passage. A couple of other things that you should notice about this. First of all, Psalm 110 that is referenced here, the most frequently cited Old Testament passage in the New Testament.

It comes up a number of times, multiple times, twice in the book of Hebrews. It comes up in other places too. This is a very frequently referenced Old Testament passage in the New Testament. But the passage starts off with the title of David.

This is a Psalm that is attributed to David. There are many people today, many scholars who will look at the different passages and then question whether or not the preposition in front of David in the Psalms really means that he is supposed to be the author or if it just means that it's in the style of David or something else.

I think this is very good evidence when you have a later Psalm, 110, that is titled being a Psalm of David and then Jesus himself is attributing it to David. I don't believe we have any reason to question that the Psalms that are attributed to David as they would be in your English Bible typically are actually David.

But it's very common that people will question whether or not they're really David's Psalms if they say they're David's Psalms. There is ambiguity around the language itself, but Scripture itself here, Acts 2, other places let you know that it really is David who is the author.

It doesn't mean something different than that. The next thing that you should notice about this quotation of the Psalm is that the people of this era, the scribes, the scholars, those who care about religion understand that these Psalms are Messianic.

When I was younger in the faith and I would hear preachers talk about the various Psalms being Messianic, talking about the Messiah, I did not know whether or not this was something that we can just say coming after the New Testament that once we see it all put in place we can see how, oh yes, this is Messianic.

Because of course Christ fulfills Psalm 22. Of course he fills Psalm 110, etc. Even the scribes at the time, even the scholars at the time understood that these passages like Psalm 2, like Psalm 110 are talking about something greater than David.

Even though David speaks in a way that is ostensibly about himself, they understand it to refer to something greater. So this is not merely a Christian interpretation of the Psalms to understand them as Messianic.

Even the Jewish understanding at the time of Jesus appropriately identified them as speaking of the Christ. So this is not just something that's so veiled that it's only after Pentecost and the giving of the Spirit that you could understand that in any way.

Even then they understood this. So David is the author, the Psalms are Messianic, and Jesus takes them to task on their understanding of David with David. So he says, The Lord says to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.

Now it's worth covering who the speakers are. The Lord says to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool. Now on one hand, people would read this passage and they'd understand that in some sense, David is alluding to the victory that God has given to him.

Yet he describes this person as my Lord. This is someone else. This is the Messiah that he's ultimately speaking of, even if it's ostensibly framed and pictured in light of the victory that God has given himself.

Same is true with things like Psalm 2. I keep mentioning Psalm 2.

You know, that's why.

Why did the nations rage and the people's plot in vain, et cetera. You are my son, this day I've begotten you. All these passages ostensibly about David, but ultimately pointing to the Messiah. And so who is the speaker here when he says, The Lord said to my Lord.

Well, the Lord here, if you look at Hebrew, it's the divine name. It is talking about God. This is the father speaking of the son. He says, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.

So do you understand the difficulty here, which Jesus presses in verse 44? David thus calls him Lord. So how is he his son? This is surprising. You would expect that if David's son is the Messiah, that he would be either equal to or lesser than.

It's not that he couldn't be a stronger king or greater in that sense. Sure, some kings who come after are greater in terms of strength and that sort of thing. But he is willing to call him Lord. A father calling his son Lord.

What does that entail? What does that entail? And they are not able to give an answer. They think that they understand the Messiah. They think that they are aligned with the prophets and rightly waiting for the Christ.

But the Christ has come and they have rejected him. They do not accept him. And so he exposes that by taking them to task, showing that their understanding of the word of God is incorrect, that it is incomplete.

They have not put it together.

Christ is Lord.

Christ is Lord. Now, on one hand, we should see that he is God. No doubt the scribes even understood that Jesus Christ, not Jesus Christ, excuse me, Christ, the Christ, the Messiah that is to come, obviously they rejected Jesus as the Christ, but the Christ is to come would be in some sense the son of God.

This is what many passages say. Psalm 2 referencing that again. Also 2 Samuel 7, 14 speaks of the son of David as being, that the father would be a father to him and that he would be a son to him, etc.

There are many different prophecies that speak to this. So they understand in some sense that he will be a son of God, but they do not fully grasp what that means. If he is going to be both a son of David and a son of God, what that entails is not merely one who has a little bit of blessing of God, but one who is himself divine.

Jesus is God's son, not just in having some measure of blessing, having been anointed, but in the fact that he was born of a virgin, that he truly is the son of God, being conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, as we read in the catechism question this morning.

There is something different about Jesus Christ. He is not just man. He is also God. He is not just human. He is also divine. This is the sense in which they should be anticipating the son of God or at least open to correction about what the son of God is.

But here he has arrived, and this is not what they are expecting. They are expecting a king who is like the kings of this world. And it is interesting that Jesus continues in this psalm. He does not just say, the Lord says, my Lord.

He could have stopped there. That would have been enough to press his question. David thus calls him Lord. How is he his son? But he continues on. Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.

He is giving the answer in the quotation that happens. The son will sit at the right hand of God himself. What that indicates is that the throne that the Messiah is to sit on is a throne that is higher than David.

It is not just that he is higher than David. His whole kingdom transcends the kingdom of David. There is a lineage that is happening, but there is a transcending nature to it such that it will not have the same character of the kingdom of David.

They're misguided, asking things about whether or not you should pay taxes to Caesar because they are expecting this to be like the kingdoms of the world. They're expecting this to be like the kingdom of David, but his kingdom transcends.

It is greater. And so Jesus, in pressing this point, is reinforcing everything that he said before. What did he say at the beginning when they asked, who gave you this authority? He said, was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?

What's the implication? They know what he's getting at. His authority is from heaven. He's showing that he has a heavenly throne, at least one awaiting him as he will ascend. And then when he says, give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, give to God what belongs to God, what belongs to God?

His people and whole, all things belong to God. So all things are supposed to be oriented around Jesus as king. And then later on when he talks to the Sadducees about the resurrection, what's the nature of their misunderstanding?

They understand, they misunderstand the nature of the kingdom of heaven. When it becomes fully manifest, they are expecting it to be like the kingdoms of this world. For people to be married and given a marriage, etc, etc.

But no, it will be something different than that. They repeatedly, all these parties involved, whether the scribes and the elders, whether they are their spies, whether they are the Sadducees, they all misunderstand the nature of the kingdom.

And so Jesus presses this point and reinforces it and says, essentially by this question that you misunderstand the nature of the kingdom. And that is why they are not able to accept him. This is not a kingdom that is simply different when I say transcendent, but it is a kingdom that is even higher.

The False Peace the World Wants

So many people are inconsistent about the nature of the kingdom of heaven. They are inconsistent about the nature of the kingdom of heaven. They believe that they align with the Christ. Even these people that we read about here, all of them are anticipating a Messiah.

They believe that they are on the side of the prophets and the coming Messiah and that they are ready for him, but they are not ready to submit to him in the way that they ought. That's what you see today as well.

So many people believe that they are on the side of the Christ. I've met so many people who claim to be Christian and when you ask them about their faith, it is very little that is there. But they say that they think that they can call themselves Christian because they believe that Jesus is the Son of God.

Do you even know what the Son of God means? Apparently you don't because you think that you can just give him what is outward and not render your whole life to him. That you can withhold from the owner of the vineyard, the fruit of the vineyard, when the Son has come to take it.

That's the parable that was given earlier in the middle of this, Jesus explaining the authority of the Son. Now these people were expecting a king to come and take taxes, etc. People today, now that they understand it in some sense that Jesus' kingdom is not like the kingdoms of this world, they offer him even less.

They understand it as being like a kingdom of this world and that what they are supposed to render is outward, but then they don't even render outwardly what they would render to a king. And so what they imagine is of the same dimension, something outward, but then something less than the kingdoms of this world.

Sure, maybe I'll give to him a little bit of my time, you know, show up on Christmas, Easter, maybe show up at a few other things. Maybe I will give him a little bit of my money. Maybe I will, maybe I'll give him a lot of my money.

Maybe I'll give him a lot of my time. But what they are imagining is that he is a kingdom that is like the king, that he is a king that is like the kings of this world that demand something outward when what he demands something inward.

He wants the whole of you, the whole of you. All your life is to be oriented around the kingship of Jesus Christ because it is a transcendent kingdom. Yes, you render to Caesar the things that belong to Caesar, but you render the things that belong to God to God.

And that is everything. Even when you give to Caesar, you should be asking yourself, how does this honor the Lord? Even after you would give directly to God, by giving through your local assembly, you are supposed to ask about every last penny that you spend, how is this glorifying God in the way that I spend it?

Even after you would give your Sunday to the Lord, you're supposed to ask about every last minute of your time, how is this glorifying God in the way that I would render it? All these things are to be oriented around God.

But people, even today, recognizing that he's not a king in all the senses, still think of him as a king in the same category, only requiring some outward submission. No, he requires your whole life. He requires your whole life.

This is good news. Well, it's not that the obedience is good news, but the fact that he is a greater and higher king speaks to his goodness at a greater level. If he were just like the kings of this world, what could he do?

Defeat Rome? Defeat some political enemies? And then he would still die in your sins and be miserable for all eternity? No, he is a greater king who will not only on that last day defeat all other kingdoms, such that his kingdom will reign supreme in full manifestation.

But likewise, he has destroyed the power of the accuser himself by suffering the penalty of death that is due to man in place of all those who would believe in him. He has conquered in a greater way and he has offered direction in a greater way.

His law is greater than the laws of the kings of this earth. His peace is greater than the peace of the kings of this earth. His kingdom in all its glory is greater than the glories of the kingdom of this earth.

And this is wonderful news, but the implications go much deeper because of that. It is greater news and it has greater implications. Those people who think that it has small, little implications for their life, they do not understand the greatness, the goodness of the good news.

It is much better than that. I would have you today also to consider the way that the world responds to Jesus in this circumstance. People want peace. Now, this is not all the time. As you can see before this, a lot of times they are trying to subdue Jesus, but when it becomes inconvenient for people, they will want a false kind of peace.

They won't want to set those differences aside because it is inconvenient to attempt any sort of conflict. We will face this all the time as you try to advance the faith. It might be that talking about things of religion or talking about differences is too relationally difficult for people.

It's too relationally uncomfortable for people. Maybe these are friends and family who don't want there to be any kind of wedge between you. It's friends or family, and so they will try to put these things aside.

Maybe it'll be someone who's very timid and they don't like talking about things where there would be any kind of disagreement, and so they will try to put these things aside. And ostensibly, those seem like good goals, but if Christ's kingdom transcends, they are lesser goals than the goals that he would have for us.

It might also be because it is too difficult to contend. Just like the scribes, they realize that for all their intelligence, they cannot contend with Jesus Christ. He has the answers. They do not have the answers.

So it might be just too much, and so they will set it aside for that reason as well. Or it might be because they recognize that there's some value in having an alliance with you and not being on your bad side.

Maybe this is what the scribes had in mind too. Wow, Jesus is actually pretty useful when he's going up against our enemies like the Sadducees. He understands the resurrection pretty well.

This is useful.

You will come across this as well. If you ever join any kind of interfaith group, this is exactly how they will operate. They'll want to put aside all the differences and pretend that they don't exist and just focus on the things that they agree on.

There are a lot of cult-like groups. I say cult-like because they kind of have more of an exterior nature to them. I'm not able to articulate that well. They essentially are cults. You know, you talk about masons or Scientologists, etc., right, where they will tell you, you can be a Christian, you can keep your faith if you join us and you pledge this, pledge the secrecy that's contrary to the Christian faith, if you affirm these truths about what is good that's contrary to Christian faith, etc., as you would have in those organizations.

So they will try to give you ways that this can all be at one and at peace because there's a valuable alliance to be had here. You may also find this politically. There have been a number of times I've found myself, you know, quote-unquote, shoulder-to-shoulder with Roman Catholics who are standing against abortion, right, and there is a reason to want to have that kind of alliance where you would be standing against some great evil in our world, and the temptation there is to set aside differences in order to stand against that perceived greater evil.

The problem is the soul is far more important than anything that could happen to the body, and so ultimately there cannot be that kind of peace. Yes, there is grounds for partnering in secular causes in secular ways, but at no time can the differences that are greater, that are more important, ever be set aside completely.

There was one time I went to an abortion clinic and there were Roman Catholics there, and the leader of their group— this was many years ago, maybe 10 years ago— the leader of their group, in a way of kind of offering peace to us, tried to organize all of us to sing A Mighty Fortress, you know, a very Protestant song, and then we'd all sing Ave Maria afterward.

It's just, no, like, this is not going to happen. We're not going to pretend that we're all the same. We have huge differences. I'm thankful that you are opposed to abortion, but we do not have the same faith, all the same.

Now, there are different kinds of tactics that people will use in order to get that false kind of peace, like you see here with Sadducees. They compliment Jesus. They speak to him as having done something good.

You've spoken well. So the first kind of way that they might accomplish this false peace is by giving you an out. There's one time I was involved in a group that considered themselves very enlightened.

It's not a religious group of any kind, but they considered themselves to be very intelligent people, and one person was speculating that it was unlikely that there would be any Christians in this group because they were such an enlightened group.

I said, well, actually, I'm a Christian. It says, oh, well, you can't be the kind of Christian that would think that homosexuality is wrong or anything like that, right? No, actually, I am. Just very direct, right?

They will try to offer you an out. Oh, but you're not that kind, right? You're not the mean kind, right? Don't take the out. They will also compliment you, just as the Sadducees complimented Jesus. Teacher, you have spoken well.

One time I had a person say, you know, the thing I really appreciate about Christianity, as I'm trying to talk to him about the importance of submitting to Jesus Christ, the thing I really appreciate about Christianity is the community.

That's something that, you know, other groups just don't seem to have, that you all really support each other, and I see my friends who are Christians, they have that, and I don't. So I really appreciate that.

They will try to compliment you as a way of establishing some kind of friendly, superficial peace, a false peace. So they'll be saying, here's an olive branch. Go ahead, take this olive branch. Let's leave this alone.

They will try to change subject. There have been times where I've spoken to someone about the importance of some biblical truth. This is someone else who all sensibly believes the Bible. And they will say, wow, you really know your Bible well.

What do you, how do you study? You know, and then they will try to shift topics. So you're pressing that they have misunderstood this important, critical truth in the Bible, and they will switch topics to something else, maybe by way of compliment, but try to transition elsewhere.

And they will offer superficial agreement. They will say things like, well, you know, we both believe in the resurrection, just like we have here with Jesus and the Sadducees. Well, you know, we're really not all that different.

We're really not all that far apart. And they will try to minimize the differences as a way of having some kind of false peace that cannot really be had. There is, there is a great danger. But what's going on here is some kind of social reciprocity, right?

This is what happens in conversations where someone does one thing with the goal of either permitting or trying to solicit the same response. Right, when you ask someone about their hobbies, what are you trying to do?

You're getting them to also ask you about their,.

Your hobbies.

You're, you might be doing it in a way you might be doing it in a way that is really just interested in yourself. There's all kinds of ranges, but that's usually the protocol in conversations. You say, what kind of hobbies do you have?

And then they're supposed to answer then ask you, what kind of hobbies do you have? Or you might say something like, you know, an older mom might say to a younger mom, you know, I had so much trouble when I was a young mom, et cetera.

And so they're trying to be vulnerable to solicit vulnerability in return, right? And there's a reciprocity that happens there. Some of that's good. Some of that can be selfish. But the point is that people will use that in order to establish a false peace.

They will make a compliment. They will shift topics and they expect reciprocity. They expect you to lay down the sword when they lay down the sword. But there's a danger in this. You cannot do this. James 4 .4 says, you adulterous generation, do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God?

Whoever becomes a friend with the world makes himself an enemy with God. This is what happens when you are a friend of the world. You become an enemy of God. There's no, his kingdom is above all the other kingdoms.

You cannot, you cannot have friendship with the world when he is against the world as it is opposed to him. In Exodus chapter 34, verse 12, it says, to the people of Israel as they're going to go into the land of Canaan, it says, take care lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land to which you go, lest it become a snare in your midst.

They're not supposed to make any kind of peace alliance with the people that they would go in with. We've read recently in Joshua about how they accidentally made a peace alliance with the Gibeonites and you've seen this at play a couple of times.

They're not supposed to make any peace alliance with the people that they would go in with. This is what the world is going to want you to do. When it becomes inconvenient for them to have that conflict, they will try to offer you an alliance.

And what did God say to the people of Israel? You cannot do this. This will undermine your ability to stand for the kingdom that I am giving you. So it is with you. If you accept that false kind of peace, now you can be pleasant with people.

You can be kind in all the ways that you should be kind. You can agree to the things that you should agree to. But if you lay aside those differences as though they are small things, then you are accepting that alliance that God has told you not to accept.

Lest it become a snare in your midst. It will become a snare to you. It will not only undermine your ability to reach them, it will undermine you yourself. You yourself, as you are not bold in that instance, are sacrificing courage so that you will grow in cowardice.

You are sacrificing a good conscience before the Lord so that you will not be able to go before Him with the same kind of boldness before the throne of grace. There's all kinds of things that may happen to you if you make that alliance, just as there were all kinds of things that may happen to the people of Israel.

They would make those peace alliances with the people of the land. Now moving on from the way that the world responds, how is it that Christ responds? Simple, memorable statement. Christ wants conflict.

Now I know that that could be taken in wrong ways, of course. Christ is bringing peace. He is the Prince of Peace. But he is bringing it through subduing every last enemy. Either that enemy will be subdued and coming into his kingdom, or they will be subdued and being defeated.

Now that kingdom has not become manifest, and so there's no physical sword that is being wielded at this time. This is not a religion like Islam where the kingdom is like the kingdom of this world, where it is advanced by a physical sword, but it is advanced by a sword.

It is advanced by the sword of the word of the Lord. This is what Christ has said in Mark.

He said,.

Do not think that I came to bring peace. I came to bring a sword. He has brought a sword. And so when we strategize about how we should respond to the world, we should look at Christ as our example. He is not because of his greatness, because of his wisdom, because he himself is God.

He is still an example to be followed. Many people would think that because he is so great that his example should not be followed. That, well, he's God. We can't necessarily do what he did. He is giving us in this whole chapter and the way that he responds to opponents examples to follow.

Does he lay things aside?

No.

He presses the point. And a very simple way to do that is to ask questions that you know your opponent cannot answer because they have not put together the true things of God. He asks them, how can they say that the Christ is David's son?

David thus called him Lord. How is he his son? This is what you ought to do is you ought to ask the difficult questions that can't be answered. If you've ever heard the name Greg Bonson before, the way he would describe this is pushing the antithesis.

It's necessarily the case if God's word is true, everything else is false. It's necessarily the case that it falls at some point that is inconsistent at some point, either with the world around it or with itself.

And so you must push the antithesis. Okay, so Christianity is the thesis. The antithesis is not Christianity. Whatever that not Christian view is, you push it. So to push it is to take it to its logical conclusions.