Of Pharisees and Sadducees
In recent weeks the Revised Common Lecionaary has featured texts that feature the two main factions of first-century Judaism- the Pharisees and the Sadducees. With that in mind I thought I would take an opportunity to describe who these groups were and how they related to Jesus' ministry. Additionally, looking at them offers an opportunity for a critique of our contemporary church.
So who were these two groups? The Pharisees are mentioned dozens of times in the New Testament and are a frequent foil in Jesus' ministry. Because they are so freqently depicted as opponents of Jesus' ministry, they have have gotten a "bad rap" historically. In reality they were about the best of Judaism. They realized that the world in which they lived was corrupt and evil, and their agenda was to try live righteous lives in that corrupt world without being stained by it. Other Jewish groups- the Essenes and the Zealots shared that basic world-view but came to different conclusions. The former group sought to withdraw from the world by moving out to the wilderness. The latter group reacted to a corrupt world by violet revolution to change or overthrow it.
The Pharisees sought to remain pure within the world by strictly maintaining their Jewish identity. They fastidiously kept the Laws of Moses, they fasted, they prayed, they tithed, they were in the synagogue regularly. The Pharisees were much more commonly the party of the lower and middle classes of society. In general, they were very knowledgeable in their scriptures (our Old Testament.) One might say that to the extent that they so faithfully prayed, fasted, tithed, studied, and attended Synagogue, they would be ideal church members today. What pastor would not want pews full of people who fast, pray, tithe and study faithfully? Theologically, this faction accepted all of the Old Testament, believed in the reality of angels and demons, and the Judeo-Christian belief in resurrection of the dead comes from within this faction. The great error of the Pharisee was not their actions, it was their attitude. They are commonly portrayed in the New Testament as being self-righteous. Even though Jesus comes much closer to being a Pharisee than anything else within Judaism of the day, their tendency toward judgmentalism and self-righteousness made them common opponents of Jesus' ministry. Their judgmental nature and self-righteousness made them common targets of insults and ridicule from Jesus.
The other major party within Judaism was the Sadducees. The Jewish ruling council, the San Hedrin was comprised of members of these two parties, with the Sadducees being a majority of the group. The Sadducees were inveterate rivals of the Pharisees- socially, culturally, and theologically. In fact at one point in his ministry (Acts 23) Paul was being questioned by the San Hedrin and was able to slip away when fists started flying between the factions over the issue of the resurrection. The Sadducees commonly were the party of accommodation to society. Whether it was earlier Greek/Hellenistic culture and society, or the Roman society of the New Testament era, it was always the Sadducees that sought to blend in to culture, and to accommodate it. Because they represented the upper class of society, they would stand to lose far more by holding out against a pagan culture. This was the party of the Jerusalem elite, the party of the temple and the priests. Theologically, they only accepted the Pentateuch as being authoritative- rejecting the prophets and writings. They did not follow the Pharisees' traditions and legal interpretations on how to obey the Law. They denied the existence of angels and demons, as well as any form of eternal life or resurrection. The common rhyme about the Sadducees was that because they did not believe in resurrection of the dead, they were "so sad you see."
After encountering these two groups in recent sermon texts, I have been pondering the relation between them and our contemporary American church. In some local churches one can still find healthy crops of Pharisees. They are likely to be there every Sunday, in the same pew no less. They zealously guard the church's traditions, and are careful to make sure that "sinners" are kept out. Heaven forbid that some sinner might actually come to their church and get saved. Standing guard against long hair, tattoos, recovering alcoholics, and addicts, they stand watch at the doors of the church because they are there whenever the doors are open. Rigid adherence to the rules, whether they are actually Biblical or not, rather than being agents of light and grace characterize the modern Pharisee.
In my opinion, the greatest failing of the American church is not that it is too Pharisaical, but that it too closely resembles the Sadducees. For many years the broader American culture to a certain extent was "Christian." Churches became accustomed to an elite privileged position in society. The values of culture in many instances reflected values of church. The result being many people who were "cultural Christians," without actually having any sort of true relationship with Christ. Being Christian was "comfortable." As study after study has shown, the "cultural Christianity" is rapidly breaking down. Given the growing distinction between culture and Kingdom, the modern Sadducee opts every time for culture. Political power over piety, material excesses reflected in home and in church, morals shaped by politics and Facebook memes; on every score the modern Sadducee may "claim the name" of Christian, but judged by outward appearances, seem to be anything but. The modern Sadducee may have a Bible in the home, but just like their ancient cousins won't believe a third of what is in it. They wouldn't have any idea whether Isaiah is in the Old Testament or the New Testament, and would be scratching their heads looking in the table of contents of their Bibles if someone asked them to find "2nd Hezekiah." They aren't standing guard at the church doors to keep out undesirables. Where the Pharisee does his best to keep sinners out of the church, the Sadducee would be unwilling to even consider anything to be a sin without consulting Facebook or the most recent New York Times poll numbers first. If asked if they are Christian, they will answer affirmatively, but would be so assimilated into the the culture that they are unrecognizable from their atheist/agnostic neighbors except that they may put up a Christmas tree.
Unlike these characters I created, he ideal Christian will be one who prays, fasts, tithes, and studies "religiously" like the Pharisee, but who does so out of gratitude for all that God has done not out of religious duty. Rather than standing guard at the church door to keep the sinners out, they will stand at the church door to welcome the newcomer. They will believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ, take scripture seriously, yet not see the Gospel as something that needs to be defended at all costs in fortresses called churches, but as something to be spread through the land.
So who were these two groups? The Pharisees are mentioned dozens of times in the New Testament and are a frequent foil in Jesus' ministry. Because they are so freqently depicted as opponents of Jesus' ministry, they have have gotten a "bad rap" historically. In reality they were about the best of Judaism. They realized that the world in which they lived was corrupt and evil, and their agenda was to try live righteous lives in that corrupt world without being stained by it. Other Jewish groups- the Essenes and the Zealots shared that basic world-view but came to different conclusions. The former group sought to withdraw from the world by moving out to the wilderness. The latter group reacted to a corrupt world by violet revolution to change or overthrow it.
The Pharisees sought to remain pure within the world by strictly maintaining their Jewish identity. They fastidiously kept the Laws of Moses, they fasted, they prayed, they tithed, they were in the synagogue regularly. The Pharisees were much more commonly the party of the lower and middle classes of society. In general, they were very knowledgeable in their scriptures (our Old Testament.) One might say that to the extent that they so faithfully prayed, fasted, tithed, studied, and attended Synagogue, they would be ideal church members today. What pastor would not want pews full of people who fast, pray, tithe and study faithfully? Theologically, this faction accepted all of the Old Testament, believed in the reality of angels and demons, and the Judeo-Christian belief in resurrection of the dead comes from within this faction. The great error of the Pharisee was not their actions, it was their attitude. They are commonly portrayed in the New Testament as being self-righteous. Even though Jesus comes much closer to being a Pharisee than anything else within Judaism of the day, their tendency toward judgmentalism and self-righteousness made them common opponents of Jesus' ministry. Their judgmental nature and self-righteousness made them common targets of insults and ridicule from Jesus.
The other major party within Judaism was the Sadducees. The Jewish ruling council, the San Hedrin was comprised of members of these two parties, with the Sadducees being a majority of the group. The Sadducees were inveterate rivals of the Pharisees- socially, culturally, and theologically. In fact at one point in his ministry (Acts 23) Paul was being questioned by the San Hedrin and was able to slip away when fists started flying between the factions over the issue of the resurrection. The Sadducees commonly were the party of accommodation to society. Whether it was earlier Greek/Hellenistic culture and society, or the Roman society of the New Testament era, it was always the Sadducees that sought to blend in to culture, and to accommodate it. Because they represented the upper class of society, they would stand to lose far more by holding out against a pagan culture. This was the party of the Jerusalem elite, the party of the temple and the priests. Theologically, they only accepted the Pentateuch as being authoritative- rejecting the prophets and writings. They did not follow the Pharisees' traditions and legal interpretations on how to obey the Law. They denied the existence of angels and demons, as well as any form of eternal life or resurrection. The common rhyme about the Sadducees was that because they did not believe in resurrection of the dead, they were "so sad you see."
After encountering these two groups in recent sermon texts, I have been pondering the relation between them and our contemporary American church. In some local churches one can still find healthy crops of Pharisees. They are likely to be there every Sunday, in the same pew no less. They zealously guard the church's traditions, and are careful to make sure that "sinners" are kept out. Heaven forbid that some sinner might actually come to their church and get saved. Standing guard against long hair, tattoos, recovering alcoholics, and addicts, they stand watch at the doors of the church because they are there whenever the doors are open. Rigid adherence to the rules, whether they are actually Biblical or not, rather than being agents of light and grace characterize the modern Pharisee.
In my opinion, the greatest failing of the American church is not that it is too Pharisaical, but that it too closely resembles the Sadducees. For many years the broader American culture to a certain extent was "Christian." Churches became accustomed to an elite privileged position in society. The values of culture in many instances reflected values of church. The result being many people who were "cultural Christians," without actually having any sort of true relationship with Christ. Being Christian was "comfortable." As study after study has shown, the "cultural Christianity" is rapidly breaking down. Given the growing distinction between culture and Kingdom, the modern Sadducee opts every time for culture. Political power over piety, material excesses reflected in home and in church, morals shaped by politics and Facebook memes; on every score the modern Sadducee may "claim the name" of Christian, but judged by outward appearances, seem to be anything but. The modern Sadducee may have a Bible in the home, but just like their ancient cousins won't believe a third of what is in it. They wouldn't have any idea whether Isaiah is in the Old Testament or the New Testament, and would be scratching their heads looking in the table of contents of their Bibles if someone asked them to find "2nd Hezekiah." They aren't standing guard at the church doors to keep out undesirables. Where the Pharisee does his best to keep sinners out of the church, the Sadducee would be unwilling to even consider anything to be a sin without consulting Facebook or the most recent New York Times poll numbers first. If asked if they are Christian, they will answer affirmatively, but would be so assimilated into the the culture that they are unrecognizable from their atheist/agnostic neighbors except that they may put up a Christmas tree.
Unlike these characters I created, he ideal Christian will be one who prays, fasts, tithes, and studies "religiously" like the Pharisee, but who does so out of gratitude for all that God has done not out of religious duty. Rather than standing guard at the church door to keep the sinners out, they will stand at the church door to welcome the newcomer. They will believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ, take scripture seriously, yet not see the Gospel as something that needs to be defended at all costs in fortresses called churches, but as something to be spread through the land.
Comments
Post a Comment