What did the Pharisees believe?

11/3/2011

The Great Sanhedrin 1808 By Edouard Moyse

(1) Theological tenets: (Buttrick, 778)

History divinely controlled: The Pharisees believed in destiny, or God's sovereignty. They held that all of history was divinely controlled and ultimately governed by/for a divine purpose (as opposed to the Sadducees who held to a more hard-libertarianism).
The Resurrection: The Pharisees believed in an afterlife. They held that people would be resurrected to reward or punishment in a future world based upon behavior in this world (as opposed to the Sadducees who only believed in sheol – the grave).
Angels & Spirits: The Pharisees had a developed angelology and strong belief in spirits, which was tied to their belief in the resurrection (as opposed to the Sadducees who denied it all).
Restored Davidic Kingdom: The Pharisees held a strong eschatological (end time) conviction that God would restore the glories of King David's kingdom. Despite their current circumstances, they were awaiting a descendent of David, “the anointed Lord,” who would turn this world into an earthly paradise. Then the pious dead would rejoin them to share in the wonders of a Messianic age.
The Messiah: The Pharisees believed that the “Anointed Lord” would overthrow Gentile supremacy and drive them from the promised land. The Messiah would then restore Israel and establish a kingdom that would subjugate the “heathen nations” converting them to Israeli worship.1

(2) Significance/Influence:

The Pharisees were seen as a progressive or rationalist group that sought to reform Judaism to be more forward looking than traditional Jewish orthodoxy (as supported by the Sadducees). This reformation movement of sorts was fueled they acceptance of the Hebrew prophetic writings and the writings (wisdom literature) in addition to the Pentateuch (five books of Moses) (Buttrick, 777). The Pharisees were known and admired for their “accuracy” in the interpretation of the law; however, it was their accuracy which “led to the development of the elaborate system of legal traditions handed down orally 'from the fathers,' which came to be regarded as the main feature of historical Pharisaism.” In short, these lay-interpreters of the law created a legalism that built a “fence” or “wall” around the Torah that no one other than a Pharisee could breach. The rigorism with which they went about enforcing these strict codes (especially purification and separateness) created a type of caste system to distinguish the members of their exclusive sect and “to minimize or remove ritual uncleanness contracted in the unavoidable intercourse of daily life” (Buttrick 776). Those who were attempting to achieve “perfectionism in purity and purification of the Levitical code” enforced the exclusiveness, especially from the common people, seen throughout the New Testament. The famous parable of the Good Samaritan exemplifies the extremes this strict group went to avoid ritual contamination and by extension those considered unclean.

When Christ came, He shared much in common with the Pharisees and Scribes while also defying much of their understanding. Christ's mission was indeed to announce and usher in the Kingdom of God, but Pharisees such as Nicodemus were “still living and thinking on the plane of natural, transitory human experience” when Jesus was speaking of the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit within the heart of a person “that is mysterious and beyond human comprehension” (Howell, 43). Sadly, doubtfully few Pharisees besides Nicodemus were ever able to grasp Jesus teachings of the Kingdom and the birth required to enter it since their reasoning was stuck in the flesh. “In fact, their failure to understand even 'earthly things,' such as the raising of the temple of his body, disqualifies them from receiving the 'heavenly things' of his doctrine of the new birth (Howell, 44).

Buttrick, George Arthur. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible: K-Q. Nashville: Abingdon Press. 1962.
Howell Jr., Don N.. The Passion of the Servant. Eugene: Wipf & Stock - Resource Publications. 2009.

15 Comments

Alan

11/22/2013 08:38:53 pm

Thanks brother for your work on this - it help me understand the issue with the Pharisees.

bolaji

1/22/2014 07:46:25 pm

I really enjoy this it broadened my knowledge

samuel

2/19/2014 10:00:22 pm

Good work

abby

10/29/2014 08:43:08 pm

cool

Russ

3/15/2016 11:59:46 pm

What Jesus condemns about Pharisees is obviously their belief in merciless, endless punishment. Acts 23:6-8 forever records that epistle believing Christians are members of the very same Pharisee party that Jesus condemns all throughout the gospels as this is where Paul declares himself to be a Pharisee and a son of Pharisees. Simon Peter was also obviously a Pharisee which explains why Jesus calls him Satan and tells him his thoughts come from man and not from God. Any fool can see that Jesus teaches reincarnation at Matthew 11:14. Anyone can also read the twin passages of Matthew 23:13 and Luke 11:52 and see that Jesus teaches that the Kingdom of Heaven is on earth now and a person needs a key to knowledge or house of knowledge to get in. Peter and Paul obviously had never read Isaiah 57:16 and Psalm 103:9 either, and the Greek word "aionios" at Matthew 25:46 doesn't mean eternal. It means age enduring or lifetime enduring.

Brett

3/16/2016 07:33:05 am

Hi Russ, you obviously feel very strongly about belief in reincarnation and I'm guessing you probably hold this for personal reasons which no amount of argumentation on behalf will convince you otherwise.

That said, it appears that your passion for this belief has given it a primacy in interpretation that the vast majority of other scholars (liberal to conservative) do not find in the text.

First, the notion/idea of reincarnation is antithetical to the New Testament's message on salvation. A fact that even a more doctrinally "neutral" site points out: http://www.comparativereligion.com/reincarnation3.html#07

Second, Pharisees were essentially a religio-political party similar to Republics and Democrats today. Paul was a "card carrying member" of the Pharisee party, hence Acts 23:6-8. The more metaphorical/hyperbolic usage of a hypocritical believer came later. While Peter may have been a Pharisee, this relation to Matt 16:23 is completely absent from the text (especially when the preceding verse gives the clear context as to why Peter was rebuked).

Third, Matthew 11:14 is clear reference to Malachi 4:5, a prophecy which opens the can of worms of prophetic fulfillment. While this may be a text that lends itself to a reincarnation interpretation, other options that do not conflict with Matthew's and the New Testament's main purpose are more than readily available including Elijah as a "type" or Malachi giving the prophecy of John the Baptist from his prophetic perspective in which they only language he knew to describe future events was using the language of his day. I could go on, but all this is to say that it is far from obvious or clear that this verse provides evidence for reincarnation.

As for the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth now, I would direct you to read about "eschatological dualism" in which it is both now and not yet. Be wary interpretations that require special knowledge a la Gnosticism which many NT authors, especially the Johanine epistles, are explicitly opposed to.

The idea that Peter & Paul had never read Isaiah or the Psalms is quite outlandish since they quote both of these works (through the Septuagint/LXX) and their training as Pharisees would have made this extremely unlikely. The fact that they do not quote these verses explicitly is little more than an argument from silence.

Lastly, much ink has been spilled over the meaning of "aionios", but even the more loose interpretations such as "enduring" generally include the notion of unending. When understood within the wider context of the NT and its message, eternal is the clearest rendering. However, even if one wishes to interpret it as "age", there is little evidence this can be equivocated to indicate a personal lifetime.

All this is to say, interpretation will be radically different if the text is allowed to provide its own evidence versus interpreting it through the specific lens of ________ (reincarnation in this case).

God bless in your studies.

Tim Loomis

6/1/2016 05:25:43 am

Brett,
I love what you are doing! Keep up the good work brother! I don't know you but I feel a kindred spirit through your testimony and writings. We live in a crazy world full of all the "religion" that satan has put out there to confuse those who need the Gospel! Thank you for your insight and using your God given intelligence to defend and explain the truths in God's Holy Word! I will definitely return to this site. I just stumbled upon it this morning while doing some Bible study while waiting to meet a congregant struggling with his faith. I am going to recommend your site to him as well! Keep up the good work as we work together for the "Kingdom" A Christian Brother, Tim

chuck

3/19/2017 04:36:06 pm

What has your research lead you to understand about the Pharisees idea of what heaven would be like? I'm sure they considered it a paradise but the idea of paradise varies between religions.

3/20/2017 06:51:06 am

Hi Chuck, I haven't researched the Pharisees in years, so I cannot answer your question definitively. I'd look up The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible for more explicit answers. However, when compared to that of the Sadducees, it would appear they DID believe in the ressurection of the body.

Steve Pratte link

6/25/2017 07:49:27 am

It is astounding that there are still people that believe in reincarnation! Your much too graceful with your comments, they are children or offspring of their father...Satan!
My comment is on the blood of Christ. How was the Blood of Jesus kept holy? I have asked four pastors here in Dothan, Alabama and they all gave the same answers....he's the Son of God! I quite understand that truth but how was the blood kept Holy? When God created woman (and all the angels) He foreknew all the events that proceed from the garden. He foreknew that He would send His Own Son into the world to redeem it. The blood in the Old Testament (animals) was a type. When the Holy Spirit brought about the conception of the Holy Thing in Mary ( a virgin) a wonderful event starts to take place and the cells start to divide. The blood of the fruit of the womb does not happen until about the 5th week. As the baby develops in the womb an amazing organ has started to form and is the organs to sustain life of the growing child. The placenta forms and provides three basic functions for the baby Jesus and for all humans. First, It allows nutrients to pass through to the developing baby for growth. Second, it removes waste from the baby and allows it to exit through the mother's normal path. Third, it provides protection by preventing bacteria getting to the developing baby but the most important protection is by preventing the blood of the child from coming into contact with the blood of the mother, if the two blood types were to be allowed to come into contact, both mother and child would die. In the case of Jesus, this was the means that God used to keep the blood of His Son Jesus from the blood of the human race, thus keeping it diving and holy. In short, the blood that Jesus shed on the cross is God's Own Blood and by faith is the covering our sins. Also, it is the male who gives the offspring their blood. Eve could not conceive an offspring without the egg being fertilized by Adam, thus Adam gave all mankind their blood ACTS 17:26. Also, Jesus came in our likeness and not in our sameness (with a sin nature) as all men have at birth Philippians 2:7. Love that your defending the faith in a dying world my brother! Love, Grace and Peace.

1/17/2023 02:32:08 pm

Steve,
I feel that calling people sons and daughters of Satan is harsh and uncalled for. If you feel their veiw is wrong... There are kinder ways to say so.

Stacy link

12/14/2020 06:10:30 pm

Nice blog poost

william neu

4/26/2022 12:08:03 pm

The reason for it all, as Book of Truth prophecies unfold.

The Book of Truth (Daniel 10:21/12:4-9) seems to have been given to mankind as foretold:

http://thebookoftruthonline.blogspot.com/p/the-book-of-truth-online.html

-----------

Protect yourself and loved ones (Revelation chapter 7 - Seal of the Living God):

http://thebookoftruthonline.blogspot.com/p/seal-of-living-god.html

Do a search for “Remnant Church” and “Remnant Army” in archived messages.

*the Remnant Army is the global network of “Jesus to Mankind prayer groups”

1/17/2023 02:31:01 pm

Patti

3/25/2023 07:32:21 pm

Brett, obviously you feel very strongly that the God you worshipped is love yet consigns people who do not fit a very narrow definition of Christianity and along with anyone else who doesn't "choose Jesus" (such as those who have never heard of him) to an eternity of torment. Far be it from me to try to take your faith away. As if I could. However, unlike others who replied to his comment on reincarnation, I agree with Russ. The apostle Paul believed in the resurrection due to his firsthand "encounter" with the risen Jesus. Your Christian theology. He clearly believed in reincarnation (as certain early Christians did - not as the Hindus do but as a redemptive process of coming closer to God through more than one life time. One life often is not enough for some people to experience what they need to and to come to know God.

Romans 5:18-20 If you believe that Adam's sin condemned all humanity then it logically follows that Christ's "righteous act" provides for the salvation of all. The only way that this could be true is that all eventually will come to know and "choose Christ" Obviously, this requires more than one life for some. What else is the Resurrection but rebirth ? In the case of Jesus, it was a n immediate return to life - there was no need for him to experience or learn anything at all. He only incarnated for the sake of the world. He is divine. His spirit is God's. However, you are not God and neither was Paul. The word eternal in the Bible is not translated properly and if you are intellectually honest you should at at least acknowledge that. Aionios means "age-abiding" not eternal. Eternity is for the person who is fully restored, redeemed, and healed - all of which salvation encompasses. Limiting "salvation" in the Bible to being saved by Jesus's death from a non-existent eternity of conscious torment that God, who loves all of his human creation would never create or consign any of it to.

1 Timothy 2:3-4 If God wants all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth, that is what will happen. Do you seriously think that Paul viewed God as wistfully and sorrowfully wanting something that cannot be. Do you think He would send Jesus to redeem the world if it were possible for Jesus to fail to do so ? Again "the world" is all. Jesus is greater than a "potential" savior. The Bible that you believe inerrant never even hints at such a thing. It is the modern Christian interpretation of it that does that by false exegeses (aka twisting scripture)

The apostle Paul was no longer a Pharisee. He no longer believed in the Pharisees reincarnation theology. He believed what he heard from Jesus. He believed what the other apostles did.

1 Timothy 4:10 "That is why we labor and strive, becaushe, we have put our hope in the Living God, who is the savior of all people, especially those who believe." I think this speaks for itself. However, have you ever wondered about the meaning of "especially those who believe?" It only makes sense in this sentence if Paul is saying that those who choose him need not be reborn because their redemption, restoration and healing can be accomplished without further human experiences. I do not say it must mean this. It's my opinion that it makes no sense otherwise. It doesn't mean God shows favoritism, does it ?

1 John 2:2. "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world" Again, no explanation necessary. The world is everyone God ever created, before Jesus, and all those he ever will create. Again, no mention of "potential" or "in theory"

1 John 4:14 "And we have seen and do testify that God has sent His Son to be the savior of the world" Again, the meaning is very clear and any other interpretation shows obvious believer bias.
And again, do you really think it likely that John, "the apostle Jesus loved" would fail the Father or that his mission had any potential to fail ?

The proof-texting verse from Hebrews from that Christians love to quote "For it is given to man to die once and then face judgement" does not disprove Christian reincarnation theology. In the first place, it needs to be read in the context of the whole passage, not plucked out. If you re-read the passage, I think you will see that the author is writing to certain Hebrews to teach them that the old beliefs are no longer in effect as the promised Messiah has come and done what was necessary for their salvation. The old sacramental system is no longer necessary, the priesthood as intermediary is no longer needed. These things never had the power to save anyone. The belief that one only has one existence and then faces judgement is part of the old system. Christ was the ultimate and only sacrifice that we need. He replaces the priesthood and is the only high priest needed and is a far superior intermediary. Indeed the whole letter is comparing the old beliefs and ways of the Jews with the new one that the Messiah has made possible. So w

Theological Works

What did the Pharisees believe?

Leave a Reply.

Author

Categories

Archives