By Clarence H. Wagner, Jr.

The antagonism of some Pharisees towards Yeshua (Jesus) in the New Testament cause the sect of the Pharisees to be much maligned in Christianity. In fact, if you asked most Christians what they think of the "scribes and Pharisees," you would undoubtedly get a very negative litany of all that is wrong with them.

Not only would there be numerous occurrences of their confrontations with Yeshua, but also the seven "woes" Yeshua pronounced upon them in Matthew 23. Even Websters New Collegate Dictionary defines "Pharisaism" as being hypocritical or self-righteous.

Surely, the Pharisees have much to answer for, yet Yeshua opened His renunciation of their movement by saying, "The teachers of the law (the scribes) and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So, you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach" (Matt. 23:2-3). It was after this statement that Yeshua pronounced His seven "woes," and each woe pointed out their failures in the practice of the law, not the law they were teaching.

Before delving into all that was wrong about the Pharisees, let us learn about this group, who they were, and what they believed. After all, they figure prominently in the New Testament narrative, and we should know more about them.

Who Were The Pharisees?

The term, Pharisee, comes from the Hebrew, Perushim, which means "separated ones," from Hebrew stem, parash (to be separated). They saw themselves as set apart from the heathen world (Gal. 2:12ff) and also from those Jews who assimilated and compromised with the world, showing little regard for keeping the Law. For reasons of ritual purity they would avoid contact with others not like themselves as well as with the Sadducees with whom they shared an ongoing conflict in interpretation of the Bible and rivalry in the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish council and tribunal. On the other hand, this verb can also mean "to divide" or "interpret." Some scholars believe that whatever "Pharisee" came to mean in a later period, it initially meant "interpreter" and referred to the exceptional ability of these men to understand and interpret the Bible. Josephus refers several times to the expertise "in the interpretation of the Law for which the Pharisees had become known" (e.g., Jos. Life, 38; Jos. War II. viii., 14).

The roots of the Pharisee movement can be traced to the Hasidim of the second century BC, those "pious men" or "saints" of Israel who sought to keep alive a reverence for the Law among the descendants of the Jews who returned from the Babylonian captivity. Their loyalty to their covenant relationship with God impelled them to instruct the people to keep the Law of God in the face of the pressure towards worldly Hellenization by the Greek-oriented, Seleucid monarchy who took every means to Hellenize the Jewish people and cause them to abandon their biblical faith. Ultimately, when Antiochus Epiphanes enforced the most stringent of anti-Jewish laws and defiled the Temple, the Maccabees (Hasmoneans) overthrew the Seleucid regime and established Jewish rule in the Land of Israel once again. The Hasidim were in favor of this Maccabean overthrow. But, since the Hasidim were more interested in the religious life of the nation, not politics, they soon separated from the political intrigues of the Hasmoneans.

Among the many sects spawned by the Hasidim were the Pharisees, which may be regarded as the direct continuation of Hasidism into the New Testament period. Other major Jewish sects found in the New Testament period were the Sadducees and the Essenes, all of whom were distinct in their doctrines and often opposed to each other's interpretation of the Law of God.

Pharisee membership was largely from the middle class and tended to be the businessmen - the merchants and tradesmen of their day - and this apparently accounts for the large amount of Talmudic material (rabbinical commentaries) pertaining to the intricacies of commercialism. The average Pharisee had no formal education in the interpretation of the law, and therefore had to turn to the professional scholar, the scribe (or lawyer of the day), the majority of whom were Pharisees. A number of priests and Levites were also Pharisees, although most of them were Sadducees.

Strict Pharisaism flourished in a closed chavurah, or community, requiring membership and training. A member of the movement was called a chaver, meaning "knit-together" or a "companion" of the community. Several of these holy communities existed in the environs of Jerusalem. Admission into the community was strictly regulated. A candidate must first agree to take upon himself obedience to all the detailed legislation of the Pharisaic tradition, involving tithing and ceremonial and dietary purity. Once accepted, he entered a period of probation, which was one month (according to the more compassionate Rabbi Hillel) or up to one year (according to the more strict Rabbi Shammai). During this time, the candidate was closely observed with respect to his vow of obedience. Successful completion of this probation entitled the candidate to full membership as a Pharisee.

Each community was organized under the leadership of a scribe, who served as a professional authority in the interpretation of the law. The communities not only provided opportunity for mutual scrutiny and encouragement, but also had regularly scheduled meetings for worship, usually the evening of Shabbat. Study of the Torah and a communal meal were also part of these gatherings.

The influence of the Pharisees was not limited to these closed communities, but reached out through the activities of the synagogue, which served as the arm of the Pharisees, especially in the teaching of Torah and in the administration of public charity. Therefore, Pharisaism influenced a large segment of the populace, many of whom were inclined toward the views of the Pharisees without becoming full members in the community.

The teaching of the Pharisees had more appeal to the general population of Israel, because their movement had membership from the middle class, while the Sadducees were from the more elite aristocracy, who were often out of touch with the common man. Also, the Pharisees focused on instructing people in the practice of the Law in their daily lives, whereas the Sadducees were more aligned with the service of the Temple and garnering favor with political leaders.

During the time of Yeshua, the principle influences in society were the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Herodians, the Zealots, the Essenes, and the Roman occupiers. I will deal more closely with the first two. However, here is a brief definition of the others:

Picture: Yeshua did not shun Pharisees; in fact, He interacted with them. We have examples of all types of Pharisees from the life of Yeshua and His years of ministry.

The Herodians were more of an assimilated group of Jews who were aligned with King Herod and his pro-Roman views and more political in nature than religious.

The Zealots were a group of extreme and uncompromising partisans in the cause of Jewish national freedom, who refused to bow to any government or power other than God. They were fanatics who hated Rome and even fought against their Jewish brethren who sided with Rome during the decades of the Second Temple Period (Moseley 181).

The Essenes were a highly exclusive and monastic group of religious Jews, most noted for the Dead Sea Scrolls that originated in their community in Qumran on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea. Some think John the Baptist was either from this group or was at least greatly influenced by their teachings.

The Romans were outside occupiers, completely pagan in their beliefs. They worked tirelessly to hold down Jewish religious or national fervor in the general population of Israel, keeping the citizens loyal to the Empire.

The prime distinction of Pharisaism is not in its zeal for the Law, for great zeal was a characteristic of all the sects of the New Testament period. Rather it is to be found in the particular importance they attached to the Oral Law, as contrasted to the Written Law of the Torah. The Oral Law arose during the Babylonian Exile and built up over the centuries. It is a running commentary of how to live one's daily life and keep the Law before God. Nevertheless, the Pharisees erroneously taught that the Oral Law had been communicated by God to Moses and passed down through the ages and was parallel to and of equal importance and authority with the written Law itself (cp. Mt. 15:2-3; Mk. 7:8-13; Gal. 1:14).

The Pharisee movement held to a letter-strict interpretation of the Written and Oral Law. They were moral, zealous, and self-denying (Lk. 18:9). However, they were very self-righteous and destitute of the sense of sin and need in their own lives (Lk. 7:39).

What Did The Pharisees Believe?

Concept of God: The Pharisees saw God as an omnipotent spiritual Being, all-wise, all-knowing, all-just, and all merciful. They taught that God loved all His creatures and asked man to walk in His ways, to act justly, and to love kindness. God endowed man with the power to choose between good and evil, creating man with good and bad impulses, advising him to do good. The Torah was a guide from God to help him know God's plan for his life (Encyclopedia Judaica Vol. 13, 366).

Resurrection and the Supernatural: The Pharisees believed in resurrection and a future life and accepted a rather developed hierarchy of angels and demons. They had an expectation of a coming Messiah who would restore the fortunes of Israel. They looked for that day when the evil regime of the present would be dissolved and the glorious kingdom of righteousness for a righteous Israel would be inaugurated. They hoped that their zeal of their practice of the Law would be a catalyst for the coming of the Messiah.

Picture: Jewish worshipers with normal sized phylacteries were not ostentatious as they came from prayer at the Temple.

Free Will and Divine Retribution: Concerning the will of man, they took an intermediate view that made it impossible for either free will or the sovereignty of God to cancel out the other. As Josephus put it, "Though they postulate that everything is brought about by fate (providence) still they do not deprive the human will of the pursuit of what is in man's power" (Jos. Antiq. VIII. i. 3). They believed that God ordained everything in the world, but that man had it in his power to choose between good and evil. This belief in man's responsibility for his actions led to the Pharisaic doctrine of divine retribution. Man would be rewarded or punished in the next life according to his conduct.

Humanity: The Pharisees were champions of human equality and advocates of a democratic movement. Their antagonism to the political reign of the aristocrats became a major reason for the popularity of the Pharisees among the masses and set them at odds with the Sadducees. They interpreted Scripture to favor the downtrodden and showed great hope that righteous living would extend beyond the priestly class to the common man. They had a high regard for tolerance and were great lovers of peace. (Remember how tolerant Gamaliel was when the Sanhedrin wanted to put the Apostles to death in Acts 5:17-41. His arguments persuaded the Sanhedrin to release them.) Their teaching fell more on the ethical side rather than the theological side, e.g. they were more interested in the "doing" of the Word not just studying and talking about it.

Synagogue Worship: The Pharisees believed that since God was everywhere, He could be worshipped both in and outside the Temple and was not to be invoked by sacrifices alone. Thus, they fostered the synagogue as a place of worship, study, and prayer and raised it to a central important place in the life of the people, which rivaled the Temple. This also antagonized the Sadducees. The centrality of the synagogue would become a very important concept once the Temple was destroyed in AD 70.

By contrast, the Sadducees drew their membership from the aristocracy and were out of touch with the common man. Most of their activity surrounded the Temple. They denied the existence of angels or other spirits and all miracles, especially the resurrection of the body. They were the religious rationalists of the time (Mk. 12:18-23; Acts 23:8) and were strongly entrenched in the Sanhedrin and priesthood. They believed that God took little cognizance of and little interest in human affairs. They are identified with no affirmative doctrine, but were mere deniers of the supernatural. They were also advocates to the written Law, not the Oral Law.

The Pharisees were both conservative and progressive at the same time, championing tradition, but capitalizing on adaptation to the society of the day. They excelled in adapting old codes to new conditions. Pharisaism was able to move ahead with changing times and circumstances, making itself relevant to the vast majority of the population, yet remaining true to its basic commitments.

Picture: A Pharisee with enlarged tassels (tzitziyot) on his garment, praying publically to be heard of men.

On the other hand, the Sadducees were most closely linked to the Temple and were not adaptable or progressive at all. Therefore, once the Temple was destroyed in AD 70 and it was clear after the Second Jewish Revolt (AD 132-135) that it would not be rebuilt, the greatest influence on Judaism came from the Pharisees. Because the Oral Law was a running commentary of how to live one's daily life before God, even in the absence of the Temple - a circumstance faced by all Jews living outside the Land of Israel and even within Israel after the 1st century AD and the destruction of the Temple - Pharisaism became the basis of normative Judaism. The Pharisee, Patriarch Judah, codified the Oral Law into the Mishnah (c. AD 200), which describes how to do what is commanded in the Law. It is a testimony to the final triumph of Pharisaism in the creation of a post-Temple rabbinical Judaism, which has survived to this day.

Good And Bad Pharisees

Even though Pharisaism encouraged the practice of the Law, it was this very point that Yeshua criticized with His seven woes of Matthew 23. The self-righteous hypocrisy that Yeshua was challenging was their pious words without appropriate corresponding deeds.

Interestingly, the Jerusalem Talmud also criticized the Pharisees by describing seven kinds of Pharisees, five of which were hypocrites, and two who were good. (1) The Shoulder Pharisee paraded his good deeds before men like someone wearing a badge on his shoulder. Yeshua began His diatribe against the Pharisees by mentioning the shoulder (Mt. 23:4). (2) The Wait-a-little Pharisee would ask someone to wait for him while he performed some good deed. (3) The Blind Pharisee would bruise himself walking into a wall because he had to shut his eyes to avoid seeing a woman. (4) The Pestle Pharisee walked with hanging head so as not to observe some alluring temptations. (5) The Ever-reckoning Pharisee was always counting his good deeds to see if they offset his failures. The two good Pharisees were (6) the God-fearing Pharisee who was truly righteous like Job, and (7) the God-loving Pharisee, who had a true affection for God like Abraham (Moseley, 110).

Both the New Testament and other Jewish literature describe various Pharisees who seem to have been sincere, honest, and godly. Nicodemus (Jn. 3:1) and Joseph of Arimathea believed the message of Yeshua and endeavored to follow Him (Jn. 7:50, 19:39; Mk. 15:43). In Acts 5, Gamaliel, the teacher of Paul, argued for tolerance toward the Christians. On at least one occasion, some Pharisees warned Yeshua of an attempt on His life, and others were seen showing hospitality to the Lord (Lk. 13:31, 7:36, 11:37 and 14:1) (Moseley, 111). And, Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul, the most prolific writer in the New Testament, was a Pharisee (Acts. 23:6).

Yeshua And The Pharisees

The teaching of Yeshua aligned more with the teaching of the Pharisees than any other sect of the day, especially that of the famous Rabbi Hillel.

Within Pharisaism, there was an ongoing conflict between the School of Hillel and the School of Shammai. Hillel was much more compassionate in his interpretation of the Law than Shammai, who was quite conservative and unyielding. Hillel was about thirty years older than Yeshua, and He summed up the Law by saying, "What you would not have done to you, do not to another; that is the whole Law, the rest is commentary." This statement is very close to the famous statement of Yeshua, known today as the Golden Rule: "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets" (Mt. 7:12). Interestingly, many of the challenges from the Pharisees were coming from the perspective of the School of Shammai, and Yeshua was sometimes defending one of His teachings that aligned with the School of Hillel.

Picture: Yeshua confronts Pharisees who challenged His authority to heal the sick on Shabbat.

On the one hand, the basic tenets of Pharisaism appear to be very closely aligned with the teaching of Yeshua and consistent, for the most part, with Christianity. So, how do we account for the scathing renunciation of Yeshua, not only in Matthew 23, but in other encounters with them? He accuses them of hypocrisy and pretentiousness and pronounces upon them a succession of seven woes culminating in the terrible, climatic exclamation: "You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?" (Mt. 23:33).

Again, it must be pointed out that Yeshua's "woes" dealt more with practice, not content. He introduces the woes by saying, "Everything they do is done for men to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels of their prayer shawls long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them ÔRabbi'" (Mt. 23:5-7). Phylacteries are boxes containing Scriptures, which are worn by Jewish men on the forehead and arms. God commanded Jewish men to wear both the phylacteries and tassels on the prayer shawls according to Exodus 13:9,16 and Numbers 15:37-41. Yet, they pretentiously embellished the symbols to impress man. The Mishnah points out that some had tassels on their prayer shawls that were so long they drug behind them on the ground. The other prideful practices we see in this passage, we might find lurking in our own hearts!

When Yeshua does criticize the content of their message, it is not the written Law, but the Oral Law, which was called into question - the "traditions of men," which the Pharisees held to be equal with the Bible (Mt. 23:16-22, 23). Yeshua exclaimed elsewhere, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God, in order to keep your tradition!" (Mk. 7:9; Mt. 15:3). These "traditions of men" had taken the place of and, in some cases, nullified the commandments of the Word of God. Yeshua did not question the rightful authority and preaching of the true word of those who "sit in Moses' seat," telling the people to "practice and observe what they tell you" (Mt. 23:2ff). At the same time, much of the legal minutia of the oral tradition constituted too difficult and unnecessary a burden, which the Pharisees made no move to alleviate (Mt. 23:4). Their apparent ability to maintain a consistency between their tradition and the written Law made them blind teachers of the blind (Mt. 15:14; cf. 23:16,17,19,24,26). Within Christianity, we too have some doctrines that have no basis in Scripture, yet we hold on to these "traditions of men" as though they were spoken by God.

The overall concern of the Pharisees with the external led almost naturally to a neglect not only of the weightier parts of the Law (Mt. 23:23), but also of working on necessary changes in the heart, which is more important to God: "Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart" (I Sam. 16:7). Yeshua quoted Isaiah when He said to them, "These people honor Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me. They worship Me in vain; their teaching are but rules taught by men" (Isa. 19:13; Mk. 7:6-7). In the seven woes, Yeshua points out that the emphasis on the outward appearance and not the heart within was like "cleaning the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence" and like "whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean," (Mt. 23:25,27). He concludes, "first clean the inside . . . and then the inside will be clean" (Mt. 23:26).

So, What Does This Mean to Us?

As ideally conceived, Pharisaism was a good thing with the intention of getting more people to live righteous lives before God. The fact is that many of the teachings of the Pharisees were quite sound and were never condemned by Yeshua. Although there is no group today that is identical to the Pharisees, it is fair to say that they were much like our contemporary conservatives, with some of both the good and the bad qualities that make conservatives controversial (Moseley 116). Actually, we should be thankful to the Pharisees for a number of their contributions. First, it was the Pharisees who preserved the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) for us. They also formulated many of the major doctrines, which are now important facets of Church theology. From the Pharisees came the synagogue organization, much of which spilled into the church. In addition, the Pharisees fought stridently to protect and preserve the nation of Israel. The Pharisees were the first to evangelize and send out missionaries. They anticipated and watched with great expectancy for the Messiah. And, from among the Pharisees came some of the first believers in Yeshua HaMashiach (Moseley 117).

Interestingly, the teaching of Yeshua was more closely aligned to the Pharisees than any other sect. Perhaps that is why He was so upset with them. By saying that "they sit in Moses' seat," He was affirming their message. It was their practice that He decried.

Some scholars believe that Yeshua was so anguished with the Pharisees because they had the message, but lost the path. They were so close to the Truth, yet were missing the mark, and this caused Him great distress. At a deeper level, He longed to see His people, Israel, come to Him. The Pharisees who were looking for the Messiah failed to recognize Him as the "Word made flesh," fulfilling the Torah as God's revelation to man.

Picture: Nicodemus came to Yeshua by night to question Him about His message.

Believe it or not, it was at the conclusion of this very strongly worded chapter, when Yeshua showed His love and compassion for His people when He cried over Jerusalem from the Mt. of Olives and said, "...O, Jerusalem, Jerusalem... how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing" (Mt. 23:37).

Yeshua was not rejecting the Pharisees or His people. Rather, He was giving them the strong message of a prophet to get right with God and have a supernatural heart-change from within. Then the practice of the Word would follow from a right relationship with and adoration of God, not just in a mere keeping of Laws from a head knowledge and religious duty. However, without an internal relationship with God, by faith and not of works (Eph. 2:8,9), like the Pharisees, all our efforts become legalism and fall short of the glory of God.

Now, this is the crux of this passage for all of us.

Let us stop looking at these words as a condemnation of someone else, in this case the scribes and Pharisees, and examine what Yeshua was denouncing in relation to ourselves. Let us take a look in the mirror. Aren't we also guilty of some of the same shortcomings of the scribes and Pharisees? Have we expunged all the pride and self-seeking out of our own lives? Are we keeping God's Word out of a sense of religious duty, or does it well up from our relationship with Him, overflowing in righteous practice as an expression of our love for Him and others? Do we preach one thing while doing another? Haven't we all been hypocrites at sometime in our walk with the Lord... maybe even now?

We cannot put on the righteousness of God like a garment; it has to come from within. "There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that came by Messiah Yeshua... Where, then is boasting? It is excluded" (Rom. 3:23; 27a).

None of us is righteous in and of ourselves. Isaiah said, "All our [self] righteous acts are like filthy rags..." (Isa. 64:6). All of us must achieve our righteousness and justification as we acknowledge our sin, which we then renounce, as we accept, by faith, the redemptive work accomplished on the cross... not of our own works. "Be reconciled to God. God made Him who has no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God" (II Cor. 5:20b, 21).

Meanwhile, James points out, "Faith without works is dead," and "Do not merely listen to the Word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says!" (Jas. 2:17; 1:22). This is not a contradiction, but a declaration that if we really have faith and believe in our hearts and have a relationship with God from within, then we will bear much fruit in our lives. Paul wrote to the Galatians, "But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Messiah Yeshua have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit" (Gal. 5:22-25).

I don't know about you, but I know I still have a long way to go in the demonstration of my walk of faith with the Lord. It is a lifelong process. In writing this message, the words of Yeshua to the Pharisees pierced my heart with a recognition that I am a "work in progress" and daily need to examine my heart, my motives, my sense of pride, my self-righteousness, and even my hypocrisy at times. It is easier to point a finger at others and see their sin, but hard to see it in yourself. Only Yeshua, the sinless One, can judge the Pharisees or any others. It is not for us to self-righteously judge another, but our responsibility is to get our own lives in order.

This message to the Pharisees is really a sobering message to each of us to examine our own heart and life in the mirror of the righteousness of God. Let's start some personal "housecleaning," so that the righteousness of God can shine forth through us in word and deed.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) John Bethel, ed. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield: Merriam Publishers, 1960).

2) Philip Blackman, ed. Mishnah. (New York: Judaica Press, 1983).

3) Eliezer Ebner. History of the Jewish People - The Second Temple Era. (Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications, Ltd., 1982).

4) Louis Finkelstein. The Pharisees. (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1962).

5) Jerusalem Talmud. (London: Soncino Presss, 1948).

6) Josephus. Antiquities, trans. William Whiston. (Philadelphia: Winston Press, 1969).

7) Josephus. Life, trans. William Whiston. (Philadelphia: Winston Press, 1969).

8) Ron Moseley. Yeshua, A Guide to the Real Jesus and the Original Church. (Hagerstown, MD: Ebed Publications, 1996).

9) The New International Study Bible. (Grand Rapids, MI: The Zondervan Corporation, 1985).

10) The New Scofield Reference Bible, Authorized King James Version. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1967).

11) Eds. C. Roth and G. Wigoder. Encyclopedia Judaica. (Jerusalem, Israel: Keter Publishing House, Ltd., 1972).

12) Dr. G. Douglas Young. Young's Compact Bible Dictionary. (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1989).

13) The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976).

(The above was borrowed from "Bridges of Peace".)