After the loss of national independence, the opposition between the Pharisees and the Sad- ducees naturally soon lost its political character, and became more and more dtatinetly religious. The Sadducees, who still formed the majority of the Sanhedrin, attempted, during the ethnarchy of Hyrcanus, to call Herod to account for his law- less proceedings in Galilee, but this attempt only proved their powerlessness (Ant, XIV. ix. 1 ff.). When Herod captured Jerusalem (B.C. 37), he put to death 45 of these Sadducean Sanhedrists (Ant. Xv. 1. 2 calls them leaders of the party of Anti- gonus, ef. BJ 1. xviii. 4; Ant. XIv. ix. 4 says ‘all the members of the Sanhedrin’ except Sameas) ; and he still further diminished their power by deposing and appointing high priests according to his own pleasure, and by introducing amon the high priestly families his own relations an creatures. When he purged the Sanhedrin in the manner just dead he spared the leaders of the Pharisees, who had advised the citizens to throw open the gates of the city to him (Ant. XIV. ix. 4, XV. i. 1); and although they refused to take the oath of allegiance, he merely punished them with a fine (xv. x. 4; xvi. ii. 4). Recog- nue their influence with the people, he at first would fain have gained them over to his side, and
* These are of Pharisaic origin, and date, according to Ryle
and James, from between B.0. 70 and 40, according to Cheyne between 63 and 45.
PHARISEES
therefore took pains in several ways to respect their religious feelings (cf. xv. xi. 5. 6); but they simply acquiesced in his rule, as being a Divine judgment upon the people for their sins. Towards the end of his reign, their attitude towards him became one of hostility. They conspired with members of his household to secure his overthrow (XVI. ii. 4), and (B.C. 4) instigated their pupils to cut down the golden eagle, which he lad placed over the chief entrance to the temple as a sign of Roman sovereignty. For this offence he caused a number of them to be burned alive (XVU. vi. 2-4; BJ 1. xxxiii. 1-4).
When, after the deposition of Archelaus, Judea pee under the direct rule of the Romans, the atter left internal matters largely in the hands of the Sanhedrin, under the presidency of the high priest, who belonged to the Sadducean party (Ant. Xx. ix. 1; Ac 5). The Sadducean aristo- crats, with whom the new families raised by Herod to the high priestly dignity had soon mixed, thus regained a considerable measure of power; but in order to stand well with the people, they were compelled to act in respect of all legal questions in accordance with the Paneiplce of the Pharisees (Ant. Xvi. i. 4). The latter, many of whom sat = ae Seem eile 23), were the real leaders of the people. nder Agrippa I. (A.D. 41-44), who, at least within Palestin’, lived the life of a AS Jew, observing strictly the ancient laws and offering daily sacrifices, they had matters very much after their own mind. To please them, Agrippa persecuted the Christians, put James, the brother of John, to death, and cast Peter into prison (Ac 12). When Judea passed again under the direct rule of the Romans, the Sadducees once more became the nominal possessors of authority. But their doom was sealed. With the destruction of Jerusalem, the high priesthood and the San- bedrin vanished, and the Sadducees, as a party, ed from history.
They
disappear It was otherwise with the Pharisees.*
survived the Temple and the State. They had not, strictly speaking, been a political party within the old commonwealth, and for that very reason, when the latter perished, their influence was not lessened. Their leading Rabbis formed a body, which regarded itself as a continuation of the ancient Sanhedrin. At first it had its seat at Jamnia; it afterwards removed to Galilee, and remained for a long time at Tiberias. The office of president was hereditary in the family of Hillel. The president’s authority grew rapidly. He bore the title of the old high priests, Nasi or Ethnarch, and, later, Patriarch; in course of time he was recognized by the imperial government as the head of the Palestinian cena from Jews in foreign lands he received gifts of money, which were collected annually by his representatives. These Rabbis separated themselves more and more com- pees from the Gentiles. The LXX, which had
me the Christian’s Bible, was supplanted by a more literal translation, that of Aquila. They also became more strict among themselves; the old tendency of the scribes to regulate the whole of life by the law was accentuated. The result was 8 spiritual slavery such as had never before existed. The communities voluntarily submitted to the new hierarchy; they willed the end, viz. the maintenance of Judaism, and therefore accom- modated themselves to the means. As result we
have the preservation of Judaism as an inter- national fellowship even after the downfall of the theocracy.
ii. LEADING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PHARI- B8EES.—(1) Their scrupulous observance of the law. According to Josephus they were noted for their
* See Wellhausen, op. ott. 871 ff.
PHARISEES
825
accuracy in interpreting the laws (BJ 1. v. 2, Il. vill. 14, Vita 38, Ant. XVII. ii. 4), and for the scrupulousness with which they kept them (Ant. XVIII. i. 3). They held as binding not only the written, but the oral law, the ‘traditions of the fathers’ (Xu. x. 6, xvi. 2). Like their progeni- tors, the Hasidwans, they were, speaking gener- ally, the party of the scribes, whose precepts they carried into practice, and whose PK latterly, proceeded from their ranks (Xv. i. 1, x. 4). The account given of them in the NT is substantially the same as that of Josephus. In the Gospels the Pharisees and the scribes are con- stantly mentioned in the same connexion, and in such a way as to imply that they practically formed the same party, e.g. Mt 5” 12% 15!, Mk 915 P+ 8, Lk 57-21-30 67 78 1153 143 153 Jn 825 The great discourse in Mt 23 (cf. Lk 11*-*) is directed against both the Pharisees and the scribes. Gama- liel is both a Pharisee and a doctor of the law (Ac 5*); the Pharisees form the straitest sect of the Jewish religion (26°), and Saul, a Pharisee (Ph 35), had been brought up according to the strict manner of the law of the fathers (Ac 22%), Attention is called to their holding the traditions of the elders, Slaten in regard to the washing of hands and vessels (Mk 7!5=Mt 15%, Mt 23", Lk 11®*), to their tithing (Lk 1813, etc.), fastin