English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Do some research, you will be surprised.

2006-08-18 03:23:34 · 9 answers · asked by 自由思想家 3 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

9 answers

Well, what research I have done has told me that Jesus was probably more closely related to the Pharisees than the other broad religious groups in Jewish culture at the time (i.e., the Essenes or Sadducees or Zealots), but that's hardly saying he was actually an "official Pharisee" himself. It doesn't seem to be a majority position in what overview I've read.

He did use rabbinical preaching styles as well as the argument formats used by the Pharisees in his interactions with them (so that he might show inconsistencies in their own arguments, a valid debate tool). I can see how this can lead to some confusion over his own background.

While Jesus often agreed with the broad principles espoused by the Pharisees, however, he disagreed with them over how they should be implemented/practiced, and there's no real historical tradition of him being anything other than a "Jewish layman" in actuality (whereas Paul laid actual claim to his Pharisee heritage). The acceptance and portrayal of Jesus as an "outsider" seems pretty clear.

Why's it important that you connect Jesus to the Pharisees anyway? (Just curious...)

--

In some ways, the Pharisees got a bum rap -- to the extent that we equate calling someone a "Pharisee" nowadays with a "hypocrite." That's probably an unfair synonym.

While Jesus laid into the "general" attitudes of the Pharisees and the poor spiritual example that set for the common person, he also agreed (as I said) with some of their theological positions. Also, the Pharisees -- even if they wandered off-track -- were originally a reaction against secular society, meant to keep Israel pure.

They also did not exclude people by class, believing that every member of Israel was called to be a "priest" under God for example rather than buying into the Sadducee notion of an elite priestly class; and they also wanted to restore purity to Israel by proper implementation of the written and oral Torahs.

So their intentions were originally good, they just ended up veering into religious debate and practices, rather than prioritizing a spiritually mature internal attitude towards God and others.

2006-08-18 04:54:51 · answer #1 · answered by Jennywocky 6 · 1 0

Paul (when he was Saul) was a Pharisee. Jesus wasn't.

Part of what the Pharisees believed was the "traditions of the elders." Jesus clearly did not uphold those traditions, which was one of the running arguments between them.

I'd be curious to know what evidence you have from your research, but from what I've read I don't see it.

2006-08-18 03:51:05 · answer #2 · answered by Contemplative Chanteuse IDK TIRH 7 · 1 0

?????,
Well let's see a definition of
Pharisee;
1. Pharisee A member of an ancient Jewish sect that emphasized strict interpretation and observance of the Mosaic law in both its oral and written form.
2. A hypocritically self-righteous person.

Well the second definition is out if you ask me, and you did. The first one may be true, except that the record shows that there were obvious differences. I would also call that a 'no.'

2006-08-18 03:32:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I disagree. Please post your proof of this assertion.

Jesus' teachings do not correspond at all with that of the Pharisees. In fact, the legalism taught by the Pharisees enraged Him.

Why is it necessary to try and place Jesus into any particular group? He was and is God in the flesh. Men should follow the teachings of God, but God does not follow the teachings of men!

2006-08-18 03:37:18 · answer #4 · answered by Suzanne: YPA 7 · 1 0

yes, Jesus was a pharisee who claimed Himself that He is the Messiah/Christ. Forgot the text but his stories and events are all recorded in the books of Matthew, mark, Luke, John

2006-08-18 03:29:44 · answer #5 · answered by michael t 1 · 1 1

Jesus did belong to this group of preachers, but when they collectively thought that he was going against them they turned him over to the Romans

2006-08-18 03:30:44 · answer #6 · answered by saroshsb 2 · 1 1

Wow that 2nd definition fits better than the first in my opinion.

2006-08-18 03:34:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

...and still managed to graduate at the top of His class...not bad.

2006-08-18 03:35:36 · answer #8 · answered by George A 5 · 0 0

well thta is until he made up his new religion

2006-08-18 03:29:37 · answer #9 · answered by Level 3 3 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers