The study of the various religious and political sects during the Second Temple period in ancient Judea offers a fascinating glimpse into the complex and multifaceted landscape of Jewish thought and practice. Among these, the Sadducees and the Boethusians, with their unique interpretations of the Torah and their alignment with certain Hellenistic ideas, stood in stark contrast to other contemporary Jewish movements. Equally intriguing are the Samaritans, whose distinct religious identity and veneration of Mount Gerizim set them apart from mainstream Judaism.
In this context, Yeshua's teachings emerge as a significant point of divergence from the doctrines of these groups. His alignment with Pharisaic Judaism, particularly with the school of Hillel, and his adherence to both the Written and Oral Torah highlight a different trajectory in Jewish religious thought. Yeshua's beliefs in the resurrection, angels, spirits, and the prophets, as well as his practices, such as his observance of pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, mark his teachings as continuing and affirming the traditional Jewish thought of the time.
The examination of these sects not only reveals the richness and complexity of Jewish religious life during this period but also provides a deeper understanding of Yeshua's teachings within the broader context of Jewish tradition and practice.
Sadduccees
The Sadducees, primarily comprising priests and aristocrats during the Second Temple period, adhered strictly to the Written Torah and notably rejected the Oral Torah and the rabbinic interpretations that accompanied it¹. Their approach to scripture was markedly literal, and as a result, they did not believe in concepts such as the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels, or spirits². These beliefs were not explicitly detailed in the Torah, hence their skepticism. The Sadducees’ stance on these matters distinguished them significantly from other Jewish sects of the time.
Regarding political alignments and cultural influences, the Sadducees displayed varying degrees of Hellenization – the adoption of Greek culture, religion, and philosophy. This inclination towards Hellenistic culture influenced their interpretations and practice of Judaism³.
Boethusians
The Boethusians, a sect closely related to and possibly even considered a subsect of the Sadducees, were founded by Boethus. They shared many beliefs with the Sadducees but were particularly known for their unique calendar calculations and significant high-priestly connections⁴. The Boethusians, like the Sadducees, were characterized by their adherence to the Written Torah to the exclusion of Oral Torah traditions⁵.
The approach of both the Sadducees and the Boethusians, often described as a "sola scriptura" methodology, led to certain theological and practical outcomes. Their exclusion of rabbinic interpretations and prophetic writings frequently resulted in a gradual assimilation of foreign cultural and religious elements. This assimilation process often led to a dilution of certain Jewish beliefs and practices, notably the belief in physical resurrection, which is a cornerstone of Pharisaic and later Rabbinic Judaism.
An additional result of their literalist approach to scripture and its subsequent effect on their practice is that they were considered by other sects, namely the Pharisees, as being only barely distinguishable from Gentiles, according to Eruvin 68b:16.
Yeshua's Teachings
In contrast, Yeshua and his disciples exhibited beliefs that aligned with Pharisaic Judaism, particularly in acknowledging the authority of the prophets, resurrection of the dead⁶, as well as belief in angels and spirits⁷. This is evident in various New Testament scriptures such as John 11:25-26, Matthew 18:10, and Matthew 25:41. Yeshua’s teachings and practices, therefore, diverged significantly from the Sadducean and Boethusian doctrines, aligning with the Pharisaic tradition, which embraced both the Written and Oral Torah⁸.
This theological divergence is crucial in understanding the religious landscape of Second Temple Judaism and the distinct position that Yeshua and his followers occupied within it. Their beliefs and teachings reflected a continuation and affirmation of traditional Jewish thought, particularly in areas where the Sadducees and Boethusians had deviated due to their restrictive interpretation of the Torah.
Samaritans
The Samaritans held beliefs and practices that set them apart from mainstream Judaism of that era. Central to their religious identity was their unique version of the Torah, which diverged in certain respects from the Jewish Torah. Additionally, they did not recognize the prophetic or rabbinic texts that are integral to Rabbinic Judaism.
The Samaritans are traditionally considered descendants of the northern tribe of Israel and, therefore, hold a sort of quasi "half-Jewish" status in the mind of the ancient rabbis and those in Judea. However, they were generally treated as Gentiles, and according to Talmudic tradition, for them to be considered Halakhic Jews (legally Jewish), they would have to undergo a complete conversion process. More on this can be found in Tractate Kitum 2:8.
Another major difference, which lead to animosity between them and their Judean counterparts in the south, is their practice of intermarriage with gentile women. Samaritans didn't consider the female to be the progenitor of Jewish status like the Judeans did, as well as they took no issues with assimilating into other cultures via marriage with other nationalities, hence the need for a full conversion as stated above. These facts among other things in large part lead to their perception in Judea as almost worse than pagans, being considered essentially traitors and "pretend-Jews."
Mount Gerizim vs. Jerusalem
The Samaritans venerated Mount Gerizim as the chosen sacred site by G-d⁹, rather than Jerusalem¹⁰. This belief significantly influenced their religious practices, including pilgrimage and festival observance. Consequently, they did not participate in the pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, which were central to Jewish religious life.
Yeshua’s Teachings
The New Testament has two relevant accounts, the first with the woman at the well¹¹, and the other in Luke 9:51-56. Both offer an insight into Yeshua’s alignment with mainstream Jewish practices over those of the Samaritans. The passage in Luke describes a Samaritan village’s rejection of Yeshua and his disciples, predicated on their intent to journey to Jerusalem – the site of paramount religious significance in Judaism for the observance of feasts. This incident underlines a clear divergence between Yeshua’s practices and those of the Samaritans.
Acceptance of Prophetic and Rabbinic Texts
Contrary to the Samaritan rejection of prophetic and rabbinic writings, Yeshua’s teachings and actions, as depicted in the New Testament, demonstrate his acknowledgment of these texts¹². His beliefs in spirits, the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels, and the concept of a messianic era are all in line with Pharisaic Judaism, which embraced both the Written and Oral Torah, including the Prophets.
Yeshua's adherence to Jewish scriptural traditions, including his observance of pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem and his acceptance of teachings found in the prophetic and rabbinic texts, highlights his alignment with mainstream Jewish thought of his time. Yeshua told the woman at the well that the Samaritans "worship what they do not know", and that "salvation is of the Jews." This stands in contrast to the Samaritan practices and beliefs, further delineating the theological boundaries between these two groups.
In summary, the Samaritans’ distinct religious identity, characterized by their own version of the Torah and the centrality of Mount Gerizim, contrasted with the broader Jewish practices and beliefs of the period. Yeshua's ministry, as depicted in the New Testament, aligns more closely with mainstream Jewish traditions, particularly in his observance of Jewish feasts in Jerusalem and acceptance of the broader canon of Jewish scriptures, thereby distancing his teachings from Samaritan beliefs.
Essenes
The Essenes were distinguished by their unique practices and beliefs, which set them apart from other contemporary Jewish groups. The Essenes were known for their ascetic lifestyle, characterized by strict discipline, communal living, and a shared economy.
Qumran and Therapeutae
The two primary Essene sects were the Qumran and the Therapeutae. The Qumran community, associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls, is particularly notable for its extensive library of religious texts that provide insights into their beliefs and practices.
Their way of life was deeply spiritual and focused on achieving a high level of ritual purity. Ritual purity held a central place in Essene practice. This emphasis extended to their daily lives, including practices like ritual bathing and strict dietary laws. Their commitment to purity often superseded social interactions, leading them to avoid contact with those they considered ritually impure, including Gentiles¹³.
The Essenes were separatists, largely withdrawing from mainstream Jewish society. They awaited a messianic figure and held strong apocalyptic beliefs, as possibly reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are often attributed to them.
Views on the Priesthood
Little is known about the Essenes truthfully, since the group was highly exclusive and closely guarded the secrets of their brotherhood. As a result, all of our sources that describe them are secondary outside viewpoints, the only exception being some of the texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some texts from the Qumran caves indicate that this Essene group viewed the contemporary Jewish priesthood as invalid, likely due to perceived corruption and deviation from their strict standards of purity and religious observance.
Yeshua's Teachings
In contrast, Yeshua’s ministry, as portrayed in the New Testament, shows a different approach to purity and social interaction. For example, Yeshua and his disciples frequently interacted with people considered "unclean" in Jewish society, as demonstrated in passages like Luke 5:12-16. This openness to engaging with various societal elements, including those deemed ritually impure, contrasts sharply with the Essenes' separatist and purity-focused practices. Another difference, despite any perceived political corruption, Yeshua and his followers acknowledged the validity of the Temple priesthood and its sacrificial system, evidenced by their participation in Temple rituals, such as the bringing of sacrifices (Acts 21:26). This acceptance of the Temple institution and its priesthood differs significantly from the Essenes' stance.
In conclusion, the Essenes' stringent focus on purity, their separatist tendencies, and their views on the Temple priesthood were in stark contrast to Yeshua's inclusive approach and his acknowledgment of the existing religious institutions of his time. These differences highlight the distinct theological and practical paths chosen by the Essenes and by Yeshua in their respective pursuits of religious and spiritual ideals.
Zealots
The Zealots, were primarily a political movement with a strong focus on nationalistic and revolutionary ideals¹⁴. Their primary objective was to challenge and ultimately expel Roman rule from Judea. They were characterized by their fervent zeal for Jewish sovereignty and their readiness to use armed resistance to achieve their goals. The Zealots' approach was rooted in a deep commitment to Jewish independence and a refusal to accept foreign domination or religious compromise¹⁵.
Yeshua's Teachings
In contrast, Yeshua's approach and teachings, as depicted in the Gospels, differed significantly from the Zealots in several key aspects.
Unlike the Zealots, who actively sought the overthrow of Roman authority, Yeshua did not advocate for political rebellion or violent resistance. His teachings focused more on spiritual and moral reform rather than political insurgency. An example of this is his famous teaching to "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to G-d the things that are G-d's" (Mark 12:17), which suggests a distinction between civic obligations and spiritual devotion.
Yeshua preached a message of peace, love, and forgiveness, emphasizing the transformation of the individual's heart and attitudes rather than societal or political revolution. This message is encapsulated in teachings such as loving one's enemies and turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:38-48), which contrast sharply with the Zealots' advocacy for armed resistance.
The central theme of Yeshua's teaching was the Kingdom of G-d, which he presented as a spiritual reality rather than a political or earthly kingdom. This focus on a spiritual kingdom differentiated his mission from the Zealots’ goal of re-establishing a sovereign Jewish state.
Yeshua's approach to dealing with Roman rule and the social injustices of his time was nonviolent. He sought to bring about change through inspiration, teaching, parables, and personal example, rather than through the use of force or armed rebellion as advocated by the Zealots.
In summary, while the Zealots represented a political movement aimed at overthrowing Roman rule through force, Yeshua's ministry was characterized by a spiritual mission focused on moral and internal transformation. His teachings emphasized peace, reconciliation, and a kingdom not of this world, marking a clear departure from the Zealot’s militant nationalism and political objectives.
Pharisees
The Pharisees were distinguished by their adherence to both the Written Torah and the Oral Torah, which they regarded as authoritative. Their approach to Judaism was characterized by a balance between mercy and judgment with interpretations for leniencies and stringencies.
The Pharisees uniformly believed in concepts such as the resurrection of the dead, the eternal vigor of the soul, the existence of angels and spirits, and the validity of the prophets. This belief system set them apart from other groups like the Sadducees, who rejected these notions¹⁶, as well as apart from the Zealots in that Pharisees were largely pacifists, and most did not support the idea of armed revolution.
Pharisees focused their attention on daily living and spirituality in the home. This focus made them popular with the common people, and turned Judaism into a religion that could be practiced outside of Jerusalem into the diaspora. Pharisees made Judaism more relatable and attainable to all people who wish to know the One True G-d. It is the Pharisees who would survive the destruction of the Temple (70CE) and the subsequent Jewish expulsion from Israel (136CE) and later become known by the name "Rabbinic Judaism," which survives to this very day.
Schools of Hillel and Shammai
Pharisaic Judaism were the teachers in the synagogues¹⁷. However, there were two primary schools of thought within Pharisaic Judaism¹⁸: The school of Shammai and the school of Hillel. Shammai was known for his stringent interpretation of the Torah, emphasizing the letter of the law, and was more conservative in his approach to interactions with Gentiles. Conversely, Hillel was renowned for his more lenient and compassionate interpretations, focusing on the spirit of the law. He advocated for the teaching of Torah to all, emphasizing the potential for anyone to embrace its teachings and reform their lives¹⁹.
Yeshua's Alignment with Pharisaic Thought
Yeshua's practices and teachings align with Pharisaic Judaism, particularly the school of Hillel. His regular attendance at the synagogue, a Pharisaic institution, and his recognition as "rabbi", a role predominantly associated with the Pharisees, indicate his connection to this group. Even John the Baptist calls him a Pharisee in John 1:26, when John tells the Pharisees, "One from among you [Pharisees] stands..." referring to Yeshua. Additionally, Yeshua’s teachings on the resurrection, angels, spirits, and the prophets align with Pharisaic beliefs, as would be assumed.
Yeshua's emphasis on the spirit of the law, particularly in teachings that underscored love and compassion, resonates with Hillel’s approach. This is evident in his interpretation of the law, which often went beyond literal compliance to embrace a more profound, ethical understanding.
Decline of the School of Hillel
During Yeshua’s time, the school of Hillel was experiencing a decline in influence, with the school of Shammai gaining prominence. The school of Hillel often faced lots of opposition, and seemingly, they became less and less outspoken, succumbing to Shammai as the authority.
That day was as hard for Israel as the day the golden calf was made... Rabbi Joshua Onaya taught: The students of Beit Shammai stood at the bottom [of the stairs], and they killed the students of Beit Hillel. It was taught: Six of them went up [to the attic], and the rest of them attacked them with spears and swords. It was taught: For eighteen things they decreed, and in eighteen they were the majority. (Gemara Jerusalem Talmud Shabbos 1:4) *This is described by many rabbis as "killing" being an exaggeration, but rather the school of Shammai considered Hillelites to be rebels of Torah and wanted to harm them.
They related that since the dispute was so intense, they stuck a sword in the study hall, and they said: One who seeks to enter the study hall, let him enter, and one who seeks to leave may not leave, so that all of the Sages will be assembled to determine the halakha. That day Hillel was bowed and was sitting before Shammai like one of the students. The Gemara said: And that day was as difficult for Israel as the day the Golden Calf was made, as Hillel, who was the Nasi, was forced to sit in submission before Shammai... (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 17a)
Despite this, the teachings of Hillel continued to resonate with certain Pharisees; one presumed Hillelite is Nicodemus, who sought Yeshua’s teachings, albeit discreetly and with the cover of night.
Shortly after Shammai's death in 30CE (the same year as Yeshua's death by many dating methods) his influence quickly subsided, and even some of his rulings. The Jerusalem Talmud mentions 18 decrees of Shammai specifically that were removed by the Sanhedrin. Hillel's school of thought and Pharisaism would fully recover and become the dominant school of thought for Pharisaism moving forward and into the "Rabbinic Judaism" age with the writing of the Mishnah. In fact, after Shammai's death, the Pharisees would elect Gamliel (the grandson of Hillel, and the Apostle Paul's Rabbi) as the president of the Sanhedrin. (Acts 5:34 & 22:3) Today, Rabbinic Judaism still follows the school of Hillel.
In conclusion, the evidence from Yeshua’s practices and teachings strongly aligns with Pharisaic Judaism, particularly the school of Hillel. His approach to Jewish law and tradition, his belief in core Pharisaic doctrines, and his emphasis on the ethical and compassionate interpretation of the Torah are indicative of his connection to the Pharisaic tradition. This perspective provides a nuanced understanding of Yeshua's place within the diverse religious landscape of Second Temple Judaism.
For more information on Yeshua's connection to Hillel & the Pharisees, see Jesus, the Pharisee.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the exploration of the various religious sects during the Second Temple period, such as the Sadducees, Boethusians, Samaritans, Essenes, Zealots, and Pharisees, reveals a rich tapestry of beliefs, practices, and interpretations within ancient Judaism. These groups, each with their distinct theological emphases and cultural influences, contributed to the diverse religious landscape of the time.
The Sadducees and Boethusians, with their strict adherence to the Written Torah and rejection of Oral Torah traditions, represent a perspective that often clashed with the more expansive approach of Pharisaic Judaism. The Samaritans, with their unique Torah version and veneration of Mount Gerizim, and the Essenes, known for their asceticism and purity rituals, further illustrate the varied religious expressions of this era. The Zealots, with their fervent nationalism and revolutionary zeal, add a political dimension to the religious discourse of the period.
Amidst this diversity, Yeshua's teachings aligned with Pharisaic Judaism, specifically the school of Hillel. Yeshua's approach reflects a nuanced understanding of Jewish law and tradition, emphasizing ethical conduct, compassion, and spiritual devotion. His teachings, grounded in the Pharisaic tradition, highlight a commitment to the Torah's spirit, advocating a Judaism that balances legal observance with an emphasis on loving neighbor and the spirit of the law.
Footnotes & References
¹ Flavius Josephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" (Book 18, Chapter 1)
² The Mishnah, Tractate Yadaim (4:6-7)
³ The Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Berakhot (58a)
⁴ The Jerusalem Talmud, Tractate Rosh Hashanah (1:2, 57b)
⁵ The Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Menachot (65a)
⁶ John 11:25-26
⁷ Matthew 18:10
⁸ The Mishnah, Avot (1:12)
⁹ Josephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" (Book 11, Chapter 8)
¹⁰ Deuteronomy (27:12-13)
¹¹ John (4:20-21)
¹² Matthew (23:1-3)
¹³ "The Jewish War" by Flavius Josephus (Book 2, Chapter 8), The Dead Sea Scrolls (1QS & Damascus Document), & Philo of Alexandria: Every Good Man is Free (Sections 12-13)
¹⁴ "The Jewish War" by Flavius Josephus (Book 4, Chapter 3)
¹⁵ "Antiquities of the Jews" by Flavius Josephus (Book 18, Chapter 1)
¹⁶ The Mishnah, Tractate Sanhedrin
¹⁷ "Antiquities of the Jews" by Flavius Josephus (Book 13, Chapter 10)
¹⁸ The Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Shabbat (31a)
¹⁹ The Mishnah, Tractate Avot
²⁰ Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Shabbat (17a)
Opmerkingen