Religious Bias Can Be a Hindrance to Understanding Truth
We seem to give the Pharisees and Sadducees a bad wrap when it comes to their acceptance of Jesus Christ as their Messiah. Let’s see if we can understand what they believed and why. There were not only Pharisees and Sadducees but also Essenes, Hellenists, and Zealots. There were likely even additional groups that would be somewhat like these with some differences. So, what were the differences between these groups? Well, it gets even more complicated because there were graded beliefs within these groups. My purpose here is not to provide all similarities and differences between the beliefs of these groups but help us to see how each of these groups could have believed Jesus not to be their Messiah.
In general, the Pharisees believed in most of the Old Testament scriptures that we have in our Bible today plus the Oral Law of Moses. Yet, even here, there was a division between the Pharisees. You have those who were more liberal in their interpretation of Scripture and those who were stricter and more conservative in their interpretations. In general, they believed in angels, the resurrection of the dead, and in a coming Messiah. Most believed their coming Messiah would be someone with military clout and rid them from all oppressors (especially the Romans), return them to how things used to be before they were oppressed, and that Israel would be the head of a Kingdom of Peace with the Messiah as their crowned king. They believed the coming Messiah would uphold all the Jewish laws and customs and they would be prominent in his kingdom because this is what they tried to be: a devout Jew keeping all the laws prescribed in the Torah (the books of Moses, which are the first five books of our Bible) as well as those taught in the oral traditions as they believed they were also presented by Moses. While they tolerated Rome, they did not like Rome interfering in their lives. While they had less prominence in the Sanhedrin, that is, the Jewish Supreme Court, so to speak, they were quite influential because they typically had the backing of the common people.
The Sadducees, on the other hand, only believed in what was in the Torah. This led them to not really believe in angels, or a resurrection of the dead, or even in a coming Messiah (they were sad, you see). They were more aristocratic and kept more to the temple than with the common people. The high priest was typically always a Sadducee and they had ingratiated themselves with Rome to maintain their prestige and influence.
The Essenes had migrated out of the city of Jerusalem, with many being at Qumran, because they believed both the Pharisees and Sadducees were corrupt. They devoted themselves to the study of the Scriptures and their meanings. From their study, they believed there could be two possible Messiahs: one who would be more spiritual helping Israel to lead a spiritual kingdom and one who would be earthlier and free Israel from all oppressors setting up an earthly kingdom with Israel as its center.
The Zealots were all about freeing Israel from Roman oppression. They were looking for a Messiah who would do just that. For them, the spiritual aspects were not as important as being free from Roman oppression.
The Hellenists Jews were those who had adopted Greek influences: both its language and practices. Many had been raised outside Judea and had returned, bringing their Greek culture with them. Many found the two worlds a compatible lifestyle. They were likely more like the Sadducees and did not necessarily believe in a coming Messiah. This may be another reason that Sadducees were able to blend into the upper echelons of Greek and Roman society.
So, Jesus disrupted each of these groups’ thoughts about the Messiah they expected. To the Sadducees and Hellenists, Jesus was just a nuisance because he stirred up people and created crowds which made Roman officials nervous that a rebellion would be forming. This then made the Sadducees anxious because if the Roman officials were nervous, then these officials would hold them responsible for this uproar of the people and their sphere of influence could be taken away from them.
Jesus was a threat to the Pharisees as well. He did not fit into their ideal mold of a Messiah. They believed the Messiah would keep all the Laws of Moses and because they did that to the max, they were expecting to be praised for their efforts and not ridiculed for them. What Jesus tried to get them to realize was that if their hearts were pure, then their actions would be pure. God is concerned with not only what they did, but why they did what they did. Jesus often referred to the ancient prophets’ teaching as he told them what they did should not be undone, but they should not ignore the greater edict of God where they were to show mercy and kindness. They were to be teachers and not just moral examples without any compassion for the people.
Jesus didn’t really fit into the Essenes’ or Zealots’ view of a coming Messiah either. While Jesus claimed to be divine, he did not teach the kingdom the Essenes were expecting. He also did not become a military presence which irritated the Zealots. Therefore, Jesus was not fitting into any views these groups expected a Messiah to be like.
Yet, if the members of any of these groups truly listened to Jesus, his claims, and spent time with him asking him questions and truly listened to his responses, they would have understood who he really was. The way Pharisees and Sadducees taught was first to study the writings of prominent Jewish leaders and then go to the Scriptures themselves. This led to a promulgation of what was taught before and not necessarily fresh or illuminating ideas. Many scriptures were emphasized while others were not focused on which led to a narrative of what prior teachers had taught, and not necessarily what Scripture itself taught.
Jesus wanted to get the members of these groups to understand the meanings and intent behind the laws they taught and not have them follow rituals for rituals sake. It was not their actions which made them righteous but their faith. The intent of what they did was more important because if the intent was right then the correct action would come automatically. Yet, because Jesus did not act as they expected, they dismissed him rather than trying to understand what he was actually telling them.
No one ever asked Jesus where he was born. Again, they heard he was from Nazareth and dismissed him immediately because they knew Scripture stated the Messiah would come from Bethlehem. Plus, of course, there was a geographical bias. Those who lived in the area around Jerusalem were considered better than the country bumkins who lived in the north around Galilee.
Jesus performed miracles, signs, and wonders to get the people’s attention so they would listen to him. Yet, the Jewish leaders, rather than understanding that Jesus was showing them he was the Messiah who could bring in the kingdom they were expecting (the reign of the Messiah with the earth being fruitful and plentiful, and all its inhabitants being healthy and free from disease), tried to discredit him and prove he was false because Jesus did not fit into the Messiah-mold they expected of such a one. Jesus did not have a commanding presence physically, was not military minded, was not from the right geographical region, and did not revere the Jewish leaders and praise them for being so good at keeping all the nuances of the Law. This bias against him led them to make ridiculous claims as to how he could do what the people said he did (e.g., casting out demons with the authority of the prince of demons). They became so agitated against Jesus that they could only think of one thing that would solve their dilemma: death.
These religious biases led the Jewish leaders to miss the coming of their Messiah. Yet, have we become so much more enlightened than they? In many ways it seems that the religious biases of these groups are still alive and well today. Next time we’ll go into this in more detail and see if we have gotten better within the two thousand years that have passed.