answersLogoWhite

0

Answer 1

The Pharisees were probably the most Conservative of those. They adhered to strict traditions.

The Sadducees rejected nearly everything but the words of Moses and didn't believe in resurrection.

The Essenes were the more mystical group. They believed in self-denial, a commitment to poverty, asceticism, abstinence from worldly pleasures, and they often practiced celibacy.

Answer 2

As to the Essenes, Answer 1 is correct, however, the definitions of the Sadducees and Pharisees are worth tweaking. The primary issue is that the Sadducees are much more conservative than the Pharisees.

The Sadducees were primarily a movement of the Temple-Elite and were seen as very conservative in that they promoted a strictly Biblical view of Judaism. In their view, the Oral Law, which is now very important in Judaism, was an addition (much in the same way that some Islamic sects see any cultural additions to Islam as bid'a). This led to them not accepting key doctrines and interpretations clarified in the Oral Law, such as the Resurrection of the Dead or any Afterlife at all. There are many smaller issues at law between the Sadducees and the Pharisees that generally show the Sadducees to be much more concerned with maintaining patriarchal wealth in this world and performing the specific Jewish rites than spirituality and charity.

The Pharisees were a populist movement, led by the Rabbis and who had a more inclusive view of traditions where they extensively used both The Bible and the Oral Law. While traditions were very important to them and the Christian Bible shows their insistence on following religious law, they believed in debating these issues to come to a consistent legal tradition as opposed to legal dogmatism. The Pharisees are the antecedents of modern Jews and, even before the Second Temple's destruction, were less concerned with the particularities of Temple sacrifice and more concerned with daily acts and spirituality. This spirituality manifested itself in the idea of an immortal soul, which meant that there was necessarily an Afterlife and they also believed in a World-to-Come. This meant that inequalities in this life would be ameliorated in the next, which was far more attractive to the poorer classes than the Sadducee belief that this was the only life.

Answer 3:

A) The above claim, that Sadducees were conservative, or Biblically-oriented, or interested in the Temple in any way, does not reflect Jewish tradition. Jewish tradition reveals the Sadducees as men of politics and secular life. They had abandoned various parts of Judaism; and they claimed no earlier source (tradition) for their attitudes. They harassed the Torah-sages; and, like the miniscule breakaway group called the Essenes, disappeared at the time of the Second Destruction, just as the earlier Jewish idolaters had disappeared at the time of the First Destruction.

Note that there is a common conception that the Sadducees, like the later (and now largely defunct) Karaites, made a deliberate decision to reject the Oral Law and reinterpret the Scriptures.

However, a careful perusal of the Talmud reveals that the Sadducees were actually opportunists who had nothing much at all to do with religion in any fashion. They were lax in Judaism; they were men of politics who weren't interested in Torah-matters.

The group that did (on rare occasions) argue with the Torah-Sages concerning subjects of religious observance, were a tiny sect called the Baitusim (Boethusians), who quickly died out.

B) The above portrayal of the Pharisees as "populists" is also foreign to the traditional Jewish viewpoint. The Pharisees were simply the Torah-sages, period. They were so popular because the majority of the Judean Jewish population consisted of their disciples and sympathizers, as stated in Josephus (Antiquities, book 18).

The Pharisees were the only movement to survive the destruction of the Second Temple and were the ancestors of modern Judaism.

Our traditional Jewish beliefs and observances today are traditions continuing from the Torah through the Prophets and the Sages of the Talmud ("Pharisees").

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago

What else can I help you with?

Related Questions

What are the differences between Pharisees Sadduees and Essenes?

The Pharisees were a Jewish sect known for their strict adherence to the Torah and oral traditions, believing in the resurrection of the dead and the existence of angels and spirits. The Sadducees were another Jewish sect that rejected the oral tradition, denying the resurrection of the dead and the existence of angels. The Essenes were a group of Jewish ascetics who lived in communal settlements, practiced celibacy, and focused on ritual purity.


What's the difference between the Pharisees and Sadducees in terms of their beliefs and practices?

The Pharisees believed in the oral tradition and strict adherence to religious laws, while the Sadducees only followed the written Torah and did not believe in the afterlife. The Pharisees were more popular among the common people, while the Sadducees were more aligned with the aristocracy.


What is the difference between the Sadducees and the Pharisees in ancient Jewish history and religious beliefs?

The Sadducees were a Jewish sect that only followed the written Torah and did not believe in the afterlife or resurrection. The Pharisees, on the other hand, believed in both the written Torah and oral traditions, and also believed in the afterlife and resurrection.


What is the difference between pharisees and seduces?

Pharisees were a Jewish sect known for strict adherence to religious laws and traditions, while Sadducees were another Jewish sect that did not believe in the resurrection of the dead or in angels. Pharisees focused on religious law and oral traditions, while Sadducees were more politically aligned with the ruling class.


What is the difference between Jews and Saduccees?

The Sadducees were Jewish. They did not believe in the authority of the Oral Torah. Eventually they degenerated into a group of thugs who attacked the Pharisees whenever possible. The Pharisees, needless to say, didn't like that much.


What differences exist between Jesus and the pharisees?

The Pharisees believed in the letter of the law. Jesus believed in the spirit of the law.


How many times the word sadducee appear in the bible?

In the King James version, the word Sadduccees appears 14 timesMat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?Mat 16:1 The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven.Mat 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.Mat 16:11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?Mat 16:12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.Mat 22:23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,Mat 22:34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.Mar 12:18 Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,Luk 20:27 Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him,Act 4:1 And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them,Act 5:17 Then the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him, (which is the sect of the Sadducees,) and were filled with indignation,Act 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.Act 23:7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.Act 23:8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.


What is the relationship between Jesus and the Sadducees?

The pharisees were often conspiring to kill Jesus, so there could be no amicable relationship. In fact Jesus called them a 'generation of vipers'. (Matthew 3.7)


Did the Sadducees believe in the resurrection of the dead?

the Pharisees did not believe in the resurrection of Jesus then or now. The Jews(Israelites) are still looking for HIS comming. ANSWER: Yes, many Pharisees believed in the resurrection of Jesus. In fact, the the New Testament records a higer percentage of Pharisaic believers than any other 1st century Jewish sect. Paul and Nicodemus where Pharisees. Also the Jerusalem council in Acts makes mention of Pharisees that believed. The Old Testament says;; "They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased they shall not rise." Isaiah 26:4. In the First Century BC, there were debates between the Pharisees who believed in the future Resurrection, and the Sadducees who did not. The Sadducees, politically powerful religious leaders, took a literal view of the Torah, rejecting the Pharisees' oral law, afterlife, angels, and demons.[2] The Pharisees, whose views became Rabbinic Judaism, eventually won (or at least survived) this debate. Source;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection


What is the difference between the essenes and the sadducees?

The Essenes were a Jewish religious group known for their communal living, strict adherence to purity laws, and apocalyptic beliefs. The Sadducees were another Jewish sect that primarily consisted of the priestly elite and had more conservative religious views, rejecting beliefs such as the afterlife and angels. They also had differing interpretations of Jewish law and scripture.


Why did Jesus hate the Pharisees?

A:Compared to the Sadducees, the Pharisees were more concerned with moral issues and the rights of the common people - many of the same concerns that Christianity expressed. Since the gospels were written long after the death of Jesus, it may be that the gospel references to the Pharisees were more related to rivalry between the early Christians and the Pharisees, rather than any genuine spirit of animosity on the part of Jesus. The first gospel, that of Mark, was written approximately 70 CE, at the end of the First Roman-Jewish War, when the old order of Temple Judaism was destroyed, the Sadducees had been eliminated and the Christians and Pharisees were both striving to be seen as the natural successor to Temple Judaism.


Why did Jesus and the Pharisees not get along?

A:Everett Ferguson (Backgrounds of Early Christianity) points out that there was a considerable area of agreement between the teachings of Jesus and those of the Pharisees. Yet, the synoptic gospels have Jesus constantly at loggerheads with the Pharisees and not much so with the Sadducees, where there was a greater theological difference. John's Gospel does not show particular antagonism between Jesus and the Pharisees, in fact for this gospel it seems that some of his good friends were Pharisees.After the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 CE, the Sadducees rapidly went into decline, while the Pharisees evolved, to develop the Rabbinic faith that Jews would henceforth follow.Perhaps the reason for the reported antagonism was that the close similarities and the eventual success of the Pharisees made them and Christianity rivals for the allegiance of the Jews. Mark's Gospel was written around the time of the destruction of the Temple, and its author would have seen Judaism as weakened by its defeat at the hands of the Romans, with opportunities to convert many Jews before the Pharisees recovered from the national defeat. Matthew and then Luke followed the hostile line begun by Mark, although increasingly against the Jews in general, not just the Pharisees and scribes. In other words, it was not that Jesus and the Pharisees were unable to get along, but that the gospel authors sought to take advantage of weaknesses in traditional Judaism.By the time John's Gospel was written, Judaism and Christianity had long since parted ways, and the Pharisees were a distant memory. There was no longer much to be gained by maintaining an antagonism towards the Pharisees. Jesus could even be portrayed as sitting down at a meal with a Pharisee.