P
patrick457
Guest
Let’s face it, at one time or another most, if not all, of us have been guilty of generalizing, making rather broad statements that stretch the truth quite a bit or a whole lot, depending on the range of generalization. 
In this thread, let us post here some rather gross generalizations that can sometimes prove rather fatal.
1.) The Pharisees killed Jesus.
Throughout the pages of the New Testament, no group is so excoriated as the Pharisees, oft-portrayed (caricatured?) as self-righteous hypocrites. Matthew’s record of Jesus’ protests against the scribes and Pharisees fill a whole chapter in his Gospel. Because of their mostly-negative portrayal, they left a not-so-pleasant mark in human history.
That said - this might come as a surprise to some - it would seem that based on history and a careful reading of the Gospel accounts, the Pharisees as a whole never had a direct hand in the death of Jesus Christ. Yes, the four Gospels does mention them plotting to kill Him quite a number of times, but there are only a couple of times when they are actually directly mentioned in the Passion narratives: in John 18:2, where Judas is supplied officials by “the chief priests and Pharisees”, and in Matthew 27:62 where “the chief priests and the Pharisees” go to Pilate. We must also remember that at the time Jesus lived, the Pharisees were largely sidelined and thus, most of them had little to no true political authority, with the majority exercising power only by virtue of their broad appeal to the common people.
So, who actually gets to kill Jesus? Based on the Gospels, we find that the “chief priests” (clearly distinguished from the Pharisees!), the “scribes”, and the “elders of the people” did. Basically, the ruling authority in Israel at that time happened to be that group which never got much airtime in the Gospels under their more-familiar name: the Sadducees, who, while never having much popularity as the Pharisees did (or so sayeth Josephus) among regular folk, did at least have enough wealth, influence and power to be the ‘top men’.
Historically, it is likely that a number of the top positions at this time, such as the office of the high priesthood and the gerousia (the ‘council of elders’), were controlled by Sadducees or their symphatizers - since Rome found them to be willing accomplices and mediators, but it isn’t really clear whether the ‘chief priests’, ‘elders’, ‘rulers’, and the ‘first men’ were all Sadducees. But what we can be certain is that these groups did share the same political alliances and economic interests, which is why they view anyone trying to upset the applecart with suspicion - and Jesus happened to do so.
Thus the statement ‘the Pharisees put Jesus to death’ is a gross generalization since there were more groups involved, more powerful than they.
And going beyond this, let’s also make mention of the fact that Pharisees are not always portrayed in a bad light. I know that I’m sounding like an apologist for the Pharisees here
, but one thing that you’ll first notice is that Jesus has major doctrinal problems with Sadducees (remember Mark 12:18-27?), but not with Pharisees, whom He agrees with in many basic matters (the belief in a resurrection and final judgment, for instance); He differs only from them on the role of rabbinical tradition in interpreting the Law, and criticizes them in sometimes-harsh language for their hypocrisy and ostentatious show of piety, but that was generally it. Many of Jesus’ followers, for example St. Paul or Nicodemus, were Pharisees themselves. By comparison, however, the New Testament does not explicitly record a single Sadducee converting to Jesus’ cause.
In this thread, let us post here some rather gross generalizations that can sometimes prove rather fatal.1.) The Pharisees killed Jesus.
Throughout the pages of the New Testament, no group is so excoriated as the Pharisees, oft-portrayed (caricatured?) as self-righteous hypocrites. Matthew’s record of Jesus’ protests against the scribes and Pharisees fill a whole chapter in his Gospel. Because of their mostly-negative portrayal, they left a not-so-pleasant mark in human history.
That said - this might come as a surprise to some - it would seem that based on history and a careful reading of the Gospel accounts, the Pharisees as a whole never had a direct hand in the death of Jesus Christ. Yes, the four Gospels does mention them plotting to kill Him quite a number of times, but there are only a couple of times when they are actually directly mentioned in the Passion narratives: in John 18:2, where Judas is supplied officials by “the chief priests and Pharisees”, and in Matthew 27:62 where “the chief priests and the Pharisees” go to Pilate. We must also remember that at the time Jesus lived, the Pharisees were largely sidelined and thus, most of them had little to no true political authority, with the majority exercising power only by virtue of their broad appeal to the common people.
So, who actually gets to kill Jesus? Based on the Gospels, we find that the “chief priests” (clearly distinguished from the Pharisees!), the “scribes”, and the “elders of the people” did. Basically, the ruling authority in Israel at that time happened to be that group which never got much airtime in the Gospels under their more-familiar name: the Sadducees, who, while never having much popularity as the Pharisees did (or so sayeth Josephus) among regular folk, did at least have enough wealth, influence and power to be the ‘top men’.
Historically, it is likely that a number of the top positions at this time, such as the office of the high priesthood and the gerousia (the ‘council of elders’), were controlled by Sadducees or their symphatizers - since Rome found them to be willing accomplices and mediators, but it isn’t really clear whether the ‘chief priests’, ‘elders’, ‘rulers’, and the ‘first men’ were all Sadducees. But what we can be certain is that these groups did share the same political alliances and economic interests, which is why they view anyone trying to upset the applecart with suspicion - and Jesus happened to do so.
Thus the statement ‘the Pharisees put Jesus to death’ is a gross generalization since there were more groups involved, more powerful than they.
And going beyond this, let’s also make mention of the fact that Pharisees are not always portrayed in a bad light. I know that I’m sounding like an apologist for the Pharisees here
, but one thing that you’ll first notice is that Jesus has major doctrinal problems with Sadducees (remember Mark 12:18-27?), but not with Pharisees, whom He agrees with in many basic matters (the belief in a resurrection and final judgment, for instance); He differs only from them on the role of rabbinical tradition in interpreting the Law, and criticizes them in sometimes-harsh language for their hypocrisy and ostentatious show of piety, but that was generally it. Many of Jesus’ followers, for example St. Paul or Nicodemus, were Pharisees themselves. By comparison, however, the New Testament does not explicitly record a single Sadducee converting to Jesus’ cause.
