The Pharisees:
From the Beginning to Modern Influence
Donna Morley
The Pharisees, which mean “separate ones,” 1 (and who devoted
considerable effort to separating themselves from others 2) were a major religious
and political party in Palestine. They were a large group with an enormous
influence over the masses. 3
One may ask, if the Pharisees had such influence, why would they separate
themselves from others? Very simply, the Pharisees felt that since other Jews, as
well as Gentiles, were not careful enough about keeping God’s laws, they felt it was
necessary to place limits on their contacts with them. For example, they could not
eat in the home of a non-Pharisee, since they could not be sure that the food had
been properly tithed and kept ritually pure.
As to the Pharisees origin? That is debatable. Some scholars will point out
that by the time of John Hyrcanus (135-104 BC) the Pharisees “had a large,
powerful, and dedicated following of people.” 4 Others will say that this couldn’t be
so. They say the Pharisees origin started in the New Testament times. 5 Of
course, with the writings of Josephus, we can certainly say that the Pharisees did
originate prior to the first century A.D. Josephus clearly points out that during the
time of Alexandra’s nine year reign, that the Pharisees assisted her in her
government. 6 It is most certain that not only did the Pharisees originate prior to
the first century A.D., but we have evidence that they first appear, by name,
during the reign of Jonathan, (brother of Judah the Maccabbe, ca. 150 B.C.E.). 7
Many scholars have attempted to identify the Pharisees with, or to locate their
origins in, the Hasidim who were allies of Judah in the Maccabean Revolt. Yet,
according to Professor of Hebrew and Judaic Studies, Lawrence Schiffman, this
theory, cannot be substantiated. 8
Rabbinic sources have also traced the Pharisees back to the Persian and
early Hellenistic periods. Some modern scholars have associated the Soferim
("scribes") with the "Men of the Great Assembly." 9 The Soferim would then be
the forerunners of the Pharisaic movement. Unfortunately, the historical evidence
doesn’t give us any definite conclusions. All that can be said is that the Pharisees
could not have emerged suddenly in the Hasmonean period. Reason being, their
theology would have been in formation sometime earlier. How much earlier? It’s
hard to say. 10
Most scholars believe that the Pharisees got their origin either during or after
the destruction of Second Temple. 11 They believe that the Second Temple
destruction marked the breakup of a monolithic Judaism, which brought about
various new sects of Judaism. Clearly, the destruction of the Second Temple
marked a major turning in the history of Judaism. Judaism not only saw the loss
of the rebuilding of the Second Temple as a considerable consequence, but there
was indeed devastation in the Jewish community. 12 But, Dr. William Varner,
Professor of Old Testament at The Master’s College, would argue the point that
this was the end of a monolithic Judaism. He tells us the Jewish community
already had other sects already in existence prior to the destruction:
Although we cannot be sure of the exact number, there can be no doubt
that at the time of the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., the Jewish
community comprised numerous parties, sects and brotherhoods. Recent
scholarship has questioned and effectively destroyed the concept of a
monolithic “Judaism” that existed during the Second Temple (516 B.C. - 70
A.D.). Furthermore, Josephus’ famous listing of the standard divisions —
Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and the “Fourth Philosophy” (the Zealots) —
is simply not adequate in conveying the mosaic of Second Temple Judaism.
The new source material (e.g. Dead Sea Scrolls) which has become available
in recent years, as well as a reassessment of information from the known
sources (e.g. the Pseudepigrapha) have indicated a number of “hidden
streams” during the period prior to the fall of the Temple. 13
In any case, the Pharisees appeared in Hasmonean times as part of the
coalition with the Sadducees and other sects of society. They were a forceful
group that ordered their way of life onto the Jewish people–how they should live
and govern themselves. They were ready to criticize others for not keeping the
laws, and they often looked down on “sinners” who showed no interest in God’s
law (Mark 2:16; Luke 7:39; 15:2; 18:11).
Under John Hyrcanus and Alexander Janneus, conditions gave them greater
political power. As the Hasmoneans became increasingly Hellenized, the Pharisees
expressed their opposition towards them. It would be under Hyrcanus, that the
Hasmoneans would be swayed towards the Sadducees. And during the time of
Janneus, the Pharisees were in open warfare with the king, who was consequently
defeated by the Seleucid Demetrius III Eukairos (96-88 B.C.E.). 14 In 89 B.C.E.
this led to a reconciliation between the king and the Pharisees. During the reign of
Salome Alexandra the Pharisees had political clout and controlled the affairs of the
nation (the Pharisees political clout may have been exaggerated by scholars and
historians, just a tad 15 ).
Rabbinic Statements About The Pharisees
In the rabbinic literature the Pharisees admitted (to themselves, at least)
that some of their own regulations were like “mountains hanging by a hair” 16 of
Scripture support, or even floating in the air with no support. But still they insisted
on and fought for their observances being the official ones (rather than that of the
Sadducees being official). This fits Josephus’ picture. The Pharisees depended on
oral tradition, but the Sadducees sought to have support of Scripture for any
regulations to be officially observed.
The rabbinic literature show great antagonism between the Pharisees and
the Sadducees. The Pharisees, who by NT times, controlled the actual practices in
the temple, 17 would go out of their way to spite the Sadducees. They would
intentionally violate a Sadducean understanding of the law when this was not
necessary. On one occasion, they made the high priest ritually unclean, so that by
Sadducean law he would not be able carry out a certain ceremony, but he could by
Pharisaic law. 18 They were probably the instigators of the incident over a century
earlier in which the crowd of a festival threw fruit at the high priest because he
poured out a drink offering in the Sadducean manner. 19 The Pharisees even
debated among themselves as to whether the Sadducees should be treated as
Israelites, Samaritans or Gentiles. 20
While it’s obvious the Pharisees sought out to humiliate the Sadducees, in
general, the Pharisees are treated quite favorably in rabbinic literature. There is one
passage, out of many, that does list the Pharisees in an unfavorable light. This
passage lists seven kinds of Pharisees who were considered plagues upon their
reputation. These descriptions are brief and obscure. Apparently one kind of
Pharisee receives circumcision for ulterior motives, another exaggerates his
humility, a third is so preoccupied with obeying a commandment that he collides
with a wall, a fourth always has his head buried in prayer, a fifth is forever looking
for new commandments that he can obey, and the sixth and seventh types are
Pharisees from love of reward and fear of punishment rather than from a real
desire to please God. 21
The Pharisees Beliefs and Daily Life
According to contemporary, Flavius Josephus, the Pharisees believed in the
immortality of the soul, 22 the existence of angels,