Available sources of information on this subject are quite limited, and much of the information available is questionable regarding its accuracy. Nevertheless, I believe that studying this subject will be profitable. Those who pursue such a study should better understand the points made by Jesus in his numerous discussions with Jews of various sects.<\/p>\n
Josephus wrote, “The Jews had for a great while three sects of philosophy peculiar to themselves: the sect of the Essenes, and the sect of the Sadducees, and the third sort of opinions was that of called Pharisees.”1 However, Josephus also writes of what he designates, “the fourth sect of Jewish Philosophy.”2 This “fourth sect” has been commonly referred to as the Zealots.<\/p>\n
The sects of the Jews were of “two kinds, arising from the fact that the differences of opinion, sentiment, and conduct were sometimes of a theosophical and sometimes of a practical character.”3 But the conduct of the various sects indicates that a religious sect would have definite political leanings while a political sect would be composed of those having definite religious views.<\/p>\n
J.E.H. Thomson wrote, “With the outbreak of the Jewish wars, the Sadducees with their allies the Herodians were driven into the background by the Zealots.”4<\/p>\n
The five Jewish sects introduced to us in this study may be classified as two “kinds” as follows:<\/p>\n
Before entering into a study of these sects, we should familiarize ourselves with specific terms in the Bible. The first such term is “scribe.” We learn from Matthew 7:29 and Mark 1:22 that the scribes were teachers. But they did not teach with the authority which Jesus employed.<\/p>\n
“In the earlier period after the exile, the scribes belonged to the Levites, but gradually an independent class of laymen sprang up, and at last they were nearly all laymen.”5<\/p>\n
“The duty of the scribes was (1) to add to the law the regulations for the minor details there omitted; (2) explanations of the law itself. These together formed the oral law. (3) The scribes were to teach the law to others, and later (4) make decisions or practically be judges, under the law.”6<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Numbers 1 and 2 would indicate that the scribes were not of the Sadducees. By comparison of Matthew 12:24 and Mark 3:22, we can see that the scribes were by party Pharisees.<\/p>\n
The second term with which we should familiarize ourselves is the term “lawyer.” In Matthew 22:35, we find a lawyer asking Jesus a question, “tempting him.”\u00a0“The term is equivalent to ‘teacher of the law.'”7 Frank E. Hirsch wrote, “Their business was threefold: (1) to study and interpret the law; (2) to instruct the Hebrew youth in the law; (3) to decide questions of the law.”8 Comparing this statement of the case with the work of the scribes will make our next quotation no surprise. “The title ‘lawyer’ is generally supposed to be equivalent to the title ‘scribe.'”9 This is certainly in harmony with the Bible. When Jesus was asked the question about the great or first commandment, Matthew 22:25-26 has a lawyer asking the question, but Mark 12:29 attributes the question to a scribe. This means that the lawyers were of the sect of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n
The third term we should consider is “doctors of the law.” Jesus was found by his parents, “sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions<\/em>” (Luke 2:46). When Jesus healed the “man which was taken with a palsy … there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by<\/em>” (Luke 5:17-18). But when Jesus told the one with palsy, “Man thy sins are forgiven thee… The scribes and Pharisees began to reason<\/em>” (Luke 5:20-21). In that “scribes” were not mentioned at first and “doctors of the law” later, I conclude that these terms refer to the same men. The only other passage where the term “doctor of the law” is used is applied to “a Pharisee named Gamaliel<\/em>” (Acts 5:34).<\/p>\n
The next term we should become familiar with is the term “chief priests.” We learn from Acts 9:1-2 that Saul “went unto the high priest and desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues,<\/em>” but when Ananias discussed Saul with God, he said, “He hath authority from the chief priests.<\/em>” The Jewish priests were divided into 24 courses. “The heads of these courses, together with those who have held the high-priesthood (the office no longer lasting for life), are chief priests.”10 We read in Acts 5:17, “Then the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him, (which is the sect of the Sadducees).<\/em>” Therefore, we conclude that “the chief priests of the Gospels and the Acts were apparently consistently Sadducees.”11<\/p>\n
Another term that we should consider is “elders.” In Numbers 11: 16, God told Moses to gather men “whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people and officers over them<\/em>.” Thus, the elders of the Jews were their rulers. They were members of the various sects.<\/p>\n
The final term we will notice is “the people.” The great majority of the Jews were not members of any sect. They no doubt sympathized with one or another of the sects but were not formally affiliated with one. Those not members of one of the sects were often referred to simply as “the people.” We read in Luke 20:19, “The chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people.<\/em>“<\/p>\n
Among the Pharisees were those called scribes, lawyers, and doctors of the Law. However, one might be a Pharisee and not rightly be called by any of these terms. Among the Sadducees were those who were termed chief priests, but there were Sadducees who were not chief priests. The leaders of the Jews came from various sects and were often termed the elders. The term “the people” refers to the Jews who were not members of one of the sects.<\/p>\n
Footnotes<\/h2>\n