I've noticed a trend over the last several years of people railing against the attitudes of the Pharisees and equating modern church leadership or conservative practices with Pharisaical thinking. Generally, the hardest critics of the "Pharisees" are those who have grown up in conservative church cultures and witnessed abuse of leadership or restrictive legalism.
The word "Pharisee" in our modern day has become a synonym for "legalist" or "hypocrite" or "self-righteous." Those word are included in the secondary definition for "Pharisee" in most dictionaries. Merriam-Webster defines the word "pharisaical" as a person who is "marked by hypocritical censorious self-righteousness".
This, of course, is a sensible definition if you are familiar with the gospels. Jesus often sternly warned and rebuked the Pharisees and when we hear the word, we automatically associate it with indictments like:
Matthew 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Many places in the gospels record run-ins with the Pharisees, and Jesus gives us many rebukes against them, which we can find in abundance in chapters like Matthew 23 or Luke 11.
I find though as I speak with people that the concept has grown, possibly beyond the its own reach. The minute any kind of personal discipline or external standard is mentioned, people who scarcely read their Bibles start quoting verses about "not judging" and are quick to remind us that Jesus's sternest reprimands were for the "religious people" like the Pharisees, while he welcomed publicans and sinners. The moment any convictions or teachings on obedient righteousness and holiness are brought up, you can be sure the word "Pharisee" isn't far to follow from some offended listener's lips.
Now, before going further, I want to be clear that Phariseeism is a danger. There is a reason so many verses deal with their errors in thought and doctrine. However, I find that we forget that not all "Pharisees" were inherently wicked. We forget that this was a historical sect of Judaism that broadly had many of these traits but from which we have heroes of the New Testament such as Nicodemus (John 3:1), Gamaliel (Acts 5:34), and the Apostle Paul (Acts 23:6, Philippians 3:5). There was a sect of believers from the Pharisees according to Acts 15.
Having said that, though, we obviously want to be aware of "the leaven of the Pharisees" which is "hypocrisy." (Luke 12:1) One of the greatest follies is in claiming to do things "for the Lord" or be so strict in the commandments and doctrines and traditions that we have constructed around the commandments of God that we, in the end, transgress the very commandments of the Lord we claim to be following. (Matthew 15:1-20)
But I have a fear that, in striving so hard to avoid the one danger we are falling right into the trap of another. Jesus mentioned two groups in Matthew 16 that we need to be aware of the leaven of...
Matthew 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
These two groups are often lumped together in people's indictment against the church. But I believe they represent two distinct dangers. The differences between the two is highlighted in Paul's trial in Acts 23...
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.
Act 23:9 And there arose a great cry: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God.
Act 23:10 And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle.
Notice which group Paul sides with in this case. The Pharisees. Why? Because of their belief in the supernatural. And this is what I want to emphasize.
There is a group that is rapidly growing in the church world that wants to get away from the fundamentalism and radicalism of the last few decades. As the world turns a more and more critical eye to the church, portraying caricatures of uneducated, ignorant hatemongers, there are elements within the church itself that begin squirming and want to get as far away from that as possible. So we start talking about the Pharisees and how Jesus reached out to publicans and sinners. We start to toss aside ideas and rules that seem hopelessly outdated and legalistic in the hopes of distancing ourselves as far away from the legalism and hypocrisy that has wounded so many. We begin searching for ways to establish ourselves in our communities as loving and compassionate neighbors, throwing the doors open wide and producing all kinds of gimmicks to entice people in. We want to align ourselves with local politics and become heavyweights with positive influence, so we reach out to the community groups that seem to carry the most weight. And if some of our strict teachings or crazy rules start to offend, we downplay those things, and either don't talk about them or throw them out altogether. And when we invite a local political candidate or humanitarian cause to partner with our church, we quickly step in front of the older woman who still believes young people should dress up for church and try to schedule things when that one guy who prays way too loud is out of town and explain away the group that believes they see angels and demons every service or the elder who still believes in giving tongues and interpretations. The discipleship class that wants to talk about modesty is cancelled and the enthusiastic convert who preaches on the street corner is asked to tone things down. After all, we don't want to be narrow-minded and legalistic like the Pharisees...right?
My concern in that in our horror of becoming associated with the Pharisees we are actually starting to become like a group that is little discussed from Scripture, but whose leaven must also be avoided at all costs. The Sadducees. And I submit that the leaven of the Sadducees is just as dangerous.
The Sadducees of Jesus's day had become a very powerful sect. Most of the high priests were selected from this faction. They were intricately involved in Temple administration and thus were very involved with the political power of their day...the Romans. The Pharisees mostly came from the common people (contrary to the common way they are described today) whereas the Sadducees were very worldly-wise and politically savvy. Since they didn't believe in a resurrection or after-life involving Hell and torment or a resurrection to rewards, their focus was naturally shifted to the things of this world. They wanted to get back to the bare bones basic elements of the first five books of the Bible as the basis for life and rule in this world, but deemphasize all the material following that involved interpretation and angelic appearances and prophecies and Messiahs and heavenly realms. All that was a distraction from the here and now. They despised the Pharisees for being so "heavenly minded that they were no earthly good." Though they would have acknowledged that God sent messengers in the past and appeared to Moses on Mount Sinai to give him the law, their disbelief in angels and spirits, visions and supernatural occurrences in the modern day gave them license to dismiss many of the radical claims of people like those Jesus-followers, unlike the Pharisees, who had to urge caution. We can see this difference in vivid detail in Acts chapter 5.
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 5:18 And laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison.
Act 5:19 But the angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought them forth, and said,
Act 5:20 Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life.
Act 5:21 And when they heard that, they entered into the temple early in the morning, and taught. But the high priest came, and they that were with him, and called the council together, and all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison to have them brought.
Act 5:22 But when the officers came, and found them not in the prison, they returned, and told,
Act 5:23 Saying, The prison truly found we shut with all safety, and the keepers standing without before the doors: but when we had opened, we found no man within.
Act 5:24 Now when the high priest and the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these things, they doubted of them whereunto this would grow.
Act 5:25 Then came one and told them, saying, Behold, the men whom ye put in prison are standing in the temple, and teaching the people.
Act 5:26 Then went the captain with the officers, and brought them without violence: for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned.
Act 5:27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them,
Act 5:28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.
One of the most remarkable things about this story to me (other than the angelic deliverance and the humorous misplacing of the apostles only to find them doing what they thought they had stopped them from doing in the same place as before) is that when the high priest had the apostles back in custody, he doesn't even address how they got out of prison. Doesn't that strike you as odd? They arrested these men for preaching in the temple, have them locked away in all safety, all night, with guards posted, but in the morning when they send for them, though the prison is still shut safely up and the guards are still in their positions, the prisoners aren't there. Then to add insult to injury they are found in the same place doing the same thing as before. I feel like my first question would have been, "How in the world did you get out?"
Not the Sadducee high priest. He doesn't believe in supernatural occurrences or angels. And this is bordering just enough on the weird side that he doesn't want to hear an explanation. So instead, his first question is, "Didn't we tell you not to talk about Jesus anymore? He's dead so leave it alone!"
But the apostles don't believe he's dead. They saw him rise from the dead and they saw an angel that let them out of the prison. Two experiences that completely contradict the Sadducees' basic mode of belief. But here's what's interesting to me...
Both here in Acts 5 and in Acts 23, the Pharisees and Sadducees differ in opinion on how to handle the apostles. In Acts 5:33, the Sadducee group takes counsel to slay the apostles, and it's only the intervention of a Pharisee named Gamaliel that saves the apostles from certain death. Why? For the same reason as the Pharisees of Acts 23. "If an angel or spirit hath spoken to him let us not fight against God!" Or in Gamaliel's words:
Act 5:38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:
Act 5:39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.
Though the apostles are spared in this instance, it demonstrates a trait of the Sadducees that scares me. Since the Sadducees have already dismissed most supernatural occurrences as impossible...even when it's before their eyes, their tendency is just to kill it. That's a scary place to be in.
Why this long diatribe about two ancient sects of Judaism?
Because while the error of the one is emphasized, the error of the other has crept silently up on us. It is tempting to group legalistic rules and supernatural occurrences together as a product of uneducated minds. We in our arrogance know better. So we dismiss sincere, passionate, excitable, sometimes over-zealous Christians with cynical jokes and knowing sneers, labeling them as Pharisees when they get too close to us and step on our toes. We mock their super-spiritual religious experiences and condemn their strict lifestyle as suffocatingly narrow-minded. We scoff at their end-time fervor and dismiss their "words from the Lord". We smile as they weep at the altar and turn away in embarrassment when they preach about Hell. And we come up with church programs and talk about grace and decry the Pharisees and become more and more worldly, all the while embracing more and more of the ways of the Sadducees.
