It centers around a rich Jesus funded by Antipas who conspired with Sejanus to upset Caiaphas power and the corrupt temple priestly class the Sadducees.
Anyone who buys into the rabbinic conspiracy theory that the Sadducees were corrupt and the rabbis were some legit religious authority is not a real scholar.
(The same goes for anyone who buys the christian scriptures' presentation of Pharisees as anal-retentive hypocritical legal pedants.)
Do you think it was addressing the corrupt temple Pharisees who were using Roman muscle to extort tithes to some extent?
I see this group as multi cultural and divided with wide and varied belief and practices with four points of conflict of which "some" did mirror the Pharisees as anal-retentive hypocritical legal pedants. YES of course the biblical portrayal is incomplete and not accurate as written.
It centers around a rich Jesus funded by Antipas who conspired with Sejanus to upset Caiaphas power and the corrupt temple priestly class the Sadducees.
Anyone who buys into the rabbinic conspiracy theory that the Sadducees were corrupt and the rabbis were some legit religious authority is not a real scholar.
(The same goes for anyone who buys the christian scriptures' presentation of Pharisees as anal-retentive hypocritical legal pedants.)
The Pharisees were more like dreamers and new agers, making tons of stuff up out of nowhere or copying it from paganism, like the messiah for instance. There's a folklore entity totally not found in the OT. The one "messianic" prophecy that mentions a "messiah" i.e. Daniel 9 is clearly only about the annointed high priest dying when the temple is destroyed. But the make-believe of the Pharisees provided a rich set of make believe for orthodoxizers to reinvent Marcionite Christianity into the cult of a "Messiah promised by the OT" who never was actually promised by the OT.
And I was getting tired of the familiar whack jobs at the forum. Now I found a new flavor of crazy. This place is like the Baskin-Robbins of nut jobs. At what point in your intellectual development did you discover that it was fun to posit uninformed opinions as "facts"?
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias wrote:And I was getting tired of the familiar whack jobs at the forum. Now I found a new flavor of crazy. This place is like the Baskin-Robbins of nut jobs. At what point in your intellectual development did you discover that it was fun to posit uninformed opinions as "facts"?
If that was directed at my last comment, have fun finding a "messianic" prophecy that mentions the word "messiah" or that is not obviously about some comparitably minor figure (compared to the mythical "the messiah") like Micah 5 is clearly about Zorobabel.
But the way you arrange and interpret information is agenda driven and you seem to have read very little. Not a good mix. How do you know how the Pharisees interpreted Daniel 9? What's your evidence?
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
No we simply don't know how the Pharisees interpreted this passage and at the very least no reasonable person has the self-assurance of this jackass.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
davidbrainerd wrote:Anyone who buys into the rabbinic conspiracy theory that the Sadducees were corrupt and the rabbis were some legit religious authority is not a real scholar.
(The same goes for anyone who buys the christian scriptures' presentation of Pharisees as anal-retentive hypocritical legal pedants.)
The Pharisees were more like dreamers and new agers, making tons of stuff up out of nowhere or copying it from paganism, like the messiah for instance.
The Pharisees were certainly not like your analogy, not like dreamers or new agers. They were very much into accuracy and getting God right. The connection between scribes and Pharisees in early christian literature should hint at their disposition. There is no evidence that they were responsible for messianism. The only direct relationship that cones to mind is Aqiba's support of Simeon bar Kochba. If you want to find the Pharisees look at their early lit, the Ezra/Esdras books and why their works talk up Levites. And by the way, Pharisaism was in its heyday under John Hyrcanus, probably reflected the removal of the wall in the temple by Alcimus circa 160 BCE and may really have stretched back to the foundational event described as the Great Synagogue under Simeon "the Just". It seems to have been a precise down to earth flavor of Hebrew religion.
There's a folklore entity totally not found in the OT. The one "messianic" prophecy that mentions a "messiah" i.e. Daniel 9 is clearly only about the annointed high priest dying when the temple is destroyed.
OK, there is no messianism in Daniel though later messianic speculation retrojected the idea.
But the make-believe of the Pharisees provided a rich set of make believe for orthodoxizers to reinvent Marcionite Christianity into the cult of a "Messiah promised by the OT" who never was actually promised by the OT.
The DSS are big on messianism in texts carbondated to the first century BCE, but include no traces of Pharisaism. Can you see any sign of the Pharisees in the Psalms of Solomon, which represents a different messianic tradition from that seen in the DSS? It is safe to think the Pharisees were out of the loop at the beginning of messianism, only later some jumping on the bandwagon.
Last edited by spin on Sat Apr 08, 2017 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes
