Читать книгу A Class-Book of New Testament History - G. F. Maclear - Страница 27

HAVING considered in the previous Chapter the wide dispersion of the Jewish nation, the change in their language, and the general adoption of synagogue worship, we shall now proceed to notice the rise of various sects among the Jews themselves.

(i) Of these sects the most important were (a)The Sadducees, (b)The Pharisees, (c)The Essenes, (d)The Herodians.

(a) The Sadducees.

It has been already observed that the long-continued subjection of the Jews to Grecian monarchs exerted a very marked influence on their habits and modes of life. Familiar not only with the language but the literature and philosophy of Greece, many acquired a strong taste for Grecian studies, preferred the Grecian religion to their own, adopted Grecian manners, and practised Grecian arts156. We have seen from time to time how it became the fashion even for many amongst the highest families to adopt Grecian names, and to recommend themselves in every conceivable way to Grecian rulers in the courts of Alexandria and Antioch. The Law, with its restraints and strict requirements, was regarded by them as a heavy yoke, and they affected the gymnasia, the theatres, and all the worldly pleasures of Grecian life.

To such aspirants after freedom the principles of the Epicurean philosophy would naturally recommend themselves, the more so as they found special acceptance in the Syrian courts. Amongst the scholars of Simon the Just157 was Antigonus of Socho, the first of the Jewish doctors who bears a Greek name. Antigonus was the master of one Sadoc158 (B.C.291–260), the essence of whose teaching was that virtue is its own reward, that men ought not to serve the Lord for the sake of gain, but to do good because it is right.

True as this doctrine was in itself, it was perverted by the disciples of Sadoc, who first attract our attention under the name of Sadducees159, in the time of Jonathan the Asmonean160. While on the one hand especially after the Maccabæan period, they were far removed from any actual adoption of Grecian customs, or apostasy from the national faith, yet on the other, they betrayed evident marks of the influence on their opinions of Grecian philosophy.

Hence they denied the doctrine of the Resurrection161 (Mtt. xxii.23; Lk. xx.27), any rewards or punishments after death, and the existence of angels or spirits (Acts xxiii.8). Holding that the actions of men depended entirely on their own free will, they denied that there was such a thing as destiny, and while they admitted the creation, they removed the Deity as far as possible from any actual administration of the world. It has been thought that they recognised as Scripture only the five books of Moses, but the truth appears to be that while holding the Law in higher estimation than the prophetical and other books of Scripture, they acknowledged the authority of the Old Testament like the rest of the Jews, but refused to hold the authority of tradition.

Aiming as they did at a philosophic elevation of sentiment they found little favour with the common people, and caring little about making proselytes numbered their followers chiefly among the rich and powerful162, and especially the young men of Judæa, and those who were in a position to live a life of ease and worldly enjoyment163.

(b) The Pharisees.

The tendency to adopt Grecian customs and modes of thought above alluded to was not, of course, shared by the entire nation. When Mattathias unfurled the banner of revolt against the heathenizing policy of Antiochus Epiphanes, it will be remembered that he was joined before long by a class calling themselves Assideans164 (1 Macc. ii.42), who seem to have been already in existence as a distinct party, and bound by a vow to the strict observance of the Law. The name they assumed sufficiently indicates their views. Living in times when their countrymen were becoming more and more infected with heathen customs, they protested against such declension from the spirit of the law, and in opposition to the impious (1 Macc. iii.8; vi.21; vii.5), the lawless (1 Macc. iii.6; ix.23), the transgressors (1 Macc. i.11), as they called the Hellenizing faction, adopted for themselves the title of the Assideans, the pious, and in these days of mixing (2 Macc. xiv. 3,38) maintained the strictest observance of the Law165.

Amongst a nation, which prided itself on its distinction from all other people on the earth, such a party would naturally have great influence, and when the Maccabees triumphed over their Syrian tyrants, the tenets of the Assideans rapidly gained ground, and received their complete development in those of the Pharisees, from Perashin, to separate, the Separatists, who are also first distinctly mentioned during the time of the high-priest Jonathan, B.C. 145166.

Like their earlier prototypes, the Pharisees were distinguished by great zeal for the Mosaic Law and the whole Canon of Scripture. But in their rigorous interpretation of its precepts and doctrines, they were mainly guided by Oral Tradition, the traditions of the Elders (Mtt. xv.2; Mk. vii.3). This Oral Tradition, which was regarded as supplementary to the written Law, was said to have been received by Moses on Sinai, to have been delivered by him to Joshua, by Joshua to the elders, by the elders to the prophets, by the prophets to the men of the Great Synagogue.

Of this Law the Pharisees were regarded as the highest interpreters, and presided over various schools, the principal of which in the time of the New Testament, were those of Hillel and Shammai, the former a moderate, the latter the strictest sect.

They held, (i) the existence of angels and spirits, good and bad; (ii)the immortality of the soul; (iii)a state of rewards and punishments after death; (iv)a resurrection of the just and unjust167 (Comp. Acts xxiii.8). As exponents of the Law, (i)they attached an undue importance to the outward act as compared with the inward spirit and motive; (ii)they were rigorous in exacting every external ceremonial, especially in reference to washings, fastings, tithes and alms; and (iii)were noted for pride and austerity.

Their political influence we have already seen was very great168. Holding strongly that the nation ought to be independent of foreign rule, standing high in favour with the people, and especially with the women169, pervading the entire country and forming the majority in the Sanhedrin, they wielded a very considerable power in the state, against which we have seen Hyrcanus, and Jannæus, vainly struggling170, and which Herod, with all his energy, was unable to control.

The writings of the New Testament illustrate, amongst many others, the following features of their character as a sect: their high repute, Jn. vii.48; Acts xxii.3; their regard for externals, while they disregarded the weightier matters of the Law, Mtt. xxiii.24; xii. 2,7; Mk. vii.1; Lk. vi.7; Jn. ix.16, &c.; their regard to tradition, Mtt. xv.2; Mk. vii.3; their scrupulous exactness of washings, tithes, alms, &c., Mtt. ix.14; xxiii. 15,23; Lk. xi.39 sq.; xviii.12; their excessive zeal in making proselytes171, Mtt. xxiii.15; their lax morality, Mtt. v.20; xv. 4,8; xxiii. 3, 14, 23,25; Jn. viii.7.

(c) The Essenes.

Though nowhere mentioned in the New Testament, the Essenes were a numerous body, amounting, according to Philo, to upwards of 4000. Dating, like the other sects already mentioned, from about the middle of the second century B.C., they formed a purely ascetic order, and dwelt far from the distractions of their age in the villages along the western shore of the Dead Sea, where they led a life of labour, abstinence, and meditation172.

They were divided into four orders, but permitted marriage only in one of them, maintained a community of goods, and inculcated a hatred of all riches and all luxury. Sacrifice they did not allow, and though they sent gifts to the Temple, never resorted to it, but held religious assemblies on the Sabbath, where they read the Scriptures, and listened to the expositions of their elders.

Even in their intercourse with one another they observed the greatest secrecy, dreaded contact with all who were not circumcised, and would rather die than eat food which had not been prepared by themselves or those of their own order.

(d) The Herodians.

This sect, which is twice mentioned in the Gospels (Mtt. xxii.16; Mk. iii.6; xii.13), was rather a political than a religious body. Taking alike their names and their views from the family of Herod, the Herodians held that the hopes of the Jewish nation rested on the Herods as a bulwark against Roman ambition, and almost looked to them for a fulfilment of the prophecies of the Messiah173. Hence many amongst them would not regard with dissatisfaction that fusion of the national faith and heathen civilisation, which it was the great object of Herod the Great and his successors to bring about.

It is not improbable that the Herodians in some respects approached very nearly to the Sadducees in their opinions (Comp. Mk. viii.15 with Mtt. xvi.6), for both would hold the duty of submission to the Romans, and join in supporting the throne of Herod. The hostility of the Pharisees to the teaching of our blessed Lord may be estimated by the fact that they joined their enemies the Herodians in attempting to ensnare Him (Mtt. xxii.16).

(ii) Before concluding this Chapter, this seems the appropriate place for noticing the Samaritans, who are frequently mentioned in the New Testament.

In the year B.C.721 Sargon captured Samaria, and removed into captivity the remains of the ten tribes, already decimated by Tiglath-Pileser174, and located them partly in Gozan or Mygdonia, and partly in cities recently captured from the Medes. This was not a partial but a complete evacuation of the country, which was wiped clean of its inhabitants as a man wipeth a dish (2 K. xxi.13), in accordance with a not unusual custom of Oriental conquerors actually to exhaust a land of its inhabitants175.

In this desolate condition the country remained till about the year B.C.677, when Esarhaddon during the invasion of Judah perceived the impolicy of leaving it thus exposed, and resolved to garrison it with foreigners. Accordingly he gathered men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim (2 K. xvii.24; comp. Ezra iv. 2, 9,10), and entrusting them to an officer of high rank, the great and noble Asnapper, had them conveyed to the country formerly occupied by the Ten Tribes, and there settled them.

These strangers (comp. Lk. xvii.18) from the further East176 were of course idolaters, and worshipped various deities, and knowing not the God of the land provoked Him by their heathenish rites to send lions among them, which slew some of them (2 K. xvii.25). In their distress they applied to the king of Assyria, who sent one of the captive priests to instruct them how they should fear the Lord. Under his teaching they added the acknowledgment of Jehovah as the God of the land, to their ancient idolatries, and in course of time detached themselves more and more from heathen customs, and adopted a sort of worship of Jehovah.

Refused permission, on the return from the Captivity, to participate in the rebuilding of the Temple, they became the open enemies of the Jews, and erected a rival temple on Mount Gerizim177, where they continued to worship till it was destroyed by John Hyrcanus, B.C.130. After this they built another temple at Shechem, and there, under its modern name of Nablûs, they have a settlement, consisting of about 200 persons, at the present hour.

Gradually detaching themselves from their ancient idolatries, the Samaritans adopted the Mosaic religion, but received as Scripture only the Pentateuch, rejecting every other book in the Jewish Canon. They celebrated the Passover (and celebrate it even now), on Mount Gerizim, and even after their temple had fallen, directed their worship towards that mountain. Holding the doctrine of the coming of the Messiah (Jn. iv.25), whom they called Hashah, “the Converter178,” their conceptions of His functions and character were derived chiefly from the original promise of a Saviour (Gen. iii.15), the Shiloh or Peace-maker predicted by Jacob (Gen. xlix.10), and the Prophet promised to the Israelites like unto Moses (Num. xxiv.17; Deut. xviii.15), and they mainly expected that He would teach all things (Jn. iv.25), and restore the glory of the holy Law on Mount Gerizim179.

The feud between the Jews and Samaritans, engendered by the refusal of the former to permit their participation in the rebuilding of the Temple, ripened into a mutual hostility of the most bitter description.

The Jews were perpetually reminding the Samaritans that they were “Cuthites,” mere “strangers from Assyria.” They loved to call them “proselytes of the lions” (2 K. xvii.25), and to accuse them of worshipping the idol-gods buried long age under the oak of Shechem (Gen. xxxv.4). To such an extent did they carry their dislike, that they cursed them publicly in their synagogues; declared their testimony was naught, and could not be received; affirmed that any who entertained a Samaritan in his house was laying up judgments for his children; that to eat a morsel of his fare was to eat swine’s flesh180; refused to receive him as a proselyte, and declared that he could have no part in the resurrection of the dead. Moreover they would have no dealings with them that they could possibly avoid, and in travelling from the South to the North preferred to take the long circuit through Peræa rather than pass through their hated country.

On the other hand, the Samaritans were not behind-hand in recriminations. They would refuse hospitality to the pilgrim companies going up to the feasts at Jerusalem (Comp. Lk. ix.53), and sometimes even waylay and murder them181. On one occasion certain of them are said to have entered the Temple at Jerusalem, and defiled it by scattering on the pavement human bones182. One special mode of annoyance was frequently practised. The Jews were in the habit of communicating to their numerous brethren in Babylon, the exact day and hour of the rising of the Paschal moon, by means of a system of beacon fires, which telegraphed the welcome news from the Mount of Olives, through Auranitis, to those who sat by the waters of the Babylon. The Samaritans would, therefore, annoy the watchers on the mountain-tops by kindling a rival flame on the wrong day, and thus perplex them, and introduce confusion.