Why Study the Pharisees with Professor Roland Deines

[@Allen2saint]

This is a real scholar.

[@mrlume9475]

Fascinating, thank you for posting this.

[@GradyRisley]

The Pharasee's perverted truth. They taught righteousness came through the law. National identity and seperation from the other nations, came through law but personal righteousness was always through faith. The idea of personal righteousness through law was a very new idea brought in by the Pharasee's My2Cents

[@fleeglekeet]

The first mention of the Pharisees was not the book of Philippians, as was stated. It was Matthew chapter three, where John the Baptist called them a '"generation of vipers."

[@IamGrimalkin]

What Professor Dienes is talking about here is not the order the books appear in the modern bible, but the order in which they were written. Clearly he thinks Phillipians was written before Matthew, which is a reasonable position.

[@33WONDERWOMEN]

@ K C Karbine I am writing a paper on the Pharisees, where in the bible can find where they were mentioned

[@wellingtonsingh1501]

DESTER SAMUEL You can find it in Matthew 23/13 or the whole chapters.

[@cathom001]

If Jesus was here He would tell Professor Roland Deines the same thing He told the Pharisees and call the Professor the same names He called the Pharisees. What Bible is this guy reading out of? Oh yeah, that's right, the Talmud.

[@pseudocalm]

+JacobTheHebrew ForeverBlessed Lol, I think it would be quite interesting if you could expand that statement, showing the exact parallels between what someone just studying history and the pharisees have in common, so much so that if Jesus were here he would condemn him. What the professor was saying was that the pharisees existed 2 hundred years before Jesus' ministry, and that Jewish people all throughout that time were living according to their teachings. Jesus told the people to obey what they taught, just not to ACT how they acted. Jesus was also speaking specifically to the pharisees that were alive during his ministry, and their actions in the community, not about the order or it's goals as a whole, which is what the professor is talking about.

[@cathom001]

LucidityNow Like I said!

[@tbillyjoeroth]

How about Ellis Rivkin's book, "A Hidden Revolution" as well?

[@willardwade7974]

The Pharisees for about eight hundred years kept their Halakhah ("The Walk") was called the Oral or the unwritten "Rabbinic law of the mind." You could only learn this law from a Rabbi Lawyer. Similar to the Catholic Catechism that supersedes any written law of God, the oral or Rabbinic law of the Pharisee "The Halakhah" supersedes any written law by Moses. Today you can read this law of the "Halakhah" by reading the modern Jewish Talmud, the oral law was finally written down in the second century AD. There are some very fascinating parallels in the Halakhah and the manuscripts of the Bible. "The worship of Havdalah" was a Jewish worship of eating bread and drinking wine at the end of the Sabbath day (dusk of Saturday night). That ancient worship of all sects of the Jews and the Israelites, is an exact parallel of the true resurrection moment of the Christ and the true time to celebrate the Lord's supper of eating bread and drinking wine.

[@proudpharisee5303]

it doesnt supersede the written law.

[@benavraham4397]

You have evidence of Pharisees' teaching in the Gospels. Hanukka (the Feast of Dedication) is mentioned, which is entirely Rabbinic. Washing hands (from a cup) before eating bread is mentioned, although the protagonist disagrees with it. Having wine at the Passover meal is a Rabbinic degree and having four cups of wine is another Rabbinic decree. These Rabbinic degrees, he yes agreed to. How ironic that the Gospels are the earliest record of Rabbinic decrees! But ultimately, the entire Christian faith dependent on the Pharisees. Why? Because there are all kind of Messianic prophecies that the man on the white donkey never fulfilled: among them, he did not gather the entire Jewish people to the Holy Land; he never built cities of refuge; he never built the Temple in Ezekiel 40-43. So how can he be the Messiah? The "second coming" is the solution, but is nowhere mentioned in the written Scripture! It was the PHARISEES who taught that there would be a second coming of the Messiah. So with no Oral Tora, there is no Christianity.

[@EliezerEisenberg]

I take issue with the grammatical tense.

[@morneterblanche2228]

The Pharisees and Saudicees are from the time of Moses when the king of Egyptian started with a new title Pharoh, instead of a king. Pharoh descendants who became Jews , who were well learners people and well taught . The same with Saudicees of Saudi Arabia. Really ?????? They could not find any wrong in the teaching of Jesus . So thy formed a tumult to crucify him with false accusations, tuning the crows deceitful with high accountability and influence of their accountability that was high.

[@NeoMoses]

Jesus opposition against them shows he’s not for them not Christians

[@ornanongsavage8688]

So why Professor no religious ever talk about what I am about to ask; I want to share with you something that has been troubling me for sometime. If you are from the blood line of Seth you are God's chosen people, if you are from the blood line of Cain you cannot be God's chosen people. Cain is of Lucifer, and can never be of the chosen race. No religious ever talk about this subject. That's why Lord Jesus Christ said to the Pharisees and Sadducees you are of your father the Devil and he's works you will do. So it's against God for me to support the children of Cain. You need to define who are the blood line of Seth?

[@benavraham4397]

How did the sons of Cain survive the flood of Noah?

[@MapleBar777]

Sympathy for the devil. Yikes.

[@AnnMUNDEN]

God expelled those people