RELIGION AND LIFE

THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE (conclusion)

Our last discussion touched on the nature of Jesus’ mission and the extent to which many of his followers did not understand it. We also discussed the accusations brought against him by the Pharisees and hinted at the real motive behind it. This time we will elaborate on it, as well as discuss the people’s choice of Barabbas.

PHARISEES’ ACCUSATIONS

The real motive behind the Pharisees’ accusations was to have Jesus crucified. And, from their points of view, they were justified. I could hear you asking, how can he justify the action of the Pharisees? Of course, I cannot. However, let’s examine some pertinent information about them.

They were one of the 3 prominent Jewish religious sects in Jesus’ lifetime. The others were the Sadducees and the Essences. Our knowledge of their origins is not definitive, and derives from 3 sources - the works of Flavius Josephus, the early rabbinical writings (200 ACE and later), the canonical Gospels, and the Dead Sea scrolls.

The Pharisees developed in the period following the Maccabean revolt (167-160 B.C.E). They came from the middle class and based their teaching on the Torah and its interpretation (the oral tradition, compiled as the Talmud). They resisted foreign intellectual thought, specifically that of Greece, which had infiltrated Jewish education to a great extent. This resistance was not total, since forms of Greek thought, such as individualism and mysticism, became part of their philosophy. They built sysnagoues in opposition to the Sadducees, who controlled temple worship. After the destruction of the Temple in 70ACE, their teachings continued, and were responsible for the continuation of Judaism.

The Sadducees, like the Pharisees, developed around 70ACE. They were wealthy members of the Jewish aristocracy, who, unlike the Pharisees, strove after Greek thought. They taught strict adherence of the Torah, and rejected the oral traditions. After the afore-mentioned destruction of the temple, the sect was wiped out and none of their writings exist. As a result, our knowledge largely derives from their adversaries.

The Essenes moved out of Judaism, because they believed that the Pharisees and Sadducees had corrupted Jerusalem and the temple. They lived in communes in the area surrounding the Dead Sea, sharing all things in common. Some scholars suggest that Jesus lived among them during his missing years.

CONFLICT WITH PHARISEES

Jesus, like the Pharisees, observed the Mosaic Law, and believed in Monotheism. Why, then, did they reject his teaching and he theirs? In this article I will discuss 3 areas of their disagreement.

(1) His inclusion of Matthew and other tax collectors as disciples. Tax collectors were hated by all segments of the Jews as robbers for Rome. They were excommunicated from synagogues, and considered unredeemable. As a Jewish rabbi, Jesus’ action was judged as pro-Roman and anti-Jewish.

(2) His contention that he could forgive sins. Mark records an incident when Jesus healed a person with palsy, and said, "Son, thy sins be forgiven thee." (Mark 2:5) The Pharisees believed that only God could forgive sins. "Why does this man speak blasphemies?" (Mark 2:7) The Pharisees were very concerned about foreign ideas perverting Jews. Jesus’ view that sins could be forgiven by a man was viewed as a foreign idea.

(3) The Pharisees fasted twice weekly as a ritual of personal piety. The disciples of John the Baptister also fasted. But Jesus’ disciples did not. Mark records that one day some of John’s disciples and some Pharisees came to Jesus and asked him the reason for his disciples not fasting. He answered, "Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom. But someday they will be taken away from them, and then they will fast." (New Living translation, Mark 2:19,20) In other words he was telling them that he was either God or his Son. On either count, it would be considered blasphemy to the Pharisees.

These are only three of many areas where there were conflicts between the Pharisees’ and Jesus’ teaching. Jesus was never as popular as John the Baptist or the Pharisees. Of course, the gospels would have us believe otherwise. Jesus was one of many traveling Jewish rabbis. But most of them talked about the Law and the Prophets in accordance with prevailing concepts. Jesus was a rebel be-yond the fringe. According to the Pharisees, he taught that he was God’s Son; that he alone could interpret God’s will; that he could forgive sins. Perhaps the claim that caused the most anger was that he could destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days.

Let’s pause, and put ourselves in the place of a zealous Jew in Jesus’ day. We love his preaching, which includes the poor. But there is something about his gospel that turns us off, to the point of wishing him crucified. How dare he ridicule and contradict the Law and the oral tradition? In fact, how dare he call himself our savior without even mentioning the question of Roman occupation? I suggest to you the contemporary Jew acted the only way he could have, based on the circumstances.

THE CHOICE OF BARABBAS

Barabbas is mentioned in all four canonical gospels. Matthew refers to him as "a notorious criminal" (Matthew 27:16) and John describes him as "a bandit" (John 18:40). Mark and Luke offer more details, noting that he had "committed murder during an insurrection" (Mark 15:7) (Luke 23:19). The consensus among biblical scholars is that Barabbas was a freedom fighter, who fought for the withdrawal of Roman soldiers from Israel.

To understand why the multitude chose Barabbas over Jesus, one must put contemporary Jewish history in context. Most Jews believed that their history was pre-determined by God, meaning that even the conquest of Judea by the Romans was divinely planned. In which respect, they believed that the Romans would be replaced by a Jewish king through divine intervention. Some like John the Baptist and Yehoshua ben Ananias claimed that a messianic age was at hand. Others, like Barabbas, believed that the Jewish kingdom should be restored immediately, through violent human action.

These agitators indulged in frequent insurrections, these days called terrorism. The penalty for insurrection was death. No pardon was granted to an insurrectionist. However, there was a custom, (some argue a Roman and others a Jewish one), to release a prisoner of the people’s choice during Passover. Barabbas and another prisoner were tried with Jesus. According to the Gospels, Pontius Pilate wanted to release Jesus.

Mark asked the crowd, "Should I release to you the King of the Jews? After the crowd chose Barabbas, Pilate, still seeking Jesus’ release, asked, "If I release Barabbas, what shall I do with this man you call the King of the Jews?’ They shouted back, "Crucify him." (Mark15:6-13) I contend that their choice was based on sound, common sense. Knowing little about Jesus, (he was not as well known as the Gospels assert), and based on their desire for Roman occupation to end, they chose the prisoner who was condemned for involvement in action to that end.

We might make a different choice these days, based on our beliefs.

Until next time, friends, think on these things

The views expressed in this article are not necessarily the views of Caribbean Impact, but those of the contributor.