The Life of Jesus of Nazareth | Page 7

the
Pythagoreans. It has always been a matter of perplexity that these
ascetics find no mention in the New Testament. They seem to have
lived a life too much apart, and to have had little sympathy with the
ideals of Jesus, or even of John the Baptist.
13. The common people followed the lead of the Pharisees, though afar

off. They accepted the teaching concerning tradition, as well as that
concerning the resurrection, conforming their lives to the prescriptions
of the scribes more or less strictly, according as they were more or loss
ruled by religious considerations. It was in consequence of their hold
on the people that the scribes in the sanhedrin were able often to dictate
a policy to the Sadducean majority. Jesus voiced the popular opinion
when he said that "the scribes sit in Moses' seat" (Matt, xxiii. 2). Their
leaders despised "this multitude which knoweth not the law" (John vii.
49), yet delighted to legislate for them, binding heavy burdens and
grievous to be borne. Many of the people were doubtless too intent on
work and gain to be very regardful of the minutiæ of conduct as
ordained by the scribes; many more were too simple-minded to follow
the theories of the rabbis concerning the aloofness of God from the life
of men. These last reverenced the scribes, followed their directions, in
the main, for the conduct of life, yet lived in fellowship with God as
their fathers had, trusting in his faithfulness, and hoping in his mercy.
They are represented in the New Testament by such as Simeon and
Anna, Zachariah and Elizabeth, Joseph and Mary, and the majority of
those who heard and heeded John's call to repentance. They were
Israel's remnant of pure and undefiled religion, and constituted what
there was of good soil among the people for the reception of the seed
sown by John's successor. They had no name, for they did not
constitute a party; for convenience they may be called the Devout.
14. Two other classes among the people are mentioned in the
gospels,--the Herodians and the Samaritans. The Herodians do not
appear outside the New Testament, and seem to have been hardly more
than a group of men in whom the secular spirit was dominant, who
thought it best for their interests and for the people's to champion the
claims of the Herodian family. They were probably more akin to the
Pharisees than to the Sadducees, for the latter were hostile to the
Herodian claims, from the first; yet in spirit they seem more like to the
worldly aristocracy than to the pious scribes. The Samaritans lived in
the land, a people despising and despised. Their territory separated
Galilee from Judea, and they were a constant source of irritation to the
Jews. The hatred was inherited from the days of Ezra, when the zealous
Jews refused to allow any intercourse with the inhabitants of Samaria.

These Samaritans were spurned as of impure blood and mixed religion
(II. Kings xvii. 24-41). The severe attitude adopted towards them by
Ezra and Nehemiah led to the building of a temple on Mount Gerizim,
and the establishment of a worship which sought to rival that of
Jerusalem in all particulars. Very little is known of the tenets of the
Samaritans in the time of Jesus beyond their belief that Gerizim was the
place which, according to the law, God chose for his temple, and that a
Messiah should come to settle all questions of dispute (John iv. 25).
15. Although the religious life of the Jews centred ideally in the temple,
it found its practical expression in the synagogue. This in itself is
evidence of the relative influence of priests and scribes. There was no
confessed rivalry. The Pharisee was most insistent on the sanctity of the
temple and the importance of its ritual. Yet with the growing sense of
the religious significance of the individual as distinct from the nation,
there arose of necessity a practical need for a system of worship
possible for the great majority of the people, who could at best visit
Jerusalem but once or twice a year. The synagogue seems to have been
a development of the exile, when there was no temple and no sacrifice.
It was the characteristic institution of Judaism as a religion of the law,
furnishing in every place opportunity for prayer and study. The elders
of each community seem ordinarily to have been in control of its
synagogue, and to have had authority to exclude from its fellowship
persons who had come under the ban. In addition to these officials there
was a ruler of the synagogue, who had the direction of all that
concerned the worship; a chazzan, or minister, who had the care of the
sacred books, administered discipline, and instructed