Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Amilius777
Ug I give up. Why are you defending Caiaphas? I understand they were learned men I am not being an anti-Semite...
|
First, Caiphas was not a Pharisee. He was a Sadducee.
Second, as to the legitimacy of the koheyn gadol - the high priest - that had been a festering sore point going back to the beginning days of the Hasmoneans.
Third, like Judaism itself, both now and back then, the Pharisees were not some monolithic group. While there was much that united those who might be labeled Pharisees there were also very strong points of disagreement - as most famously illustrated by the differences between beit Shammai and beit Hillel. At best, or at worst depending upon your viewpoint, all one could say is that
some Pharisees acted in a reprehensible manner.
I don't think that 7L was labelling you as an Anti-Semite, I know that I am not. She was simply pointing out that the portrait of the Pharisees in Christian scripture and the charges contained therein are inaccurate.
B'shalom,
Peter