Who are the J's: the Pharisees, or the sinners?
- Thread starter knight in battle
- Start date
Aha! This shows that I'm onto something. I don't like people intruding haphazardly in my schedule, either, which creates missed opportunities and many people being unable to interact with me in a fun atmosphere. Honestly I get a little disarrayed by that behavior in many cases. My ENFJ acquaintance seems a lot about "duty" and a lot less fun than the P's I know.
It seems to make sense, though. Of course, I've seen many EJ's have fun in party-ish atmospheres, so I guess my point isn't complete. I just get the overall impression that the Pharisees were behaving in a J manner.
That's actually a really good point. I think most people are fearful (self-conscious? guilty?) about something. Thanks for bringing that up.Nah, they were just scared of their shadow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees
The context has little to no connection with your statement, though. Do a little research on the group and see they were taking care of business. They weren't into partying and having fun, per se.
They could not understand why those with Jesus were not fasting and praying like they were to do.
The context has little to no connection with your statement, though. Do a little research on the group and see they were taking care of business. They weren't into partying and having fun, per se.
They could not understand why those with Jesus were not fasting and praying like they were to do.
No way all disciples were P. Jesus was instructed to pick a varied lot, from murderers to tax collectors to fisherman to doctors, etc.
You say there's alcohol, I say we party. I've boogied down with many a J.
Jesus was more focused on His mission here, and He knew His stay was short, but He also believed in loving the sinners, and not shunning them.
I have had many a discussion about Jesus with folks at bars & parties.
I used to lead by example, but when I decided to try the wild side for a spell I got opportunities to take care of hurting people and steer them out of harms way, while changing the image they had of stick in the mud Christians. I over indulged because I was hurting, too, and I learned that partying is no way of life. A little goes a long way.
You say there's alcohol, I say we party. I've boogied down with many a J.
Jesus was more focused on His mission here, and He knew His stay was short, but He also believed in loving the sinners, and not shunning them.
I have had many a discussion about Jesus with folks at bars & parties.
I used to lead by example, but when I decided to try the wild side for a spell I got opportunities to take care of hurting people and steer them out of harms way, while changing the image they had of stick in the mud Christians. I over indulged because I was hurting, too, and I learned that partying is no way of life. A little goes a long way.
Were the Pharisees J's?
Are they too focused on their rigid standards to know the right context to have fun and party? :w:
Are all J's partypoopers?
Were the disciples P's?
I'm just so tired of pharisees getting a bad rap.\
Who were the Pharisees? They were Jewish scholars that wanted to take the religious practice of Judaism out of the elitest hands of the priests and put it back into the hands of the average Jew on the street. Because often only the wealthy could afford to educate their sons, the Pharisees opened the first Jewish day schools so that EVERY Jewish boy could learn to read and right and understand Jewish law. Unlike the Galileans who were xenophobes, and the Sadducees who were contentedly self serving, the Pharisees believed in a larger mission of bringing moral enlightenment to all the world, and while they never taught that anyone had to become a Jew, they set up synagogues in cities all over the world to teach people to treat one another better. Because of their desire to help every individual become better, rather than to depend upon a priesthood, the number of "righteous gentiles" who came to believe in single creator soared, and at one time around 10% of the Roman citizenship were converts to Judaism.
There were two schools of Pharisees. The school of Shammai was very cautious and practical and emphasized "building a wall around the Torah" lest you come even close to breaking a commandment. This is the group often complained about as being "legalists" as they truly were concerned with the fine points of the law (even when they didn't always keep it themselves). The other group was the school of Hillel, which was more principle based. Hillel taught that there was only one law, "Whatever is hateful to you don't do to other people" and that there were 613 applications of this law, what he called "the commentary."
I hate to break it to some of the very "anti-pharisee" Christians, but the teachings of Jesus were very strongly in line with bet Hillel. Most of the time, bet Hillel had control of the Sanhedron (council of seventy elders and final court of appeal). However, during the ministry years of Jesus, the Sanhedron was controlled by bet Shammai. Basically, Jesus did what Jews do -- he argued about the correct interpretation of Torah. You open up the Talmud, and you'll find scores of the SAME ARGUMENTS between Shammai and Hillel and members of their camps. Yeah, you read me right. Jesus was a Pharisee.
And although I can't prove it, I think brother J was either INFJ or ENFJ. Don't you think Peter sounds like a classic SP?
As far as J's not knowing how to party hearty, I have to disagree. I've known plenty of Orthodox Rabbis who are sticklers for obeying the fine points of the law, and wow can they dance up a storm, and sing mit schmaltz. OMGosh my rabbi at Chabad used to have me in absolute stitches at parties. I know most INFJ's have had bad experiences with the SJ ilk, but come on people! They are individuals! They don't all get stuck in a rut.
Last edited:
What makes you think that brother J and his disciples didn't fast and pray? I'm just really confused by your remark, because while I may take the gospels and epistles with a big grain of salt, I seem to recall a number of occasions where fasting and praying is mentioned.
It was most likely a simple observation based on the geography of where this all transpired. I suspect Saru used "human" and "Arabic" as generic descriptors to make his point that nothing more specific or limiting could be attributed to the Pharisees or the disciples (e.g., J or P preferences).
While Jews and Arabs are both Semitic peoples, Jews are not Arabs, just as Moabites are not Amelakites and Chinese are not Japanese and Italians are not Germans. Given the current tension between Jews and Arabs, any joke that Jews are Arabs is just in very poor taste.
@GracieRuth
I have only begun to rely on Jewish scholars for context and perspective, although not nearly as much as some non-Jewish scholars already do.
I have only begun to rely on Jewish scholars for context and perspective, although not nearly as much as some non-Jewish scholars already do.
I really do, actually—he was the only disciple who ventured to walk on water.
Paul (i.e., Saul) was, of course, a Pharisee. But I can only go so far as to agree that Jesus was conceptually like the Pharisees and not in every way. I believed that Jesus conversed with the Pharisees using the same assumptions, especially perhaps when he said, "The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments." (The Gospel according Matthew 22:40). (i.e., "you shall love the LORD, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength." (Deuteronomy 6:5); and, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." (Leviticus 19:18)).
SJs dance better than I can :w:
Last edited:
[MENTION=4576]GracieRuth[/MENTION]
Indeed. I'm not sure why Christians today tend to badmouth the Pharisees so much. The New Testament mentions the Pharisees more than the Sadducees because they were the ones who liked to engage him in discussion. (The Sadducees pretty much only interacted with him when they thought they could trap him, not to have any meaningful discussions.)
Jesus did not condemn the Pharisees as a whole, only the hypocrites among them. He commanded that we do as the Pharisees teach, not as they do. Most of the earliest Christians were Pharisees.
Jesus had much greater conflicts with the Sadducees. It was the Sadducees who conspired to have him executed, and who led the persecution of the early church. Some Pharisees cooperated with the Sadducees in these things, but several stood up against them.
I just got to thinking about a part of Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, one of the earliest texts of Christian Apologetics. Here a Pharisee denounces Christians for rejecting the Torah. Justin insists that no true Christian does that, only groups like the Marcionites who falsely claim to be Christians. He then compares such heretics to the Sadducees, and goes so far as to say that when Revelation 2:9 mentions "those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan" it is talking about Sadducees. Both parties agree that those who reject the doctrine of the ressurection of the dead should not be considered Jews.
Indeed. I'm not sure why Christians today tend to badmouth the Pharisees so much. The New Testament mentions the Pharisees more than the Sadducees because they were the ones who liked to engage him in discussion. (The Sadducees pretty much only interacted with him when they thought they could trap him, not to have any meaningful discussions.)
Jesus did not condemn the Pharisees as a whole, only the hypocrites among them. He commanded that we do as the Pharisees teach, not as they do. Most of the earliest Christians were Pharisees.
Jesus had much greater conflicts with the Sadducees. It was the Sadducees who conspired to have him executed, and who led the persecution of the early church. Some Pharisees cooperated with the Sadducees in these things, but several stood up against them.
I just got to thinking about a part of Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, one of the earliest texts of Christian Apologetics. Here a Pharisee denounces Christians for rejecting the Torah. Justin insists that no true Christian does that, only groups like the Marcionites who falsely claim to be Christians. He then compares such heretics to the Sadducees, and goes so far as to say that when Revelation 2:9 mentions "those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan" it is talking about Sadducees. Both parties agree that those who reject the doctrine of the ressurection of the dead should not be considered Jews.
Last edited: