Ringo quite frequently states his opinions and beliefs on specific matters in their respective threads. What you want him to do, it seems, is sum up in one or two sentences his entire set of beliefs. I don't think Ringo has to submit himself to such generalizations.
The "modern", "politically correct" position is exactly what Jesus preached: that you don't have to go through a lot of rituals to be "saved" - you just have to behave yourself.
i'm not sure why he thinks this isn't a real position, i've heard this many times from many people in many different ways, but basicly the same core belief. has robin really read anything about christian beliefs and viewpoints? even the NT sugests this, being that they attack what they consider the worse of the bunch for legelism, pharisees
even the NT sugests this, being that they attack what they consider the worse of the bunch for legelism, pharisees
Well, actually both extremes were cited, Sadducees and Pharisees. The biggest difference is the the Pharisee movement was relatively short lived and none of their documents have yet been found. The only real difference betwen the two is that the former seemed to uphold a strict interpretation of the written Laws while the later held the oral tradition as strictly as the written.
Well, actually both extremes were cited, Sadducees and Pharisees. The biggest difference is the the Pharisee movement was relatively short lived and none of their documents have yet been found.
This is very odd, jar, since the Pharisees continue to exist. They are today's Orthodox, not the Hasidim but the Orthodox, the ones who wear the yarmulkes and strictly observe the Sabbath, the Passover, the food laws and all the other laws, just as the Pharisees in Jesus' time did, and they do all the things He criticized them for too. Pharshee I believe they pronounce it. They go back to Hillel and Gamaliel, great Pharisee teachers.
What "documents" of theirs haven't been found? The Talmud hadn't yet been written down, but was in their day the Oral Law they followed, and now it's written down.
Contrary to your idea the Pharisees were a short-lived movement, they were the only branch of Judaism that survived, according to this site:
The Pharisaic school of thought is the only one that survived the destruction of the Temple. The Zealots were killed off during the war with Rome. The Sadducees could not survive without the Temple, which was the center of their religion. The Essenes, who were never very numerous, were apparently killed off by the Romans (they were easily recognizable in their isolated communities).
For many centuries after the destruction of the Temple, there was no large-scale, organized difference of opinion within Judaism. Judaism was Judaism, and it was basically the same as what we now know as Orthodox Judaism.
There are NO Pharisee documents that I know of. And, as pointed out above, the biggest difference we know of between the two sects is that the Pharisee used a strict interpretation of both the oral and written Laws while the Sadducees held to a strict interpretation of the Torah and did not consider the oral tradition as authoritive. The Pharisees seem to have more a democratization of Judaism, moving it out of the Temples.
Both groups were condemned by Jesus for their hypocrisy.