As with John, it is easy to see then when Jesus appeared, He also strongly condemned these men of ill-repute and their legalistic requirements to the Mosaic law and excessive rabbinical traditions earlier instituted to prevent hellenization by the people. These were those "religious rulers" whom Christ condemned before Pilate ( Jn.19:11), those who had received the oracles of God for the benefit of all peoples, but through their abuse of power, used them for their own ill-gotten gain -- men who had the "form of godliness (on the outside), but denying the power (void of God on the inside)" - II Ti.3:3. These men would be called into a greater accounting, so Christ declared. (Jn.5:37-47; 7:19,24; 8:12-59; 9:41; Mat.23:1-38; Lk.12:37-54; Mk.7:5-13) In all fairness, it should be noted that although most in this party possessed hearts hard enough to be reflected in a character that John would call vipers of his generation ( Mt.3:7; echoed in 12:33 by Christ later), not all were beyond redemption. Clearly, by the examples of Nicodemus ( Jn.3:1; 7:50), Joseph of Arimathaea ( Lk.23:50-51; Jn.19:38), and later Paul ( Ph.3:5), a few still had hearts and spirits capable of responding to the truth when they heard it, however foreign it may have sounded in their day.

Due to the Temple and their headquarters being located in Jerusalem, the Judean Jew was more affected by these scholars (Pharisees, or lawyers as they were commonly called) than was the Galilean Jew (Nicodemus himself a Galilean Pharisee - Jn.7:52). Thus, the Galilean Jews were given more to the Hellenistic (Greek) culture than to the strict requirements of the distant Jerusalem sect. This helps to understand why Jesus was better received by the Galilean Jew, in particular the city of Capernaum in northern Galilee where Jesus made His headquarters during His public ministry and did His most popular work.

Among the Pharisees' evolved beliefs of the earlier stated traditions of their fathers were three that distinctly set them apart from their rival party, the Sadducees, serving as a never-ending source of debate: (1) the resurrection of the body, (2) angels, and (3) rewards and punishment in the next life for deeds done in this one. (Paul, himself a Pharisee, used this for a defense, successfully splitting a group along party lines who had falsely accused him leading to his arrest - Acts 23:6.) Primarily due to these debates, the Sadducees, during Simeon Ben Setah's presidency, had been successfully ousted as leaders in the Sanhedrin and it eventually became solely Pharisaic.

It was also commonly held by them that being a blood descendant of Abraham, with knowledge and legal adherence to Old Testament Scripture, secured for them eternal life and a place in the kingdom to come -- this, also denounced by Jesus. ( Mat.3:7-9; Jn.5:39; Jn.8:39,41,44; Jn.3:3; Lk.18:18-22)

Clearly, then, this group was in part responsible for Jesus' death, seeking to preserve their personal power over the people and their political position with Rome, though eager and willing to align themselves with any insurrectionist who might appear strong enough to throw off the Roman yoke for independent rule, such as during the earlier successful Maccabaean period. One cannot help but wonder then, if Christ had become political in His movement, whether these self-righteous Separates would have aligned with Him rather than condemning Him; after all, did they not demand the release of that infamous insurrectionist Barabbas? And what of their possible clandestine connection with him? ( Jn.11:47-48; 12:19; 18:35; 19:12) If they were eager to murder a gentle compassionate miracle worker, they certainly were not above enlisting the aid of a Zealot to further their cause, leading Jesus to identify them as the hypocrites they were with their fake allegiance to Caesar. ( Mt.22:15-18; Mk.3:6)