was of a worldly nature. The sphere of activity of the Pharisees was the synagogue, that

of the Sadducees, the Temple.

The origin of the Sadducean party, like that of the Essenes and Pharisees, cannot be

traced with accuracy, but it is likely that they arose at the same time, and in opposition to,

the Pharisaic party. As the Pharisees tended to narrow the spirit of Judaism, so the

Sadducees were inclined to rationalize it. When a spirit of Grecianism began to prevail in

Israel, the Sadducean party was inclined to accept it, and to compromise the economy of

Israel in order to be at peace with the ruling power. This explains why most of them

were drawn from the nobility, and why, at the time of the Lord, some of them were

associated with the family of Herod. Indeed, it would appear that the Herodians were a

branch of the Sadducees. (Cp. Matt. 16: 6, Mark 8: 15.).

The name "Sadducee", according to Rabbinical tradition, derives from one Zadoc,

thought to be the founder of this party, and who lived about the middle of the third

century B.100: Another view is that the name "Sadducee" is derived from the Hebrew

tsadeq, "righteous", but very little weight can be attached to either of these views.

It is a matter of some doubt as to whether or not they accepted the whole of the O.T.,

or just the Law of Moses. Matt. 22: 23-33 has sometimes been urged in favour of the

latter view, for the Lord there demonstrates the truth of the resurrection, which the

Sadducees denied, from the Law proper,  quoting from Exodus,  rather than from

passages in other parts of the O.T. which bear more clearly upon the point; for example,

Dan. 12: 2.

The inference drawn from this is that the Lord recognized that the

Sadducees acknowledged only the Pentateuch, so that Exodus would be accepted and

Daniel rejected. But it should be noted before accepting this as proof, that the Sadducees

had themselves referred to the authority of Moses in verse 24, and it was fitting that they

should be reproved from the same action of the O.T. which they themselves had quoted.

It should be remembered also in connection with this, that the orthodox Israelite, in any

case, exalted the Law above the other Scriptures, and so the Lord's reference would carry

more weight with them.

An argument in favour of the Sadducees' acceptance of the whole of the O.T., is that it

would appear to be unlikely that they would have been admitted to the Sanhedrin unless

this was so. True, they opposed the oral traditions of the Pharisees, but not the Written

Word itself.

As a party which took this position, and appear to have defended the Law against such

intrusions, they could have provided a useful balancing factor in Israel, but their motives

either were, or became political, to the compromise of the truth whenever necessary.

They gained in wealth, rank, connections and authority, and became the party of the

nobility, and as corrupted as the Pharisees themselves. Together with the Pharisees they

were condemned by John the Baptist (Matt. 3: 7), and the Lord Himself (Matt. 16: 1),

and the Disciples were warned against their doctrine (Matt. 16: 6).

Their rationalized teaching can be felt from such a passage as Acts 23: 8: