Also: Who were the Herodians and the Boethusians?
Please always get the latest version of this document, from the Bible Pages web site, at this address: www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/eo13b.htm
Need larger text? Go to your browser's "View" menu and look for "Text size" or "Zoom".
The Bible contains some references to a group called "the Sadducees". They are mentioned
only in the New Testament, and only in fourteen passages. In the Greek text of the
NT, they are called saddoukaios, plural saddoukaioi.
What does the Bible say about the Sadducees? Who were the Sadducees, and what were their teachings? What kind of people were they? Also: Who were the Herodians and the Boethusians? (There is a connection between them and the Sadducees.) The facts are that very little is known about the Sadducees and the Sadducean party or sect. In the Bible, they are mentioned only in 14 passages, and only in passing. Further: It seems that no original Sadducean writings have been preserved to our day. Consequently, what is known about the Sadducees comes from the few comments regarding them in the New Testament, and from Pharisean writings which provide some more information regarding the background and manners of their opponent, the Sadducean party. (This includes the writings of the renegade Jewish general Josephus, whom many think to have been a Pharisee before he went over to the Romans.)
This essay takes a closer look at what we can know about the Sadducees. Also the groups called "the Herodians" and "the Boethusians" will be considered, because there is a connection between them and the Sadducees.
There are different views regarding what the word Sadducee (in the Greek saddoukaios, plural saddoukaioi) might have meant, but there is no certain information regarding that.
Some have claimed that the Sadducees were "sons of Zadok", but there is no proof of that. (Zadok was a certain priest in the days of David, but again, there is no whatsoever proof that the Sadducees would have been descendants of Zadok.) Some Jewish writers have thought that the party name saddoukaioi (as it was spelled in Greek) perhaps came from a certain Sadok who lived in the 200s BCE and was a disciple of Antigonus of Soko (a figure in Jewish myths). But, the facts are that it simply is not known what origin of the word saddoukaios, saddoukaioi really was.
In New Testament times, the high priest was often a Sadducee (while the "second priest", the segan, often was a Pharisee). But, it is worth noting that it was the Romans who controlled things. During a long period of time, the Romans sold the priesthood to the highest bidder. Even this makes it clear that there was no obvious connection between the high priesthood and an eventually surviving lineage of Zadok of David's day.
The first occurrence of the word "Sadducee" in the Bible is found here:
Matthew 3:7 But when he saw a number of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, Offspring of snakes, at whose word are you going in flight from the wrath to come? (BBE)
Matthew 3:7 But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming to watch him baptize, he denounced them. "You brood of snakes!" he exclaimed. "Who warned you to flee God's coming wrath? (NLT-04)
This shows that John the Baptist called both the Pharisees and the Sadducees, by the name "offspring of snakes" (children of snakes). Obviously, he had no high thoughts of either group. (Here, it must be noted that John the Baptist had the Holy Spirit – see Luke 1:15 – and knew what he was talking about.)
Matthew 16:1 shows how the Sadducees, together with the Pharisees, tried to snare Jesus through tricky words and requests. They also asked for a "sign". Jesus' answer to them was that they were an evil kindred, and that no sign would be given them, except the "sign of Jonah" (Matthew 16:4). Matthew 16:6 shows how Jesus warned against the "leaven" of the Sadducees and of the Pharisees, and Matthew 16:12 shows that it was their teachings that Jesus warned about, calling them "leaven".
The leaven of the Sadducees and the Pharisees:
Matthew 16:6 And Jesus said to them, Take care to have nothing to do with the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. (BBE)
Please note that that really was not about what the Sadducees and the Pharisees did or were. Jesus was talking about their teachings:
Matthew 16:12 Then they saw that it was not the leaven of bread which he had in mind, but the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. (BBE)
So, Jesus warned people about the Sadducees' and the Pharisees' teachings. Those teachings were bad, something to keep away from. (The essay eo12c.htm has more on the Pharisees.)
A note: Many people have been caused to think that leaven symbolised "sin", but that is not what the Bible says. The essays ex01c.htm and eo12c.htm take a closer look at what Jesus really meant when he spoke about the "leaven" of the Pharisees. By the way, Jesus warned his disciples about the "leaven" of the Sadducees and the Pharisees, and that of Herod:
Mark 8:15 And he said to them, Take care to be on the watch against the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod. (BBE)
The group called "Herodians", with a certain connection to the Sadducees, will be discussed later in this essay.
Then, Matthew 22:23 shows that the Sadducees did not believe that the dead would be raised up. Mark 12:18 and Luke 20:27 contain parallel accounts of that.
Then, Acts 4 and 5 mention the Sadducees:
Acts 4:1 And while they were talking to the people, the priests and the captain of the Temple and the Sadducees came up to them, 2 Being greatly troubled because they were teaching the people and preaching Jesus as an example of the coming back from the dead. (BBE)
Acts 5:17 But the high priest and those who were with him (the Sadducees) were full of envy, 18 And they took the Apostles and put them in the common prison. (BBE)
And finally, Acts 23 shows how Paul used the "party system" in order to split the Jewish council which had put him on trial. Paul exploited the fact that the council (the Sanhedrin) consisted partly of Sadducees and partly of Pharisees:
Acts 23:6 But when Paul saw that half of them were Sadducees and the rest Pharisees, he said in the Sanhedrin, Brothers, I am a Pharisee, and the son of Pharisees: I am here to be judged on the question of the hope of the coming back from the dead. 7 And when he had said this, there was an argument between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and a division in the meeting. 8 For the Sadducees say that there is no coming back from the dead, and no angels or spirits: but the Pharisees have belief in all these. 9 And there was a great outcry: and some of the scribes on the side of the Pharisees got up and took part in the discussion, saying, We see no evil in this man: what if he has had a revelation from an angel or a spirit? (BBE)
Some have claimed that by doing that, Paul in some way "upheld" the Pharisees or their teachings. But, he did not. All he did was to divide that council so that they would not pass a verdict on him. He succeeded in that.
Other parts of the New Testament show that the Pharisees were no "nice guys" either, and that Jesus and John the Baptist condemned them, just as they condemned the Sadducees. In his earlier life, Paul had been taught by the Pharisees, but he noted that he had left those things behind. He wrote to the saints in Philippi:
Philippians 3: [...] 5 circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. 7 Yet whatever gains I had, these I have come to regard as loss because of Christ. 8 More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and I regard them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ (NRSV)
Paul wrote regarding those past things, in effect: "I regard those things as a loss" and "I count them as only rubbish." The Greek word he used was skubalon which meant "dung", "manure", "excrement", "filth", "refuse". The essay eo12c.htm has more on the Pharisees.
Some have claimed that since Jesus did not denounce the Sadducees "as often and as fiercely" as he denounced the Pharisees, the Sadducees supposedly "must have been better people". But that claim is ridiculous. John the Baptist called the Sadducees "offspring of snakes", and Jesus warned about their teachings.
It is not fully clear why the New Testament does not mention the Sadducees as often as the Pharisees, but then one must also consider the fact that in New Testament times, the Pharisees were the party that was in power, while the Sadducees were fewer and did not have as much to say. That was so, even when the high priest happened to be a Sadducee. Consequently, it is logical that the Sadducees who only played a secondary role, were not mentioned as often as their more numerous and more powerful rivals.
Above, it was shown how little the Bible says about the Sadducees. Also, no commonly known original Sadducean writings are preserved to our day. The old documents that can be used as a source of information regarding the Sadducees, are Pharisean writings (and the writings of Josephus, whom many think to have been a Pharisee).
There is no reason to think that the Pharisees would have falsified history in any major way, regarding the Sadducees. After all, the Sadducees had more or less vanished from the scene, while the Pharisees continued as a major factor. A "winner" has no reason to belittle a past opponent.
The "historian" Josephus seems to have thought that both the Sadducean and Pharisean parties were "ancient", but it is not clear exactly what he meant by that. His writings also indicate that the Sadducees were Hellenistic (pro-Greek); that is, in favour of the (Eastern) Roman empire which controlled Judea in the times when Jesus lived there. Josephus also wrote that the Sadducees mingled with the rich and collaborated with the Roman rulers. It seems the Sadducees were a part of the "aristocracy" who lived really fat lives at the cost of the rest of the nation.
Apparently, the Pharisees were more "popular" in the sight of the Jewish people than the Sadducees were (in case any of those elitist groups at all were "popular" with the common people).
The Sadducees denied the existence of the "spirit realm" (see Acts 23:8, "the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit"). In other words, they were "free-thinkers" – more or less like atheists. They also rejected old customs and traditions, for instance regarding the temple ritual. And, they had their own interpretation of the meaning of the book we today call "the Old Testament". It may be that the Sadducees also accepted some traditional manners and things and not "only the Bible", but still, it seems that they rejected many of the old ways and, for a limited time managed to introduce inventions of their own instead. That is, regarding such things as the temple ritual.
When the Sadducees set out to change the temple ritual, that led to bitter strife and extremely bloody fights and even plain mass slaughter. (This was before New Testament times.) But, ancient writers say that after a number of decades of strife, the Sadducees nevertheless had to comply with what the people and the Pharisees felt to be the original and proper ritual in the temple.
Some say that the first mention of Sadducees in old writings, is from the time of Johanan Hyrcanus who lived circa 175-104 BCE.
For some years, Hyrcanus (a war-lord) was both the governor of Judea and the high priest. According to Josephus, a certain Pharisee expressed doubts regarding Hyrcanus' lineage (regarding his right to be a priest). That caused Hyrcanus to become enraged. In the past, he had been a Pharisee and had even made the Pharisean teachings into law, but now he became a Sadducee instead. It seems that a Sadducee named Jonathan talked Hyrcanus into moving over to his party. (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, book XIII).
The Pharisees accepted the temple ritual as it had traditionally been. It must be noted that the Old Testament did not record all the necessary details regarding the temple rituals. Apparently, the knowledge regarding how to perform the rituals, was passed on from one priest generation to another. The Sadducees, however, did not accept that tradition but "only what the Bible said". That is, only their own interpretation of what it supposedly said.
Johanan Hyrcanus died in 104 BCE. His son Judah Aristobulus became the ruler for a short time, but in 103 BCE Alexander Jannaeus, a bloody man of extremely bad nature, became the ruler instead. His priesthood and reign led to a civil war in Judea. (Also he was the ruler and war-lord, besides being the high priest.) That war cost great numbers of people their lives. From Josephus' writings:
"Now as Alexander fled to the mountains, six thousand of the Jews hereupon came together [from Demetrius] to him out of pity at the change of his fortune; upon which Demetrius was afraid, and retired out of the country; after which the Jews fought against Alexander, and being beaten, were slain in great numbers in the several battles which they had; and when he had shut up the most powerful of them in the city Bethome, he besieged them therein; and when he had taken the city, and gotten the men into his power, he brought them to Jerusalem, and did one of the most barbarous actions in the world to them; for as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered about eight hundred of them to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes." (Antiquities of the Jews, Book XIII, Chapter 14.)
That was an example of what kind of a man the Sadducee and high priest Alexander Jannaeus really was. More:
"As to Alexander, his own people were seditious against him; for at a festival which was then celebrated, when he stood upon the altar, and was going to sacrifice, the nation rose upon him, and pelted him with citrons [which they then had in their hands, because] the law of the Jews required that at the feast of tabernacles every one should have branches of the palm tree and citron tree; which thing we have elsewhere related. They also reviled him, as derived from a captive, and so unworthy of his dignity and of sacrificing. At this he was in a rage, and slew of them about six thousand. He also built a partition-wall of wood round the altar and the temple, as far as that partition within which it was only lawful for the priests to enter; and by this means he obstructed the multitude from coming at him." (Antiquities of the Jews, Book XIII, Chapter 13.)
Alexander Jannaeus was enraged and had 6000 people murdered. But, why had the people been angry at Alexander Jannaeus? Because he changed the temple ritual, from what it traditionally had been. He introduced new things into the ritual. He did not care about what the people thought; it is said that at one time he even called in the army to slay them, in the actual temple area. Great numbers of people are said to have been killed on that occasion. The reign of Alexander the dictator and high priest, cost tens of thousands of Jews their lives, in several conflicts. It seems that those blood-sheds were mostly caused by Alexander; he simply sent the army to murder the people.
During the reign of John Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannaeus who both favoured the Sadducees, the Pharisees were forced out from the Sanhedrin. The Sadducean party was in power in religious matters until the death of this Alexander Jannaeus. His wife Salome "succeeded" him as a ruler over the Jews. It is said that Salome was favourable to the Pharisees, and that during her reign (76-67 BCE) the Pharisees were restored and rose to power and influence.
Somewhat later, Herod "the great" came into power. Josephus said that Herod killed Hyrcanus and all the members of the Sanhedrin. Eusebius records that Herod began giving the position of the high priest to whomever he liked, without care for priestly lineage. Also, high-priesthood was no longer a life-time assignment. It seems that during the hundred-year period that preceded Jerusalem's fall, there were almost thirty different high priests.
The name "Herodian" is in the Bible mentioned only three times, in Matthew 22:16 and Mark 3:6 and 12:13.
Many think that the Herodians (Greek, hêrodianoi) may have been a fraction of the Sadducean sect of party – that the Herodians were a political party who particularly distinguished themselves by being in favour of Herod the Great and his dynasty. But, it is not fully clear whether that is correct, or not.
Here is an excerpt from an article in the Jewish Encyclopedia (1901-1906) on "Herodians":
Priestly party under the reign of King Herod and his successors; called by the Rabbis 'Boethusians,' as adherents of the family of Boethus, whose daughter Mariamne was one of the wives of King Herod, and whose sons were successively made high priests by him. They followed the Sadducees in their opposition to the Pharisees, and were therefore often identified with the former. [...]
Also, that encyclopedia's article on "Boethusians" begins this way:
A Jewish sect closely related to, if not a development of, the Sadducees. [...]
In New Testament times, the high priest was for the mostly part a Sadducee. But, the Sadducean party had lost its power, and the high priest was not any longer free to do what he wished. Further, the "deputy" or "second priest" (the segan, the practical manager of things in the temple) apparently was a Pharisee. It is said that the Sadducean high priests were then forced to follow Pharisean instructions, at the threat of severe penalties. That is, the Sadducean high priests had to act as tradition required, according to how the temple ritual had been earlier, and not according to the Sadducees' own inventions.
Those two groups had differences in the realm of interpretation of the Old Testament, temple ritual, and legal matters. Some smaller details of that can be seen in the Bible.
A couple of examples in connection with the temple ritual: The Sadducees and the Pharisees had different views regarding how to perform the water ceremony during the Feast of Booths, and regarding the cutting of the barley for the wave offering during the Days of Unleavened Bread, and the timing of that ritual. The latter point also affected the timing of the Feast of Harvest of the First-fruits ("Pentecost").
Josephus and other writers have said that it was the Pharisees who controlled things in those days. Again, it appears that the high priest mostly was a Sadducee, but that he nevertheless was forced to act in the temple according to the traditional way, following the Pharisean instructions. And also, the segan was often a Pharisee.
In chapter 2 of his book "Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah", Alfred Edersheim wrote about "[...] the admitted fact, that when in office the Sadducees conformed to the principles and practices of the Pharisees [...]".
Was one of those parties, Sadducees and Pharisees, "better" than the other? That is not the right question to ask. John the Baptist condemned both groups, and Jesus warned against the teachings of them both.
The Sadducees were a part of the "high society" and were Hellenistic (Greek-orientated). It seems that when the Greek empire (and later the Roman empire) occupied Judea, the Sadducees collaborated with the occupants.
Also: It seems that the Sadducees had little care or love for the "small" people. Consider the highpriest-kings Johanan Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannaeus who slaughtered tens of thousands of Jewish people.
It is also said that some high priests were not satisfied with their already fat portion which came through the Old Covenant's religious law, but actually (illegally) went to threshing grounds and by force took "their share" from the farmer. (That is: Much more than ever would have been the high priest's share, and, they took that by force, which also was an illegal act.) Their robbing and lawless manners may have been caused by the fact that some of them had bought their high-priest vesture for great sums of money and "had to get their investment back". Indeed, in those days, the high-priesthood was very lucrative, but it also was costly to buy.
But, were the Pharisees any better, even though they were better liked by the "common" people than the Sadducees? No. For the common people it was obviously a matter of "choosing between pestilence and cholera". The Bible shows that also the Pharisees loved money [1] and despised the common people, and that they loaded heavy burden's on the backs of the small people, while living in luxury themselves. Jesus had a lot of very hard things to say about the Pharisees. Nor did Jesus, even though many translations make it seem so, ever "uphold" the Pharisees' teachings. Instead, he warned people about them, just as he warned them about the Sadducees' teachings.
[1] Clearly stated in Luke 16:14 where the Greek text says that the Pharisees were φιλαργυροι, philarguroi, which simply means "lovers of money". Also, indicated by several other things, for instance in chapter 23 in the book of Matthew.
In short: Both the Sadducees and the Pharisees (but not all individuals in those parties of course) were largely "upper-class" people, and lived in luxury at the cost of others. The Sadducees apparently were a part of the "high society"; the Pharisees perhaps were more like a "lower upper class".
When it comes to the temple ritual, it seems that the Pharisees stood for continuance (of the traditional ritual), while the Sadducees wanted to change things. For a short time, the Sadducees had even managed to apply their own new inventions, against the wishes of the people. It is said that the Sadducean high-priest ruler Alexander Jannaeus had to build a barricade around the altar, so that he could perform the temple ritual according to his own or Sadducean inventions, without the people stopping him.
A note: The Old Covenant's priests and temple ritual and other such things, have of course no practical significance today for believers, other than that one can study what those things symbolised and pointed to.
Table of contents – What's new here? – Key-word index – Search function – Goal and purpose – Contact, comment, question
If this page did not contain what you were looking for, see the links below, and the key-word index and the table of contents, or use the search function.
Additional reading at the Bible Pages, on related as well as other issues:
A clarifying explanation of the short names for the bible-versions quoted or mentioned at this site, such as that NKJV stands for New King James Version, YLT for Young's Literal translation, HCSB for Holman Christian Standard Bible, NRSV for the New Revised Standard Version, and so on. → es09c.htm
What does the Bible say about the Pharisees? Also, why did Jesus call them vipers, snakes and actors? → eo12c.htm
What does the word "righteous" really mean? What does the Bible say about righteousness? → eg08b.htm
The Old Covenant's Days of Unleavened Bread, their symbolism and prophetic message, and what leaven symbolised. → ex01c.htm
Jesus warned his disciples about false prophets, teachers of falsehood, deceivers and deception. He said that many would be deceived. → eo09e.htm
Colossians 2:16-17, "Let no man therefore judge you". What was Paul really talking about? → eo07d.htm
A study on the phrases "the snare of the Devil" and "the love of money is the root of all evil" (1 Timothy 3:7 and 6:9-10 and 2 Timothy 2:26). On Jesus' and Paul's teachings regarding how those who proclaimed the Gospel or Good Message could become spiritually unfruitful. → em08c.htm
What does the English language word and concept "doctrine" literally mean? Likewise, the terms "dogma", "creed" and "tenet", what do they signify? Countless preachers and doctors of theology compile dogmas, creeds, tenets and doctrinal statements of beliefs, and claim them to be "the Truth". But, they do not agree with each other. Their opinions and teachings differ, depending on their denomination and its viewpoints, and there is much confusion. So, the pertinent question is, who has the "true doctrines" or "correct dogmas"? What should one think – do the Scriptures give any guidance regarding this matter? What does the Bible say about "doctrine"? → es08c.htm
What the Bible says about titles of men in the religious context. A few comments regarding certain ecclesiastical titles, such as apostle, bishop, deacon, doctor of theology, evangelist, father, minister, pastor, priest, prophet, reverend, and so on. → ea08b.htm
Power among Jesus' disciples. What powers were given to the apostles, and to the saints in general? Also: Did the apostle Peter receive some special powers? → ea09b.htm
Check your bible knowledge. A basic self-test with 15 biblical questions (with answers and commentary). → es04b.htm
Many talk about "the letter of the law" versus "the spirit of the law" – but those expressions are not found in the Bible. A detailed, down to the core study on 2 Corinthians 3:6-8 and Romans 7:6 and what the apostle Paul really meant and referred to when he wrote about the letter as opposed to the Spirit. → ec13c.htm
How to understand the Bible. Easy keys to interpreting and understanding Scripture in a better and deeper way, by avoiding certain fundamental but common mistakes and errors in bible study. These vital keys are really the basics for objective bible study. Knowing these keys will make many things easier to interpret and comprehend, and one will see several central matters in the Bible from a new and different perspective, especially in connection with the Gospels and the Epistles. → eg02c.htm
"Amateur bible students" versus "professional theologians". Some preachers have spitefully called people who actively study the Bible on their own, "amateur theologians". Indeed, many a clergyman seems to feel that a layman should not put his or her nose into theological studies but should rather leave those things to "experts". But, is that correct? This treatise sorts out that matter, and clarifies and explains in layman's terms the linguistic and historical background of the concepts "clergymen" and "laymen", and gives the definition and actual meaning of such words as "clergy", "laity", "scholar" and "scholarly". → es07c.htm
What does the Bible say about authority? Who has biblical, spiritual or religious authority on the mundane, human level? Who can speak for God? Knowing the answers to those questions is a vital key to understanding the Bible in a better and deeper way. → es06d.htm
On Jesus' teaching regarding "the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven" or "the keys of the Reign of Heaven". Bible study notes on Matthew 16 verse 19, with context. What did the word "keys" depict or symbolise? What is the interpretation of that passage – what was it that Jesus was saying to his disciples? Also, a general overview and comments on the subject of "binding and loosing". → eb08c.htm
The origin and meaning of the word "church". → eg06b.htm
The meaning of the words Christ, Christian, Messiah and Messias. Also: Did the saints call themselves "Christians" – christianos or christianoi? → eg07b.htm
The Old Covenant versus the New Covenant. → keyw-c4.htm (Look under the heading "Covenants".)
Info on the goal and purpose of this site, and a contact address.
→
purpose.htm
Table of contents for this site, including a synopsis or a short, summary description
of each essay or article. →
filename.htm
Search for specific words, phrases or bible passages at this site. →
search.htm
An alphabetical bible topic keyword index of the essays and articles at this site:
1-9
– A
– B
– C
– D
– E
– F
– G
– H
– I
– J
– K
– L
– M
– N
– O
– P
– Q
– R
– S
– T
– U
– V
– W
– X
– Y – Z –
Detailed index overview
If you find any of the essays or treatises at this site interesting and helpful, please provide a copy to other people as well. But before printing or distributing anything, make sure to get the very latest version, exactly as it is, directly from this web site. In regard to printable copies of these pages, for example as PDF-format papers, booklets or brochures or so – there are no specially printer friendly variants (except some bible puzzles), nor is there a need for that – simply, when you print an essay, set the margins and the text size to fit your needs and the paper you use, in the program you use for viewing these pages, and then send it to your printer. (This varies in different browsers and word processing programs. In web browsers, for setting the margin size and headers and footers, look for "Print Format" in the File menu; to set the text size for print-out, look under "Preview" or "View" in the same menu.)
Important: You are welcome to quote the documents at this site – the Bible Pages – provided that you mention the source, by giving the full web address to the page in question. Please link to these essays and give copies to friends. However, you may not re-publish any part of the contents of this site, as a booklet, brochure or on the Internet or in other ways, without a permission from the author; he retains the copyright. For more on copying and quoting, and a few words about the author and his religious education and credentials, see the page purpose.htm.
The essays at this site are not in "bible lesson" or "bible study course" format, nor are they meant as on-line "bible study classes" of some kind. Even though this site gives ready answers to biblical questions of many kinds, its main goal is providing food for thought on a variety of biblical subjects, and challenging and encouraging people to get started with deep personal bible study and then continue with that. (Many religious organisations and denominations have their bible lessons and correspondence courses; they are ready-made "studies" which are shrewdly constructed and written in such a manner that they lead the reader to conclusions that fit the dogmas of the group in question.) A careful, closer study of the books of the Bible with proper tools will help a believer to gain better and deeper biblical understanding. In that way, one will find out more about what the Bible really says, means and teaches. One can then, with wisdom, use that knowledge as a guide for one's life, instead of accepting as "biblical truths" whatever commercial religion – churches and their ministers (preachers) – have taught and want people to believe.
A more thorough, bible-based study with care and with thought will, not only help one to learn more, but also show one how many a popular belief has no scriptural basis or support but is altogether false and not biblical at all. This applies, not only to prophecy and "end time" related things, but also to many other subjects where prevailing dogmas are often taken "for granted". For this reason, it is extremely important for believers to personally study the Writings, and to thoroughly analyse them down to the smaller details, in order to find out the real facts. For doing that, it is not necessary to know the Hebrew, Greek or Latin languages (even though learning their letters and alphabet can be a good idea); there are modern, advanced tools which can help one to study in an effective way – see the pages es01d.htm and es02c.htm for more on this. The essay eg02c.htm supplies a number of easy, elementary keys to acquiring a better and deeper understanding of the Bible, simply by consciously and methodically avoiding certain usual errors and pitfalls.
This site is non-denominational and non-sectarian. It is not connected to any church, sect or religious organisation or movement. This site looks at things from a biblical perspective, and not from a dogmatic one. It does not claim to be without error or to "know it all" or to have a perfect or complete explanation to all things – it consists of an ongoing bible study that has been made public, and as the study goes on, the contents of these pages are revised and also expanded, with new topics and themes being addressed. Readers are invited and welcome to write to the author with thoughts and comments, or to ask questions or to point out a mistake if they feel that they have found one. For more on this, see the page purpose.htm.
The address to this page is www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/eo13b.htm
Please send or mention the address to this site to others, and link to these pages.
This page was created or modified 2010-01-27.