@ThisWeekInAS This is a good thread.
Christians who use 'Pharisees' as a handy insult for legalists miss the point in a few important ways. 1) they shouldn't be looking for blanket insults for anyone if they're reading their New Testaments for personal ethics; 2) Jesus and Paul were Pharisees; and 3) since the New Perspective of the 1970s the perceived legalism and works-righteousness of first-century Judaism has been largely dismantled, and seen as a projection of medieval Catholicism onto scripture by early Protestants.
The second point is probably the key one to communicate. As the #Jewish Scholar of early #Christianity Alan Segal writes, the only first-century #Pharisee to have left us writings from their own hand was... The Apostle Paul in the New Testament.* Both Paul and Jesus are clearly marked as Pharisees by their belief in a general resurrection and their approach to the Jewish scritpures. Jesus had his sharpest conflicts with his fellow Pharisees because that's how conflict works: it takes a lot of common ground to get a proper disagreement going, since you have to expect better of the other party. Moreover, when Paul and the gospel writers refer to 'the Jews', this was the same term as 'the Judaeans' (hoi Ioudaioi). The Romans didn't care what people believed, just that they were governable; 'The Judaeans' were, in general use, the people who observed the customs of Judaea, and not a race.
* Segal thinks, as many now do, that Josephus was really an Essene.