Secondly, as regards the doctrine of Providence, there is every reason to distrust the evidence of Josephus, who contends that the Sadducees denied the existence of Providence; this is not borne out by the other sources, and is in itself highly improbable. The real difference between the Pharisees and Sadducees on the subject of the life hereafter was that while the former believed in the resurrection of the body, the latter denied this, and believed only in the immortality of the soul. Regarding the alleged Sadducæan disbelief in angels and spirits, which is stated in only one of the sources, the New Testament, one must recognize the possibility that what is said on this subject in Acts xxiii. 8 may be due to a mistaken inference derived from the Sadducæan disbelief in the resurrection of the body, namely, that the _departed_ do not become angels or spirits. In view of the Sadducæan belief in the Pentateuch, where angels are often spoken of, it is improbable that they denied the existence of these. A fundamental difference of belief between Pharisees and Sadducees was that regarding the Messiah; while the Pharisees held that the Messiah was to be of the seed of David, the Sadducees maintained that Aaron and his seed, to which the sons of Zadok belonged, were the chosen ones from whom the Messiah would ultimately proceed. Lastly, differences of opinion existed among the two parties regarding the Calendar; these centred in the fact that while the Sadducees measured time on the basis of the solar year, the Pharisaic method of reckoning was on the basis of the lunar year. The result of this was that each party accused the other of false teaching regarding the time at which the feasts ought to be kept. Among some subsidiary considerations concerning the Sadducees it was pointed out that to speak of them as sceptics and irreligious, as a body, is to do them an injustice; equally unjust is it to regard them as having been mainly occupied with politics. On the other hand, the exaggerated pro-Hellenic tendencies of those who came to be known as the Sadducæan party after the Maccabæan struggle, involved them in disloyalty to their race and to their religious principles. It is probable that those who were guilty of this constituted only an extreme section of those favourable to Hellenistic influence. The way in which the Sadducees and Pharisees to some extent changed _rôles_, so far as their attitude to the Law was concerned, can be explained on natural lines. The literary remains of the Sadducees are perhaps more than we have been accustomed to suppose; further reference is made to this subject in Chapter X. CHAPTER VIII The Origin of the Old Testament Canon of Scripture