An argument doesn't get better constructed that to maintain simplicity (my argument was only ever that Pharisees <> Jews) and lay out in a minimum of the author's own words (repeatedly so) the syllogism leading to the absurdity.
Sounds like you are now saying that (1) and (2) had different temporal contexts--that the meanings applied to different time periods. You can hardly fault me for not reading your mind on that.
it is fairly common knowledge
As for "common knowledge", let's try a dictionary:
"a member of a Jewish sect of the intertestamental period noted for strict observance of rites and ceremonies of the written law and for insistence on the validity of their own oral traditions concerning the law"
Funny the dictionary authors used so many words when "Jew" would have sufficed. And what's this business about "sect"? I guess they don't know what they are talking about. Better try another dictionary...hmm...American Heritage says the same thing.
IE. an orthodox jew.
No, but I can fault you for continuing this tirade against my syllogism after the temporal contexts have been straightened out.