I did not claim that all denominations or sects of Christianity or Judaism will make it into heaven or that only hypocrites will make it into the Kingdom of God. Denominations or sects are just tools to categorize people who have similar interpretations of the Bible, and what is important is not so much whether they can validate their names from the Bible, but whether their interpretations are correct. Early Christians referred to themselves as being members of the sect called The Way (Acts 24:14), so that is a name that can be validated from the Bible, but just because a group calls themselves that does not necessarily mean that their beliefs are correct.
The Law of Moses is the way (Jeremiah 6:16-19), the truth (Psalms 119:142), and the life (Deuteronomy 32:47), and Jesus is the living embodiment of that (John 14:6) because the Law of Moses is God's instructions for how to act in accordance with God's nature, and Jesus is the exact expression of God's nature, which he expressed through living in sinless obedience to the Law of Moses. Furthermore, expressing God's nature through our obedience to it is the way to experientially know the Father and the Son (John 14:7). There are many verses that refer to the Mosaic Law as being the way of the Lord, such as Deuteronomy 10:12-13, Isaiah 2:2-3, Joshua 22:5, Psalms 103:7, and many others, so can express the nature of Christ by walking in the way of the Lord in accordance with his example regardless of what they want to call themselves.
I did not claim that Moses based his teachings off the Pharisees and Sadducees, but rather they and Jesus based their teachings on Moses. I'm not sure you referenced the Maccabean Revolt is relevant. The Mishna and Talmud existed orally long before they were codified. Hillel predated Jesus, and we have his teachings available, so we can compare what he taught to what Jesus taught. Jesus did not exist in a cultural vacuum.
If you need to say that Paul lied in order to maintain your position, then you should reconsider your position because that stance opens up a can of worms where you can reject anything that Paul said that you disagree with by accusing him of lying, and he may have been lying when he said the things that you do agree with.
In Acts 26:4-5, the point that Paul was testifying about and said that all the Jews could testify about was that he had lived as a Pharisees from the time of his youth to the present. He was not testifying that he had been a Pharisee in the past, but was no longer one. In any case, Acts 23:6 is speaking in the present tense.
In Romans 9:30-10:4, the Israelites had a zeal for God, but it was not based on knowledge, so they failed to attain righteousness because they pursued the law as though righteousness were by works in an effort to establish their own rather than pursuing the law as through righteousness is by faith in Christ, for Christ is the goal of the law for righteousness for everyone who has faith. In John 5:39-40, Jesus said that they searched the Scriptures because they thing that in them they will find eternal life, and they testify about him, yet they refuse to come to him that they might have life. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus said that the way to enter eternal is by obeying God's commandments, so eternal life can be found in the Scriptures and the Pharisees were correct to search for it there, but they needed to recognize that the goal of everything in Scriptures is to testify about how to have a relationship with Christ and come to him for eternal life. In Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so again knowing Christ is the goal of the law. In Philippians 3, Paul was in the same boat where he had been keeping the law, but without having a focus on knowing Christ, so he had been missing the who goal of the law and counted it all as rubbish. The right solution to incorrectly obeying God's law is to start obeying it correctly with the right focus, not to stop obeying God.
Again, we have the teachings of Hillel available to us, so we can compare what he taught with what Jesus taught and find many parallels, so insisting that there are no parallels is being unwilling to look at the evidence and is willful ignorance. Both Hillel and Jesus based their teachings on the OT, so it would be absurd to suggest that what they taught had nothing in common. The world of the Talmud was the same world as the Gospels. For example:
From Shabbat 116:b "The Gemara relates:
Imma Shalom, the
wife of
Rabbi Eliezer, was Rabban Gamliel’s sister. There was a Christian
philosopher [pilosofa] in their neighborhood who disseminated about himself
the reputation that he does not accept bribes. They wanted to mock him and reveal his true nature.
She privately
gave him a golden lamp, and she and her brother
came before him, approaching him as if they were seeking judgment.
She said to the philosopher:
I want to share in the inheritance
of my father’s estate. He said to them: Divide it.
Rabban Gamliel said to him: It is written in our Torah:
In a situation where there is a
son, the daughter does not inherit. The philosopher
said to him: Since the day you were exiled from your land, the Torah of Moses was taken away and the avon gilyon was given in its place.
It is written in the
avon gilyon:
A son and a daughter shall inherit alike.
"The next day Rabban Gamliel brought the philosopher
a Libyan donkey. Afterward,
Rabban Gamliel and his sister came before the philosopher for a judgment.
He said to them: I proceeded to the end of the
avon gilayon, and it is written: I, avon gilayon,
did not come to subtract from the Torah of Moses, and I did not come to add to the Torah of Moses. And it is written there: In a situation where there is a
son, the daughter does not inherit. She said to him: May your light shine like a lamp, alluding to the lamp she had given him.
Rabban Gamliel said to him: The donkey came and kicked the lamp, thereby revealing the entire episode."
In regard to "avon gilyon", the Greek word for "Gospel" is "Evangelion". The arguments made are very similar to those that are still being made today.
We tend to consider chronology to be much more important than the people who wrote the Bible. There is a reality that order of the book of Luke can be divided in a way that corresponds to the yearly Torah cycle, make of it what you will.