The short answer to your silly reply is NO, the Protestants are actually the proud inheritors of the Pharisees, sans liturgy.
The rest of your comment shows, it appears, ignorance of Judaism since you must be the only person in the world who denies that Judaism is a liturgical religion. All elements of the Jewish liturgy are contained in Eucharistic services, including the benediction and sacrifice/offering, and standing when the Torah/Gospel is read.
Jewish sacrifices and offerings to God can be made only in the Temple, so until that time when the Temple is rebuilt, Judaism will not practice animal slaughter at the altar, but will most certainly resume such practice when the Temple is rebuilt.
Sermon on the Mount (I had to laugh that you would even mention such an event and try to connect it to the liturgy) was not a synagogue or a Temple service. Public religious services are structured and include readings, prayers, benediction and sacrifice/offering in a structured manner. Eucharistic services are carryovers from Judaism (not Pharisaical Judaism only, for the Sadducees were the priests of the Temple leading the service, and the Essenes made offerings of the cup and had a communal meal), which the early Christians practiced as Jewish services.
Evidence of that can be found in Didache (c. 70 AD).
I am increasingly of the opinion that religious debate needs some kind of corollary to Godwin's Law. Here's my idea - once a comparison is made between the 1st century Pharisees and someone's theology, the discussion is immediately finished - and whoever makes the comparison automatically "loses" whatever debate was in progress, forfeiting all points previously scored.
And since I'm "inventing" this new rule here, I get to name it. And thus, I dub this new rule the "Irving Law".
The same could be said of Jesus' aversion to liturgy in every example of Him reading in the Jewish place of worship.