(3) He was in person `blameless' so far as the righteousness of the law was concerned.

In some contexts such a catalogue would be no commendation. The Roman would say with Pilate `Am I a Jew?'

or with Gallio, that he `cared for none of these things'. The Greek would consider that his philosophers ranked much

higher than the Jewish prophets and would reckon the claims of Paul to be `foolishness'. Writing to believers,

however, the apostle's claims would be forceful.

The apostle was not only circumcised, but had been circumcised the eighth day, the emphasis being upon `the

eighth day'. In this respect Paul had the advantage of a proselyte who would naturally not be circumcised until later

in life, and by this rite he was in covenant with the God of Abraham. Further, he was of `the stock' of Israel (genos).

He was of this genus, race, family, lineage. He could not only say `I was born free', he could say `I am by birth an

Israelite', he was one of the true and favoured seed. Abraham had other descendants such as those of Ishmael and

those of Esau, but none of these could lay claim to the peculiar and privileged name of Israelite.

The Roman Governor gave the title to the crucified Saviour, `King of the Jews', but the Lord's own countrymen

use the more exclusive title `King of Israel' (Matt. 27:29,37,42). In these things the apostle could boast that he was

ahead of his contemporaries. There were, moreover, differences of degree within the favoured ranks of Israel, for

some of the tribes went early into idolatry and captivity, leaving Judah and Benjamin to hold the fort at Jerusalem.

Paul moreover claimed that he was an `Hebrew of the Hebrews'. The title Hebrew in the Old Testament is used by

Gentiles to indicate the people of Israel and is never used by Israel without some sense of national antagonism. In

the New Testament the word changed its meaning a little, and is placed in contrast with Hellenistes, `Grecians',

Greek speaking Jews (Acts 6:1). Paul not only claims that both of his parents were of pure stock, but that although

he was born at Tarsus in Cilicia, and not in Palestine, he was nevertheless not to be reckoned as an Hellenist, being a

Jew through and through. In addition to all this, Paul had been a Pharisee. In Acts 26:5 he said of himself `that after

the most straitest (strictest) sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee'. On another occasion he said `I am a Pharisee, the

son of a Pharisee'. At this distance and with the conception usually entertained by believers to-day, there was little

ground for boasting in Paul's claim to be a Pharisee, for the word has passed into common speech to indicate

`conceit', `self-righteousness', `hypocrisy' and `formalism'. Now no one in his senses would include in a list of

excellencies, the claim that he was a `conceited, self-righteous, hypocritical formalist' - the title Pharisee therefore

must have had other connotations in Paul's day. Josephus in the introduction to his works, says of the Pharisees `I ...

began to conduct myself according to the rules of the sect of the Pharisees, which is kin to the sect of the Stoics as

the Greeks call them'.

The boast of Paul and the context of the above quotation from Josephus shows that there was another side to

Pharisaism than that which is popularly supposed.  The Talmud enumerates seven different kinds mostly

hypocritical and mean. The `Shechemite' Pharisee obeyed the law merely out of self interest; the Nitki `trembling'

Pharisee outdid `Uriah Heep' in false humility; the Kinai or `bleeding' Pharisee, hurt himself continually by walking

into walls and posts, because, forsooth, he was so modest that lest he should see a woman, he walked with eyes fixed

upon the ground! But there was another class of Pharisee who were `Pharisees from love', actuated by a feverish

anxiety to fulfil the law, the title given them in the Talmud being expressed by Dean Farrar in the words `Tell-me-

The name Pharisee is derived from the Hebrew parash `to separate', and Paul seems to allude to this meaning

when in Romans 1:1 he says of himself, `separated' unto the gospel of God, the Greek aphorismenos resembling the

sound of the word Pharisee as well as sharing its meaning. The Pharisees overloaded the law with minute scruples,

they strained at gnats yet swallowed camels, they set themselves an impossible task, and then set about devising

ways in which their self imposed task could be avoided.

`Under the dignified exterior of the Pharisee lay a wildly beating heart; an anxious brain throbbed with terrible

questionings under the broad phylactery ... in all the struggle to achieve his own righteousness - this struggle so

minutely tormenting, so revoltingly burdensome - there seemed no hope, no help, no enlightenment, no

satisfaction' (Dean Farrar).

Such a moral conflict forces the sufferer to extreme attempts at self-justification, and this is often expressed by

extra zeal in persecuting those who differ.