Paul had consented to the death of Stephen, yet could he ever forget that forgiving spirit, that face like an angel,

that masterly and convincing résumé of Israel's history? Yet, to allow such thought a moment's space was suicidal,

he must crush out this disturbing questioning by greater zeal, hence his request for permission to extend his

inquisition even to Damascus.

`Concerning zeal persecuting the church' (Phil. 3:6).

The word translated `persecute' is the Greek dioko. The word means `to pursue' and is used in Philippians 3:12,

`follow after' and 3:14 `press toward' in its primitive meaning. At first sight this fact gives colour to the suggestion

that in Philippians 3:6 Paul is not speaking of persecuting the church, but of his zeal in pursuing it with the intent

that he may become a member. Philippians, however, is not the only epistle that employs dioko in two meanings.

This double usage is found in 1 Corinthians. `Follow after charity' (1 Cor. 14:1), `being persecuted, we suffer it'

(1 Cor. 4:12) and `I am ... not meet to be called an apostle because I persecuted the church of God' (1 Cor. 15:9).

In Galatians we have a parallel with the apostle's ground of boasting `in the Jew's religion' which we have been

studying in Philippians 3, and here we are left in no doubt as to his meaning, he says `I persecuted the church of God

and WASTED IT' (Gal. 1:13). The five occurrences of dioko in Galatians are all translated `persecute' (Gal. 1:13,23;

4:29; 5:11; 6:12), concerning which no alternative is possible.

The substantive diogmos is translated `persecution' in its nine occurrences, as dioktes is translated `persecutor' in

its one occurrence (1 Tim. 1:13), even though in 1 Timothy 6:11 dioko is once again rendered `follow' in a good

The primitive meaning `pursue' is colourless. What one pursues, and why, is left to the context to decide. A

man may pursue a method, a plan, a course of studies or he may pursue a fugitive, or a legal action, and in English,

as in the Greek, pursue and persecute are both derived from the same root word, and the same fallacious argument

which mistranslates Philippians 3 might just as well be used when explaining these two allied English words.

It is clear that both in Galatians 1 and in Philippians 3 the apostle introduces the persecution of the church as one

of a series of proofs of his intense Pharisaic zeal, a zeal which culminates in Philippians 3 with the claim `touching

the righteousness which is in the law, blameless' (Phil. 3:6).

Paul does not assert here that which he so continually disproves, that either he or anyone could attain unto

righteousness by the works of the law, he says that so far as a zealous conformity to all that the law demanded, as

viewed from the standpoint of a Hebrew and a Pharisee, his manner of life was beyond reproach. Here he reaches

the summit of his excellencies. Concerning his race he was an Israelite, concerning his tribe the honoured tribe of

Benjamin, concerning the law a Pharisee, concerning zeal a persecutor, concerning that righteousness which was in

the law blameless. Here, said Paul, is a catalogue of excellencies, a ground of boasting in the flesh which defies

competition. As in the Epistle to the Corinthians the apostle confessed that he had become a fool in his boasting, so

here, he no sooner completes the enumeration of his excellencies while a Pharisee, than he reveals their utter

worthlessness when seen in the light of Christ and His great salvation. All that we have seen is the justification of

the apostle's `I more', but we now are to learn his true estimate of these fleshly attainments.

The Saviour, in condescending mercy, laid aside unspeakable glory when He took upon Himself the form of a

servant and the fashion of a man; Paul's repudiation of those things that were gain for Christ is indeed put in

structural correspondence with the great example of chapter 2:6-8, but, oh! the poverty of the comparison. Paul

exchanged empty shadows for Divine substance, formalism for grace, vanity and vexation for glory beyond dreams,

yet this example must suffice - so infinite is the distance between the Lord and the greatest of His followers. While

circumcision, and the purity of his stock is enumerated, the whole seeming advantage of his earlier position is

focused on the idea of that righteousness which is in the law. So, when he now repudiates all his so-called gains, he

specifies none except that righteousness of God which is by faith, summing up all his gains in that one blessed fact.

In one sense Paul and his Master have something in common. Christ gave up His own things (Phil. 2:4-8) and

Paul gave up his own righteousness which is of the law, but there the parallel ends, for such a righteousness is

described in the Scriptures that Saul the Pharisee believed, to be but `filthy rags' (Isa. 64:6).