The Apostle Paul as a Pharisee and a Christian's Use of Labels

“Now when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, ‘Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is with respect to the hope and the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.’” (Acts 23:6)

A Christian student of Scripture would not be surprised to read that Paul had been a Pharisee before he came to trust in Jesus (see Acts 26:5; Phil 3:5). However, if someone had not considered Acts 23:6 before, it might be striking to read of the Apostle Paul, on trial before the Sanhedrin, still declaring, “I am a Pharisee” (using the present tense). That Paul, as a Christian leader, would continue to refer to himself a Pharisee (at least on this occasion) may surprise a Christian reader, as we are so used to seeing the Pharisees as villains in the Gospel accounts. Indeed Luke, who wrote the Book of Acts, had previously recorded Jesus pronouncing woes [prophetic judgments of God’s wrath] upon the Pharisees as hypocrites (Luke 11:42-44; cf. Matt 23:13-36). So why would the Apostle Paul identify himself as a Pharisee?

Wise as a Serpent, Innocent as a Dove

First, we must observe that there is no hint in the text that the Apostle Paul was sinning in identifying himself as a Pharisee. Rather, it seems that this is an instance where he was putting into effect Jesus’ instruction to be “wise as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matt 10:16; notice that, in the context of this verse, Jesus was specifically referring to a trial setting). Paul was, obviously, as wise as a serpent, because he was able to understand the situation and get those who were persecuting him to begin contending against each other instead. However, we should also see Paul, on this occasion, as also being innocent as a dove. Paul was not lying when he declared, “I am a Pharisee.”

What made a Pharisee a Pharisee? Given the attitudes and actions of most Pharisees in the Gospel accounts, the term “Pharisee” is now understandably associated with hypocrisy and legalism. However, in terms of formal, stated beliefs, Acts 23:8 informs us that Pharisees were those who believed angels and spirits, and who hoped in the resurrection (extra-biblical sources inform us that the Pharisees also accepted the entire Hebrew Bible, whereas the Sadducees held that only the Pentateuch was authoritative). Paul’s agreement with these crucial points of doctrine (points of doctrine that were directly relevant to his testimony before the Sanhedrin), in contrast with the Sadducees’ skepticism, is what allowed him to identify with the Pharisees in good conscience.

Some Applications from Paul’s Identifying as a Pharisee

Paul, as a Christian, was able (in good conscience) to identify as a Pharisee when the situation called for it. We, as Christians, should not necessarily disavow all other labels; rather, we may be in certain situations where specific theological labels (other than merely "Christian") are useful. To give one example: in the religious context of the Sanhedrin, Paul believed that the Pharisees (at least formally) held to doctrines that were in line with the Bible; therefore, he called himself a Pharisee. Likewise, in a theological debate, if we are convinced that the Doctrines of Grace, commonly called Calvinism, are in line with the Bible, we should not be ashamed to use the label “Calvinist,” if it seems to be a clarifying term in a specific setting.

Another application for Paul using the term “Pharisee” may be seen in the American political landscape. In His earthly ministry, Jesus rebuked both Pharisees and Sadducees for their attitudes and actions. Yet, doctrinally speaking, the two groups were not equally far from the truth. In their official defining beliefs, the Pharisees were right and the Sadducees were wrong. Paul could say “I am a Pharisee;” he could NOT say “I am a Sadducee.” Likewise in America, there are two major groups in terms of social-political philosophy: the conservatives and the progressives. The conscientious Christian, seeking to keep in step with the Spirit, will certainly have occasion to rebuke both conservatives and progressives for their attitudes and actions. However, conservative and progressive social-political philosophies are not equally far from the truth. In their official, defining beliefs, conservatives hold to objective truth as revealed by the Creator, with truth and justice needing to be conserved; progressives hold to relative truth as discovered by people, saying that society needs to progressively attain into greater and greater truth and justice. The conservatives are basically right and the progressives are basically wrong. The faithful Christian, seeking to stand on the revelation of God, can say “I am a conservative;” he CANNOT say (with any degree of consistency) “I am a progressive.”

Warning Against Pride in Labels

But note the following illegitimate use of labels:

“For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, ‘I follow Paul,’ or, ‘I follow Apollos,’ or, ‘I follow Cephas,’ or, ‘I follow Christ.’ Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Cor 1:11-13).

Paul wrote the words above to a church in which Christians had become obsessed with taking pride in labels and group affiliations.

When the occasion called for it, Paul could declare “I am a Pharisee.” However, Paul did not take pride in being a Pharisee, as he wrote, “But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world had been crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal 6:14). And in another place, after mentioning his background as a Pharisee, Paul wrote, “But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss for the sake on knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, the by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead” (Phil 3:7-11).

Though (at least on occasion) Paul took on a label and identified himself with a group that was enthusiastic about the idea of the resurrection, this was NOT what motivated Paul. Rather, Paul was motivated by personal knowledge of the resurrected Jesus, with hope of actually joining Christ in the resurrection. Likewise, though we may employ the term “evangelical” if it makes sense in a given religious discussion, it should not be the label, but the gospel itself that motivates us. Though we may employ the term “Calvinist” if it makes sense in a given theological debate, it should not be the label, but grace itself that motivates us. Though we may employ the term “conservative” if it makes sense in a given political debate, it should not be the label, but commitment to objective truth that motivates us. Though we may be thankful that we can employ the term “American,” freedom should not just be a slogan, we should seek true spiritual freedom and use our nationally-recognized freedoms of speech, press, assembly, etc., to proclaim the freedom available in Christ.

In conclusion, labels can be good. They should be employed wisely. They must not be considered as ultimate.