EXPLANATION OF PHIL. III. 12-17.

"Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, he thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing. Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample."

WHEN individuals read the Bible with a certain doctrine before their minds, they are inclined to assume, as teaching their dogma, every passage in which a word appears which, in any of its many meanings, does, in some single one of them, represent that doctrine. If as far as words are concerned, the same thing is, in the same passage, affirmed and denied of the same individual, that form of expression is seized upon which seems to favour the favourite doctrine, and is ever after employed as absolute proof of the same, and that to the utter disregard of the opposite declaration which stands out distinctly before us in the same passage. Those who thus read the Word of God read it with a veil before their minds, a veil which often hides from their view all that is vital in what they read.

In illustration of these statements, let us consider the use that is very extensively made of a single expression found in the passage before us, namely, "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect." An individual opens the Bible with this doctrine in his mind and heart, that of the continued conscious sinfulness of all believers in this life. As soon as he meets with the words above cited he stops right there, and from the mere words before him, and with no consideration of the circumstances and context, draws the wide, sweeping inference that Paul did not, as he elsewhere positively affirmed himself to have done, "serve God with a pure conscience," "a conscience void of offence both toward God and toward man," but with continued conscious violations of the word and will of God. Nor does the individual stop here. From the mere words, "not as though I were already perfect," the still further sweeping inference is drawn, that we are here divinely taught, and required to believe, that no believer in Jesus ever did, or ever will, from the beginning to the end of time, attain in this life to full salvation from conscious sin. Can we conceive of a more blind and presumptious use of the words of Scripture?"

If the mere words, "not as though I were already perfect," of themselves, prove that Paul was living in conscious sin, we have, in the New Testament, absolute proof that Christ "did know sin," and was conscious of the fact. "I do cures," says our Saviour, "to-day and to-morrow, and the third day (after my death) I shall be perfected," perfect, the same identical word in the original as Paul, in the passage under consideration, applies to himself. In the above declaration of our Saviour we have absolute proof that, in the sense in which the word "perfected" is there used, Christ did not become perfect until after His death and resurrection. In Heb. ii. 10, and v. 9, we are positively taught that Christ "was made perfect" after His sufferings, and in consequence of the same. Certainly Biblical scholars and all intelligent readers of the Bible ought not thus carelessly to interpret the Sacred Word. Besides, in the passage under consideration, the word perfect is unquestionably applied to Paul in the positive and negative sense: "Not as though I were already perfect"---"Let us, therefore, as many as be perfect be thus minded." It is demonstrably evident, that in the judgment of Paul, and that of his readers, the term perfect has at least two meanings, and that, according to one meaning, he regarded himself as not being, and according to the other as being, perfect. Before any doctrine is deduced from either of the above declarations, should we not carefully inquire for, and determine the two senses of the word perfect, as here employed, and then see in which of them Paul affirms himself not to be, and in which to be, perfect? To such an inquiry we will now address ourselves, and that as a means of a clear exposition of the whole passage before us. We would here, for the sake of being distinctly understood, state that we do not regard ourselves as authorised at all from the mere fact that an individual is affirmed to have been "perfect," to infer that he lived without ever sin fling. The degree of the moral purity implied must be determined, not by the mere force of the word, but by the context and other attendant circumstances and qualifying terms.

What is it that Paul refers to in the words, "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect?"

It is to us a matter of surprise that any intelligent reader of the Bible should misunderstand the apostle in this passage. He represents himself as "following after," and "reaching forth" for something which he had not then "attained," or "apprehended," a something the attainment of which was necessary to his being "perfect" in the sense in which the term is there employed. What this something was is specifically slated in Verses 11 and 14, namely, not present perfection in holiness but "the resurrection of the dead," "the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." The prize towards which the runner on the racecourse "reached forth" for and "pressed towards," was not present perfection as a runner, but "the prize," the crown, the status of honour and glory which awaited the victor at the end of the course. The term rendered resurrection, is, in the form here employed, found but in this single instance, in the New Testament, and in this place unquestionably represents the higher resurrection, that of the just. No person has occasion to do anything to have a part in the general resurrection, as all must arise, the "just and the unjust." But to attain to a part in the higher resurrection---the resurrection of the just---depends upon conditions, to be fulfilled in this life. To fulfil these conditions, and thus secure this infinite and eternal good, was, as Paul himself affirms, what be was "following after," and "pressing towards." In reference to this great end of existence, as far as his personal aims were concerned, it was necessary that he should say to his readers, that he "had not already attained, either were already perfect." The condition of receiving the prize, as he well knew, and he supremely desired his readers to know, was, that we "finish our course," "hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast even to the end," that we "bold fast until Christ shall come," and " overcome, and keep His works unto the end." He was well aware, also, that believers, after they have advanced to certain distances in the Christian course, would be strongly tempted to assume that their eternity was secure, and thus to remit their diligence. How adapted to prevent such an error was his affirmation that he did not "count even himself to have apprehended," but was "following after," "pressing toward the prize," which could be secured but by "finishing the course" upon which he had entered.

How his Grecian readers must have understood the apostle.

We must bear in mind that Paul was writing to Greeks, who, as he was well aware, employed the term perfect in two distinct, and separate senses in reference to those who contended for the prize in the racecourse---senses which they never confounded the one with the other. In the first sense the term represented the status of those who were victors in the race, had received the crown, and, as a consequence, were raised to a position among the most honoured of the nation. Ever after, such individuals were called the teleioi, the perfect, or perfected ones, and the term in all such cases had one fixed and exclusive meaning, to wit, perfection in honour or glory. Now, had Paul, in the words, "either were already perfect," employed the word perfect in the sense not of future perfection in glory, but of moral perfection, he would have utterly misled every one of the readers to whom his epistle was addressed, and we violate every principle of correct interpretation, when we understand the term in the latter, instead of in the former, sense.

In still another and equally definite sense, the Greeks were accustomed to apply the term "perfect" to the class under consideration; namely, riot in respect to their status as victors, but with reference to their character and conduct as runners. Two individuals, for example, appeared at the starting-place to contend for the prize. The eye of every Greek present would be instantly fixed upon the rivals to form a judgment of their character as runners. One comes forward with an appearance and manner indicative of the perfection of his previous training. Every weight and encumbrance are laid aside, and every article of dress is adjusted with fixed and exclusive reference to one end, the race in prospect. As he stands before "the cloud of witnesses" with whom he is encircled, he seems to be utterly unconscious of their presence. His face and eyes are turned in one fixed direction---the course and goal in prospect---while a position and attitude are assumed most favourable for the start. See that man the Greeks would exclaim; there is a perfect runner. The other individual appears with his dress and manner adjusted to attract attention and admiration. As he stands in the presence of the throng, his eye is fixed, not upon the course and goal in prospect, but is constantly turned to the scene around him. Contemptible fellow! the Greeks would exclaim. He will fail, of course. After the word start is given, the first individual is off in an instant, and, from the beginning to the end of the course, his eye and his thought are in one fixed direction, not upon what is behind, but upon the course in prospect, while every possible energy is pressed into requisition until the goal is reached, and the runner perfected. "The perfect runner, the perfect runner!" the multitude would exclaim, as they witnessed the conduct and manner of the man on the course. The other individual, when the command is given to start, is not quite ready, and loses precious moments here. On the way his attention is drawn, first in one direction, and then in another; occasionally he looks behind him to determine how much of the course he had passed over. "Fool! fool!" the Greeks would exclaim, "He ought to fail." The individual who had gained the prize in the manner explained, would ever after be called perfect in two distinct and separate respects---as a victor perfected in glory--- and as a runner for the prize. In these two distinct and separate senses all his Greek readers must have understood Paul in the words, "Not as though I were already perfect," and "Let us as many as be perfect be thus minded." Had he employed the first as representing his then moral and spiritual state, and not with reference to "the prize of the high calling," that is, perfection in glory which awaited him at the end of his course, he would, we repeat, have totally misled every one of his Greek readers, and involved himself in the most palpable contradiction. As rightly explained, the whole passage has perfect self-consistency, and the most impressive and important moral bearing. It clearly sets before us the personal aim which should command our supreme regard, the resurrection of the just, "the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus," and the spirit and manner in which the end aimed at should be pursued---that is, with the same singleness of purpose and object with which the perfect runner attained victory and perfection in glory in the ancient races.

Paul's character, as a believer in Jesus, as revealed in this passage, and in the context.

As we have said, the term perfect does not, of itself; when employed in a moral sense, determine the exact state of the individual to whom said term is applied. In the chapter from which the passage under consideration is taken, we have a complete and specific and inspired statement of the apostle's character and life as a Christian, as they were revealed in his own consciousness. In the preceding part of the chapter he gives in a simple, didactive form, in the absence of figures of speech, a statement of his conscious Christian character and life. His high standing in Jews' religion, with all else, were "loss," of no account to him. Nor had any worldly objects the remotest power over him to draw him back towards the worldly life. Let us carefully read the whole passage: "Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, and be found in Him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death: if by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead." We may safely challenge the world to designate a single defect in the character here portrayed, or a single element necessary to its completeness, that is wanted in the inspired portraiture. What has been supposed by many to be a confessed defect of character and experience, is a necessary element of their completeness and perfection. He who is seeking a supreme good, the attainment of which is conditioned upon his "fighting (out to the end) the good fight," finishing his course and keeping the faith," and is running a race for a prize not rendered secure until the goal is reached, must, at no prior moment, "count himself to have attained," or "to have apprehended." The immutable condition of the completeness of his character in such a race is, that the subject "forgets those things which are behind, reaches forth towards those things which are before, and presses toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." The Christian character and conduct of Paul would have been essentially defective but for the presence of these very elements. Their presence, on the other hand, renders the portraiture "perfect and complete, wanting nothing." If we compare Paul's description of himself under the impressive figure of a runner for the prize of life eternal, we shall find that he absolutely affirms of himself every characteristic, and that in its strongest form, the characteristic which constituted the very highest Grecian ideal of a perfect runner. Nothing, undeniably, is wanting to the full completeness of the portraiture here drawn. It is in view of such a presentation that Paul adds, "Let us, as many as be perfect, be thus minded"; and, "Be ye followers of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample." If any one imputes conscious sin to Paul, that is imputed to him of which he absolutely reveals and affirms himself not to have been conscious. Brethren, the revealed portraiture is before you. Will you not read it over again, and then heed the command, "Be ye followers of me," and "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ"