Explanation:

To understand what Paul means, it’s important to understand the meaning of the verb in the context of what precedes. The verb carries a variety of senses, which might include completing an action, bringing a goal to an end, or being made perfect in the religious sense of being consecrated.⁵ Now, it’s important to notice that when Paul says he has not already been perfect/completed, this phrase is connected with what precedes it by the conjunction or. What Paul says previously is that he has not yet obtained, and the conjunction indicates not that he is introducing a new idea when he says he has not yet been perfected/completed but that he is repeating what he has just said.⁶ In other words, Paul is saying that he has not yet obtained, that is, been perfected/completed. So what has Paul not yet obtained? Most likely what he has not yet obtained is the spiritual blessedness that he outlines in Philippians 3:8–11. For there Paul says that he would give up everything to know Christ, be found in him, and share in the power of the resurrection and Jesus’ suffering. Not that Paul has already obtained this state of perfect blessedness.⁷

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that it’s not clear that the conjunction means that Paul is repeating himself. The conjunction or is often used to denote a new thought, as in, Paul has not yet obtained x, and neither has he been perfected. Of course, it makes sense based on the context for Paul to use the conjunction or in a way that extends his thinking. For the context has him reflecting not only on the spiritual blessedness of knowing Christ, but also having Christ’s righteousness, and attaining the resurrection of the dead (Philippians 3:11). Of course, when the resurrection of the dead occurs, and we share Christ’s righteousness fully, Paul will literally be perfected in a moral sense. Thus, when he says that he has not yet obtained, or been perfected/completed, he likely means that he has not yet obtained everything he said in Philippians 3:8–11, and neither is he already morally perfect.⁸

Response to counterargument:

Even if we admit that when Paul uses the conjunction or, he uses it to add a new thought, this does not imply that the new thought has to do with moral perfection. The context has to do with not only sharing Christ’s righteousness but also knowing Christ, being found in him, knowing the power of the resurrection, and conforming to Christ’s death. In other words, Paul has in mind the spiritual blessedness that awaits the final resurrection, which is something he has not yet attained, nor has he been perfected/completed. In other words, Paul has not yet reached full spiritual blessedness, but he presses on to make it his own (Philippians 3:12).

Explanation:

When Paul says that he has not yet been perfected, he is likely taking on the views of his opponents in Philippi for the purpose of correcting their false views. ⁹ His opponents likely argued that they had attained some level of spiritual perfection or blessedness, and Paul is saying that he has not yet reached this state. In fact, the verb for to perfect can be used to denote something like consecration in a religious sense, which is likely how his opponents used the verb. That is, they likely said that they were consecrated, and had reached the highest levels of spiritual blessedness. Paul, on the other hand, preaches the gospel and admits that full spiritual blessing will only come at the end.  

Counterargument:

It is hard to see how one can infer from Paul’s use of the verb to perfect that he is taking on the position of his opponents in Philippi. For, while he does not use the verb τελειόω (to perfect) elsewhere, he does often use the related verb τελέω (to finish) as well as the noun τέλεοις (perfect).¹⁰ Given that Paul often uses variations of τελειόω (to perfect), it’s not outside his purview to use τελειόω (to perfect) not because of his opponents but to express his own position.

Response to counterargument:

There are two reasons to think that Paul is taking on the views of his opponents, which have to do with attaining spiritual blessedness. First, that he never uses the specific verb τελειόω (to perfect) is important given that he uses the verb τελέω (to finish) and the noun τέλειος (perfect) in many other passages. Second, the verb τελειόω (to perfect) can be used with a specialized religious connotation that denotes something like the highest state of religious attainment.¹¹ Of course, we know from Philippians 3:2 that Paul faces opposition in Philippi by the Judaizers, and in Philippians 3:18 he recalls that many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Given that Paul never uses the verb τελειόω (to perfect) elsewhere, along with its religious connotations, and that there are religious opponents in Philippi, he is likely responding to his opponents’ views. That is, he is saying that while they boast of attaining spiritual blessedness, Christians strive toward that goal until the return of Christ.

It is hard to see what the weakness of this view might be, given the fact that τελειόω (to perfect) has to do with consecration in a religious sense. One weakness might be that to be consecrated is to be set apart as holy, not to be in a state of spiritual blessedness. Of course, arguably Paul is already consecrated as holy, and to be actually holy, as Paul will be when Christ returns, is to be in a state of spiritual blessedness.  

Explanation:

When Paul says he has not yet been perfected, there is a connection between this statement and the immediately preceding clause where Paul says he has not yet obtained.¹⁴ Thus, to understand what it means that Paul has not yet been perfected, we need to understand what he has not yet obtained. And what he has not yet obtained is knowing Christ fully.¹⁵ Thus, what he is saying is that he does not yet know Christ fully, so that he has not yet reached his final goal/been perfected, which is to know Christ fully.

Counterargument:

There are two problems with this argument. First, it’s not clear that what Paul has not yet obtained is knowing Christ fully. Not knowing Christ fully may be one aspect of what Paul means when he says he has not yet obtained, but the fact is, there is no direct object for the verb to obtain, which means we have to infer what Paul has not yet obtained. Given what precedes Philippians 3:12, and that Paul’s train of thought forms a unit in Philippians 3:8–11, it is likely that the direct object of to obtain is Paul’s whole unit of thought in Philippians 3:8–11. Of course, this unit of thought includes knowing Christ, but it also includes gaining Christ and sharing in his suffering and the resurrection. Second, even it is the case that what Paul has not yet obtained is knowing Christ fully, this does not mean that being perfected has to do with knowing Christ. Again, Paul’s train of thought forms a unit in Philippians 3:8–11, where Paul says he wants to know Christ, gain him, share his suffering, conform to his death, and so on. Now, even if we accept that what Paul has not yet attained is knowing Christ, why should we maintain that not being perfected is also solely about knowing Christ? Why shouldn’t not being perfected be related to Paul’s whole train of thought in Philippians 3:8–11? Unfortunately, this argument does not answer these questions.

Explanation:

When we reach Philippians 3:20–21, Paul explains that only when he meets Christ face to face will he be made perfect.¹⁶ That is, once Christ returns, Paul will fully know Christ, and when Paul fully knows Christ, then he will be perfected. Thus, that Paul is not already perfected has to do with the fact that Paul does not yet fully know Christ.¹⁷

Counterargument:  

The problem here is that Paul does not explain in Philippians 3:20–21 that when he meets Christ face to face, he will be perfected. Rather, he says that Christ will transform our lowly bodies to be like his glorious body. Thus, Philippians 3:21 has to do with our resurrection bodies, not being perfected, or knowing Christ. Now, we admit that when Christ returns, we will be perfected, which includes having a new resurrection body. Thus, if we think Philippians 3:21 informs the meaning of Philippians 3:12, this argument has things backwards. For in Philippians 3:21, Paul is specific, while in Phil 3:12, the notion of not being perfected is left vague. Thus, if Philippians 3:21 informs Philippians 3:12, we might take it that not being perfected has to do with gaining a resurrection body. So when Paul says he has not yet been perfected, he is saying he has not yet gained a resurrection body.

The weakness of this view is that it understands being perfected in isolation from Paul’s unit of thought in Philippians 3:8–11. Thus, while not full knowing Christ is an aspect of not being perfected, Philippians 3:8–11 implies there are other aspects to not being perfected including having Christ’s righteousness and participating in the resurrection.