In Phil 3.3, Paul provocatively and polemically asserts that ‘the circumcision’ (ἡ πɛριτομή) is constituted of believers in Christ Jesus who place no confidence in the flesh (cf. Rom 2.25–9). This fact notwithstanding, he claims in 3.4 that he has reason for boasting in the flesh. Indeed, Paul propounds that he has stronger grounds than anyone else (ἐγὼ μᾶλλον), including his Jewish-Christian opponents, for being confident in his pedigree and performance in Judaism.Footnote 1 The apostle then proceeds to set forth no more and no less than seven items for the Philippians’ consideration (3.5–6).
Interpreters who have treated vv. 5–6 have often observed that Paul lists seven boasts that are his in Judaism. Furthermore, commentators have long recognised that this catalogue progresses from four inherited privileges (‘circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews’) to three personal commitments and accomplishments (‘according to the law, a Pharisee; according to zeal, persecuting the church; according to righteousness which comes by the law, blameless’).Footnote 2 Exegetes have not noted, however, that Paul offers precisely seven reasons for having confidence in the flesh, nor have they attempted to interpret 3.5–6 – and its immediate literary context – in light of the possible presence and influence of numerical symbolism or enumeratio.Footnote 3
In this study I offer a fresh reading of Phil 3.5–6 (and surrounding verses) by focusing on Paul's sevenfold list of his Jewish pedigree and achievements. To be sure, the number seven is not especially prominent in Paul's letter corpus and is far from being the key that unlocks every Pauline door. It does appear, however, that in this given instance Paul found the number seven and that which it was commonly thought to signal (i.e. completion or perfection) as ‘good to think with’. In this essay, I posit that recognition of Phil 3.5–6 as a seven-item list connoting completion or fullness can both sharpen and deepen one's interpretation of this programmatic Pauline passage. As a necessary first step, we turn at the outset of this essay to consider how various ancient Jews, Gentiles and ‘Christians’ conceptualised and utilised the number seven.
1. Seven among Jews, Gentiles and ‘Christians’
1.1. Old Testament Examples
Despite the prominence of the numbers three, five and ten, Robert Gordis contends that the number seven was ‘preeminent above all others in Semitic life’.Footnote 4 From the OT, Gordis highlights ‘the seven days of Creation and the Sabbath, the Sabbatical year, the Jubilee, the Feast of Weeks, the seven days of Passover and Tabernacles, and the seven-branched candlestick’. He also notes ‘the seven Canaanite peoples, the seven processions around Jericho, the seventy weeks in Daniel, [and] the “seven eyes” in Zechariah’. Furthermore, as Gordis realises, these examples are just the tip of the heptadic iceberg in the Hebrew Bible.Footnote 5
1.2. Aristobulus and Philo
According to A. Y. Collins, ‘Mystical speculation based on numbers, reflection on numbers as symbols, and various other activities grouped under the rubric of numerology, or better arithmology, were widespread in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.’Footnote 6 The influence of Pythagorean arithmology (see further 1.4 below) is clearly discernible, for example, in the works of Aristobulus and Philo, both of whom were Alexandrian Jews.Footnote 7 The former is thought to have lived and written in the second century bce, whereas the latter dates to the first century ce, roughly contemporaneous with Paul.Footnote 8
Aristobulus's affinity with Pythagorean thought is especially evident in frg. 5 of his work (apud Eusebius, Praep. ev. 13.12.9–16). In this passage, Aristobulus reckons that ‘the seventh day might be called first also, as the genesis of light in which all things are contemplated’ (13.12.9). Additionally, Aristobulus maintains that the Sabbath serves as a sign of the ‘sevenfold principle (ἑβδόμου λόγου) … by which we have knowledge of human and divine matters’ (13.12.12). He also contends: ‘all the cosmos of all living beings and growing things revolves in series of sevens’ (13.12.13). To reinforce his view that the ‘seventh day is holy’, Aristobulus appeals to Hesiod, Homer and to the mythical singer Linus for support. In a text Aristobulus attributes to Homer, it is stated that ‘on [the seventh day] all things had been completed’ (τῷ τɛτέλɛστο ἅπαντα, 13.12.14), and in a line assigned to Linus, it is said that ‘on the seventh morning all things were made complete’ (τɛτɛλɛσμένα πάντα, 13.12.16). Furthermore, Aristobulus credits Linus with saying that the seventh day is perfect (τɛλɛίη).
While the Pythagorean speculative tradition on the number seven may have been common among Alexandrian Jews by the time of Aristobulus, no ancient Jewish author of whom we are aware, whether from Alexandria or elsewhere, was more smitten by seven than Philo. In addition to his now lost tractate on numbers, wherein the number seven is thought to have featured, in his extant work On the Creation of the World (De opificio mundi) Philo extols the excellencies and propounds the properties of seven in some detail (89–128; cf. Decal. 102–5). Near the outset of his encomium on seven, Philo propounds that the number ‘deserves to be called “public” as belonging to all people’ (Opif. 89). He continues his laudation of seven by contemplating ‘whether anyone could adequately celebrate the properties of the number, for they are beyond all words’ (90). In addition, he comments in Opif. 102, ‘Now by those who are in the habit of giving words their proper force seven is called also “perfection-bringing” (τɛλɛσφόρος) because by this all things in the material universe are brought to perfection (τɛλɛσφορɛῖται)’ (cf. Opif. 107).Footnote 9
1.3. Old Testament Pseudepigrapha
Seven also appears regularly in the OT Pseudepigrapha, frequently with symbolic significance. Within this collection, ἑπτά features most prominently in 4 Macc, where the author attaches Philonic-like meaning to the number: ‘O most holy seven, brothers in harmony! For just as the seven days of creation move in a choral dance around religion, so these youths, forming a chorus, encircled the sevenfold fear of tortures and destroyed it’ (14.7–8). Further consideration of ἑπτά in the OT Pseudepigrapha supports Gordis’ contention that the number seven was of decided importance to the Jewish people and that it frequently had symbolic overtones.Footnote 10
1.4. Seven among the Gentiles
It was not only the Jews, however, who were aware of seven and its symbolic significance. The (neo-)Pythagoreans were fascinated with numbers, and seven was no exception. With respect to the number seven, Collins draws special attention to the Roman neo-Pythagorean scholar M. Terentius Varro (116–28 bce) and his discourses on the number's excellencies and powers.Footnote 11 For Varro and his Pythagorean predecessors and peers, seven signalled opportunity and order. Indeed, it (and multiples thereof) was thought to be an explanatory key for all sorts of astronomical, biological and geographical phenomena (see e.g. Aulus Gellius, Noct. Att. 3.10.1).
Additionally, many ancient Mediterranean peoples believed that there were seven planets in the universe and that the world in which they lived contained seven wonders.Footnote 12 To illustrate further, it was widely known in antiquity that Rome was the city built upon seven hills (cf. Rev 17.9).Footnote 13 Also, many who lived in Greece, including those who lived in Philippi, would have heard of the seven sages (see Plato, Prot. 342e–343b; cf. Diogenes Laertius 1.41; Pausanias 10.24.1), not to mention the various sevens associated with the Olympian god Apollo, who was called, among other things, ‘Seventh-born’ (ἑβδομαγɛνής) (Plutarch, Mor. 717D; cf. 292E) and ‘commander of sevens’ (ἑβδομαγέτης) (Aeschylus, Sept. 800). To offer but one further example, not a few ancients would have been acquainted with the idea that life was divided into seven ages or stages.Footnote 14
1.5. New Testament Occurrences
While the NT writers do not ponder the properties or extol the qualities of seven, the term ἑπτά does appear in the NT with some frequency (eighty-eight times). As one might anticipate, ἑπτά is found most often in the Apocalypse (fifty-five times). Richard Bauckham repeatedly, and to my mind convincingly, maintains that John the prophet regarded seven to be the number of completeness and fullness.Footnote 15 Such an ascribed meaning would be in keeping with the notions that numerous other ancient Jews, ‘Christians’ and ‘pagans’ had with respect to seven. I regard it as highly improbable that such was lost on Saul/Paul. Indeed, given the number's prevalence in circles in which he travelled, it strains credulity to think that he was ignorant of seven's significance and valence.
As it happens, Paul does not employ the number seven in his extant writings, though he does use the related term ‘seven thousand’ (ἑπτακισχιλίοι) in Rom 11.4 when citing 1 Kings 19.18 (=3 Kgdms 19.18 (LXX); cf. Rev 11.13). The apostle did, however, have a penchant for sevenfold lists and series. This is especially evident in his letter to the Romans. For example, Paul sets forth seven OT citations in Rom 3.10–18, enumerates seven afflictions in Rom 8.35, offers seven affirmations in Rom 11.33–6 and speaks of seven gifts in Rom 12.6–8.Footnote 16 Additionally, Robert Jewett suggests, ‘The paradigm of seven abominable things that Yahweh hates in Prov 6:16–19 may well have provided the model for the seven scriptural quotations in the catena of condemnation in Rom 3:10-18.’ Jewett continues by observing: ‘There is a close parallel in the seven indictments of CD 5:13–17, which suggests a tradition of sevenfold catenae within Judaism.’Footnote 17
We have sufficiently illustrated the predilection ancient Jewish, Greco-Roman and ‘Christian’ writers to employ heptads in organising and presenting their work. What is more, we have shown that these authors frequently infused seven with the meaning of completion, maturity, perfection and the like.
Given that ‘seven was held to be a universally significant number in the ancient Mediterranean context’Footnote 18 and that the number was frequently thought to connote perfection, one cannot help but wonder if the initial auditors and interpreters of Philippians were cognizant of the fact that Paul set forth precisely seven of his Jewish credentials and accomplishments in 3.5–6. One also wonders, however, if a numerical symbolic reading of these verses is overly subtle and if it is reasonable to think that an astute ancient recipient of the letter might have recognised Paul's sevenfold enumeration and regarded it as symbolically significant.
In his presidential address to the SNTS in 2000, François Bovon strongly encouraged scholars to ‘recognize the general interest … in the semantic value of numbers … among people of late antiquity’.Footnote 19 The following reading of Phil 3.5–6 in its literary context seeks to take Bovon's admonition seriously.
2. Paul's Sevenfold List in Phil 3.5–6
2.1. Contextual Considerations
In addition to the evidence adduced above, there are a number of other factors that lend support to my proposal that the catalogue of seven in Phil 3.5–6 constitutes an example of numerical symbolism. Paul's epistolary prowess is clearly on display throughout the carefully constructed passage in which vv. 5–6 appear. The following observations illustrate as much.
In the first instance, one may observe that the threefold repetition of βλέπɛιν found in 3.2 – replete with the alliteration of invectives τοὺς κύνας, τοὺς κακοὺς ἐργάτας, τὴν κατατομήν in the accusative case – is followed by a fourfold affirmation of Pauline believers in 3.3 (3 + 4 = 7).Footnote 20 One might also note that in writing the ‘same things’ to the Philippians (3.1), Paul begins by cautioning the church of potentially harmful influences in 3.2 (A) before affirming their ‘Christian’ orientation in 3.3 (B). He continues in 3.4–8c by depicting that which he once valued as fleshly and even as σκύβαλα (Aˊ) before declaring in 3.8d–11 his desire to gain, know and become like Christ (Bˊ).Footnote 21
Furthermore, Paul plays upon and repeats various terms throughout ch. 3. In addition to the repetition of βλέπɛιν in 3.2 (see above), I would draw attention to the following: πɛποίθησιν/πɛίθɛιν (3.3, 4); σάρξ (3.3, 4); νόμος (3.5, 9); δικαιοσύνη (3.6, 9); κέρδος/κɛρδαίνɛιν (3.7, 8); ζημία/ζημιοῦν (3.7, 8); γνῶσις/γινώσκɛιν (3.8, 10); καταλαμβάνɛιν (3.12, 13); and φρονɛῖν (3.15 (bis)). One might also observe the play on κατατομήν in 3.2 with πɛριτομή in 3.3 (cf. 3.5) as well as the different valences of διώκɛιν in 3.6 and 3.12 respectively.
An additional consideration that lends support to the interpretation I am advancing here pertains to Paul's employment of a catalogue in 3.5–6. These verses comprise Paul's ‘confidence catalogue’ relative to his Jewish pedigree and performance. Employing binary categories replete with ironic twists, however, Paul inverts and subverts all such boasts. Whereas Paul once regarded that which he sets forth in vv. 5–6 as a basis for status and as a measure of success, he subsequently eschewed these and other gains for the surpassing worth of knowing resurrection power through suffering (note esp. Phil 3.7–11). The seven-item ‘catalogue of boasting’ in 3.5–6 heightens and sharpens the dialectical tension that permeates ch. 3.Footnote 22 This would be all the more the case if (as I am contending) this sevenfold list connotes completion.Footnote 23
Arguably, the most probative Pauline parallel for this investigation is Rom 9.4–5. Here Paul enumerates seven benefits or boasts that belong to the Israelites, namely, ‘the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, the promises … [and] the patriarchs’.Footnote 24 Nonetheless, Paul does not regard these blessings alone to be sufficient for his people's salvation (see esp. Rom 10.1–13). The fact that Paul lists precisely seven items, as he frequently does in Romans (see 1.5 above), may well underscore both the privilege and the culpability of the Jewish people. The correlation between Rom 9.4–5 and Phil 3.5–6 is striking and significant. In both passages Paul sets forth a sevenfold ‘catalogue of boasting’ with respect to Jewish pedigree and past performance only to devalue such in light of the person and pursuit of Christ. Such ethnic confidence became (primarily) past tense for Paul; he ceased to view his identity (primarily) along ethnic lines. Furthermore, in both instances Paul employs a seven-item list to bespeak of completion in Judaism, a completion that he came to regard as illusory subsequent to his conversion/call (see further below).
What is more, Paul does employ the terms τɛλɛιοῦν and τέλɛιος in Phil 3.12 and 3.15 respectively. Both of these terms consistently signal perfection, completion or maturity. But Paul rarely utilises them; in fact, τɛλɛιοῦν appears only here in the Pauline corpus, and τέλɛιος occurs but four other times in the undisputed Pauline letters (Rom 12.2; 1 Cor 2.6; 13.10; 14.20; note also τέλος in Phil 3.19).
2.2. A Fresh Reading of Phil 3.5–6
In light of the foregoing considerations, we are now in a position to offer a numerical symbolic interpretation of Phil 3.5–6 in its context. Paul brings his sevenfold description of his life in Judaism to a crescendo at the close of v. 6 by declaring that with respect to righteousness under the law he was blameless (ἄμɛμπτος). While Paul does not claim to be sinless, neither does he depict himself as plagued with a guilt-ridden conscience, as Krister Stendahl astutely noted some fifty years ago.Footnote 25 Whereas believers in Christ are to strive to be blameless (note Phil 2.15), this was an achievement/condition of the ‘pre-Christian’ Paul. He was – as the term ἄμɛμπτος suggests and the seven-item list signals – pure, complete, whole, mature, without fault.
Despite Paul's standing in Judaism, he experienced a socio-religious shift that may be fairly and accurately depicted as a conversion. In his own words, Paul began to regard whatever he had gained as loss for the sake of Christ (3.7). Indeed, he came to consider all things to be loss, even as σκύβαλα, for ‘the surpassing value of the knowledge of Christ Jesus [his] Lord’ (3.8). What Paul had previously prized now paled in comparison to his pursuit to gain Christ and be found in him. While Paul does not entirely discount his life in Judaism, he clearly devalues it.Footnote 26 In fact, in 3.9 he contrasts ἐμὴν δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ νόμου with τὴν [δικαιοσύνην] διὰ πίστɛως Χριστοῦ. Moreover, he depicts the latter righteousness as ἐκ θɛοῦ … ἐπὶ τῇ πίστɛι.
The apostle's telos, the one thing he passionately pursued, was τɛλɛιότης ἐν Χριστῷ (cf. Col 1.28; 4.12; Eph 4.13). The upward call towards which he pressed was to know Christ, the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings. Becoming one with Christ in the Lord's death, Paul lived in hope of the resurrection (3.10–11, 13–14). Importantly, if ironically, the one who had every good reason – in fact no less than seven – to boast ἐν σαρκί came to see himself as one who had not yet taken hold of that for which he strove, namely, completion and perfection ἐν Χριστῷ.
Although Paul previously regarded himself as complete under the law, he came to see himself as a person in Christ who was yet to be made perfect (οὐχ ὅτι ἤδη ἔλαβον ἢ ἤδη τɛτɛλɛίωμαι, 3.12a).Footnote 27 Consequently, Paul's stated ambition was to take hold of Christ even as Christ had taken hold of him (3.12b). In an attempt to do so, Paul determined to forget the things behind him, including his prestigious Jewish past, and to strive forward to the things in front of him, particularly the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus (3.13–14).
At the outset of 3.15 Paul does speak of certain people (ὅσοι) as τέλɛιοι (‘mature, complete’). If there were believers in Philippi who considered themselves τέλɛιοι, as some scholars have suspected, then it would appear that Paul is playing into their hands in v. 15a by granting their claim. However, were Paul addressing the grandiose, yet mistaken, notion of spiritual perfection held by certain Philippians in 3.12–16, then it seems best to read 3.15a as an instance where Paul employs ‘a touch of reproachful, though loving, almost whimsical, irony’.Footnote 28 By calling those who consider themselves τέλɛιοι to recognise that their present mindset actually militates against their being τέλɛιοι, Paul counters their prideful, perfectionistic claims.Footnote 29 Given that Paul came to see himself as incomplete apart from Christ, despite his sterling track record in Judaism, he might well have wanted to iterate to those Philippians with perfectionist predilections that they had yet to break the spiritual tape and should thereby not rest upon their self-fashioned laurels.Footnote 30 At the same time, Paul is able to counter his ‘Jewish-Christian’ competitors and their ‘fleshly’ claims of completion (note 3.2, 19; cf. Gal 3.3: ‘Having begun with the Spirit, will you now end [or be made complete] (ἐπιτɛλɛῖσθɛ) in the flesh?’).
In Phil 3, especially vv. 12–16, Paul propounds that believers demonstrate maturity by recognising that they are running in a race they have yet to complete. While the ‘Christian’ τέλος (‘end’) is σωτηρία (‘salvation’) and not ἀπώλɛια (‘destruction’), the transformation from a body of humiliation into a body of his glory has yet to occur, even as the day of Christ has yet to come (3.19–21; cf. 1.28). Until that day, Paul calls the Philippians to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling, accompanied by the conviction that God is among them ‘both to will and to work for the good pleasure’ (2.12–13). All the while, Paul was confident ‘that the one who began a good work among them will complete (ἐπιτɛλέσɛι) [it] at the day of Jesus Christ’ (1.6).
3. Conclusion
Terms of completion/maturity/perfection appear three times in Phil 3 (see vv. 12, 15, 19; cf. 1.6). In this essay I have posited that the sevenfold catalogue Paul enumerates in 3.5–6 regarding his Jewish past (cf. Gal 1.13–14) might also connote such a meaning. To support my proposal, I have surveyed germane literary parallels both within and beyond the biblical canon that feature the number seven. I have also demonstrated how a numerical symbolic reading of Phil 3.5–6 is supported by contextual considerations and strengthens one's understanding of ch. 3 in its entirety. While our comprehension of this complex passage remains incomplete, it is now arguably more complete than it was.
