Do we know "in part" today?
 

I've been studying out 1 Corinthians 13 about the "that which is perfect" and knowing "in part." Here's my question, if Paul the Apostle said himself that he knew "in part" (1 Cor. 13:12), then why do we believe that we as Christians now don't believe "in part"? I've always said that it was because that which was perfect is come, speaking of the Bible. But if that was the case then what was the difference between Paul and us? Didn't Paul have the same scriptures we have today? I mean doctrinal books. Yes he did because he was the one that wrote our doctrinal books. Here's my point - If he had the same scriptures as us, and he knew in part, then we also know in part today. If that is the case then obviously the "that which is perfect" has not come yet. Because scripture says:

1Co 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.


What are your thoughts?

1 Corinthians was one of the first New Testament books to be written. At that point in time, the early church only did know in part. We need the full NT to open up the Old Testament for us.

Please consider the points raised in this study, as well as the word studies and parallel passages: 1 Corinthians 13:8-12.

Obviously there are some here who are going to disagree with my overall premise right at the start - but at least read the studies, see which words are used in the passage and the parallel passages (to determine if they are indeed referring to the same thing - ie, the glass/mirror being God's Word, which it is clearly declared in two other NT passages), and see the definitions of the words used - I list both Strong's and Webster's - so even those people who dislike Strong's can still see what the actual English words mean. Then after studying these passages and words out, you will be in a better position to discuss this issue - even if you disagree with my conclusions.

Song of Solomon 2:9 My beloved is like a roe or a young hart: behold, he standeth behind our wall, he looketh forth at the windows, shewing himself through the lattice.

In the OT, we see Jesus through a lattice, a screen, hidden - until the light of the NT shines on the OT - then you see Him everywhere, in the construction of the tabernacle, in the animal sacrifices, in the countless types, in the Messianic prophecies, and even in many other passages of Scripture (as the one who is speaking - see Isaiah 48:16, as the Angel of the Lord, as God walking in the Garden of Eden - see John 1:18 [it wasn't the Father appearing to them, as no man has seen the Father at any time - it was the Son that took on the appearance of flesh, then later was manifest in the flesh]).

1 Cor 13 is between 1 Cor 12 and 14. 1 Cor 13:8 is before 1 Cor 13:10. I think the context shows that the "in part" refers to the gifts spoken of in the context.

The word "perfect" has the idea of completion. Since prophecies shall fail when that which is perfect is come, and Rev 22:18 warns us to stop adding to the prophecy of this book, that we know that there shall be no more prophecies to be added after the last book of the completed Bible.
That Paul knew in part, one may keep in mind that he had not all the "revelations" yet and had not finished writing all his books.
I'm aware of the many other views of "that which is perfect", but of all the views, this one makes sense.

Absolutely, we know ONLY in part, hence the need for the question.

"That which is perfect" is not a reference to the perfect book, but rather the perfect "man" (vs.11 illustration). See I John 1:1, "that which" is coming again (I John 3:2) and "when he shall appear, we shall be like him." "Then shall I know, even as I am known" (of God, Gal.4:9)

How is Jesus perfect/complete? He was already so the first time He came - so He won't be any more perfect/complete when He comes again, and this verse surely seems to be indicating they only had in part what was later perfected - which cannot refer to Jesus then. He didn't come in part, and soon is going to be perfected.

i got a better idea than reading "selected passages" so you get a "private interpretation" as some are suggesting..

1. read the whole bible, cover to cover and take notes specifically for this topic
2. read and study both sides positions on this topic.

the following titles might help you understand the position better

systematic theoloigy by Stanley M. Horton

Bible Doctrines: A Pentecostal Perspective by William W. Menzies and Stanley M. Horton

Knowing the Doctrines of the Bible by Myer Pearlman

Bible doctrines by P.C. Nelson

No one is suggesting getting a private interpretation. You are not helping your cause by building straw men.

"The KJB has a built-in dictionary."
"The best commentary to the Bible is the Bible itself."
"Context determines meaning."

Here's mine:
"The KJB has a built-in 'thesaurus' ".:)

Using this principles has helped me a lot in Bible study. Here are few examples:

KJV "Thesaurus"

"Synonyms"

WALK BEFORE GOD
Genesis 17:1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. (See also Gen. 6:9.)
NO BLEMISH
Leviticus 22:21 And whosoever offereth a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD to accomplish his vow, or a freewill offering in beeves or sheep, it shall be perfect to be accepted; there shall be no blemish therein.
JUST
Genesis 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
Deuteronomy 25:15 But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
FULLY
1 Kings 11:4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father.
1 Kings 11:6 And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, and went not fully after the LORD, as did David his father.
UPRIGHT, FEARED GOD, ESCHEWED EVIL
Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.
FULNESS
Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
COMPLETE
Colossians 4:12 Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ, saluteth you, always labouring fervently for you in prayers, that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God.
THROUGHLY FURNISHED
2 Timothy 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

"Antonym" of Perfect

IN PART
1 Corinthians 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
PERVERSE
Job 9:20 If I justify myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me: if I say, I am perfect, it shall also prove me perverse.
LACKING
1 Thessalonians 3:10 Night and day praying exceedingly that we might see your face, and might perfect that which is lacking in your faith?

Jerry says: How is Jesus perfect/complete? He was already so the first time He came..."

Oh, but He wasn't. He had to be made "perfect through sufferings" (Heb.2:10) as well as "learn obedience" (see Heb.5:8-9). But when "that which is perfect is come," Paul will be perfect too. Paul is the child waiting to be a man (complete). When Christ comes, Paul will be "like him" for "the second man is the Lord from heaven." (I Cor.15:47)

So now, that which is perfect is Paul... Wonder why he didn't say, when I am perfect? Paul doesn't fit the context of the chapter. Perhaps you could go through verses 8-12 and show us how a spiritually perfected Paul would fit each one.

Is that what you read above? No wonder you're so confused.
Do you know anything about Paul that will "vanish away" or "be done away?" Oh, say, when something perfect shows up?
The passage clearly (yes, clearly) speaks of the return of Christ when Paul will see his Lord "face to face." "That which is perfect" has then the dual application (see scripture referenced above) to not only the Lord Jesus Christ, but also to what Paul will benefit from His appearing (v10,12).

The context of 1 Corinthians 12-14 is about spiritual gifts that includes healing, tongues, miracles, etc.
Paul refers to them as "in part" and "childish" and that he said they will "cease", "fail", and "vanish".
That which is perfect is the complete revelation of the Word of God. Remember, that Paul was the last apostle chosen by Christ (1 Cor.15 "last of all, he was seen of me also as of one born out of due time), and he was selected from heaven and not during Christ's earthly ministry. He said that he was a minister to "fulfil" the Word of God (Col. 1).
He told pastor Timothy that "all Scripture" is "given", and is PROFITABLE to make the MAN of God PERFECT. There is no need for extra-Biblical revelations.
Furthermore, we know John wrote the last book, but it is only the revelation of the OT prophecies, revelation of Jesus Christ - we know "revelation" is not rapture, it is second coming on earth when He sets up His kingdom.
Simply stated, John simply built what was already revealed "since the world began".
Paul was the one who "fulfilled" the Word of God, for to him was given that which was lacking - to him was revealed the mystery which was HIDDEN "since the world began" (Rom. 16).

By the way, I believe in:
1. Speaking in tongues when you talk in different languages to preach the completed Word of God.
2. Prophesying when it means "forth telling" the completed Word of God.
3. Healing as an answer to prayer according to the completed Word of God.
But:
1. There is no GIFT OF TONGUES today for we already have the completed Word of God.
2. There is no extra-biblical PROPHECIES needed today for we have the completed Word of God.
3. There is no GIFT OF HEALING of "ALL KINDS OF SICKNESS AND ALL KINDS OF DISEASES" as was done in Matthew 4 when there was not yet the completed Word of God, for the complete revelation tell us in 2 Corinthians 12 that God's GRACE IS SUFFICIENT (gift of healing is not) and that God is able to do above what we ask or think (Eph), and not just merely give what we ask (Mat 7).
According to the completed Word of God, in this age of grace, God may or may not answer our prayer for physical healing for God's grace of salvation is sufficient, whereas under the kingdom program they receive instantaneous answer to there specific prayers for physical healing, but they have to endure and hold on to the end to be saved.
Which one is better?
Physical healing, no eternal security?
or
Eternal security even without physical healing?
I'm complete in Christ. I don't speak in tongues-no gift of healing-no extra-biblical prophesying-no poison drinking - no handling snakes, but I'm saved by the grace of God and nothing shall be able to separate me from the love of Christ. Amen!

Aloha brother Sammy,

Re: Your post of 3/4/08 - "Know in part"

I have enjoyed all of your posts and have agreed with you on almost every point that you have brought up. However, I ask you to prayerfully consider this post as possibly being true.

The "Standard Interpretation" for 1 Corinthians 13:9-11 is - "But when that which is perfect is come" is the "Canon" of the Scriptures.

I can remember way back in 1973 being presented with this "thorny problem" and I examined the verses in the context (Including Chapters 12 & 14) and could not come up with the "standard interpretation" without a whole lot of "speculation" on my part. Bible believing Christians must be extremely careful of "speculation" when it comes to understanding the Holy Scriptures (especially when it comes to teaching sound doctrine). 2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

In 1 Corinthians 13:1-8 - in the context Paul is speaking about "charity" (specifically - the love between Christian brethren) and the fact that true Christian Charity "rejoiceth in the truth". and then he mentions that prophecies - they shall "fail" (stop); and tongues - they shall "cease"; and knowledge - shall vanish away; and then Paul "camps out" for a while on knowledge:
1 Corinthians 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. {NOTICE: "through" a glass NOT "into" a glass!}
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

Back in '73 When I read the preceeding verses - I asked myself - where is the word "Scriptures"? (the only place where the word is found in the entire Book of 1 Corinthians is in Chapter 15: 3-4); Where is the word "Canon"? (Of course no such word exists in the Holy Bible); Where is the word - "words" or "word" mentioned? The words are not to be found in the entire 13th. Chapter!

I then asked myself what is going on? How can we build a doctrine around the "word" or "words" of God or the "Scriptures" if they (the words) are not mentioned in the context? And what I discovered is that the brethren, in their desire to get rid of tongues and the "sign gifts", decided that all of the "gifts" had to go.

I have no problem saying the "sign gifts" have ceased until God resumes His work with the nation of Israel - Since "the Jews require a sign", then the "sign gifts of: healing"; the working of miracles; divers kinds of tongues; the interpretation of tongues; i.e. the "gifts" of signs, wonders, and miracles have ceased (since we Christians don't walk by sight, but by faith - we aren't Jews).

However, how are the "gifts" of: the word of wisdom; the word of knowledge; of faith; of prophecy (NOT prophesying); discerning of spirits considered "signs" or "wonders" or "miracles"? If I understand English words, these words have nothing "miraculous" about them that people can "see". Have all spiritual "gifts" ceased? I think not - haven't you ever met a brother who seemed to be especially "gifted" in one of these areas? I have met several.

1 Corinthians 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
1 Corinthians 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

Are all of the preceeding verses obsolete and out of date? Has all of the above ceased? Is there no one within each individual church that has any "gifts" except the man called "pastor" or "elder" or "teacher" - and because he went to school? The church of God is a "Living Organism" and God provides the body with "every man to profit withal".

I believe that one of the many failings of the modern day churches is the failure on the part of the body to recognize men within each church, that God has blessed with a "gift", but because they have not matriculated and graduated from "Bible school", are neither recognized or appreciated as being able to "profit withal". (By this modern-day criteria all of the original 12 Disciples/Apostles would not be eligible to serve - and niether would our Lord and Savior!)

The words or phrase "face to face" is the KEY to understanding this verse. There are 11 verses in the entire Bible where the phrase "face to face" shows up - Guess what the other 10 verses say in regards to the meaning? All the other verses where "face to face" is used in the Bible it means - FACE TO FACE! That is, every other place in the scriptures its a face to face meeting between God and some servant of His or a face to face meeting between 2 men.

We are commanded to study the word of God: 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (The only place in the Bible that commands us to study.)

Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Isaiah 28:10 & Isaiah 28:13 are the only verses in the Bible that tell us HOW to study the Scriptures. Do you think for a moment that God is going to go against the only instructions He has given us in the entire Bible on how to rightly divide His Holy word?

"Face to face" settles the matter for a Bible believer. With the correct understanding of the words "face to face", you should be able to discern what these verses say - not what they mean - on your own, without the aid of any Bible "scholar".

I hope that you will prayerfully consider this post and should you still disagree you won't be alone. I have a couple of dear Christian brothers who disagree with me and it hasn't affected our fellowship of love for one another.

George

Well put, George, well put.

What is the glass as used in other places in the NT?

Face to face - in James 1, we see ourselves, see our face reflected back to us. In 2 Corinthians 3:18, we see Christ reflected in all of Scripture. In this passage, we see the OT opened up to our understanding, and see Jesus face to face in the Scriptures - rather than having the OT veiled to us, now we see Him face to face.

Please see my response on page 1 of this thread for a look at the words used in this passage - of which I have not seen anyone address (except for this phrase here).

C'mon Jerry, you can't have it both ways.

I Cor. 13 - "For now we see through a glass darkly...now I know in part..."
II Cor. 3 - You suggest Paul tells the church at Corinth that they can see Him. What happened to seeing through a glass darkly?

Furthermore,

"now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."

Was Paul alive when the canon was completed? No, he wasn't waiting for a "perfect/complete Bible" to come along. He was, however, waiting for the return of Christ!

He was referring to that which is perfect (complete). With the New Testament, we are no longer looking through a glass darkly when it comes to reading and studying out the Old Testament. However, when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians (one of the earliest NT books written) the OT was not opened up completely yet. Now we have Hebrews and other NT passages to open up the OT types and shadows - therefore we are seeing Jesus face to face in the Scriptures.

This is the part that "gets me." There are 11 verses in the Bible with the phrase "face to face." If this interpretation is correct, this is the only time the phrase is allegorical and not literal. Saying we see the Lord "face to face" today strikes me as the same kind of "spiritualization" that the reformed folks engage in when they deny the literal 1000 year reign of Christ on earth.

I certainly don't believe that sign gifts are in use today, but this verse doesn't present a strong argument to me for that. Furthermore, aren't the sign gifts going to be in use again before the 1000 year reign?

The word for face here means "the front (as being towards view)." To the lost, the OT has a veil over it - with the NT (and salvation), it is not a glass darkly (enigma, riddle - something hard to figure out), but something we can view clearly now.

Here is the same word used:

2 Corinthians 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

Obviously the glass here is the Word of God - as we see the Lord in the Bible, we are transformed into His image by the Holy Spirit.

2 Corinthians 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Same word for face.

James 1:23-25 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

Same word for face, and the glass is again obviously referring to the Word of God - which is called here "the perfect law of liberty."

It fits "when that which is perfect is come."

I may not be explaining it very well in this thread - but the two other places where glass is used in the NT, it is referring to the Bible. Some of the same words are used in all three passages - why would this one passage be referring to something totally different?

Verses 8-12 all refer to the same thing - the doing away with the sign gifts. I am certainly not trying to make verse 12 stand alone and teach something the rest of the context is not.

I don't say this to make you accept my position, but it is interesting to note that David Cloud, Oliver B. Greene, D.A. Waite, Charles Spurgeon, Dennis Corle, and various other solid men of God hold to this same position (though I may not have explained it as well as them).

Here is part of the study referred to one page one of this thread:

Re: 1 Corinthians 13:12 - By Jerry Bouey

{All underlines are mine – My comments are in Italics - George}

“1 Corinthians was one of the first New Testament books to be written.”

How do you know that this was one of the “first” New Testament Books written? This is pure speculation on the part of some “scholars” which should not even enter into your "premise", since it has no bearing on the subject at hand. However, if you are using this “speculation” as part of your argument, then you are already starting out on the “wrong” foundation i.e. the “speculation” of “scholars” – which has proven over and over to be nothing but sand – QUICKSAND.

“At that point in time, the early church only did know in part.”

Are you claiming that now - we have arrived? (we know so much more now); that is now - we “know even as also I am known”? The Scriptures say that: “. . . . . . for thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men” [1 Kings 8:39 & 2 Chronicles 6:30] and again: “And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts . . . .” [Luke 16:15]; “And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;” [Acts 15:8]. Are you claiming that NOW we know even as God knows us? Is that possible in the sorry state that we find ourselves in (I’m referring to our carnal flesh; our weak conscience; our wicked & deceitful heart; our minds susceptible to corruption; our spirit that can get dirty – not the Holy Spirit that dwells within each believer). We aren’t going to: “know even as also I am known” until we get our glorified bodies and are made perfect in Christ – at last.

I do not know everything. And though I have met several really talented Bible teachers and have read many more – I have yet to meet any Christian elder/pastor/teacher that knows everything. The verse says: 1 Corinthians 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. Paul included himself in the equation.

“We need the full NT to open up the Old Testament for us.”

Amen to that brother, but I will have to add a “caveat” to that – We also need the Holy Spirit to give us discernment, understanding, and wisdom; and to reveal the truth of God’s words to us in both the Old & New Testaments [1 Corinthians 2:1-16]. Possessing or having the whole “Canon” or complete Bible has never been a “guarantee” for doctrinal purity or for God’s people knowing: “even as also I am known”. (The Eastern Orthodox Church had the Scriptures (in the hallowed GREEK) and I doubt that any one on this Forum would say that that church is a “bastion of orthodoxy”.

”Please consider the points raised in this study, as well as the word studies and parallel passages: 1 Corinthians 13:8-12.”

When I first came across this thread in the Forum a couple of weeks ago I followed your link to your web page and read (and re-read) your paper on this subject. I disagreed with it then and I still do – but I never responded. But when I noticed some other brethren on this Forum in agreement with your “premise” or interpretation of the verses I could no longer “contain”.

“Obviously there are some here who are going to disagree with my overall premise right at the start - but at least read the studies, see which words are used in the passage and the parallel passages (to determine if they are indeed referring to the same thing – i.e., the glass/mirror being God's Word, which it is clearly declared in two other NT passages), and see the definitions of the words used - I list both Strong's and Webster's - so even those people who dislike Strong's can still see what the actual English words mean. Then after studying these passages and words out, you will be in a better position to discuss this issue - even if you disagree with my conclusions.”

I read and re-read the “study” that you presented and I don’t mean to be offensive, but to be honest, when I saw the method you employ to study the Bible and how you arrive at your "conclusions" – it scares me. For example: you statement above about "the glass/mirror being God's Word" - did you forget Revelation 21:21? "And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass". Glass in the Bible if it is looked INTO is a mirror; glass that you look THROUGH is "transparent glass". There are at least 2 kinds of glass not just one as you have presented your "premise".

I do not nor have I ever used Strong’s for any other purpose than looking up verses with the same word in it. The Bible has given us the only method by which we are to study: [Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:] and just to make sure that we “get it” God repeated Himself: [Isaiah 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.] I never have allowed James Strong or Noah Webster determine the meaning of any word in the Bible when it comes to spiritual matters. I want to be clear here – For example: when it comes to the definition of the body-soul-spirit (our “substance”) & the heart-soul-conscience (our “faculties”) I would no sooner rely on Strong or Webster to give me God’s definition of these words than I would Charles Darwin or Richard Dawkins!

If I want the definition of the heart (approximately 950 occurrences in 880 verses); or mind (111 occurrences in 108 verses); or conscience (32 occurrences in 30 verses - None in the Old Testament)- ditto body, soul, & spirit; etc. I read ALL of the verses {“line upon line”} and I Collate, Categorize, Compile & Catalogue the verses (by “precept upon precept” – “here a little, and there a little”). I don’t go to a man (Strong or Webster or Ruckman or Cloud or any other man) to get the definition.

This takes time and effort – but by the time I am through I will have a far better idea of what God says and means than taking a “short cut” to Strong’s and get his personal definition of what he “thinks” a Hebrew or Greek word “means”.

(The following is part of Jerry's post):
Song of Solomon 2:9 My beloved is like a roe or a young hart: behold, he standeth behind our wall, he looketh forth at the windows, shewing himself through the lattice.

"In the OT, we see Jesus through a lattice, a screen, hidden - until the light of the NT shines on the OT - then you see Him everywhere, in the construction of the tabernacle, in the animal sacrifices, in the countless types, in the Messianic prophecies, and even in many other passages of Scripture (as the one who is speaking - see Isaiah 48:16, as the Angel of the Lord, as God walking in the Garden of Eden - see John 1:18 [it wasn't the Father appearing to them, as no man has seen the Father at any time - it was the Son that took on the appearance of flesh, then later was manifest in the flesh])."

I believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the Old Testament in "type"; prophecies; etc. However, I believe that most of your exegesis is pure "speculation" and or "private interpretation" and I shall endeavor in a later post to analyze your whole thesis (premise) in great detail.

Aloha brother Sammy,

Just a short note to your post:

By the way, I believe in:
1. Speaking in tongues when you talk in different languages to preach the completed Word of God. (AMEN TO THAT - George)
2. Prophesying when it means "forth telling" the completed Word of God. (AMEN TO THAT - George)
3. Healing as an answer to prayer according to the completed Word of God. (AMEN TO THAT - George)

But:
1. There is no GIFT OF TONGUES today for we already have the completed Word of God. (How about: "There is no GIFT OF TONGUES today" because the "sign gifts" have ceased because God is not dealing with the nation of Israel - at this time - George)
2. There is no extra-biblical PROPHECIES needed today for we have the completed Word of God. (How about: "There is no extra-biblical PROPHECIES needed today" because the "sign gifts" have ceased because God is not dealing with the nation of Israel - at this time - George)
3. There is no GIFT OF HEALING of "ALL KINDS OF SICKNESS AND ALL KINDS OF DISEASES" as was done in Matthew 4 when there was not yet the completed Word of God, for the complete revelation tell us in 2 Corinthians 12 that God's GRACE IS SUFFICIENT (gift of healing is not) and that God is able to do above what we ask or think (Eph), and not just merely give what we ask (Mat 7). ("There is no GIFT OF HEALING" - Agreed about the "gift" & "healers" but again, How about: The "sign gifts" have ceased because God is not dealing with the nation of Israel - at this time - George)

According to the completed Word of God, in this age of grace, God may or may not answer our prayer for physical healing for God's grace of salvation is sufficient, whereas under the kingdom program they receive instantaneous answer to there specific prayers for physical healing, but they have to endure and hold on to the end to be saved.
Which one is better? (I'm with you on most of what you said - But how about: According to the word of God, "in this age of grace", God is not obligated to perform any physical signs, miracles, or wonders - because we (Christians) are to walk by "Faith" and not by "Sight". We are not Jews, who could "require" signs [1Corinthians 1:22]. We are those who by faith (through the hearing of the word of God) have received Salvation through our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ - We cannot require signs, etc. for: "the just shall live by faith" - NOt sight.)

Physical healing, no eternal security?
or
Eternal security even without physical healing?

I'm complete in Christ. I don't speak in tongues-no gift of healing-no extra-biblical prophesying-no poison drinking - no handling snakes, but I'm saved by the grace of God and nothing shall be able to separate me from the love of Christ. Amen! (Amen and amen to that brother!)

Yours for the Lord Jesus Christ and for His Holy Word,

George (My comments in Italics)

Bro. George,
Thanks for being clear which one do you agree and which one you do not agree. You're right in saying that I'm not alone in this position. So please allow me some time. I'm very open minded, especially when confronted with actual words of Scripture. I'll give my reply in the next post.
Thank you!

Bro. George,
I agree with what you said, although that I'm not quite convinced that it excludes the canon of Scriptures.

I seldom consult commentaries except that of Bible believers (although they're still scarce here), for I was taught the best commentary to the Bible is the Bible.

So I re-read this passage again, and here are some of my observations:

1 Corinthians 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

Here, Paul is talking about something incomplete - "in part". As you know, 1 Corinthians was written during the Acts transition period. Other than the gospel of grace, Paul knew when he wrote 1 Corinthians that God progressively reveals His Word to him in "visions" and "revelations" to come (2Cor. 12:1). Since the only sure sign that he speaks the Word of God is to have these sign gifts to confirm the word, they have to have that. But...

1 Corinthians 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

So I believe that that which is perfect refers to the complete revelation of God (dispensationally speaking, the full revelation of the mystery to Paul), thus, the completed Word of God, and that includes the canon (if we believe the complete Word of God is the canon of 66 books).

Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:

God is gradually revealing to Paul the mystery, and so that what Paul writes "fulfills" the Word of God.

But during the Acts period, when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians, there are still things not so clear:

1Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

But now, what was unclear is now made "manifest":

Colossians 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:

I further observed that in 1 Corinthians 13, there is no reference to Christ being the one spoken of as "that which is perfect".

1 Corinthians 13:12a For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face:
1 Corinthians 13:12b now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

I don't think, this is not "spiritualizing" to say that Paul is using the expressions "see through a glass, darkly" and "face to face" as an illustration. You know, he is not looking through a literal "glass" so it is safe to say he is not referring to a literal "face". Looking through dark crystal or dark eyeglasses is much more different than looking face to face. This is an illustration. The interpretation of that is that "now" (that time) Paul knows "in part" (the dark "glass"), but then he shall "know" even as also he is "known" ("face to face").

Looking at the structure of the verse above, notice the semicolons and the COLON in between. We can see the parallelism there. The first half is interpreted by the last half. If this is correct, this is another wonder of the KJB's "built-in commentary".

see through a glass, darkly = now I know in part
face to face = then shall I know

It's true that "face to face" means "face to face". Here in 1 Corinthians, "glass" means "glass" and "face to face" means "face to face", but the literal glass is used to illustrate "in part" knowledge while "face to face" is used to illustrate clear, complete knowledge.

Finally, if "face to face" is the literal fulfillment rather than the illustration, with whom is Paul going to see "face to face"? With that "which is perfect"? The Lord and His Word are both "perfect". I find no reference to Christ in the whole chapter, but it's sure he's dealing with sign gifts soon to be done away with being replaced by something perfect or complete.

Then, the signs were around until the NT was "complete." When John penned his last words, the signs dissappeared, or maybe when the books were all gathered into one canon, then they were "done away."

Or, perhaps, (in his final words) Paul left Trophimus "at Miletum sick" because the gifts were already gone, long before the NT was "perfect."

Time and time again, y'all try to make it (that which is perfect) the Book and it just doesn't work.

It works!

In Colossians 1:25, Paul says his ministry was to "fulfil" the Word of God. His epistles are going to perfect that which is lacking in the whole revelation of God. If you've read well my previous posts, I said that John's "Revelation" added nothing new to OT revelations (prophecies) except to add more details. But Paul's was TOTALLY NEW for it was hidden in th past.

When it was revealed to him, God had to give him apostolic signs to validate his ministry - "to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery" (Eph. 3). As he reaches to the end of his journey, and the lacking revelation has been perfected, signs have ceased.

John wrote the last book in the Bible and was given the details of revelations REVEALED BEFORE, but Paul was the last apostle given the last revelaton NOT REVEALED BEFORE. Thus, when that which is perfect is come (the complete revelation of the Word of God), that which is in part shall be done away (sign gifts).

Sign gifts and added revelations are gradually recalled to the end of the canon. For example, since the completed revelation of the mystery and the dispensation of grace was given to Paul, signs have ceased; and after John the Apostle have penned the prophetic book of the Revelation, there were no more God-ordained extra-Biblical visions and revelations.

See? It works.

I don't know if anyone can prove that Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr or any of the "church fathers" ever spoke in tongues, healed miraculously, received extra-Biblical visions and revelations, and delivered extra-Biblical prophecies. The next person I remember (there may be others) in church history, who claims to have seen a vision, was the Roman Catholics' first "pope", Constantine. Some of the latter ones who received extra-Biblical visions were Joseph Smith and Ellen White. Of course, there are many others, since they do not believe that "that which is perfect is come".

Let me remind everyone that the context of the "charity" chapter (1 Cor. 13) is signs. They sure need charity during the Acts transition period. The gift of tongues is one of the signs and it (1 Cor. 13:8) shall cease when that which is perfect is come. If it's not the complete revelation of God's Word, then what is it? The only verse that tell us that tongues SHALL CEASE is 1 Cor. 13:8, and the only verse that tell us WHEN it shall cease is 1 Cor. 13:10. If that which is perfect has not come yet, then "forbid not to speak in tongues" till that comes (1 Cor. 14:39).

I absolutely agree with Bro. George when he said that the reason why NO SIGNS are used by God today is because signs are for the Jews, and God is no longer dealing with the Jews today.
They have signs in Corinth because God was still dealing with the "Jew first" during the Acts period, but after that, there is no more advantage for them. God is now dealing with all men without distinction. So signs have no use today.

Forbid not to speak in tongues - an application of that today could be to let a German missionary preach in an English-speaking church if there is an interpretor present. If not, he has to be silent.

Can't find the return of Christ in the context.

You may not take this type of thinking too seriously: The next time I see a reference to the coming of Christ is in 1 Cor 15, but before that is even mentioned, the word "Scripture" pops up. "Scripture" is nearer to 1 Cor. 13:10 than "coming".:)

Maybe he can speak with hands and let the deaf interpreter interpret. :D

Okay Biblestudent,

You want to believe that Paul is really saying,
"I'm waiting for God to reveal more to me so that we can have the complete revelation of God. When He does, I'll know even as also I am known. As a matter of fact, we'll see everything in the OT about the Lord that we previously missed."

Well then, what revelation was Paul still waiting for? In this epistle of I Corinthians he already addresses the gospel, baptism, the Lord's supper, the spiritual body of Christ, the sign gifts, the rapture, the judgment seat of Christ, the resurrection, the kingdom, and more...


Also, John added no new revelation??? WHAT? Did you read the first three chapters? Where was that previously "revealed" in the OT propecies that he was just giving details on it?

Aloha again brother,

Instead of going through your points - one by one this time, let me say that I understand (at least "in part" (: ), where you are coming from and your Scriptural reasons for believing the way that you do. (I am not saying the reasoning is "careless", but it does require a lot of "speculation" or "interpretation" to arrive at your (and others) conclusions.

Let me show you where I am coming from instead:

1 Corinthians 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

Who is is speaking? - Paul. Who is he speaking to? The church at Corinth.

Paul says: "we know in part" - that includes Paul and the church. What did they "know in part"? Is it: "knowledge (in general)"?; "knowledge" of the "Canon"?; "knowledge" of the Scriptures? Just exactly what is it that we only "know in part"? I believe that it is referring to - "knowledge" of the Scriptures.

Just exactly what is it that Paul was referring to when he said: "we prophesy in part"? This is easier - I believe that it is referring to Scripture (not the "Canon).

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

The "that" in the first part of the verse can only refer to the Lord (at His coming) or (as you propose) the formation of the Canon - the completion of God's Holy word. {I believe that we could agree that it must be one or the other}

I know of no verses in the Bible that promises (or even hints) of a "coming" of the "Canon", but there are numerous verses in both the Old Testament and the New Testament that testify to our Lord's return (His coming again). I think that this is a "point" in my favor.

Then what is the "that" of the second half of the verse - which is done away with? I believe that is referring to Paul's and the church's (and mine & yours) "partial knowledge" of the scriptures. I think that you believe that it is referring to the incompleteness of the Scriptures until the "Canon" was formed. We both have reasons for believing as we do - I believe my reasons involve less "speculation" or "interpretation" on my part than on yours.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

What would the above verses have to do with the formation of the "Canon"? Paul is illustrating or using a simile to explain "knowing In part". When we were children we didn't know what we know now. He is referring to our "personal knowledge" - not the completion of knowledge or the completion of the "Canon".

12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

This is why I said that this verse settled the matter for me: the "now" was in Paul's time. "we see through a glass, darkly;" the "we" = Paul and the church. They are seeiing "through" the glass - not looking into it! Do we see "through" the Scriptures? If someone is seeing through a glass they are looking at something on the other side of it - not their reflection.

The "darkly" - would be like seeing through "tinted" windows. Even with the completed Canon we still don't understand everything (i.e. our differences on this topic is a good example).

The " then" is referring to some specific time when an event is going to occur. And when that event does occur - Paul is going to be there! Was Paul present at the formation of the "Canon"?

The "face to face" is the piece de resistance to this matter. How can we (anyone) ignore the other 10 verses in the Bible in the use of this term? Every other place in the Holy Scriptures where the term "face to face" is used it refers to a face to face meeting between 2 parties! If we ignore these Scriptures we are going against God's teaching on HOW to rightly divide His word [Isaiah 28:10 & 13]!

Lastly: "now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known." The "now" is referring (again) to Paul's time. the "then" is at some point of time in the future - at which point Paul ("I") is going to know even as also Paul ("I") is known.

How can this possibly be the formation of the "Canon"? Did God wait until the completion of the "Canon" here on earth before He revealed to Paul everything there is to know? So that Paul (somewhere about 250 A.D.) suddenly knew "even as he was known?" - I think not.

As I said at the beginning of my posts on this subject - This is not an issue that I would break fellowship with a fellow believer. I think I understand where they are coming from. I believe that I have the stronger position (relying on Scripture only) with less personal "speculation" and private "interpretation". There is a whole lot more to this study and it involves knowing what the church of God is; and its purpose; and how it is supposed to function. And the purpose of "gifts" within the church. Obviously we don't have time or the space here to deal with it all. I'm not suggesting that I have all the answers. But I do know where all the answers are and where they aren't.

Yours in the Lord Jesus Christ for His Holy Word,

George

This is called "charity".:) "Stronger position" is what we're after. Some of our brethren in my country who reject "right division" do not realize that it only strengthens the fundamentals of the faith.
I know that we both agree that signs have ceased. Concerning "disagreements", it has been my principle that "when the waters are not clear, don't dive". Speculation and forced interpretation we both reject. May the Holy Spirit enlighten us all.
Nonetheless, browsing though all the threads, I see that 100% agreement on all the issues is an impossibility. To know which position is stronger, what I do is to assume one position to know where it is weak and where it is strong, then assume the other position and defend it to know its strengths and weaknesses, too. Finally, I get to the plain Word of God...
I think most of us here doesn't have a know-it-all attitude. That's one reason I call myself "Bible student". Having said this, we can proceed to further discussion as time permits and as long as we deem it necessary.
I will post my answers later, as I see that if I give them hastily, it appears more of a speculation (or is it?).
But to you, Bro. George, you know that I know you have a good heart. :) I thank God for you!

Bible student

Do you think Paul had no more visions and revelations after writing 1 Corinthians?

A sample of John's Revelation revealed before (in Revelation 1-3):

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Revelation 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

Revelation 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

Your Revelation samples prove nothing against what I noted. If that were all that John wrote in the first three chapters, then perhaps. But he (actually Jesus Christ) had some things to say the some churches that were not prior revelations. You see my point.

Anyway, the other statement was to refute the foolishness that Paul was still "looking through the OT darkly" (as so many read it). The book of I Cor. itself proves the extent of Paul's knowledge and understanding (prev. posted). You can hardly say that he is still looking through a glass darkly awaiting more revelation, and when it ("the last and therefore completed revelation") comes, he'll be able to see what he was missing.

A Proposed Challenge
 

To those of you who are zealous for your position on "that which is perfect" being the completed scriptures or as Biblestudent argues, the last new revelation, and not necessarily the canon. Either way, may I challenge any of you to give me one example of something that Paul had revealed to him after he wrote I Corinthians that he did not already have a knowledge of when he penned the book.
NOTE: Be sure that your example is something that "cleared up" his dark vision into the OT.

Should you not be able to teach me (and if your position is correct, this should be easy), I shall say that Paul was NOT awaiting a complete/perfect book. But then what could Paul be waiting for?

Rom. 8:23 ...waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body...(when he'll) be conformed to the image of his Son...

He didn't say "when I am perfect", but "when that which is perfect is come."

Before I take pbiwolski's challenge, I would also like to propose a challenge. According to 1 Cor. 13:8-10, when shall tongues cease? At the Rapture? Yes or No.