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]).

[Biblestudent]

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.

[George]

Originally Posted by jerry

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]).

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.

[pbiwolski]

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.

[Biblestudent]

"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?

[pbiwolski]

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)