[Biblestudent]

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".

[Biblestudent]

Originally Posted by jerry

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.

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

[pbiwolski]

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?

[George]

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

[Biblestudent]

Originally Posted by George

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

[Biblestudent]

Originally Posted by pbiwolski

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?

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.

[pbiwolski]

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.

[pbiwolski]

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."

[Biblestudent]

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.