Former pentecostal

[CS1]

I agree. It is all historical account and Luke gives the full account in chapter 9. In chapter 22 he is giving the defense of Paul and what Paul said. Acts 22:1 Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you.

In chapter 26 he once again gives defense for himself. Acts 26:1 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself:

Which in this defense he does not even mentioning being blind or anything that would have happened afterwards.

Acts 26:12-21 Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, 13At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. 14And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 15And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. 16But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; 17Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, 18To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. 19Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: 20But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

In his defense's he did not give the full account and stuck to what he felt was relevant for his defense's to the hearing parties. So I agree with what you say and the conclusion that can be drawn. As each telling has it's own individual purpose based upon the hearer's. As seeing how Christ also said that the Spirit would give us the words to say in our defense we can conclude that God found this sufficient.

Amen. I think you have made a far more authoritative point from the word of God than what I provided in my post. Paul's defense was HIS Testimony, which HE told all about the Road to Damascus experience.

 

[TheLearner]

A few years back, I was convinced that MOST of the old denominations
had finally come to believe "that which is perfect" was referring to Jesus.
Why don't you check with some of them ... and see if this is still true?

1 John 3
Easy-to-Read Version
We Are God’s Children
3 The Father has loved us so much! This shows how much he loved us: We are called children of God. And we really are his children. But the people in the world don’t understand that we are God’s children, because they have not known him. 2 Dear friends, now we are children of God. We have not yet been shown what we will be in the future. But we know that when Christ comes again, we will be like him. We will see him just as he is. 3 He is pure, and everyone who has this hope in him keeps themselves pure like Christ.

 

[TheLearner]

not keeping up,wife is already kicking me off by sitting in my lap.

 

[GWH]

Here's my take on "when that which is perfect", which CANNOT be Jesus since he isn't a "that". I previously posted this as part of a short study on spiritual gifts.

REPOST

The subject of spiritual gifts is difficult to understand, hence very controversial, and equally difficult to unravel.

First, look at the way Paul began the Corinthian letter starting at 1 Cor1:10 wherein he's discussing contentions and divisions in Corinth and the need for unity which sets the stage for the rest of 1 Cor; and keep in mind, this was written to them in their time, addressing their near term issues, and not to us nor considering some future event. And note that the church was a fledgling body with little to guide and hold it together, prone to division, contention, and falling away, such as was also warned of in Heb 6 as well.

You have to first ask yourself what is "that which is perfect"? It's not referring to Jesus or his return, Jesus is not a "that".

The answer can be found in Eph 4:13 wherein it states 'till we all come to the unity of the faith unto a perfect man, that being the perfection of the body of Christ: this then addressing the previous need for the miraculous manifestation of the gifts, parts of the body as equated to the body of a man, noted in 1 Cor 12:8-10. We now have the bible to guide us and no longer need such miraculous piece meal parts of the body. Also note, the interlinear says "should come" not "is come" which also supports the idea of the possible replacing of something permanent for the temporal nature of the gifts.

The "face to face" and "known as we are known" relates to the distinction between the OT writings when reading Moses, and coming to Christ via the NT and the comparison to the veil when reading Moses, and we now, and they then, being able to look into a glass (mirror) and seeing a reflection of Christ as opposed to our own image.

To piece it all together, you must consider the gifts and their need at that time, all being necessary in the early church to edify and grow it, such as by tongues, being a sign to unbelievers, miracles, prophesy, etc.

I've posted all the pertinent parts of scriptures from 1 Cor 12, 13, Gal 3, and Eph 4. Look closely at the similarity of words and phraseology used and piece those similar words and phrases together to get an understanding of their meaning as relates to the subject.

Show trimmed content

The "perfect" or completeness (NIV) that comes in 1CR 13:10 most likely refers to the Messiah's mission of making salvation possible for humanity by dying as atonement for their sins, which is why he cried out "It is finished! (JN 19:30) or completed.