TONGUES false teaching.

[Nehemiah6]

He also said in 1 Corth. 13 that "TONGUES would CEASE".

Correct. There are three specific spiritual gifts (all associated with divine revelations) which would cease once the entire Bible was completed -- prophecies, tongues, and supernatural knowledge.

Therefore we do not find the Apostolic Fathers claiming to be apostles, prophets, or tongue-speakers. They recognized that the spiritual gifts of apostles and prophets were limited to those who had gone before. And tongues were a sign to unbelieving Jews. Therefore after 70 AD (when Israel was dispersed) the reason for tongues was no longer there.

 

[CS1]

He also said in 1 Corth. 13 that "TONGUES would CEASE".

he did not say "tongues will cease." The context is not that. That kind of thinking one would open up the word of God and see " Judas hung himself, and turn to another page in the bible that says go and do like wise. Then suggest the bible said to hang yourself. what a joke

 

[CS1]

I do not agree with you. I actually do not have an opinion at all.

From the very 1st post I have made it a priority to quote Scripture and not to make opinions.

No.....I have not attend ALL of them and I never said that i had. I actually said....."as many Pentecostal church meetings as I have ".

Did you actually read the Scriptures???? Did you see my name attached to what was in your Bible. Now allow me to post again the actual words of the Scriptures in 1 Corinthians 14:34..........
"women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not pemitted to to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. "

Is that what the Bible says????

Read chapters 12-14 and anyone can see that the CONTEXT is "Tongues". Then Paul says in 14:34.....
"women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not pemitted to to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. "

What did PAUL then mean?????

Women should not drive cars to church? Are cars in the CONTEXT of chapter 12 - 14?
Women should not stand up in church? Is standing up the context of chapter 12-14?
Women should not wave their hands in church. Is waving hands in the context of chapters 12-14?

Instead of attacking me for posting what the BIBLT ACTUALLY SAYS why don;t you just simply say this...........
"I do not care what PAUL said in the Bible. I am going to speak in tongues because that is WHAT I WANT TO DO".

I do not mean to be a smart illack.....but that is what all of you are saying whether you believe it or not. I am just being brutally honest and it hurts because it says to not do something that you WANT TO DO.

you are wrong in your biblical understanding that all. And in error.

 

[CS1]

The word "GIFTS" in 1 Corinthians 12:1 is "ITALITIZED" in the KJV which means it was added for better understanding.

The Greek "pneumatikon" can be either masculine or neuter, referring to either MEN or to "GIFTS". The context is determinative. Here it is better understood as neuter denoting..."spiritual GIFTS" which is the seen in verse #4 and again in chapter #14:1.

"Not to be ignorant" is NOT about the context of chapters 12-14 as it is a common phrase used several times by Paul in his writings.

Verse #4.........
"There are different GIFTS, but the same Spirit. "

what a blatant attempt to Eisogeisis the 1cor chapter 12. Only verse one was added? That is absurd. The context of the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit is listed starting from verse four if you like. You are trying to remove the context with some wrong approach in using grammatical structure? Wrong! the three chapters were not written with verses guy, they are unit Chapters; meaning the context actually starts in chapters 11 through 14. YOu can't use a verse in 14 to deal with what Paul said in 12. Error.

 

[calibob]

he did not say "tongues will cease." The context is not that. That kind of thinking one would open up the word of God and see " Judas hung himself, and turn to another page in the bible that says go and do like wise. Then suggest the bible said to hang yourself. what a joke

It used to be a pray read joke. A couple decades ago there used to be a cult (That claimed to be Christians) they called themselves the local church. They taught that education is a sin because the Bible says, "Lean not to your own understanding... thereby it was a sin to try to understand anything. Including the Bible. They would chant for hours. Then pray for god to give each one a verse for the day.

They would close there eyes open the Bible. touch any page anywhere, stand and share the verse of the day. After taking turns doing that they were supposed to repeat the verse each one was given over and over. All day long. They all dressed the same too. In robes.

 

[CS1]

Now your web site name is "Scribe". NO disrespect to you my brother but it is time to be one instead of using the name.

Now turn in your Bible and read the Scriptures for yourself in 1 Corth. 13:10........
“But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” .

Now then, where in that Scripture does it say that as you stated.....
"I never understood it to be a person but rather our condition when we are glorified, post resurrection and see him face to face."

When we are glorified WE WILL BE GOING somewhere....to Heaven".

Does the Scripture in view say we are going anywhere????? You are accepting what you have read on some religiouse web sites but again ask yourself.....WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE ACTUALL SAY?????

This verse says nothing about us going anywhere, but it does teach that something is coming to us. Something coming to us and us going somewhere are two completely different situations, therefor the thought that the PERFECT is us going to heaven is not Scripturally correct.

Again.....The Greek Grammar does not allow the Perfect to be JESUS. The pronoun is neuter and can only be applied to something neutral and not MASCULINE and Jesus as a MASCULINE Human MAN.

Now that is what is there!!!!!

stop thinking like a Greek and more like Hebrew. You are approaching 1cor 12 through 14 in a canal mentality instead of illuminated ONE. Paul is no doubt speaking of the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit" which you will not accept as normative in the Church during the writing of this Letter. Why do you not see the now application then when Pau wrote it? It is clear the gifts which are listed were being used in the church at that time. YOU refuse to see that but will overlook that truth and then somehow use the context given to remove what Paul was correcting then as he was led to do by God.

Everything we see from the Lord HIMself through the Book of Acts to the letters of Paul shows nothing of the power of God ceasing. it's just not there. BUT somehow Greek masculine removes what we see. lol.

 

[Major]

Once again, we have @Magenta to thank for this beautiful panel that I believe is very appropriate here and now.

​

I've seen and have been encouraged to fraudulently display Gifts of the Holy spirit such as speaking in tongues and healing. I already however had experienced the filling of peace, love and joy beyond my imagination so I shook my head, walked away and refused to blaspheme the Holy Spirit. I asked for the Lord to make himself real to me before I was convinced. He did, I'm convinced and I will not, can not fake or deny it. Is that clear enough?

There are reasons people act unintentionally as if the have something that they do not. Wass psychosis, delusion, hypnosis, brain washing etc. They are sick, not frauds. However we are individuals and the Holy Spirit knows our capabilities and dispenses different gifts in different measures. If some one is speaking tn what seems to be tongues and there's no one that understands. I might simply be groanings and or mutterings yond comprehension.

At Pentacost the tongues that were spoken were understood by more than a few but folks that bable incoherently are just making noise and causing disorder. god is orderly. A deacon would be justified to ask them to refrain from such behavior or excuse themselves and leave.

I think that I've been clear enough.

For some reason, many people on this site seem to want to argue. I do not intend to do so. ALL I have doen is post what the Bible says.

Tongues as seen in the Bible was the gift of HEARING......Not speaking by all the people. The Bible says, not the old Major but the Bible clearly says that "Tongues were spoken by the JEWISH APOSTLES to JEWISH believers:

Read Acts 2:4-8...........
"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Aren't all these who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? "

If we receive and accept Mark 16:14-17 as a true record of our Lord’s words, the APOSTLES had, a few days or weeks before the Day of Pentecost, and THEY heard the promise that since THEY that believed should “speak with new tongues” with new powers of utterance.
Source: Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers .

If we read what is actually written in the Word of God it says in verse #7 that .............
"Utterly amazed, they asked: "Aren't all these who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears THEM (Apostles) in our native language? "

The Apostles who were gathered in Acts 2 spoke in their OWN Greek language and the JEWS gathered from all over the world heard THEM, the Apostles in their OWN language.

Now, can you please explain why so many people demand to speak in tongues which from my experiences are nothing more than unitelligable utterances?????

WHY in the face of clear words written in the English language do so many insist that this kind of experience is Biblical when obviously it is not.??????

 

[Major]

stop thinking like a Greek and more like Hebrew. You are approaching 1cor 12 through 14 in a canal mentality instead of illuminated ONE. Paul is no doubt speaking of the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit" which you will not accept as normative in the Church during the writing of this Letter. Why do you not see the now application then when Pau wrote it? It is clear the gifts which are listed were being used in the church at that time. YOU refuse to see that but will overlook that truth and then somehow use the context given to remove what Paul was correcting then as he was led to do by God.

Everything we see from the Lord HIMself through the Book of Acts to the letters of Paul shows nothing of the power of God ceasing. it's just not there. BUT somehow Greek masculine removes what we see. lol.

Thank you for your input. I do not agree with your observation.
The Scriptures I have posted and spoken to were written in the Greek. I am not a Hebrew so I have no need to act like one.

Lets consider Acts 2 then.
"All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Aren't all these who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? "

Now where in those Scriptures do we find that we are to speak in a way that no one else can interpret what is uttered as seen in churches today?

The gift of tongues was JEWS HEARING what was said by an Apostle who was a Jew.

I never, ever said that the "Power" of God ceased. I have never ever said that the 'gifts of God have ceased.

I am sure that as a moderator you have been encouraged to say something about what I have posted.

However, from my very First post I have said that the "SIGN GIFTS " given to the ELEVEN APOSTLES by the Lord Jesus Christ were given to THEM and not to you or me or anyone else today and that was the charge given to the ELEVEN in MArk 16.

 

[Major]

you are wrong in your biblical understanding that all. And in error.

Instead of accusations toward me, why not take the time to post why what I have said is not Biblical????

To say anyone is wrong and not explain WHY is incomprehensible!

That makes what you said simply your opinion.

 

[Scribe]

Now your web site name is "Scribe". NO disrespect to you my brother but it is time to be one instead of using the name.

Now turn in your Bible and read the Scriptures for yourself in 1 Corth. 13:10........
“But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” .

Now then, where in that Scripture does it say that as you stated.....
"I never understood it to be a person but rather our condition when we are glorified, post resurrection and see him face to face."

When we are glorified WE WILL BE GOING somewhere....to Heaven".

Does the Scripture in view say we are going anywhere????? You are accepting what you have read on some religiouse web sites but again ask yourself.....WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE ACTUALL SAY?????

This verse says nothing about us going anywhere, but it does teach that something is coming to us. Something coming to us and us going somewhere are two completely different situations, therefor the thought that the PERFECT is us going to heaven is not Scripturally correct.

Again.....The Greek Grammar does not allow the Perfect to be JESUS. The pronoun is neuter and can only be applied to something neutral and not MASCULINE and Jesus as a MASCULINE Human MAN.

Now that is what is there!!!!!

I did not say that which is perfect is come was Jesus Christ so why are you arguing the point as though I did. You are not addressing the point I made about the eschaton.

You are not a Greek scholar so you should probably present a reputable Greek Scholar's works rather than attempt your own. Someone with credibility and a history among academics. You will find plenty in the pdf link below.

I did not say anything about heaven so why are you arguing a point I never made. You're not very good at this debate thing are you?

You have failed at contradicting my interpretation and my interpretation still stands.

I suggested that which is perfect is come is a future CONDITION of us in eternity with Christ, whether that is our post resurrection, millennial reign, or our post millennial, post new earth, eternal state, that future state of perfection that we have yet to inherit even with the full canon of scripture.

If you do wish to refute my interpretation discuss the points I made not what someone else in your experiences have told you. I am not them. Debate them on their points, debate me on mine.

This 89 page pdf is my "Scribe worthy" presentation of the exegesis of 1 Cor 13:10. After you have read it I think you will be much more enlightened as to why my view is that of the eschaton.

Though Warfield may be the first writer to present the completion of canon as a replacement for signs and wonders, he did not mention 1 Corinthians 13 as his reason. According to this paper the first time 1 Cor 13 is used to say that the canon of scripture was that which is perfect was in the 1950s. I just read that yesterday. I did not know that interpretation was so new.

There are three main views of 1 Cor 13:10 today. 1) The state of perfection in the future. 2) The maturing of the church 3) the completion of the canon with the writing of the book of Revelation. All those that wrote and presented these views attempting a scholarly hermeneutic are presented in this 89 page Doctoral Thesis and it was not written by a Pentecostal so you can relax. LOL

You will probably find many of the writers and their presentations something that you would use to better present your argument for the canon interpretation. At least you should, they do a much better job than you have thus far.

I think after reading it you will agree that our future state of perfection is intended. It is the best hermeneutic of all the views presented.

When that which is Perfect is come We will not need the gifts for edification, nor will we need the canon of scripture to study either.

http://frankviola.org/theperfect.pdf *

"The preceding survey has demonstrated that the vast majority of biblical commentators throughout the history of the church have understood the expression τὸ τέλειον to be related in some way to the eschaton. Both the canon view and the mature body view are relatively recent interpretations that have developed out of the controversy over contemporary manifestations of the miraculous gifts. Both can be traced only to the mid or early twentieth century, though there were apparently some antecedents to both in the nineteenth century. (Page 70).

To identify τὸ τέλειον as the person of Jesus Christ would appear to be exegetically indefensible, despite the creative explanations that a few have offered. Also problematic would be the suggestion that it refers to the rapture (assuming a dispensational, pre-tribulation rapture scenario), for a resurgence of prophecy appears to be predicted as part of the ensuing events. More feasible is the appeal to eternity, though if this is understood to begin at the end of the millennium, it too would have difficulties. Perhaps it would be best to view τὸ τέλειον as referring to a condition rather than a specific time. This condition would begin at different times for different believers of the present dispensation: either at death or at the rapture. This might be referred to as the eternal state (assuming that the believer’s condition at either of those times would be essentially the same as it will be for all eternity) or perhaps even better, final maturity. (Page 72).

* CENTRAL BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
A HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION OF “THAT WHICH IS PERFECT” (1 Cor 13:10)
WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE ORIGIN OF THE “CANON VIEW”
A PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. LARRY D. PETTEGREW IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN PNEUMATOLOGY

By Rodney J Decker

 

[Major]

what a blatant attempt to Eisogeisis the 1cor chapter 12. Only verse one was added? That is absurd. The context of the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit is listed starting from verse four if you like. You are trying to remove the context with some wrong approach in using grammatical structure? Wrong! the three chapters were not written with verses guy, they are unit Chapters; meaning the context actually starts in chapters 11 through 14. YOu can't use a verse in 14 to deal with what Paul said in 12. Error.

I can not agree with your opinion.

I see that from your moniker you are a moderator. I do not mean to argue with any one and I assume that because you are joing this thread you are doing so to debate.

That being said, I contend and believe that most all scholars will agree that chapters 12-14 are to be taken as a literary unit from three facts:
1) the repetition of the Greek terms periV deV in 12:1 (cf. also 7:1, 25; 8:1; 16:1, 12) indicate a break from the previous discussion regarding the Lord's supper;
2) the material of 12-14 is unified around the idea of spiritual gifts and specifically the misuse of tongues.
3) chapters 15 and 16 concern themselves with matters other than spiritual gifts, i.e., the resurrection body, etc.

That being established it then becomes clear that the Context of chapters 12-14 is the tongues usage or misusage.

From the CONTEXT of 12 - 14, (and certain other passages) we can create with some degree of accuracy, it would appear that their was a problem in the Corinthian church.

Their questions addressed to Paul were not simply about spiritual gifts per se, as if all they needed were more information on the issue. Paul's response reveals that it is a problem with the gift of tongues and the nature of true spirituality.

Problem was that The Corinthians had made the gift of tongues the sign of true spirituality and had urged all to speak in tongues as evidence of such spirituality.

That is exactly the problem that still exists today. Please take the time to read what is being argued. People who are disagreeing with my comments are saying in essence thathave questionedheir salvation because I have said that the SIGN GIFTS were given to the ELEVEN and not to the church today.

Tongues were never ever said to be a sign of salvation to them who are saved. I HAVE NEVER QUESTIONED ANYONES SALVATION.

Back to 1 Corth. 12-14 information, but it is primarily corrective. Though he starts out in somewhat general fashion in chapter 12 and 13, he lands squarely on the issue of TONGUES in 14. in he provides the remedy for their abuse of the gift and their confused ideas about genuine spirituality. It appears that the Corinthians were more zealous for the "miraculous gifts" insofar as they demonstrated one's superior spirituality (14:12), but they had pursued such a course to the detriment of their fellow brothers and sisters. This penchant for the miraculous may very well reflect an over-realized eschatology that appears in their denial of the body certain sexual needs (7:6) and in their denial of the corporeal aspects of the resurrection body (15:1-58).
Source: The Argument of 1 Corinthians 12-14 | Bible.org

Thanks for your interest.

 

[Major]

I have heard and read many reasons (excuses) as to why a particular person will have decided to have nothing to do with tongues and that's fine. That is their decision.

However this nonsense you have posted above, is beyond reason. There is no scripture that says what you are trying to make it say. There is nothing whatsoever to indicate that when Paul mentions let women keep silence, he was thinking of tongues. Now to begin with, Paul does not actually tell all women everywhere for all time to shut up. That is error in and of itself, but to create the false conclusion he was speaking of tongues, illustrates your lack of proper exegetical understanding and an alarming apparent desire to make the Bible agree with your opinion.

Frankly, I honestly could care less if you speak in tongues, wish to speak in tongues or wish everyone would speak in tongues as per Paul.

It is your egregious and faithless rendering about women in general and tongues in particular, that, IMO, renders you one of many false teachers that parade across the internet with abandon, causing harm and leaving nothing of substance in your wake.

Now would you please take the time to post where MY NAME is found in 1 Corinthian 14:34.

You are quick to dismiss and make persoal accusation but I must ask you why you do not do the very same thing to the Apostle Paul or to God Himself.

You say I am........" egregious and faithless rendering about women in general and tongues in particular, that, IMO, renders you one of many false teachers that parade across the internet with abandon, causing harm and leaving nothing of substance in your wake"

AND ALl I have done is post the written Word of God. Now what does that say about you????

Are YOU rejecting what is found in the Bible or are you just mad at me for posting it to you???

 

[Major]

I did not say that which is perfect is come was Jesus Christ so why are you arguing the point as though I did. You are not addressing the point I made about the eschaton.

You are not a Greek scholar so you should probably present a reputable Greek Scholar's works rather than attempt your own. Someone with credibility and a history among academics. You will find plenty in the pdf link below.

I did not say anything about heaven so why are you arguing a point I never made. You're not very good at this debate thing are you?

You have failed at contradicting my interpretation and my interpretation still stands.

I suggested that which is perfect is come is a future CONDITION of us in eternity with Christ, whether that is our post resurrection, millennial reign, or our post millennial, post new earth, eternal state, that future state of perfection that we have yet to inherit even with the full canon of scripture.

If you do wish to refute my interpretation discuss the points I made not what someone else in your experiences have told you. I am not them. Debate them on their points, debate me on mine.

This 89 page pdf is my "Scribe worthy" presentation of the exegesis of 1 Cor 13:10. After you have read it I think you will be much more enlightened as to why my view is that of the eschaton.

Though Warfield may be the first writer to present the completion of canon as a replacement for signs and wonders, he did not mention 1 Corinthians 13 as his reason. According to this paper the first time 1 Cor 13 is used to say that the canon of scripture was that which is perfect was in the 1950s. I just read that yesterday. I did not know that interpretation was so new.

There are three main views of 1 Cor 13:10 today. 1) The state of perfection in the future. 2) The maturing of the church 3) the completion of the canon with the writing of the book of Revelation. All those that wrote and presented these views attempting a scholarly hermeneutic are presented in this 89 page Doctoral Thesis and it was not written by a Pentecostal so you can relax. LOL

You will probably find many of the writers and their presentations something that you would use to better present your argument for the canon interpretation. At least you should, they do a much better job than you have thus far.

I think after reading it you will agree that our future state of perfection is intended. It is the best hermeneutic of all the views presented.

When that which is Perfect is come We will not need the gifts for edification, nor will we need the canon of scripture to study either.

http://frankviola.org/theperfect.pdf *

"The preceding survey has demonstrated that the vast majority of biblical commentators throughout the history of the church have understood the expression τὸ τέλειον to be related in some way to the eschaton. Both the canon view and the mature body view are relatively recent interpretations that have developed out of the controversy over contemporary manifestations of the miraculous gifts. Both can be traced only to the mid or early twentieth century, though there were apparently some antecedents to both in the nineteenth century. (Page 70).

To identify τὸ τέλειον as the person of Jesus Christ would appear to be exegetically indefensible, despite the creative explanations that a few have offered. Also problematic would be the suggestion that it refers to the rapture (assuming a dispensational, pre-tribulation rapture scenario), for a resurgence of prophecy appears to be predicted as part of the ensuing events. More feasible is the appeal to eternity, though if this is understood to begin at the end of the millennium, it too would have difficulties. Perhaps it would be best to view τὸ τέλειον as referring to a condition rather than a specific time. This condition would begin at different times for different believers of the present dispensation: either at death or at the rapture. This might be referred to as the eternal state (assuming that the believer’s condition at either of those times would be essentially the same as it will be for all eternity) or perhaps even better, final maturity. (Page 72).

* CENTRAL BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
A HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION OF “THAT WHICH IS PERFECT” (1 Cor 13:10)
WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE ORIGIN OF THE “CANON VIEW”
A PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. LARRY D. PETTEGREW IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN PNEUMATOLOGY

By Rodney J Decker

If you did not say that then I apologize to you with all respect. There has been a lot of real negitive and mean spirited things said back to me and IF I got what some said mixed up with what you have said...I am deeply sorry.

Now you posted ...........
To identify τὸ τέλειον as the person of Jesus Christ would appear to be exegetically indefensible, despite the creative explanations that a few have offered. Also problematic would be the suggestion that it refers to the rapture (assuming a dispensational, pre-tribulation rapture scenario), for a resurgence of prophecy appears to be predicted as part of the ensuing events. More feasible is the appeal to eternity, though if this is understood to begin at the end of the millennium, it too would have difficulties. Perhaps it would be best to view τὸ τέλειον as referring to a condition rather than a specific time. This condition would begin at different times for different believers of the present dispensation: either at death or at the rapture. This might be referred to as the eternal state (assuming that the believer’s condition at either of those times would be essentially the same as it will be for all eternity) or perhaps even better, final maturity. (Page 72).

* CENTRAL BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
A HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION OF “THAT WHICH IS PERFECT” (1 Cor 13:10)
WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE ORIGIN OF THE “CANON VIEW”
A PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. LARRY D. PETTEGREW IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN PNEUMATOLOGY

THAT my dear brother is EXACTLY what I HAVE POSTED on this web site!!!!

Not those exact words but words to that effect as I did not know of the web site you used.

 

[Scribe]

If you did not say that then I apologize to you with all respect. There has been a lot of real negitive and mean spirited things said back to me and IF I got what some said mixed up with what you have said...I am deeply sorry.

Now you posted ...........
To identify τὸ τέλειον as the person of Jesus Christ would appear to be exegetically indefensible, despite the creative explanations that a few have offered. Also problematic would be the suggestion that it refers to the rapture (assuming a dispensational, pre-tribulation rapture scenario), for a resurgence of prophecy appears to be predicted as part of the ensuing events. More feasible is the appeal to eternity, though if this is understood to begin at the end of the millennium, it too would have difficulties. Perhaps it would be best to view τὸ τέλειον as referring to a condition rather than a specific time. This condition would begin at different times for different believers of the present dispensation: either at death or at the rapture. This might be referred to as the eternal state (assuming that the believer’s condition at either of those times would be essentially the same as it will be for all eternity) or perhaps even better, final maturity. (Page 72).

* CENTRAL BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
A HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION OF “THAT WHICH IS PERFECT” (1 Cor 13:10)
WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE ORIGIN OF THE “CANON VIEW”
A PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. LARRY D. PETTEGREW IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN PNEUMATOLOGY

THAT my dear brother is EXACTLY what I HAVE POSTED on this web site!!!!

Not those exact words but words to that effect as I did not know of the web site you used.

That was just a summary of some of the conclusions at the end of the paper, but the real delight is in reading all of the different hermeneuitcs on the 3 views.

What I wanted to address with you was that it was not the completion of the canon of scripture that is meant by That which is perfect is come either.

That also is the wrong heremeneutic and this paper does a great job of presenting all those who have interpreted 1 Cor 13:10 through church history and includes those that have presented the canon of scripture view in their own words. This is the weakest of all the interpretations as to "that which is perfect" and I think you would agree after you read this paper but maybe not.

So I agree that it is not talking about "When Jesus comes" and if so would need to be expanded to "when after Jesus comes and we are with Him face to face and are in a state of Perfection" or rather "When our future state of perfection is achieved in eternal glory" whatever that pans out to be... But it is not... "when the book of Revelation is completed" That hermeneutic is the weakest and and cannot be supported. It is an obvious and intellectually dishonest attempt at eisegesis.
http://frankviola.org/theperfect.pdf

 

[Scribe]

what a blatant attempt to Eisogeisis the 1cor chapter 12. Only verse one was added? That is absurd. The context of the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit is listed starting from verse four if you like. You are trying to remove the context with some wrong approach in using grammatical structure? Wrong! the three chapters were not written with verses guy, they are unit Chapters; meaning the context actually starts in chapters 11 through 14. YOu can't use a verse in 14 to deal with what Paul said in 12. Error.

They did not have verses OR CHAPTERS. Just a letter like you would write.

 

[calibob]

stop thinking like a Greek and more like Hebrew. You are approaching 1cor 12 through 14 in a canal mentality instead of illuminated ONE. Paul is no doubt speaking of the "Gifts of the Holy Spirit" which you will not accept as normative in the Church during the writing of this Letter. Why do you not see the now application then when Pau wrote it? It is clear the gifts which are listed were being used in the church at that time. YOU refuse to see that but will overlook that truth and then somehow use the context given to remove what Paul was correcting then as he was led to do by God.

Everything we see from the Lord HIMself through the Book of Acts to the letters of Paul shows nothing of the power of God ceasing. it's just not there. BUT somehow Greek masculine removes what we see. lol.

Just a moment please. I agree with most everything except the opening line. Corinth was in Greece. The majority of Corinthians were Gentiles. Paul wrote in Greek to them. Paul being a former Pharisee, Surely Could write Hebrew & probably Aramaic too.

Would you please edify us??

 

[Blain]

If you have attended as many Pentecostal church meetings as I have you will agree that what is seen in all of them is the habit of "SPEAKING" in Tongues.

It is a method of speaking in such a way that no one understands what is said.
No one interprets what is muttered.
Women it seems are the ones who do most of the "Tongues" noises.

Now, allow me to say that I have been there and done that. However as I grew older and actually READ what the Bible says it becmae very clear that what is seen today is NOT BIBLICAL tongues as recorded in the Bible.

So then, instead of just accepting what we have been told or doing what we WANT to do, shall we actually see what the Bible does it fact say??????

Acts 2:7-11............

"And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God." ​

Notice the phrase in Acts 2:11, "our tongues." The crowds heard the Apostles preach in their own native tongues, not some unknown heavenly jibber jabber. There was NEVER any heavenly languages spoken that no one understood and required an interpreter.

There is a drastic difference between Biblical tongues and the heretical speaking in tongues we see in churches today.

The "speaking in tongues" which the Pentecostals foolishly practice are UNKNOWN tongues, not anything found on earth. Supposedly, those unknown tongues can only be interpreted by ONE spirit-filled member of the congregation.

The Apostle Paul speaks common sense to us Corinthians 14:19...
"Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue."

Now before replying to this post from an "Emotional" response, and actually that is what speaking in tongues is, an EMOTIONAL event, take the time to do the work first.

Read 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14. Anyone can see that they are "Corrective" Chapters from Paul to the church and the CONTEXT is .....ready.....
Speaking in tongues".

Now that being the correct hermeneutical point then notice carefully chapter 14:34........
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. "

Literally....the CONTEXT demands that "women are not permitted to speak in TONGUES in church".

Without women speaking in tongues there is then in fact no tongues movement at all.

​

I have also seen many false tongues but I have experienced real tongues before as well. I had a friend who had a studder problem we and a small group of people id a skype bible study he wanted to pray over the study and was studdering but sudden;y he began speaking in hebrew with no studder at all I experienced a flow of power and fire surging into my being when he did this.
Even if I had not experienced it firsthand I never discount any of the gifts I have never seen or experienced a miracle of any kind but I fully believe in them in healing in the flow of the spirit raising a dead person anything God says is possible even walking on water not because I have done it or seen it but because of what I know of him

Anyone can say all things are possible with God but do we really believe that?

 

[calibob]

I have also seen many false tongues but I have experienced real tongues before as well. I had a friend who had a studder problem we and a small group of people id a skype bible study he wanted to pray over the study and was studdering but sudden;y he began speaking in hebrew with no studder at all I experienced a flow of power and fire surging into my being when he did this.
Even if I had not experienced it firsthand I never discount any of the gifts I have never seen or experienced a miracle of any kind but I fully believe in them in healing in the flow of the spirit raising a dead person anything God says is possible even walking on water not because I have done it or seen it but because of what I know of him

Anyone can say all things are possible with God but do we really believe that?

Thank you for sharing, I certainly can believe it. We hav some mutual friends. One that was about to commit suicide. The other who was deep into Astrology. Both were visited by the Lord personally and it changed their lifes' forever. Tongues seems much easier to me.

 

[Blain]

Thank you for sharing, I certainly can believe it. We hav some mutual friends. One that was about to commit suicide. The other who was deep into Astrology. Both were visited by the Lord personally and it changed their lifes' forever. Tongues seems much easier to me.

Tongues is one of the most attacked of all the gifts and with all the fake tongues out there I suppose that is to be expected but if we decide what is a true gift or not existant today or not or even an actual possibility or not based on experience and our perception we blind ourselves to the truth and possibility that God could grant us.
He uses the willing and the receptive not the unwilling and the deaf I mean the purpose of tongues in my opinion is exactly what I experienced to strengthen to ignight the fire and spirit within it gives life and surges through the one who receives it.

I believe even prayer itself is a form of tongues there are times when I am overcome with a deep feeling of mourning brokeness a deep wound and cut of sorrow and a soul crying out for someone anyone to reach out I never know who it is or where they are but I feel everything they are going through I don't understand how to even describe it in words it's like the depth of it is beyond human language and I pour my entire being into God for that person sometimes I use words but often it is more a pouring of unspoken things because I simply have no words for it.

 

[notuptome]

That was just a summary of some of the conclusions at the end of the paper, but the real delight is in reading all of the different hermeneuitcs on the 3 views.

What I wanted to address with you was that it was not the completion of the canon of scripture that is meant by That which is perfect is come either.

That also is the wrong heremeneutic and this paper does a great job of presenting all those who have interpreted 1 Cor 13:10 through church history and includes those that have presented the canon of scripture view in their own words. This is the weakest of all the interpretations as to "that which is perfect" and I think you would agree after you read this paper but maybe not.

So I agree that it is not talking about "When Jesus comes" and if so would need to be expanded to "when after Jesus comes and we are with Him face to face and are in a state of Perfection" or rather "When our future state of perfection is achieved in eternal glory" whatever that pans out to be... But it is not... "when the book of Revelation is completed" That hermeneutic is the weakest and and cannot be supported. It is an obvious and intellectually dishonest attempt at eisegesis.
http://frankviola.org/theperfect.pdf

You are drawing conclusions from a paper that does not present any conclusions. Your opinion of the weakest hermeneutic is wrong and the canon of scripture is the most likely and indeed the only real conclusion that can be derived from the passage.

Tongues are husks and not meat. The more you feed on tongues the weaker you become.

Would you still be a Christian if you had no Pentecostal tongues. Would you believe in Christ and trust only in Christ if there were no Pentecostal tongues?

For the cause of Christ
Roger