That which is perfect

[Eyelog]

I just read Watchman Nee, who said:

...when we help someone, our purpose should not be to help his mind, but to work in the deepest part of his being; only this can benefit others. We cannot work with the power of the soul. The soul can only live by itself; it cannot save or profit others. We should be very careful and reject everything that comes from the soul! Not only are the things from the soul unable to help people, they actually interfere with God in His work, frustrate Him from getting the glory, and are an offense to Him. ... The Spirit gives life, and only the Spirit can impart life to people. We should pay attention to this. Today there are many counterfeits of the Spirit.

I am not meaning to respond to anyone in particular with this. Just thought I'd share it, in a totally non sequitur way, while it was fresh on my WordPad.

[Colight]

I just read Watchman Nee, who said:

...when we help someone, our purpose should not be to help his mind, but to work in the deepest part of his being; only this can benefit others. We cannot work with the power of the soul. The soul can only live by itself; it cannot save or profit others. We should be very careful and reject everything that comes from the soul! Not only are the things from the soul unable to help people, they actually interfere with God in His work, frustrate Him from getting the glory, and are an offense to Him. ... The Spirit gives life, and only the Spirit can impart life to people. We should pay attention to this. Today there are many counterfeits of the Spirit.

I am not meaning to respond to anyone in particular with this. Just thought I'd share it, in a totally non sequitur way, while it was fresh on my WordPad.

Interesting,
How many Christians claim they are out saving souls.
How many Christians claim they are out feeding the hungry.
How many Christians claim they are out doing the Lords work.

And in many times THEY become a road block for what God is actually trying to do.

[Slug1]

And in many times THEY become a road block for what God is actually trying to do.

Specially when God wants to heal someone...

[John146]

I explained this earlier, but in case you just jumped in at this point, let me point out verse 11 again, which Paul uses to illustrate his point.

11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

Notice that Paul speaks in the past tense about doing away with childish things. When he became a man he did away with childish things. This clearly places his own experience in the past, not in some glorious future to come.

Only when it comes to becoming a man. That does not mean he was saying the perfect had already come, that he no longer saw through a glass, darkly, or that he no longer knew in part. The reason he referred to the contrast being a child and a man was to illustrate that the contrast being knowing in part and knowing fully and the difference between seeing through a glass, darkly and seeing face to face was similar to the difference between a child and a man. The process of maturing from a child into a man is not in view there. It's the contrast between a child and a man that Paul was pointing out, not the process of maturing from a child into a man. So, he is contrasting seeing through a glass, darkly with seeing face to face and not speaking of a process of going from seeing through a glass, darkly to seeing face to face. And he was contrasting knowing in part with knowing fully rather than speaking of a process of going from knowing in part to knowing fully.

This illustration explains what Paul means by "the perfect" and how the perfect does away with the partial. The Greek word translated "perfect" is "teleios", which has a range of meaning, not just one meaning: physically perfect, morally perfect, genuine, mature, fully grown, adult. Thus Paul feels it would help his readers to know which meaning he intends. His illustration of a child growing up to maturity indicates that he is talking about maturing to adulthood and how mature adults act.

But he was speaking in terms of full maturity. Perfection. Full knowledge of things just as we are fully known by God. Are we spiritually perfect and fully mature now? Absolutely not! Not only do we still sin but there are still many things we do not know and cannot see. Can you see angels? Can you see heaven? What do you really know about that realm besides the limited amount of info that is in scripture about those things? Not all that much, really. But in the future we will see Christ as He is and we will see the angels and everything will be made known to us that right now we have limited understanding of and cannot see. That will not occur until the redemption of our bodies occurs at Christ's return when we are changed from having corruptible and mortal bodies to incorruptible and immortal bodies. The perfect will not come until then.

You asked about the THEN and the NOW. These adverbs refer back to his illustration and relates to the moment when one goes from being a child (the NOW) to becoming an adult (the THEN), which itself is intended to illustrate how the practice of the gifts with love is like a child who has grown up. The NOW relates to the Corinthian Christian who has not yet matured and adopted the more excellent way. The THEN relates to the Corinthian Christian who, taking Paul's advice, adopts the more excellent way. And the difference between a beginning believer and a mature believer is that beginning believer sees himself as if looking in a distorted mirror; but the mature believer sees himself as others see him, i.e. face-to-face.

Let's stick with what Paul said was NOW and what will be THEN instead of changing the text to make it say what you want it to say.

1 Cor 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.

Paul very clearly said that "NOW we see through a glass, darkly" and "NOW I know in part". You deny Paul's clear statements and try to say that instead of him saying "NOW we see through a glass, darkly" he actually meant "In the past we saw through a glass, darkly" and instead of him saying "NOW I know in part" you're changing it to him saying "In the past I knew in part". This is such a blatant case of twisting scripture that it boggles my mind.

Accordingly, then, Paul is not including himself among those who see in a distorted mirror.

Yeah, because when someone says "we" they clearly are not including themselves.

He has already matured and he already has taken the more excellent road. He already seems himself the way others see him, and this self-knowledge already informs his perspective on his relationship to other human beings, which already motivates him to love others during the use of his spiritual gifts. A man (or woman) doesn't need to wait until Jesus returns to see himself as others see him. He can do that right now if he is willing to accept the truth wherever it leads.

This is another mistake that you're making. When Paul said "then shall I know even as also I am known" he was talking about how he was known by God, not by other people. He was speaking in the same context as he was earlier in the book:

1 Cor 8: And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know. 3 But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him.

You think Paul knew fully or that you know fully now? Think again. As Paul said, "if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know". And this also speaks of how those who love God are known by Him. In 1 Cor 13:12 Paul was speaking of a time when he would know even as he is known by God. God knows everything about us. We don't have that kind of knowledge. But a time is coming when everything will be made known and nothing will be hidden anymore. That time has not yet come. When that time comes we will see Jesus as He is and we'll even be able to see the angels and many other things that we can not currently see and have limited knowledge about.

[Colight]

Specially when God wants to heal someone...

Then have him do it.. all ready.. and quite taking up space talking about it

Sheez... how does does a sick person have to wait for these things..

[amazzin]

Then have him do it.. all ready.. and quite taking up space talking about it

Sheez... how does does a sick person have to wait for these things..

Colight

Some wish to confine miraculous healings to Bible times, but church history annuals that theory. Nothing in Scripture ever indicates that there will be any diminution in the work of Christ or the New Testament church during the whole church age. Jesus said that His church would do greater works than He had done, because He was going to the Father (John 14:12). Jesus healed through the power of the Holy Spirit and the same Holy Spirit still operates in the church today.

[Colight]

Colight

Some wish to confine miraculous healings to Bible times, but church history annuals that theory. Nothing in Scripture ever indicates that there will be any diminution in the work of Christ or the New Testament church during the whole church age. Jesus said that His church would do greater works than He had done, because He was going to the Father (John 14:12). Jesus healed through the power of the Holy Spirit and the same Holy Spirit still operates in the church today.

And what was the purpose of the hearings performed thru Christ and the apostles?

The purpose was to give them authority so believers would listen to the doctrine they spoke.
They had no completed word like we have today.
Therefore for such thing to occur today would take authority away from the scripture and place it upon the one doing these signs.
This one reason why these gifts was faded out, for we today are to live by faith not sight.
Faith is defined as:
Heb 11:11 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

We have this order upon us...

Heb 10

37 For yet in a very little while, He who is coming will come, and will not delay.
38 But My righteous one shall live by faith; And if he shrinks back, My soul has no pleasure in him.

We are ORDERED to live by faith( faith lacks sight and signs), to chase this visual signs is IMHO a violation of such order.

[Athanasius]

We are ORDERED to live by faith( faith lacks sight and signs), to chase this visual signs is IMHO a violation of such order.

Chasing 'visual signs' and claiming that we are 'ORDERED' to live by faith, defined as lacking 'sight and signs' are two quite different claims. The first claim (the second in your response) I'll leave alone. The second claim (the first first in your response) must be addressed, for it if is true then we must all conclude that the apostles and immediate disciples of Christ were rather bad at this living by faith thing, having seen, walked and talked with God; having been witness to his miracles. Perhaps you meant to say something else?

[Colight]

for it if is true then we must all conclude that the apostles and immediate disciples of Christ were rather bad at this living by faith thing, having seen, walked and talked with God; having been witness to his miracles. Perhaps you meant to say something else?

They was... if you were... during the Childhood process of the church..
The complete doctrine for the church was in the making at that time, so some gifts was there to help it along and establish the doctrine for the rest of us. That doctrine is now mature and the childish things have been put away ( Pauls words not mine )

1 cor 13

8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.
9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part;
10 but when the perfect( COMPLETE in as context link to the partial) comes, the partial will be done away.
11 ( TEACHING EXAMPLE )When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

This is why his focus to them should be on love rather than gifts...for it would endure thru the mature age of the doctrine of the church

[Athanasius]

I'm not too great at changing topics. Perhaps we could stick to what I said and you could properly address the objection I brought up to your claim that we ought to live by what I'll call 'blind faith' (faith without sight or sign)? We would do well to keep in mind that the intrinsic witness of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer falls into the category of 'sight and sign', so again I'll ask if you meant to say something else: did you mean to say something else? In case it isn't clear I'm not engaging in the larger context of this thread, which is the asinine silliness of cessationism (from what I can tell). I'm questioning an epistemological position you've taken with respect to the nature of faith, and the kind of faith we are commanded to hold to.

Oh, and it is of course very silly to claim that group 'A' was expected to live by a different kind of faith than group 'B'. It's far cleaner to simply admit that one's idea of faith is wrong, rather than to stick to it and create distinction upon distinction upon distinction.

They was... if you were... during the Childhood process of the church..
The complete doctrine for the church was in the making at that time, so some gifts was there to help it along and establish the doctrine for the rest of us. That doctrine is now mature and the childish thing have been put away ( Pauls words not mine )

1 cor 13

8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.
9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part;
10 but when the perfect( COMPLETE in as context link to the partial) comes, the partial will be done away.
11 ( TEACHING EXAMPLE )When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

This is why his focus to them should be on love rather than gifts...for it would endure thru the mature age of the doctrine of the church

[Colight]

I'm not too great at changing topics. Perhaps we could stick to what I said and you could properly address the objection I brought up to your claim that we ought to live by what I'll call 'blind faith' (faith without sight or sign)?

We really are not BLIND..
we have the complete in doctrine.. that being scripture..
and we have the indwelling of the spirit.
That being a method to teach us what doctrines are in the scripture.

We would do well to keep in mind that the intrinsic witness of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer falls into the category of 'sight and sign', so again I'll ask if you meant to say something else: did you mean to say something else? In case it isn't clear I'm not engaging in the larger context of this thread, which is the asinine silliness of cessationism (from what I can tell). I'm questioning an epistemological position you've taken with respect to the nature of faith, and the kind of faith we are commanded to hold to.

We are to hold to doctrine and apply it to our lives,
We are to use the mind of Christ, rather than emotions and wonders.
The spirit speaks thru truth, that is taught.

John 16
13 But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.

This is why it is imperative to not quench or grieve the spirit, especially where truth is being taught.

1 Cor 2

14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.
16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.

We have thru the spirit and Christ this mind, we are to mature it and live by its doctrine.
Our course is one of spiritual thought, not of emotion.
We are to think and breath doctrine.

Philippians 2:5, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.”

[Athanasius]

I'm afraid I don't understand how this is in any way relevant to what I said. You first replied in reference to the gifts of the Spirit, which I made clear I was talking about the nature and character of faith; in reply to that you've begun talking about doctrine, not even doctrine related to the nature and character of faith -- why? Or are you content randomly quoting me and then saying what you will regardless? As, for example, I've explained before that your definition of faith precludes reference to the 'indwelling of the Spirit', yet here you are referring to the indwelling of the Spirit...

The Bible, by the way, itself constitutes a sign of God. I'm asking you to re-define your idea of faith so this conversation can continue in an intelligent and non-absurd manner. For the time being it cannot, as you've precluded every 'resource' a Christian has access to.

We really are not BLIND..
we have the complete in doctrine.. that being scripture..
and we have the indwelling of the spirit.
That being a method to teach us what doctrines are in the scripture.

We are to hold to doctrine and apply it to our lives,
We are to use the mind of Christ, rather than emotions and wonders.
The spirit speaks thru truth, that is taught.

John 16
13 But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.

This is why it is imperative to not quench or grieve the spirit, especially where truth is being taught.

1 Cor 2

14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.
16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.

We have thru the spirit and Christ this mind, we are to mature it and live by its doctrine.
Our course is one of spiritual thought, not of emotion.
We are to think and breath doctrine.

Philippians 2:5, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.”

[HoboTone]

Then have him do it.. all ready.. and quite taking up space talking about it

Sheez... how does does a sick person have to wait for these things..

Someone in my position finds this comment distasteful and offensive. I usually don't chime in on your dogmatic nonsense; but I would imagine if you were diagnosed with a terminal illness, you'd be studying Scripture a little harder. Attacking other people's faith in God's will to heal? Do you consider that bearing good fruit? I'm not going to pile on, my friends here do a good job of refuting you. I will, however, ask you to refrain from sarcastic comments like this one. You are entitled to your opinion on the existence of miracles, but some of us are still praying for one.

[Slug1]

Heb 10

37 For yet in a very little while, He who is coming will come, and will not delay.
38 But My righteous one shall live by faith; And if he shrinks back, My soul has no pleasure in him.

Colight... what IS, living by faith? You seem to be saying that "faith" is ONLY and STRICTLY about the knowledge a person has, OF God. So what is... living BY faith to you? In your own words would be great because scripturally, you use so many scriptures out of context (and so many here are trying to point this out to you)... if you answer this question with scripture, I don't think your answer will be helpful.

So, can you answer in ONLY your own words?

[BroRog]

Only when it comes to becoming a man. That does not mean he was saying the perfect had already come, that he no longer saw through a glass, darkly, or that he no longer knew in part.

Sure it does. Why else would he use an illustration in which he speaks about himself in the past tense?

The reason he referred to the contrast being a child and a man was to illustrate that the contrast being knowing in part and knowing fully and the difference between seeing through a glass, darkly and seeing face to face was similar to the difference between a child and a man.

That's right. And since he places himself as being a grown man, he has placed himself among those who fully know and he see himself as other see him.

The process of maturing from a child into a man is not in view there. It's the contrast between a child and a man that Paul was pointing out, not the process of maturing from a child into a man. So, he is contrasting seeing through a glass, darkly with seeing face to face and not speaking of a process of going from seeing through a glass, darkly to seeing face to face. And he was contrasting knowing in part with knowing fully rather than speaking of a process of going from knowing in part to knowing fully.

I didn't say it was a process. I said that he is already a mature Christian, who knows fully and sees himself as one who sees face to face.

But he was speaking in terms of full maturity. Perfection.

Full maturity yes; perfection no. The idea that "telos" meant "perfection" came from the Middle Ages, not from the First Century Greek speakers.

Full knowledge of things just as we are fully known by God.

Why God? You are adding that.

Are we spiritually perfect and fully mature now?

Some of us are; others are not.

Not only do we still sin but there are still many things we do not know and cannot see.

First of all, the issue isn't sin. Being a mature Christian doesn't mean you don't sin. Paul isn't asking his readers not to sin. He is asking his readers to have a more mature view of the spiritual gifts, which involves the practice of the spiritual gifts with love. Secondly, Paul isn't talking about knowing everything about everything. He is talking about knowing in the context of the spiritual gift of "knowledge", and the point he wants to make is this. If you don't know that you need to love others, you don't know enough.

But in the future we will see Christ as He is and we will see the angels and everything will be made known to us that right now we have limited understanding of and cannot see. That will not occur until the redemption of our bodies occurs at Christ's return when we are changed from having corruptible and mortal bodies to incorruptible and immortal bodies.

Of course, but Paul isn't talking about partial knowledge in terms of a lack of information. Bear in mind the subject of his discourse and the point he is trying to make about how to live the more excellent way, and his general critique of the Corinthians that some of them are causing divisions in the church. The difference between being an immature Christian and a mature Christian is the very specific knowledge that we are to love one another. Whatever knowledge you might have received from an Apostle or a prophet, or whatever, if you haven't heard or understood that we need to love each other, then what you know is only a part of the picture.

Let's stick with what Paul said was NOW and what will be THEN instead of changing the text to make it say what you want it to say.

1 Cor 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.

Paul very clearly said that "NOW we see through a glass, darkly" and "NOW I know in part". You deny Paul's clear statements and try to say that instead of him saying "NOW we see through a glass, darkly" he actually meant "In the past we saw through a glass, darkly" and instead of him saying "NOW I know in part" you're changing it to him saying "In the past I knew in part". This is such a blatant case of twisting scripture that it boggles my mind.

Now you are twisting what I am saying, and you have mischaracterized my position. I thought I was clear about my contention that Paul is not using the adverbs "now" and "then" to speak about time. So if I deny this why do you say that I have Paul saying "In the past I knew in part." (emphasis mine) You aren't being fair to me or my position. In this context Paul is using the terms "now" and "then", not to indicate a change in time, but a change in circumstance. You seem to be hearing him say,

NOW = At the present time
THEN = A time after NOW (and specifically, a time well into the future at the Second Coming of Christ)

I am hearing him say,

NOW = The initial circumstance before maturity
THEN = The subsequent circumstance after maturity.

When he says, "For now we see in a mirror dimly . . ." you hear him saying, "For at the present time we see in a mirror dimly . . ." But I hear him saying, "For initially we see in a mirror dimly, but subsequently, after maturity we see as if face to face.

This is another mistake that you're making. When Paul said "then shall I know even as also I am known" he was talking about how he was known by God, not by other people.

Do you not see this as adding to the scripture? You are adding the concept of being known by God, which isn't anywhere in the text or even implied by anything in the text.

You think Paul knew fully or that you know fully now?

Sure. In the context, Paul is talking about being a mature Christian. If people weren't able to grow into maturity as Christians, what would be the point of telling us to adopt a more excellent way?