Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:
[QB] BACK TO THE ISSUE:
Some of the debate on tongues ceasing IS centered in I Cor 13
When "that which is perfect" is come, then the "in part" will stop.
Special revelation stopped.
Special knowledge stopped (except for Shirley McClaine).
Special language ability (tongues) stopped.
Why? The "perfect thing" came!
Take a look around. We are not all perfect - nor do we "see face to face" with the Angels. Rather we still "see in a glass darkly". Neither is this the time when "we know even as we are known" by the unseen world in heaven. Nor is this a time when we no longer "walk by faith and NOT by sight".
But aside from all those Bible based problems with the speculative view that "the perfect already came for this world 2000 years ago"...
#1. Was Christ perfect? The perfect revelation of the Father? Surely He was! You can not construe 1Cor 13 to mean "something perfect has come" - if you could then we would have no knowledge after the cross.
#2. Did Paul say "at some future point you will need to guess when the last letter is written that will be included in the NT - once that it written then anyone with a spiritual gift - will lose their spiritual gifts"?
Clearly he did not?
#3. Did Paul EVER say "The Word of God is not yet sufficient" or "the Word of God is not yet cmplete" or "The scriptures are not yet complete" or "The scriptures are still imperfect"?
Nothing of the kind can be found in ALL of scripture - let alone the writings of Paul.
On the contrary Paul said in a number of places "The scriptures ARE sufficient" (2Timothy 3:15-16 comes to mind).
#4. Did spiritual gifts end between 1Cor 12 - where they are detailed and 1Cor 13 where the future in heaven is shown to negate the need for spiritual gifts? Clearly they did not.
#5. When Paul says in 1Cor 14 "Desire earnestly spiritual gifts but especially that you may ..." can we find an excuse today to ignore this NT teaching? Hopefully not.
#6. In Ephesians 4:1-8 Paul defines the scope of spiritual gifts as that which continues until the return of Christ and the perfection of the entire church (not merely the observation that the perfect the Messiah has come).
The "perfect" is non-specific since no object is supplied. But the word in Latin is masculine in its generic form. Digging into that gender argument and taking "all possible generic options" for return, return of Christ, end of the age
Dr. Bob
BTW, "perfect" is an adjective with an understood (but unnamed) subject. So Bible interpretation must be used to figure WHAT it is.
Indeed it is unnamed. Unfortunately a number of adjectives apply in neutral form to subjects that have gender - when the subject is omitted.
So the "idea" that we only have gender as a clue here is a bit of a stretch.
Having said all of that - the current popular idea of "tongues" does not match what we see in 1Cor 14's detailed discussion or what we see in Acts 2. It hardly qualifies as a modern example of tongues.
In Christ,
Bob