Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Cessationism- have tongues and prophecy ceased, or are they still active?





It doesn't negate it for me.
I am not disputing that.

I am disputing that your theory of "the Perfect" being the coming of Lord.......... it violates the text and the context.

New International Version
but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.

Not one person here has defined exactly why the neuter gender of 'the perfect' CAN mean the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

All I have seen is a futile effort to dismiss it and discredit those who are advancing the TRUTH that the neuter gender of 'the perfect' CANNOT mean the coming of the Lord.
 
You are isolating the word 'perfect' making the gender of a single word in the sentence determine Paul was not referring to the coming of the Lord.

In reality you are isolating ' the perfect.' From the sentence and surrounding context we have no determiner/subject......so that makes the ADJECTIVE "the perfect" essentially the noun.....It is a substantive. So this makes the NEUTER gender critical in determining what "the perfect' is..........and being neuter gender because it was made substantive from no previous subject or noun to attach it ......It CANNOT mean the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It would have been masculine in this sentence.<<<<Even here, rather than say sentence, we would be more accurate in saying in this thought and sequence.

New American Standard Bible
but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
 
Last edited:





I am not disputing that.

I am disputing that your theory of "the Perfect" being the coming of Lord.......... it violates the text and the context.

New International Version
but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears.

Not one person here has defined exactly why the neuter gender of 'the perfect' CAN mean the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

All I have seen is a futile effort to dismiss it and discredit those who are advancing the TRUTH that the neuter gender of 'the perfect' CANNOT mean the coming of the Lord.
The efforts aren't futile just because there are those who insist the text does not refer to the coming of the Lord. Those persons give evidence that no matter what is presented they'll hold to their position.
 
What does “when the perfect comes” mean in 1 Corinthians 13:9-10?
Perhaps the following quotes from a couple of commentaries will help answer your question.

First from The Bible Knowledge Commentary:

13:9-10. As Paul explained it, the gift of knowledge (v. 8), essential as it was, was not exhaustive. The ability to prophesy, however crucial for the church’s life, was of limited scope. The gifts were temporary blessings in an imperfect age. One day they would give way to perfection, toward which all the gifts pointed. What Paul meant when he referred to the coming of perfection is the subject of considerable debate. One suggestion is that perfection described the completion of the New Testament. But verse 12 makes that interpretation unlikely. A few have suggested that this state of perfection will not be reached until the new heavens and new earth are established. Another point of view understands perfection to describe the state of the church when God’s program for it is consummated at the coming of Christ. There is much to commend this view, including the natural accord it enjoys with the illustration of growth and maturity which Paul used in the following verses.

13:11. Paul elsewhere described the purpose of gifts by an illustration employing the imagery of growth and maturity. According to Ephesians 4:11-16, the gifts were to be used to bring the church from a state of infancy to adult hood. The word translated “mature” in that passage (Eph. 4:13) is the word translated “perfection” (teleion) in 1 Corinthians 13:10. In the Ephesians passage, maturity is defined as “attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.” Such a state will obviously not exist until Christ’s second coming. It would appear that the same perspective was developed in this passage to the Corinthians. Paul applied the illustration to himself (cf. vv. 1-3). The threefold talking, thinking, and reasoning were probably meant to balance the thrice-mentioned gifts (v. 8). With the coming of adulthood, such gifts become passe Œ. Paul’s use of the word became (gegona, a perf. tense verb, probably proleptic; cf. Rom. 13:8; 1 Cor. 14:23) was of course to be understood in the context of the illustration. It does not indicate that he personally or the church collectively had yet arrived at that point (cf. Phil. 3:12). It would not, on the other hand, necessarily rule out a gradual obsolescence of certain gifts as the church progressed toward maturity.


13:12. A city like Corinth, famous for its bronze mirrors, would have particularly appreciated Paul’s final illustration. The perfection and imperfection mentioned in verse 10 were deftly likened to the contrasting images obtained by the indirect reflection of one’s face viewed in a bronze mirror and the same face when viewed directly. Such, Paul said, was the contrast between the imperfect time in which he then wrote and the perfect time which awaited him and the church when the partial reflection of the present would give way to the splendor of perfect vision. Then Paul would see God (cf. 15:28; 1 John 3:2) as God now saw Paul. Then partial knowledge (cf. 1 Cor. 8:1-3) would be displaced by the perfect knowledge of God.


13:13. Paul completed his three-paneled portrait of love (vv. 1-3, 4-7, 8-13) with a final triad: faith, hope, and love. Much discussion has focused on whether faith and hope were portrayed by Paul as being (with love) eternal. The solution is probably found in verse 7. Faith is an expression of love (the word “trusts,” pisteuei, v. 7, is the verb form of the noun “faith,” pistis), as is hope (cf. Gal. 5:5-6). Faith and hope, as manifestations of love, will endure eternally. So too everyone who follows the way of love (1 Cor. 14:1) finds “the most excellent way” (12:31b), because every individual characterized by love carries that mark eternally. The spiritual gifts will one day cease to exist, but love will endure forever.

(3) Priority of prophecy to tongues (14:1-25). Chapter 13 is one of the most sublime digressions in any letter in any language. But it was nonetheless a deviation from the central theme of gifts and their use by the church which Paul began in chapter 12 and then concluded in chapter 14. Paul had intimated in chapter 12 that the Corinthians were perverting the purpose of gifts from a unifying influence on the church to one fostering fragmentation and discord (esp. 12:21-25). A contributing factor to their factious spirit was the Corinthian pursuit of individual freedom and personal enhancement at the expense of other members of the body whose needs may have been trampled or ignored along the way. Manifestations of this self-centeredness affected each of the problem issues taken up since chapter 8.

The focal problem in the matter of the use and abuse of gifts seemed to be the Corinthian fascination with tongues, a gift which apparently lent itself most readily to perversion from something intended “for the common good” (12:7) to something employed for personal enhancement (14:4). Paul’s corrective was not to stifle the use of gifts (14:39; cf. 1 Thes. 5:19-20) but to urge that their use be regulated by love. The gifts of the Spirit should be controlled by the fruit of the Spirit, chief among which was love (Gal. 5:22). This would lead to exercising the gifts so they would benefit the church body as a whole (14:5) and also honor God (14:25, 33, 40). By way of illustration and correction, Paul compared and contrasted the Corinthians’ preoccupation with tongues with their apparent disinterest in prophecy.

In his study Bible, Charles Ryrie has the following to say about verse 11:

There are stages of growth within the present imperfect time before Christ’s return. After the church began, there was a period of immaturity, during which spectacular gifts were needed for growth and authentication (Heb. 2:3-4). With the completion of the NT and the growing maturity of the church, the need for such gifts disappeared.

We should note that Paul makes a distinction between the disappearance of the gifts of prophecy and knowledge and that of tongues. This is done using different Greek words and voices. With prophecy and knowledge, he used a word in the passive voice which meant “to be rendered inoperative.” Note also verse 9. But with tongues he used the middle voice and a word that meant “to cease.” The middle voice suggest that this gift would gradually die and disappear on its own. Probably because its primary purpose as a sign to the Jews (see chapter 14:20f) would cease after the fall of Jerusalem. This of course is debated.

Related Topics: Bibliology (The Written Word)
 
So then, tongues are for a sign not to those who believe, but to unbelievers, but prophecy is not for unbelievers, but for those who believe.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=1 Corinthians 14:22&version=LEB

Are there still unbelievers?
Really the question is........Is the gospel and His word sufficient for unbelievers.........or does he still need tongues/healings/signs and wonders to get His "partial/imperfect" point across?

Really, in the end, people are contending that His word to us is not sufficient to witness truth to unbelievers and is not sufficient to become mature and complete as believers........both cannot 'perfectly/completely' happen until He comes back.

Which is Hogwash. "the perfect" Judges us in the end. If we only have "partial" until the Lord comes back...........How can His incomplete/imperfect word judge us?

John 12:48~~New American Standard Bible
"He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.
 
Really the question is........Is the gospel and His word sufficient for unbelievers.........or does he still need tongues/healings/signs and wonders to get His "partial/imperfect" point across?

Really, in the end, people are contending that His word to us is not sufficient to witness truth to unbelievers and is not sufficient to become mature and complete as believers........both cannot 'perfectly/completely' happen until He comes back.

Which is Hogwash. "the perfect" Judges us in the end. If we only have "partial" until the Lord comes back...........How can His incomplete/imperfect word judge us?

John 12:48~~New American Standard Bible
"He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.
Amen!
 
The efforts aren't futile just because there are those who insist the text does not refer to the coming of the Lord. Those persons give evidence that no matter what is presented they'll hold to their position.

The efforts of those who ARE claiming that "the perfect" is the coming of the Lord and not dealing with the NEUTER gender of the adjective, which is substantive.........has been futile.

They need to splain how a neuter gender substantive adjective, in this particular sentence/statement can mean, " The coming of the Lord." Answer............they cannot. they can only dismiss it, or attack the messenger. Because the message is TRUTH.
 
Last edited:
The efforts of those who ARE claiming that "the perfect" is the coming of the Lord and not dealing with the NEUTER gender of the adjective, which is substantive.........has been futile.

They need to splain how a neuter gender substantive adjective, in this particular sentence/statement can mean, " The coming of the Lord." Answer............they cannot. they can only dismiss it, or attack the messenger. Because the message is TRUTH.
And yet the Word is Jesus.
It really isn't necessary to become so angry over this discussion. The canon argument is futile. Ignoring what learned sources supplied by many in this thread to support the perfect, which parousia also means complete, as in Jesus finished the work on the cross being He was the Word, (1John 1:1), doesn't demonstrate maturity in pursuing biology or exegesis.
We'll be judged by the Word. Not the canon.
 
One suggestion is that perfection described the completion of the New Testament. But verse 12 makes that interpretation unlikely.

I would agree if there was no vs 13.New American Standard Bible
But now(when the perfect comes/the partial is done away) faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.
2 Cor 5:7~~New International Version
For we live by faith, not by sight.




When these gifts cease, are done away.........THEN,BUT NOW we live by faith, hope and love. And love never fails.

faith and hope are done away when the Lord Comes or when we die.......We are now AT HOME with the Lord Our hope and faith is no longer needed.

New American Standard Bible
we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.
 
In reality you are isolating ' the perfect.' From the sentence and surrounding context we have no determiner/subject......so that makes the ADJECTIVE "the perfect" essentially the noun.....It is a substantive. So this makes the NEUTER gender critical in determining what "the perfect' is..........and being neuter gender because it was made substantive from no previous subject or noun to attach it ......It CANNOT mean the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It would have been masculine in this sentence.

New American Standard Bible
but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

The context is our knowledge and our prophecy. Our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect, but when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away. When the perfect comes is Paul's way of saying when the Son of man returns. We see dimly now because our understanding isn't perfect. When he returns we will understand fully. Paul said it - Now I know in part (knowledge); then I shall understand fully. The question is when will Paul understand fully?
 
Excursus on the Meaning of "That Which Is Perfect" (1 Corinthians 13:10)
by Dr. Ralph F. Wilson

Audio (6:28)

One's conclusion about the cessation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, especially tongues and prophecy, comes down to the meaning of "that which is perfect" in 1 Corinthians 13:10.

There are three main interpretations. "That which is perfect" is fulfilled when:

  1. Canon is complete, or
  2. The Church is mature, or
  3. Christ has come.
Let's consider each view.

()


3. Christ's Coming or Eschatological View
. Taking "that which is complete" as occurring in the period when Christ returns has been by far the majority view of this passage throughout church history, and there are good reasons why this is the case, in addition to the obvious weaknesses of the canon and maturity views.

  1. Teleios is best understood as "perfection" (rather than "maturity") in light of Matthew 5:48, "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." This could have been easily understood by the Corinthian readers.
  2. The neuter form of teleios allows for understanding it as the state of perfection.
  3. An eschatological view of the cessation of spiritual gifts conforms with Paul's more general statement in 1:7 --"You do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed."
  4. "Face to face" is an Old Testament formula for a theophany which will occur following Christ's return, so that point seems to be the period of, or after Christ's return.
  5. Being fully known will only be true after Messiah comes. Isaiah foresaw this time of Messiah's reign and the gathering of the nations (what we refer to as "the rapture") when, "the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea." (Isaiah 11:9)

Though there are various explanations of "that which is perfect" in verse 10, it seems clear that the gifts ceasing around the period of Christ's coming is the best explanation of this verse.

Endnote
509. In characterizing the first two views, I have drawn from research by Rodney J. Decker, "A History of Interpretation of 'That Which Is Perfect' (1 Cor 13:10) with Special Attention to the Origin of the 'Canon View'," unpublished paper, 1994. Decker concludes (p. 67), "The popularity of both these views has probably been a desire to establish a straightforward, single-passage proof text for the cessation of tongues in response to the abuses and extremes of the contemporary charismatic movement." This 85-page paper is available on the Internet.�http://ntresources.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/perfectpaper94.pdf
 
The context is our knowledge and our prophecy. Our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect, but when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away. When the perfect comes is Paul's way of saying when the Son of man returns. We see dimly now because our understanding isn't perfect. When he returns we will understand fully. Paul said it - Now I know in part (knowledge); then I shall understand fully. The question is when will Paul understand fully?
I said this~~

being neuter gender because it was made substantive from no previous subject or noun to attach it ......It CANNOT mean the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It would have been masculine in this sentence.
 
Please don't do this. I am not angry. We are just getting to the point that someone is in corner and it is getting tough to answer cross examination evidence/truth.

New American Standard Bible
preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.
Please, I've read your rebuttals throughout this thread. Deflecting blame to others because you refuse to accept insturction constantly to avoid obvious facts is what culminated in my patient gentle chastisement that there is no need for you to become angry in this discussion.
Remarks such as claiming you've not seen any credible sources , in matters of other points of discussion in this topic of cessationism, when in fact credible sources are linked in a post just above that remark, makes it evident that grace and humility isn't a strong characteristic in your pursuit of exegesis.

For my part, I've reached a point that I feel you can believe whatever you like when you dismiss scholarship that rebukes your errant assertions. It's all part of God's plan. And we all serve as an example of learning from one another and teaching the differences between being in the word, and being in the Word.
 
  1. There is something going on in this post that is totally foreign to me......messed up and can't fix it??
 
Last edited:
Please, I've read your rebuttals throughout this thread. Deflecting blame to others because you refuse to accept insturction constantly to avoid obvious facts is what culminated in my patient gentle chastisement that there is no need for you to become angry in this discussion.
Remarks such as claiming you've not seen any credible sources , in matters of other points of discussion in this topic of cessationism, when in fact credible sources are linked in a post just above that remark, makes it evident that grace and humility isn't a strong characteristic in your pursuit of exegesis.

For my part, I've reached a point that I feel you can believe whatever you like when you dismiss scholarship that rebukes your errant assertions. It's all part of God's plan. And we all serve as an example of learning from one another and teaching the differences between being in the word, and being in the Word.
So. How can the neuter gender of "the perfect" mean the coming of the Lord?
 
The efforts of those who ARE claiming that "the perfect" is the coming of the Lord and not dealing with the NEUTER gender of the adjective, which is substantive.........has been futile.

They need to splain how a neuter gender substantive adjective, in this particular sentence/statement can mean, " The coming of the Lord." Answer............they cannot. they can only dismiss it, or attack the messenger. Because the message is TRUTH.

It's not a neuter gender substantive adjective. It's an idiom, a manner of speaking.
 
I said this~~

being neuter gender because it was made substantive from no previous subject or noun to attach it ......It CANNOT mean the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It would have been masculine in this sentence.

I said it's an idiom; a method of expression which seems to be characteristic of Paul. ie. when Paul says, "For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable. Romans 11:29 when he is talking about the covenant with Israel.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top