The meaning of "mature"

[justbyfaith]

@justbyfaith ,
I'd hate to see you go away and take on more hurt due to your disease.
I will leave you in the hands of a benevolent and righteous God!

May you find the calm in the midst of the storm under his mighty wing.

Psa 103:1, [[A Psalm of David.]] Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name.
Psa 103:2, Bless the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits:
Psa 103:3, Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases;
Psa 103:4, Who redeemeth thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with lovingkindness and tender mercies;
Psa 103:5, Who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy youth is renewed like the eagle's.

I assure you that I have great peace and joy in the Holy Ghost; and that this peace shall keep and guard my heart and mind through faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[justbyfaith]

Heb 10:2, For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

My friend there is core truth here that is hidden . no conscience of sin doesn't mean the believer is perfect in himself . it means being of good conscience towards God .
1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ
in this the focus is on Jesus and the price he paid . remember nothing can separate the believer again from the love of God .

So, one does not have a conscience of sins even though he continues in sin?

I believe that such a thing can only be defined as psychosis.

 

[Diakonos]

Nevertheless, if perfect means "complete" or "mature" then "complete" and "mature" mean perfect.

For I have made a case for this in the OP that you are going to have to deal with if you are going to deny my premise.

You believe this because you subscribe to KJV onlyism.
I have neither the time nor interest to tell you why your assumption in the OP is incorrect...which is why I didn't comment on the subject of the OP. I merely corrected a specific fallacy you stated to Dino. When many of those fallacies are strung together, you'll get a twisted doctrine.

The mature believer is one who is able to comprehend the meat of the word and has his senses trained to decern good and evil (Heb 5).
#bumpthat

 

[justbyfaith]

You believe this because you subscribe to KJV onlyism.
I have neither the time nor interest to tell you why your assumption in the OP is incorrect...which is why I didn't comment on the subject of the OP. I merely corrected a specific fallacy you stated to Dino. When many of those fallacies are strung together, you'll get a twisted doctrine.

The Mature believer is one who is able to comprehend the meat of the word and has his senses trained to decern good and evil (Heb 5).
#bumpthat

Yes, a rejection of the kjv is a factor in how a person perceives doctrines of holiness in the Bible.

I believe that those who reject the kjv for other versions do heap for themselves teachers (in the translators of other versions) to tell them what their itching ears want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3).

 

[justbyfaith]

Yes, a rejection of the kjv is a factor in how a person perceives doctrines of holiness in the Bible.

I believe that those who reject the kjv for other versions do heap for themselves teachers (in the translators of other versions) to tell them what their itching ears want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3).

Old?

You brought it up, @Diakonos.

 

[Dino246]

Yes, a rejection of the kjv is a factor in how a person perceives doctrines of holiness in the Bible.

I believe that those who reject the kjv for other versions do heap for themselves teachers (in the translators of other versions) to tell them what their itching ears want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3).

The same can be said of those who hold only to the KJV. It's meaningless and empty opinion.

Maybe, instead of spouting all the negativity that you believe about others, you should use it only to fuel your prayers.

 

[Jocund]

Consider the following.

Heb 10:1, For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Heb 10:2, For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

Now, considering that the word "perfect" actually means "mature" we need to understand that if anyone is mature, they will have no more conscience of sins.

Therefore, are they simply oblivious to what is in all reality there in their lives?

Consider.

1Jo 1:7, But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

If we are walking in the light, will not any sin that is present in our lives be exposed to the light and brought out into the open?

Even as it is written,

Jhn 3:20, For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Jhn 3:21, But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Therefore, if I am walking in the light, and am not sanctified in the sense of being set free from sin, my sin will be exposed; and I will continue to have a conscience of sins.

If I am mature, I do not any longer have any conscience of sins. Which indicates that perfect, in Hebrews 10:1 (and everywhere else in scripture) does indeed mean "perfect".

Consider also the following.

Col 1:21, And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled
Col 1:22, In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

Jde 1:24, Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,

"holy", "unblameable", "unreproveable".

"faultless"

Are you going to come up with alternate meanings for these words also? Do these words also not mean "perfect"?

I suppose that we can cross off holy...for that has been re-defined as "set apart" (however in this re-definition, the word "holy" has been stripped of its meaning, impaho).

One might be able to cross off "unblameable" as referring to outward righteousness and holiness (except that God, in Hebrews 4:13, tells us that everything is open and naked to His sight; and this also refers to the inward parts of a man, which are either righteous or unrighteous (Matthew 23:25-28).

I don't think that anyone can cross off "unreprovaeable" or "faultless" however.

I haven't read the entire thread, but in response to the initial post, I agree that this perfection or maturation is synonymous with being holy, sinless, and faultless. However, it is important to note that the timing of this perfection could be after the Judgement and the purification. Until that final purification, it is a sinless part of us that grows with our connection with Christ. We would still bear sinful nature until that purification and therefore not be wholly perfect (not fully mature).

I sense this is part of a larger conversation you were having with someone else. I'm missing the context of what the disagreement was about.

 

[Diakonos]

I believe that those who reject the kjv

It's irrelevant because I could say the same thing about the KJV and it wouldn't mean anything... because it's just a claim.
In fact, you have already admitted that the KJV is not completely accurate. You believe that the only inspired parts of the KJV are passages concerning doctrine.

I believe that the kjv is inspired and inerrant as concerning doctrine

I hold the King James Version of the Bible to be the inspired and inerrant word of God, as concerning doctrine.

My contention is that the kjv is inspired and inerrant as concerning doctrine.

You are being partial with the translation. Did God endorse the KJV or not? There are holes in that train of thought that need fixing before it can be used as a badge of proof to support your position for this thread.
The whole Bible is the doctrine we guard and teach faithfully. Doctrine means teaching. Since the whole Bible is something meant to be taught, it is all doctrine. No there are different kinds of doctrine: narrative, prophesy, wisdom, ministry, etc. But it is all doctrine. And even if you somehow don't accept that, it is God's word that He said He would preserve, not just part of it.

To be honest...I really don't care what you believe about the KJV translation. My refutation of the said fallacy stands

 

[Cabrillo]

 

[Diakonos]

The same can be said of those who hold only to the KJV. It's meaningless and empty opinion.

That's funny, I literally said that same thing just now

 

[justbyfaith]

The same can be said of those who hold only to the KJV. It's meaningless and empty opinion.

Maybe, instead of spouting all the negativity that you believe about others, you should use it only to fuel your prayers.

Except that the point that was made has to do with the fact that holiness doctrine is more succinct in the kjv and is watered down in the modern translations.

It is holiness doctrine that I would consider to be the sound doctrine that people might not want to believe in according to 2 Timothy 4:3. Because people want to have their cake and eat it too. They want a "fire insurance policy" without any demands on their life.

This is what the modern translations give to people; whereas the kjv teaches us that you must be really born again in order to be saved...and that this entails being set free from the power of sin.

People who want to continue in their sins gravitate towards a teaching that tells them they don't have to walk in freedom and victory over sin in order to be saved. They want a gospel that teaches them that "grace is a license for immorality" (Jude 1:3-4, NIV).

 

[justbyfaith]

I haven't read the entire thread, but in response to the initial post, I agree that this perfection or maturation is synonymous with being holy, sinless, and faultless. However, it is important to note that the timing of this perfection could be after the Judgement and the purification. Until that final purification, it is a sinless part of us that grows with our connection with Christ. We would still bear sinful nature until that purification and therefore not be wholly perfect (not fully mature).

I sense this is part of a larger conversation you were having with someone else. I'm missing the context of what the disagreement was about.

No, it is not synonymous with being sinless.

1 John 1:8 tells us that none of us is without sin.

However, the element of sin can be rendered dead within us (Romans 6:6, Galatians 5:24, Romans 7:8) so that it no longer has any say over our behaviour (Romans 6:14). We are not obligated to obey the flesh (Romans 8:12 (kjv, NLT)).

So, we do not achieve "sinless" perfection; while we may indeed obtain perfection (Hebrews 10:14 (kjv)).

 

[justbyfaith]

You believe that the only inspired parts of the KJV are passages concerning doctrine.

I believe that the doctrine of the kjv is pure, is what I meant by that.

Every verse in the kjv has something to do with doctrine.

There are only a few errors as concerning numbers and names but those errors do not affect doctrine.

 

[Jocund]

No, it is not synonymous with being sinless.

1 John 1:8 tells us that none of us is without sin.

However, the element of sin can be rendered dead within us (Romans 6:6, Galatians 5:24, Romans 7:8) so that it no longer has any say over our behaviour (Romans 6:14). We are not obligated to obey the flesh (Romans 8:12 (kjv, NLT)).

So, we do not achieve "sinless" perfection; while we may indeed obtain perfection (Hebrews 10:14 (kjv)).

I suppose the source of the difference in our perspectives on this is that I am placing the "perfection" at the point of purification after the Judgement. The concept here would be that all that are saved are sinless after the final purification. I do not see whole perfection as something that is attainable in this life, though it may be striven for. The concept would be that the part of us that is in Christ is perfect, the rest of us is not.

 

[Cabrillo]

Except that the point that was made has to do with the fact that holiness doctrine is more succinct in the kjv and is watered down in the modern translations.

It is holiness doctrine that I would consider to be the sound doctrine that people might not want to believe in according to 2 Timothy 4:3. Because people want to have their cake and eat it too. They want a "fire insurance policy" without any demands on their life.

This is what the modern translations give to people; whereas the kjv teaches us that you must be really born again in order to be saved...and that this entails being set free from the power of sin.

People who want to continue in their sins gravitate towards a teaching that tells them they don't have to walk in freedom and victory over sin in order to be saved. They want a gospel that teaches them that "grace is a license for immorality" (Jude 1:3-4, NIV).

3 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people. 4 For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about[a] long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord. 5 Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord[c] at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.

 

[Diakonos]

Every verse in the kjv has something to do with doctrine.

There are only a few errors as concerning numbers and names but those errors do not affect doctrine.

To make sure we are on the same page, what errors are you aware of in the KJV?

 

[justbyfaith]

To make sure we are on the same page, what errors are you aware of in the KJV?

I have no recollection of where they are located...they have to do with something like the number of horses within a stall, or something like that.

 

[justbyfaith]

Except that the point that was made has to do with the fact that holiness doctrine is more succinct in the kjv and is watered down in the modern translations.

It is holiness doctrine that I would consider to be the sound doctrine that people might not want to believe in according to 2 Timothy 4:3. Because people want to have their cake and eat it too. They want a "fire insurance policy" without any demands on their life.

This is what the modern translations give to people; whereas the kjv teaches us that you must be really born again in order to be saved...and that this entails being set free from the power of sin.

People who want to continue in their sins gravitate towards a teaching that tells them they don't have to walk in freedom and victory over sin in order to be saved. They want a gospel that teaches them that "grace is a license for immorality" (Jude 1:3-4, NIV).

I want to clarify this by saying that we do not walk in freedom and victory in order to be saved...that was a poor choice of words. But I would say that those who are truly born again of the Holy Spirit will inevitably walk in freedom and victory.

We don't want to put the cart before the horse.

 

[justbyfaith]

I suppose the source of the difference in our perspectives on this is that I am placing the "perfection" at the point of purification after the Judgement. The concept here would be that all that are saved are sinless after the final purification. I do not see whole perfection as something that is attainable in this life, though it may be striven for. The concept would be that the part of us that is in Christ is perfect, the rest of us is not.

See

https://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/the-doctrine-of-entire-sanctification.202171/

especially post #1.

 

[Diakonos]

I have no recollection of where they are located...they have to do with something like the number of horses within a stall, or something like that.

Naturally, those kinds of errors would pollute doctrines involving numerology, typology, and intentional parallelism...and more.
I hope you're getting the point I'm making. You can't treat certain kinds of doctrine as special, while others are less important.
Man shall live by "every word that proceeds out of the enough of God" (Deut 8). That is God's decree and desire...to observe, meditate on, and proclaim His word of truth, unto the glory of His name. It's all holy doctrine.