Why "The Bible" doesn't fulfil 1 Corinthians 13:10

[Micaiah-imla]

But my dad taught us the value of reading the bible by making us read two chapters each morning as a family

That’s a great thing. The Lord reward him according to this good work.

I grew up in a Bible-less home. I did not read the Bible until my 30’s. And I suffered much because of it. But since coming to know the gospel through the word, life has been much better for me. Now I have hope even in hopeless situations.

God bless you!

 

[KelbyofGod]

@miknik5 What I am proposing is that the churches have made a mistake in relying SOLELY on the choosings of a committee at the expense of direct seeking of God and being led by the Holy Ghost. We could have continued to exist without the committee, but how well can we exist without knowing how to seek God (until he answers) and without learning how to be led by the Holy Ghost?

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[notuptome]

Having the ability to edify himself ("He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself - 1 Cor. 14:4) is NOT a problem, it's a solution.

Not knowing when to refrain from using it may have been a problem, but 1 Corinthians 14 is one chapter written to teach people HOW to use the solution properly.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

That is purely according to human reasoning. If you think yourself great you must be great. Self edification is not desirable solution.

You really need to ask these questions at home.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[KelbyofGod]

That is purely according to human reasoning. If you think yourself great you must be great. Self edification is not desirable solution.

You really need to ask these questions at home.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I think this is one of those times you need to "show your work". What do you mean by "You really need to ask these questions at home."?

 

[notuptome]

I think this is one of those times you need to "show your work". What do you mean by "You really need to ask these questions at home."?

1 Cor 14:35

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[KelbyofGod]

Who gave the Bible to mankind?

If History teaches us correctly it is God who provides us with Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists and Teachers who then, along with the Holy Ghost, provide us with the word, encouragements, prophecies, teachings, etc.

And it was a committee of MEN who provided us with a limitation of that work into a single volume, which was only subject to the self-approval of the committee and the king (not God) that appointed it to its task. And now men, not God, teach that the work of that committee of men replaces the committee that God actually set up (Apostles, prophets, evangelists, teachers, etc).

I'll continue to rely on what God set up rather than what man established and now claims replaces the work of God.

Without the Bible you would not have a Gospel.

How about the more accurate statement of "Without apostles, prophets, evangelists and teachers, you wouldn't have a Gospel, or a New Testament, or...."

And without the Gospel there would be no saving faith, and without faith in Christ there would be no salvation (see Romans 10).

There was and is a Gospel (and faith, and Christ) long before there was a "bible". Therefore a "bible" is NOT the necessary component.

 

[Nehemiah6]

And it was a committee of MEN who provided us with a limitation of that work into a single volume, which was only subject to the self-approval of the committee and the king (not God) that appointed it to its task.

Where did you come up with this NONSENSICAL SCENARIO?

If you are referring to the King James translators, this is pure rubbish. The whole Bible existed in a single volume since the second century, when the Syriac Peshitta was translated. And the Bible has existed in a single volume in translations for other languages also -- from very early times.

And at the time when Jesus of Nazareth walked on this earth, the Hebrew Bible (called the Tanakh) also existed in a single volume (even though written on individual scrolls). Now please note what Christ said prophetically (Hebrews 10:5-7):

Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

So if you have a beef with the Bible in a single volume, why don't you take it up with God and be soundly rebuked by Him?

 

[KelbyofGod]

1 Cor 14:35

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Roger, you know that I'm willing to patiently point out the errors of your assumptions but the value of that is diminished when you fail to say within yourself "Gee, i was wrong about that. Perhaps i should search myself for further errors rather than trying to find fault in others".

So instead, i will explain how my advice to you is consistent with what I myself practice and teach. That way others (who are willing to hear and learn and to humble themselves) may see whether or not I am in compliance with that verse AND can use that verse in their daily life whether they are male or female.


Ok. Here goes:
I looked up the verse you recommended (1 Corinthians 14:35) to see if I was thinking of the correct one. It turns out i was. Then I looked at MYSELF to see if my behavior was or wasn't in compliance with that verse. Then I considered whether I need to change, or increase, my current behavior to comply more completely with that verse.

It turns out that i need to increase (rather than cease) my current behavior if I wish to comply more completely.

Here's how:
I currently both teach and practice that the bride of Christ (every Christian male and female) ought to take their questions home to Jesus (their husband) and ask him alone (in their prayer closet) until he speaks ("my sheep hear my voice") what is the true meaning of something written in the word. I need to do more of that instead of less.

Thank you Jesus for providing such a system.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[KelbyofGod]

So if you have a beef with the Bible in a single volume, why don't you take it up with God and be soundly rebuked by Him?

I don't have a beef with the bible as a collection of some of the word of God (it certainly doesn't contain ALL the word of God). And I do take it up with God (believing He is able to teach and lead even if a person doesn't even HAVE a bible). And he answers according to his word "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God which giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him" (A.K.A. I ask and receive). And He , as promised, continues to lead and guide into ALL TRUTH by the HOLY GHOST.

And, because he does still speak and because I am a child of God, He does sometimes rebuke me because I sometimes do, say, think or behave in a manner inconsistent with his word....but to date, he has not dissuaded me from asking the deep things of God. He rather encourages his children to do so.

This is available to you, too, if you'd be willing to let go of the doctrines of men. I advise taking your own advice and seek God until he ANSWERS (rather than rebukes) because he is able to show error without necessarily resorting to rebukes.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[KelbyofGod]

Where did you come up with this NONSENSICAL SCENARIO?

If you are referring to the King James translators, this is pure rubbish. The whole Bible existed in a single volume since the second century, when the Syriac Peshitta was translated. And the Bible has existed in a single volume in translations for other languages also -- from very early times.

And at the time when Jesus of Nazareth walked on this earth, the Hebrew Bible (called the Tanakh) also existed in a single volume (even though written on individual scrolls). Now please note what Christ said prophetically (Hebrews 10:5-7):

Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

So if you have a beef with the Bible in a single volume, why don't you take it up with God and be soundly rebuked by Him?

Also, I was merely referring to the committee set up by some king ( a few hundred years after God provided us with apostles, prophets, evangelists, teachers, etc.) tasked with coming up with a collection of works they could all agree on. They were able to agree and satisfy the king...but it is a great leap to assume that their agreement replaces the need for apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers.

The KJV translators weren't until about 1600 as the Authorized KJV is a 1611 edition. I'm happy to have both a bible and a KJV translation, but if both of those were taken away, God and the Holy Ghost which he's given, would still be accessible to me.

You are someone I pray for and care about even though we currently don't agree. My proposals are irritating to you, NOT because they are wrong, because you would PROVE them wrong if they were wrong. But rather they are irritating to you because they are correct, but these ideas "fly in the face" of the doctrines you have been taught so far. My sincere desire is that you be able to recognize and receive greater truth before the end of your days. Because God has so much more for you and I think you would be a great ally (much like Apollos of Acts 18).

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[KelbyofGod]

While I understand the concept of your post, and, to a degree, agree..........in that all believers should FIRST look to the guidance of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit when seeking to understand Scripture, there is nothing wrong with people who, with all humility, and with the GUIDANCE of the Holy Spirit, try to explain in simpler terms (simpler than the King James English) the meanings of Scripture.

Sadly, not all believers have the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, so these "Books" may well assist them in learning how to receive His indwelling presence, and give them a hunger to do so.

Pastors Preach........called by God to do so............and, the vast majority of Pastors I know write down their Sermons. A collection of such Sermons are often put into Book form. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

The ONLY Books I have a grave disdain for are those who promote NEW AGE or some such Gospel that is a "DIFFERENT GOSPEL" that what the Apostles preached/taught.

I just reviewed the thread and realized I'd forgotten to thank you for your posting and the honest nature of it. I'm not against man making books, or even gathering writings that God has inspired into book formats.

It's just that approximately 300 years after the first 12 apostles, a king appointed a group of religious leaders to come up with a group of writings that they could all get behind. And I think they chose well the 66 books that are now contained in what we call "The Bible". But that assembly of books into the volume called the bible does not replace what God set in the church for the perfecting of saints (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers) which he said will be here until the church reaches the measure of the fullness of the stature of Christ.

Ephesians 4:11-13 KJV

And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; [12] For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: [13] Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:​

And this late post isn't to try to provoke an argument with you. It is honestly to thank you for the genuineness of your addition to the thread. Good will is what you conveyed, and that is always a good thing.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[KelbyofGod]

@Nehemiah6 I ask you to indulge me this particular post, partly to apologize for what could seem arrogance, and partly to address some of the REAL concerns you bring up. (So far I've responded to the easy to address points instead.)

My last paragraph of Post #50 is what I partly regret writing (because parts can be taken as arrogant, and could BE arrogant, or at LEAST would need clarification to be useful). But I do not withdraw the compliment to you within it. Saying that you could prove errors wrong is a compliment to your skill and knowledge in the word. That's one of the reasons I appreciate you.

I was going to list some valuable concerns you've brought up and try to address them but that makes the post too long. Instead, if you are willing to throw one concern at a time to me, I'll try to answer each thoroughly, to your satisfaction. I think that's the best I can offer.

If I feel you've included an assumption within a concern I will try to point that out immediately, perhaps before addressing the concern because concerns based on a wrong assumption aren't really valid concerns. But if you say "I think you're just trying to avoid the point" I will try to answer your concern in a more general yet honest manner...again with an attempt to answer thoroughly enough to satisfy your intended meaning.

An example of something I would point out as an assumption: This statement from Post #17... "THAT WHICH IS COMPLETE" can only apply to the Bible" I think that is an assumption because I know of alternate assumptions. At least one of which I find more easily defended. Yet I am quite willing to examine the basis of such statements with you, if desired.

Thanks for your consideration.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[Blik]

Blik said:
God the Father becomes that crazy guy who said not to mix fabrics and gave strange orders to people.


Intended or not, your words here are an abomination against The Great I Am! Sad to see such here on CC

Are you saying that I do not worship the Father because I say I read posting saying that we are not to listen to some of the orders God has given.

I am in opposition to those posting. I am positive our God is a Holy God, an eternal God, and scripture tells of His policies and they are Holy not to ever be scoffed at.

 

[Scribe]

Perfect = complete. It means when scripture became complete, it replaced tongues and prophecy which provided only part of the New Covenant truth. Paul says scripture completely equips us.

It would be impossible that Paul's authorial intent in writing that which is perfect is come was the canon of scripture because at the time that he wrote it he had no idea there would be a completed new testament. Nor would his readers have ever understood that as the meaning.

Authorial intent is the objective of hermeneutics and your interpretation fails at this point.

However Paul did write about a perfection that he pursued...Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. And in other of his writings he often speaks of a day of resurrection and of inheriting a full salvation that is on the other side of resurrection.

The idea that Paul was revealing a secret God had showed him, about how scriptures were currently being created by him and others and that they would be complete when John wrote Revelation is a bizarre interpretation and I find it hard to believe anyone honestly believes that was really Paul's intention and meaning.

I know that there are theologians who adhere to this interpretation but if they are educated I question their intellectual honesty. I think they know that is not what Paul was talking about but they use this erroneous interpretation to support their personal belief that tongues have ceased.

 

[jb]

Perfect = complete. It means when scripture became complete, it replaced tongues and prophecy which provided only part of the New Covenant truth. Paul says scripture completely equips us.

Absolute piffle!

The canon of Scripture is not even mentioned in 1Cor 13, so how can it refer to it?

The Greek word for "that which is perfect," "téleion" ("teleios") is never used in the Scriptures to speak of them!

The term "that which is perfect" can only refer to the Second Coming of Christ when we will see Him "then face to face."

And Acts 2v16-21,38,39 agrees with this, that the baptism in the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit and available throughout the whole of the age of Grace (for the Church) right up to the Second Comig of Christ!

 

[Dave-L]

It would be impossible that Paul's authorial intent in writing that which is perfect is come was the canon of scripture because at the time that he wrote it he had no idea there would be a completed new testament. Nor would his readers have ever understood that as the meaning.

Authorial intent is the objective of hermeneutics and your interpretation fails at this point.

However Paul did write about a perfection that he pursued...Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. And in other of his writings he often speaks of a day of resurrection and of inheriting a full salvation that is on the other side of resurrection.

The idea that Paul was revealing a secret God had showed him, about how scriptures were currently being created by him and others and that they would be complete when John wrote Revelation is a bizarre interpretation and I find it hard to believe anyone honestly believes that was really Paul's intention and meaning.

I know that there are theologians who adhere to this interpretation but if they are educated I question their intellectual honesty. I think they know that is not what Paul was talking about but they use this erroneous interpretation to support their personal belief that tongues have ceased.

Intent? How do you know it didn't happen and you missed it? Scripture says it happened.

 

[Dave-L]

Absolute piffle!

The canon of Scripture is not even mentioned in 1Cor 13, so how can it refer to it?

The Greek word for "that which is perfect," "téleion" ("teleios") is never used in the Scriptures to speak of them!

The term "that which is perfect" can only refer to the Second Coming of Christ when we will see Him "then face to face."

And Acts 2v16-21,38,39 agrees with this, that the baptism in the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit and available throughout the whole of the age of Grace (for the Church) right up to the Second Comig of Christ!

Paul said to seek the gifts until the Revelation of Jesus Christ that will also confirm you till the end. John wrote the Revelation of Jesus Christ that confirms us till the end.

 

[jb]

Paul said to seek the gifts until the Revelation of Jesus Christ that will also confirm you till the end. John wrote the Revelation of Jesus Christ that confirms us till the end.

Exactly where does Paul tell us to seek the gifts until the Revelation of Jesus Christ?

 

[Dave-L]

Exactly where does Paul tell us to seek the gifts until the Revelation of Jesus Christ?

Paul said; “so that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye be unreproveable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 1:7)
Notice they would not seek the gifts until the end of the world. But only until the Revelation of Christ who would also confirm them to the end. If the revelation also confirms them to the end, it is not the end in this case.

So when was the revelation of Jesus Christ that would also confirm them till the end? John sheds light on this in his final writing.

“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;” (Revelation 1:1)
The revelation of Jesus Christ could mean “the revelation by (or from) Jesus Christ” or “the revelation about Jesus Christ,” or both may be included. The word revelation (or “apocalypse,” Greek apokalypsis) expresses the subject and nature of the book.

 

[Scribe]

Absolute piffle!

The canon of Scripture is not even mentioned in 1Cor 13, so how can it refer to it?

The Greek word for "that which is perfect," "téleion" ("teleios") is never used in the Scriptures to speak of them!

The term "that which is perfect" can only refer to the Second Coming of Christ when we will see Him "then face to face."

And Acts 2v16-21,38,39 agrees with this, that the baptism in the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit and available throughout the whole of the age of Grace (for the Church) right up to the Second Comig of Christ!

pif·fle
noun · exclamation INFORMAL
nonsense.

Good word.