1 Corinthians 13:10 - The perfect is come (The New Testament?)

[runandsew]

I have a friend who is a fundamentalist baptist, with strong dispensatonalist leanings.
My friend had mentioned to me before that miracles had ceased since the perfect had come, and now more recently when my friend brought up the subject of Catholics confessing to a priest, my friend said that this was not needed anymore because the perfect had come. I questioned my friend on what “the perfect” meant, and my friend told me that it was the New Testament. When I told my friend that I thought that it meant the end times when we are in heaven with God, my friend told me yes, a lot of Christians believe that, but the perfect is a “thing”, and heaven can’t be a “thing”, so therefore it is talking about Scripture.

Is this actually what the Greek should be translated to (thing)?
My friend mentioned that the source which they got this information were the top scholars in the country, who am I to argue?
I do know that St. Thomas Aquinas in his commentary on this passage writes that it is talking about the end times being face to face with God, but is he as smart as these scholars that my friend is using as their source?
And would this mean that charismatic gifts have ceased with the New Testament, and are no longer used in the Church, or do they cease at the end of time when we are “face to face” with God?

1 Corinthians 13:8-13

Charity never faileth: but whether [there be] prophecies, they shall fail; whether [there be] tongues, they shall cease; whether [there be] knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. **But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. ** When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 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. And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these [is] charity.

Here is my friends reply to me to explain how they got “thing” into this passage:

The interlinear translation I use, as many seminarians use, is the one by Dr. Alfred Marshall. His format is a literal English translation below the Greek words with the Authorized KJ in the margin. Verse 10 is therefore translated from the Greek as this: “…when but comes the perfect thing, the thing in part will be abolished.” Our pastor, Dr. Schaffer, has been considered (during his pastoring days) one of the foremost authorities on the Greek text in the nation. The notes I have in my bible are the result of the depth of his study. My notes show the words in this line can actually be translated as “the completed thing”. The Greek for this is also neuter, not masculine, therefore it CANNOT be a person.

The Greek word in question is: tevelion (this is without true Greek lettering of course) the original word is “tevleio” found in Strongs #5056, a noun neuter.
Definition according to Strongs:
end
termination, the limit at which a thing ceases to be (always of the end of some act or state, but not of the end of a period of time)
the end
the last in any succession or series
eternal
that by which a thing is finished, its close, issue
the end to which all things relate, the aim, purpose

 

[Lyell]

Well, I am no Greek scholar, but I do think that most bibles were put together by people who were Greek Scholars. From the RSV-CE version, with my comments interspersed so much that you may need to look up the orginal to get the flow of it:
I Cor 13: 8 Love never ends; as for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. (so all of these things seem to be linked: they will pass away together, when the perfect is come. I do not believe that knowlege has passed away, so I do not think that the perfect has come yet. ) 9 For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect; (true) 10 but when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away. (the perfect will eclipse the imperfect) 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways. (now it gets personal: when the perfect is come, I will be affected) 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood. (Now we get some more clues: when the perfect is come, I shall understand fully. How fully? As fully as God understands me. So this is my test: since the New Testiment has come, is my understanding fully full? Do I understand fully, even as I have been understood? NO, that is not part of my experience. So I believe the perfect has not yet come.

 

[Todd_Easton]

I don’t know if this addresses your question directly but here’s my :twocents: …

It seems to me that the phrase “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” is simply an adage that St. Paul employs to contrast our imperfect “in a glass, darkly” knowledge and experience of God, including the gifts of prophecy and tongues, “now” in this present life on earth with the perfect “face to face” knowedge and experience of God that the righteous will have in heaven in the beatific vision after death and at the resurrection of the body at the end of time.

From A Catholic Commenary on Holy Scripture, edited by Dom Bernard Orchard, M.A., pub. by Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1954, page 1095, regarding 1 Corinthians 13-8-13:
8-13 Other Charismata are Transitory, Love is Eternal — The other charismata are bound up with the weakness and imperfection of our present state, and become superfluous hereafter. It now becomes clear that God, not our neighbour, is the first object of love. 8. "Falleth away’; 'Is never done with, never becomes obsolete,’ cf. Lk 16:17. ‘Prophecies’: i.e. various instances of the prophetic charisma. ‘Made void…destroyed’: ‘superseded’. The Greek word is the same in both cases and also at the end of v 10. 9. ‘In part’: or ‘imperfectly’. The knowledge that he speaks of in knowledge of God, cf. 12f. In this world our knowledge of God is indirect and imperfect, based on comparisons and contrasts to things which come within our experience. This dim picture wil be abandoned when we know Him directly, ‘face to face’. So also the prophet’s shadowy foreknowledge is superseded by the reality, and the gift of languages is clearly useless after this life. 10. ‘When…’: i.e. in the future life. 11. Our present life is compared to childhood. 12. ‘See’: i.e. see God. ‘Glass’: ‘mirror’, i.e. indirectly, by a reflexion, which in ancient mirrors (they were only polished metal) would generally be rather dim. ‘In a dark manner’. The Greek word ainigma (riddle) is used in the OT sense of parable or comparison or figurative language. Therefore, 'by means of (earthly) imagery’. ‘Am known’: or perhaps ‘have been known’, and there may be the incidental thought that God’s knowledge means God’s approval (8:3) though this is unessential to the argument. The conclusion of all this reasoning (8-12) had already been state at its commencement, and is not repeated. Charity on earth and in heaven is essentially the same, differing only in degree, and is therefore an eternal virtue. 13. ‘And now’ seems to mean "For the present’ or ‘meanwhile’, for Paul himself intimates elsewhere that faith and hope are only for this life, 2 Cor 5:7; Rom 8:24: they naturally cease when we see what we have believed in, and attained to what we have hope for.

 

[TOME]

I think that if we look at the previous chapters of Paul’s letter, what he is writing about may help with our understanding of vs 10.

Prior to Chapter 13, Paul is writing about the Chruch as it functions as the “Body of Christ” Here we find him writing about the different gifts and ministeries and charisms given to each member of Christ’s body for service to the Body, that is the Church.

Suddenly, we find Paul stopping everything and he begings his discourse on Love. In Chapter 13 Paul is putting everything into its right perspective. First he tells the Corithians that as important as the charisms are they really are meaningless without love. As we move further on in this chapter he explains why.

Once the perfect comes, there will be no need for the charism for service to the Church, because the Church, as we know it will no longer be necessary - she will have fulfilled her mission. Faith will not be needed because we then will be experiencing the Kingdom in its fullness and likewise we will no longer need hope because what we hope for will have been fulfilled.

But we will always need love because don’t we believe and hope, right now, that at the end of time we will be totally united with God who is Love?

Also, this love will bring perfect knowledge. Here I think we should approach our understanding of what perfect knowledge is, not from the greek that is used but from the hebrew roots of Paul’s understanding. The greek language and thought Paul uses was permeated by Platonic metaphysics and its stress on perfect knowledge was in the relm of thought of ideas. But in the hebrew (Aramaic) thought which was the language of Our Lord, the Twelve and Paul’s own pharisaic upbringing, there was no word or words that could express a metaphysical understanding of knowledge as used in the greek of Paul’s letter. No, knowledge was as a physical reality as it was mental. The word in aramaic for knowledge was the same word for sexual love. The intimacy and knowledge between two persons gain and understood through sexual intercoarse was in the mind set of the jewish thought was true knowledge. We find this understanding of jewish understanding of what knowledge was implicit in our Blessed Mother’s question to Gabriel when she asked how could she become a mother when she did not know man.

So I think the best we to approach this passage from 1Corinthian 13 is to reflect on it from the perspective of relationship - our relationship when we are in total union with God. That love relationship is what is truely eternal.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I cor 13:10 has historically been associated with I John 3:2, I cor 15, Rev 19, the second coming of Christ, the ressurrection, and heaven.

 

[runandsew]

Like I said, my friend is is a fundamentalist baptist, with strong dispensatonalist leanings.
Historical Christianity doesn’t mean a thing to my friend, only what matters is what the scripture are saying to them, or to the people who they think are teaching what they believe.
I forgot to mention that my friend and their spouse have recently left their old Baptist church, and started a new one in their home, because the old church began to teach error.
So even if something has been taught for the last 2,000 years by every denomination, I feel my friend if were compelled by their understanding of some passage, would reject what has been taught, and believe they now hold the truth, and every one else has been wrong through out the ages.

How does one argue with this reasoning?

I think that I will need to argue that “the perfect” isn’t pointing directly to a “person” (God) in scripture, just like their pastor said, but it is talking about the perfect that we will experience in heaven, being face to face with God.

By the way this interpretation of 1 Cor. 10 was started by BB Warfield sometime around 100 or so years ago, as an aguement against miracles and speaking in tongues, because at that time they started to appear in the protestant churches, and were no longer something they could explain away just because they were a Catholic thing, and therefore false.
(I got this explaination from a Jimmy Akins article in this rock magazine)
The Continuation of Miracles