Chart Listing - Sola Scriptura

1. Chart Listing

"Perfect" (Whole) in I Corinthians 13:10

"Part" in I Corinthians 13:9

One of the constituent parts of the whole. Universally in a context where the whole and its parts are distinguished, Lk 11:36 ... in part, partially (Thayer, p.401)

Luke 11:36:

Having no part OF WHAT? The body. How do we know? Because the whole and its parts are distinguished. The part must be of the same nature as the whole. The whole is the body, therefore the part must be part OF THE BODY.

Similarly, in I Corinthians 13:8-10, the whole and its parts are being distinguished. The perfect (complete or whole) is being contrasted with the parts of that whole. The existence of this contrast indicates the whole is of the same nature as the part.

Since the parts have to do with the revelation of God's will, and since the whole must be of the same nature as the parts, then the whole must be the whole revelation, i.e., the completed NT.

Since the NT has been completed (perfected), & since the parts were to be "done away" when the perfect came, therefore the parts (including tongues & prophecy) have been DONE AWAY.

"That which is perfect" or whole must refer to the completed revelation, as the whole must be of the same nature as the parts of that whole. That which is in part (knowledge, prophecy, v.9, and tongues, v.8) pertains to revealed information, so "that which is perfect," complete, or whole, must also pertain to revealed information, that is, the completed New Testament.

The Whole Must be of the Same Nature as a Part of that Whole

(Partial) (Complete, Whole)

Part (piece) of an Apple ................... Perfect (complete, whole) Apple

Part (piece) of an Orange .............. Perfect (complete, whole) Orange

Know in part ........................................................ Complete knowledge

Prophesy in part ..................................................... Complete prophecy

PARTIAL REVELATION ........................ COMPLETE REVELATION

In part, partial 2nd coming? ................ Perfect, complete 2nd coming

Part (piece) of an Apple ................. Perfect (complete, whole) Orange

Conclusion:

The "perfect" of I Corinthians 13:10 must refer to the perfect (completed) revelation of God, that is, the completed New Testament; therefore since tongues were to cease when that which is perfect would come, then TONGUES CEASED WHEN THE NEW TESTAMENT WAS COMPLETED.

If Fred offered Ethel a piece of an apple, and Ethel replied, "no thank you, I want a whole one," would Ethel be asking for a whole apple, or for a whole orange?

Ethel would be asking for a whole apple, not necessarily for the same apple that the piece offered came from, but a whole apple nonetheless. How would Fred know that Ethel wanted a whole apple and not a whole orange? Because the whole must be of the same nature as the part.

In I Corinthians 13:8-10, the perfect (complete or whole) is being contrasted with the part. The existence of this contrast indicates that the whole must be of the same nature as the part.

Since the parts have to do with the revelation of God's will, and since the whole must be of the same nature as the parts, then the whole must be the whole revelation, that is, the completed N.T.

Since the N.T. has been completed (perfected), and since the parts were to be "done away" when the perfect came, therefore the parts (including tongues and prophecy) have been DONE AWAY.

The perfect of I Cor 13:8-10 is not the 2nd coming of Christ. It is of the same nature as the revelation in parts - it is the complete revelation

"That which is perfect" cannot be the 2nd coming:

perfect 2nd coming

| |

prophecies | |

-------------------------------> | I Cor 13:8-10 |

tongues | |

-------------------------------> | I Cor 13:8-10 |

knowledge | |

-------------------------------> | I Cor 13:8-10 |

| |

faith | I Cor 13:13 |

--------------------------------- | ----------------------> | II Cor 5:6-8

hope | I Cor 13:13 | Heb 11:1

--------------------------------- | ----------------------> | Rom 8:24

charity | I Cor 13:13 |

--------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ----------------------->

| |

Conclusion:

The "perfect" of I Corinthians 13:10 CANNOT be referring to the 2nd coming of Christ.

The whole context (chapters 12 and 13) is talking about a single TIME PERIOD, called ...

"that day": 12:3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13:1, 2, 4

Prophecy Would Cease During The

Prophecy Would Cease During The

Same Time Period As The FIRST Coming Of Christ

"In That Day" CANNOT be the Second Coming:

Zech 13:2-4 shows that false prophets will continue on AFTER true prophets will cease to be (v.3 - "if anyone still prophesies" - NKJV). But my opponent's position says true prophets will exist on to the end, that true prophets and false prophets will stop at the same time. This would leave no time period where false prophets exist after true prophets have ceased to exist. Therefore my opponent's position cannot be true.

In That Day 2nd Coming

| |

True Prophets | |

-------------------------------> | Zech 13:2 |

| |

| |

False Prophets | |

--------------------------------- | -----------------------------> | II Pet 3:9-10

| Zech 13:3-4 |

| |

True Prophets |

-----------------------------------------------------------------> |

My Opponent |

|

Idols, prophets, and unclean spirits passing out of the land at the end of the world doesn't make any sense, because there won't be any land left to pass out of at that time - it will all be destroyed. Everything (not just idols, prophets, and unclean spirits) will pass away at that time.

Conclusion: "In That Day" in Zech 13:1-4 CANNOT be referring to (the time of) the 2nd Coming of Christ, or to the End of the World, therefore true prophets must cease before that time.

My opponent's response to my "whole must be of the same nature as the parts" argument is:

If the pieces are gone, then the whole (revelation) would be gone, because the whole is made up of the pieces.

The above statement is true, but does not describe my position. My position is not that the whole is the same as the parts, but that the whole is of the same nature as the parts.

If Fred offered Ethel a piece of an apple, and Ethel replied, "no thank you, I want a whole one," would Ethel be asking for a whole apple, or a whole orange?

Ethel would be asking for a whole apple, NOT NECESSARILY FOR THE SAME APPLE THAT THE PIECE OFFERED CAME FROM, but a whole apple nonetheless. How would Fred know that Ethel wanted a whole apple and not a whole orange? Because the whole must be of the same nature as the part.

In the case of our discussion, the completed New Testament is not the same as prophecy, tongues, and miraculous knowledge, but it is of the same nature (they both are means by which God reveals his will); but the second coming of Christ is not of the same nature as prophecy, tongues, and miraculous knowledge.

Since the parts have to do with the revelation of God's will, and since the whole must be of the same nature as the parts, then the whole must be the whole revelation, i.e., the completed N.T.

My opponent agrees that the "whole must be of the same nature as the part," that the part pertains to God's revelation, and therefore that the perfect is God's complete revelation; but he says:

There are things that we don't know now that we will find out at the second coming (beginning the millinium) - like some of the things referred to in Deut 29:29, I Jn 3:2.

• The partial revelation under consideration in I Corinthians 13:

Conclusion:

Since the parts have to do with the revelation of God's N.T. Law, and since the whole must be of the same nature as the parts, then the whole must be the whole revelation of God's N.T. Law, that is, the completed, written NT.

I Corinthians 13:13

The words "And now" in I Corinthians 13:13 introduce the contrast between the abiding of faith, hope, and charity as opposed to the stopping of prophecy, tongues, and (miraculous) knowledge in vs.8-10.

• I Cor 10:11 "Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."
• "Auburn didn't win any National Championships in the 1970's; but now, Alabama did."

• Vine (one of two definitions) - "with logical import"
• Romans 7:17 uses the same Greek word ("Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.")

• Vine - "expressing coincidence, and denoting strictly present time, signifies 'just now,' this moment"
• Matthew 11:12, John 16:12 are examples

"And now ABIDETH faith, hope ..." is set in contrast to prophecies, tongues, and (miraculous) knowledge STOPPING.

What else could v.13 mean, if it is not a contrast with vs.8-10? Is it saying "these three abide," but so do prophecies, tongues, and knowledge, even though vs.8-10 said they would STOP?

Zechariah 13:2

• v.2 - "the idols out of the land"
• but idols still exist
• therefore, Zech 13:2 has not been fulfilled yet

First of all, this does not answer my argument, it only presents a supposed difficulty with my argument. Will my opponent answer the argument itself in his next speech? Will my opponent deny that the context is a prophecy about the FIRST coming of Christ? (remember 13:1, 11:12-13, 12:10, 13:6, & 13:7)

• v.2 is talking about "out of the LAND," not out of the WHOLE EARTH (my opponent would agree that it would have to be limited in some way, because he agrees that idolatry will continue, in at least some part of the world, right up until the time of the end of the world). - but everything will pass at the end of the world
• The verse is talking about "out of the land" of the Messiah's rule.
• In the Jewish age, one could commit idolatry and still be a child of God, because he was a child of God simply by being born a Jew.
• This is not true in the church age, the worship of idols does not exist among true children of God (by spiritual birth), because if one commits idolatry he ceases to be a true child of God. Idols do not exist in the land of the Messiah's rule.

And so idols did PASS "out of the (Messiah's) land" in the time period of the first coming of Christ. And so did true prophets !

My opponent doesn't believe idols' names were cut off during the time period of Christ's death in any sense; the Bible says that they would be !

Evidently my opponent doesn't believe the Bible teaches Catholic doctrine or he wouldn't need to resort to sources outside the Bible.

II Timothy 3:16-17 - the scriptures are given "That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Since my opponent must go outside the scriptures to find Catholic practices (infant baptism for example), they must not be "good works," since the Bible furnishes us "unto ALL good works."

I Cor 13:8-13 and Zech 13:1-4 show that prophecy has ceased, so the Pope knows no more than anybody else.

The Catholics make the same claim as the Mormons and Pentecostals: continuing revelation. How would I know that the Pope is right and they are wrong? The apostles performed miracles to verify that their teaching was inspired. Where are your miracles?

The Catholics make the same claims as the Watch Tower Witnesses. If I have to go church hierarchy for correct doctrine, how do I know that I am not supposed to go to the "Watch Tower Society?"

Random House: ... (in the Eucharist) the conversion of the whole substance of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, only the external appearance of bread & wine remaining

"this is my body ... this is my blood" (Matthew 26:26,28) are metaphors:

metaphor (New Standard Dictionary):

• Pointing to a picture and saying "This is my mother" is a metaphor. To insist this could only mean, "this is actually my mother," would be nonsense.
• I am the door of the sheep John 10:7
• I am the true vine John 15:1

Figurative language is not unusual in the Bible.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Opponent's view:

that the man of God may be almost perfect, partially furnished unto most good works

• all scriptures - OT and NT (COMPLETED)
• written - no tradition, no Pope revealed, etc.

Makes the man of God:

• perfect - complete, not lacking anything
• thoroughly furnished - not partially furnished -> tradition, Pope not needed
• unto ALL good works - not just some of the good works (other sources do not reveal any additional needed good works)

And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, ... And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened ... and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

So we are going to be judged by the things WRITTEN in the books of the Bible:

• not by Catholic Church tradition
• not by what the Pope & his Cardinals say

We agree God ordained traditions/practices must be followed (see also II Thessalonians 3:6). And we agree that God's word was given orally (in parts) at that time.

But we do NOT agree that human/Catholic traditions should be followed - Matthew 15:3,9:

... Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? ... But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Here Is The Issue: Is God still revealing his law today orally? Or is it all completed in written form, namely, the New Testament?

Yes, the church is "the pillar and ground of the truth" (I Timothy 3:15), but pillars and ground hold up something, in this case the truth. They are not the same as the truth they hold up. So the church is NOT the truth, neither the source of the truth, but the church's duty is to uphold and teach the truth.

The word of God is the sole source of the truth:

John 17:17 - Sanctify them through thy truth: THY WORD IS TRUTH.

The Bible gives us ALL the truth, II Tim 3:16-17:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

That's right, I'm fallible, but the word of God is INfallible. And the word of God is the standard I am appealing to in this debate, not my own wisdom or understanding. Bible verses are what actually prove my position.

James 1:25:

Question:

If the fact that I am fallible means I can't understand/interpret correctly what the scriptures say, then wouldn't that mean that since my opponent is fallible, he can't understand/interpret correctly what the Pope says?

We CAN know the truth, John 8:32:

Ephesians 3:3-4 - How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge ...

Mt 13:23 - he that ... (is) ... the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it

II Cor 1:13 - For we write nothing else to you than what you read and understand ... (NASV)

Why people don't understand God's word:

Matthew 13:15 - For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and THEIR EYES THEY HAVE CLOSED; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted ...

It is strange that we can't understand the Bible, even though we agree the author is the Almighty God, but we can understand the Pope who is only a man. My opponent must not think much of God's ability to communicate.

Who should we believe, the Pope then or the Pope now? or God?

If by the Roman Church you mean its head or pontiff, it is beyond question that he can err even in matters touching the faith. He does this when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman pontiffs were heretics. The last of them was Pope John XXII (1316-1334). (Diet of Nuremburg in 1522)

It is certain that the Pope may err in matters of faith ... (Comm. in lib. iv., Sententiarum Quest. de Sacr. Confirm.; Romae, 1522; apud D'Aubigne, bk.10, chap.2)

Origen ("Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew" 11:14):

... it is not the material of the bread but the word which is said over it which is of advantage to him who eats it .... And these things indeed are said of the typical and symbolical body.

Tertullian ("Against Marcion" 4:40:3):

... having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, he made it His own body, by saying, 'This is my body,' that is, the figure of my body.

Evidently my opponent doesn't believe the Bible teaches Catholic doctrine, or he wouldn't resort to using quotes from outside the Bible, quotes from uninspired men.

So called "church fathers" can be used to prove both sides of just about every issue. UNinspired writings are UNreliable. Only the Bible is "profitable for doctrine" and to be used for authorizing any good work (II Tim 3:16-17).

Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 8, page 34:

The Inquisition lasted for about 6 1/2 centuries.

This flies in the face of Jesus' teaching (Jn 18:36):

And should remind you of Hitler and the Holocaust

Catholic Encyclopedia, page 300:

One should not seek to justify them, but to explain them and, most importantly, to explain how they could have been associated with a divinely established Church and how, from their existence, it is not proper to conclude that the Church of Rome is not the Church of Christ.

Revelation 21:8:

... the unbelieving ... and murderers ... and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire & brimstone ...

Catholic Encyclopedia, IX, 471:

Catholic Encyclopedia, X, 195:

... we are ... under an obligation to keep secrets faithfully, and sometimes the easiest way of fulfilling that duty is to say what is false, or to tell a lie.

How can you trust someone for the truth when they don't think the truth is important, and admit that they will tell lies if it furthers their goals and purposes?

"Who Gave The Bible To The People" - Knights of Columbus:

• The Council of Hippo may have decided the Canon for the Catholic church, but they didn't decide for the rest of us. For example, our "Table Of Contents" is different (no apocrypha).
• Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized St. Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible and authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra seven Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's original Latin Vulgate didn't include the apocrypha.
• "Even Pope St. Gregory the Great (540-604) inclined to the view (of Jerome) and speaks of the disputed books as 'books which though not canonical, and received for the edification of the Church' Lib. Mor. 19, 21, PL 76, 119" (A Catholic Commentary, 18).
• The councils didn't end disputes. Even as late as the 1500's, Martin Luther called James an "epistle of straw."
• Hippo was a mere rubber stamping of what had long been the universal standard for the majority of Christians. No problem with God using this rubber stamp, anymore than God using Judas to betray Jesus, leading to our salvation.

• Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible and authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra seven Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's original Latin Vulgate didn't include the apocrypha.
• The NT contains 263 direct quotations from, 370 allusions to, passages in the OT, but not one reference to the Apocrypha.
• The apocrypha was never part of the Jews' Hebrew OT.

• Josephus (born A.D. 37) - "For we have ... only twenty-two books" (the Jews grouped the 39 books into 22 in order to match the 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet) - Against Apion 1:8
• Origen (about 200 A.D.) rejected the apocryphal books - "It should be stated that the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them down, are twenty-two; corresponding with the number of their letters." - Eccl. Hist. VI. 25, Eusebius
• "Saint" Cyril (born about A.D. 315) - "Read the divine Scriptures - namely, the 22 books of the OT which the 72 interpreters translated" (Septuagint) - Catechetical Lectures 4:33
• The apocrypha wasn't included at first in the Septuagint, but was appended by the Alexandrian Jews, and was not listed in any of the catalogues of the inspired books till the 4th century
• Hilary (bishop of Poictiers, 350 A.D.) rejected the apocrypha - "The law of the OT is considered as divided in 22 books, so as to correspond to the number of letters." - Prologue to Psalms, Sec.15

Catholic Encyclopedia, IX, 296:

In the first period (lasting perhaps till about the fourth century) there were no books EXCEPT THE BIBLE from which lessons were read and psalms were sung.

• Lk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them

• Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.

• Acts 17:11 (the Bereans) received the word with all readiness of mind, & searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so

• II Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

"Handbook of Denominations in the United States, Sixth Edition" - Frank S. Mead, p.117:

A few hundred years later, there was another split and the Anglican Church was started.

There has not been a century for fifteen hundred years when Catholics were not killing Catholics (even Popes killing Popes). Some unity!

Most Catholics I know don't agree on hardly anything. So "visible" Catholic unity is just that, a façade ("a false or superficial appearance, often designed to give a favorable impression," Random House). There is no real unity.

Christ intended that this (Apostolic) power should be exercised also by their successors, the bishops of the church. -My Catholic Faith, p.107

• Acts 1:22 - an apostle must be an eye witness of Jesus' resurrection - by definition, eye witnesses don't have successors
• Catholic bishops don't meet the qualifications of a bishop:
• must be the husband of one wife (I Tim 3:2, Titus 1:6)
• must have obedient, faithful children (Titus 1:6-7, I Tim 3:4)

• "the signs of an apostle" II Corinthians 12:12
• "through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given" Acts 8:18
• When was the last time you heard Catholic bishops speak in tongues as the Apostles did in Acts 2?, or raise the dead as Peter did in Acts 9?

Therefore, there cannot be any living apostles.

We still have the same 13 apostles. They haven't changed. They lead through their written word.

If the contra-ception method stops the process before conception (whether by watching temperature or other) there is nothing wrong.

Some forms of "contraception" actually stop the process after conception. That is wrong; it is just another form of abortion.

"Rich Church, Poor Church" - Malachi Martin - (former Jesuit professor at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome; served in the Vatican under Pope John XXIII; trained in theology at Louvain; specialized in the Dead Sea Scrolls and intertestamentary studies; received his doctorate in Semitic languages, archeology, and Oriental history) p.239:

"The Faith of Our Fathers," Cardinal Gibbons:

If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine of faith which had been previously held, that single instance would be the death blow of her claim to infallibility (p.74)

"The Question Box" - Conway (Roman Catholic)

This must have been a matter of faith:

• marriage - a God given/regulated institution
• canon law

Romans 6:4 - Therefore we are buried with him by baptism ...

baptizo - the meaning of the word is immersion

• ... to immerge, submerge (Thayer)
• to immerse (Wigram-Green)

Adult Catechism, pages 56-57:

Baptism used to be given by placing the person to be baptized completely in the water: it was done in this way in the Catholic Church for 1200 years.

Our Faith and the Facts, page 399:

The church at one time practiced immersion. This was up to the thirteenth century. The Council of Ravenna, in 1311, changed the form from immersion to pouring.

New Interpretation of the Mass, 120, Borgmann:

Baptism took place by immersion in ancient times.

Catholic Facts, 27, Noll:

I Cor 11:26,28 - For as often as ye eat this bread, AND DRINK THIS CUP, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. ... But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, AND DRINK OF THAT CUP.

Catholic Encyclopedia, IV, 176:

Catholic Dictionary, 202:

Lives and Times of the Roman Pontiffs, I, 111:

Now my opponent tells me that the Catholic Church has changed again, and currently allows the laity to drink the fruit of the vine.

"The Faith of Our Fathers," Cardinal Gibbons:

If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine of faith which had been previously held, that single instance would be the death blow of her claim to infallibility (p.74)

Acts 20:7 - And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them ...

Legislation on the Sacraments in the New Code of Canon Law, 87, Ayrinhac:

In the beginning Mass was celebrated only once a week, then three or four times, and finally, in the fifth or sixth century, every day.

II Thessalonians 2:10:

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

Matthew 13:15:

For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted ...

To illustrate, I Corinthians 14:34-35 reads:

(see also I Timothy 2:11-12)

Yet probably 90% of congregations in the USA allow women to preach from their pulpits, including the Catholics. I have a tape where a Catholic, Janet E. Smith, Ph.D., is lecturing on "Contraception" to a mixed audience of men and women.

Is the problem interpretation, or a love of the truth ?

St. Chrysostom (Homilies Of St. John Chrysostom, "Homily LIV" on Matthew 16:18, Sec. 3):

St. Augustine ("Retract.' i.21):

Origen commented on Matthew 16:18 about 200 years after it was written ("Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew" 12:11):

"Church Fathers" Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome, Gregory Nyssa, and Cyril taught the same.

Archbishop Purcell (debate with Alexander Campbell in Cincinnati on 1-13-1837, page 27):

"A Doctrinal Catechism," by Keenan, bearing the Imprimatur (official sanction) of Scotch Roman Catholic bishops, pre 1870:

After 1870, this Q&A was dropped from Keenan's catechism.

Matthew 23:9:

And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. ... But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

I Timothy 4:1:

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; ... Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats ...

Catholic Facts, 27, Noll:

When we affirm "The Bible Only," we are only talking about informationally, as our authority. We do not believe God operates through the Bible only:

• if a farmer prays for rain, God does not grant that request through the Bible
• forgiveness of sins occurs in the mind of God, not through the Bible

The Bible did not give us itself or its TOC; the N.T. was given by God primarily through miraculous means (and secondarily providence). God inspired its writing, and confirmed who the writers were by:

• Jesus chose the apostles during his personal ministry
• the apostles and New Testament prophets were confirmed by God through miracles (Heb 2:3-4)

The early church knew the apostles & N.T. prophets, and knew who wrote each book. God providentially chose the books to be included in the N.T. through these early Christians' acceptance of the 27 books.

I Pet 1:23 . word of God, which liveth & abideth forever

I Corinthians 13:8-10:

All agree that this passage teaches that prophecy and tongues will stop when "that which is perfect" is come. The Question is, what does the "perfect" refer to? -

The whole of God's revelation, that is, the completed New Testament.

When the means by which God provides the complete revelation (the complete, written New Testament) comes into existence, the means by which God provides that revelation in parts (prophecy, tongues, and miraculous knowledge) would go away.

If I can prove "that which is perfect" refers to the completed New Testament, then I will have proven that prophecy and tongues stopped when the N.T. was completed. I will have proven my position.

Contact Webservants

Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA