1 cor. 13:10

[JohnD]

Um, my two cents are that the verse refers to the canon of scripture which was in flux for both the OT and the NT at the time Paul wrote the verse.

[His_disciple3]

Job 1:1

1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

That's right. Job was mature in faith.

A very interesting word there. The same word was used to describe Jacob in Genesis but translated 'plain' instead.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew : and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob [was] a plain8535 man, dwelling in tents.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name [was] Job; and that man was perfect8535 and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

I really don't know what to make of that. But also understand the word 'perfect' there '8535' is used to mean undefiled as well.

Interesting stuff.

Gary

well I think it has already been establish and agreed upon that words can have different meaning.

[His_disciple3]

Um, my two cents are that the verse refers to the canon of scripture which was in flux for both the OT and the NT at the time Paul wrote the verse.

what verse might that be? if you are talking about 1 cor, 13:10 this can not be the canon of scriptures for it says that knowledge will vanish, knowledge (knowing right from wrong, good or evil) didn't vanish with the scriptures but rather increased, as before the day when Eve ate the fruit, knowledge( knowing good and evil ) has been with us and will remain with us til that which is pefect comes, after the sun has darkened and the moon has turned to blood, we must live by every Word of God, rightly dividing the Word of truth.

1 Corinthians 13:8-10

8 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.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

KJV

[gdemoss]

Job 1:1

1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

That's right. Job was mature in faith.

A very interesting word there. The same word was used to describe Jacob in Genesis but translated 'plain' instead.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew : and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob [was] a plain8535 man, dwelling in tents.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name [was] Job; and that man was perfect8535 and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

I really don't know what to make of that. But also understand the word 'perfect' there '8535' is used to mean undefiled as well.

Interesting stuff.

Gary

well I think it has already been establish and agreed upon that words can have different meaning.

I would agree that words have a range of meaning but we must have a way of understanding when they should be translated which way.

Gary

[His_disciple3]

Job 1:1

1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

That's right. Job was mature in faith.

A very interesting word there. The same word was used to describe Jacob in Genesis but translated 'plain' instead.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew : and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob [was] a plain8535 man, dwelling in tents.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name [was] Job; and that man was perfect8535 and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

I really don't know what to make of that. But also understand the word 'perfect' there '8535' is used to mean undefiled as well.

Interesting stuff.

Gary

well I think it has already been establish and agreed upon that words can have different meaning.

I would agree that words have a range of meaning but we must have a way of understanding when they should be translated which way.

Gary

and you know better than all the Bible scholars that worked of the translation back in the 1600's

[Guest yod]

1 Corinthians 13:8-10

8 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.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

KJV

This verse seems simple and obvious to me.

He's only saying that when God's Kingdom has finally come, there will be no need for prophecies. We will be living in a new era (yom) and what we've known about this one, which is temporal and passing away, will be a distant memory. No need for knowledge of it.

Though everything around us will cease to be at some time, God's love will be eternal for us and in us. "That which is perfect" speaks of the Kingdom Come.

.

[gdemoss]

Job 1:1

1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

That's right. Job was mature in faith.

A very interesting word there. The same word was used to describe Jacob in Genesis but translated 'plain' instead.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew : and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob [was] a plain8535 man, dwelling in tents.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name [was] Job; and that man was perfect8535 and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

I really don't know what to make of that. But also understand the word 'perfect' there '8535' is used to mean undefiled as well.

Interesting stuff.

Gary

well I think it has already been establish and agreed upon that words can have different meaning.

I would agree that words have a range of meaning but we must have a way of understanding when they should be translated which way.

Gary

and you know better than all the Bible scholars that worked of the translation back in the 1600's

Why would this be your response to what I have written? My hope was that you might reply with something concerning how we might know these things and add to the discussion that which I might be missing. I often muse over why the translators of that day chose the words they did when they did. In many places it seems that there was no rhyme or reason to the selection. I personally believe that God had his hand closely upon the translation of the KJV just as he did the Septuagint. God has been known to hide things in his word from those he desires not to see them. He resists the proud but gives grace to the humble.

My hope is always to move forward in discussions toward unity of faith but unfortunately in our day that is becoming increasingly hard because iniquity abounds and revelation is skewed at best. I find myself unable to address much outside of encouraging people toward obedience that God reveal unto them his truth. Usually just get smacked up side the head with brutish comments and accusations though.

Do you have any understanding behind why these were chosen as they were though they be the same word?

Gary

[asper]

Job 1:1

1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

That's right. Job was mature in faith.

A very interesting word there. The same word was used to describe Jacob in Genesis but translated 'plain' instead.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew : and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob [was] a plain8535 man, dwelling in tents.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name [was] Job; and that man was perfect8535 and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

I really don't know what to make of that. But also understand the word 'perfect' there '8535' is used to mean undefiled as well.

Interesting stuff.

Gary

well I think it has already been establish and agreed upon that words can have different meaning.

I would agree that words have a range of meaning but we must have a way of understanding when they should be translated which way.

Gary

and you know better than all the Bible scholars that worked of the translation back in the 1600's

it seems that this has gone quite far from the topic. the point that was intended to be made was already made.

the word means what it means. there are many applications to the word complete. take it for what you will, but here it is again.

5046. τελειος teleios tel’-i-os; from 5056; complete (in various applications of labor, growth, mental and moral character, etc.); neuter (as noun, with 3588) completeness: —

kjv translated it as follows.

of full age, man, perfect.

Edited July 14, 2012 by asper

[His_disciple3]

Job 1:1

1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

That's right. Job was mature in faith.

A very interesting word there. The same word was used to describe Jacob in Genesis but translated 'plain' instead.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew : and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob [was] a plain8535 man, dwelling in tents.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name [was] Job; and that man was perfect8535 and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

I really don't know what to make of that. But also understand the word 'perfect' there '8535' is used to mean undefiled as well.

Interesting stuff.

Gary

well I think it has already been establish and agreed upon that words can have different meaning.

I would agree that words have a range of meaning but we must have a way of understanding when they should be translated which way.

Gary

and you know better than all the Bible scholars that worked of the translation back in the 1600's

Why would this be your response to what I have written? My hope was that you might reply with something concerning how we might know these things and add to the discussion that which I might be missing. I often muse over why the translators of that day chose the words they did when they did. In many places it seems that there was no rhyme or reason to the selection. I personally believe that God had his hand closely upon the translation of the KJV just as he did the Septuagint. God has been known to hide things in his word from those he desires not to see them. He resists the proud but gives grace to the humble.

My hope is always to move forward in discussions toward unity of faith but unfortunately in our day that is becoming increasingly hard because iniquity abounds and revelation is skewed at best. I find myself unable to address much outside of encouraging people toward obedience that God reveal unto them his truth. Usually just get smacked up side the head with brutish comments and accusations though.

Do you have any understanding behind why these were chosen as they were though they be the same word?

Gary

I am not one to ask why this or what if that, especially when it comes to the Word of God. if we think "well this word would have fitted better or that one would had more more sense", we are playing with the Word of God, after all it is the inspired Word of God, He is right and if we disagree then we are wrong, it was once said "God said it in His Word And I believe and that makes it true" something that you would probably Amen to, but in reality, because God said it is what makes it true has nothing to do with if you believe it or not. we are not to reason why God said something if Abram had reasoned on why God said to leave all and follow me, we may have never met Abraham, if Saul had reasoned with why that light came out of the sky, we would have never met Paul.

[His_disciple3]

Job 1:1

1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

That's right. Job was mature in faith.

A very interesting word there. The same word was used to describe Jacob in Genesis but translated 'plain' instead.

Gen 25:27 And the boys grew : and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob [was] a plain8535 man, dwelling in tents.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name [was] Job; and that man was perfect8535 and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

I really don't know what to make of that. But also understand the word 'perfect' there '8535' is used to mean undefiled as well.

Interesting stuff.

Gary

well I think it has already been establish and agreed upon that words can have different meaning.

I would agree that words have a range of meaning but we must have a way of understanding when they should be translated which way.

Gary

and you know better than all the Bible scholars that worked of the translation back in the 1600's

it seems that this has gone quite far from the topic. the point that was intended to be made was already made.

the word means what it means. there are many applications to the word complete. take it for what you will, but here it is again.

5046. τελειος teleios tel’-i-os; from 5056; complete (in various applications of labor, growth, mental and moral character, etc.); neuter (as noun, with 3588) completeness: —

kjv translated it as follows.

of full age, man, perfect.

I am without understanding why anyone feels it helps this thread to continue to post the definition of Teleios. teleios means complete or mature so King James translators, knew as well as anyone else that speaks English should know that complete means perfect or perfection, so there is no wonder, why they would choose perfect, in as the perfect one comes as to the complete one comes, be ye perfect as Your Father is perfect, as to be ye complete as your Father is complete! as anything else can be over abused, as well as trying to prove that a wrong word was used to attack the Holy Word of God in the Authorized English version of Holy Scriptures, has been over abused already in this thread. in those days everyone did what was right in their own eyes, So when the Word of God says to be ye perfect, we have to change the meaning and say well surely He didn't mean for us to be perfect, our Father who art in Heaven Thy WILL BE DONE IN EARTH AS IT IS IN HEAVEN, but seeing we will be perfect in Heaven forget about us being perfect down here we will do it as we see fit down here, ok go ahead and have it your way folks who want to change to word of God, for those that want to lay claim they know more about the meanings of words than anyone else, have it your way! But as I preach in Churches this is not a Burger King religion, you can't serve God and have it your way.

Edited July 15, 2012 by His_disciple3