Most Christians desire spiritual experiences. They want to know the Lord and have communion with him. Paul desired to “know [Christ], and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death” (Phil. 3:10). Such desires are legitimate.
Some believers seek spiritual experiences through the Holy Spirit’s supernatural gifts. The apostle Paul discusses these gifts at length (1 Cor. 12–14). He says, “The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal” (1 Cor. 12:7). Seeking spiritual profit is a worthy goal.1
God placed the miraculous gifts in the church (1 Cor. 12:27). Seeking what God provided is good. That is why the apostle commanded Christians to seek the supernatural gifts. “Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy” (1 Cor. 14:1; emphasis added).
Paul desired all the Corinthian believers speak with tongues and prophecy (1 Cor. 14:5). He gave regulations for the use of the supernatural spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 14:26–33).
There seem to be several weighty reasons for us to desire the miraculous spiritual gifts. Still, many Christians are uncomfortable with seeking them. They ask, does God mean for these gifts to be a normal part of our experience today?
The Scriptures answer this question. Our prophetic framework (inmillennialism) provides guidance as we seek to know God’s will regarding this matter.
The Case for the Gifts Ceasing
Some Christians teach we should not seek these gifts today. They are Cessationists because they believe the gifts ceased. They often use a passage at the heart of Paul’s discussion of the miraculous gifts:
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. (1 Cor. 13:8–10; emphasis added)
Cessationists say “that which is perfect” refers to the Bible. When the Corinthians first read these words, the apostles were writing the New Testament. When they finished this task in the first century, “that which is perfect” had come. “That which is in part”—the miraculous gifts—ceased. Therefore, we should now not seek these gifts.
There is a major weakness in this argument. Scripture nowhere refers to its own completion as “that which is perfect.” Cessationists must infer this is what Paul meant. An inference is a poor reason to forbid what the apostle commended.
The Case for the Gifts Continuing
Continuationists are the opposite of Cessationists. They believe the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit continue in the church today.
These Christians make other strong arguments besides those given above. They suggest that “that which is perfect” refers to our glorified state in eternity. This will not come until the resurrection, which they place at the Second Coming (or, parousia) of Christ at the end of history.
In the meantime, God gave spiritual gifts “for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 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” (Eph 4:12–13; emphasis added). Only then will “that which is perfect” have come.
Continuationists reason, if “that which is perfect” arrives with the Second Coming of Christ, then the spiritual gifts are still present. The Second Coming has not happened. Therefore, Paul’s “perfection” or maturity (1 Cor. 13:10) has not arrived. To propose “any preparousia maturity [i. e., perfection] simply trivializes the language in [1 Cor. 13:12].”2 Until the resurrection, we should seek the miraculous gifts just as Paul instructed.
This line of reasoning, like that of the Cessationists, is problematic. Paul says that after the miraculous gifts cease, faith, hope, and charity will “abide” or continue (1 Cor. 13:13). If the gifts cease at the Second Coming (or, parousia), then all three graces continue into the perfection of the eternal state.
This contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture. Richard Gaffin speaks of
the perennial problem exegesis has wrestled with in verse 13: How can faith and hope be said to continue after the Parousia, in the light, of, for instance, 2 Corinthians 5:7 (for the present, in contrast to our resurrection-future, we ‘walk by faith, not by sight’) and Romans 8:24 (‘hope that is seen is not hope’, NASB)?3
Faith and hope, by definition, relate to things not seen. “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1). And, “Hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?” (Rom. 8:24). In the eternal state, Christians will see the reality of their hope and faith. We will not then walk by faith or exercise hope. This implies the “in part”/“perfection” boundary is not between the Messianic Age and the eternal state.
Faith, hope, and charity require an age in which to operate after the “in part” ceases. This necessary age must precede eternity.
A Solution Based on Inmillennialism
Inmillennialism provides the necessary age during which faith, hope, and charity operate. To show this is true, we must discuss “perfection.”
Scripture refers many times to something “perfect” coming in the apostles’ near future. We saw this in our examination of Hebrews.4 Paul encouraged his readers to remain faithful to Christ during the transition from the Mosaic Age to the Messianic Age. They must not return to the law and its Temple worship. The apostle wanted them to “go on unto perfection” (Heb. 6:1; emphasis added).
Paul’s argument assumes the Mosaic Age was imperfect. “If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?” (Heb. 7:11; emphasis added).
Where the law failed, Christ succeeded. “For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God” (Heb. 7:19).
Paul said the Temple was symbolic of the Mosaic Age. Its gifts and sacrifices could not “perfect the conscience of the worshiper” and were “imposed until the time of reformation” (Heb 9:9–10, ESV; emphasis added).
During the “last days” of the Mosaic Age, Christ brought the saints
unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.” (Heb 12:22–24; emphasis added)
They dwell on Mount Zion during the Messianic Age.
“That which is perfect” is the Messianic Age. The Mosaic Age was the time for childhood instruction. The Messianic Age is the time of maturity, or perfection (cp. Gal. 3:23–25; 4:1–7). It is the age in which the parousia (presence) of Christ dwells with the church. Christ came (Gk. erchomai) in his generation just as he predicted (Matt. 24:30, 34). He came to destroy the Temple and complete the transition to the “perfection” of the Messianic Age. We saw the proof of these statements in our development of inmillennialism.5
This understanding solves the problem Carson mentioned above. Paul’s “that which is perfect” did not precede the parousia of Christ. His “perfection” is the Messianic Age and its parousia (presence) of Christ.
This also solves the problem of faith, hope, and charity continuing. The “in part” miraculous gifts ceased with the coming of the Messianic Age. These three graces continue. Faith and hope will cease at the bodily resurrection. Charity, the greatest of the three, will endure for eternity.
Confirmation from Typology
Typology confirms our solution. We have seen how the Exodus events were types of the last days of the Mosaic Age.6 Moses performed miraculous signs before God delivered Israel from Egypt (Exod. 7:14–12:31).
God sustained Israel in the wilderness through supernatural gifts. He gave them supernatural water (1 Cor. 10:4). He fed them with manna from heaven. Their clothes did not wear out and their feet did not swell for forty years (Deut. 8:2–4). Moses reminded Israel of this before they crossed the Jordan River (Deut. 29:2–5).
All these supernatural signs stopped after Israel crossed Jordan (Josh. 5:12). This completed their transition from Egypt to the Promised Land. Miracles were then not part of their normal life.
The following diagram shows the duration of these miraculous events:
Let’s plot the New Testament miraculous signs in the same way:
God sustained the church in the generation preceding the Temple’s fall. He bore them witness through supernatural gifts (Heb. 2:4). He gave them the gifts of tongues and healing (Acts 2:4; 3:6), delivered them from prisons (Acts 12:7), raised them from death (Acts 14:19; cp. 2 Cor. 12:1–5), etc.
Paul said these supernatural signs would cease when Jesus destroyed the Temple. This would complete the transition from the Mosaic Age to the Messianic Age. Christ’s parousia (presence) would continue with the church. “That which is perfect” would have come.
This is an impressive display of God’s use of typical Israel to show true Israel’s salvation (cp. Rom. 9:6).
Conclusion
God still performs miracles during the Messianic Age. But, they are not part of normal Christian life as they were in the apostles’ generation. Inmillennialism provides a biblical context for their cessation. Scripture supports its definition of “that which is perfect.” It provides an age after the cessation of the miraculous gifts. This allows faith, hope, and love to remain. Typology provides a powerful confirmation witness.
Christians should still desire spiritual experiences with God. May we learn to “be filled with the Spirit” (Eph 5:18) as he intends for the Messianic Age. Let us seek these experiences without pursuing gifts God meant for the “last days” (Heb. 1:2) of the Mosaic Age.
Footnotes
- The above painting is Karel Du Gardijn’s St Paul Healing the Cripple at Lystra, 1663. The digital file (here) is in the public domain (PD-1923).
- D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians, 12-14, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1996), 71.
- Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., “Redemption and Resurrection: An Exercise in Biblical-Systematic Theology,” Themelios: An International Journal for Theological and Religious Studies Students 27 (Spring 2002): 16–31, 29.
- See the series on “Applying Inmillennialism to Hebrews” here.
- See the series on “Development of a Prophetic Model” here.
- See Typology And Inmillennialism.
5 comments
Excellent blog Mike, I have learned a whole new instruction in an area where I knew little.
Sadly flawed around the Spiritual gifts and the miraculous, but typical commentary inside the Western conservative church I feel. A quick journey into any developing church around the world would make such a hypothesis totally redundant. Healing, the prophetic – even raising the dead are regular occurrences (then again, the church structure is very different in such places, which might be worthy of some commentary as well).
Nonetheless, I deeply appreciate your taking the time to write it.
Thank you.
Hi Michael,
Thank you for your kind comments. I’m glad the blog has been helpful.
I have done some traveling in cultures with small Christian populations. The churches I visited were growing in the Spirit and in numbers. Supernatural manifestations of God’s presence were there, but not as a normal part of church life.
I believe we must allow Scripture, not experience, to govern our view of the gifts. I suspect you will agree with this statement.
I would, therefore, like to know your thoughts about the reasoning in this post. Do you agree with my understanding of “that which is perfect”?
What about the typological reasoning? God’s supernatural sustenance of Israel stopped after forty years. (That does not mean miracles stopped altogether in Israel!) Does his supernatural witness to the apostles during the forty years from the cross to the Temple’s fall (AD 30 – 70) correspond in any way?
From your study of Scripture, what is the strongest evidence we have that the supernatural gifts are a permanent fixture in the church?
Again, thank you for taking the time to write the comment. I will feel blessed if you decide to interact further. I know we need the power of the Holy Spirit to meet the challenges before us.
Yours in Christ,
Mike
Paul says, (1 Cor 13:12) at present we see in a mirror dimly but then it will face to face. Mike, do you really think that that you now see him face to face? Then Paul goes on to say that now he only knows in part but then he will know fully just as he has been fully known. Do you, Mike, now know as fully as you are known?
Paul does not say plainly anywhere (1 Cor 13:13) that faith and hope will disappear. True, we will not then need to walk by faith. But just because we have ‘sight’, that does not mean we will stop trusting Jesus—we will trust him more, and similarly we will still hope—we will always be joyfully looking forward to more of God’s inexhaustible grace and wonders. These three gifts will be ours throughout all eternity, they remain (Gk menei). They remain after the AD70 parousia and they will remain in the eternal state after the final consummation. Paul employs the singular verb menei for a plural subject, thus tying the three together—they are interdependent. Also, Paul compares the eternal state to being ‘adult’ but while we are still here in the flesh we are like children. We must enter the Kingdom of God as children and continue to remain in the Kingdom of God only as ‘little children’(which is not the same as being childless).
To me and millions of others, this passage implies that this ‘perfection’, teleios, to which Paul refers, IS the eternal state, and exactly describes it. Then we shall know as we are known’—seeing him face to face. In the meantime, while still in the flesh, we need faith, hope and the manifestations of the Holy Spirit to obey his commissions.
Your diagram has the tag ‘Joshua 5:12’ implying that miracles ceased. But that passage does not say that miracles ceased, merely the provision of manna. The sun even stood still at Joshua’s command. See Jer 32:20—You performed signs and wonders in Egypt and have continued them to this day.
Please forgive me if these comments use up too much space—I still have some more to make—and allow me to encourage you in your brilliant work.
Ian,
I again apologize for the long delay in responding. Your comments are a blessing to me and deserve a thoughtful response. Thank you for them.
When discussing the spiritual gifts we are prone to interpret Scripture based on assumptions. Our experience determines those assumptions.
Do I see the Lord face to face and know as I am known? The answer depends on what Paul meant by these phrases. I must not assume I know his meaning as I interpret his statements.
I think you agree with this approach regarding other issues. For example, I suspect we both disagree with dispensationalism regarding the land promises God made to Abraham. Has Israel possessed “the land”?
That depends on what Scripture tells us this promise means. We should not assume we know what God meant by “the land.” Assuming he meant a certain geographical area might lead us to believe Israel has never possessed its land. Therefore, the fulfillment of this promise is yet future.
The primary key to the proper interpretation of 1 Cor 12–14 is the meaning of the “perfect” in 1 Cor 13:10. Does Scripture tell us what this word means?
Let’s consider two things the “perfect” is not. It is not the completed canon of Scripture. No other passage suggests or supports this meaning.
The “perfect” is not our Lord Jesus, even though he is “without spot.” The word is an adjective in the neuter gender. It must match its corresponding noun in gender. (For example, see Col 1:28 where “man” and “perfect” occur together and the adjective is masculine to match the noun.) None of the names or titles for Jesus are neuter. Therefore, Paul does not have the coming of Jesus in mind in 1 Cor 13:10.
I think we also agree that “perfect” describes a state. But which state?
Our mutual preteristic views—I call mine inmillennialism—give us a hint. The Corinthians were waiting for the coming of Christ and “the end” (1 Cor 1:7–8). We believe this refers to the Temple’s fall and the end of the Mosaic age in AD 70.
The Corinthians were already “perfect,” even at the end of the Mosaic age that was coming to nothing (1 Cor 2:6 KJV). They were the new temple of God designed for the messianic age (1 Cor 3:16–17).
Paul emphasizes the Exodus as a type of what the Corinthians were experiencing (1 Cor 10:1–13). They had come to the end of the ages, meaning the Mosaic age and those that preceded it (1 Cor 10:11).
Then he addresses spiritual gifts (1 Cor 12–14). In this context, he encourages the Corinthians to become “perfect” (1 Cor 14:20 YLT).
From this quick survey, we can draw some preliminary conclusions. In one sense, Christ had already made the saints in the “last days” (Heb 1:2) of the Mosaic age “perfect.” In another sense, they were to seek “perfection.” They were to live in the messianic age after the Mosaic age ended.
But Scripture gives more information about this “perfect” state that fits this context. We should give it due weight as we seek to understand 1 Cor 13:10.
I will not repeat all the reasoning in the post to which you responded. I will concentrate on Paul’s reasoning in Hebrews. He wanted the Christians of his day to “go on unto perfection” (Heb. 6:1). When would they do so? When “the age that [was] about to come” arrived (Heb 6:5 Wuest).
“Perfection” had not come by the Levitical priesthood, but had by Christ’s priesthood (Heb 7:11). The Mosaic age had made nothing “perfect” (Heb 7:19), but the messianic age had (Heb 8:1–2). And the Mosaic age was ready to vanish away (Heb 8:13).
Paul stressed the typology of Israel’s Tabernacle/Temple. It had not made worshipers “perfect” (Heb 9:9). But this situation was changing in “the time of reformation” (Heb 9:10). After that change, Christ would be high priest over a greater and more “perfect” Tabernacle/Temple (Heb 9:11)
The Hebrews, like the Corinthians, had come to the end of the ages (Heb 9:26). Christ would appear the second time (Heb 9:28) in that generation (Matt 24:34). He would bring “the good things about to be” (Heb 10:1a Wuest). Those who would come to the messianic-age Temple would be “perfect” (Heb 10:1b).
Jesus was taking away the first state (of imperfection) and establishing the new state (of perfection) (Heb 10:9). The day of this transition’s completion was approaching (Heb 10:25). It was “about to consume the adversaries” (Heb 10:27 HCSB). In a very little while, Jesus would come so God’s people could receive the promised perfection (Heb 10:36–37).
The Hebrews would “be made perfect” together with Old Testament saints (Heb 11:40). They had “come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel” (Heb 12:22–24 NKJV). They were receiving the messianic-age kingdom (Heb 12:28).
I hope the point is clear. Hebrews (and other Scriptures) says much about the messianic age being “that which is perfect.” The same is true for the Mosaic age being the state of “imperfection.” The timing statements agree with these identities. Paul mentions this perfection in 1 Corinthians, even in the context of 1 Cor 13:10.
I know of few (no?) passages that refer to the eternal state as the “perfect.” Is this not an assumption we brought with us to this passage from our pre-preterist days?
I will not expand this too-long response to address your other points: face-to-face, knowing as known, etc. If you can see the “perfection” of the messianic age compared to the “imperfection” of the Mosaic age, perhaps you can anticipate my responses to them.
If you wish for me to respond to them individually, please let me know. And, again, thank you for your keen interest, support, and encouragement.
Yours in Christ,
Mike
Thanks Mike for your thoughts.
Mike, you wrote: ‘When discussing the spiritual gifts we are prone to interpret Scripture based on assumptions. Our experience determines those assumptions.’ Right, and perhaps your experience of the spiritual gifts has determined your assumptions. We may also be prone to follow dogmas expected by our religious denomination and peers. You have spoken of this tendency on April 29, 2019 confessing “I was content to live with an ill-defined position regarding Christ’s second coming and related matters.”
You wrote: ‘Do I see the Lord face to face and know as I am known? The answer depends on what Paul meant by these phrases. I must not assume I know his meaning as I interpret his statements.’ Sure. But the natural meaning, the plain meaning, is best unless context points to another—otherwise the scriptures become incomprehensible to the reader. The context suggests Paul means the exalted and glorified state we expect to experience in a future beautiful finished state. It is difficult to imagine that there is anything better than to see Him face to face. It will be either glorious beyond measure or else most terrifying and horrifying beyond description. Those blessed saints who have had such a rare encounter fell prostrate before him. I submit that ‘we do not see him just as he is’ (1 John 3:2) because we have not yet arrived there, as indeed you have written somewhere.
You have not addressed what Paul meant by ‘face to face’. Paul also wrote Not that I have already obtained it or have already become perfect ((teteleiomai—mature), but I press on so that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as are perfect (teleioi—mature), have this attitude’. They were to have this attitude then in Paul’s day—a process rather than some sudden future state. Phil 3:11b-15a
In your view Mike, Paul was expecting a coming state which is ‘perfect’—those inconvenient spiritual gifts having disappeared. It’s fascinating and ironic that Paul and many others never would see your ‘perfect’ state—they were active in the spiritual manifestations up till their death and before AD70. He wrote to the Corinthians in AD55, so he and they had only 15 years left to enjoy Christ’s gifts to his Body! So then you have to explain why such a short period when “the promise is to you and your children and to all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to himself”. Acts 2:39
You ask: ‘Does Scripture tell us what this word perfect’ means?’ Strongs Concordance tells us that teleios means ‘having reached its end, i.e. complete, (a) complete in all its parts, (b) full grown, of full age, (c) specially of the completeness of Christian character.’ Mounce has similar. But you have given this term a unique or novel meaning to bolster your unusual view of 1 Cor 13:10.
You said: ‘The Corinthians were waiting for the coming of Christ and “the end”’ (1 Cor 1:7–8). Right. But this does not directly refer to the Temple’s fall and the end of the Mosaic age. I am not so sure what Paul’s readers understood by the ‘end’ and ‘the day of our Lord Jesus’. But then I don’t think this helps your argument. They came short in no gift then but in many ways we read they were not mature—in fact often ‘carnal’ and not ‘spiritual’. Paul was strenuously exhorting them to change in this and many other ways before he made another visit. The judgment of God upon Israel in AD70 did not signify changes in their sanctification or maturity. The same idea applies in 1 Corinthians 13. In 1 Cor 2:16 Paul is not describing any future state. He means mature—just as those who ‘have the mind of Christ’, now, present tense.
They were already the new temple of God designed for the messianic age (1 Cor 3:16–17). Absolutely! That’s because they were already living in the messianic age. They didn’t have to wait for AD70. By contrast, today we have lost so much faith, love and hope that they had then, especially in Western Christendom.
Then you wrote about spiritual gifts (1 Cor 12–14) where you say Paul encourages the Corinthians to instead become “perfect”’. But Paul wrote: Brethren, become not children in the understanding, but in evil be babes, and in the understanding (fresin) be be perfect (teleioi) or men as KJV (1 Cor 14:20). By ‘perfect’ here, he means grown up, mature, that is, in the exercise of spiritual gifts. It would be a huge stretch to say he is thinking of the Parousia. He is thinking of their current unruly behaviour and exhorting them as he has done in many matters in this epistle and as he “does in all the churches”.
You referred to ‘Continuists’, 16 Apr 2018, quoting Eph 4:12–13: God gave spiritual gifts for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a mature (NASB) man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. This is all about progress towards maturity, full stature. A future state suddenly coming for every Christian is not in view in this passage or Paul would have said so.
You then concentrate on Hebrews, asking when they would go on unto ‘perfection’ (6:1) and you say that is “the age that [was] about to come” (6:5). I disagree—these apostates already had experienced ‘the age to come’ in some abundant supernatural measure. Now he severely warns the Hebrews to wake up, by this time they should all be teachers . . . to leave behind the elementary things and go on to maturity, to get solid food, not milk, and to stop being an infant. It’s about solid food is for the mature, (teleiown) who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.’ This is about practice and progress, not about a future state.
Hebrews chapter 10 says ‘it is all done!” It was on the cross that ‘Jesus was taking away the first and establishes the second’ (10:9). Done. By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Heb 10:10). I repeat DONE. From then on, for these Christians it’s about doing God’s will and having faith (10:39).
You wrote: ‘The Hebrews would “be made perfect” together with Old Testament saints (Heb 11:40). But they already had come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel (Heb 12:22–24 NKJV). Mike, this was all past tense when written—accomplished in the finished work of Christ. Heb 12:28 is an invitation to those Hebrews who needed encouragement, warnings and urging (Heb 5:11 to 6:2; 12:12-13) to receive the messianic-age kingdom that cannot be shaken. And that has already come through the blood of Jesus for them.
You wrote: ‘I know of few (no?) passages that refer to the eternal state as the “perfect.”’ Yep. But I know of none that plainly support your view looking at the meaning in context of ‘perfect’, without arguing with lengthy, special pleading. The Hebrews passages point to several subjects that are ‘perfect’—to Jesus, to the Saviour’s continuing work in Heaven and to the sanctification and progress of the author’s readers. In each context the varying meanings of ‘perfect’ can be seen clearly.
And no, this not an assumption I have brought to this passage from pre-preterist days, I believe it is the plain meaning of the context of 1 Corinthians 13 according to Strongs and Mounce and all others I have consulted.
Mike you have been an enormous help to me in much understanding of Preterist ideas. I will stop here with still more to say on another occasion soon—especially on the unforeseen implications of your unusual position on spiritual gifts.
You wrote: ‘If you wish for me to respond to them individually, please let me know’. Well yes, please respond. And I continue my keen interest, support, and encouragement to you. Though weaving my way through your many contexts in the NT to prove your extreme interpretation of ‘perfect’ rather exhausts me, my friend.