Perfection versus maturity

[Stefan P]

Hi all,

Just a quick hello and a question for discussion! I just signed up for the forums here and before discovering this forum for Methodists, I inadvertently responded to a post in the Fundamentalists forum on sinless perfection ... but its ok, I didn't get told off!

It did get me to open my Bible though and start thinking about the subject. I was raised in the Holiness Movement tradition (for those not familiar its a tradition that grew from Methodism with a focus on perfection, and a second work of grace that brings this about). I did struggle with being told by elder members of the church that they were "perfected" when as a young man I would struggle day to day with all manner of sins and frailties, but I will admit at the time I did not have an understanding of what they meant.

So I looked up those famous verses in Phillipians last night to have another read, and noted that in Greek (no I don't .. I just have a side by side translation!) that the same basic word is used for perfect here:

Php 3:12
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.

.. as is used here:

Php 3:15
Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

.. which suggests to me that Paul counted some of the church at Philippi as being perfected already - and gave advice on how to counter division of opinion amongst those whom grace has perfected.

My problem was with the NIV translation of the word that I read. They chose to translate the word "perfect" in 3:15 as "mature", thus removing (in my simplistic view) the inference that Paul is making. Is it right to do this? The word is basically the same word in my Greek bible, so I see no justification for translating it differently ...

The rather worrying side is that I have read the NIV for most of my life, and only recently embraced other translations. It makes me wonder where else subtle changes in translation could lead to misunderstandings of teachings? Or where else a particular translation reflects (possibly) the doctrinal bias of the person who did the translating - perhaps unconconsciously, but perhaps deliberately. I see maturity and perfection as two different things, but the translation in the NIV does not ring true with me to the original text.

Sorry for rambling post ..!

 

[Mr Dave]

Hi there,

Welcome to WP.

This is a really interesting topic Both words are conjugations of τελειόω which has the following possible renderings;

1) to make perfect, complete
1a) to carry through completely, to accomplish, finish, bring to an end
2) to complete (perfect)
2a) add what is yet wanting in order to render a thing full
2b) to be found perfect
3) to bring to the end (goal) proposed
4) to accomplish
4a) bring to a close or fulfilment by event
4a1) of the prophecies of the scriptures

To me this suggests a finality, which doesn't come through in 'maturity', although does bring the sense of 'greatly improved but still able to falter'. So I can see an argument for either.

The LXX (Greek OT, from ~300BC) uses the same word in Nehemiah 6:16 (it was of our God that this work should be finished.), 2 Chron. 8:16 (until Solomon finished the house of the Lord). Sir. 24:10 (Who hath been tried thereby and found perfect?). Like you, I find it useful to look at other uses of a word to gauge from their context how it might be interpreted.

I'd say that there is an argument to be made for 'maturity', although it seems that the intended meaning is a greater sense of finality. I'd agree with you that although it can justifiably be translated in a way other than 'perfect__', there is little reason to diverge from 'perfect__'.

We (Methodists) have historically caused contention of sorts by adhering to the doctrine of Christian Perfection, which has been erroneously been believed by some to feel that we believe that a Christian can be so perfect that they have no failings.
Here is the Catechism entry on perfection - http://www.christianforums.com/t7489938/#post55441305

In Particular "Christian perfection is perfection in love only: it is not freedom from making mistakes, or from ignorance. Only God is absolutely perfect."

 

[GraceSeeker]

I actually like the NIV use of "mature" over and against "perfect" in the context of Paul's letter (and might make an argument that it should also be used as the prefer term in 3:12, not just 3:15).

Today, far too many people have a perfection complex -- consider your own understanding of "being perfected" which you recounted from your youth. And I could see modern Christians trying to "be perfect" in their own effort with the result that if they made any sort of mistake, they would think of themselves as an imperfect Christian and then translate that into a connotation of less than Christian in their own minds. Such a way of thinking is contrary to the discussion that Paul is having. He rejoices with the Philippians Christians and their faith more than any other church to which he writes in the scriptures. These are not the imperfect people of Corinth or Galatia. Yet, they are not perfect either, no one is, after all we all have not just fallen short in the past, but in general we still struggle to be who God calls us to be in Jesus Christ. And so while we are called to go on to perfection (and I really do mean absolute, even ultimately sinless perfection), to think that the Philippians had achieved this is to stretch creduality. Yet Paul celebrates and rejoices in them. What I believe the letter shows that he is looking for is maturity in Christ, and so I appreciate the use of that word in this context.

One might also note that "complete" and "finished" are other completely correct translation of the actual Greek term Paul uses. So, either one produces an Amplified Bible translation of the text or one has to use the prinicples of dynamic equivalance in a situtation like this to pick among all the possible English words that best fits the connotation of the text in the context of the letter as a whole.

So, why not use "finish" here instead of either "mature" or "perfect?" After all, there are versions that speak of Jesus not as the "perfector", but as the "finisher" of our faith. And either in entirely proper. One just has to get behind the terms. And our laziness in diligent study more than translation errors are the real problems that bring about the concerns you have for "subtle changes in translation [that] could lead to misunderstandings of teachings."

Indeed, I think that "finish" would be better than either "perfect" or "mature" if the proper image of what was being connotated would emerge in the mind of the reader. Think of the building of a house and the comparison we have elsewhere in scripture of a person being built up in Christ, our lives being a temple for the Holy Spirit. In the construction trade one doesn't just erect the edifice, but one also has to "finish" it out. The job isn't done just because one has poured a foundation, erected 4 walls and covered it with a ceiling. Indeed if you have ever built a house you know that it is never done. I find it telling that in the construction of homes for Habitat for Humanity the presentation ceremony of the "completed" house includes the presentation of a new hammer to the homeowner symbolic of the fact that they are going to have many things to continue to address as they live in and maintain their new home. It may be time to move into and live in the house, but it is never perfect, never done, never finished. Still, there is a whole trade called "finished carpentry". These are the folks who come in after the walls are erected and do the cabinetry, handrailings, door knobs and light switches that are essential to living in a house. It's the detail work. And sometimes it can be exquisite detail -- just think hand-carved crown molding.

Well, so too in our Christian faith Christ comes to "perfect" or "finish" our faith by working on the details. And we are called as Christians then to be "perfected" in this way, to look at our lives daily and seek what things need to be addressed today. What nail is it that is coming loose that needs to be hammered back into place. The job is finished in the sense of the finished carpenter, but it is never done in the sense of being perfect. And from my persepctive, writing all of this in the margin notes of your Bible would be impractical. The single word that best communicates all of this quickly to the casual reader seems to be "mature", for I do think that those who are mature in Christ will understand the need to get that hammer out and continue to work on the details of living the Christian life, knowing that it is really never finished because we are not yet perfect as Christ is perfect.

(Then of course you have those who will get the wrong impression from "mature" and think that it means "old". What's a translator to do?)

 

[Mr Dave]

Good point.

I need to check, but it's just come to me that another conjugation of this verb is used in Jesus' final words 'It is finished'.

 

[Mr Dave]

Good point.

I need to check, but it's just come to me that another conjugation of this verb is used in Jesus' final words 'It is finished'.

Yeah, here we go, John 19:30;

ὅτε οὖν ἔλαβεν τὸ ὄξος [ὁ] Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν, Τετέλεσται: καὶ κλίνας τὴν κεφαλὴν παρέδωκεν τὸ πνεῦμα.

When Jesus had received the wine, he said, ‘It is finished.’ Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

The culmination of all that is good has been made. Maturity just doesn't work in this context, an 'it is perfected' sounds a bit clumsy. Although if we were to say 'those who have been finished' in Phillippians sounds a bit ominous

There's that sense of good completion.

 

[Maid Marie]

It did get me to open my Bible though and start thinking about the subject. I was raised in the Holiness Movement tradition (for those not familiar its a tradition that grew from Methodism with a focus on perfection, and a second work of grace that brings this about). I did struggle with being told by elder members of the church that they were "perfected" when as a young man I would struggle day to day with all manner of sins and frailties, but I will admit at the time I did not have an understanding of what they meant.

I grew up and still am Nazarene so I can appreciate where you are coming from. I know what I heard the "pillars" of the church say on the subject but what they said didn't make sense, nor in many cases did it seem to shine through in any fruits of the Spirit. Thankfully, 3 years ago in my Doctrine of Holiness class, God helped me understand what holiness and "Christian Perfection" was truly about. It was vastly different than the way described to me in countless sermons I heard as a kid.

...My problem was with the NIV translation of the word that I read. They chose to translate the word "perfect" in 3:15 as "mature", thus removing (in my simplistic view) the inference that Paul is making. Is it right to do this? The word is basically the same word in my Greek bible, so I see no justification for translating it differently ...

The rather worrying side is that I have read the NIV for most of my life, and only recently embraced other translations. It makes me wonder where else subtle changes in translation could lead to misunderstandings of teachings? Or where else a particular translation reflects (possibly) the doctrinal bias of the person who did the translating - perhaps unconconsciously, but perhaps deliberately. I see maturity and perfection as two different things, but the translation in the NIV does not ring true with me to the original text.

You are right to be concerned about how the NIV translates some words. The one I am most familiar with is the way sarx is translated. I forget the details but if I remember correctly, sarx [flesh] can mean animal nature without any suggestion of depravity [ie. need to sleep everyday is not sin] or it can mean the earthly nature apart from God's influence which is prone to sin [ie. Romans 8:8]. The NIV tends to translate sarx more like the latter when it shouldn't be. That is my memory so I could be off some in the details.

I have heard criticisms about the ESV from my Wesleyan trained friends, I think for similiar reasons.

The ones that my Wesleyan scholar friends suggest are the NRSV and NAS. But no translation is perfect. There will always be errors in translation so comparing various versions while studying a passage it a good idea...short of actually learning Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew.

In Particular "Christian perfection is perfection in love only: it is not freedom from making mistakes, or from ignorance. Only God is absolutely perfect."

The easy way I remember it is to say Christian Perfection = being "perfectly loving." If I concentrate on loving others more today [with God's help] than I was yesterday I don't need to worry about sin and rules [a common American Holiness Movement concern].

Another way I've heard it explained is that Christian Perfection means we are "perfect for God to use". A pen filled with ink is perfect for use, a pen without ink isn't. The way for Christians to be perfect for his use would be to be filled with The Spirit, filled with God's love to overflowing so that it touches all those around us and so in step with the Spirit that we are conduits of his love, grace and mercy.

 

[GraceSeeker]

Yeah, here we go, John 19:30;

ὅτε οὖν ἔλαβεν τὸ ὄξος [ὁ] Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν, Τετέλεσται: καὶ κλίνας τὴν κεφαλὴν παρέδωκεν τὸ πνεῦμα.

When Jesus had received the wine, he said, ‘It is finished.’ Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

The culmination of all that is good has been made. Maturity just doesn't work in this context, an 'it is perfected' sounds a bit clumsy. Although if we were to say 'those who have been finished' in Phillippians sounds a bit ominous

There's that sense of good completion.

Hence, context is everything. Well, not literally everything; context isn't the kitchen sink, but you get what I mean.

And that's the way language works. You can't translate "everything" or "the kitchen sink" (as in everything, but the kitchen sink) the same every time it is used when going from English into some other modern language -- for the word or phrase means one thing in one context and different thing in another -- so it is with translating telos and its derivatives from Greek into English.


Da-da-da dats all folks!

 

[Stefan P]

Is that a slippery slope? Not being speakers of ancient Greek do we rather lay ourselves open to the biases of those who translate for us... 'perfection' might suit someone's doctrinal bias, 'maturity' suit someone else. Makes it kind of hard to know the truth maybe?

 

[alton3]

Is that a slippery slope? Not being speakers of ancient Greek do we rather lay ourselves open to the biases of those who translate for us... 'perfection' might suit someone's doctrinal bias, 'maturity' suit someone else. Makes it kind of hard to know the truth maybe?

Yes, hence the uproar over 'inclusive' bibles which are seen by some as compromising the actual message, for example.

Doctrinal bias kills faith. Take a lesson from the Puritans. Don't worry about who is or who isn't 'perfected;' question your own perfection at all times and strive to live according to the Gospels. Take a break from the Letters and go back to Matt Mark Luke and John. Pray, love your neighbors, keep the commandments, forgive your enemies, repent and you'll be well on your way.

Romans 3:22-14
There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

 

[Mr Dave]

Is that a slippery slope? Not being speakers of ancient Greek do we rather lay ourselves open to the biases of those who translate for us... 'perfection' might suit someone's doctrinal bias, 'maturity' suit someone else. Makes it kind of hard to know the truth maybe?

This is a good reason to do as you have done and look into different translations. Where there is a discrepancy, you can then look into it to see the reason for the discrepancy. If you have not studied the ancient languages, you can still find tools to help you. Here you can isolate an individual NT verse and then click on the words to find the right one. The full variety of possible meanings is shown. You can then get an idea of the depth of an word and see why one translator has said one thing while another translator has said something else.

There is always a reason why a translator has settled on one English word over another, this could be down to doctrinal differences, but it could be for a number of different reasons. The Good News Bible (not my favourite by a long way, I'll admit) was written specifically for children or for anyone for whom English was a second language, uses 'perfect' in Phil. 3:12 and 'spiritually mature' in Phil. 3:15
These words were chosen for these verses, not for doctrinal reasons, but because the translators felt that for their target audience, these words would be the best understood for conveying the sense that the context brought through.

 

[Stefan P]

Yes, hence the uproar over 'inclusive' bibles which are seen by some as compromising the actual message, for example.

Doctrinal bias kills faith. Take a lesson from the Puritans. Don't worry about who is or who isn't 'perfected;' question your own perfection at all times and strive to live according to the Gospels. Take a break from the Letters and go back to Matt Mark Luke and John. Pray, love your neighbors, keep the commandments, forgive your enemies, repent and you'll be well on your way.

Romans 3:22-14
There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

Thanks for this. One of the problems I always create for myself is spending far too much time thinking about my faith, and not enough time living my faith, so your post is a nice reminder of that thanks!

Do have one quick question though, I don't know what an 'inclusive' Bible is, could you explain

I suppose at the end of it all we can discuss details of translations to the nth degree but if we aren't actually living out our lives according to the example Jesus shows us it doesn't make a jot of difference to our lives or those near us.

 

[Maid Marie]

Do have one quick question though, I don't know what an 'inclusive' Bible is, could you explain

I believe that is a bible that using subjects and pronouns that are more generic than what the literal translation would be. Ex. "Finally my brethren..." vs. "Finally, my brothers and sisters..." The literal translation would be the male nouns but people didn't want to exclude females and since the verse could be understood by the context as refering to both genders, translators render it in English with both genders.

I don't have a problem with that. But I recall when inclusive bibles first came out, that some of them translated "the Son of God" into "Child of God" and instead of "Our Father in Heaven" it became "Our Parent in Heaven" so as not to exclude daughters and mothers. For me, personally, that is being overly concerned about inclusiveness.

Refering to your earlier post this morning, we can have problems by not knowing the original languages [and I would add the culture/history of the times]. I can this reflected in some of the Pauline verses regarding specific issues of ministry and women. Since it is a rather tall order for everyone to know Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, we should consult more than one version adn some good study Bibles. I would also add develop a strong relationship with God. If we are in tune with God, he'll direct us in the right path.

 

[Mr Dave]

I'm reading Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics for a paper, you know, as you do, and one of the footnotes mentioned teleios.

The passage reads;

We are now in a position to define the happy man as 'one who is active in accordance with complete virtue, and who is adequately furnished with external goods , and that not for some unspecified period but throughout a complete life'. And probably we should add 'destined both to live in this way and to die accordingly'; because the future is obscure to us, and happiness we maintain to be an end in every way utterly final and complete*. If this is so, then we shall describe those of the living who possess and will continue to possess the stated qualifications as supremely happy - but with a human happiness.**

*Both meanings are conveyed by the word teleios
**Subject to human imperfection

When applied to humans then, as in Phil. teleios doesn't signify complete and utter perfection, but a perfection that is within the constraints of human imperfections.


As for inclusive Bibles, I see no reason to repeat what MM has said. As usual she gets it 'perfect'

 

[Maid Marie]

When applied to humans then, as in Phil. teleios doesn't signify complete and utter perfection, but a perfection that is within the constraints of human imperfections.


As for inclusive Bibles, I see no reason to repeat what MM has said. As usual she gets it 'perfect'

I only wish...

I do like your conclusion above about teleios. Good way of putting it.

 

[Stefan P]

Yes I agree too .. "within the boundaries of human imperfection". The thing I got wrong when instructed in the doctrine as a younger person. It's possible to be entirely sanctified but one will still fall into the sins of ignorance (didn't know it was wrong), and/or make mistakes. It's this misunderstanding that probably causes the controversy with non-Methodists

Oh and that was the point that I tried to make for my first post in the fundamentalists forum, who were having a chat about it. Wish I'd summed it up like Mr_Dave did up there

 

[GraceSeeker]

Oh and that was the point that I tried to make for my first post in the fundamentalists forum, who were having a chat about it. Wish I'd summed it up like Mr_Dave did up there

Sometimes you won't be able to get through, because even when you are broadcasting a messagel, things on the receiving end create disturbances in the atmosphere that result in there still being poor reception. Locking in to a word having one and exactly one meaning is one of the things that I have found can be an issue hindering some (not all and not exclusively) fundamentalists from understanding concepts like perfection or even sanctification in the scriptures.

 

[GadFly]

Hi all,

Just a quick hello and a question for discussion! I just signed up for the forums here and before discovering this forum for Methodists, I inadvertently responded to a post in the Fundamentalists forum on sinless perfection ... but its ok, I didn't get told off!

It did get me to open my Bible though and start thinking about the subject. I was raised in the Holiness Movement tradition (for those not familiar its a tradition that grew from Methodism with a focus on perfection, and a second work of grace that brings this about). I did struggle with being told by elder members of the church that they were "perfected" when as a young man I would struggle day to day with all manner of sins and frailties, but I will admit at the time I did not have an understanding of what they meant.

So I looked up those famous verses in Phillipians last night to have another read, and noted that in Greek (no I don't .. I just have a side by side translation!) that the same basic word is used for perfect here:

Php 3:12
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.

.. as is used here:

Php 3:15
Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

.. which suggests to me that Paul counted some of the church at Philippi as being perfected already - and gave advice on how to counter division of opinion amongst those whom grace has perfected.

My problem was with the NIV translation of the word that I read. They chose to translate the word "perfect" in 3:15 as "mature", thus removing (in my simplistic view) the inference that Paul is making. Is it right to do this? The word is basically the same word in my Greek bible, so I see no justification for translating it differently ...

The rather worrying side is that I have read the NIV for most of my life, and only recently embraced other translations. It makes me wonder where else subtle changes in translation could lead to misunderstandings of teachings? Or where else a particular translation reflects (possibly) the doctrinal bias of the person who did the translating - perhaps unconconsciously, but perhaps deliberately. I see maturity and perfection as two different things, but the translation in the NIV does not ring true with me to the original text.

Sorry for rambling post ..!

You call your post rambling but I find it a very good example of reflective thinking. That is a mark of Christian maturity. What you have done for us is to ask the correct questions about holiness and perfection. What you have done is to show us that accepting a search for truth as finding and discovering how the Scriptures operationally defines christian perfection and maturity, which is, in this case, a willingness to accept what the Scriptures are actually trying to say to us. After which we find what the Scripture is saying to us, a mature Christian will not attempt to put our own spin on the meanings of the Scripture.

From the point in time that the Holy Spirit reveals to us the meaning of the Scripture, we individually become a fundamentalist. For example, we discover Christ died for our freedom from sin. We do not draw back from this fundamental principle. We do not allow the word fundamentalist to define us in any way. We define ourselves through Christ by adhering to what Christ commanded us to do. We are all fundamentalist in that we strictly obey Christ to the best of our ability.

 

[GadFly]

Hi there,


We (Methodists) have historically caused contention of sorts by adhering to the doctrine of Christian Perfection, which has been erroneously been believed by some to feel that we believe that a Christian can be so perfect that they have no failings.
Here is the Catechism entry on perfection - http://www.christianforums.com/t7489938/#post55441305

In Particular "Christian perfection is perfection in love only: it is not freedom from making mistakes, or from ignorance. Only God is absolutely perfect."

I agree with you 100% Mr. Dave. The love to which you refer includes love for the truth and a willingness to accept the truth of the Scriptures often at a personal lose to ourselves, to the opinions we have falsely held, and the ignorance to the reasoning we have used until the Holy Spirit intervened with new light. That is one of Scripture's definitions of Christian maturity.

 

[GadFly]

Hence, context is everything. Well, not literally everything; context isn't the kitchen sink, but you get what I mean.

And that's the way language works. You can't translate "everything" or "the kitchen sink" (as in everything, but the kitchen sink) the same every time it is used when going from English into some other modern language -- for the word or phrase means one thing in one context and different thing in another -- so it is with translating telos and its derivatives from Greek into English.

Da-da-da dats all folks!

Up to this point (post# 7), all posters have given excellent examples of Christian maturity. We all agree except in very small meaning of terms about Christian maturity. Therefore, here is simply one operationally defined term and definition of Scriptural maturity.

Since the Holy Spirit leads, guides, and teaches us the inspired truth, Christian maturity is a willingness to accept and follow the truth that is written and inspired by God, the Holy Spirit.

This definition does not consider secular or sociological trends as God is a generic law giver.

 

[GadFly]

Is that a slippery slope? Not being speakers of ancient Greek do we rather lay ourselves open to the biases of those who translate for us... 'perfection' might suit someone's doctrinal bias, 'maturity' suit someone else. Makes it kind of hard to know the truth maybe?

A very excellent point and an excellent chance to point out the need for operationally defined terms (ODT) to be clearly used is this type of debate or discussion. What do you think about ODT's?