Talk:1 Corinthians 13

Expert tag

I've added the "needs expert" tag because this article isn't very strong on theology or biblical scholarship. Mattmm 07:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Would not most of the content here be better classified as 'I Corinthians 13 in Popular culture?' --Mr Jakobos 20:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep - still not enough scholarship! I've put the expert tag back. I'm not sure why it was removed... Mattmm 12:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Interpretation

In biblical times, people did not have telescopes or eyeglasses. What is this refering to when it talks about looking through a glass. This article contains no information at all about the meaning or history of the passage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DonPMitchell (talk • contribs) 11:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

According to my study bible, this isn't about looking through things - it's about reflection. Now, before you ask if they had mirrors back then, they used shiny metal such as the back of a shield to do that. Thus these reflections were not perfectly clear.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Elwyn5150 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 9 January 2007.

Well, I think it's partially right because what it means is that we see God only through our misconceptions, not the true viewing that will be possible afterlife (according to the passage). marlos 13:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I've edited the through a glass darkly section to provide both Strong's opinion that the glass is a mirror, and Clarke's opinion that it means lens. Clarke connected this corresponding passages from the Rabbinic literature that use similar imagery, and I quoted them for comparison. Douglas W. Jones (talk) 18:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC).

Most of the chapter (aside from descriptions/definitions of love) is about why love is so great. In the end, in heaven, Hope gives way to attainment, Faith gives way to knowledge (but love never fails). "The imperfect gives way to perfection". That is, there is a time when even Hope and Faith are put aside (like childish things) and that is why love is the greatest: because love never fails. The rhetoric is very good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.16.228.6 (talk) 19:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The usual word for a mirror was katoptron (looking backwards), rather thean e(i)soptron (looking into). The King James word "glass" means "looking glass" or mirror. The Greeks believed that the future crept up on you from behind (you can't see what's coming), whereas when it has passed you and continues on in front, it becomes the past, and thereafter you can see it. Consequently, they used mirrors to try to see into the future. Their mirrors were polished bronze and gave very poor images (you only see darkly with them). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.229.232 (talk) 09:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

In context

At the risk of OR this article appears to ignore the obvious.

Chapter 13 was never intended as an essay on love, as the article implies and as many wedding ceremonies assume. Rather it is an essay on the particular sort of love that Paul sees as the gift of the spirit, and part of a larger essay 1 Cor 12-14 on the gifts of the spirit.

I'll look for sources to back this up as I find time. Or, any help doing this appreciated. Andrewa (talk) 19:09, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Very Minimalist

I augmented quite a bit of this. All religious texts are subject to controversy. As this passage is a cornerstone of Christian theology, this is even more true. I expact that people will take issue with it.

Being an expert or authority in one context or according to one standard (academic for instance) does not immediately give one credibility elsewhere. Furthermore, matters of interpretation are inherently subjective. Thus, an expert tag is seeking something probably unattainable: a definitive interpretation. The closest thing to an authoratative interpreation would come from reading the numerous translations themselves, and then, secondarily, reading the vast assemblage of online commentaries. I used multiple translations in my modifications today.87.175.202.187 (talk) 22:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

President Obama / In Popular Culture

I find this to be a pointless addition that does not fit with the rest of the article. If you were to list every significant person who ever quoted the Bible, Wikipedia would be in need of a few new servers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.115.92 (talk) 01:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Moved it to popular culture (where it probably belongs) and also trimmed it to avoid phrases like "to the nation". Still, I wouldn't mind removing it alltogether. Str1977 ^(talk) 08:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Do frequent references not qualify the phrase as important? Certainly, the bit about being a child is used at some point in Ghost in the Shell. Though you could debate it's cultural significance... 188.222.179.211 (talk) 21:36, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't the fact that Blair and Obama quoted this be moved into a new sub-heading called something like 'In Popular Culture'. The Ghost in the Shell ref could be added then. Jonpatterns (talk) 15:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

"Other notable passages"

Currently it states that there are two other notable passages, yet currently, only verse 11 is listed. Clarification? Eug.galeotti (talk) 16:49, 12 August 2010 (UTC)