text:
It's a real joy to be together this morning. And we have that very special, wonderful privilege this morning, of being in the 13th chapter of I Corinthians. And I just love to study, myself, and I trust that God has really blessed you with it. This morning, we're going find ourselves looking at it in a more technical way than we have in the past. And, in a sense, this is very much going to be like a classroom approach. Many of you are real students of the Bible, and every once in a while, we kind of gear the message to those of you who are the real students.
And so, this morning, the rest of you can kind of just go along and enjoy what's being said and, hopefully, the Lord will speak to you as well. But we'll just kind of major on some of the fine points of the text, in order to try to draw a conclusion on something that's been a very, very big area of discussion in the church. And that is certain things regarding the perfect thing mentioned in verse 10.
Now, as you know, the chapter is all about love. And the great climax of this chapter comes, really, in verse 8 in the words, "Love never fails." That's really the pinnacle of love. And what Paul is saying is that love is the only thing that is eternal. The only link we have with eternity is love. The Corinthians, who had emphasized all the good things, the gifts and the ministries and so forth and so on, but had forgotten the one which was the best thing. Paul calls it in 12:31, the "more excellent way," love. And so, he makes this major statement on the essence, the character, the qualities of love.
We saw, first of all, the prominence of love in the first three verses, and then the perfections of love in the next section, and then, beginning in verse 8, the permanence of love. And we heard the apostle Paul, last week, tell us that love never fails. Love never fails, a tremendous statement. And what he really is saying is love is the eternal thing. And if it is the only link that you have, really, with eternity, then you'd better major on that in time, because that's the most excellent thing of all. To emphasize the priority of love, Paul contrasts it with the thing with which the Corinthians were most concerned, and that was spiritual gifts.
They were proud, they had a problem with spiritual egoism, and the way that they bragged about their spirituality was by abusing and overusing and misusing and counterfeiting their spiritual gifts. And so, Paul draws their viewpoint of gifts into his viewpoint of love and makes a comparison here, to show that the gifts are not the thing that are to be emphasized. Love is, because the gifts are passing and love is forever. That's his major point.
Now, we looked, last time, at that thought love never fails. There are many uses of this term "fail" in the Greek. I read an interesting one this week where it is used of a bad actor being hissed off the stage. And we could say that love is never hissed off the stage, in the sense that love is something that is never seen as a bad actor. Love is an honored thing.
But more close to the meaning that Paul has here is the technical use in classical Greek where the word is used to speak of a flower that withers and decays, and its petals begin to fall off. And what he's saying is that love is no flower that decays. Love never falls, it never fades, it never withers away. It is the one great, eternal thing, the more excellent way.
And better than your assembly being sold out to just teaching or doctrine, better than your assembly being sold out to just ministering with gifts and so forth, would be to be sold out to love. Because the whole end of everything else is that you might love one another and that, in so doing, the world might know that you are, in fact, the children of God. So love is the more excellent thing.
Now, to make this comparison with gifts, he draws three comparisons, and I listed them for you on the outline. Gifts are temporary, gifts are partial and gifts are elementary. In those three ways, he shows the comparison between the gifts and love. I want you to put on your academic hat today, and I want you to think through this passage with me. Because we're going to look at it in a technical sense to try to solve a rather old problem relative to the meaning of some of these things. And, along the way, I'm kind of excited that you can maybe get a feel for the process that a Bible student uses to come to conclusions.
Now, very often when I preach, I just give you the conclusion. But today, I thought I'd take you through the process. You can see how we eliminate certain discussions and certain viewpoints to come to the right viewpoint and what the process is of getting to that. Now, remember that last time we discussed the first sub-point under the permanence of love. Gifts are temporary. Notice verse 8, "Love never fails." That's the great statement that covers the rest of the chapter. Now, he begins to discuss the temporary nature of gifts. "But whether there be prophecies, they shall be rendered inoperative" – or abolished or done away – "whether there be tongues, they shall stop by themselves" – in the middle voice – "whether there be knowledge, it shall be rendered inoperative" – be abolished or be done away.
Now, what he's doing here is taking the gifts as a composite. The most significant gift was prophecy, the least significant gift is tongues or languages, and one representative of the middle would be knowledge. And he's simply saying, "Gifts are a passing reality. They are not a forever item. They have their time, they have their place. But they are not permanent; they are not eternal."
They're very essential, believe me. I daresay that prophecy and knowledge – the word of knowledge, and the gift of languages – the ability to speak a foreign language unknown to the speaker – in the days of the early church were tremendously important, very essential. But as essential as they are in their time, they are only for time and not for eternity. And the only link you have with eternity is love, and so love should dominate.
Now, we saw last time that there is an interesting distinction made in the use of the verbs with prophecy and knowledge as over against tongues. And in relation to tongues, we saw that the verb that is used in the form that it is used says tongues will stop by themselves. And then we did some discussion as to whether they had, in fact, stopped. And we determined that they had, biblically, three purposes.
Number one, the purpose of tongues could be seen as revelatory. In other words, God was actually revealing His Word through that gift on occasions. And we determined that the revelation has already been given, "Once for all delivered to the saints," so that purpose for tongues would have ceased.
Secondly, we saw that tongues was also a confirmation, a wonder gift, confirming the apostles and the prophets and their apostolic ministry. And since there are no longer apostles and prophets, as we have seen from Ephesians 2:20, that part of the gift of tongues had no further need to exist because there is no authenticating of such men today.
Thirdly, we saw from the New Testament that tongues was a sign of judicial punishment on the covenant people, Israel, which punishment was carried out in 70 A.D. Consequently, the sign no longer needs to be in existence today. And history, then, corroborated for us that tongues did, in fact, cease until approximately 1900, when this modern movement began.
So we said that tongues have ceased, and the current thing that we're seeing can be explained other ways than as the gift of languages or tongues in the New Testament. But in contrast to the cessation of tongues, we realized that prophecy and knowledge, it says, shall be stopped or shall be rendered inoperative. And the verb is passive there, meaning something is going to stop prophecy and knowledge. Something is going to halt them, something is going to bring them to an end. And that something is the perfect thing mentioned in verse 10. And we're going to discuss today what that perfect thing is. Now, this is a very interesting study, because so many people have been so confused about it. And it's been dialogued and kicked around for so much time that I hope we can kind of give you a solution that might be one you could pursue yourself, and – and study and see that, perhaps, this is maybe the best of all.
Now, prophecy and knowledge haven't ceased with tongues; they are still going on when tongues stops. They're waiting for the perfect thing to stop them. Verse 9, "We know in part" – that's knowledge – "we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away." So the partial things, knowledge and prophecy, are going to stop when the perfect thing comes. They're only temporary. They're important. In fact, they're essential. But they're only part of time, not eternity. So Paul says they're temporary.
The second point – and this is where we'll get into the perfect thing – is that he says the gifts are not only temporary, they're partial. Look at verse 9 again. "In part," once; "In part," twice; verse 10, "that which is in part." Three times he says, "in part." Notice verse 12, "I know in part." Four times he emphasizes the fact that the knowledge that we have is partial, meros in the Greek. It simply means "a part of the whole," not the whole. Gifts are partial. You will notice that it is interesting to see that tongues does not appear in verses 9, 10, 11, 12 or 13. They have stopped, and the only things that will be around when the perfect thing comes is prophecy and knowledge, in Paul's illustration here.
There will be other gifts, of course, but the ones that Paul refers to here are prophecy and knowledge. And tongues has by this time, by the time the perfect thing comes, tongues has stopped by itself. It is not stopped. It is not a passive verb. Now, verse 9 says, "We know in part, and we prophesy in part." Now, that's true. At best, and I may study diligently and do everything I can to preach to you the Word of God, but at best, I can only preach to you part of what there is to tell about the truth of God. Is that right? I'm limited.
I'm limited to what God has revealed, I'm limited to my understanding, I'm limited to the fact that a human mind cannot understand a superhuman God in fullness. So at best, preaching is partial. Prophesying – to speak before – is partial. At best, the word of knowledge is partial. To draw out of the Word of God – principles of knowledge – that is only a partial thing. There is no way that we can know everything there is to know. In fact, I used to know everything when I came out of seminary, but I've been – I've been losing it along the way.
In I Corinthians chapter 8, verse 2, it says – and I think this is a good reminder, and I want to take a minute with it. You know it's so easy for us to become sort of doctrinally smug and think we've got all the answers. We've pigeonholed our theology. We've got all of the passages that are difficult figured out. But in 1 Corinthians 8:2, it says "If a man think that he knows anything, he knows nothing" – what he – what he really ought to know. Now, basically, knowledge is limited. And, especially, it's limited when you think you know everything. Then you don't know anything because the basic part of knowledge is you can't know everything.
Going back in the Old Testament, I want to show you that no Christian can have perfect knowledge. You know, I think sometimes that we think we do. I think some people may think that I do, you know. They – they think, "Well, you know, he's the pastor of the church and he speaks the Word of God, and he's got all the knowledge." I don't. It's very limited.
And I'm the first to admit that I make mistakes. The only problem is I can't – I don't know where they are, because I don't have enough knowledge to know when I'm right and wrong, you know. That's the problem. But the problem with human nature is that it is fallible, and there are mistakes. And there is a limit to the knowledge which we can apprehend. And I think some Bible teachers maybe need to remember that. I know I do – that you just don't know everything. You may think you do, but you don't – and some Bible students as well.
Look at Job with me for a minute. And I – I want to show you a few passages, just to help us with our humility a little bit, to understand that there are plenty of things that we don't know, and we're just kind of scratching the surface of this whole aspect of knowing the fullness of the divine nature. In Job 11, verse 7, it says, "Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?" In other words, can you ascertain perfect knowledge of God? "It is as high as heaven; what are you going to do? It's deeper than the grave; what can you know?"
In other words, it's impossible to attain the fullness of the knowledge of God. You can't get that high; you can't plumb that low. It's beyond the capacity of man to fully understand. And you know, when people ask sometimes, why do Bible teachers disagree or good Christians disagree, it's because – it's not because we disagree on the basics that are clear. It's because all of us are dealing with limits in our knowledge and trying to put the pieces together and make conclusions without a fullness of revelation. That's why it's so difficult to systematize things.
But in Job 26:14, this is interesting. He's just had a lot of things said about God and how marvelous God is and how powerful he is, and all the things He did with creation. And he says, "Lo," – or behold. It's an exclamation. Or you could say "wow" in the English – "these are parts of His ways; but how little a portion is heard of Him. But the thunder of His power, who can understand?" It's just beyond you to grasp the fullness of God's power and God's ways and God's truth and God's nature. Psalm 40, verse 5. "Many, O Lord, my God, are Thy wonderful works which Thou hast done, and Thy thoughts which are toward us."
Now, this is good. Many wonderful works, God, You've done. Many wonderful thoughts. "But they cannot be reckoned up in order unto Thee." In other words, "When I try to catalog them, when I try to program them and systematize them, and offer them back to You, there's something missing." If I would declare and speak of them, they are more than can be numbered." Systematizing God is very difficult because we don't have all of the information. In Psalm 139 in verse 6, "Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain it." Far beyond us. Well, that's Psalm 139:6.
In Romans 11, just to compare with a New Testament word, so that you'll understand that even the New Testament doesn't fill up all the knowledge, it says, Romans 11:33, "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!" Now, listen to the next verse. "For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been His counselor?" His ways are past finding out.
You say, "But when you know Christ, don't you get it all?" No, because it says in Colossians 2:3, "In Him are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Even to know Christ is to know only that in Him, they are hidden, not all revealed. Just because I know Christ doesn't mean I know everything. It's all in Him. But let's face it, it's hidden, much of it. So we have to remember that we're always dealing with a part of the truth in terms of its total. Now, I want to hasten to say, that doesn't mean we're having a problem because we are in error. To say we have partial truth does not mean we have error. It simply means that we don't have all the truth there is.
For example, you might teach your child that two and two is four, and that is true. You have taught him truth. But it's a long way from algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and calculus. There is much more to know that your child would never in the world begin to conceive when all he can apprehend is two plus two equals four. It doesn't mean the knowledge is wrong. It doesn't mean it is unreliable. It simply means it is incomplete. And we learn more as we grow as Christians, but we don't have it all.
May I hasten to add that we have all we need. Peter said, "You have all things that pertain unto life and godliness." You have all you need. I John 5:20, "We have enough knowledge now that we may know Him and that we may know His Son." First Corinthians chapter 2, "We have the Holy Spirit who teaches us to know the deep things of God." So we know what we need to know. We know as much as we need to know to know what God wants us to know, to do what God wants us to do. But we don't know everything. We're just a bunch of students trying to get a hold of the basics.
You say, "Well, John, why didn't God give it all to us?" Well, I think, for one thing, that the human mind would never be able to conceive, so God kept it simple. It's so simple that a child can know it. And if God had dumped on us the fullness of all truth – in the first place, folks, it's infinite. If God is infinite then truth is infinite.
And if we had an infinite book, it would be ridiculous. It would be a book without a beginning and an end. And to think that God has condescended to put His truth in this little thing right here, this is a fat one at that. There are a lot skinnier ones than this. And for somebody to believe that this is all the truth of God, that's hopeless. Oh, there's far more, far more. We haven't begun to touch the surface. God kept it simple so we wouldn't get confused.
And, secondly, a sin-defiled, depraved, human mind couldn't – couldn't deal with ultimate truth in its whole unless it was a perfect mind. So, since it isn't perfect, God didn't bother to give it all to us. Someday, when we get a perfect mind, we'll get all the truth. That's the future. So, we have this partial knowledge. It comes through the gift of preaching or prophecy, some of it. People declare to us the Word of God, as people draw out with a word of knowledge, principles in the Scripture, and teach them to us. So these are, in part, contributing to what we know.
Now, let's go back to I Corinthians 13 and look again at verse 10. "We know in part; we prophesy in part." We don't have it all. "But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be" – katargeō, done away, abolished, rendered inoperative. Same verb in verse 8 because that's what he's trying to say. Prophecy and knowledge are connected to the perfect thing by using the same verb. It stops them. The perfect thing will render them inoperative.
You know, when the perfect thing comes, Paul says "Fantastic. You won't need preaching, because you'll have all information. You won't need teaching anymore because you'll have all knowledge. You'll have every bit of truth there is. In fact, he goes so far, in verse 12, to say, "We now we see in a mirror, darkly; but then, face to face; now I know in part, but then shall I know even as also I am known." Imagine. There's coming a day no more books, no more sermons, no more classes, no more Bible studies, no more anything. You'll have it all; you'll know it all. And there will be no more need for the gifts. But you know what there will be? There will be love. That's his whole point. There will be love.
Now, what about the perfect thing? What is it and when does it come? That's what we're going to study. Now, get on your academic thought patterns and here we go. And don't bail out here. Stick with us. What is the perfect thing? And there's a lot of discussion about it. There didn't used to be, frankly. There used to be just a simple thing and then everybody got complicated, and all kinds of possibilities have been entertained in the last 100 years. Well, let's talk about it.
First of all, looking at verse 12, I just want to remind you that whatever the perfect thing is, it is something that is really perfect, because it says, "We see in a mirror darkly." That's prophecy; we now see. We can perceive what God is doing, God's Word, God's program, partially. "But someday, face to face." – fully – "We now know in part," that's the gift of knowledge in his illustration here. But someday we are going to know in the same way that we are known. It's incredible! Now, look at that illustration, we see in a glass darkly, or a mirror darkly.
The Corinthians would know exactly what he was talking about because there was a trade in the city of Corinth in which people made mirrors. And in those days, they made mirrors out of metal. They would take the metal and they would flatten it out. And then they would polish it to a high shine and it would be used as a mirror. But, of course, if you've ever looked in a metal mirror, you know that it tends to have little wavy places and so forth, so it's somewhat distorted. And, Additionally, when it was kept for a little while it would be prone to decay somewhat. And, consequently, it may become blotched here and there, and marred.
So he's saying, "For now, we are looking in a mirror, and it reveals to us a rather vague image and a rather confined image." When you looking in a mirror – sometimes when you're driving and you're looking in your rearview mirror, I mean all you're seeing is what is made available to you in that little thing. And, sometimes, you start to change lanes, you know, and we've got one blind spot. And all of a sudden, honk, and you whip back because somebody is right in that blind spot.
And that's essentially what Paul is saying. There is a vagueness, there is a dimness in what we see. And there are limitations to what we see, prophetically, in terms of our preaching and teaching of the Word of God. And, also, our knowledge is limited. But there's coming a day when we will see, without a mirror, face to face, the real picture. And we will know, without any limitations, the fullness of knowledge in the same way we are known. That's a fantastic promise. Just imagine. Imagine the day when we will know everything and see everything the way it really is. And I'm excited about that, aren't you?
You say, "Well, when's it going to be?" Well, that's what we're going to talk about. I'm getting to it, I'm getting to it. Here are the options. Some people say the perfect thing – and this I'm going to give you, these are all the most popular views, very popular among evangelicals today. And the first one is this. Some people say that the perfect thing has already come. It was the completion of the Scriptures.
It's a very, very popular view today, the completion of the Scriptures. The completion of the New Testament added to the Old Testament, and this is the perfect thing, the Scripture. And when we have this, we see face to face and we know as we are known. Now, I think this view is weak for the following reasons. Are you ready for this?
Number one, I don't think the Corinthians would have thought of that. And remember, Paul was basically writing to a group of people to get a message to them that they would understand. We are really eavesdropping on the Corinthian letter. And I don't think that that's the way the Corinthians comprehended the concept of "perfect." You see, Jesus had said, in Mathew 5:48, "Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect."
Where then, in the mind of the Corinthians, would perfection be? Well, in my mind, it would be in Heaven. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect." He was setting the ultimate standard of absolute holiness. That is what I desire for you. And perfection always is the highest level of attainment. Now, I don't think that they would have comprehended it as the New Testament. To them, the perfect thing would be to be like Christ or to be like God, to be fully matured.
Secondly, if you make the perfect thing the Scriptures, then prophecy and knowledge stopped with the Scriptures. Then there's no proclaiming the Scriptures and there's no drawing knowledge out of the Scriptures. Do you see what you've done? Really, what you've done, you've eliminated one of the manifestations of those gifts.
For example, even – even while Scripture was still being written, the writers of Scripture were preaching other scriptures, so that prophecy is something that is a proclamation of revelation. Sometimes the prophetic gift was the first of revelation that was revelatory. But sometimes, it was reiterating what was already revealed.
So if you make the perfect thing the Bible, then prophecy and knowledge stop when the Bible gets here. Then you've got no proclaiming of it and no drawing truths out of it, in terms of spiritual gifts. And I find that rather hard to understand, since that's exactly what they did in the – in the early – in fact, Peter quotes Paul, and Paul quotes Jesus. And so, there was a proclaiming of already-written scriptures going on that was part of both of those gifts.
A third principle, and I think this is really the crux of the issue. If you say that prophecy and knowledge cease at the completion of the Scripture, then you have no proclaiming or prophesying and no use of the word of knowledge drawing principles out of the Word of God through the entire church age, through the entire Tribulation, through the entire kingdom, or forever. And I find that a little hard to believe.
Let me show you why. In Joel 2 – don't turn to it. We saw this last week. In Joel 2, it says that "In the kingdom, your young men shall" – what? – "prophesy, and your daughters shall prophesy. Now listen. Church age – what follows the church age? Tribulation. What follows the Tribulation? The kingdom. In the kingdom, you've got prophesying, Joel 2, Acts 2. Well, you say, "What about the Tribulation?" What happens in Revelation 11? Immediately after the Rapture, God raises up two prophets. Remember them? Two prophets, Revelation 11. Read it.
You have prophecy in the Tribulation; you have prophecy in the millennial kingdom. And I ask you the question. Has prophecy ceased? No. There is still yet a future for prophecy. And I reminded you, last time, that the verb means "to be abolished." It doesn't mean to stop for a while and start up again. Prophecy will stop. Now, if you say it stopped at the close of the New Testament, then how do you explain the prophecy going on in the Tribulation and the prophecy going on in the kingdom, to say nothing of the proclaiming going on all through the church age? And the word of knowledge as people draw principles out of the Word of God. Teachers. Very difficult.
Well, they say, "It stops and then starts again." Well, but you can't do that because, number one, the verb means to be abolished. And the second element is that you destroy Paul's whole point. Paul is simply saying, "Some things stop and they're done; love is forever." He doesn't – hid contrast isn't, "Certain things come and go, but love is forever." Now, that's a weak contrast. "Some things stop, but love goes on forever." That's a strong contrast. That's his point.
Another thought. I don't think it's the Scripture is because it can't explain "face to face." Now, I ask you, you own a Bible and I own a Bible. Have you ever seen God face to face? No. In fact, I haven't even seen the one who reveals God, the Lord Jesus Christ. And in I Peter 1:8 it says, "Whom, having" – what? – "not seen, you love." Having a Bible doesn't mean that I have seen face to face. It will happen. It will happen someday when we go to heaven, and God's glory fills the new Heaven and the new Earth, and shines out of the midst of that Holy City. And we'll see His glory, but it hasn't happened yet.
And, further, I don't think if you take it to be the Scripture, you can explain the statement, "I shall know as I am known." Because I have a Bible, do I know God as well as God knows me? Do I? No. God knows me perfectly. I – I know Him in part. Even though I have a Bible, I don't know all there is to know about God. He says, "I shall know as I am known." In John 10:15, Jesus says, "The Father knows Me, and I know the Father." I can't say, "Oh yes, and the Father knows me and I know the Father, too," in the same sense, can I? I don't. It's limited.
So from these simple thoughts, the fact that is an obscure – it would have an obscure meaning to the Corinthians, the fact that it ends prophecy and knowledge long before the kingdom and the Tribulation, where they appear, the fact that it can't explain "face to face," it can't explain "know as I am known," just makes me believe that it – you can't say the perfect thing is the Scripture.
Let me give you a second one. Others say, "Well, it's the Rapture of the church." And this is the most common. This may be the one you've heard of. "It's the Rapture of the church." And this is a good – it's a good offering. I think I was there for a long time on this point, the Rapture of the church. But I think that's weak, also. And the reason it's weak – and I'm going to build on the last point. The reason I – it is weak is basically because it, also, can't explain why you have prophecy and knowledge going on in the Tribulation and the kingdom, if they cease at the Rapture. In fact, it's even more complicated.
There's some people say, "No. All this will cease at the Rapture." So until the Rapture, you've got prophecy and knowledge going on, and the Rapture comes and they end. And you know what happens? Immediately, in the kingdom, they start all over again. That wouldn't make any sense at all. If they end, they end. So if you make it the Rapture, then how do you explain Revelation 11, where you've got prophecy going on? How do you explain the whole thing in the millennial kingdom where you've got prophecy and teaching going on all over the earth in every corner of the world? All over the world, for 1000 years, everybody's teaching. And I'll show you that in a few minutes. So it doesn't seem to fit at the Rapture.
The third one, and this is the kind of the newest one. And it's – many popular Bible teachers have been teaching this. That the perfect thing is the maturing of the church. When the church reaches its maturity, that is, when everybody's in and the body is complete, that's the perfect thing. Well, that is simply another way of saying the Rapture, because when everybody's in and the body is complete, and the church is complete, what happens? We leave, right. That's it. I mean, what would there be for us to do? There wouldn't be anyone else to win if the church was complete.
And that's, basically, that view. But the reason they make it the body maturing rather than the Rapture is because they take the word "perfect" in terms of meaning maturity. But it still has the same problem. Because if prophecy and knowledge cease when the church is mature and takes it – and taken out of the world, then again, how do you explain prophecy and knowledge in the Tribulation end in the kingdom?
Well, another view, and there are others I could give you on the Greek – but I won't bother with them – on whether it's neuter or feminine, and so forth. Teleios, incidentally, when used in connection with the Rapture and Second Coming, the – the – it – I should say teleios here is in the neuter, but the forms are used with reference to the rapture in Second Coming, for you Greek students, are always feminine. And so, there's a little difference there that's interesting to study if you have some time.
But the fourth offering. One is the completion of the New Testament, the Rapture, the maturity of the church. Some people say, "No, the perfect thing is the Second Coming, the Second Coming when Christ returns, that's the perfect thing. Christ is the perfect thing. He is coming. But the problem is it's neuter, and Christ isn't a thing. Christ is a He, and it should be masculine, teleios. And again, if Christ comes and ends prophecy, then how come immediately after He comes, he sets up His kingdom, and prophecy starts all over the world? It just doesn't seem to make sense. The kingdom is going to be loaded with teaching and preaching.
An interesting thing I was reading this week. There is one Bible student that takes the view that it's the Scripture. Scripture comes and prophecy ceases and knowledge ceases, and so forth. But you see, they're just symbolic of gifts. And if you're going to take that view, then you're going to have to take the view that when the canon came, all the gifts stopped really, because these are just representative. And there are some who have now taken that view, as I told you last week, because they realize that. That's the problem. But, anyway, this fellow said, "Well, when the Scripture was done, prophecy and knowledge end."
And then, further, in another book – and I looked a long time to find this statement because I thought it was interesting. He said this: "Doubtless, there will be an unparalleled teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit in the millennial kingdom." I thought that was interesting, how he could have all those things stop at the – at the time the New Testament completion in 96 A.D. and have a whole teaching ministry going on in the kingdom. When he had said in one breath they stopped, and in the next breath, they were going on in the kingdom.
Let me draw this to a conclusion. There will be teaching and preaching in the kingdom, believe me, tremendous amount of it. And I could – we could go on and on forever. But let me just take you to Isaiah and give you a few scriptures to show you what I mean. Isaiah 11, now, watch this. You're going to find this interesting. Isaiah 11:9. We're in the kingdom here, and if you were to read the whole chapter, it would become abundantly clear to you.
He talks about all the wonderful things that are going to happen early in 11. And in verse 9, "They shall not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain." This is what's going to happen in the 1000-year reign of Christ on the earth after the Second Coming. "For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea." Listen. Somehow, some way, in some manner, the entire globe is going to be engulfed in knowledge, in instruction, teaching, preaching. It's going to be dominating.
Now look at chapter 12. Further, he's talking about this kingdom. Verse 3 of chapter 12, "Therefore, with joy shall you draw water out of the wells of salvation." There's going to be salvation in the kingdom. And if there is salvation in the kingdom, there's going to have to be proclamation in the kingdom, because you have to hear the message before you can believe it, "Faith comes by hearing a speech about Christ," Romans 10:17 says. "In that day shall you say, 'Praise the Lord, call on His name, declare His doings, make mention that His name is exalted.'" In other words, God is calling on Israel to preach and proclaim His name in the kingdom, to bring people to salvation.
The 29th chapter of Isaiah – and we could study Jeremiah, we could study Micah, we could study Habakkuk, but we'll stick around here for a minute in Isaiah. Isaiah 29:17, and he's talking about what's going to happen in the kingdom, blessing after blessing. But verse 18, "In that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness." In other words, there's going to be instruction. No longer will people be deaf to it, no longer will they be blind to it. The instruction will go on, and it will be carried out effectively.
The 30th of Isaiah, verse 20. "And though the Lord give you the bread of adversity and the water of affliction, yet shall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes shall see thy teachers. And thine eye – ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, 'This is the way, walk ye in it,' when you turn to the right hand, and when you turn to the left."
Listen. In the kingdom, there are going to be teachers all over the globe, and they're going to be saying, "Don't do that. Don't go this way, go this way." God is actually going to have emissaries all over the world directing people in the way they are to walk and the way they are to go during the time of the millennial kingdom. Tremendous involvement and instruction here.
The 32nd chapter of Isaiah, verse 3, "And the eyes of those who see shall not be dim, the ears of those who hear shall hearken. The heart also of the rash shall understand knowledge, and the tongue of the stammerers shall be ready to speak plainly." There will be knowledge, there will be understanding, there will be the apprehension of information and truth to lead people to righteous behavior as well as to salvation.
Isaiah 41, verse 15 to 20. We won't read them all, but just verse 20, Isaiah 41:20. "That they may see" – again, we're in the kingdom – "and know, and consider, and understand." Another element. In the kingdom, there will be those things helping people to see and know and consider and understand. There will information being dispatched in order that people might know the truth about God.
In Isaiah 2:2 and 3. "And it shall come to pass in the last days, the mountain of the Lord's house will be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations flow in it. many people shall go and come – or go and say, 'Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob," – listen – "and He will teach us His ways, and we will walk in His paths, for out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem."
God's Word will literally proceed from Jerusalem out to the world. There are going to be teachers all over the place, proclaiming and preaching and speaking. And as Joel said, "Your young men and your daughters shall prophesy." The word of knowledge, the word of wisdom, the gift of teaching, I believe all of those things, in some manner, will be functioning in divine energy in the time of the kingdom. There is one statement in the prophets that says, "And your people shall learn doctrine." Your people shall learn doctrine. The kingdom will be loaded with kingdom teachers and preachers.
Just one other passage and then we'll go on. But I want you to get this. In Jeremiah 23, verse 4, here we are in the kingdom. "And I will set up shepherds over them who shall feed them." Just that statement. And what does a spiritual shepherd do to feed his flock? He gives them the Word. So it is clear to me – and I haven't even begun to scratch the surface – that there is teaching and preaching in the kingdom. Now, listen to me. If there is going to be teaching and preaching in the kingdom, and the gifts are going to be operating in the kingdom in some sense, then they haven't ceased. And if they haven't ceased yet, then the perfect thing hasn't come.
Now, that leaves us only one other possibility. And somebody came up to me after this morning and said, "Where – where should I go for support for this position?" And I said, "Well, there's nowhere to go, really, because this is a position that I think is just kind of – well, I don't know. I couldn't find in any books, but this is what I believe." And I checked it out with a couple of people that I trust who are in – experts in theology beyond me, and found agreement, which was kind of exciting.
But I believe there is only one possibility for the perfect thing, and that the perfect thing is the eternal state. It is the eternal new Heaven and new Earth that begins at the end of the 1000-year kingdom. And that fits everything, because that's Heaven. And what he's really saying is, "You're going to need all of this stuff for time, but you're only going to need love for eternity." And that is the contrast. It is a contrast between time and eternity.
Now, I'll give you several reasons why I believe it. It allows for the neuter use of teleios, for you Greek students. It allows for that neuter use. It is the perfect thing. Not a person, but the thing, and the thing is Heaven. It allows for prophecy and knowledge in the Tribulation. It allows for prophecy and knowledge to go on in the kingdom. But one day when we go to Heaven, we won't need preachers and teachers and Bible studies and classes. Because we "will be perfect as our Father" – where? – "in Heaven is perfect."
And I'll say, thirdly. I believe this is the best view because it fits the context of I Corinthians 13 best. Paul is saying there are – these things are important, but they are only for time. Love is for eternity. So what he's really saying is, "These things will go through time, but only love will go through eternity." See, the contrast loses itself if it only – if these things only last till the canon, or the Rapture, or the Second Coming, because time isn't done yet.
And he's trying to contrast what is temporal with what is eternal, the whole point of which is to show that love is the only thing eternal. It's not that love is the only thing in the church age, not that love is the only thing in the Tribulation, not that love is the only thing in the kingdom, but that love is the only thing that goes through eternity. And his contrast is weakened if you make it anything short of eternity.
Another one. I believe it's the only way to explains "face to face." Because the only time we will ever see God's Shekinah glory manifest is when we are in Heaven. It's the only time. In the eternal state, the new Heaven and new Earth, Revelation 21 and 22 describe it. But it says that the new Jerusalem descends and God makes a new Heaven and a new Earth, and therein the glory of God is manifest. That is the Heaven of eternity. That is where we see God. That's where we shall see His glory. It provides to me the only explanation for that.
You say, "Well, what about in the kingdom? Won't the whole world of believing people see His glory in the kingdom?" No. Do you realize that in the kingdom there will be believing people physically living on Earth. But the New Jerusalem, where we glorified saints of the church will be, is suspended over the earth? And we may be able to come and go, but God will dwell in that New Jerusalem, and the people on Earth will not see His glory. They will see His Son manifest, right, on the Earth. So the idea of "face to face" isn't fulfilled until the kingdom ends and all of it is engulfed in the eternal heavens, and God's glory is manifest to all the saints, who by then are glorified.
Further, it is the only view that explains the statement, "To know as we are known." The only time I'll know as much as there is to know is when I'm in Heaven. Isn't that right? And I have perfect knowledge and I'm like Christ. So now watch. Historically, the perfect thing is the eternal state. That's historically. Now, listen to this. This is really exciting. Personally, you enter the eternal state whenever you go to be with Jesus Christ. If I die now, "Absent from the body," – what? – "present with the Lord," – and – "I shall be like Him; for I shall see Him as He is." That's the eternal state for me.
If I live until the Rapture, that's the – when the eternal state begins. Historically, it is in the new Heaven and the new Earth, when all the saints of all the ages are all glorified and made perfect. That's the historic part. The personal part is that same kind of perfection comes the moment I go to be with Christ. So that the minute I enter His presence, no need for teaching, no need for preaching, no need for Bible study, no need for classes. Why? Instant knowledge, instant sight. That's what he's saying. Fits the context.
Now, Paul adds a further note. He says gifts are elementary in verse 11. I'm just going to briefly mention this. "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. When I reached maturity, or perfection. Now, I think what Paul is simply saying is "That when I reach my maturity in Christ is when I see Christ" – right – "and I'm like him."
You see, for a Jewish boy, maturity wasn't a process, it was an instant. It was Bar Mitzvah. One day you weren't mature. You had your Bar Mitzvah, you were mature. You became a son of the law. Paul says, "I'll deal with these elementary things until I get to my spiritual Bar Mitzvah. And when I hit my spiritual Bar Mitzvah and I'm like Jesus, I put away all these things." Paul says, in essence, "When I get to Heaven, no preaching for me, no teaching for me. I'm just going to enjoy. No more working to do that. Gifts are just elementary.
Well, if gifts are time and love is forever, where should we major? On love. And he sums it up in 13 with a statement on the preeminence of love, tremendous statement. "And now" – what do you mean now, Paul? Right now, in time, temporal, in this time, on the Earth, in the segment of time – "there are three good things. Faith and hope and love. But the greatest of these is," – what? – "love." You know why it's great. You know why it's the greatest. Because faith is going to come to an end.
Right now, we walk by faith and not by sight. But someday we'll walk by sight and not by faith. And right now, we hope. But Paul says in Romans 8, "That which is seen, we don't hope for." And someday we'll see and there won't be any hope. So, faith is going to go, and hope is going to go, and what's going to be left? Love. And so he says, "The greatest of these is" – what? – "love." Your gifts, your abilities, your ministries, your talents, your faith, your hope, all of these things, as important as they are, are only for time. But love is forever.
And the point is, you'd better learn to love right here, because it's the only link you can have with eternity. That's how important love is in the assembly of the believing people. And the response to it all, chapter 14, verse 1, is this. What does it say? "Follow after love." That's the more excellent way. Let's pray.
Father, we thank You for our fellowship this morning and for that love which You have given to us in Christ, and because of which we can love back in return to You. Father, minister to us today through the love of Your people, the love of the Spirit of God, that we might truly love others as You have loved us, that the world see You in us that You might be praised. In Jesus' name. Amen.
This article is also available and sold as a booklet.


text:
Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
In a proceeding under 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Federal Trade Commission found that respondents had unlawfully conspired to adopt and use a zone delivered pricing system in their sale of lead pigments. In its general cease and desist order prohibiting concert of action among respondents in the further use of such system, the Commission inserted a provision directing each respondent individually to cease and desist from adopting the same or a similar system of pricing for the purpose or with the effect of "matching" the prices of competitors. Held: The inclusion of this provision, as here interpreted, was within the statutory authority of the Commission. Pp. 420-431.
Earl W. Kintner argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen, Charles H. Weston and Robert B. Dawkins.
Eugene Z. Du Bose argued the cause for respondents. On the brief were Mr. Du Bose for the National Lead Co., Thomas J. McDowell for the Sherwin-Williams Co., and Nathan S. Blumberg for the Eagle-Picher Co. et al., respondents. Also on the brief were John B. Henrich, Jr., Richard Serviss, Robert A. Sturges and John T. Van Keuls of counsel.
MR. JUSTICE CLARK delivered the opinion of the Court.
The sole question involved in this proceeding under 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act 1 concerns the power of the Commission in framing an order pursuant to its finding that respondents had conspired to adopt and use a zone delivered pricing system in their sale of lead pigments. 2 In its general cease and desist order prohibiting concert of action among respondents in the further use [352 U.S. 419, 421] of such system, the Commission inserted a provision directing each respondent individually to cease and desist from adopting the same or a similar system of pricing for the purpose or with the effect of "matching" the prices of competitors. The respondents assert that this is beyond the power of the Commission, and the Court of Appeals agreed, 227 F.2d 825, striking that provision from the Commission's order. We granted certiorari, 351 U.S. 961 . because of the importance of the question in the administration of the Act. We restore the stricken provision of the Commission order, permitting it to stand with the interpretations placed upon it in this opinion.
The original proceeding under 5 of the Act was commenced in 1944. The order was entered on a second amended complaint filed in 1946. After protracted hearings, the Commission entered its findings which the Court of Appeals has held to be supported by substantial evidence. The findings material here are as follows:
The pricing practice of the industry as to the sale of white lead in oil prior to 1933 is not shown in the record. However, National Lead had as early as 1910 sold this pigment on the basis of territorial differentials involving free freight to specified towns. The differentials added to the base price were generally uniform for some 589 cities listed in National Lead's pricing system in 1933. The charge to purchasers outside the listed cities was the base price plus actual freight to the nearest listed city. In the sales of dry white lead and lead oxides it appears that by the sales practice prior to 1933 there was a uniform delivered price in the case of the white lead, while the purchasers of lead oxides paid the freight charge in addition to the base price.
Beginning in July 1933, the industry held a series of meetings in Chicago for the ostensible purpose of drafting [352 U.S. 419, 422] a code of fair competition to govern it under the National Industrial Recovery Act. These meetings resulted in an understanding and agreement among those attending, including respondents, to sell lead pigments "on the basis of flat delivered prices to customers within designated zones, with uniform differentials applicable as between such zones . . . ." 49 F. T. C. 840. Four zoning systems were established covering the various lead pigments. As an example, the system for white lead in oil and "keg" products consisted of 12 geographical zones, one known as a par zone. The remaining zones in this system were known as premium zones, the price in each being determined by adding a set premium to the par zone price. These premiums varied from $.125 per cwt. in two of the zones to a high of $1 per cwt. in the premium zone covering the State of New Mexico. 3 The zones were highly artificial and zone boundaries led to bizarre results at times, with purchasers located near the plants of respondents being charged higher prices than those located at a distance from the plants. The industry, including respondents, not only agreed to sell at the same zone delivered prices in identical geographical zones but also adopted uniform discounts, terms of sale, and differentials with respect to certain of their products. A further agreement was to sell white lead in oil on the basis of consignment contracts.
The Commission stated that "nowhere in the code, nor in any preliminary draft of a code produced at the meetings of any of the committees, is there any reference to [352 U.S. 419, 423] the use of zones or to territorial differences in the prices of lead pigments, or to the use of agency or consignment contracts or arrangements in the sale of white lead-in-oil." Id., at 839. The Commission added that "with certain exceptions, the respondents have followed the pricing practices and have adhered to the terms and conditions for the sale of lead pigments agreed upon in 1933 and 1934 as herein found from 1934 to the present time." Id., at 849. The respondents admit that they are bound by these findings and we see no reason to disturb them.
The Commission entered an order prohibiting respondents from entering into or carrying out any "planned common course of action," agreement, or conspiracy to sell at prices determined pursuant to a "zone delivered price system," or any other system resulting in identical prices at the points of sale. The order also included a provision, to which respondents strenuously object, directing each of them to cease and desist from
At the beginning we must understand the limits of the contested portion of the order. First, it is temporary. Though its life expectancy is not definite, it is clear that the Commission was creating a breathing spell during which independent pricing might be established without the hang-over of the long-existing pattern of collusion. Second, the order is directed solely at the use of a zone delivered pricing system 4 and no other. This system is a pricing method based on geographic divisions or zones, the boundaries of which are entirely drawn by the seller. His delivered price is the same throughout a particular geographic zone so drawn up by him. Customarily the delivered price is different between zones, though as here, widely separated zones, geographically, might have the same delivered price. It is well to mention here that while this Court has passed upon the validity of basing point systems of sales, Corn Products Refining Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 324 U.S. 726 (1945), it has not decided the validity of the zone pricing plan used here. Third, zone delivered pricing per se is not banned by the order. The Commission might have made the order more specific by entering a flat prohibition of the use for a definite period of the device found to be "the very cornerstone of the . . . conspiracy," i. e., zone pricing. See Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386, 428 (1945), where the corporate defendants were enjoined from "forming or joining any such trade association" for [352 U.S. 419, 426] a period of five years. But the Commission chose the more flexible sanction, i. e., the limited use of zone delivered pricing. However, it concluded that the future use should be temporarily restricted for the protection of the public. And so, delivered zone pricing violates the order only when two conditions are present: (1) identical prices with competitors (2) resulting from zone delivered pricing. Considering these conditions with the mechanics of the zone plan, we see that the only way prices can be systematically identical is for the zones of competitors to be so drawn as to be in whole or in part identical and for zone prices to be the same in those zones which coincide or overlap. 5
Respondents contend that the cease and desist order, as written, excludes the benefits of 2 (b) of the Clayton Act. 6 While 2 (b) "does not concern itself with pricing systems . . . [but] only [with] the seller's `lower' price and [with] that only to the extent that it is made `in good faith to meet an equally low price of a competitor,'" Federal Trade Commission v. A. E. Staley Mfg. Co., 324 U.S. 746, 753 (1945), this section is read into every Commission order. Federal Trade Commission v. Ruberoid Co., 343 U.S. 470, 476 (1952). Since 2 (b) must, therefore, be read into this order, the respondents are afforded all of the benefits of that section.
It is the contention of respondents that the contested paragraph of the order effectively bans the noncollusive, [352 U.S. 419, 427] individual use of zone pricing, a lawful, competitive sales method, and is therefore beyond the authority of the Commission. Respondents further assert that even if the Commission had such authority its exercise here was entirely improper, unnecessary, and would, in fact, hamper competition in the industry. They stress that the complaint did not include a charge that the individual use of zone pricing was unlawful; that it came into the case after the Trial Examiner had filed his recommended decision and order; and that respondents were denied the opportunity of rebutting the charge by evidence showing zone pricing to be "a logical, economical, and competitive method of doing business." The insertion of the objectionable paragraph, they contend, violates due process in that they had no opportunity to defend. Since 2 (b) is read into every Commission order and since it would allow respondents to rebut the charge, their contention is completely answered and we shall not deal with it further.
It goes without saying that the requirements of a fair hearing include notice of the claims of the opposing party and an opportunity to meet them. Morgan v. United States, 304 U.S. 1 (1938). The record indicates that the respondents were afforded those safeguards. The emphasis that there was no charge, no evidence, no finding to support the inclusion of the objectionable provision in the order is misplaced. Its insertion was nothing more than a mode of implementation, selected by the Commission, to enforce its findings of violations of the Act. Moreover, the record is replete with evidence that counsel supporting the complaint would seek the use of such a method of enforcement. As far back as in early 1947, while the case was before the Examiner, the issue concerning the effect of the zone pricing system used by respondents was before the Commission on motions to dismiss. Admittedly Court II of the complaint dealt with the use of the zone system itself. The Commission overruled the [352 U.S. 419, 428] motions to dismiss, adopting the view of counsel supporting the complaint that its allegations were directed against the effects of the alleged system or method, i. e., the zone pricing plan, and "not against individual instances" of discrimination in pricing. Furthermore, in May 1948, almost five years before the decree was entered, counsel supporting the complaint filed written exceptions to the recommended decision of the Examiner on the ground, among others, that it did not include a provision similar to the one objected to here. If respondents thought rebuttal evidence necessary, the record is bare of any effort on their part to offer it. Nor was any request made to reopen the case for that purpose after it reached the Commission.
We pass on to respondents' major contention questioning the power of the Commission. As the Court has said many times before, the Commission may exercise only the powers granted it by the Act. Federal Trade Commission v. Western Meat Co., 272 U.S. 554, 559 (1926). The relevant sections empower the Commission to prevent the use of unfair methods of competition and authorize it, after finding an unfair method present, to enter an order requiring the offender "to cease and desist" from using such unfair method.
The Court has held that the Commission is clothed with wide discretion in determining the type of order that is necessary to bring an end to the unfair practices found to exist. In Jacob Siegel Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 327 U.S. 608 (1946), the Court named the Commission "the expert body to determine what remedy is necessary to eliminate the unfair or deceptive trade practices which have been disclosed. It has wide latitude for judgment and the courts will not interfere except where the remedy selected has no reasonable relation to the unlawful practices found to exist." Id., at 612-613. Thereafter, in Federal Trade Commission v. [352 U.S. 419, 429] Cement Institute, 333 U.S. 683, 726 (1948), the Court pointed out that the Congress, in passing the Act, "felt that courts needed the assistance of men trained to combat monopolistic practices in the framing of judicial decrees in antitrust litigation." In the light of this, the Court reasoned, it should not "lightly modify" the orders of the Commission. Again, in Federal Trade Commission v. Ruberoid Co., supra, at 473, we said that "if the Commission is to attain the objectives Congress envisioned, it cannot be required to confine its road block to the narrow lane the transgressor has traveled; it must be allowed effectively to close all roads to the prohibited goal, so that its order may not be by-passed with impunity." We pointed out there that Congress had placed the primary responsibility for fashioning orders upon the Commission. These cases narrow the issue to the question: Does the remedy selected have a "reasonable relation to the unlawful practices found to exist"? We believe that it does. First, the simplicity of operation of the plan lends itself to unlawful manipulation; second, it had been used in the industry for almost a quarter of a century; and, third, its originator and chief beneficiary had been previously adjudged a violator of the antitrust laws. United States v. National Lead Co., 332 U.S. 319 (1947).
The respondents were found to have plainly disregarded the law. In this respect the Commission correctly considered the circumstances under which the illegal acts occurred. Those in utter disregard of law, as here, "call for repression by sterner measures than where the steps could reasonably have been thought permissible." United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 340 U.S. 76 . 89-90 (1950). Respondents made no appeal here from some of the findings as to their guilt. Having lost the battle on the facts, they hope to win the war on the type of decree. They fight for the right to continue to use [352 U.S. 419, 430] individually the very same weapon with which they carried on their unlawful enterprise. The Commission concluded that this must not be permitted. It was "not obliged to assume, contrary to common experience, that a violator of the antitrust laws will relinquish the fruits of his violation more completely than [it] requires . . . ." International Salt Co. v. United States, 332 U.S. 392, 400 (1947). Although the zone plan might be used for some lawful purposes, decrees often suppress a lawful device when it is used to carry out an unlawful purpose. Ethyl Gasoline Corp. v. United States, 309 U.S. 436 (1940); United States v. Bausch & Lomb Optical Co., 321 U.S. 707 (1944). In such instances the Court is obliged not only to suppress the unlawful practice but to take such reasonable action as is calculated to preclude the revival of the illegal practices. Ethyl Gasoline Corp. v. United States, supra, at 461; Local 167, I. B. T. v. United States, 291 U.S. 293 (1934). See also United States v. United States Gypsum Co., supra; United States v. Crescent Amusement Co., 323 U.S. 173, 188 (1944). 7 We therefore conclude that, under the circumstances here, the Commission was justified in its determination that it was necessary to include some restraint in its order against the individual corporations in order to prevent a continuance of the unfair competitive practices found to exist. Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Education Society, 302 U.S. 112, 120 (1937). We shall now examine the restraint imposed.
Respondents point out that in only one other case in the long history of the Commission has a similar order [352 U.S. 419, 431] been entered. They say our restoration of the contested paragraph will effectively prevent competition. In its supplemental memorandum, see note 5, supra, the Commission has clearly stated its understanding of the scope and effect of the order. It is our conclusion that the order was not intended to and does not prohibit or interfere with independent delivered zone pricing per se. Nor does it prohibit the practice of the absorption of actual freight as such in order to foster competition. Furthermore, as we have said, there is read into the order the provision of 2 (b) of the Clayton Act as to the right of a seller in good faith to meet the lower price of a competitor. This is not to say that a seller may plead this section in defense of the use of an entire pricing system. The section is designed to protect competitors in individual transactions.
Respondents pose hypothetical situations which they say may rise up to plague them. However, "we think it would not be good judicial administration," as our late Brother Jackson said in International Salt Co. v. United States, 332 U.S. 392, 401 (1947), to strike the contested paragraph of the order to meet such conjectures. The Commission has reserved jurisdiction to meet just such contingencies. As actual situations arise they can be presented to the Commission in evidentiary form rather than as fantasies. And, we might add, if there is a burden that cannot be made lighter after application to the Commission, then respondents must remember that those caught violating the Act must expect some fencing in. United States v. Crescent Amusement Co., supra, at 187.
[ Footnote 2 ] The three principal lead pigments are dry white lead, white lead in oil, and the lead oxides, red lead and litharge. Dry white lead is a fine white powder used as a pigment in paints. White lead in oil is white lead with linseed oil added and is sold for use as the basic ingredient in exterior house paint. Lead oxides and litharge are sold to electric storage battery manufacturers as the basic raw material for battery plates. Red lead is also the basic ingredient in red lead paint commonly used as a protective coating for iron and steel structures.
[ Footnote 3 ] The par zone includes a number of northeastern and midwestern States. However, some cities located within these States are excluded from the par zone. On the other hand, the San Francisco area is a par zone, as is the City of St. Louis, though both are located in States not included in par zone areas. For a detailed discussion and maps of the operation of the zone pricing system, see the findings, 49 F. T. C. 840-870.
[ Footnote 4 ] Our discussion of the zone delivered pricing system should in no way be construed as our approval of its use. We do not reach that question.
[ Footnote 5 ] At oral argument, counsel for the Federal Trade Commission was requested by the Court to submit a statement on behalf of the Commission setting forth its view as to the scope of the disputed paragraph of the cease and desist order. In response, the Commission supplied its interpretation which coincides with that set out here.
[ Footnote 6 ] 49 Stat. 1526, 15 U.S.C. 13 (b).
[ Footnote 7 ] We need not discuss the full scope of the powers of the Federal Trade Commission, nor their relative breadth in comparison with those of a court of equity. As this Court said in May Dept. Stores Co. v. Labor Board, 326 U.S. 376, 390 (1945), "The test . . . is whether the Board might have reasonably concluded . . . that such an order was necessary . . . ." [352 U.S. 419, 432]
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Citation: 352 U.S. 419
Docket No: No. 63
Argued: December 12, 1956
Decided: February 25, 1957
Court: United States Supreme Court
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw's newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Developed by anti-corrosion experts, the three devices impress with robustness, usability and performance. All required measurement tasks in heavy corrosion protection are solved quickly and reliably. The DFT is the handheld device for the simple layer thickness measurement on steel and non-ferrous metals. The DPM with integrated measuring probe is used to measure and record all climate parameters relevant for coating processes. The SPG checks the surface profile in the blink of an eye. All devices are available in a corrosion kit. Optionally: the Bresle Salt Kit for quick, easy testing of the salt contamination of surfaces.
- Drop resistant, dustproof and hose water protected housings according to IP65
- One-hand operation via 4 seized pressure points for optimal work even with gloves
- Visual, haptic and audible feedback for full control over the measurement
- Intuitive user interface allows easy handling even by untrained personnel
- Scratch-resistant, high-contrast display adapts to device positioning
- Three-point support for precise measuring in every situation (DFT)
- Preconfigured batches for SSPC-PA 2, IMO PSPC, ISO 19840, Australian AS 3894.3 B, Swedish IS 18 41 60 etc. (DFT)
- Probe pol (DFT) and temperature sensors (DPM) very resistent
- Big memory space for 250,000 readings in 2500 batches (DFT, DPM and SPG)
- Shipbuilding, infrastructure, offshore wind farms, chemical plants etc.
- Ideal for use under very harsh conditions from -10 to 60 °C
- Dual probe for reliable measurements on all relevant substrates: ISO/FE, NF/FE, ISO/NF (DFT)
- Measuring ranges: 0–2500 µm on FE and 0–2000 µm on NF (DFT); 0–500 µm (SPG)
There are no reviews yet.


text:
Republic Wireless Review
Last August I told you that I signed up to get a smartphone through Republic Wireless, a new company with a different business model for providing cell services. I received my new phone in December and I thought it was high time to write a review!
Go back to our previous post for more detail, but briefly: Republic Wireless utilizes available wireless internet to cut cell expenses for its customers. Customers are required to register at least one wireless network (I registered the networks at my university and in our home). Calls and data go over wireless whenever possible and through the Sprint cell network otherwise. The base cost is $19/month for unlimited talk/text/data – with taxes, we are paying $22.18/month.
Thus far I have experienced all the perks and only some of the expected downsides of using this service. The chief perk, of course, is the low cost – and that I upgraded from a dumbphone to a smartphone. Also there is no contract for this phone; Kyle hates getting into utility contracts so this was a big plus for him.
The trade-offs for that low price have been:
1) No choice over the hardware. Republic Wireless only works with one phone model (an android), and it's not the flashiest thing on the planet. Kyle estimates that the phone I got at the end of 2012 had about the same specs as the one he purchased that was top-of-the-line in spring 2010. But I don't really care about whatever I might be missing out on – the phone makes calls and accesses the internet fine and that's basically all I use it for. I paid about $250 up front for the phone.
2) Sprint. In our area, Sprint coverage is actually better than AT&T (my previous carrier), which I've enjoyed. It's not as good as Verizon, though, and I've noticed a few times while driving that Kyle's Verizon phone is able to pull up directions faster than my Sprint phone. Overall this hasn't been an issue any more than what I've experienced with other carriers in the past. I've used the phone with no discernable coverage issues in Durham, the DC area, and the LA area.
The potential downsides we thought might exist but that haven't materialized are the dropped calls when transitioning from wireless to cell coverage, poor customer service, and texting over data. We have had no problems with the phone and haven't had any reason to contact customer service – which IMO is the best way to do it!
The verdict is that this was definitely a frugal choice, not a cheap choice, and one I would make again. It's a great option for people who:
- spend a good chunk of their days with wireless internet coverage
- don't need the latest and greatest phone
- have decent Sprint coverage in their areas
And did I mention we are paying $22.18/month for unlimited everything?! It's a GREAT value!
Have you taken a gamble on a new company and did it work out? Are you using an "alternative" cell service? Would you consider using Republic Wireless when your current contract is up?
Update: Republic Wireless is now offering the Moto X!
Filed under: frugality · Tags: Republic Wireless, smartphone, Spint
57 Responses to "Republic Wireless Review"
Glad that it's working out for you. I'm very intrigued by these kinds of plans, but we don't have a wireless network at work, which is where I use my phone's data plan the most. I'd also worry about combining it with the relatively slow DSL we pay for at the house. Would it support someone talking on the phone and another person streaming something online at the same time?
Mrs. Pop @ Planting Our Pennies recently posted..Rebranding – Now Spending Our Pennies-
I've got the same issue. We don't have a public wireless at work, but do you need to have it to sign up for this plan? Either way, it sounds like you are really cleaning up with this plan. Have you ever heard of FreedomPop? I don't know how it would apply to me yet, but I feel like it could be a wireless game changer at some point.
CashRebel recently posted..Financial Update – Q1 2013 (Net Worth +22%)
Thanks for the review. My goal is to drop our family's phone expense by $100 per month, and a service like Republic would do the trick. My only hesitation is the addiction to the iPhone. Now that I know it's working out for you, I might have to think harder about taking the leap.
Mark recently posted..Budgeting Lessons Learned from My Six-year-old Paper Blinds -
thanks for this review. I've had the same andrioid phone for 3.33 years, and it's about time for a new one. I heard about republic wireless and have been really wondering how it worked, and thought about giving it a try – believe it or not, that phone would be an upgrade from what I currently have (hacked, b/c verizon stopped offering me updates).
From what I've read, republic is going to get some newer phones sometime this summer or fall, and my wife and I are going to try and hang on until then, and then give republic a shot.
sustainable living blog recently posted..Tax Season Challenge Update -
Under $25/month for unlimited service? I'm almost sold! Did you buy your smartphone yourself?
Well Heeled Blog recently posted..Fitness in your financial budget -
Thanks for the review Emily. I have heard about this service but wasn't sure if it had been rolled out yet. I am also surprised that Sprint works so well for you. I am in south Raleigh and Sprint is not great. I might have to try this one out though. I assume that you could easily transfer your number?
Grayson @ Debt Roundup recently posted..Have a Small Business? Here Are a Few Tips to Save Money -
I looked at Republic, but I ended up going with Ting because I didn't want to have to pay for a new phone. This was definitely a frugal, but not cheap choice as well since I'm still paying ~$35/month. It's much better than the ~$85/month I was paying before! So far, it's working out and I'm glad I made the switch. I'm too cheap to pay the $3/month for 100 MB of data and I hardly notice that I don't have data. Some months though I'll probably use it and I really like that I have that option!
Leigh recently posted..Opening a Chase checking account for the bonus -
Thanks for the review. It's nice to hear a "feet on the ground" review about something that very well could be the next wave…
William @ Bite the Bullet recently posted..The Hi-Lo Paradox, Part 2: Selling Low -
I'm with the one commenter who said they would wait 'til RW came out with some additional phone choices. That, and the commenter who is addicted to his iPhone. I love my iPhone, too, but the slow service I'm getting from the T-Mobile Sim with my Net10 non-plan is pushing me to make the change. I'm compelled to be using WIFI ANYway, so I may as well go RW. Just hope they come up with some fancy phone choices!
I pay way more than I'd like for my cell phone plan, but I have to have e-mail on my phone and I have to use Verizon to get a discount through my work. Otherwise a plan like this would be perfect for me.
KK @ Student Debt Survivor recently posted..Pre-owned Engagement Rings-Frugal or Tacky? -
The phone is not great, Motorola Defy XT. Short battery life (have to charge it once during the day, and at night), very limited memory, small screen. 3G. Hard to watch video on. Every time I get frustrated with the phone I remind myself, unlimited everything for $25.10 a month. That is what my bill winds up @ in Washington state. Cant beat it. And my customer service experiences have been good. Two so far. Fast response on email. I would (and have)recommend this service. Pull up a Sprint coverage map of your area before you drop for the phone! It is very good where I live.
[…] now repaying monthly). We are fed up with both ATT and Verizon lying to/misleading us. So far Republic Wireless is working out fine, but we haven't had any interactions with their customer service. I'm not sure what we'll […]
I had written a longer comment but it didn't post correctly, so, I'll try to make this one short and sweet. I joined RW when they first opened in Nov. 2011. I was impressed at first but after 6 months of hearing tons of excuses why they couldn't get things working properly, I started to lose my enthusiasm for them. If you are new to RW, the excuses they dole out as to why they can't get the service working beyond beta will probably be tolerable for you at first. Unfortunately, after 18 months, they haven't made much headway in getting things any better than what they were back in Nov. 2011. My suggestion…pass on RW! I know $19 is a super deal, but the frustration of dealing with them is not worth it. Take a look at Ting, Straight Talk, Platinumtel or T-Mobile $30 should you be looking for ways to cut your phone bill. If you need to contact someone who actually works at RW to get help, check out the review of them over at Yelp.com. There are phone numbers there for you to actually reach somebody at RW and not have to deal with their same old rhetoric to email them or post on their crowd-sourced, fan forums for help from non-RW employees. Best of luck to anyone trying RW's service. It definitely isn't ready for prime-time to serve as someone's primary phone service.
I started with RW in November 2012. I have had many headaches with them including dropped calls Problems hooking up with the Internet Problems hooking up with friends Delayed hookups or calls Poor reception, the phone itself flipping screens, losing data, it just plain didn't work. to my friends I'm known as the person with the cheap phone. it has improved in the last 6 months. but I still have problems. disclaimer: my first smartphone, I had a lot of trouble adjusting, I have adjusted to the smartphone but still have problems. I plan to hang in there with it because it is improving and its very reasonable.
[…] presents Republic Wireless Review posted at Evolving Personal […]
[…] Republic Wireless Review was featured in the Financial Simplicity Carnival. […]
[…] @ Evolving Personal Finance writes Republic Wireless Review – I have been with Republic Wireless, an alternative cell service, for several months now, […]
[…] am way more ridiculously excited about this than I should be – two people have signed up with Republic Wireless using my referral link! If they stay customers for 30 days I get a $19 credit to my account. I […]
[…] people have used my referral link for Republic Wireless, which means if all goes well I'll get a $38 credit to my account! You can tell what an […]
We recently tried Republic Wireless (Owned by Bandwidth) for a month. It had very slow data speed, horrible call reception and dropped calls. Everyone kept complaining they couldn't understand me. Plus the Defy XT (the only phone they have available) felt very underpowered, like I had taken a step down from my last 2 year old phone. We were still within the cancellation period, so we canceled to get a full refund for the over $500 cost of 2 phones. Or so we thought. Their customer service is non-existent. It is email only, and they don't actually help with anything. They drug their feet the whole way, reimbursing $20, $20 there. Their customer service kept saying they couldn't help until we had waited 10 business days for the payment to clear (it didn't), and then said they would just mail me a check (they sent $20 instead of the remaining $450 they owed). By then it had been 116 days since my original purchase and I was still nowhere close to getting the rest of the refund back. I had to have my credit card dispute the transaction to get my money back. I think they were purposefully dragging their feet, hoping I would forget. If I had waited 2 more days, not even the credit card company could have helped me.
In short, sure it is unlimited, but it is unlimited crap: horrible call and data service, underpowered phone choice, nonexistent customer service, and they will try to steal your money!
If you are looking for cheap smartphone service, try Ting instead. We are on them now, and our plan is about the same price as Republic Wireless with much better everything (except data speed. After all, they are both Sprint rebundlers). Sure, they are not unlimited, but we found out that we don't actually use that much phone data and minutes since we use wifi so much anyways. Plus with Ting, you don't have to buy a new $300+ phone; you can bring in an existing one or get a used one on ebay for much cheaper.
[…] received my new phone and reviewed the service. If you want to sign up for a $19 account credit you can do so through my referral […]
[…] My New Frugal/Cheap Cell Phone Plan and Republic Wireless Review […]
Hi Emily, can you pls send me your email address & full name for you & me to get the $19 credit from republic wireless. I already signed up but they are asking me the above info & your link via email to be able to receive the credits. They will do the adjustments manually. Thanks.
gil recently posted..Rethinking Our Student Loan Repayment -
[…] Miller from 20 Something Finance explains how mobile virtual network operators like Republic Wireless work and lists the best ones with what types of plans they […]
[…] family of 6 good, wholesome food for $300 per month, how to clothe your kids for less, how to get a cell phone plan for $20 per month, and how to start investing for your future with simple, effective steps. The wealth of knowledge […]
[…] to design our header/logo but I think we'll wait until we finally take a payout. New Republic Wireless signups have finally slowed down – maybe they will pick up again when RW finally releases a new […]
[…] Becker from Mom and Dad Money used Republic Wireless Review as an example of "doing more for […]
[…] Virgin Mobile recently decided to take a page out of the playbook of other carriers like Ting and Republic Wireless. Put simply, they are bribing me to find customers for them by offering me $25 off my bill for each […]
[…] I signed up for their beta wave right away. I think we were the first personal finance blog to review Republic Wireless (at least, I don't know of any earlier) – we actually put up the review the day before they […]
[…] has had a positive experience with her phone without many complaints (see her review). Now, her foray into the unknown is about to be rewarded with Republic Wireless's announcement […]
[…] with a couple of my FPU students a couple weeks ago. I was telling them about how much I like Republic Wireless and they asked if I am planning to upgrade my phone when they release the new one. I said that […]
I just started up with the Republic Wireless Moto X, and have to say it's the best move I've made in a long time. I went from AT&T(WAY too expensive) to T-Mobile(cheaper, but absolutely minimal coverage) to RW. I was at the point where I would accept substandard service for the low cost, but was amazed. Sprint was MUCH MUCH better than T-Mobile, totally comparable – even exceeding AT&T in town(still don't know about the boonies).
Aside from the extremely low cost but very much related to it, is the fact that RW is the only provider I know of to offer cell service with data being available only on WIFI – after all, how much do you really need data out in the field? This costs me a whole $10 + tax. Nobody else can touch that. I don't know how GPS will work under those conditions, but they allow you to change plans midstream twice a month, so, in a pinch, you can go back to cell-data, but I suspect(me own opinion)that GPS will still work, but if you're using something that downloads maps as you go, you'll be out of luck getting data from WIFI only.
I was also ambivalent about switching from IO/S to Android, but, once again, I was more than pleasantly surprised. The transition was seamless, but I did have some Android experience on a rooted Color Nook. The only shortcoming is that Android apps are somewhat behind IO/S in quality – but that's something easily lived with.
So, all in all, while I was expecting something just tolerable, as far as I'm concerned I'm as pleased as if I had unlimited service with AT&T for a SMALL fraction of the cost. Thanks, Republic Wireless! -
I have more computers than any normal human being should have, but I find myself all snuggled up on the sofa much more often that I should! The phone is just an arm's length away and I can do most of what I like to do on it as easily as the computer. the typing issue being bypassed by decent voice recognition. My expectations for Sprint were quite humble when signing up, but the resulting coverage blows T-Mobile totally out of the water. I still need to pull together GPS, then I'll let you know….
[…] finally signed up for Republic Wireless and is having a great experience! "I just started up with the Republic Wireless Moto X, and […]
[…] and "republic wireless reviews 2013" – Woo hoo! I love that people are interested in Republic Wireless, particularly now that they have a hot new smartphone […]
[…] Now I'm paying $26.30/month for a brand-new smartphone with unlimited talk/text/data with Republic Wireless. […]
[…] family of 6 good, wholesome food for $300 per month, how to clothe your kids for less, how to get a cell phone plan for $20 per month, and how to start investing for your future with simple, effective steps. The wealth of knowledge […]
[…] also read my past posts on Republic Wireless – when I first signed up for the beta wave, a review of the service several months into using it, and when Republic Wireless announced the release of the Moto […]