1 Corinthians 14
OGC**Butler’s Comments
Chapter Fourteen THE PROBLEM OF EDIFICATION IN THE MIDST OF DIVERSITY
IDEAS TO INVESTIGATE:**
Who is supposed to earnestly desire the spiritual gifts? Are we, today, to desire them?
In what way were the Corinthians apparently using speaking in tongues so that the tongues were unedifying?
What is the significance of the Old Testament prophecy from Isaiah in this context?
Why did Paul state, … and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets?
Is it really shameful for a woman to speak in church?
APPLICATIONS:
The attitude of the Corinthians toward miraculous gifts shows conclusively that possession of miraculous powers, per se, does not produce holiness or Christian maturity.
It is possible to have a miraculous gift and be carnally-minded.
Teaching the word of God (in Corinth, by prophecy since there was as yet no completed New Testament scripture) in understandable human language is to be preferred above every other exercise in the church.
Edification, maturation, is the goal of everything God does through members of the body of Christ.
God wants Christians to be mature in their thinking and reasoning.
Self-glorification is childish and forbidden in Christians.
God demands order and planning in the corporate assembly of the Churchand in private worship, too, we might add.
No personal experience, miraculous or non-miraculous, can be a substitute for obedience to the apostolic word.
A thorough study of this chapter (using proper hermeneutical principles) shows conclusively that modern, pseudo-miraculous gifts, do not fit the apostolic revelation concerning miraculous gifts.
APPREHENSIONS:
Is the word gifts in 1 Corinthians 14:1? What does its absence probably indicate?
Why did Paul emphasize seeking the gift of prophecy?
Does it not seem in 1 Corinthians 14:4 Paul is rebuking (mildly) some of the Corinthians for seeking to edify only themselves by using the gift of tongues without interpretation? Why would we reach that conclusion?
Why would using a miraculous gift only for oneself be wrong?
How do we know Paul is talking about human languages, knowable languages, when he says tongues? (1 Corinthians 14:10)
Why were the gifts given to the Corinthians? (1 Corinthians 12:7; 1 Corinthians 14:5; 1 Corinthians 14:12; 1 Corinthians 14:19; 1 Corinthians 14:26)
Did the possession of a miraculous gift mean the possessor’s own abilities to think and reason were suspended in the exercise of the gift? (1 Corinthians 14:13-19)
Are Christians supposed to think? Like mature adults? (1 Corinthians 14:20)
Why does Paul quote from Isaiah 28:11-12 in this discussion of tongues?
Who is the outsider? Who is the unbeliever in Corinth?
Which was better for the outsider and unbeliever to experience in the congregation at Corinthtongues or prophecy? Why?
Did Paul give rules for the use of miraculous gifts? Name the rules!
Why did Paul address the subject of women speaking in the church here? What does he say about it in chapter 11?
What is the Greek word which is translated decency?
Is Paul’s emphatic statement about the church’s need to follow planned, regimented worship relevant for the church today? How? or why?
**Applebury’s Comments
CHAPTER FOURTEEN**
Analysis
A.
Paul indicates that he is not discouraging the use of the gifts, but that he is arguing for the necessity of correcting the misuse of the gift of tongues (1 Corinthians 14:1-19).
In urging the church to follow after love, he says for them to earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially prophecy (1 Corinthians 14:1-5).
a)
Follow after love, the most excellent way explained in chapter thirteen.
b)
In doing so, earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially prophecy.
c)
He explains what is accomplished in speaking in tongues without interpretation in contrast with what is accomplished for the church through prophecy (1 Corinthians 14:2-4).
(1)
He points out what is done by speaking in a tongue (1 Corinthians 14:2).
(a) One speaks not to men but to God.
(b)
No one understands.
(c)
In the Spirit he speaks mysteries.
(2)
He points out what is done by prophecy (1 Corinthians 14:3).
(a)
One speaks to men.
(b)
He speaks for the edification, exhortation, and consolation of the church.
(3)
He contrasts the effects of the two (1 Corinthians 14:4).
(a)
He that speaks in a tongue edifies himself.
(b)
He that prophesies edifies the church.
(4)
He tells why he would prefer to have them prophesy (1 Corinthians 14:5).
(a)
In so doing, he does not discourage the use of tongues. He says, I would have you all speak in tongues.
(b)
Through prophecy the church receives edification.
(c)
Greater is he that prophesies than he that speaks in a tongue except he interpret.
He presents a three-fold argument for the necessity of using the spiritual gifts in such a manner that the church may receive edification (1 Corinthians 14:6-12).
a)
The first argument: His own use of the gift of tongues.
(1)
He assumes that he may be speaking to them in tongues.
(2)
He asks the question: What profit would it be to the church unless it is by way of revelation, or knowledge, or prophesying, or teaching?
b)
The second argument: Such instruments as the flute, harp, and bugle must be so used as to be understood. Note: Tongues had to be interpreted in order to edify the church.
c)
The third argument: The tongue (the human organ of speech) must be so used that what is spoken can be understood (1 Corinthians 14:10-11).
(1)
If what is spoken is not understood, it is like speaking into the air.
(2)
Languages (voices) of the world must be understood; otherwise, it would be like speaking to a foreigner.
d)
Conclusion: He says, Seek that ye may abound unto the edification of the church (1 Corinthians 14:12). Note: The argument that follows is for the necessity of translation so that the tongue may edify.
In giving instruction to the one using the gift of tongues, he presents a three-fold argument for the necessity of translating the message spoken in a foreign language (1 Corinthians 14:13-19).
a)
He instructs the one using a tongue to pray that he may interpret (translate) (1 Corinthians 14:13).
b)
First argument: He assumes a case in which he might be praying in a tongue (1 Corinthians 14:14-15).
(1)
In this situation his spirit prays but his understanding is not benefitted.
(2)
He therefore determines to pray and sing with the understanding (this implies the necessity of translation as indicated in 1 Corinthians 14:5 and 1 Corinthians 14:13).
c)
Second argument: He assumes a situation in which the unlearned (the one without these gifts) is unable to understand and say Amen (1 Corinthians 14:16-17).
(1)
In this situation one is giving thanks by using the spiritual gifts.
(2)
But if he doesn-’t know what is said, how can he say Amen?
(3)
The result is that he is not edified. (This implies the necessity of translation).
d)
Third argument: Paul’s own experience in using the gift of tongues (1 Corinthians 14:18-19).
(1)
He thanks God that he speaks in tongues more than all the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 14:18).
(2)
He tells why he prefers to speak in the church with his understanding, that is, he would rather speak five words to instruct than ten thousand in a tongue (1 Corinthians 14:19). (Implies necessity of translation).
B.
In appealing to the church to use the spiritual gifts as they were intended, Paul sets forth certain rules and regulations to be followed (1 Corinthians 14:20-40).
He appeals to them to use the gifts as they were intended (1 Corinthians 14:20-25).
a)
He indicates that this implies the necessity of taking a mature view of gifts (1 Corinthians 14:20).
b)
He indicates the purpose of the gift of tongues by reference to a statement of the law (1 Corinthians 14:21-22).
(1)
The statement of the law (Isaiah 28:11-12).
(2)
Tongues are a sign for unbelievers; prophecy is for (the instruction) of the believer.
c)
His appeal for the proper use of the gifts (1 Corinthians 14:23-25).
(1)
He assumes a situation in which unlearned men (those without the gifts) and unbelievers may enter the assembly while all are speaking in foreign languages. The effect will be that they say, Ye are mad.
(2)
He assumes a similar situation when all are prophesying and points out the result since the unbeliever or the one without gifts understood.
(a)
He is approved by all.
(b)
He is judged by all.
(c)
The secrets of his heart are made manifest.
(d)
He will fall down and worship God.
(e)
He will declare that God is among you.
He presents rules and regulations for the church to follow (1 Corinthians 14:26-40).
a)
He gives general rules to be followed for the edification of the church (1 Corinthians 14:26).
b)
He gives specific rules for the use of tongues (1 Corinthians 14:27-28).
(1)
Two or three, and that in turn.
(2)
One to interpret.
(3)
If no interpreter, keep silence. Speak to self and to God (implying that the speaker and God understood what was said).
c)
He gives rules for the prophets to follow (1 Corinthians 14:29-33).
(1)
Only two or three to speak; others to discern.
(2)
One at a time; prophets can control their use of the gift.
(3)
God is not a God of confusion, but of peace.
d)
He gives certain regulations for women to observe (1 Corinthians 14:34-36).
(1)
This is the same in all the churches of the saints.
(2)
The women are to keep silence in the churches.
(3)
The law indicates that they are not to speak but to be in subjection.
(4)
They are to ask their husbands at home.
(5)
It is a shame for a woman to speak in church.
(6)
The apostle, implying that there were objections to this instruction, asks: Was it from you the word of God went forth? Or did it come to you alone?
e)
He indicates that what he wrote is the commandment of God; ignorance of the fact does not change it (1 Corinthians 14:37-38).
f)
He gives a closing word of advice on the matter (1 Corinthians 14:39-40).
(1)
Desire earnestly to prophesy.
(2)
Do not forbid speaking in tongues.
(3)
Let all things be done decently and in order.
Questions
What are the two principal phases of the subject of spiritual gifts which are discussed in this chapter?
How is the discussion of this chapter related to what is said in the two preceding Chapter s?
In what way is the subject of spiritual gifts related to the discussion of division?
What are the three major abuses of the subject of tongues which Paul discussed in this section?
What corrective measure does he suggest for each?
What evidence is there that Paul was not discouraging the use of the gift of tongues?
What was the essential purpose of the gifts when used in the church?
Why did Paul indicate that the church should desire prophecy above the gift of tongues?
What did he recommend in order to make tongues of equal value to the church?
What was speaking in tongues?
How does the gift which was used in the church at Corinth compare with the gift as used on Pentecost?
In the light of Paul’s teaching on the subject of spiritual gifts, what differences are evident between the gift of tongues and the present day utterance of speech-like sounds under emotional stress?
What is the difference between the guidance which the Holy Spirit gave the apostles and the providence of God which the faithful Christian can observe by looking back over his experiences?
How was the ability to speak in a foreign language distributed by the Holy Spirit?
How is the modern missionary forced to meet the language barrier?
How was it possible for the one who used the gift of tongues to speak to God and not to men?
What is meant by speaking mysteries? By whom was it done?
How was it possible for one who spoke in a tongue to edify himself?
Why, then, was not the church also edified?
Why was the one who prophesied greater?
What bearing does this have on the problem of jealousy over the gifts?
What is the issue in each of the two series of arguments for the correct use of tongues?
What are the three arguments in the first series?
What are the three arguments in the second series?
In verse nine, what is meant by the tongue?
What is meant by barbarian?
Why would the use of the gift of tongues cause one to be like a foreigner?
What did Paul mean by the expression, my spirit prays?
What is meant by unlearned?
What is Paul’s point about saying Amen?
Why did Paul thank God that he spoke in tongues more than all?
Why, then, the comparison about five words with understanding and ten thousand words in a tongue?
What did Paul mean by the remark, Be not children in mind?
How explain the quotation from Isaiah about men of strange tongues?
How does this show what was done by speaking in tongues?
To what did Paul refer by law?
What was the primary purpose of the gift of tongues?
What was the purpose of prophecy?
Why should we delete the italicized words, is for a sign in the English text?
What is the difference between unlearned and unbeliever?
Why would they say, Ye are mad?
Why would the same ones say, God is in the midst of you?
What rules were to be observed in determining who was to speak in the church?
What proof is there that the prophets could exercise self-control in using the gift of prophecy?
What bearing does this have on some instances of supposed speaking in tongues today?
What is meant by churches of the saints?
Why did Paul use it in this connection?
Why did he say, let the women keep silence in the churches?
What responsibility of the husband is implied by the apostle’s instruction for the wife to ask her husband at home?
Why did he say that what he was saying was the commandment of the Lord?
For Discussion
What should our attitude be toward the Bible as the guide-book to heaven?
Have you found anything lacking in it?
Do you know of instances where attempts to speak in tongues have caused division in a local church?
1 Corinthians 14:1-12
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 1
Preaching by Prophecy **(1 Corinthians 14:1-12)
14 Make love your aim, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. 2For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. 3On the other hand, he who prophesies speaks to men for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. 4He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophecies edifies the church. 5Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, unless some one interprets, so that the church may be edified.
6 Now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how shall I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? 7If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will any one know what is played? 8And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? 9So with yourselves; if you in a tongue utter speech that is not intelligible, how will any one know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air. 10There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning; 11but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me. 12So with yourselves; since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church.
1 Corinthians 14:1-5 Prophecy is Understandable: It will be profitable at the start of this chapter to reiterate the fundamental principles of Biblical hermeneutics. (1) The true interpretation is what the author intended to say; (2) The Bible is written in human language. If human language is to mean anything at all it must (granting differences in structure) mean the same thing to all human beings; (3) Each passage must be understood in the light of its historical background, its grammatical structure, and parallel words or passages; (4) Each word, paragraph, chapter, is to be understood according to its context; (5) And each passage is to be interpreted in the light of the whole scheme of redemption (the entire Bible). Remember, Paul expected the Corinthians to understand him and God expects all human beings to understand the Bible alike.
The teaching of this chapter was initially given to promote unity among Christians, in the first century, in Corinth. Unity could only result when all the Christians at Corinth understood and obeyed the will of God as expressed in this teaching. Understanding and obeying the will of God revealed in the scriptures is still the only basis for Christian unity. Let us exert every mental and spiritual effort possible to understand and obey the will of God in this chapter.
Miraculous gifts served their purpose (integration of cultural differences among believers and verification of apostolic doctrine) and ceased. But that does not mean the generic principles taught in chapter fourteen (which is, all things done to edify, and done decently, in order) are irrelevant to the believers today. God’s principles are always true and never change. The administration, or application, of those principles may, due to time or culture, serve their purpose and cease. This was the case with miraculous gifts. Both miraculous gifts and love come from God. Paul expected the Corinthian church to practice both in the will of God. Chapter fourteen gives some practical way that love controls the use a person makes of his gifts.
The Greek word prophetes, prophecy, is literally, forth-speaking. In this context it must mean more than just predicting the future, since all teaching in the first century church did not involve the necessity of predicting the future. The word propheteian in Romans 12:6 may not include the miraculous element at all since it is listed with the functional (Gr. praxin) gifts; it probably means simply, preaching. There was a school of the prophets in the Old Testament (also called sons of the prophets 2 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 2:5; 2 Kings 2:7; 2 Kings 2:15; 2 Kings 4:1; 2 Kings 4:38). Prophets with the miraculous power to predict, did not have to go to school to learn how to predict! Evidently the title prophet could be applied to a person learning to prophesy in the sense of preaching.
Yet, in the context of I Corinthians, chapter 12-14, prophecy is clearly to be understood as a miraculous gift. Here it is more than merely preaching or teaching by natural faculties. Whether it was teaching and preaching, or predicting, or both, it was under the inerrant direction of the Holy Spirit in order to deliver to the first century church an infallible message from God.
The Greek text of 1 Corinthians 14:1, like the Greek of 1 Corinthians 12:1, says, zeloute de ta pneumatika, mallon de hina propheteuete, literally, be zealous for the spiritual things, and rather, in order that you may prophesy. Once again, as in 1 Corinthians 12:1, the word gifts (Gr. charismata) is omitted. The most spiritual thing to want is the desire to edify othersthat is done by teaching.
The apostle warns that speaking in a tongue (Gr. glosse, language) usually resulted in utterance of a non-understandable mystery. The Greek word musterion, mystery, means, that which is unrevealed, not that which is unknowable; it would be knowable if revealed, or interpreted. The word unknown (supplied in KJV) is not in any Greek text, and should not have been supplied since it is not stated anywhere in the New Testament that first century tongues were non-human, unknowable utterances. Of course, God knows all human languages, dialects, phonics or tongues, (see Revelation 5:9; Revelation 7:9; Revelation 9:11; Revelation 10:11; Revelation 11:9; Revelation 13:7; Revelation 14:6; Revelation 16:16; Revelation 17:15 where tongue, glosson, is used clearly to mean, human languages). When one of the Corinthian Christians spoke with other tongues (Gr. heterais glossais, Acts 2:4; and heteroglossois, 1 Corinthians 14:21) he did not speak to his fellow Christians because he was speaking in a foreign language, but he did speak to God since God understands all languages. When a Christian in the Corinthian church spoke in a language they never learned, they did so from the supernatural gift God gave them. When there was no interpreter present, they exercised that gift only for God’s benefit (since it had not been translated, it was understood by no one elsenot even the speaker). God gave the speaker words and information directly from heaven in a language the speaker had not studied or spoken natively. When there was no translator present, speaking in language foreign to the speaker resulted, for the speaker, in a purely subjective experience. Thus, the gift of tongues was experiential only for the speakerand that only in a limited sense if he does not have the gift of interpretation. Paul is pointing, in this context, to the superiority of the gift of prophecy over the gift of tongues. Thus to speak only for personal experience is to abuse the gift.
Contrary to the very limited, often self-centered, profitableness of tongues, the gift of prophecy, since spoken in the vernacular of the audience, speaks to all for edification, encouragement and consolation. Prophecy did not need a translator; it could be understood by all.
Paul was willing that tongues be practiced by all the Corinthian Christians as he would qualify their use in 1 Corinthians 14:6 ff. However, the Greek word thelo (1 Corinthians 14:5) translated I would, I wish, or I want is a present active indicative verb and is better translated, I am willing. He was willing that tongues be spoken only if interpreted; but he was more (Gr. mallon, rather) willing that the gift of prophecy be exercised. The one who prophesied was greater than the one who spoke in an untranslated language, because prophecy edified everyone. If the untranslated language was translated, then the church was edified. And, we note, the words some one in the RSV are not in the Greek text. The one who speaks in the untranslated language is to interpret (Gr. ektos ei me diermaneun, except unless he interprets). The moment language was translated and understood by the whole church it became, in essence, a prophecy (a revelation, a teaching). What, then, was the need for speaking in foreign languages? As we shall see in another section, this gift was primarily and exclusively to be used as a sign for unbelievers and the spiritually immature.
1 Corinthians 14:6-12 Prophecy is Upbuilding: To read this section, one might think Paul’s main subject is tonguesbut it is the superiority of prophecy. In these verses the apostle illustrates and explains further the inferiority of tongues to prophecy. Some Bible students forget the main issue here and assume the emphasis is on tongues.
Paul could have spoken to the Corinthians, by the power of the Holy Spirit, in a multitude of foreign languages (see 1 Corinthians 14:18). Evidently, he did not have the power to translate these tongues. Even though he could speak in more tongues than any of them, he would have benefited no one except himself, subjectively, and God, unless the tongues could have been translated into a revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching.
Imagine a Japanese Army bugle call being blown by an American soldier at an American Army camp! The call would be an enigma (remember, Paul used this word enigma in 1 Corinthians 13:12 to characterize these miraculous gifts). Musical instruments which do not give distinct, recognizable notes (Gr. phthongois) and bugles which do not give recognizable calls (Gr. phonen, phonetics) are not only useless, they are confusing. Paul uses the Greek word diastolen, distinct, to characterize the function of musical instruments. It is the word from which we get the English word stole, and means literally, a vestment worn by someone to distinguish them from others. He uses the word adelon to characterize misuse of a bugle and the word means, Indistinct, not obvious, uncertain. Musical instruments and, especially bugles, are intended to communicate messages. If they do not they are useless and confusing.
In 1 Corinthians 14:9 the suggestion is that those with the gift of tongues not speak in the public assembly unless they may specifically speak a clear word (Gr. eusemon logon, literally, a word that well-signifies). Foreign languages without interpretation are not clear signalsthey are undistinguishable sounds.
In 1 Corinthians 14:10 Paul says there are multitudinous kinds (Gr. gene, geneses, families) of phonetics (Gr. phonon) in the world (Gr. kosmos) and not one without meaning (Gr. aphonon, literally, without its own phonetics). Yet, if one of these phonetics is sounded or spoken and not translated, and a listener does not happen to know the language being spoken miraculously, he would be a foreigner (Gr. barbaros, barbarian) and the speaker would be a* foreigner* (Gr. barbaros). Paul is using the term barbaros literally, and not figuratively. Those who do not understand one another’s human language are foreigners to one another. It is clear that Paul is speaking of actual human languages when he says tongues and not of the modern phenomena called glossolalia (a word not found in that form in the New Testament at all). The modern, alleged, speaking in tongues has been thoroughly analyzed by linguistics and philologists and their conclusions repudiate it as being any form of language at all (see The Psychology of Speaking In Tongues, by John P. Kildahl, pub. Harper and Row, 1972). Dr. Kildahl also documents cases where actual human language, spoken in an audience where the language was not understood except by the speaker, received a so-called miraculous interpretation and it was not at all what the speaker said. Modern glossolalia is pseudo-miraculous!
Paul repeats, in 1 Corinthians 14:12, the overriding, central principle of these three Chapter s (I Corinthians 12-13-14) again. That principle is, strive to excel (Gr. perisseuete, abound, fully) in building up the church. So the teaching thus far is that teaching by revelation (prophecy) builds up the church, while miraculous speaking in foreign tongues which are not translated or interpreted does not build up the church.
1 Corinthians 14:1-19
Applebury’s Comments
Text
1 Corinthians 14:1-19. Follow after love; yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. 2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men edification, and exhortation, and consolation. 4 He that speaketh in a tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. 5 Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. 6 But now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation, or of knowledge, or of prophesying, or of teaching? 7 Even things without life, giving a voice, whether pipe or harp, if they give not a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? 8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain voice, who shall prepare himself for war? 9 So also ye, unless ye utter by the tongue speech easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye will be speaking into the air. 10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and no kind is without signification. 11 If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh will be a barbarian unto me. 12 So also ye, since ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church. 13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. 15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. 16 Else if thou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the unlearned say the Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest? 17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified. 18 I thank God, I speak with tongues more than you all: 19 howbeit in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.
Commentary Misuse of the Gift of Tongues (1-19)
*Follow after love.*Paul wrote First Corinthians to correct the disorders in the church. One of the most serious of these was the misuse of the gift of tongues. Jealousy over the possession and use of the gift was causing faction and division in the body of Christ. To correct this misuse of the gift, Paul showed the brethren a most excellent way, the way of love. In chapter fourteen he discusses two more serious misuses of the gift of tongues: (1) The unrestrained use of the gift without considering the necessity of edifying the church. This was to be corrected by properly using the gift of interpretation of tongues, that is, by translating the message spoken in a foreign language for the benefit of the whole church that all might be edified. (2) All speaking in tongues when the church came together. This resulted in such confusion that men who did not possess the gift or unbelievers who might be present would say that they were mad. This misuse of the gift was to be corrected by following the rules which Paul gave so that all things might be done decently and in order.
*yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts.*They were to pursue the course that love points out and to seek eagerly the things that belong to spirit. There would be no problem over these gifts if love governed their use. The gracious consideration of others forbids the spirit of jealousy that divides the body of Christ and prohibits the selfish use of the Spirit-distributed gifts that overlooks the need of the whole church for edification. These gifts were to be done away when they had fulfilled their intended purpose; but while there was a need for them in the church of the first century, they were to be desired and used according to the principle of love and regulated by the rule which the apostle gave for their use.
While Paul wrote to correct the misuse of the gift of tongues, he did encourage its proper use as indicated by the following:
a)
Desire earnestly spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 14:1). While prophecy was to be preferred because of the need of the church for edification, the gift of tongues was not prohibited.
b)
I would have you all speak in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:5). There is no suggestion here that he was attempting to discourage the use of this gift.
c)
Since edification is the essential purpose of the gifts when used in the church, Paul says, Let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret (1 Corinthians 14:13).
d)
Paul thanked God that he used the gift of tongues more than all of the others, but he said that he would rather speak five words to instruct the church than ten thousand in a tongue. This clearly implies that if the foreign language was used in the church it had to be translated for the edification of those who did not understand. See 1 Corinthians 14:19.
e)
Tongues are a sign to the unbelieving (1 Corinthians 14:22). That’s why its use in the church was prohibited unless the foreign language was translated that the church might receive edification.
f)
When they came together each one had, among other things, a tongue or an interpretation. Paul says, Let all things be done unto edifying (1 Corinthians 14:26).
g)
Paul gives rules for the correct use of tongues and other gifts (1 Corinthians 14:27).
h)
Desire earnestly to prophecy, and forbid not to speak with tongues (1 Corinthians 14:39). If nothing else were said in the entire chapter on the matter, this would be sufficient to prove that the assumption that the apostle was trying to discourage the use of the gift by the church at Corinth is not valid.
i)
In the divine purpose of the gifts, they were to pass away when the perfect revelation had come. Until that time, they were to be used in accordance with the regulations given by Paul to prevent their misuse.
*but rather that ye may prophesy.*The emphasis on prophecy did not forbid the use of the gift of tongues. Prophecy was speaking forth the message of God under the direction of the Holy Spirit as well as predicting events to come. Peter uses the expression, the word of prophecy to refer to the message proclaimed by the apostles (2 Peter 1:19). Since the message of the prophet was spoken in the language of the people for their edification, there was no need for translation. The message spoken while using the gift of tongues could be made equal to prophecy in edifying the church by translating the foreign language in which the message was spoken.
*he that speaks in a tongue.*The gift of tongues which was distributed by the Holy Spirit enabled one to speak in a foreign language without previous knowledge or study. This was demonstrated on the Day of Pentecost when all heard in their own native tongue. It cannot be claimed, therefore, that the apostles while in a state of ecstasy were uttering unintelligible speech-like sounds. There is no indication that Paul used the term tongue in chapter fourteen to mean anything other than what it means in chapter twelve or in Acts two. Some have assumed that the gift at Corinth was different since the message had to be translated for the edification of the church. But tongues were for a sign for unbelievers throughout the apostolic period while the New Testament was being committed to writing. The unbeliever could understand the message spoken in his own language, but it could not edify the church unless it was translated. It is not possible to translate unintelligible sounds into intelligible language; nonsense cannot be interpreted so as to make sense.
Claims are made today that some perfectly sincere people who may utter speech-like sounds while under emotional stress are speaking in tongues. These persons, it is claimed, are speaking in a foreign language; others may attempt to interpret what is being said. There are several things that should be considered in an attempt to evaluate this claim:
a)
The Bible is the final, complete, and authoritative revelation from God. The modern missionary to a foreign land must learn the language before he can successfully work in the language of the people. Some missionaries even claim to have the gift of the Spirit to overcome the language barrier; nevertheless, they must patiently learn the language just as anyone else. This, it seems, invalidates their claim to be under the power of the Spirit of God.
b)
The providence of God, which any faithful Christian can see by looking back over the pathway of his life, is not to be mistaken for direct guidance by the Spirit such as that enjoyed by the apostles. The light for our pathway is the Bible. God’s blessings do accompany the one who walks in its light. See Ephesians 1:7-10. The story of Joseph illustrates this truth in a beautiful way (Genesis 45:1-5). The light that guided him during the long period of trial in Egypt came from the moral instruction and knowledge about God which he received in his father’s home. Later, as he looked back over his life, he was able to see the hand of God in the things that had happened to him.
c)
The ability to speak in tongues was given to the apostles when they were baptized in the Holy Spirit. They in turn were able to impart these gifts to others upon whom they laid their hands. No one can claim to have contacted that source of transmission of the divine power today.
d)
There is no point in attempting to speak in a tongue since the Bible must be translated into the languages of the world to be understood by the peoples of the world. One of the greatest of the missionary efforts today is the translation of the Word of God into the languages of the world that all may read the message of salvation and hope in their own tongue.
e)
Paul made it clear that the gifts were not to be used except by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching. In the light of this rule, one of two things is certain: Their attempted use in the church today is wrong, or the Bible is not the completed revelation of God’s will.
f)
Speaking in tongues today is often carried on in the churches today in the absence of an interpreter. This is in violation of the regulation laid down by Paul for the use of the gift at Corinth. It is evident that the Holy Spirit would not lead one to do a thing today that violates what He caused to be written in the Bible.
*speaketh not unto men, but unto God.*The gift of tongues, it seems, could be used by the one who possessed it to speak to God, although its primary purpose was to convince the unbeliever that God was speaking to him through this means. The message could not benefit those who did not understand it. Evidently men could use the gift in speaking to God if they so desired, but in doing so they left the church without edification unless they translated for the edification of the church. This was to be done by the speaker himself or by some other person who possessed the gift of interpretation. The one who used the gift of tongues was to pray that he might interpret for the benefit of those who heard him speak.
*in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.*Some translators have assumed that the word spirit in this context refers to the human spirit as it does in verse fourteen where Paul says, My spirit prays. But the gift of tongues was given by the Spirit of God. The one who used it was speaking under the power of the Spirit; his spirit was directed by the Holy Spirit. It seems better, therefore, to translate this verse, in the Spirit, that is the Holy Spirit, he speaks mysteries. RSV so translates. The mystery that was spoken was that which would have forever remained secret if God had not made it known through His Spirit to the inspired apostles and prophets. See comment on 1 Corinthians 2:7.
*he that speaketh in a tongue edifieth himself.*This definitely implies that he understood what he was saying under the power of the Holy Spirit. If edification for the church required that a message spoken in a foreign language be translated, it is evident that the edification of the one using the gift of tongues required his understanding of what he said in the tongue.
*rather that ye should prophesy.*By translating the message spoken in a foreign language that was for the primary benefit of the unbelieving foreigner, the whole church might receive edification. If this was like pagan jargon uttered in ecstasy, how could it be so translated as to edify the church or anyone else?
*greater is he that prophesieth.*See comment on 1 Corinthians 12:31. The prophet was of greater assistance to the church than the one who spoke in a tongue unless he translated the message spoken in a foreign language. This was contrary to the view held by some of the Corinthians who seemed to feel that the Lord had elevated those who had the gift of tongues above their fellows. This spirit of arrogance was causing strife and division in the church. The reminder about the superior value of prophecy should have had a wholesome effect on those who were striving for power and position through the misuse of the gift of tongues.
*if I come to you speaking in tongues.*This is the first of three arguments for the necessity of using the gift of tongues in such a manner that the church might be edified. It plainly implies that the message spoken in a foreign language had to be translated for the benefit of the church. Paul indicated that it was necessary for him to speak by way of revelation, or of knowledge, or of prophesying, or of teaching in order to help the church. This he could not do unless the church understood what he was saying; therefore, the message spoken in a foreign language had to be translated to be of benefit to the church.
*pipe or harp.*The second argument implies the very same thing. There must be a distinction of sounds made by pipe or harp for one to know what was piped or what was played on the harp. Just so, the message spoken in a tongue had to be translated for the church to understand what was said. The use of the bugle illustrates the same need. If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare for war?
*by the tongue.*This is the third argument in the series. While some think of the tongue as the gift of tongues, the context seems to indicate that it is the human tongue as the organ of speech. It corresponds to the other instruments that make sounds to communicate intelligible messages such as the pipe, the harp, or the bugle. It was necessary to use the human tongue, just as it was the lifeless instruments, in such a manner that the message spoken could be understood. To speak a foreign language that was not understood by anyone present was to speak into the air. Therefore, the message spoken by the gift of tongues (as it was uttered by the human tongue) had to be translated in order that the church might understand and be helped by it. Language has one purpose: to present a message that can be easily understood. The Corinthians were misusing the gift of tongues by failing to translate so that the church might receive edification.
*I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian.*That is, a foreigner. Paul is thinking of the one who speaks a foreign language and who would be like a foreigner to him if he did not understand the language that was spoken.
*seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church.*This is the conclusion of the first series of arguments. The gifts are not to be used in the church for the private benefit of the one who possessed them. But this was being done in the church at Corinth with the result that the church was being divided over the gifts which were intended to benefit all the church.
*pray that he may interpret.*This begins the second series of arguments for the necessity of interpreting the message spoken in a foreign language. The first series proved the necessity of edifing the church through using the gifts. It also implied the necessity of translating messages spoken in foreign languages. The individual who used the gift of tongues was to pray that he might also interpret. This would indicate that the message was capable of being translated into the language of the people.
*if I pray in a tongue.*This is the first point in the three-fold argument for the necessity of translating the message spoken in a tongue so that the church might understand. Paul says, If I pray in a foreign language my spirit prays. As an intelligent being he prays under the control of the Holy Spirit. Since the gifts were distributed the Spirit of God, we are to understand that the Holy Spirit exercised control over the spiritthe personof the one who was praying. Paul assumes a situation in which one might speak without the message being understood by the hearer. But the speaker himself would also need to understand what he was saying under the control of the Holy Spirit or his understanding too would not be fruitful. Such praying wouldn-’t help even the one who prayed. What was one to do in such a situation? Paul answers his question. I will pray with my spirit (under the control of the Holy Spirit) and I will also pray with the understanding (by translating the foreign language). The same applies to singing, for he was to sing under the control of the Holy Spirit and to translate that he might understand. This shows that the one who used the gift had to understand what he was saying just as those who heard had to understand to be edified.
*he that filleth the place of the unlearned.*This is the second argument for the necessity of translating the message spoken in a tongue. By unlearned we are to understand that Paul meant the one who did not possess the gift of tongues. See footnote in American Standard Version. The word signifies one who did not belong to a class of specialists. Peter and John were called ignorant and unlearned men by their persecutors (Acts 4:13). They were not school men and they were not priests, but it would be wrong to think of them as ignorant in the sense in which we use the word. There were some in the church at Corinth who did not have the gifts. Paul was thinking of such people in this case. What were they to do when they heard some one speak in a foreign language? How could they say Amen if they did not know what was said? It was necessary to translate that all might understand. Some think of the unlearned as being outsidersnot members of the church. The contrast is between those who did have the gift of tongues and those who did not. It would seem, therefore, that by unlearned Paul is speaking of the church members who did not have the gift. The point of the argument is the same which ever view of the word is taken.
*the other is not edified.*The purpose of the gifts was to edify those who heard. Even the gift of tongues that was primarily a sign for the unbeliever was to be translated for the benefit of both the speaker and the one who heard.
*I speak with tongues more than you all.*This is the third point in the argument for the necessity of translation. Far from discouraging the use of the gift, Paul says that he used it more than all. But he placed a limitation on its use: it had to be translated if it was to be used. That is why he says that he would rather speak five words in the church that he might understand than ten thousand in a tongue (foreign language) that no one understood. He argued for the necessity of translating the message spoken in a foreign language. The misuse of the gift of tongues was to be corrected by observing two rules: Use them to edify the church and, in order to do this, translate messages spoken in a foreign language.
1 Corinthians 14:13-25
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 2
Proving by Tongues **(1 Corinthians 14:13-25)
13 Therefore, he who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret. 14For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 15What am I to do? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also. 16Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how can any one in the position of an outsider say the Amen to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17For you may give thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified. 18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all; 19nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.
20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; be babes in evil, but in thinking be mature. 21 In the law it is written, By men of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord. 22Thus, tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers. 23If, therefore, the whole church assembles and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? 24But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, 25the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.
1 Corinthians 14:13-19 Intelligibility Abdicated: Those Corinthian Christians who clamored for the gift of tongues because it was spectacular were abdicating the only means of building Christ’s churchintelligible communication. The Greek word here for tongues is glossa; the Greek word for speaking is lalon. Modern charismatics have combined the two words into one, glossolalia, to denote modern, alleged, tongues-speaking. But, we repeat, the word glossolalia is not found in the New Testament. There is a distinct difference, literally, between the Greek New Testament words ho lalon glosse and the modern word glossolalia, and there is also a difference in the connotations implied. Needless to say, then, there is a distinct difference between what was practiced in the first century and today.
In the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint, or LXX), the word glossa is used for (a) the human organ known as the tongue, and; (b) the language of a known people, but never for some ecstatic, esoteric babble. The same is true of the New Testament. In Acts 2:8, when Peter and the other apostles spoke in other glossa, men from all over the world heard in their own dialect (the Greek word dialekto is used in Acts 2:8).
The Greek word gene refers to a family or genre (genealogy) of glossa, (see 1 Corinthians 14:10). This indicates that the tongues being spoken by the Corinthians were clearly distinguishable one from another and, were not unknowable, but one family or genre of human language or another.
The Greek word hermeneuo (1 Corinthians 14:5; 1 Corinthians 14:13; 1 Corinthians 14:26-27, etc.) is not used in the Bible to mean the interpretation of an unknowable language into a known language. The word hermeneuo always means to translate words from one knowable language into another knowable language (cf. John 1:38; John 1:42; John 9:7; see also Ezra 4:7) so that there may be an understanding; (see also Matthew 1:23; Mark 5:41; Mark 15:22; Mark 15:34; Acts 9:36; Acts 13:8; Hebrews 7:2; 2 Peter 1:20). When hermeneuo is translated, translate, we see clearly that Paul is talking about knowable languages being translated into other knowable languages, and not about unknown and unknowable gibberish. Paul warns, Therefore, he who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to translate.
Reasons the modern phenomenon called glossolalia is not the miraculous speaking in tongues of the first century Church:
a.
Scriptural reasons cited above.
b.
Today’s phenomenon is not received by the laying on of the hands of an apostle.
c.
Ecstatic, esoteric glossolalia similar to Christian glossolalia has been practiced, and is being practiced, by pagans in ancient and modern times (Hittites, Phoenicians, Egyptians, Greeks, East Africans, Islamics, American Indians, Caribbean voodoo practitioners, and many others).
d.
Ecstatic gibberish has been practiced by a multitude of different religious groups who have fundamental doctrinal abberations when compared with the Bible (Roman Catholics, Mormons, Jews, cultists of all varieties). The Spirit of God would not contradict his apostolic word, nor would he give credence by miraculous manifestations to these apostate religious groups.
e.
Writings of the early church fathers (immediately after the first century) indicate Biblical tongues were not manifested in their time (Irenaeus, Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine of Hippo; see Kildahl, op. cit., pp. 14-15).
f.
In the history of modern, so-called, tongues there are no scientifically confirmed recordings of anyone speaking in a foreign language which he had never learned (Kildahl, p. 39).
g.
Dr. Kildahl, in order to investigate interpretations played a taped example of tongues-speech privately for several different interpreters. In no instance was there any similarity in the several interpretations (Kildahl, p. 63).
h.
Kildahl writes of a man raised in Africa, of missionary parents, who decided to test the interpretation of tongues. He attended a tongues-speaking meeting where he was a complete stranger. At the appropriate moment, he rose and spoke the Lord’s Prayer in the African dialect he had learned in his youth. When he sat down, an interpreter of tongues at once offered the meaning of what he had said. He interpreted it as a message about the imminent second coming of Christ (Kildahl, p. 63).
i.
Personal friends of mine, of the so-called charismatic persuasion, and books in my personal library from charismatic practitioners, offer instruction on how one may learn, by human means, the act of tongues-speaking. How does one learn that which is miraculous?
j.
Much modern, so-called, tongues-speaking is allegedly not under conscious control of the person who allegedly speaks and yet this very chapter (1 Corinthians 14:1-40) says it must be (1 Corinthians 14:26-33), so that they can determine who is to speak and when they are to speak.
k.
According to one former member of a tongues-speaking denomination, 85% of modern, so-called tongues-speaking is done in the public assemblies, by women. Yet, Paul directs (1 Corinthians 14:33-36) that women should be silent in the public assemblies.
Paul explains that even the bona fide speaking in tongues by miraculous gift is unfruitful as far as intelligent communication is concerned, unless there is a translator present. When a Corinthian Christian prayed in a foreign language he did not know, his spirit might receive some emotional, subjective, excitation, but there would be nothing by which his mental, spiritual growth (edification) could proceed. Speaking in a tongue without a translator did not bring the mind into play, and anything said would bear no edifying fruit to the congregation. The same principle is true of all singing in congregational worship. Singing is a means of instructing the congregation unto edification (see Ephesians 5:19). If the singing is unintelligible, for any reason, it is foolish to say, Amen, because no instruction or edification has taken place. Edification cannot take place without instruction!
Although Paul was probably writing about singing done in Corinth by Christians with the miraculous gift of tonguesand therefore, singing in a foreign languagea great amount of today’s so-called religious music is neither Christian nor intelligible. In some cases, the words of today’s songs, when distinguishable, are actually anti-scriptural. The twentieth century church needs to restore the New Testament teaching about music. Too many Christian musicians have succumbed to the performer mentality, and, at the same time, many congregations have adopted the audience-mentality toward music. The New Testament concept of music in the worship assembly gives no credence to the modern mania for the beat, performance-mentality, and unintelligible, imprecise, vague generalizations. The desire to show-off as a performer is precisely the attitude that was destroying the Corinthian congregation. It is the issue to which the apostle Paul addresses as much as half of this epistle! It is still relevant! Speaking, praying or singing in a foreign language (tongue) had to be translated and made understandable if done at all in the worship services, otherwise the outsider could not be edified. The Greek word idiotes (1 Corinthians 14:16; 1 Corinthians 14:23-24) (from which the English word idiot comes) meant someone excluded, for one reason or another, from any specific group of people, e.g. the civilian as opposed to the soldier, the uneducated man as opposed to the scholar, the private citizen as opposed to the public official. Paul is clearly using the word idiotes to denominate those in attendance at Christian worship services at Corinth who were unskilled in foreign languages, and had no miraculous way of translating the tongues. They could neither speak in foreign languages or translate. Thus they were the same as foreigners or outsiders. Some commentators classify the outsider as one who is neither an unbeliever or a Christian, but a proselyte or a catechumen (learner). But the outsider is expected to be able to say Amen to any translated speech in a foreign tongue (1 Corinthians 14:16). Thus, it would appear, the outsider is a Christian, not ignorant, but outside the select group of Christians in the Corinthian congregation who had received special, miraculous gifts.
Any use of gifts that did not produce understanding for the whole congregation, might serve some selfish purpose for the gifted person but others are not edified. It would appear Paul disapproved of private use of speaking in tongues for the Corinthians. Such private use was selfish, childish, and, if indiscriminately used, produced the aura of insanity and foolishness. Speaking miraculously in a foreign language must communicate to the minds (Gr. nous, mind) of all present in the assembly, including the speaker, both the ungifted and the unbeliever. The tongues were to be translated into the languages of those present in the service.
The apostle had the miraculous gift of tongues in greater capacity than all the Corinthians together, but his counsel was (and his counsel would be apostolic doctrine) that five words spoken in a language all hearers could understand with their minds were worth more than ten thousand words unintelligible to the hearers, although spoken by direct miracle from God. The Greek word katecheso is translated instruct and is the word from which we get the English word catechism; it generally means instruction in the fundamentals of a subject. God gave the infant church gifts for the sole purpose of instruction and edification (Ephesians 4:11-16).
1 Corinthians 14:20-25 Immaturity Accentuated: Not only did the obsession for the spectacular gift of tongues-speaking (untranslated) show these Corinthians would abdicate intelligent communication, it also accentuated their spiritual immaturity (see 1 Corinthians 3:1 ff.). To speak in a language without translating, only for the speaker’s glory, and to elevate egotism over line upon line, precept upon precept processes of instruction is not only immature, it is a sign of unbelief.
So Paul starts this paragraph with an admonition for the Corinthian Christians to grow up! They were not to have a child’s show-off mentality. He did want them to be infant-like (Gr. nepiazete) in evil, but he wanted them at the same time, to be mature (Gr. teleioi, perfected, complete, matured, reach the goal) in phresin, mentality.
It is interesting that Paul quotes from the prophet Isaiah (1 Corinthians 14:21) and calls it the law. He is emphasizing that prophecy in the Old Testament was just as authoritative as the law of Moses. But the significance of Isaiah’s prophecy here is the context from which this prophecy came. Isaiah 28:11-12 comes from the prophet’s reproach of his Hebrew contemporaries (750-700 B.C.) who kept asking for miraculous signs that Jehovah was going to deal with them in judgment as the prophets kept insisting he was. They were unbelievers. The covenant people would not (except for a small remnant) accept the line upon line, precept upon precept teaching of the prophets. They scoffed at that kind of instruction as fit for babies. And they were angry that the prophets inferred they were babies. They considered themselves sophisticated and mature. God said, however, You are wrong; line upon line, precept upon precept is not for babies, but for the mature. The spectacular is for babies, and I am going to show you something spectacular since that is the only way some of you will believe. I am going to deliver you into captivity and you will hear foreign languages. Your hearing foreign language will be evidence that the teachings of the prophets were for spiritual maturation. Isaiah was talking to inside unbelievers when he wrote to the Jews and that is precisely why Paul quotes Isaiah here. Isaiah was talking about spiritual maturity as opposed to childish unbelief, and that is the very purpose Paul had in quoting it here to these childish, unbelieving Corinthian Christians.
There were two kinds of people in the Corinthian church. There were the believers who welcomed line upon line teaching. They believed the messages of the prophets and did not need continual miracles to remain steadfast in the faith. Then there were the unbelievers who had to have miracles at every public worship or they did not think they could maintain their faith. God was displeased even with the Old Dispensation people who put him to the test beyond what they should have (see 1 Corinthians 10:9 and Exodus 17:7). Jesus called the Jews who kept on asking for miraculous signs, an evil and adulterous generation (see Matthew 12:39; Matthew 16:4). So, tongues were a sign for the immature, the unbelievers, even the unbelievers within the membership of the church, as well as for unbelievers outside the membership. Tongues served as signs that there was a divine presence, that the one, true God was speaking to the world through the apostle’s doctrine and the messengers of Christ’s church.
But, if the whole church did nothing but speak in tongues, that would be as far as outsiders and unbelievers would get. They would not be instructedonly amazed. And, if the whole church did nothing but speak in tongues the outsider and unbeliever would probably say the tongues-speakers were all out of their minds (Gr. mainesthe, insane, out of control mentally). The outsiders and unbelievers would not be caused to worship God if the whole assembly spoke in tongues. Not even the miraculous really converts unbelievers without extensive, logical, direct, communication of the teachings of God. Prophecy makes believers out of unbelievers and edifies immature believers. Tongues were merely to signal the divine presence; prophecy (teaching) was for outsiders and unbelievers to convict them and cause them to humbly worship God and acknowledge God’s presence in the church. The Corinthian church needed a lot less of the tongues (and these were miraculous tongues), and a lot more of the prophecy.
1 Corinthians 14:20-40
Applebury’s Comments
Rules For Using Spiritual Gifts (20-40)
Text
1 Corinthians 14:20-40. Brethren, be not children in mind: yet in malice be ye babes, but in mind be men. 21 In the law it is written, By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers will I speak unto this people; and not even thus will they hear me, saith the Lord. 22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to the unbelieving: but prophesying is for a sign, not to the unbelieving, but to them that believe. 23 If therefore the whole church be assembled together and all speak with tongues, and there come in men unlearned or unbelieving, will they not say that ye are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one unbelieving or unlearned, he is reproved by all, he is judged by all; 25 the secrets of his heart are made manifest; and so he will fall down on his face and worship God, declaring that God is among you indeed.
26 What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. 27 If any man speaketh in a tongue, let it be by two, or at the most three, and that in turn; and let one interpret: 28 but if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. 29 And let the prophets speak by two or three, and let the others discern. 30 But if a revelation be made to another sitting by, let the first keep silence. 31 For ye all can prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be exhorted; 32 and the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets; 33 for God is not a God of confusion, but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, 34 let the women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law. 35 And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home: for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church. 36 What? was it from you that the word of God went forth? or came it unto you alone? 37 If any man thinketh himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto you, that they are the commandment of the Lord. 38 But if any man is ignorant, let him be ignorant. 39 Wherefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. 40 But let all things be done decently and in order.
*Commentary
be not children in mind.*They were to take a mature view of the purpose of the gifts. Gifts did belong to the childhood period of the church as indicated in 1 Corinthians 13:11; they were not marks of spiritual maturity. But more than this, some in the church were acting like children in the possession of the gifts. As a result, there was jealousy among brethren in the Lord. The possession of the gift was not a sign of God’s preference of one above the other, for God is not partial. But it was well to be like babes in malice for babes have none, but in mind Paul wanted them to be mature men.
*By men of strange tongues.*That is, those who speak in foreign languages. This word defines speaking in tongues and justifies our assumption that speaking in tongues was not some unintelligible speech-like utterance, but rather that it was speaking in a foreign language. In calling upon the Corinthians to take a mature view of the gift of tongues, Paul reminds them that their primary purpose was to be a sign for the unbeliever, while prophecy was for the edification of the believer. He illustrated his point by a reference from the law (a general term for Old Testament). See Isaiah 28:11-12.
According to the quotation from Isaiah, the prophet was answering the quibbling of those who rejected the message of the prophet. They said it was childish, precept upon precept, line upon line. The Lord said that since they wouldn-’t listen to the prophet, they would have to listen to foreigners and then they really wouldn-’t understand. Paul uses this to show that tongues were not primarily for the church, for they couldn-’t understand without having the message translated. But just as in the time of the prophet when the stranger was to speak a foreign language, so those who used the gift of tongues were to speak a language capable of being translated for the edification of all.
*Wherefore tongues are for a sign.*The gift of tongues was for a sign to cause the unbeliever to see that God was speaking to him in his own language through one who would not be expected to know his native tongue. See Acts 2:11-13. Prophecy, on the other hand, was for the edification of the believers. Prophecy was not a sign for the believers. They needed no such sign since they were already believers. These words, given in italics in the American Standard Version do not occur in the Greek text and should not be inserted in the English translation.
*will they not say that ye are mad?*Paul assumes a situation in which the whole church is assembled and all are speaking in tongues. Into this assembly there came certain unlearned men or unbelievers. They were two classes who did not understand what was being said through the gift of tongues. The unlearned is the church member who did not possess the ability to speak in tongues. See comment on 1 Corinthians 14:16. Some have assumed that the unbeliever in this case was a foreigner who could have understood the foreign language since Paul had indicated that tongues were a sign for unbelievers. But it is a mistake to assume that all unbelievers were foreigners, and in this case it is evident that they were not, for they did not understand what was being said and therefore joined with the unlearned in saying that all were mad.
*But if all prophesy.*Paul then assumed a similar situation in which all were prophesying. In this case all understood and were edified. The result was that all declared that God was among them.
*Let all things be done unto edifying.*Whether one had a psalm, or a teaching, or a revelation, or a tongue, or an interpretation, his object should be to edify the church. This was the first of the list of important instructions given for the guidance of those who possessed spiritual gifts in Corinth.
*If an man speaketh in a tongue.*Instead of all speaking at once with the resulting confusion that would cause men to say, You are mad, they were to use common sense and Christian courtesy and limit the speakers to two or three and that in turn. One was to interpret, but if no interpreter was present the one with the gift of tongues was to be silent. He could, however, speak to God in private in the tongue.
let the prophets.The same rule of common sense was to govern the prophets. Others were to discern, that is, they could decide correctly concerning what was heard. It may, however, refer to the gift of discerning of spirits (1 Corinthians 12:10). Courteous consideration for another who might have a message for the group was to determine which one was to speak. The gift was to be used that all might learn and be built up in the Christian life.
*the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.*The prophets own spiritsthat is, the prophets themselveswere used by the Holy Spirit to deliver the revelation from God, but the prophet could exercise self-control in the use of the gift. This is solid evidence that they were not involved in some ecstatic experience in which it was impossible to control their speaking. The reason for exercising such control was clear: God is not a God of confusion, but of peace.
*As in all the churches of the saints.*This refers to those who made up the church. See comment on 1 Corinthians 1:2. Saints were those who had been separated from a life of sin and who had dedicated themselves to the service of the Lord. There was no place among saints for jealousy and discourtesy that led to the sin of strife and division. It would be well to restore the use of this term in the church and live up to its evident meaning.
*let the women keep silence in the churches.*This was to apply to all the churches of the saints. See notes on 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 about the relation between man and woman while praying or prophesying in the church. This, however, has to do with wives and their husbands. Several things are indicated for their guidance: (1) Wives are to be in subjectionhave respect for their own husband (1 Peter 3:1-6). This is not the subjection of a slave, but the giving of honor that is due the husband who in turn is to love his wife (Genesis 1:16; Ephesians 5:21-33). (2) Let them ask their husbands at home. This implies the necessity of the husband assuming his responsibility in the matter of Christian teaching in the home. (3) This was to be observed because of the culture of that day, for it was a shameful thing for a woman to speak in the church. In our culture, it is not a shame for a woman to speak in public provided she can do so and maintain her womanly dignity. (4) The instruction seems to have involved the misuse of gifts. Just what the problem was, we may not know, but the Corinthians did. Paul gave the regulations to protect the church from the misuse of the gifts. Perhaps some would disagree with him, but he reminded them that the gospel did not originate with them nor did it come to them alone.
*the commandment of the Lord.*What was said by the inspired apostle was the commandment of the Lord and it was to be obeyed by His church. In all probability, there were some in Corinth who were claiming that they were prophets or even apostles, but if such a one disregarded this truth and failed to agree with what God said through the inspired apostle Paul, he was not to be recognized as a true leader of the church. Ignorance of this fact did not change the matter; God’s commandments for the church were delivered through His apostle.
*desire earnestly to prophesy, forbid not to speak with tongues.*As the chapter began, so it closes: the gifts were for the benefit of the church in the absence of the completed revelation of God’s will and were to be used to accomplish the task for which they were distributed by the Holy Spirit. They were not to forbid the use of the gift of tongues; it was to be used in accordance with its purpose and the rules given to regulate its use. In this way, all things could be done decently and in order.
Summary
Chapter fourteen concludes the three-chapter discussion of the subject of spiritual gifts. It is the longest of any of the discussions of problems with which the apostle deals in the epistle except that of division. These two issues were related in that the misuse of the gift of tongues was causing jealousy and strife in the church. In attacking the problem, the apostle did not discourage the use of the gifts, but argues for the necessity of correcting the misuse of them. In the thirteenth chapter he had pointed out the most excellent way of love that would correct the sin of jealousy over the possession of the gift of tongues. In this chapter he presents two more corrective measures to overcome the misuse of the gift of tongues. The gifts were to be used to edify the church, whether prophecy or tongues. The gift of tongues was not to be used unless the message spoken in a foreign language was translated so that all the church might receive edification. Prophecy which required no interpretation was to be preferred in the church. Tongues were primarily intended as a sign for the unbeliever. Paul presents two series of arguments in support of these corrective measures. Each series has three steps in it. The first series shows the necessity of using the gifts to edify the church. Even Paul wouldn-’t benefit the church by using the gift of tongues unless he translated so that the church might be edified. Then he shows how such instruments as the flute or harp must give understandable sounds if they are to benefit those who hear. Just so, the gift of speaking in foreign languages had to be accompanied with the gift of interpretation (translation) to be of benefit to the church. His third argument indicated that the human tongue must be used to speak a message that can be understood or the one speaking will be speaking into the air and those who hear will be like foreigners to him. Therefore, he declares, Seek that ye may abound unto edification of the church. In the second series, he argues for the necessity of translating the message delivered in a foreign language. He assumes a case in which he might be praying in a foreign language. Unless he understands what he is saying, his spirit is praying under the control of the Holy Spirit, but he is not benefitted. Therefore, he argues that the one speaking in a tongue must translate in order for the gift to be used in a profitable manner for the speaker and for those who hear. In his second argument in this series, he thinks of those who may not have the giftsthe unlearnedand who are not able to say Amen to what is being said because they do not understand the language. Therefore, it must be translated for the benefit of those who do not have the gift. Then he adds a word about his own experience in using the gift of tongues. He thanked God that he spoke in tongues more than all, but adds, in the church, I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue. The message simply had to be translated to make it profitable for the whole church. With this basic issue established, Paul proceeded to present certain rules and regulations to govern the use of gifts. They were to be used in accord with God’s purpose. The church was to take a mature view of them instead of the childish attitude they had allowed to govern their thinking. The gifts were not a mark of maturity; they belonged to the childhood period of the church, but they were not to be allowed to become a source of jealousy and strife in the church. Christian courtesy toward others was to regulate their use. If all spoke at once and no one understood, the unlearned and the unbeliever would say that they were mad. But if the rules were observed, all would know that God was in their midst. For this reason they were to limit those who spoke to two or three, and these were to speak in turn; others were to listen and be benefitted by the message. No one was to speak in tongues unless there was one present to translate. Paul plainly pointed out that the prophets could control themselves in the use of these gifts. He reminded them that God is not a God of confusion, but of peace. A difficult problem is presented in his reference to women who were to keep silence in the church. This was the rule in all the churches of the saints. There was, in all probability, some trouble that had arisen in connection with the misuse of the gift of tongues. Wives were to have proper consideration for their own husbands who were to assume the responsibilitynot authorityfor teaching at home. Respect for each other in public and at home was necessary then and now. It is a shame for a wife or a husband to be discourteous to each other at home or in the church. What Paul wrote was the commandment of the Lord. He closed the chapter with this exhortation, Desire earnestly to prophesy, and adds, forbid not to speak in tongues. These gifts had a place in the early church, and when their purpose was fulfilled they were done away. Now we have the whole revelation of the Lord in the Bible. Let us follow Paul’s closing word also by doing all things decently and in order.
1 Corinthians 14:26-40
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 3
Perfecting With Decorum and Decency** (1 Corinthians 14:26-40)
26 What then, brethren? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. 27If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret. 28But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silence in church and speak to himself and to God. 29Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. 30If a revelation is made to another sitting by, let the first be silent. 31For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged; 32and the spirits of prophets are subjects to prophets. 33For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.
As in all the churches of the saints, 34the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36What! Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached?
37 If any one thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. 38If any one does not recognize this, he is not recognized. 39So, my brethren, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues; 40but all things should be done decently and in order.
1 Corinthians 14:26-33 a Decorum: If the Corinthian church (or any church in any age) was to ever reach maturity, or perfection (reach the goal God had for it), it would have to bring order out of the confusion caused by the childish attitudes and practices with miraculous gifts. Paul sets forth specific rules of conduct to be followed for this problem of the Corinthian church of the first century. These are not, specifically, rules for the church today since miraculous gifts no longer exist. However, the principle teaching, that all things should be done decently and in order in the church, still applies. Therefore, there is much for us to learn from this section.
The idiomatic phrase, What then, brethren? is much like the modern phrase in English, How about it, then, folks? Paul is saying, This, then, is the way it is to be when you meet in your Christian assemblies. He recognized that there would be a multitude of people with gifts all at the same gathering. He also realized that a person with a miraculous gift could hardly be asked never to use it. After all, God would not give any gift, miraculous or non-miraculous, and forbid its use. God would certainly want it to be used. But the controlling principle for use of all gifts was, Let all things be done for edification. These are the apostolic rules:
If any are to speak miraculously, in a foreign language, there must be only two, or at most three, and each in turn (Gr. kaiana meros, the word meros, means, to divide up, to allot, to distribute). One at a time!
Those with the gift of tongues were permitted to speak only if they knew there was a translator (Gr. hermeneuto) present. If there was no translator present, they were to keep silent! Any so-called private exercise would be misuse.
If any prophesied, only two or three were to prophesy. And, they were told, prophesying would be each in turnone at a time, (1 Corinthians 14:30-31).
Those with the gift of prophecy were to exercise their gift only when there were others present to discern (Gr. diakrinetosan, the word from which the English words, critique, criticize, critic, meaning, to judge, to discriminate, to decide). The discerners had the miraculous power to decide (not interpret) whether a prophet spoke from God or not.
Evidently, no one prophet had all the truth to proclaim. One by one they were to teach at each corporate assembly of the church. And all, even those who taught, were to do some learning at one time or another (1 Corinthians 14:31).
All gifts were to be kept under these controls, for the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets (and so were the spirits of the language-speakers). Every apostolic command here by Paul presupposes that these gifts could be, and were to be, exercised under their control. Paul would not have insisted on the gifts being exercised by only two or three, and one at a time, had they not been controllable. No tongues-speaker, or prophet, was to jump up and begin to exercise a gift when another was doing so. No one was to claim he could not help himselfthat it was the Holy Spirit forcing him to exercise his gift. These gifts were not exercised spontaneously!
God would never produce disorder and confusion! God brings order out of chaos. God does not produce fragmentationhe creates wholeness. The Greek word akatastasia, translated, confusion, means, instability, anarchy, revolution, and from it we get the English words, catastasis, catastrophe, and catatonia.
The church today, though not possessing miraculous gifts, will do well to learn a lesson from the fundamental principle Paul teaches here. The principle is decorum, orderliness. Worship does not, in fact should not, have to be spontaneous, to be worship! Of course, worship must come from the heart. And, simply following a regimen of worship ceremonies does not insure that worship is being done. But neither does spontaneity! Paul is saying to these Corinthians (and to all Christians) that God is not pleased with any worship service that is disorderly and confusing. The worship of God must be intelligent, instructive, maturing, and orderly (according to a design, with regularity). If spontaneity must suffer, then let it suffer. This is true of youth sessions as much, or more, than adult sessions. How can Christians learn to order their lives if they are taught that the worship of God is some exercise in spontaneity, impulsiveness, and confusion?
1 Corinthians 14:33 b - 1 Corinthians 14:40 Decency: Is it indecent for a woman to speak in church? The instruction concerning women in the public assembly, in this context, must have involved the misuse of miraculous gifts. We really do not know what the problem was, specifically, but it was probably one of the following situations:
a.
either some women had miraculous gifts and were using them publicly which, in that culture especially, was an indecent usurpation of male leadership in the public assemblies; the dignity of man and woman is preserved only if the place God has ordained for each is maintained (see our comments in 1 Corinthians 11:1 ff.).
b.
or, some women, who did not have miraculous gifts, were prodding and agitating their husbands or others who did have gifts to use them contrary to the apostolic guidelines; this also was indecent behavior for women.
c.
or, some women who did not have miraculous gifts were insisting they were going to teach in the public assemblies without gifts.
The point is, even had there been women in the Corinthian church with miraculous gifts, they were not to exercise them in the public assemblies. This certainly is not the case with most of the so-called charismatic assemblies in modern times.
The apostle reiterates a teaching he has made in other places in the New Testament. He says, … women should be subordinate, as even the law says. The Greek same word hupotassesthosan (be subject, subordinate) is used in Ephesians 5:21 ff. and in Colossians 3:18. The woman was created by God subordinate to her husband. Male chauvinism has nothing to do with itit is divinely ordained.
Paul anticipated there would be those who would not agree with his teaching about women in the public assembly, but he reminded them that the word of God did not originate with them, nor did it come to them alone. Actually, Paul says, Did the word of God go forth from you. or are you the only people who have and know the word of God? The Greek word is exelthen, go forth. In other words, the word of God is not subject to the whims of the Corinthiansthe Corinthians are to be subject to the word of God.
Furthermore, Paul speaks the word of God. Any member of the Corinthian church who would disobey the apostle’s instructions about the use and misuse of miraculous gifts in this letter is not possessed of God’s truth, nor is he spiritually-minded. This warning is as relevant for the church today as it was for the first century church. When all is said and done, it comes down to this: Earnestly desire to prophesy, because that is what converts and edifies. But do not forbid anyone who has the miraculous gift of speaking in a foreign language to do so for God had a purpose for the exercise of all the miraculous gifts. But let all things be done decently and in order. The word decently is a translation of the Greek word euschemonos, and means literally, well-schematized, or, with good schematics. Any worship of God that does not follow God’s schematic (plan, blueprint, order, arrangement) is not decent! The words in order are translated from the Greek words, kata taxin; the word taxin is related to the Greek word tagma, and both are used to signify to arrange something in order, especially in a military order. It would not, therefore, be altogether unscriptural to say that the worship of God in the church’s corporate assemblies, should be regimented!
We believe the apostolic doctrine concerning miraculous gifts is clearly set forth in these three Chapter s (I Cor. 12-13-14). We believe all Christians, using accepted hermeneutical rules, should understand this teaching alike. But we also acknowledge that as long as some accept what they believe they have experienced in the place of understanding what Paul teaches here, there will continue to be division among Christians, just as there was nearly two thousand years ago, when Paul wrote to the brethren at Corinth. A quotation from Seth Wilson, Dean Emeritus of Ozark Bible College, is in order here. Dean Wilson has spent nearly fifty years researching this subject and counseling individuals and congregations who are plagued by this problem.
The tongues-speaker (modern-day) who says, You cannot understand or give any true judgment about a gift from God which you have not experienced and do not believe in, is saying, in effect, that it is not subject to critical examination in the light of Scripture. An error which grows out of this is the belief that one cannot understand the Bible unless he has been baptized in the Holy Spirit. To say that only the believer in the tongues experience is qualified to comment on it begs the question, supposes that it is always from God, and puts the subjective (inward and personal feeling) above the Scripture as a source of truth. This takes the attitude that tongues speaking is something that is beyond the realm of reasonable evidence or factual investigation.
from an unpublished essay on the Holy Spirit by Seth Wilson