A STUDY OF FIRST CORINTHIANS

Chapter 14

Introduction: Though the apostle has made a great argument concerning the effectiveness of love, he does encourage the saints, however, to desire the most effective gifts. With this, I believe, Paul picks up the thoughts he left in chapter 12. There he told the saints to aspire to the greater gifts. In chapter 14, Paul contends that the best gift to have is prophecy. Most people aspire to that which is more sensational and generated more amazement. Those things are not necessarily the most effective for the church’s growth and development. This Paul will point out.

Prophecy Versus Tongues 

Verse 1. In this verse, Paul seeks to connect the thoughts that he had in chapters 12 and 13 with chapter 14. In chapter 14, Paul will speak on the gift of prophecy. Prophecy served as a means of instructing the saints in that day. Prophecy was one of the spiritual gifts. In contrast, love was a grace that all Christians should possess. All may not be able to posses a particular miraculous gift, if any. However, every child of God can and must love.

Verses 2-3. When a person spoke in tongues (another language) without the aide of an interpreter, no one could understand him. The only one at that time who could understand his speaking was God. He was not speaking some esoteric heavenly babble, but a commonly used and understood language of the day. Although the tongue speaker could not be understood, he did speak the mind of God as so inferred by the use of the word translated “mysteries.” The one who prophesied spoke using the language of the people. They would have understood him. Through prophecy, the prophet would have given the people God’s revelation. The words of the prophet help to build up, encourage and comfort the believer as he faces hardships in life. In this, the church benefits more so than through words they can not understand.

Verse 4. If the tongue speaker did not understand what he spoke, how could he have edified himself through tongue speaking? I believe he was edified in as much as he knew that God was using him or enabling him with this gift. The recipient of such a gift may have been emboldened. He may have had his affections moved, although such was of no benefit to others. The fact that God used considered him worthy to receive such a gift was enough to lift his spirits. The person that prophesied was a blessing to the church. The church could understand him and the church could benefit from what he said. Better the whole be benefited than the few or the one. This was Paul’s argument in 12:14-27.

Verse 5. From this verse, it is possible that the person who spoke in the tongue was also one who interpreted. This does not take away from what I previously mentioned in verse 4. In that case, there was no interpretation. He did not possess the gift. In the instance when there is the gift of prophecy verses the gift of tongues, the gift of prophecy is superior. It is superior in that it benefits more people. When the tongue speaker has an interpreter, then those two gifts combined is on par with the gift of prophecy.

The Regulation of Tongues

Verse 6. During the time of Paul’s missionary journey to Corinth, his preaching proved profitable to the Corinthians. They evidently understood what he had said to them. He asks them what if he comes to them speaking in a tongue that could not be understood, what would be the benefit to them? They would only benefit if he spoke to them what can be known, and easily understood. Prophesying revealed knowledge and teaching made the knowledge understandable.

Verses 7-9. Paul uses lifeless objects to illustrate the point that the sound must be understood to excite the passions and arouse the spirit. What benefit would it be to play a flute or harp without distinguishing the sounds in a way that moves the hearers? Imagine what soldiers would have done, if they could not distinguish the sound of the trumpet. They would not know whether to prepare for battle, retreat from the fight or move against the enemy. Likewise, if those in the church have no understanding of what is being presented to them, they could not be called to duty, prepared for battle, warned of approaching enemies, etc. All of which comes by words that can easily be understood. To do otherwise would be vain.

Verses 10-11. Paul literally says, “No language is not language.”  What I believe Paul means here is that communicating significant though that can be understood is the essence of language. For those in Corinth to speak in a way that could not be understood is to defy the very purpose of language and communication, never mind the very purpose of God. Paul uses another illustration to make his point. The person that speaks in a foreign language is a barbarian to the one that he speaks who does not know the language and vice versa.

Verses 12-13. The “even so” seeks to apply the previously mentioned principle to the tongue speaker. The purpose is to communicate thought. The communication is intended to aid in the up building of the church. The motivation of the person endowed with such gifts should be the church’s edification. If that is his motivation, he will only want to do that which leads to that end.  So, if he has the gift of speaking in tongues, since he desires to excel in edifying the church, he will seek the interpretation. This he must do before he speaks even one word in a tongue (v. 27-28). The church cannot be edified, if it cannot understand what it is being told.

Verses 14-15. This verse says plainly that it is possible for one to speak in a tongue and not know what he is saying or has said. His spirit (affections) is moved, but his mind had not been benefited. Paul concludes that not only should the spirit be moved, but the mind be employed as well. The same point is made with singing. Some of the saints in the Corinthian congregation had the ability to pray and sing in miraculous tongues. However, even prayers and songs should be understood.

Verse 16. A prayer must be understood, if anyone is to agree with it.  The uninformed is probably a reference to one who is not a Christian. He is one who is ignorant of what the church is supposed to do and teach (v. 24). This would apply also to those members who do not understand the prayer.

Verse 17. Only the person that prays in a tongue that has no interpreter can give thanks. If he was to speak in a tongue publicly without an interpreter, no one else would be in a position to give thanks.

Verses 18-19. Keep in mind, Paul is not condemning the use of tongues. Paul had an ability to speak in tongues more so that the Corinthians. Yet, he never sought to abuse his ability. He would rather seek to edify the church by providing them with what was necessary and what the Corinthians could easily understand. 

Verse 20. In one sense, Paul does not want the brethren to act like children. Concerning the spiritual gifts, Paul did not want the brethren to be so dazzled and taken in by them, like a child would that which glitters or generates excitement. Children enjoy the sensational and amusing. Paul wants them to be mature adults in their thinking. Paul expressed this somewhat in Chapter 13:11. They needed to grow up. In another sense, Paul wanted them to act like infants. Infants do not display any sinful characteristics. They are free of malice, envy and any other evil passion that displays itself toward others. I believe this verse goes a long way to refute the idea that children are born sinners. Jesus said we must be as little children to enter God’s Kingdom (Matt. 18:3).

Verse 21-22. Paul uses the word law to refer to the entire Old Testament. He quotes from the book of Isaiah 28:11. This is not a direct quotation, but a loose translation. Possibly, he is paraphrasing. The point of the quotation must be gleaned by understanding the context of Isaiah 28:11. Isaiah prophesied concerning the judgment that would come upon Israel by Assyria. Isaiah prophesied similarly concerning Jerusalem in 33:19. Jeremiah clues us in on what this means in 5:15. The prophecy was a sign to those who would not believe the words of the prophet. Paul uses this reference to impress that very point in His day. Tongues were a sign to the unbelieving. They were used throughout to confirm the veracity of the truth that was spoken or a declaration of God’s will (Mark. 16:17-20, Acts 2, Acts 10, and Acts 19). Such was used to build up faith within those who did not believe. Prophecy was necessary to build up believers. Believers did not need confirmation that truth is of God.

Verses 23-25. If an unbeliever walked into the assemblies of the saints where unknown tongues were being displayed, he would not think well of the congregation. With prophecy, the unbeliever would be better served by being convinced and convicted with understandable teaching. The word penetrates his heart and discovers its condition. He then, is able to make a different report about the congregation concerning the prophecy than the unbeliever would about the tongues.

Order in the Assembly 

Verse 26. The question that Paul asks is to draw a conclusion from what he has previously told the Corinthians. This is similar to the question that he asked in verse 15. These things took place when they came together. This was an assembly for worship and not a private get together. What Paul says here should be used in the governance of the worship assembly. In the context of the assembly, several had contributions of service they could make. The Bible does not recognize a preacher-laity type of order as we see in denominationalism. In addition, this verse has been used to justify solos, quartets and Choirs. The evidence is not conclusive. In worship, all are to participate. If most of the church refrains from singing, then they become mere spectators who have gathered to be entertained.  What ever was done in the context of the assembly had to been done for the edification of the church. Those who minister during periods of worship must be mindful of the fact that they are doing what they are doing for the edification of the church. If what they do will not edify or does not have that as their motivation. They should not do it.

Verse 27. Paul evidently did not want the assembly dedicated simply to tongue speaking. At most, three of the men could speak in tongues. However, only one could interpret for the tongue speakers. Here we see the assertion of order into the assembly. Just because a person had a talent, did not mean they could exercise it at will.

Verse 28. If no one in the assembly could interpret, those that spoke in a tongue had to keep silent. A couple of points need to be made about this regulation. One, such indicates that the tongue speaker had it within his ability to control his tongue speaking. Second, although he was to keep silent concerning the matter of tongue speaking, such did not mean he could not speak at all. He simply could not address the assembly speaking in a tongue without an interpreter. Outside of the assembly, the tongue speaker can speak to his hearts content. He would only be speaking to himself and to God.

Verses 29-30. Paul poses the same restrictions concerning frequency of use concerning prophecy as he did with the tongues. No more than three prophets could speak during the assembly. These men were not to weary the congregation with an overabundance of preaching and teaching at any one time. The congregation was to sit and listen carefully to what these men prophesied. They were not to accept blindly the things that were being said simply because they were inspired prophets (1 John 4:1; 1 The. 5:20-21). Even Paul, and inspired apostle of Jesus Christ, had his words carefully scrutinized by some of the brethren (Acts 17:11). If the people carefully scrutinized the inspired prophet’s message how much more should the people scrutinize the uninspired preacher who speaks today? If, while one man spoke, another that sat received a revelation, the one speaking must keep silent and give way to the other man. It was up to the audience to judge the veracity of the message. Just as the tongue speaker was to keep silent without an interpreter, the prophet was to keep silent concerning his prophecy when another received a revelation while he spoke. Again, this did not forbid him from speaking at all.

Verse 31-33. The regulations that Paul gave were intended to establish order in the congregation and to help the congregation benefit spiritually. In subsequent as assemblies every man would be given the opportunity to prophesy. That is, only those men that had the gift of prophecy could prophesy. In each assembly, a prophet may speak one at a time and at most three. The reason for this is so everyone could receive instruction and be encouraged. If the same person did all of the preaching and teaching, where would he get his encouragement and comfort? All this was in the ability of the one who possessed the gift to control. Otherwise, there would be chaos. God does not provoke chaos, but peace.

Verse 34. The tongue-speakers and prophets prophesying at the same time were not the only interruptions in the worship assembly. Women were disrupting the worship and orderliness to the assembly by either addressing the congregation of asking questions. Paul says that the women (GUNE – An adult female) were to keep silent. Paul uses the same word for “silent” as he did concerning the tongue speaker (v. 28) and the prophet (v. 30). In the case of the tongue speaker and the prophet, they were to keep silent under certain conditions. If those conditions prevailed, those men could not address the assembly with their gifts. They were not forbidden from uttering a word. Concerning women, they were never permitted to address the assembly. Men should never do anything that would cause a woman to violate this principle. Women must not allow themselves to violate this principle. Women are to be in subjection (Gen. 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:11-15). Such is not to say that men rule women are smarter than women are or are more talented. In the husband wife relationship, the husband is not to be some demanding tyrant. Husbands are commanded to be understanding toward their wives, they are to honor and cherish them. They must treat their wives as precious. If something is precious you do not misuse or abuse it. Paul gives the reason why women are to be in subjection (1 Tim. 2:13-15).

Verse 35. If a woman had questions, she should ask her own husband at home. “At home” suggests within a domestic setting. In other words, Paul is simply saying do not interrupt the worship assembly with the questions (see 1 Cor. 11:34). Again this is a period of worship and not Bible study or some other assembly. If anything this verse teaches that husbands should be leading their families in worship. No woman is permitted to disrupt the assembly with her questions.

Verse 36. Paul is using sarcasm here. It seems as if universally churches of Christ were uniform on this issue concerning women in the assembly. Only Corinth had a problem. Paul is asking whether truth originated with them. If yes, then all the other churches are wrong. If it did not, then why are they behaving differently? Some churches today act as if the word of God originate with them. People need to study what the early church in Jerusalem was like and strive to imitate it.

Verse. 37-38. If anyone among them was truly a prophet he would recognize that what Paul was saying was truly God’s will. If they did not recognize such to be the case, they should not be recognized.

Verse 39-40. The conclusion is simple desire prophecy as the most effective means of communicating to the church. If the conditions are met, however, do not refuse to speak in tongues. As with everything in the church, such must be done in decency and an orderly manner.