Bible Study - 1 Corinthians Chapter 14
Bible Study - 1 Corinthians Chapter 14
|
This chapter continues Paul's instruction on the role of the gifts of the Spirit that began in chapter 12. It specifically deals with the abuse of the gift of tongues begun in 12:29-30. Despite the clear instruction here, there are many who violate it and even teach against this chapter. This does not necessarily mean they are not Christian or are not saved. It does mean they are sinning. But so is every other human being on Earth. Only Jesus the Christ did not sin. I can worship with and hug people who do not follow these commands. However, those who are knowingly teaching against this chapter are in rebellion against the Holy Spirit who is responsible for the writing of scripture. Those should consider carefully Matthew 7:13-23. The biggest problem with the sin of going against this chapter is that it causes disillusionment in people who see the church in contradiction to scripture, encourages people to lie about the Holy Spirit, brings disrepute to the church, and drives people away from God. I would not want to have to answer for that. | |
| 1 Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. |
We are to pursue love as a church, and to desire the spiritual as a church, especially that people would prophesy in the church. These are commands for the church, not individual instructions. All the verbs are in the plural imperative tense meaning this command is not to individuals but is to the church as a group. Thus this cannot mean that individuals should try to get the gift of prophecy as that would be in singular tense and would utterly violate chapter 12. As individuals we are to be content with what the Spirit chose to gift us with. Prophesy is the greater gift, and we should seek its employ in the gathered church as a group. This was a rebuke of the Corinthian church as they wrongly employed and valued tongues. This verse connects chapters 12-13 to the primary subject of this chapter, which is the abuse of tongues in the assembled church. Pursue love connects to chapter 13, and earnestly desire the things of the spirit, connects to chapter 12. Gifts is not literally in the Greek. Paul used pneumatikos here, Greek for spiritual, like in 12:1. And considering 12:4-6 it is unlikely he meant gifts here either, but meant all manifestations of the Spirit including gifts, ministries and talents. All things regarding manifestations of the Spirit are to be understood in the context of love in chapter 13. The two are inseparable. |
| 2 For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries. |
This verse is not making a statement for how things ought to be. It is an illustration and continues the argument against the use of tongues in a group setting without an interpreter. If someone speaks in a tongue they are leaving out everyone else present. It's as ridiculous as getting up in front of a group of people that only understand English and giving a speech in Japanese. The only one present who would understand what is being said would be God, and that only because He knows everything. The use of the term mysteries is to drive the point home by turning the tables on the Corinthians. The Greeks were obsessed with mysteries as many of their pagan religions taught that learning the secret knowledge of the world would lead to eternal life, prosperity, and such. The Corinthians accused Paul of withholding mysteries. Priests of pagan Greek temples would claim to have such secret knowledge as a means to manipulate followers. Here Paul was pointing out that by speaking in a tongue they were the ones who were withholding knowledge from the others present. |
| Verses 2-14 of this chapter come the closest to supporting a doctrine of tongues as a secret prayer language. However, there are some problems with this view. First, it violates the purpose of the manifestations of the Spirit, which is the edification of the church. Paul made this point over and over. While one could make the argument that edification of the self ultimately helps the church, self-focus is clearly being criticized in these chapters. Paul plainly rebuked the Corinthian church for having this wrong attitude. Second, the argument that tongues is supposed to be a heavenly or angelic language allowing secret communication with God is illogical. Satan and his demons are fallen angels, and thus would understand angelic or heavenly languages. Thus these could not be secret. Third, the primary narrative example in Acts 2:1-13 made it clear that the tongues spoken were actual human languages of the people present. All those who were in the upper room were speaking in unlearned languages, but these were languages that existed and could be understood by others. All the people in the crowd were able to understand what was being said in their own language without an interpreter. This was for the edification of the 5,000, a sign for these unbelievers so they would believe. Pentecostals claim to be following the example in the narrative in Acts about the day of Pentecost, but their practices bear no resemblance to what is recorded in Acts. Fourth, those that assert this passage supports a secret prayer language almost universally contradict the clear and deliberate prohibition against speaking in tongues without an interpreter, the prohibition against multiple people speaking in tongues at the same time, and the undeniable scripture that not all who are baptized in the Spirit get the gift of tongues. Fifth, the scholarship on this interpretation is lacking. The verses cited to support that interpretation of this passage are not supportive. They are dependent on the assumption that this passage is about a secret prayer language rather than supportive. | |
| 3 But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation. |
Prophesy is for the benefit of the whole church. Even if a specific word is for only one person present, all who hear it learn from it. That is why it is a higher manifestation of the spirit. Love requires that we are concerned with the benefit of the church, not just ourselves. The standard by which these are measured is that the gift operates for the edification, exhortation, consolation, and correction of the church. Prophecy is rarely foretelling the future. It is the gift of speaking a word from God to the people of God. The prophet Nathan called out King David and exposed his secret sins of adultery, murder, and conspiracy with Bathsheba and Uriah. This was revealing the hidden past, not the future. While Isaiah did foretell the future, most of his prophecy was confronting the sin of the people, telling them that God's character is based in righteousness and justice, and that the people of God grow in righteousness by being in a right relationship with God. |
| 4 One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. |
Tongues is self-centered and self-serving without an interpreter. For those who have been given this gift, there is a place for it. But it is not for group settings without an interpreter. Paul places it as the lowest of the spiritual gifts, likely for this reason rather than because it is so often abused. Prophecy is speaking into the lives of others, and benefits the church as a whole. Essentially, tongues in a group setting is an unnecessary extra step placed between the speaker and a group in teaching or prophesy. It is much better to skip the middle-man and just teach or prophesy in the common language so the group can understand. The useful purpose of tongues is found in Acts 2:5-11 where people from other lands heard those gifted with tongues speak in their own language. That they heard them speak as if they were native to the language when the appearance of the speakers clearly showed they couldn't be natives of that far off land. This was a sign that what they were preaching was true. Thus speaking to someone in their own language by the gift of tongues is what this gift meant for. |
| 5 Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying. |
The reason why some gifts are greater than others in 12:31 is explained here. It it how much they edify the church that defines their worth. Wishing or wanting is not a command or expectation. If anything, Paul was wishing everyone could experience it like a vacation postcard saying, "Wish you were here!". However, this is in no way an expectation that everyone would speak in tongues. Anyone who tries to make that argument is directly contradicting 1 Corinthians 12:4-11, 17-20, & 30-31. Paul's greater wish was that everyone would prophecy. But again, not everyone gets the same gift. It is that everyone should value the higher gifts rather than covet them or fake them. It should be noted that we are not to blindly accept prophetic utterances, but we are to examine them, and everything, carefully holding on to the good and rejecting the evil. 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil. Only if tongues are interpreted is there edification of the church. However, it is the gift of interpretation that edifies, not the gift of tongues. The use of tongues actually hurts the edification of the church as it unnecessarily requires an additional step. This is the basis of Paul's ranking. Those that edify the most are the greatest. |
| 6 But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what will I profit you unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching? | That gifts profit the church is what makes them valuable. Thus revelation, knowledge, prophecy and teaching are all higher gifts because they can be understood and thus profit the church. Tongues is useless to the church because it isn't understandable. It is only useful to the individual unless it is the native tongue of the one being spoken to. With an interpreter it unnecessarily delays edification. While speaking in tongues the others present are getting nothing. |
| 7 Yet even lifeless things, either flute or harp, in producing a sound, if they do not produce a distinction in the tones, how will it be known what is played on the flute or on the harp? 8 For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle? |
The analogy Paul used here ought to be easy to understand. Speaking in tongues in the community is like playing randomly on an instrument. It's not a melody that the listener can discern, or a message for the soldier. This could not be more clear. Speech in a corporate gathering of Christians must be understandable or it should not happen at all. To be clear, a corporate gathering is a group gathering such as a church service, small group, class, Bible study, or any other reason Christians gather together. Speech for the purpose of edifying the community is right and good. Speech that is only a display of personal ecstasy is sinful and should not be done. |
| 9 So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air. | Paul was quite harsh here. Speaking in tongues in front of others is a pointless waste of time. Implied is that this is making deliberate noise that will block people from hearing a useful speaker. It is a selfish attempt to get attention. |
| 10 There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning. |
While in most large cities at the time would have people of a variety of languages, Corinth was a center of international commerce, making it particularly common to have native speakers of a very large number of languages. Despite the large number of languages on Earth, they all share the characteristic of being valid forms of communication between people. Paul was harshly making the point that none of these languages are just a babbling noise. They are to communicate meaning. This contradicts any doctrine of tongues where a speaker can be ignorant of the words they speak. |
| 11 If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me. | Two people who don't share the same language babbling at each other is pointless. If it makes no sense for two people to babble incoherently outside the church, it is even worse to do so in the church. The church is supposed to be a place where people learn and are trained to be disciples of Jesus. That is blocked by useless noise. |
| 12 So also you, since you are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek to abound for the edification of the church. |
Paul was not criticizing that they were seeking the spiritual. Like in 12:1 and 14:1, gifts is not in the Greek. It is more likely that he was referring to all spiritual manifestations. What is clear is he directly and harshly criticized them for their selfish and self-centered attitude, specifically their zeal for tongues and their abuse of it. Paul adamantly commands that they excel/abound in the edification of the church, which tongues cannot do on its own. Tongues actually gets in the way of the edification of the church. In essence, he wanted to redirect their zeal to productive things instead of a selfish hinderance. |
| 13 Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. |
This verse begins with dio, Greek for therefore. Thus the following passage is directly connected to the commandment in verse 12 to seek the edification of the church. These verses make the point why tongues without interpretation is prohibited. Specifically the point is that speaking in a tongue without interpretation is worse than useless. It is actually harmful. Verses 13-15 seem to indicate that a person speaking in tongues is saying things they themselves do not understand. However, verse 16 uses the same syntax referring to another person rather than the self making that interpretation inconsistent with the text. Thus it is more likely that Paul was being hyperbolic to point out the absurdity of tongues without interpretation. In other words, it's just as absurd to speak in a language others do not understand as to speak in a language the person themselves does not understand. There would be no edification of anyone in that ridiculous circumstance. |
| 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. |
Using hyperbole Paul again points out that praying in a tongue others do not understand is as ridiculous as the preposterous notion of praying in a language even the speaker doesn't understand as their mind would be idle and useless. Some try to use this verse to support a version of tongues where even the speaker doesn't understand the words. This would require the Holy Spirit taking over control of the person to do the speaking. There is no scriptural support for the Spirit controlling us and making us do things without our conscious control. That is a concept from pagan religions that is falsely claimed to be Christian. |
| 15 What is the outcome then? 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. |
Paul's rhetorical question at the beginning of this verse belongs more to the previous verse, although it does connect the previous verses with what follows. Essentially, the crazy and over the top scenario in verse 14 where a person is not in control of their own speech would leave the person a mindless automaton, a mental vegetable. This contradicts the hundreds of passages exhorting, instructing, and commanding people to seek wisdom and make good choices. Control of humans in scripture is always demonic, and only when a person has opened themselves to it and left their minds empty. This is why Jesus warns against emptying the mind in Luke 11:24-26. We should fill our minds with things of God, memorizing scripture to refute and counter the attacks of demons. Next Paul illustrated the normal mode of operation for a person who has received the gift of tongues. What they do is the operation of their mind and will, just within the gifting they have been given. Thus the purpose of tongues is to communicate to others just like any other speech. So if that communication is not occurring it is worthless. |
| 16 Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying? |
To bless or give thanks in a group setting in tongues leaves out the others present, even if it is only a group of two. They cannot be edified or even participate, again reinforcing the self-centered nature of tongues and the inappropriateness of using it in a group setting, unless the tongue spoken is the native language of the listener. The Greek word idiotou is translated here as outsider in most translations. This literally means unlearned or ignorant man, or common man. It is also used in verse 23 alongside apistoi, Greek for unbelievers. If Paul had meant outsiders there would be no reason to add unbelievers to it. From the context in this verse and chapter, the NASB's "ungifted" is probably the best translation. Here ungifted means one who doesn't know the language and doesn't have the gift of interpretation. There are scholars who say this refers to initiates who are not unbelievers but were not yet fully considered part of the church. They were in the process of learning the basics of Christianity. The term was used in the Greek pagan temples to mean one who is not a member of the temple but could still participate in the temple sacrifices. And there is historical evidence that access to the group gatherings of the church was not for unbelievers. They were not invited until after they had accepted Jesus. Church gatherings were for discipleship training and not dumbed down to the unbeliever level. It was one-on-one witnessing or a few-on-one outside the church where an unbeliever would be led to Jesus and taught the basics. "Amen" literally means "truly". This was said by the congregation after a prayer as a liturgical affirmation. It was a strong endorsement of what another had said, whether in teaching or prayer. It was used in Jewish synagogues as well as the early Christian church. Without interpretation others cannot offer an amen to a prayer in a tongue. |
| 17 For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified. | In order to be giving thanks one has to be using one's mind whether speaking in tongues or the common language. Thus this verse supports that verses 14-15 are hyperbole to illustrate the absurdity of tongues without interpretation. Regardless, this repeats the prohibition against tongues without interpretation for the reason that it does not edify the group. |
| 18 I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; | With this statement Paul disarms those who would try to dismiss Paul's instruction as sour-grapes by one who doesn't have the gift of tongues. More importantly, this means that Paul's lack of speaking in tongues in group settings when he was with the Corinthians was not evidence of a lack, but his proper use of tongues and an example to be emulated. |
| 19 however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. |
Words from the mind means speaking in a learned language that is common to the group, as opposed to the unlearned language of tongues. That speaking plainly is the much more desirable is not hyperbole. If anything, it is an understatement. And while this verse is directly comparing opposing ways of speaking, there is an underlying truth. One of the incorrect views of speaking in tongues Paul corrected here is that it is a higher gift because it is directly from the Spirit. This is a distorted view of the working of the Spirit that even goes as far as some thinking the Spirit should directly guide us in every little thing we do. However, only infants are guided this way properly. It is highly improper and insulting to guide adults this way. Adults ought to be able to use their own minds and judgement. This is emphasized in the next verse. |
| 20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature. |
Thinking that speaking in tongues shows them to be more spiritual is being immature. Speaking in tongues in a group setting is a selfish act and like a child acting inappropriately to get attention. It is the opposite of the spiritual maturity the Corinthians thought it was. Paul briefly addressed another false maturity issue. Some think being "worldly" gives them a superior view. Paul was saying that is not the case. This "maturity of sinning" is not really maturity. When it comes to sin we should be inexperienced as infants. It is much better to have never done the sin as it's so much easier to resist what one hasn't experienced. An experienced sin is much harder to resist as the memory of doing increases the desire and chance of repeating it. To be mature in our thinking means that we need to use our own reasoning to come to righteous conclusions. People who rely on "the spirit" are more likely to mistake their own emotions and sinful desires for guidance. It is the mature thinking Christian that can judge between what is consistent with scripture and what is misleading. The thought from verse 19 is completed in verse 20. Verse 21 begins a new passage. Like the chapter and verse numbers, Paragraph gaps were added centuries after scripture was written. Paragraphs were added to group thoughts together. The intent was to aid reading. But the original text didn't have these as they weren't used in Koine Greek. They are a decision by the translator and publisher. While I have found these are well placed in the vast majority of scripture, it is not always the case. And we should not rely on them for our understanding of the passage. Here is a good example. Most recent translations and editions of the Greek text put the break between verses 19 and 20. Some older translations and editions of the Greek text put the break between verses 21 and 22. Very few put the break between 20 and 21. Because of the use of the vocative tense of brethren, most recent translations break the paragraph before verse 20. While that is a valid reason to look to see if a new thought has been begun, it is from the context that this must be determined. The context for considering verse 20 to be in the next paragraph is that Isaiah 28:11 is quoted in verse 21, and two verses earlier in Isaiah 28:9 similar imagery is used. Thus the argument is that this was what Paul was thinking of in verse 20. However, it is also possible that the the train of thought ending with verse 20 led to Isaiah 28:11 being referenced next. Guessing at the thoughts of the writer is just guessing, even if it is an educated guess. However, the context of 1 Corinthians 14 makes this a stretch. The vocative tense could also be a verbal foot-stomp of emphasis, like a lecturing professor emphasizing that the point he is making will definitely be on the exams. Verse 20 makes sense as a verbal grabbing of the shirt from verse 19. Whereas it makes little sense as an opening of the thought starting in verse 21. Additionally "It is written" at the beginning of verse 21 is also often used as a marker of a new thought/passage. |
| 21 In the Law it is written, "By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me," says the Lord. |
Paul paraphrased a prophecy of Isaiah to make a point about tongues. Speaking in a language that isn't understood does no good. The context of the quotation from Isaiah 28:11-12 is a prophecy about the captivity of Ephraim. Specifically, God will speak to them through a foreigners. They did not listen to God, so he will talk to them through the discipline of being captured, carried away, and forced to learn the language of that land. And even then, most of that generation would still not listen. |
| 22 So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers; but prophecy is for a sign, not to unbelievers but to those who believe. |
Paul again argues that prophecy belongs in the church, and tongues do not. The Corinthians think speaking in tongues is a sign of their spirituality to others in the church. Paul flips that and says that it is a sign for unbelievers in an apparent reference to Pentecost. To be clear, the unbelievers then understood what was being said as these were real languages the people understood. The miracle that people who could not have learned their language in the natural were able to speak to them as one raised in the language. That is what won them over. Anyone who tries to make the argument that this verse means that a room or sanctuary full of people babbling in tongues is a way to reach unbelievers is completely ignoring verses 23-25. And they completely forget that there was actual communication in real languages on Pentecost. There was not an ecstatic loss of control. It was the impartation of a gift that was easily verifiable as genuine that won over thousands. People in a church babbling incoherently is easily faked and very difficult to verify, not to mention it is counter productive and chases people away from Christianity. |
| 23 Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? | This is a direct argument against the speaking in tongues as a group that occurs regularly in many churches, including some I have been a part of. For a room full of people, or worse a sanctuary, to be babbling in tongues is a direct violation of this verse. Paul's instructions on behavior inside and outside the church is always about not hindering the gospel message. No one wants to even be around people they think are crazy or weirdos, let alone listen to them. |
| 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all; 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you. |
Thus, prophecy is for the edification of the church and for the unbeliever. By prophesy people are convicted, called to account, admit they are a sinner who needs God, and brought to right relationship with God. Moreover, this person will know God is with us. A room full of incoherent babbling will drive him away from us, and even from God. The only way that tongues is a sign to unbelievers is they hear a person clearly, and the speaker is speaking in the unbeliever's native tongue as only a native could speak, and it is by someone who could not be a native speaker. Thus they hear the gospel clearly in their own language in an impossible way that convicts them. That this argument uses an instance of an unbeliever coming into the corporate gathering of the church does not mean this is a desirable situation. The purpose of the church is to raise up disciples, not to win new converts. The inappropriate focus on unbelievers results in a dumbing down of the church service that abandons the primary role of the church. |
| 26 What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. | Here begins specific instruction for the proper use of tongues. Paul again directs that whatever is done in the gathering must be for the edification of the gathering. That is the first standard. (The unmentioned standard is that it must agree with scripture.) |
| 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; | This is a direct instruction and a command. Again, a mob of babblers in tongues is prohibited. The instruction is clear that there only be no more than two or three who speak in tongues, and that they speak one at a time. And the absolute and unarguable command is that they must be interpreted. |
| 28 but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God. |
The command is repeated with emphasis. If there is no interpreter, one who speaks in tongues must keep silent in the church. This is inarguable. This does not mean that one can speak in tongues in the church and then seek an interpreter. Doing it that way would violate the command to keep silent. The interpreter must be obtained before speaking in tongues in a group setting or that person has violated this command. Tongues is to be allowed, but only if it can edify the church. Otherwise, the speaker should be silent. There is no valid argument to explain this away. This is clear in Greek and English. Those who violate this are in rebellion against scripture and the Holy Spirit. |
| 29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. |
Next Paul transitioned to instructions about prophecy. That he begins with a parallel instruction to the instruction on tongues is not by accident. Individuals and churches who misuse tongues are the most likely to misuse prophecy. What is different is that the others present are to pass judgment on the prophecy. There is a tendency for people to blindly accept a prophecy without question. That is both unwise and unbiblical. Every prophecy must be tested. And the standard by which it is tested is by scripture. Anything that contradicts scripture is to be rebuked. The number limitation is not just for an orderly gathering, but also so that there is opportunity to judge. If dozens prophesy, the jumble will prevent a thoughtful consideration of any of them. It is a common practice in churches who have "prophetic ministries" is they fail to test prophecies. And even those that do have some sitting in judgement, they are almost always others who also claim to have the gift of prophecy. Worst of all is they judge not by scripture, but whether the prophecy is in the forms they recognize or based on feelings. A recent anti-biblical standard is that prophecy "must be positive." Whereas in scripture prophecy is almost always a rebuke or correction. A better and biblical approach would be to have those who are known to have the gift of knowledge present to judge prophecies as they are equipped to compare them to scripture and judge rightly. |
| 30 But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. | This verse is calling for an orderly gathering of Christians. We are not to speak over each other. In the example given, the one speaking must stop so the new revelation may be spoken in clear understanding. In Paul's example, if the one speaking strays from the word from God into their own thoughts and feelings the Spirit could give this revelation to another to counter an incorrect prophecy. Regardless, speaking over each other is a violation of verse 26. |
| 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; | This instruction clearly states what is meant in verse 30 and the reason for it. Edification is not possible if people are speaking over each other. |
| 32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; |
This verse defines the judgement at the end of verse 29. The one prophesying now is to be subject to the prophets who wrote scripture. The one that is subject is the prophetic spirit, which is the one speaking prophecy by gift of the spirit. The prophets they are subject to is those who wrote the scriptures, literally prophesying via writing. Prophecy is relaying a word from God that the prophet was given by the Holy Spirit. Thus we have a written reliable source of prophecy by which we can judge prophets today. This verse is used to justify that only prophets can judge other prophets. However, Paul makes a distinction here in both English and Greek. Literally, the prophetic spirits are subject to the prophets, which is a reference to the prophets from before. Prophets today are also spirits of prophets just as the one speaking is. Scripture is a safe yardstick that is not subject to a person mistaking their own thoughts and feelings for the Spirit. What is absolutely clear in this verse is prophecy is to be judged against a trustworthy standard. |
| 33 for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. | This is the reason for the instructions and commands regarding prophecy and tongues. Practices that bring confusion are ungodly. |
| 34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. |
Some people have a big problem with these verses. Before we look at what is said here, remember that scripture doesn't oppose scripture. If we see contradiction the fault is with us. There is a harmony there even if we can't see it. Also, scripture is not a buffet where we can pick and choose what we like and ignore the rest. If we don't like what scripture says we ought to accept the correction and not ignore it or try to invent reasons to deny that scripture means what it says. Those who take this as a rule for every situation regardless of context have a problem. If women are not to speak in church ever, why did Paul talk about women prophesying and praying in the church in chapter 11? In Isaiah 8:3 the prophet Isaiah refers to his wife as a prophetess. In 2 Kings 22, when the king of Israel and the priests had an issue with a recovered scripture, the king sent the priests to ask the prophetess Huldah. In Judges 4:4-5, Deborah is identified as a prophetess and was judge over Israel. She not only prophesied, but had authority over the nation. "The sons of Israel came up to her for judgment." Trying to reconcile verses 34-35 with chapter 11 in this same letter, not to mention the rest of scripture, is a challenge. Some have argued that this must be an addition by someone other than Paul. Others use this to discount the other scriptures. However, there is ample evidence in 1 Corinthians itself that would put this in the proper context. First, we know 1st Corinthians is in response to a letter from the Corinthian church to the Apostle Paul. There are references to that letter, and some of the responses are more difficult to understand as we don't know what Paul's reply was specifically about. Second, a great deal of 1st Corinthians is about dealing with abuse of the newfound freedom in the new covenant. And Paul was calling for proper restraint and self-control. Third, these verses are right on the heels of a lengthy set of instructions to correct the chaos that the Corinthian church had become and to bring order to the gathering. And fourth, there were repeated instructions for speaking in the church to be done one at a time and not talk over each other. Therefore, the most logical conclusion is that Paul was continuing his instructions in that vein to stop the chaos and bring order. And one of the elements of chaos brought up was that women were talking to their husbands while someone was speaking, making it hard for others to hear what was being said. They did not have microphones and amplifiers. While one might argue that today's amplification systems make this unnecessary, that is not true. At the least, the person being spoken to is being distracted. And the woman herself isn't paying attention. It is a distraction for those around the husband and wife. This still goes on today in the sanctuary of every church I have been a part of. In my own experience the talk is often not even about what the speaker is saying, but irrelevant things that could easily wait, and absolutely should wait until after the service. In short, verses 34-36 are calling for women to have self-control, pay attention to the speaker, not get distracted, and not be a distraction themselves. Questions and comments can wait until the service is over or they get home. |
| 36 Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? | Paul began a rather harsh correction by asking two rhetorical questions aimed at people having the wrong perspective. None of us are the author of Christianity. The gospel message does not originate from us. And we are not the only recipient. Therefore, we ought to have the humility to accept the correction that follows. |
| 37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. | Anyone who would be a prophet, or even think they are spiritual must obey God commandments that Paul has written. This means the group babbling in tongues, speaking in tongues with others without ensuring an interpreter is there before a single word of tongues is spoken, being disorderly in gatherings, and so forth are things done by people who in reality are not spiritual. They claim to be filled with the Spirit, but that is false as they are in rebellion against the Holy Spirit. |
| 38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. |
Paul is quite clear. There is judgment for ignoring these commands. Anyone who ignores these commandments will themselves be ignored. Think of what that means for their prayer, their "gift", and perhaps even their salvation. 1 Corinthians 8:2-3. If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know; but if anyone loves God, he is known by Him. The penalty in the Old Testament for false prophets was death. To be clear, one false prophecy and the "prophet" earned the death penalty. To falsely claim to speak for God is a heinous offense against God. And to claim one's own words are God's is to try to take the role of God and to try to be God. That is the worst form of blasphemy. In the New Testament the standard is the same, but the punishment is that they are to be ignored. Let me repeat that. The standard is one false prophecy one time and you're done, not to be allowed to prophesy in the church again. Paul gave an easy way to tell if someone is false, that they violate these commandments from God. Even if a church fails to enforce this, a person violates these at their peril. |
| 39 Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues. | Rather than seek to speak in tongues or hear people speak in tongues, we should desire to prophecy or hear prophecy. Tongues are not to be forbidden. They are just to be within the narrow confines of these commands. |
| 40 But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner. | Here is the summation of chapter 14, and the overarching theme of all of Paul's letters. Do things in an orderly manner so as to represent Jesus in the best light. The reason is that we should spread the gospel, not hinder it for selfish reasons. |
Scripture quotations taken from the NASB © The Lockman Foundation.