1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
In the previous chapter, the Apostle eloquently presented the supreme qualities of Love as being the highest calling of Man, far exceeding the works of spiritual gifts. Now he returns to the main topic begun in chapter 12, the exercise of “spiritualities” in the brotherhood, saying, “Give yourselves to live according to Agape. Seek the spiritualities, but even more that you might prophesy.” The word “gifts” does not appear in the original language of this verse. The literal translation is, the spiritualities. See my note for 1Cor 12:1, which explains the implications.
Prophecy is the most important spirituality because it best fulfills the purpose of church assembly laid out in these chapters: Seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church (1Cor 14:12). While to prophesy may include foretelling the future, its fundamental purpose is to warn the churches of Christ and the world in general of impending danger. It is to preach, to teach and to expound the Word of God so as to convict the hearts of men (1Cor 14:3, 24). In this way the prophets of old spoke, exposing the wicked acts of the Israelites and warning them to repent and avoid the wrath of God. Preaching is the most important gift because God chose that method to spread the Gospel (1Cor 1:21). See note for 1Cor 12:28.
The Montanist movement of the third century, which Tertullian supported in his later writings, is commonly thought to be the first to have emphasized the gifts of the Spirit. However, they did not even mention speaking in tongues. They wanted prophetic gifts, thinking to receive special, new revelation from the Spirit. Their error has been repeated often in history. It is found at the base of many false doctrines and heresies today.
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
In Greek, the word tongue is glossa, which appears about 150 times in the Greek Bible (Septuagint and NT). While it is used in several ways, never once is glossa employed to refer to nonsensical sounds without meaning. Instead, glossa is the standard word for the literal tongue in the mouth of a man or animal. It also is used in reference to words spoken in normal speech, or to spoken languages (Gen 10:5; Rev 5:9). The three accounts of speaking in tongues (all in the Acts) relate the supernatural ability to speak in a language other than one’s native tongue. It was definitely not the utterance of gibberish nor speaking a “heavenly language” unknown to humans (as the Pentecostals teach). The only other word translated tongue is dialektos, which is used interchangeably with glossa in the account of speaking in tongues in the second chapter of Acts (see Acts 2:6, 8).
Several times in this chapter, glossa is translated unknown tongue, but not once is the word “unknown” found in the Greek. Apparently the translators added it to show that the language was unknown to the hearers (i.e. 1Cor 14:19). Unfortunately, recent Pentecostalism has used this phrase to invent their specious doctrine of “speaking in tongues,” which they believe is a necessary sign of salvation, namely, that the Spirit fall upon a person such that he/she suddenly begins speaking in a heavenly language unknown to any human being. That idea does not concord with this chapter nor with the rest of Scripture. It also stands opposed to those occasions in the NT where speaking in tongues actually occurred.
The authentic speaking in tongues as recorded in Acts 2 should be the starting point for understanding this chapter. The Spirit worked a miracle – foreigners heard in their native tongue as men preaching the gospel in a different tongue. Unfortunately, some in the famously-carnal church in Corinth had taken to imitating this in their assemblies to worship. For clearly, the Corinthian method of speaking in tongues as described in this chapter was not an approved practice among the churches of Christ. The Apostle is writing to correct the church in this point, not to affirm them. In fact, Paul says that speaking in tongues was so inferior to prophecy that he would rather speak five words prophesying than ten thousand words in a foreign tongue (1Cor 14:19).
Paul does not forbid to speak in tongues, and being a multi-lingual scholar recognizes that he was able to speak in tongues more than ye all (v18). Nevertheless, he was concerned that their practice was empty, uncertain and meaningless (ex, 1Cor 14:9-12). He speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him (see v28). This is the primary verse for Pentecostalism’s idea that speaking in tongues is ecstatic, non-human speech. Yet, this phrase makes better sense if these tongues were real languages. If a person were to abruptly speak out in Arabic, Chinese, or some other “unknown tongue”, of course no man understandeth him. He is said to be speaking unto God because He alone can understand. Crucially, Paul goes on to explain that if such a person is only speaking to God, then there is no reason to do it publicly (unless someone interprets). Jesus recommended to enter into a closet to pray to God to avoid drawing attention to oneself (Mat 6:6). Speaking an unknown “heavenly language” in public would be the height of self-promotion and pride. The real “gift of speaking in tongues” is for unbelievers (1Cor 14:22), that is, when men hear the speaker in their own language.
It is astounding that some Christian groups wish to follow the Corinthian church’s false, corrupted practice of speaking in tongues. For apparently, they were sometimes not even speaking an actual language. They were just imitating. They wanted to demonstrate that they “had the Spirit.” The error in this thinking is evident, for pretending to speak another language ends up demonstrating nothing – the unlearned will simply say that ye are mad. Moreover, if a person really is possessed by a spirit in the assembly such that he looses control of his mind, tongue, and body, how do we know it is the Spirit of God? After all, he’s speaking gibberish. Jesus asked a similar question of the Pharisees: “If I am casting out demons by the power of God, by what power are you casting them out?” (Mat 12:27-28). This chapter contends that a speaker of tongues does not loose control of his mind, tongue, or body (see verses 27-32). We are correct, then, in doubting that the Spirit will overpower the believer in the worship service and speak meaningless sounds into the air. The Devil and his demons are able to transform themselves into angels of light (2Cor 11:13-14); they will imitate the truth and turn it into a lie (2Thes 2:9-11; Rom 1:25). We must ever discern carefully the true Spirit of God so that we are not deceived (1John 4).
I have inferred that some in Corinth were uttering gibberish, but that is not certain from the text; maybe they were speaking a valid language that nobody else in the audience could understand. 1Cor 14:2 and 1Cor 14:14 might imply that the the speaker himself did not know what he was saying, yet 1Cor 14:5; 14:13; 14:28 indicate that it was possible for the speaker in tongues to know if an interpreter was present beforehand. Whatever the exact expression of speaking in tongues in Corinth, the guide being laid out here is that all should be done to build up the church. To speak sounds that must be afterwards interpreted is barely valid. Why not speak in normal language right away? Nobody knows if your gibberish (whether a language or an invention) was real, so it proves nothing to a skeptic.
Genuine, Spirit-inspired speaking in tongues took place on one occasion in neighboring Ephesus (see Acts 19:1-7). The Corinthians, not wishing to come behind on any gift, took to manufacturing that spirituality. Perhaps some were speaking foreign languages in the worship service, while others were simply pretended to do so (1Cor 13:1 also hints that this was the case). The church service became a chaotic scene in which pride and selfishness abounded. Appropriately, the Apostle time and again asks that all be done to edify others rather than oneself.
It is noteworthy that the early church writers make virtually no reference at all to speaking in tongues in their services. To my knowledge, there are only two direct references. Irenaeus wrote, “We do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God” (Irenaeus, 180 AD). Tertullian, writing to the heretic Marcion ca200AD, spoke of the gift of interpreting tongues in reference to a person who would supernaturally and immediately compose a psalm or prayer.
The so-called “ecstatic speech” of some Christian movements is not an activity supported by the Scriptures. It should be regarded by Kingdom saints as spurious and anti-Christian. By their fruits ye shall know them, Jesus said (Mat 7:20).
3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
The Spirit has given to us the written Word, which is the infallible, complete revelation of God’s will for Mankind that equips the prophets of God to speak unto edification, exhortation and comfort (see 2Tim 3:16). Granted, when this epistle was written the church at Corinth did not have the NT Scriptures in full, but they did have the Old Testament. For that reason the work of the Apostles in that era was particularly important. Authentic edification and exhortation is the intellectual exercise of communicating the truth of Christ and the Gospel to the minds of others. This cannot happen by uttering sounds which nobody can understand. Even if he speak mysteries in the spirit (v2), what does it profit? (v6).
The Spirit can work best through a person whose goal is to edify the church in love. This principle is advanced in various ways throughout these verses. On the other hand, drawing attention to oneself will hinder the work of the Spirit. Do not doubt for one minute that Satan knows it, and will aim his temptations in that area for all ministers and leaders in the churches, whether in seeking the praise of others, magnifying one’s talents, valuing personal conclusions too highly, or other works of pride. The fact that God has given one person a particular talent does not mean it must be constantly revealed. Let all things be done decently and in order. There is a time for the soloist with a beautiful voice to sing and there is a time to refrain from singing. Speaking a foreign language has its beneficial uses for the church on occasion; other times it is simply unnecessary. It edifies only himself.
5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
Outside of the spurious activities of the Corinthians in these chapters, the NT Scriptures relate only three occasions that speaking in tongues took place. Each one occurred at crucial moments in the foundation of Christianity. The first happened at the famous day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit formally and visibly filled the newly-founded church of God, which was entirely Jewish at that time (Acts 2:3-4). The second occasion occurred at the formal opening of the door of salvation to the Gentiles through Peter and Cornelius (Acts 10:44-48), and the third took place when Paul encountered the Jewish disciples of John the Baptist in Asia who had not heard of Christ (Acts 19:1-7).
I would that ye all spake with tongues. Paul himself spoke in tongues more than ye all (1Cor 14:18); few had learned more languages than he. Nevertheless, he recognizes that to prophesy is far more important, for the church is not edified by speaking with tongues except he interpret. Yet, in such case speaking in a tongue would be superfluous. The speaker may as well save the time for interpreting and simply prophesy in the common language of all. As here so also throughout these chapters, speaking in tongues is thought to be a means of edifying the church (albeit an inferior one) and not some confirmatory event to show that a person has the Spirit. In the Acts, speaking in tongues was a miraculous sign to unbelievers that the Kingdom of God had come unto them (v22), but the manner in which the Corinthians spoke in tongues made unbelievers think that they were mad (v23).
6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine? 7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? 8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? 9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
These verses build upon the Apostle’s concern that the assembly of the church in Corinth was not fruitfully edifying the body (v3). To be profitable, speech must be understandable. He says, “If I come speaking in tongues, I must speak using words of wisdom that my hearers can understand. Even lifeless instruments produce harmonious, understandable sounds. Ye likewise must utter clear words or else you will be simply speaking into the air” (v6-9). Seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church (v12).
The authentic speaking in tongues found in the Acts was profitable because it was understandable to all hearers, an unmistakable, miraculous sign – for no man can speak multiple languages simultaneously. In Corinth however, their speaking in tongues was as useless as a monotone harp or a random-toned trumpet. These verses support my comment in verse two, that they were either speaking fruitlessly into the air a foreign language, or they were uttering indistinct and uncertain sounds with no meaning at all. A musical instrument or a spoken language must follow the common meanings of the sound or word, otherwise it is useless. The Pentecostal idea of “glossolalia” ignores the Apostle’s concern here.
10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. 11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
Some versions translate “languages” instead of “voices,” but the Greek word phone, which occurs some 140 times in the NT, is never elsewhere translated “language.” It is a sound, noise, or voice. The word appears in verses 7, 8, 10 and 11. Regardless of the translation, the thought is unaffected: “if someone utters a sound/voice that you cannot understand, that person is a foreigner to you. Meaningful conversation is impossible.”
12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
Here is the Apostle’s basic principle in exercising the spiritualities: Seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. Before speaking in a tongue, be sure that it fulfills that purpose. Is there no one that can interpret? Let him keep silence in the church (1Cor 14:28).
13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in an unknown 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.
The next five verses relate to praying in a tongue and the Apostle’s fundamental point is that the understanding, or mind (nous) needs to be actively engaged, else our prayer/worship will be unfruitful. In all God’s creation, only humans have the ability to think, reason and choose. The highest form of worship involves those God-given gifts. Preaching, praying, singing, blessing – all is unfruitful if the members of the church cannot understand. Again, “Seek to excel in edifying the church in your zeal to exercise your talents” (v12).
Pray that he may interpret. Many of the older commentators have pointed out that the simple reading of this verse seems disconnected from the surrounding ones. Here is my paraphrase translation: “Wherefore, let him that prays in a tongue also interpret what he has said, for if I pray in a language unknown to my hearers, the words of my mind are unfruitful to them, even though my spirit is truly praying to God. What then? I will both pray sincerely in my spirit and make known my mind to others.” Regardless of the exact translation, the conclusion is unchanged: speaking in a tongue can be beneficial in the church only if there is interpretation.
If, as we have ventured to suppose, some in Corinth were only pretending to speak in a foreign tongue, then even their own understanding is unfruituful. It seems more likely though, that Paul refers to a man sincerely speaking according to his understanding, but his hearers cannot understand him (see v19).
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? 17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
At the end of a prayer, it is common for the congregation to invoke the “Amen” with the speaker. Yet, the person praying in an foreign language is unintelligible. Who will know that it is time to add the “Amen” at the end? The one saying the prayer is doing very well in giving thanks, but the rest are not being edified. The custom of pronouncing an “Amen” to close a prayer seems to be of Jewish origin. One maxim went something like, “Greater is he that sayeth the “Amen” at the end than he that sayeth the prayer.”
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: 19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
Paul was fluent in foreign languages such as Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Latin, and probably could converse in several others (see note v2). I highly doubt that he meant to say that he spoke unintelligible sounds more than ye all, for that would be entirely opposite what he teaches in this chapter. He would rather speak five words in a language known to his hearers rather than 10,000 words in a tongue that was foreign to them.
The Pentecostal idea of speaking in tongues cannot stand before the simple teaching of these verses. Add verse 23 and the argument against “glossolalia” is clear. Let us speak unto edification, not for vainglory and selfish recognition.
20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
“Brethren, act not so childishly!” Many of the Christians in Corinth were babes in Christ. They should have been spiritually mature by this time (1Cor 3:1), but their growth was being stunted by selfish motives and practices that did not edify the church. When it comes to malice, flattery and ulterior motives, do act as innocent children (Mat 18:3); but when it comes to exercise of the mind, think as mature adults and not as untaught children (Eph 4:14). In the previous chapter, the Apostle made a similar analogy (see 1Cor 13:11).
In this verse, the word understanding is translated from the Greek word phren, which is not found elsewhere in the New Testament but does occur a few times in the Septuagint (see Pro 6:32; Dan 4:34-36; Pro 18:32). It may correspond to the English term, “common sense.”
21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
Isaiah prophesied that Judah would be punished for refusing to obey God; she would be taken captive by enemies who spoke a different language (Is 28:11). Earlier, Moses had warned the children of Israel of the same punishment (Deut 28:49). Then, at the transition of the Covenants, the word of the prophets was completely fulfilled. The Gospel was preached in Greek, in Latin, in Egyptian and more (Acts 2:9-11), yet many of the Jews would not believe.
Speaking in tongues does not serve for the benefit of believers, but for unbelievers. How then, can Charismatics insist upon tongues in the weekly church service? They are well outside the teaching of this chapter. On the other hand, by prophesy the secrets of the heart are made manifest and the Truth is made sure (v24-25). Where does that leave speaking in tongues? It serves for nothing, except he interpret. Some claim that the real purpose of speaking in tongues is to confirm that the Spirit is dwelling in the heart of the believer. There is not even a hint of that idea in these chapters.
Tongues are for a sign…to them that believe not. Yes, tongues were a mighty, miraculous confirmation to the world of the divine origin of the infant Church of Jesus Christ. For at Pentecost, just as Christ had promised (Luke 24:49), power from on high fell upon Peter as he preached to devout Jews who had come from all over the world to worship at Jerusalem. Every one heard the Gospel in his own native tongue (Acts 2:6-11). It was a sign that something new had come from God, a divine confirmation that the Kingdom of Christ had come on earth, the New Covenant was being inaugurated. Many believed on Christ after hearing Peter’s sermon and returned to their home regions speaking of what they had seen and heard. Then later, when God instructed Peter to open the Gospel to the Gentiles also, this shocking new truth was confirmed by Cornelius also speaking in tongues.
Speaking in tongues was literally the sign for unbelievers in that day, the unmistakable validation of God that the desire of the prophets had come. Those unique events are long past; now the commission of the Christ’s people is to prophesy, to teach and to disciple all nations (Mat 28:19). When the Church of Christ was a babe, speaking in tongues was a valuable sign of the transferal of Covenant blessings from the commonwealth of Israel to the new Israel of God, but when she became an adult those things were no longer necessary (1Cor 13:11). The change was so radical that even the Jewish Christians struggled to accept the Gentiles into the assembly. Even the Apostle Paul needed a special, supernatural sign to open his eyes to the new revelation. But now, the whole world is able to see and study the Gospel of the Kingdom.
If some wish to press the question of why tongues and miracles are not common today, I answer that supernatural signs necessarily detract from the fundamental New Covenant requirement that the Christian is to walk by faith. Faith is the new requisite for receiving God’s approval, but signs and wonders diminish the need for faith. This is true also of salvation, which begins with divinely-sent feelings of peace, freedom and joy in the Lord, yet as the Christian matures in his salvation, he finds that he must more and more walk by faith, often times in the absence of those earlier wonders of “feelings.” God has chosen to interact with mankind by Faith, and that means supernatural signs and wonders must take a lower seat (2Cor 5:7).
23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: 25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
Whether speaking foreign languages or simply babbling unintelligble sounds, the church cannot be edified if everyone goes about speaking in tongues, nor can the Gospel be preached to the unsaved. Far from being a compelling sign from God to unbelievers, the church will appear to be nothing but a bunch of crazies if they utter sounds without meaning. On the other hand, if an unbeliever enters a service and hears the speaker expounding in truth and sincerity the Word of God, his heart will surely be convicted and he will know and report that God is in you of a truth. The Pentecostal thinks that glossolalia will prove to all that God is within him, but Paul says that by powerful prophesy that evidence is made clear.
Here, prophesying is praised for its usefulness to convict the hearts of unbelievers. Why then does verse 22 appear to deny that? Answer: the point of verse 22 is that tongues are a sign to unbelievers, while prophesying is a sign to believers. Then, verse 23 goes on to show that prophecy reaches the unbelievers too.
26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
From this chapter we infer that the worship service in Corinth was a rather disorderly scene of sharing individualistic talents, which inevitably progressed towards sensationalism as each one tried to out-do the other. Not so different from the human tendency today, but perhaps we are better at hiding our intentions than they. In the next few verses, the Apostle lays out some general guidelines for the worship service in order to inject conviction, truth, sobriety and dignity into the formal church gathering. There are many ways and methods that the church body can be edified. But do be sure that they really edify!
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; 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.
These verses crush the idea that speaking in tongues is actually involuntary, for (they say) the Holy Spirit takes over a person’s mouth and has him utter sounds that are not his own. Yet according to these verses, he that speaks in a tongue retains control of his faculties. He has the ability to wait his turn, refrain from speaking if two or three have already spoken in a tongue, and to decide not to speak if no interpreter is present. His spirit remains in subjection to his mental powers (1Cor 14:32). Thus, he is always allowed to speak to himself, and to God in tongues later in private. Only two or three should speak in tongues during a single service, and then only men (emphatic in the Greek). Women are not permitted to speak in tongues (also 1Cor 14:34).
In a multi-lingual setting, the work of interpretation is even more important than speaking in a tongue. The interpreter repeats the words of the speaker in the native tongues of others, making the message edifying to the hearers (1Cor 14:5). Often the speaker is also able to interpret, yet he is unlikely to know all the languages present. Thus, the Spirit gives unto some the interpretation of tongues (1Cor 12:10). I have seen first-hand the good effects of an interpreter in such settings – a young man repeating a Spanish message to English-only hearers unto great edification. In the same service however, sat a family that spoke Guaraní. One of their own was able to interpret.
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. 30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. 31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
The guidelines for the prophets (see note on v1) that speak in the assembly are quite similar to those for speaking in tongues. Only two or three should prophesy in turns, one by one, while the other prophets judge what is said for veracity and application (2Tim 2:15; Acts 17:11; 1Joh 4:1).
Again we infer that the worship service at Corinth was disorganized and disruptive; the brethren were jostling among themselves for attention and power. Although Satan is ever trying to confuse foment chaos, the Word’s rule for the churches of Christ is different: Let all things be done decently and in order (v40). In the assemblies of the saints, an ambience of peace, quietness, security and confidence should reign. God is not glorified in those worship services that are conducted in confusion (akatmastasia – commotion, confusion, tumult), but by those ruled in peace (eirene – serenity, quietness, rest).
Another that sitteth by. It is unclear if this refers to the two or three prophets scheduled to speak, or to someone else in the congregation. Given the context of two prophets judging what the first is saying (v29), I infer that Paul means those judges should stand to correct the speaker if he has spoken in error. This would deter false doctrine from inadvertently spreading in the church. Many Anabaptist churches follow this general policy, except that they would not interrupt the first speaker, but would wait until their turn to speak and then rephrase or correct a previous speaker’s message. It is undoubtedly true that we say things at times without realizing that our statement could be misunderstood.
Whereas the English versions of verse 31 seem to emphasis that all in the congregation are eligible to prophesy, the Greek wording puts the emphasis rather on maintaining good order in the assembly. Ye are able, one by one, all to prophesy, that all may learn, and all may be exhorted (YLT). This better fits the context and teaching of these chapters. Not all men have the gift of prophecy.
The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. While the wording might seem odd in English, the apparent meaning is that the speaker retains complete control of his mind and tongue. In preaching under inspiration of the Spirit, the human messenger speaks in his own words and from his own mind. Doubtless, a truly inspired speaker (like the Apostle Paul) will be directed by the Spirit to reveal beautiful truths of the Gospel, but his spirit remains his own. This is consistent with the formation of the Bible itself. God spoke through holy men whose thoughts and minds were born along by the Spirit (2Pet 1:21). If the infallible and God-breathed Holy Scriptures themselves retain the stamp of human characteristics, it would be odd indeed if God chose to use direct possession of a man’s body and tongue in the church assembly. I would view any such manifestation as incompatible with what the Scriptures teach.
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
Women are not permitted to speak in tongues or to prophesy in the assembly of the church. This simple doctrine been ignored and denied by many churches in today’s world. They think that they know better than the Apostle, who anticipates their blatant defiance: “What! Did the Word of God originate with you? Whoever rejects this rule is saying that I am not writing unto you the commandments of the Lord.” The Apostle Paul was put in trust with the Gospel – to speak and write it unto others. And he did so reverently and fearfully, not as pleasing men, but God (1Thes 2:1-8). He was not irritated at them because they were ignoring his own words and ideas, but because these were the commandments of God.
In the worship service, women may sing, pray and give testimony, but they may not occupy a position of authority over the man (1Tim 2:11-15; 1Cor 11:3). Preaching, teaching and administration are roles that God has designed for man to perform, for it is unseemly that a woman rule over men. Women are responsible to teach and administer among other women and children, but not in mixed settings. In the church and home, the woman’s position is one of Godly influence rather than leadership (Eph 5:21-33). These verses indicate (along with 1Cor 11:1-16) that some women in the church at Corinth were causing disturbances in their services.
As also saith the Law – not referring strictly to the Mosaic Law, but to the Scriptures of the Old Covenant in general, for Paul uses the same expression in 1Cor 14:21 when referring to the book of Isaiah and Jesus puts the Psalms in the scope of the Law (John 10:34). The Old Covenant consistently recognizes the authority of the male over the woman, which God stated at the very beginning in the garden of Eden (Gen 3:16). The Greek word here translated obedience (hupotasso) is elsewhere used in the sense of submission or being subject unto (Eph 5:22; Col 3:18). For more on that topic see my note for 1Cor 11:3.
I venture to say that verses 36-38 are the sharpest words to be found in the Pauline epistles. He clearly anticipated that his statement would be poorly-received by certain factions in Corinth, so he stops their arguments before they can be enunciated. His reprimand stands in judgment of so many churches today who have also ignored this doctrine, and who will therefore be themselves ignored (v38).
Let your women keep silence…for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. It is a testimony to the Spirit’s inspiration of the Scriptures that this statement is so strongly reinforced, for Paul would be astonished to see the level of rebellion against this command in present-day churches. The testimony of Anabaptist churches in keeping God’s design for the roles of men and women has never been so important. Let us keep faithfully all the sayings of the prophecy of this book (Rev 22:7) and so be found worthy to stand before the Throne at the end of the Age.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. 40 Let all things be done decently and in order.
Wherefore brethren, or, hear the conclusion of this matter: “Seek to prophesy, for that is of primary importance; but do not forbid to speak in tongues.” The teaching of these chapters is that church members do well to desire the spiritualities (1Cor 14:1) and to covet earnestly the best gifts (1Cor 12:31), but should seek to use them to excel in edifying the church (1Cor 14:12). This ends the Apostle’s guidance for acceptable conduct in the worship service.
The Apostle’s discourse in this chapter brings us to consider the following question. Is speaking in tongues (as the Acts relate) a present work of the Spirit? That is, does the Spirit today change the tongue of a speaker such that he is heard in a different tongue by others? We could add to that; does the Spirit impart the power to heal as He once did to Peter and Paul? (Acts 3:6; 5:16; 28:8-9). Pentecostals (among others) would answer yes, while cessationist Christians think not.
Now, the Scriptures are quite clear that those miracles were necessary signs which validated the heavenly, divine origin of the new Church of Christ. Christ and the prophets foretold these confirming signs of the authenticity of the New Covenant (Mark 16:17-19; Acts 2:16-18). Further signs are neither necessary nor convenient (see notes for Mat 16:1-4) for they undermine the work of faith, which is the foundational criterion of God’s interaction with Mankind. The amount of one’s faith is diminished by signs and wonders, for what is seen with the eyes is not of faith but reality.
On the other hand, the Spirit is certainly able and does work every sign and wonder today that He did with the Apostles. However, He now does so for a different reason and therefore in a different manner. The veracity of the Gospel has been confirmed by many infallible proofs (Acts 1:3) that do not need repeating. Yet the continuing work of the Spirit is to convict and draw men unto Christ and surely He works in miraculous ways to affirm faith in those seekers. So today the Spirit works much more personally and quietly than He did in the Acts, for His mission is to point individuals to Christ and to strengthen the faith of the weak. We better understand the Spirit’s way of working today in this Age of Grace by reading chapters like John 3 than by reading Acts 2.
So let us not forbid to speak in tongues (1Cor 14:39), but let us also recognize that it is the Spirit who gives utterance according to His place and choosing (Acts 2:4; 1Cor 12:11). I am sure that every foreign missionary has fervently desired the ability to speak in tongues and on occasions the Spirit does so work, but God has chosen the avenue of simple, obedient faith on earth to preach to the people of the world. Likewise, the Spirit does answer prayers of healing, but according to His will and choosing. So called “faith-healers” have made a mockery of it. The time for supernatural miracles made visible to the world’s multitudes has passed. We now have the Word of God in our hands. Let us take it near and far, preaching in our native tongues and others, so that the world may know (John 17:23).