jgredline
Member
Hello Sput
Well here is the big one.
I hope it makes sense to you. Blessings my friend
1 Cor 14:2-28. I was using the NKJV for this exposition.
14:2 He who speaks in a tongue without interpretation is not speaking for the benefit of the congregation. God understands what he is saying but the people don’t because it is a foreign language to them. He might be setting forth marvelous truths, hitherto unknown, but it does no good because it is all unintelligible.
14:3 The man who prophesies, on the other hand, builds people up, encourages them, and comforts them. The reason for this is that he is speaking in the language of the people; that is what makes the difference. When Paul says that the prophet builds up, stirs up, and binds up, he is not giving a definition. He is simply saying that these results follow when the message is given in a language the people know.
14:4 Verse 4 is commonly used to justify the private use of tongues for self-edification. But the fact that the word “church†is found nine times in this chapter (vv. 4, 5, 12, 19, 23, 28, 33, 34, 35) offers rather convincing evidence that Paul is not dealing with a believer’s devotional life in the privacy of his room, but with the use of tongues in the local assembly. The context shows that, far from advocating the use of tongues for self-edification, the apostle is condemning any use of the gift in the church that does not result in helping others. Love thinks of others and not of self. If the gift of tongues is used in love, it will benefit others and not only oneself. In other words tongues used as a prayer language should be used in private.
He who prophesies edifies the church. He is not parading his gift for personal advantage, but speaking constructively in a language the congregation can understand.
14:5 Paul does not despise the gift of tongues; he realizes that it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. He could not and would not despise anything that comes from the Spirit. When he says “I wish you all spoke with tongues,†he is renouncing any selfish desire to limit the gift to himself and a favored few. His desire is similar to one expressed by Moses: “O, that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them†(Num. 11:29b). But in saying this, Paul knew that it was not God’s will that all believers should have any one gift (see 12:29, 30).
He would rather that the Corinthians prophesied, because in so doing they would be building up one another, whereas when they spoke in tongues without interpretation, their listeners would not understand and therefore would not be benefited. Paul preferred edification to display. “What astonishes is far less important for the spiritual mind than what edifies,â€Â
The expression unless indeed he interprets could mean “unless the one speaking in tongues interprets†or “unless someone interprets.â€Â
14:6 Even if Paul himself came to Corinth speaking with tongues, it would not profit them unless they could understand what he said. They would have to be able to recognize what he was saying as revelation and knowledge, or prophesying and teaching. Commentators agree that revelation and knowledge have to do with inward reception, whereas prophesying and teaching have to do with the giving out of the same. Paul’s point in this verse is that in order to profit the church, a message must be understood. He goes on to prove this in the following verses.
14:7 First of all, he uses the illustration of musical instruments. Unless a flute or harp makes a distinction in the notes, no one will know what is being piped or played. The very idea of enjoyable music includes the thought of distinction in notes, a definite rhythm, and a certain amount of clarity.
14:8 The same is true of a trumpet. The call to arms must be clear and distinct, otherwise no one will prepare for battle. If the trumpeter merely stands up and blows one long blast in a monotone, no one will stir.
14:9 So it is with the human tongue. Unless the speech we utter is intelligible, no one will know what is being said. It would be as profitless as speaking into the air. (In verse 9, “tongue†means the organ of speech, not a foreign language.) There is a practical application in all of this, namely, that ministry or teaching should be clear and simple. If it is “deep†and over the heads of the people, then it will not profit them. It might result in bringing a certain measure of gratification to the speaker, but it will not help the people of God.
14:10 Paul passes to another illustration of the truth he has been setting forth. He speaks of the many different kinds of languages in the world. Here the subject is broader than human languages; it includes the communications of other creatures. Perhaps Paul is thinking of the various birdcalls and the squeals and grunts used by animals. We know, for instance, that there are certain mating, migratory, and feeding calls used by birds. Also there are certain sounds used by animals to warn of danger. Paul is simply stating here that all of these voices have a definite meaning. None of them is without significance. Each one is used to convey some definite message.
14:11 It is true also with human speech. Unless a person speaks with articulate sounds, no one can understand him. He might as well be repeating meaningless gibberish. Few experiences can be more trying than the attempt to communicate with one who does not understand your language.
14:12 In view of this, the Corinthians should mingle their zeal for spiritual gifts with the desire to edify the church. “Make the edification of the church your aim in this desire to excel,†Moffatt translates it. Notice that Paul never discourages them in their zeal for spiritual gifts, but seeks to guide and instruct them so that in the use of these gifts they will reach the highest goal.
14:13 If a man speaks in a tongue, he should pray that he may interpret. Or the meaning might be to pray that someone may interpret. It is possible that a man who has the gift of tongues might also have the gift of interpretation, but that would be the exception rather than the rule. The analogy of the human body suggests different functions for different members.
14:14 If a man, for instance, prays in a tongue at a meeting of the church, his spirit prays in the sense that his feelings find utterance, though not in the commonly used language. But his understanding is unfruitful in the sense that it doesn’t benefit anyone else. The congregation doesn’t know what he is saying. As we will explain in the notes on 14:19, we take the phrase my understanding to mean “other people’s understanding of me.â€Â
14:15 What is the conclusion then? It is simply this: Paul will not only pray with the spirit, but he will also pray in such a manner as to be understood. This is what is meant by the expression: “I will also pray with the understanding.†It does not mean that he will pray with his own understanding, but rather that he will pray so as to help others to understand. Likewise he will sing with the spirit, and also sing so as to be understood.
14:16 That this is the correct meaning of the passage is made abundantly clear by verse 16. If Paul gave thanks with his own spirit, but not in such a way as to be understood by others, how could one who did not understand the language he was using say “Amen†at the close?
He who occupies the place of the uninformed means a person who is sitting in the audience and does not know the language that is being used by the speaker. This verse incidentally authorizes the intelligent use of the “Amen†in public gatherings of the church.
14:17 Speaking in a foreign language, one might indeed really be giving thanks to God, but others are not edified if they do not know what is being said.
14:18 The apostle apparently had the ability to speak more foreign languages than all of them. We know that Paul had learned some languages, but here the reference is undoubtedly to his gift of tongues.
14:19 In spite of this superior language ability, Paul says that he would rather speak five words with his understanding, that is, so as to be understood, than ten thousand words in a foreign tongue. He was not at all interested in using this gift for self-display. His chief aim was to help the people of God. Therefore he determined that when he spoke he would do so in such a way that others would understand him.
The expression my understanding is what is known as an “objective genitive.†It does not mean what I myself understand, but what others understand when I speak.
Hodge demonstrates that the context here has to do, not with Paul’s own understanding of what he spoke in tongues, but of other people’s understanding him:
That Paul should give thanks to God that he was more abundantly endowed with the gift of tongues, if that gift consisted in the ability to speak in languages which he himself did not understand, and the use of which, on that assumption, could according to his principle benefit neither himself nor others, is not to be believed. Equally clear is it from this verse that to speak with tongues was not to speak in a state of mental unconsciousness. The common doctrine as to the nature of the gift is the only one consistent with this passage. Paul says that although he could speak in foreign languages more than the Corinthians, he would rather speak five words with his understanding, i.e., so as to be intelligible, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. In the church, that is, in the assembly, that I might teach others also (katēchē) to instruct orally, Gal.6:6. This shows what is meant by speaking with the understanding. It is speaking in such a way as to convey instruction.
14:20 Paul next exhorts the Corinthians against immaturity in their thinking. Children prefer amusement to usefulness, flashy things to stable ones. Paul is saying, “Don’t take a childish delight in these spectacular gifts which you use for self-display. There is one sense in which you should be childlike, and that is in the matter of malice or evil. But in other matters, you should think with the maturity of men.â€Â
14:21 Next the apostle quotes from Isaiah to show that tongues are a sign to unbelievers rather than to believers. God said that because the children of Israel had rejected His message and had mocked it, He would speak to them through a foreign language (Isa. 28:11). The fulfillment of this took place when the Assyrian invaders came into the land of Israel, and the Israelites heard the Assyrian language being spoken in their midst. This was a sign to them of their rejection of God’s word.
14:22 The argument here is that since God intended tongues as a sign to unbelievers, the Corinthians should not insist on using them so freely in gatherings of believers. It would be better if they prophesied, since prophesying was a sign for believers and not for unbelievers.
14:23 If the whole church comes together in one place, and all the Christians speak with tongues without interpretation, what would strangers coming in think about it all? It would not be a testimony to them; rather they would think that the saints were mental cases.
There is an apparent contradiction between verse 22 and verses 23–25. In verse 22, we are told that tongues are a sign to unbelievers whereas prophecy is for believers. But in verses 23–25, Paul says that tongues used in the church might only confuse and stumble unbelievers whereas prophecy might help them.
The explanation of the seeming contradiction is this: The unbelievers in verse 22 are those who have rejected the word of God and closed their hearts to the truth. Tongues are a sign of God’s judgment on them, as they were on Israel in the Isaiah passage (v. 21). The unbelievers in verses 23–25 are those who are willing to be taught. They are open to hear the word of God, as is evidenced by their presence in a Christian assembly. If they hear Christians speaking in foreign languages without interpretation, they will be hindered, not helped.
14:24 If strangers enter a meeting where the Christians are prophesying rather than speaking in tongues, the visitors hear and understand what is being said and they are convinced by all and convicted by all. What the apostle is emphasizing here is that no real conviction of sin is produced unless the listeners understand what is being said. When tongues are being used with no interpretation, then obviously visitors are not helped at all. Those who prophesy would, of course, do it in the language in current use in that area, and as a result listeners would be impressed by what they heard.
14:25 The secrets of a man’s heart are revealed by prophecy. He feels that the speaker is addressing him directly. The Spirit of God works conviction in his soul. And so, falling down on his face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among these people.
And so Paul’s point in verses 22–25 is that tongues without interpretation produce no conviction among unbelievers, whereas prophecy does.
14:26 Because of the abuses that had entered the church in connection with the gift of tongues, it was necessary for the Spirit of God to set forth certain regulations to control the use of this gift. In verses 26–28, we have such controls.
What happened when the early church came together? It appears from verse 26 that the meetings were very informal and free. There was liberty for the Spirit of God to use the various gifts which He had given to the church. One man, for instance, would read a psalm, and then another would set forth some teaching. Another would speak in a foreign tongue. Another would present a revelation which he had received directly from the Lord. Another would interpret the tongue that had already been given. Paul gives tacit approval to this “open meeting†where there was liberty for the Spirit of God to speak through different brothers. But having stated this, he sets forth the first control in the exercise of these gifts. Everything must be done with a view to edification. Just because a thing is sensational or spectacular does not mean that it has any place in the church. In order to be acceptable, ministry must have the effect of building up the people of God. That is what is meant by edificationâ€â€spiritual growth.
14:27 The second control is that in any one meeting no more than three may speak in tongues. If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three. There was to be no such thing as a meeting where a multitude of people would arise to show their proficiency in foreign languages.
Next we learn that the two or three who were permitted to speak in tongues in any one meeting must do so in turn. That means that they must not speak at the same time, but one after the other. This would avoid the bedlam and disorder of several speaking at once.
The fourth rule is that there must be an interpreter. Let one interpret. If a man got up to speak in a foreign language, he must first determine that there was someone present to interpret what he was about to say.
14:28 If there was no interpreter present, then he must keep silent in church. He could sit there and speak inaudibly to himself and to God in this foreign language, but he was not permitted to do so publicly.
The end. I pray / hope that this really helps even one person as I have spent hours on this.
Blessings Jg
Well here is the big one.
I hope it makes sense to you. Blessings my friend
1 Cor 14:2-28. I was using the NKJV for this exposition.
14:2 He who speaks in a tongue without interpretation is not speaking for the benefit of the congregation. God understands what he is saying but the people don’t because it is a foreign language to them. He might be setting forth marvelous truths, hitherto unknown, but it does no good because it is all unintelligible.
14:3 The man who prophesies, on the other hand, builds people up, encourages them, and comforts them. The reason for this is that he is speaking in the language of the people; that is what makes the difference. When Paul says that the prophet builds up, stirs up, and binds up, he is not giving a definition. He is simply saying that these results follow when the message is given in a language the people know.
14:4 Verse 4 is commonly used to justify the private use of tongues for self-edification. But the fact that the word “church†is found nine times in this chapter (vv. 4, 5, 12, 19, 23, 28, 33, 34, 35) offers rather convincing evidence that Paul is not dealing with a believer’s devotional life in the privacy of his room, but with the use of tongues in the local assembly. The context shows that, far from advocating the use of tongues for self-edification, the apostle is condemning any use of the gift in the church that does not result in helping others. Love thinks of others and not of self. If the gift of tongues is used in love, it will benefit others and not only oneself. In other words tongues used as a prayer language should be used in private.
He who prophesies edifies the church. He is not parading his gift for personal advantage, but speaking constructively in a language the congregation can understand.
14:5 Paul does not despise the gift of tongues; he realizes that it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. He could not and would not despise anything that comes from the Spirit. When he says “I wish you all spoke with tongues,†he is renouncing any selfish desire to limit the gift to himself and a favored few. His desire is similar to one expressed by Moses: “O, that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them†(Num. 11:29b). But in saying this, Paul knew that it was not God’s will that all believers should have any one gift (see 12:29, 30).
He would rather that the Corinthians prophesied, because in so doing they would be building up one another, whereas when they spoke in tongues without interpretation, their listeners would not understand and therefore would not be benefited. Paul preferred edification to display. “What astonishes is far less important for the spiritual mind than what edifies,â€Â
The expression unless indeed he interprets could mean “unless the one speaking in tongues interprets†or “unless someone interprets.â€Â
14:6 Even if Paul himself came to Corinth speaking with tongues, it would not profit them unless they could understand what he said. They would have to be able to recognize what he was saying as revelation and knowledge, or prophesying and teaching. Commentators agree that revelation and knowledge have to do with inward reception, whereas prophesying and teaching have to do with the giving out of the same. Paul’s point in this verse is that in order to profit the church, a message must be understood. He goes on to prove this in the following verses.
14:7 First of all, he uses the illustration of musical instruments. Unless a flute or harp makes a distinction in the notes, no one will know what is being piped or played. The very idea of enjoyable music includes the thought of distinction in notes, a definite rhythm, and a certain amount of clarity.
14:8 The same is true of a trumpet. The call to arms must be clear and distinct, otherwise no one will prepare for battle. If the trumpeter merely stands up and blows one long blast in a monotone, no one will stir.
14:9 So it is with the human tongue. Unless the speech we utter is intelligible, no one will know what is being said. It would be as profitless as speaking into the air. (In verse 9, “tongue†means the organ of speech, not a foreign language.) There is a practical application in all of this, namely, that ministry or teaching should be clear and simple. If it is “deep†and over the heads of the people, then it will not profit them. It might result in bringing a certain measure of gratification to the speaker, but it will not help the people of God.
14:10 Paul passes to another illustration of the truth he has been setting forth. He speaks of the many different kinds of languages in the world. Here the subject is broader than human languages; it includes the communications of other creatures. Perhaps Paul is thinking of the various birdcalls and the squeals and grunts used by animals. We know, for instance, that there are certain mating, migratory, and feeding calls used by birds. Also there are certain sounds used by animals to warn of danger. Paul is simply stating here that all of these voices have a definite meaning. None of them is without significance. Each one is used to convey some definite message.
14:11 It is true also with human speech. Unless a person speaks with articulate sounds, no one can understand him. He might as well be repeating meaningless gibberish. Few experiences can be more trying than the attempt to communicate with one who does not understand your language.
14:12 In view of this, the Corinthians should mingle their zeal for spiritual gifts with the desire to edify the church. “Make the edification of the church your aim in this desire to excel,†Moffatt translates it. Notice that Paul never discourages them in their zeal for spiritual gifts, but seeks to guide and instruct them so that in the use of these gifts they will reach the highest goal.
14:13 If a man speaks in a tongue, he should pray that he may interpret. Or the meaning might be to pray that someone may interpret. It is possible that a man who has the gift of tongues might also have the gift of interpretation, but that would be the exception rather than the rule. The analogy of the human body suggests different functions for different members.
14:14 If a man, for instance, prays in a tongue at a meeting of the church, his spirit prays in the sense that his feelings find utterance, though not in the commonly used language. But his understanding is unfruitful in the sense that it doesn’t benefit anyone else. The congregation doesn’t know what he is saying. As we will explain in the notes on 14:19, we take the phrase my understanding to mean “other people’s understanding of me.â€Â
14:15 What is the conclusion then? It is simply this: Paul will not only pray with the spirit, but he will also pray in such a manner as to be understood. This is what is meant by the expression: “I will also pray with the understanding.†It does not mean that he will pray with his own understanding, but rather that he will pray so as to help others to understand. Likewise he will sing with the spirit, and also sing so as to be understood.
14:16 That this is the correct meaning of the passage is made abundantly clear by verse 16. If Paul gave thanks with his own spirit, but not in such a way as to be understood by others, how could one who did not understand the language he was using say “Amen†at the close?
He who occupies the place of the uninformed means a person who is sitting in the audience and does not know the language that is being used by the speaker. This verse incidentally authorizes the intelligent use of the “Amen†in public gatherings of the church.
14:17 Speaking in a foreign language, one might indeed really be giving thanks to God, but others are not edified if they do not know what is being said.
14:18 The apostle apparently had the ability to speak more foreign languages than all of them. We know that Paul had learned some languages, but here the reference is undoubtedly to his gift of tongues.
14:19 In spite of this superior language ability, Paul says that he would rather speak five words with his understanding, that is, so as to be understood, than ten thousand words in a foreign tongue. He was not at all interested in using this gift for self-display. His chief aim was to help the people of God. Therefore he determined that when he spoke he would do so in such a way that others would understand him.
The expression my understanding is what is known as an “objective genitive.†It does not mean what I myself understand, but what others understand when I speak.
Hodge demonstrates that the context here has to do, not with Paul’s own understanding of what he spoke in tongues, but of other people’s understanding him:
That Paul should give thanks to God that he was more abundantly endowed with the gift of tongues, if that gift consisted in the ability to speak in languages which he himself did not understand, and the use of which, on that assumption, could according to his principle benefit neither himself nor others, is not to be believed. Equally clear is it from this verse that to speak with tongues was not to speak in a state of mental unconsciousness. The common doctrine as to the nature of the gift is the only one consistent with this passage. Paul says that although he could speak in foreign languages more than the Corinthians, he would rather speak five words with his understanding, i.e., so as to be intelligible, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. In the church, that is, in the assembly, that I might teach others also (katēchē) to instruct orally, Gal.6:6. This shows what is meant by speaking with the understanding. It is speaking in such a way as to convey instruction.
14:20 Paul next exhorts the Corinthians against immaturity in their thinking. Children prefer amusement to usefulness, flashy things to stable ones. Paul is saying, “Don’t take a childish delight in these spectacular gifts which you use for self-display. There is one sense in which you should be childlike, and that is in the matter of malice or evil. But in other matters, you should think with the maturity of men.â€Â
14:21 Next the apostle quotes from Isaiah to show that tongues are a sign to unbelievers rather than to believers. God said that because the children of Israel had rejected His message and had mocked it, He would speak to them through a foreign language (Isa. 28:11). The fulfillment of this took place when the Assyrian invaders came into the land of Israel, and the Israelites heard the Assyrian language being spoken in their midst. This was a sign to them of their rejection of God’s word.
14:22 The argument here is that since God intended tongues as a sign to unbelievers, the Corinthians should not insist on using them so freely in gatherings of believers. It would be better if they prophesied, since prophesying was a sign for believers and not for unbelievers.
14:23 If the whole church comes together in one place, and all the Christians speak with tongues without interpretation, what would strangers coming in think about it all? It would not be a testimony to them; rather they would think that the saints were mental cases.
There is an apparent contradiction between verse 22 and verses 23–25. In verse 22, we are told that tongues are a sign to unbelievers whereas prophecy is for believers. But in verses 23–25, Paul says that tongues used in the church might only confuse and stumble unbelievers whereas prophecy might help them.
The explanation of the seeming contradiction is this: The unbelievers in verse 22 are those who have rejected the word of God and closed their hearts to the truth. Tongues are a sign of God’s judgment on them, as they were on Israel in the Isaiah passage (v. 21). The unbelievers in verses 23–25 are those who are willing to be taught. They are open to hear the word of God, as is evidenced by their presence in a Christian assembly. If they hear Christians speaking in foreign languages without interpretation, they will be hindered, not helped.
14:24 If strangers enter a meeting where the Christians are prophesying rather than speaking in tongues, the visitors hear and understand what is being said and they are convinced by all and convicted by all. What the apostle is emphasizing here is that no real conviction of sin is produced unless the listeners understand what is being said. When tongues are being used with no interpretation, then obviously visitors are not helped at all. Those who prophesy would, of course, do it in the language in current use in that area, and as a result listeners would be impressed by what they heard.
14:25 The secrets of a man’s heart are revealed by prophecy. He feels that the speaker is addressing him directly. The Spirit of God works conviction in his soul. And so, falling down on his face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among these people.
And so Paul’s point in verses 22–25 is that tongues without interpretation produce no conviction among unbelievers, whereas prophecy does.
14:26 Because of the abuses that had entered the church in connection with the gift of tongues, it was necessary for the Spirit of God to set forth certain regulations to control the use of this gift. In verses 26–28, we have such controls.
What happened when the early church came together? It appears from verse 26 that the meetings were very informal and free. There was liberty for the Spirit of God to use the various gifts which He had given to the church. One man, for instance, would read a psalm, and then another would set forth some teaching. Another would speak in a foreign tongue. Another would present a revelation which he had received directly from the Lord. Another would interpret the tongue that had already been given. Paul gives tacit approval to this “open meeting†where there was liberty for the Spirit of God to speak through different brothers. But having stated this, he sets forth the first control in the exercise of these gifts. Everything must be done with a view to edification. Just because a thing is sensational or spectacular does not mean that it has any place in the church. In order to be acceptable, ministry must have the effect of building up the people of God. That is what is meant by edificationâ€â€spiritual growth.
14:27 The second control is that in any one meeting no more than three may speak in tongues. If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three. There was to be no such thing as a meeting where a multitude of people would arise to show their proficiency in foreign languages.
Next we learn that the two or three who were permitted to speak in tongues in any one meeting must do so in turn. That means that they must not speak at the same time, but one after the other. This would avoid the bedlam and disorder of several speaking at once.
The fourth rule is that there must be an interpreter. Let one interpret. If a man got up to speak in a foreign language, he must first determine that there was someone present to interpret what he was about to say.
14:28 If there was no interpreter present, then he must keep silent in church. He could sit there and speak inaudibly to himself and to God in this foreign language, but he was not permitted to do so publicly.
The end. I pray / hope that this really helps even one person as I have spent hours on this.
Blessings Jg
