Chapter 14
V1-3 Despite the abundance of spiritual gifts, the Corinthians, like most carnal Christians of today, desired the less weighty, yet seemingly more ecstatic gifts of speaking in tongues in particular. It is no secret that most Christians feel spiritually mature when able to speak in tongues, yet scripture overwhelmingly proves that this is but the entry level of immature Christians, usually being a sign of the new birth cf Acts 10:45-46;19:6. Paul is about to give a discourse on the greater need to desire prophesying over speaking in tongues, for the edification of the church.
Prophesying is not only restricted to predicting the future, but more commonly is in reference to speaking forth by divine inspiration, or to utter a thing that can only be known by divine revelation. The amazing revelations found in Paul’s epistles, and that of the other apostles, is typically what prophesying is, and undoubtedly far exceeded their ability to speak in tongues, whose mysterious, unintelligible words of which are not found on any page of scripture. Prophesying is beneficial in that it teaches, refutes, reproves, admonishes and comforts others. Paul stresses that if we are to follow after brotherly love, then naturally, prophesying will be the gift coveted by the mature Christian.
V4 The word unknown as in verse 2 is added by the KJV translators and is not in the original manuscripts. Glossa is Greek for tongues as in languages. Hence tongues are not necessarily unknown altogether, except to those who do not understand the language spoken. There are however tongues of Angels too of which is most likely a language not known to mankind cf 13:1. The purpose of tongues is for direct communication with Elohim, only being of benefit to the congregation, if one is present to interpret what is being uttered. Mark 16:17 states that tongues are a sign of true believers, as opposed to nominal Christians. Isa 28:9-12 expresses that tongues are a rest and a refreshing.
V5 The person speaking tongues may concurrently have the gift to interpret that which he is uttering cf v13. In such a case speaking in tongues would be on par with prophesying in the sense that the ecclesia would be edified. If a gift from the Holy Spirit does not ultimately edify the church, then no matter how spiritual it may make one feel, it will always pale in comparison to prophesying. It is important to edify the body of Messiah in order to advance their spiritual maturity, which in turn heightens their ability to bear fruit through bringing lost souls into the Kingdom of Elohim, which should be our main goal in life.
V6 Speaking in tongues only benefits the person communicating with Elohim, but not the ecclesia, lest the tongue-speaker interpret for them to give apokalupsis/disclosure of truth, revelation, knowledge, prophetic wisdom or didache/teaching, which in most cases he can’t. Paul hence asks why the Corinthians were majoring on that which does not profit the ecclesia.
V7-8 An analogy is utilized to compare tongues without interpretation to musical instruments clanging an indistinguishable sound. Paul in not so many words is clearly relegating to the trash heap those public ecstatic utterances which are devoid of interpretive benefit to the ecclesia. Christians have turned tongue speaking into a self-ingratiating freakshow used to foolishly delude oneself as being more mature in spirit than others. This is what Paul was at great odds with.
V9 If one publicly breaks out into glossolalia, but fails to be understood, then his words are but hot air in the grand scheme of things, as they fail dismally in benefitting the congregation.
V10 The word genos translated kinds, is in reference to diversity of races or nations. Phone translated voices refers to sounds of languages. Hence the gist of this verse is essentially that although there is a myriad of different languages in this world, none are meaningless.
V11 However if two people of different languages were to converse, they would sound totally alien to each other. Barbaros means one who speaks a foreign language not understood by the other.
v12 -13 Paul knowing the typical cravings that a neophyte Christian has to be spiritually gifted, especially in the realm of speaking in tongues, does not debase such inclinations. Rather he carefully admonishes them to seek such a gift with that of the ability also to interpret, in order for the gift of speaking in tongues to be not superfluous, but edifying to the audience.
V14 This is a poorly translated sentence especially the word translated as understanding. The Greek word 'nous', is the mind, which is the faculty of perceiving or understanding divine things, it being the higher powers of the soul that recognize good and hate evil. The spirit is separate from the soul, and hence from the mind. Our spirit which wrestles against our flesh for domination, is the only part of our being which communicates with the Holy Spirit especially in praise and worship. Speaking in tongues is therefore one of the means by which our spirit speaks to the Holy Spirit, but since this bypasses our soul, the mind is left barren of understanding, which we cannot then share with the ecclesia. Only the spirit of the tongue-speaker benefits, and nothing else, not even his soul or body.
V15 Paul asks what then should one do? The solution is to pray with both the spirit and the mind, and to also sing with the spirit and the mind. By so doing the mind would have understanding. To achieve this one would hence need the gift of interpreting tongues, in order for the mind to be able to perceive that foreign language spoken.
V16 If one were to be restricted to speaking in tongues i.e. only their spirit communicating with the Holy Spirit, it would be impossible for whatever message in that spiritual realm shared, to be a blessing to those in the soulish and physical realm. However, if one were able to interpret tongues too, then the mind being prompted of the spiritual message, would be able to bless others at the soulish and physical level of understanding.
V17 No matter how beautiful the spiritual message of blessings and thanksgiving may be, if it is restricted to the spirit, and cannot be transferred to the mind for the purpose of understanding, then the congregation is pretty much robbed of a message.
v18 -19 In order to be perfectly clear and not be accused of false teaching nor create ambiguity, Paul as he classically does always plainly makes statements that are irrefutable. Many a pastor has preached against speaking in tongues, claiming that Paul taught so, yet this verse categorically states that Paul was grateful for having been bestowed with the gift of speaking in tongues more than the Corinthian members of the congregation. However, he simply stressed that it would profit the ecclesia if he could exhort, admonish and comfort through prophesying a few words, than failing to edify a single soul through a flurry of unintelligible tongue speaking.
V20 Phren translated ‘understanding’ is the midriff or region of the diaphragm believed to be the location of the mind wherein lies the faculty of perceiving. We are encouraged to be paidion/infants in kakia/evil, wickedness i.e. to be puerile in things pertaining to the devil, yet be mature in things pertaining to divine understanding. The world loves wickedness in which it is well educated, being indoctrinated into performing evil deeds, yet is almost totally ignorant of righteousness. This scourge has beset churches of today.
V21 Isa 28:11 is quoted. It is interesting that the whole Tanakh/Old Testament is referred to as the nomos, which in Hebrew is Torah cf Jn 10:34;12:34; 15:25. In Paul’s day that was the only biblical source available to them, his letters, the other epistles and gospels only having been canonized as the New Testament at the council of Rome in 382 AD, more than 3 centuries after Paul’s demise. Isaiah’s prophecy had a double meaning. Firstly, that Israel would be taken away by a nation of unintelligible language which turned out to be the Assyrians, and the tribe of Judah taken away by a nation also with a barbaric language, the Babylonians. This was as punishment for rebellion against YHVH to be meted out according to Torah cf Deut 28:49-50. The second meaning was the gift of tongues to be given by the Holy Spirit in latter times which would be unintelligible to those believers who would not also ask for the gift of interpretation.
V22 Paul then ties up this prophecy of Isaiah with the purpose of speaking in tongues being for the benefit of those who do not believe, the audience being predominantly Gentiles. If they were to hear a message divinely spoken to them in their language by a foreigner who has never known their language, they would undoubtedly consider it an amazing sign for them, of the legitimacy of the gospel thus spoken to them cf Acts 2:4-12. This is the major beneficial element of speaking in tongues: The shock value it would have on non-believers to prompt them into accepting the gospel as true, through the supernatural means of this manner of preaching. Prophesying to non-believers would be meaningless, as edifying somebody who does not know the gospel is wasteful, as the far greater need for such a person is to bring them first to believe in that which is being prophesied about. Signs and wonders are for the benefit of non-believers, not for the converted cf Acts 14:1-3; Mark 16:20.
V23 It is not unusual especially amongst the charismatic churches of this age to find the whole church breaking into tongues, without any interpretation. It has definitely caused much scepticism and even derision from visiting non-believers and even amongst the idiotes/scripturally unlearned regular attenders of the ecclesia. This was the same problem found in the Corinthian ecclesia, of which Paul found fruitless for attracting potential souls into the kingdom of Elohim, and worse off could lose the scripturally unlearned souls within the ecclesia, put off by what would appear to be insane behaviour.
V24 However, if a non-believer or scripturally deficient believer were perchance to pop into a church filled with congregants prophesying words of revelation, teachings and knowledge, the probability of them undergoing conviction by stumbling upon truth, and subsequently scrutinizing themselves leading unto repentance, would be immensely increased.
V25 Furthermore, this visiting lost soul’s heart is convicted by hearing sound prophecy within a congregation uttering profound truths, exposing the concealed sin in his heart, leading him to penitence, and once forgiven of his transgressions, culminate in praising Elohim for having redeemed a once lost soul. Prophesying wins souls, whereas tongues destitute of interpretation, avail naught. However, tongues as previously explained by Paul, which can be interpreted, especially by a non-believing attendant of the church, would by such signs and wonders convict him of his sins, leading to winning of his soul. This in reality is far less experienced in the congregation than winning of souls by prophesying, which is usually a sure means of so doing. Paul quoted Isa 45:14
V26 Paul poses a rhetorical question as to how the ecclesia should conduct itself. There were various gifts streamlined across the congregants, which possibly were being overzealously practised in a disorderly manner, deeming their purposes counterproductive. Paul encouraged orderly practice of these spiritual gifts for optimal edification of the congregation.
V27 An example of such decorous practice of the gifts is given pertaining to speaking in tongues, whereby two, or three at most in a session may speak ecstatically, provided an interpreter is present to edify the congregants.
V28 However, if no interpreter is present, let such one not speak publicly in the service, to not only prevent time wasting, but also to not foment scepticism amongst the unlearned Christian or visiting unbeliever. In such a circumstance it is preferable to privately communicate with Elohim in one’s spirit.
V29 Also, prophesying requires order whereby two or at most three should do so, and the allos/others of the same kind diakrino/try, test the words prophesied. This scrutiny by others is necessary to ensure the words align with scripture and are hence inspired by the Holy Spirit. Too many a self-proclaimed prophet in today’s churches spue utterances contrary to scripture, and never seem to be scrutinized by their listeners cf 1 Jn 4:1.
v30 -31 Paul then gives a scenario whereby one prophet may be simply giving exhortation or teaching, when suddenly the second one seated suddenly has inspired revelation. In such a case to prevent disharmony and interruption of each other or speaking over one another, Paul suggested that the first one humbly sit down, to allow the second prophet with the seemingly more important word of revelation, to take to the pulpit, and share the more pressing prophetic word. Having done so, the first prophet may then conclude his teaching cf Acts 11:28;21:10-11.
V32 By this Paul meant that the prophets could control the order of speaking amongst themselves i.e. by their own spirits, and not try to interject one another under the false pretence that the Holy Spirit had over-ridden another prophet’s speech for more important prophecy to be uttered. Ultimately the prophets were to respect each other through sound discernment of each other to maintain order within the ecclesia.
V33 To try and blame Elohim for interrupting another prophet mid-sentence for instance would be blameworthy, as Elohim is certainly not the author of confusion, as rightly stated. Pagan worship was characterized by sudden disorderly falling into trances, by self-proclaimed oracles. For this kind of behaviour to be seen in churches smacks of demonic possession. This is typical of charismania in charismatic churches such as those under the demonic Kundalini spirit.
V34-36 The nomos/law being referred to as noted earlier is a general reference to the Tanakh/Old Testament writings. The particular section being referred to would be Gen 3:16 and Num 30:3-13. Granted these are very difficult verses to understand and have caused much controversy throughout the history of Christianity. However, we must use two or three witnesses in scripture before rushing to doctrinally incorrect conclusions.
These verses need to be read in the full context of the epistle and also compared to Paul’s additional revelations concerning this topic in other epistles cf 1 Tim 2:11-14; 1 Cor 11:1-3; Tit 2:3-5; Col 3:18; Eph 5:22-24.
If women were as some interpret, disallowed from speaking altogether in the ecclesia under all circumstances, then this would surely contradict all instances of women throughout the history of Israel spanning to the day of Paul, where women undoubtedly spoke in public cf Ex 15:20; 2 Chr 34:22; Lk 2:36-38; Acts 21:8-9
Having placed all these verses together, it is quite evident that women are allowed to prophesy and teach, but are restricted to doing so to children and other women. They may not override the authority of their husbands, and hence in a congregation full of husbands and wives, it would be against the laws of Elohim for wives to teach and preach to their husbands within the ecclesia. If they feel inclined to pray, they are to do so with veiled heads. Even Miriam in Ex 15:20 when prophesying, only did so in the presence of other women.
The Holy Spirit in inspiring Moses’ writings ensured that this fact was not missed. Curiously in 2 Chr 34:22 mishneh is translated 'college', yet means second in rank. Huldah, the prophetess dwelt in Jerusalem in the second order of whatever ranking system they had for prophets. Being a woman, she did not usurp the top rank of a man above her. In Luke 2:36-38 Anna was a widow of great age and hence did not usurp the authority of a husband to prophesy. Acts 21:9 clearly states that the daughters of Philip were virgins, and hence when prophesying, had no husbands to prophesy over. The Holy Spirit is very precise in clearing ambiguity in scripture. Hence the need for thorough study, which ever the more reveals how rich the Bible is in hidden treasures, which we are admonished to seek thoroughly cf Pro 25:2.
In summary, from this in-depth study of these grievously difficult to understand verses, women are not to preach or teach husbands within the ecclesia as this goes against Elohim’s judicial set up of authority. Presuming that the women have believing husbands, it is the responsibility of the husband to ensure that he understands what is being taught in the ecclesia, through deep inquiry if need be, in order to share the truths with his wife in their private time at home. Women may prophesy and teach/preach to other women, usually of younger age seeking wisdom, or to children both male and female.
Outside the church establishment, women with the gift of prophesying may do so, and may even be approached by men for the sake of words of revelation. In the church establishment amongst husbands of other women, scripture seems to disallow this. Even women with non-believing husbands, are encouraged to draw their husbands towards gospel truth by their decorous conduct, no mention of preaching or prophesying to them being alluded to, to keep in line with the very stringent laws of Elohim which preclude such a breach in authority.
v37 -38 Paul, perceiving the potential backlash from such rigid prescriptions he had dispensed in regards to proper conduct for the sake of orderliness and respect of Elohim’s injunctions in the ecclesia, was convinced that those equally spiritually mature would readily accept that these revelations so shared, were nothing short of the very precepts of Yeshua the head of the body corporate. Note Paul always referred to Yeshua as Kurios/lord, YHVH in the Tanakh. Those choosing to be ignorant of this, would undoubtedly be in opposition of which millions of Christians worldwide have proven to be, particularly those under the demonic spirit of feminism, hellbent on usurping male authority, not only in society, but in the ecclesia. It is totally unscriptural to have female pastors, bishops, reverends and all manner of self-titled leadership in the church. The men who choose to be headed by such deluded transgressors of divinely ordained authority, need to be ashamed of their scriptural and authoritative bankruptcy.
V39-40 Having given an intensely detailed dissertation on the benefits of prophesying over uninterpreted glossolalia, and also rules and regulations pertaining to service in the ecclesia, Paul closes in reminding the readers of the epistle to adhere to such constructive teachings.