37The Position of the Gift of Tongues (14:1-19)

Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. 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. But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation. One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. 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. But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what shall I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching? 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? For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle? 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. There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning. If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me. So also you, since you are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek to abound for the edification of the church. Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What is the outcome then? I shall pray with the spirit and I shall pray with the mind also; I shall sing with the spirit and I shall sing with the mind also. 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? For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified. I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. (14:1-19)

After presenting love as the “more excellent way” above all ministries and gifts, Paul directly and forcefully confronts the Corinthians in regard to their sin against love in misunderstanding and misusing the gift of tongues. Believers there had so abused the gift that they rivaled Babel in confusion of speaking, and the apostle devotes an entire chapter to the problem, which was so representative of their sinfulness.

As commented on under 12:10, the practice of ecstatic utterances was common in many of the pagan Graeco-Roman religions of Paul’s day, including those active in Corinth. Devotees of a god would drink and dance themselves into frenzies until they went into semiconsciousness or even unconsciousness—an experience they considered to be the highest form of communion with the divine. They believed that in such drunkenness their spirits left their bodies and communed directly with the god or gods, a practice to which Paul alludes in Ephesians 5:18. The ecstatic speaking that often accompanied such experiences was thought to be the language of the gods.

The terms lalein glōssēi/glōssais (to speak in a tongue/in tongues) that Paul uses so frequently in chapter 14 were commonly used in his day to describe pagan ecstatic speech. The Greeks also used eras to describe the experience. Though commonly used of sexual love, eras also was used for any strongly sensual feeling or activity, and pagan ecstatic frenzies often were accompanied by sexual orgies and perversions of all sorts.

In the church at Corinth much of the tongues-speaking had taken on the form and flavor of those pagan ecstasies. Emotionalism all but neutralized their rational senses, and selfish exhibitionism was common, with everyone wanting to do and say his own thing at the same time (v. 26). Services were bedlam and chaos, with little worship and little edification taking place.

Because of the extreme carnality in the church at Corinth, we can be sure that much of the tongues-speaking there was counterfeit. Believers were in no spiritual condition to properly use true spiritual gifts or properly manifest true spiritual fruit. How could a congregation so worldly, opinionated, selfish, cliquish, envious, jealous, divisive, argumentative, arrogant, disorderly, defrauding, inconsiderate, gluttonous, immoral, and desecrative of the Lord’s Supper exercise the gifts of the Spirit? For them to have done so would have defied every biblical principle of spirituality. You cannot walk in the Spirit while exercising the flesh.

Against the backdrop of such false experiences Paul teaches three basic truths about the gift of tongues: its position is secondary to prophecy (w 1-19); its purpose was as a sign to unbelievers (vv. 20-25); and its proper procedure, or use, was systematic and orderly (vv. 26-40).

Within the first section, the apostle gives three reasons why the position of tongues is secondary to that of prophecy: prophecy edifies the whole congregation; tongues are unintelligible; and the effects of tongues are emotional rather than rational.

PROPHECY EDIFIES THE WHOLE CONGREGATION

Diōkō (to pursue) means to follow, hunt, or chase after with intensity, and is sometimes translated “persecute,” as in 2 Corinthians 4:9. Above all else, as Paul emphasized in the previous chapter, the Corinthians should pursue love. Lovelessness was by far their greatest problem, to which all of their other problems were related in one way or another. The only strong affection many of them had was for themselves. Paul here commands them to pursue love.

The fact that love is primary, however, does not mean that everything else is to be disregarded. Yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, Paul continues. Love is no substitute for other virtues, or even for good works; in fact, love is the great motivator, the only true motivator, of good works. It is also the great motivator of every spiritual ministry and of the proper use of every spiritual gift.

The strong desire the Corinthians had for gifts was not wrong in itself but wrong in that it was selfishly directed only toward “the greater gifts” (12:31), the showy and attention-getting gifts. They were right to have desired spiritual gifts, but their concern should have been for using the gifts they had, not for enviously wanting gifts that others had. Their desire should have been to see their gifts minister to others, not to show off.

And particularly they should have followed after prophecy. Especially that you may prophesy is a plural form, indicating not that individuals should desire to prophesy, but that the whole church should desire that gift to be used in their assembly. It was the more significant gift because it was able to accomplish what tongues could not.

The type of tongues the Corinthians practiced had no edifying value at all. It could not speak to men; it could give them no instruction or exhortation. It could only speak to God. I believe a better translation, however, is “to a god.” The Greek has no definite article, and such anarthrous constructions usually are translated with an indefinite article (see Acts 17:23, where the same form of theō [god] is used in reference to “an unknown god”).

The translation here of “a god” is supported by the fact that the Bible records no instance of believers speaking to God in anything but normal, intelligible language. Even in Jesus’ great high priestly prayer (John 17), in which the Son poured out His heart to the Father, when deity communed with deity, the language is remarkably simple and clear. Jesus in fact warned against using “meaningless repetition, as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words” (Matt. 6:7). His reference included the repetitious and unintelligible gibberish of pagan tongues-speaking, in which certain meaningless sounds were repeated over and over again. The instructional prayer Jesus then gave, commonly called the Lord’s Prayer, is a model of simplicity and clarity.

The carnal Corinthians, however, were much more interested in the sophisticated than the simple, in the mysterious rather than the edifying. They did not care that no one understands, or literally, “no one hears.” Their concern was for the excitement and self-gratification of speaking mysteries in the spirit. They did not care that the mysteries had no meaning to themselves or to anyone else.

The mysteries Paul has in mind here are of the type associated with the pagan mystery religions, out of which many of the Corinthian Christians had come. Unlike the mysteries of the gospel, which are revelations of things previously hidden (Matt. 13:11; Eph. 3:9; etc.), the pagan mysteries intentionally remained mysterious, as unknown truths and principles that supposedly only the initiated elite were privileged to know.

The spirit to which Paul refers is not the Holy Spirit, as some interpreters claim, but the person’s own spirit, as implied in the Greek (locative case) and indicated in the NASB by his (cf. vv. 14-16). Paul is not advocating tongues, but simply characterizing the uselessness of efforts to counterfeit them.

A believer who properly ministers a true spiritual gift ministers not to a false god, but to others. One who prophesies, for example, speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation. The purpose of prophecy is to build up by edification, to encourage through exhortation, and to comfort through consolation. Spiritual gifts are meant to accomplish something spiritually and practically worthwhile, and are always meant to be of benefit to others, believer or unbeliever.

On the other hand, one who speaks in a tongue edifies himself. I believe Paul’s point here is sarcastic. (His sarcasm can also be seen in 4:8-10, and reaches its height in 14:16, “was it from you that the word of God first went forth?”) Because even true tongues must be interpreted in order to be understood, they cannot possibly edify anyone, including the person speaking, without such interpretation. They cannot, therefore, be intended by God for private devotional use, as many Pentecostals and charismatics claim. Paul here is referring to the supposed value the Corinthians placed on their self-styled tongues-speaking. The satisfaction many of the believers experienced in their abuse of tongues was self-satisfaction, which came from pride-induced emotion, not from spiritual edification. It is an illegitimate self-building, often building up nothing more than spiritual pride.

The believer, however, who prophesies edifies the church. That person uses his gift to minister, as all the gifts are meant to do. The purpose of gifts, Paul was saying, is to minister for God but not to God. Their purpose certainly is not to selfishly minister to ourselves, as some of the Corinthian believers thought they were doing by speaking in tongues. Our gifts are to minister to others for God’s glory. “To each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good” (12:7).

Why, many people wonder, did Paul say, I wish that you all spoke in tongues? He has been warning them about their abuse of tongues, and is beginning a chapter devoted to showing the inferiority of tongues. Why would he have wanted the problem to be compounded by getting everyone involved?

But Paul was wishing the impossible for the sake of emphasis. He knew that all Christians do not have the same gifts. “All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?” (12:30). The apostle certainly was not suggesting that his wisdom was greater than that of the Holy Spirit, who “works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills” (12:11). To have wished literally that all the Corinthian believers had the gift of tongues would have presumed to improve on the Spirit’s wisdom. Paul simply was making it clear that he did not despise the genuine gift of tongues, the true manifestation of which is of God. “If the Holy Spirit chose to endow every one of you with the gift of tongues,” he was saying, “that would be fine with me.”

Even more, however, Paul wished that all of the Corinthian believers would prophesy. He knew that that also was impossible, for the same reason that their all having the gift of tongues was impossible. His point was that, if they insisted on clamoring after the same gift, it would be much better if they clamored after prophecy. Not only was prophecy superior to tongues in edifying the church, but it was a longer-lasting gift, one Paul knew would continue to be used by the Lord long after tongues had ceased.

It is an interpretive key to this chapter to note that in verses 2 and 4 tongue is singular (cf. vv. 13, 14, 19, 27), whereas in verse 5 Paul uses the plural tongues (cf. vv. 6, 18, 22, 23, 39). Apparently the apostle used the singular form to indicate the counterfeited gift and the plural to indicate the true. Recognizing that distinction may be the reason the King James translators supplied unknown before the singular. The singular is used of the false because gibberish is singular; it cannot be gibberishes. There are no kinds of pagan ecstatic speech; there are, however, kinds of languages in the true gift, for which the plural tongues is used. The only exception is in v. 27, where the singular is used to refer to a single man speaking a single genuine language.

In any case, even a believer with the genuine gift of tongues was never to exercise it unless he interprets. Either the tongues-speaker himself or another person (v. 28) was always to interpret, so that the church may receive edifying (a Greek purpose clause). Any private, self-building expression could not be the genuine gift, because the purposer of tongues is only realized when it is exercised and interpreted publicly so that the whole assembly may be built up.

TONGUES ARE UNINTELLIGIBLE

But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what shall I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching? 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? For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle? 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. There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning. If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me. So also you, since you are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek to abound for the edification of the church. (14:6-12)

Paul’s second major truth regarding the secondary position of tongues is that, in themselves, they are unintelligible. To strengthen his point he uses himself as an illustration, saying if I come to you. Even by an apostle, speaking in tongues gives no profit apart from interpretation, through which the revelation or knowledge (internal) or the prophecy or teaching (external) is made understandable to those who hear. Any message is useless if it cannot be comprehended. Again the private use of this gift is excluded. It is useless if it is not edifying to the church.

It is incredible that some Christians put a premium on private or en masse unintelligible utterances that no one, including the speaker, can even attempt to understand. In some instances, what is claimed to be an interpretation has been proved to have no relationship with what was spoken. Persons who have tested an interpreter by speaking in Hebrew, or another language known to them but unknown by the interpreter, have had their words “translated” into messages that had absolutely no correspondence to what was spoken. Like some of the Corinthians, such abusers not only put self-glorification above the edification of the church but add deception to the abuse.

Even lifeless things, such as a flute or harp, are expected to make sensible sounds. Rhythm, structure, harmony, and other such orderly qualities make a group of notes music instead of mere noise. For music to be music it must be intelligible in its own way; it must make musical sense. Each note, chord, and phrase has a musical purpose—to communicate joy, sadness, militancy, peace, strife, or whatever the composer intends. 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? Without variation, order, and distinction of notes, a musical instrument makes only noise. The Corinthians could especially appreciate the musical illustration because their city contained one of the great ancient music halls, seating about 20,000 people.

Changing the figure somewhat, Paul points out that if a bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle? Hearing a bugle means nothing to a soldier if a definite military call is not being played. Mere bugle notes are meaningless, even if played by the official bugler on the best instrument available. A soldier gets no message from a bunch of random notes. He only gets ready for battle when “Call to Arms,” “Charge,” or other such calls are played.

In the same way, we cannot communicate Christian truth through meaningless sounds. 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.

The Corinthians were so carnally self-centered that they could not have cared less about communication. They were interested in impressing others, not communicating with them, much less edifying them. Paul compares those Christians to musical instruments blown into by one who is not a musician or a bugle played so poorly that what comes out is unrecognizable. From such incompetence, produced by pride and lovelessness, the Corinthian assembly could not have been other than it was: confused, disorderly, and unproductive (11:21; 14:23; etc.).

Paul continues to hammer away at the same point. There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning. He simply mentions the obvious. A language without meaning is pointless. A language without meaning is not really a language. It is meaning that makes language language. The great many kinds of languages in the world all sound differently. But each has a single common purpose: to communicate, to transmit meaning among those who speak it.

Not only must a legitimate language be used in order to communicate, but both the speaker and hearer must understand it. By definition communication must be two-sided. Otherwise, I shall be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me. Barbarian was an onomatopoeic word derived from the twin syllables “bar-bar.” To a person who does not know a language it often sounds as if the words are all alike and all meaningless. To most Greeks of Paul’s day, anyone who did not speak Greek was a barbarian. His language was unintelligible.

If, therefore, even true tongues are meaningless without interpretation, Paul says, how much more meaningless is pagan-like gibberish that is a counterfeit of the true thing? Since you are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek to abound for the edification of the church. In other words, “If you are so eager to minister spiritual gifts, minister them in the way God intended: for the benefit of the church, in particular for the church’s edification.” Again the clear word is that this gift is for public, not private, use and benefit. The present tense of zēteō (seek) indicates continuous, habitual action.

The purpose of the gift of tongues, just as the purpose of all languages, was to communicate. Although it was a miraculous sign gift, it also was a communicative gift. From its first occurrence at Pentecost the Lord intended it to be a means of communication. The very miracle of tongues at Pentecost was in the fact that everyone present, though from many different countries, heard the apostles “speak in his own language” (Acts 2:6; cf. vv. 8, 11).

That was always a characteristic of genuine tongues. The Pentecost tongues, and every true manifestation of tongues after that time until their cessation, were understandable—either directly (Acts 2:6) or through an interpreter (1 Cor. 14:27). God did not give two kinds of tongues, one intelligible and the other unintelligible. The Bible speaks of only one gift, whose characteristics and purpose did not change.

THE EFFECTS OF TONGUES ARE EMOTIONAL RATHER THAN RATIONAL

Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What is the outcome then? I shall pray with the spirit and I shall pray with the mind also; I shall sing with the spirit and I shall sing with the mind also. 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? For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified. I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. (14:13-19)

In this section Paul continues to teach about counterfeit tongues, and therefore continues to speak sarcastically (cf. 4:8-10). This is indicated in the first place by the fact that he uses the singular tongue (see discussion above under vv. 1-5), which refers to the false gift, except in verse 27, where the reference is to one man speaking on one occasion. In the second place, what he says here does not, for the most part, apply to the true gift of tongues. If Paul were not speaking sarcastically of counterfeited tongues he would be asking the Corinthians to seek the true gift of interpretation. But he has already made it clear that the Holy Spirit sovereignly distributes gifts “individually just as He wills” (12:11). Gifts are not to be sought by individuals, but only accepted and properly used.

Paul sarcastically reproaches carnal believers for their immaturity (cf. v. 20), saying in effect, “While you are jabbering away in your unintelligible pseudo-tongues, you could at least ask God to give you some means of making them beneficial to the church. As you now exercise them they are both pagan and pointless.”

In the pagan rites with which the Corinthians were so familiar, speaking in ecstatic utterances was considered to be communing with the gods spirit-to-spirit. The experience was intended to bypass the mind and normal understanding. As noted above, its mysteries were meant to remain mysterious. Paul here may have used pneuma (which can be translated “spirit,” “wind,” or “breath”) in the sense of breath. If so, He was saying, If I pray in a [self-manufactured] tongue, my [breath] prays, but my mind is unfruitful.

It certainly seems impossible that spirit here refers to the Holy Spirit, as some charismatics believe—His Spirit being manifested through our spirits. All Christians are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but if Paul was speaking of the Holy Spirit in relation to my spirit, then grammatically and theologically he also was speaking of the Holy Spirit in relation to my mind. The Holy Spirit could not be praying through a person while bypassing his mind. And he certainly was not saying that the mind of the Holy Spirit sometimes can be unfruitful. The apostle has to be speaking entirely of himself, and that hypothetically. “If I, though an apostle, were to speak the gibberish that many of you speak, my mind would have no part in it. I would only be making wind, blowing air (cf. v. 9). What I would say would be as empty and mindless as the ecstasies you used to witness in your pagan temples.”

What is the outcome then? The answer is that there is no place for mindless ecstatic prayer. Praying and singing with the spirit must be accompanied by praying and singing with the mind also. It is obvious that edification cannot exist apart from the mind. Spirituality involves more than the mind, but it never excludes the mind (cf. Rom. 12:1-2; Eph. 4:23; Col. 3:10). In Scripture, and certainly in the writings of Paul, no premium is placed on ignorance. Quoting Deuteronomy 6:5, Jesus reinforced the Old Testament command that we should “love the Lord [our] God with all [our] hearts, and with all [our] soul, and with all [our] mind” (Matt. 22:37).

Praying or singing in tongues could serve no purpose, and Paul would not do it. 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? Ungifted (idiōtēs) is, I believe, better translated in its usual sense of ignorant, unlearned, or unskilled. A person who is ignorant of a language being spoken cannot possibly understand what he hears. In a worship service, for example, he could not know when to say the “Amen” at your giving of thanks. Prayers or songs of thanks could not include anyone else if they were given in unintelligible sounds.

Amen is a Hebrew word of agreement and encouragement, meaning “So let it be,” and was commonly used by worshipers in the synagogue. The practice carried over into some early Christian churches and, in fact, is common in many churches today. A person cannot know when to “Amen,” however, if he does not know what is being said. The person speaking in a tongue may feel he is giving thanks well enough, but no one else will know what is being said. The other man is not edified, as he should be when the gift is ministered properly (14:5, 12).

Lest the Corinthians, after reading this, think he no longer recognized the true gift of tongues, Paul says, I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all. He made it clear that he was not condemning true tongues or enviously criticizing a gift he did not himself possess.

Here he uses the plural tongues. He is no longer speaking hypothetically (cf. vv. 6, 11, 14-15), and he is no longer speaking of a counterfeited gift. Paul had had more experience than any of the Corinthians (you all) in speaking in tongues, though we have no record of a specific instance. He knew what the proper use of the true gift involved and did not involve. We can be sure that he did not use the gift in any perverted way for personal gratification. He may have used it as it was used at Pentecost, to bring a supernatural message to those God wanted to reach, and as a miraculous sign verifying the gospel and his apostolic authority. Yet he considered that gift so low in value as compared to his other gifts and ministries that in none of his writings does he mention a specific use of it by him or any other believer.

The gift of languages had a proper place for a prescribed time as a miraculous confirming sign to unbelievers, with an accompanying purpose of edification through interpretation. However, in the church, Paul continues, I desire to speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue. Using the singular (tongue) again to refer to pagan gibberish, he emphasizes that an uncountable number of sounds in unintelligible tones has no place in the church and is useless. Five understandable words are far more desirable.

The apostle was not speaking of an exact mathematical ratio. Although murioi can mean ten thousand (cf. Matt. 18:24), the largest number for which Greek had a specific word, it was commonly used to indicate an inestimable number. It is the term from which we get myriad, as it is sometimes translated. In the book of Revelation, for example, the term is repeated (“myriads of myriads”) and then added to “thousands of thousands” (5:11) to indicate a completely immeasurable figure.

It is in that general sense that the term is used in our text. To speak a very short sentence of five words with [his] mind, giving a message that would instruct or encourage his hearers, was more valuable to Paul than a limitless number of words in a tongue that was incomprehensible to them.

Because Paul knew that the gift of tongues would cease in a few years, he was not giving instructions for governing tongues in the church today. He was not even giving such instruction to the Corinthians, because he was speaking of counterfeit tongues, which were based in self-centered emotionalism and did not originate with the Holy Spirit. He was giving them, as well as Christians of all ages, warning against using self-serving, worldly, carnal, ineffective, and God-dishonoring substitutes for the true spiritual gifts God has ordained to be ministered in the power and in the fruit of the Spirit and for the blessing and edification of His church.