39The Procedure for Prophecy (14:29-40)

And let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, let the first keep silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.

Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also says. And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?

If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.

Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues. But let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner. (14:29-40)

In this section the apostle concludes his critical discussion of matters related to spiritual gifts. He pulls together a few remaining exhortations to summarize what had been left unsaid in the previous correctives. Admittedly, as has been obvious, some things in this whole passage are difficult to understand, because we cannot fully reconstruct the scene in Corinth. The last few exhortations, however, leave little confusion about their meaning.

Like that of the apostles, and unlike that of pastors and teachers, however, the unique office of prophet ceased to exist while the church was still very young. Judging from Paul’s pastoral epistles (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus), prophets ceased to function in the church even before the end of the apostolic age. In those letters he makes considerable mention of church leadership—elders, deacons, deaconesses, and bishops—but makes no mention of prophets. Along with the apostles, prophets were a part of the foundation of the church (Eph. 2:20), and are the first office to have disappeared from the New Testament church.

But when Paul wrote this letter to Corinth, prophets were still very central to the work of that church. In fact, nowhere in this letter is there mention of a pastor, elder, or overseer. The prophets seem to have been the key leaders in the early days of the church (cf. Acts 13:1). Because this was obviously the case in Corinth, Paul was compelled to give some principles for the prophets to follow

In verses 29-33a Paul gives four regulations for prophesying: (1) only two or three prophets were to speak; (2) the other prophets were to judge what was said; (3) if someone else had a revelation, the first speaker was to yield to him; and (4) each prophet was to speak in turn.

First, only two or three prophets were to speak at any given service. Those New Testament prophets spoke for the Lord in two ways. In some instances they gave new revelation from God to the church. And, by reiterating what the apostles taught, they also proclaimed what had previously been revealed, much as preachers and teachers of the Word do today.

Second, when prophets spoke in a meeting, the other prophets present were to pass judgment (from diakrinō). The judging prophets may have had the gift of discernment (cf. 12:10; diakrisis, “distinguishing”) or they may simply have measured what was said against their own knowledge of the Word and will of God. In any case they were collectively to evaluate the validity of all prophetic messages. The Holy Spirit enabled those evaluating prophets to “test the spirits to see whether they [were] from God” (1 John 4:1). Since the prophets sometimes were entrusted with new revelation, it was especially vital that everything they preached and taught was absolutely true and consistent. Because they were helping build the foundation of the church, the validity of their teaching was of the utmost importance. No prophet acted unilaterally in teaching. There was accountability among all of them.

Third, if a revelation is made to another who is seated, let the first keep silent. A new revelation took precedence over the reiteration of something that had already been taught. It was not that the truths in the new revelation were necessarily more important than those then being proclaimed, but that, at the moment, the new should be heard while it was fresh from the Lord. That is not an issue in the church today, because the revelation aspect of the prophetic ministry ceased with the completion of the New Testament. But apparently in the early church such conflicts sometimes occurred. When they did, the prophet with the new revelation was to be given the floor. In other words, when God spoke directly, everyone was to listen.

Fourth, whether to give new revelation or to reinforce previous revelation, the prophets were to prophesy one by one. Just as with speaking in tongues, it was imperative that only one person speak at a time, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted. The conjunction hina (so that) is used to express the twofold purpose for all such prophesying: learning and exhortation (cf. v. 3).

Paul reinforces the principle of prophets judging one another’s messages (cf. 29). The spirits of prophets are subject to prophets (cf. v. 29). Not only are prophets to judge the authenticity of what other prophets say, but each prophet is to have control of his own spirit. The Bible knows nothing of out-of-spirit or out-of-mind revelations. Those to whom God revealed His Word did not always fully comprehend the message they were given, but they were always fully aware of what the message was and aware that it was given to them by God. God does not bypass men’s minds either to reveal or to teach His Word. There were no ecstatic, bizarre, trancelike experiences related to divine action or the prophet, such as occurred and occurs with demonic revelations. That was one clear test to distinguish the work of the Holy Spirit from the work of demons, and assumes the Corinthians were having difficulty so distinguishing (cf. 12:3).

For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. Here is the key to the whole chapter. Our worship of God should reflect the character and nature of God. He is the God of peace and harmony, not of strife and confusion (cf. Rom. 15:33; 2 Thess. 3:16; Heb. 13:20). God cannot be honored where there is disharmony and confusion, competition and frenzy self-serving and self-glorying. Chaos and dischord in a church meeting is certain proof that the Spirit of God is not in control. Where His Spirit rules there is always peace (cf. James 3:14-18).

OTHER GENERAL REGULATIONS

As in all the churches of the saints. Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also says. And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only?

If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. (14:33b-38)

The second half of verse 33 seems to fit best with verse 34. The phrase as in all the churches of the saints is not logically related to God’s not being a God of confusion. The phrase does, however, make a logical introduction to Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak. Paul was emphasizing the fact that the principle of women’s not speaking in church services was not local, geographical, or cultural, but universal, in all the churches of the saints. Though it embraces tongues, the context here refers to prophecy. Women are not to exercise any such ministries.

The women who joined in the chaotic self-expression which Paul has been condemning not only added to the confusion but should not have been speaking in the first place. In God’s order for the church, women should subject themselves, just as the Law also says. The principle was first taught in the Old Testament and is reaffirmed in the New In reflection of that principle, no women were permitted to speak at the Jewish synagogues.

One of the designs of creation, as well as one of the primary consequences of the Fall, was the submission of women (Gen. 3:16). Paul reflected that principle explicitly when he said, “Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet” (1 Tim. 2:11-12). Paul’s argument was not based on cultural standards but on two historic and foundational facts: (1) “Adam … was first created, and then Eve” and (2) “it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman” (vv. 13-14). Men are to lead in love; women are to submit in love. That is God’s design.

It is not coincidental that, like Corinth, many of the churches today that practice speaking in tongues and claim gifts of healing also permit women to engage in speaking ministry. Many charismatic groups, in fact, were begun by women, just as many of the cults that have sprung from Christianity were founded by women. When women usurp man’s God-ordained role, they inevitably fall into other unbiblical practices and delusions.

Women may be highly gifted teachers and leaders, but those gifts are not to be exercised over men in the services of the church. God has ordained order in His creation, an order that reflects His own nature and that therefore should be reflected in His church. When any part of His order is ignored or rejected, His church is weakened and He is dishonored. Just as God’s Spirit cannot be in control where there is confusion and chaos in the church, He cannot be in control where women take upon themselves roles that He has restricted to men. It is improper [aischros, “shameful, disgraceful”] for a woman to speak in church. That statement leaves no question as to its meaning.

If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home. The implication is. present in this statement that certain women were out of order in asking questions in the church service. If they desired to learn, the church was no place for them to express their questions in a disruptive way. Paul also implies, of course, that Christian husbands should be well taught in the Word. Many women are tempted to go beyond their biblical roles because of frustration with Christian men, often including their own husbands, who do not responsibly fulfill the leadership assignments God has given them. But God has established the proper order and relationship of male-female roles in the church, and they are not to be transgressed for any reason. For a woman to take on a man’s role because he has neglected it merely compounds the problem. It is not possible for a woman to substitute for a man in such things. God often has led women to do work that men have refused to do, but He does not lead them to accomplish that work through roles He has restricted to men.

There are times in informal meetings and Bible studies where it is entirely proper for men and women to share equally in exchanging questions and insights. But when the church comes together as a body to worship God, His standards are clear: the role of leadership is reserved for men.

Obviously many of the Corinthian believers, men as well as women, had contended with Paul about this matter. They were determined to follow their own principles and standards regardless of what the apostle or other mature leaders said. In its pride and arrogance the church wanted to be a law unto itself, deciding on its own what was right and proper. They acted as if they had a corner on truth and dared others to question them.

The Corinthians put themselves above Scripture, either ignoring it or interpreting it in ways that fit their predisposed notions. So Paul challenges them in his most biting and sarcastic words yet: Was it from you that the word of God first went forth? Or has it come to you only? He said, in effect, “If you didn’t write Scripture, then obey it. If you are not the sole receivers of God’s Word, then subject yourselves to it as faithful children of God, as Christians everywhere else are obliged to do.” No believer has a right to overrule, ignore, alter, or disobey the Word of God. To do so is to put himself above God’s Word.

He continues the challenge: If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. In the context of what Paul has been focusing on in reference to prophets and tongues, it seems that spiritual must refer primarily to those who spoke in tongues, the special spiritual language the Corinthians prized so highly. His point is this: “If a person claims to be a prophet or to have the gift of tongues or any other spiritual gift, the mark of his true calling and faithful ministry will be his acknowledging that what I teach as an apostle are the truths of God. If a person is truly called or gifted of God and is sincerely trying to follow God, he will submit the exercise of his calling and gift to the principles God has revealed to me as His commandments.” What the apostle taught was not optional.

On the other side, But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. This play on words carries the idea that anyone who disregards the Word should himself be disregarded. The mark of a false prophet or a counterfeiter of tongues, or of a person who misuses a true calling or gift, was his rejection of what Paul taught. Because such persons rejected the apostle’s teaching, they were rejected as legitimate servants of God. Because it was the revelation of God as Scripture, Paul’s teaching was absolutely authoritative (cf. 2 Pet. 3:15-16).

This emphasis on authority comes at an appropriate place, because so many Corinthian believers had wanted to disregard Paul’s words about tongues and women. Paul says the church should ignore such ignorant, self-styled rejectors.

In verses 37-38 Paul gives perhaps his strongest claim to authority as God’s apostle. Paul had personal limitations and blind spots, which he freely recognized (see, e.g., Phil. 3:12-14). But when He spoke for God, his views were not tainted by cultural or personal bias. He did not, for instance, teach the submission of women in the church because of his Jewish background or in order to conform to any personal male chauvinism. He taught that truth because he himself had been so taught by the Lord. Paul did not claim omniscience, but he claimed unequivocally that everything he taught about God, about His gospel, and about His church was God’s own teaching, the Lord’s commandment.

No matter what their position, training, experience, expertise, or talents, Christians who reject Paul’s teaching reject God’s teaching, and are themselves to be rejected as teachers or leaders in His church.

SUMMARY EXHORTATION

Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak in tongues. But let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner. (14:39-40)

Paul concludes the chapter with a summary exhortation for the Corinthians to hold prophecy in the superior position in their services, but not to despise or reject legitimate speaking in tongues. And whatever they did in the Lord’s name should be done in the right way.

In their assemblies they were collectively to desire earnestly [second person plural] to prophesy, because prophecy is the great edifier, the great instructor and teacher. Prophecy is so important because edification is so important. Again, as the verb form proves, Paul is not suggesting that individuals seek the gift of prophecy (see comments in chap. 37 on 14:1).

But, although secondary to prophecy, legitimate tongues that are legitimately exercised should also be recognized as of the Lord, and not ridiculed or forbidden. Do not forbid is also in the plural and does not advocate individual seeking of tongues, but refers to the church as a group allowing the proper gifts to be exercised. Tongues was a limited gift, both in purpose and in duration, but it was the Lord’s gift, and, as long as it was active, was not to be despised or hindered.

Right revelation should be obeyed in the right way, and right gifts should be exercised in the right way. The basic meaning of euschēmonōs (properly) is gracefully, becomingly, harmoniously, beautifully. Orderly has the meaning of “in turn” or “one at a time” (cf. v. 27). God is a God of beauty and harmony, of propriety and order, and all things that His children do should reflect those divine characteristics.