Skip to main content

1 Corinthians 14:1-25

You can read the text here.

Apparently intent on making his point, Paul now applies his point from chapter 13 to the issues raised in chapter 12. He sees it as a both/and situation. The Corinthians shouldn't be choosing between the spiritual gifts and love, they should want both, especially gifts that build up the body like prophecy. Tongues are fine, but they build up the individual only since only God understands what is uttered.[1]

Failure to speak intelligibly prevents you from being understood and serving any true purpose. In its essence turns everyone into a foreigner or an outsider. This comes back to the main theme of the whole letter since it undermines the unity of the body. Paul's wants them to seek gifts that build the body and not destroy its unity through misuse of other, more personal gifts.

Thus for those who pray in tongues, Paul wants them to also pray for the gift of interpretation. Even for just their own sake this is good since it can involve the whole person in the act of prayer. Additionally, if one who is uninitiated hears someone praying on tongues it will be a hindrance to them rather than building them up. As Thiselton notes, worship is about God and the collective body, not God and the individual. Paul's experience with tongues exceeds the Corinthians, but he does not show it off, preferring to be understood and hence instruct.

At the end of the day all tongues will do is to scare off unbelievers as a sign of unwelcome and judgment. It will result in shame on the community. Where prophecy will have the opposite effect of validating the presence of God's Spirit as God speaks to both believer and unbeliever through exhortation and preaching.


-------------------------------------
[1] A side note on this. Paul does make room for others understanding tongues if its interpreted. Thiselton makes an important point here. There is no reason to expect that some person other than the one uttering the tongues is the interpreter Paul has in mind.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat