Monday, April 3, 2023

Conflict Management - 1 Corinthians 12:1-14:40 Part 2

 

Lesson 11: The Church’s Questions—Gifts (continued)

 

 In chapters 12-13, Paul has presented three issues that are fundamental to the proper exercise of spiritual gifts:

         There is only one Spirit at work, dispensing various gifts.

         There is only one body in which he is working, composed of diverse parts.

         There is only one way to exercise these gifts, and that way is in force until Jesus returns.

The Corinthians, though, are not basing what they do together (worship) on these fundamentals. Therefore, having laid the ground rules, Paul gets specific. Some in Corinth are abusing the gift of tongues. Throughout chapter 14, Paul attempts to show the value (or lack thereof) of tongues for worship by contrasting it with the gift of prophecy. He makes his judgment using only one criterion: whether or not the gift edifies others.

 

1 Cor 14:1 Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. 2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. 3 But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.

 

                   4.           There are important differences between tongues and prophecy. 

  a. Tongues only edify self, whereas prophecy edifies others (14:1-

5).163

 

Query: Why does Paul single out the gift of prophecy to compare with tongues, rather than using the gift of teaching or helps? Given that tongues is last on his enumerated list in 12:28, any other gift would have sufficed as being superior. Why does he not go all the way to the top and use apostleship?

 Paul is looking for a comparable gift, one that has a similar status in Corinth that tongues has.

         Apostleship has to do with church planting and may no longer have been present in the church.

         Miracles ands healing do not have the emphasis on speaking that tongues have.

         Teaching and administration do not exhibit the working of God’s Spirit as obviously as being able to speak in an unlearned language does.

Paul’s reason for choosing prophecy may have been to use a gift comparable to tongues, one that was present in the church, that had a similar mode of expression (speech), and that demonstrated clearly a supernatural ability. His intention, therefore, is not to elevate prophecy but to make a fitting comparison, one his audience will immediately recognize (i.e., apples to apples, not apples to oranges).

 

1 Cor 14:6 Now, brothers, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? 7 Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the flute or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes? 8 Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? 9 So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air. 10 Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning. 11 If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and he is a foreigner to me. 12 So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church.

 

                           b. Tongues       are      unintelligible (having                                many       possible

interpretations), whereas prophecy is intelligible (having only one interpretation; 14:6-12).

 

1 Cor 14:13 For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind. 16 If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? 17 You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.

 

 c. Tongues bypass the mind (of the speaker and others), whereas interpretation engages the mind (of the speaker and others; 14:13-17).

 

 Does this strike you as strange? In 12:7, Paul said that each gift of the Spirit “is given for the common good,” yet in 14:4, Paul says, “[h]e who speaks in a tongue edifies himself” not others. (Edifying oneself is not bad; it is simply not the purpose of corporate worship, and worship is his particular concern here.) Notice also that in this chapter (14) tongues is the only gift which, when used in worship, requires the exercise of another gift as well (interpretation). Just to be certain they do not miss his point, Paul closes each paragraph by referring to the same critique: Tongues (alone) in worship does not meet the purpose of spiritual gifts. It does not promote the common good; it does not edify others.

Query: This discussion of these two gifts raises further questions.

         In view of this single purpose (edification), how are we to understand the claim by some Christians that the gift of tongues is a special, personal prayer language (“if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays” v. 14) or one that angels use?

         Such an assertion (by advocates of glossolalia) is false, because the Holy Spirit gives gifts for communal good not for personal good.

         If neither corporate nor private worship is the proper setting for using tongues, what other—what proper—setting is there?

         It is not inside the church but outside,164 as the first use of tongues indicates.

Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place…. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? …11b we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" 12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"

         According to this passage in Acts 2 (which is the clearest example in the NT), what is the gift of tongues?

         It is a real but unlearned human language.

         How does this use in Acts 2 accord with the purpose of spiritual gifts in general (i.e., for the common good)?

         It edifies the body by bringing people to God.165

Acts 2:41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

 

1 Cor 14:18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19 But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue. 20 Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults. 21 In the Law it is written: "Through men of strange tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me," says the Lord.

 22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers. 23 So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24 But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, 25 and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"

 

        d. Tongues are for unbelievers, whereas prophecy is for believers

(14:18-25).166

 

Excursus: Let us broaden the discussion a bit to include the present. When we discuss tongues, there are four questions we should try to answer. 

         What is the duration of tongues?

         They ceased in the past—or—

         They continue in the present.

 Paul states that all spiritual gifts will continue until perfection (13:10), and we noted that the best candidate for perfection is the New Creation, when all believers will have become perfect (resurrection). Therefore, the Holy Spirit will continue to dispense all gifts, including tongues, until that time.

         What is the content of tongues?

         They are real human language—or—      • They are heavenly angelic speech—or—

         They are gibberish.

 To an outsider, at least, the tongues used in the Corinthian church would sound like nonsense. According to Acts 2, though, tongues are real human languages.

         What is the place of tongues?

         They are for worship—or—

         They are for evangelism.

 Are they for use in the service (corporate worship), or is the proper setting somewhere else? Paul states in v. 22 that tongues are “a sign…for unbelievers” but says in v. 23 that an unbeliever, present when “the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues,” will conclude “that you are out of your mind.” In other words, their primary role is outside he church (evangelism) not inside the church (worship), which is how God uses them at Pentecost.167  • What is the source of tongues?

         They are from the Spirit—or—     • They are from Satan—or—

         They are from Self.

 I stated last time that speaking in tongues was not limited to the Christian community. Some of the pagan cults of that day also engaged in the practice. In the church, of course, tongues should originate only from the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, that the second source is still possible, even today (MacArthur 1992:239-240). The most common source of tongues, however, and perhaps the source most evident at Corinth, is self.

           

I believe that much of what we see in the Charismatic community today derives from self, and it can come about in two ways. The first way a person can generate tongues is through psychological dissociation (Johnson 1992:598). “The tonguesspeaker goes into motor automatism….clinically described as radical inward detachment from one’s conscious surroundings [which] results in dissociation of nearly all voluntary muscles from conscious control” (MacArthur 1992:242). The second way a person can generate tongues is as a learned skill. Through proper instruction and practice, the speaker develops a proficiency in producing glossolalia.168 The ability to speak in tongues may also derive from a combination of psychological and pedagogical factors. The following account illustrates both types (Conway 1979:46-47, 48-49).

 Marjoe Gortner was the first Evangelical preacher to blow the whistle on his profession. In his documentary film Marjoe, made in the late sixties, he revealed age-old tricks of the trade and exposed some of the entertainment aspects of the popular movement that have made it big business.

 If he lives forever, Hugh Marjoe Ross Gortner will most likely always be “The World’s Youngest Ordained Minister.” Born January 14, 1944, Marjoe was almost strangled during delivery by his own umbilical cord. The obstetrician told his mother that it was a miracle the child survived, and thus “Marjoe”—for Mary and Joseph—the Miracle Child took his place at the end of a long line of Evangelical ministers.

 From the beginning, his preaching skills were meticulously cultivated. Before he learned to say “Mamma” or “Poppa,” he was taught to sing “Hallelujah!” When he was nine months old his mother taught him the right way to shout “Glory!” into a microphone. At three, he could preach the gospel from memory, and he received drama coaching and instruction in every performing art from saxophone playing to baton twirling. On Halloween, 1948, at the age of four, Marjoe was officially ordained and thrust into a wildly successful career as the Shirley Temple of America’s Bible Belt, the sprawling nongeographic community of strict adherents to the Christian scriptures. In the following decade he preached to packed tents and houses coast to coast, as enthusiastic audiences flocked to see the Miracle Child who allegedly received sermons from the Lord in his sleep. Owing to his mother’s careful training, harsh discipline, and indomitable ambition, Marjoe’s sermons were flawlessly memorized, right down to each perfectly timed pause and gesture. Frequent Hallelujahs and Amens punctuated his performances, which were cleverly promoted with titles such as “From Wheelchair to Pulpit” and “Heading for the Last Roundup,” which Marjoe preached wearing a cowboy suit.

 Marjoe’s captivating sermons rarely failed to fill the church collection plate to the brim, and his renowned faith healings were miraculous even to him. In his teens, however, Marjoe grew disenchanted with the continued deception of his divine powers. He left the Evangelical movement in search of more legitimate means of employment. He spent some time in a rock band, trying to move with the changing times; then he returned to the Evangelical circuit to make his revealing motion picture. Marjoe is one of those frank films that delves deeply into sensitive areas of American morality that slip over the line into profiteering…. 

 “After you’ve been saved,” Marjoe continued, “the next step is what they call ‘the infilling of the Holy Spirit. ‘They say to the new convert, ‘Well, now you’re saved, but you’ve got to get the Holy Ghost.’ So you come back to get the tongues experience. Some people will get it the same night; others will go for weeks or years before they can speak in tongues. You hear it, you hear everyone at night talking in it in the church, and they’re all saying, ‘We love you and we hope you’re going to get it by tonight.’ Then one night you go down there and they all try to get you to get it, and you go into very much of a trance—not quite a frenzy, but it is an incredible experience [= psychological dissociation].

 “During that moment the person forgets all about his problems. He is surrounded by people whom he trusts and they’re all saying, ‘We love you. It’s okay. You’re accepted in Christ. We’re with you, let it go, relax.’ And sooner or later, he starts to speak it out and go dut-dut-dut. Then everyone goes, ‘That’s it! You’ve got it!’ and the button is pushed and he will in fact start to speak in tongues and just take off: dehandayelomosatayleesaso…and on and on.”

 Marjoe paused. Flo was dumbfounded by his demonstration, although he hadn’t gone into the jerking, trancelike ecstasy that is commonly associated with the tongues moment. I’d seen the classic version in his movie, yet even in this restrained demonstration, Marjoe appeared to be triggering some internal releasing or babbling mechanism. I asked him how he brought it about.

 “You’ll never get it with that attitude,” he joked. Then he went on to explain the true nature of the experience. His perspective showed it to be a process that requires a great deal of effort to master [= learned skill].

 “Tongues is something you learn,” he emphasized. “It is a releasing that you teach yourself. You are told by your peers, the church, and the Bible—if you accept it literally—that the Holy Ghost spake in another tongue; and you become convinced that it is the ultimate expression of the spirit flowing through you. The first time maybe you’ll just go dut-dut-dut-dut, and that’s about all that will get out. Then you’ll hear other people and the next night you may go dut-dut-dut-UM-dut-DEET-dut-dut, and it gets a little better. The next thing you know, it’s elahandosatelayeekcondelemosandreyaseya …and it’s a new language you’ve got down.”

 Except that, according to Marjoe, it’s not a real language at all. Contrary to most religious understanding, speaking in tongues is by no means passive spiritual possession. It must be actively acquired and practiced. Although the “gift” of tongues is a product of human and not supernatural origin, Marjoe displayed tremendous respect for the experience as an expression of spirituality and fellowship.

 “I really don’t put it down,” he said. “I never have. It’s just that I analyze it and look at it from a very rational point of view. I don’t see it as coming from God and say that at a certain point the Holy Spirit zaps you with a super whammy on the head and you’ve ‘gone for tongues’ and there it is. Tongues is a process that people build up to. Then, as you start to do something, just as when you practice the scales on the piano, you get better at it.”

Although Marjoe is referring only to the third source of tongues, self, his experience indicates how common this source may be.

           

It would be unusual for the Holy Spirit to give so many in the same congregation the same gift, especially among those who already spoke the same language. Hence, it is possible that much (perhaps all) of the glossolalia at Corinth was of the third variety. Some Christians there, having heard the genuine article, may have attempted to imitate it and triggered their own babble mechanism. Others followed, and soon tongues were a prominent feature in worship (although not the true, biblical gift). Paul, hearing about the movement but unable to verify its source (or suspecting its source but recognizing the limit of his influence), determines that the best response is to restrict the practice (“at the most three”) and to impose the self-correcting requirement of interpretation, thereby eliminating spurious utterances.169 All tongues do not originate from the Holy Spirit and, as at Corinth, much of what passes for the gift of tongues in the Charismatic movement today may also derive from this third source—self.

 

 Some of the tongues at Corinth may have been manifestations of the Holy Spirit, but believers were not using them properly. As you might imagine, this improper use played havoc with their worship, so Paul issues a set of guidelines to bring some order to the service.

 

1 Cor 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two— or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

 29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30 And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32 The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33a For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.

 

          e. Tongues are limited, whereas prophecy is unlimited (14:26-

33a).

 

Comment: About “…others should weigh carefully what is said” (14:29)  How one makes this evaluation is not clear. In Rom 12:6 Paul says that prophecy is to be “in agreement with the faith” (NIV note), which may simply mean that it is to accord with sound doctrine. “At best one can argue that prophecies [were] not [to] have independent authority in the church, but [were] always [to] be the province of the corporate body, who in the Spirit were to determine the sense or perhaps viability of what had been said” (Fee 1987:694).

 

Comment: About “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace” (14:33a)

 Paul is saying that, to some extent, the character of our God is reflected in the character of our worship (Fee 1987:697, Manuel 2011). In this respect, the Corinthians were misrepresenting God, because anyone coming into their service might assume that God approved this chaotic expression of devotion and must, therefore, be somewhat disorderly Himself. Paul affirms that God is orderly,170 and that our worship of Him must be orderly as well.171

 

Summary: If the proper setting for the gift of tongues is outside worship, then how are we to understand Paul’s instruction, which seems to sanction their use in worship? …Paul is not presenting the ideal formula: 2 tongues + 3 prophecies = worship. This is rather a concession—he permits tongues but prefers prophecy.  Nevertheless, there is just so much he can legislate in a letter. To ban tongues altogether might be too radical a change for the Corinthians; and among those who put a high value on tongues, a ban could even provoke a rejection of Paul’s instruction in other, more important areas. Hence, he chooses the wiser course and restricts the practice rather than prohibiting it outright. (This approach also eliminates the need for him to distinguish Spirit-inspired tongues from the selfinspired variety.) He is, after all, planning to visit Corinth in the near future (4:19) and will then be in a better position to affect needed change.

 We must be careful not to assume that speaking in tongues was a common practice in the church. There is no mention of it in the gospels, and this is the only NT letter to address the practice.172 Moreover, the early Church Fathers make only occasional reference to it (Johnson 1992:598; contra MacArthur 1992:233).173

 

 Paul wants them to restore order in their worship—and you can imagine how several people babbling unintelligibly might rather give the impression of chaos. Speaking of church order, there is a related matter that has come to his attention. Some of the ladies in the congregation are getting a little rowdy (chatty). So, from glossolalia and worship, Paul turns to gender and worship.

 

1 Cor 14:33b As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

 

                   5.     There must be decorum in worship (14:33b-35).174 

a.     The women are separate.

1)    The early church was patterned after the synagogue.

2)    As men and women were separate in many synagogues,175 so

they may have been in the church (Zeitlin 1947:306-307).

b.    The women are silent.

1)    The meaning of siga¿w in general is broad: “remain silent”

(NIV).

2)    The meaning of siga¿w in context (v. 34) is narrow: “stop speaking.”

a)    The second verb (e˙pitre÷pw) informs the first by

indicating the proper decorum (i.e., that there is an appropriate time to speak out).

“The women should keep quiet in the churches, for they are not authorized to speak, but should take a secondary and subordinate place, just as the Law also say.” (AMP) “Women should be silent during the church meetings. It is not proper for them to speak. They should be submissive, just as the law says.” (NLT)

b)    Paul has already indicated that women pray and prophesy

(11:5).

c)    Therefore, he cannot mean here that they should “remain silent” but that they should “stop speaking” among themselves and disrupting the service while others have the floor (cf. v. 31).176

“Wives must not disrupt worship, talking when they should be listening, asking questions that could more appropriately be asked of their husbands at home. God’s Book of the law guides our manners and customs here.” (The Message)

i.          As in most churches (and synagogues), men probably

dominated the service in Corinth, which may have made it difficult for women to participate.

ii.        Feeling isolated, they would naturally interact with each other, which just added to the confusion already present in the church (e.g., from the abuse of tongues).

d)    Therefore, the sense of this verse and of the apostle’s

admonition is that women must stop disrupting the service when it is not appropriate to speak.

 

 Paul closes this chapter by appealing to his authority in these matters, by reiterating the relative value of tongues and prophecy, and by admonishing them to retain order in their worship. 

 

             

1 Cor 14:36 Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. 38 If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.

 39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

 

                           g. Conclusion (14:36-40)

 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Relevant and civil comments are welcome. Whether there will be any response depends on whether Dr. Manuel notices them and has the time and inclination to respond or, if not, whether I feel competent to do so.
Jim Skaggs