“An Exegetical Study of

1 Corinthians 12-14”

By

Dr. Larry A. Combs

2

3

“An Exegetical Study of

1 Corinthians 12-14”

By

Dr. Larry A. Combs

©2005

4

CONTROVERSIAL SPIRITUAL GIFTS

“An Exegetical Outline of 1 Corinthians 12 – 14”

I. INTRODUCTION (12:1-3)

A. Ignorance About Spirituals Depreciated (1)

B. Spiritual Sources Contrasted (2-3)

1. The Deception of Idolatry (2)

2. The Enlightenment of the Spirit (3)

II. THE UNITY OF SPIRITUALS (12:4-11)

A. Their Relation to the Trinity (4-6)

1. Gifts and the Spirit (4)

2. Ministries and the Son (5)

3. Effects and the Father (6)

B. Their Common Purpose (7)

C. Their Distribution (8-10)

1. Message Gifts (8)

2. Miraculous Gifts (9-10a)

3. Glossolalia (Tongues) (10b)

D. Their Sovereign Bestowment (11)

III. THE ANALOGY OF THE BODY (12:12-30)

A. The Principle: Unity in Diversity (12:12-26)

1. The Body Compared to Christ (12)

2. Comparison to Christ Explained (13)

a. Social Diversity

b. Spiritual Unity

3. Comparison of Body Explained (14-26)

a. Statement of Diversity (14)

b. Deduction (15-17)

(1) An Unpossessed Function Does not Disqualify (15-16)

(2) A Body of One Member is Absurd (17)

c. Statement of Divine Placement (18)

d. Absurdity of Equal Parts (19)

e. Statement of Unity (20)

f. Deduction (21-25)

(1) No Part to be Excluded (21)

(2) Every Part Necessary (22)

(3) Every Part Valued (23-24a)

g. Application (24b-25)

(1) To Divine Order (24b)

(2) To Divine Purpose (25)

h. Results of Unity for Parts (26)

B. The Application to Christian Unity (27)

C. The Application to Christian Diversity (28-30)

1. The Divine Order of Gifts (28)

5

2. The Evident Differentiation of Gifts (29-30)

III. A SUPERIOR APPROACH (12:31 – 13:13)

A. The Actual Concerns (12:31)

1. Of the Corinthians

2. Of the Apostle

B. The Dangers of Lovelessness (13:1-3)

1. In Glossolalia (1)

2. In Prophecy, Knowledge and Faith (2)

3. In Giving (3)

C. The Character of Love (4-7)

1. In its Behavior (4-7)

2. In its Extent (7)

D. The Superiority of Love over Gifts (8-13)

1. The Endurance of Love (8a)

2. The Temporality of Gifts (8b-12)

a. Termination Predicted (8b)

(1) Of Prophecies and Knowledge (8b)

(2) Of Glossolalia (8b)

b. Explanation of Partiality (9)

c. A Principle Propounded (10)

d. A Personal Illustration (11)

e. A Further Explanation (12)

3. The Conclusion (13)

V. THE REGULATION OF SPIRITUALS (14:1-36)

A. In General (1-12)

1. A Command to Prefer Prophesying over Glossolalia (1)

2. The Reason (2-3)

a. Their Directions (2-3)

b. Their Objects (4)

c. Their Results (5)

3. An Example (6-12)

a. A Hypothetical Situation (6)

b. A Comparison with Nature (7-9)

(1) Sound in Nature (7-8)

(a) In Music (7)

(b) In War (8)

(2) Glossolalia (9)

c. An Application (10-12)

(1) By Principle (10)

(2) By Obvious Inference (11)

(3) By Command (12)

B. In Particular (13-36)

1. For Tongue Speakers (13-25)

a. The Employment of Glossolalia (13-19)

(1) Command to Seek Interpretation (13)

6

(2) Explanation (14-15)

(a) Example (14)

(b) Conclusion (15)

(3) Reason (16-17)

(a) Example (16)

(b) Explanation (17)

(4) Personal Example (18-19)

(a) Possessing the Gift (18)

(b) Preferring Others (19)

b. The Purpose of Glossolalia (20-25)

(1) Command of Mature Thinking (20)

(2) Old Testament Example (21)

(3) Logical Deduction: Sign to Unfaithful Israel (22)

(4) Application to the Church (23-25)

(a) The Inferiority of Tongues (23)

(b) The Superiority of Prophecy (24-25)

2. For Public Worship (26-32)

a. Diversity of Contributions (26)

b. Limitations of Contributors (27-32)

(1) On Tongue Speakers (27-28)

(a) With an Interpreter (27)

(b) Without an Interpreter (28)

(2) On Prophets (29-32)

(a) The Procedure (29-30)

(b) The Purpose (31-32)

(i) Common Ability (31)

(ii) Self-Control (32)

c. Rationale for Contributors: God’s Character (33a)

3. For Women (33b-36)

a. Prohibition (33b-34)

(1) The Standard (33b)

(2) The Statement (34a)

b. Explanation: An Interdict (34b)

c. Directions for Education (35)

(1) Their Sphere (35a)

(2) The Reason (35b)

VI. CONCLUSION (14:37-39)

A. Authority of Scripture (27)

B. Danger of Ignorance (38)

C. Desirability of Prophesying and of Orderliness (39)

7

CONTROVERSIAL SPIRITUAL GIFTS

1 Corinthians 12-14

There is probably no more ultimate question that we can discuss than that of a

person’s final authority for belief and action. It is basic to how he lives today and to

what his destiny is for eternity. Now there are only four possibilities for final authority

that people have chosen, and do choose, by which to run their life. Allow me to put

them before you in summary form. Two of them are external and two are internal.

The external sources of final authority are either an institution, i.e. the church, or a

book, i.e. the Bible. The internal sources of authority are either reason or experience.

Those that are external are by their very nature objective. Those that are internal are

by their very nature subjective.

Now let’s illustrate these methods. One says, “I can’t accept the doctrine of hell. I

don’t understand how a loving God could have a hell. I don’t know what the Bible

may say about it, but I am just convinced that if God loves people He won’t destroy

people in hell eternally. That doesn’t fit my particular feeling.” So regardless of what

the Bible says, they go by experience, by feelings, and deny a specific statement of

Scripture in favor of this feeling. In that process, then, experience becomes final

authority; feeling rather than Scripture becomes authoritative. Again, what about

reason as final authority? Here is a man who says, “I don’t believe in the Biblical

account of Creation. I do not believe that God spoke, and the world came into

existence. But, I believe rather that things started with a sun spot, or something else,

and gradually evolved into what we have today.” Therefore, he denies the Biblical

account of creation because he says, “I have looked at the facts of science and they

don’t fit with the Biblical account.” Consequently, he makes his reason the final

authority. His rationalization is his final authority.

On the other hand, there are those who look to an authority outside them, i.e.

external authority. In the Roman Catholic faith, the church is final authority. When

the Pope speaks “ex cathedra”, i.e. when he speaks from the papal chair that which he

says is infallible, according to dogma. Therefore, in that particular group, the church is

the final authority. Finally, in typical evangelical Protestantism, the Bible is set forth

as final authority for faith and for practice. So that whenever a discussion of any

subject occurs, we want to discipline ourselves to remember that it is not a subjective

authority (feeling or reason) that is final authority. That does not mean that there is no

validity in experience or that reason is entirely unreliable. But neither of these can be

final authority because both of them are subjective and indeterminate. Final authority

is external of oneself; it is the infallible and inerrant Word of God.

8

Now, having said that, let’s cite a case in point. Several years ago we had the

beginning of what is called Neo-Pentecostalism on the West Coast. Father Dennis

Bennett, who was at that time a rector from Van Nuys, catapulted it into existence.

Now he is the rector of the Saint Luke’s Episcopal Church in Seattle, Washington. He

was speaking to the Full Gospel Business Men’s Fellowship in Portland, Oregon, and

he began his message by reading Ezekiel 37. It is the chapter having to do with the

vision of the valley of dry bones, and it prophecies the restoration of Israel to he land.

Most of us are aware of it from the song “Dem bones, dem bones, gonna rise again.”

Some believe that the bones are coming together today. Now Dennis Bennett read

Ezekiel 37, and then he said to the people, “There is a vision of the rise of the gift of

tongues in our day. But because the interpretation of Ezekiel 37 is so diversified

between so many people, there is not agreement as to what Ezekiel 37 means.” He

said, “I will, therefore, give you my experience, and then we will have something

solid to base our thinking on.” Now, those were his words. “Because Ezekiel 37 is

indeterminate, because of different interpretations of it, I will give you my

EXPERIENCE, and then we will have something solid to base our thinking on.”

Bennett’s statement is not unusual in contemporary evangelicalism. One has an

experience, and regardless of what you say from the Word of God, their experience is

final, and the truth of God can be judged by the experience rather than judging the

experience by the truth of God.

That is an introduction to the study on gifts because in the discussion of spiritual

gifts, in the only chapter in the epistles where Paul discusses it, or anybody else

discusses it for that matter, he orients his discussion to that which was a major problem

in the church of Corinth regarding spiritual gifts, namely ecstatic utterances, or the

counterfeit of the Biblical gift of tongues. Thus, in I Corinthians 12:1, the first thing

noted is that there was ignorance about spiritual gifts (literally, “spiritual”). The word

“spiritual” or “pneumatika is a word from breath or spirit. In verses 4

and 31 we will find another word translated “gifts”, which is “charismata”

. When the two words are contrasted the former puts the emphasis on the

inner source; whereas, the latter emphasizes the outer dynamic. When referring to a

charismatic person, we allude to his outer dynamic. Thus the gifts referred to in verse

31 are designated charismatic and appropriately rendered “the more showy gifts.” It

may be that when a “charismata” (vs. 4) is used in the energy of the

Spirit, it becomes “pneumatika” (vs. 1), which is a manifestation of the

Spirit (vs. 7).

Paul says to the Corinthians, “I don’t want you to be ignorant about pneumatika

”, that is, I don’t want you to be ignorant about spiritual gifts because they

were practicing them regularly. In I Corinthians 1:7 he says, “You come behind in no

gifs waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The church of Corinth was not

short in any gift. They had all the gifts manifested. “You come behind in no gift.” So

when Paul says, “I don’t want you to be ignorant;” he is not talking about ignorance

of the FACT of gifts, but he is talking about ignorance of the PURPOSE for the gifts.

9

They were well informed that there were spiritual gifts, but they were ignorant about

how they were to be used. This is evidenced by the way they were using them in the

church at Corinth. They were using their God given tools like toys. They didn’t

consult the instruction manual, the Bible, but wrote up their own job description out of

their experience. And, then, Paul chides them in verses 2 and 3, when he says, “You

know, I would remind you, that you were Gentiles carried away unto dumb idols. So

before you talk to me about your spiritual experience, let me remind you of who you

were and how deceived you haven been in the past. You were Gentiles, carried away

unto dumb idols, even as you were led.” It is essential to the understanding of the

Corinthian problem in I Corinthians 12-14 to understand the influence of their heathen

background. Carnal Christians in Corinth were engaging in the heathen form of tongue

speaking which were ecstatic utterances coupled with emotional extravagances. It was

a practice of speaking a language unknown to man that was supposedly taught by a

god or spirit for communicating privately. Its meaning was not known to the

worshipper but was known to the god or spirit. Thus, the worshipper was said to have

spoken “mysteries” (secrets) with his god in words more powerful than any human

language. It gave him a privileged, intimate contact with his god. This is undoubtedly

what Paul has reference to in chapter 14:2. In What is Wrong with the Church,

Alexander Hay says:

“Paul is contrasting the worship of Diana and its personal objective with the

Christians’ worship which sought the edification of the Body of Christ. These

Believers, in their heathen days, had believed that when they spoke in a tongue not

understood by men, not even by the worshipper, they were speaking secrets or

mysteries (musterion) with their god. They believed it was their spirit speaking. The

worshipper alone received the benefit; no one else understood. The Worshipper

profited through the ecstasy of feeling aroused and the sense that he was really

participating with the spirits in the inner circle. He had no thought for the building

up of other worshippers. Paul contrasts this selfish objective with the Christian

objective.” (P.32).

Paul continues, “Wherefore, I give you to understand that no man speaking by the

Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by

the Holy Spirit.” Obviously he is not saying that an unregenerate man cannot say the

word “Lord” (cf, Matthew 8:21-23). Sheer good sense causes us to understand that.

But he is essentially saying that no one can give Christ His proper place as Lord, if he

is not submitting himself to the teaching of the Spirit in accord with the Word of God.

He talks about the spiritual forces contrasting the deception of idolatry and the

enlightenment of the Holy Spirit. So Paul is saying now that the Spirit of God is never

gong to give one, in essence, an experience that will be contrary to the Word of God.

The experience that He gives one, if it is truly from Him, is going to be in accord with

the Word of God. Thus, be careful that you don’t accept as from the Spirit an

experience that is actually the result of being led astray to dumb idols for false spirits.

Thus, right at the beginning Paul want to contrast the false with the true teaching of the

Holy Spirit, which is given in the Word of God.

10

Now in verses 4-11, Paul enters into the major foundational basis for his discussion,

namely, THE UNITY OF SPIRITUALS. In the next section he is going to talk about

their diversity. But he first wants to speak concerning their unity. And the first thing

under their unity is the RELATIONSHIP TO THE TRINITY (verses 4-6). The whole

Trinity is involved with respect to one’s place of ministry and one’s gift for that place

of ministry. In verses 4-6, there are two words repeated three times. There is the word

DIFFERENT, and you have the word SAME. Under the word different, there are three

things that differ among believers: difference in gifts, difference in administration of

that gift, and difference in operation or energy that is exhibited in the place of

administration through the gift.

On the other side of the picture, there are three things that are the same: the same

Holy Spirit that gives the gift; the same lord of the church, Jesus Christ, that assigns

the place of ministry, and the same God, the Father, who turns the energy on. In each

case, there is a recipient. There is a recipient of God’s energy through them. Paul

wants to get across right in the beginning that the Trinity is vitally involved with the

gifts. He wants you to understand that though there is great DIVERSITY on the one

hand, there is unity on the other hand. Where you have a spiritual manifestation of

spiritual gifts, there will be a growing unity. And one of the evidences of the fallacy of

some of the things that are going on today is the divisiveness and schism. It is an

interesting thing how the use of glossolai today can split church after

church, but no one has seen a case yet where a church would split because someone

exercised the gift of showing mercy, or the gift of giving. People do not get all upset

and leave the church because someone all of a sudden feels that he has the gift of

giving and starts giving heavily; or somebody has the gift of showing mercy and really

starts exercising it, or somebody has the gift of administration, or the gift of teaching,

or the gift of preaching, and the gift of faith, or the gift of the utterance of knowledge,

or the gift of the utterance of wisdom, etc, etc. We have a disproportionate emphasis

today on one particular charismatic, and we have tremendous dissension, schism,

division, that is resulting from it. Perhaps the reason for that is the same as the reason

for the division in the church in Corinth. They know something about the FACT of the

gift, but they did not know about the PURPOSE of the gift; consequently, they are

using God’s gift out of accord with God’s purpose. Hence, they are creating division

and schism in the Church of Jesus Christ.

Thus, Paul talks first about the unity of the gifts because of their relationship of the

Trinity, even in the midst of great diversity. Everyone of us, therefore, has differing

gifts, differing administrations, differing operations or energy, a unique three-part

package for each Christian, and we don’t determine our package by somebody else’s

package. Each one of us has his own. Therefore, we don’t copy anybody else. True,

some of us will have the same gifts; some of us will have similar places of the ministry

of that gift; some of us will have similar operations of the gift; but there will never be

any time, probably, when all three as a package are the same in two persons because

they are an individual before God. God the Holy Spirit is working with you

11

personally. We don’t operate according to some rigid computer program at this point.

We have a personal God working with us.

Now, secondly, under unity, they have common purpose (vs. 7). “But to each one

is given the manifestation of the Spirit of the common good.” (NASV). Notice three

things in that statement, just briefly. First of all, he gives a good definition of a

spiritual gift. A spiritual gift is a manifestation of the Spirit. A spiritual gift is not a

natural talent. It may have nothing to do with natural talent. There are some people,

for example, that God has called to exercise the gift of preaching who have no talent

for speaking. The Apostle Paul was probably such a person. He undoubtedly had the

gift of teaching, but not the talent of speaking. Apollos, on the other hand, probably

had both, for he was “an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures” (Acts 18:24).

So then, you may not have a talent for speaking, but you may be given he gift of

preaching. Sometimes there is a real benefit if you don’t have the talent for speaking.

Some people who have the talent for speaking who receive the gift of preaching find

that they rest in their talent for speaking and, therefore, merely exercise the “gift of

gab” rather than developing their gift of preaching. On the other hand, there will be

times when a person who has a natural talent for speaking that has been developed will

also fin that God has given them a gift of preaching. But one is NOT DEPENDENT

upon the other. Let’s understand clearly, than, then, that the ability to play the piano,

to sing, to paint a picture, is not a spiritual gift. We may say they are a gifted person,

but that is not what we are talking about when we talk about spiritual gifts. Spiritual

gifts are supernatural manifestations according to verse 7, and you do not have them

prior to your coming into Jesus Christ. They come with the giver, the Holy Spirit.

Also, they may not be recognized immediately. They may be latent in your life for a

long period of time, either because of apathy on your part, or because of your stage of

maturity, you are not yet to the place where God the Holy Spirit is going to manifest to

you the presence of that gift for a particular job. I would say in my own life that I have

three gifts, and I knew of none of them when I was called to preach. I have only

successfully found out about them, as the occasion demanded it in God’s preparation in

my life. I found out about all of them, for the most part, from other people, which is a

principle in keeping with body life. When you are on the right track concerning your

gift, you will enjoy it; others will recognize it, and God will bless it.

“The manifestation of the Spirit is given,” and then notice, “to every man.” Now

in case there is a member of the Women’s Liberation front reading this, this is not a

prejudicial statement. “Man” here is speaking about mankind, that is, man and

woman. So that any of the gifts are possible for any man or woman or any boy or girl

who knows Christ. But there are none of the gifts that are confined to either man or

woman. They are given to the entirety of the body of Christ. You can put down a few

other verses to support that “everyone” concept. In Romans 12:3, you have the same

phrase repeated. In Ephesians 4:7 the same thing is stated: “unto everyone of us.” In

I Peter 4:10, you have the same thing: “As every man has received the gift.” So that

every one of us here that knows Jesus Christ has at least one gift. Now I am not going

to argue whether you have more than one gift. I think many people have more than

12

one gift; some people have several gifts. However, I believe that if we will at least get

started in developing our one gift we may discover some more.

Now, he says that are given for profit. Later on in the chapter, we learn that the

profit is for the entire Body of Christ (cf. Vs. 25 – “having the same care one for

another”). The gifts are not given for selfish desire. They are given for ministry to

the rest of the members of the Body of Christ. My gift is not for me to use on myself.

My gift is to use on the membership of the Body of Christ beginning with the local

manifestation of the Body, the local church, and God’s working agency on earth.

Now, in the third place, under the unity of the gifts, he talks about their distribution

(Vs. 8-10). At this point, it is not his purpose to name all of the gifts. He simply gives

you a sampling of them in order to show you their diversity. Notice how he words

this: “For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of

knowledge by the same Spirit. To another faith by the same Spirit. To another the

gift of healing by the same Spirit. To another the working of miracles; to another

prophecy; to another discerning of Spirit; to another various kinds of tongues; to

another interpretation of tongues.” Notice that this emphasis here is on the

differentiation, and their distribution. The same gifts are not given to everyone, but

there is a distribution of gifts to everyone. If you want to receive a complete list of the

gifts, you would need to put together Romans 12 and I Corinthians 12. You would

find that they might be outlined under three headings: serving gifts, speaking gifts, and

sign gifts. Time and space do not allow this author to elaborate each of the gifts at this

point. But let me make just a couple of cursory remarks with regard to this statement

of their distribution.

Take the gift of faith. Everybody that is a Christian has a gift of faith, Ephesians

2:8,9: “For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the

gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast.” So all of us have been given

faith. But the gift of faith that we are talking about when we talk about spiritual gifts is

something that goes beyond the faith that all of us exercise. Some have given a

corresponding translation of that and called it “vision”, and I think that fits very well.

There are those that have a gift of “faith” or “vision”. I would say that Dr. Bill Bright

is a man that has the gift of faith beyond the faith that every child of God has. I think

when he was given the idea of Explosion ’72, that this was a result of the manifestation

of his gift of faith. The committee that he called together did not recognize the same

thing. Perhaps he has shared with you that he asked the Lord to share with them the

same thing that He shared with him, in order that they could have unity in going ahead

with Explosion ’72.God allowed those who were in the inner circle working with him

to understand what He had taught Dr. Bright.

Most of us have read of George Mueller in one or more of several biographies, a

great man of faith. He himself admitted that he had the gift of faith, but unfortunately a

lot of people reading his biography cannot understand why the same things don’t

happen in their life when they trust God. George Mueller, during his lifetime, prayed

13

in more than 13 million dollars, but he never had more the equivalent of 60 pounds in

the bank at any particular time. At times, he would get up in the morning in one of his

many orphanages, and they would come to breakfast and there would be nothing to eat.

All the children would gather around the table to their empty plates; they would thank

the Lord for that which they were about to receive. A milkman would knock at the

door. “My wagon just broke down out here. The milk is going to spoil. Could you use

it?” “Well, as a matter of fact, we could. We just thanked the Lord for it.” That

was not one experience; that happened again and again in the life of George Muller. I

think that God demonstrated through his life the gift of faith.

Now I have not elaborated on the other gifts; I have just taken one. All of you have

a gift of FAITH that you received when you came to Jesus Christ. So you can operate

by faith. Some of you may have beyond that GIFT of faith, and you should use that for

the Body because it is the stimulation that the rest of the body needs. Now fortunately

God didn’t give all the gift of faith for the Body couldn’t stand it. For example, for

one man to come up with Explosion ’72 is one thing. For a host of other men with the

gift of helps, administration, etc., to complement it is another thing. For every exercise

of the gift of faith, there is the need of hundreds and even thousands with the gift of

helps.

Thus, the Lord gives some men the gift of faith so they will be thinking out front.

They will constantly be prodding us; they will make us reach out; they will make us

stretch our minds. And God thankfully gives other people the gift of administration

that can keep all things in order. God distributes these perfectly.

This is clearly explained in verse 11, the concluding verse of the key paragraph,

“But all these worketh that one and the very same Spirit, dividing to very man

severally as he will.” Please note every word in that verse. It is the same Spirit that is

giving them. He is dividing; He is distributing, to everyone severally, individually as

He wills. The word severally translated the Greek word (idios). The most literal

translation of IDIOS would be “one’s own”. The high school kids have a phrase

about “doing your own thing.” That would fit very appropriately right here. The

Spirit of God has divided to every man his thing. His own package; gift,

administration, and operation, his own package. It is peculiar; it is distinct; it is his.

And it is given, as He will – not as YOU will! What a mess we would have if

everybody were choosing the gift of his own. But they are not given that way. They

are not given because you tell God what He should do in the Body. They are given

because God sovereignly bestows them. Furthermore, He bestows them “as He will.”

Only! So be careful about praying and instructing God about what gift to give you.

He is really quite competent. And thankfully, even when we pray ignorantly, God

sometimes doesn’t respond affirmatively. I am surely glad that God has not answered

all of my prayers. I would be in a real mess today. But the Body doesn’t tell the head

what to do. The head gives the directions to the Body. And whenever the Body, and

the members of the Body, starts instructing the Head you have spiritual insanity, just

14

like you have physical insanity when the members of the body don’t respond to the

direction of the head.

Now, the second major section of this chapter related the unity and diversity by

means of the very vivid analogy of the body. Here we meet the principle of unity in

diversity. How can you get unity out of all of this? With everybody being different,

how can you get unity? All right, God says, look at your body. It has fantastic

diversity, but it has unity. The whole body is working together. Why? A

hypothalamus in your head is giving directions for six trillion cells, 100 thousand miles

of nerve fiber, thousands of miles of vessels carrying blood around your body, 200 plus

bones in your body, joints, ligaments, muscles and all the rest. One small, gray, prune-

shaped thing in the center of your head, the hypothalamus, is competent to do that; it

calls the directions. You have unity. The body functions together. The same is true

with our omni competent Lord, Jesus Christ, the Head of the Body, the Church.

Now in elaborating this principle, I am not going to follow the chapter point by

point, but skip very lightly through it, as I want to get to a further point. But let me

quote it here: “For as the body is one, and has many members, and all the members

of that one body being many are one body; so also is Christ.” Notice the emphasis on

the oneness, as he compares the Body of Christ. Then in verse 13, not the comparison

explained. “For by one Spirit were all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or

Greeks, whether we be bond or free, and have been all made to drink into one

Spirit.” There is your oneness again, as exemplified in the social diversity and

spiritual unity.

Then verses 14 through 26 explain the comparison between the Body and Christ.

“For the Body is not one member but many.” Note the humor of the Apostle here. It

would be fun to dwell on it, but let’s just take a glance, “If the foot shall say, because

I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?” Can you

imagine the ear saying: “No one ever tells me how beautiful I am, like they do to the

eye. I am not really important because I can’t do what the eye does.” “If the whole

body were an eye, where were the hearing?” I can see it, over here in the parking lot,

just one great big eyeball. No socket around it. Just a juicy, bouncy eyeball. Now I

wouldn’t begin to depreciate my eye. I thank God for my eye. It is the best camera in

the world. It takes 3-D, 4 color, instantly developed pictures. But I would hate to be

just an eye. Or, he says, if the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? Just

have a huge ear. No, no. Or if the whole were smelling, where were the hearing?

And so on and so forth. But it isn’t that way. It is not all eye; it is not all ear; it is not

all tongue. But that doesn’t mean that any one is less important than the other. We

may give greater honor to one than to another, as he goes on to say in the chapter. At

times I have told my wife what beautiful blue eyes she has. But I have never told her,

“Honey, what tremendous toes you have. They are really fantastic. I just love them!”

That doesn’t mean I want her to be without toes. In fact, a recent article would tell you

how valuable a big toe is by way of balance. Now, you can get along without the use

of some things. You can do without a big toe but it is just a little bit harder. In fact,

15

you can cut off your leg and do without it. You can do with one leg, but it is just a

little bit harder. You can live if you cut off both legs, but it’s tougher.

You can cut off both arms and legs, and you can still live as a basket case, but oh,

it’s hard to get things done. We are told today that 20% of the people are dong 80% of

the work. We’ve got a lot of basket cases. What happens when members of the Body

don’t exhibit their gifts? It is like the basket case. God has distributed the gifts and the

administration of the gifts and the energy to be used through them to the whole Body,

so that when every member of the Body is operating, you have efficiency and unity, if

they are all operating in their place. But if an ear is trying to be an eye, you have got

trouble. An ear has an awful hard time seeing, and an eye has a terrible time hearing.

So he compares the two. And I’ll leave that down to verse 31.

With verse 31, you have the beginning of the next major principle, the superior

approach; namely, the fruit of the Spirit, love, takes precedence over the gifts of the

Spirit. The transition statement is verse 31a and is best rendered, “But you are

selfishly striving after the more dramatic or showy gifts.” I believe that the word here

is an indicative, not an imperative, and; therefore, it is not a command. It is a

statement of fact, and it summarizes the Corinthian problem of self-seeking in contrast

to the teaching of sovereign bestowment in chapter 12. The reason there is a

discrepancy here is because the same form in Greek can be translated either indicative

or imperative. I believe the better translation would be indicative, making the

statement: “You are selfishly striving after the more showy gifts.” You are not

satisfied to be a kidney; you have got to be an eye. You want the more showy gifts.

Let me show you, he says, a more excellent way.

Now then, we enter into the whole 13th

chapter at this point, which elaborates the

principle for exercising the gifts, which is, the fruit of the Spirit, love. An in the first

portion of chapter 13, he uses five of the gifts to point out that though you had all of

these gifts to their nth degree, and you used them on yourself and you did not exhibit

them by the fruit of the Spirit, namely, love, they are zero. When the result of the use

of gifts is schism and disunity in the local body of believers, you can be sure that it is

not a manifestation of the Spirit. (Cf. I Corinthians 12:25) Love does not rend

asunder.

Notice verse 1 of Chapter 13: “Though I have the tongues of men and of

angels, and have not love, I am become a sounding bronze and tinkling cymbal.” If

I could not only speak with all the tongues of men (in excess of 3,700 languages) but if

I could speak with the tongues of angels, (messengers of God to man) and I did it for

selfish edification, it would be zero in God’s sight. “Though I have the gift of

prophecy,” I could preach up a whirlwind, “and I could understand all mysteries”,

the gift of knowledge, “and though I have all faith”, the gift of faith, “so that I could

remove mountains, and have not love, I am zero.” In other words, what he is saying

is the manifestation of gifts per se is useless unless they are manifested in the fruit of

the Spirit, love. And, if they are manifested in the fruit of the Spirit, love, they will not

16

be used for selfish ends. They will be used for the follow members of the Body of

Christ.

Today, in the current charismatic movement, we constantly hear people saying,

“Oh, my, the reason that I do this is because it helps me to pray, and it helps me to

witness, and it helps me to read my Bible.” Exactly contrary to what this says.

Spiritual gifts are not given to build you up spiritually: The Word of God is

ample. You have the resources for the spiritual walk given in many massages in the

Word of God: Ephesians 5, Galatians 5, John 15, over and over again, and nothing to

do with the gifts of the Spirit. The gifts may be manifested in the flesh or in the Spirit.

And if you are manifesting them in the Spirit, you will not be using them on yourself;

you will be using them for fellow member of the Body (12:25). It was the heathen

practice to use ecstatic utterances for self-edification. God’s principle of love is that I

get by giving. So as I give out of what I have to my Brother in the Body, I receive

from the Father. As I use it on myself, I hold back the demonstration and

manifestation from the Father through the Word. (Cf. John 15:1-3)

In verses 4 to 7, Paul gives a description of love as it applies to the matter of

gifts of the Spirit and, more particularly, to tongues. A sincere effort to practice these

verses alone would eliminate most of what goes under the name of Biblical tongues

speaking today. Notice the characterizations of love as they apply to the use of gifts.

“Love suffereth long”; literally, it is “fire spread way out like the horizon at sunset.”

It is not a fiery burst of passion, but, rather, enduring warmth. Again, “love vaunteth

not itself, is not puffed up”, that is, it won’t say, “It’s really too bad you don’t have

my gift.” Again, “love envieth not”. It will not be feeling that it has been cheated

because it doesn’t have somebody else’s gift. Again, “(love) does not behave itself

unseemly.” In contemporary English it might read, “love doesn’t act like a fanatic out

of control.” Love will always be proper and controlled as was Jesus. He didn’t act as

if He had lost His mind. Once again, “(love) seeketh not its own”; that is, love will

not seek to use the gifts for selfish benefits. How often we hear so-called “tongues”

speaker say, “I need this gift. It helps me study my Bible; it helps me pray; it helps me

witness.” Me! Me! Me! That is not of God! The gifts are the tools God has given us

“one to another.” They are not for self. The Word of God is altogether adequate for

edifying self (Matt.4:4; John 15:3; 17:17).

Notice verse 8. At this point, Paul zeroes in on the termination of the gifts, and

particularly tongues, because tongues were the problem. Now notice that he names

three specific gifts: prophecy, tongues and knowledge. There are three verbs. The

first and third are the same, “be done away”, and they are transitive. They require an

object to complete them. Something outside of them shall stop them; they shall be

done away. The middle one, “tongues shall cease”, is intransitive. It doesn’t require

an object, and it means something shall stop in and of itself. In other words, the gift of

tongues shall not need to be stopped because it shall have already stopped in and of

itself by having fulfilled its purpose.

17

Verse 9: (Now notice Paul’s argument very carefully). “For we know in part and

we prophesy in part.” There are knowledge and prophecy. Nothing about tongues is

stated yet.

Verse 10: “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part

shall be done away.” What is “in part”? Look at verse 9 again! Knowledge and

prophecy! But what is the perfection? Jesus Christ! When shall the gift of prophecy

(preaching) and the gift of knowledge cease? They shall cease when Jesus Christ

comes. This is made clear by verse 12.

Verse 12: “For we see in a mirror darkly, but then (when the perfection comes)

face to face’ Now I know in part, but he (when the perfection comes) shall I know

even as I am known.” Knowledge and prophecy shall be done away with when the

perfection, Jesus Christ, comes. Now Paul has already said tongues shall cease in and

of themselves. When? Look at verse 11: “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I

understood as a child, I thought as a child. But when I became a man I put away

childish things.” There is his next step in the answer to the cessation of tongues in

verse 8. Why shall tongues cease prior to the other gifts? They will have fulfilled their

purpose in childhood. But what is the childhood and how does one become a man?

Now following on that thought, just skip right over to I Corinthians 14:20. I am

just going to the conclusion, skipping the argumentation that leads up to it, so that you

can notice the similarity of wording as he comes to his conclusion in verse 20:

“Brethren, stop being children; stop being immature; stop being infantile in

understanding about the gifts. In malice be infants, but in understanding be men.”

Stop using God’s tools like toys. Be a man! Now how can I be a man, how can I grow

up, with regard to understanding the purpose of tongues? I will need to go to the

manual of instruction, the Bible – not to experience, to the Bible. The first thing I will

do is to understand that he said, tongues shall cease in and of itself during infancy; it

shall cease BEFORE the perfection comes, which shall put an end to the other gifts

Now why? You have the answer in verse 21 in a quotation from Isaiah 28: “In the law

it is written with men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people

and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.” In the context of Isaiah 28

“this people” can be none other than the nation of Israel. He is addressing rebellious

Israel, and he is saying to them, “You wouldn’t listen to your own prophets. I am

going a step further and give a miraculous sign.”

I am going to speak to you in your language – miraculously – with men of other

tongues, and even when I do that, even when I use men that don’t know your language

to speak to you, you are not going to listen. “And yet for all that will they not hear

me, saith the Lord.” Thus, the sign is not a converting one, but a judging one, but a

judging one, a sing of condemnation. God was there by giving notice to Israel that He

was moving from the Jews to the Gentiles as His people. Paul explains this in detail in

Romans 11 and Jesus had prophesied it in Matthew 21:33-43.

18

Now, then, in verse 22, you have a very important conclusion stated. In fact, it is

the only place in Scripture where you have the PURPOSE of tongues stated. Three

basic, undeniable facts are stated here about tongues. Here they are: (1) Tongues are

for a sign. They are not for self-edification. They are for a sign, a sign of judgment.

(2) They are for a sign not to them that believe. The Corinthians were using them

entirely out of accord with their purpose, as children who get into their dad’s toolbox.

They were not for those who believe. Who were they for? (3) They were for them that

believe not, the unbelieving nation of Israel as stated in verse 19. Let me skip to the

last of the verse, which talks about prophecy. Go to verse 23. “If therefore the whole

church be come together in one place and all speak with tongues, and there come in

those that are unlearned or unbelievers will they not say you are mad.” Tongues are

not the unlearned unbelievers; that is, pagan Gentiles. Who are they for? They are

only for one group, the nation of Israel, as stated in verse 21. And the reason that they

were still in effect then (ct. vs. 39) was because until 70 A.D, the nation, Israel was still

a factor. And even in Acts 3 the Apostle Peter was preaching for the restitution of all

things: “Ye men of Israel, ye men of Judah, hear what you say concerning the

covenant which our God made with our father Abraham. Listen to it only it, and we

will have the restitution of all things.” Even at that late date, after the ascension of

Jesus Christ, he was still appealing to the nation of Israel; hear me! Israel didn’t hear

him. In 70 A.D. Israel was wiped out in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 28:63-65. They

were dispersed into every nation on the face of the earth, and since that day there has

been no biblical purpose for tongues. Tongues are not for self-edification. Tongues

are not for believers. Tongues are not for Gentiles. Tongues are FOR (according to I

Corinthians 14:21) the rebellious, disobedient nation of Israel; (this passage referring

back to Isaiah 28). And the result of their use is condemnation, not conversion.

In Chapter 14, therefore, Paul applies the principle of the precedence of the fruit

of the Spirit of Chapter 13 to the principle of the sovereign bestowment of the gifts of

the Spirit in Chapter 12. The result is the regulation of spiritual gifts (particularly

tongues and interpretation of tongues) especially as it applies to the church of Corinth.

He set the priority in 14:1 when he starts to pursue the fruit of the Spirit, such as love,

and to desire the totality of spiritual gifts for the purposes to be emphasized (whether it

is my gift or somebody else’s) because it does more for the up building of the Body

than anything else. Thus, if I have the gifts of helps, I should use it in such a way as to

be advantageous to the ministry of preaching in the church.

Then from verse 2 to 19, Paul develops his argument leading up to his statement

of purpose in verses 20-25. Notice his use of a very basic teaching principle, namely,

taking he learner from where he is to where you want him to be. The Corinthians were

using tongues for self-edification. They were engaging in the heathen form of tongue

speaking, accompanied with emotional extravagances, which they had been

accustomed to before conversion. At that time, the “mysteries” were the central and

significant part of the religion of the Greeks.

19

There is much that we do not know of the situation in the church at Corinth, but

we should always make it a practice to interpret what we don’t know by what we do

know and not vice versa. Verse 22 is extremely clear. There is no reason for

confusion. As the infant church, the new people of God, was seeking to be established;

God gave it a sign gift to be used with respect to the nation of Israel who was

discrediting the infant church just as they had her Christ. But God was no longer

working through Israel. Judgment was sure. It came in 70 A.D., and there was no

longer any need for the sign gift of tongues. Any manifestation today, therefore, is

clearly out of accord with the stated purpose of Chapter 14. There is no possibility of

accomplishing the Biblical purpose of tongues today for it has already been fulfilled in

century One.

As we think of this whole concept of spiritual gifts; therefore, let us not short-

circuit our effectiveness by failing to use the gifts God has provided or by abusing

what He has given by accepting a subtle counterfeit from Satan. Satan works both

ways. If he cannot get us to ignore the good things God has provided for the ongoing

church, he will try to get us to pervert the things we have been given.

GLOSSOLALIA IN 1 CORINTHIANS 12-14

20

This discussion will attempt to briefly trace the argument of I Corinthians 12-14, in

reference to the exercise of glossolalia . The outline followed is that obtained

through a personal exegesis of the passage.

I. Introduction (12:1-3)

A. Ignorance about Spirituals Depreciated (1)

The problem alluded to here is not ignorance about the fact of spiritual thing, but of

their purpose and employment because the Corinthians had no lack of gifts (1:7). The

church had been using their gifts in a competitive, unharmonious manner, some

supposing to have a greater share of the Spirit, not comprehending the essential unity in

matters of the Spirit.

The pneumatikon should probably be understood as neuter in

gender, spiritual things or gifts rather than masculine, spiritual men, because the

discussion soon turns to spiritual enablements, all believers assumed to posses the Spirit

(12:3, 12).

B. Spiritual Sources Contrasted (2-3)

“Wherefore” introduces a conclusion based on their reminder of former spiritual

error and instability. The message inspired by the Spirit of God is consistent in its

teaching.

II. THE UNITY OF THE SPIRITUALS (12:4-7)

The unity of all the spirituals is demonstrated by of their common source, purpose and

distribution.

A. Their Relation to the Trinity (4-6)

There are three dimensions to each spiritual: (1) a gift, (2) a ministry, (3) an effect.

These aspects are always present in perfect harmony in a true spiritual, even as the Persons of the

Trinity work in perfect harmony.

B. Their Common Purpose (7)

Spirituals are here recognized as ‘manifestations of the Spirit”. Every believer is said to

receive one; therefore, we must conclude that there are no ungifted Christians. These

manifestations are for advantage or profit; they are not to be used for destructive purposes.

21

C. Their Distribution (8-10)

The distribution of all of the spirituals is traced to the agency (passive verb with en and

the instrumental case) of the same Holy Spirit. No one of the gifts can claim to be the exclusive

or “special” manifestation of the Spirit. “Kinds of tongues” and their interpretation, however,

are indeed spirituals, but identifiably distinguished from the others by the use of heteros for their

recipients in the same context with allos.

D. Their Sovereign Bestowment (11)

Again it is emphasized that it is the Same Spirit who is responsible for the spiritual which

each person receives, and it is not the recipient who decided which spiritual he shall receive, but

the Spirit. The determining factors are according to the standard of the Spirit’s own deliberate

decision. Each individual believer receives a spiritual with respect to that individual alone, as is

indicated by the adverbial use of idios ; it is not a product of group dynamics or by the

prayers of others; although, the exercise of the gift will be for the benefit of all.

III. THE ANALOGY OF THE BODY (12:12-30)

The organisms of the human body and of the church are viewed as analogous by virtue of

their Common Creator, and certain observations are valid for both.

The unified functions of the various parts of the body compare to that of the spirituals.

A. The Principle Unity in Diversity (12:12-26)

1. The Body Compared to Christ (12)

2. The Comparison to Christ Explained (13)

Other than the predictions by the Evangelists and Jesus (Acts 1:5), this is the only

mention of a Spirit-baptism in the New Testament. Although Christians are of various social

classes and ethnic groups, as the body is one, so are all believers, “one body”. The reason for

this is that all believers share a common identity (the meaning of “baptism”), having come to

posses the same Spirit who abides in them all. The doctrine taught is clear, that by receiving the

Spirit we are all made members of the body of Christ, and that it is in virtue of the indwelling of

the Spirit that the church is one.

3. Comparison of Body Explained (14-19)

The observation that the body is many parts leads to several deductions: (1) The lack of a

particular function does not eliminate any part from full participation in the body (15-16); (2) A

body of parts all with an identical function is absurd (17). The fact of partition by divine design

22

for a body shows that (3) sameness of parts precludes a body (18-19). However, the unity of the

body (20) further evidences that: (4) No part can exclude another (21); (5) every part fulfills a

necessary function; (6) each part should be consciously assigned recognition. The application of

this explanation is that (7) cooperation is the divine design, and (8) unity should be preserved by

mutual care among the other parts (24b-25). The result of all this leads to (9) a common interest

of all the parts.

B. The Application to Christian Unity (27)

This relates the relation of believer with one another to those within the illustration of the

body.

C. The Application to Christian Diversity (28-30)

Christian unity having been established, it is safe to discuss then the diversity of the

spirituals. But no mere list or exhaustive enumeration is given. Rather a selection, and that

presented in order of importance within the church. The first three spirituals correspond to

offices (cf. Eph. 4:11).

The established fact that every believer has already been Spirit-baptized, has already

received the Spirit, and has already been given a manifestation of the Spirit should make it clear

hat not all are to have the same spirituals, for all do not have the same. This should be obvious

from simple observation within the church. The rhetorical questions in vs. 20-30 employing the

negative particle me demand a negative response, “No, not all are apostles,” etc.

Whereas the Corinthian Christians were coveting gifts, even the better one, Paul,

however, recognized that all spirituals must be operated within the sphere of love. “Covet” can

be taken as either imperative or indicative; if the latter, it may be either a statement or question.

If the former, then the charismatic aspect of a spiritual should not be the center or emphasis.

D. The Dangers of Lovelessness (13:1-3)

Both the best and the least of spirituals are explicitly stated to be of no value unless they

are exercised with love, the greatest of Christian virtues. Verse 1: “If by the tongues of men I

should speak, and of angels…” The “tongues of men” are doubtless the normal languages

spoken by people, but what are the “tongues” of angels? Are they special heavenly dialects not

comprehended by the unaided intellect of man? If that were so, it presents a difficult problem, for

“if these tongues are ecstatic utterances, they could be duplicated fraudulently, and, therefore, be

impossible to detect. And “it must be admitted that Satan can perform this phenomenon. He had

done so in the past; he may be doing it today.”

It is Bellshaw’s contention that “the uniform usage of the word tongue in the New

Testament is that which signifies a language used by inhabitants of the world.” Although the

principal lexicons list ecstatic utterances as a definition of glossa , it is based upon a

presupposition about nature of tongues in I Corinthians. Bellshaw elucidates:

23

“The setting in which this gift was exercised lends further weight to the Viewpoint that these

were known languages, which were uttered. In Acts 2 People had come from many foreign

countries (Acts 2:5, 9-11). In Acts 10 Cornelius was a foreigner (Acts 10:1). In Acts 19 Paul

was in a foreign country. In Corinth Paul’s ministry was to a seaport community, which was

a melting pot for peoples from many parts of the world. It was a city where many languages

were spoken. There fore, the ability to speak a foreign tongue without previous

acquaintance with that language would arrest the attention of these people, and commend

that message as a supernatural one.”

The glossolalia of Acts and of 1 Corinthians should be equated as the

same phenomenon, because (1) both use the same terminology (gloss and talein) and (2) Luke

wrote about five years after Paul and still used the same terminology, fearing confusion.

Major non-biblical Greek lexicons not only so not consider ecstatics a valid definition

definition of glossa, but a comprehensive consideration of biblical usage would seem to preclude

any such glossai were known human languages.

(1) The normal meaning was the origin of, content of and designation of groups denoted by a

known language.

(2) The reference in Mark 16 employs the adjective kainos (new in quality), not neos

(new in kind or time).

(3) The tongues of Acts 2 were clearly known dialects, for they required not interpreter.

(4) Acts 10 (cf. 11:17) was the same situation.

(5) Acts 19 employs the same terminology.

(6) Attempts to feign glossolalia in the flesh may have mistaken “anathema” for “maranatha”

(1 Corinthians 12:3).

(7) Kinds (genos ) of the known and the unknown languages would not have been

kinds of the same thing.

(8) Tongues in Scripture are always translatable.

(9) The “tongues of men and of angels” are grammatically one class, are only hypothetical

(ean ), and are always comparable when angels converse in Scripture.

(10) The word “unknown” at 14:2, 4, 13-14, 19, 27 is an unjust insertion in the Authorized

Version.

(11) The tongues which “no man understands” pertained to the use of glossalalia in the then

current services of the church, not to the nature of the tongues..

(12) They were known languages produced at Babel.

(13) The illustration of 14:7ff depreciated orderless sounds.

(14) If Isaiah 28:11f pertained to known Assyrian, then 1 Corinthians 14:22is known

languages.

(15) Luke wrote sometime after Paul wrote 1 Corinthians but used the same terminology.

(16) Unintelligible sounds would not have bee indicative of any miracle.

(17) All known angelic communications were in understandable languages.

(18) That tongues were unintelligible, ecstatic utterances waits to be proved.

24

What at first glance seem to be two orders of tongues in 1 Corinthians 13:1 are, as seen

after closer examination, an assertion of just the opposite. Gromacki gives three reasons why this

must be so:

“First, Paul was describing a hypothetical case (“if;” ean). This does not mean that he had

spoken in angelic languages even though he later admitted that he did speak in tongues (1

Corinthians 14:18). Second, the very fact that the word “tongues” us used just once with

“men” and “angels” shows that human and angelic languages can be grouped together. They

have something in common. They are both languages, known and understood by the

listeners. Third, whenever men and angels conversed together in biblical times, they were

able to carry on an intelligent conversation in known languages without difficulty or

interpretation. Rather than dividing languages into known and unknown, Paul is affirming

that all tongues phenomena were in the forms of definite languages, not ecstatic utterances.”

E. The Character of Love (4-7)

F. The Superiority of Love over Spirituals (8-13)

Love never fails, “i.e., it endures forever. It is not designed and adapted, as are the gifts

under consideration, merely to the present state of existence, but to our future and immortal

state of being.”

Two spirituals in particular are selected to explicitly state their temporality, prophecies

and knowledge. But that is not to imply that prophesying and knowing will ever cease.

That (propheteia ) and (gnosis ) refer to the content of prophecy and

knowledge rather than to the act of prophesying and speaking knowledge is evident for several

reasons, In 1 Corinthians 12:8 Paul describes the gift of expressing knowledge by the term word

of knowledge,butin1 Corinthians13:8 he employs the simple term

knowledge. The former looks at the expression of knowledge; the latter refers to that which is

known or the knowledge itself. Second, verse nine emphasizes the content of prophecy and

knowledge more than the act. Third, the two are brought together in 1 Corinthians 14:6 where the

last term, doctrine indicates all the preceding terms referring to content.

The point is, as we shall see, that the imperfect content of the spirituals will eventually

be superseded. However, it is, in the case of tongues, not the message content that will be

eliminated, but the practice itself “shall cease.” An important grammatical distinction must also

be observed. In the case of prophecies and knowledge, they shall “be made” invalid, abrogated,

abolished (Passive Voice), but tongues shall merely cease “of themselves” (Middle Voice). Both

the change in verb and the change in voice of the verbs with the omission of mention of tongues

in verse 9 and 12, all in the same context, seem to be significant. The cessation of tongues is in

no wise viewed as concomitant with the abolishment of prophecies at a future point. “The

implication is clear. Tongues will not be in existence to be rendered inoperative” at that time.

25

Verse 9 states the problem of imperfection in spirituals, verse 10 states a gnomic

principle about the eventual abrogation of imperfections, verse 11 illustrates such, and verse 12

explains by application when the imperfect content of spirituals will be abolished, viz., “when

the Lord Jesus comes.” “The speaking face to face quite evidently is a reference to prophecy . . .

Numbers12:6-8.

IV. The Regulation of Spirituals (14:1-36)

A. In General (1-12)

The church is clearly commanded to continually pursue love, and to prefer to

prophecy over their desire for spirituals. The act of prophesying is distinguished from the

spiritual “prophecy” and the spiritual “prophet,” for it is something all can do (verse 31). The

reason is that prophesying edifies others, glossolalia does not, unless interpreted. The church

ought to give prominence to prophecy, or preaching.

B. In Particular (13-26)

The very incomprehensible nature of tongues for most people (they who have not

learned the particular language – “the unlearned”?) requires that tongues be interpreted to be of

any benefit to them, the very purpose of spirituals (13-19).

Mature thinking (13:9-11) is demanded to understand the very purpose of tongues. From

the quotation of Isaiah 28:11-12, it is deduced (hoste , “wherefore”) that tongues are for a

sign. But the objects of the sign are “this people,” i.e., the Jewish nation, who are further said to

not give heed, and that in Messianic times. “Accordingly directed as it is to an unbelieving

people, the true function of the gift is ‘for a sign to unbelievers’ . . . The adjective (apistos

) under these circumstances would – in contrast to a participial form – express pure

description as over against the action of believing involved in the foregoing participle.” It is

unbelieving Israel as a special class who are by nature “faithless” for who tongues were intended.

Individual believers are not here in question (23-25); tongues are no more for them than for those

who already exercise belief.

“When Paul came to Corinth he proclaimed to the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah (Acts

18:5). They considered this to be a blasphemous message, but God authenticated it to them by

giving believers in Corinth the gift of tongues.” It is also clear from the Acts of the Apostles that

whenever the gift of tongues was exercised Jews were present.

It has already been observed that glossolalia was to cease sometime before the return of

the Lord. The very nature of tongues as a sign, and in particular to the nation of Israel, especially

at the time of Messiah, indicates when that spiritual was to cease. It can be demonstrated from

Scripture that (1) the object of the sign, i.e., Israel, ceased to exist, that therefore (2) the purpose

of the spiritual, i.e., to be a sign, lost all relevance, and, therefore, that (3) the spiritual ceased.

26

Jesus himself predicted the soon destruction of the nation of Israel as an identifiable

entity “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Luke 21:20-24). By the time that the Epistle

to the Hebrews was written, the sign spirituals had ceased, having fulfilled their purpose of

confirmation of the Word among Jews (Hebrews 2:3-4; Mark16:17 and 20). To exalt the gift,

while overlooking the purpose for which God gave it, is to betray an immaturity which is

inappropriate to spiritual adulthood.

In public worship (26-32), everything, glossolalia included, must be done for edification.

No tongues should be spoken without an interpreter. With an interpreter, only two or three may

speak. It is expressly forbidden for women to speak in the church (33b-36). No Jew would ever

attend to a woman attempting to predicate.

V. Conclusion

From this brief consideration of 1 Corinthians 12-14, it appears (1) that Biblical

glossolalia was the super-natural ability to speak known languages which were not understood

by the speaker, (2) that glossolalia was a special sign for the confirmation of the Word before

unbelieving Israel until the destruction of Jerusalem which began the Times of the Gentiles, and

(3) that the exercise of glossolalia is therefore no longer valid. The failure of the modern tongues

movement to display any discernible consciousness of the plain Biblical purpose of this gift

stands as a powerful argument the movement;s genuineness and validity.

Twenty-five principles can be deduced from the same material for the regulation and

proper understanding of glossolalia. (See end notes for these principles). The failure of all known

glossolalia movements to observe these revealed truths precludes the validity of those

movements, and suggests that their origin is not divine.

It is recommended that all receptive believers be carefully educated concerning the true

nature of spirituals and warned about this false movement which is sweeping so many saints into

spiritual deception, that we might all be rightly edified and exercised in love.

Principles Regulating Glossolalia

I. Glossolalia can be exercised in a manner characterized by ignorance about spiritual

things.

II. True glossolalia is consistent in its message content, recognizing the Lordship of

Jesus.

III. Glossolalia must be exercised in harmony with the other spirituals.

IV. True glossolalia must be exercised for constructive purposes.

V. Glossolalia is one of many distinguishable manifestations of the Spirit.

VI. Glossolalia and its interpretation comprise a distinguishable subclass within the whole

class of spirituals.

VII. The Spirit alone determines which individuals shall receive glossolalia.

VIII. All believers, glossolalists and non-glossolalists alike, have (already) participated in

the “baptism” work of the Holy Spirit, and they all have his indwelling.

27

IX. The non-possession of (glossolalia) does not exclude one from full participation in the

life of the church.

X. For all to exercise glossolalia would be abnormal.

XI. The glossolalist cannot properly depreciate them who do not exercise glossolalia.

XII. Glossolalia fulfills a particular function (not identified at this point) which should be

properly identified.

XIII. The glossolalist should be sensitive to the contribution which he makes to others, and

theirs to him, and vice versa.

XIV. Glossolalia is of lesser eminence among the spirituals.

XV. No all are to exercise of spirituals is not the highest aim of the Christian life. It is

rather love. Spirituals can be misused for selfish purposes, love cannot.

XVI. Glossolalia is not the highest aim of the spiritual life.

XVII. Biblical glossolalia consists only of known languages.

XVIII. Glossolalia exercised in love is righteous and selfless.

XIX. Biblical glossolalia was to cease of itself at an unspecified time before the Lord’s

return.

XX. To prophesy is preferable to glossolalia.

XXI. Glossolalia must be interpreted when exercised among them who do not understand

the language in use.

XXII. Glossolalia is a sign for the unbelieving nation of Israel.

XXIII. Biblical glossolalia ceased with the destruction of Israel for the duration of the Times

of the Gentiles, and with the confirmation of the Word of God.

XXIV. In the church, glossolalia must be interpreted and closely regulated, otherwise

silenced.

XXV. Women are forbidden.

XXVI. to exercise glossolalia in the church.