Verses 27-28, "If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most
three, and that by course: and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let
him keep silence in the church: and let him speak to himself, and to God."
Again, may we call to our memory the word "unknown" is not in the original. In I
Corinthians 12:10 the term is translated "divers kinds of tongues." However, there is
no Greek word for "divers." The Greek term is gene glosson. Gene rendered by Dr. A.T.
Robertson as "kinds."
Robertson continues, "It was not always true the speaker could make clear what he had
said to those who did not know the tongue or language (I Cor 14:13). It was not mere
gibberish or jargon lie the modern so-called "tongues;" but a real language that could
be understood by one familiar with that tongue, as on the day of Pentecost when people
who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, no such variety existed; so it
required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not."
Further, Robertson observed, "The interpretation of tongues is from hermeneia glosson.
In case there was no one present who understood the particular language, it required a
special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret if anyone was to receive benefit
from it."
Accordingly, Paul also makes reference in I Corinthians 12:10 to "discerning of
spirits," which involved the ability to determine at once by supernatural power
whether the spirit authorizing any speech or authorizing any action was of God or was
false. The purpose of this fit is stated in I Corinthians 14:29 where the order to be
followed with respect to the use of tongues and of prophesying is given.
Demand is upon them that the "spirits" at work about them be "tried" or examined to
see "whether they be of God" (I Jn 4:1). Such action would inhibit the activities of
such "spirits." Crucially then, let us consider how they were able to "discern" or to
"know" these "spirits," as least, as to their origin.
Since "the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, and righteousness and truth" (Eph
5:9), we understand it is the "all truth" (Eph 5:10). Furthermore, that same source of
information exhorts us to "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness,
but rather reprove them. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the
light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light" (Eph 5:11; 13).
What then constitutes "works of darkness?" They are those deeds done by the motivation
of "another spirit" (II Cor 11:4). And again, how are "all things . . . . made
manifest"? Clearly it is "by the light" which is God's method today by which to "try
the spirits" (I Jn 4:1).
Hence "Let no man deceive you with vain words" (Eph 5:6). "Be not ye therefore
partakers with them" (Eph 5:7). Since the "days are evil, be ye not unwise, but
understanding what the will of God is" (Eph 5:16-17). And from whence cometh this
"understanding?" (See II Tim 2:7; 15; Ps 119:130)
In each you will see it is the word of God as it was revealed to "holy prophets and
apostles." It is not, however, now being revealed. It is a completed record and
revelation of truth.
Again, Paul shows the tongue speaker edifies only himself, apart from an interpreter
and therefore it was forbidden. "If there be no interpreter" it is shown, "ye shall
speak into the air" (I Cor 14:9). Such would, in no sense, benefit the church or
enhance its services.
Rationalizing according to the revelation of inspiration, Paul observed, "In church I
had rather speak five words with my understanding that I might teach others . . . .
then ten thousand words in another tongue" (I Cor 14:19). The reason being that all
such speaking "in the church" had to have as its aim the edifying of the church which
would only be done through an interpreter.
The "order" for tongues was given in the form of several lines of limitations as the
giver of the gifts Himself demanded. Note the simple rules they were to follow.
First, "if any man speak." Women were not allowed to speak in tongues in the churches
for it is written, "let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not
permitted unto them to speak . . . . for it is a shame for women to speak in the
church" (I cor 14:34-35). For the benefit of all who reject God's decent order, the
next verse reads, "What? Came the Word of God out from you, or came it unto you only?
(I Cor 14:36). In spite of that, ninety nine and forty four one hundreths percent of
all modern (so-called) tongues speaking is done by women in direct defiance of God's
declared "decent order."
Relative to the rule as to number, no more than two or three men were allowed to so
speak in one service of the church. Even then, only two spoke the language foreign to
the church, while the other interpreted (vs 27).
The next rule involved the right form, "and that by course" (vs 27). This is from the
Greek text meaning "in determinate order, or in turn." Never was it permissible for
more than one disciple of the Lord to speak at the same time, either in praying or in
tongues in the assembly.
The final rule had to do with the proper method, namely, the phenomenon of tongues was
to be always followed by an interpretation. As W. E. Vine observes in his commentary
on First Corinthians, "Apparently, he who had the gift of tongues must first be
assured that one was present who could interpret. Otherwise, he would not know whether
he had to keep silence."
If every member known to have the gift of interpretation was absent, the man with the
gift of tongues had to keep silence in the assembly. How utterly unlike the monkey
moans which accompany what appears to be a wild and orgiastic dance. In the course of
these displays of delirium the participants pile on the floor or dance about in a
veritable carnage of carnality.
No one, while under the influence of "the Spirit of God" was ever seen "speaking by
the Spirit" (I Cor 12:3) as though in a trance or under a "spell." Nor were they found
wallering on the floor, lying on the floor or kicking their feet above their heads.
Neither were they observed to be "out" or running up and down the aisles of the
meeting place.
In short, no such strange behavior ever accompanied a "manifestation of the Sprit,"
whether it took the form of "speaking with other tongues," and "other lips," or being
"filled with the Holy Spirit." Roy Laurin, in his commentary, observed, "anything that
causes emotional or volitional release that is not under control is not spiritual but
Satanic. It belongs to the realm of that borderland of mysticism and metaphysics that
is both diabolical and dangerous."
Verses 29-33, "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any
thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may
all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits
of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion,
but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."
The prophetic gift but implements and enlarges on this issue. Similarly did Paul tell
these to "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge" (vs 29). Again
we are assured as to the attractiveness and absolute requirements to a 'decent order.'
For no more than three with gifts associated with "prophecy" could take part in one
service. Even then one of the two or three must "judge." This was spoken of in I
Corinthians 12 under the expression "discerning of spirits" (12:10).
More glamourous indeed was the work of prophesying as set over against that of
"judging" the content of the thing proclaimed. Still it was essential that a
determination be made as to whether it was God-given or "that spirit of anti-Christ"
(I Jn 4:1-4). Observe then, the two most important rules necessary to the maintenance
of a decent order. First, no more than three and preferably two with one serving as a
"discerner," meaning one who knows or judge. Second, each prophet had complete control
over his own spirit (vs 32). Since "God is not the author of confusion" in any form or
fashion, then there were no trances, no state of shock, no hypnotic spell or no
uncontrolled impulses at work.
I have heard many people attempt to describe how "the spirit came down on them and
they no longer had a will or mind of their own and how that spirit manipulated them
and used them but they did not know what was going on. Such a confession brands that
experience as diabolical rather than divine. God is not the author of such. There was
no stupid stammering or blasphemous and barbarous babblings.
Finally, observe again, "each man (since no woman preached or prophesied in the
church) did prophesy one by one." The right aims were accomplished when such acts were
performed decently and orderly; for then all learned, were edified and were comforted"
(I Cor 14:31).
Where ever in our day men fancy themselves to be tellers forth of the mind of God, the
definition of the word prophet, or designate themselves as "spiritual," that man, not
woman, must "acknowledge that these are the commandments of the Lord" (14:35). But if
by chance some men, even in the face of the facts as revealed, continue to refuse the
truth. In such cases, the Holy Spirit enjoins us to "let him be ignorant" (14:38).
The tons of dribble taught by trespassers into territory that is off limits to all in
this age cause an evil speaking of those things "which they know not" (Jude 10). And
"these be they who separate themselves," and are "sensual (that is, fleshly), having
not the Spirit" (Jude 19). Theirs is a feeling of felicity that may flatter the ego,
but it also fulfills that for which only the flesh lusts.
Vance Havner once observed that "some folks act more like they are racing for a train
than training for the race." I could add that they arrive at the sum-total of their
knowledge and regard of truth after an incredibly brief journey! JM
three, and that by course: and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let
him keep silence in the church: and let him speak to himself, and to God."
Again, may we call to our memory the word "unknown" is not in the original. In I
Corinthians 12:10 the term is translated "divers kinds of tongues." However, there is
no Greek word for "divers." The Greek term is gene glosson. Gene rendered by Dr. A.T.
Robertson as "kinds."
Robertson continues, "It was not always true the speaker could make clear what he had
said to those who did not know the tongue or language (I Cor 14:13). It was not mere
gibberish or jargon lie the modern so-called "tongues;" but a real language that could
be understood by one familiar with that tongue, as on the day of Pentecost when people
who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, no such variety existed; so it
required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not."
Further, Robertson observed, "The interpretation of tongues is from hermeneia glosson.
In case there was no one present who understood the particular language, it required a
special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret if anyone was to receive benefit
from it."
Accordingly, Paul also makes reference in I Corinthians 12:10 to "discerning of
spirits," which involved the ability to determine at once by supernatural power
whether the spirit authorizing any speech or authorizing any action was of God or was
false. The purpose of this fit is stated in I Corinthians 14:29 where the order to be
followed with respect to the use of tongues and of prophesying is given.
Demand is upon them that the "spirits" at work about them be "tried" or examined to
see "whether they be of God" (I Jn 4:1). Such action would inhibit the activities of
such "spirits." Crucially then, let us consider how they were able to "discern" or to
"know" these "spirits," as least, as to their origin.
Since "the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, and righteousness and truth" (Eph
5:9), we understand it is the "all truth" (Eph 5:10). Furthermore, that same source of
information exhorts us to "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness,
but rather reprove them. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the
light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light" (Eph 5:11; 13).
What then constitutes "works of darkness?" They are those deeds done by the motivation
of "another spirit" (II Cor 11:4). And again, how are "all things . . . . made
manifest"? Clearly it is "by the light" which is God's method today by which to "try
the spirits" (I Jn 4:1).
Hence "Let no man deceive you with vain words" (Eph 5:6). "Be not ye therefore
partakers with them" (Eph 5:7). Since the "days are evil, be ye not unwise, but
understanding what the will of God is" (Eph 5:16-17). And from whence cometh this
"understanding?" (See II Tim 2:7; 15; Ps 119:130)
In each you will see it is the word of God as it was revealed to "holy prophets and
apostles." It is not, however, now being revealed. It is a completed record and
revelation of truth.
Again, Paul shows the tongue speaker edifies only himself, apart from an interpreter
and therefore it was forbidden. "If there be no interpreter" it is shown, "ye shall
speak into the air" (I Cor 14:9). Such would, in no sense, benefit the church or
enhance its services.
Rationalizing according to the revelation of inspiration, Paul observed, "In church I
had rather speak five words with my understanding that I might teach others . . . .
then ten thousand words in another tongue" (I Cor 14:19). The reason being that all
such speaking "in the church" had to have as its aim the edifying of the church which
would only be done through an interpreter.
The "order" for tongues was given in the form of several lines of limitations as the
giver of the gifts Himself demanded. Note the simple rules they were to follow.
First, "if any man speak." Women were not allowed to speak in tongues in the churches
for it is written, "let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not
permitted unto them to speak . . . . for it is a shame for women to speak in the
church" (I cor 14:34-35). For the benefit of all who reject God's decent order, the
next verse reads, "What? Came the Word of God out from you, or came it unto you only?
(I Cor 14:36). In spite of that, ninety nine and forty four one hundreths percent of
all modern (so-called) tongues speaking is done by women in direct defiance of God's
declared "decent order."
Relative to the rule as to number, no more than two or three men were allowed to so
speak in one service of the church. Even then, only two spoke the language foreign to
the church, while the other interpreted (vs 27).
The next rule involved the right form, "and that by course" (vs 27). This is from the
Greek text meaning "in determinate order, or in turn." Never was it permissible for
more than one disciple of the Lord to speak at the same time, either in praying or in
tongues in the assembly.
The final rule had to do with the proper method, namely, the phenomenon of tongues was
to be always followed by an interpretation. As W. E. Vine observes in his commentary
on First Corinthians, "Apparently, he who had the gift of tongues must first be
assured that one was present who could interpret. Otherwise, he would not know whether
he had to keep silence."
If every member known to have the gift of interpretation was absent, the man with the
gift of tongues had to keep silence in the assembly. How utterly unlike the monkey
moans which accompany what appears to be a wild and orgiastic dance. In the course of
these displays of delirium the participants pile on the floor or dance about in a
veritable carnage of carnality.
No one, while under the influence of "the Spirit of God" was ever seen "speaking by
the Spirit" (I Cor 12:3) as though in a trance or under a "spell." Nor were they found
wallering on the floor, lying on the floor or kicking their feet above their heads.
Neither were they observed to be "out" or running up and down the aisles of the
meeting place.
In short, no such strange behavior ever accompanied a "manifestation of the Sprit,"
whether it took the form of "speaking with other tongues," and "other lips," or being
"filled with the Holy Spirit." Roy Laurin, in his commentary, observed, "anything that
causes emotional or volitional release that is not under control is not spiritual but
Satanic. It belongs to the realm of that borderland of mysticism and metaphysics that
is both diabolical and dangerous."
Verses 29-33, "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any
thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may
all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits
of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion,
but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."
The prophetic gift but implements and enlarges on this issue. Similarly did Paul tell
these to "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge" (vs 29). Again
we are assured as to the attractiveness and absolute requirements to a 'decent order.'
For no more than three with gifts associated with "prophecy" could take part in one
service. Even then one of the two or three must "judge." This was spoken of in I
Corinthians 12 under the expression "discerning of spirits" (12:10).
More glamourous indeed was the work of prophesying as set over against that of
"judging" the content of the thing proclaimed. Still it was essential that a
determination be made as to whether it was God-given or "that spirit of anti-Christ"
(I Jn 4:1-4). Observe then, the two most important rules necessary to the maintenance
of a decent order. First, no more than three and preferably two with one serving as a
"discerner," meaning one who knows or judge. Second, each prophet had complete control
over his own spirit (vs 32). Since "God is not the author of confusion" in any form or
fashion, then there were no trances, no state of shock, no hypnotic spell or no
uncontrolled impulses at work.
I have heard many people attempt to describe how "the spirit came down on them and
they no longer had a will or mind of their own and how that spirit manipulated them
and used them but they did not know what was going on. Such a confession brands that
experience as diabolical rather than divine. God is not the author of such. There was
no stupid stammering or blasphemous and barbarous babblings.
Finally, observe again, "each man (since no woman preached or prophesied in the
church) did prophesy one by one." The right aims were accomplished when such acts were
performed decently and orderly; for then all learned, were edified and were comforted"
(I Cor 14:31).
Where ever in our day men fancy themselves to be tellers forth of the mind of God, the
definition of the word prophet, or designate themselves as "spiritual," that man, not
woman, must "acknowledge that these are the commandments of the Lord" (14:35). But if
by chance some men, even in the face of the facts as revealed, continue to refuse the
truth. In such cases, the Holy Spirit enjoins us to "let him be ignorant" (14:38).
The tons of dribble taught by trespassers into territory that is off limits to all in
this age cause an evil speaking of those things "which they know not" (Jude 10). And
"these be they who separate themselves," and are "sensual (that is, fleshly), having
not the Spirit" (Jude 19). Theirs is a feeling of felicity that may flatter the ego,
but it also fulfills that for which only the flesh lusts.
Vance Havner once observed that "some folks act more like they are racing for a train
than training for the race." I could add that they arrive at the sum-total of their
knowledge and regard of truth after an incredibly brief journey! JM
| Chapter 25 Table of Contents Back to Home Page Send us E-Mail Church Phone - (254) 865-6924 |
Website design by
Laura Slack
Copyright © 2007
Gateway Baptist
Church
All Rights Reserved
Laura Slack
Copyright © 2007
Gateway Baptist
Church
All Rights Reserved
| Gateway Baptist Church Independent Unaffiliated Separated Soul-Winning KJV "It Does Make A Difference What You Believe". |
| "Comparison of the Gifts of Tongues and Prophesy" Part VI I Corinthians 14:27-33 CHAPTER 24 By John C. Morgan |