Lessons #497 and 498
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 1. It is best to use this note after you have listened to the lessons because there are +
+ comments given in the actual delivery not in the note. +
+ 2. The Bible abbreviations are as follows: CEV =Contemporary English version, +
+ CEB = Common English Bible, ESV= English Standard Version, +
+ GW = God’s Word Translation, ISV = International Standard Version, +
+ NAB=New American Bible, NASB= New American Standard Bible, +
+ NEB= New English Bible, NET = New English Translation, +
+ NLT = New Living Translations NJB = New Jerusalem Bible, +
+ NJV = New Jewish Bible, TEV = Today’s English Version. +
+AMP = Amplified Bible, UBS = United Bible Society +
+ 3. Notes have not been edited for grammatical errors. +
+ 4. Text is based on 1984 edition of the NIV +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prophecy versus tongue in mixed worship assembly (1 Cor 14:20-25)
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!”
The message of this section that we introduced in our last study is that Prophecy is more important than tongues in a mixed worship assembly. We stated that we will expound on this message by considering three propositions that we summarized in our last study. However, we considered the first proposition which is that matured thinking is important for comparison of tongues and prophecy. We noted that the apostle commanded the Corinthians and so believers to be matured in their thinking but behave like children when it concerns wickedness or evil. So, we continue with the second proposition.
The second proposition is that assertion and inference from Scripture help in comparison of gifts of tongues and prophecy. This second proposition concerns first, the assertion from Scripture and then the inference drawn from it. The assertion of the Scripture is introduced in the first sentence of 1 Corinthians 14:21 In the Law it is written. The apostle used the word Law, but we used the word Scripture in stating the second proposition, so why? To answer this question, we need to examine the Greek word translated “law” in our passage.
The word “law” is translated from a Greek word (nomos) that is used in three ways in the Scripture. It is used for a procedure or practice that has taken hold and so means “a custom, rule, principle, norm, law.” It is in the sense of “principle” that Apostle Paul used it in Romans 7:21:
So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me.
The context of Romans 7:21 indicates that the word “law” refers to “principle” as reflected in the translation of many English versions, such as the NASB and the NAB. The translators of the CEB and the NJB used the word “rule” in place of “law” in their rendering of this passage in Romans. Another usage of the Greek word translated “law” is for describing the first five book of Moses (i.e., Genesis to Deuteronomy) often known as the Torah, as in John 1:45:
Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”
Still another usage of the Greek word translated “law” is as a reference to the entire OT Scriptures. It is in this sense that the word is used in John 12:34:
The crowd spoke up, “We have heard from the Law that the Christ will remain forever, so how can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this ‘Son of Man’?”
There are at least two passages that the crowd could have referred from which they heard about Christ ruling forever. A first passage is Isaiah 9:7:
Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this.
A second passage is Daniel 7:14:
He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
The question is: Of these three usages, which applies to our context? It is the third meaning that refers to the entire OT Scriptures. This answer is supported by the actual passage the apostle quoted in 1 Corinthians 14:21.
Apostle Paul quoted from the OT Scripture as introduced by the sentence of 1 Corinthians 14:21 In the Law it is written. The word “written” is translated from a Greek word (graphō) that means “to write.” However, the sentence it is written or its equivalent For it is written is a formula for quotation from the OT Scripture. The Lord Jesus used it to cite Scripture to Satan during His temptation as we read in Matthew 4:4:
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”
He quoted exactly from Deuteronomy 8:3:
He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your fathers had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.
Interestingly, Satan used the same formula in his quotation of Scripture in his temptation of Jesus Christ as we read in Luke 4:10–11:
10 For it is written: “‘He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; 11they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’”
Satan quoted exactly from Psalm 91:11–12:
11For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways; 12they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.
The Jews who contended with the Lord Jesus used the formula as it is written in their quotation of the OT Scripture as we read in John 6:31:
Our forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’”
The Jews did not quote exactly any passage of the OT Scripture but they in a sense referenced the account given in Exodus 16:4:
Then the LORD said to Moses, “I will rain down bread from heaven for you. The people are to go out each day and gather enough for that day. In this way I will test them and see whether they will follow my instructions.
Apostle Peter in addressing the disciples regarding replacement of Judas Iscariot supported that move by citing Psalms using the formula we are considering, as we read in Acts 1:20:
“For,” said Peter, “it is written in the book of Psalms, “‘May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it,’ and, “‘May another take his place of leadership.’
The apostle pieced together two different psalms. The first quotation May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it is from Psalm 69:25:
May their place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in their tents.
In this verse of Psalm 69, the psalmist desired the complete destruction of his enemies and their families so that there would be no inhabitants left to occupy their cities and homes so rendering them empty. However, the apostle applied what was aimed at all the enemies of the psalmist to one person, Judas Iscariot, viewed probably as enemy of Christ because he betrayed him. Anyway, the second quotation of Acts 1:20‘May another take his place of leadership’ is from Psalm 109:8:
May his days be few; may another take his place of leadership.
Again, the psalm is concerned with the psalmist’s desire or prayer for the death of his enemy so that another person will take up the position the enemy occupies. One thing we learn from the quotation in Acts 1:20 is that although the apostle pieced together two different passages in Psalms, but the two passages have something in common, desire or petition for the death of an enemy. Peter’s approach lets us know that we could piece together various passages of the Scripture that are germane to our position in support of our arguments. The human author of Hebrews used the formula we are considering in quoting from the Scripture as we read in Hebrews 10:7:
Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written about me in the scroll— I have come to do your will, O God.’”
The quotation is from Psalm 40:7–8:
7Then I said, “Here I am, I have come— it is written about me in the scroll. 8I desire to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart.”
Comparison of the quotation in Hebrews 10:7 to the original passage reveals that there is a change in the order of the sentences. In the original, the sentence I have come comes before the sentence it is written about me in the scroll but in the quotation the reverse was the case. Furthermore, the quotation left out the sentence I desire in the original and assimilated the rest of the verbal phrase to do your will, O my God to the sentence I have come leading to the reading I have come to do your will, O God. The implication is that the OT Scripture may be used in argument not necessarily citing every word in the text. In short, we may summarize a passage in the OT in support of an argument. That aside, Apostle Paul quoted the OT Scripture in 1 Corinthians 14:21.
The quotation of Apostle Paul is given in the sentence of 1 Corinthians 14:21“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. The quotation of the apostle is from Isaiah 28:11–12:
11 Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues God will speak to this people, 12to whom he said, “This is the resting place, let the weary rest”; and, “This is the place of repose”— but they would not listen.
The first thing we note about the apostle’s quotation is that it is not a verbatim of the passage in Isaiah. It does not match Septuagint versions of this passage in Isaiah. The version of the Septuagint we have as given in Lexham English Septuagint reads:
11 because of the contempt of lips, through a different tongue, because they will speak to this people, 12 saying to them, “This is the rest for the hungry, and this is the ruin.” And they did not want to hear it.
Without going into much detail in comparison between the Septuagint or the Hebrew text and what the apostle cited, we should make two observations. First, the apostle changed the word “God” in Isaiah 28:11 to the first-person pronoun “I.” Second, the apostle added the phrase to me and interpreted the passage of Isaiah as coming from the Lord because he added the verbal phrase says the Lord. Several attempts have been made by commentators to deal with the difference between what the apostle quoted and the Septuagint or the Hebrew text without any satisfactory solution. All we can say is that either the apostle had a version of the Septuagint that is not available to us as per the claim of the Apostolic father, Origen, that indicates that the apostle’s quotation probably agrees with the version of Isaiah that Aquila, a first century Jewish believer, translated or that the Holy Spirit enabled the apostle to freely quote, interpret, and apply the original text from the Septuagint or the Hebrew text. Nonetheless, it seems that the apostle quoted in such a way as to pick the sentences that he felt were necessary for the point he was about to make.
The context of the quotation from Isaiah 28 is the charge of the drunkenness on the part of Israel’s leaders as we read in Isaiah 28:7–8:
7 And these also stagger from wine and reel from beer: Priests and prophets stagger from beer and are befuddled with wine; they reel from beer, they stagger when seeing visions, they stumble when rendering decisions. 8All the tables are covered with vomit and there is not a spot without filth.
These leaders responded by dismissing the charge, asserting the prophet spoke gibberish, nonsense sounds to them as we read in Isaiah 28:9–10:
9“Who is it he is trying to teach? To whom is he explaining his message? To children weaned from their milk to those just taken from the breast? 10 For it is: Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; a little here, a little there.”
Needless to say, verse 10 is difficult to translate from the Hebrew. This is probably why the NIV gives the footnote “Hebrew / sav lasav sav lasav / kav lakav kav lakav (possibly meaningless sounds; perhaps a mimicking of the prophet’s words).” The LEB translates For it is blah-blah upon blah-blah, blah-blah upon blah-blah, gah-gah upon gah-gah, gah-gah upon gah-gah, a little here, a little there with the footnote “In this context, the Hebrew expressions tsaw-tsaw and qaw-qaw are likely meant to sound like baby talk, but they could mean “command upon command” and “rule upon rule.”” So, one gets the idea that the Hebrew is probably meant to indicate that the leaders must have felt that the prophet insulted them using baby talks for which they would only pick up “few stray syllables.” That aside, the prophet replied that Yahweh will punish them by causing them to hear gibberish that in the context would refer to the Assyrians speaking to the people in their own language that would include words that the people of Judah would not understand and so sound like gibberish to them. We should, of course, recognize that the language of Assyrians being Semitic in nature that there are words that are common between them and the Israelites. For unless this was the case, it is difficult to see how Prophet Jonah would have announced God’s judgment on Nineveh, the chief city of the Assyrians. Furthermore, it is because the Assyrians could use words the Israelites would understand that caused their military officers to speak directly to Israelites as we read in Isaiah 36:11:
Then Eliakim, Shebna and Joah said to the field commander, “Please speak to your servants in Aramaic, since we understand it. Don’t speak to us in Hebrew in the hearing of the people on the wall.”
In any event, the punishment the prophet announced would come from the Assyrians. For Assyrians were described as God’s rod of punishment in Isaiah 10:5:
“Woe to the Assyrian, the rod of my anger, in whose hand is the club of my wrath!
The Assyrians were also referenced as those who would speak with strange language as we read in Isaiah 33:19:
You will see those arrogant people no more, those people of an obscure speech, with their strange, incomprehensible tongue.
We have given a brief review of the background of the Apostle quotation so we return to the quotation in 1 Corinthians 14:21 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. The expression “men of strange tongues” is translated from a Greek word (heteroglōssos) that appears only here in the Greek NT; it means “speaking a strange language, speaking a foreign language.” The apostle used the plural in the Greek. This is probably to indicate that many foreign speaking people would carry out the punishment of God on His covenant people. But it is also possible that since the Hebrew text used the singular word “tongue” that the apostle could have intended that two different nations, that is, the Assyrians and the Babylonians were eventually God’s instrument of the judgment Prophet Isaiah predicted would come to the people of Judah and their leaders.
The apostle, of course, referred to the foreign speaking people in the phrase the lips of foreigners. The word “lips” is translated from a Greek word (cheilos) that may mean “lips” as organ of speech as it is used in the praising of God as described in Hebrews 13:15:
Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that confess his name.
The word may mean “shore, edge” of a river as it is used to describe the numerous descendants of Abraham through Isaac by comparing them to sand in Hebrews 11:12:
And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:21, the word is used in the sense of “speech” but that will be the speech of others although the NIV used the word “foreigners.”
The word “foreigners” of the NIV is translated from (heteros) that pertains to being distinct from some other item implied or mentioned hence means “other” so it may mean “other of two” as Apostle Paul used it to state he does not go beyond the Scripture in his application of truth as stated in 1 Corinthians 4:6:
Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another.
The word may mean “another, different” as it pertains to being dissimilar in kind or class from all other entities as the word is used by Apostle Paul to express his surprise that the Galatians were turning to a different gospel than the one, he preached to them and by which they were saved as we read in Galatians 1:6:
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:21, the word is used in the sense of “other,” that is, “not the same one or ones already mentioned or implied.” Hence, the phrase of the NIV of 1 Corinthians 14:21 the lips of foreigners is more literally the lips of others, that is, speech of others. In the original text quoted, we have indicated that the prophet meant the Assyrians with a recognizable language although not understood by non-Assyrians.
The quotation of the Apostle in verse 21 we are considering contains the sentence I will speak to this people. Prophet Isaiah did not mean that Yahweh would speak to the people using language of others as such but that is a way of saying that God would communicate to the people in view through punishment. This will be in keeping with the declared two methods of God’s communication described in Job 33:14–19:
14For God does speak—now one way, now another—though man may not perceive it. 15In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falls on men as they slumber in their beds, 16 he may speak in their ears and terrify them with warnings, 17 to turn man from wrongdoing and keep him from pride, 18to preserve his soul from the pit, his life from perishing by the sword. 19Or a man may be chastened on a bed of pain with constant distress in his bones,
God spoke to His covenant people through the prophets, but they did not listen, so He eventually spoke to them through judgment in the hands of the Assyrians and the Babylonians.
Anyhow, the question is who does the phrase of 1 Corinthians 14:21 this people refer to? The word “people” is translated from a Greek word (laos) that may mean “people” in a general sense. It could mean “people as a multitude or crowd” as it is used to describe the people who came to Jesus that He fed miraculously after issuing the instruction to His disciples to feed them as we read in Luke 9:13:
He replied, “You give them something to eat.” They answered, “We have only five loaves of bread and two fish—unless we go and buy food for all this crowd.”
The word may mean “people of God” as it is used for Israel implied in Acts 3:23:
Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people.’
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:21, it is used in the sense of “people-group,” that is, “a large group of people based on various cultural, physical, or geographical ties.” The meaning “people-group” or “a large group of people” helps in understanding the phrase this people. By strict interpretation of the original context, it would refer to the leaders of the people of Judah that were denounced by Prophet Isaiah. However, since the punishment that will come to them would be from the Assyrians whose language they would not understand, the phrase refers to the entire people of Judah that would include their leaders who failed to help the people spiritually since they were in constant stupor.
Apostle Paul quoted the response of the people of Judah and their leaders in the clause of 1 Corinthians 14:21 but even then they will not listen to me. The word “listen” is translated from a Greek word (eisakouō) that may mean “to hear” as the word is used in the assurance of Angel Gabriel to Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, that God has heard his prayer as stated in Luke 1:13:
But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to give him the name John.
The word may mean “to listen.” In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:21, it has the sense of “to obey” as a result of having carefully listened to an instruction. The people of Judah did not listen to or obey the warning of the prophet and eventually they were exiled. Anyway, the assertion of Apostle Paul is that God pronounced judgment on His covenant people that they would be punished by people whose language they would not understand; even then, that did not cause them to obey God’s word. In other words, the prophet conveyed to the people what God would do to them that would not cause them to become obedient to Him which history proved that He did, and His covenant people at large did not turn to Him. The question, of course, is, what did the apostle want to convey to the Corinthians in quoting this passage? The answer is that as God’s people did not obey God despite being punished through foreign speaking people, so the Corinthians should recognize that speaking in tongues in public worship might not have the effect those who focused on the gift think it has in their worship if no interpretation occurs. For example, some may feel that speaking in tongues makes them more spiritual than others but tongue not interpreted does not build up the church.
In any case, the second proposition is that assertion and inference from Scripture help in comparison of gifts of tongues and prophecy. This second proposition concerns first, the assertion from Scripture and then the inference drawn from it. We have considered the assertion from the Scripture and so we proceed to consider the inference drawn from the Scripture. The concept of inference is introduced in 1 Corinthians 14:22 with the word then of the NIV. The word “then” is translated from a Greek word (hōste) that may be used either as a marker of purpose with the meaning “in order that, so that” as Apostle Paul used it to describe the state, he and his team experienced because of the pressure they faced as stated in 2 Corinthians 1:8:
We do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about the hardships we suffered in the province of Asia. We were under great pressure, far beyond our ability to endure, so that we despaired even of life.
The word is used as a marker of result with the meaning “therefore” or even “for this reason” as Apostle Paul used it in his encouragement to the Philippians to stand firm in the Lord since they would eventually receive glorious bodies similar to that of our Lord Jesus when He returns as we read in Philippians 4:1:
Therefore, my brothers, you whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, that is how you should stand firm in the Lord, dear friends!
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:22, it is used to draw inference or for deduction from a preceding sentence so that it could be translated “therefore” or “so then” as reflected in some English versions. The inference that is to be drawn is from the fact that speaking in foreign language or tongue indicated God’s judgment on Israelites because they refused to obey God’s word given to them through the prophets but that did not cause them to respond to Him.
The inference to be drawn, as Apostle Paul applied the passage in Isaiah, is that speaking in tongues serves as a sign to unbelievers. It is this that is given in the sentence of 1 Corinthians 14:22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers. A literal translation from the Greek reads Therefore the tongues are for (a) sign not to the ones believing but for unbelievers.
What is the apostle saying when he wrote literally Therefore the tongues are for (a) sign not to the ones believing but for unbelievers? Let me begin by saying that what the apostle meant is not easy to interpret and so what the apostle meant has been challenging to understand as evident in various ways commentators have handled the declaration of the apostle. This notwithstanding, to properly interpret what the apostle meant, it is important we pay special attention to the word “tongues” as used by the apostle. There are several reasons for this requirement. First, in the passage in Isaiah 28:11-12 that is the basis for the inference of the apostle, “tongue” referred to a human language, specifically those of the Assyrians and possibly the Babylonians. Second, the apostle had indicated that there is speaking in tongue that does not involve specific human languages. We say this because, the apostle had indicated that a person could speak in a tongue that is not directed to any human being as we read in 1 Corinthians 14:2:
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.
Third, the apostle had indicated that there is speaking in tongue that is concerned with prayer as we read in 1 Corinthians 14:14:
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.
Fourth, the apostle used a definite article in the plural in the Greek to qualify the word “tongue.” We mean that the sentence of 1 Corinthians 14:22 Tongues, then, are a sign is literally Therefore the tongues are for (a) sign. It is this fact that should cause us to pay attention to what the word “tongue” the apostle used in the passage of 1 Corinthians 14:22 that we are considering means. The apostle used definite article in the plural only twice in connection with the word “tongue” that he discoursed in 1 Corinthians 12-14. The apostle used the definite article in the plural with the word “tongue” when he referred to the tongues of humans and angels in 1 Corinthians 13:1:
If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
The other usage of the definite article in the plural with the word “tongue” is in the passage we are considering. The Holy Spirit must have guided the apostle to use it because of what the Holy Spirit wanted him to convey. The Holy Spirit wanted the apostle to convey to us that the “tongue” meant in our passage is to be distinguished from the tongue or “ecstatic language” that is used in prayer or praise that is directed to God by a believer in a private setting. In effect, we are saying that the definite article is used in a generic sense implying that the apostle stressed the characteristic of tongue here as one that is different from the ecstatic language but is characterized by the fact it is a known human language. The reasons we have given means that the word “tongue” used in 1 Corinthians 14:22 refers to a human language that is unknown by the speaker but given to the individual by the Holy Spirit. This kind of speaking in tongue is the one that requires interpretation to benefit others.
There is one more word we should consider to help us in interpreting what the apostle meant in the passage we are considering. It is the word “sign” that is translated from a Greek word (sēmeion) that may refer to “a sign or distinguishing mark whereby something is known” hence means “sign, token, indication.” The translators of the NIV used the meaning “distinguishing mark” to translate the word where Apostle Paul used it at the end of his second epistle to the Thessalonians to describe how he ends his letters as we read in 2 Thessalonians 3:17:
I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand, which is the distinguishing mark in all my letters. This is how I write.
The word may refer to “an event that is an indication or confirmation of intervention by transcendent powers” and so means “miracle, portent” as it is used in God’s authentication of the message preached by Apostles Paul and Barnabas as stated in Acts 14:3:
So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:22, it has the meaning of “sign” in the sense of “a marvelous event that manifests a supernatural act of God evident in special communication.”
The interpretation that we gave to the word “tongue” and the word “sign” enable us to interpret what the apostle wrote in 1 Corinthians 14:22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers. The apostle does not mean that every speaking in tongue is an event that should cause an unbeliever to marvel at the manifestation of the presence of God. No! He meant that speaking in tongue that involves human language unknown to the speaker but given to the person by the Holy Spirit is intended to serve as what causes an unbeliever either to mock believers or to marvel about what God is doing and so to be benefited by it. There are at least two reasons for this interpretation. First, it is the interpretation that keeps the apostle from conflicting his teaching. The apostle had taught that speaking in tongue that involves ecstatic is beneficial to the speaker in that it builds the person up spiritually as we read in 1 Corinthians 14:4:
He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.
So, to say that tongues are a sign to unbelievers implies that its exercise is not beneficial to believers which then contradicts what the apostle says about tongue building up the believer who speaks it. Second, our interpretation is supported by the event of speaking in tongues on the day of Pentecost. Believers were enabled by the Holy Spirit to speak in the tongues of different people whose language they did not understand. We read of what the Holy Spirit did in Acts 2:4:
All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.
The other tongues the disciples spoke refer to human languages they did not know or learn as stated in Acts 2:8–11:
8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!”
The persons from different nations that their languages were spoken by the disciples as the Holy Spirit enabled them, testified that they heard their various languages spoken by the disciples as declaring how wonderful God is. In fact, they were amazed and wondered what it means that the people spoke in their languages as we read in Acts 2:12:
Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?”
Those who heard the disciples speak in tongues were unbelievers. On the one hand, the Jewish unbelievers who resided in Judea mocked the disciples because they did not understand what they said as we gather from Acts 2:13:
Some, however, made fun of them and said, “They have had too much wine.”
The word some refers to Jews who lived in Jerusalem as implied in Peter’s beginning address to the people’s reaction to the speaking in tongues of the disciples. On the other hand, those Jews from the nations that their languages were spoken by the disciples as they spoke in tongue had respect for what they saw or heard. So, speaking in tongues was a sign or an event that manifested the presence of God working supernaturally among the disciples. This then means that it is correct to say that what the apostle meant about tongues being a sign to unbelievers refers to human languages uttered under the directive of the Holy Spirit that will either cause the hearer to mock if the tongue is not the individual’s language or to acknowledge the presence of God in the public worship of believers where the gift of speaking in tongues is exercised properly because the individual hears the tongue as the person’s language.
There is no indication that on the day of Pentecost those who spoke in tongues benefited and so the speaking in tongue on that day was for the benefit of unbelievers present when the outpouring of the Holy Spirit occurred. This being the case, the speaking in tongues on the day of Pentecost supports the apostle’s statement stated in 1 Corinthians 14:22 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers. The Greek syntax implies that it is benefit that is the concern in the phrases for believers and for unbelievers.
The word “unbelievers” is translated from a Greek adjective (apistos) that may mean “unbelievable, incredible” as it is the word used to describe Apostle Paul’s question to Agrippa of why it would be difficult for him to accept the matter of resurrection of Jesus Christ, as used in Acts 26:8:
Why should any of you consider it incredible that God raises the dead?
The word may mean “unbelieving” as the word is used in the rebuke of the Lord Jesus to people of His generation in Luke 9:41:
“O unbelieving and perverse generation,” Jesus replied, “how long shall I stay with you and put up with you? Bring your son here.”
The word may simply refer to an “unbeliever” as it is used in the instruction regarding close partnership with unbelievers in 2 Corinthians 6:14:
Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:22, the word means “unbeliever,” that is, a person “characterized by lack of trust in Jesus as Messiah and disobedience to His revealed way of life.” It is to such a person that tongue as we have explained is meant to benefit or not benefit depending on the nature of the exercise of the gift of tongue.
The inference the apostle drew from Isaiah 28:11-12 enabled him to make the final comparison between the two gifts of prophecy and speaking in tongues. This final comparison is introduced by the conjunction however in the second clause of 1 Corinthians 14:22 prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers. The conjunction “however” is translated from a Greek word (de) that may be used to connect one clause to another, either to express contrast or simple continuation but in certain occurrences the marker may be left untranslated. Although it is often translated “but” in the English when there is a perceived contrast between two clauses, but it has other meanings such as “now,” “then,” “and,” “so” when it is used to link segments of a narrative. It can also be used to indicate transition to something new or to resume a discourse after an interruption. In our passage of 1 Corinthians 14:22, it is used to express contrast between the benefits of “tongues” and “prophecy” as they related to believers and unbelievers.
Prophecy is translated from a Greek word (prophēteia) that in 1 Corinthians 14:22 is used with the sense of a representative declaration of the mind, will, or knowledge of God. The Greek also used a definite article to qualify the word “prophecy” probably to emphasize that the prophetic activity the apostle had in mind was primarily that which occurred in a local church in contrast to prophetic activities that occurred in the OT times. It is this activity in a local church that the apostle indicates is for the benefit of believers and not of unbelievers. Again, we use the word “benefit” because of the Greek syntax of the phrases for believers and for unbelievers imply that it is “benefit” that is of the concern to the apostle. The apostle wrote the phrase of 1 Corinthians 14:22 not for unbelievers in an emphatic manner. We say this because of the word “not” is translated from a Greek negative (ou) that is an objective negative, denying the reality of alleged fact fully and absolutely in contrast to another Greek negative (mē) that is a subjective negative, implying a conditional and hypothetical negation. The negative the apostle used here shuts the door to the possibility that prophecy in the sense of communicating God’s will for functioning is for believers and not unbelievers. Of course, prophecy is used to expose the thoughts of an unbeliever as the apostle had already communicated to convict such a person of the individual's sins but that is not the same as the information that is intended to cause spiritual growth. In any case, let me end by reminding you of the second proposition that we have considered which is that assertion and inference from Scripture help in comparison of gifts of tongues and prophecy.
02/24//23