At the conclusion of this lesson you will be able to . . .
The next section is probably best seen as extending to v. 25, as the placement of the NIV headings suggests, but vv. 6-17 constitute a unit of convenient length. In it Paul develops the principle stated in v. 5, that whatever is done in their gatherings should be done "so that the church is edified". Therefore whatever is spoken should be spoken for the benefit of the hearers.
As often before, I shall provide exegetical comments on some verses and leave space for you to make your own notes on other verses, with some help from Fee. As usual, I would encourage you to read Fee on the whole passage (pp 660-674).
v.6 Paul hypothetically uses his own practice to pose a question, a question which assumes the "benefit" of the hearers to be the chief consideration. His use of the first person may be designed simply to invite them to share his perspective, but it may also be a reference to his actual practice which answers the criticism of his "unspirituality" (cf. v.18). The intent of his list, set over against tongues, is clearly to embrace all understandable, and hence potentially beneficial, utterance, so there is little value in attempting to define each item. But it does encourage us to understand what he says about the priority of prophecy over tongues to have potentially broader application, wherever what is intelligible to a particular audience is compared with what is not.
v.7f Paul illustrates his point at the level of "lifeless instruments that produce sound": even here distinctness is necessary for recognition and for an appropriate response. The flute and harp were widely used in Hellenistic culture, in such settings as dance, drama and pagan worship. The implied contrast is between mere noise and meaningful sound, whether tune or signal.
v.9 The analogy is now moved into literal application, with "not intelligible" standing in parallel with "indistinct" in v. 8 and "know what is being said" with "know what is being played" in v. 7. But "in a tongue" is a little misleading, literally it is "by means of the tongue", i.e. as our instrument of sound (with tongues-speaking in the background only). Paul’s use of both a rhetorical question and a reinforcing direct statement serves to stress the futility of uninterpreted tongues in a gathering where all present are intended to be built up.
vv.10f.
v.12 Paul draws his first conclusion. Its intent is plain (that they should give priority to building up the church, and behave accordingly) but the wording is a little difficult: "so also you, since you are zealots (eager desirers) of spirits, toward the building-up of the church strive that you may abound". The main debate is over Paul’s use of the noun "spirits". Many, like the NIV, take it to mean "spiritual things/gifts". But I doubt that it can be simply this – I suspect that the phrasing is suggestive also of their party-spirit and its association with an eagerness for manifestations of spirituality in themselves, rather than as gifts of the one Spirit.
v.13 Paul doesn’t urge the tongues-speakers to seek after prophecy instead, but to desire the benefit of their hearers by praying for the ability to interpret (whereas their desire, it seems, has only been for their own experience and status).
v.14 Some have found the connection difficult here but it seems to me quite logical that Paul says that tongues-without-interpretation is of no benefit to others precisely because the speaker doesn’t understand what he or she is saying. I doubt whether it is appropriate to be precise about identifying "my spirit" – it is the contrast between the conscious and the unconscious self that is in mind.
v.15
v.16
v.17
At the conclusion of this lesson you will be able to . . .
This passage is essentially a continuation of the previous one but, as my title suggests, it focuses on the difference between tongues and prophecy. I shall only ask you to write your own notes on a few verses, since there is something else which I want you to do. The relevant section of Fee is pp. 674-689.
v.18f Paul emphatically states the overwhelming priority of intelligibility in the assembly, again using the first person to state an attitude where he desires them to follow his lead. But it also contains an affirmation that Paul himself often speaks in tongues, but in private. This suggests that Paul may well have been diminished as lacking this gift, and also that his active encouragement is for prophecy and other immediately intelligible communication in the assembly rather than tongues (even with interpretation).
v.20 The fresh address ("brothers") suggests that this prepares the way for what follows, but there is no reason why it should not be relevant to the whole section, i.e. they are childish where they should be mature, in enthusiasm for excitement ahead of mutual upbuilding, but all too ‘advanced’ in wrongdoing.
V.21 Paul quotes selectively from Isaiah 28:11-12, but v. 22 makes his intent difficult to identify with precision. It is probably relevant, however, that this is a word of judgment on those who have refused to listen to God when he has spoken clearly to them. Have a look at Isaiah 28:9-12 for yourself. It may well be relevant to Paul’s use of this passage that there is a reference to immaturity in v.9, and that the Hebrew of v.10 consists of short, repetitive syllables (possibly suggestive of glossolalia).
v.22
v.23 Paul proposes a situation in which:
"the whole church comes together" – this probably implies a largish gathering, not necessarily in a house, of a congregation who also meet in smaller groups
"everyone speaks in tongues" – either hyperbole or in the sense that all who speak, speak in tongues
"some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in" – either one category or two, probably either simply non-Christians or both total unbelievers and unbaptised enquirers (this suggests to me a meeting in a public place).
In such a situation, he says, these people will perceive tongues-speaking as being out of one’s mind (i.e. ecstasy and/or madness), and will be left in unbelief, under God’s judgment. Probably Witherington is right in saying that the impression imagined is not strictly that of madness but of ecstasy, of being "carried away by some external powerful force, as a devotee of Dionysius might be" (p.284 of his commentary).
vv.24f
Now for your other task. A question which often arises here is: "What does Paul mean by prophecy?" And our answer to that question has bearing on what we expect to happen in our churches today. There is much debate both about what Paul meant and about its implications for today, and it is not easy to decide who is right. So I don’t expect you to come up with the definitive answer, but I do want you to think about it.
To decide what Paul meant by "prophecy" you need to look at other mentions of it in his letters. Read: Romans 12:6; Ephesians 3:2-6, 4:11-13; I Thessalonians 5:19-22; I Timothy 1:18, 4:13-14. Now come back to I Corinthians, which is our main source. Almost all the references to prophecy are in Chapters 12 to 14, and these may be clearly in your mind by now. If not, look again at 12:10, 28-29; 13:2, 8-9; 14:1-6, 22-24, 29-33, 36-39.
You will have seen that Paul nowhere offers a definition. But I expect you will be able to draw some conclusions, even if they are tentative. What are some characteristics of prophecy as Paul writes about it?
At the conclusion of this lesson you will be able to . . .
This passage is longer than in other recent lessons so we shall confine ourselves to exegesis, both yours and mine. As usual, I also want you to read Fee (pp. 689-713) on the whole passage and to draw on him where you have to make your own notes.
As my heading suggests, Paul now introduces the principle of order as he continues to instruct them concerning right behaviour in their gatherings, but this order is partly a means to the end of building one another up in the faith, as v. 31 makes clear. So the dominant concern of preceding verses hasn’t been forgotten.
v.26
v.27
v.28
v.29
vv30-31
v.32 Probably a reply to an anticipated objection: Paul does not accept that prophecy is an involuntary activity (nor tongues, presumably, or the earlier regulations would be impractical).
v.33a He concludes with a further reason for orderly gatherings and orderly worship: such gatherings and worship are appropriate to the character of the God whom they worship and in whose name they gather. "Peace" in Paul’s writings conveys more than mere orderliness – it is the "shalom" of the Old Testament; it involves wholeness or well-being (here, the well-being of the community).
vv.39-40
At the conclusion of this lesson you will be able to . . .
Today I want you to work on constructing a Bible study on Chapter Fourteen. First read through the questions below, then read the chapter with these questions in mind. Then write your answers. As when you did this for Chapter Twelve, you will be well on your way to having a useful Bible study guide once you have answered all these questions.
What are the most important ideas in this chapter which you would want people to grasp?
What kind of people are you preparing the study for?
Is there anything about these people or their church (or churches) which would significantly affect their discussion of this chapter? For example, they may have markedly different views on speaking in tongues, or their church might be going through heated debate over worship style. If so, how will you take this into account in your study guide?
What "ice breaker" question or activity could you use to get them started?
What information, if any, should you give them to help them understand the passage?
Which verses do you want them to study closely? What questions can you ask in each case to help them discover the meaning of the verse or verses?
Where do you see opportunities for getting them to think about the implications of this passage for their behaviour or the practices of their church/churches? What application-oriented questions could you ask?
What would be a good way to finish the study so as to leave something important and helpful in their minds? A final application question? A prayer time? A role play of a church situation?
Submit the following exercise to your designated e-coach:
How would you respond to someone who claimed that women are forbidden to hold a teaching ministry in the church on the basis that 1 Cor 14:34 commands them to be silent?