Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 1 Corinthians 14:6 ¶ But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what will I profit you unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching? |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 1 Corinthians 14:6 ¶ Now, believers, if I come to you speaking in unknown tongues, how will I benefit you unless I also speak to you [clearly] either by revelation [revealing God's mystery], or by knowledge [teaching about God], or by prophecy [foretelling the future, speaking a new message from God to the people], or by instruction [teaching precepts that develop spiritual maturity]? |
Subject: Acts 2:2 |
Bible Note: Hi Doc, Let's look at what the Bible says about tongues. I understand you are pretty well set in what you believe, so mostly I write for the benefit of onlookers. 1 Cor 12:10 "...to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues." Tongues that are strictly for the evangelization of others do not need interpretation - since they will understand their own language. But don't take my word for it, Paul will explain quite clearly what the interpretation of tongues is intended to do. 1 Cor 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. This is the speaking in tongues that requires an interpreter when it is done in public. 1Co 14:14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. This is clearly "praying in a tongue". The spirit prays, but the mind does not benefit. It is a spiritual experience of prayer. 1Co 14:15 What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; Paul advocates praying both ways, with the spirit, and with the mind - in a tongue, and in known speech. 1Co 14:16 Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say "Amen" to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 1Co 14:17 For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up. Again, reinforcing the idea that this use of tongues is in "giving thanks", and not for the benefit of a human hearer, but to God. Whether or not you "buy into this", it is the clear teaching of Scripture. How much more orthodox can you get than the teaching of the Paul the Apostle??? 1 Cor 13:1 "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal." In this verse Paul indicates two kinds of tongues, so this is not just a product of Pentecostal circles. Personally, I find the teachings of these verses crystal clear. They say what they say very plainly. No disrespect intended against any commentator, but if they disagree with the plain teaching of Scripture, I will choose Scripture. Please remember, 1 Cor 14:2, in its context, is comparing the value of tongues to prophecy. It is not arguing against the notion of the gift of tongues for prayer. It it were, it would be contrary to the teaching Paul is about to embark upon. Let's look at the commentaries you quoted for us. Barnes wrote "it is as if he spoke to God only." Paul said "For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God" Barnes - "as if he speaks" Paul - "speaks" Gill, refering to Lightfoot, claims Paul meant speaking in Hebrew. But if that were so, it would hardly qualify as a gift of the Spirit, now, would it? I mean, if you could just go to school for it? Besides, one wouldn't just be speaking to God, they'd be speaking to anyone else who spoke Hebrew. Does this also mean that to "prophesy", according to Gill, is to simply speak in a known tongue? Notwithstanding, the Bible makes several references to Hebrew being spoken. Hebrew thought patterns persist throughout much of the NT. There is much evidence that Hebrew was not a dead language. JFB are technically correct, in that God is the audience of the tongues Paul is speaking of, and He understands, however, I realize that is not what they intended to mean. Nonetheless, the passage says "speaks. . . to God". Matthew Henry comments on the motives of the speakers, however, Paul does not, so Henry goes beyond what the text gives us. Darby seems to be simply restating a portion of the passage, that prophecy edifies the church, and tongues do not. GSB says of this, "that the mysteries of God might be the better known to a greater number." The actual passage says "he speaks not to men but to God." And finally, John Calvin calls this speaking in tongues "perverse". Paul just says that it doesn't do anything for the bystander, because when you pray in tongues, you are talking to God, and not to men. For John Calvin to refer to praying to God in a tongue, a gift given by God's Holy Spirit for that purpose, as 'perverse', is beyond me. Wow! You know, I think I'm just going to stick with the plain reading of Scripture. Love in Christ, Mark |