1 Corinthians 14:10-20 Bible Teaching

WELCOME
PRAYER
SONG
SILENCE

Okay so we left off with Paul saying, in reference to speaking in tongues:

1st Corinthians 14.10-20
November 11th 2018
Milk
1Co 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.

Let’s continue on at verse 10 where he says:

10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.

1Co 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.

In other words, building off what we covered last week with regard to musical instruments, Paul now expands out into the world of all voices in the world and points out that all of them, if they are to be of value, have articulation and specific sounds to convey what the specific voice wants to convey.

Alarms and sirens, all musical instruments, sound tracts – you name it, right. Even sounds without apparent articulation give meaning to things once the sound is understood – (do a raspberry here – what does it say, right?)

So, if this is the case and a general rule for all sounds it would CERTAINLY be the case with tongues spoken either in an unknown foreign tongue or in the method of gibberish.

So, Paul says at verse 11:

11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

The word “barbarian” is interesting as it is essentially an onomonopea. See, the Greeks spoke Greek but all who spoke languages other than Greek or Aramaic or Hebrew were talking gibberish to them. So in opposition to the polished speakers of Greece, the rest of the “uncivilized world” were heard as babblers – so much so that the Greek took it to the point that ANYONE who did not speak Greek was considered a babbler or a bar-bar-ous – sort of like we would say, “I couldn’t hear anymore of his bla,bla,blabbing. His noise talking.

So, in the most insulting sense a bar-bar-ous talker was a speaker who could not be understood because they spoke a language that sounded like babbling and in the most general sense a barbarian would have been seen as any foreigner who speaks in a language that cannot be understood.

At verse 12 Paul says

12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.

In other words, since or if you are zealous to possess spiritual gifts, make sure the gift you seek will edify the church, and in harmony with that he adds:

13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

The invitation to pray means, “let such a person ask God for the ability to explain his words or perhaps the words of another to the church.

In other words, if you possess the gift of speaking in an unknown tongue PRAY to God that you or someone will be provided who can interpret whatever is said in that tongue so all may be edified.

At this point Paul mentions another form of expressing oneself through unknown tongues besides speaking – praying and singing – which opens us up to another discussion which is quite interesting. So, he says in 14:

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

Now, some suggest that what Paul is doing is just proving his point that WHATEVER the communication is from a human in a gathering of believers it must be done so others can understand it- speaking, and then he tosses in praying and in the next verse even mentions singing.

Is there such a thing as praying in an unknown tongue? How about singing in an unknown tongue?

If there is, Paul says that the communications, no matter how heartfelt, how genuine, how directed by the Spirit, it must all be understandable to the hearers.

So that is the first thing to consider – whatever it is – it must be understandable.

So Paul now brings himself into the picture and says:

“If my spirit prayeth.”

Some have understood it of the Holy Spirit–the Spirit by which Paul says he was actuated. Others of the spiritual gift, or that spiritual influence by which he was endowed. Others of the mind of Paul itself.

But it is probable that the word “spirit” refers to the will; or to the mind, as the seat of the affections and emotions of Paul as the word “spirit” is often used in the Scriptures as the seat of the affections, emotions, and passions of various kinds. (Like when Jesus said, blessed are the poor in Spirit – we know that this is NOT speaking of the Holy Spirit so it has to do with the soul of a being).

The question remaining is then, can we pray in the Spirit? Of course we can! If fact, this is where we want prayers to come from – certainly not from the flesh, which would only desire to be heard and seen of men, right?

So, let’s talk about this a minute – the spirit praying or praying in the spirit.

Are such things uttered in an unknown tongue? Before we answer that we must decide what is speaking in the spirit of a person by the Spirit of God?

Perhaps it is our feelings, and thoughts, and devotions – perhaps we don’t even KNOW what it is that is finding utterance but we can assume that it is part of us as individuals that is seeking to communicate to God.

So far so good.

How does it convey itself – since prayer is offering up something to God!

Thoughts? Words? Foreign language? Unknown babblings?

It’s an interesting subject and one I enter into with you with some gentle trepidation.

Again, whatever is happening, the individual is finding utterance in prayer where the mind and heart and emotions of the person is engaged in some sort of communication with God BY the Spirit.

The second point we must agree to is that Paul says if these utterances are unintelligible and cannot be discerned or interpreted by the speaker uttering the prayer, in whatever form, then such utterances are without profit since they will not edify.

So, there is the second things to know here.

The third thing to consider now, is what does Paul mean here when he says:

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

The implication is that if we are praying in an unknown tongue, just like if we are speaking in the same, we must be able to interpret what the heck is being communicated for the experience to edify our lives – even though we are the only one involved!

So, to bring it home, be wary of practices of babbling on by yourself in what is called praying in tongues or praying in the Spirit IF . . . IF the babblings are not discernable.

Got all that?

Now, to the subject of praying in an unknown tongue.

There are many many Christians who understand this concept and believe it or not, I happen to be one of them.

But I was not open to it until someone explained it to me in rational terms – which went like this:

The Holy Spirit does not force anything upon us. We, on the two-way street that runs between God and individuals, NOT A ONE WAY – choose to participate and engage with him, and not think that He takes over like a possession.

So how does this apply to praying in tongues or praying in the Spirit (which may be preferable because the term tongues can be so abused in the faith today.)

I was told that when we think – and consider the contents of our minds and hearts , and consider them through our emotions, we tend to capture things one at a time – and then put them into words.

“Dear God, I am really worried about my son, he has a gambling problem and is in the middle ooooooofffffff aaaaaaaa divooooorce.”

See, we take the contents of our heart and minds and capture them, box them up into words and deliver them up to Him.

When the Spirit of the living God moves in us, and we allow the Spirit to work with us, we are allowing the Spirit to articulate and lead us in forming our thoughts and since God knows them and reads them and hears them through any sound – birds chirping, lions roaring, people groaning – we are able to deliver up to him much more of the content in our minds than WE could ever deliver up on our own.

Sooo, this is how I was taught to explore this.

Sit quietly and open your heart to Him. Listen to the Spirit as it reveals the contents of your heart and mind and soul. When it touches you, and you sense the inner workings of God upon you, exhale with sound – like a low guttural sound.

(make it)

Inhale and continue to let your thoughts roam by the Spirit. You might notice that instead of thinking about your son and his gambling problem that your mind also wanders over to the fact that you have to

Go to the store, that
You worry about your bloodpressure, that
You long to be closer to God, that
Your sister is angry with you, that
Our country is in trouble, that
The roof is leaking in your office.

And in that one second of all of those things flashing through your mind, you exhale again, allowing the wind in your lungs to exit your mouth with a sound.

That sound that you make, represents all the thoughts that passed through your head, and you inhale and you release your thoughts and let the Spirit dictate what it wants you to know and you do it again!

More thoughts, more released air with sound, and repeated. Before you know it you will discover that you are communicating with God by the Spirit the contents in your heart that you did not know even existed!

It is amazing, as the Spirit reveals to you what to think, and utter through breaths.

That is called praying in tongues, prayer language or praying by the spirit. And I will tell you that as far as I’m concerned it is as viable a spiritual experience as any that a believer can have today.

The key to this, according to Paul, is that whatever is uttered must be understood too by the one praying – and in genuine prayer language it is.

At verse 15 Paul now says:

15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

That question, “What is it then?” Is better said through the words, “What shall I do?” Or has Paul asking, “What is the proper course for me to pursue?”

Paul uses this form of expression a couple times in Romans 3:9 and 6:15 and it simply represents or indicates his conclusion on a subject. So what has he concluded here?

He says

“I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.”

So in terms of praying in the Spirit Paul concludes that he will so do with understanding.

But he adds something interesting, and says

“I will sing with the Spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.”

What is this? It’s the same thing, where we let our mouths sing, by the Spirit, what is on our minds and hearts -again with full understanding.

I don’t know if singing by the spirit works like praying in tongues but I do believe that there is an application where a person allows the spirit to move them to sing words known and perhaps sounds that are not, but the person singing knows what the sounds and words mean when they are doing it.

If the song is in an unknown tongue the same principles apply as to speaking – if it’s a public display there must be understanding or interpretation going on so that there is edification.

Bottom line – if it is presented by the mouth among believers, it should be so done intelligibly so that it is edifying to others.

16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?

Else here means, “Or, if this is not done, and expressions are unintelligible” how shall a person who “occupies the room of the unlearned say, AMEN, when someone gives thanks” they couldn’t because they wouldn’t understand what was said.

The phrase, “He that occupieth the room of the unlearned” is a colloquialism for Paul and it would sort of be like our saying, “someone who wears a dunce cap.”

In other words, if words are spoken, prayed or sung to a person “unlearned,” or unfamiliar with them they could never give their assent to what was said, which is what Paul means when he says that they could never say, “Amen,” as a means to affirm something stated.

If he or she cannot give assent then they are not participating in the devotion and are therefore NOT edified and so Paul summarizes the issue, saying:

17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.

You could be eloquently praise God and thank him in angelic tongues but if others do not understand you’ve delivered thanks but have failed to include others. At this point Paul speaks favorably of tongues in his life, and says in verse 18-19

18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.

Reading that first line, we could choose to see Paul as boastful but I believe he was merely expressing a fact – of all people at Corinth Paul spoke tongues more than any of them.

We mentioned last week that this makes some real sense when we consider what he was called to do and to whom.

But in the church (it says here in the King James). I want to point out that the Greek term translated church here is ekklasia, and it means “the called out.”

It does not refer to what we call a church today, meaning an institution or a brick and mortar building. It stands for the people who had been called out from the world as followers of God through Christ.

In all the land where the called out are living, “I had rather speak five words with my understanding . . .”

Paul seems to be saying that when the called out were gathered he would rather speak words that were understandable to the mass then ten thousand words in an unknown tongue which would have remained a mystery to them.

Five words that were understandable to ten thousand words that were not. Why? He tells us, saying:

“that by my voice I might teach others also”

The goal of addressing the “called out” to instruct or teach or edify, to exhort, and to comfort by “revelation, knowledge, prophesying or doctrine.”

Verse 20 Paul summarizes everything at this point regarding tongues and says:

20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.

There seems to be a built-in accusation here of their behaviors there in Corinth.

Children have a tendency to do silly things with whatever is new and novel and perhaps that is what he was saying. But probably not because the Greek term he uses for children here is not paidon, but “naypee-on” (or better put nay-pee-adzo, which means a baby, an infant or a babe in Christ.

I make this distinction because Paul made the distinction when he wrote NOT calling them children in the Greek so the King James is a bit off on this one.

This being said it seems that Paul is not telling them to not be childish but to grow up from acting like baby Christians, selfish, attitudinal, infantile in their walk.

This is important because even Jesus told his disciples to be as little children – and so once again we are confronted with a biblical paradox.

Here Paul tells delivers to them a sandwich on behavior with the bread being for them “NOT be children in understanding, howbeit in malice to be children,” and then the other slice being, again, “but in understanding be men.”

Almost always an exception in scripture in things and this is no exception!!!

When Paul instructs them to avoid being infants in understanding but in understanding to be men, the word means to be complete, fully grown, perfect is how the King James is prone to translate the word.

And at this point we are brought to some more passages to cover before we wrap it up today. So at verse 21-25 he says:

1st Corinthians 14:21 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.
22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

So back to verse 21 where Paul now quotes the Old Testament, saying:

21 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.

This passage is found in Isaiah 28:11-12.

The word Law does not mean the Law of Moses but the Revelation given men of old and contained in the Tanakh.

This quoted passage, in Isaiah at least, means, that God would hit the rebellious Jews with trials by putting people of another language in their midst and then also by removing them to a land–the land of Chaldea–where they would hear only a language that to them would be unintelligible and barbarous.

Unfortunately, God also says that in spite of this effort to reform them they would still, to some extent, be a rebellious people.

What is interesting about Paul’s use of this passage is the reference to men of other tongues in Isaiah was NOT a reference to the gift of speaking in tongues.

And here we see Paul appealing to passages in the Tanakh that have no literal connection to his use of it – something I always find interesting because Paul takes the liberty to use passages that in the Old Testament had one purpose but in his world he used for another purpose.

We learn from his use of this example, however, that the example he uses from the Old Testament of other tongues refers directly to actual literal other known languages – and perhaps we can use this to help prove that is what speaking in tongues in the Apostolic age was all about – speaking another established albeit foreign language.

We also see the importance of language when it comes to true unity among people. Like the Tower of Babel experience, God was able to trouble the Nation of Israel with the introduction of another language in their midst.

This makes us wonder about the ability for Christians to really unify if they are all speaking different denominational languages instead of the universal language of Godly love.

Think about this for a moment. Major denominations have their own unique foreign languages:

Mormonism certainly has their own language, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Catholics, and Christian Scientists all have their own specialized ways of communicating.

And when those terms are introduced in the called out, there is automatic chaos, alienation and ultimate division.

Then if we push into the more unified sects – the Baptists, Lutherans, Pentecostals, all of Orthodoxy, Calvary Chapels – we see that MAN has taken approached to the Good News and customized it to the point that we often lose the ability to even SPEAK with one another.

This was the death nell at the Tower of Babel and their ability to do anything they chose to do! And here in Isaiah Paul mentions that it was the addition of the Chaldean language into the COI that made their lives miserable as a people.

The gift of tongues, in Paul’s day was a wonderful way to immediately overcome linguistic barriers – but believers – outside of the basic difficulties that exist with languages of origin, have taken the Good News and assigned to it a thousand different dialects,
Languages and vocabularies which have all served to . . . divide.

So what is THE language of Christianity that is completely universal and ought to serve to override any and all obstructions to peace and unity.

I think it consists of Three words – and no more. If these three words were all Christians communicated to each other around the world, irrespective of dogmas and doctrines which we are gonna have a hard time bringing back into the cage – then we would be an indomitable force for true light in the world:

The three words

First, Yeshua.

You will notice I did not say Jesus. The reason is that is not His name and more importantly, what people have done to His name has been reprehensible. So let’s go to the real name of our Lord and Savior – Yeshua. Nothing more. Nothing less. Just Yeshua.

Secondly, faith.

And Finally, love.

Faith in Yeshua, love through Yeshua.

No more words. None. Imagine that this is the language of Christianity around the world.

We don’t have to break the name down, we don’t have to define faith, or describe love – we let God through His Spirit do this and the study of His word, but THE ONLY words all CHRISTIANS use amidst each other are:

Yeshua
Faith
Love

Not church.
Not sacrament or communion or Sunday or sin; not hell, not heaven, not evil not good. We do not talk or introduce politics, judgment, second coming, baptism, speaking in tongues, tithes, what people can eat, drink, wear, see, or do; no special prayers, no authorities, no trinity or binity, no modes, no catecisms, no temple worthiness, no lifestyles, no words used when Christians fellowship with each other – except three:

Yeshua
Faith in Yeshua’
Love through Yeshua.

Your on a bus and a Catholic gets on. A Southern Baptist. A Presbyterian. A charismatic. A non denom, a Mormon, in fact the bus fills with representatives of every denom on earth that claims Jesus as Lord and Savior, and as each person gets on the bus all they say to each other in greeting is:

Faith and Love in Yeshua.

That is the Greeting.

No debates. Just that. And then all other conversations orbit around praising Yeshua, having faith in Yeshua, and heres the key – loving as Yeshua loved and commands others to love.

(beat)

Words – they have the capacity to unite or divide. To heal or to hurt. To irriate or to soothe. The more we have, and the more unique they are to us individually, the more misunderstanding and therefore difficulty we will have loving each other as His.

For this reason Jesus gave his disciples the remarkable instructions that said:

“Let your communications be yea, yea or nay, nay – anything more is of evil.”

By citing this example from the Tanakh, Paul is illustrating the complexities that just one new language introduced to a group can create.

At verse 22 Paul now says:

22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

There are exceptions to almost every rule under the sun and where we normally see a “wherefore,” or a “for” or a “however” as referring to the verse immediately proceeding its use, I think that the wherefore here is not referring to Paul’s reference of Isaiah but to his whole presentation on tongues in the church thus far. And what he says is pretty straightforward:

22 Wherefore . . . tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

We are going to wrap today up with this verse though Paul goes on to explain what he means by this in the verses that follow.

But Paul makes it perfectly clear:

Tongues (and because he does not distinguish between foreign tongues, prayer tongues or singing in the Spirit, I am going to suggest that he means ANY expression of tongues) TONGUES ARE FOR A SIGN NOT TO THEM THAT BELIEVE.

This is the first principle – so if you EVER run into a group of believers that are practicing tongues of any kind except those involving kissing, be very wary.

Remembering that Paul here explains why, saying:

“Tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.”

You are a professing Christian and you are known in a town from your youth and some foreign speaking people are at the local burger joint speaking Swahili, and the Holy Spirit overwhelms you and you fluently speak and communicate with them, all the unbelievers around would benefit -and marvel and the work of God in your life – and some may pursue God as a result.

Conversely, you are sitting in a gathering of believers, and someone stands up and speaks in Swahili to the rest of the group, or prays or sings in Swahili, and nobody there can interpret what is being said, its fruitless because ??? because tongues are for a sign NOT to them that believe but to them that believe NOT.

What more do we need?

But then in terms of a comparison, Paul then adds:

“but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.”

Did you catch it? When describing tongues Paul says that they “are a sign” (to non-believers) but when speaking of teaching prophetically he says that it “serveth not” them who believe not, but them which believe.”

Signs or a service.

Signs are assigned to non-believers.
Services are assigned to believers.

One is to attract and help convince and bring people about. The other is to edify, exhort and comfort believers.

Interestingly enough, Paul will now admit that tongues in the church are a waste (unless they are interpreted properly, as we said) but that prophetic teachings may NOT be lost on unbelievers, having the capacity to even bring them to repentance, as Paul saysing:

23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all (meaning the convincing words spoken in an understandable language will serve to convict him or her of sin – and then Paul adds):
25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

As an aside, that phrase, falling down on his face, has been taken by our charismatic friends and used to support what they call being slain in the spirit.

But all Paul is trying to convey is the stature of someone who has a direct confrontation between their sinful selves and the living God and what that typically amounts to – falling on ones face and worshipping the living God.

All the result of sound instruction NOT tongues, and then Paul adds

“and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

In other words, being convinced of the truth they will go out and report – the truth is found among the Christians at Corinth!

Q and A

PRAYER
Venessa and Steve
Lisa
Liz
Diane