"Spiritual gifts #4: Their Use in the Church" by Rod Bayley, 8 June 2008, 1 Corinthians 14

[dann...@gmail.com]

In 1997 the Manly Warringah Sea Eagles were playing in their third
consecutive Grand Final in the Australian Rugby League competition.
It was the disastrous year of the Super League split in the
competition, but it turned out to be a great grand final against the
Newcastle Knights who had never played in a grand final. Manly led by
6 points, the equivalent of a converted try, with only 10 or 12
minutes to go, and they were down on Newcastle’s goal line pressing
for a knockout punch, some final points which would put the game out
of Newcastle’s reach. Even one point from a field-goal would do, and
so they positioned themselves on the final tackle for an attempt at a
field-goal. They had one of the best field-goal exponents in the game
in Craig Field, but instead of the ball being passed to him for the
attempt, another less capable player insisted on being thrown the
football for the attempt. His name was Cliff Lyons, a player who had
been great for Manly over many years, but who was at the end of his
career and about to retire. It was almost definitely his last chance
to play in a grand final. Probably wanting to go out on a high and
kick the winning goal for the team, he screamed for the ball and got
it. Unfortunately he missed, and the rest is history. Newcastle were
to equalise in the next few minutes, and as the scores were tied and
the final 60 seconds were ticking down, Newcastle’s winger Darren
Albert crossed the line for a try, and Newcastle won a heart stopping
victory for their first premiership. Manly had lost a grand final
that seemed to be there for the taking. And although there are many
ifs and buts in a close match, it seemed that the desire for an
individual to be a hero for his own praise, had sunk the chances of a
team effort. The focus on an individual had taken priority over the
good of the whole team.

Well it’s a story that has been repeated many times on the sporting
field, but as we shall see today from 1 Corinthians 14, seeking the
good of the whole team, or in our case the whole church, is a
principle that applies equally to the use of spiritual gifts in our
meetings. Our spiritual gifts need to be used in a way that is for
the good of the whole church, and not simply the individual. Last week
we looked at chapter 13 and discovered that Paul’s “most excellent
way” is Christian love, which seeks to serve our fellow brothers and
sisters in the body of Christ. Today we will consider how this way of
love is pursued practically as we come together corporately.
Therefore, our big question for today is: “How is Christian love shown
in the expression of our spiritual gifts within the church?”

To answer that question let’s focus on the bible text. There are
three broad sections in today’s passage: firstly, the way of love
expressed in the principle of edification, as applied to tongues and
prophecy (vv1-25); secondly, the need to use different gifts as we
meet provided a second principle of orderliness is observed (vv26-35);
and thirdly a concluding statement about apostolic authority and a
reiteration of the need for order (vv36-40).

Firstly, the way of love applied to tongues and prophecy. In verses 1
to 5 of the first section, we see Paul summarise how the way of love
from chapter 13 applies to the practical use of spiritual gifts within
the church meeting. That Paul should restrict the focus of his
discussion now to just two gifts, having spoken about many spiritual
gifts in general in chap.12, strongly suggests that there was some
dispute or misunderstanding among the Corinthians about these two.
Paul’s chief concern is the relative weight given to prophecy and
tongues. He’s not saying that tongues is the least of the gifts and
prophecy is the greatest on some absolute scale, or offering any
comparison with other spiritual gifts. He addresses them because they
were an issue, and in doing so he outlines a principle that applies to
all gifts.

Paul’s way of love from chapter 13 is taken up in verse 1, as he
applies it to the use of prophecy and tongues. Christian love means
that the principle of edification or the building up of others, needs
to be applied. That is, the church should favour the public use of
spiritual gifts which build up and encourage everyone, rather than
ones which only benefit an individual. We see this explained in
verses 2 to 4. Notice that in verse 2, Paul notes that “no one
understands” a person speaking in tongues - therefore it is not very
meaningful or upbuilding to others. In verse 3 we see, that in
contrast, prophecy is directed toward each other and is understood,
and therefore brings “strengthening, encouragement and comfort.” Paul
himself summarises the contrast in verse 4 when he says, “He who
speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the
church.” This is why Paul has said eagerly desire the gift of
prophecy in verse 1 - he’s effectively saying, ‘focus on a gift that
builds up everyone.’ That’s also why he naturally concludes in verse
5 that the person “who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in
tongues.” He’s not saying that someone who has the gift of tongues is
unimportant - he’s simply making the point that we meet as the body of
Christ to be built up in our faith, and the expression of gifts which
achieve this are more useful in a public forum. It’s in this sense
that prophecy is “greater.” Paul is addressing an elitism which the
Corinthians had attached to tongues - he’s not now creating a new
elitism for those who prophesy, he’s simply applying the ‘way of love’
and the principle of edification to the church meeting.

Well, before we consider the rest of this first section, where Paul
applies this principle to the particular gift of tongues in detail, we
need to understand what these gifts of prophecy and tongues are -
otherwise the illustration of his point will be unclear.

Firstly, what is meant by prophecy in the NT? Like the OT prophets
the NT prophets seem to have a word for the people of God (eg. Agabus
in Acts 21:10-14). However, unlike the OT prophets, it doesn’t carry
the same authority for it is to be weighed by the church (1 Cor
14:29); and it is subject to the word of the apostles, as written in
the NT (14:37). The gift seems to be closely related to the
disclosing of mysteries and knowledge (13:2) and involves instruction
which builds up or edifies others (14:3-4). So it is an edifying,
intelligible speaking gift which does not carry the same authority of
OT prophets who spoke the very words of God recorded in scripture.
Given this broad definition, various commentators include a number of
forms of speaking under this heading, including a person sharing what
God has been teaching them from the bible, and personal testimonies of
God’s work in their life - the application of God’s word.

Secondly, what about tongues? They can be defined as ‘a manifestation
of the Spirit whereby the believer speaks forth in a language he has
never learned, and which he does not understand.’ In 13:1 Paul has
written about speaking ‘in the tongues of men and of angels’ which
might be viewed as human languages and a heavenly language, but
usually people tend to view them as one or the other. Many argue that
the evidence favours the view that Paul thought the gift of tongues
was a gift of real languages, that is languages that could be
understood or interpreted but which were unknown to the speaker, as
was the case in Acts 2 at Pentecost. It doesn’t particularly matter
how you define them for Paul’s argument through the following section,
where the principle of edification requires intelligibility - the need
for an interpretation whatever the tongue or language spoken. Both
the exercise of tongues in Acts and 1 Corinthians have similar
functions - they act as a “sign”(1 Cor 14:22, cf. Acts 2, 10:45-47
[Cornelius], 19:1-7); and mainly edify the individual rather than all
believers, unless interpreted (1 Cor 14:4).

Returning to Paul’s argument, in verses 6 to 19 we see how and why the
gift of tongues fails to meet the way of love’s overriding principle
of edification. He draws out how tongues fails to edify others. His
point is simple - if someone is speaking in another tongue or language
which we don’t know, than we don’t understand or comprehend what is
being said - it is unintelligible. Edification demands intelligible
content, and tongues by themselves, cannot provide it. Paul then
illustrates this point with the examples of musical instruments and a
military trumpet call in verses 7 to 9. Notice in verse 7 that
distinct notes from an instrument in a coherent arrangement
constitutes a tune, while in verse 8 a distinct note from a military
horn will bring a clear response from soldiers - in other words,
understanding another person’s language makes communication possible.

I don’t know if you’ve seen the 1990 movie ‘Green Card’ with Andie
McDowell and Gerard Depardieu where Gerard plays a French man who has
emigrated to the United States and is seeking a Green Card. He enters
a marriage of convenience to get his residence status, and they then
have to pretend to be a couple to convince the immigration
authorities. At a dinner party with some well-to-do friends of Andie
McDowell’s character, he pretends to be an accomplished pianist.
Well, they call his bluff, and he finds himself seated behind their
grand piano. Unperturbed, he plays a raucous atonal piece, which he
carries off with such charisma that the friends believe he is a
serious musician and offer begrudging praise, assuming he is some
modern officiando. His piece didn’t even have the hint of a tune, and
so it does not build up or encourage the listeners - it’s as if it’s a
foreign language.

“So it is with you” Paul writes in verse 9 - unless your speech is
intelligible than it is pointless, “a speaking into the air.” The
point is applied in verse 12 - Paul makes the obvious conclusion that
since the Corinthians are eager for spiritual gifts, they should seek
to excel in gifts, or develop gifts, which build up the church. As he
has now drawn out in verses 6 to 12, uninterpreted tongues simply
can’t edify as they are unintelligible. This is how tongues fail the
test of Christian love, and so the Corinthians should focus on gifts
which do encourage others.

Paul continues his argument in verses 13 to 19 where we see why the
gift of tongues fails to meet the way of love, the principle of
edification. It is because our ‘mind’ or rational understanding is
important if we are to be built up. Paul’s point is simply that the
gift of tongues does not engage the mind, and therefore it does not
produce fruit in the hearers. The NT always presents our growth as
Christians as the renewing of our mind, and so it is crucial that our
mind is engaged, or else we are merely onlookers to events we don’t
understand.

At the time of the reformation in England in the 1500s, the English
actually changed from hearing their services in Latin, as the Catholic
mass required, to having church in their own language, English, so
that it was fruitful. Catholic worship appealed to the senses through
music and incense and the sense of occasion - it was thought that it
would draw participants into an experience of the power of God through
the rituals. However, the people’s minds were not engaged - the
Lord’s Supper was seen as very mysterious, as the priests would have
their backs turned and they would speak in Latin. As a result, this
is how we got the phrase ‘hocus pocus’ in English - the Latin sounded
quite similar to this in one point of communion, and so they called
what the priests were saying ‘hocus pocus.’ The people were present,
but their minds were not engaged as they could not understand what was
being said. It is the same with uninterpreted tongues.

Moving to our second point on the outline, Paul offers a second
principle for church meetings in addition to edification - the
principle of order, in verses 26 to 35. Notice firstly in verse 26
that all of Paul’s discussion to this point has not made him less
enthusiastic for the use of spiritual gifts in the corporate
gathering. He states in verse 26:
“What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone
has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an
interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of
the church.”

It seems to be clear that the Corinthians already practiced the
priesthood of all believers, that a number of people took part and
used their gifts in various ways, and that Paul encourages them to
continue in this practice. Indeed, there is a need to express these
so that the church might be strengthened. Paul certainly doesn’t
desire a pastor or one person to dominate and present the whole
service singlehandedly. Perhaps that raises the image of so many
people jumping up and down that the service is chaotic. Well, Paul
doesn’t think that this necessarily follows, as he outlines in the
verses immediately following, how a service should and can be ordered.

In verses 27 to 28 he gives very clear and practical instructions on
how to order tongue speaking in a church service, and then in verses
29 to 32 he shows how to bring order to the use of prophecy in
corporate worship. He limits tongue speakers to three persons, one at
a time, but in line with his comments earlier in the chapter he tells
them to keep quiet unless there is an interpreter. Similarly, with
prophesy, two or three should share while the rest of the congregation
weighs up what is said, and they are again to take turns. Prophets
can control their prophetic utterances , and in this ordered manner
everyone can be instructed and encouraged. The comments on women are
a third example of Paul’s suggestions on order, and they relate to the
questioning of prophets after they have shared. The comments assume
that the men and women sat separately, as was the practice in Jewish
synagogues, and so opportunity for speaking to their husband about
something that was said needed to wait until after church. It is
clear that Paul is not prohibiting women from speaking in church,
because Paul has assumed they will pray and prophesy just three
chapters earlier (11:5, 13). It seems that the Corinthian meeting
lacked order - there were various people, perhaps simultaneously,
speaking in tongues without interpretation, there were prophets
speaking over the top of each other, there were women making comments
or calling out questions across the room, either to the various
speakers or to their own husbands.

So, Paul establishes the second principle of order. He provides the
reasoning for this in verse 33: “For God is not a God of disorder but
of peace.” He points to God’s character - that God, as evidenced by
his creation, orders everything - everything has its place.

Our third and final brief point, comes in Paul’s concluding comments
from verses 36 to 40. In verses 36 to 38 he reminded the unruly
Corinthian church, which he had planted and spent 18 months
establishing (Acts 18), of his apostolic authority. His words are a
heavy rebuke, and he makes it clear that anyone who thinks they are a
prophet or spiritually gifted should acknowledge that Paul writes with
the authority of the risen Christ. Any practice within the church or
any spiritual leader was subject to the apostolic word, the NT in our
terms. No practices could contradict God’s apostolic word, and anyone
who ignored it should be shunned. Finally, in verses 39 and 40 he
provides a summarising conclusion - prophesy is especially to be
encouraged, but tongues shouldn’t be excluded, as long as everything
is done in an orderly way.

So what is the application for us today? Well, we started with the
question: ‘How is Christian love shown in the expression of spiritual
gifts within the church meeting?’ Paul has clearly shown that serving
in love involves two principles: edification and order. How do you
think we are going on that basis? I believe we do demonstrate the use
of lots of different gifts each Sunday, and that we seek to be
ordered, and aim to edify each other. That said, I think we have
plenty of room for improvement as well. I’m sure that some would
think that we are so ordered in our worship that it is not as edifying
as it might be, as expression is limited, while others probably would
like more order and less expression. I think one example of greater
expression which we could easily encourage is the use of personal
testimonies, which can be categorised under the broad term of
prophecy. We are often greatly encouraged or built up as we hear of
God’s work in a person’s life, and their application of God’s word. I
was greatly encouraged by hearing Steve Edgecombe give his testimony
at the start of May, of hearing a number of the Burmese share via an
interview, of hearing Lindgren share his experiences in Liberia and
Guinea, and last week hearing from Kristy as she was baptised. I aim
to have more.

If edification is the purpose of spiritual gifts, than we need to
focus on gifts which build up and encourage everyone, if Christian
love is to rule. We will certainly refrain from using a gift which
does not lead to rational understanding or the use of our minds, such
as the use of uninterpreted tongues. While there is a place for
personal experience, the assembled church is a place for
intelligibility. Our God is a thinking, speaking God, and if we will
know Him, we must learn to think his thoughts after Him.