But let’s lay that issue aside for the moment and simply point out that whenever tongues is spoken, whether in public or in private, whether in prophecy or in prayer, an interpretation is always to be sought.Ģ. Paul was not authorizing the use of tongues as a private prayer language, as some charismatics claim.

Even if the tongues-speaker is praying alone and no one else is around to hear, he is to pray that he may interpret. In other words, if someone is authentically speaking in tongues, the utterance contains a message, and the message must be translated for those who hear. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God.” Verse 13: “One who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret.” And verses 27-28: “If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. So Paul insists that whenever tongues are spoken, they should be translated. If the tongue is merely gibberish and has no translatable message, it is actually worse than a savage tongue. All true language has a meaning, and if the meaning cannot be understood, it sounds like the noises of a troglodyte. I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me” (NASB). The ecstatic gibberish of the modern charismatic movement does not even fit the apostle’s definition of a language.įurthermore, he says in verse 11, “If.

Throughout the chapter, he is talking about real languages with real meaning. “There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning” (1 Corinthians 14:10). Sounds and syllables without meaning are of no use whatsoever. Paul is clearly no proponent of any kind of “speech that is not intelligible” (1 Corinthians 14:9). I want to take a more big-picture perspective of the text and point out a few of that chapter’s most important ideas. The real point of 1 Corinthians 14 is often buried under endless arguments about the exegetical nuances of that passage. That principle has been largely ignored-and often diametrically opposed-in the doctrine and practice of the modern charismatic movement. “I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue” (1 Corinthians 14:19). The point Paul makes repeatedly is that the gifts should always be used in a way that enlightens and instructs the mind. The whole theme of the apostle’s admonition about how the gifts were to function is neatly summarized in 1 Corinthians 14:40: “All things should be done decently and in order.” Along the way, it’s hard to miss the stress the apostle places on that which edifies. A goodly portion of Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians is focused on correcting that congregation’s abuse of spiritual gifts-tongues in particular.

All things done decently and in order