Should Christians Expect Miracles Today? Objections and Answers from the Bible, Part 2, by Wayne A. Grudem
By contrast, Paul says that prophecy is a sign of God’s attitude as well, but here a positive sign of God’s blessing. This is why he can say that prophesy, is a sign “for believers” (v.22). And this is why he concludes his section by saying, “If all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you” (vv. 24-25). When this happens, believers will certainly realize that God is active among them to bring blessing, and prophecy will regularly function as a sign for believers of God’s positive attitude for them.31
Regarding public use of tongues with interpretation, it should be noted in connection with this passage that Paul’s reaction to this recognition of the sign function of tongues is not to forbid tongues in public worship, but to regulate the use of tongues so they will always be interpreted when spoken in public (1 Corinthians 14:27-28). This is an appropriate response, for it is only incomprehensible tongues that have this negative function toward unbelievers, both in Isaiah 28:11 and in 1 Corinthians 14:23. But when a speech in tongues is interpreted, it is no longer incomprehensible and it no longer retains this ominous sign function.32
Therefore, it is important to realize that in 1 Corinthians 14:20-23 Paul is not talking about the function of tongues in general, but only about the negative result of one particular abuse of tongues, namely, the abuse of speaking in public without an interpreter (and probably more than one person speaking at a time [cf. 1 Corinthians 14:23, 27]) so that it all became a scene of unedifying confusion.
In the rest of this section, Paul has a positive attitude toward the proper public function of using tongues plus interpretation, or the proper private function of speaking in tongues (1 Corinthians 12:10-11, 21, 22; 14:4-5, 18, 26-28, 39). So to use Paul’s discussion of an abuse of tongues in 14:20-23 as the basis for a general polemic against all other (acceptable) uses of tongues is contrary to the entire context in 1 Corinthians 12-14.
This crucial point, essential to understanding Paul’s meaning here, is completely overlooked by some Reformed and dispensational interpreters of this passage. For example, the fact that Paul is talking not about tongues with interpretation but about uninterpreted tongues (which were not able to be understood by the hearers) is overlooked by O. Palmer Robertson, 33 and also by Zane Hodges.34 Neither Robertson nor Hodges adequately takes into account that at Corinth any unbeliever who entered a church, whether Jew or Gentile, would not understand what was spoken in tongues. Paul repeatedly says that uninterpreted tongues could not be understood by the hearers at Corinth (see 1 Corinthians 14:2, 9, 11, 14, 16, 19, 23, 28). Paul’s main concern in 1 Corinthian 14 is to contrast intelligible with unintelligible speech.
Category: Pneuma Review, Spirit, Spring 2000
Followers
Fans
