Announcement

Collapse

Biblical Languages 301 Guidelines

This is where we come to delve into the biblical text. Theology is not our foremost thought, but we realize it is something that will be dealt with in nearly every conversation. Feel free to use the original languages to make your point (meaning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). This is an exegetical discussion area, so please limit topics to purely biblical ones.

This is not the section for debates between theists and atheists. While a theistic viewpoint is not required for discussion in this area, discussion does presuppose a respect for the integrity of the Biblical text (or the willingness to accept such a presupposition for discussion purposes) and a respect for the integrity of the faith of others and a lack of an agenda to undermine the faith of others.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

1 Corinthians 12-14

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    1 Corinthians 13:12

    Text: (NA27):
    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον· ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

    Transliteration (Accordance):
    blepomen gar arti di’ esoptrou en ainigmati, tote de prosōpon pros prosōpon; arti ginōskō ek merous, tote de epignōsomai kathōs kai epegnōsthēn.

    Translation (Thiselton 2006):
    For we are seeing the present only by means of a mirror indirectly; but then it will be face to face. For the present I come to know part by part; but then I shall come to know just as fully as I have been known.

    Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
    ἄρτι : now.
    ἔσοπτρον : mirror, of polished metal, usually bronze, δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου in a mirror.
    αἴνιγμα : riddle, so ἐν αἰνίγματι "in a puzzling way", obscurely, indistinctly.
    μέρος : part, ἐκ μέρους partially, in part.
    ἐπιγνώσομαι : I shall really know, future of ἐπιγινώσκω know thoroughly/perfectly.
    ἐπεγνώσθην : passive I am known (by God).

    Comment from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
    12 Paul now proceeds to another analogy, to which he appends an immediate application. With their repeated “now, but then” language, these sentences bring out more sharply the contrast between the Corinthians’ present existence and that of the future. The fact that they are tied to verse 11 by an explanatory “for” further indicates, as we have argued, that the preceding analogy has basically to do with two modes of existence, not with “growing up” and putting away childish behavior.

    The first sentence, which literally reads “For at the present time we look through a looking-glass en ainigmati, but then face to face,” is particularly relevant to their setting, since Corinth was famous as the producer of some of the finest bronze mirrors in antiquity. That suggests that the puzzling phrase en ainigmati is probably not as pejorative as most translations imply. More likely the emphasis is not on the quality of seeing that one experiences in looking into a mirror that would surely have been an affront to them but to the indirect nature of looking into a mirror as opposed to seeing someone face to face. The analogy, of course, breaks down a bit since one sees one’s own face in a mirror, and Paul’s point is that in our present existence one “sees” God (presumably), or understands the “mysteries,” only indirectly. It is not a distorted image that we have in Christ through the Spirit; but it is as yet indirect, not complete. To put all this in another way, but keeping the imagery, “Our present ‘vision’ of God, as great as it is, is as nothing when compared to the real thing that is yet to be; it is like the difference between seeing a reflected image in a mirror and seeing a person face to face.” In our own culture the comparable metaphor would be the difference between seeing a photograph and seeing someone in person. As good as a picture is, it is simply not the real thing.

    With the second set of sentences in this verse, Paul brings into focus all that has been argued since verse 8. Picking up the words of contrast from verse 12a (“at the present time,” “then”) but the content of verse 9, he concludes, “Now I know in part, but then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” By this Paul intends to delineate the difference between the “knowing” that is available through the gift of the Spirit and the final eschatological knowing that is complete. What is not quite clear is the exact nuance of the final clause that expresses the nature of that final knowing, “even as I am fully known.” It is often suggested that the passive, “as I am fully known,” “contains the idea of electing grace.” Attractive as that is theologically, most likely it simply refers to God’s way of knowing. God’s knowledge of us is immediate full and direct, “face to face,” as it were; at the Eschaton, Paul seems to be saying, we too shall know in this way, with no more need for the kinds of mediation that the mirror illustrates or that “prophecy” and the “utterance of knowledge” exemplify in reality.

    Thus Paul’s point with all of this is now made. In verse 8 he argued that love, in contrast to charismata, never comes to an end. Precisely because the gifts have an end point, which love does not, they are of a different order altogether. This does not make them imperfect, although in a sense that too is true; it makes them relative. Paul’s concern in verses 9–12 has been to demonstrate the strictly “present age” nature of these gifts. They shall pass away (verse 8); they are “in part” (verse 9); they belong to this present existence only (verses 10–12). Most likely the purpose of all this is simply to reinforce what was said in verses 1–3, that the Corinthians’ emphasis on tongues as evidence for spirituality is wrong because it is wrongheaded, especially from people who do not otherwise exhibit the one truly essential expression of the Spirit’s presence, Christian love. Good as spiritual gifts are, they are only for the present; Christian love, which the Corinthians currently lack, is the “more excellent way” in part because it belongs to eternity as well as to the present.

    Comment


    • #47
      1 Corinthians 13:13

      Text: (NA27):
      Νυνὶ δὲ μένει πίστις, ἐλπίς, ἀγάπη, τὰ τρία ταῦτα· μείζων δὲ τούτων ἡ ἀγάπη.

      Transliteration (Accordance):
      Nyni de menei pistis, elpis, agapē, ta tria tauta; meizōn de toutōn hē agapē.

      Translation (Thiselton 2006):
      So now there remain faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

      Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
      νυνὶ δέ : and now.
      τρία : neuter of τρεῖς three.
      μείζων : comparative of μέγας, comparative for superlative greatest.
      : referring to ἀγάπη [love] as previously mentioned (anaphoric).

      Comment from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
      13 This sentence, which is related to verse 8 through its use of the verb “remain,” is at once both the best known and most difficult text in the paragraph. There can be little question that it is intended to bring the argument of the present paragraph to a conclusion, and probably the entire chapter as well. But how? There are five interrelated problems: (1) Whether the words “and now” carry a temporal or logical force; (2) in conjunction with that, whether “remain” has to do with the present or the future; (3) the sudden appearance of “faith and hope” in an argument that heretofore has had to nothing to do with these virtues, but with love and spiritual gifts; (4) how love is “greater than” these other two; and (5) how, then, this sentence concludes the paragraph.

      Despite the long debate over the temporal or logical force of the combination “and now,” it is difficult under any circumstances to divest the adverb “now” of some temporal sense. That is, even if its basic thrust is logical (= “but as it is”), it carries the force “as it is in the present state of things.” This seems to be all the more so here, given the present tense of the verb “remain” and the fact that these three opening words stand in immediate conjunction to the eschatological words that have just preceded. Thus, however we finally translate them, these opening words seem to imply some kind of present situation over against what is yet to be, when “I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.”

      The real issue, then, has to do with the sudden appearance of “faith and hope” with love, and in what sense these three “abide.” First, there is good evidence to suggest that this was a familiar triad in early Christian preaching, and therefore that it would have been well known to the Corinthians. Together these words embrace the whole of Christian existence, as believers live out the life of the Spirit in the present age, awaiting the consummation. They have “faith” toward God, that is, they trust him to forgive and accept them through Christ. Even though now they do not see him (or see, as it were, “a reflection in a mirror”), they trust in his goodness and mercies. They also have “hope” for the future, which has been guaranteed for them through Christ. Through his resurrection and the gift of the Spirit, they have become a thoroughly future-oriented people; the present age is on its way out, therefore they live in the present “as if not” (cf. 7:29–31), not conditioned by the present with its hardships or suffering. They are on their way “home,” destined for an existence in the presence of God that is “face to face.” And they have “love” for one another as they live this life of faith and hope in the context of a community of brothers and sisters of similar faith and hope. In the present life of the church “these three remain (or continue): faith, hope, and love.”

      But why this triad in the present context where the contrast has been between gifts and love? The answer probably lies with Paul’s concern to emphasize that love is not like the gifts, in that it is both for now and forever. The preceding argument might leave the impression that since the gifts are only for the present, love is basically for the future. But not so. Love never comes to an end; it always remains. So now he concludes the argument by emphasizing the presentness of love as well. In so doing, since he is trying to emphasize the nature of their present life in Christ, he adds faith and hope to love somewhat automatically, since for him these are what accompany love, not spiritual gifts. They simply belong to different categories.

      That also, then, explains why he adds at the end, “But the greatest of these is love.” Even though love “continues” in the present, along with its companions faith and hope, love is the greatest of these three because it “continues” on into the final glory, which the other two by their very nature do not.

      Thus with this sentence Paul is basically bringing the present argument to its conclusion. The concern has been over the “only for now” aspect of the gifts, which stands in contrast to love. The gifts are “in part”; they belong to the “now,” which will be brought to an end with the “then” that is to be. Love, on the other hand, is not so. It never fails; it will never come to an end. Along with its companions, faith and hope, it abides in the present. But it is greater, at least as the point of this present argument, because it abides on into eternity.

      It is not difficult to bring the final verse of this paragraph into the contemporary church; these are still the “three imperishables” for those who would live a truly Christian life in the present age. Nor is it difficult to emphasize the eschatological dimension of the paragraph, that our present existence, for all its blessings, is but a foretaste of the future. This present partial existence shall someday give way to that which is final and complete. What is more difficult is the way the emphasis on the “present only” aspect of the gifts has been treated. Most have simply yielded to historical reality and have tried to make a virtue out of that reality, that for the most part these extraordinary gifts have already ceased for so many. The irony, of course, is that our present view is almost the precise opposite of that of the Corinthians, who thought of these things as eternal and therefore needed to have that view corrected. One wonders how Paul would have responded to present-day cerebral Christianity, which has generally implied that we can get along quite well without the Spirit in the present age, now that the church has achieved its maturity in orthodoxy. It seems likely that he would not be pleased to see this text used to support such a view of things.

      Comment


      • #48
        1 Corinthians 14:1

        Text: (NA27):
        Διώκετε τὴν ἀγάπην, ζηλοῦτε δὲ τὰ πνευματικά, μᾶλλον δὲ ἵνα προφητεύητε.

        Transliteration (Accordance):
        Diōkete tēn agapēn, zēloute de ta pneumatika, mallon de hina prophēteuēte.

        Translation (Thiselton 2006):
        Pursue love and then be eager for gifts of the Spirit [for utterance {τὰ πνευματικά -JR}], most particularly that you may prophecy.

        Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
        διώκετε : imperative of διώκω pursue, διώκετε τὴν ἀγάπην be eager in pursuit of love.
        ζηλοῦτε : imperative of ζηλόω (τι) be zealous for (something).
        πνευματικός : spiritual, τὰ πνευματικά the things of the Spirit ; in this context: gifts of the Spirit [for utterance (Thiselton)]
        μᾶλλον : preferably.
        ἵνα : with subjunctive = objective infinitive.
        προφητεύητε : subjunctive of προφητεύω prophesy.

        Comment from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
        [Chapter 14, introduction to opening paragraph -JR] This opening paragraph sets forth the basic contrasts and the central themes of what follows. The concern is edification (verses 3–5), the issue intelligibility. Tongues is not understandable (verse 2), hence it cannot edify the church (verse 4). Prophecy is addressed to people precisely for their edification (verse 3), and in that sense is the greater gift.

        Although there can be little question that Paul prefers prophecy to tongues in the gathered assembly, verse 5 indicates that the real issue is not tongues per se, but uninterpreted tongues (cf. verse 13), since an interpreted tongue can also edify. That means, therefore, as verses 2–3 imply, that the real issue is intelligibility in the assembly. Furthermore, it is clear from verses 2–5 that Paul is not “damning tongues with faint praise.” In both cases the contrasts between tongues and prophecy do not have to do with their inherent value, but with the direction of their edification. The edifying of oneself is not a bad thing; it simply is not the point of gathered worship.

        1. These opening imperatives have a single purpose: to serve as a transition from the preceding argument(s) to the issue at hand, namely their abuse of tongues in the gathered assembly. Thus in chiastic order Paul says “Follow the way of love,” namely chap. 13, and in that context “eagerly desire spiritual gifts,” resuming the argument from 12:31a that was interrupted by the exhortation to love. In the earlier exhortation (12:31a) he had said “eagerly desire the greater gifts”; now he indicates (verse 5) that by the greater gifts he means those that edify the community. Thus his choice to represent those greater gifts is “especially that you may prophesy.” A further word about each of these.

        The command to “Follow the way of love” puts into imperative form what was implied throughout the preceding argument. The “love” that they are to pursue, of course, is that described in 13:4–7, since without it the “spiritual” person amounts to zero (verses 1–3); furthermore (verses 8–13), it is the great imperishable: it alone not the gifts will abide into eternity.

        The imperative “eagerly desire spiritual gifts,” although it resumes the argument from 12:31, is nonetheless not a precise repetition. The verb remains the same, but the object is no longer “the greater charismata,” but ta pneumatika, which probably means something like “utterances inspired by the Spirit” (see on 12:1). Some have argued for more significant differences between these two words; more likely it is a matter of emphasis. At the end of chap. 12, where he had been speaking specifically of the gifts themselves as gracious endowments, he told them, “eagerly desire the greater charismata.” Now in a context where the emphasis will be on the activity of the Spirit in the community at worship, he says, “eagerly desire the things of the Spirit.”

        What must be emphasized is that this imperative is now to be understood singularly in light of the exhortation to love that has preceded it. If the two imperatives are not kept together, the point of the entire succeeding argument is missed. Thus he immediately qualifies the imperative with a clause that literally says, “but rather that you prophesy.” In the following sentences Paul gives the reasons for this qualification.

        Comment


        • #49
          1 Corinthians 14:2

          Text: (NA27):
          ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν γλώσσῃ οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ θεῷ· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει, πνεύματι δὲ λαλεῖ μυστήρια

          Transliteration (Accordance):
          ho gar lalōn glōssȩ̄ ouk anthrōpois lalei alla theō̧; oudeis gar akouei, pneumati de lalei mystēria

          Translation (Thiselton 2006):
          For the person who speaks in a tongue does not communicate to human beings but speaks to God. For no one understands anything, but he or she utters mysteries in the Spirit.

          Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
          λαλῶν : participle of λαλέω speak.
          γλῶσσα : tongue ; language.
          ἀκούω : hear ; sometimes understand.
          πνεύματι : dative of instrument.
          μυστήριον : originally place of initiation, hence secret things ; mystery.

          Comment from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
          2–4 This argument may best be analyzed in light of its structure. With two balanced pairs (verses 2–3) Paul first contrasts tongues and prophecy as to who is addressed (in bold) and therefore as to their basic purpose (in italics); the second pair (verse 4) then interprets the first pair in terms of who is being edified. Thus:

          For
          a) The one who speaks in tongues speaks not to people,
          but to God
          Indeed, no one understands him;
          he speaks mysteries by the Spirit.

          On the other hand,
          b) The one who prophesies speaks to people,
          edification,
          encouragement,
          comfort
          .
          a) The one who speaks in tongues edifies himself;
          on the other hand,
          b) The one who prophesies edifies the church

          Paul’s emphasis and concern is unmistakable, the edification of the church. The one activity, tongues, edifies the speaker but not the church because it is addressed to God and “no one understands him.” The other activity, prophecy, edifies the church because it is addressed to people and speaks “edification, encouragement and comfort” to them.

          Although trying to cool their ardor for congregational tongues-speaking, Paul does not disparage the gift itself; rather, he seeks to put it in its rightful place. Positively, he says three things about speaking in tongues, which are best understood in light of the further discussion on prayer and praise in verses 13–17:

          (1) Such a person is “speaking to God,” that is, he or she is communing with God by the Spirit. Although it is quite common in Pentecostal groups to refer to a “message in tongues,” there seems to be no evidence in Paul for such terminology. The tongues-speaker is not addressing fellow believers but God (cf. verses 13–14, 28), meaning therefore that Paul understands the phenomenon basically to be prayer and praise.

          (2) The content of such utterances is “mysteries” spoken “by the Spirit.” It is possible that “mysteries” means something similar to its usage in 13:2; more likely it carries here the sense of that which lies outside the understanding, both for the speaker and the hearer. After all, “mysteries” in 13:2 refers to the ways of God that are being revealed by the Spirit to his people; such “mysteries” would scarcely need to be spoken back to God.

          (3) Such speech by the Spirit is further described in verse 4 as edifying to the speaker. This has sometimes been called “self-edification” and therefore viewed as pejorative. But Paul intended no such thing. The edifying of oneself is not self-centeredness, but the personal edifying of the believer that comes through private prayer and praise. Although one may wonder how “mysteries” that are not understood even by the speaker can edify, the answer lies in verses 14–15. Contrary to the opinion of many, spiritual edification can take place in ways other than through the cortex of the brain. Paul believed in an immediate communing with God by means of the S/spirit that sometimes bypassed the mind; and in verses 14–15 he argues that for his own edification he will have both. But in church he will have only what can also communicate to other believers through their minds.

          But despite these favorable words about tongues, Paul’s present concern is not with private devotion but with public worship. Therefore, he urges by implication that they not speak in tongues in worship (unless it be interpreted, verses 5, 13, 27), but rather that they seek to prophesy (or in light of verse 6 bring forth any form of intelligible utterance). The reason for prophecy is that it speaks “edification, exhortation and comfort” to the rest of the people. These three words set forth the parameters of the divine intent of prophecy, and probably indicate that in Paul’s view the primary focus of a prophetic utterance is not the future, but the present situations of the people of God.

          The first word, “edification,” controls the thought of the entire chapter. In 8:1 Paul had said, “love builds up”; now the sequence runs, “Pursue love, and in that framework seek the things of the Spirit, especially prophecy, because prophecy builds up.” Thus the reason for the preceding chapter: Since love builds up, in their zeal for gifts they are to seek prophecy because it is intelligible and thus builds up the body. The second word is more ambiguous, meaning alternatively “encouragement,” “comfort,” or “exhortation (appeal).” It is joined in this instance by its companion “comfort.” The question is whether these two words are, as in other instances, near synonyms meaning to encourage or comfort, or whether they embrace the broader categories of exhorting and comforting. In either case, the aim of prophecy is the growth of the church corporately, which also involves the growth of its individual members.

          Comment


          • #50
            1 Corinthians 14:3

            Text: (NA27):
            ὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ οἰκοδομὴν καὶ παράκλησιν καὶ παραμυθίαν.

            Transliteration (Accordance):
            ho de prophēteuōn anthrōpois lalei oikodomēn kai paraklēsin kai paramythian.

            Translation (Thiselton 2006):
            However, when a person prophesies to other people, the speaker thereby builds them up, encourages them, and brings them comfort.

            Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
            προφητεύων : participle of προφητεύω prophesy.
            οἰκοδομή : edification.
            παράκλησις : exhortation encouragement.
            παραμυθία : that which serves as encouragement to one who is depressed or in grief, encouragement, comfort, consolation.

            Comment from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
            2–4 This argument may best be analyzed in light of its structure. With two balanced pairs (verses 2–3) Paul first contrasts tongues and prophecy as to who is addressed (in bold) and therefore as to their basic purpose (in italics); the second pair (verse 4) then interprets the first pair in terms of who is being edified. Thus:

            For
            a) The one who speaks in tongues speaks not to people,
            but to God
            Indeed, no one understands him;
            he speaks mysteries by the Spirit.

            On the other hand,
            b) The one who prophesies speaks to people,
            edification,
            encouragement,
            comfort
            .
            a) The one who speaks in tongues edifies himself;
            on the other hand,
            b) The one who prophesies edifies the church

            Paul’s emphasis and concern is unmistakable, the edification of the church. The one activity, tongues, edifies the speaker but not the church because it is addressed to God and “no one understands him.” The other activity, prophecy, edifies the church because it is addressed to people and speaks “edification, encouragement and comfort” to them.

            Although trying to cool their ardor for congregational tongues-speaking, Paul does not disparage the gift itself; rather, he seeks to put it in its rightful place. Positively, he says three things about speaking in tongues, which are best understood in light of the further discussion on prayer and praise in verses 13–17:

            (1) Such a person is “speaking to God,” that is, he or she is communing with God by the Spirit. Although it is quite common in Pentecostal groups to refer to a “message in tongues,” there seems to be no evidence in Paul for such terminology. The tongues-speaker is not addressing fellow believers but God (cf. verses 13–14, 28), meaning therefore that Paul understands the phenomenon basically to be prayer and praise.

            (2) The content of such utterances is “mysteries” spoken “by the Spirit.” It is possible that “mysteries” means something similar to its usage in 13:2; more likely it carries here the sense of that which lies outside the understanding, both for the speaker and the hearer. After all, “mysteries” in 13:2 refers to the ways of God that are being revealed by the Spirit to his people; such “mysteries” would scarcely need to be spoken back to God.

            (3) Such speech by the Spirit is further described in verse 4 as edifying to the speaker. This has sometimes been called “self-edification” and therefore viewed as pejorative. But Paul intended no such thing. The edifying of oneself is not self-centeredness, but the personal edifying of the believer that comes through private prayer and praise. Although one may wonder how “mysteries” that are not understood even by the speaker can edify, the answer lies in verses 14–15. Contrary to the opinion of many, spiritual edification can take place in ways other than through the cortex of the brain. Paul believed in an immediate communing with God by means of the S/spirit that sometimes bypassed the mind; and in verses 14–15 he argues that for his own edification he will have both. But in church he will have only what can also communicate to other believers through their minds.

            But despite these favorable words about tongues, Paul’s present concern is not with private devotion but with public worship. Therefore, he urges by implication that they not speak in tongues in worship (unless it be interpreted, verses 5, 13, 27), but rather that they seek to prophesy (or in light of verse 6 bring forth any form of intelligible utterance). The reason for prophecy is that it speaks “edification, exhortation and comfort” to the rest of the people. These three words set forth the parameters of the divine intent of prophecy, and probably indicate that in Paul’s view the primary focus of a prophetic utterance is not the future, but the present situations of the people of God.

            The first word, “edification,” controls the thought of the entire chapter. In 8:1 Paul had said, “love builds up”; now the sequence runs, “Pursue love, and in that framework seek the things of the Spirit, especially prophecy, because prophecy builds up.” Thus the reason for the preceding chapter: Since love builds up, in their zeal for gifts they are to seek prophecy because it is intelligible and thus builds up the body. The second word is more ambiguous, meaning alternatively “encouragement,” “comfort,” or “exhortation (appeal).” It is joined in this instance by its companion “comfort.” The question is whether these two words are, as in other instances, near synonyms meaning to encourage or comfort, or whether they embrace the broader categories of exhorting and comforting. In either case, the aim of prophecy is the growth of the church corporately, which also involves the growth of its individual members.
            [/QUOTE]

            Comment


            • #51
              1 Corinthians 14:4

              Text: (NA27):
              ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσῃ ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖ· ὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ.

              Transliteration (Accordance):
              ho lalōn glōssȩ̄ heauton oikodomei; ho de prophēteuōn ekklēsian oikodomei.

              Translation (Thiselton 2006):
              For the person who speaks in a tongue "builds up" himself or herself; whereas the one who prophesies builds up the church community.

              Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
              οἰκοδομέω : edify, build up, ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖ builds up himself.
              ἐκκλησία : without article a community? or (the) church?

              Comment from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
              2–4 This argument may best be analyzed in light of its structure. With two balanced pairs (verses 2–3) Paul first contrasts tongues and prophecy as to who is addressed (in bold) and therefore as to their basic purpose (in italics); the second pair (verse 4) then interprets the first pair in terms of who is being edified. Thus:

              For
              a) The one who speaks in tongues speaks not to people,
              but to God
              Indeed, no one understands him;
              he speaks mysteries by the Spirit.

              On the other hand,
              b) The one who prophesies speaks to people,
              edification,
              encouragement,
              comfort
              .
              a) The one who speaks in tongues edifies himself;
              on the other hand,
              b) The one who prophesies edifies the church

              Paul’s emphasis and concern is unmistakable, the edification of the church. The one activity, tongues, edifies the speaker but not the church because it is addressed to God and “no one understands him.” The other activity, prophecy, edifies the church because it is addressed to people and speaks “edification, encouragement and comfort” to them.

              Although trying to cool their ardor for congregational tongues-speaking, Paul does not disparage the gift itself; rather, he seeks to put it in its rightful place. Positively, he says three things about speaking in tongues, which are best understood in light of the further discussion on prayer and praise in verses 13–17:

              (1) Such a person is “speaking to God,” that is, he or she is communing with God by the Spirit. Although it is quite common in Pentecostal groups to refer to a “message in tongues,” there seems to be no evidence in Paul for such terminology. The tongues-speaker is not addressing fellow believers but God (cf. verses 13–14, 28), meaning therefore that Paul understands the phenomenon basically to be prayer and praise.

              (2) The content of such utterances is “mysteries” spoken “by the Spirit.” It is possible that “mysteries” means something similar to its usage in 13:2; more likely it carries here the sense of that which lies outside the understanding, both for the speaker and the hearer. After all, “mysteries” in 13:2 refers to the ways of God that are being revealed by the Spirit to his people; such “mysteries” would scarcely need to be spoken back to God.

              (3) Such speech by the Spirit is further described in verse 4 as edifying to the speaker. This has sometimes been called “self-edification” and therefore viewed as pejorative. But Paul intended no such thing. The edifying of oneself is not self-centeredness, but the personal edifying of the believer that comes through private prayer and praise. Although one may wonder how “mysteries” that are not understood even by the speaker can edify, the answer lies in verses 14–15. Contrary to the opinion of many, spiritual edification can take place in ways other than through the cortex of the brain. Paul believed in an immediate communing with God by means of the S/spirit that sometimes bypassed the mind; and in verses 14–15 he argues that for his own edification he will have both. But in church he will have only what can also communicate to other believers through their minds.

              But despite these favorable words about tongues, Paul’s present concern is not with private devotion but with public worship. Therefore, he urges by implication that they not speak in tongues in worship (unless it be interpreted, verses 5, 13, 27), but rather that they seek to prophesy (or in light of verse 6 bring forth any form of intelligible utterance). The reason for prophecy is that it speaks “edification, exhortation and comfort” to the rest of the people. These three words set forth the parameters of the divine intent of prophecy, and probably indicate that in Paul’s view the primary focus of a prophetic utterance is not the future, but the present situations of the people of God.

              The first word, “edification,” controls the thought of the entire chapter. In 8:1 Paul had said, “love builds up”; now the sequence runs, “Pursue love, and in that framework seek the things of the Spirit, especially prophecy, because prophecy builds up.” Thus the reason for the preceding chapter: Since love builds up, in their zeal for gifts they are to seek prophecy because it is intelligible and thus builds up the body. The second word is more ambiguous, meaning alternatively “encouragement,” “comfort,” or “exhortation (appeal).” It is joined in this instance by its companion “comfort.” The question is whether these two words are, as in other instances, near synonyms meaning to encourage or comfort, or whether they embrace the broader categories of exhorting and comforting. In either case, the aim of prophecy is the growth of the church corporately, which also involves the growth of its individual members.

              Comment


              • #52
                1 Corinthians 14:5

                Text: (NA27):
                θέλω δὲ πάντας ὑμᾶς λαλεῖν γλώσσαις, μᾶλλον δὲ ἵνα προφητεύητε· μείζων δὲ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύῃ, ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ.

                Transliteration (Accordance):
                thelō de pantas hymas lalein glōssais, mallon de hina prophēteuēte; meizōn de ho prophēteuōn ē ho lalōn glōssais ektos ei mē diermēneuȩ̄, hina hē ekklēsia oikodomēn labȩ̄.

                Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                I take pleasure in all of you speaking in tongues, but I would rather that you prophesy. The person who prophesies is of greater importance than the one who speaks in tongues, unless that person articulates the utterance intelligibly for the church community to receive the "building up."

                Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                μᾶλλον : even more.
                θέλω ἵνα προφητεύητε : grammatically equivalent to θέλω ὑμᾶς λαλεῖν: I want you all to speak with tongues but even more that you may prophesy (= to prophesy).
                μείζων : comparative of μέγας great.
                ἐκτός : unless ; pleonastic with εἰ μή (except).
                εἰ μή : here with subjunctive probably because standing for ἐὰν μή.
                διερμηνεύῃ : subjunctive of διερμηνεύω interpret. See commentary here, here, and here.
                ἵνα : consecutive in such a way/so that.
                λάβῃ : aorist subjunctive of λαμβάνω receive.

                Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                5 This verse summarizes verses 1–4 by making explicit Paul’s preference for prophecy over tongues in the assembly. As in verses 2–4, he begins with tongues: “I would like every one of you to speak in tongues.” This sentence is often viewed as “merely conciliatory,” especially in light of 12:28–30 where he argues that all will not speak in tongues. But that is not quite precise. Paul has already indicated that tongues have value for the individual, meaning in private, personal prayer (cf. verses 14–15 and 18–19). Now he says of that dimension of spiritual life that he could wish all experienced the edification that came from such a gift of the Spirit. But that of course is not his present point; thus he quickly qualifies that “wish” by repeating the language of verse 1: “but rather that you prophesy.”

                After such a summary one would expect that it might be followed by an explanatory “for” and a reason given. In this case, however, he concludes with the proposition, “Greater is the one who prophesies than the one who speaks in tongues.” With these words two items from the preceding argument are brought into focus. First, this defines the meaning of “greater gift” in the exhortation in 12:31; second, the reason why prophecy is greater is related to the edification of the community, as the preceding argument makes clear. Thus it is not inherently greater, since all gifts come from the Spirit and are beneficial. It is greater precisely because it is intelligible and therefore can edify.

                This last point is made certain by the final qualifying clause added to speaking in tongues: “unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.” The problem is not speaking in tongues per se but speaking in tongues without interpretation which from the context seems very likely what the Corinthians were doing. The interpretation of the tongue brings it within the framework of intelligibility, which in turn means that it too can edify the community. This does not imply that such a tongue is to be understood as directed toward the community, but that what the person has been speaking to God has now been made intelligible, so that others may benefit from the Spirit’s utterance.

                Thus, even though from Paul’s perspective prophecy is clearly preferable, it seems equally clear that the real urgency is not with tongues and prophecy, but with intelligible utterances in the gathered assembly, so that all may be edified.

                At a time in history when there is a broad range of opinion about speaking in tongues in the church, both its validity and its usefulness, the point of this text needs to be heard again on both sides of that question. It is sheer prejudice to view Paul here as “demoting” tongues as such. Uninterpreted tongues in the assembly, yes; but for the edification of the believer in private, no. Anyone who would argue that what is spoken to God by the Spirit for the edification of a believer is of little value is hardly reading the apostle from Paul’s own point of view. On the other hand, there is a tendency on the part of some Pentecostals to fall full into the Corinthian error, where a “message in tongues,” interpreted of course, is often seen as the surest evidence of the continuing work of the Spirit in a given community. Paul would scarcely agree with such an assessment. He allows tongues and interpretation; he prefers prophecy.

                At the same time Paul’s clear preference for prophetic utterances is often neglected throughout the church. By prophecy of course, as the full evidence of this chapter makes clear, he does not mean a prepared sermon, but the spontaneous word given to God’s people for the edification of the whole. Most contemporary churches would have to be radically reconstructed in terms of their self-understanding for such to take place. Again, Pentecostal and charismatic groups, where such utterances are more often in evidence, continually need to “test” the spirits in terms of verse 3, that the utterance be for the edification, exhortation/encouragement, and comfort of the community.

                Comment


                • #53
                  1 Corinthians 14:6

                  Text: (NA27):
                  Νῦν δέ, ἀδελφοί, ἐὰν ἔλθω πρὸς ὑμᾶς γλώσσαις λαλῶν, τί ὑμᾶς ὠφελήσω ἐὰν μὴ ὑμῖν λαλήσω ἢ ἐν ἀποκαλύψει ἢ ἐν γνώσει ἢ ἐν προφητείᾳ ἢ [ἐν] διδαχῇ;

                  Transliteration (Accordance):
                  Nyn de, adelphoi, ean elthō pros hymas glōssais lalōn, ti hymas ōphelēsō ean mē hymin lalēsō ē en apokalypsei ē en gnōsei ē en prophēteia̧ ē [en] didachȩ̄?

                  Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                  Well now, dear fellow believers, suppose that when I come to you I come speaking in tongues. What shall I profit you unless I speak to you in terms either of a disclosure or of knowledge, or of prophetic speech or of teaching?

                  Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                  νῦν δέ : or; now then... (atemporal).
                  ἔλθω : aorist subjunctive of ἔρχομαι come.
                  ὠφελήσω : future of ὠφελέω help/benefit/do good to one, τί ὑμᾶς ὠφελήσω; what good will I do you?
                  λαλήσω : aorist subjunctive of λαλέω speak.
                  ἐν : in (the form of).
                  ἀποκάλυψις : revelation.
                  γνῶσις : knowledge.
                  προφητεία : prophecy.
                  διδαχή : instruction.

                  Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                  6 A turn in the argument is indicated both by the vocative “brothers [and sisters]” (see on 1:10) and by the conjunctive combination “but as it is.” This opening sentence functions as a transition: It carries forward the argument of verses 1–5; at the same time it sets the stylistic pattern for the first set of analogies (“If …, how shall?…”), which argue vigorously against unintelligibility (= tongues) since it has no usefulness for its hearers.

                  Even though the sentence is probably intended to present a hypothetical setting for the argument, both the combination “but as it is” and the language “if I come to you” support the suggestion made above that this is more than merely hypothetical; probably it also indicates the way things presently are between them and him, implying his rejection of their criterion for being pneumatikos (“spiritual”). Paul in effect refuses to “come to [them] speaking in tongues.” The reason for this echoes the motif of edification from verses 3–5. By following their criterion he would not “profit them.”

                  The alternative is for him to come speaking some form of intelligible utterance, which he illustrates with yet another list of charismata. This list is both illuminating and intriguing. On the one hand, the appearance of prophecy in the third position intimates, as has been argued in verses 1–5, that the real issue is not tongues and prophecy as such, but tongues and intelligibility, for which prophecy serves as the representative gift. On the other hand, as with the other lists in this argument, this one is also especially ad hoc. His concern is to specify various kinds of Spirit-inspired utterances that have intelligibility as their common denominator. Thus he includes two items from previous lists, “knowledge” and “prophecy” (see 12:8–10; 13:2, 8). The other two call for additional comment.

                  Paul uses the word “revelation” in a variety of ways, but only in the present argument to suggest some kind of utterance given by the Spirit for the benefit of the gathered community. Precisely what its content might be and how it would differ from “knowledge” or “prophecy” is not at all clear. For example, along with “teaching” it appears in the final list in verse 26, a list that includes neither “prophecy” nor “knowledge.” Yet in the subsequent discussion of the ordering of utterances (verses 27–33), Paul takes up tongues and prophecy, not “revelation,” although its cognate verb does appear in the discussion of prophecy in verse 30. This latter passage in particular suggests that there is a general lack of precision in Paul with regard to these various items. Perhaps in the final list (verse 26) this word covers both prophecy and knowledge as the more inclusive term. In any case, it implies the disclosure of divine “mysteries,” either about the nature of the gospel itself (cf. 2:10) or perhaps about things otherwise hidden to the “natural man.”

                  Equally intriguing is the appearance of “teaching,” which corresponds to “the teacher” in 12:28 as prophecy does to the prophet. Probably this has to do with a Spirit-inspired utterance that took the form of instruction, rather than with the more common usage that implies formal teaching of some kind. Again, how this differs in terms of content from the other items on this list is a matter of speculation since the data are so meager. See the discussion on 12:28.

                  Despite our lack of certainty about the precise nature and content of these various forms of utterance, however, their common denominator is their intelligibility, and to that question Paul now turns in the form of analogies.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    1 Corinthians 14:7-8

                    Text: (NA27):
                    ὅμως τὰ ἄψυχα φωνὴν διδόντα, εἴτε αὐλὸς εἴτε κιθάρα, ἐὰν διαστολὴν τοῖς φθόγγοις μὴ δῷ, πῶς γνωσθήσεται τὸ αὐλούμενον ἢ τὸ κιθαριζόμενον; καὶ γὰρ ἐὰν ἄδηλον σάλπιγξ φωνὴν δῷ, τίς παρασκευάσεται εἰς πόλεμον;

                    Transliteration (Accordance):
                    homōs ta apsycha phōnēn didonta, eite aulos eite kithara, ean diastolēn tois phthoggois mē dō̧, pōs gnōsthēsetai to auloumenon ē to kitharizomenon? kai gar ean adēlon salpigx phōnēn dō̧, tis paraskeuasetai eis polemon?

                    Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                    Similarly, with reference to an inanimate musical instrument: in the case of either a flute or lyre, unless these yield distinct differences of pitch, how can what is produced by wind or string be recognized? Further, if the trumpet produces a sound which is ambiguous as a signal, who will prepare for battle?

                    Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                    ὅμως : usually nevertheless ; unexplained ; perhaps in the sense of ὁμοίως pertaining to being similar in some respect, likewise, so, similarly, in the same way.
                    ἄψυχος : inanimate.
                    διδόντα : neuter plural participle of δίδωμι give, yield.
                    αὐλός : flute.
                    κιθάρα : harp.
                    διαστολή : difference, distinction.
                    φθόγγος : tone, note.
                    δῷ : aorist of δίδωμι: διαστολὴν δίδωμι make a distinction.
                    γνωσθήσεται : future passive of γινώσκω know.
                    αὐλούμενον, κιθαριζόμενον : passive participles of αὐλέω play the flute, κιθαρίζω play the harp.
                    καὶ γάρ : for again.
                    ἄδηλος : indistinct, vague, not clear.
                    σάλπιγξ, -ιγγος, ἡ : trumpet.
                    παρασκευάσεται : future middle of παρασκευάζω (τι) prepare (something) ; middle make preparations.
                    πόλεμος : war, here battle.

                    Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                    7-8 The analogies seem self-evident. The first (verse 7) is taken from “lifeless things that give sounds,” that is, from musical instruments. The two instruments, flute and harp, are commonplace in the Hellenistic world. Paul’s point is to be found in the “how” clause: “How will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes?” This example calls to mind another use of a musical instrument: “If the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?”

                    The analogy is clear. Tongues, Paul is arguing, is like the harpist running fingers over all the strings, making musical sounds but not playing a pleasing melody, or like a bugler who blows the bugle without sounding the battle cry. In both cases sounds come from the instrument, but they make no sense; hence they do not benefit the listener. So it is with tongues.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      1 Corinthians 14:9

                      Text: (NA27):
                      οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς διὰ τῆς γλώσσης ἐὰν μὴ εὔσημον λόγον δῶτε, πῶς γνωσθήσεται τὸ λαλούμενον; ἔσεσθε γὰρ εἰς ἀέρα λαλοῦντες.

                      Transliteration (Accordance):
                      houtōs kai hymeis dia tēs glōssēs ean mē eusēmon logon dōte, pōs gnōsthēsetai to laloumenon? esesthe gar eis aera lalountes.

                      Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                      Even so, if you yourselves do not produce through speaking in a tongue a message which is readily intelligible, how shall what is being said be comprehended? For you will be speaking into empty air.

                      Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                      διά : by means of, with.
                      εὔσημος : whose meaning is clear, distinct.
                      λαλούμενον : passive participle of λαλέω speak.
                      ἔσεσθε : future of εἰμί be, ἔσεσθε λαλοῦντες periphrastic future you will be speaking.
                      ἀήρ, -έρος, ὁ : air.

                      Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                      9 This application to their situation follows the form of the two preceding examples. Referring specifically to speaking in tongues, he asks, “Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying?” To which he adds the biting words, echoing the irresponsible bugler, “You will just be speaking into the air.” All of this, of course, assumes the perspective of the hearer in the community at worship [emphasis added -JR].

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        1 Corinthians 14:10-11

                        Text: (NA27):
                        τοσαῦτα εἰ τύχοι γένη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν ἄφωνον· ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς, ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι βάρβαρος καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν ἐμοὶ βάρβαρος.

                        Transliteration (Accordance):
                        tosauta ei tychoi genē phōnōn eisin en kosmō̧ kai ouden aphōnon; ean oun mē eidō tēn dynamin tēs phōnēs, esomai tō̧ lalounti barbaros kai ho lalōn en emoi barbaros.

                        Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                        It may be that there are varieties of language within the world, and none fails to use sound. Yet it follows that if I do not know the force of the sound, I shall be an alien to the speaker, and the speaker will remain an alien in my eyes.

                        Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                        τοσοῦτοι : plural so many.
                        τύχοι : aorist optative of τυγχάνω happen, εἰ τύχοι if it should so happen, it could be, perhaps, with reference to τοσαῦτα (rather than εἰσιν) who knows how many.
                        γένος : kind.
                        φωνή : sometimes language.
                        ἄφωνος dumb (12:2) ; without meaning or unintelligible.
                        εἰδῶ : subjunctive of οἶδα (perfect-present) know.
                        δύναμις : force, meaning.
                        βάρβαρος : not knowing Greek, foreign
                        ἐν ἐμοί : to me (= "in my estimation") ; ἐν sometimes pleonastic, parallel to simple dative (τῷ λαλοῦτι).

                        Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                        10-11 This third analogy, the phenomenon of different languages, would also have been commonplace in a cosmopolitan center such as Corinth. It is also the one most closely related to the immediate problem. The analogy is not that the tongues-speaker is also speaking a foreign language, as some have suggested, but that the hearer cannot understand the one speaking in tongues any more than he can the one who speaks a foreign language.

                        The form of the analogy differs from the preceding ones. In verse 10 there is the simple statement of fact, that there are who-knows-how-many different languages in the world, none of which is without meaning to those who speak them. This analogy also emphasizes the perspective of the hearer. It is not that the different languages do not have meaning to their speakers; rather, they do not have meaning to the hearers.

                        This latter point is pressed in verse 11 by means of the inferential conjunction “therefore.” That is, the inference to be drawn from the reality stated in verse 10 is that “If I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying,” then we are as foreigners to one another. Again, the application to their setting and “speaking in tongues” is obvious. Just as the hearer of one speaking in a foreign language cannot understand what is said, so the other worshipers in the community cannot understand what is spoken “in tongues.” Thus it is of no value to them.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          1 Corinthians 14:12

                          Text: (NA27):
                          οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς, ἐπεὶ ζηλωταί ἐστε πνευμάτων, πρὸς τὴν οἰκοδομὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ζητεῖτε ἵνα περισσεύητε.

                          Transliteration (Accordance):
                          houtōs kai hymeis, epei zēlōtai este pneumatōn, pros tēn oikodomēn tēs ekklēsias zēteite hina perisseuēte.

                          Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                          You yourselves are in this situation. Since you have a burning concern about the powers of the Spirit, direct this eagerness toward the building up of the church community, to excel in this.

                          Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                          ἐπεί : since (causal).
                          ζηλωτής : zealot ; with following genitive one ardent/eager for.
                          πνεύματα : spirits.
                          πρός : for.
                          οἰκοδομή : building, edification.
                          ζητεῖτε : imperative of ζητέω followed by ἵνα with subjunctive seek/try to.
                          περισσεύητε : (sc. in them) subjunctive of περισσεύω excel.

                          Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                          12 This final application begins exactly as in verse 9: “So it is with you.” But in this instance instead of applying the obvious point of the preceding analogy, Paul ties all this together by picking up two motifs from verses 1–5. First, (literally) “since you are zealots for spirits." As many have seen, this clause probably holds the key to much. Whatever else it means, it explicitly indicates that zeal for the things being talked about in these chapters is a Corinthian trademark. This has caused some, therefore, to read the two imperatives in 12:31 and 14:1 as quotations from the Corinthian letter. But that is an unnecessary expedient. Paul was not commanding them in those cases to do what they were already doing. Rather, just as in this verse, he was urging them to direct that zeal toward gifts that edify (14:5).

                          The more difficult concept is their zeal for “spirits.” On the basis of 14:1, this is almost universally understood, as in the NIV, to refer to their alleged zeal for “spiritual gifts” in general. But that seems unlikely, both in terms of this choice of words and of the historical context as a whole. More likely this refers especially to their desire for one particular manifestation of the Spirit, the gift of tongues, which was for them the sure evidence of their being pneumatikos (a person of the Spirit, hence “spiritual”). This plural does not mean that the “one and the same Spirit” of 12:7–11 is now to be understood as a multiplicity of spirits. Rather, this is Paul’s way of speaking about the Spirit manifesting himself through their individual “spirits.” The clue lies in the usage in verse 32, where the “spirits of the prophets” refers to the Holy Spirit’s speaking prophetic utterances through the one who is prophesying. Likewise in verses 14–15, Paul will pray with “my spirit,” meaning “by means of the Holy Spirit through my spirit.” Hence they have great zeal for their own spirits, through speaking in tongues, to be the mouthpiece of the Spirit.

                          Paul’s present concern is to capitalize on their zeal, or more accurately, as before, to redirect their zeal. Thus the second motif from verses 1–5, and the point of everything: “Try to excel in building up the church.” This was the explicit concern of verses 1–5; it has been the implicit concern in the several analogies of this paragraph. Utterances that are not understood, even if they come from the Spirit, are of no benefit, that is, edification, to the hearer. Thus, since they have such zeal for the manifestation of the Spirit, they should direct that zeal in corporate worship away from being “foreigners” to one another toward the edification of one another in Christ.

                          In a time when charismatic utterances are experiencing something of a revival in the church, this paragraph is especially important to those in that renewal. The point of everything in corporate worship is not personal experience in the Spirit, but building up the church itself. Much that comes under the banner of charismatic or pentecostal worship seems very often to fail right at this point. However, it is not so much that what goes on is not understood by the others, but that it fails to have this final verse as its basic urgency. The building up of the community is the basic reason for corporate settings of worship; they should probably not be turned into a corporate gathering for a thousand individual experiences of worship.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            1 Corinthians 14:13

                            Text: (NA27):
                            Διὸ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσῃ προσευχέσθω ἵνα διερμηνεύῃ.

                            Transliteration (Accordance):
                            Dio ho lalōn glōssȩ̄ proseuchesthō hina diermēneuȩ̄.

                            Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                            Hence the person who prays in a tongue should pray that he or she may put what they have uttered into words.

                            Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                            διό : for this reason.
                            προσευχέσθω : (he) must pray, imperative 3rd singular of προσεύχομαι.
                            διερμηνεύῃ : subjunctive of διερμηνεύ. See commentary here.

                            Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                            13 The strong inferential conjunction “for this reason” indicates a close relationship between this sentence and verse 12. It functions both to conclude verses 6–12 and to apply the principle “building up the church.” Its content, therefore, comes as something of a surprise. In light of the total argument to this point, one might have expected, “For this reason let the one who speaks in tongues seek rather to prophesy.” But prophecy is not Paul’s concern, intelligibility is; thus he moves toward that concern by urging that “the person who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.” The point is that of verses 5:12 The interpretation of the tongue makes it an intelligible utterance; therefore it can satisfy the concern of verse 12, the edification of the church. As before, the Corinthians’ practice of uninterpreted tongues is what is being challenged, not tongues as such. This is further confirmed by verse. 27–28, which again disallow uninterpreted tongues, but otherwise regulate the expression of the gift when there is interpretation..

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              1 Corinthians 14:14

                              ]Text: (NA27):
                              ἐὰν [γὰρ] προσεύχωμαι γλώσσῃ, τὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται, ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστιν.

                              Transliteration (Accordance):
                              ean [gar] proseuchōmai glōssȩ̄, to pneuma mou proseuchetai, ho de nous mou akarpos estin.

                              Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                              For if I pray in a tongue, my innermost spiritual being prays, but my mind produces no fruit from it.

                              Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                              προσεύχωμαι : subjunctive of προσεύχομαι pray.
                              νοῦς, νοός, νοΐ, νοῦν, ὁ : mind.
                              ἄκαρπος : fruitless, without effect, idle

                              Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                              14 With this sentence Paul begins the specific application of the argument against unintelligibility in verse 7–13. He does so, as he will again in verse 18, by referring to his own experience of speaking in tongues. But the point of this sentence is less than certain. Probably he is using his own experience to point up a basic principle, which will be elaborated in verse 15 and then applied to their assembly in verses 16–17.

                              This seems to make the best sense of what is otherwise a very difficult sentence in the middle of this argument, made the more so by the addition of the explanatory “for” found in the majority of witnesses (and the NIV). Paul is not arguing that the tongues-speaker should also interpret for the benefit of his or her own understanding. That would be a considerable “rock” in the middle of this argument for the edification of others through intelligibility. It would also tend to contradict what is said in verses 2 and 4 and intimated in verse 15, that the one who speaks in tongues is edified by his or her communion with God through the Spirit, without the need of perceptual understanding. Paul’s point is a simple one, and one that they themselves should fully recognize: When I pray in tongues I pray in the Spirit, but it does not benefit my mind the implication being, as he will go on to argue in verses 16–17, that neither does it benefit the minds of others.

                              As suggested before, in the present context the difficult wording “my spirit prays” seems to mean something like “my S/spirit prays.” On the one hand, both the possessive “my” and the contrast with “my mind” indicate that he is here referring to his own “spirit” at prayer. On the other hand, there can be little question, on the basis of the combined evidence of 12:7–11 and 14:2 and 16, that Paul understood speaking in tongues to be an activity of the Spirit in one’s life; it is prayer and praise directed toward God in the language of Spirit-inspiration. The most viable solution to this ambiguity is that by the language “my spirit prays” Paul means his own spirit is praying as the Holy Spirit gives the utterance. Hence, “my S/spirit prays.”

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                1 Corinthians 14:15

                                Text: (NA27):
                                τί οὖν ἐστιν; προσεύξομαι τῷ πνεύματι, προσεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ· ψαλῶ τῷ πνεύματι, ψαλῶ δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ.

                                Transliteration (Accordance):
                                ti oun estin? proseuxomai tō̧ pneumati, proseuxomai de kai tō̧ noi; psalō tō̧ pneumati, psalō de kai tō̧ noi.

                                Translation (Thiselton 2006):
                                So what follows? I will pray with my deepest spiritual being, but I will pray with my mind too. I will sing praise with the depths of my being, but I will sing praise with my mind too.

                                Grammatical Analysis (Zerwick/BDAG, meanings in this context):
                                τί οὖν ἐστιν; : how do matters stand then?
                                προσεύξομαι : future of προσεύχομαι pray.
                                νοΐ : dative of νοῦς mind: τῷ νοΐ intelligently.
                                ψαλῶ : future of ψάλλω sing praise.

                                Commentary from the first edition of The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT: Eerdmans, 1987), by Gordon D. Fee (via Accordance):
                                14 [continued -I inadvertently missed out the ending of the verse comment above -JR] As verse 15 makes certain, Paul does not mean that praying in the Spirit is a bad thing because it does not benefit his understanding; rather, this states the way things are. What he does go on to say is that he will do two things, one apparently for his own sake, the other for the sake of others.

                                15 Paul now elaborates the principle set forth in verse 14, with an eye toward turning it into application in verses 16–17. In light of the simple reality stated in verse 14, he asks rhetorically, “So what shall I do?” His answer is that he will do both. On the one hand, “I will pray with my S/spirit,” meaning, as verses 14 and 19 make certain, “I will pray in tongues.” Although this is obviously not Paul’s present concern, it joins with verse 18 in suggesting that such was his regular practice and that he was edified thereby even if his mind did not enter into such praying. On the other hand, the combination “but also” indicates that the emphasis lies here, “I will also pray with my understanding,” meaning “I will also pray and praise in Greek for the sake of others.”

                                Although it is not explicitly stated here, this contrast between praying and singing with my S/spirit and my mind ultimately aims at relegating the former to the setting of private praying, while only the latter is to be exercised in the assembly. This is implied both in verses 16–17, where he allows that the tongues-speaker is praising God all right, but to no one else’s benefit, and especially in verse 19, where this distinction is made explicitly.

                                To “praying” Paul adds “singing with the S/pirit” and “with the understanding.” Singing was a common part of worship in Judaism and was carried over as an integral part of early Christian worship as well, as verse 26 and Col. 3:16//Eph. 5:19 illustrate. The evidence from Colossians and Ephesians suggests that some of the singing was corporate; the language of these passages further indicates that besides being addressed as praise to God, such hymns served as vehicles of instruction in the gathered community. Furthermore, both passages, as well as this one, indicate that some of the singing might best be called “a kind of charismatic hymnody,” in which spontaneous hymns of praise were offered to God in the congregation, although some may have been known beforehand. The present passage, as well as verse 26, indicates that some of this kind of singing was “solo.” This text also adds a dimension to our understanding of “speaking in tongues.” Not only did one pray in this way, but one also praised God in song in this way. Hence the verbs in verbs 16–17 that pick up this theme are “bless” and “give thanks.”

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X