For he who speaks in another language speaks not to men, but to God; for no one understands; but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries. But he who prophesies speaks to men for their edification, exhortation, and consolation. He who speaks in another language edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the assembly. Now I desire to have you all speak with other languages, but rather that you would prophesy. For he is greater who prophesies than he who speaks with other languages, unless he interprets, that the assembly may be built up.
But now, brothers, if I come to you speaking with other languages, what would I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation, or of knowledge, or of prophesying, or of teaching? Even things without life, giving a voice, whether pipe or harp, if they didn’t give a distinction in the sounds, how would it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet gave an uncertain sound, who would prepare himself for war? So also you, unless you uttered by the tongue words easy to understand, how would it be known what is spoken? For you would be speaking into the air. There are, it may be, so many kinds of sounds in the world, and none of them is without meaning. If then I don’t know the meaning of the sound, I would be to him who speaks a foreigner, and he who speaks would be a foreigner to me. So also you, since you are zealous for spiritual gifts, seek that you may abound to the building up of the assembly.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12 2. For he that speaketh in another tongue, speaketh,…
2. For he that speaketh in another tongue, speaketh, etc. He now shows from the effect, why it was that he preferred prophecy to other gifts, and he compares it with the gift of tongues, in which it is probable the Corinthians exercised themselves the more, because it had more of show connected with it, for when persons hear a man speaking in a foreign tongue, their admiration is commonly excited. He accordingly shows, from principles already assumed, how perverse a thing this is, inasmuch as it does not at all contribute to the edifying of the Church. He says in the outset — He that speaketh in another tongue, speaketh not unto men, but unto God: that is, according to the proverb, “He sings to himself and to the Muses.” In the use of the word tongue, there is not a pleonasm, as in those expressions — “She spake thus with her mouth,” and “I caught the sound with these ears.” The term denotes a foreign language. The reason why he does not speak to men is — because no one heareth, that is, as an articulate voice. For all hear a sound, but they do not understand what is said.
He speaketh in the Spirit — that is, “by a spiritual gift, (for in this way I interpret it along with Chrysostom.) He speaketh mysteries and hidden things, and things, therefore, that are of no profit.” Chrysostom understands mysteries here in a good sense, as meaning — special revelations from God. I understand the term, however, in a bad sense, as meaning — dark sayings, that are obscure and involved, as if he had said, “He speaks what no one understands.”
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 By that inspiration which he has received of the…
By that inspiration which he has received of the Spirit, which notwithstanding he abuseth, when he speaketh mysteries which none of the company can understand.
He reprehendeth their perverse judgment touching the gift of tongues. For why was it given? to wit, to the intent that the mysteries of God might be the better known to a greater sort. Thereby it is evident that Prophecy, whereunto the gift of tongues ought to serve, is better than this: and therefore the Corinthians did judge amiss, in that they made more account of the gift of tongues, than of prophesying: because forsooth the gift of tongues was a thing more to be bragged of. And hereupon followed another abuse of the gift of tongues, in that the Corinthians used tongues in the Congregation, without an interpreter. Which thing although it might be done to some profit of him, that spake them, yet he corrupted the right use of that gift, because there came thereby no profit to the hearers: and common assemblies were instituted and appointed not for any private man’s commodity, but for the profit of the whole company.
Read full note →
A strange language, which no man can understand without an interpreter.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv2–12 2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue…
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
Ver. 2. In an unknown tongue] So they that preach in a kind of a Roman English, and not in a low language to the people’s capacity.
Read full note →
But unto God] Canit sibi et Musis, as the proverb is; and as good he may hold his tongue, for God needs him not.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv2–12 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue; by…
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue; by a tongue (for unkown is not in the Greek, but necessarily added by our translators, for he speaketh of such a language) he meaneth a language not known to all, or at least not to the most of them that hear him. It may be asked, what unknown language the apostle here meaneth? Shall we think that any pastors or teachers in the church of Corinth were so vain, as to preach in the Arabic, Scythian, or Parthian language to a people who understood only the Greek? Our learned Lightfoot thinks this not probable, and that if any had been so vain for ostentation, the apostle would rather have chid them for suffering such an abuse, and have forbidden such further practice, than have given direction, than if any so spake he should interpret, as he doth, 1Co 14:5. He rather thinks, therefore, that the apostle meaneth the Hebrew tongue; the use of which, though it was by this time much lost through the Jews’ mixture with other nations, yet was restored in a great measure to the guides of churches, for their better understanding the Scriptures of the Old Testament; and continued amongst the Jews in their reading of the law in the synagogues. Now there being many Jews in this church, and the service of God being ordinarily in the Jewish synagogues performed in that language, it is very probable, that some of these Jews that were Christianized (to show their skill) might, when they spake to the whole church of Corinth, use to speak in Hebrew, though few or none understood that language. The apostle saith, he that did so, spake
not unto men, that is, not to those men who did not understand that language, not to the generality of his hearers, though possibly here and there some might understand him,
Read full note →
but unto God, who being the Author of all languages, must necessarily know the significancy of all words in them: for (he saith) scarce any man understood him.
Howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries; howbeit he may speak mysterious things to himself, and to the understanding of his own soul and spirit. Others think that it was possible, that some who thus spake, being but the instruments of the Holy Spirit, might not themselves understand all which they said; but that is hardly probable.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
William Burkitt 1703 · Public Domain On vv2, 4, 7, 10 Here observe, 1. That the gift of tongues, or…
Here observe, 1. That the gift of tongues, or speaking divers languages, was greatly valued and much desired by some in the church at that time; probably for this reason, because the apostles were very eminently endowed with this gift, the Holy Ghost descending upon them in the shape of cloven tongues; but yet the gift of prophecy, that is, of understanding in intrepreting God’s will, was clearly the more valuable and desirable accomplishment; for though speaking with tongues created more admiration, and conciliated greater veneration to the speaker, yet prophesying was by far the most excellent gift, and tended most to the edification of the church: it is far better to do good, than to appear great; that is most valuable and excelling which is most advantageous and edifying.
Observe, 2. How the apostle enters upon a comparison between the gift of speaking in an unknown tongue, and prophesying or speaking plainly to the church’s benefit and comfort. He that speaketh in an unknown tongue, that is, in a language not understood, not explained or interpreted, he speaketh not unto men; that is, not to the understanding of men, for none understand him; but to God only, he alone understands him; and though in the Spirit he speaks mysteries, or the deep things of God, yet all this is not to edification, because not understood by the church.
Read full note →
Whereas, he that prophesieth, that is, he that intelligibly openeth and applieth the word of God to his auditors in the congregation, what he speaks conduces exceedingly to their edification and consolation,
Here note, That the apostle not only dislikes, but plainly forbids, preaching, praying, and all other offices being performed in the church in a language not understood.
So that the practice of the church of Rome in their Latin prayers is a flat contradiction to this whole chapter, and to the practice of the primitive church, Act 4:24; who lifted up their voice with one accord, and offered up a reasonable service to God.
The prayers of the Jewish church were made in the Hebrew tongue; and God gave the gift of tongues to the Christian church, that the apostles might establish the worship of God in every nation in their own language.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v6 In this paragraph he goes on to show how…
In this paragraph he goes on to show how vain a thing the ostentation of speaking unknown and unintelligible language must be. It was altogether unedifying and unprofitable (Co1 14:6): If I come to you speaking with tongues, what will it profit you, unless I speak to you by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine? It would signify nothing to utter any of these in an unknown tongue. An apostle, with all his furniture, could not edify, unless he spoke to the capacity of his hearers. New revelations, the most clear explications of old ones, the most instructive discourses in themselves, would be unprofitable in a language not understood. Nay, interpretations of scripture made in an unknown tongue would need to be interpreted over again, before they could be of any use.
I. He illustrates this by several allusions. 1. To a pipe and a harp playing always in one tone. Of what use can this be to those who are dancing? If there be no distinction of sounds, how should they order their steps or motions? Unintelligible language is like piping or harping without distinction of sounds: it gives no more direction how a man should order his conversation than a pipe with but one stop or a harp with but one string can direct a dancer how he should order his steps, Co1 14:7. 2. To a trumpet giving an uncertain sound, adēlon phōnēn, a sound not manifest; either not the proper sound for the purpose, or not distinct enough to be discerned from every other sound. If, instead of sounding on onset, it sounded a retreat, or sounded one knew not what, who would prepare for the battle? To talk in an unknown language in a Christian assembly is altogether as vain and to no purpose as for a trumpet to give no certain sound in the field or day of battle. The army in one case, and the congregation in the other, must be all in suspense, and at a perfect nonplus. To speak words that have no significancy to those who hear them is to leave them ignorant of what is spoken; it is speaking to the air, Co1 14:9. Words without a meaning can convey no notion nor instruction to the mind; and words not understood have no meaning with those who do not understand them: to talk to them in such language is to waste our breath. 3. He compares the speaking in an unknown tongue to the gibberish of barbarians. There are, as he says (Co1 14:10), many kinds of voices in the world, none of which is without its proper signification. This is true of the several languages spoken by different nations. All of them have their proper signification. Without this they would be phōnai aphōnoi - a voice, and no voice. For that is no language, nor can it answer the end of speaking, which has no meaning. But whatever proper signification the words of any language may have in themselves, and to those who understand them, they are perfect gibberish to men of another language, who understand them not. In this case, speaker and hearers are barbarians to each other (Co1 14:11), they talk and hear only sounds without sense; for this is to be a barbarian. For thus says the polite Ovid, when banished into Pontus,
Read full note →
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor ulli,
I am a barbarian here, none understand me.
To speak in the church in an unknown tongue is to talk gibberish; it is to play the barbarian; it is to confound the audience, instead of instructing them; and for this reason is utterly vain and unprofitable.
II. Having thus established his point, in the two next verses he applies, 1. By advising them to be chiefly desirous of those gifts that were most for the church's edification, Co1 14:12. "Forasmuch as you are zealous of spiritual gifts, this way it will become commendable zeal, be zealous to edify the church, to promote Christian knowledge and practice, and covet those gifts most that will do the best service to men's souls." This is the great rule he gives, which, 2. He applies to the matter in hand, that, if they did speak a foreign language, they should beg of God the gift of interpreting it, Co1 14:13. That these were different gifts, see Co1 12:10. Those might speak and understand a foreign language who could not readily translate it into their own: and yet was this necessary to the church's edification; for the church must understand, that it might be edified, which yet it could not do till the foreign language was translated into its own. Let him therefore pray for the gift of interpreting what he speaks in an unknown tongue; or rather covet and ask of God the gift of interpreting than of speaking in a language that needs interpretation, this being most for the church's benefit, and therefore among the gifts that excel; vide Co1 14:12. Some understand it, "Let him pray so as to interpret what he utters in prayer in a language unintelligible without it." The sum is that they should perform all religious exercises in their assemblies so that all might join in them and profit by them. 3. He enforces this advice with a proper reason, that, if he prayed in an unknown tongue, his spirit might pray, that is, a spiritual gift might be exercised in prayer, or his own mind might be devoutly engaged, but his understanding would be unfruitful (Co1 14:14), that is, the sense and meaning of his words would be unfruitful, he would not be understood, nor therefore would others join with him in his devotions. Note, It should be the concern of such as pray in public to pray intelligibly, not in a foreign language, nor in a language that, if it be not foreign, is above the level of his audience. Language that is most obvious and easy to be understood is the most proper for public devotion and other religious exercises.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv2–12 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue,.... Or…
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue,.... Or with tongues, as some copies and the Ethiopic version read: Dr. Lightfoot thinks, that the Hebrew tongue, which was become a dead language, and understood but by few, is here meant, and that not without reason; seeing the public prayers, preaching, and singing of psalms among the Jews, were in this languages (x); in imitation of whom, such ministers, who had the gift of speaking this language, read the Scriptures, preached, prayed, and sung psalms in it, which were no ways to the edification of the people, who understood it not; upon which account the apostle recommends prophesying, praying, and singing, in a language that was understood: otherwise he
speaketh not unto men; to the understanding, profit, and edification of men: but unto God: to his praise and glory, and he only knowing, who knows all languages, and every word in the tongue what is said; excepting himself, unless there should be any present capable of interpreting:
Read full note →
for no man understandeth him: or "heareth him": that is, hears him, so as to understand him; he may hear a sound, but he cannot tell the meaning of it, and so it is of no use and advantage to him:
howbeit in the Spirit he speaketh mysteries; though under the influence and by the extraordinary gift of the Spirit he has, and to his own Spirit and understanding, and with great affection and devotion within himself, he speaks of the deep things of God, and the mysteries of his grace, the most glorious truths of the Gospel, yet the meaning of his voice and words not being known, he is a barbarian to them that hear him; and though what he delivers are truths of the greatest importance, they are a mere jargon to others, being unintelligible.
(x) Vid. Gloss. in T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 3. 1. & in Yoma, fol. 20. 2.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaks, in…
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaks, in effect, not to men, but to God - Who alone understands him.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv2–12 Verse 2. For he that speaketh in an unknown…
Verse 2. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue] This chapter is crowded with difficulties. It is not likely that the Holy Spirit should, in the church, suddenly inspire a man with the knowledge of some foreign language, which none in the church understood but himself; and lead him to treat the mysteries of Christianity in that language, though none in the place could profit by his teaching.
Dr. Lightfoot's mode of reconciling these difficulties is the most likely I have met with. He supposes that by the unknown tongue the Hebrew is meant, and that God restored the true knowledge of this language when he gave the apostles the gift of tongues. As the Scriptures of the Old Testament were contained in this language, and it has beauties, energies, and depths in it which no verbal translation can reach, it was necessary, for the proper elucidation of the prophecies concerning the Messiah, and the establishment of the Christian religion, that the full meaning of the words of this sacred language should be properly understood. And it is possible that the Hebrew Scriptures were sometimes read in the Christian congregations as they were in the Jewish synagogues; and if the person who read and understood them had not the power and faculty of explaining them to others, in vain did he read and understand them himself. And we know that it is possible for a man to understand a language, the force, phraseology, and idioms of which he is incapable of explaining even in his mother tongue. We shall see, in the course of these notes, how this view of the subject will apply to the illustration of the apostle's words throughout the chapter.
Read full note →
Speaketh not unto men, but unto God] None present understanding the language, God alone knowing the truth and import of what he says:-
In the spirit he speaketh mysteries.] Though his own mind (for so πνευματι is understood here by many eminent critics) apprehends the mysteries contained in the words which he reads or utters; but if, by the spirit, we understand the Spirit of God, it only shows that it is by that Spirit that he is enabled to speak and apprehend these mysteries. See the note on 1Co 14:19.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv5, 6, 7, 10 1Co 14:5. I would that ye all spake with…
1Co 14:5. I would that ye all spake with tongues — In as great a variety as God hath imparted that gift to any man living; but rather that ye prophesied — For when we consider the different effects and tendencies of these different gifts, we must acknowledge that, with respect to the prospects of usefulness by which these things are to be estimated, greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues — Which those who hear him cannot understand; except he interpret — Or rather, except some one interpret; for it appears from 1Co 14:28, that what was spoken in an unknown tongue was usually interpreted by another person, and not by the person who spoke it, the interpretation of tongues being, in the first church, a distinct gift. See on 1Co 12:10. That the church may receive edifying — Which it might, it seems, equally receive if the things spoken had been delivered only in a language understood by the auditory, and not first in an unknown tongue. “How happily does the apostle here teach us to estimate the value of gifts and talents, not by their brilliancy, but usefulness. Speaking with tongues was indeed very serviceable for spreading the gospel abroad; but for those who remained at home, it was much more desirable to be able to discourse well on useful subjects in their own language, which might serve more for the improvement of the society they belonged to, and the conviction of such of their unbelieving neighbours as might, out of curiosity, happen to step into the assemblies.” — Doddridge.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv2–12 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue -…
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue - This verse is designed to show that the faculty of speaking intelligibly, and to the edification of the church, is of more value than the power of speaking a foreign language. The reason is, that however valuable may be the endowment in itself, and however important the truth which he may utter, yet it is as if he spoke to God only. No one could understand him.
Speaketh not unto men - Does not speak so that people can understand him. His address is really not made to people, that is, to the church. He might have this faculty without being able to speak to the edification of the church. It is possible that the power of speaking foreign languages and of prophesying were sometimes united in the same person; but it is evident that the apostle speaks of them as different endowments, and they probably were found usually in different individuals.
Read full note →
But unto God - It is as if he spoke to God. No one could understand him but God. This must evidently refer to the addresses “in the church,” when Christians only were present, or when those only were present who spoke the same language, and who were unacquainted with foreign tongues. Paul says that “there” that faculty would be valueless compared with the power of speaking in a manner that should edify the church. He did not undervalue the power of speaking foreign languages when foreigners were present, or when they went to preach to foreigners; see 1Co 14:22. It was only when it was needless, when all present spoke one language, that he speaks of it as of comparatively little value.
For no man understandeth him - That is, no man in the church, since they all spoke the same language, and that language was different from what was spoken by him who was endowed with the gift of tongues. As God only could know the import of what he said, it would be lost upon the church, and would be useless.
Howbeit in the Spirit - Although, by the aid of the Spirit, he should, in fact, deliver the most important and sublime truths. This would doubtless be the case, that those who were thus endowed would deliver most important truths, but they would be “lost” upon those who heard them, because they could not understand them. The phrase “in the Spirit,” evidently means “by the Holy Spirit,” that is, by his aid and influence. Though he should be “really” under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and though the important truth which he delivers should be imparted by his aid, yet all would be valueless unless it were understood by the church.
He speaketh mysteries - For the meaning of the word “mystery,” see Note, 1Co 2:7. The word here seems to be synonymous with sublime and elevated truth; truth that was not before known, and that might be of the utmost importance.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv2, 5, 6, 12 He that speaketh in a tongue, which others at…
He that speaketh in a tongue, which others at least understand not: nay, which sometimes, perhaps, by the 14th and 15th verse, he himself that spoke tongues, did not understand, can only be said to speak to God. In spirit he speaketh mysteries, edifies himself, because in his spirit he is piously and devoutly affected; but he must endeavour that the Church, or people present, may be also edified. Let him then pray for the other gift of interpreting, what he speaks, or let another interpret. (Witham) --- Not to men. Viz. so as to be heard, that is, so as to be understood by them. (Witham)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv2–12 speaketh . . . unto God--who alone understands all…
speaketh . . . unto God--who alone understands all languages.
no man understandeth--generally speaking; the few who have the gift of interpreting tongues are the exception.
Read full note →
in the spirit--as opposed to "the understanding" (Co1 14:14).
mysteries--unintelligible to the hearers, exciting their wonder, rather than instructing them. Corinth, being a mart resorted to by merchants from Asia, Africa, and Europe, would give scope amidst its mixed population for the exercise of the gift of tongues; but its legitimate use was in an audience understanding the tongue of the speaker, not, as the Corinthians abused it, in mere display.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv2–12 2. Unknown tongue—The word unknown, though interpolated by the…
2. Unknown tongue—The word unknown, though interpolated by the translator, expresses the truth. The “tongues” were unintelligible to the congregation unless interpreted. And herein they were far inferior to the pentecostal tongues, which spoke to every man in his native dialect. Perhaps we may say that the difference was, that the pentecostal Spirit brought all (save the mockers) into full spiritual communication with the speakers, so that they were all charismatic interpreters.
Dr. Poor, in Schaff’s Lange, takes the ground that the Corinthian charismatic language consisted not in speaking foreign languages, but in speaking a speech, “new and clean,” formed by the Spirit himself, inasmuch as the foreign tongues of that day were defiled with paganism. But we reply, by the ordinary view the pentecostal tongues were foreign and pagan. Yet may we not unite his view with our own? Let us suppose that the true new tongue was the Spirit language heard by St. Paul near the third heaven. This language can be received only by those like St. John, (Rev_1:10,) more or less “in the Spirit.” Yet the converse of pure spirits is not through the medium of sound, but is the pure and perfect impartation of the thought itself. When man receives it into his spirit it tends to take the form of language—sometimes of his own native language; sometimes, by diffusive sympathy, of foreign human dialects; sometimes of vocalities belonging to no known language, yet inherently expressive of the thought. In the latter case the man may lack the power of interpreting the thought into ordinary language, and yet the hearer, brought into sympathy, may perform the office of interpreter, as explained in our note on 1Co_14:5.
Read full note →
Unto God—As his only real hearer.
In the Spirit—In his own spirit.
Mysteries—The mysteries of the gospel previously unknown to men.
A modern resemblance to the gift of tongues was that in the church of the celebrated Edward Irving. We give the following passage from a witness of the phenomena, which we take from Stanley, p. 252:— “As an instance of the extraordinary change in the powers of the human voice when under inspiration, I may here mention the case of an individual whose natural voice was inharmonious, and who, besides, had no ear for keeping time. Yet even the voice of this person, when singing in the spirit, could pour forth a rich strain of melody of which each note was musical, and uttered with a sweetness and power of expression that was truly astonishing; and, what is still more singular, with a gradually increasing velocity into a rapidity, yet distinctness, of utterance which is inconceivable by those who have never witnessed the like: and yet, with all his apparently breathless haste, there was not in reality the slightest agitation of body or of mind. In other instances the voice is deep and powerfully impressive. I cannot describe it better than by saying that it approaches nearly to what might be considered a perfect state of the voice, passing far beyond the energies of its natural strength, and at times so loud as not only to fill the whole house, but to be heard at a considerable distance; and though often accompanied by an apparently great mental energy and muscular exertion of the whole body, yet in truth there was not the slightest disturbance of either; on the contrary, there was present a tranquillity and composure both of body and of mind the very opposite to any, even the least degree of, excitement.
“The consciousness of the presence of God in these manifestations is fraught with such a holy solemnity of thought and feeling as leave neither leisure nor inclination for curious observation. In a person alive to the presence of the Holy Ghost, and overwhelmed by his manifestations beside and around him, and deeply conscious that upon his heart, naked and exposed, rests the eye of God, one thought alone fills his soul, one wail of utterance is heard, ‘God be merciful to me a sinner.’ Nor can the eye be diverted from the only sight that is precious to it, far more precious than life itself, ‘The Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world.’”
The following is from a subject of the influence:
“I read the fourth chapter of Malachi; as I read the power came upon me, and I was made to read with power. My voice was raised far beyond its natural pitch with a constrained repetition of parts, and with the same inward uplifting, which at the presence of the power I had always experienced. Whilst sitting at home it came upon me, but for a considerable time no impulse to utterance; presently a sentence in French was vividly set before my mind, and under the impulse to utterance was spoken. Then, in a little time, sentences in Latin were in a like manner uttered; and, with short intervals, sentences in many other languages. Judging from the sound and the different exercise of the enunciating organs, my wife, who was with me, thought some of them to be Italian or Spanish; the first she can read and translate, the second she knows but little of. Sometimes single words were given me, and sometimes sentences, though I could neither recognise the words nor sentences as any language I knew, except those which were French or Latin.… My persuasion concerning the unknown tongue, as it is called, (in which I myself was very little exercised,) is, that it is no language whatever, but a mere collection of words and sentences; and in the lengthened discourses is, most of it, a jargon of sounds; though I can conceive, when the power is very great, that it will assume much of the form of a connected oration.”—P. 254.
Dr. Bushnell has, in his “Natural and Supernatural,” a suggestive chapter on gifts. He relates that in New England, at a place designated as H., at a religious meeting, “After one of the brethren had been speaking in a strain of discouraging self-accusation, another present shortly rose with a strange, beaming look, and, fixing his eye on the confessing brother, broke out in a discourse of sounds wholly unintelligible though apparently a true language, accompanying the utterances with strange and peculiarly impressive gestures, such as he never made at any other time; coming finally to a kind of pause, and commencing again as if at the same point, to go over in English, with exactly the same gestures, what had just been said. It appeared to be an interpretation, and the matter of it was a beautifully emphatic utterance of the great principle of self-renunciation, by which the desired victory over self is to be obtained. The circle were astounded by the demonstration, not knowing what to make of it. The instinct of prudence threw them in an observing, a general, silence; and it is a curious fact that the public in H. have never to this hour been startled by so much as a rumour of a gift of tongues, neither has the name of the speaker been associated with so much as a surmise of the real or supposed fact, by which he would be, perhaps, unenviably distinguished. It has been to him a great trial, it is said, to submit himself to this demonstration, which has recurred several times.”—P. 479.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 2. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue]…
2. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue] The word unknown is not in the original. The word translated tongue signifies a human language in ch. 1Co_13:1. Cf. Rev_13:7; Rev_14:6; Rev_17:15.
speaketh not unto men, but unto God] Because the language is not the language of those to whom he is speaking, and therefore what he says is hidden from them. For mysteries, see ch. 1Co_4:1.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv2–12 (2) For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue.—Better,…
(2) For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue.—Better, For he that speaketh in a tongue. The word “unknown” is not in the original, but it has been inserted in connection with the word tongue “all through this chapter, so as to make the various passages seem to be consistent with the theory that the gift of tongues was a gift of languages. This is not the place to enter into the question of what particular external manifestation of this gift was evidenced on the Day of Pentecost. (See Act_2:1-13.) Still, believing that the gift of tongues here spoken of is identical with the gift of tongues which was first bestowed at Pentecost, I would say that the phenomena described as occurring then must be explained by the fuller and more elaborate account of the nature of the gift which is given to us here. Against the theory that the gift was one of a capacity to speak various languages we have three considerations. (1) The word dialectos, which is repeatedly used to express languages (Act_1:19; Act_2:6; Act_2:8; Act_21:40; Act_22:2; Act_26:14), is never used by St. Paul or by the author of the Acts in reference to the utterances of those who possessed the gift of tongues, but the other word, glossa, which is, literally, the physical organ of speech—as if the utterances were simply sounds that proceeded from it. (2) There is no trace whatever of this knowledge of languages having been ever used for the purpose of preaching to those who spoke foreign languages. The language of the Lycaonians was evidently not understood by the Apostles when they were addressed in it (see Act_14:11), and they did not speak in it. That the hearers at Pentecost said they heard those who were filled with the Spirit “speak in our own language” would only imply, either that the outpouring on Pentecost had for the moment a miraculous effect, which immediately ceased, or that “all the various elements of Aramaic and Hellenistic speech, latent in the usual language of the time, were quickened, under the power of this gift, into a new life, sometimes intelligible, sometimes unintelligible to those who heard it, but always expressive of the vitality and energy of the Spirit by which it was animated.” (3) The description of the gift in this chapter is utterly inconsistent with it being a gift of languages. The gift was the result of a quickened spiritual power by the action of the Holy Ghost (see also Act_2:4; Act_10:44-46; Act_19:6); it poured itself forth in wild, impassioned utterances, which were sometimes mistaken for delirium (1Co_14:23); and these were the expressions, not of thoughts, but of feelings, unintelligible always, if uninterpreted, to the listener, and sometimes to the utterer himself.
It is to be observed that very notable spiritual phenomena, not unlike what are recorded here, accompanied many periods of great spiritual revival. The histories of the early work of Wesley and Whitfield, and of Irving—to take examples in England alone—afford some very remarkable illustrations. The general subject of the first part of this chapter (1Co_14:1-25) is the Gift of Tongues, and is thus dealt with:—
Read full note →
I. PROPHECY IS SUPERIOR TO THE GIFT OF TONGUES (1Co_14:2-11)
Because (1) Tongues are the means of communion between the individual and God, whereas prophecy is communion with other men (1Co_14:2-3).
(2) Tongues do yourself good; prophecy does good to others (1Co_14:4-6).
This truth is illustrated (a) by the variety of musical instruments (1Co_14:7); (b) by the distinction of musical notes (1Co_14:8-9); (c) by the varieties of human language (1Co_14:10-11).
II. PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF THE FOREGOING (1Co_14:11-19).
(1) What the aim and object of the Christians should be (1Co_14:12-13).
(2) His own example (1Co_14:14-19).
III. FURTHER APPEAL TO THEIR INTELLIGENCE AS TO THIS TRUTH (1Co_14:21-25).
(1) The Old Testament teaches the same principle (1Co_14:21-22).
(2) The gift of prophecy is a means of spreading Christianity, and the gift of tongues is not (1Co_14:23-25).
In the spirit he speaketh mysteries.—The utterances come, not from his mind, but from his spirit, stirred by the Holy Spirit; and he speaks mysteries unintelligible to others.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv2–12 In an unknown tongue. The interpolation of the word…
In an unknown tongue. The interpolation of the word "unknown" in our Authorized Version is quite unjustifiable, and shows the danger of giving way to the bias of mere conjectures. Probably it is this word, not found in the original, which has given rise to the perplexing, unhistoric, and unwarranted theory that "the gift of tongues" was a power of speaking in foreign languages. Speaketh not unto men. Because, as a rule, no one understands anything that he says. The word literally means "hears." It may, perhaps, imply that no special attention was given to those who gave way to these impulses of utterance. The whole of this chapter proves in a most striking way the close analogy between "the tongue" and the impassioned soliloquies of inarticulate utterance which were poured forth in tones of thrilling power among the Montanists, and in modern times among the Irvingites. In the spirit. It is uncertain whether this means "in his own spirit," or "in the Spirit of God," i.e. as a result of inspiration. Probably the former (Joh_4:24; Rom_8:13, etc.) Perhaps, however, the two imply the same thing. The spirit is the one Divine part of our human being, and when a man is a true Christian his spirit is in union with, is as it were lost in, the Spirit of God. St. Paul recognizes the true tongue for it might be simulated by hysteria and even by mere physical imposture as a result of inspiration, that is, of the overpowering dominance of the human spirit by a supernatural power. Nevertheless, he points out the extreme peril of yielding to or self inducing these emotions public, or in leaving them uncontrolled. Mysteries. Secrets revealed possibly to him, but unrevealed by this strange "tongue" to others.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv8, 10, 12 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who…
1Co_14:8-9
For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle.
Read full note →
Uncertain sounds
There are many sounds in nature which are uncertain and yet pleasing. The murmur of the winds among the leaves of the forests; the soft, regular lapse of the waves on the sandy shore; the roar of Niagara, confused with the cry of blended and intertangled voices, as though every particle of water in falling uttered its own wail of grief or shout of exultation or scream of fear; the hum of insects on a summers day; all such sounds are uncertain. Yet all awaken in us some feeling, convey some sentiment. The murmuring voices of nature seem to express longing and aspiration; they sound almost like prayer and praise. These voices of nature, therefore, though uncertain, are often full of expression. But of mans voice we require more. We ask that it shall be distinct and clear; that it shall convey meaning; that it shall not darken counsel with vague utterance. To speak plainly, distinctly, with precision, is one of the first accomplishments to be studied, and one of the last to be fully attained. Education begins and ends in telling us how to express ourselves; for the word, in ancient languages, means not only utterance, but also the reason which lies behind utterance. My friend gives himself to me in his speech. If his speech is obscure, perplexed, uncertain, vague, then he is not in it. But a fulness of thought and life makes language very clear. That is why we like simple, direct, straightforward talk. It is sincere, it is moral. Let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay, says Jesus; for whatsoever is more than this cometh of evil. Uncertain sounds, inexact expressions, extravagant utterances, come of evil. They mean that the speaker cares more for effect than for truth. Perhaps the most uncertain sounds of all are the words of a politician. Politics, the government of a state, the laws which affect a nation, ought to be the most elevating of pursuits. But it is like religion or art or poetry. They ennoble those who give themselves to them with sincerity and love; but make a trade of them, and they degrade to the utmost. Make a trade of religion, and you become a hypocrite. Make a trade of art, and you become a charlatan. One of the remarkable exploits of Abraham Lincoln was that he expressed himself so as to be understood. His healthy Saxon English dispelled the miasma of falsehood which hung over Washington. And one of Plutarchs men talked with you, face to face. A clear, distinct meaning is so important in a speaker that it is of itself almost enough. An audience will listen very willingly to a man who makes himself perfectly plain, even if he does nothing else. He need not be rhetorical, he need use no figures of speech, no captivating oratorical arts; he need not be original or profound. Let him only be clear--that of itself is satisfactory. In religion, especially, we want no uncertain sounds. What all men need, what all men long for, is certainty. We need to know; not merely to speculate, not merely to think, to hope, to wish, to fancy; we need to know. Now the difference between Christianity and speculation is simply this--that speculation, by its very nature, gives an uncertain sound; but Christianity gives certainty. Speculation gives us thoughts about God, Christianity gives us the knowledge of God. I once read a lecture by an able writer, in which Christ and Socrates were compared, rather to the disadvantage of the former. Socrates was considered to be, on the whole, rather the stronger and more manly person of the two. But, if so, why did he not do more? Socrates produced a school in philosophy; Christ makes a religion for mankind. One gave thought, the other life. The life of Socrates is known to a few scholars, the life of Jesus is known to millions. The words of Jesus bring strength, comfort, purity, peace; not to students only, but to the ignorant, the lowly, the fallen, the desolate. Why this immense difference in the work of the two teachers? Because the words of the one give an uncertain sound, those of the other a certain sound. One teaches us how to speculate, to conjecture, and to think about the realities of eternity; the other lets us look into the realities themselves, face to face. Striking opinions, noble speculations, came by Socrates, but truth itself came by Jesus Christ. The power--the undying power--of Christianity is that it is everywhere a new revelation of the eternal truth and love of God; that it continually makes souls alive; that it continually renews itself in renewed souls. Therefore it can never grow old, any more than birth, marriage, death, love, can grow old. These have been in the world since the beginning, but they always come as new as at first. And Christianity, appealing ever to new hearts, reforming manners, curing sinners, saving the lost, kindling the soul with faith, hope, and love, is the one certain sound in the world, never vague, never confused. Theology is uncertain; speculation is uncertain; creeds are uncertain; but Christianity is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever. (Jas Freeman Clarke.)
The ministerial trumpet giving an uncertain sound
I. The battle. In every battle you must suppose two parties. Ever since the fall there always have been two parties. In the first family Cain was on the one side and Abel on the other. And so it was after the flood--it was so in the patriarchial ages, the Mosaical dispensation, and when Christ appeared on the earth, and up to this very moment. Sometimes efforts are made to multiply these divisions--the righteous on the one hand, and the wicked on the other, with different gradations. But the lip of truth says, He that is not with Me is against Me. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. There are but two parties--the people of God and the people against God and with the devil. The two armies are in combat. What constitutes the sorest point is this--they have separate interests, feelings, hopes, ambitions. The grand interest of the people of God is the glory of their Redeemer in the salvation of their souls; the other party are for their own glory. One man belongs to the party because he loves pleasure, another man because he loves power and influence, another because he loves money, another because he is the slave of some lust. But, however these regiments have a little distinction in their facings, they have but one heart, one spirit, one interest!
2. Some people say, There is no need of a battle. Cannot the irreligious and the people of God go on comfortably and happy, and let each other alone? No; the people of God must beseech all those who are not His people to be reconciled to God. The great commander on one side is Christ, and on the other the devil; but let the hordes of Satan do their best, Christ must conquer.
II. The meaning of the sentence, if the trumpet give an uncertain sound. There can be no doubt that the trumpet means the gospel ministry. The gospel minister is to warn men lest they peril and eventually ruin their souls, and to press them to secure the eternal happiness which is offered them, drawing the telling conclusion, What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul? But the blessed trumpet is not only a trumpet of warning, but is a trumpet of welcome to Calvarys cross, to the fountain for sin and all uncleanness. The trumpet gives an uncertain sound, therefore, if it does not state--
1. Mans entire inability.
2. Completely and fully the work of Christ.
3. The holiness of the gospel.
4. If firings of confessedly minor importance, Church government, discipline, etc., have an undue importance. (H. Allon, D. D.)
The worthlessness of mere sounds, apart from their meaning
The apostle speaks of the lute, the harp, the trumpet. Concerning this last instrument it was most of all important that the meaning of its tones should be understood. For now, just as the trumpet had its special function in pealing forth distinct, definite sounds, so all things in the economy of nature, of human life, and of Christian life, have their precise and exact function, on the right discharge of which vast results--results often comparable to those of a gigantic war--are depending.
I. The principle here indicated. It is not far to seek--
1. In what we may term our a priori argument, concerning a Divinely ordered universe. Since all events are related to each other in the mighty chain of cause and effect, we should expect that the failure of any link would involve disastrous results. There are many voices in nature--every law is a voice--and none of them is without signification. Uncertainty in the sound of any of them would be scarcely less evil than silence. So, too, with every atom and every event, as well as every law.
2. In the history of human affairs. On every hand, in our march along the great highways of time, or our research in its quieter by-ways, we confront instances of the momentousness of a right fulfilment by the man, or the institution, or the nation, of the precise mission devolving on such man, or institution, or nation. An uncertain sound at some given epoch, and the course of all succeeding history, would have been changed.
II. Some practical applications of this principle. It is true in regard--
1. To the discharge of Christian activities. There are multiform methods of philanthropic activity; never so many as to-day. Each one of us has his special adaptation for the use of such methods, just as each method has its peculiar adaptation to some need. If those who are qualified to teach, do not instruct; to console, do not comfort; to contrive, do not organise, who shall? Some tone on the trumpet of truth depends on you. If you refrain, or hesitate, or yield uncertain sounds, who shall prepare for the day of battle?
2. To Christian giving. The gold, the silver, the copper has to be given, each metal, as it were, making its own music. Withhold just what, by claim and capacity, you ought to have given, and there is an uncertain sound, and that uncertain sound means beggary here, discouragement yonder, and hopeless inanition elsewhere. Nay, the very spirit of the giving may make all the difference, for is not the sounding brass and tinkling cymbal--which is gift without love--an uncertain sound?
3. To prayers. Who can tell the mischief of uncertain sounds here in a region where Moses and Elijah were so mighty?
4. Of every life. Each life is trumpet-tongued with the message of truth or error, good or ill. Silence is impossible. Uncertainty is failure, for it misleads and bewilders. Minister, parent, teacher, if your life gives an uncertain sound who shall prepare your people, your family, your class for battle?--the battle for which music prepares, and which will be succeeded by yet nobler and sweeter music. As Bishop Webb says, You are yourself; none of you are like your fellows. And you are what you are by Gods arrangement, because you have a certain part to play in Gods providence, in the history of the world, and the development of the body of Christ. God the Holy Ghost is brooding over you as the great musician. He can bring out the music that is wanted. He can enable you to furnish some strain that would be lacking in the ears of God if you did not bring it, if you did not strike your string, nor touch your key. (U. R. Thomas.)
The responsibility of the pulpit
I. Its power.
1. To warn.
2. Arouse.
3. Direct.
4. Encourage.
II. Its inefficiency. No certain sound through want of--
1. Plainness.
2. Clearness.
3. Point.
4. Spiritual power.
III. Diastrous result.
1. None prepares.
2. Destruction comes.
3. The unfaithful watchman must bear the responsibility. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to he understood, how shall it be known what is spokes?--
Plain preaching
I. What it implies.
1. Not vulgarity.
2. But a plain statement of the truth in easy words.
II. Its necessity.
1. Many are very ignorant.
2. Some will not take the trouble to understand what costs them effort.
3. All are more accessible to plain truth.
4. God will have all the glory.
III. Its importance.
1. Souls imperilled.
2. The preacher incurs a tremendous responsibility. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Need of plain preaching
A lady went one day to hear Dr.
preach, and, as usual, carried a pocket Bible with her that she might turn to any of the passages the preacher might happen to refer to. But she found that she had no use for the Bible then, and on coming away said to a friend, I should have left my Bible at home to-day, and have brought my dictionary; the doctor does not deal in Scripture, but in such learned words and phrases as require the help of an interpreter to render them intelligible. (J. C. Gray.)
Simplicity in preaching
Whenever Archbishop Whately came to preach at the chapel of the castle it was observed that a rough private soldier was always in his place, mouth open, as if in sympathy with his ears. Some of the gentlemen playfully took him to task for it, supposing it was due to the usual vulgar admiration of a celebrity. But the man had a better reason, and was aide to give it. He said, That isnt it at all. The archbishop is easy to understand; there are no fine words in him. A fellow like me, now, can follow along and take every bit of it in. (Sir Arthur Helps.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
B. W. Johnson 1891 · Public Domain On vv2–12 2. For he that speaketh in a tongue. Hath…
2. For he that speaketh in a tongue. Hath the gift of tongues. The tenor of Paul's remarks shows that the Corinthians placed too high a comparative estimate on this gift. Speaketh mysteries. Things that are unknown and mysterious to his hearers. Men do not understand him.
B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.
William B. Godbey 1900 · Public Domain On vv3, 5, 12 3. “He that prophesieth speaketh to men edification, exhortation…
3. “He that prophesieth speaketh to men edification, exhortation and comfort.” Never forget this broad and comprehensive inspired definition of prophesying; you see it simply means talking for Jesus, whether to one or a thousand, telling them the way of salvation as revealed in the Bible, exhorting them to flee the wrath to come and make sure of Heaven, and comforting the brokenhearted with God’s precious and infallible promises.
William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. W. McGarvey 1914 · Public Domain On vv2–12 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not…
For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries .
J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v2 an unknown
an unknown
Or, a tongue; and so in 1Co 14:4; 1Co 14:13-14; 1Co 14:19; 1Co 14:27.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v7 Public utterance is valueless without clear understanding:
Public utterance is valueless without clear understanding:
v. 7. And even things without life, giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
Read full note →
v. 8. For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
v. 9. So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? For ye shall speak into the air.
v. 10. There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
v. 11. Therefore, if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
v. 12. Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.
v. 13. Wherefore, let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
The apostle here draws an inference from the lesser to the greater: Likewise lifeless things, though they give forth sound, such as the flute or the harp, yet unless there is a distinction in their tones or sounds, how will that which is being piped or harped be distinguished? The apostle is here referring either to the quality of the sounds or to the intervals or to the distinction of pitch, whatever distinguishes the music of various instruments. If players permit the notes to run together in absolute confusion, with an utter disregard of the laws of harmony and of the limitations of the several instruments, how can the listener make out the air? Instead of a melody, he will hear nothing but confused noises. And likewise, if the trumpet that gives the signals in war or in battle gives forth an uncertain voice, the soldiers will not be able to distinguish whether they are to advance or to retreat or to execute some other movement: a disastrous situation.
The application of the two figures of comparison is easy: Likewise also unless you with the tongue, in making use of the gift of tongues, give forth a distinct speech, words whose meaning is clear to the hearers, how will that which is spoken be distinguished, understood, by the hearers? For you will be such as speak into the air. All the fine speaking in the church assemblies, whether it is done in strange languages or in that which the people themselves have asked for, is without value and worse than useless, if its content is not clear to the congregation, if the hearers do not get the speaker’s finely articulated words and well-modulated sentences. Note: There is far too much preaching in our days which embodies all the excellencies of the text-books as to outline, diction, paragraphing, etc. , but lacks that one most important point: edifying clearness. The motto of our days seems to be: Wash me, but do not make me wet; that is, either: Smooth down the rugged text to ears polite, and snugly keep damnation out of sight, or: Keep out the love of God with all your might, and snugly shut salvation out of sight.
For the sake of making the situation plain, Paul adds the example of the multitude of human languages and dialects: Ever so many kinds of voices are, as it happens, in the world, and none of them voiceless. In all the great number of languages throughout the world, wherever people use their voice as a medium of communication, there is not one that has not the fundamental requirement of a language: It has a meaning for somebody; it may be understood by such as are familiar with it. It follows, then, that if I do not know the meaning of the voice, if I do not comprehend its significance, I shall be to him that speaks a barbarian, and he that speaks a barbarian in relation to me. The word barbarian was applied by the Greeks and Romans to all people that did not speak their tongue. A strange language will be to me a confused jargon of sounds, and I cannot comprehend its meaning; there can be no understanding. Thus all uninterpreted tongues in the public service of the congregation are useless, and the very fact that the foreign tongue may convey a precious meaning may be all the more provoking.
The apostle now makes the application to the situation in Corinth: Likewise yourselves, so also in your case; since you are eager for spiritual gifts, for the edification of the congregation make all efforts that you may excel in them. That is the proper zeal in seeking spiritual gifts, not to covet them for one’s own gratification and self-glorification, but to have in mind always the real object of all spiritual gifts, the edification of the congregation, the service of the Church. Therefore let him that speaks with a tongue pray that he may interpret. Outward impression and prestige count for nothing in the Church, and may even work great harm. If the speaker with tongues could therefore afterwards recall some of the things which he uttered while his mouth was the instrument of the Holy Spirit and could translate the sayings into ordinary rational speech, that would be worthwhile, that would make his gift of value to the congregation. And therefore he should earnestly covet, by means of prayer, this interpretation of his own utterances.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv5, 7, 10, 12 The one who prophesies is greater
The one who prophesies is greater
Paul is emphasizing that the gift of prophecy is greater than the gift of speaking in tongues. AT: "The one who prophesies has a greater gift" (See: Synecdoche)
Read full note →
interprets
This means to tell what someone has said in a language to others who do not understand that language. See how this is translated in 1 Corinthians 2:13.
how will I benefit you?
This can be a statement. AT: "I will not benefit you." or "I will not have done anything that helps you." (See: Rhetorical Question)
translationWords
tongue
prophet
church
reveal
know
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv2, 4, 7, 12 14:2-4 The problem with the gift of speaking in…
14:2-4 The problem with the gift of speaking in tongues is that hearers cannot readily understand the message; the gift of prophecy, however, is immediately intelligible and beneficial as a word from God that strengthens . . . encourages . . . and comforts those who hear.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.