Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 14:21
In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
21. In the law it is written ] The law here stands for the whole Old Testament, as we might naturally expect from St Paul’s habit of regarding the whole of the Mosaic dispensation as a progressive order of things having its completion in Christ. See Rom 3:19; Gal 3:23-24; Gal 4:5; Heb 9:8; Heb 9:10. St John uses the word in the same manner; Joh 10:34, Joh 12:34 , 1Co 15:25. The passage is from Isa 28:11-12.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
In the law it is written – This passage is found in Isa 38:11-12. The word law here seems to mean the same as revelation; or is used to denote the Old Testament in general. A similar use occurs in Joh 10:34, and Joh 15:25.
With men of other tongues … – This passage, where it occurs in Isaiah, means, that God would teach the rebellious and refractory Jews submission to himself, by punishing them amidst a people of another language, by removing them to a land – the land of Chaldea – where they would hear only a language that to them would be unintelligible and barbarous. Yet, notwithstanding this discipline, they would be still, to some extent, a rebellious people. The passage in Isaiah has no reference to the miraculous gift of tongues. and cannot have been used by the apostle as containing any intimation that such miraculous gifts would be imparted. It seems to have been used by Paul, because the words which occurred in Isaiah would appropriately express the idea which he wished to convey (see the note at Mat 1:23), that God would make use of foreign languages for some valuable purpose. But he by no means intimates that Isaiah had any such reference; nor does he quote this as a fulfillment of the prophecy; nor does he mean to say, that God would accomplish the same purpose by the use of foreign languages, which was contemplated in the passage in Isaiah. The sense is, as God accomplished an important purpose by the use of a foreign language in regard to his ancient people, as recorded in Isaiah, so he will make use of foreign languages to accomplish important purposes still. They shall be used in the Christian church to effect important objects, though not in the same manner, nor for the same end, as in the time of the captivity. What the design of making use of foreign languages was, in the Christian church, the apostle immediately states; 1Co 14:22-23.
Yet for all that … – Notwithstanding all this chastisement that shall be inflicted on the Jews in a distant land, and among a people of a different language, they will still be a rebellious people. This is the sense of the passage, as it is used by Isaiah; see Isa 28:12. It is not quoted literally by the apostle, but the main idea is retained. He does not appear to design to apply this to the Corinthians, unless it may be to intimate that the power of speaking foreign languages did not of necessity secure obedience. It might he that this power might be possessed, and yet they be a sinful people; just as the Jews were admonished by the judgments of God, inflicted by means of a people speaking a foreign language, and yet were not reformed or made holy.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
1Co 14:21-23
In the law it is written, With men of other tongues will I speak; and yet will they not hear Me.
The use of tongues
Examine–
I. The quotation.
1. Its original force (Isa 28:11-12).
2. The apostles use of it indicates generally that the use of tongues was a disadvantage and not a blessing to the hearer.
II. The inference.
1. Tongues a sign–not for the believer who did not require it, but for the unbeliever, as a proof of Divine power.
2. Prophesying, on the contrary, could not benefit the unbeliever, who resisted the truth, but the believer by promoting his edification. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Gods dealings with a rebellious people
Observe–
I. How God speaks to them.
1. By strange instrumentalities.
2. With a strange tongue.
II. How they persist in their impenitence.
1. They harden their hearts.
2. Refuse to listen.
3. Aggravate their guilt and punishment. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe but prophesying serveth For them which believe.
Different modes of dealing with men
Here are–
I. Different conditions of human mind.
1. Unbelief.
2. Faith.
II. Different requirements.
1. In the one case conviction.
2. In the other edification.
III. Different modes of dealing.
1. In the former there must be a sign of Divine power.
2. In the latter the proclamation of Divine truth. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
If therefore all speak with tongues will they not say that ye are mad?–
Confusion in the Church
I. How it may arise,
1. Instance the case supposed.
2. Some errors of modern times.
II. Why it should be avoided.
1. It produces a false impression.
2. Brings reproach.
3. Prevents good. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 21. In the law it is written] But the passage quoted is in Isa 28:11. Here is no contradiction, for the term torah, LAW, was frequently used by the Jews to express the whole Scriptures, law, prophets, and hagiographia; and they used it to distinguish these sacred writings from the words of the scribes.
With men of other tongues] Bishop Pearce paraphrases this verse as follows: “With the tongues of foreigners and with the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people; and yet, for all that, will they not hear me, saith the Lord.” To enter into the apostle’s meaning we must enter into that of the prophet. The Jewish people were under the teaching of the prophets who were sent from God; these instructed, reproved, and corrected them by this Divine authority. They however became so refractory and disobedient that God purposed to cast them off, and abandon them to the Babylonians: then, they had a people to teach, correct, and reprove them, whose language they did not understand. The discipline that they received in this way was widely different from that which they received while under the teaching of the prophets and the government of God; and yet for all this they did not humble themselves before their Maker that this affliction might be removed from them.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In the law it is written: by the law here is meant the Old Testament, (as in many other texts, Joh 10:34; 15:25), so called (as some think) in opposition to the words of the scribes. The words following are quoted out of Isa 28:11,12; For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. To whom he said: This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. But there is nothing more ordinary, than for the penmen of the Scriptures of the New Testament to quote passages out of the Old, keeping not so much to the words as to the sense; nor quoting them all, but so many of them as serve for their purposes. The words in the prophet are a threatening, that because God had brought the Jews into Canaan, and promised them rest there, upon their obedience to his commandments, and they would not hear, he would now take another course with them, speaking to them with men of stammering lips, and of another language; meaning the Chaldeans and Babylonians, with whom in captivity they conversed afterwards for seventy years. The sense is much the same (as some think); for they that speak to others in and with strange tongues, are like those that stammer at others, which looks more like a mocking them than an instructing them. Others make the gift of tongues, under the New Testament, to be within the prophecy of Isaiah; as if the prophets words contained both a threatening, to speak to the Israelites with the strange tongues of the Chaldeans; and a promise under the gospel, to speak to them with the tongues of the apostles and others, tuned to various tunes, as men of several nations could understand. Others make this the sense, as if the prophet complained, that the people were so mad, that they regarded no more God speaking to them, than they would have regarded one chattering with a strange tongue. And they think, the apostle checks them for being so ambitious of speaking with strange tongues, whenas their being so spoken to was by the prophet threatened as a judgment upon them.
And yet they will not hear me, nor hearken to and obey me.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
21. In the lawas the wholeOld Testament is called, being all of it the law of God. Compare thecitation of the Psalms as the “law,” Joh10:34. Here the quotation is from Isa 28:11;Isa 28:12, where God virtuallysays of Israel, This people hear Me not, though I speak to. them inthe language with which they are familiar; I will therefore speak tothem in other tongues, namely, those of the foes whom I will sendagainst them; but even then they will not hearken to Me; which Paulthus applies, Ye see that it is a penalty to be associated with menof a strange tongue, yet ye impose this on the Church [GROTIUS];they who speak in foreign tongues are like “children” just”weaned from the milk” (Isa28:9), “with stammering lips” speaking unintelligiblyto the hearers, appearing ridiculous (Isa28:14), or as babbling drunkards (Ac2:13), or madmen (1Co 14:23).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
<Ver. 21. In the law it is written,…. In Isa 28:11 for the word law is not be confined to the five books of Moses, but includes all the writings of the Old Testament; and this entirely agrees with the sense of the Jews. Says R. Azarias q
“is it not to be found with our wise men, of blessed memory, in many places, that the word , “law”, comprehends the prophets, and the holy writings?”
And he gives an instance out of the Talmud, and which indeed is very pertinent to the purpose, and is rightly produced, and will support the apostle in calling the prophecy of Isaiah the law, since it is so called in the following passage r. R. Chijah bar Aba says, that
“R. Jochanan said, from whence is the resurrection of the dead to be proved, , “out of the law?” from what is said in Isa 52:8 “thy watchmen shall lift up the voice, with the voice together shall they sing”. It is not said “they sing”, but “they shall sing”: from hence the resurrection of the dead is to be proved out of the law.”
And out of the same book the apostle cites the following words;
with [men of] other tongues, and other lips, will I speak unto this people, and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord: the words, “men of”, are a supplement of our translators, and which does not seem very necessary: nor is any made in other versions. The words, as they are in our translation of the prophet, are read thus, “with stammering lips, and another tongue, will he speak to this people”. Some difference there is between the two passages, which are of no great moment; the words “lips” and “tongue” are inverted by the apostle; nor was it at all material to observe the strict order of them in the citation: and he has also rendered “stammering lips” by “other tongues”, and that very rightly; for the word , used by Isaiah, does not signify stammering, but derision or mocking; so persons that are spoken to in a language they understand not, look upon themselves to be mocked and derided: and the apostle is to be justified by the Chaldee paraphrase, which renders the words, , “with change of speech”: that is, with another and different language. Moreover, it is to be observed, that the prophet delivers the passage in the third person, and the apostle cites it in the first: the reason of this is, because he adds these words to it, “saith the Lord”: partly for the sake of the authority of the words, and partly to engage the attention of the Corinthians to them; and certain it is, that Isaiah’s meaning is, that the Lord would speak in such a manner to the Jews: the other phrase, “for all that will they not hear me”, are taken out of Isa 28:12. Some think that this prophecy refers to God’s speaking, by the apostles on the day of Pentecost, with divers tongues, to the Jews; when, though there were three thousand converted at that time, yet these were but comparatively few; the body of the people remained incredulous, and hearkened not to the apostles, though their ministry was attended with such signs and wonders: but rather the sense seems to be this, that whereas the Lord had spoken in the plainest manner to the people of the Jews, by the prophets, as he would afterwards by the apostles, and had repeated his words so often, that even a child might be thought to be capable of receiving them; yet such was their stupidity and obstinacy, that they slighted and disregarded them; wherefore he threatens them he would take another method with them, and speak to them in his providences, by people of different and strange languages, as by the Chaldeans, Medes, and Persians, in the seventy years’ captivity, and by the Romans, and other nations since, among whom they now are; and yet all this has had no effect upon them to listen to the doctrine of the prophets and apostles. Hence the Corinthians had no reason to be so desirous of speaking with divers tongues, since these have been threatened and used by God in a way of punishment to a people, and not a blessing.
q Meor. Enayim, c. 7. fol. 47. I. r T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 91. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| On Spiritual Gifts. | A. D. 57. |
21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. 23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: 25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
In this passage the apostle pursues the argument, and reasons from other topics; as,
I. Tongues, as the Corinthians used them, were rather a token of judgment from God than mercy to any people (v. 21): In the law (that is, the Old Testament) it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak to this people; and yet for all this they will not hear me, saith the Lord, Isa. xxviii. 11. Compare Deu 28:46; Deu 28:49. To both these passages, it is thought, the apostle refers. Both are delivered by way of threatening, and one is supposed to interpret the other. The meaning in this view is that it is an evidence that a people are abandoned of God when he gives them up to this sort of instruction, to the discipline of those who speak in another language. And surely the apostle’s discourse implies, “You should not be fond of the tokens of divine displeasure. God can have no gracious regards to those who are left merely to this sort of instruction, and taught in language which they cannot understand. They can never be benefited by such teaching as this; and, when they are left to it, it is a sad sign that God gives them over as past cure.” And should Christians covet to be in such a state, or to bring the churches into it? Yet thus did the Corinthian preachers in effect, who would always deliver their inspirations in an unknown tongue.
II. Tongues were rather a sign to unbelievers than to believers, v. 22. They were a spiritual gift, intended for the conviction and conversion of infidels, that they might be brought into the Christian church; but converts were to be built up in Christianity by profitable instructions in their own language. The gift of tongues was necessary to spread Christianity, and gather churches; it was proper and intended to convince unbelievers of that doctrine which Christians had already embraced; but prophesying, and interpreting scripture in their own language, were most for the edification of such as did already believe: so that speaking with tongues in Christians assemblies was altogether out of time and place; neither one nor the other was proper for it. Note, That gifts may be rightly used, it is proper to know the ends which they are intended to serve. To go about the conversion of infidels, as the apostles did, had been a vain undertaking without the gift of tongues, and the discovery of this gift; but, in an assembly of Christians already converted to the Christian faith, to make use and ostentation of this gift would be perfectly impertinent, because it would be of no advantage to the assembly; not for conviction of truth, because they had already embraced it; not for their edification, because they did not understand, and could not get benefit without understanding, what they heard.
III. The credit and reputation of their assemblies among unbelievers required them to prefer prophesying before speaking with tongues. For, 1. If, when they were all assembled for Christian worship, their ministers, or all employed in public worship, should talk unintelligible language, and infidels should drop in, they would conclude them to be mad, to be no better than a parcel of wild fanatics. Who in their right senses could carry on religious worship in such a manner? Or what sort of religion is that which leaves out sense and understanding? Would not this make Christianity ridiculous to a heathen, to hear the ministers of it pray, or preach, or perform any other religious exercise, in a language that neither he nor the assembly understood? Note, The Christian religion is a sober and reasonable thing in itself, and should not, by the ministers of it, be made to look wild or senseless. Those disgrace their religion, and vilify their own character, who do any thing that has this aspect. But, on the other hand, 2. If, instead of speaking with tongues, those who minister plainly interpret scripture, or preach, in language intelligible and proper, the great truths and rules of the gospel, a heathen or unlearned person, coming in, will probably be convinced, and become a convert to Christianity (1Co 14:24; 1Co 14:25); his conscience will be touched, the secrets of his heart will be revealed to him, he will be condemned by the truth he hears, and so will be brought to confess his guilt, to pay his homage to God, and own that he is indeed among you, present in the assembly. Note, Scripture–truth, plainly and duly taught, has a marvellous aptness to awaken the conscience, and touch the heart. And is not this much more for the honour of our religion than that infidels should conclude the ministers of it a set of madmen, and their religious exercises only fits of frenzy? This last would at once cast contempt on them and their religion too. Instead of procuring applause for them, it would render them ridiculous, and involve their profession in the same censure: whereas prophesying would certainly edify the church, much better keep up their credit, and might probably convince and convert infidels who might occasionally hear them. Note, Religious exercises in Christian assemblies should be such as are fit to edify the faithful, and convince, affect, and convert unbelievers. The ministry was not instituted to make ostentation of gifts and parts, but to save souls.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
In the law it is written ( ). Isa 28:11f. Freely quoted.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
It is written, etc. From Isa 28:11, 12. The quotation does not correspond exactly either to the Hebrew or to the Septuagint. Heb., with stammerings of lip. Sept., By reason of contemptuous words of lips. Paul omits the Heb. : This is the rest, give ye rest to the weary, and this is the repose. Sept. : This is the rest to him who is hungry, and this is the ruin. The point of the quotation is that speech in strange tongues was a chastisement for the unbelief of God ‘s ancient people, by which they were made to hear His voice “speaking in the harsh commands of the foreign invader.” So in the Corinthian Church, the intelligible revelation of God has not been properly received.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “In the law it is written,” (en to nomo gegraptai) “In the law it has been recorded or written” Paul alludes to Deu 28:49; Isa 28:11-12. The Mosaic prophesy of Deuteronomy, ‘God’s purpose to warn Israel, before serious judgment through foreigners, other languages.
2) “With men of other tongues and other lips,” (hobi en heterglossois kai cheilesin heteron) “That in other tongues (languages of another order or kind) and in lips (of articulation and diction) of another order or kind than their own.” This was fulfilled in Gentile captivities, brought to an ultimate climax through warnings to Israel by charismatic tongues at Pentecost, Act 2:1-47.
3) “Will I speak unto this people “ (laleso to lao) “I will speak to this people.” The “this people” referred to Israel, the chosen of God, before He through Christ and His church turned to the Gentiles, grafted them in.
4) “And yet for all that,” (kai oud’ houtos) “And not so” (in spite of this speaking to them in another language or tongue, in fulfillment of prophecy in the law that I wrote to them); which reached its ultimate appeal on Pentecost.
5) “Will they not hear me, saith the Lord..” (eisakousontai mou, legei kurios) “Will they (not) give heed to me, says the Lord.” If Israel would not give heed to or guided by God’s voice through tongues, specifically given to warn them, in addition to or supplement to the law, why should Gentiles clamor for the sensational, the flare of tongues, Paul argued.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(21, 22) In the law it is written.The preceding teaching is illustrated and enforced by an appeal to Jewish history. The Old Testament as a whole was not infrequently thus designated the Law. (See Joh. 10:34; Joh. 12:34; Joh. 15:25.) The words are scarcely a quotation, but rather an illustration taken from Isa. 28:9-12. The passage there refers to the refusal of Israel to hearken to Jehovah when He spoke to them with clearness and simplicity, and His judgment on them taking the form of declaring that He would make a foreign peoplethe Assyriansbe His mouthpiece to them in the future, in a language which they knew not. It is as if the Apostle said: Remember there was a time in Jewish history when an unintelligible language was a sign sent by God, and proved unavailing as regards the conversion of Israel. The gift which you so exalt now is equally useless by itself for that same purpose.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
21. The law The Old Testament as a whole; as in Joh 10:34; Joh 12:34; Joh 15:25. The passage alluded to by Paul is Isa 28:13. The Israelites had complained that Jehovah had drilled them like children, with precept upon precept and line upon line; and Jehovah retorts, with terrible sarcasm, that he would give them instructors with another tongue, namely, the Assyrian armies, and yet they will not hear. St. Paul quotes this as an impressive type, indicating that foreign tongues spoken in the Church, though intended for the conversion of unbelievers, had a fearful precedent of failing of the effect. Other tongues Gentile tongues, like those of the charismatic Corinthians; not miraculous tongues, however, yet brought by God’s overruling providence upon Israel.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘In the law it is written, By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers will I speak to this people, and not even thus will they hear me, says the Lord.’
He now turns to the Scriptures quoting from Isa 28:11-12, either from some version that we do not have (it has similarities with Aquila’s Greek translation), or as being paraphrased from the memory. This refers to the fact that in response to his opponents’ suggestion that he, Isaiah, is speaking on the same level with little children and in childish language, God would deal with Israel in judgment by bringing against them armies of men who spoke strange tongues and who would speak with the lips of strangers with nothing to say to them. This referred to the Assyrian armies who would be God’s instrument of judgment. They would hear these strange tongues at their gates, and rather than having anything to say to them the strange tongues would be a sign that they were doomed to judgment. This is how God would speak to them. They would hear strange tongues and recognise that they were about to suffer judgment because of their unbelief.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Strange tongues may become dangerous:
v. 21. In the Law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear Me, saith the Lord.
v. 22. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not; but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
v. 23. If, therefore, the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
v. 24. But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all;
v. 25. and thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so, falling down on his face, he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth. To give the Corinthians the right understanding of the gift of tongues, Paul now introduces a Scripture-passage: In the Law, in the book of the Old Testament Scriptures, it is written, In men that speak a strange language and in lips of aliens I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me, give Me an attentive ear, says the Lord, Isa 28:11-12. In the original passage “the drunken Israelites are mocking in their cups the teaching of God through His prophet, as though it were fit only for an infant school; in anger, therefore, He threatens to give His lessons through the lips of foreign conquerors. ” Paul quotes the passage to show that the speaking of tongues may work harm in the Church: Therefore the strange tongues are a sign, they serve for a sign, not to the believing, but to the unbelievers; by this gift God manifested His presence, not so much for the sake of the members of the congregation as for those that were still unbelievers. When God speaks in such an unintelligible way, He exhibits Himself “not as one that is opening His thoughts to the faithful, but as one who is shutting Himself up from those who will not believe. ” So the hardened unbelievers, having rejected the clear and unmistakable preaching of the Cross, find themselves confirmed, and even justified, according to their opinion, by this phenomenon. On the other hand, the gift of prophecy is not for the unbelievers, but for the believing. It is not only that the proper exposition of the Gospel of salvation works faith and strengthens faith, but also that it serves as a sign of the mercy of God and changes unbelievers into believers. So Paul discountenances the gift of tongues and disapproves of its use in public services, because the purpose of edification is not accomplished through its exercise.
The apostle now shows the disastrous impression which the exercise of the gift of tongues is bound to make upon men that are in no way connected with the congregation: This being the case, if the entire congregation is assembled together at one place and all be speaking with tongues, and men, unversed, unfamiliar, with conditions, or unbelievers, come in, will they not say that you are mad, that you have all taken leave of your senses? The picture is not a bit overdrawn, but can well be imagined under the circumstances as they existed in Corinth, or as those that were anxious to possess the gift of tongues would have made them: A regular service, with teaching, praise, and prayer; all the Christians busily engaged in prayer and praise in strange languages; Gentiles that were unversed with the situation coming in, or unbelievers, what was more natural than the supposition that these men were all talking in madness? For it was but proper for such visitors to expect a clear exposition of some Christian doctrine, and not an endless, incoherent, heterogeneous babbling. Note: This thought might be applied to many a congregation today, where the preaching service has become a fruitless babbling on half-digested topics, only remotely, if at all, connected with the doctrine of Scriptures.
But altogether different is the effect of the gift of prophecy: But if all prophesy, and there enter any unbeliever or uninitiated person, he is convicted by all, he is judged by all. The gift of prophecy included clear and unmistakable explanation and exposition, in ordinary language, of the Word of God, with proper application to the existing circumstances. And therefore any chance visitor to the service, or someone that was lying in unbelief, would be convicted by the testimony of Holy Writ as applied to his case, he would be made conscious of his sin and unbelief. And, incidentally, he would be searched by the words of omniscient wisdom, the secret things of his heart, the hidden sins would be revealed. And the result might very well be that such a one would fall upon his face and worship God, openly admitting that God was in the midst of the Christian congregation. Nothing is more powerful than the living Word of God, by which He searches hearts and minds, Heb 4:12, discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. Thus the gift of prophecy would result not only in gaining souls for Christ, but also in giving glory to the Lord.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
1Co 14:21. In the law it is written, In the law, here, means the Old Testament, Isa 28:11 where God has been complaining of the unteachable disposition of the Jews. Instead of, with men of other lips, some read, surely in foreign language, and with foreign lips, &c. Most critics refer the words, as they stand in Isaiah, to the Babylonians, who should come and speak to them in a language unintelligible to them; in which sense the phrase is used elsewhere, Deu 28:49. Jer 5:15. Diodati thinks the meaning is, “Because they would not attend to plain messages, God would speak to them by such as they could not understand:” and then the Apostle’s argument will be, “Since God threatens this as a curse, do not voluntarily bring it upon the church, merely to make ostentation of your own gifts.” See Luk 24:44. Acts 24.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Co 14:21 . You go against Scripture with your foolish doings! This is the theological side of the judgment, which Paul now further brings forward, before he imparts in 1Co 14:26 ff. the final precepts for the right procedur.
] of the O. T. generally. See on Rom 3:19 ; Joh 10:34 .
The passage is Isa 28:11-12 in a very free [11] variation from the LX.
] for , , belongs, with the rest, to the Scriptural quotation (LXX.: ), and has here therefore no reference in the context.
The historical sense of the original text (in which Jehovah threatens to send foreign-speaking men , i.e. barbarians , upon the kingdom of Judah, etc.) is taken up typically by Paul in such a way that he, looking back from the phenomenon of the present upon that prophetic utterance, recognises in it the Christian glossolalia divinely foreshadowed, as regards its substance , namely, in the characteristic , and, as regards its destination , in .
. . .] in peoples of another tongue (conceived of as organs of the visiting God, who speaks in their persons; hence , comp. 2Co 13:3 ; Heb 1:2 ) and in lips of others ( , see the critical remarks) will I speak to this nation . According to the original text , the reference is to people who speak a foreign language (the Assyrian, comp. 33:19), and to lips of foreigners (other than Israelites); but the similarity of the relation, which presents itself in the type and antitype, consists in the extraordinary phenomenon of the strange divine speaking, which becomes perceptible in the case of the type in the foreign language, in that of the antitype in the character of the glossolalia, so wholly different from ordinary intelligible speech. In virtue of this unintelligibility, the speaking in tongues also was for the hearers a speaking in strange tongues, and he who spoke was not one like-tongued, i.e. using the like language ( , Xen. Cyrop . i. 1. 5; Herod. i. 17, viii. 144; Lucian, Scyth. 3, de Salt. 64), but a strange-speaking man ( , Polyb. xxiv. 9, 5; Strabo, viii. p. 333; Aq. Psa 113:1 ), and his lips a stranger’s lips. What is in the original text: , Paul renders more freely than the LXX. ( ), and making it personal, by ; [12] the Hebrew , again ( through stammerers of the lip , i.e. through men speaking unintelligibly, because in a strange tongue), he renders more correctly as regards the general sense than the LXX. (who have erroneously , on account of mockery of the lips , comp. Hos 7:16 ) by . . , putting it, however, impersonally, and reversing the order of the two clauses. It may be added that it is clear from the parallel that Paul conceived of in as “ tongue ,” as also is conceived of in the original text, both as instrument of the . The tongue is , Eur. Suppl. 205.
] applying in its historical meaning to the disobedient people of Israel , which, however, is a type of those who reject the Christian faith, represents therefore the latter in the view of the apostl.
] and not even so , dealt with by such a measure, will they hearken to me (obey me, Sir 3:6 ; Sir 39:3 ; and in classical writers). This second half of the passage is, for the demonstration, the main point. See 1Co 14:22 .
[11] Hence (and on account of the quite general . ) Ewald derives the words from a source now nnknown to us. Still, for a typical reference to the speaking with tongues, Isa 28:11 f. is characteristic enough. But if Paul had this passage in his eye, he must have understood it of men speaking foreignly , not, as Ewald explains the prophetic words, of the language of the thunder and of terrible punishment.
[12] Wieseler in the Stud. u. Krit . 1838, p. 734 ff., infers from our passage that Paul recognises a double formula for the gift of tongues, a shorter one, . ., and a longer, . . . Certainly too wide an inference, since in no other place does the apostle bring forward the characteristic element of . He was using the quotation in order to prove the destination of the glossolalia for unbelievers, but could not use , which besides the LXX. has incorrectly, and therefore altered it in accordance with the parallel in the passage, . . We may infer consequently from our passage only thus much, that the glossolalia as regards its nature could be described in the way of application by and , but not that . . and . . . were two current formulae for denoting the speaking with tongues. Hence also we are not, with Hirzel in the Stud. u. Krit . 1840, p. 121 ff., to infer from this passage the originality of the designation .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
Ver. 21. With men of other tongnes ] God threatened the Jews, that since they would not hearken to their own prophets, they should hear foreign enemies,Isa 28:11Isa 28:11 ; Jer 5:15 . So those that will not obey the sweet command of Christ, “Come unto me,” shall have one day no command to obey, but that dreadful discedite, ” Depart from me,” &c.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
21 25 .] By a citation from the O. T. he takes occasion to shew that tongues are a sign to the unbelieving only : and that even for them they are profitless in comparison with prophecy.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
21. ] , as Joh 10:34 ; Joh 12:34 ; Joh 15:25 ; where the Psalms are thus quoted. The passage stands in the LXX: , . . The context is thus: The scoffers in Jerusalem (see 1Co 14:14 ) are introduced as scorning the simplicity of the divine commands, which were line upon line, precept upon precept, as if to children ( 1Co 14:9-10 ). Jehovah threatens them that, since they would not hear these simple commands, He would speak to them by men of other tongues, viz. the Assyrians, their captors.
Here as in many other cases, the historical sense is not so much considered, as the aptness of the expressions used for illustrating the matter in hand; viz. that belief would not be produced in the unbelieving by speaking to them in strange tongues. The answers in the LXX to , ‘ for ;’ or ‘ yea verily ,’ as Louth. It forms part of the citation, not of the text.
.] in (in the person of) men of other tongues : Heb. with another tongue ; and it is placed second . The Apostle personifies it and gives it the prominence.
. . ] in (as speaking in, using as the organ of speech) lips of others (strangers, see reff.): Heb. in (by) stammerers of lip : Louth, with a stammering lip .
] in Isa., the Israelites : here taken generally for the unbelieving world.
.] This is the point of the passage for St. Paul’s argument: see 1Co 14:23 : “for them, and not for us: but even for them , profitless in the main:” not even under such circumstances will they listen to me: even this sign will be for them ineffectual.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 14:21-25 . 47. THE STRANGE TONGUES AN OCCASION OF UNBELIEF. The Ap. has striven to wean the Cor [2122] from their childish admiration of the Tongues by showing how unedifying they are in comparison with Prophecy. The Scripture quoted to confirm his argument (1Co 14:21 ) ascribes to this kind of manifestation a punitive character. Through an alien voice the Lord speaks to those refusing to hear, by way of “sign to the unbelieving” (1Co 14:22 ). These abnormal utterances neither instruct the Church nor convert the world. The unconverted see in them the symptoms of madness (1Co 14:23 ). Prophecy has an effect far different; it searches every heart, and compels the most prejudiced to acknowledge the presence of God in the Christian assembly (1Co 14:24 f.).
[2122] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
1Co 14:21 . This O.T. citation is adduced not by way of Scriptural proof, but in solemn asseveration of what P. has intimated, to his readers’ surprise, respecting the inferiority of the Glossolalia; cf. the manner of quotation in 1Co 1:19 , 1Co 2:9 , 1Co 3:19 . The passage of Isaiah reveals a principle applying to all such modes of speech on God’s part. The title Jewish usage extended to Scripture at large; see Rom 3:19 , Joh 10:34 . P. shows here his independence of the LXX: the first clause, , follows the Heb., only turning the prophet’s third person (“He will speak”) into the first, thus appropriating the words to God ( ); Origen’s Hexapla and Aquila’s Gr [2123] Version run in almost the same terms (El [2124] ). Paul’s second clause, , is based on the latter clause of 1Co 14:12 (translated precisely in the LXX, ), but with a new turn of meaning drawn from the general context: he omits as irrelevant the former part of 1Co 14:12 . The original is therefore condensed, and somewhat adapted. Hf [2125] and Ed [2126] discuss at length the Pauline application of Isaiah’s thought. According to the true interpretation of Isa 28:9 ff. (see Cheyne, Delitzsch, or Dillmann ad loc [2127] ), the drunken Israelites are mocking in their cups the teaching of God through His prophet, as though it were only fit for an infant school; in anger therefore He threatens to give His lessons through the lips of foreign conquerors (1Co 14:11 ), in whose speech the despisers of the mild, plain teaching of His servants (1Co 14:12 ) shall painfully spell out their ruin. The ( ) is part of the citation: “For in men of alien tongue and in lips of aliens I will speak to this people; and not even thus will they hearken to me, saith the Lord“. God spoke to Israel through the strange Assyrian tongue in retribution , not to confirm their faith but to consummate their unbelief. The Glossolalia may serve a similar melancholy purpose in the Church. This analogy does not support, any more than that of 1Co 14:10 f. (see notes), the notion that the Tongues of Corinth were foreign languages. , to hear with attention, effect , shares the meaning of ( obedio ) in the LXX and in cl [2128] Gr [2129]
[2123] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[2124]
[2125] J. C. K. von Hofmann’s Die heilige Schrift N.T. untersucht , ii. 2 (2te Auflage, 1874).
[2126] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians . 2
[2127] ad locum , on this passage.
[2128] classical.
[2129] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
the law. The Scriptures of the O.T. are called “the law”, “the law and the Prophets”, “the law, the Prophets, and the Psalms”. Here the law includes Isaiah, just as in Joh 10:34; Joh 15:25, it includes the Psalms.
With = In. App-104.
other tongues. Greek. heteroglossos = other-tongued. Only here.
and other lips = and with lips of others.
people. Greek. laos. See Act 2:47.
yet for all that, &c. = not even (Greek. oude) so will they.
hear = hearken to. Greek. eisakouo. Elsewhere, Mat 6:7. Luk 1:13. Act 10:31. Heb 5:7; all of answered prayer. A stronger word than akouo which occ, over 400 times.
Lord. App-98. The quotation is from Isa 28:11, Isa 28:12. App-107.
21-25.] By a citation from the O. T. he takes occasion to shew that tongues are a sign to the unbelieving only: and that even for them they are profitless in comparison with prophecy.
1Co 14:21. , in the law) comprehending also the prophets.- ) Isa 28:11, LXX. , ; masculine or neuter. The paraphrase accommodating the text of Isaiah to this passage of Paul may be as follows: This people do not hear Me, though I speak to them in the language, to which they have been accustomed; I will therefore speak to them in other tongues, namely, of the enemies that are sent against them; but even then they will not listen to me, comp. Jer 5:15. Since God is said to speak in the tongues of enemies, the parity of reasoning holds good from them to the gift of tongues.- ) Isa 28:12, , And they would not hear.
1Co 14:21
1Co 14:21
In the law it is written,-The whole of the Old Testament Scripture is called the law, because it was written during the reign of the law, and was intended to uphold and enforce it. [This we might naturally expect from Pauls manner of regarding the whole Mosaic dispensation as a progressive order of things having its completion in Christ (Rom 3:19; Gal 3:23-24). John uses the word in the same manner. (Joh 10:34; Joh 12:34; Joh 13:25).]
By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers will I speak unto this people;-Here Paul shows that the gift of tongues had little or no value except as an evidence of unbelievers, and illustrates it by this quotation from Isa 28:11-12. In that passage Isaiah tells the drunken priests, who scornfully imitated his style, that since they derided Gods message so delivered to them, God would address them in a very different way by the Assyrians, whose language they did not understand.
and not even thus will they hear me, saith the Lord.-Since the Jews had refused to hear the prophets speaking their own language, God threatened to bring upon them a people whose language they could not understand. This was a mark of displeasure designed as a punishment, and not for their conversion. [From this it was intended to teach the Corinthians that it was no mark of the divine favor for them to have teachers whose language they could not understand. They were turning a blessing into a curse. The gift of tongues was designed, among other things, to aid Christians in proclaiming the gospel to the various peoples in their own language. When used for this purpose it was a blessing; but to employ it for the sake of vain display, in addressing those who could not understand the language employed, was to make it a curse.]
the law: The passage quoted is taken from the prophet Isaiah; but the term torah, Law, was used by the Jews to express the whole Scriptures, law, prophets, and hagiographia; and they used it to distinguish these Sacred Writings from the words of the scribes. It is not taken from the LXX, from which it varies as much as any words can differ from others where the general meaning is similar. It accords much more with the Hebrew; and may be considered as a translation from it; “only what is said of God in the third person, in the Hebrew, is here expressed in the first person, with the addition of [Strong’s G3004], [Strong’s G2962],” saith the Lord. – Dr. Randolph. Joh 10:34, Rom 3:19
With: Deu 28:49, Isa 28:11, Isa 28:12, Jer 5:15
Reciprocal: Psa 81:5 – where Isa 33:19 – deeper Act 2:4 – began 1Co 14:2 – he that 1Co 14:11 – I shall 1Co 14:19 – in the 1Co 14:34 – as
1Co 14:21. The quotation is from Isa 28:11-12, which shows that the term the law includes the prophetic writings of the Old Testament. The connection shows that Isaiah was writing about conditions just previous to the captivity of Israel by the heathen. Israel had refused to listen to the law of the Lord even when it was spoken to them in their own tongue. Hence He said he would cast them into the midst of a nation speaking a tongue foreign to the people of Israel. Therefore, the use of tongues was not primarily for the purpose of instruction to believers, but as an evidence to unbelievers, to convince them of the existence of supernatural power. In view of this truth, Paul makes the point that the brethren made a mistake in trying to impose their gift of tongues onto the whole church to the extent they were doing.
1Co 14:21. In the law (the Old Testament Scriptures) it is written, By men of strange tongues, and by the lips of strangers (Gr. of others) will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord (Isa 28:11-12). The Jews were there warned that since they refused the simple teaching of Gods prophet, they should be taught in a tongue they understood not (that of the Assyrians). See Isa 36:11. And since this use of an unknown tongue was sent in judgment, see (says the apostle) that ye avoid using a tongue which none understand.
Observe here, How the apostle, to take the Corinthians off from their fond admiration of the gift of tongues, tells them, That in the law, that is, in the writings of the Old Testament, particularly in Isa 28:11 it is declared, that because the people of Judah would cause them to be spoken to in an unknown language; namely, by outlandishing enemies and armies, whose language they should not understand: from whence he infers, that strange tongues were not given for a sign of any good to believers, but they were given as a token rather of God’s displeasure to unbelievers; insomuch that, by the just judgment of God, their ignorance by this means would be the more increased: but the gift of prophecy serveth not only for the conversion of unbelievers, but for the edification of believers also; therefore prophecy, or preaching intelligibly, is to be preferred in the church before speaking with tongues.
1Co 14:21. In the law it is written The law here signifies the whole Jewish Scriptures. The passage quoted is taken from Isa 28:11, (where see the note.) With stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. And so he did: he spake terribly to them by the Babylonians, (whose language, strange and unintelligible to the Jews, is here referred to,) when they had set at naught what he had spoken by the prophets, who used their own language. Some critics have observed, that the Hebrew words in this passage of Isaiah, ought to be translated, in labiis irrisionis, with mocking lips; in which sense the LXX. understood the phrase, rendering it, . But that translation makes no alteration in the meaning; for they who speak to others in an unknown language, seem to the persons to whom they speak, to stammer and to mock them. The same thing is predicted, Deu 28:49, and Jer 5:15; where see the notes. According to Diodati the meaning is, Because they would not attend to plain messages, God would speak to them by such as they could not understand; and which they would hate to hear: and then the apostles argument will be, Since God threatens this as a curse, do not voluntarily bring it upon the church, merely to make ostentation of your own gifts. Isaiahs words, however, may be considered as an intimation of the purpose God had of sending one last message to them by his servants, endued with the gift of tongues. This, according to Macknight, is the primary meaning of the prophets words. Isaiah evidently foretels, says he, the methods which God, in future times, would use for converting the unbelieving Jews; and among others, that he would speak to them in foreign languages, that is, in the languages of the nations among whom they were dispersed. The passage, therefore, is a prediction of the gift of speaking foreign languages, to be bestowed on the first preachers of the gospel. The prophecy thus understood had its accomplishment at the day of pentecost. Yet for all that Though I shall do this extraordinary thing to awaken, convince, and alarm them; they will not hear me They will not hearken and obey me. This the Lord foresaw, and foretold repeatedly by Moses and the prophets.
Vv. 21. In the law it is written: With men of other tongues and lips of strangers will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me.
The absurdity, the puerility of the preponderating use of tongues in the assemblies is demonstrated from this new point of view. Paul introduces the subject by quoting Isa 28:11-12. He calls the book of the prophets the law, as is sometimes done in the New Testament; comp. 1Co 14:34, and Joh 10:34. This wide meaning of the word law is due to the feeling that all the other parts of the Old Testament rest on the law, and themselves form law for believers.
This passage from Isaiah seems at the first glance to have no connection with the gift of tongues; for it applies in the prophetic context to foreign nations, particularly the Assyrians, by whose invading forces God will visit His people, after having sought in vain to bring them to Himself by the words of the prophets. It does not take long, however, in the closer study of the parallel, to understand its meaning. As to this rude and unintelligible language which, according to Isaiah, God will hold with His people, by giving them over to strange and cruel nations, it is the unbelief of His people, in the words of the prophets, which will force Him to use it; if the Israelites had listened to the prophets with faith, God would not have required to speak to them in strange tongues. So it is with glossolalia, says the apostle; this speaking in unintelligible tongues, which has suddenly sprung up in this new era of the kingdom of God, is the evidence of a separation on God’s part, not certainly from those who speak in tongues, but from those to whom He thus speaks. The fact, indeed, proves that the intelligible revelation of God has not been received as it ought to have been. As is well said by Kling: When God speaks intelligibly, it is to reveal [open] Himself to His people; when He speaks unintelligibly, it is because He must hide [close] Himself from them. Pentecost will be cited as an objection, where the gift of tongues appears as a blessing of grace, not as a sign of the Divine displeasure. But, first of all, on that day interpretation accompanied tongues, and transformed them immediately into preaching; but especially speaking in tongues, as it broke forth on that day, had a wholly different signification for believers from that which it had for the mass of the Jewish people. In regard to Israel, which had rejected the preaching in good Hebrew which Jesus had addressed to it for three years, this strange phenomenon was a beginning of rupture, a certification of unbelief. God, while continuing to appeal to it, now addressed Himself to other nations; the people of God was on the eve of its rejection.
The apostle’s text differs considerably from the translation of the LXX., which is altogether inaccurate; it also differs from the Hebrew text itself. It is a free reproduction, exactly corresponding, in the first part, to the meaning of the Hebrew, but differing from it sensibly in the last words. The Hebrew says: And they would not hear; which applies to the unbelief of the people in regard to the ancient prophetical revelations; while in Paul the words: and yet for all that will they not hear me, apply to the conduct of the unbelieving people in regard to the tongues themselves, as is proved by the: and yet for all that. The idea expressed by Paul is, therefore, that this new means, tongues, will fail as well as the former; in Isaiah, prophetical preaching; in Paul, evangelical preaching. How can we help thinking here of the persevering unbelief of Israel, even after Pentecost, an unbelief of which, after Palestine, the whole world, Greece itself, was at that moment the theatre? Paul does not mean that this plan will absolutely fail, and with all. Otherwise why should God still use it? But the use of such means supposes, not faith, but unbelief in those to whom it is applicable? What folly then, what puerility on the part of the Corinthians, to show a strong predilection for a sign of this kind in the worship of believers! It matters little whether we read (other lips) with the Greco-Lats. and the Byz., or (lips of others) with the Alex.
Applying the words of Isaiah, as he does here, Paul is led to the following conclusion:
In the law it is written, By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers will I speak unto this people; and not even thus will they hear me, saith the Lord.
Verse 21
In the law; in the Old Testament Scriptures. (Isaiah 28:11,12.) The meaning of the passage, in its place, is, that God would punish his disobedient and unbelieving people by bringing upon them the hostile incursions of barbarian tribes, whose language was unknown.
14:21 In the {r} law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
(r) By the “law” he understands the entire scripture.
The "Law" refers to the Old Testament here since the passage Paul cited is Isa 28:11-12 (cf. Deu 28:49; Isa 29:10-12; Isa 30:9-11; Isa 33:19). The context of this passage is the Israelites’ refusal to accept Isaiah’s warnings concerning the coming Assyrian invasion. God said because they refused to listen to the prophet’s words He would "teach" them by using their foreign-speaking invading enemy. Nevertheless even then, God said, they would not repent. Isaiah preached repentance to the Israelites in their own language, but they did not repent. Then God brought the invading Assyrians into Israel. Still His people did not repent even though God "spoke" to them of their need to repent by allowing them to hear the foreign language of this enemy.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)