Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 14:14
For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
14. my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful ] The afflatus of the Spirit suggests the words of prayer to the possessor of the gift. He is conscious that he is fervently addressing the Giver of all good in a spirit of supplication. But his consciousness goes no further. He does not know what he is saying.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For if I pray … – The reference to prayer here, and to singing in 1Co 14:15, is designed to illustrate the propriety of the general sentiment which he is defending, that public worship should be conducted in a language that would be intelligible to the people. However well meant it might be, or however the heart might be engaged in it, yet unless it was intelligible, and the understanding could join in it, it would be vain and profitless.
My spirit prayeth – The word spirit here ( pneuma) has been variously understood. Some have understood it of the Holy Spirit – the Spirit by which Paul says he was actuated. Others of the spiritual gift, or that spiritual influence by which he was endowed. Others of the mind itself. But it is probable that the word spirit refers to the will; or to the mind, as the seat of the affections and emotions; that is, to the heart, desires, or intentions. The word spirit is often used in the Scriptures as the seat of the affections, and emotions, and passions of various kinds; see Mat 5:3, Blessed are the poor in spirit; Luk 10:21, Jesus rejoiced in spirit. So it is the seat of ardor or fervor Luk 1:17; Act 18:25; Rom 12:11; of grief or indignation; Mar 3:12; Joh 11:33; Joh 13:21; Act 17:16. It refers also to feelings, disposition, or temper of mind, in Luk 9:55; Rom 8:15. Here it refers, it seems to me. to the heart, the will, the disposition, the feelings, as contradistinguished from the understanding; and the sense is, My feelings find utterance in prayer; my heart is engaged in devotion; my prayer will be acceptable to God, who looks upon the feelings of the heart, and I may have true enjoyment; but my understanding will be unfruitful, that is, will not profit others. What I say will not he understood by them; and of course, however much benefit I might derive from my devotions, yet they would be useless to others.
But my understanding – ( ho de nous mou). My intellect, my mind; my mental efforts and operations.
Is unfruitful – Produces nothing that will be of advantage to them. It is like a barren tree; a tree that bears nothing that can be of benefit to others. They cannot understand what I say, and of course, they cannot be profited by what I utter.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 14. For if I pray in an unknown tongue] If my prayers are composed of sentences and sayings taken out of the prophets, c., and in their own language-my spirit prayeth, my heart is engaged in the work, and my prayers answer all the purpose of prayers to myself but my understanding is unfruitful to all others, because they do not understand my prayers, and I either do not or cannot interpret them. See the note on 1Co 14:19.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
From this and the former verse, the papists would justify the lawfulness of their Latin service, which none or few of the common people understand; and they seem to have a little advantage from the opinion of some of the ancients: That some of those who spake with tongues, did not themselves understand what they uttered, but the Spirit of God only made use of their tongues as machines. But these are apprehensions much beneath the Spirit of light and truth, that it should make use of the tongue of a man for an end neither profitable to the man himself, nor others. Besides, how is it then true which we had, 1Co 14:4, that he who spake in an unknown tongue edifieth himself? Nay, how can it be true, which is here said, that such a mans
spirit prayeth? Nor is it here said, my understanding is dark or blind, but unfruitful; that is, though myself understand, yet my knowledge bringeth forth no fruit to the advantage or good of others.
My spirit prayeth, but others cannot pray with me.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
14. spiritmy higher being,the passive object of the Holy Spirit’s operations, and theinstrument of prayer in the unknown tongue, distinguished from the”understanding,” the active instrument of thoughtand reasoning; which in this case must be “unfruitful” inedifying others, since the vehicle of expression is unintelligible tothem. On the distinction of soul or mind and spirit,see Eph 4:23; Heb 4:12.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For if I pray in an unknown tongue,…. In the Hebrew tongue, which the greatest part of the Jewish doctors insisted a upon should be only used in prayer; which notion might be borrowed from them, and now greatly prevailed in the church at Corinth; and the custom was used by such as had the gift of speaking that language, even though the body and bulk of the people understood it not:
my spirit prayeth; I pray with my breath vocally; or else with affection and devotion, understanding what I say myself, and so am edified; or rather with the gift of the Spirit bestowed on me:
but my understanding is unfruitful; that is, what I say with understanding to myself is unprofitable to others, not being understood by them.
a Vid. Trigland. de Sect. Kar. c. 10. p. 172, 173.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
But my understanding is unfruitful ( ). My intellect () gets no benefit (, without fruit) from rhapsodical praying that may even move my spirit ().
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Spirit [] . The human spirit, which is moved by the divine Spirit. See on Rom 8:4.
Understanding [] . See on Rom 7:23.
Is unfruitful [ ] . Furnishes nothing to others.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For if I pray in an unknown tongue,” lean gar proseuchomai glosse) “For if I pray in a tongue- or language.” True prayer takes its rise to God in the spirit, in sincerity and in truth.
2) “My spirit prayeth,” (to pneuma ‘mou proseuchetai) “My spirit prays.” Normal prayer goes through the spirit into conception and expression of the intellect in intelligible words, Rom 8:23-25. Public prayer without understanding of the hearer, .becomes an empty show, a vain fantasy. Even so did tongues uninterpreted, Mat 6:2; Mat 6:5.
3) “But my understanding is unfruitful.” (ho de nous mou akarpos estin) “But my mind (in speaking) is unfruitful, barren, unproductive, or empty.” It is as if only the one casting the pearls profits from the senseless, unachieving expenditure of energy. Mat 7:6. The best fruit of the speaker is found in the profit of the hearer.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
14. For if I pray in another tongue. (827) While this example, too, serves to confirm what he has previously maintained, it forms, at the same time, in my opinion, an additional particular. For it is probable that the Corinthians had been in fault in this respect also, that, as they discoursed, so they also prayed in foreign tongues. At the same time, both abuses took their rise from the same source, as indeed they were comprehended under one class. What is meant by praying in a tongue, (828) appears from what goes before — to frame a prayer in a foreign language.
The meaning of the term spirit, however, is not so easily explained. The idea of Ambrose, who refers it to the Spirit that we receive in baptism, has not only no foundation, but has not even the appearance of it. Augustine takes it in a more refined way, as denoting that apprehension, which conceives ideas and signs of things, so that it is a faculty of the soul that is inferior to the understanding. There is more plausibility in the opinion of those who interpret it as meaning the breathing of the throat — that is, the breath. This interpretation, however, does not accord with the meaning which the term invariably bears in Paul’s discussion in this place: nay more, it appears to have been repeated the oftener by way of concession. For they gloried in that honorary distinction, which Paul, it is true, allows them, while, on the other hand, he shows how preposterous it is to abuse (829) a thing that is good and excellent. It is as though he had said — “Thou makest thy boast to me of spirit, but to what purpose, if it is useless?” From this consideration, I am led to agree with Chrysostom, as to the meaning of this term, who explains it, as in the previous instance, (1Co 14:12,) to mean a spiritual gift. Thus my spirit will mean — the gift conferred upon me. (830)
But here a new question arises; for it is not credible (at least we nowhere read of it) that any spoke under the influence of the Spirit in a language that was to themselves unknown. For the gift of tongues was conferred — not for the mere purpose of uttering a sound, but, on the contrary, with the view of making a communication. For how ridiculous a thing it would be, that the tongue of a Roman should be framed by the Spirit of God to pronounce Greek words, which were altogether unknown to the speaker, as parrots, magpies, and crows, are taught to mimic human voices! If, on the other hand, the man who was endowed with the gift of tongues, did not speak without sense and understanding, Paul would have had no occasion to say, that the spirit prays, but the understanding is unfruitful, for the understanding must have been conjoined with the spirit
I answer, that Paul here, for the sake of illustration, makes a supposition, that had no reality, in this way: “If the gift of tongues be disjoined from the understanding, so that he who speaks is a barbarian to himself, as well as to others, what good would he do by babbling in this manner?” For it does not, appear that the mind is here said to be unfruitful, ( ἄκαρπον ) on the ground of no advantage accruing to the Church, inasmuch as Paul is here speaking of the private prayers of an individual. Let us therefore keep it in view, that things that are connected with each other are here disjoined for the sake of illustration — not on the ground that it either can, or usually does, so happen. The meaning is now obvious. “If, therefore, I frame prayers in a language that is not understood by me, and the spirit supplies me with words, the spirit indeed itself, which regulates my tongue, will in that case pray, but my mind will either be wandering somewhere else, or at least will have no part in the prayer.”
Let us take notice, that Paul reckons it a great fault if the mind is not occupied in prayer. And no wonder; for what else do we in prayer, but pour out our thoughts and desires before God? Farther, as prayer is the spiritual worship of God, what is more at variance with the nature of it, than that it should proceed merely from the lips, and not from the inmost soul? And these things must have been perfectly familiar to every mind, had not the devil besotted the world to such a degree, as to make men believe that they pray aright, when they merely make their lips move. So obstinate, too, are Papists in their madness, that they do not merely justify the making of prayers without understanding, but even prefer that the unlearned should mutter in unknown mumblings. (831) Meanwhile they mock God by an acute sophism (832) — that the final intention is enough, or, in other words, that it is an acceptable service to God, if a Spaniard curses God in the German language, while in his mind he is tossed with various profane cares, provided only he shall, by setting himself to his form of prayer, make up matters with God by means of a thought that quickly vanishes. (833)
(827) “What is it,” says Witsius, (in his “Sacred Dissertations,”) “to pray with the tongue ? with the spirit ? with the mind ? (1Co 14:14.) The tongue means here a language unknown to others, and employed by one who is endowed with a supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit. To pray with the tongue, is to pray in a language unknown to others; as, for instance, to pray in the Hebrew language in presence of Greeks. In that sense he had said, (1Co 14:2,) ‘He that speaketh with the tongue, speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth him;’ that is, he who speaks in a foreign tongue, the knowledge of which he has acquired by an extraordinary gift of the Spirit, has God only for a witness. He cannot reckon as his witnesses, or as persons aware of what he is doing, those who are ignorant of the language, and to whose edification he has contributed little or nothing. The spirit means here that extraordinary gift, by which a man is led to act in a certain way, accompanied by almost ecstatic emotions, so that sometimes he is neither aware what he says, nor do others understand what he means. To pray with the Spirit, is to pray in such a manner as to show that you feel the presence of an extraordinary gift of the Spirit, which moves and hurries you along, in a powerful manner, to those actions which excite astonishment. Νους, intelligence, mind, seems here to be chiefly used in a transitive sense, to mean what we give another to understand. Such is the meaning of, תבונה, to which νους corresponds. חט אזנך לתבונתי, incline thine ear to my understanding, that is, to those things which I shall give thee to understand. (Pro 5:1.) To pray with the mind, is to pray in such a manner that the prayers which you deliberately conceive, may be conceived and understood by others. Paul, accordingly, proposes himself as an example of the proper manner of conducting prayers. If I pray in a tongue unknown to the assembly in whose presence I pray, but which I have learned by Divine inspiration, my spirit prayeth, I am acting under the influence of that gift, which impels and arouses me to unusual and remarkable proceedings; but my understanding is unfruitful, I do not enable another to understand with advantage the conceptions of my mind. What then ? I will pray with the Spirit; when the vehement emotion of the Spirit comes upon me, I will not struggle against it, but I will pray with the understanding also; I will show that I am not mad, but possessed of a sound understanding; and I will endeavor that others, as well as myself, be edified by my prayer.” Biblical Cabinet, volume 24. — Ed
(828) “ Que c’est que prier de langue, (car il y a ainsi mot a mot, la ou nous traduisons Prier en langage incognu);” — “What it is to pray in a tongue, for such is the literal meaning, where we render it — to pray in an unknown language. ” Wilclif (1380) gives the literal rendering — For if I preie in tunge. Tyndale, (1534,) If I pray with tonges. Cranmer, (1539,) For if I praye with tongue. Rheims, (1582,) For if I pray with the tongue. — Ed.
(829) “ Quel danger il y a, quand on abuse;” — “What danger there is, when one abuses.”
(830) “What the Apostle means by τὸ πνεῦμα μου, ( my spirit,) is, neither the Holy Spirit moving him to speak, nor any spiritual endowment with which he was gifted, but, as the phrase signifies in other passages in which it occurs, (Rom 1:9; 1Co 5:3; 2Ti 4:22; Phl 1:25,) his own mind, with which he engaged in the service. By νοῦς, as contrasted with this, it is manifest he cannot mean his faculty of understanding — for it is comprehended under the former. The word must, therefore, signify the meaning or sense which he attached to the language he employed — an acceptation in which he uses the term, 1Co 14:19. So far as he himself was concerned, he derived benefit — connecting, as he did, intelligent ideas with the words to which he gave utterance; but the meaning of what he uttered ( ἄκαρπος) produced no fruit in the hearers, inasmuch as they did not understand him. It must be observed, however, that the Apostle is here only supposing a case, such as that which frequently presented itself in the Church at Corinth; not that he would have it to be believed that it ever occurred in his own experience. On the contrary, he avers that, whenever he engaged either in prayer or praise, it was in a way that was intelligible, and consequently profitable both to himself and others, τῷ πνεύματι, — τῶ νωΐ, with the spirit — with the understanding. ” Henderson on Inspiration. — Ed
(831) “ Mais qui plus est, aiment mieux que les idiots et ignorans barbotent des patinostres en langage qui leur est incognu;” — “But, what is more, they like better that unlearned and ignorant persons should mutter over paternosters in a language which they do not understand.”
(832) “ Ils ont vne solution bien aigue et peremptoire;” — “They have a very acute and peremptory solution.”
(833) “ Vne pensee esuanouissante en l’air, qu’ils appellent Intention finale;” — “A thought vanishing into air, which they call final Intention.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(14) For if I pray in an unknown tongue.Better, if I pray in a tongue. 1Co. 14:14-19 are expressed in the first person (except 1Co. 14:16-17, which are a parenthesis), as enforcing the Apostles own example. A man praying in a tongue needed the gift of interpretation. The emotions of his spirit, kindled by the Spirit of God, found utterance in a tongue, the gift of the Spirit of God; but his intellectual faculty grasped no definite idea, and could not, therefore, formulate it into human language; therefore the prayer which is offered merely in a tongue, from the spirit and not from the understanding, is useless as regards others. The Apostle is here speaking of public worship (see 1Co. 14:16), and not of private devotion; and the word fruitless implies the result, or rather the absence of result, as regards others.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
14. If I pray And do not follow with an interpretation. Spirit
understanding The former is the religious faculty by which we commune with God; the inner and higher man; the seat of sacred emotions: the latter is the intelligence by which we know and reason about matters presented to our thought. Prayer in an unknown tongue may stir the man’s own holy emotions, but no definite ideas are conveyed to the understanding of the hearers. Perhaps his own understanding does not form any distinct and expressible ideas, so that he does not, in fact, take the precise meaning of the words he utters.
Unfruitful Productive of no distinct ideas which can be remembered and carried away by myself and others.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful.’
For praying in a tongue does not benefit the church at all. Indeed, says Paul, it is not only the church which does not understand me when I pray in tongues, I also do not understand myself. My mind is not involved. Praying in tongues may be of spiritual benefit because my spirit comes in close contact with God, Who does understand, but it does not benefit or assist my mind or my understanding. Nor does it benefit others.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Only through the understanding of the hearer does the utterance of the Spirit result in edification:
v. 14. For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
v. 15. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also; I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
v. 16. Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupies the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
v. 17. For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
v. 18. I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all;
v. 19. yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
v. 20. Brethren, be not children in understanding; howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. Since the purpose of every function in public worship is to be of spiritual benefit to the attendants, therefore the gift of tongues must be considered of secondary value: For if I pray with a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is without fruit. As one commentator has it: The fruit of the speaker is found in the profit of the hearer. If a man got up in public service in Corinth and prayed with the ecstatic utterance of this peculiar gift, his own spirit indeed had the benefit of feeling itself the instrument of the Holy Ghost, but all the other people present had no benefit whatsoever from his praying, because there was no point of contact between them, they could not understand the speaker, unless, indeed, he also interpreted his utterances. This being the case, what follows? The apostle writes: I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray also with the understanding, with the mind; I will sing psalms with the spirit, but I will sing psalms also with the understanding, with the mind. The wonderful utterances which were given to the apostle to articulate he wanted to make accessible also to his hearers, whether they were in the form of prayer or in that of chants, and to do this, it was necessary that he bring out the content of the speaking with tongues in the form of common speech. The hearer’s mind and heart could not be reached without interpretation, and without that there could be no edification.
This fact the apostle presents from another side: For then, under those circumstances, if thou bless in spirit, if thy praise has risen up in honor of God while in that condition of ecstasy which accompanied speaking with tongues, he that occupies the place of the layman, of the uninitiated, how will he say his Amen to thy blessing, thy doxology? The prayer and the chanting of the person speaking in an unknown tongue may be ever so rich in content, still the person in the audience unversed in its meaning would not know what it was all about, and could therefore not give his assent with the familiar “Amen” taken over from the synagogue worship, by which he expressed himself as accepting the prayer or doxology as his confession. And so the speaker’s praise may be beyond reproach, as a product of the Spirit it is bound to be excellent, but it is wasted so far as edification of the congregation is concerned. And lest any man think that the reproof of Paul was dictated by even the faintest feeling of rivalry, he remarks: I thank God, to whom, incidentally, he thus gives all credit for the gift, more than you all I speak with a tongue. Paul had had ecstatic experiences far beyond the amount vouchsafed to the average Christian; he had experienced the power of this gift of grace in a much higher degree than the Corinthians. But in spite of that fact he frankly states that in the church assembly he would rather speak five words with his understanding, in everyday, intelligible language, in order that he might teach others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue. The utterances of tongues might indicate an unusual power, an extraordinary intimacy with the Spirit, but they were not serviceable, they did not result in the betterment of the congregation. Paul’s aim was always to “catechize,” to impart by oral instruction, what the Christians needed for faith and life, and for this purpose five words in ordinary language were of more use than any amount of articulations in ecstatic speech.
In a most winning manner, Paul now appeals to the good common sense of the readers: Brethren, be not children in understanding, in mind, in judgment, in the faculty of thinking; use your good sense properly, like adults, not like immature children. Of children it is characteristic that they prefer the amusing to the useful, the shining to the solid, as one commentator puts it. In malice, rather, act as babes, but in judgment show yourselves perfect. With respect to all wickedness, Christians should keep themselves free from all the moral corruption of the world and not seek an experimental acquaintance with it. If any of the Corinthians had received the gift of tongues, they should make use of it as children would, with no attempt at conceit and bragging, Mat 18:2. In sound Christian judgment, however, every believer should try to advance, to grow from day to day, until the perfection of knowledge is reached, so far as it is possible in this life. To plant childlike innocence and maturity of understanding in the heart together: that is the great problem of Sanctification. See Psa 19:8.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
1Co 14:14. But my understanding is unfruitful. “My meaning is unprofitable to others, who understand not my words.” See 1Co 14:4.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Co 14:14 . Justification of the precept . .
For if I pray with my tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful . It is a thoroughly arbitrary and mistaken procedure to take the genitive relation in otherwise than in , and to explain the former, with Bleek, Billroth, Olshausen, Maier, and Chr. F. Fritzsche, following Chrysostom ( ), of the Spirit of God, in so far as He has laid hold of the man and speaks out of him . The Holy Spirit, although in the man, is never called the spirit of the man, and cannot be so called, just because He is different from the spirit of the man. See 1Co 2:11 ; Rom 8:16 ; Rom 9:1 . No; is my spirit, i.e. my individual principle of higher life (comp. on 1Co 14:2 ). If I pray with the tongue, this higher life-power in me, which plunges immediately ( i.e. without the intervention of the discursive reflective faculty) into the feelings and intuitions of the divine, is called into activity, because it is filled and moved by the Holy Spirit as His receptive organ; but my understanding, my thinking faculty, furnishes nothing , . [8]
in contrast to , which is the deeper basis of life, the “ penetrale ” (Bengel) of the , is the reflective discursive power through which the making oneself intelligible to those without is effected, and without the co-operative action of which the human cannot with such onesided development of its energy express the contents of its converse with the Divine Spirit in such a way as to be intelligible for others who are not specially gifted for this end. Comp. Krumm, de notionib. psychol. Paul. p. 64 ff.; Delitzsch, Psychol. p. 184; Ernesti, Urspr. d. Snde , II. p. 87 f. Note how definitely Paul here distinguishes the specific activities of the mind, and excludes the from the glossolalia. And he speaks thus from experience. But were we to think of foreign languages , that distinction and exclusion would not be appropriate, or would resolve themselves into a mere self-deception.
[8] Namely, to edify the church by the praying; see ver. 12. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Calvin, Estius, and others erroneously hold it to apply to one’s own profit. Theodoret rightly remarks: .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
Ver. 14. Is unfruitful ] In regard of others’ edification. It were a great grace, said Lambert the martyr, if we might have the word of God diligently and often spoken and sung unto us in such wise, that the people might understand it; then should it come to pass that craftsmen should sing spiritual psalms sitting at their work, and the husbandman at his plough, as wisheth St Jerome. Pavier, townclerk of London in Henry VIII’s time, was a man that in no case could abide to hear that the gospel should be in English; insomuch that he once swore a great oath, that if he thought that the king’s Highness would set forth the Scripture in English, and let it be read by the people by his authority, rather than he would so long live, he would cut his own throat. But he broke promise, for shortly after he hanged himself.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
14. ] This verse has been explained above. It justifies the necessity of thus aiming at the gift of interpretation .
. , not as in 1Co 14:32 , and Chrys. (Hom. xxxv. p. 325) , but as in reff., my (own) spirit , taking himself as an example, as above, 1Co 14:6 ; a use of the word familiar to our Apostle, and here necessary on account of following, ‘When I pray in a tongue , my higher being, my spirit , filled with the Holy Ghost, is inflamed with holy desires, and rapt in prayer: but my intellectual part , having no matter before it on which its powers can be exercised, bears no fruit to the edification of others (nor of myself:’ but this is not expressed in ; cf. the usage of by Paul, Rom 1:13 ; Rom 6:21-22 ; Rom 15:28 ; Gal 5:22 , al.).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 14:14-20 . 46. THE THE NEEDED ALLY OF THE . In 44 the Ap. has insisted on edification as the end and mark of God’s gifts to His Church, and in 45 on intelligibility as a condition necessary thereto. Now the faculty of intelligence is the ; and we are thus brought to see that for a profitable conduct of worship, and for a sane and sound Church life (1Co 14:14 ; 1Co 14:17 ff., 1Co 14:23 ), the understanding must be in exercise: it is a vehicle indispensable (1Co 14:14 f.) to the energies of the spirit. On this point P. is at one with the men of Gnosis at Cor [2078] ; he discountenances all assumptions made in the name of “the Spirit” that offend against sober judgment (1Co 14:20 ). This passage, in a sense, counterbalances 1Co 1:18 to 1Co 2:5 ; it shows how far the Ap. is from approving a blind fanaticism or irrational mysticism, when he exalts the Gospel at the expense of “the wisdom of the world”.
[2078] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
1Co 14:14 . The Tongue has been marked out as an inferior charism, because it does not edify others ; it is less desirable also because it does not turn to account the man’s own intelligence : “If I pray with a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding ( ) is unfruitful”. The introductory (see txtl. note) seems hardly needed; if genuine, it attaches this ver. to 1Co 14:13 , as giving a further reason why the should desire to interpret viz ., that his own mind may partake fruitfully in his prayers. In any case, the consideration here brought in opens a new point of view. “The fruit of the speaker is found in the profit of the hearer” (Thd [2079] ). “The is here, as distinguished from the , the reflective and so-called discursive faculty, pars intellectiva , the human quatenus cogitat et intelligit ” (El [2080] ): see Beck’s Bibl. Psychology , or Laidlaw’s Bib. Doctrine of Man, s.vv .; and cf. notes on 1Co 1:10 , 1Co 2:16 above; also on Rom 7:23 ; Rom 7:25 . Religious feelings and activities prayer in chief (Phi 3:3 , Rom 1:9 , etc.) take their rise in the spirit; normally, they pass upward into conception and expression through the intellect.
[2079] Theodoret, Greek Commentator.
[2080] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
spirit. App-101.
understanding. Greek. nous. Translated seven times “understanding”, seventeen times “mind”.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
14.] This verse has been explained above. It justifies the necessity of thus aiming at the gift of interpretation.
. , not as in 1Co 14:32, and Chrys. (Hom. xxxv. p. 325) ,-but as in reff., my (own) spirit, taking himself as an example, as above, 1Co 14:6; a use of the word familiar to our Apostle, and here necessary on account of following, When I pray in a tongue, my higher being, my spirit, filled with the Holy Ghost, is inflamed with holy desires, and rapt in prayer: but my intellectual part, having no matter before it on which its powers can be exercised, bears no fruit to the edification of others (nor of myself: but this is not expressed in ; cf. the usage of by Paul,-Rom 1:13; Rom 6:21-22; Rom 15:28; Gal 5:22, al.).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 14:14. , , my spirit-but my understanding) The spirit is a faculty of the soul, when it becomes the passive object of the Holy Spirits delightful operations; but , the understanding, is a faculty of soul, when it goes abroad, and acts with our neighbour:[123] as also when it attends to objects placed beyond itself, to other things and persons, although its reasonings may however be concealed, (Ammonius); comp. 1Co 14:20, note. So understanding, 1Co 14:19; , the inmost shrine of the understanding, , Eph 4:23; comp. Heb 4:12 : from , on account of its agitation or movement:[124] comp. Alexand. Aphrodit., 50:2, , f. 144, ed. Ald.-, without fruit) It has fruit, but does not bring it forth. Respecting this word, see Mat 13:22.
[123] i.e. is passive, when said of man: , active.-ED.
[124] Rather from the same root as , and noscere.-ED.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 14:14
1Co 14:14
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.-[If he uses words in a tongue unknown to the congregation in a prayer to God, he realizes in his own spirit what he says to God, but his understanding is not fruitful because he has not the benefit which he ought to have from every spiritual exercise.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
my spirit: 1Co 14:2, 1Co 14:15, 1Co 14:16, 1Co 14:19
but: That is, “not productive of any benefit to others.
Reciprocal: Psa 47:7 – sing Rom 1:9 – with 1Co 14:4 – edifieth himself Eph 4:12 – the edifying
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Co 14:14. My spirit refers to the spiritual gift possessed by the one who is praying, while my understanding pertains to the one hearing the prayer. If a man prays with an unknown tongue, the hearer who does not understand that tongue will not get any benefit from the prayer.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Co 14:14. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitfulmy rational intelligence is unavailing to explain myself to others.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Vv. 14. There is in the state of the glossolalete, who cannot interpret, something incomplete and insufficient.
The expression: my Spirit, is taken, by Heinrici and Holsten, to denote the Spirit of God acting and speaking in me. But the following expression: my understanding, forbids us to think of anything except a faculty belonging to the person of the man himself; comp. 1Co 2:11; Rom 8:16; and 1Th 5:23, passages where it is in vain attempted to set aside the idea of the three fundamental elements of the human person, body, soul, and spirit: the body whereby the soul communicates with the external and material world; the spirit whereby it enters into relation with the higher and Divine world; finally, the soul itself, the free and personal force which acts by means of these two organs, using them to bring down the Divine world into the terrestrial, and thus transforming earth into heaven. But it is self-evident that the human spirit is not considered here in its natural isolation from the Divine Spirit, but in its complete union with Him. When carrying it into the state of ecstasy, the Divine Spirit separates it for the time from the , the understanding, which is a faculty of the soul, or rather the soul itself viewed as thinking. Thereby the impressions take the character of pure feeling, ineffable emotion; it is a state of spiritual enjoyment of which sensual intoxication is, so to speak, the gross caricature; comp. Act 2:13; Eph 5:18-20. Such a state manifested itself in extraordinary voices, consisting of prayers (, 1Co 14:14), praises (, 1Co 14:15), or thanksgiving (, , 1Co 14:16), and expressing the satisfaction and aspirations of the saved soul. Only the understanding was not a partner in this state; it is unfruitful, says the apostle. The word used, , is taken by Chrysostom, Calvin, and others in this sense: does not reap fruit for itself. It does not seem to me accurate to allege, as Edwards does, that this meaning is contrary to 1Co 14:4, where it is said that the glossolalete edifies himself. For the speaker in a tongue must not be confounded with his . But the context speaks rather in favour of the active sense: it does not produce fruit. The understanding, not deriving from this state any new idea, produces nothing, that is to say, has nothing to communicate to others. The conclusion is drawn in 1Co 14:15.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 14
Is unfruitful; in respect to any beneficial effect upon others.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
14:14 {6} For {i} if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my {k} spirit prayeth, but my understanding is {l} unfruitful.
(6) A reason: because it is not sufficient for us to speak so in the congregation that we ourselves worship God in spirit
(that is according to the gift which we have received), but we must also be understood of the company, lest that is unprofitable to others which we have spoken.
(i) If I pray, when the church is assembled together, in a strange tongue.
(k) The gift and inspiration which the spirit gives me does its part, but only to myself.
(l) No fruit comes to the church by my prayers.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Public prayer is in view here, as it is in this whole chapter (1Co 14:16), but some may have been praying in tongues privately as well. While praying in a tongue might give the person doing so a certain sense of exultation in his spirit, his mind would not benefit. He would not know what he was saying without interpretation. The "spirit" (Gr. pneuma) seems to refer to that part of the person that exercises this spiritual gift. It is separate from the mind obviously (cf. 1Co 14:4). The person’s spirit prays as the Holy Spirit gives him or her utterance.