Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 14:5
I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh, with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
5. for greater is he ] Cf. ch. 1Co 12:31.
except he interpret ] This passage clearly implies that a man might speak in another language without himself knowing what he was saying, see 1Co 14:14. Some, however, regard the speaking with tongues as ecstatic utterances in no human language, such as took place among the Montanists in ancient, and the Irvingites in modern times. See Stanley’s introduction to this section. Cf. note on ch. 1Co 12:10.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
I would that ye all spake with tongues – It is an important endowment, and is not, in its place, to be undervalued. It maybe of great service in the cause of truth, and if properly regulated, and not abused, I would rejoice if these extraordinary endowments were conferred on all. I have no envy against anyone who possesses it; no opposition to the endowment; but I wish that it should not be overvalued; and would wish to exalt into proper estimation the more useful but humble gift of speaking for the edification of the church.
Greater is he that prophesieth – This gift is of more value, and he really occupies a more elevated rank in the church. He is more useful. The idea here is, that talents are not to he estimated by their brilliancy, but by their usefulness. The power of speaking in an unknown tongue was certainly a more striking endowment than that of speaking so as simply to be useful, and yet the apostle tells us that the latter is the more valuable. So it is always. A man who is useful, however humble and unknown he may be, really occupies a more elevated and venerable rank than the man of most splendid talents and dazzling eloquence, who accomplishes nothing in saving the souls of people.
Except he interpret – However important and valuable the truth might he which he uttered, it would be useless to the church, unless he should explain it in language which they could understand. In that case, the apostle does not deny that the power of speaking foreign languages was a higher endowment and more valuable than the gift of prophecy. That the man who spoke foreign languages had the power of interpreting, is evident from this verse. From 1Co 14:27, it appears that the office of interpreting was sometimes performed by others.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 5. I would that ye all spake with tongues] The word does not so much imply a wish or desire, as a command or permission. As if he had said: I do not restrain you to prophesying or teaching though I prefer that; but I give you full permission to speak in Hebrew whenever it is proper, and when one is present who can interpret for the edification of the Church, provided yourselves have not that gift, though you understand the language. The apostle said tongue, in the singular number, 1Co 14:2; 1Co 14:4, because he spoke of a single man; now he says tongues, in the plural number, because he speaks of many speaking; but he has the same meaning in both places.-Lightfoot.
Greater is he that prophesieth] A useful, zealous preacher, though unskilled in learned languages, is much greater in the sight of God, and in the eye of sound common sense, than he who has the gift of those learned tongues; except he interpret: and we seldom find great scholars good preachers. This should humble the scholar, who is too apt to be proud of his attainments, and despise his less learned but more useful brother. This judgment of St. Paul is too little regarded.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
I would, in this place, signifies no more than either I could wish, or I could be content that you could all speak with tongues, if God pleased. It should seem by this speech of the apostles, that this speaking in unknown tongues was that extraordinary gift, which, above all others, this church, or the several members of it, were proud and ambitious of. St. Paul tells them, that if God pleased he wished they could all do it. But of the two, he rather wished them all a power to open and apply the Holy Scriptures to mens understandings and conscience. He addeth the reason, because it was a more honourable gift and work, and made men truly greater. But he adds,
except he interpret, for then he prophesied also.
That, saith he, the church, that is, those that heard him prophesying, may receive edifying. Whence we learn:
1. That spiritual growth, and proficiency in Divine knowledge and habits of grace, ought to be the great end of all preachers; and whose doth not propound this as his end, abuseth his office, and trifles in a pulpit.
2. That whose maketh this his end, will make it his business, to the best of his skill, to use such a language, style, and method, as the generality of his hearers may best understand; for without their understanding, there can be no edifying. And this lets us see the vanity of using much Latin, or Greek, or a lofty style, or a cryptic method, not obvious to poor people in popular sermons, where the people understand not those languages; or philosophical ratiocinations before a plain people that understand none of these things. Such preaching is neither justifiable by reason, nor by the practice either of Christ or his apostles.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
5. Translate, “Now I wishyou all to speak with tongues (so far am I from thus speaking throughhaving any objection to tongues), but rather INORDER THAT (as my ulterior and higher wish for you) ye shouldprophesy.” Tongues must therefore mean languages, notecstatic, unintelligible rhapsodie (as NEANDERfancied): for Paul could never “wish” for the latter intheir behalf.
greaterbecause moreuseful.
except he interprettheunknown tongue which he speaks, “that the Church may receiveedifying (building up).”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
I would that ye all spake with tongues,…. This the apostle says, to prevent being misunderstood; for his view was not to bring the gift of tongues into contempt, or to represent it as at all times, and on all occasions, useless and insignificant; nor would he be thought to envy them this gift, or beat them off of desiring it; for, for his own part, he could wish they all had it, was it the will of God; though he must needs say, that prophesying was most desirable by him, as being most profitable;
but rather that ye prophesied; he wished them all prophets, as Moses did all the Lord’s people; he was not against their speaking with tongues, but this was the most eligible, for which he gives this reason:
for greater is he that prophesieth, than he that speaketh with tongues; that is, he is more useful and profitable to men, and so consequently more honourable, in higher esteem, and more valued, and in greater dignity, being in a more serviceable post and office, and which is more beneficial and advantageous to mankind:
except he interpret; what he said; and then he might stand upon an equal foot, and be equally useful with him that prophesieth; but this everyone could not do that spake with tongues; for speaking with tongues, and the interpretation of tongues, were two distinct gifts; see 1Co 12:10 and though a man that had the gift of tongues might understand what he himself said to his own edification, yet not be able to interpret it to the understanding and edification of others; and if he could not do this, his speaking was to no purpose: hence the apostle advises such an one to pray that he might interpret, have the gift of interpretation also, in
1Co 14:13.
That the church may receive edifying: which otherwise cannot be thought it should, or be expected, and then an opportunity and ordinance would be wholly lost.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Except he interpret ( ). Pleonastic combination of (preposition except) and (if not, unless) as in 1Cor 15:2; 1Tim 5:19. For use of with subjunctive rather than see Php 3:12 (common enough in the Koine, Robertson, Grammar, pp. 1017f., condition of third class). On the verb see on 1Cor 12:30; Luke 24:27; Acts 9:36.
Receive (). Second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of , may get edification.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “I would that ye all spake with tongues.” (thelo de pantas humas lalein glossais) “Now I wish (strongly) all you to speak with tongues.” Paul did not deprecate, speak lowly of tongues – they were a desirable gift, if and when used properly, but not as helpful as the gift of prophecy.
2) “But rather that ye prophesied:” (mallon de hina propheteuete) “Yet rather in order that ye may prophesy.” This is repeated from verse one to emphasize the practical, more profitable value in the gift of prophecy, to the glory of God, 1Co 10:31.
3) “For greater is he that prophesieth” (meizon de ho propheteuon) “And greater (in influence) is the one prophesying.” The one prophesying, edifying the church, is a greater person, with a greater gift, than the one speaking in tongues, because his service is greater.
4) “Than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret.” (he ho lalon glossais, ektos. ei me diermeneue) “Than the one continually speaking in tongues, except or unless he interprets.” One might have both the gift of tongues and interpretation, yet it would take him twice as long as the one prophesying. See?
5) “That the church may receive edifying.” (hina he ekklesia oiko domen labe) “In order that the assembly or church may receive edification, strength, help, or be built up.” Act 20:32; 1Pe 3:15; 2Pe 3:18,
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
5. I would that ye all spake with tongues Again he declares that he does not give such a preference to prophecy, as not to leave some place for foreign tongues. This must be carefully observed. For God has conferred nothing upon his Church in vain, and languages were of some benefit. (812) Hence, although the Corinthians, by a misdirected eagerness for show, had rendered that gift partly useless and worthless, and partly even injurious, yet Paul, nevertheless, commends the use of tongues. So far is he from wishing them abolished or thrown away. At the present day, while a knowledge of languages is more than simply necessary, and while God has at this time, in his wonderful kindness, brought them forward from darkness into light, there are at present great theologians, who declaim against them with furious zeal. As it is certain, that the Holy Spirit has here honored the use of tongues with never-dying praise, we may very readily gather, what is the kind of spirit that actuates those reformers, (813) who level as many reproaches as they can against the pursuit of them. At the same time the cases are very different. For Paul takes in languages of any sort — such as served merely for the publication of the gospel among all nations. They, on the other hand, condemn those languages, from which, as fountains, the pure truth of scripture is to be drawn. An exception is added — that we must not be so taken up with the use of languages, as to treat with neglect prophecy, which ought to have the first place.
Unless he interpret. For if interpretation is added, there will then be prophecy. You must not, however, understand Paul to give liberty here to any one to take up the time of the Church to no profit by muttering words in a foreign tongue. For how ridiculous it were, to repeat the same thing in a variety of languages without any necessity! But it often happens, that the use of a foreign tongue is seasonable. In short, let us simply have an eye to this as our end — that edification may redound to the Church.
(812) “ Les langues aidoyent lors aucunement a l’auancement des Eglises;” — “Languages, at that time, were of some help for the advancement of the Churches.”
(813) “ Ces gentils reformateurs;” — “Those pretty reformers.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(5) I would that ye all spake with tongues.To avoid danger of misunderstanding or misrepresentation the Apostle emphatically asserts here that the error which he is combating is the undue exaltation of the gift of tongues to the depreciation of other gifts. The teacher of religious truth to others, who thereby builds up the whole edifice of the body of Christ, is a greater one than he who is himself benefited by being possessed of profound but uncommunicable emotion.
Except he interpret.The gift of interpreting might therefore belong to the same person who had the gift of tongues: and if he had this power of articulating for the benefit of others the emotion which he incoherently expresses in reverie, then the gift of tongues was useful to the Church at large, and so was as valuable as prophecy.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
5. I would all spake with tongues Not a mere concession to the prejudices of the Corinthians, but a hearty endorsement of the gift as good in its place.
But rather prophesied The apostle is wisely utilitarian.
He adjudges the palm of superiority to the more useful gift. Catalepsies and trances are viewed with wonder; but that very wonder is not religious or sanctifying, and may take the place of holier thought. Nor has it been found that the subjects of them are the holiest persons in the Church; just as the Corinthian Church, though most exercised by these gifts, was by no means eminent among the Churches for its holiness. And so the existence of this phenomenon in the Irvingite assemblies was no proof of superior holiness.
Except he interpret For either the charismatic speaker may follow his utterance with an interpretation, (as in the case adduced by Dr. Bushnell,) or another person gifted with interpretation might interpret. This clause seems to imply that the utterer with tongues could not always explain his own utterance. The inspiration reached the spirit, and wakened powerful emotions, but did not quicken the understanding; so that the vocality, though expressive, was not understood as words by the subject himself.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that you should prophesy. And greater is he who prophesies than he who speaks with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.’
This preference for prophecy, Paul stresses, is not to demean tongues, for he would be happy for all to speak in tongues when praying privately, but rather because prophecy benefits all. He is not against tongues. He could wish that all might have the gift. But he would rather that they all prophesied. For this wish for something for all without it actually necessarily coming to fulfilment compare Num 11:29, which may well have been in Paul’s mind (see also 1Co 7:7).
He then agrees that an exception can be made when an interpreter is present, for interpretation makes tongues edifying to all. An interpreter is someone with the supernatural gift to interpret the tongues and put them into the language known to the church members. Then the church members can also be benefited by tongues.
‘Greater’ in this case means ‘of more value’. They are greater because what they do is more useful to all.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Co 14:5. I would that ye all spake with tongues. How happily does the Apostle teach us to estimate the value of gifts and talents, not by their brilliancy, but usefulness. Speaking with tongues was, indeed, very serviceable for spreading the gospel abroad; but for those who staid at home, it was much more desirable to be able to discourse well on useful subjects in their own language; which might serve for the improvement of the society to which they belonged, and the conviction of such of their unbelieving neighbours as might visit their assemblies. See 1Co 14:23-25.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Co 14:5 . ] , , , , . . ., Theophylact. Comp. the , 1Co 12:31 .
. . .] rather, however , I wish that ye should speak prophetically . Note here the distinction between the accusative with the infinitive and after (see on Luk 6:31 ). The former puts the thing absolutely as object; the latter, as the design of the to be fulfilled by the readers (Ngelsbach on the Iliad , p. 62, Exo 3 ); so that it approaches the imperative force (Fritzsche, ad Matth. p. 839).
] preferable, of more worth , 1Co 13:13 , because more useful for edification, 1Co 14:6 ; 1Co 14:26 .
.] the case being excepted, if he interpret (what has been spoken with tongues). is a mixing up of two modes of expression, so that now seems pleonastic. Comp. 1Co 15:2 ; 1Ti 5:19 . Not a Hebraism (Grotius), but found also in the later Greek writers (Lucian, Dial. Mer. 1; Soloec. 7). See Wetstein; Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 459.
Regarding with the subjunctive, see on 1Co 9:11 . The subject to . is not a to be supplied (Flatt, comp. Ewald), but . The passage shows (comp. 1Co 14:13 ) that one and the same person might be endowed with glossolalia and interpretation.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
Ver. 5. I would that ye all spake with tongues ] Gr. “I will.” He here prefers prophesying (which was most edifying) before speaking with tongues, which they most affected, because it served most ad pompam, for applause and admiration.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
5. ] He shews that it is from no antipathy to or jealousy of the gift of tongues that he thus speaks: but (force of the ) that he wished them all to speak with tongues, but rather that they should prophesy . The distinction between the acc. and inf. after , as the simple direct object of the wish, and with the subj., as its higher and ulterior object, has been lost in the E. V. The second is opposed to the subordinate . ., as in 1Co 14:1 to .
] is transitional.
] see reff., superior in usefulness , and therefore in dignity .
is a mixture of two constructions, , and . It is not a Hebraism, as Grot, supposes; Wetst. gives examples from Demosth., Aristides, Lucian, Sextus Empiricus: and from Thom. Mag., , , .
] viz. , not , as suggested by Flatt. On the subj. with , giving a sense not distinguishable from the ind., see Winer, edn. 6, 41. b . 2 end, and Herm., on Soph. Ant [63] 706.
[63] Antiochus of Ptolemais, 614
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 14:5 . Notwithstanding the above drawback, the Tongues are a real and desirable charism; the better is preferred to the good : “Yet I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that you might prophesy.” is repeated from 1Co 14:1 : what the Ap. bids his readers prefer, he prefers for them not to the exclusion of the Tongues, for the two gifts might be held at once (1Co 14:6 ; 1Co 14:18 ), but as looking beyond them. occurs several times in the Gospels without any marked telic force (Mat 7:12 , Mar 6:25 ; Mar 9:30 , Joh 17:24 ), but only here in P.; its substitution for the inf [2024] ( ) of the coordinate clause is significant. “Moreover he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues” attached by the part. where one expected (T.R.); P. is not justifying his own preference just stated, but giving a further reason why the Cor [2025] should covet Prophecy more than Tongues: the main reason lies in the eminent usefulness of this charism (1Co 14:2-4 ); besides that ( ), its possessor is a “greater” person ( : cf. 1Co 12:31 ) “than the speaker with tongues except in the case that he interprets (his ecstatic utterance), that the Church may get edification”. The power to interpret superadded to the glossolalia (see 1Co 14:13 ; 1Co 14:26 ff., 1Co 12:10 ) puts the mystic speaker on a level with the prophet: first “uttering mysteries” (1Co 14:2 ) and then making them plain to his hearers, he accomplishes in two acts what the prophet does in one. is a Pauline pleonasm (see parls.), consisting of ( except if ) and ( unless ) run together; “with this exception, unless he interpret” (Wr [2026] , p. 756). For with sbj [2027] , in distinction from , see Wr [2028] , p. 368; it “represents that the event will decide the point” (El [2029] ). To supply with ., supposing another interpreter meant, is ungrammatical; the identity of Speaker and interpreter is the essential point. He interprets with the express intention that the Church may be edified ( ).
[2024] infinitive mood.
[2025] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[2026] Winer-Moulton’s Grammar of N.T. Greek (8th ed., 1877).
[2027] subjunctive mood.
[2028] Winer-Moulton’s Grammar of N.T. Greek (8th ed., 1877).
[2029] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
would = wish. App-102.
except. A strong expression. Greek. ektos ei ml. Literally without if not.
interpret. Greek. diermeneuo. See Act 9:36.
edifying. Same as “edification”, 1Co 14:3.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
5.] He shews that it is from no antipathy to or jealousy of the gift of tongues that he thus speaks: but (force of the ) that he wished them all to speak with tongues, but rather that they should prophesy. The distinction between the acc. and inf. after , as the simple direct object of the wish, and with the subj., as its higher and ulterior object, has been lost in the E. V. The second is opposed to the subordinate . ., as in 1Co 14:1 to .
] is transitional.
] see reff.,-superior in usefulness, and therefore in dignity.
is a mixture of two constructions, , and . It is not a Hebraism, as Grot, supposes; Wetst. gives examples from Demosth., Aristides, Lucian, Sextus Empiricus: and from Thom. Mag., , , .
] viz. , not , as suggested by Flatt. On the subj. with , giving a sense not distinguishable from the ind., see Winer, edn. 6, 41. b. 2 end, and Herm., on Soph. Ant[63] 706.
[63] Antiochus of Ptolemais, 614
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 14:5. , with tongues) The Corinthians chiefly cultivated this gift; and Paul does not consider them as doing wrong, but he reduces it to order: see 1Co 14:12.-, greater) more useful, 1Co 14:6.-) elegantly expresses the position of the interpreter between him, who speaks in an unknown tongue, and the hearer. If the very same person, who speaks in an unknown tongue, also acts as interpreter, then the very same person in a manner comes in between himself and the hearer; according to the different point of view in which he is regarded.- , the Church) seeking [1Co 14:12] edification; may receive it in consonance with this [viz. with seeking].
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 14:5
1Co 14:5
Now I would have you all speak with tongues,-Since it helps him who speaks in an unknown tongue, he would be glad for all to do so.
but rather that ye should prophesy:-Prophesying helps both the prophet and the church, and for that reason he would rather they prophesied.
and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues,-He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, because he does more good than he who speaks in tongues.
except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.- This is the only way to instruct and build up those who hear those who speak in an unknown tongue.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
would: 1Co 12:28-30, 1Co 13:4, Num 11:28, Num 11:29
for: 1Co 14:1, 1Co 14:3
except: 1Co 14:12, 1Co 14:13, 1Co 14:26-28, 1Co 12:10, 1Co 12:30
Reciprocal: Gen 30:34 – General Mar 16:17 – they Act 2:4 – began Act 9:31 – were edified 1Co 1:5 – in all 1Co 4:19 – I 1Co 12:7 – General 1Co 14:39 – covet Eph 4:12 – the edifying 1Th 5:11 – and edify
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Co 14:5. Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesybecause tongues require an interpreter, else they are a heap of unmeaning sounds, whereas by prophecy all may at once benefit.
Note.Could anything make it clearer that speaking with tongues meant speaking in articulate and actually spoken languages, unknown to the speaker save through an interpreterhimself or another? All other explanations are forced and inconsistent with the plain facts of the case, while some of them carry absurdity on their face.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
1Co 14:5. I would that ye all spake with tongues In as great a variety as God hath imparted that gift to any man living; but rather that ye prophesied For when we consider the different effects and tendencies of these different gifts, we must acknowledge that, with respect to the prospects of usefulness by which these things are to be estimated, greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues Which those who hear him cannot understand; except he interpret Or rather, except some one interpret; for it appears from 1Co 14:28, that what was spoken in an unknown tongue was usually interpreted by another person, and not by the person who spoke it, the interpretation of tongues being, in the first church, a distinct gift. See on 1Co 12:10. That the church may receive edifying Which it might, it seems, equally receive if the things spoken had been delivered only in a language understood by the auditory, and not first in an unknown tongue. How happily does the apostle here teach us to estimate the value of gifts and talents, not by their brilliancy, but usefulness. Speaking with tongues was indeed very serviceable for spreading the gospel abroad; but for those who remained at home, it was much more desirable to be able to discourse well on useful subjects in their own language, which might serve more for the improvement of the society they belonged to, and the conviction of such of their unbelieving neighbours as might, out of curiosity, happen to step into the assemblies. Doddridge.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vv. 5. Now I would that ye all spake in tongues, and rather that ye prophesied; but greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the Church may receive edifying.
The following is the result of 1Co 14:1-4 : the gift of tongues is a good thing; but prophecy is superior to it, unless by interpretation the discourse in a tongue be transformed into prophecy. The first is progressive, now: Now I do not reject glossolalia, I desire that it should abound; but I desire still more earnestly the development of the gift of prophecy.
The , for, which, in the Greco-Lat. and Byz. texts, connects the second part of the verse with the first, has been substituted for the much more difficult , which is the reading of the Alex. The is adversative; it is well explained by Holsten: But yet there is a case in which the man who speaks in a tongue is as great as the prophet. The term great is used here from the standpoint of utility. The measure of this greatness is borrowed from the principle of charity.
In the form , unless…not, the , not, is a pleonasm arising from the mixing of the two following constructions: excepting if ( ), and: if not ( ).
The subject of except he interpret can be no other than the glossolalete himself. No doubt, failing him, some other might do it (comp. 1Co 14:27). But, as a rule, Paul expected that he should do it himself (1Co 14:13; 1Co 14:15). There was thus less room left for arbitrariness. By way of analogy, we may imagine a man coming out of a dream and explaining what he has seen and heard, and so giving account of the broken exclamations and words which the bystanders had heard without understanding them.
The , in the verb, indicates the detailed, discursive element of the contents of the brief and summary sayings uttered in a tongue.
The complete uselessness of tongues without interpretation is demonstrated in what follows by a series of examples, 1Co 14:6-12.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater [because more profitable] is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
5. I wish you all to speak with tongues, but rather that you may prophesy; but greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues unless he interpret in order that the church may receive edification. E. g., I preach, teach and write constantly from the original Greek, making no use of the English translations. Now suppose I should read and speak the Greek; you know it would be unintelligible and of no value to the hearer. Hence in so doing I would not only forfeit my opportunities to do good, but actually grieve the Holy Spirit. Hence I do not use this unknown tongue in my ministry to the people, though I have it constantly before my eyes; but I translate it whether preaching by speech or pen, so the people receive the truth in plain English. While the use of this dead language to me is invaluable, and through me to others of infinite value; yet prophesying,.
e. g., speaking and writing to them in their own language, is infinitely more important, so they can receive it. Hence Paul gives the constant preeminence to prophecy, i. e., that spiritual gift which qualifies us to talk salvation to everybody we meet, thus preaching with the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven, with the grand end in view that the church may receive edification. Oh, what a burning emphasis Paul lays on this injunction! We should constantly watch and be sure that everything is edifying to the church. I preached a funeral yesterday; the organ made so much noise and the voices were so indistinct, that the good and suitable funeral songs which they sang were not intelligently heard by the people. We have no criticism for instrumental music, if it does not destroy the intelligence of the gospel in song. In this way, religious meetings lose their interest and utterly break down. God here commands us to sing with the spirit and the understanding. We have no right to do anything in a religious meeting in such a way as to render it unintelligible to the people, as all such procedure is subversive of the real interest and grievous to the Holy Spirit, who uses our songs, prayers, testimonies and sermons to reach human spirits through their mental faculties, which proves a failure when unintelligible. When we worship in the spirit and the understanding, i. e., let the Holy Ghost have His way and manage the meeting, and do our part in such a manner as to be understood by the audience, you will always see the glory of God manifested in conviction, conversion, sanctification and edification. Church services are devilishly murdered by unintelligible singing, preludes, interludes and postludes, solos, so indistinct or slow and dead that they are an insult to human intelligence and a contempt of the Divine presence; prayers and testimonies too low and indistinct to be intelligently heard, and highfalutin sermons out of reach of the people. Consequently they resort to artistic phantasmagoria to entertain the people in the house of God, where there should be nothing whatever to attract their attention but the worship of the Most High in the songs of Zion ringing out the awful truth as revealed in Gods Word, fervent and earnest prayers, not only replete with gospel truth, but so loud and distinct that the people all hear them without an effort; testimonies fired by the Holy Ghost, full of gospel truth; and so clear and intelligent as to reach every auditor; and especially the preaching, clear, plain, distinct and irresistibly intelligible to all the people. As a rule, the people get so far from the preacher that the message loses its force before it reaches them; they miss words enough in every sentence to lose the connection and forfeit the intelligibility. Consequently the people go to meeting day after day and get nothing. No wonder they are not saved. Gods plan is to reach them through the mental faculties with which He has endued them. In this matter there is a fearful responsibility. Look out! God Almighty is going to make inquisition for blood in the Judgment Day. What will become of the preachers who so overtly violate the commandments of God in this paragraph, conducting services in their churches Sabbath after Sabbath, which are almost as unintelligible as if in an unknown language? The singing is done by Satans choir in an operatic, fantastical and utterly unintelligible way. The drag, humdrum routine is literally murderous to spiritual life. So fast as Satan tightens his grip on a church the services pass out of the comprehension of the people, lest they may get a little bit of gospel truth and be saved. Hence we see this problem verified in wicked, debauched Romanism, where the service is spoken in the old Latin language throughout the whole world, for people speaking a hundred different languages know not a word of this dead Latin. Even the citizens of Rome do not understand it, because a radical revolution has taken place, relegating the Latin to the archives of antiquity and giving the modern Italians an entirely different language. It is a fact patent to all and deniable by none that the Roman Catholic Church throughout the world is positively and overtly violating the plain commandments of God in this paragraph by holding their services in the Latin language.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Paul acknowledged the value of the gift of tongues even though it also required an interpreter. Nevertheless he made it clear that the ability to prophesy was more important. The issue, again, is private versus public benefit. Since Paul depreciated speaking in tongues without interpretation so strongly, it seems very likely that this is what the Corinthians were doing in their meetings. The real issue was not a conflict between tongues and prophecy, however, but between unintelligible and intelligible speech.
In this whole discussion "prophecy" evidently refers primarily to an impromptu word that someone would share in a service in which congregational participation was possible more than to a prepared sermon.