1 Corinthians 14:26-40
“All Things to be Done in Order”
Sermon by
Mark A. Horne
This week we are finishing our study on spiritual gifts and are one week away from finishing our study on 1 Corinthians. Before we get started with the present text, let’s review verses 20-25 because I think they set the tone for the rest of chapter 14.
If you will remember from last week, Paul’s tone changes in verse 20. With his introduction of “brothers” and the comparison of the congregation to little children, Paul begins chastising his church. Paul uses strident emphasis to point out the Corinthians faulty use of tongues and prophecy. Paul also introduces a new factor to this discussion, which is unbelievers seemed to be visiting the congregation. Paul wanted the Corinthians to consider these new people, especially in light of speaking intelligently about Christ and most importantly their representation of Christian edification towards each other in the presence of the unbelievers. Paul wanted those who lifted up their ability to speak in tongues to not be surprised if an unbeliever thinks they were possessed. Though Paul affirms that tongues do have a place in the Church universal, they must take a back seat to prophesy. It is through prophecy that real communication takes place with an unbeliever. Paul states that it may just be this communication that is designed by the Spirit to expose the secrets within the unbeliever’s heart and convict him or her of sin, bringing them to repentance and worship. Within these context there raises another question of just how far can the universality of such descriptions be pressed? It is this question that leads us to our present text.
To answer this question we will need to note three points:
1. Order in Public Worship
2. Warning
3. Summary
First, order in public worship. Though verse 26 lists several of the gifts, its primary function is to set the stage for a renewed discussion of tongues in verses 27-28 and prophesy in verses 29-33. Also we will note that the second half of verse 33 through verse 36 is not unrelated to the gifts of prophecy. Yet, the preliminary question this passage brings to our attention is this: who may prophesy? We know from chapter 12 verse 29 that the rhetorical question implies that not everyone could be a prophet.
Let’s discuss for the moment verse 26. Paul’s introductory question anticipates what he thinks can be learned from the discussion so far. His position, that he seems to be trying to drive into the hearts and minds of his congregation, is that whatever gifts to be done when a church gathers is to be done for the edification of the church.
Then Paul renews the discussion of tongues in verses 27-28 by imposing three specific limitations to this gift. The first limitation is that an interpreter be present (though how that interpreter is identified in advance is not specified). Second, only one speaker may speak at a time. And third, only two or at the most three may speak. This was to be done so that the worship is not too unmanageable or even so the tongue speakers not assume such a prominent place. The one who is speaking should also have control over themselves and when they are speaking those sitting are to keep quiet. This produces a dynamic tension between the speaker who is the vehicle and the Holy Spirit who is leading that person.
In verses 29 through the first part of 33 there are also some issues Paul confirms with the prophets like he did the tongue-speakers. First, there is a limitation to the number of prophets who should speak at one meeting. Second, the prophets should retain control of their spirits throughout the prophesying (again hinting a dynamic tension between the Holy Spirit and the one He is using). Third, we must presume that the information the prophet is spreading is not from study but revelation. The “others” Paul refers to in verse 29 that were to “judge” or discern were the rest of the congregation, not just the other prophets. This is something that we need to apply in our situation today. Where we have so many books being written and preachers preaching on television about the end times and prophecies to come, we as Christians should test what is being said. Paul made it a common practice that a prophet who treated his or her prophecy so immediate and untarnished by divine inspiration allows for other true believers to judge what he has said. If one is so dogmatic in his position and not allow others to discern what he has said then he should come under suspicion of the church. D.A. Carson says this: “One of the more troubling aspects of some parts of the modern charismatic movement is the frequency with which prophesies are given as direct quotations from the Lord (even though that pattern is extraordinarily rare in the New Testament). This aberration is then compounded by far too little attention to the importance of Paul’s exhortation to weigh out what is said, or in 1 Thessalonians 5, to test everything. The inevitable result is that some charismatic leaders and their followers treat the prophesies of their leaders as if they possess the unqualified authority of God himself, and such authority on American religious television programming is transmuted into a fund-raising device….” I hope that whatever you hear from a spiritual leader, and I include myself and any ruling elder or teacher in this church, that you study and evaluate the claims he make to see whether it is truth and Scriptural.
The divine reality given in the first part of verse 33 is that our God is not a God of disorder, but of peace. This does not mean that we should hold dear and tight to the traditions we have established or does it sanctify stuffiness, we are allowed to change; but it does warn us about the opposite end of the spectrum that I think certain American denominations or independent churches will be accountable for. Paul is explaining that no church should pursue freedom in worship at the expense of order, or unrestrained spontaneity at the expense of reverence.
Thus we enter into the discussion of the restriction Paul placed on women in the second half of 33 through verse 36. As you can imagine this is a highly disputed passage. This passage is one that many seem to hone in on in modern day religious circles from the side that women should keep silent in church and the side that women’s silence at all times is not the ultimate intent of Paul. One of the main arguments is how we should read verses 33 and 34. Is it “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace, as in all the congregations of the saints (NKJV)?” Or should it be read “As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches (NIV)?” Let me state here that the issue is not one to determine salvation. I am not going to bind your conscience on which way to read these sentences. For the issue is a matter of one’s view of translation. However, I feel led to translate the passage as “as in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches.” I have two reasons for doing this. First, If you read the passage the other way there is a logistic and stylistic issue to consider. God is God. Of course the God of peace will be the God of all the congregations of the saints. I think this translation makes the reading trite and meaningless. The second reason why I like the NIV’s rendering of the verses is that it gives better emphasis to what is being compared. In other words, it gives more light to what is happening with women in all the congregations. In the Greek the same word is used for congregations and churches. Thus you could read it as congregations / congregations or churches /churches, which again places emphasis on the issue at hand.
Understanding this, I believe that Paul is not saying that women should keep silent in the church to where they never speak. In light of other passages such chapter 11 verse 5 and Paul’s reliance upon women and couples in his church, I don’t think Paul intends women to just sit in a pew like a knot on a log. However, in light of such passages as chapter 11 verses 8 and 9 and 1 Timothy 2:13, I believe Paul is emphasizing the role women play in the church. Why do I say it like this? Well, Paul has been emphasizing in this passage orderly worship. And he has required that the church in Corinth carefully weigh the prophecies presented to it. We know from chapter 11 that he allows for women to participate in these prophecies, but here I think Paul means they should not participate in weighing, testing or judging such prophecies. This is what was not allowed in all the other churches of the saints and why I like the NIV’s rendering better. It is in this connection that they are not allowed to speak – “as the Law says.” This also goes more with Paul’s line of thinking where he refers to the Genesis account in chapter 2:20-24 in the two other places already mentioned. The genesis 2 account does not force women to be silent at all times, but it suggest that because man was made first and woman was made for man, a pattern was laid down regarding the roles the two play. Paul understands from the creation account that the woman is to be subject to the man – or at least the wife subject to the husband. In the context of the Corinthian weighing of prophecies, such submission could not be preserved if the wife is to be subject to the husband. Also, we know from 1 Timothy 2:11 that Paul refused to allow any woman enjoy teaching over a man and the careful weighing of prophesies fall under that magisterial function. Thus the woman should excel in her learning with understanding that she should question her husband at home. I think that because the immediately preceding verses deal with the evaluation of prophets; these verses further refine that discussion. And we must remember that this is not all the Bible has to say about the relationships between men and women. I have said nothing about the command that the husband ought to love the wife as Christ loved the church – an extremely high standard characterized by exquisite self-giving. I have said nothing about other duties Paul records for women. What is essential is that this teaching is for our good, not for our enslavement.
This leads us to our final two points that I will be brief for they are quite self-explanatory.
In verses 37 – 38 Paul gives a warning to his church, not just the women. I think part of the answer that the Corinthians had to say upon Paul’s question is that they received the word originally from him. Paul was the one who first preached it to them. And because of that alone all the things that he has said to them in this epistle (not just the issue about women), that they should understand has authority of the risen Christ himself. The Corinthians should submit to the Lord’s authority because if they don’t then they deny Jesus’ lordship. Also notice here that Paul’s emphasis on prophecy is because he understands it as revelatory. But, he also concludes that the authority of the prophets is not absolute. It is only authority when it agrees with the Apostles teaching and with the Law, or the Word of God. If their prophecy does not agree then it should be rejected. The one with the Holy Spirit recognizes the authority and submits to the apostolic writings, not simply because they are the writings of an apostle, but because they are the Lord’s command, and therefore tie to the believers confession that “Jesus is Lord!” And Paul writes that if anyone succumbs to the temptation to ignore this then God will ignore them, even the church as a whole such as the Corinthian church was on the verge of being ignored because of their pride.
In verses 39 and 40 we have a forcible contrast between prophecy and tongues. A strong summary to what he has discussed in chapter14. I will sum up this summary with an illustration that, again, D.A. Carson uses: “Some time ago a pastor in England discussed some of these matters with a well-known charismatic clergyman. The charismatic, doubtless think of Paul’s words, “Do not forbid speaking in tongues,” asked the reformer what he would do if someone began speaking in tongues at on of the meetings of the church he served. The pastor replied “I’d allow the tongues-speaker to finish, and if there were an interpretation immediately forthcoming, and not proselytizing in the ensuing weeks, I’d have no objection.”
Then he paused, and asked in return, “But what would you do if there were no public tongue-speaking in your church for six months or so?”
“Ah,” the charismatic replied, “I’d be devastated.”
There is the difference between us,” the pastor replied; “for you think tongue-speaking is indispensable. I see it as dispensable, but not forbidden.”
And that surely is Paul’s distinction in chapter 14. For God wants the church service done in a fitting and orderly way; and for Paul that means nothing less than what he has described in our text this morning. Paul’s chief aim in our passage was not to lay out an exhaustive list of necessary ingredients for corporate worship, but that the unleashed power of the Holy Spirit characteristic of this new age must be exercised in a framework of order, intelligibility, appropriateness, seemliness, dignity, and peace. For that is the nature of the God for whom we worship.
Let Us Pray: Dear Heavenly Father. Thank you for your Word given through the Apostles which has been preserved through the ages for our study today. I pray Lord that you will help us understand our place of reverence in worshiping you. That we will take heed to the warning to not be ignorant and ignore your Holy Word. And that we will search for the peace that your nature displays to us each day by grace and mercy. Dear Lord we pray for truthful discernment of what is taught in your Holy Word, for all of this in your Son’s Holy name we pray, Amen.