BIG IDEA:
THE ORDERLY PATTERN FOR WORSHIP LEADERSHIP IN THE CHURCH INVOLVES MULTIPLE GIFTED MEN PROMOTING THE GOAL OF EDIFICATION
INTRODUCTION:
There is a pattern for worship leadership in the church. There are appropriate ways to achieve the goal of edification; there are inappropriate ways. The role of gifted men is different from that of gifted women. Need to determine if this passage addresses the church as it comes together in its entirety or just as it meets in smaller house church or flock group meetings. It would seem that the corporate meeting of the entire church is in view. However, in either case, these principles would seem to apply.
David Garland: In the final unit of chapters 12–14, Paul issues regulations for worship. Gatherings in which each person could make a contribution under the guidance of the Holy Spirit need some ground rules. Openness to the Spirit and to individual expression of spiritual gifts is not to become a pretext for chaos. Paul does not see tongues or prophecy as a solo performance. The glossolalist requires an interpreter; the prophet requires reviewers who assess what is said (Friedrich, TDNT 6:852). He offers three criteria to control what is done.
- First, edifying others becomes the touchstone to determine the fitness of everything that is done in the Corinthians’ worship. Contributions to the church’s worship are not to become an ego trip or an exercise in “unbridled individualism” (Talbert 1987: 93).
- Second, they are to speak one at a time (14:27, 30, 31) and may be limited to no more than three speaking at any given gathering (14:27, 29).
- Third, they are to do nothing that is shameful (14:35); wives are to refrain from speaking in any way that brings shame or shows insubordination.
His discussion can be outlined as follows:
- Restraints concerning speaking in tongues (14:27–28)
2. Restraints concerning prophecy and discernment (14:29–36)
- Restraints on the number of prophets speaking and others discerning (14:29)
- Restraints on a prophet speaking (14:30–33a)
- Restraints on wives in discerning (14:33b–36)
3. Injunction (14:37–38)
4. Encouragement of prophecy and tongues (14:39)
5. Concluding statement of general principles for worship gatherings: all things must be done in decency and order (14:40)
This unit is similar to the conclusion of Paul’s long discussion of the issues related to idol food in 10:23 – 11:1 in that it gives specific instructions about what should be done in concrete situations. The pattern for his instructions in both passages is comparable:
Statement of general principles
- All things are to be done for the edification of others (10:23–24 / 14:26)
Specific instructions for one situation
- Eating whatever is sold in the public market (10:25)
- Speaking in tongues (14:27–28)
Theological rationale
- The earth is the Lord’s (10:26)
Specific instructions for a second, correlative situation
- Eating in an unbeliever’s home (10:27)
- Prophecy (14:29–32)
Theological rationale
- God is not a God of disorder but of peace (14:33a)
Exception applicable to the second situation
- If someone points out that it is idol food (10:28–29a)
- Wives joining in the evaluation of prophecy (14:33b–35)
General principle stated as a question
- Partaking thankfully (10:29b–30)
- The word of God not reaching the Corinthians alone (14:36)
Concluding statement of general principles
- Do all to the glory of God (10:31 – 11:1)
- Do all things properly and in good order (14:37–40)
I. (:26-33) CONNECTION BETWEEN ORDERLINESS AND EDIFICATION
Richard Hays: In verses 26–33, Paul sketches a picture of a free-flowing community gathering under the guidance of the Holy Spirit in which “each one” contributes something to the mix. Clearly there was no fixed order of service, no printed bulletin for the worshipers! Nor — more remarkably — is anything said of a leader to preside over the meeting. Apparently Paul expects all the members to follow the promptings of the Spirit, taking turns in offering their gifts for the benefit of the assembly, deferring to one another (vv. 29–30) and learning from one another. The meeting will include singing, teaching (probably exposition of Scripture), revelatory utterances (prophecy and its cognates, cf. v. 6), and praise to God in tongues with interpretation. . .
The overall picture that emerges from these instructions is of a church in which the Spirit is palpably present, flowing freely in the communal worship through the complementary gifts of different members. In Paul’s vision for Christian worship there is neither stiff formality nor undisciplined frenzy: the community’s worship is more like a complex but graceful dance, or a beautiful anthem sung in counterpoint. . . If the Corinthian worship meetings are chaotic and conflictual, the question must be raised: What God are they really worshiping? The term akatastasis has connotations of civil strife and rebellion (M. Mitchell, 173). This is one more hint that the problems in Corinthian worship are not merely the result of overheated spirituality; they are also linked to the factionalism and defiance of Paul’s authority that have been the consistent concern of this letter. If, however, God is a God of peace, the Corinthians should learn to be at peace with one another and to express that peace in a style of worship that emphasizes concord and complementarity.
A. (:26) Orderliness Essential for Edification
- (:26A) Exercise of Spiritual Gifts Must Achieve Desired Outcome
“What is the outcome then, brethren?”
We have spent a lot of time studying spiritual gifts and the pursuit of love. This has not been just an academic exercise. There is a practical objective of accomplishing the goal of edification within the context of orderly church services.
Robert Gundry: The brotherly relationship is supposed to make the instructions palatable as well as mandatory.
- (:26B) Eclectic, Haphazard Contribution by All Does Not Work
“When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching,
has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation.”
Paul is challenging the appropriateness of their unorganized practice.
Paul Garland: It has been our contention throughout this commentary that the Corinthians have probably taken the more spectacular gifts—those which do indeed perhaps seem more “spontaneous”—and have made them into indicators or markers of spiritual maturity. Throughout Paul has denied them this function. The issue is whether they build up or not. There is no clear reason to limit these gifts to complete spontaneity, even if some may have been given by God in this way. The text does not preclude some people standing up at will in the congregation with a prepared piece of “teaching.”
Anthony Thiselton: Hymn (Greek psalmon) may denote a biblical psalm, a pre-composed hymn, or an innovative utterance sung rather than spoken. Other terms are more akin to their normal modern usage, for example, teaching. Something disclosed (Greek apokalypsis) may denote a stretch of prophetic speech “given” to a speaker from God, but it may equally include a sermon or even a “given” portion of Scripture as God’s revelation.
- (:26C) Edification Must be the Goal
“Let all things be done for edification.”
They have gotten so caught up in themselves and their giftedness that they have lost sight of God’s goal for the church.
David Garland: The thrust of this chapter makes clear that he wishes to thwart those expressions of spiritual gifts that build up only the individual (14:4) and to encourage those gifts that edify the entire community. The controlling factors are to be order, self-control, and concern for others (Fee 1987: 688).
Mark Taylor: The concluding unit of this chapter, 14:26–40, is marked off by an inclusio regarding how “all things must be done” (14:26, 40). All things must be done “for the strengthening of the church” (14:26) and all things must be done “in a fitting and orderly way” (14:40). The two commands complement one another. The church is strengthened (edified) only when everything is done in the right way and in an orderly fashion. Order in worship imitates Christ by taking others into account and brings glory to God, who is the God of peace rather than disorder (14:33; cf. 10:31 – 11:1). Paul’s instructions are theologically grounded.
B. (:27-32) Orderliness Ensured by Following Simple Guidelines / Restrictions
Ray Stedman: Well, I do not like rules either. I basically resist rules, but I learned many years ago that you cannot function as a corporate body without some rules. You cannot play a game of football without rules; the rules make the game possible. You cannot play a game of chess without rules; you cannot drive through traffic without rules.
- (:27-28) Guidelines Involving Speaking in Tongues in Church Meetings
a. Not Too Many – But More Than One
“If anyone speaks in a tongue,
it should be by two or at the most three, “
Why this emphasis on multiple ministry?
b. Not All At Once
“and each in turn,”
c. Not Without an Interpreter
“and let one interpret but if there is no interpreter, let him keep
silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.”
Implied goal is edification of the church – not just speaking to oneself or to God
- (:29-32) Guidelines Involving Prophesying in Church Meetings
a. (:29A) Not Too Many – But More Than One
“And let two or three prophets speak”
b. (:29B) Not Without Checks and Balances
“and let the others pass judgment.”
How do we accomplish this goal of checks and balances in our assembly. Do the elders actively monitor the content of the teaching and preaching and raise appropriate questions or refute error? Do other gifted men have a forum to pass judgment on what has been spoken as well? Importance of discernment
David Garland: Paul does not list any criteria for gauging what a prophet says, but we can infer some norms from his discussions in this letter.
(1) Does what is said accord with the tradition of Jesus (7:10; 9:14; 11:23; 12:3; 15:3; cf. 2 Thess. 2:15 – 3:6) and with the preaching of Christ crucified (1 Cor. 1:18–25)?
(2) Does it accord with the Scripture as it is properly interpreted through Christ (1:19, 31; 4:6)?
(3) Does it accord with what their apostle has handed on to them and taught them (2:1–5; 7:25; 11:2; 15:3)?
(4) Does it accord with sacrificial love for others (13:1–13; 8:1)?
(5) Does it promote the community’s good (14:3–5, 12, 17, 26; cf. 12:7)?
(6) Does it not cause another Christian to stumble in the faith (8:7–13)?
(7) Does it lead outsiders to come to faith by reproving, convicting, and convincing them that God is present in their midst (14:20–25)?
c. (:30-32) Not Without Self Control and Restraint and Consideration
for the Contribution of Others
“But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, let the first
keep silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all
may learn and all may be exhorted; and the spirits of prophets
are subject to prophets;
Implied goal is edification of the entire church – not just speaking to oneself or to God.
Why would God give multiple men in a single church the gift of teaching and preaching? What should be the context for the expression of those gifts?
Does it show a lack of self control and a lack of restraint and a lack of consideration for the contribution of others for the public teaching ministry to be dominated by one man – no matter how singularly gifted?
Robert Gundry: Not only are prophets to speak “one by one.” They’re also to stop prophesying if another prophet receives a revelation. Reception of the revelation while the first prophet is speaking indicates that the Lord wants the first prophecy concluded. Presumably the second prophet signals the first one in the event of a revelation. “For you can all prophesy one by one” gives the reason behind the command that a prophet stop talking if another prophet receives a revelation. This restriction parallels the restriction to one translator for each tongue.
Ray Stedman: nobody was to take over the meeting, Paul says, for two reasons:
- First, because the spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet. Someone might have said, “I can’t help what I say. The Spirit of God is in me and he is speaking through me. Therefore, everything I say is of God.” Paul says, “Rubbish! The spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet. You can help yourself; you need not claim that you just have to say these things.” As someone has said, there are always two kinds of speakers — those who have something to say, and those who have to say something. The apostle is concerned that he limit the latter.
- The second reason he gives is, the Spirit of God never creates confusion or disorder.
Therefore, no one is to dominate a meeting, to run away with it, or consider himself an inspired spokesman because God does not work that way. Let it be orderly and decently done and give room to others to speak and to share in the ministry. Remember, if there is strife, jealousy, confusion, argument, and that kind of thing, it is not a meeting led by the Spirit of God. God does not work that way. When that kind of a meeting is going on, it is some other spirit at work.
John MacArthur: A new revelation took precedence over the reiteration of something that had already been taught. It was not that the truths in the new revelation were necessarily more important than those then being proclaimed, but that, at the moment, the new should be heard while it was fresh from the Lord. That is not an issue in the church today, because the revelation aspect of the prophetic ministry ceased with the completion of the New Testament. But apparently in the early church such conflicts sometimes occurred. When they did, the prophet with the new revelation was to be given the floor. In other words, when God spoke directly, everyone was to listen.
C. (:33) Orderliness Consistent with the Character of the God we Worship
“for God is not a God of confusion but of peace,
as in all the churches of the saints.”
David Garland: Paul clearly believes that persons inspired by the Spirit remain in control of themselves (Conzelmann 1975: 244).[5] They are not “carried away” so that they are not fully responsible for what they say or do, but rather can hold their tongues. By contrast, the Greek world had many religious groups that claimed to have experiences of divine inbreathing, which were likened to playing a flute: the flute plays what is breathed into it, no more, no less. The enthusiast is compelled to speak and has no control over it. Philo (Plant. 9 §39) shares such a view in describing the psalmist, who cries, “Delight in the Lord” (Ps. 36:4 LXX), as moved to an ecstasy of heavenly and divine love, and whose “whole mind” was snatched up “in holy frenzy [οἴστρῳ, oistrō] by a divine possession.” The noun οἶστρος is a term for a tormenting insect and is used metaphorically to describe “insane passion” or “madness,” such as the Maenads caught up in a Dionysian frenzy (Euripides, Bacchae [Bacchanals] 665). By contrast, Paul does not view tongues as an uncontrollable emotional experience that overpowers an individual. The promptings of the Spirit do not contribute to confusion or unbridled outbursts. In fact, Paul lists “self-control” as one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:23). If tongues are of the Holy Spirit, then one should be able to hold one’s peace to maintain order in the worship so that things do not get out of hand. Fee (1987: 692) comments, “It is indeed the Spirit who speaks, but he speaks through the controlled instrumentality of the believer’s own mind and tongue. In this regard it is no different from the inspired utterances of the OT prophets, which were spoken at the appropriate times and settings.”
Paul Gardner: Paul has been clear that “love” is the marker that authenticates true Christian existence. The spiritually mature person exhibits love because he or she will reflect the image of God. So Paul returns to the character of God himself. God is a God of “peace” and hence not of “disorder.” Nowhere should this “imaging” of God be more clearly seen than in the worship of the gathered congregation. As Paul ends this section, therefore, his concern remains for the building up of the body of Christ even when he is talking about an especially useful gift like prophecy. All the good learning and encouragement (v. 31) that should come from a prophecy comes to nothing if the presentation of the prophetic messages is not ordered in a humble and peaceable way. Paul will say more about the prophets in 14:37–38, but his comments on order in worship now turn to the matter of “the women.”
II. (:34-35) CORRECTION REGARDING THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE PUBLIC CHURCH SERVICES – NOT A VOCAL, TEACHING, AUTHORITATIVE ROLE
A. (:34) Role of Women Defined – Two Broad Injunctions
- With Regards to Their Role in Public Teaching – Keep Silent
“Let the women keep silent in the churches;
for they are not permitted to speak”
Robert Gundry: The command that corresponds to all the churches’ custom is that “the women are to keep quiet in the churches; for it’s not permitted for them to speak.” But in 11:2–16 Paul laid down a condition under which women could indeed speak in church meetings—by way of praying and prophesying.[9] So what kind of speaking is prohibited here? The contrast with being in subjection indicates speaking by way of contradicting the message of a prophet. There may have been, incidentally, something of a women’s liberation movement in the first-century Roman Empire, a movement that would have encouraged the speaking prohibited here by Paul. He’s still concerned to avoid “disorder” and maintain “peace” (14:33a). On the other hand, he respects the desire of women to learn, but says they should direct enquiring questions to their husbands at home. For asking such questions in church would not only interrupt the prophesying but also hinder the purpose of prophecy “that all may learn” (14:31). Church meetings have the purpose of corporate learning, which is a form of corporate edification such as Paul has been advocating all the way through chapters 12–14. Individual learning can take place “at home.” Paul says that the Law commands women to be in subjection but doesn’t cite any passage in particular. Apparently, then, his arguing in 11:7–12 from Genesis 1–2 (“the Law”) for the subjection of women carries over to the present passage. He’s also concerned that they not shame their husbands with contrarian comments and interruptive questions directed to men not their husbands. In a culture that traditionally frowned on public discourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, such shaming would disrecommend the gospel — hence Paul’s command that women ask “their own husbands” (compare 11:5).
David Garland: The situation that best fits the adjective “shameful” is one in which wives defy convention by publicly embarrassing their husbands through their speaking. In the context, it is likely that Paul imagines a wife joining in the process of weighing what is being said during the congregational scrutiny of prophecy (14:29). They either raise questions or contradict their husbands or other senior male relatives. By doing so, they compromise their husband’s authority over them and appear to undermine the good order of the household (Dunn 1998: 592). The problem, then, concerns how wives are to comport themselves in the public sphere in the context of examining prophecies and has nothing to do with the public ministry of women, as many suppose (Ellis 1981: 217). Paul does not contradict what he says in 11:5 but imposes silence on wives in matters other than praying and prophesying.
Paul Gardner: There is no contradiction with Paul allowing women to prophesy and to pray in 11:5. They have not been asked here to refrain from speaking prophecies. In fact “all” have been encouraged to do so. Rather, they have been asked to refrain from speaking during the “judging” of those prophecies and, perhaps specifically, during the judging of the prophecies of their own husbands.
Alternate View:
Mark Taylor: Paul’s concern is not with the wives’ speech per se or with their participation in the evaluation of prophecy but with behavior that would be offensive to their husbands. The reference to submission would be understood in Paul’s world as a reference to the wife’s submission to her husband. While asking one’s husband questions or calling into question their prophecies would bring shame, Ciampa and Rosner think it is more likely that women were asking questions of other men during the church meeting that would have brought shame on her husband. Thus, the improper questions were not necessarily related to the weighing of prophecies but other kinds of disruptive questions that would have been considered shameful. The clearest hint of what was occurring is found in 14:35, that is, the desire for the wives to learn and asking their husbands at home.
- With Regards to Their Submission to Male Authority – Submit Themselves
“but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also says.”
Doug Jeffries: Prophesying and speaking in tongues involve teaching, transmitting truth and revelation. A woman, who is to be in submission to male authority, should never seek to overshadow that authority. This does not mean that she is not endowed with these gifts, which she can use privately. Neither does it mean that she cannot pray or sing, because neither of these actions involve exercising authority.
B. (:35) Proper Context for Doctrinal Interaction
“And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home;”
Seems to imply a much greater role of participation on the part of a larger number of men than what we see in our church services.
C. (:35B) Appropriateness of This Role Reiterated
“for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.”
III. (:36-38) CAUTION AGAINST PRIDEFULLY ASSERTING SOME INDEPENDENT STANDARDS FOR CORPORATE WORSHIP SERVICES
Craig Blomberg: Verses 36–38 thus challenge the Corinthians not to reject Paul’s counsel lightly. If every other Christian church practiced what Paul preached on this matter, who are they to be the sole exceptions (v. 36)? Those who contested Paul’s teaching undoubtedly justified their rebellion by claiming the Spirit’s direction (v. 37a). So Paul adds that if they are truly Spirit-led they will come to acknowledge his views as from the Lord (v. 37b). If they continue to go their own way, they demonstrate that they are out of touch with the Spirit, and the Lord will continue to ignore them and to accomplish his work without them (v. 38).
A. (:36) Caution Based on the Source and Scope of the Word of God
- Source — Did Not Originate FromYou
“Was it from you that the word of God first went forth?”
- Scope — Was Not Limited toYou
“Or has it come to you only?”
B. (:37-38) Caution Based on Respect for Apostolic Authority –
Communicating Divine Commands must be in the context of recognizing and submitting to the Authority of the Word of God
- (:37A) Warning Against Pride
“If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual”
- (:37B) Assertion of Apostolic Authority
“let him recognize that the things which I write to you
are the Lord’s commandment.”
David Prior: Paul ends the general discussion on spirituality (chapters 12–14) and the specific teaching on prophecy (chapter 14) with a strongly worded statement about his authority as an apostle: what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. Obviously there were many Christians at Corinth laying claim to being really spiritual: Paul’s response to such claims points out that true spirituality is not arrogant and self-assertive, but accepts the authority of those set over them in the Lord. To those Corinthians who prided themselves on being prophets – an attitude which often seems to characterize those used in the prophetic ministry – Paul also emphasizes the call to recognize the authority behind his remarks. Any tendency to think that we are right, while the rest of the church universal is wrong, is both arrogant and dangerous.
John MacArthur: In verses 37-38 Paul gives perhaps his strongest claim to authority as God’s apostle. Paul had personal limitations and blind spots, which he freely recognized (see, e.g., Phil. 3:12-14). But when he spoke for God, his views were not tainted by cultural or personal bias. He did not, for instance, teach the submission of women in the church because of his Jewish background or in order to conform to any personal male chauvinism. He taught that truth because he himself had been so taught by the Lord. Paul did not claim omniscience, but he claimed unequivocally that everything he taught about God, about His gospel, and about His church was God’s own teaching, the Lord’s commandment.
- (:38) Litmus Test for Legitimacy
“But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.”
Beware of anyone who is not willing to submit to the authority of the Word of God; or who appeals to some type of subjective experience for legitimacy rather than putting the priority on the Word of God
Anthony Thiselton: The force of v. 38a, If anyone does not recognize it, he or she is not recognized, performs the speech act of withdrawing recognition of claims. More important still, it reflects the “internal grammar” of 1 Cor. 3:18, “If anyone thinks himself wise, let that person become a fool in order to become wise.” This axiom follows 3:17: “If anyone destroys God’s temple, that person will God destroy.” Each respective action brings a self-defeating axiomatic penalty of self-loss. To step beyond the bounds is thereby to show the emptiness or lack of validity of the claim. This becomes all the clearer when the cross is perceived as both “ground and criterion” of the gospel and the church, especially in 1:18 – 2:5.
IV. (:39-40) CONCLUSION: THE ORDERLY PATTERN FOR WORSHIP LEADERSHIP IN THE CHURCH INVOLVES MULTIPLE GIFTED MEN PROMOTING THE GOAL OF EDIFICATION
A. (:39) Pursue the Goal of Edification
- Priority on Prophesying
“Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy”
Robert Gundry: “And so” introduces a wrap-up of chapters 12–14.
- Prudence Regarding Speaking in Tongues
“and do not forbid to speak in tongues.”
B. (:40) Practice Orderliness in the Church Services
“But let all things be done properly and in an orderly manner.”
Paul Gardner: There is a right and proper way for Christians to live before outsiders that reflects who they are and who they worship. The word is used here not in a moral context of life lived before outsiders but in a church context of worship before God. There is a right way to behave and a wrong way. Paul has described the right way for people to conduct themselves in corporate worship, and so all things must be done “properly” (or “decently”). To this Paul adds, “and in an orderly manner.” This has been the key point. Since God is a God of peace and not confusion and since he brings order to everything, all must be done in a way that reflects him “in an orderly manner” (κατὰ τάξιν).