There is much debate over the issue of revelatory gifts in the church today. Part of that discussion centers on the gift of tongues in general and the nature of that gift in particular. Is the gift of tongues a gift related to known languages or is it a gift related to a private prayer language? While the revelatory gifts are spelled out in Scripture, including that of speaking in tongues, the concept of a private prayer language is foreign to the Scriptures. The New Testament gift of tongues refers to known languages. Not only is the gift of tongues defined in Acts 2:4-11, but the concept of a private prayer language flows from a misinterpretation of 1 Cor. 14:2-4 and 14:13-17.

 

The issue of tongues in Acts can be dispensed with quickly by a simple reading of the text. “4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. 5 And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. 6 And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language. 7 Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, ‘Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and Arabs--we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.’”

 

Two points can be made here. First, no less than four times in this text is the statement made that the gift of tongues was the gift of known languages (6; 7; 8; 11). Second, unless Paul redefines tongues in 1 Corinthians, (which he doesn’t), then this definitive word in Acts must control our understanding of what the gift of tongues is.

 

Concerning 1 Cor. 14:2-4, in v. 2, Paul begins to outline the primary reasons the individual Christian should desire the gift of prophecy over the gift of tongues. He says, “For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.” Several points may be made here.

 

The first point is that it is critical we understand Paul in context. His discussion flows out of this verse and his point is crystal clear. That point is that when a person speaks in tongues without an interpretation, he is not edifying the church and thus should not engage in such activity. Edification is an absolute necessity or else the manifestation of the gift is worthless (v. 9) and even damaging (v. 23). The following verses attest to Paul’s point regarding the necessity of the congregation understanding that which is being spoken and the command to cease from tongues without that understanding by way of interpretation (3; 4; 5; 6-7; 8-9; 10-11; 12; 13-14; 15-16; 17; 18-19; 26). Indeed, in the remaining verses of the chapter, the same dynamic is strongly implied. This point must control our interpretation of v. 2.

 

The second point is that Paul says that “he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God.” Paul does not infer that tongues is a private prayer language as some have suggested. The book of Acts confirms that the gift of tongues is for the purpose of proclaiming the wonderful works of God. At the same time, here in 1 Corinthians, Paul affirms that the gift of tongues, when exercised properly, is for the edification of the body. That is Paul’s point here. He goes on to explain what he means by his opening statement. Again, he says, “for he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him.” We may not overlook the connecting “for” between the clauses in Paul’s sentence. Rather than affirming that tongues is a private prayer language, Paul is simply saying that if a man speaks in tongues (without an interpreter) in the local assembly, no one understands him. He is simply speaking to God in the sense that no one can understand him. If a man cannot be understood, he cannot edify the body. Therefore, he should remain silent. Remember that Paul’s point in the chapter must control our understanding of these phrases in v. 2. Otherwise, we read presuppositions into the text that are not there.

 

The third point is that Paul uses a similar phrase later in this same context to say the same thing. In v. 9, he simply says if one speaks in a tongue and no one understands, he is “simply speaking into the air.” The phrase “does not speak to men but to God” in v. 1 functions as a synonym to the phrase “speaking into the air” in v. 9.

 

The fourth point is that Paul says that this man who speaks in tongues is not understood because “in the spirit he speaks mysteries.” Three dynamics must be made clear. Firstly, abounding are those with fanciful interpretations of this verse. Some take Paul to be affirming tongues as a private prayer language in which one speaks in an ecstatic sense, or, as one may say, gibberish. They would say that even the one speaking in tongues has no idea of what he is saying. They would say the phrase “unknown tongues” in the KJV supports their claim. However, the fact is that the word “unknown” has been inserted into the KJV text. It is not in the Greek text. “Unknown” is simply a way of saying “foreign” or, “in a language not known to the one speaking.” Since the word “unknown” is not in the Greek text, one cannot use the word to claim that tongues is ecstatic speech. Paul affirms no such thing.

 

Secondly, some point to the word “mysteries” to affirm that tongues is ecstatic speech. Again, one must read presuppositions into the text to come up with such an interpretation. The gift of tongues is not ecstatic speech. As noted, the gift is given that God’s gospel might be proclaimed in known languages as a sign.

 

Thirdly, we may ask, what is Paul saying? To what does the word “mysteries” refer? Again, he is simply saying that tongues with no interpretation serves no purpose. Whether one takes the word “spirit” to refer to the Holy Spirit or an individual’s spirit makes little difference. The gift of tongues is certainly a manifestation of the Holy Spirit and one speaks out of his own spirit. Paul’s point is that as one speaks in a tongue without interpretation, without edifying the church, one is “speaking mysteries.” As noted in our commentary on 13:2, the word “mystery” is defined in that verse as “revelation.” Moreover, as noted, the word “mystery” is a technical term in the New Testament and refers to truth alluded to in the Old Testament but now revealed or unveiled in the New. The unveiling in the New came by way of direct revelation from God to the apostles (Rom. 11:25; 16:25; 1 Cor. 2:7; 15:51; Eph. 1:9; 3:3: 4; 9; 5:32; 6:19; Col. 1:26-27; 2:2; 4:3; 2 Thes. 2:7; 1 Tim. 3:9; 16; Rev. 1:20; 10:7; 17:5; 7). In some of the cited verses, revelation and mystery are used as synonyms. Thus, Paul is saying that the one who speaks in tongues is speaking the revelation given to him by God back to God, or, into the air. It serves no purpose. And, it certainly does not mean the individual does not understand what he is saying. Again, it is a “mystery” in the sense of revelation, not something that cannot be understood.

 

In v. 3, Paul declares his point plainly. “But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men.” The purpose of any spiritual gift is that of edification. The one who speaks in a foreign language without an interpretation provides no such edification. But, Paul says, the one who prophesies “speaks edification.” That is, he builds others up in the Lord. The one who prophesies provides exhortation. That is, he comes along side and encourages. The one who prophesies speaks comfort. That is, he strengthens. These dynamics are accomplished “to men.” That is, ministry occurs, the body is edified, and God is glorified.

 

In v. 4, Paul continues his thought. He affirms, “He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.” Again, the word “unknown” is not in the original. Two further points ensue. First, the one who speaks in a tongue edifies no one but himself. He may be encouraged and/or enraptured as he receives revelation from God. The problem lies in the fact that he edifies no one but himself. Spiritual gifts are given by God that others might be edified. Paul may even be disparaging this self-edification by way of implication. That is, if one edifies himself, it may be for nothing even in that regard. That is, he is selfish. Either way, Paul does not affirm that tongues is for the purpose of self-edification as some claim. Paul’s point is that such a person does no one any good but himself, and, it may be that he actually sins with his self focus.

 

Second, the one who prophesies utilizes his gift in a proper fashion. The church is edified. The one who prophesies is focused on others and indeed does them good.

 

Now we turn to 1 Cor. 14:13-17. In v. 13, Paul begins to conclude his appeal to the Corinthians that they speak in tongues only if interpretation follows. However, he goes on to offer further rationale for his appeal in the following verses. Thus, this verse serves as somewhat of a pivot. While other dynamics are mentioned subsequently, Paul’s chief concern remains the edification of the body. As such, he says, “therefore let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret.” His exhortation is simple. If one has the gift of tongues, he must pray that God would give him the interpretation that he might edify the body. The purpose of edification is drawn from the surrounding context. If someone else has the gift of interpretation, he may interpret (12:10; 14:28). Absent that person, the one who speaks in a tongue must interpret. If he cannot, he must remain silent (12:10; 14:28).

 

As noted, the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation may or may not reside in the same person (12:10; 14:28). Far better than parading one’s gift for self-centered reasons is the ability to clearly communicate God’s truth to the congregation. Far better than utilizing one’s gift for personal edification is the ability to edify others.

 

Moreover, as ordinary gifts and talents are conferred upon persons today, and as those gifts and talents may be developed or atrophied, used or abused, and/or given in one degree or another so that one man may seem to have a greater ability to convey truth than another, so it is with the extraordinary gifts. Just as those with the gift of teaching must work to develop their giftedness and pray for the unction of the Spirit, so too must those with the extraordinary gifts do the same.

 

In v. 14, Paul offers further rationale as to why tongues must be interpreted. “For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.” Two preliminary points must be made here. First, as in previous verses, the word “unknown” is not in the original text and simply signifies our contemporary concept of “foreign.” No doctrine of tongues being ecstatic speech can be developed from this word as it is not in the text.

 

Second, some take the apostle to be affirming that tongues is a private prayer language. His use of the word “pray” seems to indicate such on the surface. In response, Paul does not here argue that tongues is a private prayer language. Rather, he argues that if he prays in a foreign language, he bears no fruit. That is, he does not edify the congregation. He has been arguing for edification for thirteen verses. To say that he now affirms that tongues is a private prayer language is to rip this verse right out of context.

 

Those who hold to tongues as a private prayer language make a further argument. This line of thought relates to their supposition that tongues is something done only in the spirit. As such, the mind is not engaged. Several factors mitigate against this interpretation.

 

In the first place, the verse in context is an argument against any form of self-edification. Paul is saying that what we do with our giftedness must edify others.

 

In the second place, Paul does not say “my spirit prays but I don’t understand.” He says that “my spirit prays but my understanding is. . .” He has understanding. That is, he understands what he is praying. He says that if he prays in a foreign language, his understanding bears no fruit for others.

 

In the third place, the word “spirit” here refers to the mind, the will, and the seat of emotions and affections. It refers to the intentions and desires of the heart. The word is used in this manner throughout the New Testament (Matt. 5:3; Lk. 10:21; et. al.). When we pray, sing, or worship for example, we may be moved in spirit. Our affections for the Lord are aroused. However, those affections are aroused as the result of our minds being engaged with truth. We may have emotions and warm feelings as the result of something other than truth. For example, a certain style of music may arouse our emotions. However, in that instance, those emotions are not true worship. Only as our emotions are aroused by truth, even truth conveyed in an emotional way, truth nonetheless, do we engage in true worship. Only when we understand God do we worship in spirit and in truth. Thus, to pray in the spirit is to pray with understanding. Now, if I pray in the spirit, I may indeed have sweet communion with God. But, I have not benefited others. The purpose of a spiritual gift is to edify others. I am useless to others unless what I say is understood.

 

In the fourth place, as one takes vv. 13 to 18 together, Paul is referring to that which goes on in the public assembly. That is, he is referring to speech in the public assembly. Note his wording: “let him that speaks (13),” “sing (15),” “say ‘Amen’ at your giving of thanks (16),” “for you give thanks well, but the other is not edified (17),” and “speak with tongues (18).” The point is six-fold. First, tongues is something that is spoken out loud; it is audible; it is not something that is silent. Second, the dynamics mentioned above are in the context of the public assembly. Third, v. 14 is in the midst of these verses related to the public assembly where Paul is referring to speech that is audible. Fourth, in vv. 16 and 17, Paul refers to prayers of thanksgiving and blessing that are heard by others. Fifth, these prayers seem to define the type of praying that Paul has in mind when he refers to praying in v. 14. Sixth, we conclude then that Paul is referring here to public prayer. Again, he does not argue for tongues being a private prayer language. He does not even refer to silent prayer here. He is saying that if one is going to pray in the assembly, he must interpret his prayer (“pray that he may interpret [13]”) or else he bears no fruit. He does not benefit those who hear him.

 

In v. 15, Paul makes the point that he will thus pray and sing in the spirit and with understanding. He affirms such that he might illustrate proper prayer and proper singing. If one is going to pray or sing and worship or benefit, then he must do so in spirit and in truth. He must do so in spirit and with understanding. Paul deduces from this affirmation his exhortation in 16f. Thus he affirms, “What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding.” Three further points may be made.

 

First, Paul asks the question, “what is it,” or “what is the conclusion,” or “what shall I do?” Based upon the foregoing, how should he employ the gift of tongues?

 

Second, if one prays or sings privately, he must do so with understanding for real worship to occur. There is no such thing as Christian worship that does not engage the mind. No doubt ecstatic worship is part of pagan religion, but it has no place in Christian worship. The True and Living God is full of grace and truth. He must be worshipped in spirit and in truth (John 4).

 

Third, the praying and singing to which Paul here refers is public. The surrounding context dictates such an understanding. Thus, if one is going to pray in the public assembly, he must do so in such a way that those who hear him understand. If one is going to sing in the public assembly, he must do so in such a way that those who hear him understand. If one happens to sing in a foreign language, he must interpret. After all, why do we sing in the assembly? Paul says we are to engage in “teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in [our] hearts to the Lord (Col. 3:16).” Thus, our singing is a form of teaching and admonishing one another. As such, it must be done in such a way that the listeners understand. This dynamic is critical so that the listeners may praise God with the one who is singing and that their affections might be raised as high as possible in response to the truth understood. The same holds true for public prayer.

 

Two points of application may be made here. Firstly, why do we not hear about people singing in tongues? If tongues is a private prayer language as some affirm from this text, then why do they not refer to the private practice of singing in tongues? If tongues as a private prayer language were indeed a manifestation of the Spirit, then singing in tongues would be the same. Yet, we don’t hear of such. Secondly, those who sing in the assembly must make sure that the congregation understands what they are singing. If they do not, edification does not occur no matter how excellent the music or the voice happens to be.

 

In v. 16, Paul does two things. He clarifies the type of praying to which he refers (though it need not be exclusively such). He refers to blessing and/or thanksgiving, particularly as it relates to others in the assembly. That is, Paul refers to blessing others in the assembly. The second thing Paul does is reiterate that one’s prayers must edify the body. They do so in the public assembly as persons understand them. Paul asserts, “Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how will he who occupies the place of the uninformed say "Amen" at your giving of thanks, since he does not understand what you say?”

 

Paul asks a question. He begins with the phrase “otherwise, if you bless with the spirit. . .” He means by that phrase, “if you bless with the spirit only.” We know his meaning to be thus from the preceding verses concerning understanding and edification. We also know his meaning to be such based upon his question here ending with the phrase “. . . since he does not understand what you say.”

 

We must bless with the spirit and with truth. That is, we must bless others with our hearts and with truth conveyed. They must understand our blessing to be edified.

 

The phrase “he who occupies the place of the uninformed” refers to the average church member. Most persons in Paul’s day were illiterate. They were certainly ignorant of deep spiritual truth as many were newly converted and none had the complete New Testament. At the same time, in context, the phrase also likely refers to one who does not understand the tongue (foreign language) being spoken.

 

Paul’s point is made by way of a question. How can this person say “Amen” at one’s giving of thanks if he does not understand what has been said? The “Amen” may be inward or it may be audible. The point has to do with agreement or affirmation. How can one affirm what is being said if he does not understand it? One can only be edified and moved to say “Amen” if he understands.

 

 

As an aside, note that persons say “Amen” to that which is prayed. Prayer is not a priestly activity only in which someone prays on behalf of another. Rather, while it is priestly in some sense in the public assembly, it is part of corporate worship in which all participate through listening and respondent affirmation.

 

In v. 17,Paul simply reiterates his point. “For you indeed give thanks well, but the other is not edified.” If you pray in your spirit only, that is, if you pray without interpretation, you give thanks well. You give thanks to God. Your heart may be right in the sense that you give thanks for another. But if you pray in a tongue so that no one understands, you are not engaging in proper prayer in public worship because you are not edifying the ones listening or the one for whom you are praying.

 

Therefore, it is clear from these verses that the gift of tongues has to do with known languages and not a private prayer language. We must ever be careful not to read things into the text that are not there. Exegesis is hard work from time to time, but, it is fruitful work. Anything that is cursory or sloppy is simply an act of unfaithfulness. Let us demonstrate our love for the word by handling it carefully, properly, and by rightly dividing it for our good and God’s glory.