I’d been wondering about something, and now at least I’ve gotten the Presbyterian perspective on 1 Corinthians. I just had an opportunity to talk with Kevin Twit, a minister from Christ Community, about the study of 1 Corinthians 14. To the best of my knowledge, I understand the charismatic approach to this passage, but that’s what can be gotten from merely reading the passage and extrapolating without historical context or immediate literary context. Many times that can be very misleading in studying the scriptures. I wanted to know what’s Paul was talking about, who he’s addressing, and what the contemporary understanding would’ve been concerning his message.
There’s nothing I’ve read in scripture about tongues (only Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians mention it) that leads me to believe they are secret languages only God can understand. According to Kevin Twit, the historical understanding until only very recently (within the last couple hundred years) is that tongues meant other languages. Meaning that Paul was writing to the Corinthians about languages that were unknown to them specifically, but not necessarily unknown to everyone. In fact, he most likely meant that those languages were known by other people, just not to the majority of the church at Corinth. It seems that way judging from Paul’s reference to Isaiah 28:11-12; the juxtaposition of “unknown languages” and “lips of foreigners” seems to suggest that the unknown language will merely be the language of the foreign oppressors. As Kevin Twit argues, “Tongues in Acts 2 are clearly known languages, not some angelic tongue. Why should we take ‘tongues’ to mean something different in 1 Corinthians?”
And what of the prophesying? I know I’ve had many experiences where I feel God impressing something on my heart, but my knee jerk reaction is to check it in the scriptures. If it is contradicted in any way by the Bible, then it’s most likely the deceit of my heart. Are these prophecies just impressions on people’s hearts that are being misunderstood as an authoritative word directly from God? That’s a pretty strong statement to make, that a message is for you from God. It basically leaves you no wiggle room. How does one know that a word is truly from God? I’d say this is a pretty good test.
But I feel I should mention this: I am trying to come at this passage unbiased, but I have to admit that almost immediately I felt uncomfortable with the “speaking in tongues” thing. Uncomfortable in the sense that it seems there are many churches that emphasize this sort of thing, but it’s all concentrated. It’s a whole church doing it, but then over here you’ve got another church that doesn’t have anyone speaking in tongues. If this is something from God, the Holy Spirit manifest in a person, wouldn’t it just happen all over the place, unhindered by the walls of a church? It shouldn’t be some skill that you have to be taught how to do. Acts doesn’t portray Pentecost as a seminar on how to speak in tongues, it just happened (even assuming we want to interpret scripture to mean that speaking in tongues is a secret prayer language or utterance to God). Coming at it from a sociological viewpoint, it looks a whole lot like groupthink to me, but I’ll continue to study this and report on it more later.
[Edit]
I would greatly appreciate reactions to my current thoughts. I am merely charting my own study of this passage, and critique is most welcome, particularly the critique of those whom I may have offended or otherwise disagree with me.