Intelligibly Build Up the Church-1 Cor 14

Do you build up the church? How?

Spiritual gifts in church worship (14:1–40). Those who think themselves gifted with wisdom and knowledge—place inordinate singular emphasis on speaking in tongues. They think they speak a heavenly language (1 Cor 13:1) as the ultimate sign of their spirituality and maturity. Their worship service is a disorderly confusion, as they speak simultaneously and unintelligibly under the inspiration of the Spirit, even competitively to outdo one another in displaying glossolalia. As with the Lord’s Supper, Paul cannot commend them (1 Cor 11:17), for it fractures the church.

1. The Need for Intelligibility in the Church (14:1-25)
   1. The “greater gift”–prophecy (1-5), for it builds up the church.
   2. Analogies that argue for intelligibility (6-13), which builds up the church.
   3. Application to the believing community (14-19)–builds them up.
   4. Application for the sake of unbelievers/outsiders (20-25) to be convicted and converted.
2. The Ordering of Gifts (14:26-40)
   1. The ordering of tongues and prophecy (26-33). One at a time.
   2. Conclusion:
   3. Confrontation (36-38). You’re not the only one who is spiritual.
   4. Summary (39-40). Prophesy to build up the church. Be orderly, not rowdy.
   5. On women remaining silent (34-35; 1 Tim 2:11-15).

Build up the church (1 Cor 14:3-5, 12, 17, 26). Spiritual manifestations (pneumatika)—including tongues—are gifts (charismata) of the Spirit to the church (1 Cor 12:11, 28): God speaks/acts powerfully through spontaneous supernatural revelations. How can Paul create order in the church worship without squelching the Spirit? Insist that love (ch. 13) requires gifts to be used for building up the church (1 Cor 14:5, 12, 26). Intelligible speech is necessary in the church for the common good (1 Cor 12:7); unintelligible tongues must be interpreted or reserved for private prayer. Cf. tongues, prophecy is the highest gift (1 Cor 14:1, 3, 5, 6), for the prophet speaks inspired intelligible messages from God to the congregation, thereby building up the church.Don‘t prohibit tongues. Ch. 14 has been interpreted [by those with no experience of spiritual gifts] as grudgingly allowing tongues-speaking—damning this gift with faint praise while trying to root it out. No. The one who speaks in tongues is praying, under the inspiration of the Spirit, to God (1 Cor 14:2), which in some mysterious way, spiritually builds up the individual (1 Cor 14:4). Paul prays in tongues more than all of them (1 Cor 14:18) and wants them to enjoy this gift (1 Cor 14:5). He gives constructive directions for tongues in church worship (1 Cor 14:26–28) and that glossolalia not be prohibited (1 Cor 14:39). His major concern is to counteract the excessive valuation and undisciplined practice of glossolalia in church.

Eagerly desire the gift of prophecy (1 Cor 14:1, 5-6, 12, 39). “Prophecy” is not composing and preaching a sermon, but a spiritual gift (1 Cor 12:10, 28) spontaneously Spirit inspired and tested by church discernment (1 Cor 14:29–32; 1 Th 5:19–21). Don’t rationalize away Paul’s vision of Christian worship as the spontaneous Spirit-led encounter of the community with God.The theme of building up the church. The verb oikodomein (“to build up”) and the noun oikodome (“upbuilding, edification”) occur 7 times ch. 14, including in the summaries (1 Cor 14:5, 12, 26). The watchword, guiding principle for church worship is “Let all things be done for building up” (1 Cor 14:26). In light of that framing exhortation, what is Paul’s specific advice? Ch. 14 falls has major parts.

1. Prophecy as the preferable mode of manifestation of the Spirit in church gatherings (14:1-25). Paul puts forward several different arguments and concludes with a fascinating (but difficult) reflection on the divergent impact of tongues and prophecy on those who are outsiders to the community (14:20–25).
2. Specific guidelines for orderly worship (14:26–33) asserts Paul’s authority to promulgate such guidelines (14:36–38), and briefly recapitulates the message of the chapter as a whole (1 Cor 14:39–40).
3. In the midst of this last section appears an abrupt and thematically incongruous demand for women to be silent and subordinate (1 Cor 14:34–35), which is almost certainly an early gloss interpolated into the text of the letter.

Prophecy builds up the church (14:1–25). After the interlude (ch. 13), Paul resumes his discussion from ch. 12 of the various roles of spiritual gifts in the body of Christ. 1 Cor 14:1a sums up ch. 13: pursue the way of love (cf. 1 Cor 13:31b). “eagerly desire spiritual gifts” (1 Cor 14:1b) uses the same verb [zloute (1 Cor 12:31a)]. Why must the gift of prophecy be especially sought (1 Cor 14:2-4)? Cf. tongues: tongues are unintelligible and benefit the speaker alone, while prophecy builds up (oikodomei) the church. This is Paul’s most informative account of these 2 gifts. The speaker in tongues addresses God in prayer and speaking “mysteries in the Spirit (1 Cor 14:2).” This prayer “in the Spirit” expresses praise and thanksgiving (1 Cor 14:15-17). This discourse isn’t intended for human hearers, who can’t understand it (1 Cor 14:2). But prophecy is addressed not to God but to human beings “for their upbuilding [oikodomen] and encouragement and consolation” (1 Cor 14:3). To Paul prophecy isn’t predicting future events, but to address the hearts of the hearers and to encourage them in the faith. That is why it builds up the church.

Prophecy is among the “greater gifts” mentioned earlier (1 Cor 12:31a), because it is of greater benefit to the church (1 Cor 14:5a). The one who prophesies is “greater” than the one who speaks in tongues, unless the latter also interprets the tongues (1 Cor 14:5b). The tongue-speaker himself or herself is the subject of the verb “interpret” (NIV). The one who speaks in tongues should pray for the gift of interpretation—again (1 Cor 14:13), so that the utterance might benefit the church (1 Cor 14:12). Paul is not averse to ranking the relative importance of spiritual gifts; the major difference between him and them is that they’re using different evaluative criteria for their rankings. Paul continually presses for the primacy of community building.Paul restates his argument by using 3 analogies (14:6-12)), Inspired speech in church are like sounds produced by harp and flute (1 Cor 14:7), and to the call of a military horn (1 Cor 14:8), and to the varieties of natural human language (1 Cor 14:10–11).

1. 1st analogy–don‘t play random notes. For the melody to make sense to the hearer, there must be an order or pattern to the notes sounded by the harpist. [A point Paul doesn’t make—different musicians playing together cannot simply play whatever occurs to them; their parts must be orchestrated in a complementary fashion.]
2. 2nd analogy—the trumpet sounding a call to battle. Paul uses military metaphors to describe the calling of Christians (Rom 6:12–14; 2 Cor 10:3–6; Phil 1:2730; 1 Thess 5:8; cf. Eph 6:10–20; 2 Tim 4:7). Public speech in church should awaken members to action in the cosmic conflict in which the church is engaged (1 Cor 14:8). The “indistinct” sound of incoherent speech in tongues will do nothing to marshal the troops for battle. The speaker in tongues will merely be talking “into the air” (1 Cor 14:9).
3. 3rd analogy–many languages in the world (1 Cor 14:10). Estrangement occurs when we encounter someone who does not share a common language with us, because meaningful communication is impossible (1 Cor 14:11). Similar estrangement will divide us from one another in the church, he suggests, if incomprehensible tongue-speaking dominates the church’s discourse.

Be eager to build up. Paul concludes this unit by characterizing them as “eager for spiritual gifts” [“eager for spirits” (1 Cor 14:12a, 1)]. Paul constructively urges them to “excel” in using their gifts to build up the church (1 Cor 14:12b). This exhortation is a familiar refrain. Interestingly, he doesn’t single out prophecy in the same way he had done in 14:1–5. Prophecy is 1 of 4 operations of the Spirit, along with revelation, knowledge, and teaching, that benefit the church through intelligible instruction (1 Cor 14:6). Thus “prophecy” should be read throughout ch. 14 as synecdoche [a part representing the whole] for all forms of intelligible speech gifts that edify the church. Distinctions between these 4 terms is not explained, and is useless to speculate.   “Now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you speaking in tongues” (1 Cor 14:6) echoes “When I came to you, brothers and sisters, I did not come proclaiming the mystery of God to you in lofty words or wisdom (1 Cor 2:1)” This may be deliberate. They had perhaps reproached Paul for failing to come to them with a fireworks display of glossolalia. If so, Paul replies that this was strictly for their benefit, for his speaking in tongues would have done them no good. He chose instead, as he has already explained, to come to them with simple understandable words proclaiming Jesus Christ crucified (1 Cor 2:1–2). [Fee suggests there’s “an undercurrent of apologetic” in 14:6.]Able to say “Amen” (14:14–17). When praying in tongues the mind is “fruitless” (1 Cor 14:14). To Paul, it’s best to pray and sing not only with the spirit but also with the mind (1 Cor 14:15). The worshiper prays in tongues (“with the spirit”) and then, still under the guidance of the Spirit, offers an interpretation [“with the mind also” (1 Cor 14:13)]. Otherwise, everyone else in church remains an “outsider” to the mysterious communication between the tongues-speaker and God (1 Cor 14:16). But when the utterance of praise is interpreted, the other person can say “Amen,” joining in the expression of thanksgiving and thereby being built up (1 Cor 14:17).Imitate me. For rhetorical impact, Paul claims to speak in tongues more than any of them, including those who pride themselves on this gift (1 Cor 14:18)! But he hasn’t employed this gift “in church” [en ekklesia: “in the congregation” is a better translation (NEB)] because he would rather speak “five words with my mind” to instruct the congregation than to pour forth a torrent of incomprehensible words (1 Cor 14:18–19). Paul plays his ace to trump their claims. He could beat them at their own game of superspirituality, but has chosen not to play that game because he has another goal in mind. Again Paul holds himself up as an example to be imitated—an example of renouncing spiritual glory and status for the sake of others (1 Cor 10:33-11:1). His ethical example concerning the use of spiritual gifts matches the pattern already outlined in chapters 8–10: Paul renounces rights and privileges for the benefit of others in the church. The instruction of the community is a higher value than any amount of exalted religious experience.The effect of tongues and prophecy on unbelievers is one more consideration. So far, Paul focuses on the effects of these gifts within the community of believers, but he then shifts attention to people on the periphery of the church community (14:20-25). He suggests that their absorption with spiritual gifts as an end in themselves is childish (1 Cor 14:20; cf. their divisiveness in 3:1–4). A mature perspective considers the impact of these gifts on others, not only those within the church but also outsiders who might be confronted by the gospel.The house church worship meetings assume nonbelievers‘ presence to be a normal in the community’s life. It’s suggested that Paul is thinking of the unbelieving spouses (7:12–16). But there’s no reason to restrict his concern to this group alone. “Outsiders” (NRSV) is perhaps more likely simply a synonym for unbelievers. Whoever they are, the present context requires that they be people who are not yet committed worshipers of the one God of Israel.Concern for unbelievers (1 Cor 14:23–25). Outsiders who enter and find the whole community speaking in tongues will think that this Christian group is simply one more mystery cult that whips its partisans into a frenzy of frothy enthusiasm (1 Cor 14:23). In the Greek cultural context the verb translated as “you are out of your mind” (1 Cor 14:23), does not necessarily have the pejorative sense that this suggests for readers today. It doesn’t mean that they are crazy, but that they’ve temporarily caught up in a fit of religious ecstasy, a common phenomenon in that culture. The typical pagan observing this would say, “Oh, this is just another group like the devotees of Dionysius or Cybele”—one more consumer option in a pluralistic religious market. But if outsiders come and find them prophesying in clear, sober language, they will encounter the word of the Lord, which will disclose “the secrets of the heart” (1 Cor 14:25), i.e., their real moral condition before God (1 Cor 4:5). This doesn’t mean that Christian prophecy is a fortune-telling trick that discloses personal secrets about individuals; rather, it’s more like the argument of Romans 1–3, a discourse in which all human pretensions to righteousness are stripped away by the proclaimed message of the severity and kindness of God. Paul envisions that unbelievers who encounter this sort of unparalleled truth-telling in the form of Spirit-inspired utterance will be cut to the heart (Acts 2:37) and brought to “bow down before God and worship him” (1 Cor 14:25).“God is really among you” uttered by outsiders converted by the word of prophecy. Paul recalls what Israel’s prophets envision: the Gentiles come to acknowledge that the God of Israel is the one God of the whole world. 1 Cor 14:25 echoes Isa 45:14 when Gentiles from Egypt and Ethiopia come and bow down before Israel, saying, “God is with you alone, and there is no other; there is no god besides him” (Zech 8:22–23; Isa 49:23; 60:10–16). Thus, when the church prophesies authentically, it becomes the instrument through which God accomplishes the eschatological conversion of the nations—or at least a foretaste of that final event. In short, Paul sees prophecy as a powerful tool of evangelism, but he sees tongues (in public worship) as a hindrance to making the gospel understood.

Paul’s garbled argument—or it rests upon a complex (and insufficiently explained) interpretation of a notoriously obscure OT passage. So, great confusion is caused by the way Paul introduces the issue of the unbelievers in 14:21–22. He quotes an approximation of Isa 28:11–12 and then offers an exegetical comment: “Tongues, then, are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers” (1 Cor 14:22). Does this contradict 14:23–25, where unbelievers are turned away by tongues and converted by prophecy? A full discussion of the exegetical problems is complex. Some difficulty clears by attending closely to the context of Isa 28 that Paul quotes, but other problems remain unresolved.Isa 28 is a judgment oracle directed particularly against the “scoffers who rule this people in Jerusalem.” They have refused to listen to the word of the prophet, mocking it as unintelligible baby-talk (Isa 28:9–10). “Precept upon precept … line upon line … here a little, there a little” (Isa 28:10, 13) is completely obscure in Hebrew; nothing more than a string of nonsense syllables. The point of Isaiah 28:11–13 is that because the scoffing rulers have refused to listen to the prophetic promise of rest, but have instead tried to create security for themselves by making an alliance with Egypt, the word of God will henceforth be to them gibberish spoken in an alien tongue. Thus, the “sign” of unintelligible speech is a prophetic sign of judgment.That tongues are “a sign for unbelievers” (1 Cor 14:22a) means they are a sign of condemnation, symbolizing the inaccessibility of divine revelation. Paul must have meditated on this Isaiah passage, because he cites Isa 28:16 in Romans where he ponders the mystery of Israel’s unbelief (Rom 9:33). 1 Cor 14 cites just an excerpt on the run without explaining its context. Perhaps he expects some of them to understand the allusion. The text works by linking “strange tongues” with unbelief and disobedience. (This is not Paul’s primary understanding of speaking in tongues is clear by everything else he says in 14:1–19). In light of this, tongues are a sign for unbelievers (1 Cor 14:22a). More difficult is that prophecy is “not for unbelievers but for believers” (14:22b). Clearly, prophecy is for believers in that it encourages and builds up the church (14:3–6, 12, 19). The problem is with 14:24–25 where prophecy can be powerfully effective for unbelievers. Paul got carried away by the rhetorical antitheses of 14:22 to say something that he does not strictly mean; perhaps interpret him to mean “prophecy is not [primarily] for unbelievers but for believers.” Nonetheless, the force of his argument is clearly stated in 14:23–25.Order in the assembly (14:26–40). Paul finished explaining why prophecy (and other modes of comprehensible revelation and teaching) is preferable to tongues in the gathered church. Now some general guidelines about how the worship meetings should be conducted.A free–flowing church gathering under the guidance of the Holy Spirit where “each one” contributes something to the mix (14:26-33). There’s no fixed order of service, no printed bulletin for the worshipers, and nothing is said of a leader presiding over the meeting! 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 (1 Cor 14:29–30) and learning from one another. The meeting has singing, teaching (exposition of Scripture), revelatory utterances [prophecy and cognates, (1 Cor 14:6)], and praise to God in tongues with interpretation (1 Cor 14:26).Is Paul thinking here of a prayer and praise meeting separate from the meeting for the common meal, or whether the gathering described here is of the same sort as the celebration of the Lord’s Supper in 11:17–34? In favor of the latter is the phrase “when you come together” (1 Cor 14:26; 11:17–18, 20, 33).All things in this Spirit-led assembly should be done for building up the church (1 Cor 14:26) as in all of ch. 14. The danger in such a spontaneous assembly is that the worship will become chaotic or that some members will dominate the time for speaking. In order to facilitate good order, therefore, Paul lays down some ground rules.

Only one person at a time speaks in tongues (1 Cor 14:27); cf. 1 Cor 14:23—a room full of babbling believers—is excluded. There are to be no more than two or three utterances in tongues at any one meeting, and each prayer in tongues is to be interpreted for the benefit of the whole congregation. Paul doesn’t mean that the prayer in tongues is spoken in a natural language (such as Aramaic) that someone else in the assembly can translate, for these are “the tongues of angels” (1 Cor 13:1). So, the “interpretation” is also a supernatural gift of the Spirit. If there’s no one present with this gift, the tongues-speakers are to be silent (1 Cor 14:28). These directives presume that the gift is under the speaker’s control. One can choose to speak out in tongues or remain silent. Tongues is not an overpowering emotional experience where the speaker is possessed by the Spirit in some sort of ecstatic trance. English translations that use the word “ecstacy” to describe tongues (NEB throughout ch.14) supply an interpretive category absent from the Gk text and at variance with the picture that Paul draws in 14:26–28. Avoid using such terminology to discuss this.Prophets are also able to control their exercise of the prophetic gift (1 Cor 14:32). They also should speak in turn; 2 or more prophets from competing for the community’s attention (1 Cor 14:30). If new revelation is given to someone, the first speaker should be silent and listen. Paul understands prophecy as a revelatory charismatic gift which may be given in the congregation as the wind of the Spirit blows freely. As with the tongues-speakers, however, only two or three should prophesy at any one meeting (1 Cor 14:29).Church members (not just “prophets”) are told to judge (1 Cor 11:29) the prophetic words that are spoken in the church, exercising spiritual discernment about whether these words really are authentic words from God. This intriguing aspect of Paul’s directives is similarly instructed: “Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything” (1 Thess 5:19–21a). [Charismata were not uniquely Corinthian. There’s less in Paul’s other letters, because they didn’t create the difficulties at Corinth (1 Cor 14:32–33).] Submitting the prophetic word to the community’s discernment is an outward visible sign that Paul is impressing on them: The gifts are for the service of the church, not the church for the gifts. The one who prophesies doesn’t become exalted to a higher spiritual plane over others; because all have the Spirit (12:3, 13) all are able to participate in the spiritual reception and assessment of the preferred prophetic word. In a community that consistently exercises such discipline, no one prophet should ever seize undue authority or influence.Cf. the Didache: “Do not test or examine [diakrineite] any prophet who is speaking in the spirit, for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven’” (Didache 11:7; Mt 12:31–32). In the Didache, prophets are to be judged on the basis of their moral conduct, but their prophetic utterances are treated as sacrosanct. But for Paul, the role of prophets was neither so sharply defined nor so authoritative as in some other early Christian groups.All church members try prophesying: “For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and be encouraged” (1 Cor 14:31; 14:1,5). “…you can [dynasthe] all prophesy” is not giving permission but acknowledging a power given to all by the one Spirit for the benefit of others in the church. Hardly anywhere do we see a clearer expression of Paul’s desire to see all the members of the church grow up into spiritual maturity and full participation in the church’s ministry.A church where the Spirit is palpably present, flowing freely in the communal worship through the complementary gifts of different members. In Christian worship there is neither stiff formality nor undisciplined frenzy: the worship is like a complex but graceful dance, or a beautiful anthem sung in counterpoint. If some claim that spiritual inspiration moved them to uncontrollable displays of pneumatic enthusiasm, Paul flatly contests the claim, for “the spirits of prophets are subject to the prophets” (1 Cor 14:32). This truth is not for some purely human desire for orderliness; it is grounded in the character of God, for “God is a God not of disorder [akatastasis] but of peace” (1 Cor 14:33). “the character of one’s deity is reflected in the character of one’s worship” [Fee]. If their worship meetings are chaotic and conflictual, the question is: What God are they really worshiping? The term akatastasis has connotations of civil strife and rebellion. Their problems in worship are not the result of overheated spirituality, but are linked to the factionalism and defiance of Paul’s authority–a consistent concern of this letter. If, however, God is a God of peace, they should learn to be at peace with one another and to express that peace in a style of worship that emphasizes concord and complementarity.Only we hear from God. Paul anticipates their protest of 14:26–33. “But Paul,” they might say, “these guidelines will cramp our style and squelch the freedom of our worship; indeed, important revelations from God may be silenced if we follow your rules.” Paul defuses this objection by pointing to the practice of other Christian communities whose worship conforms to more orderly norms. [To see the logic of the argument, read the text with the interpolation of 14:34–35 deleted.] “And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, for God is a God not of disorder but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. … Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached? Anyone who claims to be a prophet, or to have spiritual powers, must acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. Anyone who does not recognize this is not to be recognized” (I Cor 14:32–33, 36–38). The prideful Corinthian enthusiasts are acting as though they alone have received revelations so powerful as to override standards of community discipline in worship. With withering sarcasm, Paul replies in effect, “Oh really? That’s funny: in all the other churches of the saints, it seems that God is a God of order and peace. Or perhaps you are the only ones who really have heard the word of God?”Paul seems to run out of patience after painstakingly explaining the theological reasons for his directives for 2 ch. (12:1–14:33). He points to the example of the other churches and then bluntly asserts his own apostolic authority (1 Cor 14:37–38). Cf. some of his earlier advice (1 Cor 7:10–11, 25–38), Paul explicitly claims that his teachings on orderly worship are “a command of the Lord.” Anyone who defies these teachings by refusing to recognize Paul’s authority will suffer the consequences. As in 4:18–21, Paul concludes this long section by challenging the “puffed-up” to yield to his authority. 1 Cor 14:38, NRSV, suggests that Paul is telling other members of the church not to recognize the person who rejects his teaching. But the verse is a “sentence of holy law,” announcing God’s eschatological punishment on those who reject the word of God. (For eg., Mark 8:38: “Those who are ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of them the Son of Man will also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” For a classic OT example, 1 Sam 15:26 says, “For you have rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD has rejected you from being king over Israel.”) 1 Cor 14:38, NEB, captures the sense: “If he does not acknowledge this, God does not acknowledge him.”Such strong sanctions are invoked against a circle of people in the church who have persistently set themselves up as too high and mighty to listen to Paul or to concern themselves with the problems and weaknesses of others. “If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or a spiritual person …” (1 Cor 14:37) repeats a rhetorical pattern that we have seen twice before (Fee, 711). The revealing parallels:

• “If anyone among you thinks himself to be wise in this age …”            (1 Cor 3:18)
• “If anyone    thinks himself to know something …”             (1 Cor 8:2)
• “If anyone    thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual …”                (1 Cor 14:37)

Targeting the “strong” Corinthians: wisdom, knowledge, and spirituality. Paul’s consistent response to them has been to insist that the word of the cross brings all boasting in such qualities to nothing; consequently, they should acknowledge Paul’s apostolic authority over them and conform their lives to his eg. The minimal expression of such obedience would be for them to constrain their overwrought spiritual impulses and to abide by Paul’s directives for orderly worship.Concise summary of the directives: “So, my friends, be eager to prophesy [1 Cor 14:1, 5, 31], and do not forbid speaking in tongues [1 Cor 14:5, 26–27]; but all things should be done decently and in order” (1 Cor 14:39–40). With that Paul closes. Though Paul doesn’t seek order for order’s sake, the order he desires to see in them allows for great flexibility and for the diverse and unpredictable spiritual contribution of all the members of the body of Christ/the church. Order is necessary only to constrain self–indulgent abuses and to create an atmosphere in which the gifts of all can work together to build up the community in love.

EXCURSUS: “Women should be silent in the churches” (14:34–35). In the midst of directions about tongues and prophecy in the church, there’s an abrupt interjection commanding women not to speak in meetings of the congregation (14:34–35). Some ancient manuscripts place them not as an addendum at the end of ch. 14, and 1 ancient manuscript has markings suggesting that the scribe considered them to be a gloss inserted into the text. If these sentences are an addition to Paul’s letter, the addition occurred at an early stage, since all extant manuscripts contain these words either between v. 33 and 36 or following v. 40. [Fee makes a strong argument that these verses are an early interpolation/insertion.] The ancient manuscript evidence suggests that only v. 34–35 authenticity is suspect, and the passage makes excellent sense when these 2 vs. are deleted.One of the strongest reasons for regarding these verses as an interpolation is that their demand for women to remain silent in the assembly stands in glaring contradiction to 11:2–16, where Paul teaches that women may pray and prophesy in church as long as they keep their heads appropriately covered. It is hard to imagine how Paul could have written those instructions and then, just a few paragraphs later, write that “it is shameful for a woman to speak in church” (1 Cor 14:35b). the other available evidence indicates that women played an active role in preaching, teaching, and prophesying in the early Pauline communities: Phoebe (Rom 16:1–2), Prisca (Rom 16:3–4; Ac 18:18–28), Junia (Rom 16:7), and Euodia and Syntyche (Phil 4:2–3). (For extended discussion of the evidence, see Schüssler Fiorenza).2 other factors cast doubt upon the Pauline authorship of 14:34–35.

1. The command in 1 Cor 14:34 is suddenly addressed not to the specific Corinthian situation but to “the churches.” Nowhere else in 1 Cor does Paul shift in this way to generalized instruction for the churches at large; indeed, this makes no sense at all from a rhetorical point of view in a letter written to a specific congregation, but it does make sense rhetorically if the passage was added at a later time when the letter was being circulated for the guidance of a wider circle of communities.
2. The unqualified appeal to “the Law” as requiring women’s subordination (1 Cor 14:34b) is—to say the least—uncharacteristic of Paul’s way of appealing to Scripture as a source of behavioral norms.

All things considered, this passage is best explained as a gloss introduced into the text by the second- or third-generation Pauline interpreters who compiled the pastoral epistles. The similarity of 1 Cor 14:34–35 to 1 Tim 2:11–12 is striking: Both command women to “learn” in silence and submission. Such directives assume a later historical situation in which there was a conscious effort to restrict the roles played by women in the first-generation Pauline churches.Those who do regard 1 Cor 14:34–35 as belonging originally to Paul’s letter have to explain how they fit together with 11:2–16 and how they work within Paul’s argument. 4 different explanations have been proposed, from most to least plausible.

1. Paul isn’t really prohibiting women from praying and prophesying in the assembly, but is addressing a specific local problem at Corinth and restricting certain kinds of disruptive speech, such as chattering and asking questions (1 Cor 14:35a). (A variant is Ben Witherington’s suggestion that the women thought of Christian prophets on the analogy of the Delphic Oracle, which prophesied in response to particular questions about the personal life of the seeker.) The difficulty with this explanation is that it fails to reckon with the categorical declaration that it is “shameful” for women to speak in church at all (1 Cor 14:35b) and with the clear statement that this rule is for “the churches” at large, not just for a particular problem at Corinth.
2. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza argues that the women who are allowed to pray and prophesy in the assembly (11:2–16) must be unmarried and that the speech restriction of 14:34–35 applies only to married women, who have husbands to instruct them at home. This explanation introduces a distinction that is not explicit in the text, and it overlooks the evidence that married women such as Prisca did in fact exercise leadership roles in the Pauline churches.
3. Antoinette Wire has suggested that 11:2–16 should be read as a tactical concession by Paul, allowing women to speak with certain restrictions, but that his real aim is to silence the female prophets altogether. On this reading, 14:34–35 is the rhetorical goal and climax of the letter. Wire’s proposal depends upon an elaborate speculative reconstruction of the role of the women prophets at Corinth, and it also ignores the evidence that Paul elsewhere heartily supports the leadership role of women in ministry. If Paul’s aim was to suppress women, why did he send Phoebe as his emissary to the Roman churches?
4. Finally, some interpreters try to avoid the contradiction between ch. 11 and 14 by reading verses 33b-36 as Paul’s quotation of the Corinthians’ position. According to this theory, it is the Corinthians who want to silence women, and Paul quotes their opinion in order to reject it. (Notice that this is the polar opposite of Wire’s interpretation.) This explanation is farfetched in the extreme. There’s no indication in the text that Paul is quoting anything (unlike 7:1) or that the Corinthians held such views about women; furthermore, the other Corinthian views cited by Paul are always short slogans, not extended didactic arguments.

None of these attempted explanations make sense out of this text and within what we know about women in Pauline churches. The best explanation is that the passage is a gloss, inserted in the text at this point because of the catchword connection to Paul’s instruction to prophets to “be silent” under certain circumstances (1 Cor 14:28, 30) and because of Paul’s appeal to the general practice of “all the churches of the saints” (1 Cor 14:33). The whole passage is much more coherent without these extraneous verses. Paul never told women to be silent in churches: this order is the work of a subsequent Christian generation.Nonetheless, the passage remains in our Bibles, even if we think it is an interpolation. Also, 1 Tim 2:11–15 reinforce the same teaching. How do we deal with such passages? It’s not sufficient to say “Paul didn’t write it” and let the question drop. Recognizing that the teaching of 1 Cor 14:34–35 is the work of a later hand that sought to squelch women’s public role in the church is only the first step toward getting the issues clearly into focus. Let’s develop a more nuanced view of the authority and diversity of the canon. The Bible is not a homogeneous or systematic body of teachings; there are many points of internal tension. (Rom 13 and Rev 13 take radically different views of the power of the state.) One such point of tension is the unresolved discussion in the early church about the appropriate role of women as public witnesses to the gospel; this discussion has left its marks in the divided teaching of our canonical NT.Recognize these tensions where they exist and make theologically informed judgments about how the different texts speak to our situation. Try to discern the fundamental themes of the NT’s teaching and make decisions about contested matters in light of that discernment. (A full scale discussion–The Moral Vision of the New Testament.) For example, the church ultimately came to decide that the institution of slavery—though widespread in the ancient world—was incompatible with the NT’s fundamental vision of the freedom and dignity of human beings; consequently, those NT texts that support slavery (Eph 6:5–9; Col 3:22–4:1; 1 Tim 6:1–2; Tit 2:9–10; 1 Pet 2:18) must be rejected, or understood as provisional adaptations of the gospel message to a particular cultural setting. Such texts should not be used normatively to perpetuate slavery in the church.Women’s public leadership. There are good theological reasons to be guided by Paul’s vision of Christian worship in which the gifts of the Spirit are given to all members of the church (1 Cor 14:31), men and women alike (1 Cor 11:4-5), for the building up of the church (1 Cor 14:12, 26b). The few NT texts that seek to silence women (1 Cor 14:34–35; 1 Tim 2:11–15) shouldn’t be allowed to override this vision. As our congregations wrestle with the ongoing task of discerning God’s will for our life together—a task to which 1 Corinthians repeatedly calls us—we must be faithfully attentive to Paul’s wider vision of men and women as full partners in the work of ministry.REFLECTIONS. If Paul visits most of our churches, he’d mostly not chastise us for disorderly and excessive displays of the spiritual gifts. So we may say, “Well, at least we don’t have those problems.” [In the Revised Common Lectionary, 1 Cor 12–15 read on Sun after the Epiphany in Yr C and 1 Cor 14 is omitted–a shallow unimaginative reading.] Paul raises crucial important issues for the church today.

1. Building community. The overriding concern of ch. 14 is that the church worships collaboratively in a way that builds up the community through the participation of each member. Worship, Paul emphatically insists, ISN’T just for private spiritual blessings, but for members to share with each other God’s gifts for all to learn and be encouraged. This may require a conversion of the imagination. How does our present styles of meeting and worship serve the end of building community? Can we read 1 Cor 14 seriously and discover more participatory styles of worship?
2. Focus on the message not the medium. Paul’s focus isn’t just on the attitude of the speaker but the content of the message through the gifts. Intelligible speech instructs others, and encourages and consoles them. A major effect of prophecy is “that all may learn” (1 Cor 14:31). The outsider confronted by prophecy will be moved by what‘s said, not by winsomeness or friendly smiles. Even churches that don’t practice glossolalia, often lean on the side of affective religious experience [feeling], + inattention to substance of the Christian message and tradition. The right use of gifts is to build up the church through proclaiming and interpreting the gospel, without which the church’s talk becomes “an indistinct sound” that will rightly be ignored.
3. Order without hierarchy. In 1 Cor 14 Paul doesn’t solve the problem of order in the worship service by telling them to stick to the liturgy or to follow the leadership of the priest/preacher. The letter as a whole suggests that there’s no established authority structure within the church: no bishops, presbyters, deacons; no mediating structure between the apostle and his unruly flock. Absence of such structures may have contributed to the problems of order Paul addresses. Yet their situation wasn’t an unqualified debacle that forced the more institutionalized church depicted in the pastoral epistles. Paul gives thanks for the very real gifts and graces in the church (1:4–7). Does Paul’s vision for worship in ch. 14 deserve more of a try than the church has historically given it? Paul sees a church where all members wait together on the Spirit, and all discern what God is saying to them. Could our churches learn to listen to the Spirit in this way? Would we then gain something that’s lost? Might many discover an openness to the power of the Spirit working through them? Could experience worship as a graceful extemporaneous dance of the whole body?
4. Welcome the Spirit. The 20th century’s charismatic movement gives Paul’s teaching about tongues and prophecy new relevance. His cautionary words and disciplinary restrictions on using gifts must be heard. But few are likely to do so. 1 Cor 14 might serve a different function. Rather than warn the dangers of excess, ch. 14 beckons us to glimpse a strange new world of spiritual power. “Modernity” and its confident rationalism that dominated 20th century Protestant theology and preaching is receding. How to move forward? We may echo Horatio’s line, “O day and night, but this is wondrous strange!” If so, Paul whispers back Hamlet’s reply: “And therefore as a stranger give it welcome. There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” Ponder 1 Cor 14 seriously and be led to pray for the gift of prophecy and welcome it when it’s given.
5. Evangelism: Tell the truth to outsiders. What is the outsider’s encounter with Christian worship (1 Cor 14:23–25)? What’s the challenge of evangelism in a post-Christian culture? Is the gospel packaged in smooth, unthreatening ways to appeal to consumers conditioned by the slick come-ons of advertising and mass entertainment? Paul offers a stark contrast: the outsider who wanders into a Christian meeting “is reproved and called to account by all” (1 Cor 14:24), and hears the secrets of the heart disclosed through Christian prophecy (1 Cor 14:25a). 1 of 2 things will happen. Turn and run, OR fall down and declare, “God is really among you” (1 Cor 14:25b). Preaching and prophecy with integrity will force stark choices and radical responses. If Christian preaching is just a reassuring word of self-affirmation, will it elicit from unbelievers the response that “God is really among you”? Does our preaching offer a Christian experience that’s different from other feel–good experiences in the pagan world? Does our preaching plumb the depth of the human predicament and narrate the extraordinary story of God’s costly redemptive act in Christ? Do outsiders and unbelievers recognize that something’s different here–that the truth is being told and God is really present?

Reference:

1. Richard B. Hays. First Corinthians. Interpretation. A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. 1997.
2. Gordon D. Fee. First Corinthians. The New International Commentary on the NT. 1987, 2014.
3. Kenneth E. Bailey. Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes. Cultural studies in 1 Corinthians. 2011.
4. Richard B. Hays. The Moral Vision of the N.T. A Contemporary Introduction to N.T. Ethics. 1996.