When Nobody Understands What You're Saying.
1 Corinthians 14 — Paul's case for clarity over spiritual spectacle
10 min read
fresh.bible editorialChapter discussion
0:00--:--
Loading
Loading
0 Chapters0 Books0 People0 Places
1 Corinthians 14 — Paul's case for clarity over spiritual spectacle
10 min read
fresh.bible editorialShare this chapter
The had a problem — and it wasn't a lack of enthusiasm. If anything, they had too much. Their gatherings had become a kind of spiritual free-for-all. People speaking in tongues over each other, nobody interpreting, visitors walking in and walking right back out. Everyone was chasing the flashiest gifts while the actual purpose of gathering — building each other up — was getting buried.
had just finished telling them that is the point of everything (chapter 13). Now he applies that directly to what their worship services should actually look like. And his argument is surprisingly simple: if what you're doing doesn't help anyone else in the room, it doesn't matter how spiritual it feels to you.
started by establishing a clear priority. first. Then gifts. And among the gifts, one matters more than the others — not because it's flashier, but because it actually helps people:
"Chase after love. Genuinely pursue it. And yes, eagerly desire spiritual gifts — especially the ability to prophesy. Here's why: when someone speaks in a tongue, they're speaking to God, not to people. Nobody in the room understands them — they're expressing mysteries through the Holy Spirit. But the person who prophesies? They're speaking directly to people — building them up, encouraging them, bringing comfort.
Speaking in tongues builds up the speaker. Prophesying builds up the whole church.
I want all of you to speak in tongues — but I'd rather you prophesy. The person who prophesies is doing something greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless there's someone to interpret. Because then — and only then — the church actually benefits."
Notice what Paul isn't doing here. He isn't banning tongues. He isn't saying they're fake. He's saying: who is it helping? If the answer is "just me," then it's not the priority when the whole is gathered. That distinction matters. A gift can be genuinely from the Spirit and still not be the right gift for the moment.
pulled out an analogy that would have landed immediately with anyone who'd ever heard a musician warm up:
"Think about it — if I came to you speaking in tongues, what good would that do unless I brought you something you could actually understand? A revelation, some knowledge, a prophecy, teaching — something concrete.
Even instruments work this way. If a flute or harp just plays random notes with no melody, how would anyone know what song it is? And if a military bugle blows an unclear signal, who's going to get ready for battle?
Same thing with you. If you speak words nobody can understand, you're talking into thin air. There are countless languages in the world and every single one carries meaning. But if I don't understand your language, I'm a foreigner to you and you're a foreigner to me.
So since you're so eager for the Spirit's gifts — channel that eagerness toward building up the church."
That bugle analogy is perfect. Imagine an army hearing a trumpet call and having no idea whether it means charge, retreat, or lunch. That's what unintelligible speech does in a gathering — it creates noise without communication. Enthusiasm without clarity isn't helpful. It's just loud.
got practical. If you do speak in tongues, here's the bare minimum:
"If you speak in a tongue, pray that you'll also be able to interpret what you're saying. Because when I pray in a tongue, my spirit is engaged but my mind isn't contributing anything. So what do I do? I'll pray with my spirit AND with my mind. I'll sing with my spirit AND with my mind.
Otherwise — if you're giving thanks purely in your spirit, how can the person sitting next to you who doesn't understand say 'Amen' to your prayer? They have no idea what you just said. You might be giving thanks beautifully, but the other person gets nothing from it.
I thank God that I speak in tongues more than any of you."
Then came the line that should have settled the argument:
"But in a church gathering, I would rather speak five words that people understand and learn from than ten thousand words in a tongue."
Five versus ten thousand. That ratio is staggering and intentional. Paul wasn't being anti-tongues — he literally just said he speaks in tongues more than all of them. But he understood something the Corinthians kept missing: your personal spiritual experience is not the point of gathering together. The point is that everyone leaves more built up than when they walked in. If your contribution doesn't serve that purpose, save it for your private life.
shifted tone. He wasn't just giving advice anymore — he was challenging their maturity:
"Brothers and sisters, stop thinking like children about this. When it comes to evil, yes — be as innocent as infants. But in your thinking? Grow up.
The Law says, 'Through foreign tongues and foreign lips I will speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.'
So here's the implication: tongues function as a sign for unbelievers, not believers. Prophecy is a sign for believers, not unbelievers."
Then Paul painted two pictures of what a visitor would experience:
"Imagine the whole church gathers and everyone is speaking in tongues. An outsider walks in. What are they going to think? That you've all lost your minds.
But imagine instead that everyone is prophesying — speaking God's truth clearly. That same outsider walks in, and suddenly they're convicted. They're called to account. The secrets of their heart are exposed. And they fall to their knees, worship God, and declare, 'God is really here among you.'"
This is the visitor test, and it's as relevant now as it was then. When someone walks into a gathering of believers for the first time, what do they experience? Confusion? A performance? An insider club speaking a language they don't know? Or do they encounter something so real, so clear, so honest that it cuts right through them? Paul was saying: design your gatherings with that person in mind.
Now laid out the practical framework. This is what orderly, Spirit-led looks like:
"So here's how it should work when you gather: one person has a hymn, another has a teaching, another a revelation, another a tongue, another an interpretation. Everything should be done with the goal of building others up.
If anyone speaks in a tongue — two, maybe three at the most — and they take turns. And someone must interpret. If there's no one to interpret? Stay quiet. Speak to yourself and to God.
Two or three Prophets should speak, and the rest should carefully evaluate what's said. If someone sitting there receives a revelation, the first speaker should stop and give them the floor.
You can all prophesy, one at a time, so that everyone learns and everyone is encouraged. Prophets are in control of their own gift — the Spirit doesn't override your ability to wait your turn.
Because God is not a God of chaos. He's a God of peace."
That last line is the principle underneath everything. Some people use "the Spirit moved me" as for anything — interrupting, dominating, ignoring everyone else in the room. Paul said no. The Spirit doesn't create disorder. If your expression of a gift creates confusion rather than clarity, the problem isn't the Spirit — it's how you're using the gift. Self-control isn't the opposite of being Spirit-led. It's evidence of it.
This is one of the most debated passages in all of letters, and it deserves careful, honest treatment.
"As in all the churches, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as The Law also says. If they want to learn something, they should ask their own husbands at home. It is disgraceful for a woman to speak in church."
Let me be straightforward: faithful, thoughtful Christians have wrestled with these verses for centuries and arrived at very different conclusions. Some read this as a universal, permanent instruction. Others point out that Paul elsewhere affirmed women praying and prophesying in (1 Corinthians 11:5), commended women like as co-workers, and that this instruction may have addressed a specific situation in — possibly disruptive speech or a cultural context we don't fully share. What everyone agrees on is that these words are in , they carry weight, and they deserve to be taken seriously rather than dismissed or weaponized.
closed with a challenge that has a real edge to it:
"Did the word of God originate with you? Are you the only ones it has reached?
If anyone considers themselves a prophet or spiritually gifted, they should recognize that what I'm writing to you is a command from the Lord. If someone refuses to acknowledge this — they won't be acknowledged either.
So, brothers and sisters: eagerly desire the gift of prophecy, and don't forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done properly and in an orderly way."
That's the whole chapter in two sentences. Pursue what builds people up. Do it with order, not chaos. Paul wasn't against spiritual gifts — he was against spiritual gifts being used in ways that served the individual at the expense of everyone else. What counts in a room full of believers isn't the flashiest thing. It's the thing that actually builds people up. And two thousand years later, that principle hasn't changed.