Why did Paul talk about tongue speaking only in 1 Corinthians?

[Strong in Him]

Paul used it as the context to state 1 Corinthians 14:22.

No, he quoted a couple of verses from the middle of Isaiah 28, and then said that tongues are a sign for unbelievers.
That does not alter anything I said about what was happening in the church in Corinth at that time. Which, in turn, was answering the question posed by the title of this thread.

So, yes, he quoted a couple of lines from the middle of an OT chapter. The two issues - judgement on OT leaders and the use of tongues in worship - are still unrelated.

 

[Guojing]

No, he quoted a couple of verses from the middle of Isaiah 28, and then said that tongues are a sign for unbelievers.
That does not alter anything I said about what was happening in the church in Corinth at that time. Which, in turn, was answering the question posed by the title of this thread.

So, yes, he quoted a couple of lines from the middle of an OT chapter. The two issues - judgement on OT leaders and the use of tongues in worship - are still unrelated.

I see, alright, thanks for sharing your interpretation.

 

[JAL]

Here is my view.

Acts 18
After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;

2 And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome and came unto them.

3 And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers.

4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

5 And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.

6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

7 And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.

The Corinth "church" was mainly in Justus's house, which if you read Acts 18:7, shared a common wall with the synagogue.

Once you are able to see that, you can understand better why Paul only talk about tongues in his Corinthian epistles and how he stated categorically that "Tongues are for a sign, not to believers but to unbelievers".

The Corinth church is the gentile church that is so close to the Jewish synagogue.

You can imagine if I am a Jew who rejects Christ as my messiah, as I visit the synagogue every Sabbath, I will keep hearing gentile believers speaking in actual foreign languages that they have not learnt.

I will recall Isaiah 28:11-12, as Paul cross referenced in 1 Corinthians 14:22, and understood that God is proclaiming judgement to my nation, just like it was for my rebellious ancestors who had to listen to the Akkadian language when they were in exile.

This is something that only Jewish unbelievers would have understood, not gentiles, the latter whom would have thought that that the Corinth church was full of mad believers. (1 Corinthians 14:23).

You seem to be making the argument that:
...(1) the entire Corinthian church was a tiny house-church next to a Jewish synagogue.
...(2) the Jews overheard the unknown tongues. Hence tongues were mostly for rebellious Jews to hear, thus not much needed today.
...(3) THEREFORE Paul mentioned tongues only in the Corinthian epistle, because that was likely the only case where a house church happened to be situated next to a Jewish synagogue.

Let's start with #1. Acts is merely telling us that the Jews ostracized Paul. It's not telling us how many Greeks and other Gentiles accepted his message. Perhaps the Corinthian revival started at the house of Justus but it didn't end there. Thousands got saved per week in the revivals of Charles Finney - and he was no Paul. Pastor Yonggi Cho built up a congregation of one million - and he was no Paul. It's unlikely that Paul wrote two of his largest epistles to a tiny house church. Look at verses 9 -11 of Acts 18:

"One night the Lord spoke to Paul in a vision: “Do not be afraid; keep on speaking, do not be silent. 10 For I am with you, and no one is going to attack and harm you, because I have many people in this city. So Paul stayed in Corinth for a year and a half, teaching them the word of God."

Does that sound like a tiny house church to you? The epistle opens with Paul complaining about factions in the church. Essentially it was splitting into four denominations. Does that sound small to you? Get real. Paul spread the gospel halfway around the planet - ON FOOT - for a very good reason: he was the most effective evangelist and church-planter in history. His churches may have begun small but did not remain small.

Now for #2 and #3. Seems wrong again. The epistle is complaining that tongues, without interpretation, fails to edify one's Christian brother (it's not about the Jews accross the street). Paul is clear that outsiders cannot hear, because he says that confusion arises if a foreigner enters and begins to hear these tongues.

So why did Paul mention that passage in Isaiah? Paul isn't terribly clear here, but I think Gordon Fee's theory is correct. Like you said, the OT Jews bewildered by the Assyrian language felt alienated and thus felt scorned of God. Paul is saying that the Corinthians were having the same effect on their own brothers - causing them to feel alienated. It's like moving to a foreign country where you can't join in the fun and games, and can't make any friends, just because you don't know the language. You feel alienated.

Were I to take the time, I think I could argue reasonably well that Paul expected tongues - with interpretation - to exist in every church, even today. (I think tongues-without-interpretation was originally intended for private use).

 

[Saint Steven]

Um, I speak in tongues, so no snide remark from me. I belive tongues are actual languages.

Good, thanks.
Your reaction to first Corinthians chapter fourteen is rather perplexing then.

Saint Steven said:

As if "calling gibberish tongues authentic" is even an interpretation.
More like a snide remark. A smear against those who operate in spiritual gifts.

 

[Guojing]

So why did Paul mention that passage in Isaiah? Paul isn't terribly clear here, but I think Gordon Fee's theory is correct. Like you said, the OT Jews bewildered by the Assyrian language felt alienated and thus felt scorned of God. Paul is saying that the Corinthians were having the same effect on their own brothers - causing them to feel alienated. It's like moving to a foreign country where you can't join in the fun and games, and can't make any friends, just because you don't know the language. You feel alienated.

You missed out the part where Jews require a sign. (1 Corinthians 1:22)

Once you accept that, you cannot use the Jews experience in Isaiah 28 to come up with "Paul is saying that the Corinthians were having the same effect on their own brothers - causing them to feel alienated."

 

[JAL]

You missed out the part where Jews require a sign. (1 Corinthians 1:22)

Once you accept that, you cannot use the Jews experience in Isaiah 28 to come up with "Paul is saying that the Corinthians were having the same effect on their own brothers - causing them to feel alienated."

Non sequitur. There's no discernible logic in your words. For one thing, you're citing a verse 13 chapters away without demonstrating any relation. Secondly, the Jews requiring a sign has nothing to do with tongues, it has more to do with this:

1The Pharisees and Sadducees came to Jesus and tested him by asking him to show them a sign from heaven... 4A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.”

 

[JAL]

@Guojing,

Paul is clear that the Corinthian tongues failed to edify their brothers. If the effect wasn't edification, then what was it? Alienation. That's a pretty sound conclusion, based on common sense.

 

[JAL]

@Guojing,

By the way. I don't believe the gift of tongues is mentioned in Acts. Acts is dealing with the gift of prophecy spoken in various languages ("tongues").

The gift of tongues (1 Cor 14) is very different, it is a multi-stage process:
....(1) A person receives a tongue.
....(2) He prays for an interpretation or an interpreter.
....(3) If God reveals one, he speaks it out loud. Otherwise he speaks/prays it quietly to himself and God.
....(4) Then the interpretation is spoken.

Acts is a single-stage utterance understood IMMEDIATELY. That's prophecy.

 

[Guojing]

Non sequitur. There's no discernible logic in your words. For one thing, you're citing a verse 13 chapters away without demonstrating any relation. Secondly, the Jews requiring a sign has nothing to do with tongues, it has more to do with this:

1The Pharisees and Sadducees came to Jesus and tested him by asking him to show them a sign from heaven... 4A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.”

I am simply saying, you cannot use those 3 verses to form a story that "Paul is saying that the Corinthians were having the same effect on their own brothers - causing them to feel alienated."

If Jews require a sign
and tongues are a sign for unbelievers

THEN, those unbelievers, whose tongues are a sign for, cannot be gentiles.

 

[JAL]

I am simply saying, you cannot use those 3 verses to form a story that "Paul is saying that the Corinthians were having the same effect on their own brothers - causing them to feel alienated."

If Jews require a sign
and tongues are a sign for unbelievers

THEN, those unbelievers, whose tongues are a sign for, cannot be gentiles.

I am simply saying that you should not confuse miraculous signs with signs of judgment/alienation.

Here's what Paul said at verse 11:

"11If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker is a foreigner to me."

This is just like the Assyrians were foreigners to Israel, causing a feeling of alienation. You accuse me of making up stories. Clearly you are the one fabricating some far-fetched story of miraculous signs, based on a verse thirteen chapters out of context.

 

[Guojing]

I am simply saying that you should not confuse miraculous signs with signs of judgment/alienation.

Here's what Paul said at verse 11:

"11If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker is a foreigner to me."

This is just like the Assyrians were foreigners to Israel, causing a feeling of alienation. You accuse me of making up stories. Clearly you are the one fabricating some far-fetched story of miraculous signs, based on a verse thirteen chapters out of context.

No one is accusing you of anything, chill.

You are free to form your own interpretation, based on Gordon Fee.

 

[JAL]

No one is accusing you of anything, chill.

Review your own words. You insinuated that I formed an exegetically impossible story about Paul's meaning.

And I'm entitled to a rebuttal, so chill.

 

[Guojing]

Let clear scripture interpret the unclear ones and not vice versa.

That is why I regarded 1 Corinthians 14:22 as the keystone/Rosetta stone verse.

If tongues are for a sign, like other sign gifts, to allow speaking in tongues to be a private prayer language is an interpretation forced into the passage.

In Acts 2, tongues are a sign of judgment to the "Men of Israel" (Acts 2:14, Acts 2:36) that the last days are coming (Acts 2:17-20), and that if they do not repent and join Peter's little flock, the remnant of Israel, they will all perish with perverse Israel during the last days (Acts 2:40).

In Acts 10, tongues given to gentiles are a sign of judgment to the "Men of Israel" (Acts 10:45-46, Acts 15:8-9), that the nation is diminishing/fallen in God's eyes, and salvation is now poured to the gentiles thru their fall (Romans 11:11).

This fits the passage of Isaiah 28 and all the cross reference OT passages I have listed.

To conclude, tongues in scripture are always:

• Actual foreign languages and
• A sign of judgement to unbelieving Israel.

No doubt if God gives a gentile believer in the church of Corinth the gift of tongues for the purpose of signaling judgment to the Jews who are in the synagogue right next to the location (Acts 18:7), if I am that believer, I will be edified, knowing how awesome it was that I could speak a foreign language that I have never learned before.

That is what Paul meant in 1 Corinthians 14:4, which is an outcome/result/consequence of me speaking in a tongue, but not the purpose for tongues.

By mixing up purpose with outcomes, Continuationists inserted their doctrine of "tongues as private prayer languages" into the passage.

 

[bling]

Here is my view.

Acts 18
After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;

2 And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome and came unto them.

3 And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers.

4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

5 And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.

6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

7 And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.

The Corinth "church" was mainly in Justus's house, which if you read Acts 18:7, shared a common wall with the synagogue.

Once you are able to see that, you can understand better why Paul only talk about tongues in his Corinthian epistles and how he stated categorically that "Tongues are for a sign, not to believers but to unbelievers".

The Corinth church is the gentile church that is so close to the Jewish synagogue.

You can imagine if I am a Jew who rejects Christ as my messiah, as I visit the synagogue every Sabbath, I will keep hearing gentile believers speaking in actual foreign languages that they have not learnt.

I will recall Isaiah 28:11-12, as Paul cross referenced in 1 Corinthians 14:22, and understood that God is proclaiming judgement to my nation, just like it was for my rebellious ancestors who had to listen to the Akkadian language when they were in exile.

This is something that only Jewish unbelievers would have understood, not gentiles, the latter whom would have thought that that the Corinth church was full of mad believers. (1 Corinthians 14:23).

It is surprising to me how miraculously gifted the Corinthian church was. I do like your idea of this being a way to witness to the Jews, they might have even spoke Hebrew to them.

If the Corinthian Church did not have all these problems including the problem with tongue speaking, we would not have a lot of lessons on working within the church on problems.

One thing I learn from Paul's letters to Corinth is some of the disadvantages to having very immature Christians speaking in tongues.

 

[Guojing]

It is surprising to me how miraculously gifted the Corinthian church was. I do like your idea of this being a way to witness to the Jews, they might have even spoke Hebrew to them.

If the Corinthian Church did not have all these problems including the problem with tongue speaking, we would not have a lot of lessons on working within the church on problems.

One thing I learn from Paul's letters to Corinth is some of the disadvantages to having very immature Christians speaking in tongues.

Once you realized Acts 18:7, that the Corinth house church is just next to the synagogue, does it shed some light to you why so many of Israel's signs are being displayed there?

God really wants to make the nation of Israel jealous for rejecting him (Romans 11:11)

 

[freeinhim3]

What conclusion are you drawing from your topic title question?

Why did Paul talk about tongue speaking only in 1 Corinthians?​

Hmmmm, why did Jesus only mention the words ''born again'' in John ch3?

Why did Paul only tell the corinthians the power of sin is the law?

Why did he only state to the phillipians he was blameless concerning the law/legalistic law?

Why did he only tell timothy he was the chief of sinners?

Why did he only tell the galatians they were foolish?

How many times in the NT is a subject only mentioned in one book?

 

[bling]

Once you realized Acts 18:7, that the Corinth house church is just next to the synagogue, does it shed some light to you why so many of Israel's signs are being displayed there?

God really wants to make the nation of Israel jealous for rejecting him (Romans 11:11)

I agree with you, but think thee might be even more to it.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Paul used it as the context to state 1 Corinthians 14:22.

And you can still confidently claim it has nothing to do with it.

Paul is using it to explain that tongues were a sign of the unbelief of the non-believing Jews. The presence of this particular charism was, in itself, a sign of the unbelief of so many.

In the larger context of the epistle, Paul is saying that tongues are not a sign for believers, i.e. speaking in tongues doesn't make one special in the Church. Because that was one of the sins of the Corinthians: their arrogance and boasting over what they thought was their special spirituality--and yet they were divided into factions, contentious, boasting in their immorality, and all around acting like spoiled rotten children.

-CrypoLtheran

 

[Guojing]

Paul is using it to explain that tongues were a sign of the unbelief of the non-believing Jews.

-CrypoLtheran

Would you agree that it was the same situation in Isaiah 28, where tongues were also a sign of "a sign of the unbelief of the non-believing Jews"?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Would you agree that it was the same situation in Isaiah 28, where tongues were also a sign of "a sign of the unbelief of the non-believing Jews"?

This is what Isaiah is talking about, it's fulfilled here.

-CryptoLutheran