Paul's Passing Thoughts

Exercising Spiritual Gifts in Love – Lesson 4: The Priority of Gifts – Part 2

Posted in Uncategorized by Andy Young, PPT contributing editor on August 1, 2017

The following is part four of a four-part series.
Taken from Andy Young’s fourth session at the 2016 Conference on Gospel Discernment and Spiritual Tyranny

Click here for lesson oneClick here for lesson two Click here for lesson three
(Links to the archived files are found below)


In this next section in 1 Corinthians 14:20-25 Paul begins an entirely different line of thought. There is a dramatic shift in thought in verse 20. He just concluded his last point about how giving thanks to God is more effective in words that are clearly understood than all the words ever spoken that no one could understand. And then he says this:

“Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.” ~ 1 Corinthians 14:20

If you are only reading this casually this verse seems like it doesn’t have anything to do with anything. Its seems blatantly out of place. But this is Paul’s was of getting your attention. This is Paul’s way of saying, listen up, I’m about to make a very important point and I want to make sure you understand this.

In both places in this verse the word “understanding” is the word φρην (phrane). I want you to see this is a different word than the one used up in verse 15 when he talks about praying with understanding. That’s the word “nous” that has to do with intellectual understanding. The mind. The word “phrane” literally refers to the midriff; the middle part of the body. In this culture the center of the body was the center of the deepest part of human emotion and cognitive faculties. The center of reason. In our culture we would refer to the heart. When we want to express the deepest parts of our being we refer to our heart. I love my wife with all my heart. From the bottom of my heart. This is where that expression comes from.

This goes far deeper than just an intellectual acceptance of facts. Paul is talking about something that he wants them to commit to the deepest part of their cognitive abilities, their deepest faculties of reason. And he announces this as a way to get their attention. Listen up. Don’t be children in this regard. Don’t be children when it comes to your capacity to reason with what I’m about to tell you. Be like a man. Have this fully developed because I’m about to share with you something that is vital that you understand. So this verse is like a big flashing strobe light to get their attention.

What does he want them to understand? The next four verses deals with the gift of tongues as it relates to the Jews. How do we know this? Because he starts out by referencing the Law.

21In the law it is written, “With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.” (Isaiah 28:11-12)

“In the law.” This is the Greek word nomo. Generally it can refer to the Mosaic Law, or the whole of the OT scriptures. In this case it would be the more general usage for the OT because this citation is from Isaiah 28:11-12. In this case, who is the “this people”? It would be the Jews because we’re dealing with the law and also the source of the citation tells us that. It was written to Jews. The sentiment in this verse is very similar to what is found in Deuteronomy 32:21

“They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.” ~ Deuteronomy 32:21

Now look at what we have here. Paul is addressing Gentiles with a passage that was addressing Jews. Paul quotes this passage in Romans 10:19. But the idea is the same, that God would convict Israel of their rejection of Him and of Christ. They would see salvation being offered to the Gentiles and this would provoke them to jealousy to the point that it would ultimately cause them to turn back to God.

Here is the actual reference from Isaiah.

“And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.” ~ Isaiah 6:9-10

Jesus also quoted this passage in Matthew 13:14-15 when He was asked why He spoke in parables.

And the Apostle Paul quotes this same passage at the end of Acts in chapter 28 when he met with the Jewish leaders in Rome, and they refused to be persuaded by the things he taught them. You have this rejection of the gospel by Jews on the whole, especially the religious leaders. And you have them being provoked to jealousy by the Gentiles being saved.

In addition to being a reference to Jews, it is also a reference to the actual gift of tongues. Paul makes the connection between the prophesy in Isaiah and how this prophesy is fulfilled by Gentiles being saved and some of them being given this gift of tongues. It was to be a sigh to the Jews specifically. And since the gift was the ability to speak in the vernacular of an actual human language, something other than Aramaic or some local dialect in Galilee, you have believers speaking in the language of dispersed Jews at first. But then you actually have Gentiles speaking in tongues in Acts 10, and I think it reasonable to assume that Gentiles would be speaking in Gentile dialects. So it makes perfect sense that Paul would cite this passage from Isaiah as an example because it fits right in with this notion of provoking the Jews to jealousy.

So Paul starts out by reminding the Corinthians that the Jews would be provoked to jealousy by men of other tongues – Gentiles. Having this in mind he goes on to say in verse 22:

22Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not:

Stop right there. Paul has just placed the limiting factor on the gift of tongues. This is why tongues is a minor gift in the assembly. It is a sign to them that do not believe which in this context are Jews. See, it’s not that tongues isn’t able to edify the body. It’s that is has a very specific role; to serve as a sign to unbelieving Jews. So all he is doing here in verse 21 and the first part of 22 is to explain the limited scope of tongues.

Now he switches again. He switches back to prophesy to establish why prophesy is a superior gift.

but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

The context is still the same. Those who “believe not” are still the Jews. What makes the gift of prophesy truly superior to tongues is that it is truly edifying to the Body. And he gives another reason for that. Why is prophesy better? Well consider another hypothetical situation. Remember in lesson two I talked about the grammatical structure in the Greek of a 3rd class condition? We have another 3rd class condition in verses 23 and 24. Another hypothetical situation.

23If therefore the whole assembly be come together into one place,

Consider for a moment that if hypothetically every believer in Corinth were all gathered together in one location…

and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

Now this is not an argument for a church purpose building. Paul is not advocating for the gathering of all believers into one building for worship. Paul is saying, let’s assume that you have every believer in Corinth who just happened to be gathered together into one place and in walks an unbeliever, or those who are ignorant of the gospel. Now the context has changed. He is no longer showing why tongues is limited and how it is a sign the unbelieving Jews. The context is now the superiority of prophesy among the assembly for the purpose of edifying the body. So an unbeliever in this case would be any unlearned or ignorant unbeliever, who might just happen to walk into this group of believers, and witnesses them all jabbering away in disparate foreign languages. What’s his reaction going to be? Are you all nuts? Why? To him it’s not going to make any sense. It’s going to look like mass confusion. What is going to be his impression of Christianity?

But…Verse 24:

24But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: 25And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

More than that. If he hears you talking about God, preaching and admonishing each other, building each other up and encouraging each other, showing LOVE to each other, he’s not going to be able to speak anything bad about you. His testimony to others about what he witnessed is going to be a positive one. Let me remind you of a couple of passages I cited in lesson two.

“Only let your conversation be as it becometh (that which makes something attractive, pleasant, or desirable) the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;” ~ Philippians 1:27

“Do all things without murmurings and disputings: That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;” ~ Philippians 2:14-15

“A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” ~ John 13:34-35

“Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” ~ Matthew 5:16

See this is the same sentiment of verse 25. The way we show love to each other speaks volumes to a lost world around us who is watching us and carefully scrutinizing us. And he summarizes his point here:

26How is it then, brethren?(How should it be done? What’s the right way?) when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

Simple enough. So how then should this be done? How are they to keep order in the assembly so that things don’t get out of hand and the Body is edified? Verse 27:

27If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.  28But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the assembly; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

I think this is pretty self-explanatory. How should prophesy be handled.   Notice, it’s pretty much the same way. Verse 29

29Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. 30If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. 31For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. 32And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all assemblies of the saints.

Let’s look at verse 32 first, because that is the concluding statement in his argument. “The spirit of the prophets are subject to the prophets.” The expression “are subject” is the Greek word υποτασσω (hoo-poh-TASS-oh) – to put under an orderly arrangement. The same word is used to describe the way a wife “submits” to the husband. This does not have to do with any notion of authority or subservience. This is referring to the way one defers to another in a orderly fashion. It’s not about a hierarchy or a spiritual pecking order or caste system. What you see here is the idea of being willing to let someone else have the floor. To defer to someone else to get their input. And that’s exactly what Paul describes in this paragraph. You have two or three people prophesying, speaking before the assembly, and teaching is implied in this.

Think about it this way. Let me use the example of a Sunday School class.  Depending on the type of church you came from maybe your teacher didn’t allow discussion. But you know what’s like when you’re discussing a topic and someone raises his hand and he makes a point, and someone else makes a point, and pretty soon you have everybody wanting to contribute to the discussion, and then before you know it the discussion gets out of hand and you end up off track, and then the time is up and you realize you never really learned anything.

I think that is what Paul might be describing here. Everybody wants to contribute to the teaching time, but that’s not practical. Let’s limit it to two or three comments and then move on. And then lets say someone is speaking, and while he’s making his point someone else says, um, hold on, excuse me, that’s not quite right let me correct that, Paul says that speaker needs to stop and allow the other person to make his clarifying remark. We all defer to each other. And in this way we keep the fellowship of the assembly moving on in an orderly fashion.  God’s Body should not be characterized by confusion.

Now let’s look at this next paragraph.

34Let your women keep silence in the assemblies: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the assembly.

I want you first to notice that I replaced the word “church” which most of you have in your Bibles with the word “assembly”.  Consider this. The word translated “church” is the Greek word “ekklesia” and it means “assembly”. It is not a place or building. It is not a religious term. In fact, it is a secular term used to describe ANY ad hoc assembly of the populace for a political purpose.

The Roman government was very strict about keeping law and order throughout the empire.  Rioting was considered to be a treasonous offense.  Roman law allowed for public assemblies, but the key to this was that is had to be carried out in a lawful manner, otherwise the participants could be arrested for inciting a riot or any other kind of unruly behavior.

This is precisely what almost occurred in Ephesus in Acts 19.  The craftsmen who fashioned statues and shrines for the goddess Diana provoked the crowd to a frenzy.  But what is key to note in this account is the usage of the word “assembly”

“Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly was confused; and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together.” ~ Acts 19:32

“But if ye enquire any thing concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly. For we are in danger to be called in question for this day’s uproar, there being no cause whereby we may give an account of this concourse.” ~ Acts 19:39-40

“And when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the assembly.” ~ Acts 19:41

In all three places the word translated “assembly” is the Greek word “ekklesia”.  This same word everywhere else in the NT is translated “church”.  I want to stress once again that an “ekklesia” is a secular word that is used to describe ANY ad hoc gathering of people for some political purpose.  In this context, Christ referred to His Body as an “ekklesia”, an “assembly”.  When believers gather together for fellowship it is called an “ekklesia”, an “assembly”.  There is nothing at all “religious” about this term.  It is simply the word used to describe the gathering together of people for a specific purpose.

Now think about this in relation to our text here dealing with the assembly of believers. And I have a couple of thoughts on this, and I think either one f these could be valid.

It could be that the assembly of believers had to adhere to the same laws that governed secular assemblies, and the stipulation for women to keep silent was a matter of Roman law pertaining to such (since women were afforded little if any rights as citizens)

It could also be that Paul was referring not to the assembly of believers, but rather when believers participated in secular political assemblies (remember the same word is used for both), instructing the women to remember that they needed to obey the Roman laws and not to be emboldened by their Christian liberty to voice their political concerns in public.

This last paragraph puts the concluding remarks on this subject and wraps everything up.

36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. 39Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. 40Let all things be done decently and in order.

And I just want to focus on that last verse. That just so perfectly puts the final word on the whole matter. Think back of everything we’ve studied in these four lessons. Exercising our gifts in love. Loving the members of the Body.  Caring for each other. Not coveting each other’s gifts. Not seeking to gain any kind of personal recognition for our gifts but using our gifts to help build up the Body. If the members of the Body are showing love for each other, then really all of the problems should take care of themselves. We want all things to be done decently an in order because that is characteristic of our God.   That is characteristic of our Father. That’s how the word will know that we are God’s children, when they see the way we love each other.

~ Andy

Andy Young 2016 Session 4 Archive Video (YouTube) Audio Only (mp3)

Exercising Spiritual Gifts in Love – Lesson 3: The Priority of Gifts – Part 1

Posted in Uncategorized by Andy Young, PPT contributing editor on July 31, 2017

The following is part three of a four-part series.
Taken from Andy Young’s third session at the 2016 Conference on Gospel Discernment and Spiritual Tyranny

Click here for lesson oneClick here for lesson twoClick here for part four
(Links to the archived files are found below)


In the first two lessons we’ve worked our way through 1 Corinthians chapters 12 and 13. It is very common to hear lessons on chapter 13 – the great love chapter. It’s a very popular chapter to use in marriage counseling, or something you most likely will get a sermon on at a couples’ retreat. And that can be a very effective use of the passage. It certainly has application to all aspects of life.

But I think if we are going to be responsible students of scripture, if we are going to be good Bereans, if we are going to make any progress in undoing over 500 years of protestant orthodoxy and doublespeak, we need to be very careful to understand the context of every passage. We can no longer just take any text and wrest some application out of it that might make us feel good or might support our pre-suppositions, our assumptions, our theological bias. We must understand that the author of EVERY passage of scripture had a specific message he wanted to communicate. He has a specific context, and if we are going to understand truth we must understand that it can only be found if the application is made in that context, and only in that context. Otherwise we run the risk of doctrinal error. This is what happens when you begin with an assumption and read that assumption into the text (eisegesis), rather than reading the text and drawing the conclusion out of it (exegesis).

So lets continue on where we left off. This entire subject of exercising spiritual gifts in love covers 3 chapters, 12-14.  The entire passage is really a rebuke to the Corinthians. Paul is attempting to correct faulty behavior that has arisen because of bad thinking – bad assumptions. And the bad thinking was the result of bad teaching.

Paul’s rebuke to the Corinthians was that they were being taught to covet tongues. In our first two lessons we explored the reality of being part of the Body of Christ and how we are all members. Our spiritual gift is analogous to the function of a body part. His first argument was that you can’t all be the same body part. The body needs to have all the parts with different functions if it’s going to work properly.

His next argument was that by coveting after tongues you were not showing love because you sought to edify yourself and not the body, and this prompts him to launch into his dissertation on love in chapter 13. At the end of that dissertation, he makes the point that our gifts are merely an installment payment on our inheritance. The Holy Spirit is the down payment, the gifts are an installment, and something better is yet to come – our full reward and inheritance. Tongues is just one of many gifts that have a purpose in the here and now but have no real eternal value.

Now as Paul moves into chapter 14, he starts to get into the practical application of spiritual gifts, specifically comparing and contrasting tongues and prophesy. The whole chapter is devoted to practical examples of the how and why gifts are exercised in love.   Keep in mind the context. He is rebuking the Corinthians for allowing themselves to be swayed by this teaching that tongues are to be coveted after. He picks up once again with that point, and his next argument is that when it comes right down to it, tongues is an inferior gift.

Now that is not to say that tongues has no value. But from a comparative standpoint, tongues is inferior. Remember in lesson one I showed you the list where Paul prioritized the gifts, and in that list tongues was listed last. It’s not to say that tongues does not have value, but there are other gifts that have more value, just like we said the heart is more valuable than the pinky toe. The pinky toe has value. AND, we would not just arbitrarily decide to cut off our pinky toe. But if we had to prioritize parts of the body, we would all agree that some parts are more valuable than others.

What is ironic about all of this is that the Corinthians thought they were being zealous for a very important gift. They all wanted it. And the irony is that in the grand scheme of things, they all wanted to be pinky toes. And Paul begins chapter 14 by driving home this point.

14:1Follow after love, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.”

Look what he’s saying here. You can almost hear the sarcasm in this. He’s just finished making his case that coveting after any gift is not showing love, and that to make that point even more profound, he says, you’re not even coveting the best gift. I mean, if you’re going to covet a gift, you should at least covet prophesy. Prophesy is a superior gift. It’s at the top of that list. So he starts out almost mocking them here.

So this next paragraph he makes his case WHY prophesy is superior and tongues is inferior, why it’s of lesser value. Why tongues is only a pinky toe.

2For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 3But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. 4He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the assembly. 5I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the assembly may receive edifying.”

Here’s his point. If you covet prophesy- now again he doesn’t condone this; his whole case is to be thankful for whatever gift the Spirit gives us- but if you covet prophesy it may be for your own benefit, but at least you would also be edifying the whole Body as well. Why? Because everyone would understand what you’re saying. With tongues, no one but you would be edified. Unless there is someone there who can interpret what you’re saying, which implies that someone is present who speaks that language. There is also the implication that the one speaking in tongues doesn’t even know what he’s saying. I’ll talk about that more in a little while.

But go back for a moment. Remember in Acts 2, those who were speaking in tongues were actually speaking real native languages, the vernacular of those Hellenistic Jews who had made the pilgrimage to Jerusalem from different lands. They sounded like native speakers, and the ethnic Jews there thought they were all speaking gibberish because they couldn’t understand them. They said they were drunk. The ethnic Jews in Jerusalem weren’t edified, UNTIL, the Hellenistic Jews told them what they heard and Peter explained the purpose; the fulfillment of Joel 2. Then you can be sure that MANY were edified. Who? The Hellenistic Jews who heard the wonderful works of God in their own language, and the ethnic Jews who saw the sign performed in fulfillment of Joel 2 and believed in the name of Jesus as a result.

As far as the Corinthians go, if we are to make the correct application here by comparing the use of tongues among these Gentiles with how we see tongues used in Acts, if tongues was to serve any edifying purpose, there would have to be Jews present, or there would have to be foreigners present; those who would hear whatever the tongues-speaker was teaching in their own native language. It would seem to me that that would be a valid and consistent use of tongues within the assembly for the purpose of edifying the body.

Now Paul goes on to use himself as an example. Paul says, what if, hypothetically, I came to you speaking in tongues. Here he might even be referencing the first time he ever came to Corinth and brought the gospel to them or any time that he returned to teach them. Paul says what if I came and taught you in a language you didn’t understand?

Or we can make this even more personal. I took 3 years of French in high school. Now I can hardly call myself fluent in French. I can congugate a few verbs and I know a few conversational phrases. But let’s suppose hypothetically that I have the ability to speak French like a native speaker. What if I stood up here right now and started speaking to you in French. Would you be edified? No? Why not? Wouldn’t you be impressed by my ability? Wouldn’t that make you want to speak French, too, so you could impress everyone with how well you can speak French? What’s the motivation? Me trying to impress you with my ability. Is that love? No, and you’re not edified. So Paul uses himself as an example in verse 6. He says:

6Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?”

There is no benefit to you if I speak in tongues. You’re only going to benefit if I teach you in your own language. It has to be something you understand. It has to be clear and distinct. I go back to Acts 2 again. It said the disciples spoke as the spirit gave them utterance. And that word “utterance” was the word αποφθεγγομαι – “ap-off-THENG-oh-my” – to speak forth plainly and distinctly. Now look how Paul emphasizes this idea of being plain and distinct.

7And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? 8For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? 9So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.”

See how he’s making this case that tongues is not as important as you think it is? He’s making the case that tongues is an inferior gift. It has a very limited purpose. It is of no benefit to anyone unless it can be understood. He uses the example of a musical instrument. And he uses the phrase that refers to distinct musical notes. Perhaps we can think of it this way. It would be like going to a concert that is supposed to be a Mozart flute concerto, and the flutist, instead of playing Mozart, starts playing Beethoven while the rest of the orchestra is playing Mozart. What are you going to have? It’s going to be an unintelligible mess.

Now the flutist might be giving superior performance. He may be playing Beethoven the best he ever has. He would probably be very impressed with himself. But everyone else in the orchestra will be looking at him like, “Dude, what are you doing?” People in the audience might start booing. They came to hear Mozart. They came to hear a famous flutist. He might be good, but we can’t tell how good he is because he’s doing his own thing. We can’t discern what he’s playing.

Or suppose you have an army back in the days of the American Revolution, and the commanding general wants the reserve battalion to go in and support the front line. And he sends a message to the bugler to play the call to support, and the bugler starts playing “Yankee Doodle.” Now, he might be playing “Yankee Doodle” the best he ever has. But the battalion is going to hear that during battle and they will be like, “What’s that supposed to mean? Are we supposed to charge, are we supposed to retreat, are we supposed to flank right?”  And someone else would reply, ” I don’t know, but man, can that guy play the bugle or what!”

No. It’s useless. It is unintelligible, useless noise. It does not edify anyone except the one doing it, and that is not using your gift in love.

But Paul doesn’t stop there. If nothing else, he is thorough when he develops his arguments. Now he uses tongues as a language itself. And this I think gives even more support to the idea that the gift of tongues is a real spoken, human language. He talks about the importance of language. Look at verse 10:

10There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.”

None of them is without signification. The word here is αφωνον (a-PHOH-non), and it means “without sound.” He’s referring to all the various languages in the world. Think about all of the languages there are, and none of them are useless. None of them are without meaning. Each language has its own ability to communicate. Each language is able to be understood. Each language is distinct. Now if I can’t understand the language, what does that make me to be? Look at verse 11:

11Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.”

A barbarian is the term that was used to describe an uneducated or an uncultured person. The people who lived in the remote islands in those regions were separated from Greek and Roman culture, and so they had their own culture and their own language, and they generally didn’t fit in to the Roman society. So this term “barbarian” was a pejorative term that was used for those groups of people. We might say savages. You might think of the way the American Indians were viewed by colonial settlers. So if I start talking to someone in a language he doesn’t understand, I would seem like a savage or a barbarian to him. I would seem as if I were uneducated, like I had no skill in relating to his culture. Just like that flutist who played Beethoven when the rest of the orchestra was playing Mozart.   Everyone would be like, what is the matter with him. He doesn’t know what he’s doing. He’s not a very skilled musician. He’s a barbarian.

And likewise, I might think someone else was a barbarian or uneducated or uncivilized if they tried to communicate to me and I didn’t know what they were saying. And we tend to do that don’t we, if you’ve ever tried to have a conversation with someone who doesn’t have a good grasp of English, and you have a hard time understanding them, don’t you somewhere in the back of your mind, maybe just a little, you kind of think they aren’t very smart.   I think that’s part of human nature, and I think Paul understands that. The ability to communicate is perceived to be indicative of your intelligence. Right or wrong I think that is just a reality of life.

And then in verse 12 here he uses a word I love. Take a look:

12Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the assembly.”

That ye may excel to the edifying of the assembly. The word “excel” is the word περισσευω (peri-syoo-oh), it is literally translated “super-abound.” Not just abound, but SUPERabound! The prefix “peri” means to go over and above. Seek after being “super-abounding” towards the edifying of the body. So, if you’re going to zealous for spiritual gifts, make sure your zealousness is in the right place. Be zealous for gifts insofar as it accomplishes the edifying of the body. Be zealous for that. Not just zealous, but super-abounding!

So going along with this exhortaion that Paul just gave, he now gives some practical instruction for how to carry that out. If someone in the assembly has the gift of tongues, how should he exercise it? How would he use his gift in a way that is done in love so that it edifies the body? Verse 13:

13Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 14For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.”

If someone begins speaking in tongues, he should pray for an interpreter. Ok, well that brings up several questions.   I think we need to ask these things. Does the tongue-speaker understand what he’s saying? Because if he does, why doesn’t he just interpret what he just said? I think the implication is that for the most part, the tongue-speaker does NOT understand what he’s saying. But somebody would. Whatever that native language is, someone else who does speak that language would understand it.

Now Paul, says, “let him pray that someone should interpret.” Does that mean he prays in that tongue? If he doesn’t understand what he’s saying how can he pray for an interpreter? Does someone else need to pray for an interpreter?

So there are all these questions, and I don’t know if we can answer them. You know I’m with Paul Dohse on this matter, and this is what we mean when we say we’re coming out of a Protestant dark age. There is so much that we are re-learning here. We’re undoing over 500 years of orthodoxy. But these are the kinds of questions the laity needs to be asking, and we need to be earnestly trying to find out the answers to the kinds of questions.   This is going to take a lot of work, and we are bit by bit trying to put the pieces together.

But I think what the apostle Paul is doing here is setting up a test for authenticity. He’s allowing for a way for those in the assembly to discern if someone who is exercising tongues is exercising a real gift or a counterfeit one.

Let me show you something here real quick. This might be off topic, but it’s a good example to illustrate what I mean. Turn over real quick to 2 Timothy 3:8. In Paul’s second letter to Timothy, in chapter 3 he’s warning about false teachers coming into the assemblies, and he’s describing what they look like, what they do. And then in verse 8 he compares them this way:

“Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.” ~ 2 Timothy 3:8

Jannes and Jambres, in case you don’t know, are the names traditionally given to Pharaoh’s magicians. You remember what they did. God told Moses to perform certain signs before Pharaoh. He told Moses to throw down Aaron’s rod and it turned into a snake and he picked it up and it turned back into a rod. You remember this. And what happened, they said, oh that’s no big deal, we can do that too, watch. And they threw down their rods and they turned into snakes. Only problem was that Moses snake ate up their snakes.

But the point is, Jannes and Jambres were able to reproduce the same sign that Moses did. The only difference is that what Jannes and Jambres did was counterfeit. 2 Timothy 3:8 uses the word reprobate, but that’s what reprobate means, “counterfeit.” Now you know what counterfeit means right? Think of counterfeit money. It looks real, it’s the same size, has the same markings. It might feel real. And unless you know what to look for, you can’t tell it apart from the real thing. And that’s how Paul describes false teachers to Timothy. They come in looking real, sounding real, they might work some of the same signs or exercise some of the same gifts, but their deception is subtle, and you have to know what to look for.

What if spotting a false teacher was this easy?

You know that’s how the Fed trains people to identify counterfeit money. They don’t study the fake bills. They spend all their time studying the real thing. They get them to the point of being so intimately familiar with what a real bill looks like and feels like that they can tell a fake one immediately. Identifying false teachers takes the same kind of skill, and Paul wants Timothy to be so familiar with sound doctrine that when false teachers come in, they give themselves away immediately!

I think he’s doing the same here with tongues. Because remember we said in lesson one that there must have been some teaching that worked its way in teaching these Corinthian believers to be earnestly seeking after the gift of tongues. They all wanted tongues. And we know that some people should have had the gift already. That’s reasonable to assume. But what about those who didn’t have the gift of tongues but coveted after it? Is it possible that in their desire to speak in tongues that some of them may have developed a counterfeit form of it? In other words, an utterance that was not a real language that could be understood, but was really nothing but gibberish?

So basically here is the test he gives. If someone starts speaking in tongues, if there is no one there who can understand him, then he needs to stop. Plain and simple. If no one understands him, no one is being edified. And here we are right back at the original point. Exercising gifts in love for the purpose of edifying. These statements he makes in these next verses allude to that. Paul shows us a better way. Look at verse 15.

15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. 16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say ‘Amen’ at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?”

Got that? This is the better thing to do. If no one can understand you, then be quiet. It’s better that you be understood because that edifies the body. That is love. If you’re praying in an unknown tongue, how can anybody rationally say “Amen” to what you just prayed? He has no idea what you said. It’s vain and meaningless and certainly doesn’t edify anyone.

Now, I like these next verses because here is Paul’s sarcasm coming through again. Verse 17:

17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified. 18I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:”

You know what Paul is saying here? This is one of those really confusing verses in the Bible that theologians twist themselves into a pretzel trying to explain it. Really they are trying to make it fit their theology. But the problem is the verse suffers from a really bad translation. And if you look at this verse in the Greek it is understandable. But when it comes right down to it, the answer is very simple. I think Young’s Literal Translation has the best rendering of this verse.

“I give thanks to God – more than you all with tongue-speaking” (YLT)

See what he’s getting at? See he’s giving them the benefit of the doubt. Ok, you might be giving thanks to God praying in that tongue that no one can understand. I’ll give you that, but so what? No one is edified. When I give thanks to God, when I pray, since I’m praying in a language that you speak and understand, everyone is edified. It’s more effective. My thanksgiving to God is more effective than all of you put together with your tongue-speaking.

See that? See how simple that is? That’s all he’s saying. And then he piles on even more. He makes his point even harder. Verse 19:

19Yet in the assembly I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.”

For all the importance you guys put on tongues, I’d rather speak a few words and be understood and have everyone be edified, than make a show of all the words I can speak in an unknown language and not have anyone understand me. Now you tell me which is better? You tell me, which one is showing love? Which is the better way?

…To be continued

Andy Young 2016 Session 3 Archive Video (YouTube) Audio Only (mp3)

Exercising Spiritual Gifts in Love – Lesson 2: What is Love?

Posted in Uncategorized by Andy Young, PPT contributing editor on July 27, 2017

The following is part two of a four-part series.
Taken from Andy Young’s second session at the 2016 Conference on Gospel Discernment and Spiritual Tyranny

Click here for lesson oneClick here for lesson threeClick here for part four
(Links to the archived files are found below)


In part one we began by looking at this idea of a physical body being a metaphor for a spiritual body, specifically the body of Christ. We spent a good deal of time developing this argument and why it is so important to understand, because if we understand that the Body of Christ is just like a physical body it will help us to understand how we must relate to each other in love.

If you want to further study the doctrine of the Body of Christ, the entire book of Ephesians is an excellent study. We looked at one small passage in the last session, but in the entire book of Ephesians, the apostle Paul makes an lengthy argument for the Body of Christ and how believers are to behave with regard to each other. We won’t get into that any more here because our focus is love, but I do want to show you one particular point in Ephesians 5, because this ties in to what we talked about in part one and will help us make the transition into this lesson on chapter 13. One theme that is repeated in the book of Ephesians is this head/body relationship. There is no more Jew and Gentile, but all are now part of one Body that Paul calls the New Man. There is one body and Christ is the Head.

So you have this head-body relationship. And Paul spends 2 or three chapters developing this idea, and then in chapter 5 he gets into the practical application of this. He uses three examples of other head/body relationships. The first is the husband-wife relationship, where the husband is the head of the wife; the parent-child relationship, or the home relationship, where the family unit is the body and the father is the head of the family; and the servant-master relationship, where the master is the head of the servant.

In using the example of the husband-wife relationship, Paul goes to great length to describe how and why husbands are to care for their wives. And it can be summed up in this one passage in Ephesians 5:28-29:

“So (thus, in this manner) ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:”
~ Ephesians 5:28-29

So this is the point. No one hates his own body. We talked about that a little last time. You don’t take a hammer and purposefully hit your thumb. You take care of your body because you love it.  You value life in general, and you value your own life and you take action to protect and preserve your life and your body.  So if the husband and wife are one body, and the husband is the head, he should be just as protective of his wife as he would his own body, because she IS his body. They are one.

So therefore by extension this idea of caring for the body extends to the Body of Christ. The way we love the Body of Christ should be the same as the way we love ourselves. This is nothing new. Jesus said this very thing. You are very familiar with this passage:

“Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” ~ Matthew 22:36-40

Paul reiterated this same sentiment on his great treatise on the law in the book of Galatians.

“For all the law is fulfilled in one word (saying, statement), even in this; ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.’”
~ Galatians 5:14

“Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.”
~ Galatians 6:2

Here the command is directed right at how believers are to care for each other as members of the same Body. But the point is well taken. We are to use the Law to show love to God and to others, especially to other believers. And that is especially important when it comes to the way we conduct ourselves in this life, because the world is watching us. The unsaved are looking at us, and they are very aware of not just the way we treat them, not just our disposition towards them, but especially the way we treat other believers. This is another point repeated in the New Testament over and over.

“Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God…Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.”
~ 1 John 4:7, 11

“Only let your conversation (how you conduct your life) be as it becometh (that which makes something attractive, pleasant, or desirable) the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;”
~ Philippians 1:27

“Do all things without murmurings and disputings: That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;”
~ Philippians 2:14-15

“Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.”
~ Ephesians 5:1-2

“From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.”
~ Ephesians 4:16

“Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.”
~ Romans 13:10

“A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.”
~ John 13:34-35

“Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.”
~ Matthew 5:16

That last one doesn’t use the word love specifically. But the implication is there isn’t it? What are the good works? Is Jesus not talking about using the Law to show love to others? Is that not the light that Jesus is talking about? The light of our lives that shines into a world full of darkness.

We have all these statements about how believers are to show love to each other and why. And when we get to the end of 1 Corinthians 12, we learn that the Corinthian believers are doing just the opposite when it comes to exercising their spiritual gifts. Paul makes this fantastic argument for how the Body of Christ is just like a physical body. Now you couple that with this truth about we all love our own bodies and we care for them, so the conclusion is that every member of the Body of Christ ought to be taking care of itself.  Every member of the Body should be using his gift to benefit the body; helping the body to grow, caring for the body. But instead of showing love, they are not content with the gift the Jesus gave them through the Holy Spirit. They are all coveting one gift in particular, and that happens to be this gift of tongues.

This is not something that has just arisen spontaneously. We looked at the grammatical construction of verse 31 last time, and it appears that this seems to have been a teaching trend going around in these assemblies. Covet the better gift. Be zealous for the better gift. Don’t be content with just being a pinky toe. This is ironic, because as we saw last time, Paul prioritizes the gifts, and we saw that in the grand scheme of things, tongues is the equivalent of a pinky toe. It’s only a minor gift, but yet they are being taught that they should all want to be pinky toes; that somehow, tongues is really important. This teaching is elevating tongues to a higher level than it really is.

Paul says, no, I’m going to show you the best way. And that brings us to chapter 13 of 1 Corinthians – the great love chapter. We’re going to apply this chapter to the exercising of spiritual gifts, because that was the purpose for Paul writing this. It wasn’t meant to be a standalone treatise on love. It was not meant to be an exhortation to married couples on how to treat each other, although that is a valid application. But there is so much more to this chapter that you miss if you take it out of context. So today I’m going to attempt to put it into it’s proper context, and you will see that the application, Paul’s intent, for this chapter runs far deeper than just marriage counseling.

Remember our context. We are a body, we are to love each other, love the body (because we love our own bodies), care for the body, use our gifts to help edify the body so that we can be equipped to go out and tell people about the gospel of the Kingdom. Paul gives them a rebuke and says here is the best way. He starts out at the beginning of chapter 13 with a series of hypothetical arguments. Now the King James uses the word “charity” but the Greek word is “agape”, so I am going to use the word “love” throughout this chapter.

13:1Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not love, I am nothing. 3And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not love, it profiteth me nothing.

There are a series of hypothetical situations here. Get this. I want to stress that these are hypothetical. The grammatical structure of these statements tells us they are hypothetical. That’s what’s wonderful about the Greek language. The structure and tense and voice and mood and case of the words provide for us the intended meaning.

In each of the situations that Paul gives in verse 1 through 3, the structure is exactly the same. We have what is called a 3rd class condition. A third class condition has the following structure: you have the Greek word εαν which means “if ever” coupled with a verb in the subjunctive mood. The subjunctive mood is called the “mood of probability.” In English we typically use the words “should or “would” to indicate the subjunctive mood. Take note that the subjunctive mood implies a future tense; something that we might possibly do in the future.

So each of these three verses could be read like this:

If ever I should speak…

If there should ever be a time in the future where I would speak with tongues of men and angels, and I’m not doing it out of a motivation of love for the Body, I am just unintelligible noise.

Now contrast that with what we learned about the gift of tongues from Acts 2 and Acts 10. We learned that the gift of tongues was a literal human language that was meant to be understood by the hearer. It was clear and distinct.

I also want to point out the implied future tense of the passage. Paul is not saying that I DO right now have this gift and that I CAN right now presently speak with some heavenly language of the angels that no one else can. This is a hypothetical situation. He is saying, if it were ever possible, or if the possibility existed that there was some special angelic language, but no one understood me, I am not showing love, and I am nothing but noise. Unintelligible noise. And we know for certain that the gift of tongues was meant to be understood by the hearers so that they could be edified.

That should also give us another clue into what Paul was rebuking them over. Paul is acknowledging that there IS a genuine gift of tongues, but he just spent all this time making the point that everyone has their own gift and that not everyone has the same gift. But they were all coveting some gift of tongues, and it appears that what they were coveting after may have been some counterfeit use of the gift. Do you understand how this could be the case? If they were exercising what they thought was the gift of tongues, and we know for certain that not everyone could have this gift, then it is reasonable to conclude that many of them were exercising some counterfeit form. In which case, they would be uttering nothing but gibberish.

Now look at the next hypothetical argument. This one has to do with prophecy. The word prophecy simply means “to speak before” or “to speak in front of.” Usually we think of this word having to do with the revelation of future events. But prophecy is more broad than that. It can refer to the forth-telling of ANY kind of revelation from God. So in the technical sense of the word, what I am doing right now is prophesying. I am standing in front of you and speaking. I am speaking before you. And while I am not giving you any NEW revelation, I am speaking to you about what God has already revealed in His word.

Now quickly lets look at the next two verses. Because while we are focusing on tongues, Paul does something rather clever here. The poetry in these lines are not just beautiful prose, but they are an intellectual progression. In fact he seems to be addressing the summation of spiritual gifts he just mentioned in chapter 12. I’ll put them in chart here to help us see this.

Spiritual Gift
(1 Corinthians 12)
Contrasting Argument
Wisdom …so that I might understand wisdom…
Knowledge …and that I might understand knowledge…
Faith …if ever I should have faith…
Prophesy …if ever I should have prophecy…
Miracles …so as to transport a mountain…
Tongues …though I speak with tongues…
Helps …if ever I should give all I have to the poor…

Now this is clever the way Paul presents this, because you could take each one of these on its own and you could say whichever gift you have, if you aren’t using it in love it doesn’t do you any good. Let me come back to this idea of “doing us any good” in just a second.

There is also a cumulative effect in his progression of thought. Each statement builds on the next. He says, even if you have this gift, and you add another gift, and then you add another, and then you add another, no matter how many gifts you may have, even if you have every gift possible, if you don’t have love, it doesn’t do you any good.

Now why is that? Well first of all, we should ask, should the spiritual gifts be of any benefit to us personally to begin with? No. Why? Because the gifts are to be used to edify the Body. Why were the Corinthians being taught to covet tongues? Perhaps there was a perceived personal benefit. Personal spiritually because it was a sign of their new birth; a sign of them having the Holy Spirit perhaps. Personal from a social aspect; and here we see a little bit of the caste mentality maybe creeping in, those who had tongues were viewed as more mature, more spiritual, more holy, more whatever, fill in the blank.

Well Paul throws water all over this notion of a personal benefit. In the first place, the whole idea of love is antithetical to personal gain. And he will elaborate on that in the next several verses. And since love should be the motivation, the whole notion of personal benefit becomes moot. And that is his point in these first three verses. The only way you are going to get a personal benefit from your gift would be a by-product of exercising it for the purpose of benefiting the whole body. So you benefit only as the Body benefits together. So if you don’t exercise you gifts in love, all your efforts are fruitless. You are nothing, and you profit nothing.

So what is love then? We are talking about something that is other than seeking your own benefit. Honoring and respecting the rights and the benefits of others. That really is the definition of love.

(Author’s note: It is understood that love and values are closely tied because this is dealing with the philosophical discipline of ethics.  We love someone because we ascribe value to them.  As John Immel taught us in his 2016 TANC sessions, values are the result of individuals seeking out those things necessary to sustain life.  While we would not say that we value/love another person because we directly “feed” off of them to sustain our lives, we do recognize the emotional enrichment certain people bring to our lives, especially those with whom we have close personal relationships.  But fundamentally we ascribe value to others because in others we recognize the value of our own life.)

Paul engages in this very comprehensive discourse now to explain to us what this looks like. What does it look like not just when we are using our gifts in love but just loving God and others in general. I don’t think it needs to be said that “others” doesn’t just mean other believers, but this should apply to the way we show love to unbelievers as well.

The complexity of the poetry in this chapter is astounding. It is a fantastic work. They way Paul organizes his thoughts into a logical progression, builds his argument, and then does so in such a poetic way is such an epic work that can be appreciated for its aesthetics alone.  We’ll take a look at the structure, but before we do that I want to do a quick word study on these verses. Let’s take a quick look at each of these – let’s call them characteristics of love – and then we’ll dissect the poetical structure.

“Suffereth long”
μακροθυμει (mak-ROTH-oo-my) – To be long-spirited. Forbearing or patient. Love hangs in there for the long run.

“Is kind”
χρηστευνεται (chray-STYOO-neh-tie) – Derived from the word χρηομαι (CHRAY-oh-my), and this has to do with the hand in the sense where one is furnishing that which is needed. “Lending a hand”. To show oneself useful. Acting useful. Benevolent. Love does what is needed for another’s benefit.

“Envieth not”
ου ζηλοι (oo dzay-loy) – “oo” being the negative particle meaning “no” or “not”. “Dzay-loy” is derived from the word which means “heat”. To be boiling with heat. Zeal in an unfavorable sense. “Hot headed”; petulant. Love does not behave like a petulant child who doesn’t get his way.

“Vaunteth not itself”
ου περπερευεται (per-per-you-eh-tie) – The prefix “peri” has the meaning of going beyond or further. The double use of “per” in this word gives emphasis of going farther beyond what is necessary, which is what a braggart does. Giving oneself more honor than one should; elevating oneself. Love does not boast, brag, or elevate itself.

“Is not puffed up”
ου φυσιουται (foo-see-OO-tie) – This comes from the root word φυω (foo-oh) meaning to swell up or grow. To inflate or puff up. Used figuratively, to become proud. Love is not proud.

“Doth not behave itself unseemly”
ουκ ασχημονει (ah-SCHAY-mo-nie) – A compound word with the negative particle “a” meaning “no” or “without” and a derivative of two closely related words; εχω (ech-oh) which means to possess some ability, and σχημα (schay-ma) which is some figure, form, or pattern. Literally, it means “not being able to possess its form.” If someone is behaving in a manner that is considered indecent, he is not behaving the way one would expect him to.  Love behaves in a way that would be congruent with what one should expect of love.

“Seeketh not her own”
ου ζητει τα εαυτης (“oo DZAY-tie ta heh-OW-tays) – Literally, “not seek of herself”. The key word in this expression is ζητει (dzay-tie), and it has the idea of plotting or making a plan. But it is also used as a “Hebraism” (a Jewish idiom or figure of speech) to indicate worship to God. Either meaning has application. Love does not plan for its own self-interest. Love does not worship itself.

“Is not easily provoked”
ου παροξυνεται (par-ox-OO-na-tie) – A compound word from the prefix παρα (para), meaning along or beside, and οξυς (ox-zoos) meaning keen or sharp or swift. Literally, “to sharpen beside.” To make “on edge”. If you think about this figuratively, if someone is “on edge” they are irritated or frustrated. Love does not become frustrated quickly. Think about how this is related to the first quality of “suffering long”.

“Thinketh no evil”
ου λογιζεται το κακον (oo log-idz-eh-tie to ka-kon). The key word in this expression is λογιζεται (log-id-zeh-tie), and it means to take an inventory. Love does not take an inventory of evil. Or as Paul Dohse says, “don’t keep a sin list.”

“Rejoiceth not in iniquity”
ου χαιρει επι τη αδικια (oo CHAI-rie epi tay ah-di-KEE-ah) – The word αδικια (ah-di-kee-ah) is a compound word from the negative particle “a” meaning “no” or “without”, and the word δικη (dee-kay) meaning right or just. So this expression literally means “not cheerful about unjustness.” Love does not show joy over unrighteousness.

“Rejoiceth in the truth”
συγχαιρει δε τη αληθεια (soon-CHAI-rie deh tay a-lay-THIE-ah) – The word for truth is interesting;  “a-lay-thee-ah”.  It is a compound word from a negative particle “a” meaning “no” or “without”, and the word “lathano” which means “to lie hidden” or “to be ignorant”. Truth in this sense is literally that which is no longer hidden, or something revealed. Truth is the opposite of ignorance. But notice now that the word “rejoice” translated here has the prefix “soon” before it. The prefix “soon” means “together”. In this one statement, we are to understand that two things are joyful; love AND truth. Each are dependent upon the other. Love shares a joyful symbiotic relationship with truth.

Paul sums up his dissertation on love with four concluding statements.

“Beareth all things”
παντα στεγει (PAN-ta steh-GEH-ee) – Literally, “to roof over”, that is, “to cover with silence”. In other words, to keep quiet about something. Think about how this relates to “suffering long” and “not taking an inventory of evil”. Love does not bring up past wrongs. It is all-enduring.

“Believeth all things”
παντα πιστευει (PAN-ta pis-tyoo-EH-ee) – To have faith in someone or something. To have faith in someone means that you assume the best about them. Love does not automatically think the worst about others. It is all-believing.

“Hopeth all things”
παντα ελπιζει (PAN-ta el-PID-zie) – To anticipate with joyful expectation. The Greek word for “hope” does not describe a wishful sort of thinking. It is a looking forward to with absolute certainty, like a child anticipates Christmas morning. He knows it’s going to happen. Love anticipates with certainty the best from others. It is all-expecting.

“Endureth all things”
παντα υπομενει (PAN-ta hoo-poh-MEH-nie) – A compound word from the prefix “hupo”, meaning “under” and the word “meno”, meaning “to stay or remain”. Literally, “to remain under” like the foundation or some other supporting structure. The implications here are both one of submission but also one of support. Love remains supporting even when it has been wronged. It is all-supporting.

Something you should notice about chapter 13 is that there is a distinct change in the literary style. In chapter 12, Paul’s style was logical and conversational. But Paul’s Hebrew cultural influence becomes apparent in chapter 13 as he switches to a very poetic style. One of the most defining characteristics of Hebrew poetry is parallelism. This can be seen in Psalms, where the writer expresses a thought and then restates that same though another way in the next line. The thoughts can either be comparative or contrasting. Paul uses a more complex form of parallelism called inverse parallelism, and you can see it here in 1 Corinthians 13:7. The relationship between these four aspects of love looks like this:

With inverse parallelism, what you have is a structure where the two outer statements are related, and the two inner are related. Rather than just a simple parallelism where you have a statement followed by a restatement or a contrasting statement. Here is another way you can look at it.


Paul uses parallelism as a poetic way to express his thoughts by restating the same idea in a different way in order to make his point understood. If you look closely at the definitions you will see that the ideas of “bearing” and “enduring” are very much the same thought. Love does not bring up past wrongs (all-bearing/enduring); The parallel thought is, it remains supporting even when it has been wronged (all-enduring/supporting). It endures those wrongs. Likewise, the ideas of “believing” and “hoping” are also very much the same thought. Love does not automatically think the worst (all-believing), and the parallel thought is, it anticipates the best with certainty (all-hoping/expecting).

In fact, if you go back and consider the first 8 characteristics of love in verses 4 through 6, they are also arranged in a much larger and even more complex inverse parallelism construct. Let me show you what that looks like.

But, here you have the first 8 characteristics of love. And I’ve drawn brackets around the lines of parallel thought, and you can see how they are nested inside of each other. This is a good way to help you visualize the lines of parallel thought.

Look also at this group in the middle that actually begins with the last clause of verse 5 and includes verse 6. Paul says love “thinketh no evil,” and then to reinforce that statement, he uses a pair of parallel statement to clarify it or enhance or embellish what he means by that. In what way does love not think evil?

Now the structure of the chapter changes again here. And I want us to try and see the parallelism. Paul makes a grand summarizing statement about love and then contrasts that with three examples. So what is the grand summarizing statement? One generalized, overall characteristic of love.

Love never fails.

ουδεποτε εκπιπτει (oo-deh-POH-teh ek-PIP-tie) – The word for “faileth” is a compound word from the prefix “ek”, meaning “out of” and the word “pipto”, meaning “to fall”, literally or figuratively. In this sense, it does not describe something that comes to an end, but rather something that no longer measures up to a perceived standard of excellence. Love will never let another down. Another way to think about this is that love will never not live up to its expectations.

BUT! Compare that to other things. And Paul uses three examples, and notice that he chooses three spiritual gifts to use as examples. Take note of the progression.

8Love never faileth: but

whether there be prophecies, they shall fail;
καταργεω (kat-ar-GEH-oh) – to be rendered entirely useless

whether there be tongues, they shall cease;
παυω (POW-oh) – to pause or stop

whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
καταργεω (kat-ar-GEH-oh) – to be rendered entirely useless

I’m not sure why the translators of the King James used a different expression for the same word, but they did. I think they took some liberties with the poetry there to make it seem to say something it doesn’t. But what I do want to mention is that all three of these verbs are in the passive voice. That means the subject is the recipient of the action. So prophecies don’t just fail, prophecies will be rendered entirely useless.  Tongues don’t just cease, tongues will be stopped.  Knowledge doesn’t just vanish away. Knowledge will be rendered entirely useless.

Now Paul has only referenced three gifts here. He could have used all of them couldn’t he? But usually when you’re making an argument it is sufficient to cite three examples. So really, what Paul is saying about these three gifts can really be said about all the gifts can’t they? Why is that? What do you suppose Paul is getting at? What’s his point?

I think the point is the temporary nature of spiritual gifts. All of them. And I don’t mean temporary from standpoint of any given age or dispensation or era, but temporary in the sense that we shouldn’t make more out of gifts that what is intended. The transient nature of gifts. Again, what is the purpose of gifts? It is for mutual edification of the Body. Not for the edification of the individual. The Body isn’t always going to be here. One day it’s going to be taken in the rapture, or individual members are doing to die and await the resurrection, so you can already see this transient nature of spiritual gifts. They only serve a rather immediate purpose only.

So I think what Paul is getting at here is that it’s foolish to spend all this time coveting after something that you can’t have in the first place, is of no benefit to you personally, and is really only temporal in nature for the time that you are here in this world fellowshipping with the Body of Christ.

To drive home this point, Paul takes each of the three examples and develops each of them with a now/then comparison. So here we see the parallelism come into play again. Using this kind of comparison he going to show the incompleteness of each gift, and you will see the transient, temporal nature of spiritual gifts; how they serve a purpose now, but something better is coming.

So here’s the first one, in verses 9 and 10:

9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.”

So what is the “now”? What is true about now? Knowledge and prophesy are incomplete. The word in the Greek actually refers to it as an installment. And that is really interesting the way Paul puts this. What does Paul call the Holy Spirit elsewhere in the New Testmant? Doesn’t he refer to the Holy Spirit as the “earnest” of our inheritance? What is an earnest? That’s an Old English term that means like a down payment. It’s a good faith payment that signifies that the rest of the payment in full is coming. Now isn’t it interesting to think of spiritual gifts as an installment. So God has an inheritance waiting for us. But He didn’t give it to us all at once. He gave us a down payment on it when He gave us the Holy Spirit, and He made an installment payment when He gave us our spiritual gifts.

Isn’t that an even more important reason why we should not covet after someone else’s gift? It’s a payment that isn’t ours. It’s not owed to us. It’s owed to someone else. Do you think we should covet after someone else’s installment payment that’s really owed to them? So for now, gifts are only a partial payment, but something better is coming.

THEN, something perfect is coming. The word here for “perfect” actually means mature or complete. So, why settle for a partial payment when the complete payment is yet to come? When we get our inheritance, the partial payment, the installment, the gift, is no longer needed. So NOW, we have only an installment, but THEN full and complete reward.

Ok, next one. Verse 11:

11When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child:
but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”

And this one builds on this idea of maturity or completeness. I used to be a child. I talked, behaved, and though like a child did because I was immature. I was not grown up yet. But I grew up and became a man, and so I don’t behave like a child anymore. So here is a great metaphor that Paul uses to make this point. We understand this. We understand what it means to grow up. So NOW, restating this idea of incompleteness, NOW we are not mature or complete, but THEN, one day in the future, we will be mature and complete. So let’s understand that these gifts that we are coveting after that we think are so important and we place such significance on, in the grand scheme of things, one day we are going to put them away. They are childish. Not childish in the sense of pettiness, but childish in the sense of being not complete or not mature. Maturity should be our goal. That’s where our aim should be.

Last one. Verse 12:

12For now we see through a glass, darkly;
but then face to face:
(now I know in part;
but then shall I know even as also I am known.)”

Notice this one even has a parenthetical thought inside of it, another parallel thought that restates this parallel thought. What is the “now”? NOW we see through a glass darkly. And we can assume that this implies knowledge, but we don’t have to assume because he tells us in the parenthesis, my knowledge is incomplete. Now I know in part. With that word for “in part” he again refers to it as an installment. I don’t have full knowledge.   It is like looking at my reflection in a foggy mirror.  If I have the gift of knowledge, guess what, it’s only an installment payment. There is more coming.

Well when will that be? THEN – face to face. When I see the Father face to face I will be complete. How complete will I be? “Even as I am known.” Everything God knows about me – which is everything. God knows everything about me, so we will know just like God knows about us. The suggestion here is that we’ll know everything God knows.

You see why love is so important? You see why Paul rebukes the Corinthians. Let’s put our gifts into perspective. There is something better coming. Don’t get so hung up on the here and now. Just love each other and don’t worry about what everyone else has.

You know I heard a good saying some weeks ago. I can’t remember who said it, but I use it with my kids at meal time. You know how kids are, kids are all about fairness, so they always get stressed out if one of their siblings is taking too much corn, or too many potatoes, or the bigger piece of chicken. But I heard this, and this is what I tell them. Don’t look into your neighbor’s bowl to see if he has too much. Look into you neighbor’s bowl to make sure he has enough. And I though, what a great statement! That’s what love is about. Not coveting after what your neighbor has and comparing it with what you don’t have. No, love says, hey brother, do YOU have enough?

Paul says the spiritual gifts are only an installment. They have a purpose only for now, to edify the body. The full payment is coming.

But there is something that is going to stay. There is something that IS now and will remain forever. What is of lasting value? There are three things.

Faith, Hope, and Love.

And out of all of these, the greatest is love. Why is love the greatest? Because love fulfills the law. Love is the antithesis of fear.  Fear is all about condemnation and judgment and death. But love is all about life!

…To be continued

Andy Young 2016 Session 2 Archive Video (YouTube)  Audio Only (mp3)

%d bloggers like this: