By Pastor Dave Farmer
Topic # 19 The Fifth Argument - Part 1
Summary
The fifth and final argument of 1 Corinthians 14 examines two kinds of church ministries. Paul's evaluation of the charismatic worship service is shocking and disturbing.
Introduction
Paul begins his fifth argument against using the gift of tongues during public worship. He does so by employing two hypothetical illustrations that compare the results of two different kinds of church services. One emphasizes the spectacular gifts of the Spirit, and the other the preaching and teaching of the Word of God. Each word picture that he draws has a different outcome. One leads to a bad impression and has an unsatisfactory result. The second indicates that God is at work in the church, and this type of ministry glorifies God.
In this chapter, there are seven conditional sentences, 6,8,11,15,23,24,26. Paul loves to use the debater’s technique, so his writings are filled with conditional sentences. As stated before, a conditional sentence has two parts; the IF clause is called the protasis, which means standing before. It makes a statement, lays down a premise, or states a condition. This is followed by the THEN clause called the apodosis, which means a giving back. It says whenever the condition of the protasis exists, you can expect the condition of the apodosis to occur.
THE CASE OF THE BAD IMPRESSION
1 Corinthians 14:23 Expanded Translation
Therefore, suppose the whole church assembles together in the same place and all are speaking with tongues, and visitors or [specifically] unsaved persons enter [joins the worship service], will they not say that you are mad? 1
The Circumstances Of The First Case
Three elements are involved in the protasis: (1) The church is assembled for public worship. (2) All the members are speaking in tongues. (3) Some visitors are in attendance. The focus is on the visitors. Regarding the first noun, IDIOTES, the NASB identifies them as ungifted and, in the footnotes, unversed in using spiritual gifts. Wuest’s New Testament calls them unlearned. The NIV says "someone who does not understand” with some inquirers in the footnote. As you can see, there are a variety of translations.
Our English word IDIOT comes from this noun. Everyone agrees that the Greek word doesn't have the negative connotation it does today. It is used sarcastically today as an insult. It describes a person as utterly foolish or senseless. This is not how the Greeks applied this word. In the scholarly work by Dr. Gerhard Kittel, the noun IDIOTES has three main uses:
In Greek usage, we find the following senses: [a] “a private individual” as distinct from a public person; [b] “a layman” as distinct from an expert, and [c] “outsider” as distinct from a member. The term takes on its distinctive sense from the context. 2
This noun is found five times in the New Testament. The religious leaders called Peter and John in Acts 4:12 IDIOTES. This passage meant that they only had a synagogue education, unlike these elite leaders, who were all seminary graduates. The disciples' training in the Law was ordinary and common to all Jews. This use corresponds to “b” in Kittel’s list. Another interesting passage was a reference Paul makes about himself. The Corinthians called Paul IDIOTE S:
2 Corinthians 11:6
But even if I am unskilled [idiotes] in speech, yet I am not so in knowledge; in fact, in every way, we have made this evident to you in all things.
Paul was plain-spoken, not a trained public speaker, like Apollos: [see 1 Corinthians 3:4-9; cp. Acts 18:24, 19:1]. Apollos spent some time at Corinth and had a reputation among the Corinthians as an expert orator. Paul warned the Corinthians that it would be a mistake to assume his lack of ability in speech should lead them to conclude that he lacked a knowledge of Bible Doctrine. Again, this use corresponds to Dr. Kittel’s number “b.”
The other uses of IDIOTES are found in our passage, 1 Corinthians 14:16, 23, 24. In verse 16, the individual is said to be IDIOTES in that they lacked the ability to understand the language of the tongues- speaker. Here is a member of the congregation who is unable to worship for they do not understand the language. We see the third idea of Kittel’s in this use of IDIOTES. He becomes like an outsider, cut off from corporate worship and fellowship because the language of worship is unintelligible to him.
Most treat the two nouns IDIOTES and APISTIS as referring to two groups of people that visit the church. However, both words represent unbelievers who are in attendance and seeking after God. 3 Again, this corresponds to "c" in Dr. Kittel's list. They are visitors, not members. The one thing the IDIOTES and the APISTIS have in common is their need for salvation. The question is, does a charismatic service at Corinth fulfill that need? Will they hear the gospel? No! As the church service is flooded with tongue speakers, the visitors cannot understand what is being communicated.
Furthermore, God, the Holy Spirit does not minister to the unsaved in these circumstances. How sad is that? Next, we learn there is no impact for Christ.
The Outcome Of Their Visit.
The second part of the conditional sentence is the apodosis, which is in the form of a question, "Will they not say you are mad?" The question demands an affirmative answer. They will think you are nuts. The word MAINOMAI does mean MAD in the sense of describing someone who has lost their mind. Paul's point is clear. They have failed to worship God in a manner pleasing to Him. The believer, speaking in tongues during a worship service, has lost their mind.
The outcome is that when this occurs in a church service, it will leave a bad impression. They testify, “The church has gone nuts!” This is precisely what the word means, and it is the same word the religious establishment used when blaspheming the Lord Jesus Christ. They called Him mad:
John 10:20
Many of them were saying, “He has a demon and is insane [mainomai]. Why do you listen to Him?”
The unintended consequences of the charismatic worship service are that it does not glorify our Heavenly Father nor honor the Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, Paul says it discourages those who are seeking the Lord. Instead of drawing them to Christ, it turns them away.
Sadly, this is true today as well. The Charismatic church has left the path of orthodoxy and has damaged the cause of Christ. Like the Corinthians, who sought the spectacular gifts of the Spirit, who thought they were so spiritual and solely living to the praise and glory of God, they do not understand the true nature of Christian worship or the true purpose of the church's ministry. Certainly, it is not found in the charismata as this passage affirms. The testimony of this kind of church is, "They are mad." This is shocking and troubling.
In light of this passage, it is interesting that the Charismatics left the orthodox church, declaring it dead. They tell us they are the true church, for their denomination is the only one in which the Spirit of God is visibly present. Their proof is the gift of tongues and other associated gifts, such as miracles, healing, prophecies, etc. Yet, they have not read this passage, which is hard to believe. What are we to conclude? You answer the question.
__________
ENDNOTES
1 See Appendix C for the exegesis of 1 Corinthians 14:23 for support of translation.
2 Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. (1985). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament(p. 348). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.
3 One of the primary ways this particle is used is to connect "related and similar terms, where one can take the place of the other or one supplements the other [Arndt, W., Gingrich, F. W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (1979). A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature: a translation and adaption of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu den Schrift." Paul has used this particle in this manner in 1 Corinthians 14:6.