First, he says that we should all “eagerly desire” spiritual gifts, but he places prophecy ahead of tongues. Perhaps you would rather speak in tongues than prophecy…if that’s so, you should ask yourself why you want to do something in a different priority than what the Bible recommends. When Paul speaks of the prophet he says that they “strengthen, encourage and comfort”. I would equate the modern day pastor with the Prophet, only because they fulfil all three roles listed above, and like the prophet, they identify areas of weakness and drift, and call the church to repentance. Where the teacher opens our minds to understand the teaching, the prophet is pointing out the good and the bad things about our spiritual direction, and reminding us of God’s favor and displeasure. For certain, the two overlap somewhat.
But what about the one who speaks in tongues? As a general rule, they don’t strengthen, encourage or comfort anyone, because no one knows what they are saying. Unless someone is in the congregation to interpret, we really can’t assign much value. And if the person who speaks in a tongue also interprets….why not simply say what you were going to say in the first place? We cannot discount the validity of tongues…it is definitely a spiritual gift. However, Paul seems to place it rather low on the value chart. It seems from this chapter that some folks were more interested in speaking in tongues than they were in edifying the church. Speaking in a different language would be “cool” and “extraordinary”. People would likely gather around you and say “wow…what came over you?” If these thoughts enter your mind, then you shouldn’t pursue tongues, because you might be more interested in YOU speaking tongues than in the SPIRIT using you. Paul spoke in tongues often “more than any” of the believers, but he didn’t value it over speaking intelligent, comprehensible words to the congregation. I think Paul used tongues more as a “personal prayer language” than he did an evangelism tool.
I am often confused at the last several verses of this chapter: Paul says that tongues are a “sign for unbelievers” and prophecy is a “sign for believers”. But then in the next sentence he says that if we speak in tongues and unbelievers see it, they will think we are “out of our minds”. What kind of sign is that for unbelievers? I understand both sentences, but I think the second one doesn’t seem to line up with the first. How about you?
Also in this passage Paul says that when we do speak in tongues, we should have translators. Now if that happens, I can see an unbeliever recognizing some unseen power in the room. John says something and Mary translates. Of course in this case, Mary wouldn’t be allowed to speak…if we use Paul’s suggestion.
To that end, I say this: Paul isn’t claiming that women are inferior, that clearly isn’t true. He’s saying that there needs to be order in the church, and in his day, with their practices, women didn’t speak in public. Today in our country (U.S) it’s very different, and women speak publically often. God is blessing it, and it doesn’t cause any problems at all. Therefore, I suspect that Paul’s statement was more of a guideline for his day, not ours.