"He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church" (1 Cor. 14:4).
Paul clearly connects tongues and prophecy because both involve people speaking under the influence of the Spirit, with the only difference being the language that was used. Because the gift of prophecy offers direct, understandable comfort and edification to the people of God, the apostle considered this to be the better gift. It edifies the church whereas the gift of tongues, if the language is not interpreted, only edifies the speaker.
It is clear from this passage that the word tongues means languages, as it does in Acts 2 (see also 14:10, 11, 21). We find that the speaker has control of himself; he can either speak or be silent according to his own will. Contrary to some views, he understands what he is saying because it is edifying to him. It is also true that what he speaks can be interpreted by someone who has the gift of interpretation. Furthermore, we find in this passage that the unintelligibleness of what was said by the speaker arose not from the sounds being uttered, as if they were inarticulate, but from the ignorance of the hearer—there was no one there to interpret the language.
When Paul says that he who speaks in tongues speaks to God, not to men, he means that unless the words are interpreted those who were present could not understand what was being said. “This, however, does not imply that the sounds uttered were in themselves unintelligible, so that no man living (unless inspired) could understand them,” Hodge wrote. “When the apostles spake with tongues on the day of Pentecost, what they said was understood. The meaning is, not that no man living, but that no man present, could understand. It is not the use of the gift of tongues that he censures, but the use of that gift when no one was present who understood the language employed.”
The use of the term spirit in verse 2 refers not to the man’s spirit but to the Holy Spirit from which the gift comes. Paul’s reference to mysteries here means divine truths, such as those imparted through prophetic messages. The only difference is that with the gift of tongues they are not understood by anyone else except the speaker unless there is an interpreter or someone present who already knows the language, as in the case of the apostles in Acts 2.
Read Acts 2:5–12; 8:14–17; 10:44–48; 19:1–7. How is the gift of tongues manifested in these four situations? What four different groups are represented in each of these accounts? Why is the gift of tongues useful in the spread of the Gospel? Pray that Christians today will gain a right understanding of the proper, historical use of this gift.
