What does 1 Corinthians 14:28 imply about the necessity of interpretation in church gatherings? Immediate Literary Context Paul is regulating public worship (1 Colossians 14:26-40). He has already limited uninterpreted tongues to at most two or three speakers (v. 27) and has set prophecy above uninterpreted tongues for corporate edification (vv. 1-5, 12). Verse 28 gives the corrective provision when interpretation is absent. Edification As The Governing Principle Throughout the chapter Paul repeats that “everything must be done for edification” (v. 26). Speech no one understands cannot build up the body (vv. 6-11, 17). Interpretation is therefore not optional but essential for any public exercise of tongues. Grammatical And Linguistic Observations • “If there is no interpreter” (ean mē ē diermēneutēs)—the clause is first-class conditional; Paul assumes the possibility. • “He is to remain silent” (sigatō)—present active imperative, ongoing restraint. • “Let him speak to himself and to God” (laleitō heautō kai tō Theō)—not a prohibition of the gift but a relocation to private devotion. The grammar makes interpretation the immediate qualifier for public vocalization. The Necessity Of Interpretation—Four Theological Reasons 1. Comprehensibility: Acts 2 sets the paradigm—miraculous languages were understood by hearers; corporate worship must replicate that clarity (cf. Nehemiah 8:8). 2. Edification: Spiritual gifts are “for the common good” (1 Colossians 12:7). Without interpretation, tongues profit only the speaker (14:4). 3. Witness to Outsiders: Unintelligible speech produces the very confusion Isaiah 28:11-12 warns about; intelligible proclamation convicts and converts (14:24-25). 4. Order and Peace: God is “not a God of disorder but of peace” (14:33). Interpretation supplies the structure that guards corporate harmony. Historical Manuscript Evidence Papyrus P46 (c. AD 175-225), Codex Vaticanus (B), Codex Sinaiticus (א), and the majority Byzantine tradition all read identically here, strengthening the textual certainty that the regulation is original. Early citations by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 5.6.1) and Tertullian (On Baptism 19) echo the same principle, showing uniform reception. Patristic And Post-Apostolic Practice The Didache 11-13 requires visiting prophets to make themselves understood. Hippolytus’s Apostolic Tradition (c. AD 215) instructs interpreters to accompany tongues-speakers. The patristic consensus affirms Paul’s mandate. Comparative Scripture • 1 Corinthians 12:10—tongues and interpretation are paired gifts. • 1 Corinthians 14:13—tongue-speakers themselves should pray to interpret. • 1 Corinthians 14:39-40—“do not forbid tongues … but all things must be done decently and in order.” • Romans 12:6-8—every gift is to be exercised “in proportion to faith,” implying intelligibility. Practical Guidelines For Modern Gatherings 1. Discern interpreters before public expression of tongues. 2. Permit the gift privately if no interpreter is present. 3. Encourage bilingual or interpretive ministries to bridge linguistic gaps in multicultural congregations. 4. Elders should oversee and gently correct deviations, replicating Paul’s apostolic oversight. Implications For Ecclesiology The verse upholds congregational participation under the boundary of intelligible edification. It balances charismatic freedom with doctrinal fidelity, preventing chaos while valuing every Spirit-given gift. Conclusion 1 Corinthians 14:28 unequivocally asserts that public tongues without interpretation have no place in corporate worship. Interpretation is not a courtesy but a divine requirement so that the gathered church may be taught, comforted, and unified to the glory of God. |
    |