Diversely Functioning Signs in I Corinthians 14:22

1 Corinthians 14:22 is one of those passages which, upon a cursory reading, contain a glaring difficulty. If the most natural and obvious way of understanding the phrase “sign for unbelievers” is accepted, then the verse is in direct and irreconcilable contradiction with the immediate context. The same observation holds true for the implied “[sign] for believers,” later in the verse. The initial reaction to this phrase, particularly in one who has some prior knowledge of the functioning of signs in a biblical-theological context, must be that the gift of tongues is a sign which is “for” unbelievers in the sense that it tends to their advantage, or serves to produce or abet faith. Likewise, prophecy must presumably be to the advantage of believers, edifying and building up their faith. However, if this assessment is correct, we immediately encounter insurmountable difficulties. Regarding tongues, if it is exclusively a gift for the advantage of unbelievers, the previous verse is inexplicable, which prophesies rather the opposite, namely, that tongues would not be an effective sign for producing the hearing of faith. Furthermore, it contradicts the following verse, which indicates that the reaction of an unbeliever to the tongues-manifestations of the Corinthian church would be skepticism (“You are mad!”); and it is also in conflict with other assertions within the broader context of the chapter, which speak of tongues as being to the advantage of believers, and not unbelievers merely (cf., for instance, 1 Corinthians 14:4). In the same way, if prophecy is a sign for the advantage of believers, serving to strengthen their faith, then why do the following verses speak only of how the sign falls out to the advantage of the visiting unbeliever, and say nothing of how a believer may be benefited?

There must be a different sense in which “sign for unbelievers” (semeion tois apistois) is intended than “sign tending to the advantage of unbelievers”. A couple of observations are in order here: first, the obvious understanding implies movement from one position to its opposite – a sign which finds a person in the position of unbelief and so affects him that he comes to stand in the opposite position. It is a sign that has the capacity to change a person’s classification from unbeliever to believer. This interpretation must then lead to a corresponding understanding of prophecy as a sign which tends to produce the same motion to belief, but from a different starting point, that is, in one who is already a believer. In essence, the signs are contrasted because the starting points are different (persons of unbelief/belief); but the functioning relative to those different starting points is the same. However, this unspoken assumption fails to do justice to the contextual indicators. What we must come away with, as we observe the following verses in particular, is that the starting point is the same for both gifts; as Paul explains the ways in which the one sign is “tois apistois” (for unbelievers), and the other is “tois pisteuousin” (for believers), he begins, with respect to both of the signs, with a field of unbelievers upon which the different signs will act. But if the starting point is the same, and if the signs are clearly contrasted by means of association with believers and unbelievers, then the point of difference must lie in the motion produced by the sign, or the actual effect towards which each particular sign tends, from that uniform starting point. In other words, the one sign, tongues, beginning with an unbeliever, tends to produce continuing unbelief; and the other sign, prophecy, beginning with the same class of person, tends to work in him faith, and so makes him a believer.

When viewed in this light, understanding signs “for” to indicate signs “resultative of,” and not signs “to the advantage of,” then the immediate context makes perfect sense. The Old Testament prophecy that, in spite of God’s speaking to his unbelieving people in other tongues they will still not believe, corresponds most convincingly to the present situation of the church: the Corinthian believers suppose that, because of the power manifested through their speaking in tongues, unbelievers will come to believe; but Paul is denying this unspoken assumption of the Corinthians, saying that the powerful sign of tongues will not produce faith in the unbelievers – and he uses the situation spoken of in Isaiah twenty-eight to illustrate his point. In verse twenty-three, he reiterates the same point more specifically, asserting that, in actuality, an unbeliever who visits the church and sees this visible gift of tongues proliferated without restraint will likely conclude that they are mad – the opposite effect of that which the Corinthians were attempting to produce. Tongues was only working as a sign of judgment, causing the unbeliever to remain hardened in his unbelief – it was a sign resultative of ongoing unbelievers, and hence was not of any evangelistic profit in the church. Incidentally, this understanding also clears up the problem with Paul’s treatment of tongues elsewhere as being profitable for the individual believer. It is a sign which tends to ongoing unbelief in unbelievers; but it may well serve as a source of edification to those who already believe.

In a similar vein, prophecy is a sign which is resultative of believers. When an unbeliever visits the church and hears the word of God applied specifically to him – when “the secrets of his heart are revealed,” in the context of the proclamation of the gospel, then the truth of the gospel is affirmed and made personal. The power and presence of God become undeniable, as the unbeliever hears many Christians who know things about his heart than only God could reveal. This is no simple sign of power; it is a sign of power mingled with informational content – it is the power of God joined with the message of preaching – and it is a sign which results in many unbelievers coming to faith. Tongues may display power, and they may edify him who already believes; but unless they are interpreted, they contain no informational content, and are thus dismissed by the unbeliever as madness. Prophecy contains undeniable content which is fully understandable to the unbeliever; and the content, as well as the power, is necessary to produce any positive effect in an unbelieving heart.

In summary, the datives following the expression “sign” (whether written or implied) in 1 Corinthians 14:22 do not indicate advantage, or a moving toward belief, beginning with different classes of people, unbelievers and believers. Rather, they assume an identical starting point (unbelief), and indicate motion towards a classification. They are signs tending towards the result either of continued unbelievers or new believers respectively, as they begin in the same way with a field of unbelievers. The discussion is centered on unbelievers, and specifically those visiting unbelievers which the Corinthians hope to influence by means of sign gifts. The related topic of those same signs as they affect persons who already believe is here untouched; and so Paul is able to explicate those various effects at different points in the chapter without contradicting himself in these verses, which expound the results of the different signs in a very specific situation. And the conclusion here is quite similar to the conclusions of other portions of the chapter: namely, while tongues have some value for edifying the spirit of believers, yet because they are unfruitful with respect to the understanding, they are not beneficial for others who surround the tongue-speaker. They cannot edify the members of the church without interpretation, and they cannot move an unbeliever to belief for the same reason. That effect is rather to be sought in prophecy, which by its very nature contains understandable content.

5 Responses to “Diversely Functioning Signs in I Corinthians 14:22”

  1. Chris says:
    October 18, 2006 at 2:59 pm

    I probably shouldn’t have read that at the end of a work day. It made no sense at all. I’ll try again after a nap! :)

  2. pitchford says:
    October 19, 2006 at 7:45 am

    I was trying to get that done before I went to work yesterday, so in my haste I probably wrote with a good deal of ambiguity, obfuscation, and other unhelpful qualities. But this is my basic point:

    When you read I Corinthians 14:22, you find that tongues are a sign not for believers, but for unbelievers; prophecy is exactly opposite. One’s initial reaction would be that tongues are “for” in a positive sense — that is, they are to the advantage of the unbeliever, or they are to produce faith in the unbeliever. However, if this is the case, we have two glaring contradictions: Paul says here that tongues is not for the believer, but elsewhere he says precisely the opposite (e.g. vs. 4). Even more pointedly, he says prophecy is not for the unbeliever — but immediately goes on to explain how prophecy convicts and admonishes the unbeliever, and even causes him to worship. How can this not be an obvious contradiction in the very same passage?

    My point is that it must be a contradiction if we take believer/unbeliever as two groups upon which the signs initially act for edification of faith. If we see these signs acting upon only unbelievers in this passage, but one of them acting so as to produce more unbelief, and one of them acting so as to produce genuine faith, then you can account for Paul’s example of prophecy benefiting an unbeliever, after he had just said prophecy is not for an unbeliever, you can account for other places where Paul says tongues are edifying for the believer, and so on.

    I’m not sure if my explanation made any more sense than the original. But that’s all I can say right now.

    Pitchford

  3. Chris says:
    October 19, 2006 at 1:15 pm

    Produce more unbelief? Hmmm… I’m going to have to think about this.

  4. felician says:
    December 25, 2006 at 4:57 pm

    Hi! Christmas Day falls on December 25. It is preceded by Christmas Eve on December 24, and in some countries is followed by Boxing Day on December 26. Some Eastern Orthodox Churches celebrate Christmas on January 7, which corresponds to December 25 on the Julian calendar. December 25 as a birthdate for Jesus is merely traditional, and is not thought to be his actual date of birth.Sincerely

  5. Greg says:
    January 23, 2007 at 10:04 pm

    Nice article, but I’d say you’re over-complicating the issue somewhat. I think Paul was simply using a literary device to get across two points- 1) that tongues don’t help unbelievers, and 2) that we should exercise our brains when interpreting ancient texts (see verse 20). I wrote about it here if anyone’s interested.

Leave a Reply