How is 1st Corinthians 14:26-40 followed in the vast majority of modern churches? How does the fellowship you attend practice it?

It seems to me that the Scripture says that if a brother has a teaching from Scripture he would like to share, Paul approves of giving the opportunity for such. Although, the brother should be ready for questioning or correction if the teaching is false per 1st Thessalonians 5:19-22. Likewise, it seems Paul is suggesting this applies if a brother wants to suggest a song to sing during the meeting (not before the bulletin is printed, rather during the actual meeting).

Furthermore, if women are commanded to keep silent, and Paul gives some guidelines for the brothers teaching (one by one, courteously), doesn't that imply that the meeting does have an openness to it? However, it seems like in today's meetings, the men follow the command (and are expected) to keep silent in the churches, when they should be free to bring an edifying teaching.

Calvin even seems to agree that there was an open meeting for the brothers to bring a teaching, or correct a teaching:

So, in light of these Scriptures, how can a planned order of service in which one man teaches week after week while all other men follow the command to women of being silent be justified Scripturally?

Notice, I'm not talking about wild chaos here, I'm talking about brothers humbly exercising the opportunity to share teaching from Scripture during the gathering of the church (decently and in order).

Also notice, I'm not talking about the opportunity for a brother to share a teaching during a meal after the "service", neither am I talking about a man sharing a teaching during extra-Biblical events such as Sunday School or a youth group. This Scripture passage is clearly applying to when the church "comes together", and no distinction is made between a mid-week meeting, a worship service, a testimony time, or other "special" meetings set aside to follow these commands. This passage seems to be talking about the "main" gathering of the church on the Lord's day.

If these guidelines are "the command of the Lord" (1st Corinthians 14:38), they must be dealt with seriously. I would greatly appreciate responses on how this applies and is applied today. Or, why it is ignored?

I would appreciate arguments from Scripture, or that can be plainly deduced from Scripture.

__________________
Taylor Otwell
Considering Membership -- Oak Cliff Baptist Church
Fort Smith, Arkansas, USA

Did we ever hear any cry out on their deathbed that they have been too holy, that they have prayed too much, or walked with God too much? – Thomas Watson, The Godly Man’s Picture

The Brethren churches where I as a member years ago, worship in this fashion. They have elders, and the services are completely open. One elder opens in prayer and from then on, it is left to the Spirit of God to direct. Some elders lead a hymn, some pray, some teach from the Scriptures, the worship is ended with the Lord's Table. It is all done in an orderly fashion. The women kept silent and only joined in on the singing. This type of worship can be quite refreshing, though there was a downside, particularly that we never had any expository preaching, and after a year of this, I could tell that I wasn't getting "fed" properly. Also, I personally believe, because of the lack of sound teaching, there were many in the church who did not really have a grasp or understanding of their faith apart from the traditions of the church.

__________________
J Baldwin
Keowee Presbyterian Church, PCA
Pickens, SC
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” Luke 10:27

Check Out My Blog: http://reflectjoy.blogspot.com/

Thank you for your response.

Perhaps the fact that there was a lack of systematic teaching of Scripture could be addressed, and more attention could have been given to it? I personally know an open meeting that has systematic, expository teaching (one brother was teaching through Galatians). An observed deficiency in this type of meeting doesn't mean one must leave... 1st Corinthians 13 makes pretty good sense coming right before 1st Corinthians 14. If one brother sees a lack of expository teaching, he is free to bring an expository teaching. If one brother sees a lack of songs relating to the cross and Christ and justification, he is free to suggest such a song.

I also understand the concern about not having a grasp for the faith except from the traditions of the particular group, but could this not also be said for Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc?

I'm just trying to reckon with the fact that this is in Scripture, and can not be brushed aside or ignored. If this is the model for the church, and this is the apostolic command for church practice, a lot of churches are in direct opposition to the Scripture's commands.

Have you looked at the thread regarding solo preaching? It addresses some of this better than I could.

Thank you for pointing that out.

However, none of the responses brought the lengthy section of 1st Corinthians regarding the meeting of the church to bear on the situation. This passage deals specifically with the gathering of the church.

I can't find any good answers for this passage, other than just accepting that the majority of modern churches have ignored it.

What about group Bible study? I realize that this usually doesn't involve the entire church, but I do see this dynamic, especially in my church within the group Bible study, especially since this is open to the entire church. Prayers, hymns, and Scripture are shared as the Lord leads.

Taylor -- You might find this thread to be of interest:

The Puritan Excercise

__________________
Andrew Myers
Husband of Jessica, Father of Jackson, Katie and Samuel
Member, Presbyterian Reformed Church of Northern Virginia
Warrenton, VA USA
Editor, The Matthew Poole Project

"On land, at sea, at home, abroad, / I smoke my pipe and worship God." -- J.S. Bach

Thanks for pointing this out brother. After reading, it seems like they took a good half step. However, they still had this "Exercise" separated from the "regular" meeting of the church, while 1st Corinthians 14 has it integrated into the Lord's day meeting.

That being said, this extract you posted from the 1556 Geneva Book of Church Order is very interesting:

Is the battle cry, for one of the Elders of my Church, he really feels, the way we handle Sunday Morning worship, with one man standing in front of all, preaching, is not biblical...I'm reading with interest.

__________________
WWW.SURFWRITERS.BLOGSPOT.COM
Trevor
Christian/Husband/Father/Writer/Teacher--
--In that order.
Bethany Church, Sierra Madre, CA.
God is my King
"You've got to accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative, latch on to the affirmitive, and don't mess with Mr. in-between." Tony Bennett.

Thank you for showing your interest. Do you have any insight you can share from your situation regarding the reason that 1st Corinthians 14 doesn't seem to be applied to the vast majority of modern churches?

This is something I'm also interested in. I have heard this passage used to say that the elders of the Church should take turns giving teachings from scripture, and that the floor should thereafter be opened for questions and discussions (note the verse saying that women should ask at home if they have a question).

If I had to step into the shoes of one side and give an argument, I would say that this form of a worship service no longer applies because these people were speaking prophetically under the unction of the Spirit. That is why there was "judging" to be done of a prophet's words by the other prophets. If the gift of prophecy has ceased, then this method has also ceased.

__________________
Davidius
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics

This may explain the old adage about Baptists being Methodists with shoes, and Presbyterians being Baptists who can read. To round out the adage, Lutherans might qualify as Presbyterians who drink to excess, and Episcopalians as Lutherans who know when to say when. - D.G. Hart

According to my friend, it should apply. This seems to me, almost one of those, "Well, we've always done it this way, seems to work, why are you questioning it
?" And so, most, don't seem interested, in the fact of whether or not it's biblical.

I have not read it discussed much; or shown, that it does not apply today. The only reason I've read, is that, not that many people are gifted as "good speakers". So, let the gifted speaker do the teaching. My friends reply, "They'd get better with practice."

He is starting a blog, or web page on the subject, he's been doing a study on it for a year, so, I'll let you know, when it is up.

I'm sending him an email, with this thread, so he can read it.

Let's assume there are not prophets in the church today, this still can not rule out the fact of this mandate for the church meeting. Paul says that someone may share a hymn, lesson, revelation, tongue, or interpretation. I think it is safe to say that a prophesy falls under the category of a revelation; however, what is a lesson? It seems to me like a lesson would be an exposition of some Biblical truth. Therefore, even if there are not prophets in the modern church, there should still be the opportunity for multiple brothers to share a lesson in the gathering of the church on the Lord's day.

We would have to assume that tongue and interpretation are gone, too. Throughout the chapter Paul lists "lesson" along with "prophecy," "word of knowledge," "revelation," (see v. 6) and here again with tongues and revelation. It sounds like he is using a bunch of terms to describe revelation from God, some of which probably overlap in meaning.

Later on in the passage Paul says "Let two or three prophets speak." I don't think he's talking about letting just anyone talk, especially because of the testimony of the rest of the NT ("especially those elders which labor in teaching and preaching," etc.). I'm not saying I automatically disagree that we should allow questions, discussions, but it sounds like you're saying that anyone can get up and talk. Personally, I wouldn't even want to sit and listen to just anyone stand up and try to teach me God's Word. The office of teacher is clearly something that's been given to the Church for our edification.

I think your friend has a good point.

However, in bring this topic up, I'm not insisting that every male must teach. For example, some men may recognize the fact that they can not teach in a way that they feel will be edifying to the church. On the other hand, they have some other gift that could be used to the edification of the church. Perhaps they are not a very good speaker or teacher; however, they may be throughly familiar with the Scripture. So, after a teaching, they may edify the church by bringing up passages of Scripture that agree or disagree with a brother's teaching.

I agree that there are certain men who are more gifted at teaching the Scripture; however, I am trying to assert the fact that men should be free to bring a teaching on the Lord's day. Also, Scripture seems to acknowledge the fact that mean can grow in a particular gifting.

I don't see any passage in Scripture that bars any believing man from sharing a lesson from the Scripture in the gathering of the church. You may not want to hear a particular person speak because of doctrinal disagreement, which can be understandable. If he brings incorrect teaching, it can be corrected.

However, if we are hesitant to hear someone based on the fact that we don't feel like they are a good enough speaker or smart enough to be teaching us, perhaps we should refer to 1st Corinthians 13, since it does fall into the larger context of the church gathering.

Furthermore, if 2nd Timothy 3:16 is true, what do we make of this passage (except verse 40) doing nothing more than satisfying mere historical curiosity about the early church?

For worship we don't have to provide a scripture barring any believing man from sharing a lesson. We must have positive commands. The passage you have been referencing does not give a positive command that just anyone can bring a teaching. As I've already pointed out, Paul says, within the context of letting individuals take turns speaking, that two or three prophets should be allowed to speak, and that the other prophets should judge what he has to say.

It's not necessarily that I would think someone a poor speaker or not smart enough, but I want to be taught by those who have been recognized by the Church as having the gift of teaching and who have been set apart for that purpose ("the elders who labor in teaching and preaching").

This begs the question. Perhaps it does only satisfy mere historical curiosity. If that is true, so what? But if it does more than that, you need to look at the passage within the context of the entire New Testament's teaching on how instruction during worship is supposed to take place. Again, I certainly think it is up for discussion whether discussion/questions should be allowed, but you seem to be overlooking both immediate context and other relevant NT passages as it concerns who can stand up and teach.

Which other relevant NT passages are you referring to?

I definitely understand where you are coming from, since I'm sorting out these issues myself!

It just seems to me that we have outlawed anyone except the pastor (and maybe a music minister) from speaking in the church gathering, and all other men and women fulfill the command to be silent. It seems like this practice has absolutely no Biblical basis. Actually, it seems like there is Biblical basis to the opposite.

I understand that there are those elders who labor in preaching and teaching; however, that Scripture does not rule out that other brothers could give a teaching.

Also, how does one recognize someone has the spiritual gift of teaching, it seems fairly subjective...? Some godly men may think he is a great teacher, and some may think he is mediocre.

My understanding is that the gift of teaching and the call to be an elder go hand in hand. Whoever has the latter has the former by nature of being called as an elder. This, of course, opens up another can of worms depending on whether one thinks that ruling elder is a separate office, but I think most would agree that the gift of teaching does not exist apart from the office of teacher/elder.

As far as worship is concerned, I would argue that the idea that anyone may give a teaching is automatically ruled out until it is established from scripture that anyone else may teach, based on the Regulative Principle of Worship. Again, Paul seems to be speaking specifically about prophets in this passage, based on the solution that he gives to the Corinthians, which is to allow two or three prophets to speak while the other prophets judge. All men teach at home in their families, but those gifted to teach and ordained as teachers/elders teach during corporate worship.

Per your statement about "all other men and women remaining silent" other than the pastor, this is why I admitted that I'm curious to know others' opinions about having a time of discussion/questions after an elder has given a scripture lesson. Of course, Paul does say regarding women that they are supposed to remain silent and ask their husbands at home if they have any questions.

Fair enough. I will try and do some more study and post back on this thread if I find anything.

Also, I agree about women remaining silent in the church gathering, I wasn't trying to say otherwise. I can see how it may have seemed like I was.

All other input is appreciated!