Prophets, two or three. As to prophecy, too, he prescribes limits, because "multitude," as they commonly say, "breeds confusion." This is true, for we know it by every day's experience. He does not, however, restrict the number so definitely, as when he was treating of tongues, for there is less danger, in the event of their applying themselves for a longer time to prophesyings, nay more, continued application would be the most desirable thing of all; but Paul considered what the weakness of men could bear. There still remains, however, a question -- why it is that he assigns the like number to prophesyings and to tongues, except that, as to the latter, he adds particularly -- at the most, for if tongues are less useful, there ought assuredly to be a more sparing use of them? I answer, that even in tongues, as he takes the term, prophecy is included; for tongues were made use of either for discourses, [1] or for prayers. In the former department, the interpreter was in the place of the prophet: thus it was the principal and more frequent exercise of it. Only he limits the measure of it, lest it should fall into contempt through a feeling of disgust, and lest those who were less skillful should prevent those that were better qualified from having time and opportunity of speaking; for he would, undoubtedly, have those to whom he assigns the duty of speaking, to be of the more select class, and appointed by their common suffrages. [2] None, however, are more inclined to push themselves forward, than those who have but a slight smattering of learning, so that the proverb holds good, "Ignorance is pert." [3] Paul had it in view to remedy this evil, by assigning the office of speaking to two or three Let the others judge. Lest he should give any occasion to the others to complain -- as though he were desirous that the gift of God [4] should be suppressed among them and buried, he shows in what way they may lawfully make use of it for the benefit of the Church, even by keeping silence -- if they set themselves to judge of what is said by others. For it is of no small advantage, that there should be some that are skillful in judging, who will not allow sound doctrine to be perverted by the impostures of Satan, or to be otherwise corrupted by silly trifles. Paul, accordingly, teaches that the other prophets will be useful to the Church, even by keeping silence. It may seem, however, to be absurd that men should have liberty given them to judge of the doctrine of God, which ought to be placed beyond all controversy. I answer, that the doctrine of God is not subjected to the scrutiny of men, but there is simply permission given them to judge by the Spirit of God, whether it is his word that is set before them, or whether human inventions are, without any authority, set off under this pretext, as we shall have occasion to notice again ere long.

Footnotes

1 - "Pour traiter de quelques matieres de la religion;" -- "For treating of some matters of religion."

2 - "Par l'approbation commune de l'Eglise;" -- "By the common approbation of the Church."

3 - The Latins have a similar proverb -- "Stater in lagena bis bis clamat;" -- "A penny in an earthen pot is constantly tinkling." The Germans say -- "The higher the head, the humbler the heart." -- Ed.

4 - "Le don de Dieu qu'ils ont receu;" -- "The gift of God which they have received."

Let the prophets - See the note at 1-Corinthians 14:1.
Speak two or three - On the same days, or at the same meeting; see the note at 1-Corinthians 14:27.
And let the other judge - The word "other" (οἱ ἄλλοι hoi alloi, "the others"), Bloomfield supposes refers to the other prophets; and that the meaning is, that they should decide whether what was said was dictated by the Holy Spirit, or not. But the more probable sense, I think, is that which refers it to the rest of the congregation, and which supposes that they were to compare one doctrine with another, and deliberate on what was spoken, and determine whether it had evidence of being in accordance with the truth. It may be that the apostle here refers to those who had the gift of discerning spirits, and that he meant to say that they were to determine by what spirit the prophets who spoke were actuated. It was possible that those who claimed to be prophets might err, and it was the duty of all to examine whether that which was uttered was in accordance with truth. And if this was a duty then, it is a duty now; if it was proper even when the teachers claimed to be under divine inspiration, it is much more the duty of the people now. No minister of religion has a right to demand that all that he speaks shall be regarded as truth, unless he can give good reasons for it: no man is to be debarred from the right of canvassing freely, and comparing with the Bible, and with sound reason, all that the minister of the gospel advances. No minister who has just views of his office, and a proper acquaintance with the truth, and confidence in it, would desire to prohibit the people from the most full and free examination of all that he utters. It may be added, that the Scripture everywhere encourages the most full and free examination of all doctrines that are advanced; and that true religion advances just in proportion as this spirit of candid, and earnest, and prayerful examination prevails among a people; see the note at Acts 17:11; compare 1-Thessalonians 5:21.

Let the prophets - Those who have the gift of speaking to men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort; 1-Corinthians 14:3.
Two or three - As prophesying implied psalmody, teaching, and exhortation, Dr. Lightfoot thinks that the meaning of the place is this: Let one sing who has a psalm; let another teach who has a doctrine; and let a third exhort, or comfort, who has a gift of that kind.
And let the other judge - The other prophets, or qualified persons, judge of the propriety of what had been spoken; or let them discern, διακρινετωσαν, how the revelation under the new covenant confirmed and illustrated the revelation granted under the Old Testament. It appears to have been taken for granted, that a man might pretend to this spirit of prophecy who was not sent of God; and therefore it was the duty of the accredited teachers to examine whether what he spoke was according to truth, and the analogy of faith. For the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets; every man's gift was to be judged of by those whose age, experience, and wisdom, gave them a right to decide. Besides, though the person who did speak might do it from an impulse of God, yet, if he was not sufficiently known, his testimony ought to be received with caution; and therefore the aged prophets should judge of his gift, lest false doctrines should slide into the Church.
But all these provisions, as Schoettgen justly observes, were in imitation of the practice in the Jewish synagogues; for there it was customary for them to object, interrogate, judge, refute, etc.

(14) Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
(14) The manner of prophesying: let two or three propound, and let the others judge of that which is propounded, whether it is agreeable to the word of God or not. If in this examination the Lord indicates that nothing was wrong, let them give him leave to speak. Let every man be admitted to prophesy, severally and in his order, so far forth as it is required for the edifying of the church. Let them be content to be subject to each other's judgment.

Let the prophets speak, two or three,.... The apostle having finished the rules for streaking with an unknown tongue, proceeds to lay down some for the gift of prophesying; and observes, that where there are a number of prophets, as very likely there were in the church at Corinth, two or three of them might prophesy, or explain the prophecies of the Old Testament, or preach the Gospel at one opportunity or meeting: he does not use that restrictive clause, "at most", as before, because if there was any necessity or occasion for it, more might be employed, so that care was taken not to burden the people, and send them away loathing; and this they were to do, as before, in course, one after another, otherwise it would be all confusion, nor could they be heard to edification. Though some have thought that they might speak together at one and the same time, in different parts of the church:
and let the other judge: the other prophets that sit and hear, and all such as have a spirit of discerning, whether what the prophets say comes from their own spirits, or from a lying spirit, from the spirit of antichrist, or whether from the Spirit of God; and even the body of the people, private members of the church, and hearers, might judge of the doctrine for themselves, according to the word of God, the standard of faith and practice; and were not to believe every spirit, but try them, whether they were of God, and their doctrines by his word, whether they were true or false; for the spiritual man is in a measure capable of judging all things of a spiritual kind, through that spiritual experience he has of the word of God, and divine things, and by the assistance of the Spirit of God.

two or three--at one meeting (he does not add "at the most," as in 1-Corinthians 14:27, lest he should seem to "quench prophesyings," the most edifying of gifts), and these "one by one," in turn (1-Corinthians 14:27, "by course," and 1-Corinthians 14:31). Paul gives here similar rules to the prophets, as previously to those speaking in unknown tongues.
judge--by their power of "discerning spirits" (1-Corinthians 12:10), whether the person prophesying was really speaking under the influence of the Spirit (compare 1-Corinthians 12:3; 1-John 4:13).

Let two or three of the prophets - Not more, at one meeting. Speak - One after another, expounding the scripture.