struct and edify the hearer. Of these two gifts, he says, the latter is to be preferred. The reason for this preference is given in what follows.
2. For he that speaketh in an (unknown) tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God : for no man understandeth (him) ; howbeit in the spirit he speak- eth mysteries.
What is here taught is. First, that he who speaks with tongues speaks not to men, but to God. Second, that this means that men do not understand him. Thirdly, that the rea- son of his not being understood is in the medium of communi- cation, not in the things communicated. Speaketh not unto men^ but unto God ; or, speaks not for men, but for God. Sibi canit et musis, according to the Latin proverb. Calvin. His communion is with God, and not with man. For no man understandeth him. Literally, no man hears^ i. e. hears any articulate sounds. He hears the sound, but does not distin- guish the words. This, however, does not imply that the sounds uttered were in themselves unintelligible, so that no man living (unless inspired) could understand them. 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 lan- guage employed. Howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. Spirit does not mean the man's own spirit as distinguished from his understanding. The Scriptures do not distinguish between the voi)? and irvcvixa as distinct faculties of the human intelligence. The latter is not the higher spiritual powers of our nature, but the Holy Spirit ; comp. 2, 14. In favour of this interpretation is, 1. The prevailing use of the word spirit in reference to the Holy Ghost in all Paul's epistles, and especially in this whole connection. 2. That the expression to speak in or by the Spirit, is an established Scriptural phrase, meaning to speak under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 3. When spirit is to be distinguished from the understanding., it desig- nates the affections ; a sense which would not at all suit this passage. 4. The meaning arrived at by this interpretation is natural, and suitable to the connection. ' Although he who