Let the prophets speak two or three

Introduction[1]

When Paul is teaching the Corinthians about how they should behave when they “come together … in ecclesia (1 Corinthians 14:23)”, he says:

Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. (1 Corinthians 14:29)

What does it mean to “speak two or three”, and why was Paul giving this commandment?

Texts

The idea of “two or three” people speaking is a theme that runs through scripture. Paul also makes reference to it in his second letter to the Corinthians:

This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. (2 Cor 13:1); cf. Heb 10:28

This is a reference to the Law of Moses, specifically these two places:

At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death. (Deut 17:6)

One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established. (Deut 19:15)

The issue that is being dealt with in Deuteronomy is when a witness “arises” against a man. Will their accusation “arise” (the same word describes the “arising” of the witness as the “establishment” of the word)? If the mouths of two or three witnesses testify against a man, then the “word” “arises”. However, if a false witness arises against a man then both men are made to stand before the priests and the judges, and the judges are to make a “diligent inquisition” about the case.

Jesus also advises the church to follow a similar procedure when one brother has sinned against another:

But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. (Matt 18:16)

These passages demonstrate that in order to establish what is true it is necessary to have two or three witnesses to it. In Deuteronomy, the outcome of the word being made to “arise” is that the person witnessed against is put to death (Deut 17:6), or if the word does not arise the false witness is severely punished (Deut 19:19-21).

In Matthew 18 the case might seem less “vital” – the punishment for this brother is that they “let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican” (Matt 18:17). However, the purpose of the teaching in Deuteronomy is to “put the evil away from among you” (Deut 19:19). Likewise the teaching of Jesus in Matthew 18 is echoed by Paul earlier in his letter to the Corinthians:

For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. (1 Cor 5:12-13)

By treating their brother in this way, the church are putting away evil. By putting their brother “without” they hand him over to God’s judgement, like in Deuteronomy 17 & 19.

Doubled

We see a similar pattern in the way that God reveals himself to us. When God gives Joseph dreams, he has two dreams, different in content, but giving the same message (Genesis 37). The same thing happens when God gives Pharaoh dreams – he has two dreams, again different in content, but Joseph says “the dream is one” (Gen 41:25). He also says:

And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharaoh twice; it is because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass. (Gen 41:32)

In order to emphasise how soon the dream will come to pass, God sends it twice, establishing the word in these two dreams.

The same is true of the promises to Abraham:

For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, … Where in God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: (Heb 6:13 & 17-18)

God swore by himself (Gen 22:16), because he could sware by no one greater, and this provided two things which testify of the promises – God himself, and the oath he swore. God emphasises the truth of his promises with “two” things.

God’s word is like this too; some examples:

• God gives extensive details for the tabernacle, and they are repeated when Moses executes them.
• Deuteronomy gives an account of things also covered in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers
• Chronicles describes many of the same events as Samuel and Kings
• The life of Jesus is detailed four times (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John)

This is part of a deeper pattern in God’s revelation which goes right to the heart of how he has written his word. There is an internal resonance in it, in which we see the different parts agreeing together.[2]

Witnesses

Thus far the examples considered are about witnessing to sin, but the idea of a witness is much broader as Jesus explains in John 5:31-39:

Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. (John 5:39)

Here Jesus appeals to three witnesses to himself – John (v. 36); his works (v. 36); and the scriptures (‘testify’ in v. 39 is the word ‘witness’; see also John 8:13-18). There are also witnesses that testify to the things Jesus said and did, for example Luke 24:48; Acts 1:8; 2:32; 10:39&41 etc. These examples demonstrate that a witness is more than just testifying against a sinner; it is testifying to the truth of what you have seen.

Paul describes himself as a witness:

Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come (Acts 26:22)

This demonstrates that being a witness can be saying things from the scriptures (cf. Rom 3:21). With this broader context for what a witness is, it is easier to see how this teaching relates to the prophets speaking; they should be witnesses to the word by speaking from it and testifying that it is true.

Symphony

In the same way that the scriptures agree together, the words that we say should also agree with them, as Peter says:

And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written… (Acts 15:15)

This “agreeing” is also mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 18, just after the passage already considered:

That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. (Matt 18:19)

When two agree, and ask, God does it; when two or three witnesses agree together on judgements made concerning the church, they are “bound in heaven”. Likewise, when two or three witness to the things that the word says, they should agree together, like the word itself does. This phrase “agree together” translates the Greek word “συμφωνέω” from where we get the English word “symphony”. It is built out of the word for “sound” or “voice”. This is supported by what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:

And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? For ye shall speak into the air. (1 Cor 14:7-9)

Paul is using the example of musical instruments to demonstrate how the things they say should sound. With the “two or three” background the picture becomes enriched; the things that are said should be agreeing together like musical instruments playing sounds that agree.

And let the others judge

Considering Paul’s teaching to the Corinthians with this background some important details surface; “the others” are to judge what is said (the correct translation is “others” plural). This connects with the “judges” in Deuteronomy 19 – the idea is to determine if what is said is true or not. By having more than one person “witnessing” to the things that are spoken, all of the other members of the church are better able to make a judgement about whether the things that are said are true.

This relates back to what Paul has already said to them in chapter 2:

Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Cor 2:12-13)

The word “compare” is built out of the word judge (literally “judge with”). The words that they are to speak should be the words that come from God – when comparing the things that they say it becomes clear whether or not this is the case. Similarly, when the prophets speak, the rest of the church should be comparing what they say to the word, and the other things that have been said, to discern what is true.

Edification, and exhortation, and comfort

Whereas in Deuteronomy the purpose of the two or three witnesses was to make the word “arise”, in 2 Cor 13:1 it is to make the word “stand”. The similarity is clear, but how does this relate to 1 Corinthians 14, when they “come together … in ecclesia”?

…he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. (1 Cor 14:3)

The things that are said by those who prophesy are edifying, exhorting and comforting; there is a strong emphasis throughout the rest of the chapter on ‘edifying’ a word which is used seven times, compared to ‘exhorting’, once and ‘comforting’, twice. “Edification” or building, is linked to “standing” in other passages:

…every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: (Matt 12:25)

Jesus is making clear the relationship between the unity of the ‘house’ (part of the verb “to build”), and its ability to stand; a house that is divided cannot stand.

The detail about “division” is worth considering in more depth. Jesus says more about the division which he brings:

For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. (Luke 12:52)

Jesus talks about the division of this house in terms of “five” people “divided” into groups of “two” and “three”. Paul uses the same language to describe the process of building the church, not just the “two or three” who are to speak, but also:

I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (1 Cor 14:19)

In addition Paul says that those who speak in tongues were to do so “by course”, or “by part” (1 Cor 14:27). This is the root of the word “divided” in Matt 12:25/26 and Luke 12:52. It seems that the limitation on those who spoke with tongues was not simply in how many of them could do it (at the most three) but also in how much they could say (by parts). Not everyone in the church would have been able to understand those who spoke with tongues without an interpreter, so the benefit to the church is smaller (for no man understandeth (v. 2)), and there is a risk of causing division if the members are hearing different things, rather than being built in unity so that the house is made to stand.

Double honour

Similar language is used of a “bishop”, who should be:

One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) (1 Tim 3:4-5)

The word for “ruling” is related to the word for “standing”, and again the word for “house” is part of the word for “edification/building”.

The role of the bishop is to take care of the church of God. Their ability to do this can be perceived by their ability to make their own house to stand. This is because the church is the “pillar” or “standing” of the truth (v. 12); it needs to be “edified” so that it “stands”.

Similarly the elders:

Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. (1 Tim 5:17)

The elders should be “ruling” (making to stand) well; the ones who “labour in the word” are worthy of “double” honour. This connects with the dreams of Pharaoh which were “doubled” because the word was going to come to pass quickly. Elders teach from the word, testifying to its truth, which builds the church in unity, so that it stands; their honour is “doubled” because they labour in the word (See also 1 Cor 9:9).

Because of this double honour, the process of receiving an accusation against an elder is therefore explicitly with care:

Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. (1 Tim 5:19)

The objective of two or three speaking is to make the house (the church) stand; this links with this strong emphasis on “edification” or “building” in 1 Corinthians 14. The reason why Paul is giving them this practice is to ensure that they are building a unified church that will stand, not a divided one. By providing two or three witnesses to the things that they are saying, they are building the church, making it to stand in unity, and not causing division (Division was a problem at Corinth – 1 Cor 11:18.).

Since the context for this teaching is when they “come together … in ecclesia”; it seems particularly important that at this time they focus on unity, putting away the evil from among them and letting “all things be done unto edifying (v. 26)”.

Let all things be done unto edifying

The body of Christ is made of many different members, and each has a role to play in ensuring that the church is not divided:

How is it then, brethren? When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. (1 Cor 14:26)

The criteria of who is to able to speak when they come together, is not connected to their role as a bishop or an elder, it is about whether they are able to say words that are edifying. The range of different types of contribution is diverse, reflecting the diversity of the body. It is only by having more than one person speaking that they would be able to fulfil this pattern.

Ye may all prophesy one by one

The context for this teaching is in a situation where the members of the church are endowed with “spiritual gifts” (v. 1):

And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. (1 Cor 12:28)

There is a clear order to these gifts. The apostles “first” and the tongues last. The number of contributions that were recommended for members with these different gifts matches this order. Those with tongues are to speak “two or at most three” (1 Cor 14:27), providing that there is an interpreter (v. 28). Those who prophesy are to speak “two or three”, but also:

For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. (1 Cor 14:30)

There is a clear correlation between the type of gift and how much of that type of speaking was encouraged at this time; lots of prophecy was desirable so “that all may learn, and all may be comforted”; prophecy was able to be understood by all, which tongues were not (1 Cor 14:19).

Since all prophets are encouraged to speak, the command to “let the prophets speak two or three” is not a restriction on the number of prophets who were to speak, as it was with tongues, but rather a reference to this background of raising up truth.

This shows that is it necessary for judgement to be made, not just by those who are listening, about the truth of what is being spoken, but also by those who speak – that they are to speak “words easy to be understood” (v. 9) and that are able to “comfort” those who listen. If the things that are said fulfil the criteria of “edification, and exhortation, and comfort” then it is profitable for “all” to speak (v. 34 indicates ‘brethren’).

There is also a connection between the “all” of those who prophesy and the “all” of those who are comforted; the way to ensure that everyone in the church is comforted is to have “all” prophesy. This seems to connect to the “all” in v. 26, which describes the diversity of different contributions. The body is diverse, not just in the type of contributions they should make but also in things that they find comforting/edifying/exhorting; if the contributions that are made are diverse they are more able to achieve this goal.

Conclusion

This background is useful in demonstrating, while the commandment given for two or three to speak is given in the context of the spirit gifts, the principle is much wider and speaks about how we can build the church in unity.

The language Paul uses also helps to show this; he could have said “Let the prophets prophesy“. The choice of the word “speak” here demonstrates that this guidance is relevant for a broader range of contribution than prophesying alone. (It also shows that it is scriptural to have “speakers”!).

Today, when we “come together … in ecclesia” we face the same challenge of making judgements about who should speak, what things to say and how to determine if things that are said are true. This passage gives us some clear principles to consider when making these judgements. One of these is that by speaking words of edification, exhortation and comfort, “two or three” can provide a witness to the truth of the word, by speaking from it, and testifying to what the others have said, making the church stand in unity and building it up.

[1] I am grateful to Peter Heavyside who originally introduced these findings to me, and Mark Morris for his continual supply of wisdom and insight when putting together this article.