Spiritual Gifts, Spiritual Maturity, Love and the Building Up of Christ’s Church
ChatGPT with Stephen D Green, October 2026
Introduction
The New Testament teaches that the Holy Spirit gives gifts to believers for the good of the Church. These gifts are diverse, their distribution belongs to God, and their exercise must be governed by love, truth, order and the purpose of building up Christ’s people. Spiritual manifestations are significant, but they must be understood within the wider purposes of the Spirit’s work.
Recognising evidence of the Holy Spirit’s activity is not the same as discerning the full purpose, character and fruit of that activity. A spiritual manifestation may provide meaningful evidence of God’s work without, by itself, establishing a person’s spiritual maturity, suitability for leadership or contribution to the wider body of Christ. A mature understanding of spiritual gifts therefore requires attention not only to their presence, but also to their purpose and the way they serve the Church.
The central question is whether spiritual gifts, church practices and ministerial decisions are helping the Holy Spirit build one mature, loving body in Christ.
The Source and Purpose of Spiritual Gifts
In 1 Corinthians 12:4–11, Paul explains that there are different gifts, services and activities, but the same Spirit, Lord and God is at work in them. He identifies gifts including wisdom, knowledge, faith, healing, miraculous powers, prophecy, discernment of spirits, different kinds of tongues and interpretation of tongues. He emphasises that the Spirit distributes these gifts individually, according to his will.
The diversity of gifts is important. No single manifestation exhausts the range of the Spirit’s activity, and no believer should regard a particular gift as a personal achievement that establishes superiority over others. The gifts are God’s provision for his people, entrusted to them for purposes that extend beyond personal distinction.
Paul introduces his discussion by explaining that “the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal” (1 Corinthians 12:7, KJV). The expression conveys the idea of benefit or advantage. In context, the emphasis is corporate: the Spirit’s manifestation is intended to benefit the community of believers.
This principle is reinforced throughout the New Testament. Romans 12:3–8 identifies gifts that include prophecy, service, teaching, encouragement, giving, leadership and mercy. Ephesians 4:11–16 describes ministries given by Christ to equip believers for service and build up his body. First Peter 4:10–11 instructs Christians to use whatever gifts they have received to serve one another as faithful stewards of God’s grace.
These passages broaden the understanding of spiritual gifts beyond tongues and other visibly supernatural manifestations. Teaching, pastoral care, generosity, leadership and practical service are also important means through which believers contribute to the life of the Church. Their significance should not be overlooked simply because they differ from more conspicuous manifestations.
Peter’s description of believers as stewards is particularly helpful. A steward does not own what has been entrusted to them but is responsible for using it faithfully. The relevant questions are therefore not merely what gift a person possesses or what experience they have had, but how that gift should be used, who benefits from it, whether it is exercised according to Scripture and whether it contributes to the maturity of Christ’s people.
The existence of a gift is significant, but the purpose and manner of its exercise are also essential to biblical discernment.
Initial Signs and the Wider Work of the Holy Spirit
The book of Acts records several occasions on which people receive the Holy Spirit and experience spiritual manifestations. At Pentecost, the disciples speak in other tongues as the Spirit enables them (Acts 2:1–4). In Samaria, Peter and John lay hands on believers who then receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:14–19). In Cornelius’s household, the Spirit falls upon Gentile hearers who speak in tongues and praise God (Acts 10:44–48). At Ephesus, disciples receive the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues and prophesy (Acts 19:1–7).
These accounts establish an important connection between the Spirit’s activity and spiritual manifestations. However, careful interpretation requires distinguishing what each passage explicitly reports from conclusions drawn by comparing the accounts. For example, Acts 8 does not explicitly identify the manifestation Simon observes as tongues. The reception of the Spirit is clear, but the particular manifestation is not named.
Classical Pentecostal theology interprets these passages as supporting the understanding that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit. Other Christians interpret the relationship between the accounts differently. The disagreement requires theological reasoning across Scripture rather than assuming that every account describes an identical sequence of events.
It is also important to distinguish between tongues as initial evidence of Spirit baptism and tongues as a congregational spiritual gift. In 1 Corinthians 12–14, Paul discusses tongues as one of the gifts distributed among believers and addresses their appropriate use in the gathered church. He asks, “Do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?” (1 Corinthians 12:30, KJV). The expected answer is no, because the passage concerns the diversity of gifts among the members of the body.
Classical Pentecostal interpreters distinguish this congregational gift from tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit baptism. Other Christians question whether Scripture establishes this distinction as a universal requirement. This is a genuine interpretive disagreement and should be examined honestly rather than resolved by assuming that either position follows automatically from a single verse.
A further distinction must be made between evidence of the Spirit’s activity and the conclusions drawn from that evidence. Suppose someone genuinely manifests the gift of interpretation of tongues. First Corinthians 12:7–11 identifies interpretation among the manifestations associated with the Spirit’s work. It is therefore reasonable to regard a genuine manifestation as evidence of the Spirit’s activity.
However, several questions remain distinct. Is the manifestation genuine? What does it establish about the Spirit’s work in the individual? Does it satisfy a particular theological definition of Spirit baptism? Is the person qualified for a specific ministry? Evidence relevant to one question does not automatically settle all the others.
Equally, the absence of a manifestation being observed by a congregation is not proof that it has never occurred. Someone may have spoken in tongues privately or in another Christian community. Alternatively, they may never have spoken in tongues, or the available evidence may simply be insufficient to determine their experience. These possibilities should not be confused.
The Church must exercise discernment, but it should also recognise the limits of what it can establish through observation alone. The Spirit distributes gifts according to his will (1 Corinthians 12:11), and this should encourage humility about the comprehensiveness of human assessment.
The possibility that a manifestation can be imitated or misunderstood also demonstrates why it cannot serve as a complete assessment of spiritual maturity. This does not make the manifestation worthless. It means that its significance must be considered alongside Scripture, Christian character, the purpose of the gift and the wider evidence of a person’s life.
Love as the Governing Principle of Spiritual Gifts
Paul’s teaching about love in 1 Corinthians 13 is essential to understanding his discussion of spiritual gifts. In chapter 12, he explains the diversity and interdependence of the body. In chapter 13, he establishes the necessity of love. In chapter 14, he applies these principles to the exercise of gifts in the gathered church.
Paul declares that even if he speaks in the tongues of men and of angels but has no love, he becomes like sounding brass or a clanging cymbal (1 Corinthians 13:1). He continues by considering prophecy, knowledge, faith and generosity. Even extraordinary manifestations and great sacrifices cannot compensate for the absence of love.
This does not make spiritual gifts unimportant. Rather, it establishes their proper place. A believer may exercise a striking gift while remaining immature in their treatment of others. The Corinthian church itself provides an example: its members exercised spiritual gifts, yet Paul confronted their divisions, jealousy and disorder.
Spiritual manifestation is therefore not a substitute for spiritual maturity. The fruit of the Spirit described in Galatians 5:22–23, including love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control, must also inform our understanding of Christian life.
The gifts and the fruit of the Spirit are not interchangeable. Gifts concern the ways believers are equipped for service, while the fruit describes qualities that should characterise a life shaped by the Spirit. Nevertheless, both belong within a mature understanding of the Spirit’s work.
Churches should therefore avoid two opposite errors. They should not treat visible spiritual gifts as sufficient evidence of Christian maturity, nor should they disregard genuine gifts simply because they do not fit a narrow set of expectations. The New Testament calls for discernment of gifts alongside serious attention to character, doctrine and the way people treat one another.
Love asks whether a gift benefits others, whether it is exercised in a way that people can understand, whether its possessor accepts correction and whether believers value those whose gifts differ from their own. It also asks whether Christians are willing to recognise the work of God in other congregations and traditions.
A spiritual gift should not become a means of boasting, and the absence of a particular gift should not automatically become a ground for contempt. Love governs both the exercise of gifts and the way believers recognise and respond to the gifts of others.
Tongues, Interpretation and Mutual Edification
In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul acknowledges the value of tongues while insisting that the gathered church must be built up. He explains that the person speaking in a tongue speaks to God and that others do not understand the utterance. He contrasts this with prophecy, which builds up, encourages and comforts the church (1 Corinthians 14:2–5).
Paul states that the person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets so that the church may be edified. This is a functional comparison rather than a declaration that one believer is intrinsically more valuable than another. Paul’s concern is the benefit received by the congregation.
In verses 13–19, he instructs the person speaking in a tongue to pray that they may interpret and discusses the relationship between praying with the spirit and praying with the mind. Later, in verses 26–28, he provides practical instructions for congregational worship. Contributions should serve edification, public tongues should be interpreted, and, where there is no interpreter, the speaker should remain silent in the congregation and speak to themselves and to God.
These instructions demonstrate that the public exercise of a spiritual gift is subject to the purpose of building up the congregation. A claimed gift does not give its possessor permission to disregard that purpose.
Nevertheless, Paul recognises personal edification through tongues (1 Corinthians 14:4) and speaks of praying with the spirit as well as with the mind (verses 14–15). It would therefore be inaccurate to conclude that tongues have no value without interpretation in every context. The distinction concerns their purpose and setting.
In personal prayer, Paul recognises personal edification. In congregational worship, he insists that the needs of others must be considered. When interpretation makes a message intelligible, tongues can contribute to the edification of the gathered church.
The important principle is not that individual edification is inherently wrong, but that it must not displace the corporate purpose of spiritual gifts. Personal spiritual growth and the growth of the body should not be treated as competitors. Personal experience should be integrated into a life of love, service and mutual responsibility.
Nor should the significance of spiritual gifts be measured solely by what happens during a particular meeting. The New Testament also asks whether believers are becoming better equipped to serve, growing in truth and learning to love one another. The immediate effect of a manifestation matters, but so does its place within the Church’s continuing life.
A congregation should therefore consider whether the exercise of gifts strengthens faith, encourages obedience to Christ, communicates truth, promotes mutual service and contributes to unity and maturity.
Building One Body and One Temple
In 1 Corinthians 12:12–27, Paul uses the human body to explain Christian unity. The body has many members with different functions, yet all belong to one body. No member can declare another unnecessary simply because their function differs. Paul challenges the idea that members who appear weaker are less important and emphasises that the members should care for one another.
This teaching has direct implications for spiritual discernment. If a church values one manifestation so highly that it overlooks other genuine gifts, it risks failing to appreciate the diversity that Paul says God has placed within the body.
The point is not that every gift must be treated identically or that every believer is suited to every ministry. It is that differences should be understood within a framework of mutual dependence. The gifts are intended to serve the body, not to establish a hierarchy in which some members are valued while others are disregarded.
Ephesians 2:19–22 develops the picture of the Church as God’s dwelling place. Believers are described as members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ as the cornerstone. The whole building is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord. Believers are being built together into a dwelling place for God through the Spirit.
The emphasis is on the whole building being joined together and growing together. The New Testament’s central image is not of every congregation or Christian group constructing an entirely separate temple, but of God’s people being joined together in Christ.
This does not mean that every institutional separation is necessarily wrong. Differences in doctrine, governance and practice can be serious, and unity should not be pursued by abandoning biblical truth. Nevertheless, church structures should be assessed in relation to their purpose: serving Christ and building up his people.
Ephesians 4:11–16 describes ministries given by Christ to equip the saints, build up the body and bring believers towards maturity. Paul identifies unity in the faith, knowledge of the Son of God, doctrinal stability, truth expressed in love and the coordinated growth of the whole body as intended outcomes.
The passage brings doctrine, maturity, unity and love together. Unity is not merely organisational agreement, maturity is not simply the accumulation of spiritual experiences, and love is not simply friendliness that avoids difficult questions. The body grows as its members are equipped to serve one another, hold to truth and work together under Christ’s headship.
The measure of ministry is therefore not only whether it produces activity or growth in numbers, but whether it equips Christ’s people to become a more mature body.
This also raises questions about denominational boundaries. Does a particular doctrinal requirement faithfully express Scripture? Does it protect an essential truth, or does it unnecessarily restrict recognition of another believer’s gifts? Are differences being addressed through patient biblical reasoning? Can churches recognise one another’s genuine gifts and ministries while maintaining legitimate convictions?
The fact that a practice creates division does not by itself prove that it is wrong. Its biblical basis must be examined carefully. However, if a practice is found to go beyond what Scripture requires, reconsidering it could remove an unnecessary barrier to fellowship and service.
Discernment, Ministerial Recognition and Accountability
Spiritual gifts matter, but the New Testament does not make the possession of a particular gift the sole qualification for pastoral leadership. First Timothy 3:1–7 and Titus 1:5–9 emphasise qualities such as being above reproach, exercising self-control, demonstrating faithfulness in personal life, showing hospitality, teaching sound doctrine and leading responsibly.
These passages focus on the kind of person an overseer must be, as well as their capacity to teach and lead. A spiritual gift may be relevant to ministry, but it does not override the qualifications for leadership. Conversely, these passages do not explicitly identify speaking in tongues as a qualification for eldership.
Churches may adopt additional doctrinal requirements for their ministers, but those requirements should be examined in the light of Scripture and their relationship to the biblical qualifications for leadership.
Paul’s warning to Timothy not to lay hands on anyone hastily (1 Timothy 5:22) also demonstrates the importance of care in recognising leaders. The immediate context concerns the treatment and recognition of elders, although the precise scope of the laying on of hands in this verse is debated. Acts 8:18–23 likewise illustrates the importance of examining motives when Simon attempts to purchase the power he sees associated with the apostles’ laying on of hands.
These passages should not be used to suggest that only apostles can pray for people to receive the Holy Spirit. They do, however, support the need for responsible ministry, discernment and accountability.
A balanced assessment of a prospective minister should consider Christian character, calling, spiritual gifts, doctrine, pastoral ability and willingness to receive correction. It should also distinguish between what has actually been observed, what the candidate reports and what can reasonably be concluded from the available evidence.
For example, if someone manifests the gift of interpretation but has never been observed speaking in tongues, several possibilities must be distinguished. They may have spoken in tongues privately or in another congregation; they may never have spoken in tongues; or the available evidence may simply be insufficient to determine their experience.
A genuine gift of interpretation is evidence of the Spirit’s activity, but it does not automatically settle every question about Spirit baptism or pastoral eligibility. Likewise, a lack of witnessed tongues does not establish that the candidate has never spoken in tongues.
The Church should therefore exercise discernment without confusing the limits of its observation with the limits of God’s work. It should neither accept every spiritual claim uncritically nor assume that its own experience provides a complete account of how the Spirit may work.
Spiritual Maturity: Moving from Signs to the Purpose of God
In 1 Corinthians 14:20, Paul tells believers not to be children in their thinking but to be mature in their understanding. In Ephesians 4:13–16, maturity is associated with knowledge of Christ, doctrinal stability, truth expressed in love and the coordinated growth of the body.
Maturity therefore involves more than accumulating spiritual experiences. It includes understanding what Scripture teaches about the Spirit’s work, why gifts are distributed differently, how they should be tested and exercised, how Christian character relates to spiritual power, and how believers can build one another up.
An initial manifestation may be important within a particular theological framework, but it cannot replace these wider responsibilities. A church risks an incomplete understanding if it treats a sign as though it were the whole purpose of the Spirit’s work.
For example, it might establish that someone has spoken in tongues while giving insufficient attention to whether that person exercises love, teaches sound doctrine or cares faithfully for others. Alternatively, it might recognise a person’s gifts and Christian character while failing to consider legitimate doctrinal questions about their experience. Both approaches are incomplete.
A mature process considers the evidence in its proper context and asks what Scripture requires at each stage.
Growth in understanding does not necessarily require doctrinal correction in every case. Greater understanding may confirm an existing doctrine, refine its application or reveal that a previous interpretation needs correction. If careful biblical examination demonstrates that a requirement exceeds what Scripture establishes, correcting it could represent growth in understanding rather than abandonment of faith.
Such a correction could also affect relationships between churches and Christian traditions, particularly where different understandings of the Spirit have contributed to exclusion or separation. The appropriate response would involve biblical reasoning, humility, accountability and a willingness to address past consequences honestly.
Conclusion: The Spirit’s Work in Building Up the Whole Church
The Holy Spirit’s work cannot be understood fully by isolating one manifestation from the purpose for which God equips his people. Tongues may have a significant place in Christian experience and Pentecostal theology, while interpretation, prophecy, teaching, pastoral ministry, service and other gifts also have their place. Their value must be understood within the whole biblical picture: the Spirit equips the members, Christ is the Head, and the body is called to grow towards maturity through truth and love.
The New Testament does not ask the Church merely to identify spiritual manifestations. It calls believers to discern and use what God gives in a way that builds up his people. This requires attention to the authenticity and purpose of gifts, the character of those who exercise them, the needs of the congregation and the unity of Christ’s wider body.
A mature church should neither dismiss genuine gifts because they do not fit narrow expectations nor accept spiritual claims without discernment. It should hold together the recognition of the Spirit’s activity, the testing of spiritual manifestations, the importance of Christian character and the responsibility to build up others in love.
The deepest question is not simply whether the Church can recognise the Spirit’s presence, but whether it is becoming the kind of body the Spirit is given to build.
The intended outcome is not merely a church in which spiritual manifestations occur, but a people in whom the gifts of the Spirit contribute to greater maturity, deeper love, stronger unity in Christ and more faithful service to one another and the world.
