The Use of Isa 28:1112 in 1 Cor 14:2022

Trevor Peterson December 11, 1996

1 Introduction
Speaking in tongues is an often debated, often misunderstood concept in the NT. Perhaps this is due to the fact that it seems to have been a phenomenon associated peculiarly with the Church. While sign gifts of other sorts, such as prophecy, healings, and mastery over physical forces, came at various times to various people throughout the OT, thus setting the stage for their appearance in the NT, this gift in particular seems to have no precedent in the OT. It is for this reason that particular attention must be given to Pauls use of Isa 28:1112 in his explanation of the purpose and significance of tongues. Paul makes reference to the prophets words in 1 Cor 14:21, but the question is: How does Paul see the prophecy as fitting into his broader argument, and more specifically, how does it relate to his explanation in the following verses?

2 Primary Views
It is important to understand, in approaching this study, that there is by no means agreement as to the answer. Some have suggested that Paul was actually indicating the fulfillment of Isaiahs prophecy in the time of the early Church. Others have argued that perhaps this was not Pauls argument at all but that of a rhetorical opponent, representing the proCorinthian position. Most, however, seem to fall between the two extremes, understanding Pauls usage of the prophecy to be illustrative.

2.1 Prophetic fulfillment

O. P. Robertson argues that the foreign tongue was a sign of Gods covenantal curse, prophesied initially in Deut 28:49. Isaiah specifically applied the 1

curse as a coming event in Israels future, and Jeremiah confirmed the initial fulfillment in 586 BC. Robertson takes Pauls words to indicate the ultimate fulfillment: In a very literal sense, the tongues of Pentecost represented the taking of the kingdom away from Israel and the giving of the kingdom to men of all nations.1

2.2 Illustrative use

Of those who see Pauls use of the prophecy as illustrative, there are four basic viewpoints on how tongues qualify as a sign to unbelievers: that tongues are a sign of judgment on unbelievers; that tongues are a sign producing unbelief; that tongues are a sign of Gods grace to unbelievers; that tongues are a common pagan sign, which would be recognizable to unbelievers. Tongues are a sign of judgment on unbelievers. Most commentators see some kind of a negative impact inherent in the sign nature of tongues. The first form this takes is the concept that tongues signify Gods judgment on unbelievers. Robertson and Plummer call it not a convincing, saving sign, but a judicial sign. In their estimation, tongues served as a form of chastisement, preventing the recipients from understanding the sounds they hear. They compare the purpose of tongues to that of Christs parables, which veil His meaning from those who could not or would not receive it.2 F. F. Bruce likewise holds that Pauls point is that a divine communication in strange tongues addressed to the deliberately disobedient will but confirm them in their disobedience: they will remain all the more unbelievers.3 L. Morris and R. C. H. Lenski take the same view, seeing the to emphasize the effect, rather than the nature, of tongues as a sign. This view usually includes an understanding that the significance of sign is different for believers and unbelievers.4 Tongues are a sign producing unbelief. An alternative to the understanding that tongues display Gods judgment goes one step further. A
O. P. Robertson, Tongues: Sign of Covenantal Curse and Blessing, WTJ 38 (1975) 47. A. Robertson and A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1914) 316. 3 F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (The New Century Bible Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971) 133. Emphasis his. 4 L. Morris, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958) 19697; R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Pauls First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1937) 60001.
2 1

number of commentators take the sign as not only confirming unbelief, but producing still more unbelief and hardening. This view has the advantage of reconciling Pauls illustrations with his prior assertions, as it sees the condition of unbelievers and believers as applying to future circumstance.5 Erdman likewise speaks of the melancholy purpose for those who were rejecting the simple gospel of Christ, suggesting that it confirmed them and made them feel justified in their unbelief, as well as provoking them to insult the church and its people.6 Findlay concurs that this interpretation best fits Pauls illustrations, and appeals as well to Pauls discouraging purpose in writing to the Corinthians.7 Fee admits that this approach results in two different senses for sign, yet does not see this as conflicting or inconsistent, since the uses are taken in accordance with the effects seen in Pauls illustrations.8 Tongues are a sign of Gods grace to unbelievers. F. W. Grosheide takes Isaiahs prophecy as hypothetical, suggesting that the judgment upon Israel was that it, after it had heard the voice of the Lord, delivered by the prophets, would not listen even if the Lord spoke through foreign nations. He goes on to call the sign a new token of His grace thereby to arouse the attention of the people. In the same way, tongues today and in Pauls time serve to point the way to salvationa sign which believers do not need to see but which unbelievers might receive.9 Tongues are a pagan sign. P. Roberts suggests that a more consistent view begins with understanding that, as a sign to unbelievers, tongues would have to be readily recognizable to pagans as an indicator of divine activity. Pauls accusation against the Corinthians, then, is that they are looking for the sort of indistinct sign that a pagan would seek, rather than maturing to the point at which a Christian should recognize less ecstatic indicators. Roberts sees no more relevance in the Isaiah prophecy than that
5 J. A. Bengel, C. T. Lewis, and M. R. Vincent, Bengels New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1981) 2:248. 6 C. R. Erdman, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: An Exposition (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1966) 146. 7 G. G. Findlay, St. Pauls First Epistle to the Corinthians, The Expositors Greek Testament (ed. W. R. Nicoll; 5 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983) 2:910. 8 G. D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) 68283. 9 F. W. Grosheide, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953) 33031.

it deals with the ineffectiveness of strange tongues.10

2.3 Rhetorical opponent

B. C. Johanson, in attempting to resolve the apparent tension between Pauls illustrations in vv. 2325 and his assertions in v. 22, takes a structural approach to the passage. By this he indicates various parallels in the text, which lead him to the conclusion that there is no way to consistently interpret and avoid either contradiction or ambiguity. He attempts to resolve the tension by viewing the assertions in v. 22 as a rhetorical question, posed by Pauls opponents, which he then refutes, using the illustrations. Johanson thus concludes that the Isaiah prophecy was quoted by Paul as the springboard which his imaginary opponent used to support his assertions.11

3 Exegesis of 1 Cor 14:2022

Most of the preceding arguments are attempts to deal with some basic problems in the text. How did Paul use Isaiahs prophecy to support his conclusions about speaking in tongues? How do his illustrations fit his assertions? What is the significance of the term translated sign? Ultimately, a proper understanding of Pauls argument must deal with these specific issues.

3.1 Pauls argument against the abuse of tongues

Pauls use of Isaiahs prophecy and the applications that follow come in the midst of his explanation to the Corinthians of the superiority of prophecy over tongues. He does not condemn the use of speaking in tongues, but he wants to further their understanding of how the gift should function and what significance they should attach to it. Paul argues against speaking in tongues as the sign of spirituality. In the opening verses of chap. 14, Paul begins by pointing out some differences in the effects produced by tongues and prophecy. Tongues, without interpretation, provide nothing to other people; only God knows what is being said (v. 2). By contrast, prophecy builds up the church, encouraging
P. Roberts, A SignChristian or Pagan? ExpTim 90 (1979) 200201. B. C. Johanson, Tongues, a Sign for Unbelievers?: A Structural and Exegetical Study of I Corinthians XIV. 2025, NTS 25 (1979) 194.
11 10

and comforting others (vv. 34). Paul is not opposing the gift of tongues, but he wants the Corinthians to understand that sounds, without understanding on the part of speaker or hearer, achieve nothing (vv. 5-11). In vv. 1319, Paul allows no superiority for speaking, praying, blessing, or giving thanks in an unintelligible tongue, over plain speech. His meaning is cleartongues are not bad, but they dont produce or display spiritual excellence. They serve a specific purpose, but excess of use can actually be inferior to plain speech, and certainly fails to accomplish as much as prophecy. This idea of understanding carries him into vv. 2125, in his transitional exhortation to be mature in understanding (v. 20). Paul recommends orderly exercise of the gift of tongues. Beginning in v. 26, and continuing to the end of the chapter, Paul deals with the orderly exercise of tongues and prophecy. Again, he does not forbid the use of the gift, but it must be done individually, by no more than three in a service, and there must be an interpreter (v. 27). Paul places similar restrictions on the exercise of prophecy (vv. 2932) and forbids women to speak out in the assembly (vv. 3335). His conclusion returns to his opening exhortationto prophesy is desirable; to speak in tongues is not wrong, but love and order should characterize all (vv. 1, 3940).

3.2 Pauls consistency in vv. 2225

The issue that has generally resulted in the widest variety of interpretations surrounding this passage is that of reconciling the assertions of v. 22 with the illustrations of vv. 2325. In the estimation of several commentators, as cited above, these verses present an apparent contradictionthat what Paul illustrates does not follow what he is trying to prove. Paul calls tongues a sign to the unbelieving. In v. 22, Paul makes a simple enough statement: , , which can be translated: So then, the tongues are unto a sign not to the ones believing but to the unbelievers . . . . In this clause, the words and play the most significant roles. The grammatical distinction is well-know between introducing a dependent clause, chiefly with the infinitive, and introducing an independent clause. The former indicates actual or intended result, while the latter indicates conclusion.12 In this verse, the introduced clause is in fact
12

BAGD, 899900.

independent, so that indicates a conclusion drawn from the preceding material. Pauls assertion then is one which may be inferred from his citation of Isaiahs prophecy. This being the case, another way to approach the problem is to discern what his assertion means and work backward, to determine how he used Isaiahs prophecy. BAGD defines as a sign or distinguishing mark, token, indication by which something is known.13 A fuller word study indicates that this is an accurate assessment. Whether considering in the MT or in the NT and LXX, the range of meaning seems to be the same. It most often identifies a supernatural event which displays Gods will or promise to man, but in the OT particularly, there is a strong case for its common usage in reference to a natural object or event.14 The basic meaning is therefore quite similar to the English word sign, which can be supernatural but is not necessarily, and which most fully identifies something that points to a concept, person, event, thing, etc. Often, when there is no particularly mentioned object of a NT , it is seen to be a sign of divine activity. Just as Paul could leave his distinguishing mark in a letter to the Thessalonians (2 Thess 3:17), God was seen to provide certain wonders and miracles that identified His works. Such could be false, as is the case with the works of the Beast in Revelation, or genuine, as in the book of Acts.15 When Paul calls tongues a , he is therefore indicating a distinguishing mark of God which is given to unbelievers. The indicates that Isaiahs prophecy will shed light on what sort of a sign this might be, but at present it may be concluded that this is a sign not given to believers. Paul calls prophecy a sign to the believing. Paul goes on in v. 22 to contrast tongues with prophecy. He essentially reverses the previous
Ibid., 74748. For supernatural events, see Exod 4:8, 9, 17, 28, 30; 7:3; 8:23; 10:1, 2; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; 6:22; 7:19; 11:3; 13:1, 2; 26:8; 29:3; 34:11; Josh 24:17; 1 Sam 10:7, 9; 2 Kgs 20:8, 9; Neh 9:10; Pss 78:43; 105:27; 135:9; Isa 7:11, 14; 8:18; 38:7, 22; 66:19; Jer 32:20, 21; 44:29; Ezek 14:8; Matt 12:38, 39; 16:1, 4; 24:3, 24, 30; Mark 8:11, 12; 13:4, 22; Luke 2:34; 11:16, 29, 30; 21:7, 11, 25; 23:8; John 2:11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 20:30; Acts 2:19, 22, 43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 6:8; 7:36; 8:6, 13; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19; 1 Cor 1:22; 2 Cor 12:12; 2 Thess 2:9; Heb 2:4; Rev 12:1, 3; 13:13, 14; 15:1; 16:14; 19:20; for natural objects, see Gen 1:14; 4:15; 9:12, 13, 17; 17:11; Exod 12:13; Num 16:38; 17:10; Deut 6:8; 11:18; Josh 4:6; Ps 65:8; Isa 55:13; Rom 4:11; 2 Thess 3:17; for natural events, see Exod 3:12; 13:9, 16; 31:13, 17; Deut 28:46; 1 Sam 2:34; 10:7, 9; 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Isa 19:20; 20:3; 37:30; Ezek 4:3; 20:12, 20; Matt 16:3; 26:48; Luke 2:12. 15 See above references.
14 13

concept when he says, , . The parallel structure implies the insertion of , which would yield the following translation: and the prophecy is unto a sign not to the unbelievers but to the ones believing. Paul is thus setting up a dichotomy between the effects of tongues and prophecy: the former produces a sign for unbelievers and not for believers; the latter for believers and not for unbelievers. It is possible to conclude therefore that, in the same sense that tongues are a sign to unbelievers, prophecy is not a sign to them, and the reverse is likewise true. For this reason, the resolution must involve a common meaning for , as it is applied to both tongues and prophecy, to both unbelievers and believers. Paul illustrates his assertions. In vv. 2325, Paul goes on to illustrate his assertions. Speaking of an outsider or an unbeliever who enters the assembly, Paul depicts the effects of two possibilities: If all are speaking in tongues, he will conclude that they are mad; if all are prophesying, he will meet with conviction and worship God. The apparent conflict is that this appears to show that tongues are not a sign to the unbeliever, but that prophecy is. Certainly, if the nature of the sign is taken to be a positive one, this would be the case. The illustrations do clearly show that uninterpreted tongues can have no positive effect on the unbeliever. This being the case, many have felt led to find a more negative implication of the sign function. While the negative perspective on the significance of is attractive in that it seems to best conform to the illustration Paul gives with regard to tongues, it often seems to produce opposing connotations for as applied to tongues and as applied to prophecy. In other words, the way that prophecy qualifies as a must be somehow different, since the example shows a very positive effect of prophecy on unbelievers, and Paul gives no indication that it might do otherwise to believers. W. Grudem, however, sees an avenue by which may be taken in both a positive and a negative sense, without inconsistency. As was seen earlier in the word study, (and its Hebrew counterpart )are neither necessarily supernatural nor necessarily natural. Likewise, Grudem asserts, they can be either negative or positive, depending on the situation, for they serve to indicate Gods attitude toward a people or person. Grudem cites a number of examples in his article, of how a sign can show either disapproval toward the unrighteous or approval toward the righteous. He goes on to explain that the illustrations therefore make perfect sense. In the first, an unbelieving outsider responds negatively to a message that should not be 7

sent by the church he enters, unless God has chosen to pronounce judgment upon this one for his hardness of heart. In the second, this outsider hears prophecy and reacts positively by turning to God. For him, there is no sign involvedonly conviction; but the believers can see from the way it affects him that God is indeed at work in their midst.16 This interpretation has the benefit of explaining how the illustrations fit Pauls assertions, while the significance of and unbeliever remains consistent throughout.

3.3 Pauls citation of Isa 28:1112

Having thus dealt with the surrounding issues, it is possible to turn to Pauls citation of Isaiah, in v. 21. Paul quotes loosely from the MT. One issue that seems to spring up in most detailed considerations of this passage is that of Pauls underlying text. His quote does not seem to fit either the LXX or the MT. B. C. Johanson suggests, based on a claim attributed to Origen, that Paul was using another Greek translation not in existence today.17 Probably the better analysis, though, comes from Grudem, who suggests that Paul is quoting freely from the MT.18 The MT of Isa 28:11, 12 reads: . - The LXX renders the passage a bit dif ferently: , . Finally, Pauls citation follows: , . The LXX has evil lips to Pauls other lips, they will speak to I will speak, and almost every preposition and conjunction is altered, so that in light of their being the same language, there is very little similarity. By contrast, the MT has stammering of lips to Pauls other lips and a different tense in the response, but considering the language transition, it is surprisingly close. As for the omitted portion from v. 12, it was unnecessary to Pauls argument. It seems, then, that there is enough similarity between Pauls citation and the MT of Isaiahs prophecy to assume that Paul, working from memory, translated the Hebrew text into Greek, with a few minor changes.
16 W. Grudem, 1 Corinthians 14:2025: Prophecy and Tongues as Signs of Gods Attitude, WTJ 41 (1979) 390392. 17 Johanson, A Sign for Unbelievers? 181. 18 Grudem, Gods Attitude, 386.

Paul understands the context of Isaiahs message. Undoubtedly, Paul understood the context of Isaiahs prophecy. His background in the OT and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit would have prevented him from ignoring altogether the significance of Isaiahs prophecy in its original setting. Isaiah was foretelling imminent judgment upon Israel, which would bring to pass what Moses had warned about in Deut 28:49, that God would judge them with a foreign nation, whose language they could not understand. According to Isaiah, there was no one left in the land to receive instruction from the Lord. He would therefore send a barbaric people, speaking apparent gibberish to these unbelieving Israelites, who did not believe when they heard the very clear word of the prophets. Paul changes the tense of the failure to hear, because he understands the significance of the prophecy, that even after facing the outcome of this prophecy, they still did not listen, for they were too hardened to the truth and incapable of hearing the Word of God. Paul understands his readers. Even though it is safe to assume that Paul understood Isaiahs prophecy, his audience is another matter. The Corinthians would have had a heavily Gentile population, and even those who were familiar with the Scriptures would probably not have been as well-trained as Paul. For him to have quoted such a small portion, without giving any explanation as to the circumstances of the statement, and to have expected his audience to understand the full content of Isaiahs message would have been ludicrous. Paul does not indicate a fulfillment of Isaiahs prophecy. O. P. Robertson holds that Paul was using Isaiahs prophecy in its fullest sense, showing therefore the ultimate fulfillment of Gods removal of Israels place as His people.19 As Fee states, however, Robertsons conclusions are often biased and theological in nature, without much exegetical foundation.20 Paul never asserts in this passage or anywhere else that Isaiahs prophecy was not ultimately fulfilled by the Assyrian invasion or that it was being fulfilled in his own day. In fact, Paul says nothing about the fulfillment of the prophecyhe uses it to establish a principle in v. 22. Paul uses Isaiahs prophecy to show the effects of tongues. The flow of Pauls argument can therefore be seen: The Corinthians should be mature in
19 20

O. P. Robertson, Covenantal Curse and Blessing, 4647. Fee, Corinthians, 680.

their thinking. They should recognize therefore the principle seen in Isaiah 28that tongues are a sign to unbelievers, not believers. In Isa 28:1112, the prophet explained that God would send a sign of His displeasure on the people of Israel, which would take the form of invaders, speaking an unintelligible tongue. When an unbelieving person hears, therefore, this unintelligible tongue, he gains nothing. In fact, he will call the people crazy, because they appear to be speaking gibberish. Just as the foreign speech of the Assyrians did nothing to bring the Israelites to repentance, the foreign tongues of the Corinthians would fail to persuade unbelieving outsiders. In this sense, the gift would function just like the speech of these invading armies, as a sign of Gods displeasure. The unbeliever was often given a sign in the OT, but it did not serve to sway him but to condemn him and show his blindness before God.

4 Conclusion
What then can be concluded about Pauls use of Isaiah 28:1112? He was trying to show the Corinthians that prophecy is superior to tongues. Whereas prophecy will convict the unbeliever so that he repents, and serve as a sign to the believers that God is working in their midst, tongues has the opposite effect. The unbeliever will gain nothing, and the believers will fail to see Gods power working. The reason is that unintelligible speech can never communicate truth to the unbelieverit serves only to show him Gods judgment upon the one who will not repent, but it shows him in such a way that he cannot respond positively. To substantiate this, Paul used the example of foreign tongues, as Isaiah prophesied their use to bring Gods judgment upon rebellious Israel. The Corinthians thought that speaking in tongues showed one to be more spiritual. Paul wanted them to see from this OT example, that speech without understanding is worthless.

References
[1] Alford, H. Alfords Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary. vol. 2. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1871. [2] Bauer, W.; Arndt, W. F.; Gingrich, F. W.; Danker, F. W. A GreekEnglish Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

10

[3] Bengel, J. A., C. T. Lewis, and M. R. Vincent. Bengels New Testament Commentary. vol. 2. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1981. [4] Brown, F.; Driver, S. R.; Briggs, C. A. The New BrownDriver BriggsGesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon With an Appendix Containing the Biblical Aramaic. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1979. [5] Bruce, F. F. 1 and 2 Corinthians. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971. [6] Edgar, T. R. Miraculous Gifts: Are They for Today? Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux, 1983. [7] Erdman, C. R. The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: An Exposition. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1966. [8] Fee, G. D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. [9] Findlay, G. G. St. Pauls First Epistle to the Corinthians. The Expositors Greek Testament. Ed. W. R. Nicoll. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983. [10] Grosheide, F. W. Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953. [11] Grudem, W. 1 Corinthians 14:2025: Prophecy and Tongues as Signs of Gods Attitude. WTJ 41 (1979) 38196. [12] Hatch, E., and Redpath, H. A. A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament (Including the Apocryphal Books). 2 vols. Graz-Austria: Akademische Druck - U. Verlangsanstalt, 1954. [13] Johanson, B. C. Tongues, a Sign for Unbelievers?: A Structural and Exegetical Study of I Corinthians XIV. 20-25. NTS 25 (1979) 180 203. [14] Kaiser, W. C. The Uses of the Old Testament in the New. Chicago: Moody, 1985. [15] Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of St. Pauls First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1937. 11

[16] Liddell, H. G.; Scott, R.; Jones, H. S.; McKenzie, R. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon, 1940. [17] Mastraccio, W. L. The Purpose of the Spiritual Gift of Tongues According to 1 Cor 14:21-22. Th.M. thesis, Capital Bible Seminary, 1986. [18] Morris, L. The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958. [19] Moulton, J. H., and Milligan, G. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1930. [20] Moulton, W. F., and Geden, A. S. A Concordance to the Greek Testament According to the Texts of Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf and the English Revisers. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963. [21] Nestle, Eberhard, Erwin Nestle, B. Aland, K. Aland, J. Karavidopoulos, C. M. Martini, and B. M. Metzger. Novum Testamentum Graece. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993. [22] Omanson, R. L. Acknowledging Pauls Quotations. BT 43 (1992) 20113. [23] Rahlfs, A. Septuaginta. Stuttgart: Wrttembergische Bibelanstalt Stuttgart, 1935. [24] Roberts, P. A SignChristian or Pagan? ExpTim 90 (1979) 199 203. [25] Robertson, O. P. Tongues: Sign of Covenantal Curse and Blessing. WTJ 38 (1975) 4353. [26] Robertson, A., and A. Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. ICC. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1914. [27] Thielman, F. The Coherence of Pauls View of the Law: The Evidence of First Corinthians. NTS 38 (1992) 23553. [28] Wigram, G. V. The New Englishmans Hebrew Concordance. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1984. 12