Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

Yeah, Shaggy I have heard this idea before. It is touted and loved by cessationists.

Truth is, while I have some issues with tongues as they are often practiced in todays Pentecostal churches, I am not at all ready to give credence to cessationism either. I do know Christians of both persuasions and do not think it speaks of their faith or their standing in the body.

Also, if only for the Apostles and a few they anointed, what was that discussion in Corinthians all about?

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

I'm in agreement with you, Hoovie.

And for me, "speaking in tongues" is simply not the "evidence" of anything other than... "speaking in tongues."

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

All the gifts are for the church:
1 Cor. 1:7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:


And NOT only the apostles had power to heal -
Ananias wasnt an apostle, yet he laid his hands on Paul to heal him- acts 9:17


And signs including tongues would follow the believer - Mk. 16:17


Im not supporting the cessationist view especially in its entirety, but I am however saying, that what I posted seems to be some decent evidence for it just being the 12 in Acts 2(thot to be ALL Galileans). That does not mean that tongues(& other signs..) and etc could not otherwise also follow the believer...to jive with other scriptures like I posted..

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

Well, its a rhetorical question which was never answered. It's entirely possible they thought "most" were Galileans, or that they wrongly thought all of them were.

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

We've all heard stories about people understanding what was said when a person spoke with tongues. I can't help but think that many of these stories are "urban legends." I have cited the ones I did because I think they are credible. Sis. Alvear speaks from experience. I have read of instances of people speaking in English in Bro. Drost's biography and Bro. Cole's biography and I think they are credible. The man named Louis that told me the story of hearing the counting to ten and then other words in a language that he recognized as Japanese was credible when he told me than over 50 years ago. Maybe I'm naive but I believe Jack Hayford and Robert Heidler when they gave first hand accounts of either speaking in a tongue/language that was understood by another or of hearing someone they know speaking in English. I trust the accounts in the book, "They Speak With Other Tongues" because the author spoke to the person himself and the author approached the subject objectively and with doubts.

Yes, I am a one stepper. I believe a person is saved at repentance prior to and separate from water and/or Spirit baptism, but I do believe in "speaking with tongues." I believe Pentecost was an exception but I do believe that at that time and at other times people have spoken in languages or tongues unknown to them but they have been understood by others.

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

I have some problems with some of the "tongues" in some of our meetings and churches, but I do believe that "speaking with tongues" is a valid gift or manifestation of the Holy Spirit for our day.

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

probably most of the 120 were from Galilee, so to the hearers it would seem like they were all from Galilee.

Galilee was a large region with many cities

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

There are those who believe that only the 12 were filled with the Spirit and spoke with tongues in Acts chapter 2. Some connect the last verse in chapter one with the first verse in chapter two and come to that conclusion.

At the time of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts chapter 2 there were more than 500 believers according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:6, but according to the way I understand Acts 1:15 only about 120 of them were filled with the Spirit on that day. That does not trouble me because I realize not all Christians receive the Holy Ghost Baptism (as we Pentecostals define it) in our day. I know good Christians that do not speak with tongues --actually I know good Christians that do not even believe that speaking with tongues is a valid experience for today.

Personally, I consider myself Apostolic or Pentecostal or Charismatic and I pray in tongues just about every day, however I do not consider myself to be superior to other Christians who do not speak with tongues.

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

I accept your testimony, Sam and I appreciate your viewpoint on this. I think when it comes to questions of salvation and even the Christian experience vis-à-vis "speaking in tongues" that we're pretty much in agreement.

Would you agree with my challenge for "Three Steppers" to produce real evidence of a recurrence of Acts 2:4-8, since they demand that this is the "evidence" of one's salvation?

A person's salvation is a point that really brings it to home, in my mind anyhow. If this is something that MUST happen every time a person is saved - then shouldn't we expect to actually see Acts 2:4-8, every time a person is saved?

Instead, they try a slight of hand act by diverting the conversation to what MIGHT have happened on an airplane many years ago, and what some missionary reported as happening on the foreign field, thousands of miles away. What about at THEIR church LAST Sunday? What happened? Did any get saved? Did they tell them, or did they expect Acts 2:4-8, to happen? Did it?

Since it DID NOT happen, why do they demand this as a requirement for salvation?

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

It was sort of the "hinterlands" of the Jerusalem area due to the fact that it was practically cut off from Jerusalem by the region of Samaria, but it was also home to the largest Jewish population at the time outside of Jerusalem itself.

I probably have something on that in my Logos package... somewhere! :foottap

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

Well, y'all know me, the old greasy grace Bapticostal. I certainly don't believe that a person is not saved unless they speak with tongues, but I do believe speaking with tongues is a valid experience and I personally speak with tongues just about every day. But I don't think everything that happened at Pentecost is repeated every time the Holy Spirit is poured out. We don't read about the wind and fire afterward but just the speaking with tongues was enough for Peter to say that the Gentiles had received the same experience he and others had received.

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

It was called Galilee of the Gentiles and folks from there were considered rustic and not as religious as the Judean Jews. They also had their own regional accent.

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

lol

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

There is a dichotomy here in our modern day experience and perhaps in the Bible days as well...

What we see manifest most often is usually called "unknown tongues." This appears to stem from the KJV's translation of "glossa" in 1 Corinthians 14, where the English word "unknown" (italicized) was added by the translators.

This is the ecstatic speech that was also seen in the ancient world among prophets (see the account of the Egyptian official Wen-Amen's trip to Byblos) and oracles. The Delphic oracle spoke in an "unknown tongue" or language which was "interpreted" by the priests of the Temple.

The ecstatic worshipers of Dionysus spoke in an "ecstatic speech" in their revelry which sometimes turned quite violent. The disciples from the Upper Room may have been seen as Bacchanalians by some in the crowd and this is why the accusation was made that they were "filled with new wine."

See for example beginning at page 219 (Glossolalia-Language of the Unconscious?) in this book: Psychology of the Bible.

But the experience of Acts 2:4-8, taken at face value seems to ask the reader to believe that a supernatural event was occurring wherein the speakers spoke in languages that they had never learned and the hearers clearly understood the language as their native speech. This a something else, other than the "speaking in tongues" typically observed in Pentecostal meetings where no one - not the speaker nor the hearer - understood what was being said.

Given the ambiguity and the confusion of the "Three Steppers" over this issue, I think that it is prudent to NOT demand something of people that is simply unreal or at the very least (or the very best?) uncertain.

Why not just be open to the possibilities of what God can do in our lives and not make demands of people based upon our own historically confused and jumbled theology on the matter?

Re: Confess your sin, UPCI!
 

Possible I suppose, tho Im not convinced for a few reasons...

Oh well, it doesn't matter at all anyway, because the gentiles received the same gift of the Holyghost as whoever all did in the beginning anyway.

Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
:45And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.


And Peters explanation of such:

Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. (no apostle laying on of hands either)

16Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

17Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

18When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life




and to all that are afar off....